Final Evaluation of the Societal Healing and Participatory Governance for Sustainable Peace in Rwanda Programme

Location: Remote engagement with missions to Rwanda

Application closing: 20 July, 2018

Introduction

The Societal Healing and Participatory Governance for Sustainable Peace in Rwanda programme, jointly implemented by Never Again Rwanda (NAR) and Interpeace, seeks a team of consultants (international and local) to conduct a final evaluation.  The evaluation is expected to measure and assess the programme achievement of intended outcomes and contribution to behavioural change among boundary partners. It also aims to assess the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact and sustainability of the programme strategies and programme outcomes.  The evaluation is also expected to provide recommendations for ensuring programme effectiveness and efficiency, adapting to changes in the political context, as well as maximising programme impact in the anticipated next phase of the programme. The programme has been designed using the outcome mapping approach which is also expected to guide the methodology of the evaluation.  Interpeace anticipates that the evaluation will commence in early August 2018, for a period of 40 working days, including a minimum of 20 days in Rwanda for the international consultant(s).

Background

The Societal Healing and Participatory Governance for Sustainable Peace in Rwanda programme is a four-year programme funded by Government of Sweden and implemented by Never Again Rwanda and Interpeace. The programme commenced implementation on 1 January 2015 in all provinces of Rwanda in a total of 16 districts and aims to contribute to Rwanda’s continued pursuit of sustainable peace and stability. Never Again Rwanda and Interpeace designed the Societal Healing and Participatory Governance for Sustainable Peace in Rwanda programme using the outcome mapping approach, focusing its efforts on contributing to behavioural change among key stakeholders in order to promote sustainable in the Rwanda.  In keeping with the outcome mapping approach, the programme has identified the following:

  • Vision: To contribute to the consolidation of a peaceful and inclusive Rwandan society, enabled to overcome the wounds of the past and to peacefully manage conflicts and diversity as well as empowered to influence programmes and policies responsive to citizen priorities.

 

  • Mission: To facilitate dialogue, within new and existing spaces where citizens as well as youth convene, enabling community members to openly discuss sensitive topics; to initiate a healing process; to identify and reach consensus on priorities and solutions; to effectively engage decision makers through the media; to use new and existing mechanisms for citizen participation; and to jointly implement activities in support of their shared vision of the future. To accomplish this mission, the program works through two axes of intervention:
    • Through the societal healing and reconciliation axis, NAR and Interpeace aim to enable diverse groups of community members, and youth in particular, to openly discuss sensitive past, current or emerging issues, to settle differences through dialogue, and cooperate to implement activities towards a shared vision of the future. The healing process will be facilitated by peace agents empowered through participation in the programme after being selected by community members in participating dialogue spaces based on their personal background and positive disposition towards peace. Societal dialogue, combined with joint action, aims at increasing social cohesion and promoting critical thinking – both key ingredients to sustainable peace in Rwanda.
    • The participatory governance axis aims to strengthen the link between citizens and policy makers, as well as to minimize the vertical space between the beneficiaries of public policies and decision-makers, strengthening government accountability. By facilitating citizen participation in the development, implementation and evaluation of public policies and programmes, Interpeace and NAR seek to contribute to the government’s efforts of aligning decisions with citizen needs and priorities. Responsive and participatory governance can provide the space for citizens of all backgrounds to engage in an open debate and peacefully pursue a shared vision of the future.

