EXCLUSIF
Niveau BAC+5
Norwegian Refugee Council recrute des Consultants en Évaluation (Projet IMPACT)
Integrated Multisectoral Response for Conflict-Affected Populations in the Territories (IMPACT) of North Kivu and Ituri, DRC, July 2026
Navigation[ ] Login Login with LinkedInHomeJobsResumesPost A JobPagesScholarshipMemberPost a Resume Login Login with LinkedIn Integrated Multisectoral Response for Conflict-Affected Populations in the Territories (IMPACT) of North Kivu and Ituri, DRC 4 views0 applications Consultancy Democratic Republic of Congo July 6, 2026 - July 21, 2026 Monitoring and Evaluation Print
1. Background information
Background Context
The eastern part of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), particularly North Kivu and Ituri provinces, continues to face a protracted humanitarian crisis driven by persistent armed conflict, intercommunal violence, and widespread population displacement. Cycles of violence have resulted in massive disruptions to livelihoods, destruction of infrastructure, and weakened social protection systems. Millions of people remain internally displaced or have experienced multiple displacements, often living in precarious conditions with limited access to basic services. The complexity of the crisis, combined with limited state capacity and continued insecurity, requires integrated humanitarian responses that simultaneously address immediate lifesaving needs while strengthening resilience, promoting protection, and supporting recovery and transition toward durable solutions.
The Integrated Multisectoral Response for Conflict-Affected Populations (IMPACT) project is implemented by the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) with funding from European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO). The project is implemented in North Kivu and Ituri provinces, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), regions characterized by protracted armed conflict, large-scale internal displacement, protection risks, and limited access to basic services.
Through this integrated approach, the project seeks not only to address urgent humanitarian needs but also to strengthen local capacities, improve access to essential services, and contribute to longer-term resilience and protection outcomes
NRC’s activities and presence
The Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) has been present in the Democratic Republic of the Congo since 2001 and is today among the leading international humanitarian organizations supporting populations affected by armed conflict, forced displacement, and protracted humanitarian crises. Its operations are mainly concentrated in the eastern provinces of the country, particularly North Kivu, South Kivu, and Ituri, which experience some of the highest levels of vulnerability and displacement on the African continent. NRC maintains an extensive operational presence that enables it to respond rapidly in emergency-affected areas while ensuring close follow-up and engagement with affected communities.
The organization implements an integrated and multisectoral approach based on its core competencies: Information, Counselling and Legal Assistance (ICLA), Education, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), Shelter and Settlements, as well as a Rapid Response Mechanism (RRM) component. This approach aims to address the immediate life-saving needs of affected populations while strengthening their resilience to recurring shocks. Interventions primarily target internally displaced persons (IDPs), returnees, refugees, repatriates, and vulnerable host communities affected directly or indirectly by crises.
Beyond emergency humanitarian assistance, NRC promotes approaches that support durable solutions to forced displacement and socio-economic exclusion. Through its programs, the organization supports access to housing, land and property rights, access to quality education for children affected by crises, as well as access to water and shelter. NRC also places particular emphasis on inclusion, Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP), community participation, and the cross-cutting integration of gender, protection, and risk management throughout its interventions. As a key actor in the humanitarian response in the DRC, NRC plays an active role in sectoral coordination mechanisms at both national and provincial levels. The organization regularly contributes to the work of humanitarian clusters and technical working groups, particularly in the areas of Protection, WASH, Shelter and Non-Food Items (NFI), Education, and Housing, Land and Property (HLP), where it is widely recognized for its technical expertise. Through its analysis and advocacy efforts, NRC also helps bring the concerns of affected populations to the attention of national authorities, donors, and international humanitarian partners.
Furthermore, NRC is fully committed to international commitments on the localization of humanitarian aid. The organization works closely with national organizations, community-based structures, and local authorities to strengthen their technical and institutional capacities, promote local ownership of interventions, and ensure the sustainability of achieved results. This partnership-based approach not only enhances the effectiveness of the humanitarian response but also strengthens the resilience of communities facing recurrent crises in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.
