Provision of End-Line Evaluation Consultancy

Who is the Danish Refugee Council?Founded in 1956, the Danish Refugee Council (DRC) is a leading international NGO (non-governmental organization) present in 40 countries, with over 9,000 employees and supported by 7,500 volunteers. DRC protects, advocates, and builds sustainable futures for refugees and other displacement-affected people and communities. DRC works during displacement at all stages: in acute crisis, in displacement, when settling and integrating in a new place, or upon return. DRC provides protection and life-saving humanitarian assistance, supports displaced persons in becoming self-reliant and included in hosting societies. It works with civil society and responsible authorities to promote the protection of rights and peaceful coexistence. DRC has been operational in Kenya since 2005 and is one of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ (UNHCR) largest implementing partners in the refugee response. DRC is present in Garissa (Dadaab & Garissa), Turkana (Kakuma, Kalobeyei & Lodwar), Nairobi, Isiolo, Marsabit, Lamu, and Mandera counties.Project BackgroundThe micro-entrepreneurship ecosystem in Kenya is vibrant yet many entrepreneurs face a growth ceiling. Since 2015, the Danish Refugee Council (DRC) has successfully supported Community Savings and Loans Associations (CSLAs). These informal lending outfits provide vital financing opportunities to those micro businesses cut off from mainstream banking. As these businesses mature, they encounter systemic barriers that prevent them from accessing formal financial and business support services essential for long-term resilience.Refugees in Kenya, particularly those in urban centers like Nairobi and border counties like Mandera, navigate a complex regulatory landscape. Despite the progressive Refugee Act 2021 which recognizes the Refugee ID as a valid KYC (Know Your Customer) document for financial services and business registration, financial institutions remain hesitant to lend to this demographic group due to lack of information and refugees’ perceived flight risk. The exclusion from mainstream financing leaves refugees leaves with no much option but to rely on informal CSLA funds, which are often insufficient for significant business expansion.The SDACKED project employs a Market Systems Development (MSD) approach to unblock these barriers. By working at a systems level, DRC facilitates linkages between CSLAs and formal institutions like KCB Bank, while simultaneously advocating for policy coherence and supporting the digitization of group records. In Mandera, the project addresses thinner markets by exploring value chains in livestock and farming and promoting Sharia-compliant financial products.Objectives of the ConsultancyThe consultant is expected to conduct the end-line evaluation to the required standards. S/he will be expected to lead in the day-to-day management of the activities, including, coordinating field-level data collection, analysis, and report writing. The consultant is expected to regularly consult DRC staff while implementing the assignment.The specific objectives of this evaluation are:1. To evaluate the project’s effectiveness, relevance, coherence, efficiency, sustainability, and impact with a primary focus on assessing the project’s meeting of the expected results, objectives, and overarching goal. 2. To ensure accountability by evaluating whether resources invested have led to desired results. 3. To compare end-line data with baseline data to understand the magnitude of achievement and of change over time. 4. To identify pivotal lessons and potential practices for organizational learning. 5. To assess challenges, best practices, lessons learnt, and document outcomes of evidence-based recommendations, to inform future processes. 6. To conduct an outcome harvesting exercise aimed at identifying behavioural changes among the targeted community/participants, and systematically capture outcomes related to business performance, including changes in monthly income levels, income consistency, and stability.End-line Evaluation CriteriaThe end-line evaluation will employ specific OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) evaluation criteria for humanitarian action, to guide the study, with special emphasis on sustainability.Key Objectives/Evaluation CriteriaKey Questions to be Asked1. Relevance/ AppropriatenessThe extent to which the intervention objectives and design responded to the beneficiaries' needs.1. Were the project inputs, targets, and strategy (including its assumptions and theory of change) realistic and appropriate? 2. Were the project’s activities and objectives designed and implemented in a way that avoids future harm? 3. To what extent did the community and stakeholders participate in the planning and implementation of project interventions? 4. What tangible benefits or changes did the project bring to the target audience or community? 5. Did the project respond to the needs and priorities of the target groups? 6. To what extent did beneficiaries (host and refugee girls, women, boys, and men) and partners participate? 7. Was the selected target group relevant/significant?2. CoherenceThe compatibility of the intervention with other interventions.1. Did the project’s logic allow the achievement of its objectives and results (Quality of ToC)? 2. Were the approaches coherently used? 3. Did project activities overlap and duplicate other similar interventions (funded nationally and /or by other donors)? 4. Have diverse stakeholder perspectives been integrated coherently into the project design and implementation? 5. Is there consistency in how stakeholder feedback and input have been incorporated throughout the project life cycle?3. EffectivenessThe extent to which the intervention achieved, or is expected to achieve, its objectives and results.1. To what extent did the project achieve its outputs, outcomes, and goals? 2. What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives? 3. Have critical components for strengthening resilience been implemented and shown intended results? 4. Are the project outcomes likely to be sustained beyond the project's lifespan? 5. What lessons were learned during project implementation, and how were they applied to improve effectiveness?4. CoverageThe extent to which the intervention reached the intended beneficiaries and the geographical areas targeted.1. Did the intervention cover all the geographical regions identified as priority areas for assistance? 2. What proportion of the intended beneficiary population was reached by the project? 3. To what extent did the interventions cover the range of services intended for the targeted population? 4. What were the key challenges or barriers that affected the coverage of the intervention?5. EfficiencyThe extent to which the intervention delivers, or is likely to deliver, results in an economic and timely way.1. What was the relationship between the resources invested and the outcomes achieved? 2. Were the intervention activities implemented cost-effectively? 3. Were the intervention activities carried out promptly, considering the urgency of the humanitarian situation? 4. How effectively were the operational processes managed, including procurement and logistics? 5. To what extent were innovative approaches or technology utilized to improve the efficiency of the intervention? 