Jobs

Evaluator: Supporting Human Rights Defenders in the area of land-related rights (closes 30 November)

Job |

Programme name: Supporting human rights defenders in the area of land-related rights, indigenous peoples, in the context of inter alia ‘land grabbing’ and climate change

Programme funded by: European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights

Programme duration: January 2019 to October 2022

Background of the Project

The project was implemented by MRG in partnership with four implementing partners in East and Central Africa. The African International Christian Ministry (AICM)-Uganda, the Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC) – Kenya, the Institut Environnement Ressources Naturelles et Developpement (ERND Institute)-DRC and the Reseau Camerounais des organisations des Droits de l’Homme (RECODH)- Cameroon.

More details about the activities and a copy of the full project log frame will be shared with the appointed consultant.

The results planned for the project were as follows:

Overall objective

To guarantee the protection of indigenous peoples’ rights to land & their role in conservation & the prevention of climate change in 4 East and Central African states by supporting Indigenous Land Rights Defenders (LRDs), their communities & representative organisations working on land and natural resources-related rights.

Specific objective

To empower indigenous Land Rights Defenders (LRDs) and their representative organisations to overcome the lack of access to judicial and non-judicial remedies and the non-recognition of the role of indigenous peoples in preventing climate change.

Planned results

  1. Increased short- and long-term capacities and protection of 500 LRDs (50% women).
  2. Increased number of cases of land rights violations taken to existing international and regional domestic judicial and non-judicial mechanisms and associated increased of access to remedies secured for victims by supported LRDs.
  3. Increased commitment of 260 key stakeholders from target countries to ensure the respect of rights and standards LRDs are campaigning for in order to overcome impunity and secure access to remedies for victims.

Evaluation objectives

The objectives of the Final Evaluation are:

  1. Assess the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability, and impact of the project in relation to the objectives desired results, planned activities and supporting outputs set out in the proposal documentation and any amendments during the project (whilst respecting security and risk avoidance protocols).
  2. Provide MRG and partners with an opportunity for ‘structured evaluative learning’, with the aim of learning from the design and implementation process.
  3. Based on the findings of the evaluation, highlight key lessons learnt, develop a set of suggestions and key recommendations for future and continued MRG and partners activities.
  4. Also make recommendations to any stakeholder groups as appropriate.

Key evaluation questions

The key evaluation questions highlighted in this section are indicative and non-exhaustive.

Output Level

  • Referring to the project documentation, did we complete all the activities as planned to a reasonably high quality?
  • What problems were encountered at this level?
  • How did changes on the ground with respect to COVID-19 related restrictions affect our plans and were our reactions and changes to plans appropriate and timely?
  • How did any problems affect the activities and to what extent were they overcome?

Outcome level

  • Where completed as planned, did the activities contribute to the planned results? Where this was so, refer to evidence. Where not so, what factors intervened and explain how they impacted.
  • Suggest ways that MRG, Partners, CSOs, Land Rights Defenders (LRDs) tried to overcome any problems and how successful this was (or not).
  • Document any changes in the external environment since the programme design period that may have helped or hindered the project.
  • Discuss the extent to which they were foreseeable and the extent to which the program design considered foreseeable risks and context changes.
  • If there were any unplanned results (positive or negative) explain what these were and how they came about.

Impact Level

  • Make an assessment as to whether the results achieved are likely, over the longer term to achieve or contribute to the achievement of the specific objective of the project and comment on whether this is likely to be sustained. Refer to evidence.
  • If it is unlikely that all or part of the purpose will be achieved, or even if achieved, may well not be sustained, why is this and is this something that could have been foreseen or overcome?

Additional Evaluation Questions

  • What effect has the project had (if any) on the capacities of those trained and supported to represent the rights and interests of their communities through advocacy campaigns?
  • Detail progress made but equally identify gaps or constraints that are still impeding progress. Were capacity gains spread equally among groups (e.g., men, women, groups in different situations?)
  • What input have other organisations or individuals had in supporting and developing partners’ and trainees’ capacities in addition to or alongside MRG’s input? Assess MRGs contribution to any capacity gains vis a vis the work of others.
  • Which capacity building methods were effective and why?
  • To what extent are any gains in partners’ capacity sustainable over the longer term?
  • To what extent have any improvements in capacity translated into benefits for the community/ies on the ground?
  • To what extent have grassroots communities benefited from the project?
  • What sort of partnership relationships have developed between MRG and the partners and amongst the partners? What aspects of this have been helpful?
  • Did MRG and partners incorporate women’ issues and gender in the way envisaged? If not, why not? If yes, how was this achieved? What can MRG learn from this in the future in similar program?
  • Were the publications produced in this project timely and relevant? Were they of an appropriate quality? Did they address the issues of importance to the target communities? Did they reach and influence intended audiences?

