ThaiNGO

Consultant for ECHO Project Final Evaluation

1.          PROJECT SUMMARY

Type of evaluation:        External final evaluation and end-line assessment

Name of the project:     Integrated Emergency Preparedness and child protection framework to protect children and their communities from violence during emergencies in ASEAN (ECHO) Final Evaluation and End-line Assessment

Project Start and End dates:      June 1,2020 – November 30, 2021

Project duration:            1 Year 5 months

Project locations:           Purong, Thasap and Bangoi sinae sub district, Yala province 

Thematic areas:              Child protection

Sub themes:      -

Donor:                             European Union Humanitarian Aid (ECHO)

Estimated beneficiaries:             2,721

Overall objective of the project  Ensuring the most marginalized girls and boys are safe and protected from violence including SGBV, conflict, natural and everyday hazards in and around the community before, during and after an emergency

2.          INTRODUCTION

This document provides a Terms of Reference for the Final Evaluation and End-line Assessment of the ECHO project (Integrated Emergency Preparedness and child protection framework to protect children and their communities from violence during emergencies in ASEAN). 

The ECHO project is funded by European Union Humanitarian Aid (ECHO) to implement from June 1,2020 – November 30, 2021. The project aims to increased regional, sub/national, and local capacities to develop and implement DRR and Emergency Preparedness Plans embedded with Child Protection. The primary purpose of this consultancy is to conduct a final evaluation of the ECHO project to understand the extent to which the project has achieved the intended outcomes. More details on the project background, evaluation scope, key questions, intended methodology, reporting and governance, key deliverables and timeframes for its implementation are provided in the sections that follow.

3.          BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

An estimated 195 million children live across the ASEAN. SE Asia is one of the most disaster- prone regions in the world with 1,586 disasters affecting more than 27 million people in 2018, In fragile and humanitarian contexts, the mechanisms protecting children are often overwhelmed and weakened, and in time of disaster, children are at increased risk of all forms of violence, including SGBV. SC proposes to focus this action on children and putting actions in place to reduce the risks boys and girls face, in particular SGBV. With the ongoing global pandemic and mitigation/restriction measures in place, the gaps in the capacity of national and local mechanisms to protect children became even more glaring. Significant process has been across SE Asia in Disaster Management due to the ASEAN agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response, and in Comprehensive School Safety. However, SC has identified a child protection gap (including SGBV), which has led to the need to bring together experience from DRR (including emergency preparedness, mitigation, risk reduction, anticipation and early action), child protection, gender and inclusion into an integrated approach that can be adapted to any context based on the threats and hazards.

This 18 - month action will develop and test this approach by working with child protection and disaster management system in two locations currently facing triple challenge of an on-going Covid19 pandemic, natural disaster and conflict: Mindanao in Philippines and Deep South of Thailand. The results of in-country testing will feed into refinement of the framework that can be used by ASEAN members, as well as ensure the model is rolled out through key CPiE and DRR stakeholders in the Asia region. Through a Joint Theory of Change with UN women, SC will contribute to regional level advocacy to ensure child protection (including inclusion and disability) is incorporated into disaster management plans of ASEAN.

Brief program outline

The ECHO project contributes to achieve the following specific objective and results: Specific objective: Increased regional, sub/national, and local capacities to develop and implement DRR and Emergency Preparedness Plans embedded with Child Protection

Result 1: Joint TOC: Evidence and good practices for gender, inclusion, protection and child protection (SGBV) responsive resilience building are available for ASEAN Member States who are equipped to develop regional policy framework to inform national level implementation of disaster laws and plans.

Result 2: ASEAN Member States and relevant stakeholders at sub-national level have increased capacity to harmonize age, gender and inclusive inter-sectorial operational frameworks in disaster preparedness and early action to reach the most vulnerable groups with protection and prevent and respond to sexual and gender based violence against women, girls and boys in Thailand and Philippines.

Result 3: Community-level child protection actors have increased skills and capacities to provide appropriate and inclusive protection services to prevent and respond to child protection risks, including SGBV, in crisis-affected and disaster prone contexts to keep all girls and boys, including children with disabilities safe before, during and after an emergency.

4.          SCOPE OF EVALUATION

4.1        Purpose and key questions

SC intends to conduct a final (external) evaluation of ECHO project to generate substantive evidence-based knowledge by identifying and documenting good practices and lessons learned from intended impact and unintended consequences of the project interventions. This evaluation is intended to assess the extent of change that has taken place in the lives of targeted children, quality of services provided, and related policy changes and implementation/response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The results from this evaluation will be highly useful in providing recommendations for the Thai Government, partner, donor, as well as future strategies for Save the Children Thailand. 

