Consultancy opportunity: Mid-term evaluation of IPIS’ programme on drivers of conflict

IPIS is looking for an External Evaluator for the mid-term evaluation of its EU-funded programme: “Addressing drivers of conflict, and promoting the fulfilment of human rights, sustainable governance of natural resources, climate justice and environmental protection through evidence-based research and grassroots collaboration.”

Context

About IPIS

IPIS is an independent research institute that provides tailored information, analysis and capacity enhancement, and policy advice to support actors who want to realize a vision of durable peace, sustainable development, and the fulfillment of human rights. Throughout the years, IPIS has developed a geographic focus on sub-Saharan Africa and a thematic focus on natural resources, conflict motives of armed actors, business and human rights, and international arms transfers. Within this scope, IPIS strives to be a center of excellence in field-based research.

About the programme

Building on its research and capacity enhancement in Phase 1 of this action, IPIS aims to address specific drivers of conflict and work with key stakeholders to tackle them. Among these conflict drivers, natural resources governance, illicit trade in natural resources, and climate change stand out. IPIS’ research and collaboration with partners at the grassroots level will support stakeholders to respond to existing or emerging crises.

The overall objective is increased and improved security, sustainable development, environmental and human rights conditions for communities in IPIS’ focal. 

The project runs over 36 months with a view to rendering key stakeholders in multi-stakeholder initiatives, state officials, business practitioners and civil society organizations in both Africa and beyond, better informed, and better aligned to addressing drivers of conflict.

The action is built on 3 interlinked outcomes:

• The first objective (Outcome 1) focuses on research to inform actors about existing or emerging crises, drivers of conflict and conflict hotspots. To achieve this research on due diligence and the impact of recently adopted or new EU legislation relating to natural resources and energy transition is ongoing. Further research and data collection on environment and energy transition as a conflict hotspot has been conceptualized and data collection in focal countries is being prepared. Diamond research is ongoing. Within the Kimberley Process (WGAAP), dialogue is ongoing to progress on setting up a regional approach in Central Africa to tackle illicit trade and cross-border challenges. IPIS research on diamond research in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is conceptualized to underpin this initiative. Diamond research and information sharing, including on the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent actions taken, has been ongoing. 

• The second objective (Outcome 2) focuses on working with partners who can bring a grassroots perspective to the analysis of the political economy of conflict. More specifically, the action funds the activities of the Kimberley Process Civil Society Coalition (KP CSC) to fulfill its watchdog role on diamond governance, both within and outside the KP. For this the Kimberley Process Civil Society Coalition has again taken up its watchdog role in diamond governance. IPIS takes the lessons from this network into account to strengthen the incident reporting network “Kufatilia” which is operating in DRC. 

• The third objective (outcome 3) ties the research findings and the grassroots perspective together and aims at securing that the research findings, the perspectives, and analysis from African civil society on conflict drivers are brought in a digestible and actionable format to stakeholders that can address conflict.  To achieve this aspect of the project, research findings in IPIS reports and analysis of current day conflict hotspots in IPIS briefings were shared with relevant audiences, through social media and through active participation in conferences, workshops, and seminars. IPIS improved its communication tools to reach a larger and more targeted audience. Media work has focused on diamond research in 2023. 

For the research pillar of the project (outcome 1), Research focused on Central African Republic, DRC, Tanzania, Central and West Africa. Topics addressed are due diligence and responsible sourcing, diamond governance, (unintended consequences of) energy transition, transhumance, environment and illicit trade of minerals. 

Support to civil society (outcome 2) is mainly for African partner CSO’s operating in the Kimberley Process Civil Society Coalition and Kufatilia: They are based in Angola, Botswana, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Cote d’Ivoire, DRC, Guinée, Lesotho, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Tanzania and Zimbabwe.

The information and outreach axe of the programme does not have a specific regional scope. Interventions in multistakeholder platforms are largely taking place in the global north (outcome 3). 

