[DevJobsIndo] Vacancy- Final Evaluator – Search for Common Ground
TERMS OF REFERENCE
For
Final Evaluation of the
Project
Project
Youth Ambassadors for Tolerance and Religious Diversity
Search for Common Ground Indonesia in partnership with Asia Muslim
Action Network (AMAN) seeks an experienced evaluator to carry out the final evaluation
of its project “Youth Ambassadors for Tolerance and Religious
Diversity”. The project aims to promote inter- and intra-faith cooperation
and tolerance in communities of high religious tension in Indonesia. This
project has been implemented in six cities (Bekasi, Bogor, Bandung, Jember,
Malang, Madura) between March 2014 to January 2016, and is funded by US State
Department, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (US DOS DRL).
Action Network (AMAN) seeks an experienced evaluator to carry out the final evaluation
of its project “Youth Ambassadors for Tolerance and Religious
Diversity”. The project aims to promote inter- and intra-faith cooperation
and tolerance in communities of high religious tension in Indonesia. This
project has been implemented in six cities (Bekasi, Bogor, Bandung, Jember,
Malang, Madura) between March 2014 to January 2016, and is funded by US State
Department, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (US DOS DRL).
This Terms of Reference (TOR) defines the work that must be carried
out by the external evaluator. It provides a brief outline of the project,
specifies the scope of the evaluation, and outlines the evaluation method.
out by the external evaluator. It provides a brief outline of the project,
specifies the scope of the evaluation, and outlines the evaluation method.
1. Background
1.1 Project Summary
In
Indonesia, there are limited opportunities for youth from different religions
to learn about other religions and to have dialogue with youth from other
Indonesia, there are limited opportunities for youth from different religions
to learn about other religions and to have dialogue with youth from other
religions. This is, in part, because of the education system that reinforces
religious differences as opposed to encouraging cooperation across religious
dividing lines, contributing to misunderstanding and prejudice between
religious groups, which even resulted in further conflict in several areas. In
areas that have experienced sustained inter- or intra-religious tension. In
some of the areas covered by this project, youth are both vulnerable to
involvement in violence, and are often overlooked to engage them in
peacebuilding. In these areas, youth have little, if any, opportunity for
meaningful interactions with religious “others” because people in these areas
are divided along religious lines. Even if interactions occur, youth lack “safe
spaces” where they can build trust and meaningful relationships with one
another. In such areas, youth have (almost) always been overlooked as potential
peace builders.
In
order to address these issues at the intersection of youth and inter- and
intra-religious conflict, Search
for Common Ground has been implementing a 21 months project in six cities of Indonesia. The project started
in March 2014 and will run until January 2016.
order to address these issues at the intersection of youth and inter- and
intra-religious conflict, Search
for Common Ground has been implementing a 21 months project in six cities of Indonesia. The project started
in March 2014 and will run until January 2016.
The overall goal of this project
is to promote inter- and intra-faith cooperation and tolerance in
communities of high religious tension in Indonesia.
is to promote inter- and intra-faith cooperation and tolerance in
communities of high religious tension in Indonesia.
The
specific objectives are:
specific objectives are:
1.
To
build the capacity of youth ambassadors to promote inter- and intra-faith
cooperation and tolerance.
To
build the capacity of youth ambassadors to promote inter- and intra-faith
cooperation and tolerance.
2.
To
increase understanding of the importance of inter- and intra-faith tolerance
and cooperation among youth in areas of high religious tension.
To
increase understanding of the importance of inter- and intra-faith tolerance
and cooperation among youth in areas of high religious tension.
3.
To
shift the perceptions of community members about the importance of religious
cooperation and tolerance in areas of high religious tension.
To
shift the perceptions of community members about the importance of religious
cooperation and tolerance in areas of high religious tension.
The
following activities are implemented in order to achieve each objectives:
following activities are implemented in order to achieve each objectives:
Objective
1:
1:
1. Youth-mapping
2. Stakeholder-meetings
3. Youth-Camp Curriculum
Development
Development
4. Youth-Camps
Objective
2:
2:
1. “Celebrating Religious
Diversity” Road Shows.
Diversity” Road Shows.
Objective
3:
3:
1. Community Action Plan
Development
Development
2. Community
Action Plan Implementation
Action Plan Implementation
3. Reflection
Meetings
Meetings
The primary targets of the project are 60
“multiplier youths” between 16 and 28 years of age which have participated in
the “Youth Camp” in September 2014, which then are acknowledged as the “youth
ambassadors ”. SFCG have supported them to
lead community dialogue-based activities throughout implementation. Secondary targets are youth who have participated
in “Celebrating Religious Diversity Road Shows,” and who have worked with
ambassadors to draft petitions on youth concerns. Tertiary targets are thousands of youth, community leaders and
community members that have participated in a wide variety of interactive,
dialogue-based activities, and are exposed to media outputs.
“multiplier youths” between 16 and 28 years of age which have participated in
the “Youth Camp” in September 2014, which then are acknowledged as the “youth
ambassadors ”. SFCG have supported them to
lead community dialogue-based activities throughout implementation. Secondary targets are youth who have participated
in “Celebrating Religious Diversity Road Shows,” and who have worked with
ambassadors to draft petitions on youth concerns. Tertiary targets are thousands of youth, community leaders and
community members that have participated in a wide variety of interactive,
dialogue-based activities, and are exposed to media outputs.
Through
mentioned activities, the project expects the following results:
mentioned activities, the project expects the following results:
1.
Increased opportunities for inter- and
intra-faith interaction among youth; Increased capacity of youth
ambassadors to promote inter- and intra-faith cooperation and understanding
amongst themselves and their communities; Increased capacity of youth
ambassadors to engage with the media, their peers and other youth through
innovative community actions.
Increased opportunities for inter- and
intra-faith interaction among youth; Increased capacity of youth
ambassadors to promote inter- and intra-faith cooperation and understanding
amongst themselves and their communities; Increased capacity of youth
ambassadors to engage with the media, their peers and other youth through
innovative community actions.
2.
Increased understanding of inter- and
intra-faith tolerance and cooperation among youth; improved mechanisms
for inter-
and intra-faith dialogues between youth and their peers.
Increased understanding of inter- and
intra-faith tolerance and cooperation among youth; improved mechanisms
for inter-
and intra-faith dialogues between youth and their peers.
3.
Increased awareness among community members in
respecting other faiths.
Increased awareness among community members in
respecting other faiths.
1.2
Organizational Background
Organizational Background
Search for Common Ground (www.sfcg.org) is a non-governmental organization
which has been working in Indonesia since 2002. The mission is to transform the
way the world deals with conflict: away from adversarial approaches, toward
cooperative solutions. SFCG works in 35 countries across Africa, Asia and the US
engaging in a long-term process of incremental transformation. In Indonesia,
SFCG has a multi-pronged approach to support the peacebuilding process,
combining media with community peacebuilding work. SFCG Indonesia has 20 staff
with a presence in 15 provinces across the country and works with youth, women,
security services, teachers, media, and other civil society actors.
which has been working in Indonesia since 2002. The mission is to transform the
way the world deals with conflict: away from adversarial approaches, toward
cooperative solutions. SFCG works in 35 countries across Africa, Asia and the US
engaging in a long-term process of incremental transformation. In Indonesia,
SFCG has a multi-pronged approach to support the peacebuilding process,
combining media with community peacebuilding work. SFCG Indonesia has 20 staff
with a presence in 15 provinces across the country and works with youth, women,
security services, teachers, media, and other civil society actors.
2. The Evaluation
2.1 Organisational Goal
SFCG as an organisation is committed to
conducting program evaluations in order to assess the effectiveness of our
programs and engage in continuous improvement and learning within programs and
across the organisation. The overall goal of this evaluation is to assess to
contribution of the project in promoting inter- and intra-faith cooperation and tolerance
in communities of high religious tension in Indonesia.
conducting program evaluations in order to assess the effectiveness of our
programs and engage in continuous improvement and learning within programs and
across the organisation. The overall goal of this evaluation is to assess to
contribution of the project in promoting inter- and intra-faith cooperation and tolerance
in communities of high religious tension in Indonesia.
