Angola: Final Evaluation “Together for the Best: Uniting Angola’s Youth for Political Dialogue"

The Organization

Search for Common Ground (SFCG-ANG) Angola seeks qualified consultant(s) to conduct a Final Evaluation of its project “Juntos Para o Melhor” being implemented in two Providences in Angola 1) Luanda Province (Viana, Cazenga, Belas municipalities) and Uige Province (Uige, Maquela do Zombo, Songo municipalities). The project started on October 1, 2014 and will end on September 30, 2016. For this consultancy, SFCG-ANG seeks to procure the services of an independent, external consultant(s) to design, plan and conduct a high quality final evaluation covering seven municipalities in two provinces. The objective of the evaluation is to assess and evaluate the project performance and achievement against the set goals, objectives and results as described in the logframe.

Introduction

Search for Common Ground (SFCG, www.sfcg.org) is an international, non-governmental organization whose mission is to “transform the way the world deals with conflict: away from adversarial approaches, toward cooperative solutions.”With programming in 35 countries in Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe and the USA, SFCG works with governments, security sectors, civil society, media, women, youth, and other relevant sectors in order to maximize its influence in the prevention and transformation of conflict. SFCG believed that Conflict and differences are inevitable- Violence is not. SFCG partners with people around the world to ignite shared solutions to destructive conflicts. SFCG works at all levels of society to build sustainable peace through three main avenues: dialogue, media and community.

SFCG have been working in Angola since 1996 to support the peace and reconciliation process, with offices in Luanda and Cabinda, gaining support from key actors in various sectors. In 2014 SFCG Angola was awarded a grant to implement a 24-month project supporting political dialogue among Angolan youth. The program is underpinned by theories of change based on the “healthy relationships” hypothesis, which posits that long-term peace emerges out of a process of breaking down isolationist tendencies, polarization, and stereotypes between groups, in order to fully address deep grievances and identify mutual interests and values. Based on this theory, the project has the overall goal to foster the abilities of young men and women political leaders of all parties to be peace-builders and agents of positive social change in their communities.

Background

Angola is rapidly recovering from 27 years of civil war: with enormous macroeconomic and infrastructure development. Angola is emerging as a regional power and middle-income country. Yet, the specter of war casts its shadow over the country: security issues persist with a separatist movement in oil-rich Cabinda, while widespread human rights abuses, structural poverty, and inequality have hampered the reconstruction process. The majority of Angolans do not benefit from the country’s enormous wealth. Angola is one of the most unequal countries in the world. The government focuses on the oil industry, at the expense of agriculture or other income-generating opportunities.[1] Reliance on oil rents leaves the country highly vulnerable to potential external economic shocks, which could trigger internal social unrest and conflict. This is especially true in cities where rapid urbanization, poor service delivery, and lack of basic necessities, along with a large, underemployed youth population create a potentially explosive mix. The challenges are greater for women, who are among the poorest and most vulnerable groups in Angola.[2] They are burdened by childcare and economic production responsibilities, are victims of rampant and unpunished sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV), and are routinely denied access to basic social services and community decision-making positions due to institutionalized gender discrimination.

In Luanda Province, one of the project target zones, and one of the most afflicted by youth-led street violence, the political divisions run deep. Traditionally, Luanda has been supportive of the Portuguese Movimento Popular de Libertação de Angola (MPLA) or the Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola, the ruling party. But, massive migration, an emerging critical middle class, and access to non-state-controlled information, are rapidly changing the political dynamic. However, the conflict model set by the elite politicians, as well as the legacy of nearly three decades of war, means that party partisans tend to approach problems through a political and antagonistic lens. The absence of dialogue and cooperation at the top level encourages prejudices at the community level and, with a large, underemployed youth population of different political backgrounds living together in vast urban slums, a small trigger could unleash widespread violence.

Uige Province, the other target zone for the project, has long been a key supporter of the opposition party, the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA) and therefore viewed with particular suspicion by the ruling party. Tensions between the followers of the main parties run high. The social conflict dynamic in this border province is exacerbated by immigration from neighboring DRC: in the last decade the Angolan government has instituted a policy of mass deportations of Congolese migrants, arguing it must protect its mining industry from illegal workers. This has played right into the political dynamic, as Congolese are widely perceived by MPLA supporters to be culturally allied with UNITA. Beyond a derogatory racial implication, this division is also based on class, with MPLA seeing itself as an urban, educated Europeanized party, while UNITA traditionally drew support from rural areas. The slur “langa”, nominally used to denote Congolese is in reality used to pejoratively distinguish “Africanized” people of any nationality in Angola.

