Consultant – Mid-Term Evaluation Of Three Projects To Support Social Protection Systems In Benin, Togo And Burundi At Louvain Cooperation

1. 1. Context

Louvain Coopération in short, LC in acronym, is the NGO of the Catholic University of Louvain (UCLouvain in acronym). It is headquartered in Louvain-la-Neuve in Belgium. For LC, development is a process of permanent and dynamic social transformation that gives the most disadvantaged populations the opportunity to build a fairer society where everyone feels capable of realizing their human potential. The specificity of LC is to contribute to this vision of development by mobilizing the human and scientific resources of the university community. In the South, LC supports actions in health, access to health care and food and economic security, in Central Africa (DRC and Burundi), West Africa (Benin and Togo), Andean America (Bolivia), Southern Africa (Madagascar) and Asia (Cambodia). In the North, LC also contributes to actions of Education for Global and Solidarity Citizenship (ECMS).

In the area of ​​access to health care in particular, LC operates in Benin, Togo and Burundi.

In Burundi, Louvain Coopération (LC) has led an intervention to promote and develop community health mutuals (MUSA) from 2009 to today. The National Directorate of LC in Burundi has obtained a second phase of funding from the Directorate General for Development Cooperation (DGD) as part of the five-year program 2022 – 2026 to carry out a health care access project called AMAGARA ARUTA AMAJANA II (3A II). This project is implemented by the association “Unissons les forces pour la Coopération, le Développement et Appui au Monde Rural”, a non-profit association (acronym UCODE-AMR asbl), whose head office is in the city of Ngozi in northern Burundi. The “Health has no price” or Amagara Aruta Amajana Project aims to make a significant contribution to the national health social protection policy, by targeting populations excluded from traditional health insurance mechanisms. This target particularly concerns rural and informal sector workers. To this end, the Burundian NGO UCODE AMR has been strengthened in its mutualist expertise to support the development of seven communal health mutuals and their federative structures. The latter ensure the sustainability of the achievements.

The Platform of Actors of Mutual Health Societies in Burundi (PAMUSAB), of which Louvain Coopération and its partner UCODE AMR are members, in its mission to work towards the professionalization of the mutualist movement, supported the process of restructuring mutual health societies into umbrella organizations to have a united and strengthened mutualist movement. It is in this context that the National Confederation of Community Mutual Health Societies, CONAMUS “NKINGI Y’AMAGARA MEZA ” was created in May 2021. This process of restructuring the mutualist movement is underway at other levels of structuring.

In Benin , Louvain Coopération (LC) has been present since 1994, where it opened a regional coordination office in 1999. Its activities then extended to Togo from 2003. After somewhat isolated interventions, during its first years of presence in the region, Louvain Coopération undertook to conduct interventions in a multi-year programming approach. This is how an initial five-year action plan covering the period 2003-2007 was developed and implemented. From 2008, a new six-year programme comprising two three-year phases (2008-2010 and 2011-2013) was implemented. A five-year programme 2017-2021 was also implemented. Since 2012, a new five-year programme covering the period 2022-2026 has been underway.

The LC five-year program 2022-2026 in Benin and Togo related to social protection in health focuses on the promotion of mutualist systems and the promotion of health. It is implemented in the Departments of Atacora and Mono in Benin, in the Central, Plateaux and Savanes Regions in Togo. This program mainly aims to consolidate our previous interventions in these areas, and to a lesser extent the extension within the same concentration area. The theme of accessibility to quality health care carried out is one in which LC in West Africa already has confirmed expertise.

• Specific objective

The objective of the project is that by 2026, social health protection is extended to the population in the informal sector (agricultural and non-agricultural) through professional and well-structured mutual health insurance companies. The project is structured around 5 common results for 3 countries:

Result 1 : An efficient and effective organizational framework and operational system for the mutualist movement are established and functional.

Result 2 : The population covered is significantly extended thanks to the operationalization of group/automatic membership of social and solidarity economy initiatives (IESS) and geographical extension.

