Scope of Work for the PRO-WASH Final Evaluation
Hiring Organization: Save the Children US
See the full advert here: https://www.fsnnetwork.org/sites/default/files/2022-01/PRO-WASH_final_evaluation_scope_of_work.pdf
Estimated number of days: 70-80 working days
Contact information: email@example.com
Individuals, teams, and firms are eligible to apply.
1. Background and Context
Practices, Research and Operations in Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (PRO-WASH) is an initiative funded by USAID’s Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA) and led by Save the Children. PRO-WASH aims to provide support to implementing partners in order to strengthen the quality of WASH and Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) interventions through capacity strengthening, knowledge-sharing and applied WASH and IWRM research opportunities. PRO-WASH’s approach to providing support is driven by a commitment to empower BHA partners to become technical leaders in WASH and IWRM, particularly for vulnerable and food insecure communities. PRO-WASH focuses on:
● Strategic Learning with Stakeholders: Knowledge sharing forums, webinars, learning notes, blogs, and conference presentations aimed at lifting up WASH and IWRM best practices, as well as individual implementing partners’ experiences in executing high-quality programming.
● Capacity Strengthening for Effective Program Application: Effective and context-specific opportunities for increasing the knowledge and skills of WASH and IWRM (and related) technical staff, through training, ongoing coaching, and peer to peer learning.
● Developing and Distributing High-Quality Technical Resources: Relevant and highly-accessible technical resources, aimed at providing evidence-based, user-friendly tools that can be adapted to specific program contexts. This includes easy to use quick guides, training packages, and short video tutorials that leverage adult education principles.
● Operational Research for Field-Viable WASH and IWRM Interventions: Applied WASH and IWRM research aimed at addressing partners’ key research needs and offering solutions that are accessible and ready-to-implement.
PRO-WASH is currently entering its fifth and final year of project implementation. This Scope of Work (SoW) outlines the purpose of the final evaluation, which is to assess specific aspects of PRO-WASH’s outreach and influence, award design and objectives, thought leadership and influence on BHA Policies, standards, and program quality. The evaluation will also generate recommendations for future food security support mechanisms and other capacity strengthening and learning activities. Given how closely PRO-WASH has worked with the food security support mechanism Strengthening Capacities in Agriculture, Livelihoods and Environment (SCALE), it is anticipated that the consultant will also work closely with the SCALE evaluators to coordinate and to undertake some joint stakeholder consultations and components of the desk review.
2. Objectives and Scope of Evaluation
As this is the final year of the PRO-WASH Award, we are seeking a review of the outcomes of the Award while simultaneously gathering and analyzing information about the interest and needs of implementing partners for future support related to these technical areas. The following learning questions will be explored:
Award Design and Objectives
● How did the technical design of the award and the level of flexibility affect the ability to respond to implementing partner and donor needs, collaborate with partners, and adapt to external circumstances (e.g., COVID-19 pandemic, Food for Peace/Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance merger)?
○ (Probing): What have been the favorable or impeding factors related to the design and management of the award that have affected the Award’s ability to meet its objectives? ?
● How appropriate and effective is PRO-WASH’s organizational and staffing structure for the implementation of our work?
○ (Probing): How effective was the design, composition and management of the PRO-WASH Steering Committee? How could this be improved?
● How did the design, staffing and management of the Award affect its ability to engage with and meet the needs of BHA-funded emergency partners?
Implementing Partner Engagement and Impacts of Technical Assistance and Influence
● How do Implementing Partners perceive the relevance, utility and quality of the different types of support offered by PRO-WASH (e.g. applied research, technical guides, learning briefs, coaching, remote and in-person training, technical knowledge sharing events, webinars, and communities of practice)?
○ (Probing): To what extent do implementing partners perceive that PRO-WASH tailored priorities to their requests/needs?
○ (Probing): Which technical focus areas were most useful?
○ (Probing): What remaining gaps/existing challenges that have not been met through PRO-WASH learning and research?
○ (Probing) What are barriers / enablers in terms of working with PRO-WASH on this research?
● How did the combination of the different approaches to engagement (e.g. training, applied research, coaching, etc.) and the intensity of engagement influence the WASH/IWRM technical quality improvements?
○ (Probing) Which approaches most effectively and efficiently influence WASH/IWRM technical quality improvements within RFSAs?
○ (Probing): To what extent does layering engagements (e.g. coaching, mentoring, in-person or virtual training, applied research) contribute to implementing partners being able to use the resources/tools?
○ (Probing): How has PRO-WASH contributed to WASH/IWRM knowledge sharing and understanding of best practices and promising/innovative models for WASH service delivery among Resilience Food Security Activities (RFSAs)?
● To what degree did implementing partners use resources/tools (technical tools; training packages; learning briefs; webinars and applied research findings) developed by PRO-WASH within the specific projects that the Award supported?
○ (Probing): How easy was it for partners to find and access resources/tools?
○ (Probing) Which PRO-WASH resources/tools partners have been used and how often?
○ (Probing): What are the barriers/enablers to implementing partners using the resources/tools?