2.2
Evaluation Criteria and Key Evaluation Questions
Evaluation Criteria and Key Evaluation Questions
The evaluation will specifically focus on the
following dimensions taken from the OECD DACs Guidance on Conflict Prevention
and Peacebuilding activities:
following dimensions taken from the OECD DACs Guidance on Conflict Prevention
and Peacebuilding activities:
Relevance
·
How relevant was the project to address the
problems of misunderstanding and prejudice among youth across religious divides?
How relevant was the project to address the
problems of misunderstanding and prejudice among youth across religious divides?
·
Did
the project target the right group of participants with right set of strategies
and activities?
Did
the project target the right group of participants with right set of strategies
and activities?
Effectiveness
Programme
Effectiveness
Effectiveness
·
What are the major outputs and outcomes of this
project? How is the progress in comparison to the relevant baseline data?
What are the major outputs and outcomes of this
project? How is the progress in comparison to the relevant baseline data?
·
How has the project contributed in increased
awareness and knowledge of ‘other religion’ especially among youth and wider
community?
How has the project contributed in increased
awareness and knowledge of ‘other religion’ especially among youth and wider
community?
·
How has the project created opportunities for
inter and intra-faith cooperation among youth, their increased interaction and
engagement with media, peers and other youth?
How has the project created opportunities for
inter and intra-faith cooperation among youth, their increased interaction and
engagement with media, peers and other youth?
·
Has the project helped youth to start some
innovative actions to promote inter and intra-faith cooperation?
Has the project helped youth to start some
innovative actions to promote inter and intra-faith cooperation?
·
To what extend has the seed-grant activities
given to the youth ambassadors provided them with a platform to bring people from
different religious divides together in a share platform of dialogue and collaboration?
To what extend has the seed-grant activities
given to the youth ambassadors provided them with a platform to bring people from
different religious divides together in a share platform of dialogue and collaboration?
·
To what extend has the youth
ambassadors engage with media in promoting intra and inter-religious tolerance
towards the public?
To what extend has the youth
ambassadors engage with media in promoting intra and inter-religious tolerance
towards the public?
·
To what extent do the mechanisms for inter- and intra-faith dialogues
between youth in targeted areas and their peers improved?
To what extent do the mechanisms for inter- and intra-faith dialogues
between youth in targeted areas and their peers improved?
·
What unexpected positive or negative results did
the project lead to?
What unexpected positive or negative results did
the project lead to?
Peace
Effectiveness
Effectiveness
• How has the
project contributed in promoting peace and harmony through increased inter- and
intra-faith cooperation and tolerance in the target communities?
project contributed in promoting peace and harmony through increased inter- and
intra-faith cooperation and tolerance in the target communities?
• Are there
any noteworthy examples demonstrating increased cooperation and tolerance leading
towards a peaceful society within the target communities which could be
attributed (fully or partially) to the project initiatives?
any noteworthy examples demonstrating increased cooperation and tolerance leading
towards a peaceful society within the target communities which could be
attributed (fully or partially) to the project initiatives?
Coherence
and Coordination:
and Coordination:
·
How was the coordination between SFCG and its
partner in implementing the project?
How was the coordination between SFCG and its
partner in implementing the project?
·
What were the challenges, if any, and how did
SFCG and partners overcome them?
What were the challenges, if any, and how did
SFCG and partners overcome them?
·
How coherent were the activities implemented in
achieving the goal/objectives set for the project?
How coherent were the activities implemented in
achieving the goal/objectives set for the project?
Sustainability:
·
What steps were planned or have been
taken by the project team (SFCG and partners) and youth ambassadors to create
long‐term processes or structures to
promote inter and intra faith dialogue as well as cooperation in their
community?
