end evaluation terms of referencehotjobs.bdjobs.com/jobs/worldvision/tor-131.pdf · dhaka. the...

Bogura ADP_ End Evaluation TOR (FY’18) 1

End Evaluation Terms of Reference

Bogura Area Development Programme

July 22, 2018

Program Number: B00070

End Evaluation: Transition phase (FY’17-FY’19)

World Vision Bangladesh

Published July, 2018

© Bogura ADP, World Vision Bangladesh


i. Table of Contents

II) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3

III) AFFIRMATION 4

IV) GLOSSARY 5

V) INTRODUCTION 6

1. EVALUATION SUMMARY 8

2.2 WORKING AREA 9

3. EVALUATION TARGET AUDIENCES 23

ADP LOCAL PROGRAMME PARTNERS: 23

4. EVALUATION TYPE 24

5. EVALUATION PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES 24

6. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY 26

7. LIMITATIONS 29

8. AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY 29

9. TEAM ADVISORS 31

10. LOGISTICS 31

11. PRODUCTS 32

12. BUDGET 32

14. LESSONS LEARNED 33


ii) Acknowledgements

It is a pleasure to produce Terms of Reference (TOR) for Bogura Area Development Program (ADP)

end evaluation with full support of Bogura ADP team and in light of LEAP2. This document will help

effectively conduct this evaluation, with involvement of the ADP team, WV Bangladesh Regional and

National staff, the different stakeholders of the ADP, World Vision South Korea and the consulting

firm who will be appointed to conduct the end Evaluation of Bogura ADP.

So, we want to extend our thanks to Bogura community members including leaders, partners,

government officials, children who actively participated in implementing planned interventions in the

last two years and interested to contribute the end evaluation process. Bogura ADP is grateful to

community for contributed to the development journey till today.

We are also grateful for the technical support of Deputy Director-MEAL, WVB, RDMEC, NBR and

ADP Manager-Bogura ADP. Besides, Monitoring and Evaluation officer of Bogura ADP associated the

closely engaged to prepare this document. Here, we would like to acknowledge for their

contribution, so thanks goes to all.

This TOR has been developed timely; that is, as a result of the good advice of Atul Mrong, Regional

Field Director, and Northern Bangladesh Region. So, we acknowledged to him for brilliant

contribution and guidance.

Finally we would like to thanks & gratitude to SO friends, especially Jungyoun Choi, Country

Program Manager, Bangladesh, World Vision South Korea for time to time guidance and support.

Advent Tripland

ADP Manager

Bogura ADP

Northern Bangladesh Region,



iii) Affirmation

Except as acknowledged by the references in this document to other authors and publications, the

TOR and references described herein consist of our own work undertaken to advance learning as

part of the requirements of World Vision‟s Design, Monitoring and Evaluation Learning System. The

ADP team collected data/information from TDD, BL 2017 and valid secondary sources. We do

hereby affirm that primary quantitative and qualitative information described in this document are

valid and authentic. So, this document must be used only with their consent. The contribution of the

other people in the coming up with this document is fully recognized.

Advent Tripland

ADP Manager

Bogura ADP

Northern Bangladesh Region,



iv) Glossary

ADP Area Development Program

CBO Community Based Organization

DIP Detailed Implementation Plan

CWB Child Well Being

CEDC Children Especially in Difficult Circumstance

DME Design Monitoring and Evaluation

EPI Expanded Programme on Immunization

FGD Focus Group Discussion

GO Government Organization

GOB Government of Bangladesh

GMP Growth Monitoring & Promotion

HH Household

IGA Income Generation Activities

JSC Junior School Certificate

KII Key Informant Interview

KM Kilo Meter

LEAP Learning through Evaluation with Accountability and Planning

MEAL Monitoring Evaluation accountability and Learning

M&E Monitoring & Evaluation

NGO Non-Government Organization

NO National Office

PSC Primary School Certificate

PQ Program Quality

RDMEC Regional Design, Monitoring and Evaluation Coordinator

TDD Transitional Design Documents

SO Support Office

SSC Secondary School Certificate

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Science

SWOT Strength Weakness Opportunity and Threat

TIN Tax Identification Number

TOR Terms of Reference

VAT Value Added Tax

WASH Water Sanitation & Hygiene

WVB World Vision Bangladesh


v) Introduction

Bogura ADP is going to steady progress towards the programme goal “improved well-being of

children in the family and community especially the most vulnerable’’. ADP first phase

considered from 2007-2011 and fiscal year 2012 considered as the year of re-design and RDD

implementation for 2nd phase (FY‟2013-2016). Now, Bogura ADP is implementing its Transitional

phase (2017-2019).Following the LEAP2 design guideline in the program area. Bogura ADP has

working align with Child Wellbeing carefully Enjoy good health, Educated for life, Love God and their

neighbours, children are cared for protected and participating. The Health project has more focus on

the first child well-being aspiration (Enjoy good health); the Through Sponsorship Mgt. project

focusing on the second and third aspiration (Educated for life & children love God and their

neighbours); the Economic projects contributing all four aspiration and outcomes.

Bogura is located in northern part of Bangladesh. Bogura Area Development Program is

concentrated within Bogura Sadar and Shajanpur Upazila. The working area situated in Bogura sub

district (Sadar Upzila) is under Bogura District. It is about 225 KM North West of the capital,

Dhaka. The context of target area is a mixture of urban and rural location. Bogura ADP covers

population living in Rajapur, Subgram, Madla and Bogura Municipality areas of Bogura. It comprises of

12 administrative wards of Bogura Municipality (urban) and 60 villages of three Unions namely

Rajapur, Shabgram (under Bogura Sadar Upazila) and Madla(under Shajahanpur Upazila).

In the TDD, there considered landscape and findings of the base line 2017 attention are as follows:

As per BL survey 2017 results (among ADP working villages)-

5.22% households are female headed and the rest 88.2% are male headed households. It was

found that 50.61% are male, 49.36% are female and 0.3% transgender. Average household size is

4.3. Among the population there is 14.23% under five children, 5-11 years is 12.08%, 12-18 years

is 14.08% and rest of is adults.

The Major primary occupational status of households members are agriculture (2.15%) who have

own land/ mortgaged/borrowed or rented/Bargha land, daily labor 4.88% (agricultural and non-

agricultural), Rickshaw/Van/ puller 2.22%, driver of motor vehicle 2.78%,

Government/Nongovernment employee 7.43%, Petty traders 6.72%, live-stock rearing 1.46%,

Student 26.03%, House wife 26.65%, 15.92% (children below 6 years is 15.28% and above sixty

years is 0.64%) and rest of others is involved with some sorts of occupations.

It is good that 6.38% children of age 3-5 years are in Pre-primary /Play/Nursery/ KG/ECCD for

school readiness. Among the children of age 6-18 years 97.06% are going to school/continuing

education (boys 96.13% and girls 98.05%) and school dropout is 2.94% (boys 3.87% and girls

1.85%)

Among children aged <5 years, stunting is 11.1% (where is severe stunting 4.1%). stunting is

35.7% (where is sever stunting 15.3) and underweight is 23.8% (where sever underweight is

6.4%).

96.5% (658 women out of 682) received ANC during pregnancy period ANC while only four or

more times is 46.3% and 3.5 have no visit. Among women (with under two years child), 28.2%

delivered her child in her own home, Upazila Health Complex is 4.1%, Matri Sadan is 15.8%,

NGOs Health Center is 1.5%, private clinic/hospital is 33.7%, Medical college and hospital is

11.7%, Community clinic/Union Health Complex is 2.1% and others is 2.9%.

