Organization: HelpAge International
Country: Ethiopia, Mozambique, United Republic of Tanzania, Zimbabwe
Closing date: 03 Apr 2017
HelpAge International helps older people claim their rights and challenge discrimination and poverty, so that they can lead dignified, secure, active and healthy lives. HelpAge International is implementing ‘The Better Health for Older People in Africa’ programme between, July 2014 and June 2017 with a total budget of GBP 3,910,354 funded by DFID. The programme is implemented in four countries: Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Tanzania and Ethiopia.
The overall aim of the programme is to make poor older women/men and their households less vulnerable to illness and worsening poverty through provision of better access to health and care services. Efforts to provide age – appropriate health, HIV and care services as well as social entitlements that will better enable them to meet their health needs as well as efforts on improving the accountability of service providers and policy makers both locally and nationally were also made.
There are four months of implementation remaining before programme phase out. Under donor stipulations and because Helpage international has a string ethos of learning from its programmatic work this final evaluation of the work between April – May 2017 will be conducted.
· Target Beneficiaries
Direct Beneficiaries – 387,763 older women and men (232,658F, 155,105M), over 50 years of age in the programme areas will access improved health care services (age – friendly and gender sensitive).
1,718 health staff will benefit from the training supported by the programme.
Indirect beneficiaries – 938,853 family members, from older people households will benefit. This is assuming that one household has five members. Thus, improving the health status of an older person at the household level, will lead to improved livelihood status within the household, making an older person less dependent on the other household members.
· Programme Management
HelpAge International, is an international network of organizations working on ageing with a London secretariat. HelpAge manages the programme through its country offices, Africa Regional Office (based in Nairobi, Kenya) and its headquarters in London.
Age International is the UK affiliate of the HelpAge Network and has the overall responsibility of overseeing the programme management, reporting and donor liaison. It also has the responsibility of sharing the programme learning widely.
HelpAge country offices/representatives manage the country programme through working closely with national partners; coordinating with the regional HelpAge office, monitoring activities and reporting.
Table 1: Country Office with Implementing Partners
1. Country – Mozambique (MOZ)
Country Office/Representative – HelpAge International – Mozambique
- Associacao Para Aos Velhos Desamparados (AAVEDOS)
Associacao Crista Interdenomiacional para o Desenvolvimento da Comunidade (ACIDECO)
Associacao de Proteccao dos Idosos de Tet (APITE)
Red Cross Mozambique (CVM)
Associacao Humanitaria de Apoio a Velhice (Vukoxa)
Associação Moçambicana para o Desenvolvimento da Família (AMOFEDA)
2 Country – Ethiopia (ETH)
Country Office/Representative – HelpAge International – Ethiopia
Ethiopian Elderly and Pensioners National Association (EEPNA)
Tesfa Social and Development Association (TSDA)
24 health facilities in Oromia and SNNP Regions directly managed by the country office
3 Country – Zimbabwe (ZIM)
Country Office/Representative – Center for Community Development Solutions (CCDS)
4 Country – Tanzania (TAN)
Country Office/Representative HelpAge International – Tanzania
Jumiya Wastaafu Na Wazee Zanzibar (JUWAZA)
Magu Poverty Focus on Older People Rehabilitation Centre (MAPERECE)
Tanzania Mission to the Poor and Disabled (PADI)
2. Purpose of the Evaluation and Intended Use
The final evaluation will strive to interrogate the extent to which programme objectives have been met and will utilize the OECD-DAC criteria (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability) from which to structure the evaluation. It aims to build upon the mid-term evaluation that was conducted in 2016; see if recommendations from the evaluation have be me and identify key learnings that will help improve future health programming in HelpAge international.
Evaluation findings should be applicable for health programming in the regional and national contexts in which programme implementation was conducted. The findings are expected to inform decision making, foster an environment of learning, and promote greater understanding of effective health service provision for older persons in Africa.
3. Objectives of the Final Evaluation
The main objective of the evaluation will be to test the extent to which the programme has realized its broader theory of change
Ø To critically assess the level of achievements attained vis – a – vis the initial plan (results framework)
Ø To assess the programme of work against the OECD-DAC criteria (effectiveness, efficiency & value for money, relevance and impact)
Ø Assess the sustainability of achievements, implementation procedures, approaches and modalities
Ø Identify and draw out key learning as a result of implementation of the programme
Ø Provide recommendations to improve the future effectiveness of health programme development
4. Evaluation Focus and Scope
· What specific change has this programme brought about in reducing the poverty level of older people households through improvements in their health outcome?
· Has access to affordable health and care services by older persons improved in the four implementing countries?
