comparative assessment of different livelihood approaches ... · pdf filecomparative...

Comparative assessment of different livelihood approaches across

humanitarian organisations as part of the resettlement programs to

support those internally displaced by the earthquake that struck Haiti

on January 12, 2010.

September 2015

Terms of reference – Comparative assessment of different livelihood approaches. Page 1

Table of contents

1. CONTEXT, EVALUATION AND JUSTIFICATION ………………………………………………………………………………….2

2. OBJECTIVES, SCOPE and QUESTIONS……………………………………………………………………………………………….2

2.1 Overall objective……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….2

2.2 Specific objectives…….………………………………………………………………………………………………………2

2.3 Scope…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………….3

2.4 Questions to be addressed by the evaluation………………………………………………….………………..3

3. RESULTS…………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………..4

4. LANGUAGES…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4

5. METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………………………..………………………….…………………………5

5.1 Documentation...………………………………………………………………………………………………………………5

5.2 Field visits……………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5

6. DURATION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..….6

7. COMMUNICATION LINES……………..………………………………………………….……………………………..………………6

8. SUBMISSION…………..……………………………..………………………………………………….…………………………………...7

8.1 Application and selection criteria……..…………………………………………………………………………..….7

ANNEXES…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….8


1. CONTEXT, EVALUATION AND JUSTIFICATION

The earthquake that struck Haiti on 12 January 2010 was by all means a ‘mega disaster’, with an estimated 1.5

million people left homeless. As a result, many displaced families began living in temporary “shelter camps” which

sprung up around the city on any available open ground with only limited access to water sanitation and other

basic necessities. The international community quickly responded to the urgent needs of the displaced families in

order to provide a minimum level of access to basic services in the affected zones. It is in this context that several

humanitarian actors in synergy with local authorities launched a joint resettlement initiative for internally

displaced persons (IDP). This strategy is now considered a model strategy at national level to provide assistance to

displacement camps.

In order to facilitate the resettlement of displaced families who live without the financial means for suitable and

save rental accommodation, several organizations such as; ACTED, CARE, CONCERN WORLDWIDE, CRF, CRF, GOAL,

HelpAge, IFRC,JPHRO, OIM, Oxfam and World Vision, have adopted various livelihoods approaches as a way of

achieving poverty reduction. These approaches also facilitate their social reintegration in the preliminary stages of

their search for sustainable solutions while taking into account the perspectives of the poor. Since 2010, almost

81,000 households were relocated through a rent subsidy program. Among these households, it is estimated that

25% received a livelihoods package but this information remains unconfirmed. However, some questions still

remain; “are families able to meet their basic needs and continue to pay the rent in their new homes through

sustainable livelihoods approaches once rental support cash grants are finished?”, “are significant differences

observed between families who benefited from “livelihood packages” and those who received no support?”

Furthermore, various reports conducted in Haiti on resettlement and the development of sustainable solutions has

recommended that humanitarian actors carry out assessments on livelihoods approaches. The Brookings

Institution’s report on « Supporting Durable Solutions to Urban, Post-Disaster Displacement,: Challenges and

Opportunities in Haiti », recommends carrying out longitudinal studies in order to better understand the long-term

impacts of resettlement programmes. Also, the “External evaluation of the Rental Support Cash Grant Approach

Applied to Return and Relocation Programs in Haiti”, conducted by Large-N, Analysis – inc in 2014, insists on the

need to carry out a comparative study to measure the impact of livelihood grants.

It is in this context that several actors from Camps Coordination and Camps Management (CCCM) working group

decided to meet and contact a consultancy firm to undertake a comparative assessment of Livelihoods Approaches

adopted in relocation/resettlement programs.

2. OBJECTIVE, SCOPE ET QUESTION

2.1 Overall objective

The overall objective of this evaluation is to determine the impact of the different livelihoods approaches and the

economic security of households that were relocated; and to provide a comparison of the impact relative to

relocated families who have not been targeted by livelihoods program.

The objective of evaluation will be to draw the main lessons learned and seek to identify best practices to

influence future actions in similar contexts (massive urban displacement in developing countries). This evaluation


will also be used to influence future emergency programs in urban environments through the capitalization of

lessons learned and good practices.

2.2 SPECIFC OBJECTIVES

I. Evaluate the impact of supplemental support on the economic situation of households ;

II. Evaluate the different livelihoods approaches from a quality/cost/effectiveness point of view in order

to improve program performance based on lessons learned and accountability. Best practices and

approaches which prove to be effective/valid and cost-effective can be used to influence future

emergency programs through the capitalization of lessons learned and good practices ;

III. Feed into current reflection process of parties concerned on sustainable livelihood approaches ;

2.3 SCOPE

IV. The scope of the evaluation should focus on all livelihoods approaches adopted and funded by

humanitarian actors as part of the return and relocation programmes in Haiti, between January 2011

and September 2014 ;

V. The evaluation will also analyse the impact of actions implemented. In terms of impact, the

evaluation will identify the reasons/factors for a positive, limited or negative impact ;

VI. The evaluation will respond to a series of questions which will help identify clear and concise

recommendations in order to improve the results of similar programs in a variety of contexts. The

knowledge and experience drawn from this program will help support efforts that advocate for

similar programs.