83.8% HHs using sanitary/slab latrine while 9.8% using slab latrine without water sil, 5.7% pit

latrine, 0.4% open/bush and 0.3% others. Regarding hygienic latrine using by HHs (as per

observation) is 85.1%. Also 88.9% HHs have own latrine.


92.7% households have food depict while high food depict in Ashar (18.6%) & Srabon (18.9%),

Kartick (9.1%) and Chaitra (11.4%) and Baishak (10.3%) and 7.3% no food depict round the year.

There shared that the major causes of food deficit are no cultivation land (42.3%) and work

deficiency month 38.6%). The survey data revealed that the maximum HHs ma taking Loan from

Bank/NGO/Others (63.8%), Loan from relatives (25.5%) and Sold livestock (1.3%).

95.2% HHs have regular income while 22.6% HHs have secondary sources of income. Annual

average net income per family is BDT 148276.20 (monthly 12356.35), while annual average grows

income per family is BDT 179471.15 (monthly BDT 14955.93).There found that 27.3% HHs are

family members involved in small business or entrepreneurship, where only 01 members is

maximum in 95% family. Among the family members involved in IGA (23.7%), the major types of

IGAs are sewing (16%), handicraft (9%), Duck/Poultry rearing (28%), Cow/goat rearing (19.2%).

It was found only 11.8% family‟s female members got training on IGAs.

68.05% children have birth registration certificate, 3.83% is under process and 28.12% children

have no birth certificate as yet. 74.1% children shared that they have participated in different

events of family. Regarding sponsorship activities, 95.7% of the households know about the

program. Among the parents of RC & Non-RC families, 38% highly satisfied where 61% are

satisfied sponsorship program.


1. Evaluation Summary

Programme/Project: Bogura Area Development Program

Programme Phase: Transition Phase 3rd Phase (FY 2017-2019)

Evaluation Type: Summative evaluation (3rd phase evaluation).

Evaluation Purpose:

This evaluation investigates the entire impact, the chain of efficiency,

consistency, effectiveness and impact towards CWBA and sustainability.

However, the evaluation will explore some key issues as like

1. What are the most important changes over the life of the programme,

how do these contribute to improved child well-being?

2) Who are the actors who have contributed and what have they

contributed?

3) What is the community and partner capacity to sustain any important

changes, and what are the threats to sustainability?

4) What was WV‟s contribution to each of the important changes?

5) To identify any emerging common vision or priorities that is owned by the

wider community.

6) To identify how people improved their livelihoods through capacity

building and empowering

7) To identify the partnership level with stakeholder and communities

towards CWBO and program ownership, sustainability.

Methodology:

An appropriate mix of both quantitative and qualitative methods will be

employed during primary data collection.

Besides The following should be addressed:

• What disaggregation requirements are there (sex, ethnic group, income

level, etc.)?

• How will the data be analyzed (e.g., frameworks, what software, what

process)?

• Who will “own” the raw data?

• How will the communities members (girls, woman, boys, and men),

resource people, and other interested individuals and groups be included in

the data collection and analysis (including formulation of implications and

recommendations), and how will the findings and methods will follow in this

evaluation process:

Quantitative

30 cluster methodology will be followed and sample size will be

Quantitative Survey 930 HHs as Sample considering multiple indicators

Qualitative:

Focus Group Discussion

Key Informant Interview

Case Study

SWOT Analysis

Spider Diagram tool with children (with boys & girls separately)

„H‟ tool with children (boys and girls)

Change Tree Tool.

Evaluation Start and

end dates: August to October, 2018

Anticipated

Evaluation Report

release date:

By October, 2018


2. Description of Programme /Context of the Programme being evaluated

2.1: Evaluation context: A description of the local context of the program area has been provided

in the program design document and there have been no major changes ever since. In the light of

LEAP2, Bogura ADP prepared its TDD for its 3rd phase Transitional phase. The end evaluation will

cover the evidence base life time impact in the community, measure quantitative progress and child

well-being aspects. The sustainability issues will be more focus in the evaluation including

partners/stakeholders functioning towards sustainability. Bogura ADP transition phase is a

continuation of the second phase design which reduced the number of projects from 4 components

and now focused only to 3 projects that will consolidate all previous efforts to sustain program gains.

Name or Project Project Goal Target beneficiaries current

year (by head) Total

Program Goal Improved well-being of children in the family and community especially the most

vulnerable.

Health Project Sustained wellbeing of children

ensuring maternal & child health &

nutrition.

# Male: 756, # Female: 1792,

# Boys: 1370 & # of Girls:

1890

5808

Economic

Development

Project

Sustain economic development and

creating employment opportunities for

self-reliant through strengthening local

partnership.

# Male: 928, # Female: 2400,

# Boys: 570, & # of Girls: 690 4588

Sponsorship

Management

Project

Quality Sponsorship program

operationalized for the protection and

transformation of children, families,

communities and sponsors

# Male: 540 # Female: 1212, #

Boys: 1852 & # of Girls: 2242 5846

Programme

Annual Budget

(Included PNS)

US$: Total: 1700723

FY 2017 US$: 640723

FY-2018 US$: 560000

FY-2019 US$: 400000

2.2 Working area

The programme area population covers living in 03 unions, specifically Rajapur, Subgram, Madla and

01 municipality i.e. Bogura pourashava. During last phases the program area comprised of 72 villages

/Mahallah of three Unions and one Municipality area. But the transition of the programme is

concentrated 45 villages /Mahallah of three Unions and one Municipality area.

Bogra ADP Village & Population information.xlsx

2.4 ADP programme goal, outcomes, sustainability drivers, CWB Indicators, well-being

indicator for transition strategy and sponsorship evaluation issues:

The programme and project goal and outcome level indicators, sustainability and CWB, well-being

indicators as well as sponsorship program issues will be considered during this end evaluation. The

indicator with definition of programme outcome, projects Goal Project Outcome, CWB Indicators,

well-being indicator for transition strategy and sponsorship in evaluation are indicated below:


i) Programme Outcome, Project Goal, and Project Outcome:

Programme Goal: Improved well-being of children in the family and community especially the most vulnerable

Goal/Outcome Indicators Indicator Definition Data Collection

Methodology

Remarks

Programme

Outcome/Project

Goal 01:

Sustained wellbeing

of children ensuring

maternal & child

health & nutrition.

Prevalence of underweight in

children under five years of age

Prevalence of underweight in

children under five years of age

% of wasting (MUAC) in children

under five years of age

Proportion of women who gave

birth to their youngest child at a

health facility

Percent of children aged 0-59 months whose height-

for-age is below minus two standard deviations from

the median (or less than two standard deviations

below the median) as determined by the WHO Child

Growth Standards.

Percent of children aged 0-59 months whose weight

for age is less than minus two standard deviations

from the median (WAZ) for the international

reference population ages 0–59 months.


for height is less than minus two standard deviations

from the median (WHZ) for the international

reference population ages 0–59 months.

Percent of mothers of children aged 0–23 months

who were attended to by a skilled birth attendant at

latest delivery, in a maternity ward or delivery room

Caregiver Survey,

KII, FGD



Methodology

Remarks

Programme

Outcome/Project

Goal 02:

Sustain economic

development and

creating

employment

opportunities for

self-reliant through

strengthening local

partnership.