NRC’s intervention specific to the evaluation
The intervention is based on an integrated and multisectoral approach, with Education in Emergencies (EiE) serving as the primary entry point for reaching crisis-affected children and their families. This approach is complemented by a package of interventions covering Protection and Information, Counselling and Legal Assistance (ICLA), Shelter and Settlements (S&S), Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH), as well as a rapid shock-response mechanism (Crisis Modifier). An additional component dedicated to engagement with Armed Groups and De Facto Authorities (AGDAs), implemented in partnership with a specialized organization, further strengthens the protection and humanitarian access dimensions of the project. The project’s Theory of Change assumes that the combined provision of quality essential services in safe environments, together with protection mechanisms, rights-based support, and dialogue with influential conflict actors, contributes to reducing the negative impacts of crises on internally displaced persons and vulnerable host communities. This approach aims not only to address immediate humanitarian needs but also to preserve humanitarian space and create enabling conditions for durable solutions for populations affected by forced displacement.
The project primarily targets internally displaced persons (IDPs), returnees, and vulnerable host communities across the intervention areas. Attention is given to school-aged children, women and girls, adolescents, and households facing multiple vulnerabilities related to access to education, WASH services, protection, basic services, and housing, land and property rights. To date, the project has reached approximately 209,348 unique participants, of whom 52% are women and girls, demonstrating a strong focus on the most vulnerable population groups.
In terms of intended results, the project seeks to achieve six interconnected outcomes covering: improved access to safe and quality education in emergency settings; strengthened protection and access to rights through legal assistance and community-based protection mechanisms; improved living conditions through dignified shelter solutions; enhanced and sustainable access to water, sanitation and hygiene services; reduced vulnerability to shocks through integrated rapid-response mechanisms; and strengthened engagement of armed groups and de facto authorities in promoting civilian protection and respect for International Humanitarian Law (IHL).
These outcomes have been translated into tangible achievements across six technical sectors. Under the Education in Emergencies component (Result 1), more than 53,000 children were enrolled in formal education, over 4,000 children benefited from non-formal education programmes, and more than 77,000 children received school kits, demonstrating significant progress in improving access to and continuity of education. Under the Protection and ICLA component (Result 2), nearly 20,000 individuals received support to obtain civil documentation, while more than 16,000 people were assisted with housing, land and property (HLP) issues. In addition, thousands of community members participated in awareness-raising activities on rights protection and gender-based violence prevention, with support from specialized partners. Under the Shelter component (Result 3), 107 classrooms were rehabilitated or constructed, and approximately 7,680 people benefited from safe shelter solutions. WASH interventions (Result 4) enabled more than 10,000 people to access safe drinking water and nearly 17,000 people to benefit from improved sanitation facilities, complemented by hygiene promotion activities. Through the Crisis Modifier mechanism (Result 5), close to 20,000 individuals affected by sudden shocks received rapid humanitarian assistance. Finally, the AGDA engagement component (Result 6) facilitated awareness-raising sessions, trainings, and dialogue initiatives involving community actors, state authorities, and non-state actors, reaching more than 50,000 people to date.
Project implementation has also been characterized by significant adaptations in response to the evolving operational context. A major amendment (MR02) enabled the geographical expansion of activities, increased the number of targeted schools from 49 to 79, and introduced a new component focused on engagement with armed groups and de facto authorities. Several operational adjustments were also undertaken, including the relocation of activities due to security constraints in certain areas. The project further benefited from a No-Cost Extension (NCE) until August 2026, justified by security, logistical, and financial challenges that affected access and implementation in parts of the intervention area. In addition, a Cost Extension (CE) was approved, increasing the overall project budget from EUR 4.5 million to EUR 10.3 million. This additional funding enabled the expansion of the geographical scope and the integration of new project components, with ECHO contributing more than EUR 9.2 million to the intervention.
