Terms of Reference 

Services Consultancy for Annual Monitoring

Operation Areas Somaliland

Programme  Strengthening the Social Contract through Access to Justice in Somaliland

Position International Consultant ( individual or firm)

1.    Background

The programme "Strengthening the Social Contract through Access to Justice in Somaliland" (also known as the “Damal programme”) seeks to foster the social contract in Somaliland by increasing the legitimacy of justice institutions. The intervention’s overall goal builds on the assumption that improved access to adequate, timely, and fair justice services will increase citizens’ trust in relevant justice institutions, which will - in turn - encourage them to accept the State’s authority more easily. Thus, the increased legitimacy of justice institutions will translate into an improved social contract due to the enhanced capacity of the State to fulfil social expectations, ensure the protection of fundamental human rights and facilitate the peaceful resolution of disputes. The overall goal will be reached through three intermediate outcomes: (i) improved access to an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanism and referral pathways, especially for vulnerable groups; (ii) enhanced access to formal justice for vulnerable groups through holistic support to gender-based violence (GBV) survivors and affected communities; and (iii) increased participation of citizens in Somaliland in accountability processes relating to the provision of security and justice. The programme adopts a Problem-Driven Iterative Adaptation (PDIA) approach.

The programme is implemented by a Consortium led by the International Development Law Organization (IDLO). IDLO is responsible for the overall coordination and direct implementation of Outcome 1, building on the expertise acquired on ADR through the implementation of the project “Alternative Dispute Resolution Somalia”. Currently, the Consortium consists of IDLO and Media INK,[1] and two local organizations who contribute to programme implementation as Implementing Partners (IPs): the Network Against Female Genital Mutilation in Somaliland (NAFIS) [2] and the Legal Aid Clinic of the University of Hargeisa (LAC).[3] These organisations are primarily involved in implementing Outcome 2, while Media INK is responsible for communication-related activities. The Somaliland Ministry of Justice (MOJ) is the programme's line ministry.

2.    Programme Results

Programme Goal:

The programme goal is to “improve social contract through increased legitimacy of justice sector institutions in Somaliland”.

Outcomes:

1.    Improved access to an alternative dispute resolution mechanism and referral pathways, especially for vulnerable groups.

2.    Enhance access to formal justice for vulnerable groups through holistic support to gender-based violence survivors and affected communities.

3.    Increased participation of the citizens of Somaliland in accountability processes relating to the provision of security and justice.

3.    Purpose and Objectives of the Evaluation

The purpose of the Annual Monitoring consultant is to assess the “Strengthening the Social Contract through Access to Justice in Somaliland” against the stated outcomes and outputs as of 31 December 2024, as well as identify issues and course recommendations. It will identify constraints and challenges affecting the effective and efficient implementation of outputs and their contribution to the programme’s outcomes. The evaluation will propose amendments (if any) required to the program design and implementation arrangements to contribute to the achievement of expected results towards the completion of the program, planned for March 2025. Within this framework, the evaluation will:

1. Provide an independent assessment of the programme and measure the extent to which the expected results were achieved so far in quantity and quality as well as usefulness and timeliness. The evaluation will be conducted at both activity and output levels, providing insights towards outcomes and impact prospects, where possible, and
2. Make recommendations, if relevant, to adjust/improve the programme while it is being implemented to achieve the expected results and contribute to programme outcomes, potential impact, and sustainability.
3. Contribute to the 2025 work plan and programme extension. 

The specific objectives of the evaluation are:

1.    Assess the theory of change (ToC) and results framework and, based on the information collected, reconstruct the programme’s ToC, including articulation of key assumptions guiding the programme design. This will serve as a basis for drafting focused Evaluation Questions (EQs) and Indicators to be shared with IDLO.

2.    Examine the planned programme’s outputs and activities implemented so far, if they have been delivered on time and the extent to which they are contributing to the expected results. The areas of attention will include.

