Call for tenders

Consultant for a Final Evaluation of the project "Youth Innovation Laboratory in the Great Lakes Region" (YouthLab)

Deadline for applications: 10 March 2024

Start date: 20 March 2024

Expected end of assignment: 20 April 2024

Project area: in DRC: North Kivu: Goma and Nyiragongo, South Kivu: Bukavu and Uvira; in RWANDA: Kigali; in UGANDA: Isingriro District in Nakivale Refugee Camp and Ntungamu District, and Kampala; in BURUNDI: Ngozi, Cibitoke and Gitega.

A. Introduction

Interpeace is an international organisation founded in 1994 that supports local peacebuilding initiatives around the world. Interpeace adapts its approach to each society and ensures that the work is carried out locally. Working with local partners, Interpeace jointly develops peacebuilding programmes and helps establish processes of change that link local communities, civil society, government and the international community. As a strategic partner of the United Nations, Interpeace is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, with offices around the world. 

For more information about Interpeace, please visit www.interpeace.org 

In the Great Lakes region, Interpeace and its partners (RLP, CENAP, NAR, POLE, APC) have implemented the project "Youth Innovation Laboratory in the Great Lakes Region" which ended on 31 December 2023 and today, Interpeace is looking for a consultant (natural or legal person) to carry out the final evaluation of the said project. 

The final evaluation is necessary to measure the results (changes produced directly by the action) and effects, the effectiveness and quality of the work carried out, the approaches developed and the lessons learned during implementation, in order to formulate guidelines for improving future interventions by Interpeace and other organisations working on the same theme in the Great Lakes region. 

An external evaluation was chosen to help ensure the independence, impartiality and credibility of the process. Interpeace expects the evaluation to start at the beginning of March 2024, for a period of 30 days, including a minimum of 15 days for field data collection in the countries where the project is being implemented: DRC: North Kivu: Goma and Nyiragongo, South Kivu: Bukavu and Uvira; in RWANDA: Kigali; in UGANDA: Isingriro District in Nakivale Refugee Camp and Ntungamu District and Kampala; in BURUNDI: Ngozi, Cibitoke and Gitega. 

B. Background and justification

With funding from the European Union, Interpeace and its partners (RLP, CENAP, NAR, POLE, APC) have developed a project to "promote youth leadership in regional peace processes" for the Great Lakes region. The project contributes to the sustainable development objectives and to United Nations Resolution 2250, which aims to strengthen the participation of young people in decision-making processes. 

The Youth Innovation Laboratory in the Great Lakes Region project was implemented in four countries (DR Congo, Rwanda, Burundi and Uganda) for a period of 2 years, ending on 31 December 2023. 

The main objective of the evaluation is to determine the extent to which the project has or has not achieved the results assigned to it.  

As a reminder, its overall objective was for young people in the Great Lakes region to increasingly influence and play a leadership role in regional peace processes through dialogue for collective action and advocacy. 

To achieve this Global Objective, the project was structured around three specific objectives:

Specific objective 1: Young men and women have a common voice to urge political decision-makers to articulate their vision of peace in the Great Lakes.

Specific objective 2: Collective initiatives that bring together young men and women to contribute to sustainable peace in the Great Lakes region are undertaken by young people.

Specific objective 3: Support for young people's leadership in peacebuilding is increased through intercultural and intergenerational exchanges.

To achieve this, the project worked with communities, the authorities in the target countries, young people and civil society organisations in the target countries through a local partner for project implementation. 

In view of the above, and given that the project is coming to an end, a final evaluation is necessary to examine the progress made by specific objective and indicator. It will also show to what extent the support provided in this area has achieved its objectives and to what extent it is still appropriate to mobilise the resources needed to implement the next phases of the project in the Great Lakes region. 

Interpeace is therefore looking to recruit a consultant to carry out the final evaluation of the project. This evaluation includes the design of the methodology, the collection, processing and analysis of quantitative and qualitative information collected from project beneficiaries.

C. Aim and objectives of the evaluation

As stipulated in the project document, a final independent evaluation will take place at the end of the project.

The valuation is being undertaken to provide an independent assessment of:

• The design quality of the project;
• Effectiveness in implementing the project in terms of achieving the planned objectives, including the mobilisation of state authorities and other stakeholders;
• The strengths and weaknesses of the design and implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the project;
• Unforeseen results, positive or negative, arising from the implementation of the project;
• Lessons learned and best practice from the project for the development and planning of future interventions;
• Specific recommendations for any follow-up action required to effectively maintain or improve support for project outcomes, improve or rectify undesirable outcomes in the future. 

The results of this evaluation will benefit not only Interpeace, APC, Pole Institute, NAR, CENAP, RLP and the European Union, but also other technical and financial partners and stakeholders involved in peace and security issues in the Great Lakes region.

D. Timetable, methodology and expected results 

The planned duration of the evaluation is 30 days, with a minimum of 15 days for data collection in the field in the implementing countries. As the project ended on 31 December 2023, the planned start date is the beginning of March 2024. The final timetable will be agreed with the selected consultant.

The programme was designed using the Outcome Mapping approach, which is also intended to guide the evaluation methodology.

