Consultancy for the Final Evaluation of Isuku Iwacu Project- Rwanda Rural Sanitation Activity
Contract type: Short term consultancy contract
Section 1: Company Description
SNV is a not-for-profit international development organization. Founded in the Netherlands in 1965, SNV has built a long-term, local presence in 30 countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Our global team of local and international advisors works with local partners to equip communities, businesses, and organizations with the tools, knowledge, and connections they need to increase their incomes and gain access to basic services, empowering them to break the cycle of poverty, and guide their own development.
Section 2: Project Background
Isuku Iwacu is a four‐year rural sanitation Activity in Rwanda, funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and executed by a consortium of international non‐governmental organizations (NGOs), headed by SNV USA dba DevWorks International with World Vision International and Water for People. The Activity is being implemented in eight districts in Rwanda (Kayonza, Kicukiro, Ngoma, Nyabihu, Nyanza, Nyarugenge, Ruhango, and Rwamagana) where it will help an estimated 500,000 people gain access to improved household sanitation.
The overall goal of Isuku Iwacu is to increase local ownership and capacity to deliver sustainable, high-quality sanitation and hygiene services in order to decrease childhood stunting. Over the life of the Activity, to foster local ownership and strengthen capacity building, the Isuku Iwacu Activity has defined the following Strategic Objective (SO):
- Improve access to and encourage correct, consistent use of household sanitation and hygiene facilities in order to decrease childhood stunting.
The Activity will achieve this SO by:
- Directly supporting and contributing to the Government of Rwanda (GOR)-led efforts to improve access to sanitation in Rwanda; and
- Promoting districtwide, private sector‐driven household sanitation and hygiene interventions, and district‐ and national‐level capacity development.
Section 3. Purpose of the Assignment
The evaluation primarily aims to assess and document the impact of Isuku Iwacu Activity by examining project results against their overall goal and objectives, summarizing findings, addressing lessons learned, and providing recommendations for future projects. The evaluation should also provide program end-point indicator results as set out in the Monitoring Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Plan.
Section 4. Objectives of the Evaluation
The evaluation will have the following specific objectives:
- To establish an understanding of how the strategy, implementation, and results of Isuku Iwacu activities in Rwanda have contributed to the overall goal of the project.
- To highlight the strengths and weaknesses of different activities of Isuku Iwacu, their effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact, and sustainability.
- To identify the enabling and disabling factors that affected the implementation of Isuku Iwacu activities.
- To identify lessons learned and provide recommendations for future projects and for learning in relation to WASH projects programming.
Section 5. Scope of Work and Evaluation Questions
The evaluation’s focus will be on the following criteria: effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact, and sustainability. The evaluation will also assess USAID Isuku Iwacu’s effectiveness in implementing and incorporating the recommendations from the Mid-term evaluation.
- To what extent are Isuku Iwacu objectives in line with the GoR priorities in the WASH sector?
- To what extent are objectives of Isuku Iwacu activity still valid?
- To what extent were Isuku Iwacu objectives achieved as set out in the Cooperative Agreement?
- To what extent did Isuku Iwacu contribute in promoting sanitation marketing, including its newly introduced approach of sanitation loans? What were the major factors influencing the achievements or non-achievement of the outcomes/objectives of the activity?
- Was Isuku Iwacu implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives?
- Was the activity cost-efficient?
- Were the objectives achieved on time?
- To what extent did the demand for sanitation products and services increase in the targeted communities as a result of Isuku Iwacu interventions?
- To what extent has the supply and availability of sanitation products and services in the private sector improved as a result of the Isuku Iwacu activity?
- How did the governance of sustained access to sanitation and hygiene products and services change as a result of Isuku Iwacu activity?
- To what extent the Isuku Iwacu interventions are likely to continue after donor funding has been withdrawn?
- What are the key barriers to accessing hygiene and sanitation services and products at HH level?
Mid-term Evaluation Questions to follow-up on
- How appropriate was Isuku Iwacu’s initial activity design of building capacity and applying market‐based approaches to increase demand for sanitation products and access to sanitation services in the targeted districts and villages?
- How effective are Isuku Iwacu’s current implementation strategies to successfully expand access to sanitation services? What changes could be made to increase the effectiveness in future programming?
- To what extent have the different implementation approaches been successful? Which of them appear to be sustainable and should be prioritized going forward?
- To what extent has Isuku Iwacu been successful in building capacity to improve sustainable access to sanitation?
- How has Isuku Iwacu’s approach taken into consideration issues of gender and equity?
Section 6. Approach and Methodology
The evaluation team should propose an appropriate methodology for this evaluation. The evaluation should use a mixed-methods approach to gather enough evidence to respond to the evaluation questions
Section 7. Expected Deliverables
The following deliverables are expected:
- An inception report: Presenting the detailed evaluation design, outlining the key scope of work, proposed most appropriate methods, source of data, data collection and analysis, lists of informants and site/villages to be visited and proposed selection criteria, sampling methods, and sample size, intended work plan and detailed evaluation questions. The inception report should be discussed and agreed upon by Isuku Iwacu and should be approved by USAID. This shall be submitted after one week from award
- A draft comprehensive evaluation report: The report should inform all key stakeholders including SNV USA, World Vision, Water for People, CSOs implementing partners, UNICEF, AfDB, Government of Rwanda, and USAID. The draft report is expected to be submitted after 3 weeks from the completion of data collection. The report should be presented, discussed, and agreed upon with project stakeholders and approved by USAID.
