Call for Proposals: End-line Evaluation for Improving Access to Vocational Training and Employability among the Marginalized and Vulnerable Youth in Mandera County, Kenya Red Cross

Last Date for Receipt of proposals: 26^th January 2022

Time: 1100 Hrs

Tender Number: PRF08783

Submission Method: Email tenders@redcross.or.ke

Tender Opening Venue and Time : KENYA RED CROSS SOCIETY HEADQUARTERS BOARDROOM

                                                           Time: 1200 HRS

1. Summary of the Evaluation

1.1. Purpose: To find out the exact extent to which the conditions identified by the baseline study have changed/been influenced through the implementation of the Improving Access to Vocational Training and Employability Among the Marginalized and Vulnerable Youth in Mandera County about the project objectives, indicators, and targets per beneficiary. The review will provide a detailed reference to compare project achievements against the situation/baseline at the start of the intervention. At the minimum, it must answer all project indicator as well as provide lessons learnt and recommendations for on-going and future interventions.

1.2. Partners: Kenya Red Cross Society (KRCS), Enabel (Belgian Development Agency), VET Toolbox, County Government of Mandera, Mandera Technical Training Institute (MTTI) and National Industrial Training Authority (NITA)

1.3. Duration: 30 days

1.4. Estimated Dates: xxxx

1.5. Geographical Location: Mandera County

1.6. Target Population: Community members, youth, EBVET Trainers and stakeholders within targeted locations

1.7. Deliverables: Inception report and data collection tools shared at the initiation of the assignment, presentation of preliminary findings, a draft report for review, and a final print & soft copy version of the report plus all data sets in soft copy. (See detailed timelines under section 8)

1.8. Methodology: This may include but not limited to document review, Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with key partners and stakeholders; interviews with community members, Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and observations, household surveys and any other approach that the consultant can propose.

1.9. Evaluation Management Team: KRCS MEA&L, Program Representatives and Donor Representative

2. Background Information

Despite economic progress in Kenya, poverty and inequality levels remain relatively high, particularly in rural areas (75 per cent of the population), because of a number of factors, including the high cost of living disproportionately affecting the poor, high population growth rate, small landholdings, frequent droughts and large income disparities. Kenya’s population stands at 41.6 million, with 46 per cent living below the poverty line. Economic inequality is most prevalent and visible in the north- east counties (Mandera, Wajir and Garissa) which have also been excluded from the national development process.

The project is aligned to the 2012 UNESCO Shanghai Consensus by contributing to equitable access of education to the most vulnerable and disadvantaged youth in Mandera County. Its approach is aligned to the Communication on a new Africa-Europe Alliance for Sustainable Investment and Jobs as well as with the bigger goal of the European Union Trust Fund (EUTF) for stability to address some of the drivers of conflicts in the targeted counties. This project is aligned to Mandera County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP) and more specifically the innovation is designed to improve continuous access to VET to the most vulnerable and disadvantaged youth in the county. Overall, the proposed approach contributes towards increased employability of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups. The disadvantaged and vulnerable groups are youth who reside in areas that are VE hotspot and/or with limited access to VET centres due to security issues, unavailability of VET centres and/or poorly equipped VET centres. This action introduces an innovative and sustainable approach of providing Vocational Education and Training (VET); the Enterprise Based Vocational Educational Training (EBVET) to youth of Mandera County. The EBVET approach is designed in collaboration with County Government of Mandera, MTTI and NITA.

The EBVET approach will address all the four key priorities outlined in the call. The use of NITA certified local entrepreneurs and business entities as training providers is greatly going to reduce barriers to access to VET since these EBVET providers are people within the confines of the targeted youth. Considering the low literacy level of the targeted youth, local language is used to provide the required trainings. In addition, due to its community friendliness (ownership), this approach is likely to see more youth not only enrolled for but also completing the VET courses.

The project addresses the key gaps that limit access of formal and informal labor market for the marginalized and hard to reach youth in Mandera County. It does so by introducing the accessible youth and gender friendly Enterprise Based Vocational Education Training (EBVET) approach that integrates skill provision and employment linkage into its design. This approach recognizes that provision of skills and competencies is critical for the development of hands-on workers and a skilled human resource base for national development. Since Kenya’s population comprises mainly of youth, competitive vocational, entrepreneurial and life skill training programmes for their employability and contribution to national development goals becomes of paramount importance. Focus on building their capacity in life skills and technical skills provides a substantial contribution to the development of a middle-skilled labor force that is instrumental in promoting the growth of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) that is critical to wealth creation, promotion of self-reliance and growth of the national economy. The overall objective of the action is to contribute to increased employability of vulnerable and marginalized youth and women in Mandera County.

