TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE FINAL EVALUATION 1. BACKGROUND: ONE UN S PARTNERSHIP WITH THE GIHUNDWE HOSPITAL

Transcription

1 ONE UN PARTNERSHIP WITH GIHUNDWE HOSPITAL TO PROVIDE HOLISTIC CARE TO SURVIVORS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND GIRLS THROUGH THE ONE STOP CENTER MODEL TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE FINAL EVALUATION Recruitment Type: One international and one national consultant Contract Type: SSA Location: Kigali/RWANDA with travel to Gihundwe/Rusizi District Start date: 15 September 2014 End Date of contract: 30 October 2014 Duration of the Consultancy: 27 working days 1. BACKGROUND: ONE UN S PARTNERSHIP WITH THE GIHUNDWE HOSPITAL The partnership between Gihundwe District Hospital and the One UN Rwanda begun in 2010 with the establishment of a pilot One Stop Centre (OSC) within the above hospital to provide a comprehensive and multi-disciplinary response to Gender Based Violence (GBV) and child abuse victims/survivors in Rusizi District Western Province. The OSC is conceived to be a specialized free-of-charge referral center, where GBV and child abuse victims/survivors can find holistic services ranging from: medical care; psychosocial and legal support, including police investigation and forensic evidence. These services are intended to reduce the harmful after-effects of GBV and child abuse on individual victims/survivors, promote their recovery and empowerment as well as their integration into the community. The OSC works closely with the district, the sector, cell and umudugudu/village leaders, community police, hospitals and health centers from surrounding areas to ensure that GBV and child abuse cases are prevented and responded to in a timely manner. The OSC operations are jointly supported by the Ministry of Health (MoH) through the Gihundwe Hospital administration and the One UN Rwanda. Through a parallel funding modality, participating UN Agencies comprising of UNICEF, UNFPA and UNWOMEN provide financial, technical support and capacity development services according to their respective mandates and areas of expertise. On the other hand, the Gihundwe hospital focuses on overseeing the day-to-day management and functionality 1

2 of the OSC through the provision of additional human resources, office supplies and essential drugs for the treatment of patients in the center. In a bid to bring GBV services closer to the population, the government of Rwanda committed to put in place a functional OSC in each District Hospital by 2017 (7-year programme ). The national scale up of the OSC model is now underway and is led by the government and the One UN Rwanda. The evaluation of the Gihundwe OSC, therefore, comes at an opportune time, as it will assess the extent to which the OSC model has addressed the needs of GBV and Child abuse victims/survivors and achieved the intended results. Additionally, the findings of the evaluation and lessons learned will guide the implementation of the scale up process country wide. Gihundwe Hospital serves a population of people spread across 18 Sectors and 213 villages. There are also 6 health centers and 426 community health workers involved in community health care provision. Available statistics show that, from the time it was established (Sept 2010) until end of 2013, the centre had cared for a total of 1613 GBV and child abuse survivors of whom 392 were children below 18 years and 1221 adults. 2. JUSTIFICATION AND PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION After three years of implementation of the pilot phase, it became paramount to assess the extent to which set objectives have been achieved. The evaluation is in line with article IV of the MoU signed between the Gihundwe Hospital and the One UN. The evaluation shall specifically determine the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of OSC interventions. To the extent possible the summative evaluation will focus on the impact of the joint initiative on direct and indirect beneficiaries. It will also document any good practices emerging from the implementation of the OSC model. This evaluation shall be carried out by a team of two independent evaluation experts (international and local consultants) who will be hired by the One UN. Respondents will be drawn from the Gihundwe Hospital staff and management, OSC staff, local partners, beneficiaries and participating One UN agencies. 3. OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION The overall objective of the evaluation is to assess the extent to which the joint initiative achieved set objectives and met the needs of its intended beneficiaries and document any resulting changes (intended and unintended). The specific objectives are to: 1. Determine the effectiveness of the OSC model in addressing the short and long-term issues of GBV and child abuse through a multi-sectoral approach taking into consideration the health, legal and psycho-social outcomes on victims/survivors. This will include an analysis of the overall 2

