Consultancy Services to Evaluate Child’s i Foundation Programs – Uganda

Background and context

Child’s i Foundation was established in 2009. The organisation focuses largely on the prevention of child-family separations and care reform, including repurposing of institutions. Specific interventions include supporting vulnerable children and families to prevent separations, recruiting and training foster carers, and building community structures for child protection. Childs i Foundation also works alongside orphanages to support the transition from institutional care to family and community-based care.

Currently, the organisation runs programs in five districts (Eastern and Central Uganda) and a division in Kampala, the capital city of Uganda. The program to be evaluated includes all projects that are currently being implemented by Child’s i Foundation in five districts of Uganda. The districts are Mpigi, Kampala, Tororo, Masaka and Wakiso.The organisation also undertakes national advocacy and training and is currently supporting organisations in the East African region, collaborating with Transform Alliance Africa to consolidate our work on care reform in the region. The programs aim to demonstrate how children and young people can be supported to thrive in families through a division and district level child protection and care system, strengthening the political will at national level for care reform and influencing private and government funding to achieve sustainable change and better outcomes for children.

Program specific objectives

• To strengthen political will and mobilise funding in Uganda for child protection and care reform
• Demonstrate the effectiveness of district and division level child protection care systems and its components
• To assess the impact of the Covid 19 pandemic on the cost of living in the community and how Child’s i economic interventions have addressed the challenges
• To highlight the innovative approaches that have been utilised in the delivery of the program
• Build the capacity of social service workforce; government, NGOs, and other key stakeholders to deliver quality services to children across prevention, alternative care and gate keeping
• To establish the impact of IGAs (Income Generating Activities) on the beneficiaries that are under the Child’s i Foundation program
• To assess the contribution of Child’s i Foundation to care reform in Uganda at the community level (prevention, community based alternative care, lived experience care voices) and National level advocacy
• Build the case for private donors to redirect funding from institutions to children in families and communities.
• Consolidate our position to influence and lead child protection and care reform

Outputs;

The following are the selected outputs;

1. Number of children provided prevention support through community volunteers and community development networks
2. Number of children reintegrated into the community
3. Number of foster carers, identified trained and approved
4. Number of government officials and stakeholders whose capacities have been built
5. Number of children / families receiving active family support
6. Number of children and families strengthened
7. Number of support groups/wellbeing committees established
8. Number of children with disabilities supported
9. Number of children provided with post placement support.
10. Number of peer support groups formed
11. Number of children placed in to foster care
12. Number of young people with lived experience of care supported with mental health services.
13. Number of community youth reached for mental health support through champions.
14. Number of care institutions repurposed
15. Number of advocacy groups created

Purpose and rationale for evaluation;

The purpose for this evaluation is to assess the performance of Child’s i programs and capture key achievements, challenges and best practices to inform future programming. The evaluation will also identify key lessons learned, and the flexibility of Child’s i programs to adapt and respond to the changes in the Alternative Care landscape. The main thrust of the evaluation is to assess the extent to which the Child’s i programs have been successful in delivering the following outcomes:

(a) Demonstrating best practice in child protection and care reform to safely transition children into families and to repurpose orphanages at district level

(b) Establishing community-based mechanisms of preventing family separation via Community Development Networks (CDN)

(b) Family strengthening through reunifying children, ensuring their wellbeing and preventing family separation, Active Family Support, prevention & post placement support)

(c) Recruiting champions/influencers in community and government for deinstitutionalization

(d) Influencing public opinion in favour of family and community-based care

(e) Influencing institution owners (secular and faith-based) to change their model of care

Summary of program theory of change

Our theory of change reflects our thinking- that to address the situation of children currently institutionalised, we should not only look at the presenting symptoms, that is, their institutionalisation, but also look at the underlying causes that drive children into institutions. These drivers include conditions of poverty and vulnerability, domestic violence, stigma and discrimination against children with disability, among others.

These conditions lead to children being abandoned or separated from their families, ending up under institutional care. Our approach will therefore prioritise preventive work to stop unnecessary family separation and entry into residential care institutions.