- Final evaluation report: This will be submitted 2 weeks after receiving approval of the draft report from USAID. The evaluation team should consult Isuku Iwacu to agree on the structure and content of the final report and should meet the evaluation reports requirements of SNV USA and USAID.
Section 8: Candidate Profile
The assignment is open to firms or individuals meeting the requirements described below. The evaluation team is expected to include women and men with solid experience in evaluating USAID projects in Rwanda. The evaluating team should be multi-disciplinary and include members who together include an appropriate balance of expertise and practical knowledge in the following areas:
- Demonstrable experience in conducting evaluations in Rwanda and receiving the necessary approvals from relevant authorities.
- A solid and diversified track record of experience in implementing or evaluating USAID funded projects including WASH programming in Rwanda, in the EAC Region, in Africa and/or Asia countries
- At least have a Master’s degree in Sanitation, Environmental Health, Public Policy, International Development, Marketing or related fields
- Extensive expertise, knowledge, and experience in implementing or evaluating BCC and/or Sanitation marketing
- Private sector development, having experience in evaluation of functionality and business plans of SMEs
- Familiarity with USAID programming and Evaluation Policy, preferably USAID WASH programming
- Strong skills in evaluation, assessment, and analysis of USAID activities
- All team members should have strong analytical and communication skills, evaluation experience and at least one team member should be familiar with WASH policy in Rwanda
- Strong experience in quantitative and qualitative research methods, preferably in the WASH sector
Section 9: Ethical and Business Conduct Requirements
SNV is committed to integrity in procurement, and only selects suppliers based on objective business criteria such as price and technical merit.
SNV does not tolerate fraud, collusion among offerors, falsified proposals/bids, bribery, or kickbacks. Any firm or individual violating these standards will be disqualified from this procurement, barred from future procurement opportunities, and may be reported to the Office of the Inspector General.
Employees and agents of SNV are strictly prohibited from asking for or accepting any money, fee, commission, credit, gift, gratuity, object of value or compensation from current or potential vendors or suppliers in exchange for or as a reward for business. Employees and agents engaging in this conduct are subject to termination and will be reported to the Office of the Inspector General. In addition, SNV will inform the Office of the Inspector General of any supplier offers of money, fee, commission, credit, gift, gratuity, object of value, or compensation to obtain business.
Offerors responding to this RFP must include the following as part of the proposal submission:
- Disclose any close, familial, or financial relationships with SNV or project staff. For example, if an offeror’s cousin is employed by the project, the offeror must state this.
- Disclose any family or financial relationship with other offerors submitting proposals. For example, if the offeror’s father owns a company that is submitting another proposal, the offeror must state this.
- Certify that the prices in the offer have been arrived at independently, without any consultation, communication, or agreement with any other offeror or competitor for the purpose of restricting competition.
- Certify that all information in the proposal and all supporting documentation are authentic and accurate.
- Certify understanding and agreement to SNV’s prohibitions against fraud, bribery, and kickbacks.
Section 10: Further instructions to Offerors
This is a Request for Proposal only, and in no way obligates SNV or the isuku iwacu project to award any subcontract. All documents from the Offeror related to this RFP shall be in English and all costs shall be expressed in Rwandan Francs (Rwf).
The Offeror shall bear all costs associated with the preparation and submission of a proposal. SNV or the isuku iwacu programme shall in no case be responsible or liable for these costs. If this solicitation is amended, then all terms and conditions which are not modified remain unchanged.
No offer, payment, consideration, or benefit of any kind shall be made, either directly or indirectly, as an inducement or reward for the award of a subcontract. Any such practice constitutes an illegal or corrupt practice and will be grounds for canceling the procurement, terminating an Offerors’ consideration for award, or terminating the award of the subcontract and for such other additional actions, civil and/or criminal, as may be applicable.
Offerors must set forth full, accurate, and complete information as required by this RFP. The penalty for making false statements to the Government will be disqualification with immediate effect.
It is SNV’s preference that Offerors do not subcontract implementation of the technical activities of the scope of work described in Section 2.
Section 11: Protocol for Submission of Offers and Required Documents
Offerors are responsible for ensuring that their offers are received in accordance with the instructions stated herein. If an Offeror does not follow the instructions set forth herein, the Offeror's proposal may be eliminated from further consideration or the proposal may be down-graded and not receive full or partial credit under the applicable evaluation criteria. If an Offeror does not understand the instructions in this Solicitation, then it should submit a request for clarification sufficiently in accordance with the instructions herein in order to obtain an answer in time to meet the submission deadline.
Offerors must prepare one electronic copy of the technical and cost proposals. The technical proposal and cost proposal must be kept separate from each other. Technical and cost proposals shall be provided in software compatible with MS Word and MS Excel. Technical proposals must not make reference to pricing data in order that the technical evaluation may be made strictly on the basis of technical merit.
Section 12: Award Selection and Notification
A. Selection criteria
Proposals shall be selected based on the following criteria:
Criteria and Marks
CVs or company profile 20 Marks
Understanding of the scope and/or assignment 10 Marks
Proposed methodology 20 Marks
Experience in conducting similar assignments 20 Marks
Financial Offer 30 Marks
Total: 100 Marks
Section 13: Offer Deadline
The Offers must fully meet all requirements of this RFP and are requested to submit their proposals no later than Thursday, August 13, 2020, local Kigali time via the Smart recruiter’s link shared on other relevant job publishing websites.
Section 14: Additional Information
For any questions or concerns please convey them to firstname.lastname@example.org
NB: Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted
We do not appreciate third-party mediation based on this advertisement