Evaluation Terms of Reference

 

 

Consultancy Services for Evaluation of Project titled: “Social Protection Program towards Improving Resilience of Refugees and Vulnerable Jordanians”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

August 2025

 

1.Summary of Evaluation Terms of Reference

Medair is seeking an external consultant to undertake an evaluation for the Action titled “Social protection program towards improving resilience of refugees and vulnerable Jordanians”. The project, funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), and implemented by Medair and its partners, aims to provide livelihood and economic empowerment opportunities, Multi-purpose and emergency cash assistance, disability inclusion and empowerment activities, as well as MHPSS, and health services.  to refugees and vulnerable host communities in Jordan, and to strengthen the capacity of local actors to have responsive and sustainable access to communities.  The evaluation will be conducted using the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria to assess the project’s relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, coherence, and sustainability. The findings will enhance accountability and learning for Medair and partners to support future programming.  The project is implemented in locations: Mafraq, Amman, Irbid, Zarqa (non-camp), Madaba, Balqa, Ajloun, and Jerash during the period from January 2023 to the end of December 2025.

Project Title	Social protection program towards improving resilience of refugees and vulnerable Jordanians
Donor	Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC)
Project duration	01 January 2023 – 31 December 2025
Implementing NGOs	Medair and Partners
Evaluation type	Summative End-of-Project (EoP)
Methodology	Mix methods: Qualitative – KIIs and FGDs Quantitative – Survey
Evaluation dates	October 01 – December 15, 2025
Evaluation report release	December 15, 2025

 

2.Background and Context

Medair is a Swiss humanitarian aid organization. Globally, Medair works in shelter, health and nutrition, WASH, MHPSS, social protection, and cash and voucher assistance. Since 1989, Medair has been helping people in crisis, regardless of race, creed, or nationality, so that the world’s most vulnerable and difficult-to-reach people live in dignity, free from human suffering, and with hope for a better future. 

Medair has been working in Jordan in response to the Syria crisis since 2012, with 2025 marking Medair's thirteenth year of operations in Jordan. From an initial health emergency been consolidated into a series of stable needs-based responses focused on access to healthcare and social protection, with cash being used as the primary programming modality. Medair's past programmes in Jordan have included the provision of primary healthcare, cash-based winterization support, cash-for-rent, livelihoods for Jordanians and shelter assistance. As the context changes, Medair has adopted intervention strategies to meet the most pressing needs. Medair currently delivers health (cash for health and community health), emergency cash, CCM support for social protection and PSS for refugees and vulnerable Jordanians.

Medair is recognized as a sector leader for health due to quality programming and coordination and as a sector leader for social protection due to its unique approach of CCM and its willingness to work with the most challenging cases through vast service provision and internal and external referrals. Medair leads and collaborates with different entities to provide the best services and exchange experiences. Furthermore, it is a member of CaLP regional community of practice for social protection and cash and voucher assistance.

During the past ten years, Medair’s interventions have focused on the 82.6% of the Syrian refugee population residing outside a formal camp setting (UNHCR, 2022). As the humanitarian landscape in Jordan shifts towards a One Refugee approach and the move towards vulnerability-based beneficiary selection gains momentum. Medair recognizes that local organizations have better community acceptance, higher accessibility and high coordination with ministries and other local stakeholders in Jordan. Therefore, Medair has revised its approach in 2024 to include more partner-led activities, whilst concurrently providing institutional and technical capacity strengthening. Medair also established a partner network, that capitalizes on the technical strengths of the different organizations and strengthens cross learning and improves linkages and referrals.

Medair is committed to moving towards a responsible exit and handing over its activities to well-capacitated and seasoned national organizations. Additionally, Medair is adopting a nexus approach to move householdsit is serving away from vulnerability and dependency on humanitarian services and towards increased resilience through comprehensive intervention packages for CCM and livelihoods.

 

Project information

The project targeted the most vulnerable Jordanians and refugees who were vulnerable in two or more areas (livelihood, health, education, shelter, PSS, legal, protection, and cash). Over a period of six months, beneficiaries received cash assistance and case management support, alongside participation in a livelihood component.

