NOTICIAS

VOLVER

FUNPADEM requiere la contratación de servicios de un(a) consultor(a) en evaluación de proyectos

Lunes 13 Junio, 2016

Terms of Reference

Independent Evaluation of projects

  • OVERVIEW AND JUSTIFICATION

Title of project being evaluated: Dialogando II- Building labour law compliance capacities in Honduras and Panama

Timing of evaluation: Final

Funding agreements were signed between Funpadem and the Labour Program of Employment and Social Development Canada (Labour-ESDC) for three projects between 2012 and 2014 

  • “Dialogando I - Strengthening compliance capacities for labour law and social dialogue in Costa Rica and Honduras” – $ 600,000 CAD
  • “Dialogando I - Strengthening compliance capacities for labour law and social dialogue in Panama and Dominican Republic” – $ 600,000 CAD
  • “Dialogando II - Building labour law compliance capacities in Honduras and Panama” – $ 700,000 CAD

An additional project was approved in March 2016, but will not be subject to this evaluation.

The “Dialogando I” projects were originally to be implemented in a period of 24 months, from April 2012 to March 2014. Both projects were extended for 2 months through a “time-only extension”. Subsequently, projects were completed on May 31, 2014. 

The “Dialogando II” project was implemented from March 2014 to June 2016. The project duration was extended by 3 months to program unused funds and finalize project activities.

According to the Funding Agreement signed between the Labour-ESDC and FUNPADEM an independent final evaluation is to be conducted to review the progress and achievements of the three projects, as well as to identify the lessons learned.

 

2. PROJECT BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND CONTEXT

The Foundation for Peace and Democracy (FUNPADEM), based in Costa Rica, is a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization with more than 22 years of experience in the implementation of strategic development actions to promote sustainable human development in the Americas. With well over 10 years implementing projects in Central America, FUNPADEM has developed both contacts and tools for the promotion of social dialogue and civil society initiatives with partners throughout the region.

In general, Central America has shown progress in social dialogue and labor law compliance initiatives. FUNPADEM´s approach indicates that to become part of the culture in labor relations the intended dialogue has to thrive in local, regional and sectoral conditions, and most importantly, related to concrete topics and performance. This approach allowed for specific problems to be tackled more directly and for actors to develop abilities to address those specific problems.

Funpadem implemented the Dialogando 1 projects in Panama and Dominican Republican, and in Honduras and Costa Rica. And Dialogando 2, in Panamá and Honduras. The projects aimed to strengthen the capacities of dialogue for better enforcement of Labour laws in the Ministries of Labour of those countries and have accomplished notable results.

In Panama, a new organizational management capacity was developped in the capital, based on a cutting edge model of work focused in the disciplines of execution; inspection and conciliation officers have the tools and habits to plan their ordinary work as well as to monitor its performance and achievement. A national training program was conducted with more than one thousand beneficiaries from different Departments. Protocols have been designed and validated.

In Dominican Republic, a series of protocols to standardize the inspection procedure were designed and the inspectors of Health and Safety as well as the general ones were trained on how to implement them. Also, public campaigns to prevent and eradicate child labour were broadcasted, within the scope of the National Road Map and the countries commitments in this matter. Both in Panamá and Dominican Republic a national monitoring system for the eradication of child labour has been designed.Honduras a very successful training program of more than 120 hours was conducted for inspectors. During the two versions of the Diploma courses, more than 50 inspectors from all over the country were trained, covering the key aspects of their ordinary work, from Labour law topics, to procedural matters, also including managerial aspects, negotiation skills, and international labour standards. These Diploma programs were jointly implemented with two Universities (one public and one private), allowing them to generate the capacities to replicate the curriculum. Technical support was also provided for inspection to better administer their cases on a digital way, and equipment was provided in order to facilitate their work.

In Costa Rica a very successful training program of more than 120 hours for new conciliators from different regional offices in the country was conducted, jointly with a public University. This training program was complemented with the upgrade of the electronic case management system (ECMS) of conciliation, and with the development a web-base application for worker to appoint their counselling and conciliation audience online. This tool has been a full success. Before this application, there were long line-ups for services from 5 a.m. to 7 p.m.  Today, thousands of workers receive a more agile, modern and transparent conciliation service due to the training program, the ECMS and the web-based appointment application.

Management arrangements of the project

  • The project is managed by a National Project Coordinator (NOA) based in San José, Costa Rica, who reports to the ESDC in Canadá. There were also in country project coordinators.

3. Purpose, SCOPE, CLIENTS OF THE EVALUATION

Purpose:

The independent evaluation serves two main purposes:

  • Give an independent assessment of the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact of the project including the effectiveness of strategies, implementation modalities chosen and partnership arrangements
  • Document challenges, lessons learned, good practices, and recommendations for future similar interventions.

