Evaluation of Roving Team Flexible Management Support

1.INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT

Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e. V. is one of the largest non-governmental organisations in Germany operating in the humanitarian assistance and development fields. It was established in 1962, as the German section of the “Freedom from Hunger Campaign”, one of the world’s first initiatives aimed at the eradication of hunger. Welthungerhilfe’s work is still dedicated to the following vision: All people have a right to a self-determined life in dignity and justice, free from hunger and poverty.

By 2022, Welthungerhilfe and its partner organisations ran 603 international projects in 37 countries with an overall financing volume of EUR 287,4 million, comprised of private donations, public national and international funds reaching a total of 18,8 Mio people in need.

The Roving Team of the Flexible Management Support (FMS) was established in 2017 in order to bridge staffing gaps at country level based on the notion that ‘a key element for the functioning of the decentralized structure is a highly competent and functional management team in place in the countries and key positions like Country Directors (CDs), Head of programmes and Head of projects are covered’. WHH’s experience in the past showed that there are often difficulties in ensuring the timely filling of key positionsin the Country Offices (COs), Project Offices or in the Regional Directorates (RDs). To bridge resulting management gaps, to ensure that COs are always fully functional and to provide crucial support to the Country Offices during these phases, we have established the Flexible Management Support Team which consists of experts in program- and project-related management tasks. From the start, the FMS was able to fill in all programme managing positions (Country Director, Head of Progammes, Head of Project), since responsibilities within the team have been diversified and include a large spectrum of assignments from support functions within projects (mergers, reports, proposals) to acting as Regional Directors. With their experiences they ensure smooth transition phases and contribute with their skills to the functioning of the management teams**.**

The FMS is handled by the Regional Director for Asia/South America, assignments are requested by Country Offices through their respective RDs. At present seven rovers (as well as two new proposal writing rovers who are not part of this evaluation) are part of the team with 112-168 annual assignment days. The FMS team works similar to the Emergency Response Team (ERT) or the Flexible Support of the Financial Advisory Unit. The days of deployment are refinanced by the respective projects the rover is assigned to, which will cover the fixed daily allowance and travel expenses. The support runs under the project DE 1106-22.

Assignments have covered 21 countries in addition to HQ support:

2.EVALUATION PURPOSE

FMS exists since 2017 and the evaluation aims to assess the contributions of the team to WHH programmes. The key objectives of the evaluation are as following:

• Taking stock of achievements and assessing the contributions of FMS both on mission and organizational level
• Gathering lessons learnt and developing recommendations to improve future assignments
• Documenting case studies to assess the team’s capabilities

3.SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION

The evaluation is expected to produce a set of case studies, representative across the RDs, covering development and humanitarian settings, including intense and ‘once-off’ coverage by FMS as well as additional collaborative agreements, e.g. collaboration with the Humanitarian Directorate and different levels of hierarchy. The studies should not exceed 10 pages each.

Moreover, the evaluation shall produce a Powerpoint Presentation with an executive summary, lessons learnt and recommendations (synthesized results) for improving the effectiveness of the FMS assignments as well as a set case studies as described above.

More details will be provided in the Methodology Section below.

4.USERS OF THE EVALUATION

The main recipients of the evaluation are the FMS team as well as the Regional Directorates as main clients of the team. In addition, the case studies shall serve as showcases for Country Offices and other interested parties of what can be expected from an FMS assignment.

5. EVALUATION QUESTIONS (AND CRITERIA)

The main focus of the evaluation is the contribution of the FMS to ensuring functionality of Country Offices and assuring high-quality implementation of programs and projects both in regards to individual missions as well as on organizational level. The evaluation should ideally focus on the following OECD DAC evaluation criteria and answer the responding evaluation questions.

Relevance

To what extent and how does the project respond to the priorities and needs of

a) Welthungerhilfe as an organization?

b) Regional Directorates and Country Programmes?

Sustainability

What lasting effects did the assignments have in the country offices 1-3 years after the assignments, e.g. which procedures/standards/positions/additional measures have been established and are still in use today?

How and which additional learnings from missions have been taken up by the organization as a whole?