% of households (From - to -)

where one or more adults are

earning an income

Proportion of communities

members who are entrepreneurs

% of households feel more

confident in dealing with disaster

risks and climate change' effects

# and % of partners with

appropriate capacity to make

sustained contributions to child

well-being

Percent of households where at least one adult is

earning a consistent income, to meet household

needs, through sale/exchange of own produce, labour

(self-employed) or wage employment (working for

someone else).

Entrepreneurs: who has unit business that are

generating profit

Households feel more confident in dealing with

disaster risks and climate change' effects

Partners(CBOs and other community based local

groups, organization) with appropriate capacity to

make sustained contributions to child well-being

Caregiver Survey,

checklist/ FGD

Programme

Outcome/Project

Goal 03:

Quality

Sponsorship

program

operationalized for

the protection and

transformation of

children, families,

communities and

sponsors

Percentage of communities

demonstrates that they are

empowered through sponsorship

operations.

Proportion of children able to

voice their concerns and

participate in decision making

Proportion of children with

continued educational

opportunity

Proportion of communities

where children/youth are able to

share their views and be listened

to by community or district

government leadership

Communities demonstrate that they are empowered

through sponsorship operations.

% of children aged 0-18 years enjoy positive

relationships with peers, family and community

member.

% of children able to continue one's study higher

than grade 9 both in formal and non-formal

education

Communities where children/youth are able to share

their views and be listened to by community or

district government leadership

Caregiver Survey,

KII, FGD



Methodology

Remarks

Health Project

Outcome1.1:

Promote health

care services by

improving quality

of health care

providing system

Proportion of health facilities

providing basic and/or

comprehensive Emergency

Obstetric Care (EmOC)

Proportion of mothers who

report that they had four or

more antenatal visits while they

were pregnant with their

youngest child

Percent of health facilities providing basic and/or

comprehensive Emergency Obstetric Care meet

minimum supply standards: availability/coverage,

geographical distribution, functionality, affordability,

quality of care and essential commodities


who report that they attended four or more

antenatal visits before the birth of their youngest

child

Caregiver Survey,

KII, FGD

Outcome1.2:

Improved essential

Nutrition services

for children,

Pregnant women &

lactating mothers

% of PD/Hearth children

graduated from PD/Hearth

program at 3 months

Proportion of women who

increased food consumption

during most recent pregnancy


for age is less than minus two standard deviations

from the median (WAZ) for the international

reference population


who report increasing the number of meals or snacks

during pregnancy

Caregiver Survey,

KII, FGD

Outcome 1.3:

Improved healthy &

safer environment

by ensuring waste

management &

WASH initiatives.

Proportion of households that

have effective options for solid

waste treatment and/or disposal

Proportion of adolescents with

access to improved sanitation

facilities at school

Proportion of households using

improved sanitation facilities (for

defecation)

% of household doing solid waste separation

according to the regulation that is to separate waste

based on its organic and nonorganic nature, located

in the proper places.

Percent of school-going adolescents aged 12-18 years

using an improved sanitation facility at their school,

typically a latrine or toilet for defecation.

% of household using improved sanitation facilities

Caregiver Survey,

Proportion of households accessing

clean water Proportion of households accessing clean water

Caregiver Survey,

Proportion of children who

completed compulsory vaccination

% of children who completed compulsory vaccination

before their 1st birthday as per Govt. EPI schedule (It

will measure among 12-23 months child)

Caregiver Survey,



Methodology

Remarks

% of U5 child mortality U5 mortality

Valid Secondary

sources

% of Maternal Mortality Maternal Mortality

Valid Secondary

sources

Economic Development Project

Outcome 2.1:

Enhance capacity

of community

based

organizations to be

self-supporting in

collaboration with

GO (i.e.

Cooperative

Department, social

welfare,

Department of

Women and

Children Affairs,

Department of

Youth

Development),

NGOs & CBOs

% increase level of organizational

capacity of community

structures(CBOs)

% of women in leadership

positions in Community Based

organizations

Community structures consider as CBO's, Producer

Groups, Disable Person's Organization (DPO),

Business Forums etc. increase their capacity

according CBO Index. It's included measures through

Mandate, Structure, Decision Making, Operation,

Planning, Act

The percentage of women holding leadership

positions in CBO's. This includes main office bearer

positions such as Chairperson, Secretary & treasurer

in which women are given the opportunity.

Healthy partnering relationships means formal and

informal MoU will take place with CBOs, other

community groups and GO/NGO organization

Caregiver Survey,

check list, KII, FGD



Methodology

Remarks

Outcome 2.2:

Increase household

income through

skill development

of farm and non-

farm producers and

linkage with

markets and

service providers

Percent of increase in household

income (households articulate

that their household incomes at

increased from BDT. 11812 to

BDT. 15000 by the intervention

of the project)

Proportion of women engaged in

market led IGAs (engaged in

viable product marketing )

Proportion of groups whose

income increases as the result of

the practice of marketing

enhancement approach.

% of households will report their income was

increased comparing to the past 12 months through

project intervention. Source of income might from

crop production, livestock raising, non-farm jobs and

others.

Percent of women engaged in market led income

generating activities

% of groups whose income increases as the result of

the practice of marketing enhancement approach.

Caregiver Survey,

Outcome 2.3:

Increased

community

resilience through

disaster risk

reduction and

climate change

adaptation

Proportion of community

members using disaster risk

mitigation and climate change

adaptation skills

Proportion of disaster affected

households that were able to

recover from a disaster with

minimum

external assistance

% of community able to respond to their basic

needs without external support

Minimal assistance = external assistance that the

household received for it to recover from a disaster.

Caregiver Survey,

Sponsorship Management Project



Methodology

Remarks

Outcome 3.1:

Established

effective

community led

child protection

mechanism for

ensuring child

rights & reducing

all forms of

violence against

children

Proportion of partners who

advocate for rights of children

Proportion of child protection

and advocacy (CPA) groups

effective and functioning

Communities can identify,

understand and act on issues of

injustice affecting the well-being

of children and progressive

fulfillment of their rights

Proportion of partners who advocate for rights of

children

% of child protection and advocacy groups mobilized

at the village level, with a core group of 10-15

concerned individuals. It is a key informal element of

the child protection system as "circle of care".

Communities can identify, understand and act on

issues of injustice affecting the well-being of children

and progressive fulfillment of their rights

Caregiver Survey,

KII, FGD

Outcome 3.2:

Effective

sponsorship

management &

system functional

Proportion of community people

satisfied with sponsorship

program

Proportion of correspondence

done as per Customer Relation

Service standard.

Percent of community people satisfied with

sponsorship program

Percent of correspondence done as per CRS

standard.

Caregiver Survey,

FGD

Outcome 3.3:

Empowered

children through

community/

educational

institution led life

skills and

leadership

development

programme

Proportion of adolescents who

develop and demonstrate the

application of essential life skills

to lead a productive and fulfilling

life

Empowered children through community/

educational institution led life skills and leadership

development programme

Caregiver Survey,



Methodology

Remarks

Outcome 3.4:

Mainstreamed drop

out and working

children into

education in

collaboration with

local educational

institutes.

Proportion of out of school

children attending a structured

learning activity

Out-of-school means, children who never enrolled in

school or dropped out from school. Children who

never enrolled in school and dropped out from

school are the unit of measurement of this indicator.