Part of this effort will involve identification of children and their families at risk of separation and enabling them to access support from our volunteer and professional social workforce, and the social protection structures in place. If families at risk are identified early, then they can benefit from referral and improved access to needed services to prevent their separation.

The objectives of the evaluation;

Objective 1: To evaluate the entire Child’s i program in terms of effectiveness, relevance, efficiency, sustainability, scalability, replicability and impact, with a strong focus on assessing the results at the outcomes and program goal;

Objective 2: To analyse the information included in the end-line which will be based on the design established for the baseline review and the selected indicators;

Objective 3: To generate key lessons, identify promising practices for learning and propose potential to provide recommendations and best practices that may be used in current and future programming and strategy.

Objective 4: To provide recommendations and best practices that may be used in current and future programming and strategy design.

Scope of the evaluation

The evaluation scope shall cover the evaluation of all Child’s i programs delivered in Uganda and implemented between 2020-2022 in the districts of Kampala, Mpigi, Tororo, Wakiso, Jinja and Masaka.

The target groups of the evaluation include beneficiaries of Child’s i programs such as vulnerable children, youth with lived experience of care, foster carers, families within the districts of program implementation, local leaders such as area local council leaders, Community Development Officers, District Probation Officers, members of Alternative Care Panels, Well-being Committee members, community volunteers and like minded partners among others.

Issues that are out of scope of the evaluation: Should the consultant identify issues that are directly or indirectly related to the program being evaluated they may be considered if they add value or meaning to the subject matter.

Evaluation questions and design

Reflecting on the model/theory of change, the evaluation shall focus on answering the questions related to relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, sustainability and impact of the program on the intended beneficiaries.

Evaluation questions to be explored will include:

1. Have Child’ i programs been implemented according to the approved project work plans and project proposals? (efficiency and effectiveness)
2. Has the implementation of Child’s i programs met beneficiary needs and the required quality standards (relevance)
3. What results have been achieved throughout the duration of the program? (impact)
4. How do the results compare with an alternative intervention to achieve the same objective (relative effectiveness, impact)?
5. How can program implementation be done better in the future? (impact, efficiency)
6. Are the results obtained from program implementation sustainable (sustainability/impact).

Relevance

(i) How relevant has the program been to meeting the needs of the beneficiaries?

(ii) What is the feedback of the beneficiaries in relation to the program as far as meeting their needs is concerned?

Efficiency;

i) How efficient was the delivery of the program, not only in terms of expenditure, but also in terms of implementation of activities?

ii) What would the opportunities within the program have been to reach more beneficiaries with the available budget or to reduce costs while reaching at least the same number of beneficiaries without compromising quality?

Effectiveness;

i) To what extent have the planned objectives been reached, per indicator, disaggregated by gender and age.

ii) To what extent have the program activities contributed to the overall goal? Was the program effective in terms of preventing children from being institutionalised.

iii) What were the major factors influencing the achievement of the objectives of the program? What opportunities for collaboration have been utilised and how have these contributed to increased effectiveness? Or otherwise?

Impact:

• How has the implemented program improved the lives of beneficiaries of Child’s i Foundation? Are there any stories of change?
• How has the collaboration and networking among community networks and care givers led to reduction of child abuse, family separation and institutionalization of children?
• To what extent was the program able to adapt and provide appropriate response to context changes and emerging needs, and the priorities of beneficiaries?

Sustainability:·

• Will the changes caused by these programs continue beyond the life of existing projects?
• What mechanisms has Child’s i Foundation and partners put in place to sustain the key program Outputs and Outcomes?
• How has the program worked with local partners/structures to increase their capacity in a sustainable way?
• What motivations /mechanisms exist for the Child’s i Foundation network to continue playing these roles?
• What are the risks facing sustainability of program Outputs and Outcomes?
• To what extent did the program interventions contribute to build long-term community capacity in promoting DI and community-based child protection?