Result 3 : MUSAs strengthen access to quality health services and develop health prevention and promotion actions for the benefit of populations in connection with the social determinants of health and particularly on Non-Communicable Diseases (NCDs) and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Result 4 : Actions generate evidence and innovations supporting advocacy and political decision-making to consider mutual societies as actors in the operationalization of the strategy towards Universal Health Coverage (UHC).

Result 5 : Strategic and operational partners are strengthened to effectively carry out their role in the system.

The specific objective for Benin is worded as follows: “By 2026, the strong and organized Beninese mutualist movement is a key player in Universal Health Coverage (UHC) and the fight against non-communicable diseases, with professional social mutuals, which offer quality health services and respect their commitments to members (M/F)”;

And for Togo: “In 2026, the Togolese mutualist movement is strengthened through the structuring and professionalization of social mutuals and their umbrella organizations, in order to be a key player in Universal Health Coverage (CSU), to improve their services to members and to contribute to the prevention and promotion of the health of populations”

In both countries, the program is structured around four results which are identical to the first four results of the program in Burundi.

• Operational partners

In Burundi, the operationalization of the project is ensured by a local non-profit association called Unisons les forces pour la Coopération, le Développement et Appui au Monde Rural (acronym UCODE-AMR asbl).

In Benin, four operational partners are involved in the implementation of the program:

• The Council of Support Structures for Social Mutuals (CONSAMUS).
• The Union of Social Mutuals of Pendjari (UMUSOP).
• The “MIVO” Network of Health Mutuals of the Comé Health Zone (REMUSA ZS-C)
• And the Hubi and Vinciane Foundation.

In Togo, four operational partners are also involved:

• The National Framework for Mutual Consultation in Togo (CNCMUT).
• The Mutual Unions of the Savannah Region (UMUSAS).
• The Mutual Unions of the Central and Plateaux Regions (UMUS-CP).
• The Association for Supporting Community Health Activities (3ASC).
• Typology of beneficiaries

In Burundi,

1. Direct target groups:

• 1 provincial federation
• 3 health district unions
• 7 municipal mutuals
• 1 national PAMUSAB platform
• 1 national confederation

1. Beneficiaries

• Populations in the agricultural and informal sectors active in socio-professional groups
• Specific groups: school environment, adolescents, maternal health, chronic diseases;
• Vulnerable groups: mental health, destitute, refugees or returnees
• Direct beneficiaries: 923,382 people (M: 49% and F: 51%) not covered by another health insurance scheme.
• Indirect beneficiaries: The population of the provinces of Kayanza and Ngozi, i.e. 1,246,129 inhabitants (M: 604,994 and F: 641,135).

In Benin,

1. Target groups

• Mutualist units: 6 municipal mutual societies, 2 departmental unions, 1 national federation
• Approved Health Centers: 21 in Atacora, 20 in Mono.

1. Beneficiaries

• Populations active in the agricultural and informal sectors in the Departments of Atacora and Mono and not covered by a health insurance mechanism, i.e.:
• Atacora (Communes of Tanguiéta, Cobly, Matéri and Toucountouna): 421,311 (M: 49%, F: 51%)
• Mono: (Communes of Comé, Bopa and Houéyogbé): 339,631 (M: 48%, F: 52%)
• Borgou (Communes of N’Dali, Parakou and Tchaourou): 730,748 (M: 50.69%, F: 49.31%).

In Togo

1. Target group(s)

• Mutualist units: 12 Prefectural Mutuals, 2 Regional Unions, 1 National Federation.
• Approved Health Centers: 53 in the Savanes Region, 90 in the Central Region and 19 in the Plateaux Region.

