Building an inclusive community through disability sport. Terms of reference (ToR) for external evaluation

Transcription

1 Building an inclusive community through disability sport Terms of reference (ToR) for external evaluation Background Motivation Established in 1991, Motivation is an international development charity supporting people with mobility disabilities. Our high-quality, low-cost wheelchairs are designed specifically for use in developing countries. Teamed with our innovative training programmes, our wheelchairs transform lives, giving disabled people independence, confidence and hope for the future. Motivations work is broken down into four key programme areas: Survival, Mobility, Empowerment and Inclusion. The Project Motivation with funding from the Comic Relief Sport for Change programme has implemented a three year project in Uganda under the title Building an inclusive community through disability sport (IDS). The project started in April 2011 and will run till March 2014 This project has been delivered on the ground by two local delivery partners: Gulu Disabled Peoples Union The Kids League Both organisations have an individual Memorandum of Understanding with Motivation to deliver the Project outcomes through a set of identified Project Activities. Project area The Project is delivered in three districts in the north of Uganda all of which are post conflict affected areas: Gulu Amuru Nwoya 1

2 Project outcomes 1. Increasing self-confidence/self-efficacy Disabled children show a measurable increase in self-efficacy, including increased confidence, independence, and ability to take greater responsibility for their own health, well-being and life choices. 2. Advocating for rights Disabled children demonstrate a willingness and ability to advocate for their rights, particularly in the areas of education and health, supporting the development of a young and vibrant disability movement in northern Uganda. 3. Raising awareness of disability Disabled children and their parents report that they feel more accepted amongst their nondisabled peers and non-disabled children participating in the existing Gulu sports league and their parents demonstrate a measureable improvement in their attitudes about disability. 4. Improving organisational capacity GDPU and the Kids League have the capacity to deliver inclusive sport activities and peer mentoring, and both partners have increased capacity to manage projects, measure the impact of their programmes and finance their activities. 5. Expanding knowledge about sport and development Research into the relationship between sport and self-efficacy helps explain how sport causes changes in self-efficacy, particularly for disabled children, and which factors are most important in achieving positive change. The programme now is in its third year and due for evaluation as a part of a donor requirement and this ToR seeks to identify an external consultant who would undertake an independent review of the program. Scope and focus of evaluation Goal and methodology The goal of this evaluation is to assess and critically analyse the IDS project in relation to: outcomes achieved, what difference the Project has made how it has made that difference - particularly focusing on understanding the key success factors for achieving long term sustainable change. Evaluation questions The process of the evaluation should answer the following questions regarding the IDS project by using participatory methodology: 2

3 Project effectiveness: To what degree has the Project achieved the planned Project Outcomes through the set Project activities set out in the MOUs? Were there any unexpected outcomes? Project coverage: Has the programme reached the participants and beneficiaries identified in the MOU Project participation: Has the programme engaged sufficiently and appropriately with project stakeholders, in particular project participants and beneficiaries? Project capacity: Was there sufficient capacity to implement and manage the project effectively? Supervision, monitoring and data collection: Has the project been able to measure project outcomes and indicators with the supervision, monitoring and data collection strategies currently in place. Has data been managed effectively? Sustainability: what are the barriers to sustainability and what recommendations can be made to improve sustainability? The evaluation should have a particular focus on the added value of the sports element of the project. In particular to what extent does this create a fertile ground to bring about change in the lives of children and young people with disabilities and to influence the attitudes of those around them. Specifically what is the impact on: (1) The children and young people with disabilities that participate in regular team sports sessions and end of season awards days in terms of: Increased self esteem Empowerment Sustainability of this impact Their perception of their disability (2) Parents and the community of young people with disabilities participating in regular team sports sessions and end of season awards days in terms of: Perception of disability has there been an increase in awareness of disabled children and young people s worth and ability? Changes in social attitudes to disability What difference has the programme made to people s lives? Who has benefited (by age and gender) and in what ways? Are these the groups that the project aimed to reach? Are they the expected changes? Are the changes (outcomes) relevant to disabled children and young people s needs? Are the outcomes likely to be sustainable in the long term? 3