The results will define key learning and lead the design of the next phase of future child protection in emergencies programme. To ensure objectivity and credibility, the evaluation is to be led by an external consultant who has made no prior commitment or contribution to the project. The evaluation is expected to take place from November 2021 to February 2022. 

The overall objectives of this consultancy include:

• Evaluate project performance, including progress and achievements towards the project goal and objectives, the overall impact of the project, including unintended consequences and the factors that influenced change at all levels of the outcomes framework.
• Measure and report against the project outcome indicators, baseline and interim assessment report to create end line information
• Consolidate key success stories and lessons learned (what work and did not work) from the project on 1. integration of child protection policy in DRR plan at National and Provincial level 2. capacity building provided to government officials, school administrator and teacher, and children 3) children engagement in improvement DRR plan
• Assess to what extent the project has made impacts to 1. change at policy level and/or advocacy with local and national government 2. The lives of children and caregivers as a result of our support to strengthen emergency preparedness and early actions
• Capture gap and barrier that project faced challenge in both operation and result achievement
• Provide recommendation to SCI management and program team for project adaptation and scale up.

The Evaluation team will be required to undertake consultation with the SC MEAL Coordinator, the Education Technical Advisor, and the Child Protection Technical Advisor, at the commencement of the assignment in order to further refine the evaluation questions.

4.2        Scope

ECHO project is working in three targeted communities in Purong, Bangoisinae and Thasap sub-districts of Yala province where are the high vulnerabilities to conflict an natural disaster. Purong and Bangoisinae are both located in red zone area affected by armed violence and areas that are vulnerable to flooding. The community in Thasap has a mixed population of both Muslims and Buddhists and is in an area vulnerable to natural disasters.

The consultancy service provider needs to conduct the project final evaluation including develop the inception report, data collection with the stalk holders and beneficiaries, finalize and present the finding as require in the section below. Additionally, the consultancy service provider aims to work upon the specific objective, questions as indicated in TOR.

Due to the changing context and travel restriction regarding to the COVID19 pandemic in the project implementation area, Yala province, the evaluation team will be requested to prepare alternative evaluation method, i.e. remote data collection and evaluation, with support from Save the Children, in case the face-to-face data collection cannot be done.

4.3        Stakeholders/audiences

The main stakeholders/targeted audiences for this evaluation are:

The Evaluation team will be required to :

1.           Conduct data validation workshop with relevant child protection stakeholders to crosscheck the quality and correctness of the data collection.

2.           How the evaluation findings will be shared with each of the different stakeholders in the table above, particularly outlining how reporting back to communities, beneficiaries and children will be conducted in an accessible and child friendly manner.

4.4        Secondary Questions

The evaluation should include an assessment and discussion around relevancy, effectiveness, efficiency, impacts, sustainability and gender-sensitivity as cross cutting issues as per the following framework and learning questions:

a) Relevance:

• To what extent have the project interventions including its objectives and activities been responsive to the needs of children and families in the deep south and how are they aligned with local and national polices and strategies towards vulnerable migrant children?
• To what extent have SC integrated broader gender and other inclusion concerns and child safeguarding issues into the design and implementation of its interventions?
• To what extent to the project adjust to the needs of children in the deep south during the COVID-19 pandemic?

b) Effectiveness:

• To what extent has the project been effectively achieving its goal and outcomes?
• What were the gap and barriers to the achievement of the project goal and outcomes?
• Were there any unintended outcomes? 
• How is the effectiveness or impact of the project compared to the goals planned?
• How effectively and appropriately have we worked with government organizations, partners and target beneficiaries and involved them in relevant stages of the project?
• what sort of activities conducted and products produced (e.g. advocacy campaigns, capacity buildings, development of the tools and research) to contribute to the development of EPP and CSG policies?
• What are the framework/practices for the protection of children in emergency before and after the commence of the project (e.g. DRR and EPP plans, access to child protection services
• What is the process and result in integrating of child protection policy in DRR plan at National and Provincial level? What is the lesson learn?
• How the capacity building to government officials, school administrator and teacher, and children been identified, planned and implemented? What is the lesson learn?
• How children are engaged in process of improvement DRR plan? What is the lesson learn?
• How the project activity increases the knowledge among the targeted boys and girls on protection risks and reporting channel?
• How the school adapted and inclusive child protection and DRR to include mitigations measures for violence against children?
• How the project ensure the emergency and DRR plans in place that include child protection disaster risk reduction actions and SGBV prevention? What is the process and tools?

