United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: Tender for desk review and mapping of IRW global education projects and intervention outcomes and impact consultancy, July 2018 (Lot 2)

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 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 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

Islamic Relief’s Global Strategy 2017-21 identifies a mission to “Promote integrated development and environmental custodianship… regardless of race, political affiliation, age, gender, abilities or belief, and without expecting anything in return”. Our vision includes “Empowering local communities to overcome poverty and vulnerability”. To do this “We aim to complement humanitarian work with a stronger portfolio of longer-term integrated development programmes across our core programme countries, improving the lives of poor and marginalised people (of all faiths and none) through this work”. The global strategy states that “by 2021 we will have completed consultation on and development of a strategy to make a significant impact on educational attainment from both a programme and resource mobilisation perspective. The global strategy further states, that by 2021 we would have ‘developed an IR strategy for a significant contribution to educational attainment within the countries in which we work.’ This outputs from this assignment shall contribute to and act as the basis for wider consultation on the development of an IRW educational strategy, possibly the recruitment of global education advisor, as well as inform short to medium term funding and programming priorities, plans and actions related to enhancing the effectiveness and impact of IRW educational programmes globally.

Islamic Relief implements a wide range of education projects globally in humanitarian, conflict and development contexts. Examples of type of education related projects and interventions range from support to formal basic/primary education, early childhood education development, through to teachers training, improving school infrastructure including classrooms, water, hygiene and sanitation, support for children with special needs such as those with living with hearing and sight disabilities, provision of basic education to agropastoral and pastoralist children who have no access to formal schools through a staggered curriculum that led to transformation of the non-formal schools into formal schools where the government had allocated budgets to support to and for tertiary education and technical and vocational educational centres.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this consultancy is to provide a detailed account of Islamic Relief’s current and recent activities in education interventions in order to identify outcomes achieved, any indicative impact, best practice, and provide a baseline and capture learning that will be used to further the strategic objectives set out above. It is recognised that currently Islamic Relief’s International Programmes Division lacks adequate capacity to carry out this review in a timely manner, and that by recruiting a dedicated consultant it will be able to complete this work within its 2018 plans.

This consultancy will involve document reviews, emailing, face to face, virtual- and tele-meetings, distributing and analysing the results of questionnaires, and other means of eliciting data concerning Islamic Relief’s current and recent activities in education sector programming interventions. The resulting reports will inform programme, policy and advocacy development, regional and country coordinators, programme managers and officers and the global education advisor (should this position be recruited) to support situation analyses, funding, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of education related work throughout the organisation.

Consultancy Goals

1. Islamic Relief will be informed of the extent, nature, key results (outcomes/indicative impact) best practices and learnings derived from its work in and around education programming since 2014.

2. Islamic Relief will be able to utilise this information to inform its programme, policy, advocacy and planning towards achieving its strategic objectives in the education sector including contribution to SDG4 and support funding positioning.

3. The Global Education Advisor who is to be potentially recruited (or a further phase of consultancy) will be able to identify locations for country and field visits which will provide primary evidence of outcomes achieved and programme impact to support future planning to achieve the strategic objectives.

IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK

Consultants are invited to propose the specific methodology as part of this call. In general, it is envisaged this desk review and mapping will involve document reviews, emailing, face to face, virtual- and tele-meetings, distributing and analysing the results of questionnaires, and other means of eliciting data concerning Islamic Relief’s current and recent activities in education sector programming.

· Please refer to annex 1 for the specific scope of assignment highlighting key questions this desk review seeks to answer and suggested final report outline.

· The consultant is expected to propose a suitably robust methodology through which areas highlighted in annex 1 can and will be most readily extracted, analysed, synthesised and reported back on, within a 4 week consultancy time period, to provide a detailed understanding of the current status, approaches, gaps and potential opportunities in further developing IRW’s education programming globally both within development and emergency contexts.

· The proposal should also take into account that some projects may not have evaluation reports and other baseline or endline data; whilst other projects are ongoing and may not have final reports. In such situations, the consultant should consider and propose suitable alternative methodology which can be used to determine project details and provide indicative, relevant and credible findings and recommendations.

Policy Framework

The consultant will be expected to work within and abide by Islamic Relief’s policy frameworks on communications, information management, human resources etc. and will be obliged to sign an agreement assuring the confidentiality of data and information utilised and collected in pursuance of the consultancy. The consultant will be sensitive and compliant to any requirements of GDPR.

