Project AID-011516-AICS

Issued on: 13 November 2019

Deadline for Application: 30 November 2019

Background information
People with Disabilities (PwDs) face numerous physical, attitudinal, social, cultural and economic barriers in exercising their citizenship rights. These barriers affect all the different facets of their lives, starting from school education and friendship with their peers, to access to health services, employment, housing, marriage, sports and leisure activities. (WHO, 2011) In Liberia, the situation of people with disabilities has been further complicated by the long civil war and by the more recent Ebola Virus Crisis, increasing the barriers they need to overcome for their participation in different life-activities. (SIDA, 2014)

In particular, the high rate of unemployment among PwDs is concerning. The prejudice and discrimination against them is one of the main causes: children with disabilities do not attend school as much as their peers and they do not get socially involved in the community. This makes it hard for them to acquire the skills needed to enter the labour market. Unemployment means poverty and poverty contributes to PwDs isolation. Disabled People Organizations (DPOs) are a great resource to promote and protect PWDs interests. The DASU project work alongside 9 DPOs at county level and the National Union of Organization of the Disabled, the federation of all DPOs in Liberia to promote socio-economic empowerment for PWDs.

The DASU project’s overall goal is to contribute strengthening the role of Civil Society Organizations (DPOs) for sustainable and inclusive growth processes in Liberia.

The project’s specific objective is to reinforce the role of People with Disabilities Organizations (DPOs) in the socio-economic development processes and in the fulfilment of People with Disabilities (PWDs) rights. In order to achieve this goal, the project includes different sets of activities, each related to a specific result.
R1. The National Union of Organizations of the Disabled (NUOD) and 9 DPO members actively participate in the policy making with a sound role and they are in the position to promote effective initiatives for PwDs rights, with a focus on inclusive business

1.1 Diagnostic study on DPOs and NUOD’s institutional and managing capacities. The aim is to improve organizational and management capacity and to increase the ability of NUOD and the DPOs to affect the policymaking processes and to support (PwDs) in inclusive business.
1.2 Training courses for NUOD and the DPOs, in order to respond to the needs emerged from the Diagnostic Study (R1.1)
1.3 Exchange of good practises with African Platforms and Networks on disability to promote the transfer of know-how and real forms of partnerships which could be sustainable in the long term.
1.4 Workshops at National and County level to promote dialogue between DPOs and Governmental Authorities.
1.5 Communication program. To promote a sustainable long standing partnership between NUOD and Community radios’ network while giving DPOs a chance to practice what they’ve learned during the training process and keep on acquiring further skills and capacities.

R2. Improved the economic independence and the social participation of 120 PwDs through the creation of 30 start-ups for their self-employment

2.1 Baseline survey on social economy. The study was carried out in YR1 to understand how the local social economy ecosystem is composed. The results of the study helped shaping all other activities of result 2.
2.2 Skills’ assessment. Co-participated creation of skills assessment sheets (SAS) to assess PwDs’ employability. The SAS formed part of the dossier each enterprise had to present to access funding through DASU
2.3 Realization of training courses on social entrepreneurship to provide the beneficiaries knowledge, tools and skills for the preparation of viable and sustainable Business Plans.
2.4 This activity promoted the effective creation of Start-ups through a competitive process; the long-term objective is to promote PwDs economic independence.
2.5 Consultancy service for enterprises whose business plan was unsuccessful; the aim is to provide individuals with technical knowledge to ensure their businesses ideas are improved.

R3. Facilitated the inclusion of Mental Health Users in economic and social development initiatives, through a specific and participated plan.

3.1 Implementation of an Emancipatory research on the factors facilitating or hindering the entrepreneurship of PwDs in Liberia, with a focus on mental health.
3.2 Development of a free App for mobile phones (MH-RehApp) which could facilitate information sharing and increase coping skills for people with mental health conditions and their families.
3.3 Training of Resource Persons at village level to promote the engagement of communities on mental health and encourage the participation of people with mental health conditions to DPOs and to Start Ups promoted by the project.

Over its 36 months’ implementation, DASU aims at directly impacting the lives of 2,326 direct beneficiaries among PWDs, Persons included in the Start-ups activities, community radio staff; and 120,000 indirect beneficiaries, including family members of PwDs, National and local authorities’ representatives, CSOs members and stakeholders attending the national and county seminars and attending the village meetings about mental health; citizens reached by the radio program and by the sensitization community meetings.

