RutgersWPF Vacancy: External Evaluation for MenCare+ Programme - East Java, DI Yogyakarta, Jakarta and Lampung - Indonesian

RutgersWPF Indonesia is an organisation working on sexual reproductive health and rights (SRHR) and sexual gender based violence (SGBV) . ... thumbnail 1 summary
Loading...
RutgersWPF Indonesia is an organisation working on sexual reproductive health and rights (SRHR) and sexual gender based violence (SGBV). We have a longstanding expertise in this field and work together with organisations in many other countries. RutgersWPF Indonesia consists of a dynamic team of 20 staff members. RutgersWPF Indonesia works together with many partner organizations in promoting SRHR and working on prevention of SGBV.

Terms of Reference
EXTERNAL EVALUATION FOR MENCARE PROGRAMME 

Introduction MenCare+ Programme
Context
Improving SRHR of girls and women is seriously hindered by prevailing social cultural notions of masculinities in the respective countries, Indonesia, Rwanda, South Africa and Brazil, reinforced by various conservative religions. Girls and women suffer from poor SRHR outcomes, feminization of Hiv/Aids, and domestic violence. Engaging boys and (young) men is as crucial as strategic for improving SRHR for all, reduction of domestic violence and more equal relationships. Becoming a father is a ‘life-event’ and offering an exceptional opportunity to get through to young men with a new perspective on manhood. When fathers become more caring, domestic violence goes down, SRHR of women improves, and children develop better. This allows a unique and global tipping point in the equality between men and women to become a reality. If fathers start caring, everyone will be a winner: men, women, and children.

Overall Objective of Mencare+
The central objective of the MenCare Programme is to address harmful social and cultural norms and behaviours that negatively impact SRHR and MCH outcomes by engaging young and adult men as caregiving partners.

Programme objectives include:
  • Addressing male norms and behaviours that influence SRHR outcomes;
  • Engagement of  (young) men in stopping domestic violence as a major impediment to SRHR;
  • Engagement of young men via caregiving and as fathers as an effective way to promote better MCH outcomes as well as men’s support for women’s contraceptive use;
  • Creating an enabling environment for engaging men in SRHR and MCH and to stop domestic violence.
Result Areas
The result areas covered by the programme:
  • Result Area 1: Young men and caregivers are better informed and better able to make healthier   choices regarding their sexuality, relationships, maternal health, and caregiving 
  • Result Area 2: Increasing young men’s/couples access to contraceptives, including male and female condoms, to promote good health 
  • Result Area 3: Public and private clinics provide better sexual and reproductive healthcare services, including domestic violence services, which more people are using 
  • Result Area 4: Greater respect for the sexual and reproductive health rights of people to whom these rights are denied
Contribution to SRHR Objectives
Combined the outcome indicators under the 4 result areas all work towards positively influencing the SRH status of women and men, specifically addressing prevailing norms of masculinity and inadequate SRH information and services. Removing these obstacles will ultimately have an impact on reducing maternal mortality, teenage pregnancy and domestic violence.

Young and adult men will transform them from a potential cultural bottleneck into involved  partners for implementing SRHR. The experiences in four countries in three continents will lead to evidence based key indicators to stimulate this approach in other regions and countries.

Main Programme Activities:
  • Increasing young men’s/caregivers knowledge allowing them to make informed / healthier choices regarding their sexuality, relationship and care-giving by awareness training to public and private stakeholders.
  • Increasing young men’s/couples access to contraceptives, including male and female condoms to promote good health by identifying needs of target group and match with actual supply, providing community action plans for improvement. 
  • Public and private clinics provide better sexual and reproductive healthcare services, including domestic violence services, which more people are using because of the involvement in awareness training, feedback of target group and needs assessment.
  • Greater respect for the sexual and reproductive health rights of people to whom these rights are denied.
Target Groups
The Programme work in four result areas, and target 1) young and un-partnered/unmarried aged; 2) men and couples who are expecting the birth of a child aged; 3) health providers and counsellors; and 4) men who are at risk of using violence against an intimate partner.