The baseline study of the project was undertaken in 2020 that provided bench mark statistics for the project indicators. In addition, monitoring missions 1 and 2 were conducted in 2021 and will also be used as secondary information for this evaluation.

3. Endline Survey Objectives

Specific Objectives of the Survey are:

• Establish end line information against the projects log frame indicators which will be used as a threshold for this project to assess inputs, outcomes and impact of the Enterprise Based Vocational Education and Training (EBVET) model.
• Review accessibility to Market driven vocational Education by marginalized and vulnerable youth and women (so as to provide youth and women with skills that can be used to improve employment and livelihoods prospects)
• To assess how the EBVET model could be upscale/rolled out beyond Mandera County
• To assess increase in generated income of targeted youth and women
• To establish how the EBVET model has contributed to keep youth on track by preventing negative developments, engaging in violence, radicalization etc.

4. Scope of Work

End-term evaluations (ETE) aim to assess the performance of the project and capture project achievements, challenges and to draw lessons learnt from the best practices to inform future similar programming. This ETE will also review the recommendations of the project baseline survey, monitoring mission 1 and 2 reports to assess the extent to which they were implemented. As well, it will evaluate the quality of Community Engagement and Accountability (CEA) during the project implementation period. The ETE will also identify key lessons learned, challenges, recommendations for changes and sustainability.

Geographically, the ETE will cover Mandera East, Mandera West and Banisa Sub-Counties of Mandera County

5. Key Questions

The following are the key questions to be addressed during the ETE while aligning them to the objectives of the project. The evaluator may however suggest changes/additional questions at the inception stage:

5.1 Effectiveness

• To what extent were the project expected quantitative results achieved (objectives, outputs and outcomes)? How does that compare to the target and the baseline findings?
• What changes on beneficiaries as reported by the community/stakeholders can be attributed to the project (positive, negative, expected and unexpected)
• What changes could have happened because of other projects in the same area?
• Were all the activities carried out? If not, why?
• What is the level of resilience amongst the targeted youth? What resilience protections and capacities do the targeted youth already possess that can be preserved or further strengthened?
• What vulnerabilities or needs may be present that can be addressed?
• Have there been any positive or negative unintended outcomes of the project towards preventing violent extremism?

5.2 Efficiency

• Were all activities done within the budget? If there were any significant variances (whether early or late, over or under expenditure), what caused them?
• How did the efficiency affect the effectiveness of the project?
• Was there value for money?
• What has been done in an innovative way?

5.3 Sustainability:

• What sustainability measures were put in place – institutional/financial/technical?
• To what extent have socio-cultural factors affected uptake of project interventions? And what measures have been/should be taken to address the same?
• To what extent the elements of the intervention can be sustained or are likely to be sustained?
• To what extent do the intervention objectives and design respond to communities’/stakeholders´ needs, policies, and priorities, and continue to do so if circumstances change?

5.4 Relevance

• How satisfied are the community members/stakeholders with the interventions undertaken by the project?
• What do the beneficiaries feel is the effect of the project on their lives in the short term and in the long run?
• To what extent was gender equality taken into consideration at all stages of project implementation?

5.5 Coherence:

• How well has the project’s intervention been compatible in line with the political agenda of the county?

5.6 Community Engagement and Accountability:

• To what extend were the KRCS minimum accountability standards integrated?
• How much do the community/stakeholders and beneficiaries understand the project?
• How much were beneficiaries involved in the project design and decision making?
• What complaints and feedback mechanism were put in place? To what extent were the common community complaints addressed during the project period?
• Do the community members think that the project respected their culture/religion/daily routines/community calendars etc. and how did that affect the project uptake?

6. Survey Methodology

The End Term evaluation shall employ a mixed method study design. For every indicator, every quantitative piece of data must be qualified by its corresponding qualitative and spatial data. The consultant is expected to propose a sample size and the techniques intended to be used that is scientific and can provide reliable and comparable data while minimizing bias. Ensure that all indicators have been answered through the tools and questions developed. The evaluator can also advise additional proposed approach/methodology that can be used to bring out intended outcome.