6. How effectively did the actors collaborate and coordinate their efforts to avoid duplication and maximize efficiency?6. ImpactThe extent to which the intervention has generated or is expected to generate significant positive or negative, intended, or unintended, higher-level effects.1. What positive and negative, intended and unintended changes has the SDACKED project generated at the individual, household, community, and market systems levels? 2. What tangible and intangible differences has the intervention made in the lives of project participants; including changes in business performance (e.g., monthly income levels, income consistency, business growth trends, financial inclusion, access to income), and the role of financial services in influencing income and business outcomes? 3. To what extent has the project contributed to strengthening community and stakeholder resilience, including improved coping strategies, access to formal financial services, strengthened CSLA systems, and enhanced linkages with market actors and institutions? 4. What broader changes, if any, have occurred within the entrepreneurship and financial inclusion ecosystem (e.g., financial institutions, local markets, service providers, policy or practice shifts) as a result of the project’s Market Systems Development approach? 5. How likely is it that the observed positive changes will be sustained in the short- and medium-term at both beneficiary and systems levels, and what factors may enable or constrain sustainability?7. SustainabilityThe extent to which the net benefits of the intervention continue or are likely to continue.1. To what extent did the planning and implementation of the interventions take longer-term and interconnected problems into account? 2. Did the project plan and implement an adequate transition and exit strategy that ensures longer-term positive effects while reducing the risk of dependency? 3. How effective is the exit strategy and approach to phase out assistance provided by the project, including support for public policy dialogue? 4. How well are the project’s outputs linked to more long-term focused objectives? 5. What are the key factors/areas that will require additional support/attention to improve prospects of sustainability of the project outcomes and the potential for replication of this approach?8. Learning and ReplicabilityWhat worked well, lessons learned, and potential for replicating successful approaches.1. What are some of the key lessons learned as a result of this project that can be shared and replicated? 2. What are the recommendations for similar future interventions? 3. What mechanisms have been established to capture, document, and share the lessons learned and the best practices from the project within the community and other stakeholders? 4. Can the knowledge and skills acquired through this project be easily replicated and used in similar contexts in other regions? 5. How have the project activities contributed to building the capacity and knowledge of the community members? 6. What evidence exists to support the replicability of the project’s approach and outcomes in other settings?5. ResponsibilitiesThe general responsibilities of the consultant are:* Propose a sound evaluation methodology and tools, in line with the stated objectives. * Develop a consultancy work plan. * Review project documents, prepare an inception report, and data collection tools for review and feedback. * Review existing secondary literature to inform development of the conceptual framework and data collection tools. * Develop the end-line data collection schedule and suggest respondents to be selected to participate in interviews. * Conduct data collection in line with data protection regulations and perform data quality checks to ensure accuracy, validity, and integrity. * Conduct field visits and interviews with project stakeholders, beneficiaries, and partners. * Conduct data cleaning, processing, and analysis. * Prepare and submit a draft evaluation report for review and feedback. * Validate findings with DRC, i.e., preliminary presentation of the report. * Participate in a project outcomes event to be convened by DRC which will be geared towards showcasing successes and lessons from the implementation of the project. * Submit a comprehensive final evaluation report and annexes.The general responsibilities of DRC are:* Provide access to project documents, reports, and relevant data for the evaluation. * Facilitate the consultant’s access to project sites, beneficiaries, and key informants. * Brief stakeholders about the purpose of the evaluation. * Participate in key informant interviews and discussions as required. * Review the evaluation methodology, including data collection tools designed by the consultant. * Review and provide feedback on the draft evaluation report. * Act on the recommendations provided by the evaluator to improve future project planning and implementation. * Prepare and effect payment to the consultant, in instalments as agreed upon completion of the set milestones in the assignment.6. Scope of Work & MethodologyThe evaluation should be done within the existing national, legal, and regulatory frameworks. The methodology should entail a comprehensive assessment of the SDACKED project as per the project design. It will also involve conducting a thorough evaluation, utilizing a mixed-method approach, integrating both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. The sample size should be a representation of the total population, both sexes, age groups, communities, and coverage. The evaluation will assess the effectiveness, efficiency, impact, relevance, sustainability, and coherence of the intervention in relation to relevant policies and best practices. The assessment will focus on engagement, ensuring the participation of diverse stakeholders such as the targeted population, project team, implementing partners, and local authorities, throughout the evaluation process.The final deliverable will be a detailed evaluation report containing key findings, analysis, and actionable recommendations, all while upholding the highest ethical standards in data collection and analysis. The evaluation is expected to be completed within a maximum period of 30 days (within the month of April 2026) from the time of signing the contract with the successful bidder.The evaluation will follow a collaborative and participatory mixed methods approach that draws on both existing and new quantitative and qualitative data to answer the questions. There should be combined evaluation tools based on international standards and guidelines for evaluating humanitarian action.The methodology design should be developed by the consultant in consideration of the information outlined in this ToR to ensure accuracy and rigor.To assess change over time, end-line findings will be systematically compared against baseline values for all common indicators using the project’s approved monitoring and evaluation framework. The evaluation will assess emergent and contribution-based indicators related to business performance and general financial inclusion. These indicators are critical for understanding the project’s contribution to changes in income, income stability, and business growth. Measurement will rely on retrospective self-reported data, financial records where available, qualitative narratives, and outcome harvesting techniques to triangulate findings and assess the plausibility of contribution.As part of…