  1. Objectives of the mid-term evaluation (MTE)
    The mid-term evaluation (MTE) aims at assessing the continued relevance of the DASU intervention and the progresses made towards achieving its planned objectives. MTE should as well provide an opportunity to make modifications to the project design, implementation and methodology to ensure planned objectives are achieved within the lifetime of the project. Additionally, the MTE aims at providing tools, instruments and capacity building to the DASU programs’ team to strengthen its capacity for internal management and evaluation. The evaluation should provide information that is credible (evidence based) and useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into AIFO decision-making process.
  2. Specific Evaluation Questions
    The midterm evaluation aims at providing recommendations for improving the project’s implementation through the following criteria: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, sustainability and project management. The MTE also assessed the project’s performance on cross cutting issues; gender equality, disability inclusion, added value and participation. Particular attention will be paid to the processes of realization of activities (respect for inclusive modes, effective participation of beneficiaries, perception of satisfaction, management and co-ordination between partners, level of skills gained from them during the implementation; visibility).
    All data collected must be disaggregated by sex, age, disability type and catchment areas.
    • To what extent are the project’s objectives still valid for the country, the partner organizations and the beneficiaries?
    • Are the expected results of the project consistent with the outputs, objectives and overall objective (as part of the analysis of the log frame matrix)?
    • To what extent has the project already achieved its obective(s) or will be likely to achieve it/them?
    • To what extent has the project already achieved its expected outputs or will be likely to achieve them?
    • What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the outcome(s)/expected results/outputs? (Also consider any which were possibly beyond the control of the project)
    • Did the project contribute to DPOs capacity building as planned?
    • To what extent are gender and environment mainstreaming included in the project?
    Effectiveness of project management
    • Was the project managed as planned? If not, what issues occurred and why?
    • To what extent have all project/programme stakeholders collaborated as planned? Did the project receive adequate political, technical and administrative support from its national partners?
    • Is there a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities by all parties involved?
    • How effective is communication between the project team and the implementing partners?
    • How effectively does the project management monitor project performance and results?
    • If applicable, to what extent were all items/equipment purchased and used as planned under this project?
    • Was the project implemented in the most efficient way (time, personnel resources)? Have any issues emerged, if so which ones and why?
    • How many women, men, girls, boys and people with disabilities in total have already benefited from the project (immediate impact)?
    • What exactly has already changed in the lives of women, men, girls, boys with disabilities (immediate impact)?
    • Has the project impacted on the lives of women, men, girls and boys without a disability? How?
    • Which positive and/or negative effects/impacts in terms of gender and environment can possibly be attributed to the project?
    • Which organizations have already benefitted from the project and how? What has changed for whom (immediate impact)?
    • Are there any other important aspects regarding impact?
    • To what extent will the benefits of the project continue after the withdrawal of the donor?
    • If applicable, if the project continues will it be integrated in local structures and/or funded by other sources?
    • What were the major factors that influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
    • If applicable, what needs to be done and/or improved to ensure sustainability?
  3. Approach and Methods
    The MTE is carried out by an external evaluator who has no previous links to the project, with the involvement of internal evaluators: The Management and Monitoring Committee; the Technical & Scientific Commission; representatives of DPOs; the project staff; beneficiaries; the main stakeholders.Consistent with the Community Based Inclusion Approach adopted in the project, mid-term evaluation will be carried out using mixed and participatory methodologies (co-evaluations), both quantitative and qualitative (focus groups, interviews, case studies, self-assessment tests). These methodologies will be used to evaluate (i) processes, (ii) products, (iii) impact, analyzing relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, harmonization with the Italian Cooperation Guidelines, sustainability and replicability of the initiative.
    Location: The evaluator is expected to work across the three localities where the DASU project is implemented (Grand Gedeh, Nimba and Bong counties) and the city of Monrovia and surrounding areas. The mid-term evaluation consists of several phases:
    Contract and Kick-off meeting: Contract is signed and a discussion of the assignment takes place. First documents, including available data, are provided to the evaluation team. (1 day)
    Desk Study: The evaluator studies all necessary project documents; re-construct and analyse the intervention logic/programme theory and theory of change and its assumptions. Existing data needs to be analysed and interpreted. (10 days)
    Inception-Phase: In the inception report, the evaluator will describe the design of the evaluation and will elaborate on how data will be obtained and analysed. The evaluator is moreover requested to advise on, ameliorate and if required, elaborate additional, data collections tools for the continuous monitoring of the DASU program, that will be piloted during the field phase. The use of a data collection planning worksheet or a similar tool is required. Interviews with senior DASU staff and partners take place. (5 days) Data triangulation and quality control are very important and need to be discussed in the inception report.
    The field trip will only take place upon official approval of the inception report by the contractor.
    Field-phase: Data needs to be gathered, analysed and interpreted. It is expected that the evaluation will include quantitative and qualitative data disaggregated by sex, type of disability, age, catchment areas. (15 days)
    Presentation, Tools’ handover (workshop): Presentation of key findings at the end of the field trip and tools handover workshop (2 days)
    Final Draft Report: Submission and presentation of final draft report. Inclusion of comments from partners and contractor. (5 days)
    Final Report: Submission of final report. (1 day) For the different phases, it is expected that data and information will be obtained through different methods such as: analysis of documents, structured interviews, semi-structured interviews face-to face, group discussions, others.
  4. Necessary Qualification
    The Evaluator will be a local professional.
    • Relevant academic degree (master level) in economics, statistics, sociology or other similar studies
    • A minimum of three years’ experience and expertise in social research
    • Has conducted at least three evaluations in the last five years ideally in the relevant field
    • Knowledge and working experience of Liberia with focus on topics such as disability, socio-economic inclusion, awareness campaigns
    • Experience in project cycle management
    • Experience preparing and analysing a theory of change
    • Experience and expertise in evaluating cross-cutting issues
    • Experience in social science methods
    • Excellent oral and written English skills
    • Sound MS Office and IT skills
    The consultants must not have been involved in the design, implementation or monitoring of this project.
  5. Reports & Material
    The consultant will submit the following reports:
    • an inception report (10-15 pages without annexes),
    • guidelines and set of (revised) tools for routine monitoring of
    • a final draft evaluation report (about 25-30 pages without annexes), including a draft executive summary and the results-assessment form (part of the reporting requirement)
    • and the final evaluation report (25-30 pages without annexes), the final executive summary and the results-assessment form (part of the reporting requirement)
    All reports must be written in English. All data collected must be disaggregated by sex, age, disability type and catchment areas.
    Identify lessons learned and provide recommendations: it is important that a suggested action plan corresponding to each recommendation is included in the evaluation report. It is expected that the evaluator will present concrete recommendations addressed to each specific stakeholders. The findings and recommendations of the draft final report and final report have to be structured according to the evaluation questions. An outline of the report’s structure needs to be agreed upon during the inception phase.
    The executive summary should summarize key findings and recommendations (two to three pages) and needs to be submitted as part of the final draft report.