This integrated approach enabled participants to improve their social protection and reduce vulnerabilities by identifying their needs, learning how to address them, becoming familiar with available service providers in their areas, and attending awareness sessions. The provision of cash assistance for six months allowed households to meet their basic needs with dignity and enhance their resilience. In parallel, the livelihood component equipped beneficiaries with knowledge, skills, and tools to generate sustainable income, through awareness sessions, business management and technical/vocational training, legal consultations, endowments for small businesses, and ongoing mentoring. A total of 540 individuals, equally male and female, benefited from these activities.

The project also strengthened the technical capacity of local NGOs. Medair worked with 10 LNGOs/CBOs across Amman, Irbid, and Mafraq to build their case management and referral capacities, providing tailored training on social protection and other relevant sector standards, national protection services, and referral mechanisms, alongside monthly learning exchange workshops[1].

Local Partners

Medair embarked on partnerships with 5 organizations, with different sectoral focuses. These local organizations receive referrals from Medair’s CCM component and deliver services in livelihoods, MHPSS, health, MPCA and disability. Medair supports these organizations to strengthen their capacity in operational areas, in addition to their technical areas.  Medair’s partnership model supports mutual learning and within this project, Medair encourages cross- learning through lessons learned, strategy and themed workshops within the network, and engages partners in monitoring, program reviews and project discussions.

The project also focuses on promoting linkages and learning across partners, whilst providing technical and operational capacity strengthening, to enable local organizations to impact communities in a collaborative and sustainable manner. Selected partners are forming a partners’ network that provides multi-purpose cash assistance, livelihoods, health and MHPSS awareness and referrals, and disability mainstreaming to communities, whilst benefiting from tailored capacity strengthening initiatives. The impact of this collaborative model of communities and local organizations as a whole, will be larger than that of individual organization activities.

 

3.Evaluation Purpose and Target Audience

1. Evaluation Purpose

The overall objective of the external evaluation is to provide an independent and in-depth assessment of the project’s performance according to the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria. This evaluation will focus on assessing the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact of the partnership model and the livelihoods component.

The specific objectives are to:

 

• Assess the relevance and appropriateness of the project design and implementation adequately responded to the specific needs of refugees and vulnerable host communities, with particular attention to the partnership model and livelihood support.
• Examine whether project resources (budget, staff, and time) were utilized efficiently to maximize impact, including the delivery of project (partner) activities.
• Evaluate the effectiveness of the project and to what extent it achieved its stated objectives and outcomes, such as improved referrals between partner network members, improved partner organizational capacities, reducing health and psychosocial risks, decreasing reliance on negative coping mechanisms, and enhancing household resilience through livelihood interventions.
• Assess the effectiveness of coordination between the project, local authorities, NGOs, and other stakeholders, considering how the partner network contributed to avoiding duplication, improving referrals, and leveraging synergies with other initiatives.
• Assess sustainability and review the likelihood that project benefits will continue beyond their duration, with a focus on the strengthened institutional capacity of local NGOs, their operational sustainability, and the role of the partner network in maintaining community-level support structures.
• Evaluate the project’s coherence and alignment with broader strategies and interventions in the region, particularly in the areas of localization.
• Capture key lessons learned from the project’s implementation that can inform future humanitarian and development interventions, especially regarding the implementation of the partner network, and the different sectoral projects.
• Assess impact and measure the and the longer-term changes brought about by the project, including improvements in partner capacities, referral pathways and household resilience.

 

1. Target Audience

This EoP evaluation target audience:

• SDC – as the project’s main donor
• Medair
• Implementing partners
• Project staff as well as relevant Support Office Representatives

