• Home
  • Jobs in Kenya
Deal of the day



  1. Background

The Adaptation Consortium (ADA) through Christian Aid received funding from Department for International Development (DFID) to implement a 26- month project titled: Lake Region Economic Block Climate Change Governance. The project is being implemented in 6 counties of the Lake Region Economic Block (LREB) namely; Kisii, Kisumu, Kakamega, Vihiga, Nandi and Bomet through two local implementing partners; Lifeskills Promoters (LISP) and Anglican Development Services Western (ADSW).

The project seeks to create conditions to enable commence of County Climate Change Fund (CCCF) mechanism in the targeted LREB Counties. To achieve this the project facilitated technical support not only to the six targeted county governments but also other counties in the bloc and LREB secretariat to adapt the CCCF mechanism to their contexts within the wider CCCF scale-out strategy across Kenya. The CCCF mechanism allows for establishment of financial and institutional mechanism for managing climate change and variability. It supports the mainstreaming of climate change in County processes, prepares counties to access climate finance from different sources, and strengthens public participation in the management and use of those funds. In addition, it promotes use of participatory resilience planning tools including Climate Information Services plans to inform decision making among policy makers, different livelihoods and social groups in managing risks associated with climate change and variability. Moreover, it incorporates a component of monitoring and evaluation to track climate actions.

  1. Broad Project Objective

The objective of the project is to support the institutionalization of the County Climate Change Fund mechanism with following expected outputs;

  1. Output 1: CCCF mechanism for the Lake Region Economic Bloc Counties established and functional

  2. Output 2: Lake region economic block counties facilitated to legislate framework policy on CCCF

  3. Output 3: CCCF monitoring and evaluation system, learning framework and knowledge management strengthened

  4. Output 4: Climate information, resilience planning strengthened

  5. Purpose of end line evaluation

Christian Aid is interested in hiring a consultant to undertake an end term evaluation of the ‘Lake Region Economic Block Climate Change Governance’ Project. The primary purpose of the valuation is to assess the performance of the project and capture project achievements, challenges and best practises to inform future similar programming on CCCF scale out. It will also review the recommendations of the project Political Economy Analysis (PEA), Ecosystem Based Adaptation (EbA) study, Capacity Building needs assessment and regular quarterly reports, and assess the extent to which these were implemented. The evaluation will also ensure accountability towards DFID as a donor and the beneficiaries of the project. On the other hand, it offers a learning aspect for all actors in climate change. The evaluation will also identify key lessons learned, challenges and the flexibility of the programme to adapt and respond to the changes and sustainability of CCCF scale out in Kenya.

The end of project evaluation will have three objectives

Objective 1: Evaluate to what extent the Lake Region Economic Bloc Climate Change Governance Project has delivered on intended objectives and outputs.

Objective 2: Identify and assess key lessons learned, challenges and draw recommendation for future programming on CCCF scale out

Objective 3: Assess whether the one programme approach for scaling out CCCF by Adaptation Consortium under a single oversight and coordination framework in collaboration with key government agencies ( Kenya School of Government, Climate Change Directorate, Kenya Meteorological Department, Council of Governors, Lake Region Bloc) responsible for climate change, implementing local partners have added value to the interventions with positive effect on linking national and local climate change governance through CCCF scale out. What has contributed to this added value?

The results will be measured based upon the following key programme documents:

  1. The project Log frame

  2. Project narrative and financial reports

  3. Annual work plans

  4. Agreement documents with DFID

  5. Contextual and sectoral reports

  6. Project success stories, case studies, presentations, snapshots, and other communication material such as videos

  7. Capacity Needs and Sensitization forums delivered

  8. Monitoring and Evaluation plan

Scope of Work

The end line evaluation should assess the following:

  1. Effectiveness

  2. To what extent have the planned objectives in the log frame of the project, been reached, per indicator?

  3. To what extent have the project activities contributed to the overall goal? Was the project effective in strengthening mainstreaming of climate change into the county functions and enhancing capacity of the policy makers in climate change policy, planning and budgeting?

  4. What were the major factors influencing the achievement of the objectives of the project?

  5. What opportunities for collaboration have been, utilized and how have these contributed to increased effectiveness? or otherwise?

  6. What factors may have hindered or facilitated realization or non-realization of project objectives?

  7. Were the strategies employed adequate and/or appropriate to realize the project objectives or should other project strategies have been preferred rather than the one implemented?

  8. To what extend was the capacity needs assessment implemented? What are the results of the sensitization and capacity building forums?

  9. Have proper accountability and risk management framework(s) been in place to minimize risks on program implementation?

  10. Are there any recommendations as to how to improve future performance for similar projects in terms of effectiveness in achieving its objectives?