(structure learning means minimum 9 months

education

Caregiver Survey,

Education portion

% literacy rate of population

age 7 and above increase from

existing…. %

% School dropout rate

decrease from existing…. %

% increase of students who

pass at least with grade B in

public examinations

Literacy: Means children can read with comprehension at

functional levels by the age when children are expected to

have completed a basic education programme.

School dropout: Means school aged children admitted in

school but stop their study due to various reasons

Grade B means: assisted children/students obtaining at least

50-59 marks in public exam (PSC, JSC & SSC)

Caregiver Survey,

% reduced drop out children at

primary and secondary levels

% increased proportion of

children completed primary

(PSC) and secondary (JSC &

SSC) levels obtaining at least B

grade

Percent of school aged children, who were enrolled in

school but during the last 12 months, dropped out and are

no longer attending.

Obtaining at least B grade: assisted children/students

obtaining at least 50-59 marks in public exam (PSC, JSC &

SSC).

Caregiver Survey,

% increase proportion of out

of school children in main

streaming of education

% increase self-employment for

out of school children

Mainstreaming means out of school children (CEDC) are

getting opportunity to study formal education

Self-employment means out of school children are involve

in economic opportunity after completion of their

vocational training

Caregiver Survey,



Methodology

Remarks

# of primary schools in

targeted area

Govt. data

Child Protection & Women empowerment

Proportion adolescents who report

that their views are soughed

incorporated into the decision making

of local government

# of women participated in vocational

training

Project records

Proportion of women who feel that

their status in household and

community has been escalated

Care giver survey

% of early marriage in the targeted

area

Care giver survey

# of children and youth leaders

equipped with skills to manage

children club and youth activities

Children‟s Forum will play active role towards child

rights and protection in the target villages.

Care giver survey

Sustainability indicator (to be measured):Sustainability indicator.zip


Also be considered and include the following indicators for measuring sustainability. Working together Strongly Strongly Don’t

Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Know

12.1 This community is able to tackle the most difficult situations because we have the same goals.

1 2 3 4 88

12.3 When our community undertakes activities to improve child well-being, I know that those assigned the

task will work hard until it is completed successfully.

1 2 3 4 88

12.4 People in this community work well together to improve the well-being of all children, not just those

within their own family

1 2 3 4 88

12.5 The activities that are being implemented to improve the well-being of children are the most relevant and

important activities

1 2 3 4 88

HDM06. How many of the children in the household, aged 0-18 years, are registered for sponsorship

by World Vision?

How many are girls? How many are boys?

M F

_____ ______

HDM07. Are you or anyone in your household, including children, involved in a World Vision project?

Yes = 1 No = 0 DK = 88

Special note:

Trends of CWB status disaggregated by RC/Non-RC, Beneficiaries/non-beneficiaries Would be included national benchmark or desired threshold for indicator. Raw data: Share all the raw data with the final evaluation report for our further analysis. Follow the guideline (there are two tabs in the excel file for key points and trends) before you go to the next stage and share this with the selected

external firm.

Evaluation Guideline for NO_20180702.xlsx:

Evaluation_Guideline_for NO_20180702.xlsx

Considered Change tree tools also:

Tree of Change_Note taking template_.docx

Tree of Change_SandT_.docx


ii) Child Well-Being Indicator:

This evaluation would be the measures an overall sense of well-being. This target reflects all of the

child well-being aspiration and it is recommended that both qualitative and quantitative methods be

used to measure it. The below attached document is for measuring CWB Outcome Level indicators

to be measured in this evaluation.

CWBO-indicators.docx

iii) Sustainability (Prior Concern) as per WV transition guideline:

This evaluation will be measured the sustainability issues as a prior concern. World Vision defines

sustainability as „the ability to maintain and improve upon the outcomes and goals achieved with

external support after that support has ended‟. World Vision has identified five key Drivers of

Sustainability which are listed below. So, the evaluation will be identified the following 05 key

sustainability issues (as per definition):

1. Local ownership: The programme vision and priorities are developed with and owned by the

community and local partners after an in-depth shared exploration of child well-being in their own

context. There are clear plans for how local actors will continue mutually accountable dialogue and

action on child well-being priorities after WV‟s engagement has ended

2. Partnering: Shared projects (including those linked to Technical Programme) are developed and

implemented by multi-stakeholder and cross sector working groups. Local groups and organizations

are developing and using the skills to work effectively together for child well-being, balancing their

priorities and interests. Governments, regulators, traditional structures the media and the private

sector are engaged and play a role. Churches and other faith-based organizations are actively

engaged, building on their sustainable presence and influence with their congregations and wider

communities.

3. Transformed relationships: God calls WV and the Church into a ministry of reconciliation

which is visible in transformed relationships. Men, women, girls and boys care for each other, for

their community, for their environment, and the wider world. Relationships within households and

communities are defined by trust, equitable gender relations, conflict prevention and resolution,

voluntary sharing of time and resources, and the valuing and protecting of all children, especially the

most vulnerable.

4. Local and national advocacy: On-going activities by citizens and local groups to hold

government service providers accountable for the quality and quantity of services delivered for the

community and children against plans and policies, based on regular assessments. Activities also focus

on building collaborative dialogue between communities and decision makers at the local and national

level, to press for wider systemic changes with impacts and reach beyond the borders of our

programme. National engagement will often be undertaken in collaboration with coalition partners

who share our objectives.

5. Household & Family Resilience: Families and households develop resilience to changing shocks

and stresses. They can prevent, prepare for, mitigate and recover from disasters, adapt to external

factors and transform their wellbeing on a pathway of growth and progress out of poverty.

iv) Others Indicator (according to WVB approved guideline on transition):

According to WVB Program transition Strategy, the evaluation also will consider to measure well-

being indicators in order to make an informed decision to transition process, World Vision

Bangladesh understands that there must be evidence of change as exemplified in achievement at the

programme level of (a) well-being indicators; and (b) community capacity indicators – both of which

will be informed by staff and community discernment and reflection.


Mandatory

1. % decrease underweight (% change over three years, five years, ten years of project

implementation)

2. % increase of literacy rate from existing baseline

3. % of households that have at least one reliable income source (Reliable income source definition

should be clear because in our country context there are one more income source that is not

reliable like day labour, rickshaw puller, agriculture, etc. but most of the people involved with those

occupation)

Optional:

4. % of diarrhea cases managed by the community

5. % of EPI Coverage

6. % of households that have access to safe water and sanitation

7. % increase of primary education completion

8. % of households having knowledge on coping or disaster management strategies

9. % of children who enjoy their rights in the community

10. Harmonious relationship / inter faith relationship among the communities

Also for community capacity standards-

Mandatory

1. Increased community participation and leadership for managing child-wellbeing

2. Institutions undertake programs independently (Child Forum, WASH and other community level

groups / committees).

Optional:

3. Community based child protection systems are functioning independently

4. CBOs monitor and evaluate their own development program by themselves

5. Skills and resources of the community level groups to engage in various social issues (i.e. early

marriage, dowry systems, etc.)

6. Increased number of social and inter-organizations networks

7. Improved sense of community and community members‟ care (caring community for each other,

social harmony, etc.)

8. Household-level skills and capacity increased for solid income sources

9. Targeted households are successfully inserted into a value chain to maintain their livelihood.

10. ADP CBOs have their own economic development plan and are integrated with household level

economic development plans.

