Tender for the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) evaluation of the Cyclone Idai response in Malawi, September 2020

Islamic Relief Worldwide

Islamic Relief is an international aid and development charity, which aims to alleviate the suffering of the world's poorest people. It is an independent Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) founded in the UK in 1984.

As well as responding to disasters and emergencies, Islamic Relief promotes sustainable economic and social development by working with local communities - regardless of race, religion or gender.

Our vision:

Inspired by our Islamic faith and guided by our values, we envisage a caring world where communities are empowered, social obligations are fulfilled and people respond as one to the suffering of others.

Our mission:

Exemplifying our Islamic values, we will mobilise resources, build partnerships, and develop local capacity, as we work to:

Enable communities to mitigate the effect of disasters, prepare for their occurrence and respond by providing relief, protection and recovery.

Promote integrated development and environmental custodianship with a focus on sustainable livelihoods.

Support the marginalised and vulnerable to voice their needs and address root causes of poverty.

We allocate these resources regardless of race, political affiliation, gender or belief, and without expecting anything in return.

At the international level, Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW) has consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council, and is a signatory to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Code of Conduct. IRW is committed to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through raising awareness of the issues that affect poor communities and through its work on the ground. Islamic Relief are one of only 13 charities that have fulfilled the criteria and have become members of the Disasters Emergency Committee (www.dec.org.uk)

IRW endeavours to work closely with local communities, focussing on capacity-building and empowerment to help them achieve development without dependency.

Please see our website for more information http://www.islamic-relief.org/

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Cyclone Idai made landfall in a Mozambique on the 14^th of March, 2019. Given the strength of the cyclone, Malawi experienced heavy rains and strong winds resulting in widespread flooding across 15 regions in Southern Malawi. Chikwawa, Nsanje, Phalombe, Machinga and Zomba districts were particularly affected. Nationally, over 20% of the population were affected in multiple ways by displacement, loss of life and/or loss of livelihoods. In response, the Government of Malawi declared a State of Disaster and appealed for support from humanitarian actors. Islamic Relief (IR) Malawi responded to the emergency with internal funding as well as funding from the Disasters Emergency Committee. The table below outlines the objectives for both Phase 1 and 2 of IR’s DEC response.

DEC Phase 1: Key Outcomes/Out puts

Planned (No. Of Beneficiaries)

1

Outcome A: Targeted vulnerable flood affected HH's have improved ability to meet their food security needs

Flood affected HH's have access to cash to meet their immediate food needs

10,000

2

Outcome B: Targeted flood affected HH's have improved ability to meet their immediate shelter needs

Flood affected people have access to adequate and accessible shelter through Cash voucher

10,000

3

Outcome C: Resilience of targeted flood affected households is increased through timely livelihoods recovery

Flood affected HH’s are able to plant during the upcoming agricultural season

2,000

DEC Phase 2: Key Outcomes/Out puts

Planned (No. Of Beneficiaries)

1

Outcome A: Strengthened local capacity to develop, support and advocate for Community-based Disaster Risk Reduction Plans (CDRRPs)

Community-based Disaster Risk Reduction Plans (DRRPs) developed and endorsed by concerned stakeholders

90

No. of Individuals assisted through the implementation of DRRPs' priorities with the project's allocated grants

4,910

Immediate NFIs needs are timely addressed through unconditional restricted cash transfers (vouchers)

5,000

Emerging food needs are timely addressed through unconditional unrestricted cash transfers

7,000

Increased access to safe water supply facilities,

9,000

Increased access to hygiene and sanitation promotion services

9,000

2

Outcome B: Disaster affected population have more access and utilization of diversified and resilient livelihood systems

No. of individuals assisted through livelihood restoration activities [seeds and tools]

7,000

No. Individuals trained to perform as Local Agriculture Extension Agents (LAEAs)

30

No of individuals employed through CFW activities [30 days / 4000 MWK per day net per beneficiary]