What steps were planned or have been
taken by the project team (SFCG and partners) and youth ambassadors to create
long‐term processes or structures to
promote inter and intra faith dialogue as well as cooperation in their
community?
·
Have the youth ambassadors been able
to independently organize formal or informal initiatives to promote cooperation
and tolerance in target communities?
Have the youth ambassadors been able
to independently organize formal or informal initiatives to promote cooperation
and tolerance in target communities?
·
Are there any specific mechanisms
established as a result of the project that work as a platform to promote
cooperation and tolerance in the target communities?
Are there any specific mechanisms
established as a result of the project that work as a platform to promote
cooperation and tolerance in the target communities?
2.3. Audience
The primary audience of this evaluation includes:
·
The staff of SFCG Indonesia and
partner organisations to draw out reflections and lessons learned from the
project and to use the recommendations for future project design.
The staff of SFCG Indonesia and
partner organisations to draw out reflections and lessons learned from the
project and to use the recommendations for future project design.
·
DOS DRL, the funding agency, for assessing
the effective and efficient use of the funds to achieve the stated goals and
results of the project.
DOS DRL, the funding agency, for assessing
the effective and efficient use of the funds to achieve the stated goals and
results of the project.
2.3. Evaluation Methodology
The SFCG approach to
evaluation is grounded in the guiding principles of our work: participatory;
culturally sensitive; committed to building capacity; affirming and positive
while honest and productively critical and valuing knowledge and approaches
from within the context.
The evaluator will
visit the six targeted cities in the project for the purpose of evaluation. S/he
will meet with the project participants, partners, SFCG staff and relevant
stakeholders. The evaluator will develop the methodology and tools of the
evaluation in consultation with SFCG management and DM&E staff. The evaluator will compare the findings form
the final evaluation process with the data generated in the baseline. The evaluation methodology and data
collection tools are required to be included in an inception report to be
submitted within a week of signing the contract.
visit the six targeted cities in the project for the purpose of evaluation. S/he
will meet with the project participants, partners, SFCG staff and relevant
stakeholders. The evaluator will develop the methodology and tools of the
evaluation in consultation with SFCG management and DM&E staff. The evaluator will compare the findings form
the final evaluation process with the data generated in the baseline. The evaluation methodology and data
collection tools are required to be included in an inception report to be
submitted within a week of signing the contract.
S/he will use quantitative
and qualitative methods of evaluation, which include:
and qualitative methods of evaluation, which include:
·
Desk study review: It is important to review
academic literature on the topic of interfaith and intra faith dialogue and
collaboration in Indonesia in order to clearly understand the dynamics. It is
also mandatory to review project proposal, logical framework, quarterly reports,
baseline survey data and report, training manuals, and other monitoring data
and secondary sources of data to complete the evaluation. The evaluation will
take special reference form the baseline and will use the baseline data to
compare with end line results.
Desk study review: It is important to review
academic literature on the topic of interfaith and intra faith dialogue and
collaboration in Indonesia in order to clearly understand the dynamics. It is
also mandatory to review project proposal, logical framework, quarterly reports,
baseline survey data and report, training manuals, and other monitoring data
and secondary sources of data to complete the evaluation. The evaluation will
take special reference form the baseline and will use the baseline data to
compare with end line results.
·
Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): Interviews
will be conducted to assess the result of the first and second objective, as
well as gather in-depth information on the result of the third objective. It
will be carried out with at least 14 key informants in four target areas,
including the youth ambassadors, the secondary target youth, and community
leaders. Additional Interviews will also be conducted with SFCG staff and partner
organizations. An abridged version of MOST Significant Change (MSC) Approach will
be conducted with the select youth ambassadors to assess the changing
perception and attitude, as well as their role in promoting inter and intra
faith cooperation and tolerance in communities and develop stories of change
happening among the youth and their communities. This will form sub-set of the KIIs we will be
doing. These first hand stories of change will give human face to the project’s
results and provide information about the personal development of the youth
ambassadors and their abilities to play the role as ‘multiplier youth’ to
promote tolerance among their communities.
Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): Interviews
will be conducted to assess the result of the first and second objective, as
well as gather in-depth information on the result of the third objective. It
will be carried out with at least 14 key informants in four target areas,
including the youth ambassadors, the secondary target youth, and community
leaders. Additional Interviews will also be conducted with SFCG staff and partner
organizations. An abridged version of MOST Significant Change (MSC) Approach will
be conducted with the select youth ambassadors to assess the changing
perception and attitude, as well as their role in promoting inter and intra
faith cooperation and tolerance in communities and develop stories of change
happening among the youth and their communities. This will form sub-set of the KIIs we will be
doing. These first hand stories of change will give human face to the project’s
results and provide information about the personal development of the youth
ambassadors and their abilities to play the role as ‘multiplier youth’ to
promote tolerance among their communities.
·
Focus-Group Discussions (FGDs): Two FGDs (one with the youth
ambassadors and one with the secondary target youths) will be conducted out in
each of the chosen four target areas to assess the result of the first and
second objectives,. The participants of the FGDs will be
selected to ensure all voices are heard and all aspects of the evaluation
questions are covered.
Focus-Group Discussions (FGDs): Two FGDs (one with the youth
ambassadors and one with the secondary target youths) will be conducted out in
each of the chosen four target areas to assess the result of the first and
second objectives,. The participants of the FGDs will be
selected to ensure all voices are heard and all aspects of the evaluation
questions are covered.
·
Public Perception Survey: A short
public perception survey (similar to the baseline) will be conducted to measure
the results of the third objective. The survey will collect data to see the
change of
perceptions about the importance of religious cooperation and tolerance among
community members in areas of high religious tension. In order
to do the survey effectively and appropriately, the consultant will calculate a
proper total sample size based on the total population universe of the four
target districts using a scientific sample size calculation formula. The total
sample size will then be distributed proportionately to four districts and a
survey will be carried out inclusive of gender, age, religion and ethnicity (if
and where appropriate). If the
allocation of sample size to any districts becomes less than 25% of the
originally calculated total sample size, the sample size for the particular
Public Perception Survey: A short
public perception survey (similar to the baseline) will be conducted to measure
the results of the third objective. The survey will collect data to see the
change of
perceptions about the importance of religious cooperation and tolerance among
community members in areas of high religious tension. In order
to do the survey effectively and appropriately, the consultant will calculate a
proper total sample size based on the total population universe of the four
target districts using a scientific sample size calculation formula. The total
sample size will then be distributed proportionately to four districts and a
survey will be carried out inclusive of gender, age, religion and ethnicity (if
and where appropriate). If the
allocation of sample size to any districts becomes less than 25% of the
originally calculated total sample size, the sample size for the particular
districts should automatically be increased at least 25% of the total sample
size. The consultant is responsible for conducting the perception survey in
target districts, including arranging the enumerators for the survey. The
consultant can include survey budget in the proposal.
3. Scope of Work
3.1
Location
Location
This evaluation will take place in six chosen
locations where program activities are implemented: Bekasi, Bandung, Bogor, Jember, Malang and Madura.
locations where program activities are implemented: Bekasi, Bandung, Bogor, Jember, Malang and Madura.
3.2 Deliverables:
Following
specific deliverables are expected form the consultant.
specific deliverables are expected form the consultant.
- Within seven days from signing the contract, the consultant shall
submit the Inception Report, which clearly defines the evaluation
methodology, such as clear outlines of FGDs and KII checklist, survey
questionnaires, and an evaluation timeline with specific deadlines for
each deliverable. The inception
report should also clearly explain the sampling methodology and sample
size for the quantitative survey and clear and logical explanation of the
number of FGDs and KIIs planned in each location. The inception report
will be reviewed and approved by the SFCG Team. The evaluator cannot start
the data collection process without the SFCG team’s approval on the
inception report, including the sample size calculation and distribution
across different locations. - Data collection in the field. Conducting FGDs, public Perception
survey and MSC stories collection from among the select Youth Ambassadors
as part of the KIIs. - Draft revaluation report to be submitted within 10 days of
completion of the data for the review and comments from SFCG Indonesia Team
and Institutional Learning Team from the headquarters. The review and
feedback of the report could be more than one rounds depending on the
quality of the report submitted by the consultant and the extent to which
the comments and suggestions from the first round of review have been
incorporated. - The final evaluation report after incorporating the comments from
SFCG. The report should be written strictly in English language and should
be around 25-30 pages (excluding annexes) in length and consists of:
a. Cover Page. SFCG will provide sample cover sheet for reference.