In the face of massive inequality, poverty and the absence of social cohesion, as a cause and consequence of political tension, Angola’s transition to lasting peace thus hangs in the balance. Yet windows of opportunity for positive change are opening up: the government’s immensely favored position among Angolan voters is no longer a given. Compared to the 2008 elections, the MPLA lost 10% of the share of total votes in the 2012 contest.[3] Taking into account low voter turnout, they had the active support of less than half of the electorate. Furthermore, Convergência Ampla de Salvação de Angola – Coligação Eleitoral (CASA-CE), a splinter group of UNITA, took 6% of the vote in its maiden campaign,[4]demonstrating dissatisfaction with the main opposition option (this result included significant support in Luanda and Uige Provinces). Opposition gains were notable in Luanda, previously an MPLA stronghold. Discontent is now increasingly being heard, with demonstrations and public complaints about corruption, poverty, and lack of basic services. Aware of the high risk of social unrest and its decreasing popularity, the government has embarked on a series of reforms, including on political rights, the judicial system, civil society organizations (CSOs), and decentralization of power and budgeting. If effective, decentralization should increase accountability and citizen participation, co-opting the voices of previously marginalized groups, stimulating local collaboration and joint planning, and tracking of government action.

These changes have not gone unnoticed by international peace partners, including USAID and Search for Common Ground (SFCG). We aim to increase citizens’ opportunities to engage with local government to collaboratively resolve local challenges, and to reinforce the capacities of non-state actors (NSAs), including government oversight bodies, to serve as instruments to reconcile the interests of local authorities and populations to meet community needs. We are currently developing programs focused on increasing fiscal transparency to support this engagement, and developing youth leadership for non-violent change, including in the fight against SGBV.

Our focus on youth (including young women) is consistent with the healthy relationship theory: younger political actors have less of a historical suspicion of the “other” and would thus be more motivated to attempt to break down barriers. The current political domination by an older generation of leaders cannot endure infinitely and young Angolans must be prepared to shape the future of their country in a less divisive manner.

Project Objectives

The overall goal of this project is to foster the abilities of young Angolan men and women political leaders to be peace-builders and agents of positive social change in their communities. The specific objectives (SO) and expected outcomes (EO) are:

SO1: To reinforce peaceful and positive youth relationships across political and social dividing lines in communities.

• EO 1.1: Young men and women leaders from opposed political groups are better prepared to interact peacefully across dividing lines;


• EO 1.2: The relationships and level of trust between youth, including women, from different political groups are improved;


• EO 1.3: Young men and women from different political backgrounds are willing to dialogue to develop solutions to community challenges.

SO2: To strengthen a culture of non-violence through leadership of young men and women.

• EO 2.1: Young men and women leaders of different political affiliations in target areas use their new skills and knowledge to resolve conflicts non-violently;


• EO 2.2: Young men and women leaders of different political affiliations actively develop and implement peacebuilding/violence-prevention activities in their own communities;


• EO 2.3: The broader population better appreciates youth leadership in peacebuilding.

Project partners

1. Angolan Christian Solidarity and Mutual Aid Association (ASCAM)


2. Concelho Nasional Juventude (CNJ) – Angola National Youth Council

Evaluation Objectives and Criteria

The overall objectives of this final evaluation are to assess to what extent the project has contributed to foster abilities of youth in Angola and how has it improved the communication and dialogue between youth, CSOs and decision makers and political leader at various levels. SFCG wants to explore how the project was implemented, to what extent the project objectives and results were achieved, as well as furnish recommendations for similar projects and/or the expansion of project interventions in the future.

In accordance with the OECD-DAC Criteria of Evaluating Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding Programming, SFCG will employ the following evaluation criteria: relevance, effectiveness, impact, and coordination. The evaluation will also evaluate the measures taken by SFCG to publicize CMM/USAID’s financial support of the project, and whether such measures complied with the branding policies and marking requirements of CMM/USAID for implementing partners.

Key Evaluation Questions

1. 
   

   Relevance

   
   


2. 
   

   How relevant was the methodology and approach given the social, political and conflict context in Angola?

   
   


3. 
   

   To what extent were the project objectives consistent with the needs of the beneficiaries?

   
   


4. How relevant are the project strategies and activities as perceived by the beneficiaries and other community stakeholders?


5. 
   

   How relevant were the project strategies and activities to addressing the changing dynamics of the current generation of Angolan youth?

   
   


6. 
   