1,800

No. of Households selected and assisted to produce blocks and bricks [in TA Makhwira]

600

3

Outcome C: Targeted at risk population groups and respective health mechanisms have enhanced preparedness, mitigation and response to COVID-19

Targeted communities have increased access to accurate and appropriate health and hygiene information and improved handwashing practices

11,000

Vulnerable HHs are able to meet minimum needs as a result of increased access to social protection support to better manage negative social and economic impacts of COVID-19

2,500

No. of community health workers (CHWs) and Health Surveillance Assistants trained in [COVID-19 symptoms, prevention, contact tracing and referral]

95

No. of health facilities supported/rehabilitated [through provision of Personal protection Equipment]

28

OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION

This evaluation has been commissioned by Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW) in line with agreed internal policies (IR MEAL framework) and external policies (Evaluation Policy in DEC Accountability framework). The purpose of this evaluation is to assess overall performance of the project with reference to the outcomes and outputs as well as draw lessons for future programme. This evaluation should take into consideration the OECD/DAC Evaluation Criteria to assess the performance of the project, as well as use the Core Humanitarian Standards (CHS) to evaluate the quality of the interventions and the aspects of accountability.

The focus is on:

1. Assessing the extent to which planned outputs and outcomes have been achieved using the OECD DEC criteria for evaluating humanitarian responses: relevance, coherence, coordination, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability/connectedness

2. Evaluating the appropriateness and extent of application of quality standards, with a particular focus on the CHS.

3. Identifying lessons and good practice from the project to inform both IRW and IR Malawi future response and the wider sector. This report will be externally published.

The scope of the evaluation

The scope of the evaluation should cover the various activities funded through DEC Phase 1 and Phase 2 allocations. The geographical scope of the evaluation includes the west and east bank of Chikwawe.

The technical scope of the evaluation is to:

· Examine the response’s relevance and appropriateness, with specific reference to the design of project and the progress in achieving the planned objectives (i.e. the outcomes and outputs)

· Uncover the gaps in provision or unintended positive or negative impacts and providing commentary on the primary and secondary effects of the intervention, along with any direct and indirect contributions

· Analyse the coherence with other actors and the extent of engagement and collaboration with stakeholders and the strategic linkages made.

· Review the effectiveness and efficiency of the mode of operation

· Examine the strategic value addition and distinctive contribution of IRW

In addition, IRW is a certified CHS agency and therefore uses the CHS standards as the foundational approach to undertake evaluations, which ensures that we focus on communities. We believe this can be integrated with the DAC criteria in the following way:

Relevance

· CHS Commitment 1: Humanitarian response is appropriate and relevant.

· CHS Commitment 4: Humanitarian response is based upon communication, participation, and feedback

Effectiveness

· CHS Commitment 2: Humanitarian response is effective and timely.

· CHS Commitment 3: Humanitarian response strengthens local capacities and avoids negative effects.

· CHS Commitment 5: Complaints are welcomed and addressed.

· CHS Commitment 8: Staff is supported to do their job effectively, and are treated fairly and equitably.

Efficiency

· CHS Commitment 6: Humanitarian responses are coordinated and complementary.

· CHS Commitment 7: Humanitarian actors continuously learn and improve.

· CHS Commitment 9: Resources are managed and used responsibly for their intended purpose.

For more guidance on CHS evaluation questions, refer to annex 1.

Methodology and approach

We are looking for an evaluation team to meet the above objectives and scope through a mixed method (quantitative and qualitative) approach of:

· Desk review of secondary data and IRW project documentation

· Household surveys of statistically representative sample

· FGD with communities – with proportionate sampling

· Key informant interviews with IR staff, peer agencies, UN and government authorities

We would like the evaluators to outline their proposed methodology and requirements for this particular consultancy.

