Malawi: Consultant for Final Evaluation of WASH Project

Organization: Water Works
Country: Malawi
Closing date: 31 Jul 2017

1. Purpose of the Independent Final Evaluation

The independent final evaluation report will be used to inform the Fund Manager’s understanding of Water Works’ performance at the project level and will also be used to inform the Evaluation Manager’s assessment of performance at the UK Aid Direct fund level[1].

The independent final evaluation report needs to be a substantial document that a) answers all the elements of the Terms of Reference; b) provides findings and conclusions that are based on robust and transparent evidence; and c) where necessary, supplements Water Works’ own data with independent research.

2. Background Information

2.1. About Water Works

Water Works is committed to reducing the prevalence of water borne disease in rural Malawi by supporting communities to gain access to safe drinking water, hygienic sanitation facilities and improved hygiene practices. We do this by: promoting improved hygiene awareness and practice; assisting households to construct latrines and hand-washing systems; supporting communities to install, manage and maintain simple, innovative and sustainable water pump technologies.

In Malawi, over 40 percent of the water points are not functioning, over half of the households do not have access to adequate sanitation and washing hands with soap or ash is seldom practised. The result is that people frequently suffer from diarrhoea, which is responsible for the death of 4,500 Malawian children under the age of five each year.

The high failure rate of the water points is due to the use of inappropriate technology and lack of community involvement in previous interventions. The vast majority of the broken water points are fitted with the Afridev hand pump, which has major flaws. The components that wear out are too difficult for community members to repair. The spare parts and tools are also not readily available or are too expensive. The high cost of the parts for the Afridev pumps further exacerbates the problem as the pumps are prone to vandalism and the communities are not able to afford the spare parts to perform the repairs. In addition to the inappropriate technology, previous programmes have failed to adequately involve the community, which has resulted in a lack of community ownership of the water points and the expectation that external actors should be responsible for the maintenance.

Interventions to assist communities to improve their hygiene and sanitation practices have also had little success. Past programmes have used a top down approach that failed to mobilise the communities to analyse, address and resolve their own sanitation and hygiene needs. Furthermore, vulnerable households, who are unable to build an improved latrine have been provided with little support. Some households have attempted to build a latrine using log sanitation platforms, but termites attack the logs and the latrine collapses.

Water Works was founded in 2009 in response to the lack of sustainability of the water points and lack of access to sanitation in Malawi. We have worked in partnership with Malawian artisans to develop simple, innovative and sustainable hand pump technologies. One of the pumps, the Alinafe pump, is a direct action hand pump that resembles and functions as modern conventional hand pumps, but has the advantage of being simple to construct and maintain using locally available and low cost materials. Water Works’ second pump, the rope pump, is an extremely simple technology that has existed for over a thousand years. We formed a partnership with the SMART Centre (an NGO based in Mzuzu, North Malawi), who have designed a pump using a car tyre, a metal frame and plastic pipes. The simplicity of the pump means that communities easily understand how it works, thus are able to fix it with locally available and inexpensive materials. At just over £70 (65,000 Malawian Kwacha), the pump is a fraction of the cost of conventional pumps.

Water Works understands that increased access to safe drinking water will only improve the health of the community if combined with improved sanitation facilities and hygiene practice. Therefore, in addition to supporting communities improve their water resource, we also support households to construct latrines and hand-washing systems and run hygiene awareness programmes. Particular attention is placed on assisting vulnerable households whose members are not able to construct their own latrines, including the extremely poor, single parent headed households, child headed households, elderly people without carers and people with a chronic illness or crippling disability.

2.2. Project Details

Water Works has been awarded a grant by DFID that commenced in September 2015 and will finish in December 2017. The project details are as follows:

Outcome:

Men, women and children in target communities in Malili, Malawi have increased safe access to potable drinking water, improved sanitation and better hygiene; thus are protected from water borne disease.