1. Beneficiaries:

• Active population in the agricultural and informal sectors in the Savanes, Centrale and Plateaux regions and not covered by a health insurance mechanism, i.e.:
• Savannah Region (Prefectures of Tône, Cinkassé, Tandjoaré, Kpendjal, Kpendjal West): 450,521 (M: 48%, F: 52%)
• Central Region: (Prefectures of Tchamba, Tchaoudjo, Sotouboua and Blitta): 287,332 (M: 49.92%, F: 50.08%)
• Plateaux Region (East-Mono Prefecture): 94,274 (M: 49.84%, F: 50.16%).
  1. Objective, scope and users of the evaluation
     1. Goals

The evaluation will focus, depending on the progress and performance of the project, on the question of whether the expected changes can be achieved by the end of the project, particularly in terms of access to health care for populations in the agricultural and informal sectors of 7 communes in the Northern region of Burundi, 6 communes in Benin and 10 Prefectures in Togo.

• Verify the results of the programme in priority relation to the criteria of the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) and the OECD: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency (rational use of resources), impact, sustainability and coherence.
• Pay attention to the following:
• Structuring, professionalization, extension of health risk coverage,
• Community awareness approaches, support for the operation of MUSAs, training of members of management bodies and MUSA managers,
• Advocacy/communication and integration of innovative approaches (Social and Solidarity Economy Initiatives (IESS) approach, health prevention and promotion, NCD approaches, etc.) and identify promising or problematic practices to capitalize on.
• Evaluate the quality of care offered to mutualist patients.
• Based on the MUSA management data in the Mutual Health Insurance management system (SIGEMUB in Burundi and STIGMA in Benin and Togo), assess the quality of the data and suggest improvements.
• The cross-cutting themes (gender and environment) will be analyzed by the evaluator. It will provide elements of responses on the consideration of the gender aspect in the implementation of actions and services. In addition, it will show how the project actions affect the environment.
  1. Main users:
• LC as ACNG involved in the implementation of the DGD/P5 program.
• The DGD which is the main funder of this project.
• Local partners implementing the project on the ground: UCODE AMR, CONSAMUS, REMUSA, UMUSOP, Fondation Hubi et Vinciane, CNCMUT, UMUSAS, UMUS-CP, 3ASC).
• National platforms for stakeholders and health mutuals.
• National confederations of mutual health insurance companies.
• National federations of mutual health insurance companies.
• The Ministry of Social Protection and its decentralized entities which will use the results of the evaluation for the development of strategic and operational documents.
• The Ministry of Health, through the decentralized entities at the provincial level which supervise the FOSAs contracted with the MUSAs.
• The organizations in synergy are:
• For Burundi: VSF Belgium, Belgian Red Cross, UCODE AMR and BADEC-CARITAS Ngozi, SFCG, Glid, PAMUSAB;
• For Benin: the NGOs WSM, ECLOSIO, ESSENTIEL;
• For Togo: the INSPIR-Togo Network promoted by the Belgian NGO WSM.
• There is also a MASMUT synergy within which 3 Belgian mutualities (Libres, Chrétiennes et Socialistes) and 3 Belgian NGOs (Louvain Coopération, WSM and SOLSOC) interact with local partners (Burundi, Benin and Togo) to support the development of mutuality.
• Members of platforms operating in the field of access to healthcare (MASMUT Platform).
• Members of UNI4COOP (Joint program of Louvain Cooperation with ULB Cooperation, FUCID and ECLOSIO).
  1. Period covered by the assessment:

This final assessment takes into account the period from January 1, 2022 to August 31, 2024 .

It should be carried out between October 1 and December 31, 2024.

1. Overall approach and type of assessment

This is an external mid-term evaluation of three projects (one in Burundi, one in Benin and one in Togo)

The evaluation criteria to be favored are:

• The following CAD criteria [1] : effectiveness, sustainability, impact , efficiency and relevance, with particular emphasis on the first 3 criteria.
• LC’s cross-cutting themes:
  • Integrating the environment into programs?
  • Implementing a gender and inclusive approach?
  • The partnership approach and good governance?
  • The innovative nature of the initiatives (from a knowledge management perspective)?
  1. Key Evaluation Questions

This evaluation will have to shed light on all the CAD criteria (effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, impact and relevance) of the strategies developed by LC and its local partners in the implementation of the program to achieve the specific objective).