1.Evaluation Objectives and Key Questions

Key objectives / dimensions	Key questions
To assess the relevance and appropriateness of the project	Was the project design appropriate given the context of Jordan, particularly in terms of engaging local and national partners to address refugee and host community needs? To what extent were the project’s activities and outputs  consistent with the overall objectives of the project, and aligned with the mandates, capacities, and comparative advantages of implementing partners? How well did the partnership model ensured addressing  the needs of refugees and vulnerable host communities? Were the activities and outputs designed in line with the identified needs and gaps, and how did the implementing partners contribute to this process? How flexible was the project’s partners and networking arrangements in adapting to the increasing needs and contextual changes? Were there any gaps in the project’s design and the design of the partnership model that limited its relevance or responsiveness to the needs, and what were those?
To assess the Efficiency of the project	To what extent were financial and human resources used efficiently by the implementing partners? Was the partnership implemented based on the best use of existing internal and external resources and capacity of the partners? Did the networking arrangements allow for the best use of the partners resources? Were project resources/inputs (funds, expertise, time etc.) sufficient in achieving the results/outputs by partners? Was sufficient time provided to partners to implement the agreed-on activities for all the components/ interventions of the project? How effective was the partnership approach in demonstrating value for money? Were there any cost-effective alternatives that could have been used? Were project resources used to maximize service/support provision to affected communities, i.e. refugees in all seven sites of the project? How did the partners react to unforeseen circumstances in the operational area? To what extent did partners contribute to achieving program objectives and meeting logframe indicators? How did accountability and M&E mechanisms function within the partnership framework? Were there alternative partnership models, coordination processes, or networking mechanisms that could have improved the project's cost-effectiveness?
To assess the effectiveness	To what extent did the project achieve its objectives, particularly in terms of strengthening household resilience through livelihood interventions and enhancing the institutional capacity of local partners? What mechanisms were in place to ensure accountability to beneficiaries, and how effective were these mechanisms? Were there any barriers that prevented the project from achieving its livelihood goals? How were these barriers addressed? What factors inhibited or accelerated the achievement of objectives and results? What were the intended, unintended, positive, or negative effects the project had on beneficiaries and partner institutions? To what extent has the project contributed to building implementing partners’ overall organizational and technical capacities to sustain service delivery? How effective were the livelihood activities and training provided to beneficiaries and local partners in equipping them with the tools and skills to achieve sustainable results? How effective were the capacity strengthening and the networking events provided to local partners in equipping them with the tools and skills to achieve sustainable results? To what extent have project beneficiaries benefited from livelihood activities outputs? To what extent have project partners benefited from the institutional strengthening outputs? How and to what extent was the feedback from beneficiaries integrated to adjust the program and its implementation modalities?
To assess the sustainability of the action and connectedness to other existing actions	To what extent will the project benefits, particularly in terms of improved partner capacities and networks continue in the future? What capacities were built at the individual, organizational, and community levels? Was Medair’s partner model successful in implementation and in laying the foundation for sustainability? How has the project contributed to strengthening the capacity of local actors to continue supporting beneficiaries and community resilience? What factors promoted or hindered the long-term benefits of the project?
To assess the coordination between Medair, project implementing partners and key stakeholders	To what extent did coordination positively influence the project and contribute to the achievement of results, particularly for partner implemented activities? How are the implementing partners being perceived by beneficiaries and other stakeholders in terms of their strengthened role and capacity? Were there any challenges in partnering and coordination between the implementing partners and Medair? What could have been done better or differently?
Coherence	How well was the project aligned with the partner organization aspirations and needs? How well was the project aligned with national livelihood strategies, resilience frameworks, and the Jordan Response Plan (JRP)? Were there synergies between this project and other livelihood- or resilience-focused interventions in the region? Did the project complement or duplicate other efforts? How effectively did the project engage with local authorities, NGOs, and community-based structures in advancing livelihoods and capacity-building objectives?
Lessons Learned	What lessons or aspects of the project can be replicated in other contexts, particularly regarding the partnership model. How do the lessons relate to any innovative aspects of the project that were highlighted in the project proposal? What best practices can be included in future projects? What lessons should be avoided in future partner led projects?
Impact of the action	How did the project contribute to improving the organizational, operational, and networking capacities of local partner institutions? What changes have been observed in household resilience, income-generating capacity, and reliance on negative coping mechanisms as a result of the project? What were the unintended positive or negative impacts of the project on both beneficiaries and local partners, and how were these managed?

 

4.Approach and Methodology

Mix methods are suggested, including qualitative and quantitative primary data, project documents review along with secondary sources of information revision. The external consultant is expected to develop the design methodology - under Medair’s close supervision – that will be informed by the MEAL plan specified during project design. The design methodology, including sampling strategy, sample size, and instruments will be ready to use after field testing and final approval from Medair.

