Consultant for Breakthrough Study – Disasters Damage Fewer Lives

The International Strategy 2022-2025:Ready to Act sets the overall direction and priorities for how we will work with people, communities, and partners towards positive change. The strategy identifies three key changes – breakthroughs – which if achieved can positively transform the lives of the people we work with and for.

As part of the DRC’s International Strategy Performance Plan, we have developed a learning agenda with specific learning questions to explore during the strategic period, with specific areas of interests within each breakthrough area.

The overall learning question is: How and to what extent do our breakthroughs and the strategic initiatives interact to create transformative change that amplifies the impact of each individual component?

As one way of contributing to answering these learning questions, DRC has committed to carrying out a series of Breakthrough Studies to generate learning on how transformative change happen within each of the three breakthroughs. A total of 3 Global Breakthrough Studies will be conducted, one per breakthrough. This second Breakthrough Study will focus on the breakthrough “Disaster Damage Fewer Lives”.

2. PURPOSE, OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE

2.1 PURPOSE

Thepurpose of the study is to generate learning on how change happens with the breakthrough “Disaster Damage Fewer Lives” in order for DRC to understand whether we are doing the right things to generate the necessary change to contribute to achieving the breakthrough.

For this Breakthrough Study 2, we will specifically explore the efficacy of utilizing anticipatory and rapid emergency response approaches as a strategic mechanism. Both to facilitate timely, relevant and scaled emergency responses as well as to enhance engagement and joint transformative change together with national and local authorities.

The study aims to identify key strategies, challenges, and examples of good practices associated with leveraging emergency response efforts for our partners to step into their auxiliary role to allow for broader engagement and transformative change together with national and local authorities.

2.2 OBJECTIVE

The study seeks to:

• Assess the effectiveness of anticipatory and rapid emergency response initiatives in catalyzing scale-up opportunities and deepening engagement with partners and authorities in selected countries.
• Identify the key factors that contribute to successful utilization of anticipatory actions and emergency response as a stepping-stone for broader and longer-term engagement.
• To analyze the challenges and barriers encountered in leveraging anticipatory and emergency response efforts for scale-up and increased engagement, and to propose mitigation strategies.
• To provide actionable recommendations for DRC and its partners to optimize the use of emergency response as a strategic tool for scaling up initiatives and enhancing collaboration.

2.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The study should answer the following tentative research questions that will be finalized together with the DRC team upon selection.

• How have anticipatory and rapid emergency response been utilized by Danish Red Cross and its partners in the selected countries to enhance engagement with authorities?
• To what extent has such enhanced engagement been related to preparedness and anticipatory actions versus other technical areas such as health, MHPSS and social cohesion?
• What are the main drivers behind the success or failure of leveraging anticipatory actions and emergency response efforts for stepping into the auxiliary role in order to scale-up and increase engagement?
• What are the primary barriers faced in utilizing anticipatory and rapid emergency response as a stepping-stone for such broader engagement, and how can these be addressed?
• What are the good practices and lessons learned that can inform future strategies for scale-up and enhanced engagement?

2.4 SCOPE

The study will include in-depth case studies in 3 countries to examine specific cases of DRC and partner engagements within anticipatory action emergency response, their subsequent impact on scale-up and engagement and collaboration with national and local authorities. It is expected that each country case study will include primary data collection as well as document review.

The study may also include secondary data from other DRC countries to allow for a broader analysis and learning. The breakthrough study is representative of DRC’s work, yet it is not expected to showcase DRC’s work in its entirety.

The breakthrough study will NOT assess the case study countries’ results in its entirety nor all their results within Breakthrough 2.

3. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY & PROCESS

The detailed methods will be presented in an inception report, following the inception phase. The consultants are welcome to propose other approaches or methods for data collection as suggested below.

It is expected that the study will draw upon the following methods:

Literature review: A comprehensive review of existing literature, reports, and case studies related to anticipatory action and rapid emergency responses.

Desk review of relevant documents: A review of relevant documents such as the DRC and IFRC/movement guidance documents as well as country-specific documents such as country strategies, project reports and evaluations, yearly reports etc.

Evidence synthesis analysis: Systematically assessing the available DRC reviews, evaluations and other evaluative documents related to DRC’s anticipatory action and rapid emergency response interventions globally against the research questions.

Stakeholder consultations and interviews: A series of interviews / workshops / group interviews / other engagement with relevant stakeholders:

• Individuals and communities, we work with and for
• Local stakeholders such as community chiefs, groups and others
• Local and national authorities
• Relevant DRC field staff, including Country Manager and delegates in country
• Interviews with relevant Host National Society staff
• Relevant counterparts in other Partner National Societies, IFRC and ICRC
• Relevant parties within DRC Regional Office and Head Quarters
• Relevant external partners and/or other stakeholders

Case studies: 3 country case studies in selected countries to identify specific examples of emergency response and their subsequent impact on scale-up and engagement.

Comparative Analysis: Analyse the findings from the literature review, desk review, stakeholder interviews, and case studies to identify common themes, trends, and variations across the selected countries.

4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The PMEAL Team Coordinator is responsible for the completion of the study, with DRC’s international director being interim accountable for the exercise. The PMEAL Team Coordinator will coordinate the DRC Breakthrough Study team who acts as coordination body and is responsible for delivery of all aspects of the study.

The PMEAL Team Coordinator is also coordinating the input of the advisory group who acts in an advisory role and will be consulted at pre-agreed key moments where their input is needed. The advisory group provides advice on the technical subject matter and will be no more than 10 people from the field, region and HQ.

The PMEAL Team Coordinator will provide support and guidance to the external consultant including consolidate feedback from DRC to the consultant. The PMEAL Team Coordinator will coordinate travel to case study countries, if necessary, on behalf of the consultant. The PMEAL Team Coordinator will ensure that the consultant has access to secondary data and ensure that online interviews are set-up in accordance with the inception report.

The case study country staff will organise field visit for the consultant, including all in-country travel and arrangements related to data collection while in country in accordance with the inception report.

The consultant is responsible for deliverables as detailed below. It is the consultant’s responsibility to identify the necessary relevant secondary documentation and information as part of the inception report. Additionally, the consultant can request further documentation to triangulate information uncovered during field visits. The consultant is responsible for coordinating travel in their home country e.g. to and from airport, and any travel insurance, as appliable.

5. DELIVERABLES AND SCHEDULE

As the study seeks to produce evidence-based learning that can inform operational improvement and humanitarian diplomacy, findings and learning need to be concise and clear and be presented to the DRC as per the below timeframe. The following deliverables are expected:

• Study inception report will be submitted prior to field visits (max 10 pages)
• Presentation of preliminary findings to field staff during field visits
• Short document and presentation of key findings to Country Team, Regional and HQ management upon completion of all field visits (online)
• Country case studies (max. 7 pages per case study)
• Study report (max. 20 pages) and annexes
• Short visual product (1-2 pages) with key conclusions

5.1 TIMEFRAME

The below is the proposed timeframe and time allocation from consultancy team. It is expected that this will be adjusted based on the methodology and process.

The timeline can be seen here.

6. Skills & Qualifications

The consultant(s) are expected to posses the following skills and qualifications:

• Advanced degree in humanitarian response or similar
• Significant technical experience within emergency humanitarian response and anticipatory action
• A minimum 10 years of experience within the humanitarian sector
• Extensive experience with evaluations and studies
• Experience with facilitation and stakeholder engagement/consultation
• RCRC experience an asset but not a requirement
• Personal competencies: result oriented, ability to work across cultures, strong analytical skills
• Fluent in English, French is an advantage