• Efficiency

The efficacy analysis, which aims to verify the transformation of Products into Effects, will aim to answer the following key questions:

• What is the level of achievement of the Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs)? Has the methodology for monitoring the OVIs changed during the programme?
• What are the levels of use and effectiveness of the services offered by the partners/supported structures?
• What external factors impacted the effectiveness of the products/effects given their relative importance?
• Have the projects demonstrated good adaptability? How do the projects integrate external factors?
• Have local partners been effective in their approaches?
• What could have been done differently for greater efficiency?
• Efficiency

Efficiency refers to the way in which the project transforms the intervention resources into expected products, thanks to the activities implemented. The evaluation will therefore have to assess the achievement of the project results, taking into account the schedule and compliance with the means used.

• Are project resources (financial, material and human) adequate and used optimally to achieve results?
• How can lessons and good practices identified in one country be taken into account through the implementation of activities in other countries? What are the common values ​​and distinct particularities between each country?
• What should have been done differently for greater efficiency?
• Sustainability/impact

The analysis of the effects of the projects aims to assess the changes obtained at the level of the beneficiaries and their organizations (in terms of living conditions and behaviors) as well as at the level of the partners (in terms of strengthening their capacities).

• At the beneficiary level:
• What are the effects perceived by the beneficiaries (nature of the changes: positive or negative, direct or indirect effects generated by the project)?
• Do the projects contribute to reducing the vulnerability of beneficiary populations?
• Do the projects contribute to effectively strengthening the beneficiaries’ organizations?
• Do the projects contribute to strengthening the political impact of the beneficiaries’ organisations in the areas of consultation and decision-making that concern them?
• Are the observed effects sustainable on an organizational, economic, technical, social and political level?
• What is the impact of LC and its partners on the platforms of health mutual actors?
• To have a greater impact, what other approaches could be used?
• At the partner level:
• Do the projects contribute to the strengthening of partner organisations with a view to providing appropriate services to target groups?
• At what levels is this strengthening observable: organizational capacities (strengthening of the organization, its procedures, its team, its structuring), operational capacities (technical mastery of activities, financing capacity)?
• Is the strengthening of partner organizations sustainable on an institutional, economic and technical level (are the partners able to pursue their mission without the support of the project)?: assess the consistency of the partner strengthening plan and its implementation, the existence or absence of a post-project “business plan” at the partner level.
• At the level of the institutional environment
• Have public authorities or other civil society organisations appropriated certain results or products of the projects?
• Have partners communicated their experience outside the scope of the programs?
• Have the approaches and methodologies driven by the projects been implemented by the partners in other collaborations?
• Relevance

The relevance of the project will be analyzed from the following angles:

• From a general point of view
• Are the projects consistent with international policies (SDGs) and the political orientations of Belgian development cooperation?
• Are the projects consistent with national and sectoral development policies?
• From a regional and local perspective
• Are the projects consistent with the development challenges of the areas in which they are implemented?
• Does LC have the legitimacy and skills necessary to implement the project?
• Are the projects properly coordinated with the actions implemented by other development actors present? (Are we stakeholders, or even recognized as referents in spaces for consultation and coordination of local development?)
• Are the means implemented commensurate with the development challenges taken into consideration?
• What added value can the projects bring to the areas where they are implemented?
• From the perspective of development partners
• Do partners benefit from the necessary legitimacy in their institutional environment for the implementation of projects?
• From the beneficiaries’ point of view
• Do the projects provide an appropriate response to the priority problems and ambitions of the beneficiaries?
• Are the projects based on local dynamics desired and supported by the beneficiaries? Are the beneficiaries subjects or actors of the projects, does the aid complement an effective mobilization of the beneficiaries, is the aid proportional to the capacity for local mobilization?
• Are projects designed taking into account the cultural specificities in which they are implemented?
• From the point of view of its internal coherence
• Do the projects convey a development logic consistent with the organization’s values?
• Is the academic nature of the NGO valued in a relevant way on the ground?
• Consistency

The analysis of project coherence aims to assess the degree to which the intervention is compatible with other interventions carried out within a country, sector or institution. The criterion seeks to examine how other interventions (in particular policies) support or undermine the intervention being evaluated, and vice versa.