 Scope:

  • The evaluation will consider project implementation from 2012 to the present. It will also consider the geographical areas covered by the project activities.
  • Information gathering and analysis should be gender responsive. All data collected should be sex-disaggregated.

Clients:

The findings of this final evaluation are destined primarily to the donor, Labour Program of Employment and Social Development Canada (Labour-ESDC) overseeing the implementation of the project, the project management and key national partners involved.

4. EVALUATION CRITERIA AND QUESTIONS 

The evaluation will address the following evaluation criteria i) relevance and strategic fit, ii) validity of design, iii) project progress and effectiveness, iv) efficiency of resource use, v) effectiveness of management arrangements and iv) impact orientation and sustainability.  In line with the results-based approach, the evaluation will focus on identifying and analysing results through addressing key questions related to the evaluation criteria and the achievement of the outcomes/immediate objectives of the initiative using the logical framework indicators.

Key Evaluation Questions

The evaluator shall examine the following key issues:

Relevance and strategic fit,

  • Given the current political and socio-economic situation, have the projects carried out a regular needs assessment to address emerging relevant needs?
  • How did the projects coordinate and complement other Canadian projects and/or other organizations and donor’s relevant work in the countries?
  • Were the projects objectives consistent with the national key partners’ needs, requirements, and the country needs?

Validity of design,

  • Did the projects carry out a proper situation analysis exercise prior and during the inception of the projects?
  • Have the intended results and intervention logic been properly identified and addressed in the project-cycle: design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation?
  • Did the project implement the result-based-management approach? Was the logical framework coherent and realistic (inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes, indicators and means of verification; risk factors and mitigation plans)?

Project progress and effectiveness,

  • Were outputs produced and delivered so far as per the work plan? Has the quantity and quality of these outputs been satisfactory? How do the stakeholders perceive them? Do the benefits accrue equally to men and women?
  • In case the project has amended its initial plans did the added activities/amendments contributed in achieving the objectives?
  • Did the foreseen risk factors and other constrains affect the progress? What were the alternative strategies? Were these new strategies effective and efficient?
  • Was a monitoring and evaluation plan in place?

Efficiency of resource use,

  • Have resources (human, financial resources, time, etc.) allocated and used strategically and efficiently to achieve the objectives of the project?
  • Were the project’s activities/operations in line with the schedule of activities as defined by the project team and work plans?
  • Have activities supporting the strategy been cost-effective? Do the results justify the costs?
  • Are the disbursements and project expenditures in line with expected budgetary plans? If not, what were the bottlenecks encountered? 

Effectiveness of management arrangements,

  • How effective have the internal project management arrangements been? Cooperation and coordination among the project staff members.
  • Was there a clear understanding of roles and responsibilities by all parties involved in the project implementation?
  • How effective was the coordination and communication between the project staff and national partners?
  • Did the project effectively coordinate with other relevant projects?

Impact orientation and sustainability,

  • Have the achieved results enabled the environment towards achieving the developmental objective of the project?
  • Has the project strengthened the institutional and organizational capacities of the key national partners?
  • What are the emerging impacts of the project and the changes that can be linked to the project’s intervention?
  • What are the realistic long-term effects of the project?
  • Are the key national partners able to continue the project?
  • How effective and realistic is the exit strategy of the project?

5. METHODOLOGY

Based on the above criteria and considering the participatory approach, the evaluation methodology is based on the following steps:

  • Desk review and preparation of inception report: desk review of all relevant documents: project document and its logical framework, funding agreement, relevant minute sheets, implementation plan, performance evaluation plan, progress reports, and other relevant documents and studies. 
  • Meeting with the project staff: the evaluator will have online calls, to communicate with each project staff outside Costa Rica.
  • Collection of data and interview with stakeholders: the evaluator will contact with the national key partners of the project, organize virtual discussions with them, and relevant stakeholders (see below).
  • Debriefing phase: the evaluator will organize a debriefing conference call to present and discuss the preliminary findings.
  • Submission of the first draft of the report: The evaluator will submit a draft evaluation report for comment and factual correction.
  • Collection of feedback on the first draft: The evaluation manager will incorporate any comments deemed appropriate and provide a brief note explaining why any comments might not have been incorporated.
  • Submission of the final report: the evaluator will submit the final report.

The evaluator should use multiple methods to analyze both qualitative and quantitative data.

The evaluator should pay a particular attention to the following:

  • All data should be sex-disaggregated,
  • Different needs of women and men should be identified and considered throughout the evaluation process,
  • Efficiency and effectiveness of gender mainstreaming in the evaluation should be ensured

Key stakeholders to be consulted

Key national partners:

  • The main project counterparts are the Ministries of Labour in Costa Rica, Honduras, Panamá and Dominican Republic, and employer and employee organizations.