Efficiency/effectivity

To which extent did the FMS team members successfully fill gaps during the assignments, ensured functionality of their respective units and contributed to assuring continuous high-quality implementation of programs and projects? How well did the FMS members adjust to the context of their respective assignments? To what extent were the expectations of the requesters met?

How could efficiency/effectivity of the roving team be improved, e.g. in terms of administrative procedures or follow up on recommendations?

Impact

What impact did the FMS have on WHH’s performance as an organization and on country level, also including systemic development (e.g. Capacity development), unintended effects and implementing additional measures (e.g. thematic inputs or links to networks and individuals)?

If applicable: How far did the assignments improve work with partners or contribute to their performance?

6. EVALUATION DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The Evaluation shall ideally be conducted in three steps:

1. Inception report/desk study of overall assignments. Scan “End of Mission Reports” and Feedback Questionnaire (available for FMS missions) in order to identify a representative number of case studies covering at least two countries from each Regional Directorate. The sampling of case studies should ideally take into considering the following sampling criteria: covering development and humanitarian settings, including intense and ‘once-off’ coverage by FMS as well as additional collaborative agreements, e.g. collaboration with the Humanitarian Directorate and different levels of hierarchy. In addition, synergies of assignments in the Regional Directorates or collaboration with the Humanitarian Director shall be considered.
   The desk study should be the basis for the inception report and result in a suggestion for countries to be covered which will be agreed upon with Regional Directorates for further in-depth case studies. The inception report should include details on the methodology (guiding questions for interviews).

2. The basis of the case studies shall be developed utilizing available documentation of the assignments (as detailed above including handover notes and/or further documentation as available given the sampled case studies). In a second step, semi-structured interviews shall be conducted with a sample of collaborators of the FMS team in country and HQ, to be agreed upon with the respective CO/RD and concerned FMS member(s) to feed into the case studies. The first drafts of the case studies shall be discussed with CO/RD and FMS member(s).

3. General findings of the case studies shall be synthesized into an executive summary (PPT) including recommendations to RD, CO and FMS team (and others in case deemed useful) and presented/discussed with RD, FMS team and additional stakeholders if deemed useful.

In consideration of the proposed evaluation methodology outlined in this TOR, we acknowledge that flexibility may enhance the evaluation process.

7.MANAGERIAL ARRANGEMENTS / ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Overall guidance and reference point for the topic of FMS is Regional Director Elke Gottschalk who will liaise with FMS and other RD and CO in case of any matters of concern. WHH’s evaluaton advisor Katharina Kreutz will fill in the role of the internal evaluation manager who will be in direct contact with the evaluators regarding evaluation process and products.

8.DELIVERABLES AND REPORTING DEADLINES

The following deliverables are expected to be produced by the evaluator(s):

• Inception report (max. 7 pages for the main text without front page, table of contents and annexes).

The inception report should elaborate on the selection of case studies and provide the interview guidelines for the second step of the evaluation. A WHH template can be provided for guidance.

The inception report should be submitted 10 working days after the kick-off session and agreed upon no later than 10 working days after submission.

• The case studies shall be elaborated tailored to the specific context of the assignments and not exceeding 10 pages (excluding annexes). The studies shall be submitted latest two months after acceptance of the inception report and discussed and agreed upon within 10 working days after submission (can also happen earlier per case study if needed).

Regional Directorates will assist in setting up the virtual meetings for discussing/agreeing on case studies.

• Executive summary (PPT) shall be drafted and submitted no later than 15 working days after the last case study has been agreed upon and discussed/agreed upon no later than 10 days after submission of the first draft. The summary may need to be adjusted after the presentation.

Payment schedule is

20% of overall amount upon signing of contract

30% after agreement on inception report

30% after acceptance of case studies

20% after acceptance of executive summary and recommendations

9.RESOURCES AND AVAILABLE DATA

The available budget for the evaluation is 15.000,-, travel, expenses will be limited to travel to Bonn for discussion of Inception Report and presentation of Executive Summary/Recommendations, interviews will be conducted through MS Teams.

Evaluators will conduct an average of 5-10 interviews (RD, key collaborators in HQ if applicable CO, programme, financial and logistic staff in country, partner representatives if applicable), per case study and have access to all relevant documentation including ToR, end of mission reports, end of mission feedback, handover notes and additional documentation relevant to the respective assignments