Key group: Men ages 15-35 who are either young fathers, or unmarried but at the age at which they are internalizing messages about SRHR. These groups are divided into separate interventions for:
  • Younger, unmarried men – group education and community campaigns with a focus on fatherhood and maternal health, and training of health sector workers to reach them, making use of Programme H.  Roughly ages 15-21. 
  • Married and parenting men – these will be reached with couple-based group education during the pre-natal period via the public health sector, and the MenCare campaign.
Programme Partners
The MenCare+ Programme is implemented with partner organisations in the four provinces in East Java, DI Yogyakarta, Jakarta and Lampung.

Objective of Evaluation
Rationale for the Evaluation:
As the Mencare+ programme will come to an end by December 2015, the Mencare+ Programme  in Indonesia calls for an external, independent evaluation to provide the partners with an objective view on the progress of the programme.
Furthermore in order to be accountable to the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Rutgers WPF Indonesia would like to assess to what extent the intervention has reached its objectives, as laid down in the proposal and assess whether there is still a need for the activities supported. A publication on the main findings will be shared with the international SRHR field, the Dutch development sector and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Objectives of this evaluation are to:
  1. Analyse the programmes achievements against the set objectives of the MenCare+ programme
  2. Understand what processes have led to these results, including the enabling and hampering factors, as well as the cooperation between the partners in the Mencare+ programme
  3. Propose feasible recommendations to inform future programme design.
Evaluation Criteria:
The evaluation will generate evidence on the programmes intervention approach and performance through the standard OECD-DAC evaluation criteria: relevance, efficiency, effectiveness and impact as well as sustainability.

Tasks to be Performed
The evaluation team will conduct a qualitative and quantitative assessment of the programme implementation through desk review of relevant documentation, interviews with key stakeholders, and visits to selected programme  sites in Indonesia. Exact tasks to be undertaken by the evaluator will be determined in close consultation with RutgersWPF Indonesia.
Guiding Evaluation questions
Guiding evaluation questions are outlined below, and must be further detailed by the evaluator team.

Relevance (alignment/harmonisation and current situation):
  • Assess the extent to which the programme strategy, activities, and expected outcomes and outputs are justified and were relevant to beneficiaries’ assessed needs, country’s policies and donor’s priorities. Has this context changed since the start of the programme? To what extent have MenCare+ activities corresponded to the overall aims and objectives of the programme? 
  • To what extent is the programme appreciated by the government of Indonesia? Are other NGO’s working on the same issues? 
  • To what extent are the modules and toolkits developed used and are valuable to address the situation in the programme locations? 
  • To what extent has the design (and redesign) of the programme influenced the achievement of results? To what extent was the design logic, i.e do outputs lead to outcomes? How could any gaps in design logic be addressed in a future programme
  • After three years of implementation, what are the gaps identified in the overall design, approach, and strategies of the programme? How should these gaps be addressed? To what extent do these gaps call for further programme action?
Efficiency and Effectiveness
  • To what extent were programme resources (funds, expertise, time, etc.) were optimally used and converted into intended results. Was working in the MenCare+ programme  relevant, effective, and efficient for partner organisations, in terms of their capacity? 
  • To what extent have the programmes expected outputs and outcomes been achieved in so far not assessed by the Outcome Measurement. Factors contributing to or detracting from the achievement of the programme desired results and objectives should also be included in the assessment.
  • To which extent have the dissemination activities reached relevant stakeholders?
Impact and Sustainability
  • Impacts (or progress to impact): analysing any positive or negative, primary and secondary long-term effects produced by the program, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended. 
  • To what extent has the  programme promoted and achieved sustainability of initiatives? 
  • Although the Mencare approach is only in its third year of implementation in Indonesia, what is the potential impact resulting from the achievement of outputs in the years to come, if the implementation will be continued? 
  • What sort of modalities or strategies should the partners in the Mencare programme have in order to deliver the best results under the partnership with the Government of Indonesia, effectively and efficiently?
Tangible outputs
The team of consultants should work on the following deliverables:
  • Inception report: The consultants are requested to develop an inception report, including tools, methodology and a schedule of field activities. 
  • Draft evaluation report (max 50 Pages) 
  • One Feedback workshop for all partners
  • Final evaluation report and all data gathered during the consultancy
Methodology
The evaluator will make use of existing monitoring and evaluation documentation and results of the outcome measurement to answer the leading questions of this evaluation, adding value to current reports by a critical assessment and cross-analysis of secondary data, which can be strengthened by additional data collection. The research team will focus its’ field studies on remaining questions that need further and more in-depth research, and to verify the existing documentation in a selected number of countries.