4.1Technical considerations

The sample size needs to be representative for the entire population across all five components: livelihoods, health, disability, MPCA, and MHPSS. All quantitative data has to be disaggregated by age, gender and nationality (Refugees, Host communities). The sample size will be calculated following a 95% confidence interval and 5-7% margin of error based on suggested budget.

The study will have to consider relying on primary data, as well as on projects documents data review produced and delivered throughout the implementation of the project, along with relevant secondary data resources.

Participatory approach is highly recommended for running the data analysis, using workshop method, with all project stakeholders (Medair’s and implementing partners).

Project documents and secondary sources review, along with FGDs/KIIs will be key elements for developing the project timeline, with identified factors hampering or delaying the project implementation, and the reaction of Medair and Implementing Partners per moment in time.

 

The methodology suggested for the end of project evaluation is:

 

Document Review:

• Review of key project documents, including the project proposal, logframe, progress reports, financial reports, and monitoring and evaluation data.
• Assessment of national basic needs strategies and relevant policies in Jordan.

 

Key Informant Interviews (KIIs):

• Conduct interviews with Medair staff (project managers, field staff), implementing partners, and local authorities.
• Collect six success stories highlighting the impact of the livelihood component, along with one to two success stories showcasing the impact of capacity strengthening and partner networking.

Focus Group Discussions (FGDs):

• Facilitate FGDs with beneficiaries, including refugees and host community members, to gather qualitative feedback on their experiences with the livelihood component.
• Facilitate FGDs with implementing partners to gather qualitative feedback on their experiences with capacity building and networking.

 

Surveys:

• Administer surveys to beneficiaries to assess the project’s contribution to achieving its objectives especially in accessing services and their satisfaction of the support received over the project period.

 

4.2Ethical considerations

In conducting this evaluation, the consultant must adhere to key ethical standards to ensure the process is respectful, transparent, and safeguards the rights of all participants. Informed consent must be obtained from all individuals involved, ensuring they understand the purpose of the evaluation and their right to withdraw at any time. Confidentiality and anonymity must be maintained throughout, with personal data securely handled to prevent unauthorized access or disclosure. The evaluation should follow the principle of "do no harm," particularly when addressing sensitive issues such as mental health and trauma, and be conducted with cultural sensitivity, respecting local norms and values. Gender and equity considerations are crucial to ensure that the voices of all groups—men, women, children, and marginalized populations—are included. Participation should remain voluntary, and the evaluator should avoid any conflicts of interest that may bias the findings. Additionally, the evaluation must comply with Medair’s data protection standards and ensure transparency and accountability throughout the process.

 

5.Timing and Deliverables

Responsibilities include the following:

Evaluation Phase	Role	Primary task
Planning	Medair MEAL Departments	Coordinate collection of information for terms of reference. Develop terms of reference Provide feedback and strategic guidance on process and input on the quality of products generated Final approval of the evaluation design methodology
	Partnership department	Introduce external consultant to partners Provide information on implementing partners under the SDC  fund to the consultant
	Program and IM	Provide list of beneficiaries reached through the partners for all sectors
	Partnership department	Provide a list of implementing partners with contact details. Coordinate with partners for the evaluation Introduce the evaluation team to the partners Provide capacity building documents (assessment, reports, training evaluations) to the consultancy team
	External consultant	Develop evaluation design methodology (tools included to be developed in a soft copy and ODK software format)
Data Collection and Analysis	External consultant	Coordinate the evaluation process Recruit enumerators for the evaluation process Train enumerators on tools/guides to be administered via mobile data collection Collection and analysis of data Conduct participatory analysis using workshop as a platform
	Partnership	Ensure key stakeholders from Implementing partners are well informed about the proceedings Ensure the consultant is supported by the implementing partners in terms of field level planning and coordination
	Medair Project team	Ensure key stakeholders from Program are well informed about the proceedings Actively participate during the data analysis workshop and facilitate Implementing partners participation in the workshop
	External consultant and the evaluation team	Participate actively in the process Supervise and assure the quality of quantitative data collection, through mobile phones. Lead focus groups and interviews; record responses and qualifying observations; prepare summaries of responses, etc. Provide regular feedback to Medair team on the evaluation process Conduct analysis and interpretation of data
Reporting	External consultant	Draft evaluation report and circulate it for feedback. Incorporate feedback into the report. Draft a 2-pager factsheet to be disseminated among the partners, Medair Office, Support Office, Syria Response, donor and other stakeholders.
	Medair Project team and MEAL unit	Provide critical feedback on draft and on the 2-pager factsheet Share evaluation report and factsheet internally and externally with relevant stakeholders.