 

  • Expected outcomes:
    • Community members diverse backgrounds, both women and men, are committed to dialogue openly and peacefully discuss sensitive issues, stemming from historical events, address tensions and settle differences. Community members, men as well as women, use the appropriate dialogue to overcome wounds of the past, create a shared vision of a joint future, and work together to implement activities towards this vision.
    • Youth of diverse backgrounds, both girls and boys, are able to resist manipulation through critical thinking about past, current and emergent events and societal challenges. They are empowered to peacefully express their emotions and are increasingly tolerant of differences. They are able to manage diversity and work together for a shared vision of the future of Rwanda. Youth of both sexes and of diverse backgrounds serve as a catalyst for peace, healing and reconciliation in their communities.
    • Citizens of diverse backgrounds, both men and women, are empowered at the community level to discuss their rights and responsibilities in policy and programme making. Male and female citizens are aware of the policies being developed by the government and the potential impacts of these policies on their lives. Male and female citizens collectively prioritize their concerns and needs and increasingly more effectively communicate these priorities to government officials using existing and new mechanisms to facilitate citizen participation in planning, decision making and evaluation and hold government accountable.
    • Decision-makers effectively use existing and new mechanisms to engage citizens to better understand their priorities and assist them to design responsive policies and programmes. They provide citizens with updates on priorities and the implementation of policies and programmes. Decision-makers solicit citizens’ feedback on priorities selected and engage them in assessing the effectiveness of programmes and policies.
    • The Media increasingly recognize their role in promoting and facilitating the participation of citizens in governance. They report professionally and in a conflict-sensitive manner on opinions, decisions and events related to governance.  Media uses its role to provide the space and facilitate dialogue between citizens and the government on local priorities and progress

 

  • Theory of Change: If Rwandans, young and old engage in processes of healing and inclusive dialogue to overcome social divisions and wounds of the past, to work collaboratively across divides, and to utilize spaces for informing decision-making responsive to their needs and priorities, then they will deepen their resilience to violent conflict and be empowered to manage and transform conflict through greater collective participation as well as the use of strengthened Rwandan institutions.

 

  • Boundary Partners: To achieve this mission, the proposed programme has as direct target groups: community members and youth under the societal healing access and citizens, decision makers and media in the participatory governance axis.

NAR and Interpeace commenced the programme with two Participatory Action Research (PAR) processes: one to map existing healing and reconciliation initiatives and one to examine perceptions of Rwandans on citizen participation in governance. In keeping with the PAR approach, the implementation of the programme has built on the learnings that emerged from the two research.  The programme has established dialogue spaces focused on the two main processes of the programme: spaces for peace to foster trauma healing and citizen fora that gather citizens to identify priorities and solutions that can inform governance policies and processes.  The programme will run until the end of 2018.  A mid-term evaluation was conducted in the beginning of 2017. The programme’s strategy, outcome statements, progress markers, indicators and logframe were refined to respond to the evaluation findings.

The programme is approaching the end of the first phase, scheduled to close out at the end of 2018.  The final evaluation is intended to not only assess the implementation of the programme against key evaluation criteria, assess the results/outcomes of the programme, and to document challenges and lessons learnt, but also to provide recommendations for improving programme design and implementation in the next phase.

Objectives and key questions of the evaluation

The main objectives of the evaluation are to assess the intended and unintended results of Societal Healing and Participatory Governance for Sustainable Peace in Rwanda programme and to provide recommendations for improving the programme’s contribution to behaviour change among boundary partners in future phases of the programme. The evaluation is expected to analyse the effectiveness of programme strategies in achieving the intended outcomes, to assess possible deviations from the mission and suggest corrective measures, to gather lessons learned during programme implementation and to provide recommendations for maximising impact and achievement of progress markers and outcomes. The evaluation will be of interest to Interpeace, NAR, and the embassy of the Government of Sweden in Kigali as well as to international donors and policy makers engaged in Rwanda.

Key evaluation Questions:

Relevance:

  • To what extent was the overall strategy of the programme relevant for the context of trauma healing, governance and peacebuilding in Rwanda?
  • To what extent was the overall strategy of the programme relevant for the programme’s boundary partners?
  • To what extent was the intervention logic/overall strategy relevant in pursuing the programme’s vision?