11. Community capacity / resilience for recovering from disaster

12. Harmonious inter faith relationships in the community

Staff and community reflection questions follow and are used during data analysis of the well-being

indicators and community capacity standards to ascertain if further WV involvement in a community

would make any further significant positive difference

Community Capacity Standards

1. Increased community participation and leadership for managing child-wellbeing

2. Institutions undertake programs independently (Child Forum, WASH and other community level

groups / committees).

3. Community based child protection systems are functioning independently

4. CBOs monitor and evaluate their own development program by themselves

5. Skills and resources of the community level groups to engage in various social issues (i.e. early

marriage, dowry systems, etc.)

6. Increased number of social and inter-organizations networks

7. Improved sense of community and community members‟ care (caring community for each other,

social harmony, etc.)

8. Household-level skills and capacity increased for solid income sources


9. Targeted households are successfully inserted into a value chain to maintain their livelihood.

10. ADP CBOs have their own economic development plan and are integrated with household level

economic development plans.

11. Community capacity / resilience for recovering from disaster

12. Harmonious inter faith relationships in the community

Staff and Community Discernment

These questions below are illustrative critical thinking questions that may be asked as the ADP staff

and community review data from the above indicators to assess if the ADP should responsibly exit

the community or if WV continued presence for a determined period of time will make a significant

further difference.

1. Does the community have any new vision from when the ADP begun?

2. What types of critical challenges does the community now have?

3. What is the type and quality of the commitment of community stakeholders?

4. Does a referral system exist with GO/NGO and others?

5. What is the nature and quality of community caring?

6. In what ways does the community recognize the love of GOD/CREATOR?

7. What is the level of community sensitivity regarding the child well-being aspirations?

8. What is the ADP staff‟s satisfaction with the result? What is the community‟s satisfaction?

9. If it is ascertained that WV presence should be extended, should the ADP continue with a

different funding stream (e.g. non-sponsorship)?

v) Sponsorship in Evaluation

The consulting firm will have to see the impact of sponsorship program with keen interest that has

created over the life of the children especially registered children. In the evaluation, sponsorship

considerations can provide critical information about the effectiveness and efficiency within the

program. Evaluations of sponsorship funded programs need to include the following themes:

1. Program contribution to improved well-being of children, including Registered

Children

How has the program contributed to the improved well-being of children, including

registered children?

2. Sponsorship contribution to empowerment of the community

How has sponsorship contributed to community capacity to care for and protect

children?

3. Sponsorship communication processes promote CWB

How have the sponsorship processes like APRs, ILs etc. been fun and meaningful for

children?

4. Participation and ownership of the community

To what extent the communities own the sponsorship process?

How engaged have families, volunteers or partners been in participating sponsorship?

6. Efficiency of sponsorship practices

In the evaluation special attention will be given to see whether Child Selection was done properly or

not. In this regard following aspects will have to be focused.

How are children selected for sponsorship? How was the criteria established? How is the

community engaged in child selection? What is WV‟s role?

Child participation

How are children involved in programming? What is the extent of child participation in

sponsorship activities?


Community led monitoring:

It is important to see how community is being monitored the children. This continuum is for mapping

existing community mechanisms for monitoring children (not just sponsorship monitoring).

What community mechanisms are in place to monitor and support the well-being of all

children, such as functioning school committees, health, and child protection...? In

considering SMPS and the evaluation findings, are there significant gaps in community

mechanisms? How effectively are they functioning in identifying and responding to

children in need, especially the most vulnerable? How well are they networked to

monitor the overall picture of child well-being, coordinate responses and strengthen

community and government mechanisms?

Sponsorship Monitoring Responsibility

How is the sponsorship monitoring process managed? Who is the primary goal owners

for child monitoring and how is the monitoring responsibility shared?

Sponsorship Monitoring Data Utilization

Who uses the monitoring data? Who are the primary goal owners and how is the data

from monitoring shared and used?

Sponsorship Monitoring Follow-up

Who is responsible for the follow-up of issues identified during monitoring? How is the

responsibility shared? Is the follow-up consistent?

Sponsorship Activities

How well is sponsorship activities integrated into programming? Is there any evidence

that this contributes towards CWBO? Are the activities fun and meaningful to the

children?

Sponsor Communication

How is the sponsor communication handled? How WVB Regional Office the children

participate in these processes? Are the activities fun and meaningful to the children?

Sponsorship Understanding and Engagement

How is the community engaged in sponsorship processes?

Integration

To what extent are sponsorship processes integrated into programming? How well is

sponsorship integrated in program assessment, design, implementation, monitoring and

evaluation and staff roles?

2.4 Major Interventions of different projects

Health Project:

Nutrition program

PD Hearth program

WASH Program

Solid WASH Mgt. Program

MCH Program

Economic Development Project:

Agriculture farming of poor HH

Advocacy program with Govt. Official Dept.

Value chain & Entrepreneur Development

Capacity building of CBOs

Disaster awareness & climate change adaptation


Sponsorship Mgt. Project:

Advocacy on child rights & protection

Children leadership development

Children monitoring & regular data management

ECCD

CEDC program

LSBE program

2.6 Project wise target direct beneficiaries

Beneficiary Health Economic Sponsorship Total

Male 756 928 540 2224

Female 1792 2400 1212 5404

Boys 1370 570 1852 3792

Girl 1890 690 2242 4822

Total 5808 4588 5846 16242

3. Evaluation Target Audiences (i.e. for whom is the evaluation intended?)

The evaluation shall be carried out learning across the World Vision Partnership, among project

stakeholders and to provide accountability to the donors and the beneficiary community on project

accomplishment as well as to fulfil World Vision‟s design, monitoring and evaluation framework for

programming. The target audiences are as mentioned in table below.

ADP Local Programme partners:

To enable sustainable development, the ADP selected some vulnerable groups such as ultra-poor,

poor, marginalized people, minorities and people living with disabilities: they are our development

partners. There are some local institutions also considered as program partners.

CBOs: There are 21 community based organization with about 6000 members.

Committee members: The committees‟ are i.e. PD Hearth, WASH, SMC CEDC, DMC, CMC,

Social movement committees, etc. playing their role and responsibility as local partners.

Local Government: Local government (Union Parishad) and Municipality provide technical support

on agriculture related information; facilitate training on livestock/ poultry, health, and immunization.

Local NGOs: A good working relationship between Bogura ADP and local NGOs exists. We

exchanged views for better health, education, economic development and sponsorship services

through ensuring their participation in different gatherings/events and awareness programmers of the

ADP.

School Management Committees (SMCs): The ADP sensitizes to SMCs and teachers to the

importance of education and supports them in the quality and friendly school environment.

Government Sector: Bogura Upazila administration extends support through different

government departments like health, education, agriculture, cooperatives, LGED, women affairs,

social welfare to ADP. The Upazila health complex contributes for immunization, training, day

observation, coordination meetings and advises on health issues. Local Hospitals, clinics provided

necessary health services to community people, including children. The Upazila education

department contributes to ensure quality education. It provides technical, moral and material


supports to educational institutions. The Govt. agriculture sector plays a vital role to ensure quality

seeds and other new technological support to farmers. The Govt. cooperatives department will

support CBO with different trainings and advice to be formed as good cooperatives for their

empowerment.

Clubs and Societies: The community clubs and societies work for local community development.

They help the ADP through participation in planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation.

Child Forums: The Child Forums are children‟s organizations led by themselves. They are involved

in ADP planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. They will be at the forefront of child

leadership development and raising children‟s voices on child rights and protection.

