Final Evaluation Consultant at Search For Common Ground’s International

Location: Maiduguri, Borno

About the Project
The overall objective for “Expanding Initiatives to Reduce HR Abuse by Security Forces in Northern Nigeria” is "expanding engagement and advocacy processes and enabling local CSOs to effectively address human rights abuses perpetrated by security forces". The 52 month project was implemented in Borno, Adamawa, Bauchi and Plateau States in Northern Nigeria from August, 2013 to December, 2017.  It is supported by three specific objectives:  

• Objective 1: Strengthen the capacity of CSOs and the NHRC in human rights monitoring, reporting, and advocacy;
• Objective 2: Establish a platform between the NHRC, CSOs, and judicial actors for effective action on issues related to human rights;
• Objective 3: Improve communication and understanding between affected communities, key stakeholders, and security actors on issues related to human rights.
• The project theory of change is “If we build coalitions and capacities among networks of Civil Society, the Judiciary, and National Human Rights Commission and within the security services then human rights abuse by security will be reduced”.
• The project aims to bolster the established CSO platforms, and leverage investments in state actors, CSOs and community leaders through targeted trainings to build their capacity to own and address human rights gaps. In parallel it draws relevant regional actors into a growing network of human rights actors. It further aims to bring displaced populations into the spheres of the networks by supporting partner organizations to extend their programming across the border of difficult-to-reach areas such as Diffa, Niger. The targeted beneficiaries and primary stakeholders include: Civil Society Organizations (CSOs); NHRC; Security actors; Judiciary; and affected communities. A cross section of these stakeholders, inclusive of participants and non-participants of the project, will be engaged in this evaluation to draw lessons and gauge results of the project.

Evaluation
Evaluation Questions:

• The study will primarily evaluate the Project Theory of Change (TOC).
• It will also evaluate components of the Project, inclusive of the community and media engagements, and respond to key project indicators as specified in the Project Monitoring Plan.
• It will also compare findings on the project in North East and North Central Nigeria.
• This evaluation will be conducted with stakeholders in select communities in the project locations - Borno, Adamawa, Bauchi and Plateau States. 
• It will be participatory, centering around three DAC criteria - effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of the project.
• It will also highlight the good practices on the project, and lessons learnt.

Evaluation questions will include:

Theory of Change and Design:

• What sort of human rights abuses are still happening in communities where the project is implemented? Who are the perpetuators and targets of these abuses?
• To what extent has our current programming addressed human rights abuses in the locations where we work, including abuses of women and youths?
• How relevant is the Project Theory of Change and design to the context and area in which the project intervened?

Effectiveness:

• How effective has the project been in building the capacity of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) in human rights monitoring, reporting and advocacy?
• How effective has the project been in changing the way affected communities, key stakeholders, and security actors communicate (formally and informally) and understand each other?
• How effectively has SFCG’s media programme contributed to or hindered any change in attitudes and perceptions of citizens and security personnel regarding human rights violations? How is radio program sustaining interaction with presenters and response mechanisms?
• What unexpected changes, both positive and negative, has the project contributed to?
• What contributed to, or hindered the effectiveness of the project to do these?

Relevance:

• How relevant were the project strategies and stakeholders to the objectives and goal of the project?
• Could the project have explored other approaches of engaging with stakeholders, including security forces? Which other stakeholders could the project have explored engaging with?

Sustainability:

• Did this project contribute to building coalitions and networks between groups in targeted communities, as well as government, civil society and security agencies? Which coalitions and networks did the project contribute to building?
• What added value do these coalitions and networks have (to coalition members and to the community)?
• Has the project contributed to building NHRC’s capacity, and linkages to engage with other stakeholders?
• How sustainable are these linkages and relationships built by the project?