   Effectiveness

   
   

Review of project indicators: what activities were carried out, and what targets were reached (or not reached)? How do the indicators compare to the baseline data?

• % change of community members in target areas who feel that young men and women leaders are playing a positive role within their communities


• % target youth who state that they have an increased level of trust and respect for those from different political affiliation


• % of targeted young leaders who facilitate community dialogues


• % of SFCG trained young leaders who report resolving a conflict in their life or in their communities through non-violent means during the course of the project


• 
  

  % audience interviewed who say that project media products have given them a more positive view of youth

  
  


• 
  

  How did these indicators help us understand the whether the goal of the project was achieved?

  
  


• 
  

  To what extent was media programming effective in the project?

  
  
  • For the comic books and the TV mini-series, separately: Who did each of these tools reach? Did they understand and resonate with the messages?
  
  
  • Did the messages impact their actions? How?
  
  


• 
  

  To what extent did internal and external factors affect the implementation of activities and/or effectiveness of the project?

  
  


• 
  

  How did the project respond to challenges and opportunities during project implementation?

  
  


• 
  

  Impact

  
  


• 
  

  Were there any unintended positive or negative impacts of the project?

  
  


• 
  

  What is the overall (direct and indirect) contribution of the project to strengthening peacebuilding in Angola specifically in target provinces/municipals?

  
  


• To what extent has the project contributed to the improved coordination and collaboration among youth from diverse political wings, CSOs, local constituencies and decision makers/Government of Angola (GOA) authorities in peacebuilding and development process? (specifically through the following activities)
  
  • Collaborative micro-grant projects
  
  
  • Youth-led public forums on tolerance and non-violence
  
  
  • Large-scale solidarity events
  
  


• Has the project (specifically through the following project activities) strengthened the culture of non-violence in Angola?


• Youth leader training in the Common Ground Approach and in collaborative conflict resolution


• Leadership training for young women


• 
  

  Youth-led participatory dialogue and exchange

  
  


• 
  

  Did the project constructively engage youth, social and GOA institutions to promote peacebuilding and development in the country? Has the projected affected the degree of access to leaders?

  
  


• 
  

  How have youth organized differently as a result of this project intervention?

  
  


• 
  

  To what extent did the project contribute to the development of a sense of leadership, especially among the youth from marginalized groups and women?

  
  


• 
  

  What, if any, are the project’s unique contributions to/impacts on government strategy or policy related to youth empowerment, participation/engagement and leadership in Angola?

  
  


• 
  

  What aspects of the project outcomes are likely to be sustained after the life of the project? Have there been any particular mechanisms in place to ensure sustainability of initiatives?

  
  


• 
  

  How has partner capacity increased as a result of the project? What % of partner staff involved in project report improvements in project management processes?

  
  


• 
  

  Coordination

  
  


• 
  

  How well has the project been coordinated by SFCG-ANG with the implementation partners? Were the major coordination challenges? If so, what were they? How did SFCG-ANG handle/overcome those challenges?

  
  


• 
  

  Could the coordination mechanisms or processes be improved to be more efficient and effective? If yes, how?

  
  


• 
  

  CMM/USAID visibility

  
  


• 
  

  What has SFCG done to publicize CMM/USAID’s funding of the project? (logos, radio mentions, etc.)

  
  


• 
  

  Do these actions comply with the branding policies and marking requirements of CMM/USAID?

  
  

Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation is meant to produce information and make recommendations that are valid and reliable based on actual data and analysis. We expect that the methods to be used by the evaluator in completing this evaluation will include a mixed methods approach, including, but not necessarily limited to:

• Document review


• Analysis and review of monitoring data


• Key informant interviews (KIIs)


• Focus group discussions (FGDs),


• Surveys


• Case studies using the Most Significant Change (MSC) approach, observation, etc.

The evaluator should employ “triangulation” between several methods of data collection where attribution of a net change to a project intervention is difficult, by eliciting responses from several different types of sources (e.g., program management, key informants in SFCG project partners (ASCAM, CNJT, GOA officials) when it is relevant and targeted youth groups).

The evaluator will be tasked with analyzing both quantitative and qualitative data. Existing project documents, baseline report, listenership survey report, quarterly reports and other relevant documents will be shared with the evaluator. She/he is expected to draft the questionnaires in consultation with the SFCG-ANG Team and get approval of the questionnaires before using them. The consultant will calculate sample size using statistically accepted methods, identify local researchers, train them on data collection and administer the survey in target locations with the sample population identified.