The project is implemented by NRC as the lead agency in collaboration with technical and operational partners. Geneva Call is responsible for the component related to engagement with armed groups and de facto authorities, particularly on issues concerning International Humanitarian Law and civilian protection. SOFEPADI, a Congolese national organization, supports the implementation of gender-based violence prevention and community awareness-raising activities. The project also benefits from funding and co-funding from several donors, including ECHO, BHA, SIDA, and NMFA, as well as from synergies with other humanitarian and development interventions, thereby strengthening its reach, complementarity, and overall contribution to the humanitarian response in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
2. Purpose of the evaluation and intended use
2.1. Overarching purpose
The overall purpose of this external evaluation is to conduct an independent and objective assessment of the IMPACT project. The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project has achieved its intended objectives and contributed to improving the well-being and protection of targeted populations, in line with the project’s specific objectives and theory of change.
The evaluation is expected to serve three primary and complementary purposes.
First, it will fulfil NRC’s accountability commitments to ECHO, project participants, and other stakeholders by providing external evidence on project performance. Assess the alignment of the project design and implementation with the NRC DRC priorities and global policies.
Second, it will generate learning by identifying strengths, weaknesses, lessons learned, and good practices that can inform future humanitarian programming in DRC and similar contexts.
Third, it will support strategic decision-making by providing actionable recommendations to improve programme design, implementation strategies, and integrated programming approaches.
More specifically, the evaluation will aim to:
Assess the relevance and appropriateness of the project design in relation to the needs and priorities of affected populations.
Assess the extent to which the project design and implementation are aligned with NRC DRC priorities, global policies
Assess the extent to which Education in Emergency interventions contributed to improved access to education, retention of children in school, learning continuity, and psychosocial well-being of girls and boys affected by the crisis.
Assess the extent to which ICLA interventions produced concrete legal and administrative outcomes for affected populations, including access to birth certificates and supplementary judgments, improved security of tenure, access to land, and mitigation of HLP-related risks affecting shelter and protection outcomes.
Assess the added value of the integrated approach between Education, Protection, ICLA, Shelter, and WASH in improving overall outcomes for affected populations.
Assess the extent to which project activities were implemented in a timely manner and how operational decisions and adaptations contributed to efficient delivery of results in a changing context..
Assess how protection, gender equality, and inclusion were integrated in the project cycle and addressed.
Identification of unintended positive or negative effects resulting from the implementation of the project.
Identification and analysis of external factors (social, economic, political, geographical, cultural) and their effect/impact on results and processes
The evaluation should explicitly analyse how insecurity, repeated displacement, limited functionality of civil registry and judicial services, administrative costs and delays, coexistence of statutory and customary land systems, and humanitarian access constraints affected ICLA delivery and outcomes.
Assess the sustainability of selected project outcomes and interventions that were designed to generate longer-term benefits beyond the project period..
Document lessons learned and good practices to inform future programming.
2.2. How will the evaluation be used?
Findings will be shared through:
Internal learning workshops,
Community feedback and restitution sessions,
One-page summaries in local languages,
Cluster forums, policy briefs, and learning products.
Evaluation findings will inform program adaptation, advocacy with ECHO, and future humanitarian programming.
2.3. Who will it be used by?
Primary users of this evaluation will be NRC programme and MEAL teams at field and country level, senior management, and implementing partners. They will use the findings to strengthen accountability, improve programme performance, and inform operational and strategic decision-making.
Secondary users include donors and other key humanitarian stakeholders, who will use the evaluation results to gain evidence on project performance, results achieved, and lessons learned, and to inform future funding decisions, policy dialogue, and programming in similar contexts.
3. Scope and lines of inquiry
3.1. Scope:
The evaluation will cover project intervention areas and the whole duration of the project from July 2023 until August 2026 depending on launching of inception phase.
3.1.1. Geographic Scope
The evaluation will cover selected project implementation areas in North Kivu (Mabalako HZ, Mwesso (Kitschanga) HZ, Rutshuru HZ, Nyrangongo/Goma HZ, Beni/Bingo HZ and Ituri (Tchomia HZ, Linga HZ, Jiba HZ and Rwampara HZ) provinces. The consultant is expected to select representative sites that reflect different operational contexts, including displacement areas, return areas, and host communities.
3.1.2 Sectoral Scope
The evaluation will examine all sectors implemented under the project, including Education, Shelter, WASH, ICLA, and DRR. Particular attention should be given to assessing the added value and effectiveness of the integrated multisectoral approach. Particular attention should also be given to the specific contribution of ICLA, with a distinct analytical focus on: (i) legal identity/documentation, especially access to birth certificates and supplementary judgments for conflict-affected children; and (ii) housing, land and property (HLP/LTP) support, including access to land, tenure security, due diligence support, and responses to HLP disputes and eviction risks.