Local churches/faith based organizations: The local churches lead schools, hostels and religious

activities. They will take part in planning, implementation and monitoring of spiritual and moral

aspects.

4. Evaluation Type

The ADP is in its 3rd phase Transition Phase which covers year 2017 to 2019. The evaluation will

mainly focus on assessing progress made towards achievement of results at outcome and goal levels.

Based on the results and findings of the evaluation, the ADP, WVB management and WV South

Korea will take guide for further transition of the program to address the child well-being through

sustainable development

The ADP progress has been regularly reported to WV South Korea and WVB management following

LEAP guidelines. But behavioural changes, practical impact and other long term effects need to be

measured to assess the sustainability of implemented interventions. This will also encourage donors,

WV South Korea, target communities, ADP staff and WVB management to continue development

efforts for the target community.

The end evaluation should provide evidence-based information that is credible, reliable and useful,

enabling the timely incorporation of findings, recommendations and lessons learned into decision-

making processes towards program/projects.

5. Evaluation Purpose and Objectives

The evaluation purpose is to measure the impact of the ADP Projects implemented on the wellbeing

of children, their families and communities by assessing progress towards achieving Programme

objectives (Goal & outcomes). This evaluation investigates the entire impact, the chain of efficiency,

consistency, effectiveness and impact towards CWBA. However, the evaluation will explore some

key issues as like

The Specific objectives of the evaluation are as bellow;

1. What are the most important changes over the life of the programme, how do these contribute to

improved child well-being?

2) Who are the actors who have contributed and what have they contributed?

3) What is the community and partner capacity to sustain any important changes, and what are the

threats to sustainability?

4) What was WV‟s contribution to each of the important changes?

5) To identify any emerging common vision or priorities that is owned by the wider community.

6) To identify how people improved their livelihoods through capacity building and empowering

7) To identify the partnership level with stakeholder and communities towards CWBO and program

ownership, sustainability.


The key evaluation questions pertain to project/programme implementation. Key areas

to evaluate include:

What progress have we made towards objectives?

How are intervention activities related to progress towards objectives? (Use of outcome-mapping)

How relevant is our project/program in addressing our target population‟s needs?

What internal and external factors may be affecting the ADP‟s progress?

How can we improve project/programme strategies and interventions?

How active is civil society and civic participation?

To know the as follows:

Effectiveness

Did WV and/or partners implement the project/program as planned and if not, why not?

Did a particular project/program cause a particular change in the children‟s lives and/or

their families and communities? How significant was this change and how did it happen?

What component(s) and element(s) of the project/program were responsible for the

change?

If your project/program tried a new methodology/approach, what was the result? What

lessons were learned and what recommendations made?

On what basis were participants (children and adults) selected?

How well did the program integrate ministry lines? How did that affect outcomes?

What are the project/program‟s unintended effects and how did they influence the

outcomes?

Relevance

Was the project/program appropriate for the context where it was implemented?

To what extent has it taken into account children‟s needs according to age, gender,

particularly the most vulnerable children? How has the project/program adapted to meet

those different needs?

How has the project/program ensured that children‟s voices are heard and reflected, both

in project activities and more broadly, in our interaction with governments and other

stakeholders?

Were the activities and outputs of the project/program consistent with the intended

impacts and effects?

Sustainability

Will the changes caused by the project/program continue beyond the life of the program?

Has the project/program resulted in any leveraging of our knowledge and interventions to

ensure sustainable impact for children at scale?

How has the project/program worked with local partners to increase their capacity in a

sustainable way?

Impact

What has happened to children, their families and communities as a result of the

project/program? What real difference has the project/program made to the sustained

well-being of children?

How many people were affected by the project/program?

Coverage and Non-discrimination

Have all target groups been reached?

Have there been any constraints in terms of access to the services/goods provided and/or

activities conducted through the project/program?

Has our work resulted in more equitable and non-discriminatory projects/programs and/or

policies for children and young people at a local, national and regional levels, particularly for

boys, girls and disabled children?

Accountability to beneficiaries

Are communities informed of World Vision activities and plans, including future ones?

Are there mechanisms in place for community members to provide their feedback or make


a complaint?

What is the degree of beneficiary participation in the program, including in decision –

making?

Were all interventions culturally appropriate?

Cross-cutting themes: The evaluation will assess to which extent the following present cross

cutting themes have been addressed in actual implementation: These cross cutting theme are; Most

vulnerable children, Gender environment, protection, Peace building, Disability and Christian.

Examples of these issues for addressing:

To what extent do men and women have equal access to program benefits?

To what extent do differently-able people have access to program benefits?

Have program activities had any harmful effect on the environment?

Have program activities ensured that children are not put at risk?

Have program activities promoted understanding between different groups, or created

tension?

6. Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation will be participatory with a focus on learning, success and action; it will be Northern

Bangladesh Regional lead by internal DME team, program staff and need base support from NO-DME

manager in aspects of technicality. This evaluation will be combination of quantitative and qualitative

methods for data/information collection. Evaluation will focus on outcome level objectives regarding

community empowerment, system/structure and sustainability issues in collaboration with

communities and partners as World Vision works to improve and sustain child well-being by working

at four levels:

• Children themselves as key actors in their own well-being

• Households and families

• Communities

• The broader enabling environment of systems and structures for child well-being.

The ADP authority will provide background information necessary for sampling design for the survey.

The methods for data collection will include:

6.1. Document Review:

This refers to gathering of pre-evaluation information and listing of all possible sources of existing

information like as baseline information, design document information, project documentation,

government records , annual and semi-annual report and other need base documents etc. The review

should be limited to the critical information that the evaluation team needs.

6.2. Onsite visual inspection:

For an experienced observer, this is an excellent way to become familiar with program locations and

realities. This method does not stand alone, and other assessment methods should be used in

conjunction. Onsite visual tasks include:

To observe people‟s physical condition and activities; ask questions focusing most vulnerable

children.

To visit homes or shelters, water sources, schools, compartment offices.

To observe the daily lives of HH (use women as interviewers) and disadvantaged groups.

To make sketches, take photographs, or use videos, photos, video footage, and even

sketches as communication tools to convey the reality of the situations.

6.3. FGD or qualitative methods of investigations:

The focus group discussions (FGD) will be conducted with community members (female members)

measure program/project impact and prospects of sustainability of services rendered through short

and long-term projects and interventions. Each FGD should involve 8-12 members carefully chosen

participants grouped focusing representative. The facilitator will use a discussion guide, a record

keeper who will record comments and observations. # of FGDs-07


Community leaders (mixed group)-, CBO leaders (female)-1, Boys (12-18 yrs.)-1, Girls (12-

18 yrs.)-1, RC parents-1, ADP staff-1 and Volunteer/facilitators-1.

Note: Qualitative data collection tools/interview guides for Focus Group Discussions be developed

alongside the survey tools (after an initial analysis of the survey data) and it will be provided to

facilitators (including orientation to FGD team). ADP will monitor this.

H-Assessment Tool: H-assessment will be conducted with children age 12-18 years. The purpose of

this exercise was to involve children age 12-18 in the evaluation process to assess the capacity of

child forum and different educational institutions by involving children effectively. In this process

children share their views, opinions and experiences within a child friendly environment. They were

identified their changes happened in the community (both positive & negative) and shared their

thoughts for further improvement. They also identify the changes has been happened by the

contribution of WVB.

Change Tree Tool: This will be used to see the change over the period in the project working area.