This will be achieved by empowering community members to meet their water, sanitation and hygiene needs. Firstly, Health Surveillance Assistants (HSAs) from the Chitedzi health centre will mobilise the communities to address and improve their water, sanitation and hygiene behaviours through the application of the approaches Community Led Total Sanitation (CLTS) and Participatory Hygiene and Sanitation Transformation (PHAST). Secondly, Water Works will assist the communities to meet their water, sanitation and hygiene goals through protecting water resources with simple, innovative and sustainable hand pump technology and supporting households to construct latrines and hand washing systems. Finally, Water Works will establish a water pump repair service to ensure that all 94 water points installed by Water Works since 2010 remain operational.

Output 1:

At least 2550 men, women and children from 50 villages (30 percent of the population over 5 years old) participate in a hygiene awareness programme leading to an increased knowledge of improved water, sanitation and hygiene practices.

Output 2:

Over 1800 household latrines and hand washing facilities are constructed, with additional assistance provided to, at least, 188 vulnerable households, leading to access to improved sanitation and hygiene for 8500 men, women and children.

Output 3:

50 water points are constructed, leading to access to potable drinking water for 8,500 men, women and children.

Output 4:

A water pump repair service is established, leading to increased water point sustainability of Water Works’ 94 water points.

3. Aim and Objectives of the Consultancy

The aim of the consultancy is to provide an independent evaluation of Water Works’ DFID funded project.

3.1. There are two explicit objectives:

  1. To verify (and supplement where necessary) the Water Works’ record of achievement as reported through the Annual Reports and defined in the project logframe;
  2. To assess the extent to which the project was good value for money, which includes considering:
    • How well the project met its objectives;
    • How well the project applied value for money principles of effectiveness, economy, efficiency in relation to delivery of its outcome;
    • What has happened because of DFID funding that wouldn’t have otherwise happened; and
    • How well the project aligns with DFID’s goals of supporting the delivery of the MDGs[2].

3.2. Evaluation Questions

The evaluation should focus on the OECD-DAC criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and impact.

Relevance:

  • To what extent did Water Works support achievement towards the MDGs?
    • MDG 7 (halving the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation);
    • MDG 4 (reducing child mortality, specifically relating to the number of children under 5 experiencing diarrhoea in previous 2 weeks); and
    • MDG 3 (promoting gender equality and empower women).
  • To what extent did the project target and reach the poor and marginalised?
    • How were the beneficiaries selected and were the beneficiaries informed of the selection criteria?
    • How effective were the selection criteria in reaching out to the most vulnerable populations?
  • To what extent did the project mainstream gender equality in the design and delivery of activities?
  • How well did the project respond to the needs of targeted beneficiaries, including how those needs evolved over time?
    • What was the level and quality of participation of the beneficiaries in the project?
    • How and to what extent were the monitoring, evaluation findings used to inform decision-making and the improvement of project implementation?

Effectiveness:

  • How well were the activities, outputs and outcomes documented and monitored?
  • To what extent are the results that are reported a fair and accurate record of achievement?
  • To what extent has the project delivered results that are value for money? To include, but not limited to:
    • How well the project applied value for money principles of effectiveness, economy, efficiency in relation to delivery of its outcome;
    • What has happened because of DFID funding that wouldn’t have otherwise happened.
  • To what extent has the project used learning to improve delivery?
  • What are the key drivers and barriers affecting the delivery of results for the project?
    • What were the main challenges of the project and how well were they addressed
    • Generally, were the activities carried out in line with the original plans? If not, were the changes adequately discussed, documented, and justified?
  • How effective were the partnerships developed by Water Works with other government agencies and NGOs?

Efficiency:

  • To what extent did the charity deliver results on time and on budget against agreed plans?
  • To what extent did the project understand cost drivers and manage these in relation to performance requirements?
    • Was a suitable financial control system in place?
    • How cost effective was the intervention? What cost-effective alternatives could have been used?
    • What systems were in place to ensure inputs provided were of the highest possible quality and were acceptable to beneficiaries?
    • Is the staffing (quantity and quality) and the structure appropriate to the programme being implemented?

Sustainability:

  • To what extent has the project leveraged additional resources (financial and in-kind) from other sources? What effect has this had on the scale, delivery or sustainability of activities?
  • To what extent is there evidence that the benefits delivered by the project will be sustained after the project ends?
    • What adaptations, if any, should be made to improve programme sustainability?

