Mid Term Evaluation- Sustainable pyrethrum market system development (Daisy) project in Kenya

Terms of Reference:

Mid Term Evaluation for the project: Sustainable pyrethrum market system development (Daisy) project in Kenya

Reference Number: DCA/14/07/2023

July 2023

1.0: Introduction

About DCA

DanChurchAid supports the poorest in the world in their struggle for a dignified life and helps people in need. DanChurchAid (DCA) vision is to strengthen the world’s poorest people in their struggle for a life in dignity by implementing projects in the following thematic areas – Save lives; Build Resilient Communities; and Fight Extreme Inequalities. DCA’s international programmes contribute to the fulfilment of several SDGs (sustainable development goals), including SDG (sustainable development goals) 2, 5, 8, 13, 16 and 17.

In Kenya, DanChurchAid (DCA) is working with refugees and local communities in Turkana, West Pokot, Baringo, Elgeyo Marakwet, Nyandarua, Nakuru, Busia and Siaya counties to enhance peace, livelihoods, and resilience. DCA implements projects directly as well as through local partner organizations. For more information on DCA, please visit www.danchurchaid.org.

Background of the Project

Since July 2021, DCA Kenya in consortium with commercial partners Kentegra Biotechnology and the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK) has been implementing the Sustainable pyrethrum market system development (Daisy) project in Kenya. The three-and-a-half-year project, ending in December 2024) is funded by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD).

The project aims to contribute to a sustainable business eco-system, improved and resilient livelihoods for smallholder farmers and workers engaged in the pyrethrum sub-sector in Kenya, focusing on Nakuru, Nyandarua and Elgeyo Marakwet Counties. The four overarching outcomes are: i) Upscaled production of pyrethrum resulting in increased yield; ii) Improved crop quality (pyrethrum content) – resulting in increased income; iii) Improved and organized producer groups and systems that enable collective action in access to inputs, markets, financial services, and championing of farmers rights; and iv) Improved policy and regulatory environment supporting growth of the pyrethrum sub-sector and responsible business conduct.

This project’s partners (Kentegra Biotechnology and NCCK) provide a chance to combine development and commercial objectives in a sustainable and responsible way. DanChurchAid, as an administrative partner, oversees and coordinates project development and implementation, and supports project partners in the implementation. The key business partner, Kentegra Biotechnology, takes lead in internal and export demand market activation to generate a pull factor in the value chain to absorb increased farmer production and support services and inputs provided by SMEs. Kentegra also supports in policy advocacy efforts to support sector growth. The National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK) as a non-commercial partner with an expertise in facilitating a pro-poor systemic market systems change, takes on a primary role to mobilize, recruit and offer agro-extension advisory support using digital solutions for smallholder farmers, as well as to strengthen the advocacy capacity of farmer organizations.

2.0: Evaluation Purpose, Criteria

Objectives of the Evaluation

Daisy project has been implemented over the last two years, and as such DCA and project partners will be conducting a mid-term project evaluation. The overall objective of the midline study is two-fold. i.e., First, the evaluation will assess whether and/or the extent to which targets have been achieved this far in the project, understand the determinants enabling and/or disabling achievement of targets, the extent of ownership built among the target groups. Second, the evaluation will also seek to capture key learnings from the implementation experience and recommend doable actions for the remaining project period.

Evaluation Objective 1:

The evaluation will follow the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) /Development Assistance Committee (DAC) criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact, and sustainability, which will be the basis of the mid-term project evaluation. Specifically, the evaluation will seek to answer the following questions under the various criteria.

Effectiveness:

• To establish a midline value for the project in line with the project results framework indicators i.e., Has the planned or expected results been achieved, including whether the intended population reached?
• To what extent has the intended objectives (outcomes) indicated in the project log frame/results framework been achieved? – Have the primary objectives identified achieved?
• To what extent have the project results contributed to the overall goal?
• What are the major factors influencing the achievement of the objectives of the project?
• Has the targeted population been reached? To what extent have the project beneficiaries been reached and what mechanisms were in place to improve the coverage?
• What opportunities for collaboration have been utilized and how have these contributed to increased effectiveness? Or otherwise?
• Has proper accountability and risk management framework(s) been in place to minimize risks of project failure?

Efficiency:

• How efficient was the use of project resources(inputs) to realize the set results? Could the same results be achieved with fewer resources?
• Are the investment and recurrent costs justified?
• Are the project implementation modalities considered timely and cost-efficient? What choices were made for leveraging other opportunities for collaboration and non-collaboration during program design? Why were these choices made?
• Assess the key innovations used in the project and their impact, whether positive or negative, upon the delivery of project deliverables.

Relevance:

• Evaluate the project’s theory of change (ToC); its relevance to the overall country programme; the appropriateness of its planned objectives in terms of funding and duration of the intervention; and its appropriateness to project design, intervention and needs of the beneficiaries.
• The extent to which the intervention objectives and design respond to beneficiaries, global, country, and partner/institution needs, policies, and priorities, and continue to do so if circumstances change?
• Have the interventions contributed to addressing the communities’ needs identified by the project?
• How do beneficiaries perceive the relevance of the project and how have the interventions implemented improved their lives? Are there any stories of change?
• Are the development interventions relevant to DCA and partners’ development policies, goals, and strategies?
• How has the collaboration between DCA and other stakeholders contributed to appropriate response of specific needs and priorities of the beneficiaries?
• To what extent was project able to adapt and provide appropriate response to context changes and emerging local needs/priorities of beneficiaries?