4 Have there been changes to policies, practice and attitudes of decision and policy makers to benefit the project s target groups? To what extent has the project contributed to the achievement of broader inclusion national and international policies (including sports policies), conventions, targets etc. in Uganda? To what extent has the achievement of the changes/ outcomes and their potential sustainability been influenced by external context and other factors? Approaches used by the project and implementing organisations: Has the overall theory of change for this project - combining the two elements of sports participation and peer mentoring - been effective in starting to bring about lasting change? Were there any gaps? What has worked and what has not? What lessons have been learned? Who have they been shared with? Has partnership between The Kids League and the Gulu Disabled Person Union been beneficial to the delivery of the project and the capacity for the sustainability of its impact and continuation of some elements of the project post Comic Relief funding? Has Motivation s project management, monitoring and support been beneficial to The Kids League and the Gulu Disabled Person Union in the development and running of the project, its sustainability of its impact and continuation of some elements of the project post Comic Relief funding? What has worked, what could be improved? Has the project been cost effective? Approaches used by Comic Relief: How have Comic Relief s grant making policies and processes helped or hindered the delivery of lasting change? Are there any other ways in which Comic Relief has helped or hindered the delivery of change? The methodology must be participatory: all key stakeholders should be provided with an opportunity to provide input and comments to the evaluation team, including interviews with Motivation and Comic Relief grants staff. It is expected the evaluator will review and analyse the relevant IDS Project documents listed below: 4

5 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) - Comic Relief and Motivation MOU GDPU and Motivation MOU - TKL and Motivation Monthly narrative and financial reports from GDPU and TKL Training and awareness raising reports form GDPU Case studies International Project Grant Feedback Report - Year 1 International Project Grant Feedback Report - Year 2 Monitoring and evaluation undertaken to produce Feedback Reports The report The report should be clear and simply written, free of jargon. The main body of the report should not exceed 30 pages and should include an executive summary and recommendations. Technical details should be confined to appendices, which should also include a list of informants and the evaluation team s work schedule. Background information should only be included when it is directly relevant to the report s analysis and conclusions. All analysis of a project s achievements must be supported with relevant data and state how this has been sourced. Recommendations should also include details as to how they might be implemented. The grant holder and partners should own the report. The report must include guidance on the process by which findings will be shared and discussed with all stakeholders including those who are benefiting from the project and how any resulting changes in the report will be included. The report must be accompanied by an analysis (no more than 2 pages in length) giving the views of the grant holder and partners on the quality/depth of the evaluation, the relevance and usefulness of the recommendations, and what actions they propose to take in response. All pre and post field trip write up must be conducted from the evaluators own premises. Following the dissemination of the report, it will be required that grant Motivation will inform Comic Relief of the response of project staff, local organisations, project participants and other stakeholders, including what is found to be useful and what is contested. Evaluation process and timeline The final evaluation is expected to be completed by the end of April The following timetable indicates approximate timings for the process: 5

6 Actions Proposed dates Who Tender bids received by Motivation Review applicants/shortlist/appoint week beginning Motivation/Comic Relief Refine methodology, agree final Motivation/, Partners/Evaluator evaluation plan, agree contractual details Begin evaluation Evaluator Presentation and discussion of Motivation/ Partners/Evaluator first draft Final report submission Evaluator Skills and competencies Motivation is looking for an evaluator with the following demonstrable skills and competencies: Experience in the evaluation of, or background of working in disability projects (with children and young people would be an advantage) A strong record in conducting evaluations particularly in the African context Producing high-quality, credible evaluations (examples required) Working with/evaluating NGO work Use of participatory methodologies Excellent writing and communication skills in English Tenders/bids Motivation invites bids from organisations or individuals with the experience and skills described above. Joint bids are welcome. Tenders should include: A covering letter introducing the evaluators/organisation and how the skills and competencies described above are met, with concrete examples 6

7 A two page outline of the proposed evaluation process and methodology A C.V for each evaluator (not exceeding two pages) One recent example of a previous evaluation (one for each of joint bids) Tenders to be ed to parker@motivation.org.uk by 17.00GMT on 28 th February 2014 Budget The budget available for the evaluation is 6,000. All costs of the evaluation are to be met within this budget including international flights and accommodation. The planning and coordination of the evaluation will be the responsibility of the evaluator. Further information For further information please contact Jane Parker by parker@motivation.org.uk 7