The report will be produced for internal audience but may be edited and adapted for external publication by IRW for wider communication and learning purposes.

Reporting Framework and Schedule

Brief reports (written or oral) on progress against implementation plan weekly for the duration of the project.

DELIVERABLES

Deliverables for this project would be;

1. Written implementation plan agreed with Programme Impact and Learning Manager within one week of commencement.

2. Narrative account, not exceeding 32 pages describing the extent, nature, best practices and learnings derived from its work in and around education projects since 2014

3. Executive summary incorporated in the above, not exceeding 3 pages

4. Data base on MS Excel format of all projects and programmes examined, including country, PIN number, name, brief description, dates, budget, donor.

5. Soft copies of any substantial MS Excel or Word documents or other documents created to support mapping and analysis from which the findings in the main report have been extrapolated – including any tables, charts, graphs etc.

ACCOUNTABILITY

The consultant will be responsible for conducting the activities and delivering the outputs set out in this terms of reference and will coordinate all activities with and through the Programme Impact & Learning Manager. The Programme Impact & Learning Manager is responsible for facilitating access to all relevant and available documents (proposals, donor reports and evaluation reports) and wider staff necessary for the consultant to conduct these activities and deliver the outputs.

Required competences

Required Competencies of the consultant would be;

1. Have a broad understanding and experience of conducting evaluations, outcome and impact assessments and reviews using a variety of methodologies and conducting desk reviews and studies.

2. Must have experience in accessing and managing large bodies of diverse data, and extracting relevant information from them and drawing appropriate conclusions and recommendations

3. Must be able to converse with stakeholders from a variety of background in order to elicit specific information

4. Will have either significant technical and/or practical field-based or relevant academic experience of the Education Sector in the context of international development and emergencies and be able to us this knowledge to construct effective enquiries and order information received.

5. Will write informatively and succinctly in English

6. Respect the values of Islamic Relief

Project outputs

The consultant is expected to produce:

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

• A full report with the following sections:

a) Title of Report: Desk Review & Mapping of IRW Global Education Projects and Interventions Outcomes and Impact

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 32 pages (please see indicative layout in annex 1 below – 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 HQ 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 where the consultant is outside the UK or based on request from the consultant.

Required inputs

The following are the key inputs to the desk:

Stakeholders to be involved include:

· IRW and IRW-field staff (through remote communication by Skype / Zoom etc)

a) Relevant IRW proposals, narrative reports and evaluation reports/documentation

b) External secondary information and data as appropriate to the desk review

Timetable and reporting duration

The consultancy will be for a maximum of 20 working days and commence as early as possible but before July 26th July 2018, and will be completed by no later than 29th August 2018.

Action

By when

Who

Tender live date

12^th July 2018

IRW

Final date for submission of bid proposal

23^rd July 2018 (1pm)

Consultant

Proposals considered, short-listing and follow up enquiries completed

24^th July 2018

IRW

Consultant interview and final selection

25^th July 2018

IRW

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

26th July 2018 (120 minutes);

Consultant/IRW

Submission of Inception Report

1^st August 2018 (1 working day)

Consultant

Desk Review and Report Preparation Between

2^nd August 2018 – 25^th August 2018 (15 working days)

Consultant

Submission of the first draft to IRW for comments

26^th August 2018

Consultant

IRW responses to draft report

28^th August 2018

IRW

Final report submitted to IRW (1 working days)

30^th August 2018

Consultant

Presentation of the report to IRW management

2.5 hours (date TBC)

Consultant

Contract duration: Duration to be specified by the consultant ( max 20 days preferred)

Direct report: Programme Quality Department

Job Title: Consultant: Education Impact Mapping

The Programme Impact & Learning Manager acts under the authority of the Head of Programme Quality who has the ultimate responsibility for the conduct of activities under this consultancy.

The consultant will communicate in the first instance with and will forward deliverables to the Programme Impact & Learning Manager.

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 outcome reviews, mapping and impact assessment/evaluation approaches for similar work

Terms and conditions

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

· 25% of the total amount – submission of the inception report

· 25% of the total amount – submission of the first draft of the evaluation report

· 50% 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.