As part of this evaluation, the consultant will use various methods to gather information: review of key project documents; direct observation in the field; interviews with targeted individuals and focus groups. The consultant will also use data collected by the partners (project reports) and the results of the Baseline and Endline surveys (to be conducted by Interpeace and its partners prior to the evaluation). 

The consultant will present and apply a conceptual framework for analysis consistent with the participatory and peace-building approach of Interpeace[1] and its partners. The evaluation of the project should be objective, while the learning and reflection exercise should be consultative/participatory. 

The consultant will be able to carry out a results-based evaluation of the project. To do this, he/she will be able to draw on pre-existing project data and parts of the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system: project proposal, budget, logical framework, monitoring table, databases, data analysis tables, attendance lists, mission reports, debriefings of dialogue sessions, interim report(s), etc to carry out a first level of evaluation. 

To complement and support these initial findings, and in response to the evaluation questions, the consultant is invited to use participatory and inclusive (more qualitative) methods, for example: interviews, focus group discussions, Outcomes Harvesting, Most Significant Change Stories. The methodology used should demonstrate sensitivity to gender, age, conflict and other potential biases in order to ensure rigour. 

Document review: the key documents relating to the project will be examined. These include: i) the project document, minutes of meetings, the monitoring and evaluation framework, the various work plans, periodic reports and reports drawn up to document the progress of activities; ii) working documents or other documents produced during implementation, such as monitoring reports, mission reports, half-yearly and annual reports, study reports, presentations and training reports. 

Key informant interviews: the evaluation should include interviews with key project stakeholders: community and religious leaders, implementing partners, young innovators (and their networks) including key project staff. 

Stakeholder consultations: Consultations with stakeholder groups including local, provincial, national and regional political and administrative authorities, regional mechanisms and civil society. Below is a list of the project's various targets and stakeholders: 

1. Young innovators: The proposed project focuses on a core group of 30 young men and women who are active in their communities as advocates or initiators of youth projects and/or organisations. They have been strengthened and supported to engage directly with communities, through dialogue and other means, throughout the independent or supported initiatives. 
2. Youth representatives/leaders: The project also involved young men and women who are leaders and/or representatives of formal agencies, including governments (local, provincial and national) and regional bodies in Burundi, DRC, Rwanda and Uganda, as well as at regional level through national or regional policy dialogues and summits.
3. Members of youth groups and young people from the wider community: These are young men and women from different fields and backgrounds who are affiliated to various existing platforms, including youth groups, youth organisations, associations, clubs, cooperatives, savings circles, student associations, youth councils, farmers' associations, young people in technology, youth wings of political parties, young people in the private sector, artists, shopkeepers, musicians, etc. These young people have been involved in OS2 and OS3, as participants to articulate and express their needs and priorities within the dialogue platforms, including intergenerational and intercultural dialogues, and/or as participants in the dialogue platforms. These young people were involved in OS2 and OS3, as participants in articulating and expressing their needs and priorities within dialogue platforms, including intergenerational and intercultural dialogues, and/or as participants in independent initiatives or initiatives supported by young innovators. 
4. Influential people and change agents: including but not limited to peacebuilding activists/professionals, conflict mediators, government officials, religious leaders, regional representatives, etc., identified through a mapping exercise and existing Interpeace networks in the region to participate in project coordination and policy development (SO1). They specifically acted as mentors (SO2) with the role of promoting active learning and skills development throughout the programme period.
5. Government agencies including youth ministries: By engaging key people from this target group, the project established collaborative relationships with relevant ministries (including youth ministries, youth councils, youth parliaments, etc.). This included youth ministries, youth councils, youth parliaments, etc. This collaboration facilitated government buy-in and support for the project, and also helped to guide constructive dialogue (SO1 & SO3) so that the needs and interests of young people became a priority for their respective governments.
6. Regional organisations: The project also involved regional organisations such as the Economic Community of the Great Lakes Countries (CEPGL) and the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region (CIRGL), as well as the Platform of Local Authorities of the Great Lakes (PALPGL), etc., for their crucial role in promoting youth engagement at local, national and regional levels through established youth networks.
7. Community members: These are the people in the communities with whom the young innovators have been involved in their initiatives or independent projects and are considered secondary and final beneficiaries. 

The evaluator may use a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods for data collection and analysis. However, the evaluation is expected to assess the project's contribution to the role played by the region's youth in promoting the values of peace at national and regional level. It should be noted that a more detailed methodology, work plan and evaluation matrix will be presented by the evaluation team. 

In order to collect the data, the consultant's reference resource will be the Project's logical framework, which contains the relationship between the Project's indicators.

The methodological process will follow the stages set out below:

1. Preparatory phase :
   1. Carry out a review of all relevant documentation (provided by the project and other documentary research)
   2. Designing and finalising the evaluation methodology
   3. Preparing a work plan
   4. Updating or designing the questionnaire and interview guide to be used when carrying out the surveys.