Effectiveness and Impact

  • To what extent did the programme meet its revised progress markers and expected outcomes?
  • To what extent has the programme contributed to changes in behaviour among boundary partners?
  • How has the programme contributed to changes in behaviour among boundary partners?
  • What were the main factors that influenced whether the programme reached its expected outcomes/changes in behaviour or not?
  • To what extent did the programme integrate gender into the programme’s strategy?
  • How effective were the programme’s efforts to integrate gender into the programme strategy?

Sustainability

  • How likely are boundary partners to sustain these behaviour changes beyond the support of the programme?
  • To what extent are the programme’s established processes and systems likely to support the continued implementation of the programme?

Efficiency

  • To what extent were the programme’s strategies and activities sufficient for meeting expected outcomes?
  • How did the project adapt to changes in the context and emerging challenges during programme implementation?
  • Were the appropriate implementation methodologies applied in the different contexts and circumstances of the programme?

Cross cutting issues:

  • To what extent has the programme integrated gender equality into the programme’s strategy?
  • How effective are the programme’s efforts to integrate gender equality into the programme strategy?
  • To what extent does the programme adhere to the principles of Do No Harm and employ conflict sensitivity while implementing and adapting the programme strategies?
  • How effective are the strategies for sustainability of impact following withdrawal of external support?

Project Design Improvement

  • What best practices and lessons learnt from the programme should be incorporated into the next phase of the programme?
  • What strategies should the programme employ in its next phase to be more relevant to the context, responsive to the needs and priorities defined by stakeholders and relevant for the programme’s boundary partners?
  • What should programme partners take into consideration to improve the overall design of the programme’s next phase?
  • What areas/themes would be most relevant for the programme (and any spin-off programmes) to focus on in the next phase?
  • What do the outcomes of the programme imply for initiatives for sustainable peace in Rwanda?

Interpeace and Never Again Rwanda anticipates that these key evaluation questions will be further refined with the selected evaluation consultants.

Timeframe and Methodology

The anticipated duration of the evaluation is 40 working days with a minimum of 20 days spent in Rwanda as possible. The anticipated start date is early August 2018 with submission of the final draft end of September 2018.  The final timeframe will be agreed upon with the selected consultants.

The evaluators are expected to use evaluation methodologies consistent with the outcome mapping approaching, which may include but are not limited to, outcome harvesting, theories of change, contribution mapping/contribution analysis, interviews, focus group discussions, etc.  The methodology used should also be gender sensitive, conflict sensitive and respect the principles of Do No Harm. The evaluators are expected to apply the conceptual framework of assessing outcomes and changes in behaviour and relationships among boundary partners as a result of engagement in programme activities and actions.  The evaluation will be both an objective and a consultative/participatory exercise, and is expected to involve the following elements:

Initial planning process: in conjunction with Interpeace and Never Again Rwanda, finalize the methodology, guiding questions and indicators, and workplan.

Documentary review: a review of relevant documentation, including the original and revised programme document; programme logical framework; programme reports and updates; reports of workshop proceedings; research outputs; and relevant audio-visual material produced for the programme.

Stakeholder interviews and focus group discussions: including with employees of Interpeace; Never Again Rwanda staff; authorities in Rwanda as possible; institutions engaged by the programme; donor representatives; civil society organizations engaged by the programme and community members/youth/citizens/decision makers/media participating in programme activities. Indicators to assess the progress and impact of the programme, complementing existing progress markers and outcome statements, will be developed in consultation with Interpeace and Never Again Rwanda.

While Interpeace anticipates the use of the elements listed above, the list is not exhaustive.  The evaluation may include additional elements and approaches as appropriate for responding to the final evaluation questions. The applicant is encouraged to suggest a comprehensive methodology that includes these elements and others that the evaluators deem fit for meeting the evaluation objectives. The methodology for data collection should be described in the proposals. The final list of elements will be discussed with the selected team of consultants.