 

Deliverables:

The evaluation should result in, but not be limited to, the following products:

 

1. Inception Report:

A report outlining the evaluation design, refined methodology, data collection tools, sampling strategy, and work plan. This should be submitted within one week after the contract is signed.

  

2. Draft Evaluation Report:

A comprehensive draft report detailing the findings against each DAC criteria, preliminary conclusions, and suggested recommendations. The draft should include:

• Executive Summary (max. 7 pages)
• Introduction and background (context, purpose, scope)
• Methodology
• Findings (per DAC criteria)
• Conclusions and lessons learned
• Recommendations for future programming

 

3. Validation Workshop:

A workshop to present the preliminary findings, conclusions, and recommendations to key stakeholders, including project staff, and partners. The workshop will serve to validate the evaluation results, gather feedback, and refine the findings before finalizing the report.

 

4. Final Evaluation Report:

A final version of the report, incorporating feedback from Medair and other key stakeholders, with clear and actionable recommendations. The report should be no longer than 50 pages (excluding annexes) and should include:

• Finalized executive summary and conclusions
• Refined lessons learned and recommendations
• Annexes (list of interviewees, data collection tools, raw data summaries, transcription of KIIs and FGDs, etc.)
• The report needs to follow Medair’s guidelines and template, which will be provided to the selected external consultant in the inception meeting.

  

5. Presentation of Findings:

A PowerPoint presentation of key findings and recommendations to be delivered to Medair’s project team, donor representatives, and relevant stakeholders.

 

6. Timeline

The evaluation is expected to be conducted over a period of 10 weeks, with the following indicative schedule:

 

Week 1: Inception phase, document review, and finalization of methodology and tools.

Week 2: Approval on inception report

Week 3-4: Data collection (KIIs, FGDs, surveys, and field visits).

Week 5: Data analysis and drafting of the evaluation report.

Week 6: Presentation of preliminary findings to the Medair team and stakeholders.

Week 7-8: Finalization of the report based on feedback.

 

7. Evaluation Team

 

The evaluation team should include members with the following qualifications:

• Proven experience in conducting evaluations in complex humanitarian contexts, particularly in livelihood sector and Institutional capacity.
• Expertise in the application of the OECD-DAC criteria in evaluations.
• Proficiency in both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies.
• Experience working with international NGOs and donors (particularly SDC is preferred).
• Strong analytical and report-writing skills.
• Proficiency in English (required) and Arabic (preferred).

 

8. Budget

 

The evaluator is expected to provide a detailed financial proposal, including:

• Professional fees (daily rates for team members).
• Travel and accommodation costs for field visits.
• Data collection expenses (enumerators, survey costs).
• Any other logistical costs related to the evaluation.

 

All deliverables should be submitted in only in English, except for the tools and the two-pager summary factsheet that needs to be provided in English and Arabic.

 

All collected data is legally owned by Medair, Jordan Office and the consultant is expected to hand over all data sets. The consultant shall maintain in confidence and protect all information provided to him/her by the partners, staffs, and beneficiaries. The consultant may only disclose the extent necessary to perform the evaluation.

6.Evaluation Team Composition and Required Competencies

Team composition: This evaluation process will be led by the external consultant, and will also include project staff, partners, and Medair staff as deemed necessary during the various phases of the process. The size of the evaluation team will depend on evaluation design methodology, which will be developed by the external consultant.