6.1 Project Indicator definitions

6.1.1 Understanding of the log frame indicator definitions

Table 1: Indicator definitions

7. Survey Quality & Ethical Standards

The consultant shall take all reasonable steps to ensure that the survey is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of the people and communities involved and to ensure that the assessment is technically accurate and reliable, is conducted transparently and impartially, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability. Therefore, the evaluation team shall be required to adhere to the evaluation standards and applicable practices as recommended by International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

• Utility: Evaluations must be useful and used.
• Feasibility: Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost effective manner.
• Ethics & Legality: Evaluations must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the evaluation.
• Impartiality & Independence; Evaluations should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.
• Transparency: Evaluation activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
• Accuracy: Evaluations should be technical accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that its worth or merit can be determined.
• Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the evaluation process when feasible and appropriate.
• Collaboration: Collaboration between key operating partners in the evaluation process improves the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.

It is expected that the survey will respect the seven Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent:

1) Humanity, 2) impartiality, 3) neutrality, 4) independence, 5) voluntary service, 6) unity, and 7) universality.

8. Qualifications and Experience for Consultants

The lead consultant must possess the following qualifications:

• The lead consultant must have an academic background in social sciences at master’s level
• Demonstrable experience in conducting high quality baselines for related projects in the past 3 years (sample reports will be required during the oral stage of bid analysis).
• Experience of conducting field assessments/working in Mandera
• He/she must have a team member that identifies with the local community in Mandera that can lead field data collection process.
• High level of professionalism and an ability to work independently under tight deadlines.
• Strong interpersonal and communication skills
• The lead consultant must have strong analytical skills and ability to clearly synthesize and present findings, draw practical conclusions, make recommendations and to prepare well-written reports.
• Availability for the period indicated.

Additional requirements/qualifications

• The team must have a statistician/data analyst with experience to develop data collection tools in ODK, design projects and advise on methodology appropriate, analyze quantitative and qualitative data
• Consultant must have experience in using electronic/mobile phone technology for data collection.
• Have expertise in the team for the key components of the project

9. Management of the evaluation

Duration: The End Term Evaluation shall commence on xxxx and the deliverables will be provided to the KRCS on 31st January 2022.

Deliverables:

1. Inception report detailing the end line Survey design, methodology, sampling methodology & sample frame,
2. Survey data collection tools, and work plan.
3. Share and present the preliminary findings (PowerPoint), draft Evaluation Report and the raw data used for reporting.
4. Final End Line Survey Reports.
5. The final report outline should be as proposed:

I. The executive summary to be written in a separate paper providing the bare essentials for decision-makers regarding the background, major conclusions about the survey criteria, recommendations, and lessons learned (total 1-2 pages).

II. The main report (max. 30 pages plus a list of abbreviations) of which a substantial part will be the main conclusions and recommendations. These should be substantiated with more detailed information only to the extent necessary. Detailed findings should be referred to the annexes. Conclusions and recommendations in the main report should have references to the relevant findings in the annexes.

III. The annexes should provide all information necessary to substantiate major conclusions and recommendations in the main report. The Terms of Reference, the teams’ itinerary, list of persons interviewed, and list of documents used should be annexed.

1. Copies of original and cleaned data sets with codebook. The raw data, the database which has been cleaned (both qualitative and quantitative, including original field notes for in-depth interviews and focus group discussions, as well as recorded audio material), should be submitted together with the report. A simple inventory of material handed over will be part of the record. KRCS & Enabel will have sole ownership of all final data and any findings shall only be shared or reproduced with the permission of KRCS.

Evaluation Management Team: The evaluation management team shall consist of KRCS MEA&L Unit Representative, KRCS program representative and Donor representative. They shall ensure that the deliverables agreed upon and approved in the inception report are achieved on time.

Role of KRCS (project and M&E team)

• Lead the recruitment and survey process
• Coordinate the assessment implementation process through the KRCS M&E unit
• Review of assessment products including tools and reports
• Organize logistics for the assessment team
• Avail experienced data collectors within agreed criteria
• Avail of all necessary documents for desk review
• KRCS will be the link between the community and the consultant
• Custodian of all data generated from the assessment
• Organize dissemination forums as necessary

Role of VET Toolbox

• Participate in the TOR development
• Potentially participate in the recruitment process
• Where appropriate serving as “sounding board” for developed deliverables (notably the final report)

10. Application Requirements

Application materials shall include:

• · A written response to this TOR in terms of a proposal detailing the technical understanding of the task, proposed methodologies of the evaluation, expected activities and deliverables, proposed work plans with schedule, and financial bids. See Annex 1
• Detailed CVs of all professional (s) who will work on the evaluation. If there is more than one contractor on the proposed evaluation team, please attach a table describing the level of effort (in number of days) of each team member in each of the evaluation activities. See Annex 3

Please also note that the people whose names appear in the team composition template MUST be the ones to undertake the assessment. As such, they MUST be the ones to appear in persons if the proposal moves to the interview stage.