Through using this tool, positive change that has made over the life of the community especially

children were measured. 02 change tool exercises will be conducted for getting the overview of

development according to community knowledge.

6.4. Key Informant Interview:

This technique can include interviews with individuals or groups. Loosely structured interviews will

be conducted with informed stakeholders in Community representatives Like THFPO, TLO, Thana

Education Officer, UP Chairman, UP Member (Female), commissioners, NGOs, CBOs, and local

leaders, representatives from community groups, project facilitators and local media sources. The

focus should be on obtaining information that is crosschecked with other sources.

6.5. Questionnaire and Survey:

This method allows a surveyor to gain information from a large number of people in a structures way

according to specific questions, often in ways they allow for statistical analysis. These can range from

being very simple to complex, which makes them useful in both

demographic/development/empowerment/relief and rehabilitation contexts. They can include

structured set of closed questions (yes/no or multiple choice questions) or they can include open-

ended questions such as semi-structured interviews. Fixed-choice or fixed response questionnaires

are good for gathering data that needs to be analysed statistically, while open-ended or free-response

questions can be particularly good for determining people‟s feelings and attitude. To measure the

nutritional status of children 6-59 months in terms of stunting, wasting and underweight there need

anthropometric measurement. So, In addition there will be need to collect 450 children age, sex,

height and weight.

Anthropometric measurement: The method is used to measure the nutritional status of

children 6-59 months in terms of stunting, wasting and underweight. There will be need to collect

appropriate number of children age, sex, height and weight.

6.6. Sampling:

The ADP impact area will be categorised into clusters and will be selected clusters randomly (as

sample) as well as respondents will be selected as sample of clusters. In all, the confidence level

should be at 95% and the interval of 5% to guarantee precision and reliability. Sampling allows

surveyor for generalization about an entire population on the basis of characteristics of a sub-set or

sample of the population. Properties of population are estimated through interviews.

Note: In baseline 2013, the sample size for this study was calculated using the following formulae

(WHO, 1991; Cochran, 1977):


Where,

.)()1(

2

2

deffd

ppZn

n = size of the sample

deff. = design effect = 1.4

p = expected prevalence of a specific indicator (Under-weight among U5 children: 32.83% (District

Level Underweight Rate 2012_BBS WFP IFAD).

Z = value of the standard normal variable, which is equal to 1.96 at 5% level of significance

d = the level of precision required or maximum error deemed acceptable = 0.05.

As per calculation we need 474 under five children (considering design effect 1.4) and to get this U5

child, there may need to go 1067 HHs (considering at least one U5 children searching every 2.25

HHs). Again considering 5% extra sample, the required sample size is 1120. Rounded up, it will be

1200 for this survey (40 sample will be selected for each of the 30 clusters).

6.7. Case study:

This method is meant to give snapshot of a particular family /individual /institution‟s situation over a

period of time and can be used for evaluation purposes. It documents the life story or sequence of

events over time related to a person, location, HH or organization in order to obtain insight into

people‟s effect and to learn about people‟s experience, dreams, and understanding of the context and

human factors behind summarized data collected through other means. The team should agree

beforehand as to how the subject will be selected. Questionnaires, semi-structured interview

questions, and other relevant methodologies will need to be employed. 2-4 case studies will be

collected.

1.8 Data collection tool (Care giver Survey):

There will be developed survey questionnaire for quantity data collection from HH. The evaluation

team will be responsible for the develop questionnaire. ADP staff and stakeholders will put feedback

in the questionnaire for finalization. On the other hand, FGD/KII checklist/guide questions will

develop necessary by this team as needed. There will be exercised Spider Diagram tool with children

(with boys & girls separately) and „H‟ tool with children (boys and girls) and in depth study at least 1

from each project. Besides, Change Tree Tool will be drilled with stakeholders.

6.9 Community comments:

Community comments and quote will capture if possible collect photograph and video.

6.10 Data Analysis

Collected qualitative and quantitative data will be analysed through general software such as MS

Access and SPSS/STRTA. Various statistical procedures like average, standard deviation test of

significance, multiple correlations and multiple regressions etc. will be used to analyse the collected

quantitative data. Some non-parametrical statistical techniques will also be used to analyse the

collected categorical data. A form of descriptive analysis will also follow for the presentation of data.

6.11 SWOT Analysis (Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats): This method is

used to determine strengths, weakness, opportunities & threats in relation to a project or group,

how such a situation can change over time.


7. Limitations

The ADP end of 3rd phase evaluation has been scheduled in FY 2017-2019. It is anticipated that not

all the expected changes will have been met at the time of the evaluation in 2018. People are busy

with daily earning; it may hamper to get appropriate time from respondent during the survey

specially reach male respondent at day.

8. Authority and Responsibility

8.1 Team Members and Roles

The end evaluation should have two teams: the core team and the field enumeration team. Both

teams will be formed by the consulting firm. The core team will be formed by the Lead consultant

and subject based consultant. The overall process will be conducted by the core team and members

of the core team will be physically present in the field during data collection. WVB Regional DME

Coordinator, Deputy Director MEAL team and ADP team will be members of the core team and

they will assist to the consulting firm to complete the assignment in time and produce a more

informative report. The field team will comprise at least 24 enumerators, 4 supervisors and trainers.

Both teams will work as per advice of WVB and guidance of the consulting firm.

The field enumeration team will be responsible for data collection from the field using various tools.

The firm will select the field enumerators from Bogura ADP community in consultation with the ADP

Manager/Team. The consulting firm will also hire supervisors who will supervise the enumerators‟

work. They will be trained, including on survey data collection. Survey related arrangements will be

attended to by the consulting firm and related costs will be borne by it. No extra payment will be

made to the firm except the contract amount.

8.2 Partners (i.e. who will be involved in the evaluation?)

The WVB/ADP management wishes to have the Phase Evaluation conduction internally. Because,

WVB‟s recent experiences of evaluation done by external consultant found unsatisfactory in some

cases. Thus, the evaluation will be conducted internally; there will be involved staff from World

Vision Bangladesh, target community and local implementing partners (GOB agencies, CBOs/NGOs).

Besides 05-10 members from local community groups (representative from SMC, WASH

committees, Child Forum and CBOs etc.) will engage to monitor as well as evaluate of the various

event of the program, they will communicate with ADP for any missing or helping the find out the

target beneficiary. In addition to that during finalize the ToR, community expectations were taken

including intervention wise mapping), which will help to design quantitative tools.

The manning schedule should describe the estimated duration of personnel deployment for the

whole evaluation period and the time-span for each of the specialists and support staffs including

volunteers (if any). It should be presented in line with the estimated budget provision and in the form

shown below:

MANNING SCHEDULE

SL POSITIONS TIME FRAME (IN WEEKS)

August‟18 September‟18 October‟18 November‟18

Sample of Team member 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1 Team Leader

2 Consultant 1/2/3

3 Manager

4 Data analyst

5 Supervisor/4

6 Enumerators /24

7


8.3. Development of Phase Evaluation Proposal for ADP (Submission of Proposal)

The consultant/consulting firm should produce a proposal for Phase Evaluation based on this TOR

and submit the same to the ADP Office or Regional Field Office (NBR), Bogura of World Vision

Bangladesh within stipulated timeframe. The evaluation proposal should contain two separate

envelopes:

a. Technical proposal and

b. Financial proposal

Technical proposal that should demonstrate the firm, knowledge and understanding of the

World Vision ADP development approach, general and detailed methodology that the firm is

proposing for the phase evaluation, methods and procedures of data collection as deemed

relevant for the survey and certification of the consultants and key personnel in favor of the

firm and

The financial proposal should specify:

Head-wise cost-estimate

Salary/honorarium of professional/experts and other support staff including social

costs (VAT, tax etc.)

