Latest Jobs in Kenya: PROCESS EVALUATION OF STRENGTHENED PARTNERSHIP FOR NURTURING CARE PROJECT IN UGUNJA SUB-COUNTY, SIAYA COUNTY-ChildFund International

**

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR PROCESS EVALUATION OF STRENGTHENED PARTNERSHIP FOR NURTURING CARE PROJECT IN UGUNJA SUB-COUNTY, SIAYA COUNTY

1.0 Background:

ChildFund Kenya is implementing the project, “A Strengthened Partnership for Nurturing Care” project, from August 2018 to October 2021 in Ugunja Sub-County of Siaya County. The project builds upon learning and promising results on what works for responsive caregiving through home visiting and group parenting sessions during existing community platforms in the same implementation area. The goal is that vulnerable children aged 0-5 years old affected by HIV and AIDS meet developmental milestones in nurturing environments by July 2021.

2.0 About ChildFund

ChildFund is an international child-centered development organization. We are a member of the ChildFund Alliance; a global network of 12 organizations that assists more than 15 million children in 58 countries around the world.

ChildFund Kenya works through 13 local partners (LP’s) comprised of 38 community organizations in 26 counties. The thematic areas that we focus on are Child Protection, Household Economic Strengthening, Early Childhood Development, Education, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), Emergency Response, Health and Nutrition.

Our three-fold mission is to help deprived, excluded and vulnerable children improve their lives and become adults who bring positive changes to their communities: to promote societies that value, protect and advance the worth and rights of children: and to enrich supporters’ lives through their support of our cause.

3.0. Overview of the Process Evaluation Intent and the Process Evaluation Plan

The current consultancy is to carry out a process evaluation of the Nurturing Care Responsive Parenting Project being implemented by ChildFund Kenya and Kisumu Development Program-her local partner (LPs) in Siaya County, Kenya titled “A Strengthened Partnership for Nurturing Care project”.

The process evaluation’s main aim is to assess the implementation of the project in the following areas:

a. fidelity of the project implementation to the original design; this includes the assessment of three key dimension of fidelity—adherence, dosage, and quality.

b. engagement and participation of male caregivers

c. process around baseline data collection

d. impact of COVID-19 pandemic

e. functioning community-based child protection mechanisms

f. multi-sectoral coordination at sub-county/ level

This process evaluation will inform and be informed by the project outcome evaluation.

For this study’s general timing, the process evaluation should take place between May 2021 and beginning of August 2021 with the report finalized no later than August 2021.

The consultant will be given access to the project evaluation plan, baseline and M&E data collected so far.

4.0. Objectives of the Process Evaluation

The purpose of this assignment is to work in close coordination and consultation with ChildFund Kenya, ChildFund’s local implementing partner in Kenya (Kisumu Development Program), and ChildFund technical advisors, ChildFund International Office, and the International Evaluator to support the process evaluation activities specifically for the design and conduct of the project’s process evaluation as well as the finalization of all associated reports.

Through this dynamic partnership, this evaluator will coordinate directly with ChildFund’s international evaluator.

All logistical support will be completed in coordination with the ChildFund Kenya Project Staff.

The following are the main activities of the local consultant.

4.1. Review key internal and external documents to inform finalizing plan, existing Results Frameworks and M&E plans, ChildFund’s Responsive and Protecting Parenting program model’s M&E plan, past project MEL tools, Conrad N. Hilton Foundation program strategy, project database, project reports and any other supporting documents, etc.

4.2. Finalize research questions in consultation with ChildFund and the International consultant.

Possible but not exhaustive research questions might include those in table below.

Evaluation Question

Sub-questions

Key indicators

Data sources/measures

Objective 1: Assess fidelity of the implementation of the project to the original design

Q1A: What did caregiver participation in the project look like?

What was participant engagement through home visits and parental sessions during the project?

Reach/dosage – What percentage of target participants attended the sessions?

What was the average number of participants per session?

How well were sessions received by caregivers?

# and % of sessions attended by caregivers, disaggregated by type of session, community, and gender and sub county

# of participants, on average, per session, disaggregated by type of session, community, and gender and sub county

% of participants who reported satisfaction with the sessions by gender and community/sub county

# and % of participants who attended all sessions, disaggregated by type of session, community, and gender and sub county

Average number of sessions attended by participants, disaggregated by type of session (home visits/group sessions/boda boda group), community and gender and sub county.

# and % of participants who dropped out of the program, disaggregated by type of session (home visit/group session/boda boda group), community, and gender

Attendance sheets/activity reports

Focus group interviews with caregivers.