○ (Probing):What are the barriers/enablers to implementing partners replicating training?
● To what degree do partners believe they will continue to use and share the resources/tools developed by PRO-WASH after the end of the Award?
○ (Probing): Which resources?
○ (Probing): How will they be used or shared, and with whom?
○ (Probing): What are the barriers to continued use and sharing?
○ (Probing): To what extent will the knowledge management platforms used by PRO-WASH ensure sustainable access to and uptake of their respective resources?
● To what degree did implementing partners institutionalize into their organizations the resources/tools developed by PRO-WASH beyond the specific project that the Award supported?
○ (Probing): What are the barriers/enablers to implementing partners institutionalizing the resources/tools?
Outreach to Implementing Partners
● At what points in the RFSA cycle was outreach to implementing partners most and least relevant and effective? Why?
● How effective was PRO-WASH’s outreach as part of the Program Cycle Support (PCS) Inception and Culmination workshops?
○ (Probing): How can this be improved?
Thought-leadership and Influence on BHA Policies, Standards, Program Quality
● How did the awards inform advancements or changes to USAID/BHA policies, standards, and guidance?
3. Evaluation Design and Methods
The PRO-WASH team will work with the evaluation lead (external consultant) to clearly define the scope and role of the evaluation team members during the evaluation’s inception phase. The external consultant will work closely with the PRO-WASH and SCALE teams.
It is expected the consultant will first conduct a desk review (see Annex A) and interview select PRO-WASH team members to inform the final methodology. The final evaluation is expected to utilize qualitative methods and secondary quantitative data. PRO-WASH will provide the evaluation team with full access to monitoring data and award documentation. Detailed methodologies for the evaluation will be agreed between PRO-WASH and the external consultant.
Sources of existing activity information include
● Desk Review (Annex A)
● PRO-WASH resources on the FSN Network
● Quantitative survey data that PRO-WASH can make available as part of the desk review (such as pre/post tests, training evaluations, etc.).
Potential stakeholders to consult/interview
● PRO-WASH staff and consultants (~7 interviews)
● BHA Activity Manager, Award Agreement Officer, and other technical staff(~5 staff)
● Select BHA implementing partners, determined in close collaboration with PRO-WASH (~10-12)
● Steering Committee members (~5)
● Other Food Security Support Mechanisms (e.g. PCS, IDEAL)
● Other PRO-WASH partners (iDE, applied research partners, Water for People etc.) (~3-5)
4. Activities and Deliverables
● Kick-off meeting online
● Inception report with a work plan timeline, evaluation approach (methodology, methods, and complete set of evaluation questions as agreed upon with BHA and PRO-WASH) and analysis plan
● Desk review of relevant literature including quarterly reports, end of training reports, and post-training monitoring reports (See Annex A) ,
● Online survey of key stakeholders (e.g. PRO-WASH Steering Committee members, USAID, implementing partners)
● Online interviews with program staff, PRO-WASH Steering Committee members, USAID, implementing partners (from different levels of leadership, different geographies, and different levels of engagement with PRO-WASH), and other food security support mechanisms.
● Draft evaluation report, including raw data sets as appendices (e.g. qualitative matrices used for analysis)
● Internal and external briefing on evaluation findings, including a briefing with USAID.
● Final evaluation report, to include case studies on PRO-WASH’s different forms of support to partners
● Online Learning Workshop (not to exceed half a day) + 1-2 pager/summary of key takeaways to
○ Disseminate findings and recommendations from the evaluation;
○ Review in-depth the key lessons and their implications for future RFSAs and support mechanisms–what did we learn from PRO-WASH’s capacity strengthening activities and how can it be improved?
○ Discuss recommendations and generate a dialogue that captures stakeholder input, thoughts, and ideas on the technical approach used to achieve Award results as presented in the evaluation.
○ PRO-WASH: Capture specific, and actionable next steps that could be used to inform future WASH and IWRM capacity strengthening, knowledge sharing and learning support mechanisms
5. Estimated Timeline:
February 2022 Consultant start-up and inception Report
March and April 2022 Desk review, stakeholder interviews
May 2022 Data Analysis and Report Writing
June 2022 Draft report + briefings
July 2022 Final report and learning workshops
6. Required Competencies
● Hands-on experience leading evaluations of global support mechanisms for international development activities
● Experience with USAID Food for Peace and/or USAID BHA food security programming
● Minimum of 15 years’ experience with evaluation design, implementation, and analysis of development and emergency programs, including those focused on providing technical assistance, capacity strengthening and coordination, etc.
● Technical expertise in evaluation methods
● Cultural sensitivity
● Desirable: French language skills to conduct interviews with francophone stakeholders and review programmatic documents that are in French
7. Proposal Requirements
Individuals, teams, and firms are eligible to apply. Total proposal must be less than 10 pages, excluding annexes/attachments
● Proposal must include the following:
○ Description of the individual(s) and/or firm and their relevant experience
○ Proposed team structure (and CVs of all team members)
○ Proposed approach (not a full methodology) and timeline
○ Budget (including a breakdown of expected LOE and cost per deliverable)