Tender of a consultancy for the desk review and mapping of IRW’s WASH programme effectiveness and sustainability (2017-2021), January 2022

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.

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 14 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

In 2020, 2.3 billion people lived in water stressed countries - with 2 billion people (equal to 26%) of the world’s population lacking safely managed drinking water. 3.6 billion people (equal to 46%) of the world’s population lacked safely managed sanitation and 2.3 billion people (29%) lacking basic hygiene.

829,000 people die each year from diarrhoea as a result of unsafe drinking water, sanitation and hand hygiene. Safe drinking-water, sanitation and hygiene is crucial to human health and well-being. Safe WASH is not only a prerequisite to health, but contributes to livelihoods, school attendance and dignity and helps to create resilient communities living in healthy environments.
Drinking unsafe water impairs health through illnesses such as diarrhoea, and untreated excreta contaminates groundwaters and surface waters used for drinking-water, irrigation, bathing and household purposes. Chemical contamination of water continues to pose a health burden, whether natural in origin such as arsenic and fluoride, or anthropogenic such as nitrate.

Safe and sufficient WASH plays a key role in preventing numerous NTDs such as trachoma, soil-transmitted helminths and schistosomiasis. Diarrhoeal deaths as a result of inadequate WASH were reduced by half during the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) period (1990–2015), with the significant progress on water and sanitation provision playing a key role. SDG 6 of the 2030 Global Goals sets the target of achieving universal and equitable access to safe and affordable drinking water for all and achieving access to adequate and equitable sanitation and hygiene for all - including an end open defecation, paying special attention to the needs of women and girls and those in vulnerable situations. It also sets the target of supporting and strengthening the participation of local communities in improving water and sanitation management.

Evidence suggests that improving service levels towards safely managed drinking-water or sanitation such as regulated piped water or connections to sewers with wastewater treatment can dramatically improve health by reducing diarrhoeal disease deaths.

However, according to the 2021 UN SDG report, 129 countries are currently off-track from achieving sustainably managed water resources by 2030 and would need to double the current rate of progress meet the SDG 6 targets.

During the last 5 years, WASH specific projects accounted for 7% of total global programme expenditure at Islamic Relief Worldwide. However, if including all projects which included a WASH component then this increases to around 23% of global programming expenditure. Whilst WASH isn’t listed as a strategic priority in the current IRW global strategy, however it is evident that its an important part of our global programming and complements many multi-sectoral activities.

Objective of the evaluation

The aim of this consultancy is to provide a detailed account of Islamic Relief’s current and recent activities in Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) interventions in order to identify the range of outcomes targeted and achieved, sustainability of completed actions, any indicative impact, highlight internal and external best practice and learning and provide a baseline which will be used to improve our WASH interventions in the future.

This consultancy will involve document reviews, emailing, online meetings, distributing and analysing the results of surveys, and other means of eliciting data concerning Islamic Relief’s current and recent activities in WASH interventions. The resulting reports will inform programme, policy and advocacy developers, regional and country coordinators and country officers to support situation analyses, funding, planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of WASH related programmes and projects throughout the organisation.

Consultancy Goals;

1. Islamic Relief will be informed of the extent, nature, key results (effectiveness at the outcome level/indicative impact & sustainability), best practices and learnings derived from its work in and around WASH since January 2017.

2. Islamic Relief will be provided with an overview of sector best practices, promising and scale able innovations or evidence-based solutions already being scaled, trends and evidence of what works related to WASH programming and approaches in fragile, low and middle income countries in which IR works.

3. Islamic Relief will be able to utilise this information to inform its programme, policy, advocacy and planning towards achieving its strategic objectives in the WASH sector.

Methodology and approach

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 literature and document reviews, virtual meetings, internal and external KIIs, distributing and analysing the results of questionnaires, and other means of eliciting data concerning Islamic Relief’s current and recent activities in WASH interventions.

· 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 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 WASH programming globally.

· The proposal should also consider that most projects will not have evaluation reports and may lack other baseline and end line data; whilst other projects are ongoing and may not have final reports. Under such situation, the consultant should consider and propose a suitable methodology which can be used to determine project details (from proposals and narrative reports) 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 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.