• At the level of external consistency:
• Are the projects consistent with national policies, particularly national social protection policies?
• Are the projects properly coordinated with the actions implemented by other mutual development stakeholders present?
• From the point of view of its internal coherence
• Do the projects convey a development logic consistent with the organization’s values?
• Is the academic nature of the NGO valued in a relevant way on the ground?

This assessment will also have to take stock of certain questions specific to the project :

• To what extent have the projects contributed to the achievement of the knowledge management plan?
• To what extent is the intervention logic consistent with the theory of change?
• Gender, environment and academic collaboration

The mid-term evaluation should also take stock of certain questions specific to the project:

• To what extent have the projects contributed to gender promotion?
• To what extent has the implementation of the projects impacted the environment?
• What is the adequacy and added value of academic collaborations in achieving the different objectives of the 3 projects?

1. Desired method and tools

While taking into account the evaluation criteria, the team of consultants is free to establish its methodology and the evaluation tools that it will present in its technical offer. Nevertheless, Louvain Coopération will be particularly attentive to offers presenting a methodology including partners and beneficiaries in the production and analysis of information on the items evaluated.

A restitution will be organized locally (in Benin, Togo and Burundi) with the participation of Louvain Coopération teams and partners in each of the 3 countries.

It should be noted that in addition to contacts with the teams of the Louvain Cooperation Directorates based in Bujumbura-Burundi and Cotonou-Benin, data collection in the field will take place mainly in:

• 7 municipalities in Burundi housing community health mutuals spread across the provinces of Kayanza (Gahombo, Butaganzwa and Muhanga communes) and Ngozi (Busiga, Gashikawa, Mwumba and Ngozi communes),
• 6 communes of Benin: Toucountouna, Tanguiéta, Cobly and Matéri (Atacora Department), Bopa and Houéyogbé (Mono Department)
• 10 prefectures of Togo: Tône, Cinkassé, Tandjoaré, Kpendjal. Kpendjal West (Savannah Region), Tchamba, Tchaoudjo, Sotouboua and Blitta (Central Region).

The evaluator will ensure that the information is triangulated and that the information collection tools are varied as much as possible.

1. Required skills

To carry out this assessment, the team will be composed of local consultants. The assessor will have the following skills:

• He must hold at least a university degree related to the themes developed by the program: social health protection for the population in the rural and informal sectors and the functioning of MUSA;
• A good knowledge of the targeted themes;
• Solid experience (at least 6 years) in the formulation, analysis and evaluation of development projects and programs;
• Proven expertise in project management and evaluation related to development projects;
• Current practice of quantitative, qualitative and participatory evaluation methods;
• Good command of approaches to theory of change, monitoring and evaluation methods and approaches, information analysis and report writing;
• Experience in facilitating workshops to facilitate discussions on evaluation results;
• Have excellent written and oral communication skills in French;
• Good knowledge of the project intervention areas;
• Good understanding of cross-cutting issues including gender and environmental issues.
• Good understanding of social and solidarity economy approaches.

1. financial offer

The financial offer will be presented according to the following outline:

I

EXPERT FEES

Unit

Quantity

Unit price

Total (excl. VAT)

VAT

1.1

Consultant Fee for the preparation of the mission and for the writing of the report

Man/

day

1.2

Consultant Fee for the duration of the mission

Man/

day

1.3

Expert fee 2 for the duration of the mission (if proposed)

Man/

day

S/Total I: Experts’ fees

Total 1.1 + 1.2 + 1.3 + 1.4

Man/

day

II

EXPERTS’ PERDIEMS

2.1

Consultant

2.2

Expert 2?

2.3

Expert 3?

