BACKGROUND
Shoruq is a non-profit organization founded in Dheisheh refugee camp in 2012. Shoruq’s vision, mission, objectives and programs are geared towards a political, social, cultural and economic prosperity and dignified life for all refugees in Occupied Palestine and the Diaspora, and empowering refugees in shaping a just solution and a better future for themselves and their offspring.
Vision
We envision Palestinian refugees, whether living in occupied Palestine or in the Diaspora, striving individually and collectively to attain and exercise their rights including the right of return to their original lands, and realizing dignified lives for themselves in the meanwhile.
Mission
Mission: Shoruq aims at defending and protecting the inalienable rights of indigenous Palestinian refugees, to act as a voice for Palestinian people, and demand implementation of their rights locally and internationally. Shoruq seeks to empower the most marginalized refugee groups who are affected by the Israeli occupation policies, and lack any social and legal protection in Occupied Palestine and host countries. Shoruq does this by developing their capabilities and empowering them to depend on themselves and the local resources.
Objectives of the evaluation:
Evaluations are conducted with a view to:
enhancing the work impact.
developing recommendations for further developments of the project or the guidance of similar projects in the future
providing an analysis of accountability with respect to the use of project funds
drawing key lessons learned to contribute to organizational learning
Accountability to affected population
1. Project Background and Context
Provide also the following key information:
Project Location | Bethlehem Governorate |
Project Name | Towards a More Protective and Enabling Environment for Children in Conflict with Law |
Donor(s)/ funding sources | UNICEF |
Project duration | 12 months |
implementing agency and partners | Shoruq Organization |
|
|
2. Purpose and Objectives of the Evaluation
The purpose of the Mid-Term Evaluation of the project is to highlight progress made towards the implementation of project’s objectives to-date, and to identify key recommendations to take into account during the implementation of the project over the course of six months
3. Audience for the Evaluation
65 children who received psychosocial support
20 children who received legal support
22 families who received psychosocial counselling and support
4. Evaluation Issues and Key Questions – Evaluation Matrix
The scope of the mid-term evaluation will cover Shoruq’s project: towards a more protective and enabling environment for children.
The analysis should contain recommendations on future courses of action. The evaluation should be a document that can function as a learning tool for Shoruq.
In addition to the governance structure of the project, whether the project set up leads to the desired result by measuring to what extent the objective/outputs/activities have been achieved against the results and resources over the course of six months.
4.1 Quality and Relevance of Design
Assess the continuing appropriateness and relevance of the Design. The project context, threats and opportunities may have changed during the course of the project. Assess what adjustments have been made and what others might be necessary. In particular:
To what extent does the project respond to priority issues?
To what extent are the objectives of the project still valid?
Is the project team planning the most appropriate strategies?
Are there any major risks or ‘killer assumptions’ that are currently not being taken into account?
Do stakeholders care about the project and believe it makes sense?
4.2 Effectiveness
Assess the major achievements of the project to date in relation to its stated objectives and intended results. As far as possible this should be a systematic assessment of progress based on monitoring data for the planned Goal, Objectives and Strategic Activities. (Data already collected by the project’s monitoring and reporting systems should provide much of the basic information).
Focus on the higher-level results.
Assess what has been achieved, the likelihood of future achievements, and the significance/ strategic importance of the achievements
Refer to quantitative assessments as far as possible
Include also qualitative evidence e.g. opinions on the project’s effectiveness based on impressions and interviews with target groups, partners, government, etc.
Describe any major failures of the project to date, explaining why they have occurred.
Describe any unforeseen impacts (whether positive or negative).
Identify any exceptional experiences that should be highlighted e.g. case-studies, stories, best practice
4.3 Efficiency of Planning and Implementation
Assess to what extent resources are being used economically to deliver the project.
Are plans being used, implemented and adapted as necessary? For example:
Is the overall project action plan used and up to date?
What % of activities in the workplan is being delivered?
Is financial spend in line with plan?
Is monitoring data being collected as planned, stored and used to inform future plans
Assess other programme management factors important for delivery, such as:
Working relationships within the team
Working relationships with partners, stakeholders and donors
Learning processes such as self-evaluation, coordination and exchange with related projects.
Internal and external communication.
4.4 Impact
To what extent is the project contributing to a long-term positive effect on people and nature? How is the project making a difference?
Normally this should assess to what extent the project is achieving its Vision and Goal. It can be combined with Section 4.2 Effectiveness if it makes sense to do so.
4.5 Potential for sustainability, replication and magnification
Assess the key factors affecting sustainability of the project, such as:
What is the social and political environment/ acceptance of the project?
Will the project contribute to lasting benefits? Which organisations could/ will ensure continuity of project activities in the project area?
Is there evidence of organisations/partners/communities that have copied, upscaled or replicated project activities beyond the immediate project area. Is such replication or magnification likely?
Assess whether the programme be considered as delivering value for money for its present scope/ scale of impact (it is recognised this will be a somewhat subjective view)?
Assess and make recommendations on the key strategic options for the future of the project i.e. exit strategy, scale down, replication, scale-up, continuation, major modifications to strategy
5. Methodology
Provide specific suggestions for data collection methods to be used (e.g. field observations, interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, participatory methodologies, etc.). Note the possible geographic scope of the sampling and any cultural conditions that may affect the methodology. Lists of key informants and important background documents are attached as Annexes 2 and 3.
