TERMS OF REFERENCE (ToR) FOR A CONSULTANCY

Job Description

TERMS OF REFERENCE (ToR) FOR A CONSULTANCY TO REVIEW THE WESTERN AREA LOCAL RIGHTS PROGRAMME (LRP) FROM 2013-2023

1. Introduction: 

Western Area is the second Local Rights Programme (WALRP) established In Sierra Leone in 2003 following an appraisal in 2002. It has tremendously impacted the lives of the poor and marginalized in 17 communities in the east of Freetown. ActionAid interventions in the Western Area after the review in 2009 were directed towards enhancing access to education for children, promoting women’s rights, supporting the livelihoods of women through agriculture and village savings and loans associations (VSLA), advocacy and campaigns on land rights for women and other marginalized groups, and strengthening women’s groups to meaningfully advocate for their economic, social, and political participation. All these interventions are done to build the consciousness of communities to become organized and demand accountability from their duty-bearers.

Since its establishment, the LRP has been supported by ActionAid Greece with the number of supporters ranging between 600 to 1000. The current number of links stands at and this continues to decline every other year. This has resulted in an annual decrease in Child Sponsorship (CS) income available for programme implementation in the Western Area. The challenge with raising funds from the Greek market and low investment in CS over the last few years has resulted in decreased income from child sponsors. AA Hellas’s method of redistributing resources has had a huge impact and reduction in income and meeting the numerous needs of communities. 

Consequently, AASL is planning to consolidate its partnerships and geographic footprint across the country for purposes of having greater impact and ensuring higher efficiencies in other areas like institutional funding. After several engagements with and support from AA Hellas, AASL has therefore resolved to commence a process that leads to reviewing the CS Programme in the Western Area from late 2013 to 2023. It has also resolved to conduct a comprehensive review of the LRP to ascertain the impact of AASL interventions over the years, in line with ActionAid Accountability, Learning and Planning Systems (ALPS). 

2. Purpose and Scope of the Review:

The review provides an opportunity for intense reflection and re-engagement with contemporary issues and offers learning that will help the LRP to move the new ActionAid Sierra Leone (AAISL) LRP forward. 

It aims to assess the effectiveness of the WALRP in contributing to eradicating poverty from 2013-2023. The review will assess progress in the achievement of the programme goals and objectives, which the LRP had set out in their specific annual and three-year progressive plans, and how these have translated to achieving the strategic goals and objectives in the LRP’s previously conducted review in 2009 in line with AASL Country Strategy  2013 – 2017 (Claiming Rights to End Poverty- CREP) and Enhancing Peoples Action for Social Justice (2018-2023). It will also assess the appropriateness and effectiveness of the LRP’s organizational development processes, leadership and management structure, and styles in contributing to the attainment of programme objectives within the broader context of AAI Global Action for Social Justice. The reflective and objective review and/or critique of our work by external people and staff provide opportunities for staff, stakeholders, and communities to objectively assess their contribution to the achievement of programme goals and objectives.  Key lessons, gaps, constraints, challenges, and threats will be identified and analysed. The review findings will inform AAISL Senior Management Team, and the Funding Affiliate (Greece) of the achievement of programme objectives during the review period. 

Consultation with communities and stakeholders: –

A very important phase in the review process is building a common understanding of the needs and procedures of the review process with communities, partners, and stakeholders. This can happen by involving all actors in the proposed review of the WALRP and sharing the findings of the review through sessions. Therefore, extra effort must be made to internalize the purpose, rationale, and process as well as to what extent the organization has achieved the intended objectives to convince communities, partners, and stakeholders and reach a common understanding. The phase-out familiarization sessions must involve as many people as possible and must be documented.

Developing and Implementing Review Plan: 

Based on the findings of the review and child sponsorship requirements, this plan is designed for three (3) months November to January 2025.  The Plan will guide management and Funding Affiliate (FA) on key activities and processes to be undertaken during the review and the plan will be agreed on and signed off by AASL.

 The strategy/plan must consider the following among others:

• Consolidation of initiated programs/interventions.
• Ensuring linkage of initiated programs with relevant institutions.
• Documentation of achievements, challenges, and lessons learned.
• indicating the trend of investments for future project development.
• Indicating the need to undertake terminal evaluation. 

3. Objectives of the Assessment:

1) To assess the extent to which the WALRP has been responsive to a changing internal and external context and environment in its programme work and strategies employed.

2)To assess the extent to which the LRP design and development, strategies, and working approaches have been in line with and contributed to the achievement of AASL’s overall programme goals and strategic objectives in our country’s strategies and the Global Strategy.

3)To assess how LRP strategies and interventions have contributed to sustained improvements in the lives of poor people in the LRP and more generally how we have contributed (or not) to bringing about social change in the WALRP through our advocacy and campaign work. Are the changes sustainable? 

4) To assess the extent to which the LRP has conceptualized, understood, and adopted the working approaches and core interventions, the Affiliate Programme’s programme, and policy work and, by extension, the extent to which rights-based approach has been upheld as a way of working for sustainable and long-lasting changes and how this has helped communities and partners to promote rights.

5) To assess the local partners’ effectiveness & efficiency with regards to accountability to the children and their families, accountability to with programme interventions, etc., and sustainability of the programmes

6) assess how the LRP programme has addressed ALL minimum standards of HRBA programmes of AASL, including their impact on children’s lives. 

7) To assess the sustainability not only of policy & campaign work but also of empowerment work and alternatives.