• Establish and operationalise ADR centres in targeted areas and the ADR Unit within the Ministry of Justice, including mobile ADR centres.
• Training for ADR Centre staff and adjudicators on the ADR Centres’ Standard Operating Procedures
• Strengthening the coordination between ADR Centers, MOJ and regional authorities 
• Dialogues between the State Ministry of Justice, the Attorney General and the Chief Justice
• Communication by State and CSO partners on justice-related issues
• Implementation of a community awareness-raising campaign on ADR
• Support and assistance to the MOI, particularly Radio Hargeisa, to expand its outreach and coverage of ADR and justice-related issues to non-urban areas
• Format support production for MOJ and Radio Hargeisa and the production and distribution of bi-weekly justice educative radio programmes and radio public Q&A for a
• Support and capacity development to the MOJ institutional communication capacity;
• Operationalization of the Implementation Centre (IC)
• Development of justice assistance referral service maps
• Provisions of Immediate legal advice, psychosocial and medical response provided to survivors of SGBV and human rights violations
• Provisions of Remote legal assistance to vulnerable people, including SGBV victims and IDPs, through hotlines
• Legal awareness training sessions for target IDPs and communities
• Process and platforms for citizens’ involvement in accountability processes supported
• Government led- justice coordination dialogues supported
• Multi-stakeholder dialogues

3.    Organize the Reflection workshop with Programme Coalition partners to review the evaluation findings and recommendations.

The users of this evaluation include the Netherlands Government, IDLO, and partner institutions.

4.    Scope of the Evaluation

The evaluation will cover all programme activities delivered between 1 January – 31 December 2024.

5.    Evaluation approach: Methodology and Phases

a)  Theory of Change

The consultant will reconstruct the programme's ToC, which will allow for presenting the overarching rationale, including the articulation of key assumptions guiding the programme’s design. The consultant will also develop the key EQs and Indicators linked to the reconstructed ToC. While drafting the EQs, all expected results of the programme will be considered.

The consultant will also consider elements not necessarily captured in the ToC, such as policy dialogue, contextual changes, capacity development of implementing partner organisations, and coordination (within the programme, partners, the donor, and IDLO), as a further possible basis for focused EQs and Indicators.

a)  Evaluation Criteria

In general, the evaluation will be guided by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Development Assistance Committee (OECD DAC) evaluation quality standards and the IDLO internal Evaluation Policy and Guidelines. The criteria listed below (based on the OECD DAC evaluation framework) will guide the formulation of the EQs (primarily based on the examination of the programme’s Toc and related Indicators (enabling focused data collection to answer the EQs).

Relevance

·         Assessing the extent to which the programme is in line with national strategies and priorities (including National Development Plans II and III), International frameworks (such as the recommendations of the Somaliland SDG16+ Coalition) and IDLO’s Strategic Plan 2021-2024, and the needs of direct beneficiaries.

·         This assessment should include an analysis of any risks, mitigation measures taken, contextual changes and challenges that occurred at political, security, environmental and social levels, etc. (taking also into consideration the programme’s risk register).

Effectiveness

·         Assessing the extent to which the planned outputs lead to the intended outcomes in line with the programme’s reconstructed ToC.

·         Analyzing the operating environment and the variables and factors that affected or could affect the achievement of intended results.

·         Analyzing to what extent the programme activities have made a tangible difference for the target beneficiaries and institutions.

·         Identifying potential mitigation strategies and proposing relevant adjustments for the remaining period of the program.

Efficiency

·         Assessing whether the programme delivered its planned outputs and if they have been achieved in a cost-efficient and timely manner; a comparison with market value of cost units will also be provided, where relevant. Information will be provided by output to facilitate an analysis of the efficiency of the programme for each of the output-level results.

·         Assessing how and/or to what extent the administrative, financial, or managerial issues affected or influenced the implementation of the programme.

Impact Prospects

·         Assessing specific/immediate, medium-term/intermediate results and the likelihood of long-term results produced by the programme, whether directly or indirectly, intended or unintended and positive or negative.

·         Describing noticeable or tangible broad benefits of the programme.

Sustainability Prospects

·         Assessing the likelihood of the continuation of the potential programme benefits after the programme has been completed.

·         Identifying potential strategies to strengthen the sustainability of programme components after the programme has been completed.

·         Assessing the quality of measures undertaken to build ownership of the programme by its beneficiaries and the partner institutions.

Coherence[1]

·         How did the programme consider the consistency of the interventions with other actors’ interventions in the same context - including complementarity, harmonisation, and co-ordination with others?