2.4 QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED BY THE EVALUATION

VII. Relevance: How were the approaches identified/were the selected approaches based on

evaluations/vulnerability criteria/previous studies conducted? Are they adapted to the current

context? What are the terms and conditions for these approaches (unconditional cash grants,

vocational training, life skills training, grant-supported income generating activities etc.? What are

the objectives of the different approaches?

VIII. Effectiveness: Were the objectives for each approach achieved and to what degree? What were the

main factors for achievement, or non-achievement of objectives?

IX. Efficiency: Were the approaches efficient with regards cost/quality? Were objectives achieved within

the set timeframe?

X. Impact: Are there differences between approaches in terms of creation or strengthening of viable

income generating activities? Has the amount allocated to each approach made a difference in

impact? What concrete changes have the approaches had on household livelihood security? To what

extent are beneficiaries able to continue generating enough income to meet their basic needs once

the program comes to an end? Do certain factors of vulnerability affect the success of the programs:

e.g. large families with young children, families in debt etc.? From a socio-economic point view, do

beneficiaries find themselves “worse off,” “better off” or “about the same” as before the

earthquake? Are there any differences between beneficiaries who did not receive a “livelihood”

package and those who did? To what extent has previous experience of beneficiaries influenced the

success of income generating activities?


XI. Coherence: The different approaches were they in line with identified needs? What are the indicators

used to monitor the performance of livelihoods projects?

XII. Operationalization and beneficiaries: How are livelihoods interventions initiated and communicated

to communities? How targeting is achieved and how is it perceived by the community? What have

been the positive and negative effects of this methodological approach for implementing project

activities regarding beneficiaries and the community?

XIII. Coordination and complementarity: Is complementary to other actions necessary and / or adds value?

Are the different approaches coordinated between the different humanitarian actors, national

institutions and other economic actors? Do the different approaches work in close synergy with other

development programs?

XIV. Cross-cutting issues: Are questions regarding cross-cutting issues (gender, protection, and

environment) considered at the design and implementation stages of sustainable livelihoods

approaches?

XV. Sustainability: What are the main factors which influence the sustainability and non-sustainability of

activities? What percentages of beneficiaries still have an income generating activity and continue to

generate income? What percentages of beneficiaries have managed to break into the job market

after training? To what extent do the selected areas of resettlement and type of activities influence

the success of the program?

XVI. Capitalisation: lessons learned / best practices/ recommendations for future interventions in Haiti or

elsewhere.

3. RESULTATS

Expected products:

XVII. Document outlining the methodology used, and examples of the different tools used (add to

annexes) ;

XVIII. Inception report will be prepared by evaluators after the first visit and before data collection. This

exercise will enable the pilot committee and evaluators to verify that they share the same

understanding regarding the evaluation and also clarify any misunderstandings during start-up of

evaluation ;

XIX. First draft of the report ;

XX. Final report in French which should be a maximum of 50 pages and include the executive summary

summarising key lessons learned, best practices and recommendations ;

XXI. Oral presentation of evaluation for the CCCM cluster as well as other relevant actors (CNSA, DINEPA,

donors, NGO, etc.) (PowerPoint presentation) with a brief outline of the study, conclusions and

recommendations.

4. LANGUAGES

The necessary languages for the evaluation are French and Creole for conducting interviews with beneficiaries

and local actors. The report will be submitted in 2 versions: 1 in English and 1 in French.


5. METHODOLOGY

The evaluation will be based on the analysis and triangulation of the following information :

- Project documents from different partners who have adopted livelihoods approaches;

- Field visits ;

- Meetings and surveys with beneficiaries and the community ;

- Meetings with partners, authorities and donors.

The consultancy firm will need to outline the type of methodology that they intend to use to respond to

questions outlined in section 2 as well as the type of methodology to be applied during field visits and

interviews. A detailed evaluation plan and timeline as well as budget will need to be drafted and submitted by

the consultancy firm.

The consultancy firm will have to adopt a participative approach when working in concert with the pilot

evaluation committee (consisting of partners from the CCCM working group) throughout all stages of the

evaluation. The consultancy will also be expected to submit an interim report which will be revised and

discussed jointly before submitting the final report.

5.1 DOCUMENTATION

Before beginning the evaluation, all documents relating to programs must be read by the consultancy firm and

they must also attend a workshop with the evaluation steering committee.