Evaluation Methodology

• The methodology will be developed by the consultant, as well as all relevant tools and presented in the inception report. The four evaluation objectives mentioned above should be assessed, including all research questions under each objective.
• The data collection should include the use of a number of approaches to gain a deeper understanding of the outcomes of the program, including:
• Desk review of background documents (project documents, project monitoring data, progress reports, field visit reports etc.
• Key informant interviews (e.g. Probation Officers, District community development officer, police, project staff members, i.e. Head of Programs (HOP), MEAL department, Country Director, Project Managers and some technical staff, so as to gather substantial evidence on the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact and sustainability of the program.
• Focus Group Discussions (Foster parents, Community development networks community volunteers, Young people with lived experience of care, supported beneficiaries), community members, District and sub county Local government structures etc. The FGDs will serve as input for the narrative anecdotal evidence.
• Data collection methods: An appropriate and strategic sampling method should be selected e.g. snowball sampling, purposeful random sampling or mixed purposeful sampling methods.
• Data analysis, this should be both qualitative and quantitative approaches using different statistical software i.e. STATA, SPSS, EXCEL, CSPro Power Bi for proper analysis and visualisation of data.

Work plan: It must detail a step‐ by‐ step work plan that specifies the methods the evaluation will use to collect the information needed to address evaluation criteria and answer the evaluation questions, analyse data, interpret the findings, and report the results.

Evaluation matrix:

An evaluation matrix which at least includes analysis dimensions, evaluation questions, indicators, means of verification, source, methodology and space for comment (to be filled after the data collection) to be filled.

Data sources:

Primary data; These data consists of the reported or observed values, beliefs, attitudes, opinions, behaviours, motivations and knowledge of stakeholders that should be obtained through questionnaires, surveys, semi-structured and or in-depth interviews, focused group discussions, key informant interviews, expert panel, direct observation and case studies.

*Secondary data;*These data should be collected from documentary evidence that has direct relevance for the purpose of the evaluation. The documentary information will be obtained from Child’s i Foundation monitoring database and the different documents and information generated from projects, including baseline, mid-term analysis and end-line.

Proposed data collection methods:

The data collection should include in-depth interviews with key informants as well as focused group discussions and other methods that can enrich the information that shall sustain the evaluation analysis. It should also include quantitative and qualitative surveys with beneficiaries of the organization’s projects. The number of districts/areas to be visited for data collection will be decided with the Evaluation Task Manager.

Data analysis process; An analysis matrix will be included to ensure the suitability of the process of data analysis to be developed by the consultant

Evaluation ethics:

The evaluation must be conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) Ethical guidelines for evaluation.

Deliverables:

The consultant is, expected to lead, accomplish and submit the following deliverables within the agreed timeframe and budget:

• An inception report, which will serve as an agreement between parties on how the evaluation will be conducted. Items to address:
• Understanding of the issues and questions raised in the ToR
• Data sources; how to assess the questions in the ToR
• Research methodology, including suggested sample and size
• Schedule of activities and travelling (timelines)
• Detailed budget
• A max 35-page draft and final evaluation report (in MS Office and PDF for final), excluding annexes and in English, incorporating evidence, learning, case studies, feedback received from CiF and partners and meets agreed quality standards. The report should be precise, must answer each evaluation objective and question and should at least contain the following (this can be discussed within the inception phase):

1. Cover page (title of the evaluation report, date, name of evaluator).
2. Contents table.
3. Executive summary (of no more than 2 pages outlining the key purpose of the evaluation, main points of analysis, key findings, conclusions and recommendations).
4. Introduction (outlining the background to the organisation; purpose and objectives of the evaluation; logic and assumptions of the evaluation; overview of programs.
5. Evaluation Methodology (evaluation plan; strengths and weaknesses of selected design and research methods; summary of problems and issues encountered and limitations of the evaluation).
6. Findings (overall results; assessment of accuracy of reported results; relevance; effectiveness; efficiency; sustainability; and impact).
7. Conclusions (summary of achievements against evaluation questions; overall impact and value for money of activities)
8. Lessons learnt (project level – management, design, implementation; policy level; sector level).
9. Recommendations.
10. Annexes (such as independent final evaluation terms of reference; evaluation research schedule; evaluation framework; data/information collection tools; list of people consulted; list of supporting documentary information; Child’s i Foundation’s management response to report findings and recommendations).

