Tourathi Final Evaluation

Tourathi- Search for Common Ground

Terms of Reference for a Final Evaluation

September 2018

Search for Common Ground Lebanon (Search) seeks to recruit a consultant to conduct a Final Evaluation for its British Council funded project in Lebanon called Tourathi. The assessment should be completed by January 17, 2018

1. Background

1.1Organization Overview

Search for Common Ground (Search) is a non-governmental organization working to transform the way the world deal with conflict - away from adversarial approaches and toward cooperative solutions. We have acquired over 35 years of experience in peacebuilding and are based in 53 local offices worldwide. We strive to build sustainable peace for generations to come by working with all sides of a conflict. We do this through a type of peacebuilding called “conflict transformation.” We shift the everyday interactions between hostile groups of people, so they can work together to build up their community, choosing joint problem-solving over violent means. Search first worked in Lebanon in 1996, opening a permanent office in 2008. Since then, our activities and capacities have grown significantly.

For more information, visit www.sfcg.org and https://www.facebook.com/sfcg.lebanon.

1.2.    Project Overview

Search for Common Ground, in partnership with Biladi, Arcenciel, and Nahnoo, is implementing an 18-month project called “Tourathi” with an overall goal to bridge geographic and sectarian divisions through the promotion of a shared Lebanese cultural heritage among youth in both rural and urban areas. The project is being implemented in 6 areas in Lebanon: Zahle, Sarafand, Tripoi, Salima, Beit Chabab and Bekfaya. Tourathi aims at building skills in recording and sharing historical information, as well as reach across dividing lines to protect cultural heritage and contribute to healing fractures in Lebanese society. The foundation of the project relies on two intertwining pillars: promoting cultural heritage facilitates conflict transformation, while efforts to address and transform conflict and its legacies will preserve cultural heritage

Below are the project objectives:

1. Lebanese youth from diverse background and communities are engaged in cultural heritage identification and documentation
2. Local cultural heritage is mapped, documented and promoted online
3. A diverse group of Lebanese young volunteers has increased skills and knowledge to protect and promote their local cultural heritage
4. Local communities have increased awareness and interest in their own local cultural heritage
5. Lebanese community members in target areas have increased awareness and interest in the diversity of local cultural heritage across Lebanon (beyond sectarian, socio-economic and geographic dividing lines)

The proposed action is expected to achieve the following results:

1. Cultural heritage at risk is researched, documented, and mapped to safeguard against potential permanent loss.
2. The capacities of youth to promote cultural heritage in their own communities and across dividing lines is strengthened.
3. Target communities in Lebanon are informed about cultural heritage at risk by engaging a wider diversity of people to participate in cultural exchange and discussion about the role of heritage.

Below are the project activities:

1. Training on community mapping and heritage identification and recording in which youth leaders gained skills in documentation, recording, research, and intergenerational dialogue, as well as define for themselves the role of heritage in their communities and in Lebanon generally.
2. Youth-led Heritage Mapping, Research and Assessment in their communities in which they identified and gathered information about the heritage that they want to promote through the project.
3. Training on heritage promotion and media skills focusing on the management and marketing of cultural heritage through various media and promotion strategies, as well as storytelling and tour guiding as relevant to the specific heritage and needs in their communities.
4. Youth Exchange Visits where youth in each of the six communities will host the other volunteers from all over Lebanon to showcase the heritage they have been mapping and promoting in the previous months through a guided tour or other relevant tools, followed by a roundtable discussion about cultural heritage in their respective contexts.
5. Ongoing communication and online and social media promotion (website, Instagram, etc.) through which youth will reflect on what they have learned and shared about Lebanese cultural heritage. This communication may take various forms, including photo essays, short videos, oral history recordings, blog posts, and/or an interactive website.
6. Final events/festivals in which youth will organize intergenerational groups from their community to attend, thereby elevating the impact of the project. They may plan their own final events to celebrate and further promote the mapped heritage or coordinate with existing festivals.