3 strategy and approaches of the OSC related to data collection and knowledge generation and dissemination to analyze the different approaches used by each partner in the joint intervention and assess their respective effectiveness and efficiency intended and unintended, positive and negative, as well as the major factors that influenced Gihundwe OSC achievements; 2. Identify trends and dynamics in GBV and determine the nature of collaboration between the OSC and GBV and Child Protection (CP) committees at District, Sector, Cell and Village levels. 3. Identify good practices learned (identifying strengths and weaknesses) on both operational and management issues of OSC implementation (cost-effectiveness) and make recommendations. 4. Develop a Theory of Change (ToC) for the OSC model and -strategy in light of the proposed recommendations that allows adjustment of the intervention logic. 5. Determine the sustainability of the OSC model based on the phasing out/ end of donor funding; 4. THE AUDIENCE OF THE EVALUATION The evaluation will have a diverse audience namely: The government of Rwanda: to provide information on effective strategies to guide the implementation of the national scale up of the OSC model District Hospitals: (i) to provide them with information on better strategies to guide work in responding to survivors of child domestic abuse and gender-based violence (GBV); For ONE UN: (i) to provide evidence on effective ways to move forward with the national scale up of the OSC, (ii) to assess the way holistic care is currently being provided by the OSC and propose solutions to fill the possible gaps identified by the evaluation, and (iii) to inform the ongoing scale up process of ONE STOP CENTERS across the country and for knowledge sharing. 5. SCOPE OF EVALUATION The scope of the evaluation will be limited to three dimensions: timeframe, geographic and thematic focus: Timeframe covered: the evaluation will cover the whole implementation period (September 2010 to December 2013: 3 years). Geographic scope: the evaluation will focus on OSC coverage area. To properly evaluate the Centre, institutions that are partnering with OSC in providing services to victims/survivors will be visited such as Gihundwe Hospital, Haguruka, Ministry of Justice (MINIJUST), Ministry of Health, and GBV/CP Committees. This will help to assess the effectiveness of horizontal and vertical partnership in providing care to survivors. Thematic scope: the evaluation will cover all areas of focus/components of the OSC joint initiative as indicated in the OSC project document. Combining the thematic and geographic focus, the evaluation should produce an overview of what was achieved in the different areas of 3

4 focus, identifying factors of success and challenges (external and internal to the joint intervention). The evaluation should include an analysis of the role, strengths and weaknesses of different stakeholders. 6. EVALUATION QUESTIONS The following is an initial series of questions to be answered by the evaluation. It will be refined with the evaluators during the inception phase. The evaluator will be requested to suggest, in detail, a methodology to be used for the evaluation to address the questions below. This must be elaborated in an inception report and include the proposed outcome/impact indicators the evaluator intends to use for analysis. The inception report will be reviewed by an Evaluation Technical Committee and comments will be incorporated in the revised inception report. The questions have been classified according to standard evaluation criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability. Note that aspects of quality of care in the centre will be analyzed both under the criteria of relevance and effectiveness ; aspects of management of the centre will mainly be analyzed under the criteria of efficiency. Relevance and validity of design: Is the OSC joint initiative design articulated in a coherent structure? Is the definition of goal, outcomes and outputs clearly articulated and were these achievable? Are the OSC joint initiative objectives addressing identified rights and needs of the target group(s) according to international and national standards? How did the allocation of resources reflect the needs and priorities of victims/survivors of violence? Effectiveness: What are the challenges faced by the legal personnel in handling GBV and child abuse cases and so with the victims/survivors? What are the results of the specific programmatic actions? Has the joint intervention achieved its planned outputs? How well has each approach been implemented? (Medical, legal and psychosocial) Were activities being implemented as planned? Were the implementation activities effective at delivering the intended outcomes? If not, what are the gaps? Were there any quality standards defined, procedures or protocols in place, and were they followed in the implementation of activities? 4

5 Have the quantity and quality of the results produced so far been satisfactory? Measure the effectiveness of joint intervention strategies: how effective is the One Stop Centre in providing holistic, timely and high quality multi-sectoral services to survivors of GBV and child abuse? How has the support of the One UN contributed to capacity building of the OSC team to ensure effective delivery of services? How is data collected? Is the data aligned with national standards? Are reports generated regularly? Is the system computerized? Who is in charge of the data and is this coordinated with other sectors? How effective are the monitoring and reporting mechanisms? How effective is the reporting of GBV and child abuse cases? Efficiency: What measures are taken during the implementation to ensure that resources are efficiently used? Have the outputs been delivered in a timely manner? Could the activities and outputs been delivered with fewer resources without reducing their quality and quantity? Is the managerial and staff structure of the OSC -effective? Is it adequate to the current context and demands? Have ONE UN s organizational structure, managerial support and coordination mechanisms effectively supported the delivery of the joint intervention? How well was the joint intervention managed? Impact Have the approaches contributed to any important intended/unintended changes (consequences?), either positive or negative? Sustainability: What mechanisms have been put in place to ensure the sustainability of the joint intervention results? Is there evidence of interest or concrete plans for scaling up or replication of successful experiences? o The adequacy of the government commitment to the joint intervention; and extent to which government has allocated resources for this; Whether Ministry of Health and district have a sense of ownership of the joint intervention; 5