• Professional references: please provide at least three references from your previous clients and full contact details of the referees (working and active email & phone number).

Failure to adhere to any of these requirements will lead to automatic disqualification or breach of contract if the work has begun.

Kenya Red Cross Society reserves the right to cancel the contract if, convinced that the consultant is in breach of the terms and conditions including those approved in the inception report.

11. Submission of Proposal

The Technical Proposal MUST be prepared in conformance to the outline provided in Annex 1 while the financial proposal shall conform to the template provided in Annex 2. Team composition should conform to Annex 3

*Bidders should provide softcopy technical and financial proposal in two separate folders clearly marked* “Technical Proposal_name of consultant” and “Financial Proposal_name of consultant”. The subject of your email should “Tender No. PRF08783 – “Call for Consultancy for Improving Access to Vocational Training and Employability Among the Marginalized and Vulnerable Youth In Mandera County”

The Proposal MUST be sent on mail to reach tenders@redcross.or.ke by 26^th January 2022at 11.00am.

ANNEX 1: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL FORMAT

1) Introduction: Description of the consultant, qualifications, and statutory compliance (1 page)

2) Background: Understanding of the project, context, and requirements for services, Key questions (2 pages)

3) Proposed methodology – Indicate methods to be used for each indicator and highlight any areas where indicators may need adjustment. The targeted respondents should be indicated for each indicator. Proposed detailed questions should be indicated. A detailed sampling procedure needs to be indicated. (5 pages)

4) Consultant’s experience in undertaking assignments of similar nature and experience from the geographical area for other major clients (Table with: Name of organization, name of the assignment, duration of the assignment (Dates), reference person contacts-2 pages

5) Proposed team composition (As per annex 3)-1 page

6) Work plan (Gantt chart of activity and week of implementation)-1 page

7) Sample relevant reports (Can list the project report and highlight what it was about if sharing is not permitted by the owners of the work)

8) Legal requirements (Certificate of incorporation for firms, PIN certificate of the firm, Tax compliance certificate in the respective country where the firm is registered). For individual bidders, attach the Lead Consultant KRCS PIN Certificate and tax compliance.

9) References (Attach at least 2 reference letters from other clients other than KRCS)

ANNEX 2: BUDGET TEMPLATE

The consultant shall only quote for the items below as KRCS will manage all other related costs (Logistics and payment of enumerators)

ANNEX 3: PROPOSED TEAM COMPOSITION TEMPLATE

ANNEX 4: TENDER ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

A three-stage assessment procedure will be used to evaluate all proposals from bidders. The total number of points which each bidder may obtain for its proposal is:

• Technical Proposal 60 marks
• Oral presentation 30 marks
• Financial Proposal 10 marks

1. Mandatory Requirements

The proposal shall be evaluated on the basis of its adherence to the following compulsory requirements, this applies to both local and international firms or individuals.

2. Evaluation of the Technical ProposalThe technical proposal shall be evaluated on the basis of its responsiveness to the TOR. Specifically, the following criteria shall apply:

Top third bidders to proceed top third to proceed to the next stage of oral presentations. If the bidders are less than eight, then the top three should be identified for the oral presentation stage as outlined in the MEA&L manual.

3. Oral presentation

4. Evaluation of the Financial Proposal

The Financial Proposal shall be prepared in accordance to Annex 2. The maximum number of points for the Financial Proposal shall be 10% (10 points). This maximum number of points will be allocated to the lowest Financial Proposal. All other Financial Proposals will receive points in inverse proportion according to the below formula:

Points for the Financial Proposal being evaluated =

(Maximum number of points for the financial proposal) x (Lowest price)

Price of proposal being evaluated

A total score obtained including Technical, Oral and Financial Proposals is calculated for each proposal. The bid obtaining the overall highest score is the winning bid.https://www.redcross.or.ke/Tenders