2. Work in the field :
   1. Putting together a team: A team will be put together based on the level of professional experience, knowledge of the context, knowledge of local languages, ability to conduct interviews and focus groups and other types of data collection experience. Interviewers must be identified, recruited and trained locally. Partners will be involved and the final report will be shared with them for validation.
   2. A team of supervisors will be recruited and trained by the consultant.

3. Data analysis (calculation of indicators) and report writing

The evaluation team will analyse the data collected in the field and draw up an interim report, which will also contain the key points of the key meetings and focus groups held. This report will be submitted to the project management team for reading and any necessary comments.

4. Feedback session with key stakeholders.

This session will enable the evaluation team to present the main findings and recommendations to the parties involved in the project, as well as to capitalise on any final comments and observations before submitting the final report.

The evaluation team will submit the following products during the periods indicated.

E. Key evaluation questions 

The final assessment will answer the following questions, which are not exhaustive: 

Design quality:

• Were the project objectives clear and realistic?
• Have the project stakeholders been properly involved in the formulation/design of the project? 

Relevance:

The relevance review will consist of analysing whether the actions carried out under the project are well-founded in terms of the security and peace-building approach and issues in the Great Lakes region, and in particular in the intervention areas.

• Does the project respond to a problem or need that is keenly felt in the countries concerned?
• To what extent is the project aligned with and has it contributed to local, national and regional strategies for the promotion and involvement of young people and development and peace-building partners? 

Effectiveness:

Effectiveness assesses the extent to which the project's objectives have been achieved, or are likely to be achieved, and any expected or unexpected effects. For the project, the assessment of effectiveness will include:

• The main factors that influenced the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives (including those that may have been beyond the project's control)

Were the activities planned, managed and monitored effectively and continuously? Were there any delays, and if so, what were the consequences? Was the pace of implementation of the activities satisfactory?

• Have robust financial management systems and practices been used that have provided timely, accurate and transparent information on project expenditure and procurement?
• Are stakeholders generally satisfied with the quality of project management?

Efficiency:

Efficiency studies the relationship between the resources deployed and their costs, on the one hand, and the results financed, on the other. The evaluation must enable the project to:

• Have the resources (time, funds, equipment, expertise) been used in such a way as to achieve the expected results, on time and at the lowest cost?
• Have budgets been allocated proportionately between outputs and spent as planned? What measures have been taken during the project programming and implementation phases to ensure that the resources allocated are used efficiently and to best effect?

Impact and sustainability:

The consultant will mainly analyse :

• What changes in the behaviour, attitudes and practices of beneficiaries can be attributed in whole or in part to the project's actions? To what extent are they sustainable after the end of the project?
• Have the beneficiaries taken ownership of the objectives to be achieved by the project?
• What threats, if any, have been identified to the sustainability of the benefits, and have they been taken into account?

F. Final Evaluation Report and Deliverables 

The main products of this valuation are as follows:

• Inception report: The consultant must produce a document. This document should present the understanding of the project, methodology to be followed, division of tasks between team members and chronogram of the intervention, as well as a survey questionnaire in Word version and the interview guide must be submitted before data collection. The initial report should be produced and submitted within the first 5 days, after the contract has been signed, and will be reviewed by Interpeace for guidance on the continuation of the evaluation. 
• Report of preliminary findings: a presentation of the findings to the project management team and key stakeholders will be made. The purpose of this section is to provide an opportunity for initial validation of the evaluators' findings.
• Evaluation report: One week after the presentation of the preliminary results, the evaluation team will submit a draft evaluation report to Interpeace. This report will be shared with the various project stakeholders for their reading and comments.  
• Final evaluation report: the team of consultants will finalise the report, including an executive summary and all the documents, taking into account the comments and suggestions made by Interpeace and its partners. This will be done in a well-formatted document that can be used for publication.

The lessor's logo is part of the layout, as is Interpeace's, with the structure:

Acronyms

Summary

1. Introduction and brief history
2. Methodology
3. Main conclusions

• Relevance
• Efficiency
• Efficiency
• Durability
• Impact
• Coherence
• Cross-cutting issues

4. Overall assessment
5. Challenges
6. Best practices and lessons learned
7. Recommendations for improvement

Appendices:

• Terms of reference
• List of documents assessed
• List of interviewees
• Evaluation matrix
• Presentation of changes identified in relation to programme results and objectives.
• Updated logical framework 

G. Qualifications

The consultant must have at least the following skills and experience: 

H. Instructions for the preparation and submission of proposals

Technical offer 

To demonstrate their qualifications, each candidate, whether a natural person or a legal entity, must submit a tender which includes the following documents:

Financial offer 

A financial proposal (file/file to be separated from the technical offer) must be submitted in accordance with the following indicative model:

Applications (natural or legal person) must be sent by e-mail no later than 10 March 2024 before 16:00 to the following e-mail address: drcprocurement@interpeace.org, with copies to the following addresses: with the subject of the e-mail: "Consultant for the final evaluation of the Youth Laboratory Project in the Great Lakes Region".

Applications will be examined as they are received. Advanced submissions are therefore encouraged. 

Once the applications have been examined by the Adjudication Committee, the successful candidate will be contacted directly by Interpeace. 

[1]http://www.interpeace.org/what-we-do/our-peacebuilding-principles/