External Evaluation of Child and youth-friendly Juvenile Justice in Iraq

I. Introduction

Terre des hommes Foundation (Tdh) is seeking to contract a consultant to conduct an external evaluation for the project “Child- and youth-friendly Juvenile Justice in Iraq” implemented since September 2018 to March 2020 under funding from the US Department of State – Bureau of Democracy Human Rights and Labor (DRL).

II. Projects Basic Information

Implementer: Terre des hommes Fondation – Iraq

Title of Project: Child and youth-friendly Juvenile Justice in Iraq

Life of Strategy, Project, or Activity: Start Date: 29-Sep-2018 / End Date: 31-Mar-2020

Active Geographic Regions:

1. Anbar Governorate – Ramadi District
2. Baghdad Governorate – Al tobchi, Al Jaefar and Al Rashad District
3. Kirkuk Governorate – Kirkuk District
4. Salah Al Din Governorate – Tikrit District

Goal: Detained children’s rights are respected and their reintegration into society is promoted

Objective 1: Formal and informal juvenile justice systems are reinforced to better protect children in contact with the law

Objective 2: Children in contact with the law have greater and more adapted access to services protecting their rights

External Evaluation Focal point: Ganesh Bahadur Thapa, email : [email protected] (Only for the query.) don’t send a proposal to this email.

III. Terre des hommes

Tdh is the Swiss leading Child Protection (CP) Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), with a proven track of creating child protection systems with specific focus on juvenile justice (JJ). Since its Iraq program opened in 2014, Tdh has been working on the first line, second line and full cluster response and can now count on established operational capacity in the proposed areas of intervention, specifically in Anbar, Kirkuk, Baghdad, Salah al Din and Ninawa Governorate. Experience in child protection in the 4 target governorates combined with 20 years of global experience in juvenile justice puts Tdh in a unique position to expand into juvenile justice sector in Iraq. The capacity is further strengthened through a partnership with Legal Clinic Network, which has strong expertise in legal assistance in Iraq, especially in advocating for alternatives to detention.

IV. Program Overview

Under the DRL award, Tdh is currently responding in 4 governorates – Anbar, Baghdad, Kirkuk and Salah al Din, in hard to reach areas. Populations in these locations face a multitude of problems stemming from the past conflict, which continues to have negative impacts on the population to this day. This project aims to achieved five outcome level result implementing various output activities.

Project Outcomes:

1.1. 50 relevant stakeholders have access to knowledge on the position and options for children in contact with the law in Iraq

1.2. The capacity of 30 state and NGO Juvenile Justice actors in Iraq actors to protect detained children is strengthened

1.3. Community-based conflict resolution in 3 governorates is more attentive to the needs and rights of children.

2.1. 1,000 Children in contact with the law have access to quality assistance & services.

2.2. 100 children in contact with the law are better reintegrated into their communities.

This project goal is to improve the situation of children in contact with the law in Baghdad, Anbar Salah Al Din and Kirkuk governorates. First, the project aims to improve the outcome and process of children’s contact with judicial and law-enforcement authorities, to be achieved through the training to relevant NGOs and government stakeholders on child protection, conflict resolution, and legal alternatives to detention, as well as through the provision of legal assistance to children. Secondly, the program aims to improve the living conditions of children who have already entered the detention system through material support and provision of psycho-social support and non-formal education activities. Finally, the program assists in the reintegration process following detention through material support to families, counseling, and facilitating visits to detention centers. The reintegration process will also be assisted by awareness raising sessions in the receiving community to increase their acceptance of formerly detained children.

V. Scope of the External Evaluation

The evaluation will make a comprehensive assessment of the program describing its level of success in achieving its objectives, program efficiency and effectiveness, the sustainability of its interventions, the impact (Key outcomes – effects) attributable to the program with a particular focus on the targeted children, their families and the formal and informal justice actors, identifying key weaknesses and assessing its contribution to national juvenile justice priorities. The evaluators will be tasked with documenting lessons learned (including identified weaknesses and strengths) as well as best practices, and concrete recommendations for strengthening future programming. The external evaluation will assess the collective performance, implementation and impact of all program activities, including those carried out by Tdh and sub-awardees Legal Clinic Network LCN. The evaluation will address the Relevance, Cost Effectiveness, Efficiency, Sustainability, and Impact of the project while assessing how effectively gender concerns and issues specific to children and youth were part of project planning and implementation. The evaluators will provide an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) to the program’s achievement.

VI. Evaluation Questions

The performance of the project will be evaluated following the Development Assistance Committee of the Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD/DAC) criteria. The evaluator will mainly analyze the following questions:

Relevance

1. Were the activities as reflected in the program proposal and work plans consistent with the overall goal and objectives?
2. To what extend the program is aligned and relevant for the national priorities in terms of justice for children and youth? What are the gaps identified?