Interpeace and its partners will be responsible for:

  • Providing a focal point for the evaluation, who may or may not travel with the consultants (time and funds permitting)
  • Providing a focal point at each partner organization
  • Providing logistical support inside and outside the Great Lakes region
  • Providing standard Interpeace security support for the evaluators (responsibility rests with the consultants)
  • Arranging meetings with stakeholders
  • Providing relevant programme reports and documentation in advance.

Deliverables, Reporting and feedback

The evaluators will provide:

  • A brief inception report (no more than 5 pages) at the end of the initial planning phase, setting out a timetable for the evaluation, an overview of the final agreed upon methodology, the names of people and groups to be interviewed, a detailed workplan and a list of documents to be reviewed. Data collection tools are expected to be reviewed by and finalized together with Interpeace and NAR.
  • The evaluators will provide a brief mid-term progress report and presentation for Interpeace and NAR management and relevant staff at the end of the fieldwork phase (no more than 10 pages) summarising the progress of the evaluation, highlighting any changes to the evaluation schedule, and providing tentative findings.
  • The evaluators will submit a draft report within 15 days after completing the fieldwork.
  • The evaluators will provide a final report taking into account comments on the draft report within 5 days of receiving such comments.

The evaluators will hold a feedback meeting (or meetings) for the Interpeace East and Central Africa office and Never Again Rwanda. This will be an opportunity to debrief on the evaluation, and to exchange views on preliminary findings and recommendations.

The evaluation report will include a main text of no more than 40 pages with findings and recommendations.  The report will be expected to be structured in the following manner:

Acronyms

Executive Summary

  1. Introduction and brief background
  2. Methodology
  3. Major findings
    1. Relevance
    2. Effectiveness and Impact (including major accomplishments to date)
    3. Efficiency
    4. Sustainability
    5. Cross-cutting issues
  4. Overall Assessment
  5. Challenges
  6. Best Practices and lessons learned
  7. Recommendations for improvement

Annexes:

  • Terms of Reference
  • List of documents assessed
  • List of persons interviewed
  • Evaluation Matrix
  • Presentation of changes identified related to programme outcomes and progress markers
  • Proposed revised logical framework

Qualifications

The evaluation will be undertaken by a team composed of international and local consultants. The consultants will be expected to have the following skills and experience at a minimum:

International consultant(s):

  • Experience conducting and leading evaluations/assessments
  • Experience in conducting gender sensitive evaluations
  • Strong analytical skills and experience working with the Outcome Mapping approach
  • Strong knowledge of and experience with conflict resolution, peacebuilding and reconciliation programmes
  • Experience working in Rwanda, the Great Lakes region and other conflict or post-conflict environments
  • Proven record of delivering professional outputs
  • A willingness to travel to Rwanda
  • Excellent French and English speaking and writing skills.
  • The local consultant will be expected to speak Kinyarwanda.
  • An ability to work within tight deadlines
  • Experience in data collection and analysis

Local Consultant(s):

  • Experience conducting and/or leading evaluations/assessments
  • Experience in conducting gender sensitive evaluations
  • Strong analytical skills and experience working with the Outcome Mapping approach
  • Strong knowledge of and experience with conflict resolution, peacebuilding and reconciliation programmes in Rwanda
  • Proven record of delivering professional outputs
  • Excellent English and Kinyarwanda speaking and writing skills.
  • An ability to work within tight deadlines
  • Experience in data collection and analysis

How to Apply

For consideration for this opportunity, please submit an expression of interest (no longer than 5 pages and inclusive of the proposed methodology for the evaluation, including the framework for gender analysis) and a CV for both the international and local consultants proposed by July 20, 2018 (midnight Nairobi time) via email to: eca@interpeace.org

In case you have any questions about this call, please email them to eca@interpeace.org by Friday 13 July. Interpeace will reply to these queries by close of business on Monday 16 July.

Applicants, if shortlisted, will be required to subsequently submit work samples in English, references and a preliminary evaluation methodology.

Interpeace values diversity among its staff and aims at achieving greater gender parity in all levels of its work. We welcome applications from women and men, including those with disabilities.