N.B. Direct observation is critical for gathering evidence and opinion. However for most WWF evaluations, the evaluation team will not collect primary data on populations, threats or socio-economic status. Therefore the precision of the evaluation results will depend to a large extent on the quality of the monitoring data already collected by the project.
6. Profile of the Evaluation Team.
Detail The specific skills or characteristics needed in the evaluator or evaluation team, e.g. technical knowledge, familiarity with the country / culture, language proficiency, evaluation experience, facilitation and interviewing skills, etc. Define the structure of the team, including roles and responsibilities.
7. Outputs and Deliverables
List of key deliverables and deadlines (e.g. workplan, briefings, draft report, final report). The required format for the evaluation report is attached as Annex 4.
8. Evaluation Timetable
A suggested timetable for the evaluation. To be realistic, a timetable must allocate adequate time for:
Development of the evaluation design; finalization of the evaluation matrix; sampling strategy
Development of research instruments (questionnaires, interview guidelines, etc.)
Review of documentation
International travel; domestic travel
Field (or desk) research
Data analysis (usually half the number of days of the research)
Meeting with project staff and stakeholders on the initial findings and recommendations
Preparation of the draft report
Incorporation of comments and finalization of the evaluation report.
9. Cost
General allocations (not a detailed budget) of resources available for the evaluation (consultant fees, travel, subsistence allowance, etc.).
10. Logistical Support (normally provided by the implementing office).
Support to be provided to the evaluation team and by whom (provision of documentation, scheduling of interviews, local travel, arrangement of accommodation, access to office facilities, etc.).
Annex 1. Evaluation Matrix
The evaluation matrix is an important tool summarizing the evaluation design. First the key questions for the evaluation are defined. These then are broken down into specific research questions. Then for each specific research question, data sources are identified, together with data collection tools or methods appropriate for each data source. It may also be useful to specify indicators by which the specific questions will be evaluated.
Issues | Key Questions | Specific Research Questions | Data Sources | Methods / Tools | (Indicators) |
Design |
|
|
|
|
|
Effectiveness |
|
|
|
|
|
Efficiency |
|
|
|
|
|
Impact |
|
|
|
|
|
Sustainability |
|
|
|
|
|
(other key issues as necessary) |
|
|
|
|
|
Annex 2. Key Informants
A list of individuals who should be consulted, together with their contact information and organizational affiliation. The list of individuals/ groups will normally include, but not be limited to, the following:
Specify also the locations to be visited.
Incorporate the information in the Evaluation Matrix, if that is helpful.
Annex 3. Documents to be Consulted
A list of important documents that the evaluators should read at the outset of the evaluation and before finalizing the evaluation design. This should be limited to the critical information that the evaluation team needs. Data sources and documents may include:
Standards for Project/ Programme Management
Project proposal
Action Plan (e.g. (atest) log frame/ Results Chains)
(Latest) Annual work plans
Monitoring data and analysis of that data
(Latest full year) technical report
Key outputs produced: research/ surveys conducted, Regulations and policies developed
Partnership arrangements e.g. agreements of cooperation with local governments
Newsletters and publicity information
Output of any organizational learning initiatives
Other assessments e.g. self-assessments, previous evaluations
Annex 4. Required Format for the Evaluation Report
Title Page, including project title and number, date of report, authors and their affiliations, WWF contact point for the evaluation, etc.
Executive Summary (1-4 pages):
Brief project description and context
Purpose and expected use of the evaluation
Objectives of the evaluation
Summary of the evaluation methodology
Principle findings and conclusions, especially relating to project goals / targets
Key recommendations
Summary of lessons learned
Acknowledgements
Table of Contents
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Main Report
Purpose of the evaluation
Audience for and use of the evaluation
Objectives of the evaluation
Evaluation methodology, including: rationale for choice of methodology, data sources, methods for data collection and analysis, participatory techniques, ethical and equity considerations, major limitations of the methodology
Composition of the evaluation team, including any specific roles of team members
Project description, including: context, underlying rationale, stakeholders and beneficiaries, conceptual model, results chain or logical framework, and project monitoring system
Evaluation findings, documented by evidence:
Design: quality and relevance
Effectiveness (progress towards objectives and results); contributions of stakeholders; constraints or problems encountered
Efficiency of Planning and Implementation
Impact; progress towards Vision and Goals (often the impact on biodiversity and livelihoods)
Sustainability and replicability of project / programme impacts; capacity built; institutional and stakeholder issues
Conclusions: insights into the findings; reasons for successes and failures; innovations
Recommendations (based on evidence and insights)
Lessons learned with wider relevance and that can be generalized beyond the project
Annexes to the evaluation report:
Terms of Reference for the evaluation
Evaluation matrix
Timetable
List of individuals interviewed and of stakeholder groups and/or communities consulted
List of supporting documentation reviewed
Research instruments: questionnaire, interview guide(s), etc. as appropriate
Project logical framework
Specific monitoring data, as appropriate
Summary tables of progress towards outputs, targets, goals – referring directly to the indicators established for these in the project logframe
Short biographies of the evaluators.
Individual Proposals and the consultant CV should be submitted to Shoruq Organization by 17/9/2022 to the following email: info@shoruq.org.
Timeline of the consultancy: 2 weeks.