6 Lessons Learned What are the lessons learned in terms of implementation of the multi-disciplinary approach, coordination, and beneficiary satisfaction? What are the key challenges to successful implementation of Gihundwe OSC and how can they be improved upon or adjusted moving forward? What are the good practices that can be incorporated in future projects taking into account the current and potential context in upscaling of OSC country wide? 7. METHODOLOGY AND EVALUATION APPROACH The evaluation methodology will be developed by the Evaluation Team (composed of 1 international and 1 national consultant) and presented for approval to the Evaluation Technical Committee. The methodology should use a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods that are appropriate to address the main evaluation questions. These methods should be applied with respect to human rights and gender equality principles, and ensure the engagement of key stakeholders, particularly survivors utilizing services of the OSC. The evaluation will follow UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) Norms and Standards as well as the Ethical Code of Conduct for Evaluations in the UN, available under Following UNEG Norms and Standards, upon finalization of the evaluation report a management response will be prepared as practical means to enhance the use of evaluation findings and follow-up to the evaluation recommendations. The management response will be approved by the Evaluation Management Committee and will identify who is responsible, what are the action points and the deadlines. Following UNEG Standards both the final evaluation report and the management response will be publicly disclosed at the online Global Accountability and Tracking of Evaluation Use (GATE) system under The quality of the final evaluation report will be assessed following GERAAS methodology (Global Evaluation Reports Assessment and Analysis System GERAAS). To further promote learning and the exchange of experiences, a dissemination strategy will be developed for sharing lessons learnt and good practices from this evaluation with UN partners, Government of Rwanda and other relevant stakeholders. The methodology outlines in the inception report should: i) specify the approach to address the purposes of the evaluation and the evaluation questions (including an evaluation matrix with key evaluation criteria, questions, indicators, and sources of information); ii) determine the instruments and methods to gather relevant information and data (e.g. document review, phone and face-to-face interviews, focus groups, surveys, site visits, etc.). It should also include the review of a wide range of information sources (e.g. documents, filed information, institutional information systems, financial records, and a variety of key informants 1 ). 1 The consultants can raise or discuss any issue or topic they deem necessary to fulfil the tasks. The Consultants, however, are not authorized to make any commitments to any party on behalf of ONE UN. 6

7 The proposed approach and methodology has to be considered as flexible rather than final; the evaluators will have an opportunity to make their inputs and propose changes in the evaluation design. It is expected that the selected consultants for the evaluation will further refine the approach and methodology and submit their detailed description in the proposal and Inception Report. 8. MANAGEMENT OF THE EVALUATION This independent evaluation will be managed by the ONE UN Evaluation Task Force with the technical support and guidance from the One UN M&E team. An Evaluation Task Manager in UN Women will be appointed with responsibility for managing the day to day aspects of the evaluation process. The Evaluation Task Manager will closely liaise and receive inputs from the Evaluation Reference Group which will serve as consultative body to provide substantive and technical input throughout the evaluation process. The Evaluation Reference Group will be chaired by UN Women. The Evaluation Reference Group will consist of: Representatives of implementing parties for the Government of Rwanda: a representative of the Ministry of Health, the Medical Director of the Gihundwe One Stop Center and the Ministry of Gender and Family Promotion (MIGEPROF); Three relevant representatives from UN Agencies involved in supporting the OSC (UN WOMEN, UNFPA and UNICEF); Two M&E Technical Advisors/Specialists; One Gender Expert from UN Women; GBV joint intervention manager and ONE UN joint intervention focal points ; One representative of CSO; UN Women Regional Evaluation Specialist (based in Nairobi). The Evaluation Reference Group will review and provide feedback to key evaluation milestones/ products as follows: the Evaluation Terms of Reference, the evaluation team selection, the draft/ final evaluation report and evaluation dissemination strategy, the draft management response and action plan. It will provide methodology advice and feedback for all technical products submitted by the evaluation team and support preparation of the management response and final report dissemination strategy. Day-to-day administrative, financial and content-related activities will be handled by the Evaluations Task Manager. S/He will work to ensure that key steps of the evaluation are orchestrated smoothly and approved by the Evaluation Reference Group. 7