Required competencies

Required competencies of the consultant would be:

· Will have either significant technical and/or practical field-based or relevant academic experience of the WASH sector in the context of international development and humanitarian settings and be able to us this knowledge to construct effective enquiries and provide practical recommendations.

· Have a broad understanding and experience of conducting evaluations, outcome and impact assessments, value for money analysis, reviews using a variety of methodologies, including conducting desk and literature reviews and studies.

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

· Possess strong qualitative and quantitative research skills.

· Will write informatively and succinctly in English.

· Respect the values of Islamic Relief.

The chosen evaluation team will be supported by IRW Programme Quality (PQ) team and the IRW Regional team.

Project outputs

Deliverables for this assignment are:

1. Written inception report and detailed work plan agreed with Programme Impact and Learning Manager within one week of commencement, setting out timelines, sampling and analytical framework, detailed methodology, relevant technical standards to be used, draft survey and interview questions, draft proposed report structure etc.

2. Narrative report, not exceeding 32 pages describing the extent, nature, effectiveness, value for money analysis, sustainability, best practices and learnings derived from our work around WASH since 2017 as well as external best practices, approaches and evidence of what works and currently being scaled up. The report should have the the following sections:

a) Title of Report: Desk Review & Mapping of IRW Global WASH Programme Effectiveness and Sustainability (2017-2021)

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 (not exceeding 3 pages).

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.

· Persons participating in the review – with appropriate consent for names to be published or specific names should be anonymised highlighting just role, organisation and gender.

· Documents consulted during the desk review.

· Data base on MS Excel format of all projects and programmes examined, analysis framework and data used for analysis, including country, PIN number, name, brief description, dates, budget, donor.

· Anonymised copy of field data collected during the review.

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

· Bibliography.

1. The consultant will be required to regularly communicate with the IRW international office and provide feedback on and answer questions about the findings from the desk review. This should include an initial presentation of the draft report by the consultant via Microsoft Teams or Zoom.

2. The consultant will lead a presentation and sharing workshop up to 90 minutes with IRW (programme quality MEAL team, head of region, desk coordinators and officers, technical advisors).

The work plan, inception report, draft report, final report, presentation, etc., and communication language must be in English.

Timetable and reporting information

The project is expected to run for a maximum of 20 working days, starting by the 31^st January 2022 and and ending before the 31^st of March 2022.

Date

Description

Responsibility

6^th January 2022 Tender live date IRW

18^th January 2022 Final date for submission of bid Consultant

18^th – 21^st January 2022 Proposals considered, short-listing and follow up enquiries completed IRW

24^th – 31^st January 2022 Consultant interviews and final selection (+ signing contracts) IRW

1^st February 2022 Meeting with the consultant and agree on a methodology, sampling, plan of action, working schedule IRW

10^th February 2022 Submission of Inception Report (at least 7 days before commencing the evaluation) Consultant

11^th February – 25^th February 2022 Desk Review Consultant

4^th March 2022 Submission of the first draft to IRW for comments Consultant

9^th March 2022 Initial Presentation of Findings Consultant

14^th March 2022 IRW responses to draft report IRW

18th March 2022 Final report submitted to IRW Consultant

21^st – 25^th March (TBC) Final Presentation * 2 with IR key stakeholders Consultant

Reporting information:

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

Direct report: Programme Impact & Learning Manager

Job Title: Consultant: Desk Review & Mapping of IRW WASH Programme Outcomes and Impact

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

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.

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 done

iv. The financial proposal including the consultancy daily rate, please refer to appendix 2

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 access or download the full tendering documents please click on 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 31^st January 2022 (or earlier). 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 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, references and cost proposal (including expenses) are expected.

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

TENDER DATES AND CONTACT DETAILS

All proposals are required to be submitted by Tuesday 18^th January 2022 at 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. Financial proposal including payment terms (as mentioned above), please refer to appendix 2

2. Best value for money including a full break down of costs including taxes, expenses and any VAT and the ability to complete the project on time

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.

Framework agreements

Islamic Relief Worldwide may enter into framework agreements with suppliers/consultants who can support us in similar evaluations in the future. We therefore request those interested companies/consultants to fill in the table below and return this with the schedule 1 beneath with their proposal before the above deadline.

