Baseline of the regional GFFO project 2018-2021 in Cameroon, Niger and Nigeria
Terms of reference
By Josaphat TCHETAN-AWO, Lake Chad MEL Specialist
The complex and protracted Lake Chad humanitarian crisis has resulted in the displacement of more than 2.3 million people, half of them are children. Many are living in desperate conditions without access to food or clean water. Malnutrition rates are alarmingly high.
Protection issues are of grave concern with evidence of violence against children as well as all worst forms of child labor. Women and girls face unabated gender based violence-they have been targeted, abducted and held hostage, raped or forced into marriage. When they do manage to escape, some of them face stigma from their families and communities.
GFFO funded a regional project covering Cameroon, Niger and Nigeria which ended in the second half of 2018. To strengthen the achievements of these projects a 3-year regional project covering the three countries and running from 2018 to 2021 started the 1st November 2018. Within the project framework it is planned to conduct a baseline study to inform the different outcomes indicators set in the logframe.
The present document outlines the terms of reference of the baseline study.
The overall objective of this baseline is to inform about the current situation in the intervention areas in each of the 3 countries (Cameroon, Niger and Nigeria) regarding the results set in the logframe.
2.1- SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES of the evaluation
To determine the baseline values of the outcome indicators
To develop the mapping of main CP/GBV risks and of existing child protection groups/structures in all the intervention areas
2.2- BASELINE QUESTIONS
To address the objectives of the baseline it is expected that answers are provided to the following questions:
- What are the baseline values of all the outcome indicators defined in the project logframe?
- What are the different types of CP/GBV risks in the communities and what are their enablers?
- What are the existing child protection groups/structures and what are their activities?
3 Key stakeholders involved
Children and youth and their families: These include girls and boys between 8 to 24 years old, as well as their families, who are in the different intervention areas. In addition to them, the community leaders and community groups will be heard.
National civil society organizations (CSO) or implementing partners: As key actors at community level, they are going to provide their perspective for the triangulation of the information collected.
Relevant country based coordination mechanisms and relevant government representatives: to understand how CP/GBV risk are classified within the country.
4 methodology AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY/ EVALUATION
The baseline exercise shall be conducted in all 3 countries (Cameroon, Niger and Nigeria) in which the project will be implemented.
The methodological approach to this exercise shall be generally a qualitative/mixed method approach of literature review combined with data collection through the different stakeholders cited above. The primary data collection is meant to get the initial picture of all the indicators as well as complement or triangulate information gathered through the desk review work on the main CP/GBV risks and the child protection groups/structures.
Focus groups discussions will be organized with community members, including children, youth and their families, and key informant interviews with the rest of the stakeholders cited above.
For the quantitative data collection, it is recommended to use the Lot Quality Assurance Sampling methodology.
5- expected deliverables
The expected outputs are:
- Inception Report including details of the methodology, data collection tools, and a schedule of field activities.
- Draft report(s) for review with qualitative and quantitative data analysis interface in MS Excel or SPSS.
- Baseline report per country (French for Cameroon and Niger, English for Nigeria)
The report must include:
- Title Page
- Table of Contents / Figures and Tables
- Abbreviations / acronyms page
- Executive summary (not more than 3 pages)
- Background and a short introduction to the project
- Methodology and limitations
- Indicators values
6- Intended users of the report(s)
The report will be primarily used by the three countries and the Lake Chad Programme Unit to inform about the current situation on the ground and to allow effective outcome monitoring as well as to provide clarity on the different CP/GBV existing risks with their drivers/enablers. It will be disseminated to the partners/ stakeholders (CPiE working group, GBV working group, protection cluster, donors, etc), the children, youth, parents/care givers and their communities and will be uploaded on Planet for a wider use.
Activity / Nr. of Days/ weeks
Secondary data review, develop and refine tools, logistics & inception report
4 days (home based)
Field visits/ interviews for data collection
30 days ( )
Data analysis and report preparation
15 days (home based)
Total Number of days
The final report will be due by 28/02/2019.
8- SELECTION CRITERIA FOR CONSULTANTS
For this exercise, Plan International is looking for a multi-disciplinary team composed of at least one member having:
- Proven expertise in designing and conducting evaluations using participatory, selective techniques
- Proven expertise in child protection and gender-based violence
- Experience in conducting gender sensitive research with children and young people
- Relevant advanced university degree in education, social work or another related discipline.
- Experience in conducting studies in the West Africa Countries
- Fluency in French and English
- At least 10 years’ experience in evaluation of human development/humanitarian work
The consultants team shall prepare and submit by December 12th 2018 a financial and technical proposal including
- detailed curriculum vitae of each team member with three references (two professional and one personal)
- a proposal outlining how and when they intend to accomplish this task
- a detailed financial proposal
To Linda Prahm - firstname.lastname@example.org and Saskia Kriester - email@example.com.
The selected team will be contracted and will start work shortly after recruitment. A service contract will be signed between the team and the Plan International Nigeria.
10- Ethical and child protection statements
Child Protection: Plan has a Child Protection Policy and Code of Conduct that the evaluation team will comply with.
In addition, the following ethical issues should be adhered to:
- Consent: It is important to always get the consent of the interviewees or children parents/guardians when doing an evaluation interview with them or when using their story as part of the evaluation case study. Informed consent can be verbal or written – whichever the evaluation team thinks is recommended for the person who is part of the evaluation.
- Confidentiality: It is important to respect confidentiality within this evaluation. For example, it can be useful to use pseudo-names for children, when using their names in case study in a report – or to codify the names of communities for the identification of the children. A good practice is that an interviewee is asked first whether a researcher can share information, before they tell their information to anyone else. But a researcher should not promise to keep secrets from other team members as this could create problems in the future. It is good to let people know from the outset that the information that they share with the evaluator may be shared with other members of the team. There are some occasions when it may be necessary to break confidentiality – this is when the child is threatened or in danger.
- Privacy: It is important to respect the privacy of a child and not ask invasive questions. While an adult may be able to say “no, I don’t want to answer that” a child may not be able to say that they feel uncomfortable. It is always good to allow the child the right not to answer any questions and to let them know that is OK.
- Expectations: It is important that the interviewee does not have their expectations raised unrealistically in survey. Therefore, an evaluator should not make promises that they cannot keep.