8 9. TIMEFRAME AND PRODUCTS The evaluation will be conducted between August and September 2014 The evaluation will be conducted in 4 stages: (i) an inception stage; (ii) a comprehensive study; (iii) catchment area field visits, and (iv) a final overall analysis stage to draft the final evaluation report: - Stage 1 Inception phase involves an initial desk review and interviews with the key stakeholders to define the scope of the evaluation and refine the evaluation questions. It will result in an inception report with the development of detailed work plan, methodology for gathering and analyzing the data, and the criteria for the selection of countries. The evaluators will meet with the Evaluation Reference Group. - Stage 2 Comprehensive study covers a thorough desk review of all relevant documentation related to health, justice and psycho-social services and completion of interviews with key stakeholders at national levels as well as with survivors of violence. - Stage 3 fieldwork/surveys, data collection and analysis etc. - Stage 3 Preliminary findings: drafting and presentation of preliminary evaluation findings and of the draft report. - Stage 4 Final evaluation report: preparation of the final evaluation report based on feedback received on the draft report These evaluation phases will be linked to specific deliverables to be submitted by the Evaluation Team, as follows: 1. An inception report which contains evaluation objectives and scope, description of evaluation methodology/methodological approach, data collection tools, data analysis methods, key informants/agencies, evaluation questions, performance criteria, issues to be studied, work plan and reporting requirements. It should include a clear evaluation matrix relating all these aspects. 2. Power point presentation of preliminary findings to the key stakeholders. The comments made by key stakeholders should inform the draft report. 3. Draft evaluation report highlighting key evaluation findings and conclusions, lessons and recommendations. The format of the evaluation report will be agreed with the evaluators. 4. Final evaluation report which should follow the proposed structured: o Executive Summary (maximum five pages) o The Joint intervention description o Evaluation purpose o Evaluation methodology o Findings o Analysis o Conclusions o Recommendations and Lessons learnt o Annexes (including interview list without identifying names for sake of confidentiality/ anonymity, data collection instruments, key documents consulted, Terms of Reference). 8

9 Deliverables are to be written in English and submitted to the Evaluation Task Manager and the Evaluation Reference Group in the due date, as per the timeframe. 8. SKILLS, COMPETENCIES AND EXPERIENCE The evaluation team would be composed of 2 consultants: i) A Team Leader (International): international expert on gender, child domestic abuse and Gender-Based Violence (GBV), responsible for ensuring the quality of the overall evaluation; and 1 national consultant with strong evaluation and data collection and analysis skills, who will collect the data at Gihundwe OSC and support the collection of other relevant information. The team leader (International Consultant) must demonstrate: (a) Extensive knowledge of, and experience in evaluation: applying qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods; and in data analysis skills (b) 7-10 years experience (knowledge of and experience) in working in the area child abuse, GBV, gender, aid effectiveness, and human rights; (c) Experience in designing and leading evaluations; (d) Process management skills such as facilitation skills; (e) Knowledge of the role of the UN and its programming is desirable; understanding of the One UN and the Delivering as One approach is an asset (f) Language proficiency in English a must, French is added value; (g) Experience with conducting evaluations in various cultural settings and knowledge of Rwanda socio-cultural context is an asset. The National Consultant should demonstrate: (a) Extensive knowledge of, and experience in evaluation: applying qualitative and quantitative evaluation methods; and in data analysis skills; (b) Process management skills such as facilitation skills; (c) Experience in gender/gbv analysis and human rights. (d) Knowledge of the role and ways of working of both the UN and the government partnership is desirable; Language proficiency in English and Kinyarwanda required. For logistic purpose, evaluators will be hosted by UN Women: office space, administrative and secretarial support, telecommunications, printing of documentation, etc. The evaluation team is responsible for developing and administrating all methodological tools such as surveys, but the Evaluation Reference Group will facilitate this process to the extent possible by providing contact information such as addresses and phone numbers. 9