Additional information and conditions of contract

During the consultancy period,

IRW will only cover:

· Consultancy fees

· Any travel costs to visit IRW

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 access the original tender documents please visit the link beneath;

https://www.islamic-relief.org/tenders/category/open-tenders/

Consultancy contract

This will be for an initial period that is to be specified by the consultant commencing from July 2018 (exact date to be mutually agreed). The selected candidate is expected to work from their home/office and be reporting into the Programme Impact & Learning Manager.

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 2 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, 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).

Sole traders applying for both lot 1 and lot 2 will only be awarded a tender for just a single lot (either lot 1 or lot 2) and not both.

TENDER DATES AND CONTACT DETAILS

All proposals are required to be submitted by Monday 23^rd July 2018 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 criterias are subject to change.

Appendix 1

Annex 1

Desk Review & Mapping of IRW Global Education Projects and InterventionsOutcomes and Impact

1)Data relating to items 1 – 24 below will be provided to the consultant by IRW. Consultant will be required to present this information in an appropriate manner including using graphs/charts and any narrative commentary to summarise and provide any observations:

Mapping number of projects:

1. What is the total number ongoing and closed education and education related projects across IRW between the periods of 1st January 2014 to 30th March 2018?

2. What is the total budget value of all projects combined?

3. How many ongoing projects are there?

4. How many have closed in the last 1 year?

5. How many have closed in the last 3 years?

Mapping value, duration, location and donors of projects:

1. What is their average budget value?

2. What is their average duration?

3. How many children/students do the projects target directly on average?

4. How many are more than 3 years in duration? What is the average value of these projects? Who are the key donors?

5. How many less than 3 years and more than 2 years in duration? What is the average value of these projects? Who are the key donors?

6. How many are less than 2 year in duration but more than 1 year? What is the average value of these projects? Who are the key donors?

7. How many are less than 1 year in duration? What is the average value of these projects? Who are the key donors?

8. How many greater than 1 year projects are above $1m in value?

9. How many greater than 1 year projects are between $0.5m to $1m in value?

10. How many greater than 1 year projects are between $0.1m and $0.5m in value?

11. How many greater than 1 year projects are less than $0.1m in value?

12. Which countries are these education projects in?

a. How many in Asia?

b. How many in East Africa?

c. How many in West Africa?

d. How many in MENA?

Mapping evaluation and reporting status of projects:

1. How many have been evaluated?

2. How many have baseline reports?

3. How many have end-line reports?

4. How many have both base-line and end-line reports?

5. How many have outcome results?

6. How many have result monitoring reports?

7. How many direct beneficiaries on average per project?

2) Analysis to be provided by the consultant:

Mapping the planned and actual key results, outcome and goal/indicative impact and theories of change of 36 projects of highest value and detailing relevant observations, analysis and recommendations:

1. What impact do these projects seek?

2. What actual reported impact have they achieved – based on available final report and evaluation reports? If any?

3. What outcomes do these projects seek?

4. What actual reported outcomes have they achieved – based on available final report and evaluation reports? If any?

5. What results/outputs do these projects seek?

6. What actual key reported results/outputs have they achieved – based on available final report and evaluation reports? If any?

7. What percentage and how many projects are service-delivery focused?

8. What percentage and how many projects are rights-based with no service delivery?

9. What percentage and how many projects incorporate service delivery complemented by rights-based approaches?

10. What percentage and how many projects are focused on education in emergency contexts (EiE)? What are the key features and components of such projects most commonly found within across IR education related projects? Are there any key EiE components, specifically as referenced against INEE Minimum Standards for Education, that are notably absent from IR education projects that could or should be incorporated?

11. What percentage and how many projects are focused on supporting a finite number of schools, centres of learning or children/adults? What are the key features/components of such projects?

12. What percentage and how many projects seek to influence or support the wider educational system? What are the key features/components of such projects?

13. What percentage and how many seek to support/influence education within a local area? What are the key features/components of such projects?

14. What percentage and how many seek to support/influence education nationally? What are the key features/components of such projects?

15. What percentage and how many projects focus on increasing educational access? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

16. What percentage and how many are focused on exclusively building new schools? What is the total value of these projects as a percentage of total value of projects (item 2 above)?