In addition, the evaluation will respond to the following project indicators, comparing with baseline and midterm data where available:

• Increase of radio listeners who have increased understanding of judicial and accountability processes
• Target CSOs who report better relations with other rights and advocacy CSOs at the end of the project than before the project
• Increase in allegations of human rights pursued by the NHRC in target states at the end of the project compared to first 3 months of project
• Target CSOs who report better relations with the NHRC at the end of the project than before the project
• Increase in inter-CSO meeting at the end of the project, compared to start of the project
• Target CSOs who report better relations with other CSOs at the end of the project than before the project
• Increase in allegations of human rights abuses pursued by the NHRC in target states at the end of the project compared to first 3 months of project
• Of focus group discussions in which participants spontaneously volunteer examples of increases security attributed to the project
• Findings from this evaluation will be shared widely with project participants and partners, and presented during SFCG Nigeria programs. The evaluation - with sensitive details redacted – will eventually be published on SFCG’s website and shared with other learning networks in order to enhance the broader field of peace-building in Nigeria and the world.

Methodology:

• The final evaluation will adopt a mixed approach methodology, comprising of both qualitative and quantitative methods. In addition to an in-depth desk review of project documents and other supporting documents, the evaluation will utilize focus group discussions, key informant interviews, and a survey.
• The evaluation will target community residents in the locations where the project was implemented.
• It will also target civil society, security and government leaders within Borno, Adamawa, Bauchi and Plateau States.

Deliverables
The final evaluation deliverables are:

• An inception report detailing the proposed method, study matrix, data collection tools and work plan. It is to be approved by SFCG before starting data collection.
• Draft report for review by SFCG staff and other stakeholders.
• Final Report (maximum 30 pages, excluding appendices), consisting of but not excluded to: Executive Summary, Methodology, Findings and Analysis, Conclusions, Lessons Learned and Recommendations. The report should be structured according to the evaluation questions.
• A 3-pages summary with key findings and recommendations
• Appendices, including data collection tools and list of interviewees.
• A power point presentation of the report.

Requirements
The ideal candidate and/ or team will have the following: 

• More than 5 years of experience in evaluations with international organizations;
• Graduate Degree in Conflict Studies, Human Rights, Social Work or other relevant degree;
• Experience in evaluating programs relating to peacebuilding, conflict resolution and human rights; 
• Experience in evaluating international development programs, prior work experience in North Central Nigeria; 
• Experience with mixed methods;
• Strong analytical skills;
• Excellent written communication and report writing skills in English;
• Ability to communicate fluently in Hausa;
• Ability to be flexible with time and work schedule

Logistical Support:
SFCG will provide the following logistical support to the consultant;

• Transmission of background materials (project proposal, meeting notes, etc.);
• Availability of meeting rooms in Maiduguri and Yola;
• Use of SFCG printers;
• Meeting arrangements with stakeholders and beneficiaries as requested by the consultant;
• Support of a SFCG Field Officer for introductions to key stakeholders and equivalent.

Timeframe:

• The evaluation will take place either between November - December 2017, with the final deliverables due end of January, 2018; or between February - March, 2018, with the final deliverables due end of April, 2018.
• The actual duration will be determined by the project donor’s response to Search’s request for a project extension.

 The consultant is required to respect the following Ethical Principles:

• Comprehensive and systematic inquiry: Consultant should make the most of the existing information and full range of stakeholders available at the time of the review. Consultant should conduct systematic, data-based inquiries. He or she should communicate his or her methods and approaches accurately and in sufficient detail to allow others to understand, interpret and critique his or her work. He or she should make clear the limitations of the review and its results.
• Competence: Consultant should possess the abilities and skills and experience appropriate to undertake the tasks proposed and should practice within the limits of his or her professional training and competence.
• Honesty and integrity: Consultant should be transparent with the contractor/constituent about: any conflict of interest, any change made in the negotiated project plan and the reasons why those changes were made, any risk that certain procedures or activities produce misleading review information.
• Respect for people: Consultant respect the security, dignity and self-worth of respondents, program participants. Consultant has the responsibility to be sensitive to and respect differences amongst participants in culture, religion, gender, disability, age and ethnicity.