|
Tenders are invited for Evaluation of a Nutritional Resilience Program. Closing Date: 7 Jan 2026 Type: Consultancy PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION This evaluation will focus on the projects contribution to promoting gender equality and strengthening the nutritional resilience of 670 households with FEFAs and children under 2 years of age in the Ouaka Prefecture, Central African Republic. The goal of evaluation is to learn and be accountable. Specifically, to determine the extent to which the program has achieved the expected results at the end of the 18 months of implementation (September 2024 February 2026) with the financial support of the Embassy of France and to identify lessons learned and make recommendations for future programs. This project aimed to strengthen the nutritional resilience and gender equality of households with pregnant and lactating women and children under 2 years old. The programs nutritional response focuses on preventing malnutrition through access to diversified diets through food production and improved incomes. This project aims to adopt good care and hygiene practices through the construction/rehabilitation of water points and awareness-raising. The project adopted a community-based approach conducive to sustaining the reduction of malnutrition that made it possible to discuss and address the barriers to behaviour change related to gender inequalities. This project is implemented in consortium with the NGO ACTED and is structured around the four results, namely: Food production and the availability of nutrient-dense and diverse foods throughout the year are improved and mens engagement with their households is increased. This result targets 670 households with FEFA or children under 2 years of age (6 persons per household) and 43 FSAs. The economic resilience of households with pregnant and lactating women and mothers of children under 2 years of age is improved. A total of 34 VSLA groups with 30 members per group (6 people per household) created and supported by the project. Households with pregnant, breastfeeding women, or women with children under 2 years of age, adopt good care practices, including hygiene and dietary diversity. In terms of this result, 154 Care Group volunteers (6 people per household) i.e. 77 mixed pairs who follow 1155 households (6 people per household); 38 Community Relays (6 people per household) are supported by the project. The sanitary environment is improved. A total of 58 RECOS (6 persons per household) covering 2900 households of 6 persons (50 households per RECOs) are targeted by the project. The project targets 2 main categories, including: Pregnant and lactating women (FEFA): 670 households with pregnant and lactating women are at the heart of the project and the targets of all interventions (behaviour change communication, agricultural production and income improvement, improved flour production, sanitation and borehole). In addition to improving their capacity to produce, buy and consume nutritious food in good hygienic conditions, they will see their autonomy increase through gender-based interventions thanks to the projects support. Children under two years of age: They are prioritized as part of interventions aimed at preventing malnutrition through a better sanitary environment and better feeding practices. Children aged 6 to 24 months from vulnerable households also benefit from locally produced improved flour. A total of 670 children aged 0 to 24 months will be supported by the project. Evaluation Objectives The objectives of the evaluation are to: To determine the extent to which the program has been successful in achieving its expected outcomes, as illustrated in the project proposal and results framework Establish key learning points for replication of the approach in other food security programs. The results of the evaluation will be compared with baseline data, routine follow-up data (MIPs), endline surveys and other information collected as part of the implementation of the programme. The information collected will be used to establish good practices and help formulate new interventions in the sectors targeted by the programme and will guide the reflection around the food and nutrition security strategy. The study will achieve its objectives by exploring the following points: Assess progress towards the goals, indicators and targets, as well as the relevance of the implementation strategy used, To assess the extent to which the proposed activities have complied with the planned implementation and achieved the objectives, goals and expected results, Support the commitment of consortium organizations to be accountable to stakeholders (donors, government, participants) by assessing good practices and gaps and highlighting lessons learned for future programs, Highlight the extent to which changes expected and unexpected, positive and negative have occurred as a result of the proposed programme and the impact they have had on participant.es ciblé.es, community members and other stakeholders, Assess the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact, coherence, coverage and interconnectedness of the programme using the DAC+ criteria, Identify lessons learned and provide practical, innovative, and sustainable program options to help improve future programs. Evaluation criteria The evaluation will focus on the CAD+ criteria as presented below: Relevance Was the logic of the program relevant? Were there any gaps in this logic (incorrect assumptions, broken causal links)? To what extent have the proposed activities been in line with the needs and priorities of the programmes target groups, including the most vulnerable? Has the programme met the priority needs as expressed by the participating households? Efficiency Was the budgeting of activities realistic and relevant in view of the context of intervention? How was the budget usage compared to the planned budget? What was the comparative cost of the program in relation to the results achieved? Efficiency To what extent have the objectives of the programme, as defined in the project proposal, been achieved? Have there been any changes to the original proposal to accommodate unforeseen circumstances? What lessons have been learned from these experiences? Impact Has the program contributed to reducing the prevalence of negative coping mechanisms that targeted populations have resorted to due to the lack of resources and services provided by the program? Has the programme enabled households to meet their basic needs in terms of water, hygiene and sanitation and nutrition, especially for young children and pregnant and lactating women? Have the activities aimed at changing behaviour (Care Group approach) contributed to an improvement in nutrition, health and hygiene practices? Have the "Support for Agricultural and Market Gardening" activities made it possible to improve the dietary diversity of vulnerable households and individuals (pregnant women, breastfeeding women and children under 2 years of age)? Do the improved flours produced by the programme participants meet the nutritional needs of young children and pregnant and lactating women? Has the programme contributed to a change in perceptions, attitudes and practices on gender issues? Are the VSLA groups and income-generating activities developed under the programme functional and contribute to a better resilience of participants in terms of food and nutrition security? Sustainability Has the programme fully involved beneficiaries and other stakeholders in the implementation process? Has the programme promoted ownership of activities and results by actively involving beneficiaries in decision-making and action at each phase of the programme cycle? Can the production of improved flour be sustainably taken over by the community and under what conditions? Has the partnership with the States technical services been carried out within the framework of equitable collaboration leading to a sharing of capacities between partners? Integration Have gender equality and ethnic groups been duly taken into account to ensure that the programmes intervention does not increase the vulnerability of the target groups and tensions between different ethnic or other vulnerable groups? Monitoring and evaluation and project management What were the strengths, weaknesses and challenges of the programmes monitoring and evaluation activities, particularly with regard to data quality assurance? What are the lessons learned from the current gaps identified throughout the programme cycle? What are the main action points of this learning to be incorporated into future programs? Do program participants have good knowledge on how to submit a complaint or feedback to Concern and ACTED? If so, were they satisfied with the response to a complaint? Consistency To what extent does the intervention integrate with other interventions and policies in the sector of activity and in the area of intervention? (thematic coherence and geographical coherence) Coverage Has the program targeted the most nutritionally vulnerable populations in the intervention area? Was the targeting process carried out in a transparent and participatory manner? Have certain groups or categories of the population been excluded without justification in relation to their level of need? Interconnection Has there been a good integration between short-term and medium-term interventions, for example in the use of the Emergency Fund as part of the more general programme? Rating scale 5 - Outstanding Performance 4 - Very good overall performance with some shortcomings 3 Good overall performance with some minor shortcomings 2 - Generally acceptable performance but with some major shortcomings 1 - Barely acceptable performance with many major shortcomings 0 - Totally unacceptable performance or insuffic Tender Link : https://reliefweb.int/job/4191672/evaluation-dun-programme-de-resilience-nutritionnelle
|