Impact:

• What positive and negative, primary, and secondary higher level, long-term effects that have been produced by the development intervention, directly or indirectly, intended, or unintended?

Sustainability:

• What is the probability of long – term benefits as a result of the project interventions?
• Is local ownership established?

Evaluation Objective 2

In addition to the OECD Criteria, the evaluation will seek, to assess the effectiveness of accountability systems and the functionality of complain response mechanism in the targeted communities, while documenting lessons learned while implementing different activities. Specifically, the evaluation will seek to document the extent to which the project contributed to delivering DCA’s Accountability Framework, in relation to CHS Commitment 4 (Communication, Participation and Feedback) and CHS Benchmark 5 (Handling complaints) and lessons learned. The emphasis on lessons learnt speaks to the issue of understanding what has and what has not worked as a guide for future planning.

Based on the findings, the consultant is expected to share clear and actionable recommendations for adoption and integration by the project actors in the remaining phase of the project**.**

3.0: Intended users of the Findings

The intended users of the evaluation are:

Organization

Focal Person

Contact Details

Remarks/Possible Interest

DCA

Head of Program – Kenya (Patrick Kibuku).

patrick.kenya@dca.dk

Lessons learnt, best practices & how they can be used to improve future programming.

Revision/alignment of the target.

NCCK

Programme Director – (Phyllis Kamau)

pkamau@ncck.org

Effectiveness and lessons on the synergies created and advocacy capacity of farmer organizations.

Kentegra

Micah Thuo

Head of Field Operations

micah@kentegrabiotech.com

Sustainability of project interventions &

CHS Benchmark 5 (Handling complaints)

4.0: Methodological approach

Methodology

The following methods of data collection shall be applied.

• Literature review of all relevant project documents including strategy, evaluation reports, progress reports, financial reports, documents, and materials produced during the project including relevant documents (e.g., evaluation)
• Conducting household surveys based on an appropriate sampling design.
• Individual key informant’s interviews and focus group interviews with stakeholders and target community representatives (both beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries), relevant partners, senior management, and relevant staff, relevant Gok departments, private sector partners.

NB:

Applicants should outline suggested methodologies for answering the evaluation questions (if different from the above, incorporating quantitative, qualitative primary and secondary research methods. Appropriate data collection and sampling approaches should be outlined in the technical proposal, for further discussion during the inception meeting.

The consultant will conduct a two-day workshop with selected enumerators to train them on the tools, methods, and approaches to data collection.

A validation workshop to review the report will be organized by DCA.

5.0 Scope of the Mid-term Evaluation

Geographical area

The mid-term evaluation will cover the project’s beneficiary Counties – i.e., Nyandarua, Nakuru and Elgeyo Marakwet.

Period:

The evaluation will take place between August – September 2023 with initial preparatory activities and development of data collection tools being completed in August 2023 and actual data collection starting in early to mid-September 2023. This period will cover designing of the survey tools, data collection, data analysis, report writing and dissemination.

Technical scope:

Whereas the evaluation scope will primarily be informed by assessing the project contribution in realizing the objectives (outcome and goal level) as outlined by the relevant aspects in the log frame, it is expected that the following will be highlighted.

• The Complaints Response and Feedback Mechanism (CRFM) under the project
• Respect for RBC Principles under the project

6.0: Evaluation deliverables and timeline

Timeline:

The baseline study shall be expected to be completed within 30 calendar days with effect from the day of signing the contract with DCA.

Reports:

The final evaluation report should follow the format 1-3-25 as described here. Failure to comply with this format results is considered breach of these Terms of Reference.

In addition, the following deliverables are expected at various stages of the assignment.

• A Mid Term Evaluation Inception report which details what the consultancy team will do, and what research methodologies they will use. All data collection tools must be annexed. (Template to be agreed with DCA).
• Qualitative and quantitative data collection plan.
• A PowerPoint presentation of draft findings to DCA team for discussion and feedback.
• A Concise Mid Term Evaluation Report of not more than 35 pages, including user-friendly graphs comparing midline data against baseline data for key metrics.
• Presentation of the Mid Term Evaluation to project stakeholders for validation.
• Clean quantitative datasets in excel format with a data dictionary and data cleaning log.
• Worked quantitative dataset in Excel format showing analysis and graphs.
• Clean, transcribed qualitative datasets.

Workflow:

An initial meeting will be convened by DCA and attended by the consultant and DCA staff. This meeting will outline the scope of the evaluation and agree on the evaluation parameters including, tools, evaluation design, methodology, respondents that will be interviewed, locations to be covered and timelines to be used during the evaluation. The consultant will also outline the resources and documents that he/she will need to deliver the task and use the opportunity to clarify expectations of DCA. Alongside the review of the relevant existing literature and project documents, the consultant will embark on developing the tools that will be used for data collection. A meeting will be organized between the consultant and DCA to share and review these tools and to give feedback before the tools are validated for use in data collection.