 

Profile of the Consultant

The consultant (team) must have proven expertise and experience in social research, protection in humanitarian emergency responses. In addition, the consultant should be able to implement the research in Jordan following the required procedures and in the required languages. The consultant must have:

• At least 5 years of strong experience in designing and leading program evaluations with proven experience in the field.
• Expertise and experience in research, and evaluation in humanitarian emergency response contexts, preferably related to the Syria crisis and Jordan, as well as related technical standards with a particular focus on partnership Programs (to be shared with the technical proposal)
• Good understanding of the Syria crisis and the situation of refugees in Jordan.
• Proven experience in conducting participatory qualitative and quantitative evaluation studies with superior analytical skills.
• Good knowledge of data collection software (such as Kobo, ONA) and statistical packages.
• Excellent report writing skills.
• Excellent written and spoken English and Arabic.
• Have permission to work, travel and undertake primary data collection in the project target locations and be able to do so in the language of the primary target groups and the project teams (Arabic, English)
• High research ethics

 

7.Management Arrangements

The evaluation will be led by the external consultant, while Medair and implementing partners’ project staff will be key in facilitating the logistic arrangements. The project staff, partners (and donor if applicable) need to provide a list of the relevant stakeholders subject to evaluation measurements.

All deliverables will need Medair’s approval prior to be considered final and be implemented in the field.

The expected timeline for conducting the evaluation process is February - April 2025. Evaluation Final report due by the 10^th of April 2025.

 

Table 2: Tentative timetable[2]

Milestones of the evaluation process		Due Dates
Drafting Evaluation ToR	MEAL/ Program/ PC		First draft ToR
Review of ToR	Medair Advisors		Second draft ToR
	SDC		Share finalized ToR with SDC for their information
Announcement	Medair Procurement		Announcement in place
Selection of consultant	Medair committee	Selection on a rolling basis	Consultant selected
Entry meeting with consultant			Consultant present work plan and sign contract
Draft design methodology and share with Medair			Draft evaluation design (tools included)
Approval of design methodology	Medair MEAL		Final evaluation design
Recruitment and Training of enumerators			Enumerators have clear understanding of the purpose of the study and tools to be administered
Data collection and analysis			Preliminary findings/ Validation workshop
Workshop for the participatory analysis	Consultant with Medair and Implementing partners		Consolidated analysis (includes all qualitative and quantitative data analysis)
Draft evaluation report and share with Medair			Draft evaluation report in place
Medair stakeholders provide feedback			Written feedback in the draft report sent to consultant
Finalize evaluation report and develop summary factsheet		December 10, 2025	Final report and 2-pager approved
Share final evaluation report and factsheet with donor		December 15, 2025	Evaluation report in place with the 2-pager summary factsheet

 

8.Budget and Payment

The consultations fees available for this evaluation will include development of tools and testing, travels, transportation, logistics and accommodation fees identified by the consultant, recruitment of enumerators, as well as quantitative and qualitative data collection, data management, analysis, translation fees and report writing, and revision based on feedback received. The consultant must prepare and submit a detailed budget breakdown along with the Design methodology herewith attached. The payment schedule will be as following:  

 

Milestone	Payment
1st Payment		Completion of Milestone 8
2nd Payment		Completion of Milestone 12
Final Payment		Completion of Milestone 14 (approved final report)

 

9.Proposal Submission

The consultant should submit a proposal comprising the following:

• A technical proposal which indicates how the consultant is going to undertake the activities highlighted in the ToR, with initial indication of the enumerators and timeframe required
• A capacity statement detailing the consultant´s ability to deliver a quality evaluation report within the given timeframe, including an overview of relevant work and technical experience
• At least 3 samples of previous relevant works undertaken, including at least 2 evaluation reports that were 100% led by the lead consultant
• Contact details for 2 references for similar assignments done not more than 2 years ago
• CVs of the key personnel on the evaluation team
• Any appendices the consultant sees as relevant to the application.
• Implementation schedule/work plan of ToR tasks-work plan on a GANTT chart- period it would take the firm to complete the field work and submit the final consultancy report.
• Clear financial proposal with detailed break-down of each cost that will be associated with the evaluation.

 

Applications should be submitted electronically to:

• Procurement focal point, logs-jor@medair.org , by September 15^th, 2025.

 

Award criteria:

The offer will be assessed as follows:

• Technical proposal 60%
• Price of the offer 40%.

Only short-listed candidates will be contacted.

10.Child Protection & Data Confidentiality

The external evaluator, along with all enumerators, will be required to sign and follow Medair’s child protection standards and protocols of behaviour, which will be provided to the research team selected. In addition to sign and follow the data protection policy for Medair to ensure that the collected data is protected.

 

All primary data collected by this evaluation process is to remain confidential and is not to be shared with third parties.