**Question: Was participant refusal/dropout tracked – and if so, were reasons recorded for why participants refused to participate/drop out?

What factors enabled caregivers to participate in the parenting program?

# and type of factors that enabled caregivers to participate

Focus group interviews with caregivers

What challenges prevented caregivers from participating in the parenting program?

(Barriers: What problems were encountered in enrolling/reaching participants? Were there other challenges in delivering the parenting program?)

# and type of challenges that prevented caregivers from participating (suggested levels: at facilitator/mentor/ECD teacher level, from project staff level e.g. possible delays, etc.)

Focus group interviews with caregivers

Q1B: How consistent was the delivery of the program?

How many sessions took place by community/sub county? Did they follow the planned frequency?

Question about facilitators and their experience delivering the program as originally planned.

Of the activities implemented, how many were on target/over or under achieved? How many did not meet targets? Why?

# and % of parenting sessions delivered as intended, disaggregated by type of session, community

# and % of reflective supervision sessions delivered as intended, disaggregated by community, mentor

# and kind of activity compared to those originally planned, original targets against actual targets.

Type of barriers and cause of delay (external to the project, internal to project, internal to CF, etc.)

Activity reports

Project workplans/DIPs

Q1C: What training, guidance, and information did facilitators receive?

What was mentor engagement during monthly reflective supervision touch points?

Were the reflective and supportive supervision meetings led by the LP conducted consistently?

# of monthly reflective supervision sessions carried out, disaggregated by community, mentor, gender of mentor, and gender of facilitator and sub county

Attendance sheets/activity reports

Filled reflective supervision tools.

Focus group interviews with mentors

What was facilitator engagement during monthly reflective supervision touch points?

Were the monthly reflective supervision meetings led by mentors conducted consistently?

# and % of reflective supervision sessions attended on average by facilitators, disaggregated by gender and community

Attendance sheets/activity reports

Filled reflective supervision tools.

Focus group interviews with facilitators (CHVs, ECD Teachers and group facilitators)

DS: suggest adding a question about factors facilitating/enabling training and barriers/challenges to training so that we have these two types of questions consistently for 1A, !B, & 1C

Objective 2: Evaluate whether, and to what extent, the project’s design was successful in engaging male caregivers in nurturing care

Q2: To what extent was the project successful in engaging male caregivers?

What was male caregiver engagement in home visits and parenting groups?

What was the participation of caregivers in the boda boda parenting groups (which target solely male boda boda drivers)?

% of parenting groups that included male caregivers

# of male caregivers attending parenting groups sessions

Average # of “regular” sessions attended by individual male caregivers.

% of parenting groups/home visits led by a male facilitator

Attendance sheets/activity reports

**Question: Is there a way to track to see if it is the same male caregivers participating?

**Question: Is there a way to track dropout?

What factors enabled male caregivers to participate in the parenting program?

# and type of factors that enabled male caregivers to participate

Focus group interviews with male caregivers (if possible) and mentors/facilitators (CHVs, ECD Teachers and group facilitators)

What challenges prevented male caregivers from participating in the parenting program?

# and type of challenges that prevented male caregivers from participating

Focus group interviews with male caregivers (if possible) and mentors/facilitators (CHVs, ECD Teachers and group facilitators)

Objective 3: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the baseline and endline data collection process as well as identify areas for improvement

Q3: How can the preparation for and process of baseline data collection be improved to ease data collection and analysis?

What were strengths of the baseline data collection process?

# of strengths of the baseline data collection process

Baseline report

Feedback from local evaluators, CO, and IO project stakeholders (sub-county relevant departments)

What were weaknesses of the baseline data collection process?

# of weaknesses of the baseline data collection process

Baseline report

Feedback from local evaluators, CO, and IO project stakeholders (sub-county relevant departments)

Did baseline data inform the programming direction of the program? If so, how? If not, why not?

# of actions of the project triggered by baseline findings

Feedback from IO and CO project stakeholders (sub-county relevant departments)

Objective 4: Assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on project implementation

Q4A: What has been the impact of the pandemic on project implementation, in terms of workplan and original targets?

How were the caregivers participating in the project affected by the COVID-19 pandemic?

What is the perspective of caregivers on how the pandemic has affected their daily life and participation to the program?

How many activities were rescheduled during/adjusted because of the pandemic?

Of the activities implemented, how many were on target/overachieved? How many did not meet targets? Why?

What adjustments were made by the project based on the DIP? Were these adjustments successful in helping help reach targets or ensure smooth implementation?

