End-Line Evaluation Survey Consultant at The National Agency for the Control of AIDS (NACA)

Background

• Health indicators in Nigeria remain poor, hence the National Council on Health (NCH) resolved and recommended five years Strategic Health Development Plan (SHDP) as an approach towards tracking and improving the entire country’s health indices and outcomes, as part of the Government’s overall strategy for development of the health sector.
• Sequel to the above, the Federal Ministry of Health, in collaboration with State Ministries of Health, FCT Health & Human Services Secretariat (FCT-HHSS), and other stakeholders developed the second National Strategic Health Development Plan (NSHDP-II) 2018-2022.
• This Plan, which is the operational framework to the National Health Policy, is the guide to planning and implementation of health activities at the national and sub-national levels.
• Federal Departments, Agencies, and Parastatals (DAPs) as well as State Ministries of Health (including FCT-HSS) and their DAPs are to develop their Annual Operational Plans (AOPs) with respect to the NSHDP-II.
• The Nasarawa State Ministry of Health through the RSSH II project with support from Global Fund and NACA is to conduct the Joint Annual Review (JAR) and Mid-Term Review (MTR) of NSHDP-II to assess/track the progress of implementation of the NSHDP-II against set milestones and targets for 2018-2022, identify key bottlenecks/challenges in the implementation, document best practices, and provide information for necessary decision making.
• The findings are to also generate evidence towards improving health sector performance.

Goal and Objectives

The objectives of the End-line evaluation/assessment survey of the SSHDP II in Nasarawa State are outlined as follows:

• To evaluate/assess the plan against the SSHDP II criteria in Nasarawa State and provide a narrative summary against each one and a score indicating the extent to which the plan has met each criteria;
• To measure the outcome/impact indicators and the corresponding output as stated in the project results framework of the SSHDP II that are relevant to Nasarawa State;
• Determine the level of progress made in the plan implementation based on the needs assessment outcomes;
• Evaluate/assess the SSHDP II impact (both positive and negative) on cross cutting activities: PSM, HMIS, Laboratories and other ATM-related services in Nasarawa State
• To juxtapose policy briefs with planned output/impact to measure the extent of conformity of implementation to designs and guides

Scope of Work

The end-line evaluation/assessment survey is expected to be carried out within the context of the following criteria: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability. The evaluator shall examine the following detailed activities within the context of the stated criteria:

Relevance:

• Did the planned targeted intervention activities address the prioritized needs based on the SSHDP II designs in Nasarawa State?
• Were there adaptations in implementation plan/road map due to changing context in the core areas of the SSHDP II in Nasarawa State?

Effectiveness (project management arrangement):

• Based on project monitoring data and achievement of indicator targets, to what extent has each of the expected planned -outcomes and their related outputs been achieved according to the work plan?
• How adequate is the management and monitoring arrangement of the SSHDP II?
• How have the various roles and responsibilities been able to collaborate and work together? Is there a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities by all parties involved?
• How effectively has the management and relevant stakeholders monitored SSHDP II performance and results?
• What has been the level of administrative, technical and policy support from the PCU?
• How effective is the SSHDP II monitoring system put in place? Is relevant information and data systematically collected and collated?

Efficiency:

• How efficiently have resources such as human resources, time, expertise, funds etc. been allocated and used to provide the necessary support and to achieve the broader SSHDP II
• objectives?
• To what extent are the SSHDP II activities carried out in consonance with the work plan as approved by the relevant authorities?
• To what extent are the disbursements and SSHDP II expenditures in line with expected budgetary plans for the core areas of RSSH (PSM, HMIS, laboratories, etc.) in Nasarawa State?

Impact:

• How has this SSHDP II applied the RSSH project design principles? Especially the key targeted intervention activities around the RSSH core areas (PSM, HMIS, Laboratories, etc.)
• What are the obvious and direct benefits that have accrued to the core areas of the RSSH (PSM, HMIS, Laboratories, etc.) from the SSHDP II activities?
•  How have the SSHDP II activities implemented changed the functionality, operational procedures and speed, ease of access, proficiency, and other performance and operational indicators in the core areas of RSSH in Nasarawa State?
• How have the SSHDP II activities implemented created the incentives/need for human resource and operational capacity building in the core areas of RSSH in Nasarawa State?
• To what extent has the SSHDP II led to practice and behavioural change in the core areas of RSSH in Nasarawa State?
• What impact has the SSHDP II had on Professional and Non-professional personnel involved in the core areas of RSSH in Nasarawa State?

Sustainability:

• How has the SSHDP II targeted intervention activities implemented empowered key staff and other health workers in the core areas of the RSSH in Nasarawa State?
• How have the SSHDP II activities implemented helped to support lasting impact on the community of users of the services provided in the core areas of the RSSH with special reference to new equipment introduced/refurbished, current software/technologies deployed?
• How were local stakeholders in the core areas of SSHDP II in Nasarawa State carried along throughout the project activities cycle?
• How sustainable are the benefits of the implemented targeted intervention activities of the SSHDP II in the core areas of the RSSH in Nasarawa State?
• What are the steps to be taken to enhance the sustainability of the impact of the SSHDP II in the core areas in Nasarawa State?

Terms of Reference for the consultant:

• Develop and finalize detailed proposed evaluation approach, methodology, sampling techniques, data collection tools and report writing format, work plan/timeline and key team members to be used in the evaluation survey. Provide overall leadership and technical support throughout the evaluation process (planning, data collection and analysis, synthesis of finding, recommendation and report writing)
• Facilitate meeting of the key stakeholders related to the evaluation.
• Present findings and recommendations for discussion and validation at a stakeholders’ validation meeting
• Develop report containing finding, recommendations and priorities for the national response.
• Use inputs from the stakeholder’s validation meeting to develop a final, clear and concise report that will form the consolidated report.
• Submit a process report on the consultancy highlighting achievements, lessons learned, challenges and recommendations for future exercises.

Deliverables

• A detailed report of the findings of the evaluation survey of the core areas of SSHDP II in Nasarawa State using the prioritized areas for intervention as the bench mark (hard and electronic copies)
• The report should contain a comprehensive methodology used for the survey with special attention paid to the details of data collection instruments/tools of analysis used, sampling method applied (where
• necessary)
• A detailed results framework with end-line evaluation data entered in the relevant sections showing each indicator of impact, outcome and output
• An inception report that explain the understanding of the terms of reference (TORs), and objectives
• Data files of the statistical analysis and infographics shared in a retrievable electronic form.

Qualifications / Relevant Experience

The end-line evaluation consultant shall possess the listed qualifications and have the relevant experience summarized below:

• Master’s in Public Health, Social sciences, Statistics or any relevant field 10 years of applied experience in quantitative and qualitative research skills and design, monitoring and evaluation (applicants should provide a copy of baseline / evaluation reports carried out previously)
• Proficiency in statistical software applications with proven skills in infographics design
• Strong background in participatory designs, evaluation methodologies and knowledge of evaluation results frameworks
• Excellent communication, writing and analytical skills
• Experience in working on international donor-funded programs is added advantage.

MUST possess:

• Strong skills in using word processing, spreadsheet, database and presentation software (Microsoft Office applications preferred), capacity to present data using current infographics
• Experience using web-based applications (email, browsing, and literature retrieval).