Company name Day rate for 1 year Day rate for 2 year Preferred duration (1 or 2 years)

Earliest start date Can sign an agreement (yes or no)

Islamic Relief Worldwide is not under any obligations to enter into framework agreements with prospective and potential suppliers/consultants and it is at the discretion of the evaluation committee to proceed with this option.

Appendix 1

Desk Review & Mapping of IRW WASH Programme Outcomes and Impact

1) Data relating to items 1 – 14 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 WASH projects across IRW between the periods of 1st January 2017 to 31^st December 2021?

2. How many ongoing projects are there?

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

Mapping value, duration, location and donors of projects:

1. What is their average value?

2. What is their average duration?

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

4. 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?

5. 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?

6. How many greater than 1 year projects are above £750K in value?

7. How many greater than 1 year projects are between £300K to £750K in value?

8. How many greater than 1 year projects are between £100K and £300K in value?

9. How many greater than 1 year projects are less than £100K in value?

10. What is the average value of projects with a duration less than 1 year?

11. Which countries are these projects in?

a. How many in Asia? What’s the average value and duration?

b. How many in East Africa? What’s the average value and duration?

c. How many in West Africa? What’s the average value and duration?

d. How many in MENAEE? What’s the average value and duration?

2) Analysis to be provided by the consultant (through document reviews, KIIs, surveys etc):

**Mapping the WASH programming strategies and approaches used:

1. Which WASH technical standard/s do projects reference and use to inform design and implementation?

2. To what extent do projects follow and adhere to relevant WASH technical standards as evidenced in proposal and reports?

3. Which common WASH strategies and approaches do projects use?

4. To what extent do projects take a service delivery versus a rights-based approach?

5. To what extent do project use participatory and community based approaches, including e.g. CLTS etc?

6. To what extent do projects use market-based approaches, e.g. market-led sanitation etc?

7. To what extent do projects consider and integrate with wider WASH governance at the local government level?

8. How relevant, effective and efficient are these approaches given the context?

9. What are the sector trends and evidence of effective of alternative approaches for efficiently and sustainably scaling-up WASH interventions in rapid onset disaster, protracted humanitarian and development settings?

****Mapping the project result chains: 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:

Please provide an assessment of planned outcomes and impact (based on proposal, log frames, MEAL plans etc) versus actual achieved by IR projects (based on final reports/evaluation reports etc):

1. What key impacts do these projects seek?

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

3. What key 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. How many direct beneficiaries on average have been planned and achieved per project?

8. What is the unit cost per direct beneficiary per project? What is the unit cost per litre etc?)

9. 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?

Where possible, the above analysis should categorise and enumerate planned and actual results according to the following common result areas:

Reduce diarrhoea and other water-borne diseases

· How many seek to reduce the prevalence of diarrhoea and other water-borne diseases among children?

· How many seek to reduce the number of working days lost due to diarrhoeal diseases and other water-borne diseases?

· How many seek to reduce the number of school days lost due to diarrhoeal diseases and other water-borne diseases?

· How many seek to increase awareness of the causes and prevention of diarrhoea and other water-borne diseases?

· How many seek to increase awareness on the appropriate treatment of diarrhoea and other water-borne diseases?

Improve access to safe, clean drinking water:

· How many seek to increase safe access to clean, drinking water?

· How many seek to decrease the distance to water sources?

· How many seek to increase the volume of clean water available to communities?

· How many seek to increase the quality of the water sources available?

· How many seek to provide treatment of available drinking water?

· How many seek to provide safe water storage?

· How many seek to provide capacity building and training for the management of water sources?

· How many seek to establish local water management groups?

· How many seek to provide repairs and maintenance of existing water sources?

Increase access to improved sanitation:

· How many seek to increase safe access to latrines?

· How many seek to prevent groundwater contamination by faeces?

· How many seek to increase to usage of improved sanitation facilities?

· How many seek to promote good sanitation practices?

· How many seek to provide safe solid waste disposal?

· How many seek to provide solid waste management?

Increase hygiene awareness:

· How many distribute hygiene items/kits?