Within the Shelter sector, the evaluation should analyse the community-based approach implemented, particularly the mechanism through which NRC provides cash directly to schools to enable them to carry out all procurement and construction works.
The evaluation should examine the extent to which this approach promotes local ownership and effectiveness in the implementation of activities.
It should also identify the main limitations and challenges encountered, including delays in payments, financial management difficulties, as well as any other obstacles that may have affected the proper execution of the works.
In addition, particular attention should be given to the organization of the works, by analysing the use of local labour (community artisans), the involvement of local workshops, as well as the dynamics of community participation.
Finally, the evaluation should assess NRC’s supervision and support throughout the entire process, from planning to completion of the works, highlighting good practices and areas for improvement.
3.1.3 Time Scope
The evaluation will cover the entire implementation period from July 2023 until the time of evaluation. It will assess both implementation processes and achieved results.
3.1.4Target Population
The evaluation will consider the perspectives and experiences of various stakeholders, including project participants, community leaders, local authorities, teachers and school staff, NRC staff, and implementing partners. Special attention should be given to ensuring the inclusion of women, children, youth, internally displaced persons, and persons with disabilities.
For the Education component, the evaluation should consider the perspectives of students (girls and boys), parents and caregivers, parent-teacher associations, school management committees, teachers, and local education authorities.
For the WASH component, the evaluation should consider the perspectives of stakeholders involved in both school-based and community-based interventions. This includes students, teachers, parent-teacher associations, school management committees, users of school WASH facilities, households benefiting from community WASH services, water management committees, hygiene promoters, community leaders, and relevant local authorities.
For the ICLA component, the evaluation should also consider the perspectives of parents or caregivers of children supported for civil documentation, civil registry officials, judicial actors involved in supplementary judgment procedures where relevant, customary and administrative land authorities, and households supported on HLP/LTP issues.
For the Shelter & Settlements component, the individuals and structures to be targeted include school management committees, users of the infrastructure (students and teachers), parent-teacher associations, temporary workers involved in the construction workforce, and, by extension, suppliers who have directly worked with the management committees.
3.1.5 Project: IMPACT – Integrated Multisectoral Response for Conflict-Affected Populations in North Kivu and Ituri, Democratic Republic of Congo
3.1.6 Donor: European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO)
3.2. Lines of inquiry
The evaluation will be guided by the OECD-DAC criteria, with a strong emphasis on Education, Shelter, WASH, ICLA, DRR. It is intended to assess the project’s performance against the following criteria: (i) relevance, (ii) efficiency, (iii) effectiveness, (iv) impact, (v) sustainability, (vi) non-discrimination and gender (vii) replicability and scalability.
However, NRC is conscious that the timing of the evaluation does not lend itself to a consideration of (iv) and (v), given that some outcomes will take time to manifest. As such, the evaluation is expected to focus on assessing the likely sustainability of the project, as well as ideally proposing a reflective practice approach and a ‘resource light’ approach that can be used for capturing future impacts.
Relevance
The evaluation will assess whether the project was designed and implemented in a way that appropriately responds to the priority needs and vulnerabilities of affected populations. It will examine how well the project aligns with humanitarian priorities, community expectations, and the evolving context. Main questions to address will include:
To what extent has the project been aligned to NRC priorities and policies?
To what extent was it designed according to local needs and priorities of Eastern DRC?
To what extent did it consider different needs and priorities of boys/men and girls/women, vulnerable groups? How was the project adapted to meet these various needs?
To what extent did the integrated design of the project contribute to addressing the multiple and interconnected needs of affected children, households, and communities across education, WASH, shelter, protection, and ICLA sectors?
To what extent were ICLA interventions designed in line with the main legal, administrative, judicial, and customary barriers affecting access to birth certificates for children and access to land or tenure security for displaced, returnee, and vulnerable households?
