Consultant Terms of Reference
Final evaluation of the
Child Protection Program January –December 2014
Background on Plan
Plan, one of the world largest INGO, works with children and poor communities in 50 developing countries and promote children’s rights in the fields of child protection, participation, sexual and reproductive health, economic security, education, health, water sanitation and hygiene and emergency assistance with a strong commitment to gender equity, inclusion of all ethnic groups and children with disabilities. Plan has no religious or political aims or affiliations. Visitwww.plan-international.org
Background on the Child Protection Program.
The Program was designed based on previous experiences from three years implementation in 2010 – 2013. This extension project for one year was supported by Sweden National Office (SNO) implemented by 3 local Partners namely Suhurama were based in Maubesi Sub District in Ainaro district and Belun Ba Comunidade (BBC) and Mane Ho Vizaun Foun (MHVF) were based in Aileu district and Forum Tau Matan (FTM) through the establishment of an agreement between Plan Timor Leste with these partners.
This one year extension project was designed with the very simple logframe and the numbers of the indicators that are use to directing those local partners in their implementation in the coverage areas.
The project was expected to implement by the earlier of 2014, but with the limited capacity of those partners were identified that were late in their in submitting their proposal and the needs of initial technical assistance that were urged Plan to facilitated them for the proper handling of the project, delaying the project implementation just started at the beginning of April 2014.
Overall Objective of the project is that the Timorese children and youth, particularly those from vulnerable groups, have the opportunity to become increasingly aware of their rights, to grow up in families and communities that support their development, and to be empowered to contribute to the development of their nation, and this extension project objective is to ensure that at the end of the project implementation, there will be:
- The children have increased their awareness on the importance of child protection and child participation.
- Strengthening the child protection mechanisms at community (suco) level.
- Improved Government laws, policies, regulations that protect children from violence are adopted and implemented
- CSOs have improved technical and institutional capacity.
The program results, indicators and strategies are as follows:
Major Strategies (2014)
Indicators (end of project)
Children have increased awareness on the importance of child protection and Child Participation
Child Protection Training for Students
Children’s participation through the establishment of children’s clubs (CCs) and media and communications
# of Children trained on child rights and child protection and demonstrates greater awareness of their rights to protection.
# of CPN members trained on child rights and child protection.
# of CPN meetings participated by CC members and the ability of the members to voicing issues related to the realization of their rights.
# of Child Clubs been established with the proper structures and functioning on promote children’s rights.
# of media promotion (radio talk show) that participated by the children from CCs members on promoting their rights and the right to protection.
Building children’s and communities’ “demand” for violence free societies
Strengthening the child protection mechanisms at community (suco) level.
Capacity building and awareness raising of local authority and parents on the importance of child protection
# of Suco Council members that are trained on Child rights and child protection and have a basic understanding of child rights and are aware of reporting mechanisms.
# of Community Based Child protection Mechanism (CBCPM) that been established in the suco level.
# of CBCPM Focal Points that are participated in the CPN meetings and voicing the CP issues in their villages.
In addition, the project will prioritize increasing awareness of child protection and reporting mechanisms amongst suco council members and children through mobile films on child protection and community noticeboards.
Result 3: Improved Government laws, policies, regulations that protect children from violence are adopted and implemented
Advocacy and lobbying directed at key decision-makers
Shadow CRC report finalized by FTM with assistance from a consultant identified with Plan assistance and funded by Plan.
Children’s lobby of National Assembly members and leading officials.
FTM wishes to prioritize finalising CRC shadow report, much of which was drafted with Plan inputs.
CSOs have improved technical and institutional capacity
CSO trainings on child protection Plan’s CSO implementing partners across all Programs CPP
Development of partner’s monthly action plans and review progress reports.
Partners participate in gender, child protection, and participation trainings
# of CSOs with improved finance, admin and governance and (see Annex B for details indicators)
# CSOs with all staff /members trained
# CSOs with CP Policies and acurate reporting mechanisms
# CSOs trained on gender equality and with active CP Policies and reporting.
The Plan’s Project Partners (CSOs) wishes to have an ability of proper financial management and administration and governance in their organizations and able to established their Child Protection Policy after the trainings.
1. Objectives of the evaluation:
1. To assess program progress against intended results
2. To identify outcomes of the program, and impact if possible
3. To identify program potential, challenges, and lessons learnt
4. To generate concrete conclusions and recommendations that can feed in to be a reference for the next project implementation in 2015-2017.
2. Scope and focus of the evaluation
2.0 The evaluation should address the following questions from Plan’s global Evaluation Policy:
- How consistent is the programme with key aspects of Plan’s CCCD approach
- How consistent is the programme with the local Plan strategy (CSP/regional strategy)
- How well has the internal monitoring system contributed to the evaluation and to ongoing programme implementation?
- How appropriate was the original project/programme design for achieving the results that were originally expected?
- How much has the programme/project cost to date?
- Approximately how many people has the project/programme reached?
In addition the evaluation should focus on the following aspects…………..
To what extent were the planned program results relevant to the context and needs?
Suggested questions to address
- Does the Program design address the most important child protection issues in Timor Leste?
- Does the program involved more children in their own protection and the vulnerable groups such as children with disabilities to do so?
2.2 Progress against intended Results
- How effective has the program been in achieving its intended results?
Suggested questions to address:
- What changes, if any, have there been at community and school level in terms of the behavior and attitude of village leaders, parents and teachers?
- To what extent have children and young people engaged actively in their own protection? What are their views?