17. What percentage and how many are focused on refurbishing school infrastructure? What is the average and total value of these projects as a percentage of total value of projects (item 2 above)?

18. What percentage and how many supply school furniture? What is the average and total value of these projects as a percentage of total value of projects (item 2 above)?

19. What percentage and how many supply school bags, stationary, study materials and/or school uniform? What is the average and total value of these projects as a percentage of total value of projects (item 2 above)?

20. What percentage and how many support with paying educational fees?

21. What percentage and how many projects focus on improving educational quality? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

22. What percentage and how many projects are focused on . pre-primary/ early childhood education? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per student?

23. What percentage and how many focus on primary education support? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

24. What percentage and how many focus on lower-secondary and secondary education support? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

25. What percentage and how many focus on post-secondary or higher education support? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

26. What percentage and how many focus on technical and vocational training (TVET)? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

27. What percentage and how many focus on supporting adult literacy and education? How many focus on supporting adult women’s literacy and numeracy? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

28. What percentage and how many focus on supporting education through faith-based institutions? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

29. What percentage and how many focus exclusively or primarily on supporting or promoting girl’s education? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

30. What percentage and how many focus exclusively or primarily on supporting or promoting boy’s education? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per direct student?

31. What percentage and how many focus exclusively or primarily on supporting or promoting adult education or lifelong learning ? What are the key features/components of such projects? What is the range and average cost per student?

32. What percentage and how many projects incorporate the introduction or use of technology to promote enhanced quality or access to education? What are the key features/components of such projects?

33. What percentage and how many projects incorporate parent, carer and community participation to promote enhanced quality or access to education? What are the key features/components of such projects?

34. What percentage and how many projects incorporate teacher education and teacher training to promote enhanced quality or access to education? What are the key features/components of such projects?

35. What percentage and how many projects incorporate School based DRR. WASH, health, nutrition to promote enhanced quality or access to education? What are the key features/components of such projects?

36. What percentage of pupils or students of the top 18 projects and top 6 are boys/girls? Please provide commentary and any summarised data on sex, age, disability profiles of project participants.

37. Do any projects support inclusion of vulnerable children, children engaged in child labour, children with disabilities in mainstream provision? What additional components do these projects incorporate?

38. Do any projects support education for children with disabilities in seperate or ‘special’ provision?

39. What percentage and how many projects involve faith and faith leaders? If any? What are the key interventions? How effective are these reported to be? What evidence is available of effectiveness?

40. Do any have evidence of policy influencing activities at national or local levels or capacity building of relevant technical departments or bodies of government on relevant education areas? Please provide detail of range of related activities and any indicative results/impact from these.

41. What are the claimed and actual programming approaches being followed by the different education projects in different countries and regions?

42. What are the different education related features, components of projects identified? Which features or components are the most common? What features or components are some of the most innovative or potentially of the most impact?

43. How frequently do these features appear in different projects? How effective are the features/components? What evidence or claim is made to support indication of effectiveness?

44. What are the claimed and actual sustainability strategy pursued by the different projects?

45. How effective are the sustainability strategies employed? What evidence is available to support?

46. Are there any impact/significant change case studies available related to each of the specific projects – particularly any that reflect the range of interventions, outcomes and impact arising from the project?

47. From the list of 36 projects, please extract and document the 18 most significant/prominent change case stories from 18 projects that are deemed to have the highest impact potential, including systemic impact (and justify selection method):

a. 7 for Asia

b. 4 for East Africa

c. 3 from West Africa

d. 4 from Middle East/Eastern Europe

1. Of the 18 projects selected which are the 6 projects with most significant indicative/potential impact (locally or nationally)? Please justify selection.

2. What are the most common features of the 18 selected projects? Please assess based on identified significant case studies, theory of change, influence on wider systems, results, reported outcomes and impacts. What are the key differences between these projects?

3. What are the broad theories of change behind the most common type of the 18 selected projects?

4. What are the theories of change behind the specific 6 projects selected as having potentially the most significant impact, including possibly impacting local or national education systems?

76.How does these theories of change compare to best practice in wider literature and/or large donor programme design for educational programming (e.g. DFID, EC, UNICEF, Save the Children, GPE etc)?

77.Are there any new stand-out or innovative features in selected IR programmes?

78.Are there any key features missed/not incorporated in IR programmes that are suggested by wider sustainable education sector best practice, systematic reviews or donor programming priorities?