S/Total II: Per diems of experts

Total 2.1 + 2.2 + 2.3

III

CONSULTANT TRAVEL EXPENSES

S/Total III

IV

OTHER SPECIAL COSTS (EXAMPLE WORKSHOP, PARTICIPANTS’ PERDIEM, ROOM RENTAL, INVESTIGATORS, ETC.)

S/Total IV

V

ADMINISTRATIVE AND REPORTING COSTS

S/Total V

GENERAL TOTAL OF THE OFFER (I) + (II) + (III) +(IV) +(V)

1. Terms of contracting and selection

A contractual document will be drawn up for the evaluation. Payment of fees will be made in three installments:

• 40% upon signing the contract,
• 30% upon submission of the interim report and
• 30% after approval of the final report.

Payment of the various installments of the service will be made on the basis of invoices issued.

1. Terms of the expertise
   1. Desired content for the technical & financial offer

Proposals should provide the following:

• A note of understanding of the terms of reference, as well as how the context and evaluation questions were understood in relation to the theory of change;
• A description of the methodological approach envisaged to answer the questions and objectives set out in these terms of reference, describing precisely the information collection tools that it wishes to use during its evaluation;
• A provisional timetable for the mission as well as an estimate of the workload in man/days;
• A presentation of the references and experiences of the expert(s), highlighting the aspects particularly relevant to the planned assessment;
• The profile of the expert(s) with a distribution of responsibilities between expert members (max. 3 pages per CV);
• A detailed budget (in euros) for the service.
  1. Evaluation team selection procedures

Offers for consultant applications will be sent by email to the following persons:

• Mr. Brice TITIPO , Head of the Access to Health Care & Health Promotion Program in West Africa for Louvain Coopération: btitipo@louvaincooperation.org

And to:

• Mrs. Jeanine KAMANA , Coordinator of Health and Mutual Health Insurance projects in Burundi for Louvain Coopération: jkamana@louvaincooperation.org

The evaluation of the proposals will be done according to the following grid by an evaluation committee made up of several people (Brice Titipo, Dr Jeanine Kamana, Jacques Ametepe, Léonidas Mbanzamihigo and Zoulikha Faraj).

Criteria

Relative weight

Profile of the expert(s)

50

Qualifications, experience and skills

25

Experience of the problem to be assessed

15

Knowledge of the local context

10

Technical and methodological offer

30

Presentation of the problem and understanding of the subject

15

Proposed methodological approach

15

Financial offer

20

Price of the service

10

Cost realism in relation to the proposed methodology

10

Total

100

1. Documents to consult

For the drafting of the offer:

• The logical frameworks of the projects;
• A brief description of the partners.

Reference persons who can be consulted if necessary:

At LC headquarters:

• Sophie WYSEUR swyseur@louvaincooperation.org
• Zoulikha FARAJ zfaraj@louvaincooperation.org

In Burundi:

• Léonidas MBANZAMIHIGO lmbanzamihigo@louvaincooperation.org
• Jeanine KAMANA jkamana@louvaincooperation.org

In Benin and Togo:

• Jacques AMETEPE jametepe@louvaincooperation.org
• Brice TITIPO btitipo@louvaincooperation.org

After selection:

After selection, LC will provide the selected consultants with the following documents:

• Project documents;
• Technical reports (narrative and financial);
• Project specific productions
• Country policy documents.
• Any other available document deemed useful by the assessor.

1. Terms of carrying out the field mission

The mid-term evaluation team of the programme must also provide, before the start of the evaluation, a start-up note describing the methodological process that it intends to apply on the basis of its review of the documentation that will be provided to it and the initial interviews conducted with the teams of the Louvain Coopération Offices based in Bujumbura and Cotonou.

The Louvain Coopération operational team will be available to facilitate the smooth running of the evaluation (contacts, general information, logistical assistance, etc.) and to organize the various meetings.

The evaluation monitoring committee is made up of the following people and is responsible for the framework meetings, support and debriefing with the evaluation team:

No.

