Country: Uganda
Closing date: 31 Jan 2018
Background of the Project
The overall project objective is to contribute to the respect of human rights, rule of law and fundamental freedoms of civilians in the Rwenzori region in Uganda.
The project seeks to empower and protect poor and marginalized people at the grassroots levels from acts of torture and degrading treatment, plus building response mechanisms for Human Rights Defenders. The intervention works closely with Uganda Police Force (UPF), the Uganda Peoples Defence Forces (UPDF) and other security agencies to protect citizens from torture and other rights violations. The project contributes to the establishment of a functional and justice referral system. In cooperation with cultural institutions, the project promotes dialogue and common understanding about positive cultural values and peaceful co-existence.
The expected results are the following:
- Increased awareness, access and utilization of mechanisms for protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms for poor and marginalized people at grass root levels like the Batwa, Banyabindi, Bakonjo and Basongora.
- Enhanced capacity of CSOs to monitor, document and report on human rights violations
- Security Agencies provide accountability on human rights work and cooperate with CSOs and government agencies to ensure citizens are protected from torture, and other human rights violation.
The project target groups include community members, individual human rights defenders, civil society organizations, security agencies, journalists, cultural institutions and religious leaders.
The project duration of this pilot-phase is July 1 2017 till December 2018, a follow-up phase from January 2019 – December 2021 is envisaged. The results of the evaluation will directly feed into shaping the new project phase.
1. Objective of the Evaluation
The objective of the evaluation is to assess the completion and achievements of the project by analysing the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the project intervention. The evaluation will provide a well-founded, comprehensive and concretely argued document that gives a clear statement on the quality of the project and its implementation. The recipients of the evaluation are the back-donors Austrian Development Agency (ADA) and DKA Austria as well as HORIZONT3000 and the implementing partner HURINET.
The specific objectives of the evaluation are to provide information on the following points:
· Evaluate the project to draw out key lessons, indicate the strengths and weaknesses of the current project and make recommendations on completion of the first phase and on the design of the follow-up phase.
· Analyze the approach used by HURINET and state whether it is suitable to be transferred and implemented by other development actors in the region.
· Outline and asses the contributions of the HORIZONT3000 KNOWHOW3000 activities to this project.
2. Evaluation criteria and guiding questions
2.1 Relevance of the intervention
a) To what extent does the intervention reflect the actual needs and interests of the target group?
b) To what extent is the intervention in line with public strategies and policies of Uganda?
2.2Effectiveness (achievement of targets) of the project in terms of the defined objectives
a) What is the progress from the beginning towards the agreed project objective (as determined in the project document)?
b) To which degree did the trainings and workshop provide participants with the necessary knowledge to improve their practical skills and attitudes?
c) Does the target group practice the new techniques in their organisations and actual work?
d) Did unforeseen external factors intervene? If so, how flexibly did the management adapt to ensure that the result would still achieve the objective?
2.3Efficiency (use of resources)
a) Is the relation between input of resources vis-à-vis the results achieved appropriate and justifiable?
b) Describe the monitoring system in place and assess whether it is suitable to gather timely relevant information on the achievement of results and objectives?
c) What is the cost-benefit relation in comparison to similar projects in the region and in particular to the project named “Enhancing Capability and Influence of Women in the private sector in the districts of Amuro, Zombo and Mubende, Uganda” (Benchmarking of salary scheme and value for money)?
d) Organisational set-up: are the number and professional/managerial skills of the project team as well as the organisational set-up, adequate for the activities of the project and where are improvements needed?
2.4Impact (effects)of the intervention on the general situation of the target group and other stakeholders
a) What changes have happened since the project implementation (Most significant change)?
b) To what extent have the training, community events radio broadcasts changed and improved the attitudes and practices of the beneficiaries towards human rights violations?
c) To what extent has the project intervention resulted in a reduction and improved documentation of human rights violation?
d) What are the positive or negative, intended, unintended and visible effects of the project on the target groups, surrounding communities and the district?
2.5Sustainability (durability) of the intervention and its impact
a) To what extent can activities, results and effects be expected to continue after the project has come to an end?
b) How self-sustaining is HURINET and its networking partners in the district in general?
c) To what extend does the project take political-, social-, cultural sustainability into account?
d) Institutional sustainability: to what extent is the intervention designed to develop the institutional capacities of HURINET in terms of improving internal processes, structures and skills of staff members?
2.6 Participation and ownership
a) To what extent have stakeholders been involved in decision-making during implementation?
b) How did the implementing team choose the beneficiaries?
c) What is the level of local ownership and the identification with the project?
d) How satisfied is the project partner with the cooperation with HORIZONT3000? What should be kept, changed or improved?
2.7HORIZONT3000 Knowledge Management
a) Did the partner organisation participate in any KNOWHOW3000 activity? If yes, which one?
b) What was the benefit of the participation for the partner organisation and for the target group?
2.8Lessons learnt and recommendations
a) What are the main lessons (3-5) learnt from the project?
b) What good practices (e.g. approaches, trainings and methods) are suitable to be replicated in other projects with similar objectives?
c) What should be continued in the next phase / what needs to be changes or even be abandoned?
3. The Evaluator
The Evaluator needs to proof technical experience and knowledge of the sector and the region, fluency in English and managerial as well as methodological skills in designing and performing project evaluations (track record). The Evaluator needs to come up with an appropriate methodology for the evaluation.
The Evaluator will be in charge of the entire evaluation process and is expected to provide HORIZONT3000 with a final evaluation report as stipulated in the timetable below.
4. Methodologies
The evaluator is free to choose the appropriate methods.
5. Timetable
The whole assignment including the final evaluation report should be concluded by April 30, 2018. The Evaluator will develop, discuss and agree on the evaluation schedule with HURINET before commencement of the assignment. The final evaluation schedule will be shared with HORIZONT3000.
Evaluation Report
· The report shall present the key findings and recommendations.
· The report should contain a description of methodologies / design.
· The evaluation report starts with an executive summary of three to five pages. The summary contains a brief overview of the objective, scope and, methods of the evaluation and refers to the most important findings, conclusions, lessons learnt and recommendations. The executive summary must be written as an independent document so that it can be forwarded to third parties in accordance with the contract partner.
· The report shall be clear and concise, limiting itself to essential points and respond to the criteria mentioned in “2 Evaluation criteria and guiding questions” (maximum 20 pages without cover page, content, appendices etc.).
· The report shall be written in English language.
· The report shall be drawn up using Microsoft Word software and submitted electronically; including tables and graphics were useful and necessary.
How to apply: