FCA has worked in in Syria since 2018, and the country programme evaluation planned for 2025 is its first opportunity for programme-level probing of achievements, challenges and lessons learnt in the country. 2025 is a particularly favourable moment for this stock-taking, as FCA’s programme for the years 2022-2025 is coming to an end, and the organization is currently designing a new programme for 2026-2029 based on e.g. learnings from the on-going programme.

Against this background, two objectives are set for the Syria country programme evaluation of 2025:

1. Capturing the successes and challenges of the country programme between 2022-2024 as well as factors contributing to them;
2. Capturing lessons learnt and providing recommendations for FCA’s country programme in Syria and Service and Accountability Center (SAC) in Helsinki especially with a view to opportunities and threats of the operational environment.

The results and recommendations of the country programme evaluation will be used both internally and externally. Within FCA, the evaluation will support FCA’s Syria country strategy review scheduled for 2025 as well as the operationalisation of FCA new global programme to be launched in 2026. Externally, FCA will also use the evaluation report in its engagements with donor organisations and local stakeholders in Syria.

4.Scope of the evaluation

The evaluation will cover FCA’s country programme in Syria between 2022-2024 including

• the modalities of humanitarian aid, early recovery, and advocacy
• the strategic themes of livelihoods and quality education
• the rights-based approach to promotion of quality education and livelihoods
• the cross-cutting approaches of GESI (Gender equality and Social Inclusion), climate action and environmental protection, and conflict-sensitivity and Do No Harm (including safeguarding)
• the governorates of Rural Damascus, Aleppo, Hama, Homs, Idleb, Ar-Raqqa, and Latakia

5.Evaluation questions

1. Relevance

Q1.1 To which extent have FCA’s interventions been relevant to the needs of the targeted areas and groups?

Q1.2 Do the targeted areas and groups offer strategically relevant opportunities that FCA is yet to seize?

2.Coherence

Q2.1 To what extent have the objectives of the country programme been aligned with the OCHA-coordinated Syria Humanitarian Response Plans (HRPs) for 2022-2024?

Q2.2 To what extent are the objectives of the country programme aligned with FCA’s global strategy, global programme, and Syria country strategy?

3.Effectiveness

Q3.1 To what extent has the country programme achieved the desired objectives set in the country strategy and country programme annual plans? Are there any intervention areas/strategies/ modalities in which the CP could be more effective? What have been the enabling and undermining factors behind attainment of these objectives?

Q3.2 To what extent has the country program applied the right-based approach and the cross-cutting approaches in its interventions to promote quality education and livelihoods? What factors have enabled or undermined the application of RBA and the cross-cutting approaches?

4.Efficiency

Q4.1 To what extent, the allocated resources were sufficient and efficient to achieve programme targets and goals within relevant timeframes, scope and budget.

Q4.2 To what extent have the allocated resources been used in an accountable and efficient manner to achieve targets (cost, time, and value efficient)?

5.Sustainability

Q5.1 To what extent have the results achieved by the country programme been sustainable and what factors have contributed to or undermined their sustainability?

Q5.2 To what extent has the country programme been able to empower local individuals, organisations and institutions to take over the lead of local processes and what have been the enabling and undermining factors in these efforts?

6.Impact

Q6.1 What are the most notable changes in the targeted communities brought by FCA’s interventions?

7.Recommendations

Q7.1 What recommendations can be made to enhance future programming in the light of the findings for the questions 1.1-6.1? Please provide separate recommendations for 1) Syria country programme 2) FCA’s Service and Accountability Center SAC.

6.Methodology required & available data

The evaluation will be conducted by an external evaluator (a sole consultant or a team) in collaboration with FCA’s Service and Accountability Center (SAC) in Finland and FCA’s Syria country office (SYRCO). The overall management of the evaluation is ensured by the FCA evaluation manager based in SAC.

Methodology

The evaluation will be conducted by using mixed methods with a priority on qualitative approaches. The evaluator will define in their offer a more detailed methodology for undertaking the evaluation, but it should meet at least the following requirements:

• Desk review
• Participatory approaches involving both internal and external stakeholders
• Data collection at least in two governorates mentioned in section 4 (to be agreed with SYRCO in the inception phase)

The methodology will be finalised in the inception report. Its presentation should clearly outline the following:

• An outline of the approach proposed for contract implementation;
• A list of the proposed activities considered to be necessary to achieve the contract objectives;
• The related inputs and outputs

Flexibility with the evaluation methodologies may be required taking into account possibilities of restricted access and mobility as well as rapid changes in the country context.

The evaluator is expected to exercise a secure data policy with regard to the personal data collected during the evaluation. Collection of personal data should be kept to the minimum and no unnecessary personal data should be collected. The registers should be destroyed when no longer needed for the purpose they were collected for.

Available documentation

FCA will make the following material available for the evaluation:

• FCA’s global strategy 2022

• FCA’s policies, strategies and guidelines on themes and cross-cutting issues

• Documentation related to FCA’s global programme 2022-2025

• FCA’s Localisation Framework from 2023

• FCA's child safeguarding policy

• FCA Syria’s country strategy from 2022 and its 2023 revised version

• FCA Syria’s country programme annual plans and reports 2022-2024

• FCA Syria’s context analysis

• Relevant project plans, reports and evaluations from 2022-2024

• FCA Syria’s Quality and Accountability Self-Assessment and accountability improvement plan

  7.Evaluation process

• The evaluation process will include the following key steps:

• Kick off meeting (online) with the evaluator, FCA Service and Accountability Center (SAC) and Syria Country Office (SYRCO);

• Desk review of relevant documentation;

• Submission, feedback, finalisation and approval of the inception report including workplan (FCA template);

• Data collection and analysis. It is foreseen that the following groups will be included in the data collection process: selected rights-holders and relevant duty-bearers to the extent they are available[1], selected FCA staff in SAC/Helsinki, selected SYRCO staff members, local partners and selected funding partners.

• Submission and feedback on the draft report including a validation session (online) held with relevant FCA staff members after the submission of the draft report (FCA template);

• Finalisation, submission and approval of the final report

• SYRCO is responsible for facilitating the setup of logistics and appointments in Syria whereas the evaluation manager in SAC will facilitate arrangements for the meetings with SAC. The evaluator will take care of organising all other support services such as e.g. translation. The costs of logistics, support services, etc. are the sole responsibility of the evaluator.

  8.Provisional timetable

• Regular online meetings with FCA to monitor the progress of the process and discuss needs/challenges

• Kick-off meeting (Max. half a day)

• Inception report

• Mid-June

• Desk review and

• inception report writing

• Second half of June + July[1]

• FCA comments and approval of the inception report

• First half of August

• Data collection in SAC and SYRCO (incl. ½ day debriefing with SYRCO) with a minimum of 10 days allocated for data collection in Syria

• Draft report

• Second half of August + first half of September

• Data analysis and writing of the draft report

• Second half of September

• FCA comments and approval of the draft report (incl. ½ day validation session with FCA)

• First half of October

• Finalisation of the evaluation report

• Final report

• Second half of October

• Submission of the final report and FCA’s approval

• November

• TOTAL DURATION

• 5 months

• 9.Deliverables & Payments

• The evaluator will produce an inception report, a draft evaluation report and a final evaluation report, each of them on the template provided by FCA. All reports are to be submitted to FCA for comments that need to be sufficiently addressed by the consultant within an agreed timeframe. FCA reserves the right to terminate the contract in cases of the inception report not being of satisfactory quality. The quality will be assessed against the elements highlighted below.

• Each deliverable will be separately approved by FCA if found being of acceptable quality in terms of:

• Inception report

• containing all the sections specified in FCA’s templates (please see the more detailed requirements in the attached templates);

• reflecting the tender proposal with the modifications agreed in the inception phase;

• written in clear and comprehensible English.