Effectiveness

1. Were there any unexpected outcomes? How have the inputs and activities led to the output and contributed to the achievement of the outcomes?
2. What contextual factors have contributed or distracted to the achievement of the outcomes?
3. What expected results were not achieved and why? What lessons can we draw from this?
4. Was collaboration with stakeholders (GoV, other NGOs, local civil society) effective? If not, how could it have been improved?
5. The project provides psychosocial and legal support. The consultants will evaluate these activities with regard to value for money, return on investment and potential for scaling up.

Efficiency

1. Has the intervention been cost-effective? Were the alternative analyzed and considered
2. Were the sub-agreements with Legal Clinic Network LCN useful to achieving project objectives?

Impact (Key outcomes – effects)

1. How did the program contribute to improving the national formal and informal justice system? Has the program changed stakeholder attitudes and practices towards children and youth in contact with the law?
2. How did the program strengthen favorable environment and service delivery for children and adolescent in detention?
3. Was the support provided to children and families effective regarding a smoother reintegration? To what extend? Any gaps identified?
4. What are the potential unintended positive and negative effects of the implementation of the program?
5. What measures have been and can be taken to reduce the negative effects and expand the positive? What were the particular features of the program that made the most difference?
6. Gender considerations: Has the program effectively contributed to the creation of favorable conditions of gender equality on formal and informal justice systems.

Sustainability

1. To what extent can major milestones achieved during the program be sustained beyond the life of the intervention to support the needs of the beneficiaries?
2. Which sustainability mechanisms has Tdh and partner put in place to ensure continuity of activities and approaches after the end of the program?
3. Are they likely to be effective? Do the local stakeholders have the financial & technical capacity to maintain the benefits from the intervention when Tdh’s support comes to an end?
4. Was the exit strategy of the program suitable for its sustainability? To what extend? Any gap or lessons learnt?

VII. Methodology of the Evaluation

The evaluation will involve all relevant stakeholders, including program staff, implementing partners, beneficiaries and others as are deemed relevant. Tdh proposes that the evaluation methodology consists of both qualitative and quantitative data gathering techniques including key informant interviews, focus group discussions, questionnaires and other methods to answer evaluation questions. The consultant will be asked to submit the methodology of the evaluation, which will include but not be limited to the following:

• In-country briefings with Tdh Iraq team and regular feedback during the field work;
• Desk review (narrative project proposal, budget, PFU (project follow up), quarterly reports, monitoring plan, articles, Clusters’ documentation, organizational chart, monthly sitreps, training curricula, technical tools, sources of verification and any other document produced in the frame of the project);
• Observation of ongoing activities in the field bases (if applicable and possible in terms of access);
• Interviews with beneficiaries, relevant stakeholders, including key staff (remotely if needed), partners.

The consultant will ensure that different evaluative methods will be combined, and the information triangulated. As much as possible, participatory methods will be used to involve project actors and staff, therefore ensuring optimal learning by the team and partners. It is strongly recommended to differentiate as much as possible the activities to evaluate, in order to have a comprehensive vision of the projects implemented in each base.

The evaluation methodology and communication strategies must take this into account. Tdh DRL Juvenile Justice team and MEAL Manager will work with the evaluation team to ensure for all evaluation approaches, activities and timelines.

VIII. Deliverables of the Evaluation

The consultant will provide deliverables in a timely manner and in electronic format.

Essential deliverables required are:

• Following desk review and briefings, and before the start of the fieldwork: The inception report, which will include:
  • the detailed suggested methodology, including the evaluation matrix highlighting how evaluation questions will be addressed and to whom
  • the draft data collection tools,
  • work plan, including the list of people and sites to be visited
  • the first results derived from the desk review, including risks and limitations analysis
• An intermediate (draft final report) and the final evaluation report, which will include:
  • an executive summary (max. 3-4 pages) focused on the methodology, the main evaluation questions, conclusions and relevant recommendations
  • a table of contents
  • a list of annexes, abbreviations, tables, figures, pictures, etc.
  • an introduction
  • the presentation of the methodology, scope and limitations
  • the findings of the evaluation including lessons learned
  • detailed recommendations for the next projects including good practices in general and per sector
  • an evidence-based conclusion
  • annexes (Terms of Reference (ToR), data collection tools, updated work plan and list of people interviewed)
  • a PowerPoint presentation

Reports must be provided in Word format and the report pages numbered. Reports must be written and submitted in English. Results of this evaluation will be intended for Tdh, partner and for the donor.

IX. Intellectual property rights

All documentation related to the Assignment (whether or not in the course of your duties) shall remain the sole and exclusive property of the Terre des hommes (Tdh) Foundation.

X. Evaluation Schedule

The evaluation should be finish by 13^rd August 2020.