· How many seek to promote good hygiene practices?

· How many seek to increase access to soap?

· How many seek to impart handwashing knowledge?

· How many seek to promote good handwashing practices?

· How many provide handwashing facilities with soap and water?

· How many provide handwashing education at schools?

· How many provide menstrual hygiene facilities/items?

· How many seek to increase COVID-19 awareness?

**Mapping range of WASH components and features prioritised/incorporated in IR projects

1. What is the range of different WASH related features and components (e.g. boreholes, tube wells, piped systems, rainwater harvesting, micro dams, trucking etc and e.g. communal, household, public latrine types, CLTS etc) incorporated within IRW WASH projects?

2. Which are the most common?

3. How frequently do these features appear in different projects?

4. What are some of the most innovative or potentially may have the most impact relative to cost?

5. To what extent are these interventions and features relevant, sustainable and cost-effective given the context? Should IR prioritise some and not others? Why?

**Mapping approaches to sustainability of interventions and investments

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

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

3. To what extent are WASH committees established and trained to sustain investments? Is the strategy likely to be sustainable/effective?

4. What are the good practices from within IR and evidence from wider sector of enhancing sustainability of WASH actions?

**Mapping resilience, protection and inclusion and other cross-curing themes – what’s done well and what needs to improve and why?

1. How well do projects ensure safety, protection and gender considerations?

2. How well do projects ensure environmental protection and risk considerations?

3. How well do projects ensure conflict-sensitivity?

4. How many integrate DRR, climate change or resilience mainstreaming? What the type and range of related interventions and activities?

5. What percentage of beneficiaries are women/men? Please provide commentary and any summarised data on sex, age, disability profiles of project participants.

6. Do any highlight work with older people, people with disabilities? What additional components do these projects incorporate?

7. How many projects are inclusive of faith and faith leaders? If any?

8. How many support and promote and integrate a rights-based approach?

9. How well do projects integrate with wider programmes and result areas related to e.g. livelihood (irrigation), education, nutrition etc?

10. 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 WASH areas? Please provide detail of range of related activities and any indicative results/impact from these.

**Mapping WASH intervention MEAL mechanism and systems:

1. How appropriate are the planned output, outcome and impact targets and indicators?

2. How many projects planned and report results appropriately at the outcome or impact levels?

3. What monitoring and evaluation mechanisms and systems did the projects employ to assure delivery of outputs and measure progress towards outcomes and impacts?

4. How many have relevant result monitoring reports?

5. How many have been evaluated?

6. How many have baseline reports?

7. How many have end-line reports?

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

9. How is sustainability of interventions monitored and assured?

10. What MEAL activities are done well and what needs to improve and why?

**Shortlisting potentially highest impact WASH projects

1. From the list of 36 projects provided, please extract and document the 18 most significant/prominent projects that are deemed to have the highest impact and sustainability potential (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 impact? 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, results, reported outcomes and impacts. What are the key differences between these projects?

3. What are the broad theories of change/approaches/strategies 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?

5. How does these theories of change/strategies/approaches compare to evidence-based best practice in wider literature and/or large donor programme design for WASH programming (e.g. UNICEF, DANIDA, EC, USAID)?

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

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

8. What are the recommendations for consolidating, scaling-up and/or focusing IR WASH programmes to contribute to Agenda 2030, in particular SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation? Which SDG 6 targets should IRW focus on if choosing just two SDG 6 targets and why?

9. Identify 4 projects which have been or are potentially of the most impact 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 the study and suggest possible impact measurement methodology 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 limiations: 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 succinctly.

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 WASH 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 impact 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 WASH.

• 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 WASH programmes, key learning and recommendations.

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

• Include recommendations on improving MEAL approaches for WASH programming in IR which enhances assurance of quality and quantity of outputs and supports outcome and sustainability measurement, evidencing, reporting and tracking.

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 of a consultancy for the for the desk review and mapping of IRW’s WASH programme outcomes, effectiveness and sustainability, January 2022

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) £

Payment terms

40% payment upfront, 30% upon submission of first draft, 30% upon submission of final draft**

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.

How to apply:

Please access or download the full tendering documents if you are interested in applying for this consultancy;

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