[DevJobsIndo] Urgent Required: External Evaluator for The Gayo Coffee Success Initiative

Background and Context

The Gayo Coffee
Producer Empowerment Initiative Second Phase project began on April 1, 2014 and
runs until December 2015 as a continuation and expansion of the First Phase
which was implemented from April 1, 2013 to March 2014. The project was funded
by Rabobank Foundation trough Fair Trade USA.  
The goal of the second
phase project is to
improve the productivity, quality, and market access of 2,590 coffee
producers in 2 districts of Gayo Region, Aceh, Indonesia. The goal for the
first phase was the same with a different number of project beneficiaries.
The
first phase of the project focused on two cooperatives: Koperasi Permata Gayo
and Gayo Linge Organic Cooperative (GLOC) with 2,625 project beneficiaries in
75 villages. The project had four objectives. Two objectives were under LWR’s
responsibility, and the other two were under Fair Trade USA’s intervention. The
two objectives under LWR are:
1.       Strengthen the capacity of

the Permata Gayo and GLOC cooperatives to provide training and technical
support to members while improving levels of governance, accountability and
member participation to increase market access and benefits.

2.       Over a 12-month period,
build the capacity of 2,625 coffee farmers to improve on-farm management of
their cultivations, including pest control, soil management, organic
fertilization and value-added post-harvest management techniques.
The
second phase focused on two additional cooperatives: Ketiara and Koperasi
Baitul Qiradh Babburayan (KBQB) with continued assistance to Permata Gayo and
GLOC. The activities involving Ketiara and KBQB in the second phase are the
same as the ones carried out with Permata Gayo and GLOC during the first phase.
The only difference is the number of wet-mill processing units and organic
fertilizers constructed.
LWR
is seeking an external evaluator or team of evaluators to assess both phases of
this project. This assessment should be completed within a maximum of one month
and reports should be submitted in accordance with the given schedule.

The purposes of the evaluation are:
1.       To assess and explore the major socio-economic
impact of the project at the community and household level from both project
phases.
2.       To examine LWR’s working and partnership approaches
with cooperatives in implementing the projects.
3.       To document key achievements, strengths,
weaknesses and lessons learnt from the projects and make specific
recommendations for scaling up such projects in the future.
 
The evaluation report will be used by LWR to
identify lessons learn or programmatic approaches that can be replicated. The
evaluation report may also be distributed to other organizations such as
Rabobank Foundation and Fair Trade USA as well as
 
Evaluation
Scope and Key Question
This evaluation
includes the assessment of the two phases of the project. In summary, these are:
Phase I:
Two cooperatives in Bener Meriah
2,625 farmers
75 delegates
20 cooperative staff and board
 
Phase II:
Four cooperatives, two in Bener Meriah, two in
Aceh Tengah
2,620 farmers
80 delegates
22 cooperative staff
Bener Meriah is 20-30kms from Aceh Tengah
 
The consultants
should consider these key questions during the design of the study instruments
– methods, questionnaires, checklists or any evaluation tools. These are just
guiding questions. The evaluation should not be limited to them.
  1. What are
    the most significant socio-economic changes from this project at the coffee
    producers’ level?
    • Is there any significant improvement in terms of the quality of the
      coffee that the farmers produce?
    • Is there any change in price due to the difference in the quality of
      the coffee the farmers produce?
Do farmers produce a greater yield because of the project’s assistance?
Did the changes (in yield/quality) affect the buyers’/farmers’ behavior? For
instance, were there changes in the coffee that the buyers purchase?
·      
Do farmers think that coffee farming is a worthwhile source
of income?
    • Are farmers’ incomes sufficient to support the needs of their entire
      family (food, health, education)? [1]
    • How does LWR’s approach to increasing yield per ha compare with
      other organizations’/companies’ approaches?
    • Were farmers’ production losses reduced because of LWR’s
      assistance?
    • Do farmers still depend on loan sharks’/collectors’ pre-finance
      prior to harvest season?
    • Has there been any significant impact on farmers’ livelihoods,
      family health and education? Is LWR’s project contributing to that impact?
  1. What are
    the most significant socio-economic changes from this project at
    cooperative level?
    • Has the cooperative received new funding because of LWR’s
      assistance?
    • Do farmers think that cooperatives are a good place to sell their
      coffee?
    • What are the sustainability plans of the cooperatives? Are they
      able to run their business on their own?
 