Name and surname

Function

Structure

Contact and email

1

Leonidas MBANZAMIHIGO

National Director

LC, DN Burundi

+257 71 34 95 59

lmbanzamihigo@louvaincooperation.org

2

KAMANA Jeanine

Coordinator of Health Projects and Health Mutuals

LC, DN Burundi

+257 79 97 48 53

jkamana@louvaincooperation.org

3

NAHIMANA Charles

Director

UCODE-AMR/Burundi

+257 69 64 50 33

nahchar@yahoo.fr

4

NDAGIJIMANA Diane

Project Manager

UCODE-AMR/Burundi

+257 79 98 22 93

dianendagije@gmail.com

5

Jacques AMETEPE

Regional Director West Africa

Benin-Togo

jametepe@louvaincooperation.org

6

Brice TITIPO

Responsible for social protection projects in West Africa

Benin-Togo

btitipo@louvaincooperation.org

1. A post-evaluation meeting (after submission of the final report) when the managerial response has been formulated by LC will be organized as well as other meetings deemed necessary by the consultant.
   1. Expected deliverables

Expected:

• At the start of the mission, a methodological note including the approach chosen for the field mission and the field data collection plan as well as the detailed timetable with the deadlines for each stage;
• An interim report;
• An oral restitution of the interim report;
• A final report;
• A synthetic accountability document accessible to Louvain Coopération members, beneficiaries, the general public and donors which presents the main results, lessons learned and recommendations of the evaluation, with illustrations (diagrams, photos, graphs, drawings, etc.) and at least some testimonies from beneficiaries in each of the 3 countries.
• A restitution presentation (Power Point, Prezi, etc.).

The documents will be written in French. These documents will be sent in electronic format. A paper version of the final version of the report will also be provided.

Each report (provisional and final) will be constructed as follows:

• 5-page summary of key findings and recommendations;
• Objective, field;
• Context ;
• Definition of the main concepts used;
• Methodological approach and its justification and the constraints encountered;
• Assessment of understanding of intervention logic/theory of change;
• Observations and results of the evaluation based on the terms of reference and the questions above;
• Answers to the evaluation questions with mention of the sources of information used to do so;
• Concrete and operational reasoned recommendations to be implemented in the rest of the program or in future interventions;
• Conclusions and other reflections;
• Annexes: Anonymous raw data

The report will present findings, conclusions and recommendations and lessons learned separately in a logical manner. Any underlying analysis will be stated explicitly.

1. Provisional calendar

The period planned for the completion of the evaluation mission is between October 1, 2024 and January 30, 2025 .

Main activities

Dates

• Publications of the call for tenders

Early September 2024

• Reception of offers

All of September 2024

• Examination of offers by LC Management

Between October 1 and 8, 2024

• Notification of selection to the selected Consultant

No later than October 10, 2024

• Working sessions with consultants for understanding and validation of the proposed methodology

Between October 15 and 30, 2024

• Discussion on the practical arrangements for carrying out the mission
• Signing of the service contract
• Transmission of necessary documents
• Meeting of consultants with partners and beneficiaries

November 2024

• Field data collection by consultants
• Field phase debriefing
• Analysis of collected data

December 2024

• Production of the interim evaluation report
• Transmission of the interim report to LC management
• Reporting of provisional results to LC management and partners
• Reading and amendment of the provisional report by LC management, by LC headquarters and transmission of amendments to consultants

January 15, 2025

• Preparation of the final evaluation report and transmission to the regional management

January 30, 2025

Drafting of the managerial response by LC

February 2025

Availability of all documents in final version

February 2025

[1] OECD Development Assistance Committee

How to apply

Offers for consultant applications will be sent by email to the following persons:

• Mr. Brice TITIPO , Head of the Access to Health Care & Health Promotion Program in West Africa for Louvain Coopération: btitipo@louvaincooperation.org

And to:

• Mrs. Jeanine KAMANA , Coordinator of Health and Mutual Health Insurance projects in Burundi for Louvain Coopération: jkamana@louvaincooperation.org

https://louvaincooperation.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/TDR-Evaluation%20externe%20mi-parcours-MUSA%20LC.pdf