In general the methodology to conduct this external evaluation consists of the following:

Desk research:
Prior to conducting desk study the evaluator will draw up a list of documents relevant to the programme with Rutgers WPF staff. This list includes but is not limited tot: 
  • Existing programme documentation and literature
  • Baseline study 
  • Outcome measurement 2015 
  • Monitoring reports
  • Training curricula and workshop reports 
  • Bi annual and annual reports 
  • Government policy documents, 
  • Review of statistics related to SRHR and SGBV 
Interviews with relevant resource persons and partner organizations
  • A tentative list of resource persons will be provided later and needs to be discussed and approved at a later stage.
  • Extensive in depth interviews will be held with the management and staff of the four implementing partner organizations.
  • An interview guideline will be developed for use during the in depth interviews with the suggested resource persons and organizations. The interview guideline will contain all relevant questions. 
Focus Group Discussions (FGD’s)
  • FGD’s need to be organized with relevant key persons to crosscheck between the data and the facts and to obtain relevant data on the programme. FGD guides need to be developed prior to the FGD’s
Analysis and Draft and final report
  • The evaluator will subsequently review documents, reconstruct the log frame, draw up an evaluation matrix, collect additional data, conduct interviews and FGD’s, analyze the obtained data and compile a draft report (max 50 pages). 
  • Taking into account remarks and comments from Rutgers WPF the evaluator will prepare a final report within 14 days after receiving input to the draft report.
Applicants are requested to propose an evaluation approach, taking into account the following criteria: 
  • Add 1. The applicant is welcomed to include additional research methodologies to the desk study in the proposal. 
  • Add 2. The applicant is requested to propose the methodological design for the field studies.  After selection of the applicants, the proposals will be developed into country specific ToRs in collaboration with the consultant, the country alliance and the Alliance Evaluation Core Group. 
  • Add 3. There is a preference for a mixed methodology approach, and participative and/or innovative approaches and meaningful youth participation are welcomed. 
Required Expertise of the consultants team/Specifications
The Alliance will contract an evaluation team with a lead consultant to the following selection criteria:
  • Masters’ degree in social sciences and advanced skills in Research Methodologies; Quantitative and qualitative skills, and analysis of secondary data. 
  • At least 5 years experiences in the development sector with a primary focus on SRHR
  • Knowledge of (adolescent) Sexual Reproductive Health and Rights, Gender Based Violence and preferably, Male Involvement 
  • Proven evaluation skills in SRHR programs, Gender Based Violence and Male Involvement 
  • Experiences in leading an evaluation team
  • Ability to work independently, demonstrating initiatives and responding appropriately to  constructive feedback  
  • Is experienced in sharing and discussing evaluation findings with clients, in-country partners and beneficiaries and will do so in an appropriate way
The lead researcher should not have had any professional relationship with either the MenCare+ program for the past three years. 

Work plan and timeline
Indicative timeline:
  • Deadline for proposals: December 7th  
  • Start of the assignment: December 20th  
  • First draft report: January 20th 2016 
  • Response partners: February 20th 2016
  • Second draft report: February 29th 2016 
  • Response alliances: March 20th 2016 
  • Submit final report: April 30th (2016)
The evaluation proposal that will be selected will demonstrate an appropriate balance between quality and costs of the evaluation.

How to apply
Please express your interest in a max. 4 page outline (addressing research methodologies in relation to evaluation questions, data gathering and analysis, composition of research team and your motivation) explaining how you would approach this assignment.

Please include in the annexes:
  • CV, including relevant experience(s) and personal profile(s) of co-evaluators (if any)
  • Number of days you would spend on the assignment,
  • Daily fee and total budget (exclude workshop budget)
  • Availability from December (2015) – April (2016)
  • Two recent studies conducted by the lead researcher on this assignment
Interested consultants, or organizations can submit their EOI by e-mail to : recruitment.rutgerswpf.indo@gmail.com,
Indicating the title of this assignment (EOI External Evaluation for MenCare+) and deadline at 5.00 pm (Jakarta time), December 7 2015
Subscribe via Email for Free Updates