c) Impact:

• To what extent has the ECHO project had an impact in the lives of beneficiaries especially children within the target areas?
• What tools that SC and Partner develop and implement to support the child protection practice? How the tools are implemented and what are their contribution to the CP system?
• What skills that the child protection actors received to prevent and respond to child protection risks in conflict-affected and disaster-prone contexts?
• What changes in policies, practices, knowledge and attitudes have occurred with the support of the project?
• How have the needs of target beneficiaries been addressed from the project? What significant changes have occurred in lives of children and families in the targeted communities?

d) Efficiency:

• Were objectives achieved on time? (and budget)
• Were activities cost-efficient?
• Were the projects implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives?

e) Sustainability:

• To what extent can activities, models, initiatives, results and effects be expected to continue or replicate at the conclusion of the project?
• How is the project planning and implementing its sustainability strategy?
• Will the project or programme work in a different context?

f) Cross cutting issues Participation, Gender, Safe programming and inclusion

• What kind of gender gaps were identified in deep south context and tools used to address those gender gaps, what are other actions the project implement to tackle those gaps?
• What were the protection measure undertaken in project implementation i.e. child safeguarding policy implementation, safe school facilities? How has the project considered gender sensitivity in the implementation of these policy?
• To what extent have SCI integrated gender and social inclusion (i.e. disability, SGBV analysis tool) concerns and child safeguarding issues into the design and implementation of its interventions?
• What is the accountability mechanism in place for the project and how effective it is?

5.          EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

5.1        Research design and sampling

The suggested research design for this evaluation is a mixed methods design including participatory methods if and where possible. Both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis for addressing each of the evaluation criteria. SCI anticipates the methodology to include a review of project documents, semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with relevant stakeholders including beneficiaries, observations, and review of project monitoring data. The consultant is encouraged to propose additional methodology that they consider appropriate to the project, which is subject to Save the Children’s approval and must meet ethical guidelines (Annex I).

The evaluation will focus in the targeted areas in Yala province. It will involve children, teachers, community led child protection committee, provincial disaster management, child protection agencies, project partner organizations, and SCI project team. Participants in the study will be selected through purposive sampling.

5.2        Data

All primary data collected during the course of the evaluation must be disaggregated by sex, age, people with disabilities, status and location and inclusive of children’s representation.

Save the Children has existing data collection instruments and tools that can be drawn on in the evaluation. These will be shared with the evaluation team.

Save the Children will not provide enumerators to assist with primary data collection. Data triangulation is expected for this evaluation. It will be a requirement of the Evaluation team, including qualified translators, to source additional external data sources to add value to the evaluation, such as consultations with partners and review of project documents. 

A range of project documentation will be made available to the Evaluation team that provides information about the design, implementation and operation of the Program. Example of documents include previous evaluations, interim reports, project implementation plan, and logframe.

5.3        Ethical considerations

It is expected that this evaluation will be:

• Child-friendly and participatory. Children should be meaningfully involved in the evaluation as a holistic process and not only as informants. Refer to the Practice Standards in Children’s Participation (International Save the Children Alliance 2005); and Global Indicator technical guidance (SCI M&E handouts Package, Volume 2).
• Inclusive. Ensure that children from different ethnic, social and religious backgrounds have the chance to participate, as well as children with disabilities and children who may be excluded or discriminated against in their community.
• Ethical: The evaluation must be guided by the following ethical considerations:

• Child safeguarding – demonstrating the highest standards of behaviour towards children
• Sensitive – to child rights, gender, inclusion and cultural contexts
• Openness - of information given, to the highest possible degree to all involved parties
• Confidentiality and data protection - measures will be put in place to protect the identity of all participants and any other information that may put them or others at risk.
• Public access - to the results when there are not special considerations against this
• Broad participation - the relevant parties should be involved where possible
• Reliability and independence - the evaluation should be conducted so that findings and conclusions are correct and trustworthy

It is expected that:

• Data collection methods will be age and gender appropriate.
• Evaluation activities will provide a safe, creative space where children feel that their thoughts and ideas are important.
• The Evaluation team will adhere to the Save the Children Child Safeguarding, Data protection and Privacy policies that are required throughout all project activities.

6.          EXPECTED DELIVERABLES

The evaluation deliverables and due dates (subject to the commencement date of the evaluation) are outlined below. The lead evaluation consultant will advise the ECHO Project Coordinator immediately of any risks or issues that may impact on their ability to provide the deliverables by these due dates.