Required competencies

The successful team will have the following competencies:

· Demonstrate evidence of experience in evaluating humanitarian action

· Possess sectoral experience and knowledge in evaluating DRR interventions, as well as some experience in CVA, shelter, health, food security and livelihood interventions

· Possess deep knowledge and practical experience of using quality standards such as CHS and Sphere

· Possess strong statistical/quantitative and qualitative research skills

· Have excellent written skills in English

· Have the legal right to travel to the disaster zone and able to conduct evaluations in Malawi.

· Be able to fluently communicate in English and the local languages (e.g. Chichewa). If local translators are required this should be budgeted.

The chosen evaluation team will be supported by IRW Programme Quality (PQ) team, the IRW Disaster Risk Management Department (DRMD), the IRW Regional team and IR Malawi Senior Management.

Project outputs

The consultant is expected to produce:

• A detailed work plan and inception report developed with and approved by IRW, setting out the detailed methodology and deliverables prior to commencing the desk review.

• A Covid-19 risk assessment with proposed mitigation measures related to conducting this evaluation, setting out different contingencies in case of challenges to the evaluation due to Covid-19 or other issues.

• A full report with the following sections:

a) Title of Report: The Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) Evaluation of the Cyclone Idai Response in Malawi

b) Consultancy organisation and any partner names

c) Name of person who compiled the report including summary of role/contribution of others in the team

d) Period during which the review was undertaken

e) Acknowledgements

f) Abbreviations

g) Table of contents

h) Executive summary

i) Main report – max 40 pages – (Standard reporting structure will be shared at inception stage, but consultant is invited to propose most suitable report structure layout)

j) Annexes

· Terms of reference for the review

· Profile of the review team members

· Review schedule

· Documents consulted during the desk review

· Persons participating in the review

· Field data used during the review

· Additional key overview tables, graphs or charts etc. created and used to support analysis inform findings

· Bibliography

k) The consultant will be required to visit IRW international office and provide feedback on and answer questions about the findings from the desk review. This meeting can be attended remotely by the consultant via video conference (Microsoft Teams or Zoom) where the consultant is outside the UK or based on request from the consultant.

Timetable and reporting information

The evaluation is expected to run for 30 days, starting by the 19^th October 2020 and ending before the 25^th of January 2021

Date

Description

Responsibility

3^rd September 2020

Tender live date

IRW

21^st September 2020

Final date for submission of bid proposal

Consultant

21^st - 23^rd September 2020

Proposals considered, short-listing and follow up enquiries completed

IRW

24^th September - 6th October 2020

Consultant interview and final selection (+ signing contracts)

IRW

7th- 9th October 2020

Meeting with the consultant and agree on an evaluation methodology, plan of action, working schedule

IRW

15^th- 19^th October 2020

Submission of Inception Report (at least 7 days before commencing the evaluation)

Consultant

21^st October– 20^th November 2020

Evaluation/Data collection

Consultant

1^st December 2020

Collation and analysis of evaluation data, and submission of the first draft to IR Malawi/IRW for comments

Consultant

4^th December

Initial Presentation of Findings

Consultant

20^th December 2020

IRW/IR Malawi responses to draft report

IR Malawi/IRW

10^th January 2021

Final report submitted to IRW

Consultant

20^th January

Final Presentation with IR key stakeholders

Consultant

Reporting information;

Contract duration: Duration to be specified by the consultant

Direct report: Programme Impact & Learning Manager

Job Title: Consultant; DEC Evaluation of Cyclone Idai Response in Malawi

The consultant will communicate in the first instance with and will forward deliverables to the IRW Programme Quality team.