Impact:

  • To what extent and how has the project built the capacity of civil society?
  • To what degree did the intervention address the WASH needs of the targeted women, men, boys and girls and contribute to reduced vulnerability?
  • What unintended consequences (if any), whether positive or negative, has the intervention had on women, men, boys and girls?
  • What is the potential for scaling-up Water Works’ water and sanitation techniques:
    • Within the same or neighbouring territorial authority in which the project is based;
    • Within Malawi; and
    • In other countries in sub-Saharan Africa?

4. Scope of Work

The consultant shall among other things undertake the following:

  1. Review all relevant reports, proposals and relevant literature on the project.

  2. Design a study to evaluate outcome and outputs of the project as stated above.

  3. Identify and conduct interviews with a sample of stakeholders in project area to gather data on project results and outcomes.

  4. Lead a discussion with management and fieldwork team of Water Works on findings of the evaluation prior to finalising the report.

Key deliverables are the following:

  1. An inception report detailing the methodology for evaluation, delivery schedule, budget, and sample tools.

  2. Soft and hard copies of draft of evaluation report.

  3. Final report – no more than 40 pages (including or excluding annexes). One of the annexes should consist of a table summarising the findings according to the OECD-DAC criteria.

5. Management and Coordination

Upon selection, the consultant will be expected to engage with Water Works for the following:

  1. Negotiate and conclude the contract terms and sign a contract.

  2. Review and finalise the terms of reference for the assignment.

  3. Explore and reach agreement on the approaches or methodology to be employed for the assignment (including documentation of ‘most significant change stories’).

  4. Obtain the documents critical to the assignment for initial review.

  5. Explore and sort out logistical needs for assignment including appointments.

  6. Finalise delivery plan with a designated Water Works staff members who will work closely with the consultant for purposes of learning, coordination and providing backstopping support.

6. Time Frame

The assignment should be completed, including planning, fieldwork and writing up, within a time frame between middle of November 2017 and middle of January 2017. It is anticipated that the evaluation will require a period of up to 20 days consultancy time, including fieldwork and writing up. The exact dates of the evaluation are to be confirmed with the selected consultant(s).

The final report should be submitted no later than 7 days after discussing the draft findings with the Water Works management team.

7. Evaluator Qualification

The evaluation should be led by a person (or persons) with a minimum of 5 years’ experience in humanitarian interventions including demonstrated experience in the monitoring and evaluation of WASH programming.

Experience of working in sub-Sahara Africa is preferred.

8. Budget

The total budget for the project evaluation is £10,000. This includes all fees and expenses.

Consultants should include the following costs in their offer’s budget:

  • daily rate,
  • cost of international travel (home location of consultant to Malawi and back),
  • per diems (starting from first day of travel until last day of travel),
  • accommodation, and
  • miscellaneous costs (phone credit, in country travel etc.)

(Water Works can advise the selected consultant on accommodation and miscellaneous costs.)

No receipts will be requested from the consultant towards the end of the evaluation, so estimates of costs in the offer should be as accurate as possible, as any extra costs incurred by the consultant during the conduct of the evaluation cannot be reimbursed by Water Works.

[1] TripleLine is the Fund Manager for the UK Aid Direct and is responsible for assessing performance of grantees at the project level. Coffey International Development is the Evaluation Manager and is responsible for assessing the performance of the funding mechanisms as a whole. For more information on the fund level valuation, please see the 2012 Evaluation Strategy.

[2] The original proposal to DFID was before the transition from MDGs to SDGs, thus the objectives and evaluation questions refer to the project’s relevance to MDGs.

http://www.waterworkscharity.org

How to apply:

A proposal of no more than 4 pages detailing the methodology to be followed should be emailed by 31st July 2017 to Water Works (contact@waterworkscharity.org) . Appendices can be attached, including CVs of relevant staff, organisation profile and past relevant work experience; there is no page limit on appendices but applicants are encouraged to be concise.

Powered by Jobs Zimbabwe