10 9. RECRUITMENT PROCESS Please send CVs of Evaluation Team members and a Technical Proposal (5-pages maximum) to registry.rw@undp.org by 28 July Please include a Financial Proposal clearly identifying in the subject financial proposal for Gihundwe evaluation. Only pre-selected candidates will be notified (See Annex 2 for the criteria on how the Evaluation Teams and their proposals will be assessed). 10. ANNEXES Annex 1: Criteria for Assessment of the Evaluation Team (To be discussed with Human resources desk) Annex 2: Evaluation Ethical Code of Conduct of the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) ANNEX 1: Criteria for Assessment of the Evaluation Team (International and National) The selection of the evaluation team will be based on the fulfillment of the specifications established in the TOR. The submitted proposal /offer will be assessed on three main categories: the expertise and competencies of the evaluators (Nationals), as reflected in their CVs, the technical proposal for the specific evaluation, and financial proposal. The categories will be assigned different weighting will total 100%. I. The main Consultant (Team leader)( 40%) The team leader s experience and qualifications meet criteria indicated in the TOR. II. Technical proposal (40%) 1. Evaluation matrix: The matrix clearly addresses the TOR, relating evaluation Questions with evaluation criteria, with indicators and with means of verification. 2. Evaluation approach and methodology: The proposal presents a specific approach and a variety of techniques for gathering and analyzing qualitative and quantitative data that are feasible and applicable in the timeframe and context of the evaluation, and incorporate human rights and gender equality perspectives. 3. Work plan: The timeframe and resources indicated in the work plan are realistic and useful for needs of the evaluation. 4. Motivation and ethics: The evaluators reflect clear professionalism commitment with the subject of the assignment and follow UNEG code of conduct. III. Budget (20%) The budget proposed is sufficient for applying the data gathering techniques and for obtaining reliable data for the evaluation in the timeframe indicated. 10

11 ANNEX 2: ETHICAL CODE OF CONDUCT FOR THE EVALUATION It is expected that the evaluators will respect the ethical code of conduct of the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG). These are: Independence: Evaluators shall ensure that independence of judgment is maintained and that evaluation findings and recommendations are independently presented. Impartiality: Evaluators shall operate in an impartial and unbiased manner and give a balanced presentation of strengths and weaknesses of the policy, program, project or organizational unit being evaluated. Conflict of Interest: Evaluators are required to disclose in writing any past experience, which may give rise to a potential conflict of interest, and to deal honestly in resolving any conflict of interest which may arise. Honesty and Integrity: Evaluators shall show honesty and integrity in their own behavior, negotiating honestly the evaluation costs, tasks, limitations, scope of results likely to be obtained, while accurately presenting their procedures, data and findings and highlighting any limitations or uncertainties of interpretation within the evaluation. Competence: Evaluators shall accurately represent their level of skills and knowledge and work only within the limits of their professional training and abilities in evaluation, declining assignments for which they do not have the skills and experience to complete successfully. Accountability: Evaluators are accountable for the completion of the agreed evaluation deliverables within the timeframe and budget agreed, while operating in a cost effective manner. Obligations to Participants: Evaluators shall respect and protect the rights and welfare of human subjects and communities, in accordance with the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other human rights conventions. Evaluators shall respect differences in culture, local customs, religious beliefs and practices, personal interaction, gender roles, disability, age and ethnicity, while using evaluation instruments appropriate to the cultural setting. Evaluators shall ensure prospective participants are treated as autonomous agents, free to choose whether to participate in the evaluation, while ensuring that the relatively powerless are represented. Confidentiality: Evaluators shall respect people s right to provide information in confidence and make participants aware of the scope and limits of confidentiality, while ensuring that sensitive information cannot be traced to its source. Avoidance of Harm: Evaluators shall act to minimize risks and harms to, and burdens on, those participating in the evaluation, without compromising the integrity of the evaluation findings. Accuracy, Completeness and Reliability: Evaluators have an obligation to ensure that evaluation reports and presentations are accurate, complete and reliable. Evaluators shall explicitly justify judgments, findings and conclusions and show their underlying rationale, so that stakeholders are in a position to assess them. Transparency: Evaluators shall clearly communicate to stakeholders the purpose of the evaluation, the criteria applied and the intended use of findings. Evaluators shall ensure that stakeholders have a say in shaping the evaluation and shall ensure that all documentation is readily available to and understood by stakeholders. Omissions and wrongdoing: Where evaluators find evidence of wrong-doing or unethical conduct, they are obliged to report it to the proper oversight authority. 11

12 ToRs Prepared by the One UN (UNW, UNFPA and UNICEF) and Gihundwe Hospital). Inputs provided by members of the evaluation reference group. Approved by: Diana Ofwona UN Women Representative/Manager of the evaluation Date: 12