AltCity Impact/Bloom will organize a series of activities to help MSMEs maintain and
create new employment opportunities leading to new income opportunities for
refugees, vulnerable, and marginalized communities. These activities include a set of
direct training and support activities (2 cycles led by the AltCity Impact/Bloom team,
supporting 10 MSMEs each cycle) and six cycles provided by Training Partners with
the support provided by AltCity Impact/Bloom (supporting 5 MSMEs each cycle).

 

These activities include versions of “best practice” programs used by the accelerator
and SME training programs worldwide adapted for the current context in Lebanon,
and enhanced by new methods and approaches developed by the AltCity
Impact/Bloom team based on its experience and research, and supported by
external research.

These activities include:

● Sprint Programs: Intensive short programs (5-12 days) of training and support
designed to help participating MSMEs improve essential skills
(communications, leadership, collaboration, etc, “soft skills” that support
entrepreneurship and enterprise success) and get light enterprise
development support (in core business domains, marketing, financial
planning, etc) while helping AltCity Impact/Bloom and Training Partners
assess MSMEs for readiness and appropriateness for selection to the next
stage Accelerator Programs.

● Accelerator Programs: Intensive medium-term programs (3-4 months) of
training and support, along with funding support, to help to participate
MSMEs reach a key business objective identified by the MSME in collaboration
with AltCity Impact and the Training Partners that are deemed to specifically
support the MSME in their effort to maintain and create new employment
opportunities leading to new income opportunities for refugees, vulnerable,
and marginalized communities.
This enhanced training and mentorship provided by both AltCity Impact/Bloom and
the Training Partners work to bridge geographical barriers, to help MSMEs have
increased capacity to maintain and create new employment opportunities leading to
new income opportunities for refugees, vulnerable, and marginalized communities.
The two outcomes, along with multiple outputs, work together symbiotically:

● The direct enterprise support programs enable AltCity Impact/Bloom to have
a direct impact while continuing to refine the methods, content, and tools
used in the programs;

● The support of Training Partners improves the scalability of impact during the
program by enabling support a larger number of times and beyond the
duration of the program by enhancing capacities with the ecosystem;

● The Community of Practice engages the broader ecosystem to support both
of those elements above, along with the participating enterprises themselves.

 

Program Outcomes

● OUTCOME 1: An effective community of practice (Training Partners and
MSMEs) with improved capacities supports MSMEs to operate in complex
economic environments

 

Output 1.1: A community of practice and platform activated for
collaborative discussions and learning that supports MSME growth
across Lebanon
○ Output 1.2: Training Partners with enhanced capacities to deliver MSME
support using AltCity Impact/Bloom’s methods

● OUTCOME 2: Capable MSMEs operate successfully within complex economic
environments.
○ Output 2.1: MSMEs with Increased Capacities from Sprint and/or
Accelerator Programs Provided by AltCity Impact/Bloom
○ Output 2.2: MSMEs with Increased Capacities from Sprint and/or
Accelerator Programs Provided by Training Partners

● OUTCOME 3: AltCity Impact/Bloom with strengthened organizational abilities
to deliver sustained and growing economic impact for MSMEs in complex
environments.
○ Output 3.1: Organizational Capacity Building is strengthened

Project Objective

The objective(s) of the development cooperation among the parties is to have
MSMEs capable of maintaining and creating new employment within complex
economic environments with the support of national partners.
The focus of all those activities is to improve job opportunities for the target
communities of refugees and host communities both as Direct Beneficiaries and as
Indirect Beneficiaries.

Project Specific Objective

A core consideration of this project is developing a structure that continues
providing value and growing beyond this project's duration, including benefiting the
MSMEs that went through the program, other MSMEs, and the broader ecosystem.
This is a core part of the design for the “community/ecosystem building” activities,
which will continue after the project ends. Additionally, the project's skills
development and character-strengthening elements will provide continued
long-term benefits to the MSMEs, and access to the platform and mentors can
continue self-directed after the project ends.