2.         The Final Evaluation

a. Assessment Objectives: The intended evaluation should be based on the OECD-DAC peacebuilding Evaluation Criteria, investigating below set of questions, and utilizing and/or addressing the performance indicators described in the project document. The final evaluation will also consist of a comparative assessment towards the baseline findings, and draw conclusions to inform future programming. In particular, it will answer to the following questions:

• Relevance:
  • Are the stated goal and outcomes relevant to the context in Lebanon?
  • Did the project work on the right issues at the right time?
  • Did the activities and strategies fit objectives?  

• Effectiveness:
  • How effective was the project in achieving its set objectives and results?
  • How effective were the different activities in contributing to the achievement or non-achievement of the project objectives?
  • To which extent did this project creates a virtuous cycle whereby   cultural   heritage   is   protected   by building  bridges  across  dividing  lines,  which will   in   turn   be   strengthened   by   fostering   greater value in cultural heritage?
  • What were the internal or external factors that facilitated or hindered the objectives’ achievements?
  • What are the major best practices and lessons learned stemming from the project’s implementation?
  • What are the main results from the project, intended and unintended, positive and negative?

• Impact
  • What are the intended and unintended results of the project on the project’s internal and external stakeholders, both positive and negative? To what extent are these changes desirable?
  • What real difference has the activity made to the project participants?
  • How the impact of the project can be further developed?

• Sustainability
  • Are the changes introduced by the project long term and sustainable? To what extent will the benefits of the project continue after donor funding ceased?
  • Have new mechanisms been designed to continue any work initiated by this project?
  • What could have been done differently so that similar projects could become more sustainable in the future?

• Coherence, coordination and connectedness:
  • Evaluate the coordination (coherence) achieved within the action, including communications, sharing of information and management among partners; was there a lack in coherence and why?
  • What are some of the key lessons learned and recommendations on participatory and partnership approaches
  • Are the Field level strategies and management structures sufficient to direct these types of interventions?
  • To what extent was the coordination between Search and the partners was efficient?

In addition to the above lines of inquiry, the evaluation is expected to provide quantitative and qualitative information on the below key indicators:

• % of cultural heritage under threat is researched, documented, and promoted in each community
• % of people who think that cultural heritage in their community is better identified/recorded
• % of Increased engagement in cultural heritage protection among youth from targeted areas
• # of youth demonstrating increased knowledge of local cultural heritage
• # of community relevant and knowledgeable stakeholders consulted by the youth in each community
• # Community members express desire for final events to be repeated on an annual basis.
• % Improved understanding and interest of local community members in target locations around the value and diversity of cultural heritage
• # of youth build relationships across sectarian, socio-economic and geographic dividing lines
• % Increase in the visitor numbers from different areas in Lebanon to local cultural heritage sites identified
• # of youth demonstrate application of the gained social media and public outreach skills

b. Audience: The primary audience of the Final Evaluation will be Search and its partner organizations. Recommendations should emerge from the study to inform current and future programming in Lebanon.

The secondary audience will be the donor, the British Council, as well the peacebuilding community at large, which will use the findings and recommendations to strengthen its current and future programming.

c.  Methodology: 

Approach: Search approach to evaluation is grounded in the guiding principles of our work: participatory, culturally sensitive, committed to building capacity, affirming and positive while honest and productively critical, and valuing knowledge and approaches from within the context. Search and the hired consultant(s) will agree upon a joint set of evaluation standards when negotiating the final contract of agreement.

The below principles should be taken into account:

• Inclusiveness—the methodology should include a wide range of viewpoints, specifically gender and age-sensitivity when applicable.
• Mixed-method approaches—both qualitative and quantitative methods need to be present in the methodology.
• Rigor of evidence—gathered information needs to be reliable and transparent
• Ethics—the methodology needs to consider ethics in order to insure that the evaluation is fully objective.