  1. What is the
    cost-benefit analysis when assessing efficiency and effectiveness of the
    projects?
    • What is the cost:benefit ratio of the project?
    • What were the major benefits of the project to the target
      households’ incomes?
    • How many farmers benefited from the project in total?
    • What is the income increase: project investment ratio?
 
  1. Have the
    coffee projects impacted gender roles at the household or community level?
    • What were women’s/men’s role before the project?
    • How have women’s/men’s roles changed over the course of the
      project?
    • Is there any support that the project has given to make gender roles
      worse/better[2]?
    • To what degree has women’s status in the coffee business has been changed
      by the project intervention?
 
  1. How has the
    private sector in these projects helped and contributed to the
    socio-economic changes of the community and targets households.
    • How many private sector actors work in the region, directly with farmers’
      organization (cooperatives)?
    • What support does the private sector provide to the cooperatives?
    • How has the support from the private sector contributed to coffee
      quality and production?
    • Does the additional price that the company pays to farmers benefit
      both the company and the farmers (in terms of the sustainability of coffee
      production)
 
EVALUATION
METHODOLOGY
LWR

encourages the consultant to bring or propose relevant and innovative study
methods and tools. The consultant will design an impact study framework on how
the studies will be carried out, taking into account the study context, purpose
and use, criteria and questions. The data will come from primary and secondary
sources such as the project participants, project implementers/LWR partners,
and other stakeholders; project documents; and other relevant sources. The
study may use data collection tools that range from household surveys, key
informant interviews, focus group discussions, in depth case studies etc. LWR
encourages the use of participatory evaluation tools. The consultant may decide
on the other appropriate methodologies based on their consultations with LWR, the
partners, and project participants.

This study encourages the use of both quantitative and
qualitative methodologies, “with and without” communities, and “before and after”
(the intervention) evaluation as suggested methods for rigorous analysis. LWR
Regional Monitoring and Evaluation Manager will provide support to finalize the
evaluation study tools.
 
EVALUATION
DELIVERABLES
The
consultant is expected to deliver:
1.       Evaluation plan (inception
plan, inception report) – The consultant/evaluator, with guidance from LWR,
will prepare an Assessment Plan/inception Report before initiating data
collection. The assessment plan will include an evaluation matrix: what is
being evaluated, and how each evaluation question will be answered by way of:
proposed methods, proposed data sources, sampling methodology, data collection
procedures, and who will use the report findings, and how.
2.       Draft evaluation report: The
consultant/evaluator will submit a draft assessment report to the Country
Director (CD) for feedback and input. CD may share the draft report with other
concerned LWR staff for their input and feedback. The consultant will
incorporate LWR’s relevant input, feedback and comments into the final report.
Final evaluation report: The
consultant will finalize the report incorporating relevant input and feedback
from LWR. The final evaluation report is to be submitted by December 18, 2015.
The consultant must use the LWR report template. It is available on request from
the contact person.
 
IMPLEMENTATION
ARRANGEMENTS
Roles and responsibilities of LWR:
·       Assist

the consultant in the coordination of meetings and scheduling of data gathering
activities with the implementing partners and project participants in the
covered project areas.

·       From
time to time monitor the progress of study activities.
·       Assign
an evaluation manager/officer as the point person for this study, including
communication, logistics, and guidance.
·       LWR
will facilitate communication with various stakeholders, private coffee
companies, and implementing partners and beneficiaries.
·       Assist
the consultants in identifying and linking with the beneficiaries and other
identified respondents for the study.
 