b. Table of contents, list of acronyms/abbreviations and list of tables and
charts
charts
c. Executive summary of key findings and recommendations – no more than 3
pages.
pages.
d. Introduction: Context analysis,
project description, evaluation methodology with clear explanation of sampling,
survey methodology, FGDs/KIIs participant selection and data analysis approach.
project description, evaluation methodology with clear explanation of sampling,
survey methodology, FGDs/KIIs participant selection and data analysis approach.
e. Evaluation findings, analysis, and conclusions with associated data
presented per evaluation objective and per evaluation criteria, via a reasonable
balance of narrative vs. graphs and charts (mandatory). The findings can include subsections for each
evaluation criteria.
presented per evaluation objective and per evaluation criteria, via a reasonable
balance of narrative vs. graphs and charts (mandatory). The findings can include subsections for each
evaluation criteria.
f.
Recommendations for future
activities/intervention. The recommendations should be forward looking and
should focus on program design, planning vs implementation, implementation
methodology and approach, project monitoring and evaluation system, among
others. The recommendations should also be frame according to eh evaluation
criteria.
Recommendations for future
activities/intervention. The recommendations should be forward looking and
should focus on program design, planning vs implementation, implementation
methodology and approach, project monitoring and evaluation system, among
others. The recommendations should also be frame according to eh evaluation
criteria.
g. Appendices, which include collected data, detailed description of the
methodology with research instruments, list of interviewees, bibliography, and
evaluator(s) brief biography.
methodology with research instruments, list of interviewees, bibliography, and
evaluator(s) brief biography.
·
It should be submitted
electronically in a MS-Word document. The evaluator is responsible for English
editing of the final report and should be well formatted. The report will be
credited to the evaluator and potentially placed in the public domain at the
decision of SFCG. A verbal presentation of the findings of the evaluation in a
meeting organized by SFCG for its staff and its partners. The representative of
the donor may be present in this meeting.
It should be submitted
electronically in a MS-Word document. The evaluator is responsible for English
editing of the final report and should be well formatted. The report will be
credited to the evaluator and potentially placed in the public domain at the
decision of SFCG. A verbal presentation of the findings of the evaluation in a
meeting organized by SFCG for its staff and its partners. The representative of
the donor may be present in this meeting.
·
All handwritten and electronic
transcripts of interviews and FGDs, hard copies of the survey questionnaires,
any logistics taken from SFCG for the evaluation purpose and photographs taken
during the evaluation should be submitted to SFCG. Further to this, all
information generated during the evaluation will be the sole property of SFCG
and is subject to submission to SFCG along with the final report.
All handwritten and electronic
transcripts of interviews and FGDs, hard copies of the survey questionnaires,
any logistics taken from SFCG for the evaluation purpose and photographs taken
during the evaluation should be submitted to SFCG. Further to this, all
information generated during the evaluation will be the sole property of SFCG
and is subject to submission to SFCG along with the final report.