# of participants, disaggregated by community and gender

% of parenting sessions conducted as planned, disaggregated by type and community

% of reflective supervision sessions conducted as planned, disaggregated by community

Monthly Project targets

% of progress made per month or quarter compared to the period before COVID

Attendance sheets/activity reports indictor tracking tools.

**Question: will it be possible to disentangle the impact of the pandemic on participation vs. problems that may have happened independently of the pandemic? When did data collection begin?

May be more effective to compare the original timeline to the current timeline

Q4B: What learnings and best practices can be shared internally and externally?

What have been unintended consequences, both positive and negative, of the pandemic on project activities?

# of unintended positive consequences on project activities

# of unintended negative impacts of the pandemic on project activities.

Activity reports

Feedback from CO and IO

Focus group interviews with mentors and parenting education facilitators (CHVs, ECD Teachers and group facilitators)

Government officials (sub-county, county and selected national government ministries)

What measures have been put in place by ChildFund and local partners to ensure that the implementation of project activities remained true to its mandate?

# and types of corrective measures initiated by CO/LPs to ensure smooth implementation

Activity reports

Feedback from CO and IO

What role has ChildFund/the project played in supporting nurturing care during the pandemic?

# and types of actions undertaken to enhance nurturing care

Feedback from CO and IO

Focus group interviews with caregivers, mentors, and parenting education facilitators (CHVs, ECD Teachers and group facilitators)

Objective 5: Assess the extent to which child protection issues have been taken on by community structures

Q5: What actions have been taken on child protection issues by community structures?

What actions have been taken on child protection issues by community structures as result of the program?

# and types of actions taken on child protection because of project capacity building and mentorship activities

Activity reports

Feedback from CO and key stakeholders (sub-county relevant departments)

What project interventions/activities have promoted child protection activities in target communities?

# and types of factors that have promoted child protection activities

Activity reports

Feedback from CO and key stakeholders (sub-county relevant departments)

Have project interventions/ activities hindered child protection activities in target communities? If yes, what interventions?

What external variables have promoted/hinder child protection activities?

# and types of factors that have hindered child protection activities

Activity reports

Feedback from CO and key stakeholders (sub-county relevant departments)

Objective 6: Assess the extent to which multisectoral coordination has taken place

Q6A: To what extent has multisectoral coordination in nurturing care taken place as a result of this parenting program?

What activities have been successful when coordinating between different sectors/stakeholders in promoting nurturing care?

# and types of activities

Activity reports

Feedback from CO and key stakeholders (sub-county relevant departments)

Maybe focus group interviews with mentors/facilitators? (CHVs, ECD Teachers and group facilitators)

Have any activities or components been fully integrated into government/partner program(s)? If not, which ones can be easily integrated into existing government/partner program(s) to foster continuity after the project life?

# and types of activities integrated into government/partner program(s)

Feedback from CO and key stakeholders

Maybe focus group interviews with mentors/facilitators? (CHVs, ECD Teachers and group facilitators)

4.3. In consultation with ChildFund and the International consultant, develop a succinct process evaluation plan that includes:

o a detailed description of the planned quantitative/qualitative methodology (inclusive of sampling) for conducting the study.

o proposed study tools (as needed)

o proposed analytical framework and analysis plan for the study,

o A detailed study plan including: the research questions and their data sources (e.g., primary data collection, secondary data), finalization of tools, enumerator training, data collection, data entry and analysis, draft report, and final report. This detailed study implementation plan will be determined in consultation with the international consultant and ChildFund country office staff and will include, but will not be limited to the following information:

§ proposing the timeline and logistics (transport, quality assurance mechanisms, ensuring data storage and security in the field) for field data collection.

▪ identifying time and resources needed for developing the training agenda and modules for training enumerators on data collection tools and piloting tools (if/as needed).

▪ identifying the time and resources required for finalizing tools either printing or including in mobile data collection forms.

▪ identifying the time required for creating the data entry forms; entering data; and cleaning data prior to receiving data for analysis,

4.4. Hire and provide enumerators oversight support:

o Review credentials of enumerators, hire and manage them during the entire period of the exercise.

o Review and provide technical oversight on all enumerator trainings’ preparatory logistics directly in coordination with ChildFund Country Office staff (i.e. review training agendas and modules, etc.).

o Train enumerators on how to utilize the study’s tools based on training agenda and modules agreed with ChildFund’s international evaluator. Training will include piloting the data collection tools.

o Identify and facilitate (in consultation with ChildFund country office staff and Kisumu Development staff) the enumerators’ entering the quantitative data collected for the study using agreed upon data entry forms determined in consultation with ChildFund’s international evaluator.

o Identify and facilitate (in consultation with ChildFund country office staff and Kisumu Development staff) the enumerators’ entering and translating the qualitative data for the study collected using agreed upon data entry forms determined in consultation with ChildFund’s international evaluator.