Cost of data collection

Cost of stationeries and report production of draft final in 2(two) copies.

8.4. Job of consultant/consulting firm

1. Review the ADP Design Document (project logical framework, DIP, M&E Plan, Performance

Indicator Tracking Table and other relevant documents.

2. Ensure participation of both WVB technical and programming staff members in all activities

mentioned above as observer.

3. Develop survey methodology and sampling procedures required for the survey in respect to

demand of ADP in consultation with ADP management, Regional DME Coordinator and

National DME Coordinator/Member of MEAL team, WVB.

4. Develop questionnaires and other tools incorporating appropriate questions for information

items and include proxy indicators so that complex outcome indicators (e.g. socio-economic

indicators) can be derived from. Ensure to have indicators disaggregated by gender, age and

ethnicity and where appropriate also by religion, poverty status and other vulnerabilities such

as widows, orphans or people with disabilities etc.

5. Translation of survey tools in local language i.e. Bengali as it is mandatory

6. Conduct pre-test of questionnaire at ADP working area and update the same with appropriate

questions.

7. Finalize the sample size with the consultation of ADP management and technical persons in the

Regional and National Office of WVB.

8. Form a team for Phase Evaluation involving ADP staff different stakeholders at community level

and Regional & National Office of WVB.

9. Organize a comprehensive training session to orient the team members on tools and

methodology. A practical session can be included for data collection for the enumerators for

collection of quality data and reduce any ambiguity of questions. Maximize quality of data to be

collected through developing training enumerators and supervisors, developing procedures of

data collection from field. A detail guideline would be developed that questionnaire may

understandable.

8.5. Activity Schedule

GANTT CHART OF PLANNED ACTIVITIES


Phase Evaluation FY'18 Gantt Chart.xlsx

8.6. Work location:

Bogura ADP command areas are situated under Bogura Sadar Upazila (Municipality, Sabgram &

Rajapur union) and Madla union in Shajahanpur Upazila, Bogura district, Bangladesh.

8.7. Reporting language

The reporting language will be English ADP will share report in Bangla (Translate from English to

Bengali to English).

8.8. Tentative time frame for the Phase Evaluation

The whole process of Phase Evaluation should be completed by a period of 90 days (including

holidays). An extended period (max. 15 days) may be required on justification of extension placed by

Evaluation Team Leader. The timeframe will be validated from date of contract signed for the work.

8.9. Confidentiality and Copyright

All papers shared with the consulting firm are confidential to World Vision Bangladesh and should

not to be used outside of World Vision Bangladesh without prior permission. Information received

by the Consulting firm from Bogura ADP and World Vision Bangladesh and ADP working area should

be treated as confidential. The Phase Evaluation report will be owned by Bogura ADP, World Vision

Bangladesh and disseminated to authorities as the organization sees fit.

9. Team Advisors

An advisory team will work to make the end evaluation a success. The roles of responsibility of

advisory body are given below:

Sl. No Description of

Advisory

Committee

Responsibilities

01 WV-KREA (CPM) Feedback on ToR and approval

Guidance in evaluation (if any)

Feedback on draft final report

Approval of final report

02 Deputy Director

MEAL, WVB

MEAL team will give feedback on ToR

03 Regional Field

Director

Guidance for decision making

Ensure feedback on draft report to share with SO

Attend meeting/dialogue/workshop with community

04 SCM (supply chain

mangment)

Lead the tender process

Finalization of Consultant firm

Coordinating the overall consultation process

Payment consultancy firm

10. Logistics

All relevant logistics (accommodation, transportation, height scale, weight scale etc.) to be managed

by external consultant farm as per ToR as well as necessary services such as translator, interpreters,

driver (for firm/consultant), data processor, facilitators, computer, printer etc. that is associated with

end evaluation to be managed by consultant/consulting firm. ADP will have the opportunity to allow

survey firm/consultant to arrange sharing/discussion sessions at ADP hall room on basis of the

availability


11. Products

The evaluation shall have four products as provided below.

1. Cleaned qualitative and quantitative data set in a summarized manner

2. Evaluation team leader shall prepare survey tools and guidelines which shall be feedback by

WVB, DME team before the evaluation takes course.

3. The evaluation team leader will prepare final evaluation reports which shall incorporate

feedback from all stakeholders. These reports will be prepared using LEAP formats which

shall be supplied to the team leader by WVB, DME team.

The evaluation team leader (Evaluation team) shall prepare two draft evaluation reports which will be

circulated to all stakeholders by the ADP to get their feedback. These reports will be organised in

consideration of LEAP formats.

Draft Evaluation Report

The evaluation team will submit a draft evaluation report for review and feedback (within

two weeks of receiving report) from the Programme management team, community

stakeholders, RFO/NO and support office.

Final evaluation Report

Within two (2) weeks of receiving comments on the draft report, a final evaluation report

including an evaluation abstract/executive summary will be submitted to the

SO/RFO/NO/NBR.

The Evaluation report will follow the following LEAP guidelines/ format covering the following key

areas as attached template.

Specifically, the evaluation products should be presented or preserved in the form of:

- The final report (both in hard & soft format)

- The database of quantitative survey (MS Access, SPSS/STRTA)

- The consolidated records and findings of FGD as qualitative data

- Summary primary and secondary tables/matrices used in report (both in hard and soft

formats)

- The presentations and summary of recommendations, conclusions and lessons learned used

during sharing and debriefing with stakeholders.

Different dissemination channels will be used to share evaluation findings with different stakeholders.

For example, meetings will be conducted with community and district leaders, CBO and NGO

representatives during which visual and oral presentations will be made to provide further

opportunities for learning. In addition, evaluation results will be disseminated to key district and

government leaders through summarized reports containing key findings, recommendations and

conclusions. Summary on the evaluation lessons and recommendations will be prepared and shared

with different stakeholders.

12. Budget

Due to tendering process confidentiality, budget information is not shown here.


13. Documents

The following documents might be useful for review during the various phases of phase evaluation

process:

TDD document

Semi-annual and Annual program Management Report

Baseline Survey report

1st and 2nd phase Evaluation Report

Project Monitoring Reports etc.

14. Lessons Learned

To identify lessons learned the following steps would be kept in mind:

Through this evaluation, ADP wants to know the effective implementation process of

activities that would be not only helpful but also efficiently used to achieve the target.

Implementation strategies of different activities, which have brought positive change

within short period in the community, would be replicated in the next phase.

During the Evaluation processes, the team shall be expected to keep track of the records

during planning and implementation of the evaluation activities. The enumerators shall be

advised and encouraged to use notebooks to make records of the trend of events during

the training and pre testing before actual data collection. The lessons learnt shall be

compiled and consolidated by the evaluation team leader (Evaluation team) and shall be

shared with world vision staff in the exit meeting. Data collected from the field shall be

organized by the Evaluation team and used to come up with the evaluation draft report.

The lessons learnt shall be used to guide the whole process of compiling the reports

15. Appendices

Child well-being outcomes .docx

Appendix-2 WV’s Sustainability Drivers

WVs_Sustainability_Drivers_13_Nov_2014.pdf