Purpose of the Evaluation
Scope and Focus of the Evaluation

To evaluate the implementation and achieving the program's outcomes, AltCity
Impact/Bloom is recruiting an external M&E Impact Evaluator to provide diligent
insights on the program's impact in relation to the different resulting outcomes from the implemented approach and mitigation measures. The evaluation will cover the entire program implementation period, particularly to AltCity Impact/Bloom’s improvement of best practices following the mid-program evaluation completed on
January 31, 2022. The evaluation should also assess the Theory of Change and
whether the fundamental assumptions supporting it are still valid in light of the
changing circumstances. The evaluation should also provide project execution
outcomes, recommendations, and lessons learned. It should also make specific
recommendations to help AltCity Impact/Bloom execute future development
programs that incorporate MSME support and collaboration with partners within the
ecosystem.

The Evaluation Questions

The following is an example of key questions that will guide the project evaluation:

i) Relevance
1. How well has the project aligned to the objectives, in addition to the priorities
and requirements of the target beneficiaries in terms of income access?
2. Operating within a challenging economic situation, to what extent were the
mitigation measures implemented successful in achieving the overall outputs
and outcomes of the project for supporting MSMEs' operational capacity in
complex economic environments (including contributing factors and
constraints)?
3. As a result of the program support, are the “new jobs” created or pre-existing
jobs filled by beneficiaries?
4. Did the “Sprint” phase of the program, solely without the “Accelerator” phase
of the program, have any contribution/impact on the new jobs created?
5. In what capacities were the “new jobs” created filled by vulnerable
communities from refugees and/or host populations as initially intended?
6. To what extent are the new jobs created sustainable and meet “decent work”
conditions?
7. What are the different “decent work” attributes that were taken into account
by different beneficiaries? Were there any challenges in meeting those
attributes? Any successes to be highlighted?
8. Were the inputs and strategies identified, and were they realistic, appropriate
and adequate to achieve the results?
9. Did the project cater to the external challenges, and were they adequately
addressed?
10. How effective has the project been in responding to the needs of the
beneficiaries, and what results were achieved?

 

ii) Effectiveness

1. Describe the management processes and their appropriateness in supporting
delivery
2. To what degree did beneficiaries' access to income change due to different
approaches? Which approach had the most positive impact, and why? Were
there differences between refugees and the host community?
3. What were the positive and negative, intended and unintended, changes
produced by the project? (examples of positive changes could for example be
businesses creating more jobs than intended, or growing beyond the plan
outlined in the business plan etc.)
4. To what extent did the Project’s M&E mechanism contribute to meeting
project results?
5. How effective were the strategies and tools used to implement the project?
6. How cost-effective is the program implementation? What cost did the
program incur to create a new position (including HR costs etc.)?
7. What are the future intervention strategies and issues?

iii) Efficiency of Project Implementation

1. How did various change techniques affect effectiveness and adaptation?
What elements contributed to this?
2. Specifically, did the actual or expected results (outputs and outcomes) justify
the costs incurred? Were the resources effectively utilized?
3. Did project activities overlap and duplicate similar interventions (funded
nationally and /or by other donors?
4. Are there more efficient ways and means to deliver better results (outputs and
outcomes) with the available inputs?
5. How was the project’s collaboration with national MSME training partners?
What are some possible areas of improvement?
6. What are the variances (if any) in program implementation between AltCity
Impact/Bloom and national training partners, including in number of jobs
created, quality of services delivered, etc?
7. How efficient were the management and accountability structures of the
project?
8. How did the project financial management processes and procedures affect
project implementation?