· Have there been any policy changes/directives put in place that support improved health for older persons at country and regional level as a result of the programme’s efforts?
· Are there any policy changes that have been initiated at country/national level as a result of the project’s policy advocacy impact?
· What changes have occurred as a direct result of the project at different levels, and for different stakeholders?
· What are the unintended consequences of the project (positive and negative)?
· To what extent have the interventions undertaken been relevant to the local needs and priorities of older persons?
· Did the project adapt to changes in the context and from learning as the project progressed?
· How well did the project achieve the expected results (objectives and outcomes) in the results framework?
· Which results showed significant over- or under-achievement, and what were the major factors influencing this?
· Were there any gaps related to planning, management, monitoring and implementation that influenced the results?
· Have the lessons learning, monitoring and evaluation systems put in place after the mid-term evaluation been effective, placing particular attention on the roll out of the digitalization activities?
· The roles and responsibilities fulfilled by the HelpAge country and regional offices as well as implementing partners at country level. How the performance of each agency influenced the realization of the project objectives
Efficiency & VfM
· Were procurement, management and partnership arrangements appropriate to achieving the desired quality, quantity, and timeliness of outputs?
· Were the benefits delivered by the project proportionate to the costs?
· To what extent could the programme cost have been reduced/made more efficient without sacrificing the quality of the results
· To what extent will the benefits of the project continue after funding ceases? Specifically,
· Policy support – will efforts made thus far continue to influence policy makers after the programme has phased out?
· Institutional capacity – how far the programme is embedded in the local institutional structures – if the health facilities retain the knowledge received after trainings – if OCM will actively continue working after the programme has phased out – what changes have occurred in the capacities of local implementing partner organizations that will enable them to continue supporting the work after the programme has phased
Cross – Cutting
· What measures have been taken to mainstream gender in the programme and to what extent have women and vulnerable groups been involved in decision making?
· What measures were taken to ensure cross country and regional level learnings?
A mixed methods approach will be undertaken consisting broadly of 2 main components:
Desk review: all programme documents such as the project proposal, quarterly reports, budget, mid-term evaluation report etc. will be reviewed against the results framework. Documents shaping the wider external environment such as in country policies, strategies employed by regional bodies will be reviewed.
Field work: field visits to a representative sample of selected partners in all programme implementing countries will be conducted. Data collection methods might include: Key Informant Interviews, Focus group discussions and Participatory mapping and story-telling (encouraged)
Analysis and Reporting: the evaluator/s will undertake robust and appropriate analysis of the data and provide ample opportunity for feedback and resonance testing.
6. Specific Tasks and Deliverables
The evaluator will undertake the following tasks:
• Undertake a document review to become familiar with the project.
• Develop an evaluation framework, methodology and tools and refine these with the HelpAge staff.
• Undertake data collection and analysis according to HelpAge guidelines on evaluation quality
• Present draft findings and recommendations to all relevant project stakeholders
• Prepare a draft report for review, circulate and consider comments
• Prepare and submit a final report according to HelpAge guidelines on length and structure
HelpAge will support with provision of required documents, logistics and coordinating with countries/locations/stakeholders where evaluation consultations will take place and providing comments on evaluation draft/s.
7. Expertise Required
• A postgraduate qualification (Masters or above) in Social Sciences or International development and/or public health with a minimum of 5 years’ experience in Research, Monitoring and Evaluation.
• Proven experience of evaluating complex multi-country programmes especially in the area of health and advocacy
• Experience and familiarity with aging and gender
• Strong communication skills, proficient in working across all levels of institutions with experience of conducting primary data collection activities sensitively in a range of contexts.
• Excellent report writing skills in English
· Experience of evaluating digital data collection and analysis systems
The evaluation should commence not later than May 2017. It is anticipated that the evaluation will take no more than 30 working days, including, preparation and piloting the tools, briefings/debriefings and external meetings, presentation/revision of findings to HelpAge and other stakeholders and preparing draft and final reports.
How to apply:
9. Expressions of Interest
Expressions of interest are sought from applicants meeting the criteria above. These should be sent to firstname.lastname@example.org, no later than April 3, 2017.
10. Expressions of interest should include
• A short (one page) cover letter addressing the selection criteria above.
• CV (maximum 3 pages) outlining his/her experience
• Summary Proposal (maximum 3 pages) illustrating the applicant’s understanding of the TOR and task to be accomplished, plus a draft evaluation framework with clear sampling method and plan including any logistic support required.
• Financial proposal: The financial proposal should provide cost estimates for services rendered including daily consultancy fees.
Powered by Jobs Tanzania