The consultancy firm must review all program documentation, external documents, existing evaluations,

studies, etc.

5.2 FIELD VISITS

The consultancy firm must :

- Collect information directly through field interviews and from beneficiary sample ;

- Collect information indirectly through interviews with local representatives and humanitarian actors as

well as through meetings with local authorities, beneficiary groups, humanitarian agencies as well as

donors and stakeholders. During the collection of data, standard evaluation methods as well as

participative approaches must be used ;

- Analyse secondary information including the analysis of program monitoring data as well as other relevant

statistical data ;

- Conduct interviews with different humanitarian actors and donors.


6. DURATION

Description Date

Beginning of evaluation 20 October 2015

End of evaluation 20 February 2016

Submission of initial report 5 November 2015

Submission of interim report 23 January 2015

Submission of final report 12 February 2016

Oral presentation of evaluation 14 February 2016

The dates and duration of the evaluation can be discussed during the negotiation phase of the contract.

7. COMMUNICATION LINES

The Concern Urban Program Manager will supervise the execution of the contract and will ensure that the terms of

reference are adhered to. The consultancy firm will work in close collaboration with the evaluation steering

committee that will be responsible for validating the evaluation framework as well as the technical aspects of the

evaluation. The steering committee will also provide key information since the majority of committee members

are program implementing partners. The different steps of the evaluation will be validated by the steering

committee.

8. SUBMISSION

Written proposals addressing the statement of work and the requirements listed above must be sent before 4pm on October 9, 2015 by email to the following address : [email protected] or by post to « RTN4 – Evalliv002 » to the following address : CONCERN WORLDWIDE – HAITI /28, rue Metellus, Pétion Ville/B.P.15016 ; Any written appeal shall be submitted to Systems Director : [email protected]

8.1. APPLICATION AND CRITERIA SELECTION

The proposal must be drafted in French or English and as should the support documents relevant for you application. 1. Technical offer should include the following:

- Cover letter formally submitting your application, duly signed and dated containing technical and financial details ;

- Strategic comprehension of the mission and comments on ToR ; - Detailed description on how the undertaken tasks will be achieved with detailed methodology, including a

detailed schedule and the sampling effort; - CVs of specialists outlining their relevant skills and experience in similar studies, including references and

field of specialisation ; - Proposed implementation plan.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


2. Financial offer should include the following : - Detailed table of the number of people per day per activity as well as profile for each candidate; - Breakdown of fees, specific costs and administrative costs, containing unit costs and quantity. Fees and

disbursements must be outlined separately in the offer. - All logistic- related costs (transport, accommodation, etc.) must be included in the financial offer as

Concern will not assume responsibility for these costs outside of the offer. The above information should be presented using the suggested formats in annex 1 (technical proposition) and 2 (financial proposition) : The selection of the Consultancy will be based on the following criteria :

- The proposed content and timeline ; - Skills and qualifications of consultancy team ; - Previous experience in a similar study/setting ; - Price of the offer ; - General comprehension of the subject and quality of the CV ; - Availability ; - References from previous employers ; - Knowledge and experience within the Haitian context and issues around displacement.

9 OPENING OF OFFERS The opening of the offers will take place on Tuesday 12th October 2015 at 2pm at the office of Concern WW 28, Rue Metellus, Pétion-Ville, Haiti. All interested bidders may attend.

**************************************************


ANNEX 1 – Technical Proposal Format

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------

[Location, Date]

To: The Chairperson

Concern Worldwide (CWW)

[Address depending on how it is submitted]

We, the undersigned, offer to conduct the Comparative assessment of different livelihood approaches across

humanitarian organisations as part of the resettlement programs to support those internally displaced by the

earthquake that struck Haiti on January 12, 2010 in accordance with your Call for Proposals dated 24th

of

September 2015 and our Proposal. We are hereby submitting our Proposal, which includes this Technical

Proposal, and a Financial Proposal.

Proposal is binding upon us and subject to the modifications resulting from Contract negotiations.

We acknowledge and accept CWW’s right to inspect and audit all records relating to our Proposal irrespective of

whether we enter into a contract with CWW as a result of this proposal or not.

We understand you are not bound to accept any Proposals you receive.

We remain,

Yours sincerely,

Authorized Signature:

Name and Title of Signatory:

Name of Firm:

Address:


Consulting Firm’s Organization

[Provide a brief (two pages) description of the background and organization of your firm/entity and each associate

for the assignment (if applicable)]


Consulting Firm’s Experience

Relevant Services Carried Out in the Last Five Years

That Best Illustrate Qualifications

Using the format below, provide information on each assignment for which your firm/entity, either individually as

a corporate entity or as one of the major companies within an association, was legally contracted.