Key deliverables

  • Evaluation workplan/inception report in English
  • Preliminary findings (max. 5 pages) at mid-term of the evaluation period in English
  • Final evaluation report (min 20 pages, max 35 pages excluding annexes – including 2–3-page executive summary in an accessible, easy-to-read format. This will be a full and detailed version with all information included which will be for internal use and for submission to the EU and other donors (in English only).
  • A public facing document to be available on MRG’s website in which key identifiers of individuals, organisations and locations will be removed where inclusion in a public document may result in additional security risks; and which will be supplied in both English and French.

Based on MRG’s prior experience, we anticipate that the following tasks will be needed but we are open to suggestions for alternative methodologies:

  • Read all project materials, review feedbacks from project partners (including notes of meetings, publications, reports of campaigns, media coverage, training evaluations, capacity assessments, email correspondence.)
  • Speak to MRG project staff (on secure virtual channel).
  • Hold detailed discussions re project implementation, results, and impact with 2-4 staff in each of the 4 partners’ organisations involved in the project.
  • Correspond with a sample of 20 activists trained to gather feedbacks.
  • Visit at least one contested land right location in each of two of the four project countries to discuss knowledge of the project with at least 15 community members. These visits should be organized independently of partner organisations and partner staff should not be present at the meetings.
  • Correspond with a sample of 16 advocacy targets contacted by the project. 8 of these should be from a list of 20-30 supplied by MRG and partners, 8 should be independently sourced by the evaluator/evaluation team. The evaluation team will not share information not already in the public domain with any advocacy target consulted via this exercise.

 Experience and expertise required

  • Extensive knowledge and experience of working on human rights, gender, indigenous and minority rights, land rights and human rights defenders including knowledge of relevant debates and international standards.
  • very good knowledge of the East and Central African Region including political, social, legal, media context, particularly with regards to the situation of indigenous and minority communities in project target countries
  • Good knowledge of relevant international and regional human rights mechanisms.
  • At least 2 years’ experience of comparable evaluations and strong track record of evaluations carried out on projects with similar elements.
  • Familiar with and able to comply with all EU evaluation requirements.
  • Ability to speak, read and write English and French fluently.
  • Expertise in human rights monitoring and violation reporting systems.
  • Experience of carrying out or evaluating training, capacity building, advocacy, and work with smaller NGOs in difficult contexts would also be helpful.

The evaluator will need to be independent of MRG, its donors, partners, the project’s targets, and participants and will need to demonstrate that no perceived or actual conflict of interests would arise during the evaluation.

The evaluation team will need to be able to demonstrate that they will be able to gain the trust of the partners’ organisations, individuals and the minority and indigenous communities targeted in this programme.

Report submission, timetable and budget

The evaluation shall be carried out between November 2022 and April 2023.

An inception report should be submitted within one month of contract signature, a 5-pages statement of preliminary findings should be submitted no later than 1 January 2023.

A draft evaluation report should be submitted no later than 15 March 2023.

MRG and its partners will submit comments within 15 working days and the final report responding to all comments must be submitted by 10 April 2023.

The evaluation team will then submit a public version of the report redacted for security and translation of the public report into French by 25 April 2023.

The current budget for this evaluation is €8,000.  Value for money will be a consideration in the selection process, together with experience, quality and best fit with evaluation requirements.

How to apply

If you are interested in being considered for this opportunity, please fill out the form below by 30 November 2022. In case of any questions, please contact jennifer.castello [at] minorityrights [dot] org.

Your details

Your motivation

Your documents

Click or drag files to this area to upload. You can upload up to 5 files.
Click or drag files to this area to upload. You can upload up to 5 files.

Final details

Share this content