To what extent were ICLA modalities adapted to the realities of the intervention areas, including weak civil documentation systems, procedural delays, limited institutional capacity, displacement patterns, and land-related tensions?
To what extent has the Shelter sector taken into account and applied the guidelines related to school infrastructure construction standards from the Ministry of Primary Education, particularly by integrating the geographical, demographic, and economic specificities of the context, as well as the orientations defined within the national school planning framework?
Effectiveness
The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project achieved its intended outcomes and contributed to improving the well-being, protection, and resilience of affected children, households, and communities through an integrated, education-centred approach. It will examine how Education, WASH, Shelter, ICLA and Protection interventions interacted and complemented one another to address interconnected needs, reduce vulnerabilities, and improve access to essential services. The evaluation will assess both intended and unintended outcomes, as well as the contribution of each sector to the overall project objectives.
Main questions to address will include: 1. To what extent did the project achieve its intended outcomes and contribute to improved access to education, retention, protection, well-being, and basic services for affected children, households, and communities?
How effective was the integrated programming approach in addressing interconnected education, protection, WASH, shelter, and legal needs?
To what extent did the combination of interventions generate outcomes beyond those that could have been achieved through standalone sectoral interventions?
How successful was the programme in improving the quality, accessibility, safety, and inclusiveness of services for targeted populations?
Are there contextual or external factors that influenced the achievement of results?
To what extent did the education component function as a central entry point within the project’s theory of change, enabling and reinforcing interconnected outcomes across WASH, Protection, Shelter, and ICLA sectors, and contributing to improved well-being and resilience of affected populations?
To what extent has the project contributed to an increase in confidence of communities towards traditional/formal authorities? How different are the results for women/girls and men/boys?
What unintended positive or negative outcomes emerged from the integrated implementation of the project?
To what extent did ICLA interventions contribute to achieving broader education, protection, shelter, and inclusion outcomes?
To what extent did legal identity support facilitate school enrolment, school retention, and access to services?
To what extent did HLP/LTP support contribute to safer housing conditions, reduced displacement risks, and improved tenure security?
To what extent were the ICLA outcomes obtained recognised, usable, and respected by the relevant administrative, judicial, and customary authorities? These additions are important because the project documentation already identifies concrete ICLA result evidence such as birth certificates, supplementary judgments, occupancy agreements, occupancy forms and land measurement reports.
Strengthened protection outcomes through reduced exposure to documentation-related exclusion, eviction risks, and land-related disputes. This is consistent with the project’s integrated design and the documented links between ICLA evidence, shelter outcomes, and education access.
For the Shelter component, the evaluation will assess the extent to which shelter and school infrastructure interventions contributed to addressing the priority needs and vulnerabilities of affected populations within an integrated programming approach. It will examine community mobilization and ownership, including the involvement of school management committees, parent associations, and end-users (students and teachers), as well as the role of local communities in the design, implementation, and maintenance of infrastructure. The evaluation will also assess the extent to which Shelter interventions contributed to broader multisectoral outcomes, particularly improved access to education, enhanced protection and safety of children, and strengthened access to basic services through improved infrastructure.
Impacts
To what extent is the programme contributing to improving the resilience of the most vulnerable displacement-affected populations, especially women, girls and youth? What are the major contributing factors?
Sustainability
The evaluation will assess the extent to which the benefits of the project are likely to continue after its completion, with a focus on the durability of key outcomes and the conditions that support or hinder their continuation. Particular attention will be given to ownership by communities and relevant local actors, as well as the extent to which project design and implementation have contributed to strengthening local capacities and systems.. Mains questions to answer will include:
To what extent are the project outcomes in Education, Protection/ICLA, Shelter and WASH likely to be sustained beyond the project period?
To what extent has the project contributed to strengthening the capacity of the local education system (including teachers, school management committees, parent-teacher associations and education authorities) to sustain access to education, retention of learners, and learning environments after project closure?
To what extent has the project design and implementation approach supported sustainability, including through community participation and alignment with local systems and practices?
To what extent have women, girls, men and boys participated in and taken ownership of project activities and results?
To what extent has the project strengthened the capacity of relevant local actors (including civil registry services, local authorities, community structures) to continue delivering services after project closure?