Roles and responsibilities of
consultant:
·       Provide
LWR with details of the role of team members if there is more than one
evaluator.
·       Work
closely with the LWR point person in carrying out the evaluation work.
·       Conduct
document review.
·       Provide
all the deliverables as mentioned in the ToR below on time.
 
EVALUATION
TIMEFRAME
The
consultant will complete all above deliverables within a maximum of twenty-three
(23) days. The consultant can revise schedule and days required jointly with
LWR. The proposed major deliverables and days required are given as below:
Desk Review of all the project documents including the project
proposal, logframe, and other DMEL tools 
– ITT/ATT and progress report
3 days
Briefing, discussion and
interaction with LWR Country Directors and relevant staff involved in the
project (Program Manager, Senior and Project Officer, Finance staff).
2 days
Finalization of survey
instrument (Inception Report) including study methods, questionnaires,
checklists, field schedules
2 days
Field work : Field work, primary
data collection, observation, meeting and interactions,
6 days
Cost benefit analysis :
measuring efficiency and effectiveness of the projects
3 days
Drafting the final report
4 days
Debriefing and taking feedback
about field work to country team and staff
1 days
Preparation of final report with
inclusion of LWR input/ comments and comprehensive presentation on sharing
the lessons, opportunities and challenges identified through the process
2 days
Total days required
23 working days
 
EVALUATOR QUALIFICATIONS
AND APPLICATION PROCEDURES
LWR is open to a consultant or team or
firm for this assignment. The submitted 
proposals will be assessed with the following 3 major criteria:
1.       Demonstrated
capacity to conduct an impact study, cost-benefit analysis, and research/studies/assessments
of coffee projects.
2.       Technical
proposal outlining an understanding of the assignment, and proposed impact
study plan and methodology.
3.       Cost-effectiveness
of the proposed budget to achieve these deliverables.
 
LWR is looking for
consultants with the following qualifications and experience:
·      
At least 5 years of progressive
professional experience in conducting impact studies, cost benefit analyses,
surveys, project evaluations with solid experience in conducting and managing
coffee or similar cash crop projects (CVs will be reviewed).
·      
Demonstrated capacity to analyze
qualitative and quantitative data in a systematic way.
·      
Demonstrated ability to present
complex information in a concise, clear and accessible way.
·      
Extensive knowledge on standards and
procedures about cost-benefits analysis.
·      
Demonstrated experience applying
participatory evaluation methodologies in cross-cultural settings.
·      
Capacity to conduct gender analysis
and its impact in livelihoods.
·      
Experience
collecting data in rural areas of Indonesia and target project sites is
considered an asset, although is not a prerequisite for applying.
·      
Have excellent writing skills (in
English), and have outstanding analysis, and communication skills.
·      
Working knowledge of Bahasa is an asset. 
·      
Feedback or comments on this TOR, and questions
·      
A short proposal (not more than 5 pages) on how
to fulfill the TOR, which should include impact study methods, evaluation plan
and cost detail including fees
·      
Resumes/CVs with references
·      
A sample similar evaluation report
Expression of Interest with the full
proposal is to be sent to
[email protected] and also copied

to [email protected] before 20 November
2015

Any decision for
disqualification rests solely with LWR.
 
BUDGET
The
evaluator should submit the proposal with budget including, but not limited to,:
·      
Travel cost to and from Takengon
·      
Translator cost, if needed
·      
Accommodation and meals when in Medan / field
·      
Field enumerator fee
 
ANNEXES
These annexes are available upon
consultant being determined:
·      
Project proposals
·      
All periodic project
progress reports
·      
M&E Plan Matrix,
·      
Logframe
·       Monitoring report


[1]
Sufficient will be compare with minimum monthly pay for daily labor (UMP – Upah
Minimum Provinsi/ Province Minimum Payment)
[2]
Better/worse: more equitable/less equitable, where man and woman have better
partnership in household level as well as in community level


0077722
Visit Today : 254
This Month : 5170
Hits Today : 1136
Total Hits : 276750
Who's Online : 4
Visit Us On FacebookVisit Us On TwitterVisit Us On YoutubeVisit Us On Instagram