• Draft summary report (summarising key findings and recommendations, up to 4 pages) that can be used to disseminate findings, written in English, in clear and plain language and style suitable for all stakeholders.
• The raw data (all transcripts, quantitative data) must be handed over to Child’s i together with the evaluation report.
• Presentation of findings – to be discussed with Child’s i

Indicative time scale

In line with the purpose and methodology of the evaluation, the evaluator will deliver the following:

Deliverable Timeline

Inception report 14th October 2022.

Draft evaluation report 4th November 2022.

Final Evaluation report 11th November 2022

This consultancy is planned to be conducted in 25 working days from 10th October 2022 to 11th November 2022.

Qualifications and experience required

Child’s i Foundation is looking for a lead evaluator with a strong record in conducting evaluations as well as direct program interventions. The lead evaluator will need to carry respect and credibility within the development field and have an excellent knowledge of evaluation and monitoring in theory and in practice.

Individuals as well as research institutions/firms such as Universities are welcome to express their interests as consultants to perform the present assignment. To qualify, the consultant(s) should possess the following expertise and skills as a minimum:

• The lead consultant should be affiliated to a reputable University, should possess a minimum a PhD degree in social sciences or MA/MSc degree with additional five years of experience in evaluation or research undertaking;
• The lead consultant should have relevant experience in conducting social research for/with the Ministry of Gender Labour and Social Development, baseline evaluations, end line evaluations, reviewing and assessing child care reform programs and projects at national and decentralised levels for at least 5-10 years.
• At least five years of proven experience in conducting knowledge, attitudes, and practices quantitative research;
• Proven previous experience in research related to social protection issues.
• Familiarity with the Ugandan context and technical knowledge of strategic planning and programming of child care reform.
• Strong data analysis and visualisation skills.
• Consultant(s) who have knowledge and experience of conducting cost benefit analysis will have an added advantage.
• Strong written communication skills.
• Fluency in English (written and verbal) is a must.
• Consultants should have vast experience with issues of child care reform especially in the context of child protection policies, guidelines and response systems and structures.
• Good working knowledge of alternative care in local governments.
• They should also be conversant working within community settings both rural and urban.

The lead consultant must be aware of the current trends of the child protection sector, and knowledgeable of the current child protection and safeguarding strategies. He/she must have wide experience in social research; good communication and negotiation, analytical and report writing skills. The Lead Consultant will lead and manage the exercise and she/he will ultimately be responsible for drafting and presenting the final report.

Roles, responsibilities and expectations

The individual and/or team will be expected to sign and adhere to Child’s i Foundation’s Child Protection and Safeguarding Policies.

• All data, materials produced, and the final reports will be the property of Child’s i Foundation.
• The evaluation will be signed off once approved by the Country Director and CEO of Child’s i Foundation.
• 30% of the total fees will be paid upon signing the assignment contract, and 70% upon submission and ap the final evaluation report (on approval of Country Director and CEO)
• The assignment will be supervised by the Country Director with support from the Head of Programs at Child’s i Foundation.

How to apply

Interested applicants should submit a technical proposal (detailing how the evaluation exercise will be undertaken inclusive of consultant’s understanding of terms of reference, methodology, approaches, timeline) and financial proposal (including an itemised budget based upon activities/requirements of the consultant, work plan), references from previous clients, team members’ details and CVs. Clearly highlight the team leader whose minimum qualifications should be a Master’s Level qualification. Samples of assignments carried out in a similar field should also be provided.

This should reach Child’s i Foundation not later than 30th September 2022 at 5.00 pm Uganda time. Applications should be emailed to; applications@childsifoundation.org