Objectives of the evaluation

The evaluation concerns the SIA programme of Iles de Paix (IDP) in Uganda, for the period 2017-2021: PROMOTION OF SUSTAINABLE FAMILY FARMING AND SOCIAL ECONOMY FOR A FAIRER WORLD.

In this country, the program is implemented by partners in the following areas:

• Kabarole District: Local partner RCA (previously SATNET) Local partner JESE
• Kamwenge District: Local partner JESE

This evaluation must meet the requirements of learning and accountability to the financial donor that is the DGD. It must make it possible to assess the achievement of results and to draw lessons for future interventions.

In particular, the objective of this evaluation is to assess all the program’s results, whether or not they have been achieved, on the basis of DAC criteria. The new DAC criteria do not need to be taken into account for this current program and the evaluation will therefore focus on the criteria of relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability as well as the cross-cutting dimensions of gender and environment.

It will therefore:

• For each of the results of the program (including SOs):

• Assess the achievement of the result in terms of quality and quantity
• Qualify the relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the changes observed in the field

• For the program as a whole:

• Appreciate the consideration of the transversal gender dimension
• Appreciate the consideration of the cross-cutting environmental dimension

• For specific aspects of the program:

• Respond to the specific evaluation questions proposed

 

Fields of evaluation

The evaluation will report on the results of the SIA program carried out by Iles de Paix in Uganda.

For this evaluation, the consultant may refer to the program’s Theory of Change, through which the desired results are made explicit. However, the consultant should focus on assessing the relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the results achieved in accordance with DAC requirements.

Relevance: The degree to which an aid activity is relevant to the needs of the target group and the priorities of the beneficiary.

Effectiveness: The degree to which the objectives of an activity are achieved.

Efficiency: Measures the relationship between the results - qualitative and quantitative - and the resources used to achieve them within a given time frame. An economic concept, efficiency means using the least expensive resources possible to ensure that the desired results are achieved. Therefore, to determine whether the most efficient process has been adopted, it is usually necessary to compare it with other possible ways of achieving the same results.

Sustainability: Measures the chance that the benefits of a development intervention will survive after the intervention ends. The potential for survival of the intervention after the end of the grant is assessed according to three aspects: financial sustainability, social sustainability and knowledge transfer/capacity building.

Impact: positive and negative effects, direct or indirect, intended or unintended, induced by an intervention in support of development.

 

Outputs

The outputs will be written in English.

• Support (PPT or other) for the restitution of preliminary observations to the field teams at the end of the visits and partner meetings;
• A provisional report;
• A final report which should contain the following elements:

1. Executive summary,
2. Background and objectives of the program
3. Reminder of the objectives and questions of the evaluation,
4. Description of the evaluation methodology (highlighting how the methodology was used to answer the evaluation questions, the arrangements made to ensure the quality of the sources of information, the arrangements made to ensure the triangulation of data, and the arrangements made to ensure the neutrality of the evaluation report),
5. Evaluation:
   • Analysis of program results according to DAC criteria (evaluation question 1)
   • Analysis of the consideration of cross-cutting dimensions (evaluation question 2)
   • Analysis of strengths, weaknesses and lessons identified from the analysis of program results (evaluation questions 3 and 4)
   • Response to specific evaluation questions
6. Conclusions and recommendations (evaluation question 5)
   • - Overall conclusions
   • - Overall recommendations and areas for improvement (making sure they are realistic and workable),

• A PowerPoint presentation of the results of the evaluation
• A "key message" note summarizing in a maximum of one page the main messages to be retained from the evaluation