Proposal to tender and costing:

Consultants (single or teams) interested in carrying out this work must:

a) Submit a proposal/bid, including the following;

i. Detailed cover letter/proposal outlining a methodology and approach briefing note

ii. CV or outline of relevant skills and experience possessed by the consultant who will be carrying out the tasks and any other personnel who will work on the project

iii. Example (s) of relevant work

iv. The consultancy daily rate

v. Expenses policy of the tendering consultant. Incurred expenses will not be included but will be agreed in advance of any contract signed

vi. Be able to complete the project within the timeframe stated above

Vii. be able to demonstrate experience of humanitarian review for similar work

Payment terms and conditions

Payment will be made in accordance with the deliverables and deadlines as follows:

· 40% of the total amount – submission of the inception report

· 30% of the total amount – submission of the first draft of the evaluation report

· 30% of the total amount – submission of the final report including all outputs and attachments mentioned above**

We can be flexible with payment terms, invoices are normally paid on net payment terms of 28 days from the time of the invoice date.

Additional information and conditions of contract

During the consultancy period,

IRW will only cover:

· The costs and expenses associated with in-country, work-related transportation for the consultant and the assessment team

· International and local travel for the consultant and the local team

· Accommodation while in the field

· Training venues

· Consultancy fees

IRW will not cover:

· Tax obligations as required by the country in which he/she will file income tax

· Any pre/post assignment medical costs. These should be covered by the consultant

· Medical and travel insurance arrangements and costs. These should be covered by the consultant

To download and access the full tender and guidelines dcoument please visit our website on;

https://www.islamic-relief.org/tenders/open-tenders/tender-document-for-the-disasters-emergency-committee-dec-evaluation-of-the-cyclone-idai-response-in-malawi-september-2020/

How to apply:

Consultancy contract

This will be for an initial period that is to be specified by the consultant commencing from early October 2020 (exact date to be mutually agreed). The selected candidate is expected to work from their home/office and be reporting to the Programme Impact & Learning Manager or team member designated for this study.

The terms upon which the consultant will be engaged are as per the consultancy agreement. The invoice is to be submitted at the end of the month and will be paid on net payment terms 28 days though we can be flexible.

All potential applicants must fill in the table beneath in Appendix 1 to help collate key data pertaining to this tender. The applicant must be clear about other expenses being claimed in relation to this consultancy and these must be specified clearly.

For this consultancy all applicants are required to submit a covering letter with a company profile(s) and CV’s of all consultants including the lead consultant(s).

A proposal including, planned activities, methodology, deliverables, timeline, references and cost proposal (including expenses) are expected.

Other relevant supporting documents should be included as the consultants sees fit.

All applicants must have a valid visa or a permit to work in the UK (if travel is required to the UK) and to the places where this project is required to be undertaken.

TENDER DATES AND CONTACT DETAILS

All proposals are required to be submitted by Monday 21^st September 2020 1.00pm UK time pursuant to the attached guidelines for submitting a quotation and these be returned to tendering@irworldwide.org

For any issues relating to the tender or its contents please email directly to tendering@irworldwide.org

Following submission, IRW may engage in further discussion with applicants concerning tenders in order to ensure mutual understanding and an optimal agreement.

Quotations must include the following information for assessment purposes.

1. Payment terms (as mentioned above)

2. Full break down of costs including taxes, expenses and any VAT

3. References (two are preferred)

4. Technical competency for this role

5. Demonstrable experience of developing a similar project

Note: The criteria are subject to change.

Appendix 1

Please fill in the table below. It is essential all sections be completed and where relevant additional expenses be specified in detail. In case of questions about how to complete the table below, please contact; tendering@irworldwide.org **

Cost evaluation of a consultancy for the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) evaluation of the Cyclone Idai response in Malawi, September 2020

Full name of all consultants working on this project

Full company trading name

No of proposed hours per week

No. of proposed days

Preferred days

Non preferred days**

Earliest available start date

Expected project finish date

Day rate (required for invoicing purposes)

£

Total cost for consultancy in GBP (less taxes and expenses)

£

Expenses (flights)

£

Expenses (accommodation)

£

Expenses (transfers)

£

Expenses (in country travel)

£

Expenses (visa)

£

Expenses (security)

£

Expenses (food)

£

Expenses (print/stationary)**

£

Expenses other (please specify)

£

Total expenses

£

Total VAT or taxes

£

Total cost for consultancy in GBP (inclusive of taxes and expenses)

£

Note

The applicant is expected to take responsibility for paying full taxes and social charges in his/her country of residence.

