Final evaluation of the Project “Clean Money in Elections”

BACKGROUNDTransparency International (TI) is the global civil society organisation leading the fight against corruption. Through more than 100 chapters worldwide and an international secretariat in Berlin, Germany, TI raises awareness of the damaging effects of corruption and works with partners in government, business, and civil society to develop and implement effective measures to tackle it.The Transparency International Secretariat (TI-S) in Berlin is seeking an evaluator or a team of evaluators (a diverse, networked team with presence of local data consultants) to conduct an independent final evaluation of the Clean Money in Elections (CME) Project.The CME Project’s ultimate outcome is enhanced accountability for transparency and gender equality of political finance to voters in Indonesia, Madagascar, Panama, Sri Lanka, Venezuela, and Zambia, so that elected leaders serve the public interest rather than vested interests. To achieve this outcome, the Project works to improve political finance frameworks and practices by supporting legislatures and oversight bodies in adopting, implementing, and enforcing rules aligned with international standards. At the same time, it strengthens public demand for reform by equipping civil society, the media, and election watchdogs with the skills and tools to generate evidence, monitor political finance, and communicate the impacts of corruption risks and women’s political participation. Together, these intermediary goals aim to increase political will for reforms that reduce undue influence in elections and level the financial playing field for women candidates.The Project is implemented by TI-S in six target countries, in partnership with its national chapters. At the national level, it focuses on monitoring political finance, advocating for reforms, and holding decision-makers accountable. The Project addresses systemic issues that enable undue political influence and barriers that limit women’s ability to compete in elections. By promoting global standards, strengthening oversight actors, and raising public awareness, the Project works to ensure political finance systems uphold equality, integrity, and transparency. Ultimately, it contributes to creating more inclusive and democratic political processes. The CME Project directly contributes to TI’s Strategic Objective (SO3), Securing the Integrity in Politics, and aligns with TI’s anti-corruption programming under this SO.The Project is funded by Global Affairs Canada (GAC) and is implemented from October 2023 to August 2026.OBJECTIVES OF THE FINAL EVALUATIONThis final evaluation shall provide an independent, external, systematic, and objective assessment of the Project's relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability.The overall objectives of the evaluation are the following:1. Provide an independent, systematic, and objective assessment of the achievements of the objectives and outcomes and their sustainability as specified in the Project’s MEL framework, and the extent to which the Project has contributed to impact and its sustainability over time. 2. Identify internal and external factors that shaped the Project’s outcomes, including strengths, innovations, limitations, and challenges encountered during implementation. 3. Document lessons learned and good practices by implementation partners to pivot and/or respond to evolving global and national conditions, to generate forward-looking and practical recommendations to support sustainability and enhance future programme design that is adaptive to evolving contexts, to protect the integrity of politics.The results of the evaluation will be shared with the donor, Global Affairs Canada, and participating chapters, and published on TI’s website along with the Management Response.KEY ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSEDThe evaluation should be based on the six OECD DAC criteria. The operationalisation of these criteria into evaluation questions should be contextualised in consultation with TI. The following questions could be addressed during the Project evaluation but are subject to discussion and agreement with TI during the period of designing the evaluation approach. The evaluator(s) is/are free to further prioritize these questions in the proposal and suggest others deemed necessary.RELEVANCE & COHERENCE• To what extent did the Project align with TI’s SO3 Securing the Integrity in Politics and its indicators, GAC’s priorities, chapters’ strategies? Have contradictions, if any, prevented the implementation and achievement of the Project’s objectives?• To what extent does the Project address the core challenges of political finance opacity, undue influence, and gendered barriers in the six target countries?• To what extent did the Project’s Theory of Change (ToC) remain valid, and which assumptions were confirmed, adapted, or challenged during implementation? Why?• How did the Project complement other ongoing interventions, initiatives and partnerships locally, nationally, regionally, and globally?• To what extent did the Project’s design enable chapters to adapt activities, strategies, and partnerships in response to evolving political contexts, electoral cycles, emerging risks, and implementation constraints, and how coherent was this adaptation with chapters’ existing political integrity strategies?EFFECTIVENESS & EFFICIENCY• To what extent were the Project's immediate and intermediate outcomes (at both global and national levels) achieved in comparison to initial plans? Were the initial objectives realistic?• Which approaches, partnerships, and coalition-building, such as oversight agency engagement or gender sensitive digital tools, most effectively contributed to the implementation of outcomes?• How did different contextual factors (political environment, actors’ incentives, legal frameworks, gendered barriers, institutional openness) shape the effectiveness of interventions across countries?• How efficient were Project management and coordination mechanisms within TI, including reporting, monitoring, and communications?• To what extent have the resources (financial, human, technical support) been allocated strategically and sufficiently to achieve the Project outputs/outcomes? Were the Project's objectives achieved on time, at reasonable costs, and in an economically justifiable way?• To what extent was TI’s coordination and the technical guidance delivered through TI Colombia effective, and what were the relative benefits and challenges of this innovative model of engaging a chapter with specialised expertise within the Movement?IMPACT• What key outcomes and impact were achieved on global, regional, and national levels? And how strongly did TI’s work contribute to their achievement? What other factors contributed?• To what extent have Project outcomes fostered public scrutiny and accountability through tools such as monitoring tools and assessments?• Are there indicators that the Project’s results have been or could have been replicated or scaled by other stakeholders?• How has the Project enhanced the capacities of CSOs, local groups and other stakeholders to sustain and expand their impact beyond the Project’s duration?• What unintended positive or negative impacts have emerged, and what factors contributed to these developments?