·         How did the programme ensure coordination with other interventions to avoid duplication and enhance impact by adding value to existing initiatives?

b)  Data Collection

To respond to the EQs and to derive findings, conclusions, and recommendations (lessons learned), the evaluation will employ the following approaches to collect information:

Desk/document review:

A crucial part of the assessment will entail reviewing programme documents and related documents, such as strategic frameworks, progress reports, monitoring and evaluation reports, etc. The final list of documents will be agreed upon at the outset of the evaluation, bearing in mind the scope and timeframe of the assignment.

Interviews and focus-group discussions:

Interviews and focus group discussions will adopt a blended approach with Key Informants where possible [for more information, refer to evaluation phases below].

Other relevant cost/time-effective data collection tools and approaches (e.g., surveys, observations, etc.) that can capture information from the programme stakeholders might be considered.

c)  Evaluation Phases

The monitoring process will entail the following phases:

Inception Phase – Desk Review Phase:

·         At the outset of the exercise, the consultant needs to acquire a complete comprehension of the operating context. This includes the political situation, security issues, international presence on the ground and related interventions, and the status of partner institutions in general, etc.

·         The consultant needs to undertake an in-depth analysis of all documents defined as relevant to the intervention under scrutiny (to be described in detail at the outset of the evaluation).

·         The consultant will draft a list of Key Informants (KI), including the relevant programme personnel, the donor representatives, and other stakeholders (the KIs list will comprise Name, Titles, and Institutions of potential interviewees) and conduct a number of preliminary remote interviews with these professionals (the number of preliminary interviews will be decided at the outset of the evaluation); and

Furthermore, the consultant will:

·         Develop the EQs and Indicators stemming from the reconstructed ToC for the programme;

·         Produce an ‘Impact Diagram’ (for basic guidance, refer to Annex 2) presenting, in graphic form, the programme’s reconstructed ToC. The reconstructed ToC should, inter alia, include an explication of the assumptions underlying the programme and the approach for assessing their validity within the framework of the evaluation;

·         Propose a sampling approach for beneficiaries, stakeholders, programme staff members and trainees to be interviewed.

·         Develop a tentative monitoring work plan, inclusive of all evaluation phases and deliverables;

·         Design essential data collection tools and undertake a thorough review of existing data relevant to the programme; and

·         Finalize the KI details and list of people to be interviewed. Based on newly acquired information, the KI list can be further fine-tuned/expanded during the field mission, especially regarding safety and security-related limitations to stakeholders' accessibility. To ensure an independent evaluation, the consultant will take the lead in designing the KI list.

Field Phase:

·         The consultant will seek additional information in the field to complement the Inception Phase data collection and analysis. This will entail data collection and analysis: Approximately 20 working days spent in the country (and/or on remote data collection) to capture additional data from the IDLO management/leadership and programme staff in Somaliland.

Synthesis Phase:  

·         Writing and dissemination of the annual monitoring report: A draft Report will be prepared and shared with relevant IDLO personnel for review and feedback. It will include final answers to the Questions and related findings, conclusions, and recommendations (lessons learned). The causality link between findings, conclusions, and recommendations must be clearly detectable. Subsequently, the final Report, including an executive summary and all relevant annexes, will be prepared and submitted to IDLO.

[1] Based on the adapted definitions of Evaluation Criteria: https://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/revised-evaluation-criteria-dec-2019.pdf

Interested candidates are requested to submit an electronic application to [email protected]. not later than 13rd January 2025. 

Submission package

1. Cover Letter

• Introduce yourself/organization, emphasizing expertise in monitoring and evaluation, particularly in justice and social contract programs.
• Highlight a proposed approach and commitment to deadlines.

2. Technical Proposal

• Understanding of the Assignment: Briefly explain program goals and evaluation objectives.
• Methodology: Summarize approach to reconstructing the ToC, assessing outputs, and collecting/analyzing data.
• Work Plan: Provide a timeline with key milestones and deliverables.

3. Financial Proposal: Include fees, travel, accommodation, and other related expenses.

4. CVs/Experience

• Provide resumes highlighting relevant skills and similar assignments.
• Summarize relevant past work with references and contact details.

5. Sample Work

• Attach a recent, relevant evaluation report as an example.