1. Background
The National Capital Region (NCR) of the Philippines is traversed by the West Valley Fault System that is expected to move anytime soon. According to studies this could generate a 7.2 Magnitude earthquake with an Intensity VII ground shake, leading to a destructive scenario in the National Capital Region. The Philippine Red Cross (PRC) would play a major role in the national humanitarian response to this anticipated disaster as an auxiliary to the government and one of the country’s leading humanitarian organizations.
PRC partnered with German Red Cross (GRC) to implement the project entitled, “Strengthening of Response apacities of The Philippine Red Cross Towards Metro Manila Earthquakes,” (2019-2021) as part of the 2019-2022 lobal funding support of German Federal Foreign Office (FFO).
The project aims to enhance PRC and its partners’ preparedness and response capacities to face the urgent needs of the urban population in case of a major earthquake in Metro Manila. One of the PRC’s key interventions will be the deployment of an Emergency Medical Unit (EMU), to increase the capacity of health facilities in response to patient surge and a mass casualty situation.
Although knowledge and practice to deploy the EMU exists in the institution, there is a need to develop hazard and context-specific plans, procedures and protocols tailored at local and national level for an urban earthquake response in Metro Manila. Improved National Society preparedness through trainings and with material is also required. Finally, institutional and logistical effectiveness of the EMU deployment must be tested through a major drill. At the global level, this project supports the larger “Humanitarian assistance in the urban context” GRC and the FFO aim to dvance specific priority areas of German humanitarian assistance. Specifically, “Humanitarian assistance in the urban context is strengthened as thematic priority within German and international humanitarian assistance, new or furtherdeveloped approaches are integrated and tested”.
2. Project design
Following Federal Foreign Office Global Project I (GPI) logframe
Impact: The German Red Cross and its sister societies provide high-quality and context-specific humanitarian aid for people particularly affected by crises and disasters.
Outcome 1: Improvement of joint response capacity of the Philippine Red Cross and its partners by enhancement of the contingency planning quality and by joint functional exercising.
Outcome 2: GRC and its sister National Societies provide high quality and context specific humanitarian assistance to people particularly affected by crisis and disaster.
Output 1: Systematic analysis and operational planning are the recognized basis of response and preparedness decision-making and approaches of the Host National Society (HNS)
Output 2: The HNS is enabled to actively find and to manage its roles and responsibilities within the humanitarian system on various levels in an integrated and coordinated
Output 3: The HNS has the operational capacities in terms of mechanisms, procedures and protocols to effectively respond to crisis and disaster situations within their mandate
Output 4: The HNS can rely on a strong mandate for its operations and is embedded in relevant policies, strategies and standards of the government
Output 5: The HNS is provided with the necessary means to activate plans and mechanisms in a timely and effective manner
DRR- Output 3: The communities have functioning community-based committees and procedures for effective humanitarian Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation action in coordination with all relevant stakeholders
DRR- Output 5: The HNS at targeted local level has the knowledge and procedures in place (plans, protocols, training curricula) to respond humanitarian crisis
HEALTH –Output 4: Target communities actively participate in the process of designing and implementing health activities
3. Mid-Term Project review purpose and users
The project “Strengthening of Response Capacities of the PRC Towards Metro Manila Earthquakes” has been implemented since August 2019 at the national, as well as local level, specifically with Quezon City Chapter. The purpose of this Mid-Term review is to support the PRC and the GRC to assess the overall implementation of the project and to emphasize achievements and challenges, with the aim of establishing recommendations and drawing key lessons learned to improve the quality and impact of the upcoming project activities. More specifically, this review will cover the project to date to systematically capture knowledge and experience gathered from the implementation and for future planning; especially in terms of:
- Local ownership and institutionalization of strengthened earthquake responsecapacities for the urban context of a major Earthquake in Metro Manila Northern Quadrant (According to MMDA contingency plan, in case of a major earthquake, Metro Manila is divided in 4 quadrants with dedicated evacuation / command center)
- Effectiveness, efficiency impact of adopted methodologies and tools
- Project management and coordination
The Mid-Term review findings are expected to be fed into the remainder of the PRC Earthquake Project, with a specific emphasis on better preparing the 2021 Emergency Field Hospital simulation exercise, as well as future urban programme planning at the country, regional and global level.
The key users of this study are: the PRC NHQ (with a specific emphasis on the main implementers: Health Services (HS) and Disasters Management Services (DMS), PRC National Capital Region Chapters (with emphasis on the main implementer, Quezon City Chapter) the GRC Manila office and HQ.
4. Task description
This review will collate and consolidate knowledge and experience gained during the implementation and should recommend clear and practical steps forward in terms of strengthening local ownership and institutionalization. Further, the effectiveness and efficiency and impact of new urban methodologies applied to the urban context shall be assessed.
