Terms of Reference
Comparative Learning Study on Cash Consortium Models in East Africa and the Horn
Final Draft 1.2 · revised following cross country consultations
1. Background and rationale
Cash consortia are now an established feature of humanitarian cash and voucher assistance in crisis-affected settings
(e.g. Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq, Colombia). They are usually established to improve coordination, align
approaches, reduce duplication, strengthen accountability, build donor confidence, and support more coherent,
people-centered and efficient delivery of multi-purpose cash assistance.
However, the added value of a consortium model is not automatic. Consortia can improve coverage, harmonisation,
shared systems, risk management and learning, but they can also add coordination layers, management costs,
complex governance arrangements and tensions around decision-making, accountability and the role of local and
national actors. Whether a consortium model justifies its cost should therefore be examined rather than assumed.
The Somalia Cash Consortium (SCC) initiated the study and will serve as the administrative anchor. However, the
assignment will be designed as a regional comparative study rather than a Somalia assessment supplemented by
country examples. The retained consortia will be examined as full cases, with attention to how operating context,
programme modalities, donor requirements and stage of development influence their structures and costs.
The study will initially consider five country contexts: Somalia, Uganda, Sudan, Kenya and Ethiopia. The final number
of full cases will be agreed during inception by the steering committee, based on relevance, comparability, data
availability, access to key informants, and the time and cost required to achieve sufficient analytical depth.
2. Purpose and central question
The purpose of the assignment is to generate practical comparative learning on cash consortium models in East
Africa and the Horn, with priority given to governance and operating structure, added value, and cost structure and
efficiency.
The study should help participating consortia understand how different models work in practice, identify
approachesthat may be adapted across contexts, and define practical areas where governance, shared functions
and cost structures could be strengthened. It should also provide credible evidence for dialogue with donors
without assuming in advance that a consortium model is more effective or efficient than other arrangements.
The study will be guided by one central question: When does a cash consortium model add value,
for whom, and at what cost compared with realistic alternatives?
Added value and cost efficiency should not be assessed in isolation. The study should use realistic, named
comparators and should prioritise, where data are accessible, standalone cash programmes implemented by
consortium members in closely comparable context. Other alternatives, such as pooled funding without a full
Comparative Learning Study on Cash Consortium Models · Draft 1.2
consortium structure, direct funding to local actors, UN-led delivery, or coordination mechanisms without a
consortium management layer, may be used selectively where they provide a credible comparison. The assignment
is not expected to quantify every alternative.
3. Objectives
The study will pursue three objectives:
1. Map and compare consortium governance and operating models.
Describe and compare lead-agency arrangements, consortium management units, governance bodies, member and
local-partner roles, decision-making processes, accountability lines, shared functions and financial architecture. The
study should use existing consortium and collaboration typologies as a starting point and refine only the dimensions
needed for this comparison.
2. Assessthe added value of the consortium model against realistic alternatives.
Examine whether and how each model generates benefits for affected populations and improves coordination,
harmonisation, coverage, programme quality, speed, preparedness, risk and compliance management,
accountability, monitoring, innovation, technical support and learning. Claims of added value should be tested
against named alternatives that are realistic and feasible in each operating context, with attention to benefits as
well as any additional process, constraint or duplication created by the consortium.
3. Assessthe efficiency of consortium coststructures.
Identify and compare the main operational and management costs of each model, including shared or mutualised
costs, costs retained by individual members, hidden and indirect costs, duplicated functions, and efficiencies
generated through mutualisation. The analysis should explain how context, modality, payment infrastructure,
access, protection requirements, scale and consortium maturity affect costs. Quantitative comparison should be
undertaken only where sufficiently comparable data are available and should not rely on blanket comparisons of
overhead or transfer ratios

Requirements and How to Apply
Interested consultants who meet the requirementsshould submit the following:
• Given the number of potential cases and the technical demands of the cost analysis, the assignment is
expected to be delivered by a team able to work across countries in parallel. The proposed team should
demonstrate:
• Strong experience with humanitarian cash and voucher assistance and the design, management or
assessment of consortium models;
• Expertise in cost-efficiency or value-for-money analysis, including the ability to interpret different budgeting
and accounting structures without making invalid comparisons;
• Experience in regional comparative research, qualitative interviewing and facilitation of cross-country
learning;
• Relevant country or regional contextual knowledge and the language capacity required for the proposed
interview plan; and
• Independence and the ability to test claims of consortium added value objectively.
• Valid registration certificate and tax compliance certificate and firm profile.
• Key experts qualifications

• Interested candidates, whomeet the above requirements,should submit their by email to
[email protected] with the subject line “Consultant for Comparative Learning Study on Cash
Consortium Models in East Africa and the Horn” by Thursday 23rd October, 2026.
NB: 5% Withholding Tax Requirement: - In accordance with government regulations, all suppliers and contractors
engaged in business with Concern are required a 5% withholding tax should be inclusive in their quotations. This
amount will be retained by Concern and submitted directly to the government. Failure to do so will result in the tax
being deducted from your invoice payment.