Evaluation details

(to be discussed, amended, and finalized with the selected evaluator)

Requested evaluation questions and relevance of DAC criteria on evaluation

The interim evaluation will describe the results of the action with reference to the OECD DAC criteria on external evaluation. Given the interim nature of the report, impact assessment may be premature. Below requested questions by IPIS and the suggested DAC criteria:

Regarding outcome 1:

• Did the research outputs, policy advice and training activities strengthen IPIS’ grassroots network to mitigate and deal with the drivers of conflict and act as an impetus to the promotion of human rights? 
• Have the research outputs informed key stakeholders, and has it fed and supported other activities of this action as well?

DAC criteria Relevance and Effectiveness

Regarding outcome 2:  

• Does our collaboration strengthen our partners in addressing relevant issues? 
• Were decisions made in a participatory way 
• Did IPIS provide relevant training to address the issues identified?

DAC criteria Relevance and Efficiency

Regarding outcome 3: 

• Has the intervention been effective in sharing its information and actions with other multilateral institutions with the purpose of affecting change? 
• Has the research work or the activities been able to influence policy or practices that have helped in achieving the objective? 
• Do the IPIS publications, working papers, messages and videos reach their intended audience? 
• Have the people of the community directly benefitted from the interventions? A case study could be done to answer this question. 
• Did the intervention minimize potential negative risks and increase the positive outcomes related to peace and security?

DAC criteria Efficiency and effectiveness

Minimal requirements for final reporting

As a minimum, the interim and final report should contain the following elements: 

• Objective and purpose of the evaluation
• Objectives and indicators within the scope of the evaluation
• Methodological approach
• Sources (documents, interviews, meetings, …)
• Validity of used data: describe verification methods and how they corroborate the final conclusions.
• Conclusions
• Executive summary

Proposed timeframe:

• Call for proposals: applications by 15 August
• Preselection of quotes second half of August, followed by first exchange, if needed, and a final selection of one quote
• First week September: First meeting to refine the evaluation design, i.e. methodology, evaluation question, breakdown of the budget and stakeholders (inception phase)
• Actual evaluation and report writing:  September-October-November
• First draft presented to steering committee: 15 November
• Second final draft ready: 5 December
• Presentation with management response to board: December
• Inclusion in interim reporting to EU commission: December

Contact persons and stakeholders

The selected evaluator can engage with IPIS staff or other stakeholders

Within IPIS:  Programme Manager (Han Verleyen), respective staff from IPIS team

Within EU commission: FPI team 

Within the Kimberley Process Civil Society Coalition: Coordinator and all members of the KP CSC

The external evaluator can broaden this list from his/her own expertise and the selected methodology. 

Role of IPIS

IPIS launches a call for proposals for a mid-term evaluation of the action. IPIS is accountable to the EU Commission on the action’s implementation in terms of deliverables and outcomes. 

IPIS will invite the evaluator, who meets IPIS criteria best, to further refine the scope of the evaluation, the evaluation questions, and the methodology to be applied. In this inception phase, IPIS will identify with the evaluator the stakeholders involved in the evaluation and provide contact details. The coordinator of the action and the person responsible for M&E will facilitate the work of the evaluator by providing all necessary background information. Additionally, IPIS will set up an evaluation steering committee, comprising most likely the M&E coordinator, the director, a board member, and research staff (to be defined in the inception phase). 

The steering committee will be involved in finalizing the Terms of Reference, will act as a soundboard of the first draft of the report, will endorse the final evaluation report and will formulate a management’s response based on the evaluation. IPIS will share the report and the management’s response with the EU commission.

PROFILE

The following skills and experience are expected by IPIS for the evaluator (or team of evaluators) on this programme:

• Lead evaluator: Minimum of 5 years of experience in project and advocacy evaluation
• Proficient in qualitative and quantitative data collection methodologies and analysis, with familiarity in diverse evaluation methods.
• Proficiency in English and French (written and spoken); Knowledge of Dutch is desirable. 
• Sound understanding of the Belgian and European policy landscape and experience working with international organizations.
• Familiarity with the contextual challenges and/or work experience in Africa South of the Sahara. 
• Demonstrated expertise in evaluating the integration of gender and environmental considerations, throughout project implementation.
• Ability to collaborate with other in-country consultants and enumerators to minimize long-distance travel (consideration for the environment).
• Strong quality assurance support from reliable data collection and analysis, with a commitment to maintaining the confidentiality of personal data.
• Subscribe to IPIS integrity policy.

This programme is implemented with the financial assistance of the European Union.