8) To assess the extent to which AA’s work addresses gender inequities and related injustices has been developed, resourced, and implemented in the LRP and the level of management support and staff commitment and aptitude to address gender-based inequities and injustices. How have we clearly defined our work on addressing gender inequities in programme and policy work? What has been the impact of our work on the conditions and positions of women and girls particularly? To what extent has our work on gender challenged power relations and changed these relationships?  What forms of partnerships with external networks, women’s movements, and gender-focused organizations have we promoted and supported, if any, and what results have we achieved? What mechanisms have we put in place to sustain these gains?  

9) To assess the extent to which the LRP development and expansion have been matched with resource mobilization (funding/fundraising) to achieve programme goals and objectives and leverage on policy influencing? To what extent have funding sources been diversified to meet LRP/programme delivery needs within the context of a rights-based approach? Has the capacity of partners been built enough to also harness potential sources of income? Has the partner’s dependency on the LRP decreased or increased over the years?    

10) To analyse the levels and allocations of LRP expenditures across themes/ Priority programmes, goals and objectives, and balance between investments at the field level. 

11) In the process of carrying out the review, analyse and document key lessons and findings for internal sharing in AAISL (and for further sharing within ActionAid International and with external stakeholders) and draw out implications for the LRP and AP.  

12) To assess the role of community structures (young people, women, community development committees, SMCs, etc) in programme delivery, their effectiveness in the substantiality of interventions, their linkages or not with Local Councils/Local Authorities in holding duty bearers to account.

4. Methodology

The assessment will be conducted by an independent consultant (s), with the assistance of research assistant(s), and staff of AASL. The assessment will employ the normal range of social science research methods in standard social science evaluations, namely:

a) Literature review of major strategic and policy documents, reports, and records of AASL, the Government, donor partners, and the LRP.

b)A review methodology design meeting will be held at headquarters with unit heads to review the methodology and develop an analytical framework for the review. Planning meetings will be held with the LRP management team for a detailed timeframe and schedule for field review processes.

c) Field work will be undertaken with interviews, focused group discussions will be conducted, and project sites will be visited. In-depth interviews will be done with core reference groups, the review team at HQ, and the LRP Management Team at the field level. Focus Group Discussions will comprise men, women, youths, community leaders, sponsored children, and local council representatives. Meetings will be held with partner organizations, beneficiaries, and other external stakeholders to review and reflect on LRP’s interventions.

d) The Funding Affiliate and Country management team will be engaged in the discussions; debriefed and provided with feedback on the outcome of the draft review.

Documents to be reviewed:  The documents to be reviewed include but are not limited to the following:

• LRP operational plan
• Appraisal document
• Annual PRRP 2013 to 2023
• Annual plans and budgets for 2013 to 2023
• Annual reports 2013 to 2023
• AASL Country Strategy Documents

5. Output and deliverables.

The consultant is expected to use acceptable tools for social science research preferably survey tools and provide a sample of the questionnaire and guidelines for community engagement. 

a) Inception report: The consultant will submit an inception report that explains the consultant’s understanding of the assignment and how this will be conducted. This is to ensure that the consultant and the key stakeholders have a shared understanding of the review and evaluation process. The inception report will include the review design, methodology, questions, data sources, and collection analysis tool for each data source and the measure by which each question will be evaluated. The report will include the scope of work, work plan, time frame, and data analysis plan.

b) Data collection tool: The consultant will develop a data collection tool suitable for the review and train the data collectors on how to administer it.

c) A Review Report: A comprehensive report of not more than 40 pages with findings, recommendations, etc. The Consultant will first share a draft version of the report and do a PowerPoint presentation to AASL.

d) Raw data: All raw data and complete database from primary data collection will be delivered including all original research instruments with their recorded field data and copies of all Excel files /databases used for data analysis for AASL.

6. Time frame –

The expected time frame for the review process will be a maximum of twelve weeks from the date of commencement of the work for the submission of the first draft of the report findings to enable management to analyse the report and provide feedback.

Person specification: The preferred candidate should have knowledge in conducting social science research and proven ability with examples of previous research conducted with reputable institutions to conduct programme reviews and appraisals.

• A post-graduate degree in Social Sciences, Humanitarian Studies, and/or Development Studies.
• At least 5 years of professional work experience in conducting reviews and evaluations for preferably INGOs.
• Experience in data collection and analysis using participatory methodologies and developing equality and gender-sensitive evaluation methodologies.
• Demonstrated understanding of, and commitment to, women’s rights, gender, and development issues.
• Track record in community development approaches.
• Excellent facilitation skills. 
• Excellent written and spoken communication skills in English.

Application Process and Timeline

Interested consultants/firms should submit their proposal in English language and should include: 

1. Expression of interest/technical offer outlining how the consultant(s) meets the selection criteria and their understanding of the TOR and methodology.
2. List of people to be involved in the contract with their role on the team and a detailed CV for each.
3. Description of the methodology to be used while conducting the baseline, including sampling strategy, sample size, data collection methods, proposed types of data collection tools, and data analysis plan.
4. Separate financial proposal (budget) detailing itemized fees, data collection, and administrative costs.
5. A proposed activities schedule/timeline 
6. Profile of the organization (in case of an institution) including at least (3) references of individuals or organizations that ActionAid can contact to obtain more information on the quality and experience of the Contractor(s)
7. A copy of a recent example of similar work done by the applicant to validate the quality of analysis and presentation of findings.

Interested persons/institutions should send EOI in a sealed envelope addressed to:

Expressions of interest must be sent either in hard or soft copies. Hard copies must be submitted in a sealed envelope addressed to:

The Procurement Committee

ActionAid Sierra Leone

97C Wilkinson Road – Church Yard 

Freetown.

Both soft and hard copies can be submitted to AASL’s Procurement Committee with email : Procurement.AASL@ActionAidGlobal.onmicrosoft.com

Deadline for submission is 3rd December 2024 at 1pm.