Suggested timeline:

Full term of consultancy: document review, field work and report writing should not exceed 30 working days. The envisaged evaluation period should not exceed 35 consultancy days distributed as time for preparation, field work, travel, and report writing, to be outlined in the technical proposal. The timeline proposed by the consultant(s) should also take this into account, and ideally should propose preparation/desk research and any adherence to Covid19 protocols as laid down by the Ministry of Health.

7.0: Evaluation roles and responsibilities

Roles and Responsibilities of DCA, NCCK

DCA, Kentegra and NCCK will manage the consultancy task jointly in close consultation. For administrative purpose, DCA is responsible for managing the contract including the procurement process, signing agreement with the selected company/firm, managing communications, whilst the consortia will actively involve in the entire process of ensuring the quality of the work through supporting in selection of capable firm/company/ consultant and commenting on the draft tools and reports at various levels.

General Terms

The general terms and conditions of this consultancy are:

• A contract will be signed by the consultant(s) prior to commencement of this consultancy which will detail additional terms and conditions of service, aspects on inputs and deliverables.
• Logistics: The consultant(s) will cover his/her own cost of travel to the field and back, meals, and accommodation during data collection.
• Professional fee: The consultant(s) will be paid professional fees in accordance with this TOR and within DCA’s approved rates.

Payment Details

Consultant will receive a remuneration under the following terms of payment which will be based on the quoted cost in the financial proposal. Payment schedule: 40 % of the total shall be paid upon submission and approval of an inception report. The remaining 60% shall be paid after a final satisfactory report and other outputs are submitted and satisfactorily signed off by DCA.

Tax – 5% withholding income tax payable to the Government of Kenya (GoK) shall be deducted from the consultants’ fees during payment when relevant.

Decisions making.

Specifics on who makes decisions on what and what resources does DCA mobilise to support the evaluation, e.g., logistical support will be contained in the consultancy contract. However, the evaluators will be expected to ensure maximum engagement with the project implementing team in liaison with the core internal evaluation team.

Roles and responsibilities during the Evaluation.

DCA shall avail additional References or Resources,relevant to the project as outlined below:

• • Project documents – Project proposal and Log frame documents for the Daisy project – Baseline report – Project progress reports and monitoring reports. – DCA Evaluation guidelines & Humanitarian Assistance policy. – DCA Strategy document.

8.0 Response to the Call (EoI)

Structure of the Proposal and Submission Guidelines

All expressions of interest should include**:**

Technical Proposal which includes the following:

1. A short outline of evaluation approach, research design and methodology, evaluation matrix for the Mid Term Evaluation including specific evaluation questions. Maximum 3 pages
2. An overview of the consultants’ approach to field data collection and how it sources and works with enumerators. Max 1 page.
3. An outline of the consultants’ approach to ensuring data quality. Max 1 page.
4. A proposed process and period for the Mid Term Evaluation setting out the phases, the number of consultants and the number of days. Max 2 pages.
5. The anticipated challenges and dependencies affecting the implementation of the Mid Term Evaluation and how these should be addressed both by the consultants and DCA. Max 1 page.
6. A summary of the skills and experience of the proposed lead consultant and the consultant(s) together with CVs showing relevant previous assignments and the details of at least three referees.
7. Statutory documents of the consultancy firm. (Certificate of registration/incorporation, KRA pin and brief company profile) in case of a firm.

Qualifications for the consultant (s)

1. A master’s degree in field of project management / Economics/ Development/ Agriculture, or other closely related fields.

2. A minimum of 10 years’ experience in quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis in areas of, project management & evaluations, value chain analysis, result-based management evaluation methodologies.

3. Experience working/researching among the small-scale farmers especially in rural areas.

4. Extensive research/M&E experience in the country and the respective Counties.

5. Knowledge of agriculture livelihood in development context or resilience building programs with measurement of resilience and livelihood enhancement sensitive indicators; gender inclusion, sustainable agriculture, agricultural policies analysis and advocacy.

6. Experience in conducting donor funded project surveys including agricultural value chain analysis, agricultural projects’ Mid Term, and End term evaluations.

7. Experience in implementing evaluations remotely with field logistics and guiding enumerators to assure high quality data as an asset.

8. Experience with Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) /Development Assistance Committee (DAC) criteria of effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact, and sustainability will be an added advantage.

Curriculum Vitae:

A detailed Curriculum vitae of the consultants(s) detailing the academic, professional, and technical experience relevant to this job.

Financial Proposal**:**

The financial proposal should provide cost for services rendered including daily consultancy fees related to the consultant’s including accommodation and living costs; transport cost, stationeries, and supplies needed for data collection; costs related to persons that will participate from partners and government officers.

9.0: Submission of the EoI

Consultancy firms are invited to submit the proposal by 10th August 2023 at 17:00 hours EAT.

Apply online through: https://dca.career.emply.com/en/national-positions

10. Questions

Interested Parties, applicants should refer any questions through the email luwa@dca.dk.