It is expected that the consultant(s) refines questions mentioned below together with the project team during the inception period. Those questions, and potentially additional ones if agreed by the consultant and the project team, will be included in the inception report.
4.1 Current intervention review
a) Effectiveness
- To what extent are the project outcomes and outputs likely to be achieved?
- What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the outcomes, also beyond the expected factors due to COVID-19 crisis?
b) Efficiency
- How was the quality of the management of the project, including planning, monitoring and reporting, resource and personnel management, cooperation, coordination and communication?
- What was the level of coordination between key stakeholders and how efficient was it during the first phase of the project? How efficient was the coordination within the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement, particularly between GRC and PRC?
- Did the intervention link to PRC / in-country cross sectoral thematic work within the urban
area: DRR, anticipation and health interventions?area: DRR, anticipation and health interventions?
c) Impact
- How has the project currently impacted the PRC Health Services and PRC DMS, as well as Quezon City Chapter level of preparedness for earthquake and additional hazards?
- Are there other co-benefits of this project that might not have been foreseen at proposal stage, i.e. were capacities strengthened in additional ways, advocating for new approaches, new fields of work, additional stakeholders involved etc.?
- Did the intervention advocate and further advance for taking account the specific features of the urban context in PRC strategies, processes, procedures?
4.2. Strengthened humanitarian assistance in the urban context
Alignment with the “Urban” thematic objectives and focus
- Did the intervention develop new or improved methods for working in urban areas?
- Did the intervention test, evaluate and document new or improved methods to strengthen humanitarian assistance in urban contexts, if so, how?
- Did the intervention establish, coordinate and maintain an urban stakeholder networkincluding relevant events on national and global level?
4.3. Synthesis of Learnings and Recommendations
- How can the intervention overcome barriers influencing the potential non-achievement of the outcomes? How can it further optimize factors influencing achievements, including how to improve the quality of the project management?
- How might coordination be enhanced between PRC and GRC at the central HQ and chapter level?
- Are there any co-benefits of this project that might not have been foreseen at proposal stage that should be promoted for the rest of the intervention? Are there any risks that could limit the project?
- Are there new ways of working, tools, methodologies, products and approaches developed under the scope of this project that can be further promoted within PRC or globally?
- How can those new ways of working developed under the scope of this project be promoted locally and globally?
5. Project review design and methodology
The review will be conducted by an independent consultant / consulting company working incountry in close coordination with the remotely-based IFRC Regional Urban Advisor (RUA). They will be supported in their work by the Earthquake Project Team.
The consultant(s) will have access to relevant project documents including the project proposal, project management documents, activity report, project reports etc. These documents are confidential but can be cited and used in the review process. Information which could do harm to any stakeholder if published should be treated in a confidential way. The decision about the publication is the right of GRC.
The review will make also make use of primary sources of information. A team meeting will be prepared by the consultant(s) and the IFRC RUA and facilitated by the consultant(s) to interview the Earthquake Project Team members. The consultant will also interview stakeholders identified together by the consultant(s), the IFRC RUA and the project team. The review shall follow the IFRC standards for evaluation
The IFRC Evaluation Standards are:
- Utility: Evaluations must be useful and used.
- Feasibility: Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost effective manner.
- Ethics & Legality: Evaluations must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the evaluation.
- Impartiality & Independence; Evaluations should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.
- Transparency: Evaluation activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
- Accuracy: Evaluations should be technical accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that its worth or merit can be determined.
- Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the evaluation process when feasible and appropriate.
- Collaboration: Collaboration between key operating partners in the evaluation process improves the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.
The consultant(s) will focus on reviewing the “current intervention” (4.1) while the “Strengthened humanitarian assistance in the urban context” (4.2) will be reviewed in close coordination between the consultant(s) and the IFRC Regional Urban Advisor. They will regularly collaborate and exchange information specially to prepare stakeholders meetings that should be as much as possible in person. Both will provide inputs on the “Synthesis of Learnings and Recommendations” (4.3): The consultant(s) will focus on the way forward for the intervention and within PRC, while the IFRC Regional Urban Advisor will focus on thematic and programmatic regional and global guidance.
6. Project review process including timetable and reporting
6.1 Timetable:
Date # Task # Responsible person # In country consultant(s) (ICC)**
Nov. 23 # Introductory virtual meeting with the consultant # ICC + RUA + Earthquake Project Team # ½
Nov 23 - Nov 27# Analysis of relevant documents (remote desk research): proposal, log frame, reports, tools, memos, etc. Delivery of inception report # ICC (lead) + RUA (support) # 4 ½
Nov 30 # Review with in depth exchange with the EQPT (Team meeting) # ICC (support preparation with RUA) # 1
Dec 1 –Dec 3 # Bilateral meetings with stakeholders (interviews) # ICC (support preparation with RUA) # 3
Dec 4 – Dec 8 # Data analysis and preliminary Review Report drafting # ICC + RUA # 3
Dec 9 # Presentation of the Preliminary Review Report (during project Steering Committee) # ICC + RUA # ½
Dec 10 -Dec 11 # Final report preparation # ICC # 2
Dec 16 # Report reception and final discussion # ICC + RUA + EQPT # ½
----Total 15 days
6.2 Deliverables
The in-country consultant(s) is/are solely responsible for the deliverables
6.2.1. Inception report
The in-country consultant(s) are expected to submit an inception report within the first five days after signing the contract. The inception report offers the opportunity for the consultant(s) and GRC to clarify the contract and the ToR. The inception report should not be longer than 3 pages and should clearly articulate the approach, methodology and tools to be used for review.