Request for quotation (RFQ) timeline: 20^th May – 3^rd June 2020

XI. Profile of consultant

The consultant (team) must have a strong background in the design, implementation and evaluation of humanitarian projects. Other requirements are:

• Knowledge of the Middle East, especially the Iraqi context
• Should have Iraq visa
• Demonstrated previous experience in leading humanitarian evaluations, using a range of different evaluation methods (impact evaluation, process evaluation, etc.). Particular expertise in evaluation with U.S-based donors will be an asset.
• Expertise in project cycle management, humanitarian project monitoring, and accountability issues
• Experience in working in the humanitarian sector, more specifically on child protection, access to justice or/and psychosocial programming Expertise in Humanitarian standards
• Strong conceptual and analytical thinking
• Excellent communication and writing skills
• Gender mixed team would be an asset
• Excellent knowledge English and Arabic ( As per the need, the consultant will have to manage translator).
• Successful experience in implementing / or evaluating DRL-funded projects would be an asset.

XII. Application and Mandatory documents

To be considered, the applicant must submit the following documentation:

• Methodological proposal highlighting understanding of the Terms of Reference, the context of the evaluation and the proposed approach to the evaluation tasks
• A detailed quotation including all cost (in Excel format).
• Letter from the bank confirming the bank account information and mentioning the financial standing
• A Curriculum Vitae (max. 3 to 4 pages highlighting work experience and qualifications relevant to this consultancy)
• Iraq Visa status / residency / on arrival visa
• Company’s registration and License
• ID card of the representative
• Power of Attorney from the owner of the company to the legal representative (if different)
• Tax compliance certificate
• Litigation history of the company (both court and arbitration cases)
• Full contact details of at least two references from recent clients
• A criminal record extract as required for any staff/contractor working for Tdh
• Two sample evaluation report highlighting previous experience relevant to this evaluation (Mandatory)
• Passport copy of team leader
• Up-to-date banking details (only for individual contractor)

XIII. Roles and Responsibility

Tdh team will provide support to the consultants in terms of:

• Responding inquiries and questions about the task
• Briefing about security conditions
• Logistics: Facilitate contact with / gathering staff and people to be interviewed
• Providing equipment / space needed for kick-off meeting and debriefing session in Tdh office meeting room
• Providing internet access, printer and office furniture if needed with in Tdh office
• Providing translation if needed
• Reviewing and commenting on deliverables (inception report, draft report)

The consultant will be responsible for:

• Consulting with Tdh for any inquiries / questions
• Ensuring that the consultant team is aware about security conditions as per Tdh briefing
• Behave in a culturally, gender and child sensitive manner.
• Abide by ethical principles when collecting data from beneficiaries, in particular from children and women (inform consent, confidentiality)
• Develop the data collection tools, test them and review them upon Tdh recommendation, data collection, data quality assurance, analysis
• Prepare quality reports and deliver them as planned in the work plan and schedule.
• Consultant is responsible to ensure all safety and security considerations for their evaluation team
• Consultant is responsible to manage all travel and logistics of their team.

All consultant team members are required to sign and abide by Tdh CSP and PSEA (Child Safeguarding and Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse Policies). The consultant will be required to adhere to and follow Tdh administrative and logistical regulations and procedures.

XIV. Selection Criteria and score

1. Expertise in Humanitarian standards – Juvenile Justice/Child Protection and Strong conceptual and analytical thinking (20)
2. Excellent knowledge English ; Arabic and Excellent communication and writing skills (10)
3. Successful experience in implementing and / or evaluating DRL-funded child protection Juvenile Justice projects (10)
4. Methodological proposal highlighting understanding of the ToR, tools, the context of the evaluation and the proposed approach to the evaluation tasks (40)
5. Two sample evaluation report highlighting previous experience relevant to this evaluation (20)

Total Score: 100

XV. Security and Responsibilities

Everyone is responsible for his/her own safety. Risks can be minimized with some caution and common sense by everyone. However, the Tdh Country Representative has responsibility for security rules. At any given time, all movements and activities outside Erbil must be endorsed by the mission and its security focal points for each sub-office.

Visitors and all persons under Tdh contract (employees, trainees, volunteers, contractors, etc.) must comply with the standards and rules of security of the delegation. However, they must also adapt their way of being and acting according to the circumstances in order to maximize their own safety.

They should not rely entirely on the organization: security depends largely on the behavior of each person. Everyone has an obligation to be consistently informed of the local security situation. In reference to the country security SoPs and security plans for all bases, the evaluator and the evaluation’s team will be briefed at their arrival in Iraq and when deployed in Tdh sub offices.

The compliance with Tdh Iraq security rules is mandatory and expected for the entire duration of the evaluation and for every staff, national and expatriate involved in it.

XVI. Total budget and Modalities of payment

Total budget available for this external evaluation max 14500 USD (including all cost )

Tdh will pay the consultant in two installments:

• First installment (30 % of total fee) upon acceptance of the inception report,
• Second installment (remaining % of the total fee) upon acceptance of the final report.