• Draft evaluation report and final evaluation report

• containing all the sections specified in FCA’s templates (please see the more detailed requirements in the attached templates) and the outcomes of the data collection annexed in English;

• written in clear and comprehensible English;

• reflecting the chosen evaluation methodology (see the section 3 in the technical proposal template and the inception report template as well as the section 2 in the evaluation report template for more details).

• N.B. FCA’s written feedback will be provided in the form of a matrix, and the evaluator is expected to provide his/her clarifications, comments and questions in the same format.

• The maximum length of the draft and final report can be 30 pages each without annexes. The annexes include but are not limited to the ToR for the evaluation, list of consulted documents, list of people interviewed by affiliation, evaluation matrix, data collection and analysis tools.

• Deliverables

• Payment %

• Upon approval of the inception report

• 20%

• Upon approval of draft report

• 40%

• Upon Approval of final report

• 40%

Given the scope of the evaluation, the Tenderer must make available a team of minimum two persons, consisting of a team leader and at least one other team member.

The team leader must meet all the following criteria, which will be checked from the CV. Please specify the name of the team leader in the proposal.

• Master’s degree in a field relevant to the assignment such as development studies, public policy, or social development
• Demonstrated experience of being the sole evaluator OR a team leader in evaluations including programme-level evaluations
• At least 3 years of demonstrated work experience from development and humanitarian sector in Syria starting from 2019
• At least 5 years of demonstrated experience of working in/evaluating initiatives related to humanitarian aid.
• Fluency in written and spoken English and Arabic

The following minimum criteria must be fulfilled either by the named team leader or at least one of the team members.

• Demonstrated experience working in/evaluating initiatives related to education and livelihoods

Please provide the name of the team member who is the most competent to each part in the technical proposal.

Tenderers must state the length of each evaluation and other work experience in months in Annex 1 (Consultant CV template) to enable bid comparison. Please note that reference checks with previous clients will be made.
11. Budget

Budget limit is maximum of 30 000 EUR. Below this threshold,the budget depends on the proposed methodologies and approach put forward by tenderers to most effectively and efficiently address the required service. Bids above this limit will not be eligible for evaluation.

Applicants’ proposals must include a detailed and competitive budget inclusive of all fees and costs related to the execution of the service (travel, insurance, health care, per diems etc.). It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that the budget limit presented here is not exceeded by any tax payments including VAT.

Consultant(s)/service providers are responsible for managing their own tax contributions. The proposed budget and its detailed break down without VAT is to be presented in Euros on the budget template provided by FCA. Please make sure to submit a proposed budget without VAT to ensure the submissions are directly comparable.

12.Eligibility criteria

#

Description

Means of verification and required documentation

1

For consultancy firms only: The tenderer has paid all taxes and pension contributions as well as other payments required by the applicable laws.

(YES/NO)

Tenderer shall confirm this by providing a valid tax certificate issued in the last three (3) months OR a valid non-conviction certificate from Syrian authorities issued in the last three (3) months.

2

For consultancy firms only: The tenderer is registered in the Trade Register in its country of domicile. (YES/NO)

Tenderer shall confirm its registration by providing a valid Trade Register certificate.

3

The team leader has demonstrated experience of conducting evaluation(s) as the sole evaluator or the team leader incl. experience from programme level evaluation(s).

(YES/NO)

Tenderer shall submit the following documents to demonstrate competence in the highlighted areas:

1. CV (using the annex 1 CV template)
2. 3 examples of recent evaluation work

The consultant must provide client contact info for the three work samples. By providing the client contact info, the Consultant agrees to allow FCA to contact the client for verification. Only positive feedback will be considered eligible

4

The team leader has a minimum of 3 years of demonstrated work experience in Syria starting from 2019. (YES/NO)

CV (using the annex 1 CV template)

5

The team has demonstrated experience of working in/evaluating initiatives related to education and livelihoods. (YES/NO)

CVs (using the annex 1 CV template)

6

The team leader has at least 5 years of demonstrated experience of working in/evaluating initiatives related to humanitarian aid.