Any changes to the ToR or changes to the conditions of the project must be jointly agreed upon by both parties.
6.2.2. Preliminary report
The preliminary report is based on the review of secondary information and analysis of the primary information collected through meetings, interviews and consultations. All findings, conclusions and recommendations including the review methodology should be described and presented by the pair of reviewers in a short preliminary review report. The results of the preliminary report will first be discussed with GRC and the partner/s and will be presented by the reviewers during the project Steering Committee.
6.2.3. Final report
The final Mid-Term Review Report should be delivered within 1 week of the presentation. All documents should be delivered in English. The consultant(s) will provide their recommendations and should incorporate the inputs obtained from the validation process in the final report, including additional recommendations from the Steering Committee participants. The final review report should, as a minimum, include the following elements and should not exceed 15 pages (excluding annexes):
- Key data of the review (from the inception report)
- Executive summary – a tightly drafted, to-the-point, free standing document (about 2 pages max) with an overview of the methodology, key questions, and key findings, conclusions, lessons learnt and recommendations.
- Introduction – with objective of the review, key questions, short description of the project to be reviewed and relevant framework conditions.
- Review design and methodology
- Key findings with regards to the questions pointed out in the ToR and those raised by the consultant(s)
- Conclusions based on evidence and analysis
- Recommendations as expected in the ToR, which are relevant and feasible and targeted to the respective audience
- Lessons learnt
- Annexes (ToR, list of stakeholder interviews, documentation, literature, etc.)
Key findings, conclusions and recommendations should be presented in a clear and transparent way, preferably in a table to demonstrate the logic.
The report can be extended by the consultant(s) by additional findings and recommendations
if necessary.
7. Review quality and ethical standards
The in-country consultant(s) should take all reasonable steps to ensure that the review is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of people and the communities of which they are members, and to ensure that the review is technically accurate, reliable, and legitimate, conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and
contributes to organisational learning and accountability. Therefore, the pair of reviewers should adhere to the evaluation standards of the IFRC as mentioned above (in footnote). The final report will be evaluated by GRC based on a checklist of criteria. The in-country consultant/s will receive feedback from GRC before the final payment of the contract is approved.
8. Application of review findings
The following organisations will receive the final report: GRC, PRC, IFRC Country Office, and other interested stakeholders.
PRC and GRC can publish and make this report available through online and/or offline means as and when deemed necessary.
The accepted recommendations will be used by GRC and PRC or the further planning and implementation of urban earthquake preparedness as well as for their organizational learning.
9. Minimum qualifications and Application Procedure
Only in-country consultants will be considered The consultant(s) profile should demonstrate the following qualifications
Education
- Graduate of Bachelor’s Degree or equivalent in Health Sciences, Disaster Risk Reduction, Urban planning, Development Studies, Nursing, Social Sciences, International Relations, Political Science or related field;
Experience
- A minimum of 5 years professional work experience in MEAL, Organizational/Change Management, or Disaster Management related work;
- Experience dealing with donor agencies, government structures, private sector and NGOs.
Language requirements:
- Excellent written and verbal English language skill.
Other skills
- Good understanding of Project Management, Urban contexts, Disaster Management, Public Health;
- Knowledge and skills in the use of Microsoft Office;
- Be able to work with a wide variety of colleagues;
- Ability to foster trust, and facilitate constructive, open feedback and discussion.
- Ability to work under high pressure;
- Ability to meet deadlines on time;
- Creative, Innovative, flexible.
The application should include:
- Technical offer including a brief description of the method and timeline planned by the consultant(s) (1 to 2 page(s))
Financial offer (Daily professional fee / total for 15 working days)
Others
CVs of the consultant(s)
Names, addresses, telephone numbers of three individuals or organizations that will act as professional referees
Full name, telephone number, e-mail address, physical address and contact person of the consultancy
Example(s) of similar reports delivered
How to apply:
Interested consultants/firms should submit their application in English until November, 13th,
2020 to:
In-country support and coordination of review- in Philippines
Contact: Arnaud Raulin (Urban DRR Delegate)
Email: arnaud.raulin@germanredcross.de