To what extent were local knowledge, practices and perceptions integrated into project implementation, and how has this influenced sustainability?
The evaluation will not assess all project activities equally in terms of sustainability. Greater emphasis will be placed on interventions with a higher potential for durable effects, such as infrastructure (classrooms, WASH facilities), capacity strengthening, community systems, and access to rights (ICLA). Emergency or short-term assistance activities will be considered with limited sustainability expectations.
Efficiency
The evaluation will assess the extent to which the project was implemented in a timely, resources and operationally efficient manner, considering how resources were planned, coordinated, and adapted in response to contextual challenges. It will focus on implementation processes rather than cost-efficiency analysis.
Main questions to be addressed include:
To what extent were project activities implemented within planned timelines, and what factors influenced delays or accelerated implementation?
How effectively were human, material, financial and operational resources managed to support project delivery?
To what extent were operational decisions and adaptations effective in maintaining implementation progress in a changing context (e.g. insecurity, access constraints, logistical challenges)?
To what extent were ICLA results achieved through efficient case management processes, including sequencing of legal steps, coordination with duty-bearers, and handling of administrative procedures?
How did procedural complexity, reliance on external authorities, and administrative bottlenecks affect the timeliness and operational efficiency of ICLA implementation?
Non-discrimination-gender equity
The evaluation will examine how effectively the project addressed protection risks and promoted equitable access for vulnerable groups:
To what extent and how are we delivering appropriate and effective interventions for people with disabilities?
To what extent did NRC minimise the negative consequences of its interventions and ensure safety, dignity and well-being (and equal access) for women/girls and men/boys?
How did sex, age, disability status, and displacement status affect access to ICLA services, completion of legal and administrative procedures, and the quality of outcomes in birth registration and HLP support?
Were there any differences in outcomes for girls and boys in relation to documentation-related barriers to education, and for women-headed households in relation to land access, tenure security, and exposure to eviction or HLP disputes?
The evaluation will assess how Shelter interventions addressed protection risks and ensured equitable access to infrastructure for all vulnerable groups. It will focus on the inclusion of people with disabilities, the safety, dignity, and well-being of women/girls and men/boys, as well as the prevention of any negative impacts of the works on these populations.
Replicability and scalability
To what extent will the project work in a different context?
What lessons can be drawn regarding the implementation of the project across different operational contexts (e.g. varying levels of insecurity, access constraints, and displacement dynamics in Ituri and Nord-Kivu)?
The evaluation will examine the capacity of the community-based classroom construction approach to be replicated in other contexts. It will analyze the key success factors and necessary conditions, including the availability of local materials, community mobilization and ownership, local technical skills, as well as climatic and topographical conditions. The study will also assess potential risks and challenges associated with scaling up the project in different areas, in order to determine the feasibility and effectiveness of expanding the model while maintaining the quality and durability of the infrastructure.
Accountability to Affected Populations
The evaluation will assess the extent to which communities were engaged in decision‑making and whether feedback mechanisms were effective.
The evaluation should also assess whether ICLA participants received clear, accurate, and realistic information on procedures, timelines, eligibility, limits of support, and possible case outcomes, in order to minimise frustration, misinformation, and protection risks linked to unmet expectations. Regarding Shelter, the evaluation will assess the involvement of communities throughout the project, their participation in decision-making, and their understanding of procedures and the limits of support. It will evaluate the extent to which the community adhered to the project’s philosophy and appropriated the community-based construction approach, including the management of community cash and NRC’s technical support. The evaluation will also consider the positive or negative effects on social cohesion, trust in local authorities, and the sustainability of the constructed infrastructures
4. Methodology
Methodological Approach
The evaluation will use a mixed-methods performance evaluation approach, integrating quantitative and qualitative data to assess contribution pathways and implementation quality. Quantitative analysis will draw on baseline and endline data (where available) from household or individual surveys and monitoring systems. Qualitative methods will complement quantitative findings and explore dimensions not fully captured by surveys, including protection outcomes, sustainability, integrated programming, and participant perceptions.