Assignment Name: Country:

Location within Country: Professional Staff Provided by Your

Firm/Entity(profiles):

Name of Client: No of Staff:

Address: No of Staff-Months; Duration of

Assignment:

Start Date (Month/Year): Completion Date (Month/Year): Approx. Value of Services (in Current

US$):

Name of Associated Service Providers/ Consulting Firms , If Any: No of Months of Professional Staff

Provided by Associated Service

Providers/ Consulting Firms :

Name of Senior Staff (Project Director/Coordinator, Team Leader) Involved and Functions Performed:

Narrative Description of Project:

Description of Actual Services Provided by Your Staff:

Firm’s Name:


Comments and Suggestions of Consulting Firms on the Terms of Reference and Methodology

A. On the Terms of Reference:

[The Consulting Firm should present and justify here any modifications or improvement to the Terms of Reference

and Methodology which they consider could improve performance when conducting the assignment (such as

deleting some activity you consider unnecessary, or adding another, or proposing a different phasing of the

activities). Such suggestions should be concise and to the point, and incorporated in the Consulting Firm’s

Proposal.]

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.


Description of the Approach, Methodology and Work Plan for the Project

[Technical approach, methodology and work plan are key components of the Technical Proposal. The Consultant is

suggested to present the Technical Proposal using the following:

a) Technical Approach and Methodology

b) Work Plan

c) Organization and Staffing

a) Technical Approach and Methodology. In this section the Consulting Firm should explain their

understanding of the objectives of the assignment, approach to the services, methodology for carrying out the

activities and obtaining the expected output, and the degree of details of such output. The Consultant should

highlight the problems being addressed and their importance, and explain the technical approach that would be

adopted to address them. The Consultant should also explain the methodologies being proposed to adopt and

highlight the compatibility of those methodologies with the proposed approach.

b) Work Plan. In this section the Consulting Firm should propose their own work plan which should be

consistent with the technical approach and methodology, showing understanding of the ToR and ability to

translate them into a feasible working plan. A list of the final documents, including reports, drawings, and tables to

be delivered as final output, should be included here.

c) Organization and Staffing. In this section the Consulting Firm should propose the structure and

composition of the team. Main disciplines of the assignment should be listed.


Format of Curriculum Vitae (CV) for Evaluation Team Members

Name of Staff:

Profession:

Date of Birth:

Years with Firm/Entity: Nationality:

Membership in Professional Societies:

Detailed Tasks Assigned:

Key Qualifications: [Give an outline of staff member’s experience and training most pertinent to tasks on

assignment. Describe degree of responsibility held by staff member on relevant previous assignments and give

dates and locations. Use about half a page.]

Education: [Summarize college/university and other specialized education of staff member, giving names of

schools, dates attended, and degrees obtained. Use about one quarter of a page.]

Employment Record:[Starting with present position, list in reverse order every employment held. List all positions

held by staff member since graduation, giving dates, names of employing organizations, titles of positions held, and

locations of assignments. For experience in last ten years, also give types of activities performed and client

references, where appropriate. Use about two pages.]

Languages: [For each language indicate proficiency: excellent, good, fair, or poor in speaking, reading, and writing.]

Certification:I, the undersigned, certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief, these data correctly describe

me, my qualifications, and my experience. I understand that any willful misstatement described herein may lead to

my disqualification or dismissal, if engaged.

Date:

[Signature of staff member and authorized representative of the firm] Day/Month/Year

Full name of staff member:______________________________________

Full name of authorized representative: _______________________________________


Schedule for Completion and Submission of Reports

Completion and Submission of Reports

Reports Date

1. Inception Report

2. Draft Report

3. Final Report


ANNEX 2 – Financial Proposal Format

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------

[Location, Date]

To: The Chairperson

Concern Worldwide (CWW)

[Address depending on how it is submitted]

We, the undersigned, offer to conduct the Comparative assessment of different livelihood approaches across

humanitarian organisations as part of the resettlement programs to support those internally displaced by the

earthquake that struck Haiti on January 12, 2010in accordance with your Call for Proposals dated 24th of

September 2015 and our Technical and Financial Proposal. Our attached Financial Proposal is for the sum of

[amount in words and figures] all inclusive.

Our Financial Proposal shall be binding upon us subject to the modifications resulting from Contract negotiations,

up to expiration of the validity period of 90 calendar days of the Proposal.

We acknowledge and accept the CWW right to inspect and audit all records relating to our Proposal irrespective of

whether we enter into a contract with the CWW as a result of this Proposal or not.

We confirm that we have read, understood and accept the contents of the Bidding Documents, the Terms of

Reference (ToR), any and all attachments and inclusions included in the Call for Proposals sent to us.

We understand you are not bound to accept any Proposal you receive.

Yours sincerely,



Name of Firm:

Address:


Summary of Costs (more activities could be added if needed)

Costs Currency Amount(s)

Staff costs -

Transport costs-

Accommodation -

Others

Total Amount of Financial Proposal