3.3 Duration & Deadlines
The duration of contract will be a
total of 10 weeks starting November 27st
to January 31st 2015. The
proposal package should be submitted to Pramita Handayani via email: [email protected] and
cc: [email protected] no later
than November 22nd 2015.
total of 10 weeks starting November 27st
to January 31st 2015. The
proposal package should be submitted to Pramita Handayani via email: [email protected] and
cc: [email protected] no later
than November 22nd 2015.
|
Deadline of application
|
November 22nd 2015
|
|
Decision of the selected evaluator
|
November 25th 2015
|
|
Signing of contract
|
November 27th 2015
|
|
The evaluation plan/inception
report submission |
December 5th 2015
|
|
Comments on the inception report
incorporated and finalized |
December 10th 2015
|
|
Field evaluation (Field data
collection) in 6 cities |
December 15th 2015 – January 10th
2016 |
|
First draft of the report
|
January 20th 2016
|
|
Back and forth review between SFCG
& consultant |
January 20-27th 2016
|
|
Final Evaluation Report submitted
|
January 28th 2016
|
3.4 Evaluation Team
The evaluation team will include the evaluator, SFCG Indonesia DM&E Coordinator,
and SFCG Asia DM&E Specialist. The evaluator will be under the direct
supervision of the DM&E Coordinator an overall guidance of the SFCG Country
Director. SFCG’s DM&E Coordinator will be responsible for facilitating the
needs of the consultant for the purpose of the evaluation.
and SFCG Asia DM&E Specialist. The evaluator will be under the direct
supervision of the DM&E Coordinator an overall guidance of the SFCG Country
Director. SFCG’s DM&E Coordinator will be responsible for facilitating the
needs of the consultant for the purpose of the evaluation.
3.5 Logistical Support
SFCG will provide preparatory and logistical assistance to the
evaluator, including:
evaluator, including:
·
Background materials (project
proposal, periodic reports, existing evaluations, etc.)
Background materials (project
proposal, periodic reports, existing evaluations, etc.)
·
Meetings, phone/e-mail communication
with program administrators
Meetings, phone/e-mail communication
with program administrators
·
Identify interviewees and provide
contact information
Identify interviewees and provide
contact information
·
All logistical support for the field
visit, including travel cost (local as well as air travel)
All logistical support for the field
visit, including travel cost (local as well as air travel)
·
Arrange meetings and appointments
with stakeholders and beneficiaries in the field (if necessary).
Arrange meetings and appointments
with stakeholders and beneficiaries in the field (if necessary).
4. Evaluator’s Role and Competencies
4.1. Evaluator’s Role
The evaluation will be carried out
by a single external evaluator, who will report to and work under the guidance
by a single external evaluator, who will report to and work under the guidance
of SFCG’s DM&E Coordinator, who is also the evaluation manager for this
project.
The external evaluator will:
·
Identify and define evaluation
priority areas, methodology and indicators;
Identify and define evaluation
priority areas, methodology and indicators;
·
Look for the enumerators/field data
collectors him/herself, budget, and manage the team of enumerator.
Look for the enumerators/field data
collectors him/herself, budget, and manage the team of enumerator.
·
Design and implement data
collection;
Design and implement data
collection;
·
Analyse data and findings and
prepare a report;
Analyse data and findings and
prepare a report;
·
Write and submit a final report;
Write and submit a final report;
·
Make a brief presentation of
findings and recommendations to SFCG Indonesia and partners.
Make a brief presentation of
findings and recommendations to SFCG Indonesia and partners.
Evaluator competencies
- Sound knowledge on conflict and peacebuilding, inter and interfaith
issues and dynamics in the Indonesian context; - Sound understanding of youth and social movements.
- Cultural
competency and strong ethics – particularly around interviewing children
and evaluative process related to youth. - Gender-sensitivity
in incorporating gender perspectives when analyzing problems. - Sound knowledge on program development;
- Master’s degree in social science or other related fields;
Candidates with degree in conflict and peacebuilding will be given a
priority. - Excellent command over written English;
- Prior experience in evaluating peacebuilding programs will be an
added advantage.
A complete proposals/application should be submitted by the deadline and
should include:
should include:
ü Proposal (maximum 6 pages, including the methods and methodology to be
adopted)
adopted)
ü Budget estimates and price quote
ü CV
ü Cover letter
ü Availability
ü References
ü Writing sample
Visit Today : 373
This Month : 7015
Hits Today : 4406
Total Hits : 348639
Who's Online : 1