Similarly, the evaluator is expected to develop FGDs/KIIs guides for different sets of stakeholder groups such as youth, government officials, etc. The SFCG-ANG team must review and approve these guides before the fieldwork can begin. These data collection tools will be part of an “Inception report” to be submitted by the consultant before starting the data collection. The consultant will conduct at least five KIIs and two FGDs in each of the municipalities, and collect two success stories using the MSC approach.

Scope of Work and Deliverables

The evaluation will be conducted in six municipalities.

Deliverables

1. Inception report to be submitted within five days of signing the contract. The inception report includes a brief introduction of the project, the evaluation objectives and final key evaluation questions agreed with SFCG and the consultant, detailed evaluation methodology, including all required data collection tools (such as FGDs/KIIs checklists, survey questions, other tools) data analysis approach and the evaluation timeline from signing the contract to the submission of the final report. SFCG will provide a sample inception report for reference, if necessary. The inception report needs to be approved by SFCG DM&E Team before starting the fieldwork.


2. Field visit to all districts included in the evaluation plan.


3. Draft report for review by the SFCG ILT team and the Africa Regional DM&E Specialist.


4. 
   

   Final report after incorporating the comments and feedback from the SFCG ILT team and the Africa Regional DM&E Specialist. The report should be in English and no more than 40 pages in length and consist of;

   
   


5. 
   

   Cover Page: SFCG will provide sample cover sheet for reference

   
   


6. 
   

   Table of contents, list of acronyms/abbreviations and list of tables and charts

   
   


7. Executive summary of key findings and recommendations (no more than 3 pages)


8. Introduction: Context analysis, project description, evaluation methodology with clear explanation of sampling, survey methodology, FGDs/KIIs participant selection and data analysis approach


9. Evaluation findings, analysis, and conclusions with associated data presented per evaluation objective and per evaluation criteria, via a reasonable balance of narrative vs. graphs and charts (mandatory)


10. Lesson learned, future opportunities and recommendations for similar interventions in the future; recommendations should be forward looking and should focus on program design, planning vs. implementation, implementation methodology and approach, project monitoring and evaluation system, among others. The recommendations should also be framed according to the evaluation criteria.


11. 
    

    Appendices: Including collected data, detailed description of the methodology with research instruments, two success stories using the MSC approach, list of interviewees, bibliography, and evaluator(s) brief biography

    
    


12. 
    

    The evaluator(s) should submit an electronic version of the report along with all original databases for analysis.

    
    


13. 
    

    Make a final presentation of the report with the SFCG-ANG Team (this can be negotiated if the consultant will be submitting the final report from outside of Angola)

    
    

The evaluator will work closely with the SFCG-ANG Program Manager and Project Coordinator and the SFCG Africa Regional DM&E Specialist at every stage. The evaluation report will be credited to the consultant and will be placed in the public domain at the discretion of SFCG.

Evaluation Team

The evaluation team will include the evaluator, SFCG-ANG Program Manager, SFCG-ANG Project Coordinator, and SFCG Senior DM&E Regional Specialist East and Southern (remote support). The evaluator will be under the direct supervision of the SFCG-ANG Country Director. SFCG-ANG Program Manager will be responsible for supervising the team and facilitating the needs of the consultant for the purpose of the evaluation.

Logistics

SFCG-ANG Project Coordinator will assist the evaluator in all logistics, travel arrangements, translation (if required), accommodation, communications, and scheduling of meetings and appointments. SFCG-ANG will also ensure that all required documentation is made available to the evaluator as required.

Experience and Qualifications

• A minimum of a Bachelor degree in social science or other related subjects (Master’s degrees in peacebuilding, conflict transformation or international relations is desirable);


• Between 5-10 years of DM&E experience required (experience in program implementation preferred);


• Experience in conducting project evaluations in the following subject areas: governance, CSOs, youth, media and peacebuilding programs, would be an added advantage;


• Work experience in a post-conflict environments required;


• Work experience in Angola is an advantage;


• English required; Portuguese is desirable;


• Excellent writing and speaking skills in English;


• Ability to work in challenging conditions, and


• Sensitivity to cultural issues.

Remuneration

The consultant will receive a daily rate for total of 20 working days; of which 15 days must be spent in Angola. SFCG will cover travel to and from the consultant’s home country (if appicable), per diem and accommodation while in Angola, and local travel costs related to fieldwork. SFCG will be responsible for all translation services.

The schedule of payment of the consultancy fee is as follows:

1. 40% will be paid upon signing the contract


2. 60% will be paid upon completion and approval of evaluation report