In addition, the consultant is expected to respect Search  evaluations standards, to be found in Search evaluation guidelines: https://www.sfcg.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/SFCG-External-Evaluation-Guidelines-FINAL.pdf

Scope of Evaluation:

The evaluation will investigate project stakeholders. The sample size should be adequate and representative of the target groups. In addition, the evaluation should employ both quantitative and qualitative methods. The consultant is fully responsible on recruiting the adequate staff needed to conduct the evaluation.

It will draw on the following sources and data collection methods:

• Desk study review: Project documents and other relevant sources of data to complete the assessment.
• Focus group discussions (FGDs): FGDs with project direct and indirect stakeholders
• Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): interviews to be conducted with key stakeholders involved in the project
• Population Survey: Surveys to be conducted with relevant stakeholders

3.         Implementation Information

a.  Final Evaluation Team

The consultant will work closely with Search Lebanon DM&E Manager who will be ensuring that all milestones are met. He will also act as focal point on all issues including logistics and will sign off on the final papers in consultation with the MENA Regional DME Specialist and with the final approval of Lebanon Country Director.

b. Deliverables

• Within ten days from signing the contract, the consultant should submit an Inception report, which clearly defines the study background and methodology, including clear outlines for the data collection tools and research timeline with specific deadlines for each deliverable. The Inception report and the data collection tools need formal approval from Search before starting the data collection in the field.
• A draft final evaluation report to be submitted within 15 days of completion of the data collection for review and comments from Search country team and the Regional DME specialist. The review and feedback of the report could be more than one round depending on the quality of the report and the extent to which the comments and suggestions from first round have been incorporated.
• A final evaluation report to be submitted after incorporating the comments of Search. The report should be written in English, 30-35 pages excluding annexes, and using the Evaluation Template provided by Search, consisting of:
  • Cover page, Search will provide sample cover sheet for reference
  • Table of contents, list of acronyms, abbreviations and list of tables and charts.
  • Executive summary of key findings and recommendations – 3-4 pages
  • Background information and context analysis presented per key criteria with a brief description
  • Evaluation methodology with clear explanation of sampling and limitations, participants’ selection and data analysis approach.
  • Research findings, analysis, with associated data presented, where appropriate in clear graphs or charts. The findings can include subsections for each research criteria.
  • Conclusion and Recommendations for future project implementation.
  • The recommendations should be framed according to each evaluation criteria.
  • Appendices should include the ToRs, collected data, detailed description of the methodology with research instruments, and list of participants.

• An info-graphical Digest Assessment of 2 pages to be shared with the wider target audience.
• Restitution meeting with Search Staff
• Once the draft is submitted and reviewed, Search may decide based on the quality of the draft whether the consultant may be required to revise the draft, working closely with Search DM&E Manager as necessary.
• The report should be submitted electronically in a MS – Word document. The consultant is responsible for English editing of the final report which should be well formatted. The report will be credited to the evaluator and potentially placed in the public domain at the decision of Search.
• All handwritten and electronic transcripts of data collection, hard copies of survey questionnaires, photographs taken during the assessment and any equipment received from Search for the purpose of the study should be submitted to Search. Furthermore, all information generated during the baseline study will be the sole property of Search and is subject to submission to Search along with the final report, prior to the end of the contract.

4.    Deadlines and Timeline

• Consultant recruitment deadline: October 7, 2018
• Deadline for finalizing the Inception Report and data collection tools: October 21, 2018
• Deadline for finalizing data collection: December 25, 2018
• Deadline for the draft report: January 6, 2019
• Deadline for the final deliverables: January 17, 2019

The Final Evaluation Consultant: Search Lebanon seeks an experienced consultant with the following qualifications: Proficiency in Arabic and English; Solid understanding of the Lebanese peacebuilding context; More than 5 years of experience in conducting final evaluations to projects related to peacebuilding, cultural studies or a related sector; Experience in research methodologies both qualitative and quantitative including collecting and analyzing data from interviews, Focus Groups, and surveys; Experience in working with international organizations; Strong communication and writing skills; Ability to be flexible with time and work schedule; Attention to detail and ability to meet tight deadlines.