In relation to ICLA, the methodology should include a review of a purposive sample of case files and documentary evidence in order to verify the quality and completion of legal and administrative outcomes. This should include, where feasible and ethically appropriate, review of case management forms, case databases, copies of birth certificates, supplementary judgments, occupancy agreements, occupancy forms, land measurement records, and relevant records of mediation or advocacy.
The Shelter evaluation will use a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative analyses. It will focus on the quality, durability, and use of the infrastructure, as well as on community involvement and ownership. The effectiveness of the community-based approach and NRC’s technical supervision will be examined, along with impacts on social cohesion, inclusive participation, and trust in local authorities. Beneficiaries’ perceptions regarding the comfort and suitability of classrooms will also be assessed to inform recommendations for future interventions.
Data Collection Methods
Methods may include:
Household and individual surveys;
Key informant interviews (KIIs);
Focus group discussions (FGDs);
Most Significant Change (MSC);
Participatory tools such as H-frame and Photovoice;
Direct observation.
Secondary data sources will include NRC’s Global Outputs and Outcomes Reporting System (GORS), IOM DTM, REACH assessments, project and activity reports, post-distribution monitoring (PDM), post-construction monitoring, and after-action reviews.
In addition, the evaluation will systematically draw on formal education system data, including school administrative records (enrolment, attendance, retention and dropout rates), and relevant data from local education authorities.
The Q-methodology may be used to capture diverse participant perspectives through structured ranking and sorting of statements.
Sampling
Quantitative sampling: Two-stage cluster sampling using Probability Proportional to Size (PPS), based on the following assumptions: Power = 0.80; Minimum Detectable Effect = 0.10; ICC = 0.01; Loss to Follow-Up = 10%. This can be customized or adjusted with solid rationale.
Qualitative sampling: Purposive sampling guided by saturation, ensuring representation of diverse population groups and intervention contexts.
Qualitative sampling should intentionally include ICLA-specific stakeholders, including caregivers of children supported for birth registration, civil registry authorities, judicial actors where relevant, customary and administrative land authorities, households receiving HLP support, and Shelter-related stakeholders concerned with land access or tenure security. Key participants will be purposively selected, ensuring representation of:
School management committees,
Teachers and student users,
Parents and local associations,
Artisans and workers involved in construction,
Local suppliers.
Information saturation will guide the final number of interviews and focus group discussions to capture all perceptions and experiences related to the construction, use, and durability of the infrastructure.
Ethics and Safeguarding
The evaluation will adhere to NRC’s Safeguarding Policy and Code of Conduct. Informed consent, confidentiality, and data protection will be ensured. Enumerators will be trained on ethical data collection and protection-sensitive approaches. Data storage and access protocols will be clearly defined.
Specific ethical safeguards should be applied to ICLA-related data collection, particularly for cases involving children, civil status documentation, personal legal records, land disputes, and sensitive household information. The evaluation should ensure that review of case files and collection of testimonies do not expose participants to protection risks, stigma, retaliation, or conflict escalation.
Data Analysis
Data analysis will be gender-responsive and will use appropriate descriptive and inferential statistics to assess trends and associations. Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic content analysis.
Analysis of ICLA results should distinguish between: (i) information and awareness-raising, (ii) case identification and intake, (iii) procedural accompaniment, (iv) completed legal or administrative outputs, and (v) sustained protection outcomes. This distinction is important to avoid conflating service delivery with completed case outcomes. Evaluation follow up and learning The findings will be used to inform program adaptation, advocacy with ECHO, and future humanitarian programming.
A dissemination plan will be developed to ensure that important learning is shared with internal and external stakeholders.
5. Management of the evaluation
Overall responsibility for ensuring that this evaluation is conducted rests with the Evaluation Steering Committee. The Assessment, Learning and Reporting (ALR) Coordinator will act as the Evaluation Manager and serve as the primary focal point for the evaluation team throughout the assignment.
An Evaluation Steering Committee will be established by NRC to provide strategic oversight and quality assurance. The committee will comprise:
Hoad of Program
NRC Country MEAL Manager;
Relevant Core Competency Specialists;
A project participant representative;
A partner representative.