CV (using the annex 1 CV template)

7

The team leader has a Master’s degree in a field relevant to the assignment such as development studies, public policy, or social development.

(YES/NO)

Degree certificate shall be attached.

8

The tenderer shall specify if the tender is made as a consortium (a group of several economic operators). (YES/NO)

IF YES: The members of the consortium shall be jointly and severally liable for the fulfilment of the contract. All members of the consortium must meet the eligibility requirements set out in this invitation to tender. All consortium members must be involved in delivering the services requested.

9

The tenderer confirms it has submitted the requested CVs in the format requested to enable bid comparison. (YES/NO)

CVs must be submitted using Annex 1: CV template.

Confirm YES.

10

The tenderer meets the criteria of proposing the minimum of two team members.

Confirm YES.

11

The tenderer has ability to perform the tasks highlighted in this TOR that require physical presence in the named location(s). The requirement concerns all members of the proposed team.

Copy of a Syrian passport/ID or a valid work permit for Syria of all the team members.

12

The tenderer meets the qualification and skills requirements set out in Section 10 of this ToR.

CV(s) shall be attached to demonstrate the requirements are met. CVs must be submitted using Annex 1: CV template.

1. Bids assessment

The bids will be assessed according to the following contract award criteria.

Qualitative award criteria & percentages

Means of verification & scoring

Weight

Skills/expertise of the evaluator/ evaluation team lead

Tenderer shall submit (i) CV (ii) 3 examples of recent evaluation work (preferably from UN agencies or humanitarian INGOs present in Syria) to obtain additional scoring in the tender evaluation. Scoring is determined as below:

Criteria 1: Evaluation experience as sole evaluator/ team leader

1 point for each evaluation as sole evaluator/team leader, up to 20 points total

Criteria 2: Programme level evaluations

2 points for each programme level evaluation conducted as sole evaluator/ team leader, up to 20 points total

Criteria 3: Humanitarian experience

1 point for each additional year of experience from working in/evaluating humanitarian aid projects/programmes above the minimum requirement of 5 years, up to 10 points in total

50 points

Methodology

Technical proposal

Criteria 4: Rational

5 points for a demonstrated understanding of the country program and objectives of the evaluation

Criteria 5: Evaluation questions

5 points for successful elaboration of the evaluation questions

Criteria 6: Proposed methodology

5 points for relevant activities and diversity and flexibility of the suggested data collection methods

5 points for a clearly structured evaluation matrix

(Total 10 points)

Criteria 7: Work plan

5 points for a realistic workplan in line with the questions and methodology of the evaluation

5 points for human resources available for realisation of the plan (1 point for 3 team members with additional 2 points for each extra member up to 5 points);

5 points for a clear presentation of the team structure and division of labour

(Total 15 points)

Criteria 8: Risk management

5 points for a comprehensive risk matrix with relevant mitigation measures

40 points

Timetable

Criteria 9: Timetable in the technical proposal

5 points for a timetable matching the timetable presented in section 7.

5 points

Financial Score

Criteria 10: Financial proposal

Lowest price receives highest score. Scores of other offers are calculated proportionally.

5 points

Evaluation Process

The evaluation process of the offers is managed by FCA Syria Country Office Procurement Committee.

Candidates will be first evaluated according to the requirements in section 12 Eligibility Criteria. Candidates who are eligible will be allowed to proceed to the evaluation phase and their offers will be evaluated according to the Bids Assessment Criteria in the section 13.

Terms of contract

• Confidentiality – Highlight any confidentiality concern
• The Consultant is responsible for payment of all social costs, other employment related costs and insurance contributions and for all other liabilities of a statutory nature.
• The consultant will have to abide by FCA Code of Conduct for Contractors and Service Providers and any other relevant policies
• The consultant will provide an online debriefing session to present the main findings and recommendations
• Copyright for the report will remain with FCA.