  11. Efficiency

  12. To what extent were the results achieved in a timely manner? What factors may have hindered or facilitated implementation of activities as per the work plan?

  13. Did the processes of achieving results justify the costs incurred and represent value for money?

  14. What measures were taken to ensure that resources were efficiently used?

  15. Were risks appropriately identified by the project? How appropriate were the strategies developed to deal with identified risks?

  16. What choices were, made in terms of collaboration and non-collaboration during program design? Why were, these choices made?

  17. Were, alterations made to the program design in terms of collaboration during the implementation phase based on the reality on the ground?

  18. What were the outcomes of these choices for efficient program implementation?

  19. Impact and Relevance

  20. To what extent has the realization of the project objectives had/ will have an impact on the specific problem the project aimed to address?

  21. To what extent did the project strategy produce unintended outcomes (positive and negative)?

  22. How do the stakeholders/actors perceive the relevance of the project? Are there any stories of change?

  23. To what extent was project able to adapt and provide appropriate response to context changes and emerging local needs, and the priorities of actors/stakeholders?

  24. Was the project relevant to needs at local, country, regional and global levels?

  25. Sustainability

  26. Will the changes caused by this programme continue beyond the life of the project?

  27. What, mechanisms have, Christian Aid and partners put in place to sustain the key project Outputs and Outcomes?

  28. What are the risks facing sustainability of project Outputs and Outcomes?

  29. Are there any recommendations on actions to improve prospects for sustainability of project outcomes?

  30. Learning

  31. Which of the interventions, approaches, and modalities/ strategies have been most effective according to stakeholders/actors?

  32. Is there any substantial evidence on how project learning, were generated and applied to improve the delivery or effectiveness or efficiency of activities?

  33. Who benefited from shared learning experiences (e.g. quarterly, joint field learning visits, Kenya School of Government workshops on Climate Change Policy, Planning and Budgeting), mainly the implementing partner organizations and county government policy makers or also the local sector and community members?

  34. How did the different actors learn from these experiences?

5. Methodology

This will essentially be a performance evaluation. The evaluation team is expected to propose an evaluation methodology and analysis tools that guarantees the highest degree of rigor to ensure credible findings and recommendations. A mixed-method approach is highly recommended with the appropriate key data gathering techniques.

Participation of stakeholders in the evaluation should be maintained, reflecting opinions, expectations and vision about the contribution of the project towards the achievement of its objectives.

6. Deliverables

  1. An inception report detailing the key scope of the work; a work plan; evaluation design; proposed methods; sources of data; data collection plan and tools.

  2. Preliminary draft Evaluation Report for discussion

  3. Final Evaluation Report

  4. An evaluation briefing note

  5. Weekly reports during field work to update on progress

  6. Debriefing/Presentation

  7. A brief summary of final report (the popular version)

  8. All primary source data, both quantitative and qualitative, generated during the study course

7. Indicative timescales

The data collection phase in the field is to be confirmed between the consultant and Adaptation Consortium, but ideally would start in fourth week of September 2020, with the final report deadline to Christian Aid by the third week of October 2020.




Working Days Indication

Inception Phase

Draft Inception Report

Tools development phase

Deliverable 1: final inception report including budget, methodology and research tools, approved by Project Team

30 % of total budget


Data collection phase

Desk review, interviews in and field visit to Lake Region Economic Bloc


Data analyses phase

Presentation of initial findings in Nairobi and draft of the report


Evaluation report phase

Draft Evaluation Report, for comments by project team


Deliverable 2: Learning session in Nairobi

30 % of total budget


Deliverable 3: Final Evaluation Report

40 % of total budget




25 Days

7. Qualifications of individuals

  1. Master’s degree in related field (Preferably in Social Sciences, Development studies, Environment and Natural Resources, Climate Change)

  2. At least 5 years’ professional experience in conducting evaluations

  3. The individual should have demonstrated ability to assess development projects in order to succinctly and clearly distil critical issues and draw forward looking conclusions

  4. No prior involvement in the design, planning or implementation of any of the activities under review.

  5. Experience in using mix methods of evaluations including outcome harvesting techniques

8. Duration

The consultancy will take approximately 25 working days.

9. Reporting

The consultant will report to the project team under the coordination of the project lead based at Christian Aid.

How to apply

10. Application Procedure

Forward your expression of interest to [email protected] by 22nd September 2020 detailing the following:

  1. Technical proposal detailing methodology for undertaking the evaluation taking cognisance of the methodology as proposed in the TOR

  2. Proof of experience in undertaking similar assignments

  3. Financial proposal detailing the proposed costs for undertaking the evaluations

  4. Curriculum vitae of team lead and members

Sharing is Caring!
Deal of the day