Appendix 2: Core Humanitarian Standards Questionnaire (for reference only)

Below is a suggested questionnaire, for reference, for the consultant to frame their questions for this evaluation. The consultant should use this and any extra questions they feel necessary, to provide an overall judgment about the performance of IR Malawi, and the implementation of this project, against the quality criteria set out by the CHS.

Please see the following link to learn more about the CHS:

1) https://corehumanitarianstandard.org/files/files/Core%20Humanitarian%20Standard%20-%20English.pdf

2) https://corehumanitarianstandard.org/files/files/CHS-Guidance-Notes-and-Indicators.pdf

1. Humanitarian response is appropriate and relevant.

• Has a comprehensive and timely needs assessment been conducted and used to inform response planning including age, gender and diversity analysis?
• Has a rapid food security and livelihoods assessment and response options analysis been undertaken at the onset of the humanitarian crisis to inquire about changes in food availability and food access following the crisis, to assess market functions and the severity and underlying causes of food insecurity; analyse coping mechanisms, and; identify the worst affected groups and areas, resources and capacities of communities to meet immediate needs, and appropriate interventions to support food security and livelihoods recovery?
• Are multiple sources of information, including affected people and communities, local institutions and other stakeholders consulted when assessing needs, risks, capacities, vulnerabilities and context?
• Are assessment data and other monitoring data disaggregated by sex, age and disability?
• Were the short set of Washington Group Questions used to collect disability data?
• Are barriers to participation of groups at risk, including older people, people with disabilities, women and children, assessed and enablers created?

• Does the response include different types of adapted assistance and/or protection for different demographic groups based on the findings of the analysis?

• Are the project objectives relevant to the specific needs and priorities of the affected community? Are the activities also appropriate to realise the objectives? Was the assistance culturally appropriate?

• Did the project meet the most urgent needs first? Were the project components well integrated?

• Was cash routinely considered alongside with other tools? Were there competent staff available for strategic, technical and operational functions required for cash and voucher assistance?

• Has the assistance provided by IR Malawi met the needs of different stakeholders, in particular men and women, children, the elderly, and those with disabilities?

• What, if any, changes do we need to make to the programme to make it more appropriate and relevant?

2. Humanitarian response is effective and timely.

• Are constraints and risks identified and analysed? Where they analysed along with the affected communities including groups at further risk? Was identification and analysis undertaken from outset and then throughout project duration? How were new risks added?
• Does planning consider optimal times for activities? Does it consider seasonal calendar?
• Are contingency plans used?
• Are globally recognised technical standards used and achieved? Which standards? (e.g. MERS, LEGS, INEE, SPHERE)
• Was the use of cash and vouchers assistance effective and timely to meet the identified priority needs of the cyclone-affected households?

• What was the participation strategy used to allow effective information are shared with groups at risk?

• How timely was IR Malawi’s response in meeting the needs of the affected people, especially vulnerable people?

• Was there any implementation delay? If yes, why? If yes, how did you ensure timely completion of the project activities? If yes, were any changes made to the project as a result and if not, should changes have been made to be more appropriate?

• What, if any, changes could we make to improve timeliness of the overall response? Was there any way the affected community could have been reached sooner?

3. Humanitarian response strengthens local capacities and avoids negative effects.

• What local capacities for resilience (structures, organisations, leadership, and support networks) exist and how these have been strengthened?

· Has the CVA capacity of the country office been strengthened as a result of the humanitarian response? In what way and how it may be strengthened even more?

· How was the capacity and leadership of groups at further risk (children, women, older people and people with disabilities) and their representative organisations strengthened to contribute to inclusive humanitarian response?

• Were risks faced by groups at risk identified, assessed and mitigated? How?

• Is existing information/ data on protection risks, barriers, hazards, vulnerabilities and related plans considered to allow safe and equitable access to services?

• In what ways are local leaders (formal and informal) and/or authorities consulted to ensure strategies are in line with local and/or national priorities?

• Are there equitable opportunities for participation of all groups in the affected population in decision-making?

• Does the response facilitate early recovery? Does the response only take an emergency approach or are there elements of early recovery?

• What mechanisms exist for assessing, prompt detection and mitigation of unintended negative effects?

4. Humanitarian response is based upon communication, participation, and feedback.

• Is information about the organisation and response provided in accessible and appropriate ways to affected communities and people?
• Is information about rights and entitlement provided in an accessible and inclusive way to all (women, men, girls and boys of all ages and abilities)?
• Are people, especially vulnerable and marginalised groups, accessing and understanding the information provided?
• Are crisis-affected people’s views, including those of the most vulnerable and marginalised, sought and used to guide programme design and implementation?
• How was meaningful participation of groups at risk of marginalisation promoted in decision making?
• What was the programme’s contribution in influencing national/ regional/ local government policies and programs on livelihood recovery through climate change adaptation? Was this was planned/factored in from the outset?
• To what extent local capacity (capacity of government, civil society and other partners) is supported and developed?
• Was a specific exit strategy prepared and agreed upon by key stakeholders to ensure post project sustainability? Do the local institutions demonstrate ownership commitment and technical capacity to continue to work with the programme or replicate it?
• What, if any, changes could we make to improve connectedness of the overall response?

5. Complaints are welcomed and addressed.

• Is information provided to and understood by all demographic groups including women, older people and people with disabilities about how feedback and complaints mechanisms work and what kind of complaints can be made through them?
• Was information on feedback and complaints mechanism communicated in different ways to reach out to all?
• Are complaints about sexual exploitation and abuse investigated immediately by staff with relevant competencies and an appropriate level of authority?
• Was there a written complaints system developed (preferably in local language) involving the communities?
• Did the complaint system clearly and effectively communicated to staff and partners?
• Was there any complaint received?
• How were they dealt with?

6. Humanitarian responses are coordinated and complementary.

• Is information about the organisation’s competences, resources, areas and sectors of work shared with others responding to the crisis?
• Is information about the competences, resources, areas and sectors of work of other organisations, including local and national authorities, accessed?
• Have existing coordination structures been identified and how has IR participated in these structures?
• Does existing coordination structures include Older People Association, Organisation for Persons with Disabilities, Women Group, etc.?
• Are the programmes of other organisations and authorities taken into account when designing, planning and implementing programmes?
• What criteria were used to select the project location? Did the project target the most vulnerable areas where the needs were highest?
• How many people did the project target in relation to the total number of people affected? What criteria were used to select the project beneficiaries? Was it participatory and transparent? Has the project reached to the targeted number of beneficiaries?
• Has the project considered the differing needs of men and women, children, the elderly, those with disabilities?
• Which group has benefited most from the intervention, how and why? Was there any group excluded? If yes, why?
• What, if any, changes could we make to improve the coverage of the overall response?
• What have been the biggest successes in coordination? What were the biggest gaps?
• Have local capacities been involved, used and strengthened and have partnerships with local CBOs, CSO organisations been built-up?
• What internal coordination problems (between field offices, between field and country offices and between country office and IRW) have you faced and how have they been addressed?
• What, if any, changes could we make to improve coordination of the overall response?

7. Humanitarian actors continuously learn and improve.

• Are evaluations and reviews of responses of similar crises consulted during programme design?
• What are the benefits, challenges and lessons learned in the use of cash and voucher assistance in the humanitarian response?
• Are monitoring, evaluation, feedback and complaints-handling processes leading to changes and/or innovations in programme design and implementation?
• Did IR Malawi used the learning to improve the way they provide inclusive humanitarian assistance in other projects? Is learning systematically documented?
• What kind of actions and systems are used to share learning with relevant stakeholders? To what extent has IR’s response been coordinated with the efforts of the broader humanitarian community and the government?
• Did IR Malawi identify and document learning, challenges and opportunities for including women, older people and people with disabilities in humanitarian action?
• Did IR Malawi share learning, good practice and innovation, both within IR and with other organisations, such as project partners, national organisations and authorities.

8. Staff is supported to do their job effectively, and are treated fairly and equitably.

• Does staff sign a code of conduct?
• If so, do they receive orientation on this and other relevant policies?
• Are complaints received about staff? How are they handled?
• Is all staff and volunteers provided with an induction and appropriate and ongoing training to help them to effectively do their jobs? Did the induction include training on protection and inclusion?
• Was staff working as per the agreed IRW values? How have IR staff incorporated the values into their work?
• Does IR Mali have relevant capacity, diverse and gender balanced team for response?
• Does the office have all appropriate and up to date policies and procedures, including the IR Handbook, available to them for reference should they be required?

9. Resources are managed and used responsibly for their intended purpose.

• To what extent were the proposed output achieved as per log frame?
• To what extent have agreed humanitarian standards, principles and behaviours including the Code of Conduct standards been respected?
• What was the impact on creating communal assets and contribution in enhancing their resilience capacity?
• What, if any, changes could we make to improve impact of the overall response, in regards to resource management such as finance, HR, procurement, logistics?
• Are services and goods procured using a rapid competitive bidding process?
• Are potential impacts on the environment monitored, and actions taken to mitigate them?
• Is a safe whistle blowing procedure in place and is known to staff, communities, people and other stakeholders?
• How did you ensure that good practices/lessons were incorporated from similar on-going or completed projects (good practice review) in the project design and implementation?
• Have the essential project support functions of IR and partners (including finance, human resources, logistics, media and communications) been quickly and effectively set up and resourced, and performing to an appropriate standard?
• How efficient was procurement process? Did the procurement process ensure that the best and lowest prices were obtained balancing quality, cost and timeliness? What could have been done better?
• Were the funds used as stated?
• How does the project demonstrate value for money?
• Were small scale mitigation activities cost-efficient?
• To what extent have innovative or alternative modes of delivering on the response been explored and exploited to reduce costs and maximise results?
• What, if any, changes could we make to improve efficiency of the overall response?
• How effective has livelihood recovery approaches been in reducing climate vulnerability over time and is there evidence of this?
• To what extent have minimum quality requirements and standards been met?
• Was timely provision of support, goods and services achieved, according to the perceptions of key stakeholders? How do you know?
• What were the biggest obstacles to the achievement of the purpose of the intervention?
• What, if any, changes could we make to the programme to make it more cost effective?
• Do you have a risk matrix? If yes, how often did you review it? If No, why not? How are you adjusting your programme with the unforeseen risks?

Cross cutting issues

· How well did the response mainstream/ensured the inclusion of gender, age and disability?

· How well did the response tackle immediate and strategic gender needs?

· How did you ensure protection of women and children from abuse? Including other vulnerable groups such as older people and people with disabilities

· How well disaster risk reduction (DRR), the environment, and conflict/cultural sensitivities integrated in the project?

· How well this project include ethnic people/ socially excluded

· What examples of innovative good practice can be seen in IR MALAWI’s response?

· How did the humanitarian response promote cash and vouchers assistance as a potential approach within the humanitarian toolbox of IR Malawi?

· What general lessons can we draw from this response for our preparation for future response?

Sustainability:

· To what extent did the benefits of a programme or project continue after donor funding ceased?

· What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?

To download and access the full tender and guidelines dcoument please visit our website on;

https://www.islamic-relief.org/tenders/open-tenders/tender-document-for-the-disasters-emergency-committee-dec-evaluation-of-the-cyclone-idai-response-in-malawi-september-2020/