Other stakeholders

Donor: The Labour Program of Employment and Social Development Canada (Labour-ESDC).

Funpadem: Project staff based on Costa Rica, Honduras, Panamá.

Others: Other development partners involved in social dialogue and fundamental principles and rights at work (other donors, local and international organizations, and civil society organizations).

6. MAIN DELIVERABLES                               

  • An inception report including evaluation workplan and methodology, including the information gathering tools to be used,
  • Report on the debriefing phase.
  • Draft report that should follow the structure outlined below:
    • Cover page with key project and evaluation data
    • Executive Summary
    • Acronyms
    • Description of the project
    • Purpose, scope and clients of the evaluation
    • Methodology
    • Clearly identified findings for each criterion
    • Conclusions
    • Recommendations
    • Lessons learned and good practices
      • Annexes:
        • TORs,
        • List of persons met and consulted,
        • List of meetings and interviews,
        • Other relevant documents.
    • Final evaluation report.

7. MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

Management arrangements of this evaluation

The following management arrangements are to be considered for this evaluation:

  • The evaluation will be conducted under overall responsibility of FUNPADEM.
  • The evaluator will report directly to FUNPADEM.
  • The project team will provide the required administrative and logistical support for the completion of the evaluation in consultation with the evaluation manager.
  • The evaluation does not include additional travel expenses. Therefore the consultant will gather information and conduct interviews mostly through electronic means.

8. TIMETABLE AND PAYMENT

The evaluation will be undertaken from June 13 –  July 13, 2016.

The evaluator shall be remunerated for a total amount of $5000.

Payment breakdown:

*       First payment represents 30 % upon signing the contract.

*       Second payment represents 70 % upon completion of work and submission of the final report to the satisfaction.

9. LEGAL AND ETHICAL MATTERS

By agreeing to undertake this work, the evaluator guarantees he/she does not have any stakes or prior involvement with the project implementation, nor any links to project management or any other conflict of interest that would compromise the independence of the evaluation.

10. COMPETENCIES REQUIRED

The evaluator should have the following qualifications:

*       Master degree in development, law, Business management or related qualifications,

*       A minimum of 10 years of professional experience in evaluating international development initiatives, logical framework and other strategic approaches, M&E methods and approaches, and information analysis and report writing,

*       Understanding of the development context in Central America.

*       Excellent communication and interview skills,

*       Excellent report writing skills,

*       Demonstrated ability to deliver quality results within strict deadlines,

*       Excellent knowledge of English and excellent drafting skills.

ANNEXES

ANNEX 1. Timeline

ANNEX 2. Inception report outline

 

ANNEX 1. Timeframe

The evaluation will be undertaken from 13 June – 13 July 2016, in accordance with the work plan detailed below

 

Detailed work plan table

Evaluators tasks

Source of information

Time frame

Desk review and preparation of inception report: desk review of all relevant documents: project document and its logical framework, funding agreement, relevant minute sheets, implementation plan, performance evaluation plan, progress reports, other relevant documents and studies. 

Project staff, ESDC

Fifteen days

Meeting with the project staff: the evaluator will meet the project staff for briefing in San José Costa Rica, and hold virtual meetings with country managers.

Project staff

Collection of data and interview with stakeholders: the evaluator will communicate with relevant stakeholders and beneficiaries of the project.

Key partners, and relevant stakeholders, beneficiaries.

Five days

Debriefing phase: the evaluator will organize a debriefing meeting to present and discuss the preliminary findings.

Evaluator, Funpadem

one day

Submission of the first draft of the report: The evaluator will submit a draft evaluation report.

Based on the debriefing and the seminar discussion, the evaluator will send a first draft of the evaluation report for comments.

Three days (email the report then Skype)

Collection of feedback on the first draft:  the evaluator will finalize the report incorporating any comments deemed appropriate and providing a brief note explaining why any comments might not have been incorporated.

Comments of the draft evaluation report

5 days

Submission of the final report: the evaluator will submit the final report to the evaluation manager.

 

The evaluator incorporates comments as he/she deems it appropriate and submits the final report to the evaluation manager

One day

Total number of days

30 days

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ANNEX 2. INCEPTION REPORT OUTLINE

OVERVIEW

Title of projects being evaluated

 

 

 

Organization responsible for administrating the project

 

 

 

Type of evaluation (e.g. independent, internal)

 

Timing of evaluation (e.g. mid-term, final)

 

FUNPADEM requiere la contratación de servicios de un(a) consultor(a) en evaluación de proyectos