9. What are the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the project’s
implementation process?
10. How efficient and effective was the online implementation of the program in
comparison to in-person implementation in reaching the target audience and
meeting objectives?

iv) Sustainability

1. What are the key factors/areas that will require additional support/attention to
improve prospects of sustainability of the project outcomes and the potential
for replication of this approach?
2. How efficient and sustainable was using AltCity Impact/Bloom’s online
platform, tools, and library for MSMEs capacity building?
3. What major factors influenced the achievement or non-achievement of
sustainability of the business supported and project outcomes?
4. How effective were the exit strategies and approaches to phase out assistance
provided by the project, including contributing factors and constraints?
5. Describe key factors that will require attention to improve prospects of
sustainability of Project outcomes and the potential for replication of the
approach.
6. To what extent has the project contributed to building the sustainable
capacity of AltCity Impact/Bloom, influencing the effectiveness, quality, and
sustainability of project activities and results?
7. What are some of the key lessons learned as a result of this project that can be
shared and replicated?
8. What are the recommendations for similar support in the future?
(Nb. The recommendations should provide comprehensive proposals for future
interventions based on the current evaluation findings)

v) Engagement Cross-Cutting Principles

Assessing the extent to which the project is deepening localization of support and
engaging with all relevant stakeholders, being supportive of innovation, and
employing a human rights-based approach.
1. To what extent is the project working towards creating a supportive
community of practice within a broader entrepreneurship ecosystem?
2. To what extent is the project deepening support localization and engaging
with all relevant stakeholders?
3. To what extent does the project support innovation with the outcomes and
potential scale-ups?

 

Interested candidates should submit a proposal including the proposed methodology, budget, and timeline for the evaluation by email:  [email protected]  

Overall Objectives: 
The objective(s) of the development cooperation among the parties is to have MSMEs capable of maintaining and creating new employment within complex economic environments with the support of national partners. The focus of all those activities is to improve job opportunities for the target communities of refugees and host communities both as Direct Beneficiaries and as Indirect Beneficiaries. 4. To what extent is the project employing a human rights-based approach in terms of: ○ Participation ○ Accountability ○ Non-discrimination and equality ○ Empowerment ○ Legality Methodology for Evaluation For the evaluation to provide quantitative and qualitative data, the following methods might be used for a representative sample that includes internal/ external stakeholders and direct/ indirect beneficiaries: 1. Desk study and review of all relevant project documentation, including project documents, annual work plans, project progress reports, annual project reports, reports of the project steering committee, similar interventions, and approaches. 2. In-depth interviews to gather primary data from key stakeholders using a structured methodology 3. Focus Group discussion with project beneficiaries and other stakeholders. 4. Interviews with relevant key informants (see attached list of relevant institutions) 5. Observations (field visits using checklist) Duration of the Evaluation The evaluation is expected to start mid of October 2022 and conclude by mid of December 2022, for an estimated date to finalize data collecting, analysis, drafting, and holding the feedback and communications of the draft report, and finally, the final product finalizing date. Expected Deliverables An initial inception report is to be submitted for review and feedback by the donor and key stakeholders before the implementation of the evaluation. The report needs to include the consultant’s understanding of the TOR, detailed methodology of implementation, work plan, and proposed team members. A draft report of preliminary findings, prior to the final report, that will be reviewed by the donor and key stakeholders; including the consultant’s understanding of the TOR, detailed methodology of implementation, work plan, proposed team members, and preliminary findings. The report is also to be discussed with respective parties in a preliminary findings meeting. The content and structure of the final analytical report with findings, recommendations, and lessons learned covering the scope of the evaluation usually include the following: 1. Executive summary 2. Introduction 3. Description of the evaluation methodology 4. Situational analysis regarding the outcome, outputs, and partnership strategy 5. Analysis of opportunities to guide future programming 6. Key findings, including best practices and lessons learned 7. Conclusions and recommendations 8. Appendices: Charts, terms of reference, field visits, people interviewed, documents reviewed
Activities: 
N/A
Start Date
Sat, 15/10/2022 (All day) to Thu, 15/12/2022 (All day)
Project Status
Started/Ongoing
Project Timeframe
N/A
Intervention Sector(s):
Development, Relief Services, Social & Cultural Development
Project Location:
Beirut
Lebanon
LB
Collaboration with Other Organisations
The LGA Program is supported by the European Regional Development and Protection Program for Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq (RDPP II).