79.What are the recommendations for consolidating, scaling-up and/or focusing IR global education programmes to contribute to Agenda 2030 , in particular SDG 4 (Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all)? To which specific SDG 4 target/s could IR programming focus on contributing?

80.What are the recommendations for consolidating, scaling-up and/or enhancing IR global education programmes and interventions to better and more strategically support education in emergencies (EiE), especially in light of any gaps or opportunities related to INEE Minimum Standards in Education?

81.Identify 4 projects which are potentially of most significant impact, including possibility of having systemic impact (which could or should be replicated or scaled up either nationally, regionally or internationally) which warrant further detailed field-based impact assessments or evaluations. Suggest what components or dimensions of these projects should be more specifically assessed during the study and suggest possible impact measurement methodolology that could be employed given available data for those projects.

Suggested Report Layout (Consultants are invited to suggest more coherent layout):

Executive Summary: Max 3 pages (this should be publishable externally – so should contain summarised key findings and recommendations)

Methodology of the Desk Review/Study and any challenges or limitations: 2 pages max:

Introduction – 3 pages max: Overview of number and type of projects across different geographic locations; duration and budget values and commentary about the range of projects including relevant charts, tables and graphs to summarise and illustrate key data succintly.

Mapping of projects – max 8 pages: Data and narrative, supported with appropriate graphs, charts and tables to reflect the mapping of projects and analysis. Where there are chart or tables created to support analysis but not included in the main report, please share as an annex or separate file in MS Word or Excel.

Theories of change/logic models underpinning projects – based on project logic models/logical frameworks, most significant/prominent case studies from the 18 selected highest impact projects. Rationale or methodology for selecting these 18 projects should be provided.

• Outcome and impacts planned and achieved for the projects:

• common results planned and achieved

Analysis of similarities and differences in planned outcomes and impacts between projects in different countries and regions.

Comparison with external best practice, institutional donor education programme objectives and ToCs – gaps and opportunities for IR going forward.

Other key features of projects – max 4 pages: Stand-out features of particular projects; innovations, use of technology, sustainability features; features that highlight impact on women and children or older persons, persons with disability etc; DRR/climate change and resilience mainstreaming. To what degree have these elements been value-adding to realising project outcomes, impact and sustainability objectives?

Feature of 6 most impactful projects – max 6 pages: discussion of similarities and differences, key impacts and comparison to wider sector best practice and donor priorities. What models do they use, are there any innovations within these or other of the selected. Could/should these projects or the models and approaches underpinning them be replicated, scaled up in the country, region or wider – what kind of adjustments or further verification may be required prior to such scale up?

Further field study needed – max 3 page: Identify 4 projects which have been or are potentially the of the most significant impactl and which warrant further detailed field-based impact assessments or evaluations. Suggest what components or dimensions of these projects should be more specifically assessed during a field impact study/assement. Consultant should provide an outline of the possible impact assessment methodology that could be used given availability or lack data for these projects and provide an outline of the broad terms of reference for such an impact assessment.

Conclusions and recommendations – max 3 pages:

• Summarise overall experience and capacity of IR in education programming

• Provide an assessment of the outcome measure, impact and sustainability

• Highlight best practice and innovations and stand-out features

• Highlight core weakness, limitations of IR educational programmes, key learning and recommendations

• Recommend way forward for IR global education programming to align with best practice, donor priorities, contribution to relevant SDGs

• Include recommendations on outcome measurement and impact assessment methodologies to incorporated within projects to allow for better outcome and impact measurement of new projects and programmes

Full report – max 32 pages including executive summary.

Appendix 2

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 consultancy for desk review & mapping of IRW global education project and intervention outcomes and impact, July 2018

Applicants name

Company name

No of proposed hours per week

No. of proposed days

Preferred days

Earliest available start date

Non preferred days

Hourly rate

Total per week

Inclusive of Taxes if relevant (Total)

Other expenses (please specify)

Other expenses (please specify)

Other expenses (please specify)

Preferred payment terms (IRW UK terms are normally 28 days).

Total cost for consultancy (for one month)

Total cost for consultancy (for proposed period)

Note

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

To access the original tender documents please visit the link beneath;

https://www.islamic-relief.org/tenders/category/open-tenders/