The Steering Committee will not interfere with the independence of the evaluation methodology, analysis, findings, conclusions, or recommendations. Its role is to ensure that the evaluation is conducted in a timely, transparent, and quality-assured manner.
The Steering Committee will:
Approve the Terms of Reference;
Participate in the selection of the external evaluator(s);
Review and provide technical feedback on the inception report;
Review and comment on the draft evaluation report;
Support the development of dissemination and utilization strategies;
Monitor overall progress against agreed timelines.
The Evaluation Manager will facilitate access to project documentation, coordinate stakeholder engagement, support logistical arrangements, and ensure compliance with NRC evaluation standards.
NRC encourages consultants to independently arrange all matters related to visas, access to project sites, and accommodation. However, should difficulties or constraints arise due to the complex context in eastern DRC—particularly the presence of two administrative authorities—NRC may provide limited administrative support where necessary.
Consultants will also be responsible for all logistical arrangements, including refreshments for focus group discussions, vehicle rental, communications, and secretarial services (such as printing of documentation and other related materials). The consultants will further be responsible for administering all methodological tools, including questionnaires, focus group discussions, key informant interviews, and any other data collection instruments required for the evaluation.
6. Deliverables and reporting deadlines
Expected Deliverables
Duration of the consultancy: Approximately 60 days between July and October 2026.
The main deliverables will include:
An Inception Report, including the evaluation methodology, data collection tools, sampling approach, and detailed work plan, due on 03 August 2026.
A comprehensive Evaluation Matrix covering all sectors involved (WASH, Education, Shelter, and ICLA), ensuring that the specificities of each sector are adequately reflected. The matrix will include tailored evaluation questions and sub-questions, variables, indicators of interest, data sources, data collection tools, and data analysis methods, due on 03 August 2026.
Completion of field data collection, including Photovoice activities, due on 07 September 2026.
A debriefing and validation workshop to present and discuss preliminary findings following data collection, due on 21 September 2026.
Cleaned datasets, together with the data collection tools and relevant documentation, due on 21 September 2026.
A Draft Evaluation Report and an analysis based on the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria, due on 25 September 2026.
A Final Evaluation Report, incorporating comments received and including a set of operational and strategic recommendations, due on 09 October 2026.
Final dissemination and learning presentation: Presentation of the approved final evaluation findings, recommendations, and key lessons learned to NRC DRC teams and relevant stakeholders, due on 15 October 2026
7. Evaluation consultant team
The evaluator or firm should demonstrate:
Advanced degree in humanitarian/development studies, social sciences, statistics, or related fields.
At least eight years of professional experience in programme evaluation within humanitarian settings, with demonstrated expertise in applying both qualitative and quantitative evaluation methodologies.
Proven expertise in participatory and inclusive evaluation approaches and methodologies
Proven experience in conducting evaluations or assessments in humanitarian and resilience programming, with demonstrated understanding of at least one or more of the following sectors: WASH, Shelter, Education, and ICLA. Knowledge of integrated, multi-sectoral programming approaches is required.
Familiarity with eastern DRC preferred.
Excellent written and spoken English and French.
The evaluation team should be gender-balanced to ensure comprehensive coverage of gender-related perspectives and adequate engagement with all target population groups throughout the evaluation process.
Experience with participatory, gender-responsive, and inclusive evaluations.
How to apply
Application Deadline: 20/07/2026 Interview dates: Bids must include the following:
Proposal including, outline of evaluation framework and methods, including comments on the TOR, proposed time frame and work plan (bids over 9 pages will be automatically excluded).
A detailed financial proposal in USD (inclusive of all applicable taxes), covering consultancy fees by team member and level of effort, accommodation and per diem costs, transportation expenses (including flights where applicable), and all operational costs related to data collection, such as stationery, equipment, and field supplies
Joined 03 external multisectoral project evaluation reports with at least one component in education
Curriculum Vitae (CV) of each proposed team member; A summary of relevant experience demonstrating the team’s qualifications and expertise related to the scope of this evaluation. These documents should be annexed to the technical proposal
Submit completed bids to drc.consultancy.evaluation@nrc.no Channel for further information requests : drc.consultancy.evaluation@nrc.noexclusif
20 juil. 2026
0
Voir plus