4.5. Provide oversight study tools finalization and data collection processes in consultation with the international consultant.

4.6. Analyze raw, clean qualitative and quantitative data in consultation with the international consultant.

4.7. Conduct preliminary analyses of qualitative and/or quantitative data for the study as per an agreement with ChildFund’s international evaluator using the data analysis plan.

4.8. Review and provide feedback on the drafts of the report and briefs produced by the international evaluator in coordination with ChildFund Kenya and ChildFund International.

5.0. Expected deliverables.

Expected Deliverable

Estimated number of days

Review key internal and external documents to inform finalizing plan

2

Finalize research questions in consultation with ChildFund and the International consultant.

2

In consultation with ChildFund and the International consultant, develop a succinct process evaluation plan

2

Hire and provide enumerators oversight support including training of enumerators, translation of tools, pre-testing

3.5

Provide oversight study tools finalization

1

Conduct field data collection exercise and data entry

10

Analyze raw, clean qualitative and quantitative data

2

Conduct preliminary analyses of qualitative and/or quantitative data

2

Review and provide feedback on the drafts of the report and briefs produced by the international evaluator

2

Travel to and from Siaya (where needed)

1

6.0. Proposed Time Frame

The consultancy will be not more than 29.5 days starting from 19th April 2021 to 1st August 2021. Specific timelines with breakdown of activities applicable to this evaluation will set out in consultation with country-based consultant.

7.0. Scope of Evaluation

The process evaluation will be undertaken in the 3 wards (Ugunja, Sidindi and Sigomre wards) of Ugunja Sub-county located in Siaya County.

8.0. Evaluation Approach

The evaluation will be done in line with process evaluation plan that will be developed in consultation with ChildFund Kenya, ChildFund International and led by the International Consultant.

9.0. Selection of Consultant

Interested individuals and/or institutions are requested to provide, at a minimum:

· their CV and CVs of all team members (if institution or team) including academic and professional qualifications.

· daily rate

· a past writing sample of a final assessment report

· reference contact information of at least 2 individuals or institutions that have conducted process monitoring research with the individual or institution in the past.

· Conversant with Dholuo language

10. Submission of Proposal

The consultant shall submit to ChildFund Kenya a technical and financial proposal through the email address provided. All interested Individuals/firms are requested to send their EOI by email to: kenyaprocurement@childfund.org by noon on 15th April 2021 indicating the assignment Title on the subject line.

11. Management and Coordination

The key people that the consultant will be working closely with at ChildFund include:

ChildFund Kenya team namely Program and Sponsorship Director, Technical Advisor-ECD, Child Protection Advisor, Monitoring and Evaluation Manager, Project Monitoring and Evaluation Officer and Project Coordinator. ChildFund International team specifically the Senior ECD Advisor and Partnership and Grants Manager. The consultant will also work with the International Consultant hired by ChildFund International. The day-to-day management of the consultants is the responsibility of the Project M&E Officer in consultation with the Project Coordinator.

10.0. Payment process

· The Consultant’s compensation shall be paid NET, within 30 days from receipt of a proper invoice unless otherwise specified.

· Payment will be made by cheque unless otherwise specified.

· The payment shall be subjected to 10% withholding tax as required by the Law at the time of payment.

· The full costs include consultancy fees, payment of enumerators (meals and professional fees) field logistical costs (enumerators training, field data collection, transport, accommodation, and meals) during the entire assignment.

This is a deliverables-based consulting agreement and payments will be done as per the schedule below:

No

Deliverable

Payment schedule

  1. Review and finalize the process evaluation questions

25%

  1. Review and develop sound process evaluation methodology

Develop data collection tools and analysis plan

  1. Develop a workplan for the process monitoring exercise

25%

  1. Hire, train and manage the enumerators during field data collection

Propose a report outline for process monitoring exercise

  1. Develop draft process monitoring report for review

25%

  1. Acceptance of draft process monitoring report by CO/IO

25%

How to apply

The consultant shall submit to ChildFund Kenya a technical and financial proposal through the email address provided. All interested Individuals/firms are requested to send their EOI by email to: kenyaprocurement@childfund.org by noon on 15th April 2021 indicating the assignment Title on the subject line.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.