• How have global and regional advocacy efforts supported or strengthened national level reforms and impact?SUSTAINABILITY• How durable are the behaviour, policy, and practice changes recorded? How likely is it that key Project achievements, will continue after the Project ends?• What were the major factors that influenced the achievement or non-achievement of the sustainability of the Project?• What are the opportunities for wider scalability of tools and approaches developed under this Project, within and beyond the TI Movement?• What are the main sustainability risks, and what mitigation actions were/could be implemented by TI and chapters?METHODOLOGYThe Consultant(s) is ultimately responsible for proposing the overall methodological design.The evaluation, including its approach and methods, will be planned and agreed upon in close consultation with the TI Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) coordinator and Project team.While the Consultant(s) retains full flexibility in designing the approach, TI welcomes methodologies that can:• identify and verify observable changes in behaviour, relationships, practices, or policy;• explore how and why these changes occurred in varying political and institutional contexts;• analyse the conditions that enabled or constrained influence;• compare similarities and differences across country cases; and• test the validity of the Project’s Theory of Change, including its key assumptions.The final methodological design should apply a participatory and inclusive approach and should combine both qualitative and quantitative data. The exact methods will be defined during the inception phase and may include, but are not limited to:• desk review of relevant Project documents;• individual and/or group interviews with global stakeholders and across all implementing countries online or in-person;• survey questionnaires for internal and external stakeholders; and• participatory workshops or validation sessions with TI and national chapters.The inception report should specify how the Consultant(s) will seek input from final beneficiaries. Given the large and diverse constituency of voters, the Consultant(s) should assess feasibility and propose realistic sampling or alternative approaches.The Consultant(s) is expected to refine the scope and methods during the inception phase and present the detailed plan in cooperation with TI in the inception report.EXPECTED DELIVERABLES AND TIMELINEThe evaluator(s) is/are expected to deliver:● An inception report, not exceeding 20 pages, outlining the proposed methodology, stakeholders for interviews and focus group discussions, data collection tools and timeframe of planned actions by 16 March 2026. Where applicable, the report may include outcome maps, causal pathways, or context–mechanism–outcome insights if such methods are adopted.● A draft evaluation report for review and comments by TI, not exceeding 30 pages, along with its annexes, by 15 October 2026. While considering the comments provided on the draft, the evaluator(s) shall use their independent and impartial judgment in preparing the final report.● An online validation meeting with key stakeholders to discuss findings and feedback on draft report, with design, facilitation and documentation of a participatory workshop, incl. PowerPoint presentation, to discuss and validate the draft report● A final evaluation report documenting the evaluation process and results following a clear structure (see structure below), not exceeding 40 pages (excluding the annexes and the executive summary), by 10 November 2026. It should be accompanied by a summary PowerPoint presentation.The evaluation report will contain the findings, an executive summary, conclusions, and recommendations as well as lessons learned with action-oriented recommendations. All presentations and reports should be submitted in English, in electronic form, in accordance with the deadlines stipulated above. The evaluator(s) is responsible for editing and quality control of language. Annexes to the Final Report should be kept to an absolute minimum, only those annexes that serve to demonstrate or clarify an issue related to a significant finding should be included. Existing documents should be referenced but not necessarily annexed.Please note that the timeline is indicative and will be confirmed during the inception phase with the selected evaluator(s). Guidance and quality assurance:●The findings should be referenced.● The evaluator(s) approach should be guided by the TI's Impact Monitoring Approach● The research should abide by ethical protocols including participant confidentiality and privacy, and by data protection regulations and must comply with TI’s Evaluation Ethics Protocol, Inclusive Communication Guidelines, and Data Quality Checklist (to be provided).TI retains sole rights to all distribution, dissemination, and publication of the deliverables.SELECTION CRITERIAThe Consultant(s) should have the following qualifications:• University degree in social sciences or a related area.• At least 7 years of proven relevant professional experience in an international development environment, of which at least 5 years should be in Monitoring & Evaluation of multiple country Projects & programmes.• Substantial experience in conducting evaluations, including in the anti-corruption field.• Knowledge and experience of working for advocacy-oriented organisations.• Deep understanding of good governance and anti-corruption• Demonstrated Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI) expertise.• Relevant regional representation from Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia Pacific and direct experience working in/with some of the Project countries in each region on related issues. Preference will be given to a diverse, networked evaluation team with presence of local data Consultants in as many CME countries as possible.• Proven experience in the conceptualisation and facilitation of participatory workshops.• Experience with GAC-funded programming is desirable.• Excellent drafting and report-writing capacities in English, strong command of Spanish is desirable.• Highly motivated and committed to the values of transparency and integrity.REMUNERATION AND COSTSThe evaluator(s) should provide their estimated total fee as a lump sum or as standard daily rates before any VAT or other charges. The total budget should cover per diem for any potential field trips and participation in the end-of-project in-person meeting. The plane tickets and hotel accommodations for these trips will be arranged and paid for directly by TI. The budget available for this evaluation (excluding plane tickets and accommodation) is EUR 25,000 (including VAT).For candidates based in the EU, EEA, UK, and Switzerland.Transparency International e.V. (Secretariat), is registered as a Business Entity in Germany with VAT identification number DE273612486. EU reverse charge applies. Service providers should issue invoices with zero VAT. Candidates based in Germany who do not charge German VAT must confirm their status as small entrepreneurs.Data protectionWhen you respond to this tender and submit your application, you provide consent that Transparency International e. V. keeps your application materials for a period of ten years according to German legal requirements. Afterwards, Transparency International will delete your application and any personal data it contains. If you have any questions, please reach out to [email protected] for handling overhead and travel expensesOverheadRegular overhead expenses associated with the Consultant(s) maintaining their …