- What child protection mechanisms exist or been established as a result of the Program, and how well do they function: n.b. District Child Protection Networks and Community Based Child Protection Mechanism (CBCPM) and Child Clubs (CCs)?
- What changes have there been in government practice (e.g. resource allocation), in terms of child protection?
- Overall, what were the intended and unintended outcomes of the program?
2.3 Efficiency and effectiveness
- How efficiently has the Program been implemented and managed?
Suggested questions to address:
- How efficient and effective has the project been in strengthening local civil society partners?
- How efficient and effective have the civil society partners been in achieving the project’s objectives
- How well did Plan select partners?
- How well did Plan manage partners?
- How effective was monitoring of progress towards results?
- How effective was direct implementation of project activities by Plan staff?
2.4 Equality and Non-Discrimination
Suggested questions to address:
- Who benefits from the program? Who doesn’t and why?
- Does the program promote inclusion, especially of the most vulnerable and most marginalized, including children with disabilities and girls? If not, why?
- What needs to change to contribute to greater equality and non-discrimination?
How sustainable and enduring are the outcomes of the program likely to be?
Suggested questions to address:
- If there have been changes in practice by parents and teachers, how sustainable are they likely to be?
- How sustainable are institutions such as the District Child Protection Networks?
3. Target Audience of the evaluation:
- Plan management in Timor Leste and Sweden
- Plan local partners in Timor Leste: (Suhurama, Belun Ba Comunidade (BBC), Mane Ho Vizaun Foun (MHVF) and Forum Tau Matan (FTM)).
- National and local Government: (Ministry of Social Solidarity, National Commissioner for the Rights (KNDL) and Vulnerable Police Unit (Police VPU).
- Other child focused organizations in Timor Leste: e.g. UNICEF, World Vision and ChildFund.
4. Suggested Methodology:
The evaluator needs to use participatory approaches and primarily qualitative methodologies. The evaluator should pay particular attention to consulting women, children groups (Child Club members (CCs), Community Based Child Protection Mechanism (CBCPM) Focal Points and Villages Council members.
5. Consultant tasks:
- Development of evaluation tools
- Desk review of data and information related to the program, particularly MoUs, annual plan and reports, midterm review.
- Collect primary data from the program implementers and target groups through observations, interviews and focus group discussions. Summarize and analyze the findings. This includes (a) field visits to Aileu Lautem and to Maubesi Sub District to collect data with suco and aldea leaders, Child Protection Officers (OPL), Child Clubs (CCs), parents, and teachers; (b) Discussions with national level officials and leaders, members of the (c) discussions and interviews with staff of current CSO partners; (d) discussions with current Plan staff. NB in all interviews, FGDs etc the evaluator should seek recommendations for the future program as well as reflections on the past.
- Present a draft report at a consultation meeting involving key stakeholders to discuss key findings, recommendations and future actions.
- Prepare a final report with comments, suggestion from the consultation meeting, archive of reference documents, presentations and minutes of consultation meeting
- The expected outputs:
- Evaluation proposal and field work plan with methodology of the data collection
- Draft and final evaluation reports highlighting main findings and analysis, major achievements, lessons learnt, expected and unexpected changes.
- Very importantly, recommendations for planning and design of the next phase of the Program
- Final report with comments, suggestion from the consultation meeting, archive of reference documents, presentations and minutes of consultation meeting
- Supervisor of the evaluation process:
- Ramalho Barreto, Child Right Manager
- Stephan Barthel, Grants and Business Manager.
- Format of the Report:
The report shall not exceed 25 pages (excluding appendices), which includes:
o Executive summary
o Description of the program’s achievements at the time of review
§ Estimated coverage (area and beneficiaries)
§ Details of the objectives and results achieved
§ Other unexpected significant changes
o Description of program’s implementation history
o Report on
§ relevance and quality of the program design
§ effectiveness and efficiency
§ progress against intended results
§ crosscutting aspects (gender, inclusion)
o Note: include the following topics in the review of efficiency
§ management structure for the program
§ monitoring system
§ experience with formal partnerships (i.e. where Plan provides funding)
§ identify other (existing and potential) Plan activities which add synergy to the program
o Lessons learned and recommendations
9. Evaluation team:
The consultant will work with an evaluation team but will be responsible for all outputs. The team will consist of one Plan staff member from Sweden and one from Timor Leste and the CSOs staff to provide guidance during the evaluation.
8. Time frame:
The duration of the evaluation is between 4-5 weeks from last week of October to last week of November 2014, or as agreed.
9. Consultant’s qualifications summary:
· Background knowledge in child protection
· Background in practical development program management education development
· Approximately 3-5 years of experience in child rights program evaluation/review, including use of both qualitative and quantitative methods.
· Knowledge of child protection and rights issues and research trends globally
· Knowledge of child rights situation in Timor Leste an advantage
· Gender and child rights analysis skills.
· Ability and commitment to meet deadlines.
10 Submission of Proposals
The individual/agency will have to submit a proposal for comparison and evaluation.
- Detailed proposal on methodology and suggested changes to ToR, if any
- Past experience of similar work
- Curriculum Vitae
- Detailed time lines for work
Last date for submission of proposal: Friday October 20th 2014 at 5.00 PM.
Send proposals either through email or by hand delivery in a sealed envelope to Plan’s office Plan International in Timor-Leste Rua Nu’u Laran 20, Bairo dos Grilhos PO Box 246, Dili, Timor-Leste