Deliverables and Due Dates

*All reports are to use the Save the Children Evaluation report template. Please also refer to Save the Children technical writing guide.

** The Evidence to Action Brief is a 2-4-page summary of the full report and will be created using the Save the Children Evidence to Action Brief template.

All documents are to be produced in MS Word format and provided electronically by email to the SC ECHO Project Coordinator, MEAL Coordinator, Child Protection Technical Advisor.  Copies of all PowerPoint presentations used to facilitate briefings for the project should also be provided to Save the Children in editable digital format.

7.          REPORTING AND GOVERNANCE

The consultant will report to the SC ECHO Project Coordinator. Additional technical advice will be provided by the Child Protection Technical Advisor, MEAL Coordinator and technical team from Save the Children members. Save the Children should approve all plans and documents developed by the consultant.

The lead consultant is to provide reporting against the project plan. The following regular reporting and quality review processes will also be used:

• Regular email at least once a week to the Save the Children ECHO Project Coordinator documenting progress, any emerging issues to be resolved and planned activities for the following week.

At the end of the field visit, the evaluator will hold a meeting with the project team and project partners to discuss the preliminary findings of the evaluation exercise.

A draft report should be submitted for feedback and comments. The report should be written in English and approximately 30 pages with executive summary (appendices not included). The final evaluation report will comprise the following contents:

• Table of Contents
• List of Acronyms
• List of Tables
• Executive Summary
• Background and context
• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Scope of Evaluation
• Research Design and Methodology
• Data analysis
• Key Findings
• Key success stories and lessons learned from the project
• Conclusions and Recommendations
• Annexes

• Evaluation TOR
• Inception report including work plan and budget
• Project Logical framework
• Evaluation matrix and tools
• List of people involved – including list of key informants interviewed  
• Raw data  

The consultant will revise the report according to the agreed feedback and comments.

The final report will be assessed against Save the Children’s Evaluation Report Scoring checklist (Annex II). The MEAL Coordinator and Technical Advisors will review and sign-off for final submission to the Program Director, who will be accountable for approving the Final Evaluation.

8.          EVALUATION MANAGEMENT

What	Who is responsible	By when	Who else is involved
Evaluation tender submissions	ECHO Project Coordinator	1st week of November  2021	Procurement teams
Tender review and selection of evaluation team	ECHO  Project Coordinator	Mid-Nov 2021	Procurement teams; Finance; CP Technical Advisor, MEAL Coordinator
Inception report with data collection tools informed by desk review	Evaluation team	1st week of December  2021	ECHO Project Coordinator; CP Technical Advisor, MEAL Coordinator, SCN MEAL Advisor.
Review of inception report	ECHO Project Coordinator	Mid Decem Contact : tha_procurement_bkk@savethechildren.org, + 66 62 142 469, thorrung.sivanawin@savethechildren.org ที่ปรึกษา / Consultant Recent Jobs Nonprofits / องค์กรไม่แสวงหาผลกำไร Programme Officer (Research) มูลนิธิความร่วมมือเพื่อต้านการค้าหญิง 03 Apr 2026 24 April 2026 606 Business / องค์กรภาคธุรกิจ Myanmar Project Manager COAR Global LTD 03 Apr 2026 03 May 2026 626 Nonprofits / องค์กรไม่แสวงหาผลกำไร HR Coordinator Reach for Equity (REACH) 03 Apr 2026 19 April 2026 245 Nonprofits / องค์กรไม่แสวงหาผลกำไร Senior Program Manager (Localization) Reach for Equity (REACH) 03 Apr 2026 19 April 2026 410 Jobs by Categories บัญชี / Accountant การเงิน / Financier ไอที / IT ที่ปรึกษา / Consultant ผู้ประสานงาน / Coordinator นักพัฒนาโครงการ / Creative project developer เจ้าหน้าที่ประจำสำนักงาน / Officer ระดมทุน / Fundraising กราฟิก / Computer Graphic ผู้ช่วย / Assistant เจ้าหน้าที่ภาคสนาม / Field officer นักกิจกรรม / Activist ผู้จัดการโปรเจค / Project manager ทรัพยากรณ์มนุษย์ / Human resources ล่าม , นักแปลภาษา / Translator นักวิจัย / Researcher นักกฎหมาย / Lawyer นักพัฒนางานเขียน / Creative content developer นักสื่อสารออนไลน์ / Online communication ผู้อำนวยการ / Director ผู้บริหาร / Administrator ธุระการ / Administrative เลขานุการ / Secretary นักสถิติ / Statistician ติดตามและประเมินผล / Monitor and Evaluator