The quality of the reports will be judged according to the following criteria:
• Is the results-matrix format part of the report?
• Does the report contain a comprehensive and clear executive summary?
• Were the Terms of Reference fulfilled and is this reflected in the report?
• Are all evaluation questions answered?
• Are the methods and processes of the evaluation sufficiently documented in the evaluation report?
• Does the report describe and assess the intervention logic (e.g. logframe, project methodology/theory) and present/analyze a theory of change and its underlying assumptions?
• Are cross-cutting issues analyzed in the report?
• Are the conclusions and recommendations based on findings and are they clearly stated in the report?
• Does the report clearly differentiate between conclusions, lessons learnt and recommendations?
• Are the recommendations realistic and is it clearly expressed to whom the recommendations are addressed to?
• Were the most significant stakeholders involved/consulted?
• Does the report present the information contained in a presentable and clearly arranged form?
• Is the report free from spelling mistakes and unclear linguistic formulations?
• Can the report be distributed in the delivered form?

Remuneration Package:
According to AIFO consultancy fees standards.

To apply, send your CV, a Cover Letter detailing how you meet the job specification and two references to: indicating in the subject of the email: Application for Consultant. Please also include report of previous evaluation done by you.

We apologize in advance but only shortlisted candidates will be contacted for interview. We encourage applicants to submit the application well before the deadline date. The selection respects the principles of equal opportunities (Law 903/77)

Subject: Application for Consultant : DASU Project
Email :

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *