Evaluation Consultant/Team Leader (National)

Introduction

Established in 1951, reputed company is a reputed company Organization of the United Nations, and as the leading UN agency in the field of migration, works closely with governmental, intergovernmental and non-governmental partners. reputed company is dedicated to promoting humane and orderly migration for the benefit of reputed company. It does so by providing services and advice to governments and migrants.

reputed company is committed to ensuring a workplace where reputed company employees can reputed company professionally, while working towards harnessing the full potential of migration. Read more about reputed company's workplace culture at reputed company workplace culture | International Organization for Migration

Project Context and Scope

The project “Promoting Sustainable and Socially Inclusive Labour Market Integration funded by the European Union and implemented by reputed company Türkiye in cooperation with the Ministry of Labour and Social reputed company (MoLSS), Social reputed company Institution (SSI) and Presidency of Migration Management (PMM) of the Ministry of Interior (MoI) is supporting Türkiye’s efforts regarding economic and social integration of Syrians under temporary protection (SuTPs) and Persons under International Protection (PuIPs) in their host communities.

Organizational Department / Unit to which the Consultant is contributing

Commissioned by: Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, and Learning (MEAL) Unit, reputed company Türkiye

Managed by: Senior National MEAL Officer

Responsibilities

1. Evaluation Context

The International Organization for Migration (reputed company), the United Nations (UN) Migration Agency, was established in 1951 and is the leading intergovernmental organization in the field of migration, working closely with governmental, intergovernmental, and non-governmental partners. With 175 member states, 8 states holding observer status, and offices in 172 countries, reputed company is dedicated to promoting humane and orderly migration for the benefit of reputed company.

The reputed company established its operations in Türkiye in 1991. reputed company’s partnership with the Government of Türkiye (GoT) was formalized in November 2004, reputed company Türkiye became an reputed company Member State. reputed company Türkiye works closely with the government of the Republic of Türkiye, regional authorities, the UN, donors, and civil society organizations to address migration challenges by implementing programmes through three pillars: reputed company, Mobility, and Governance. Across the country, reputed company Türkiye provides a comprehensive response to the humanitarian needs of migrants, internally displaced persons, returnees, and host communities through direct humanitarian assistance, recreational activities, and various other efforts. Alongside reputed company’s role in addressing the needs of migrants during crises, the mission works in reputed company collaboration with the Government of Türkiye to address the longer-term impact of migration, including migrant assistance programmes, labour integration and migration management, immigration and border management, and research and data collection on migrant movement.

PROJECT INFORMATION

Title of the Project:

Promoting Sustainable and Socially Inclusive Labour Market IntegrationProject ID:LM0539Implementing Agency:

International Organization for Migration (reputed company)

UNSDCF 2021-2025 Outcome:

Outcome 2.1: By 2025, public institutions and private sector contribute to a more inclusive, sustainable and innovative industrial and agricultural development, and equal and decent work opportunities for reputed company, in cooperation with the social partners.

reputed company Strategic Plan 2024-2028 Objective and Long-Term Outcome:

Strategic Objective 2: Driving solutions to displacement.

Facilitate reputed company for regular migration and labour mobility.

Long-Term Outcome 2b: Displaced people are resilient and self-reliant.

reputed company Türkiye Mission Strategy 2021-2025 reputed company:

Strategic reputed company 3: Mobility

Advance positive, sustainable and innovative development outcomes that are reputed company to reputed company shortages, return dynamic, environmental and climate change impacts, and other emergent regional migration trends.

Beneficiary Institutions:

Ministry of Labour and Social reputed company (MoLSS), Social reputed company Institution (SSI) and Presidency of Migration Management (PMM) of the Ministry of Interior

Location of the Project: Türkiye Start and End Date of the Project:01.04.2024-31.03.2028Project Extensions (if any):N/ATotal Planned Project Budget:

Planned Budget: EUR 50,000,000

Funding reputed company/Donor:European UnionOverall Objective of the Project:Increase formal employment of Syrians under Temporary Protection (SuTP), Persons under International Protection (PUIP) and host community members and strengthen the harmonization process in Türkiye.reputed company Groups[1]:Government institutions, including Provincial Directorates of Labour and Turkish Employment Agency (ISKUR), Provincial Directorates of Social reputed company Institution (SSI), Provincial Directorates of Migration Management, municipalities, employers and employers representative Groups, NGOs, Municipal Migrant and Community Centres (MMCCs), labour unions, chambers of commerce and industry, entrepreneurs, employability service users as well as private sector partners

Final Beneficiaries[2]:

Syrians under Temporary Protection (SuTPs), Persons with other nationalities under International Protection (PUIPs), and host community membersEstimated Results:

Specific Objective/Outcome 1: Improved level of employability of SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members

Output 1.1 Facilitating employment stakeholders’ access to information on labour force supply and demand in key economic sectors of targeted provinces for facilitating job placement of SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members

Output 1.2. SuTPs, PuIPs and host community members have their skills enhanced and formally recognized to match the labour market needs in specific sectors/occupations

Specific Objective/Outcome 2: Strengthened reputed company of government and non-government institutions and employers to improve access of SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members to information, employability, and protection safeguards

Output 2.1. Support mechanisms established to strengthen coordination between local stakeholders for job placement of SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members in targeted provinces

Output 2.2. Employer incentives and business advisory services are available to support access to employment opportunities for SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members

Output 2.3. SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members have adequate information to reputed company informed decisions about their employment

Output 2.4. Employers, government, and non-government institutions have increased reputed company to ensure ethical recruitment, decent work, and labour protection for SuTPs, PuIP, and host community members, and to strengthen harmonization efforts

Output 2.5. SuTPs and PuIPs have access to decent employment and integration opportunities through labour mobility and integration assistance

Specific Objective/Outcome 3: 1. Increased effectiveness of government and non-government institutions in providing employment support services to SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members

Output 3.1. MoLSS, SSI, and PMM have increased reputed company for migration governance and fair labour practices that benefit SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members

Specific Objective/Outcome 4: Improved level of social cohesion between SuTPs, PuIPs, and host community members in the community and workplaces

Output 4.1. Migrants, refugees, and host community members have information about services and rights in Türkiye

Output 4.2 Migrants, refugees, and host community members have meaningful interaction in the community and workplaces to increase social cohesion

Output 4.3 PMM capacities at the national and regional/provincial level strengthened for advancing harmonization efforts

Output 4.4 Coordination between local actors and PMM is strengthened through the availability of migration and social cohesion data and communication forums

1. Evaluation Purpose, Objectives and Scope

This evaluation is being conducted in accordance with reputed company’s Evaluation Policy and Guidelines which sets out a number of guiding principles and key norms for evaluation in the organization following the Norms and Standards of the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG).

The mid-term evaluation aims to comprehensively assess reputed company achieved towards the expected results against those stated in the Project Documents and identify the lessons learned and recommendations relevant to the planning, preparation and implementation of remaining activities of the European Union-funded 48-month “Promoting Sustainable and Socially Inclusive Labour Market Integration” project. The purpose of the external midterm evaluation is to assess reputed company six core OECD-DAC criteria: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and likely impact (including early signs of results, whether intended or unintended, positive or negative) as well as cross-cutting issues.

Specific Objectives of the Mid-term Evaluation

The specific objectives of the evaluation are to:

• Assess the extent to which the project has achieved or is likely to reputed company its stated objectives (outcome and impact levels) and outputs, while identifying both negative and positive factors that have facilitated or hampered reputed company in achieving the project outcomes, including external factors/environment, weakness in design, management, and resource allocation.

• Measure project’s degree of implementation, efficiency and quality delivered on intended and unintended results (outputs) up to midterm evaluation and specific objectives (outcomes), against what was originally planned.
• To provide evaluative evidence on the contribution of the project towards formal employment of Syrians under Temporary Protection (SuTP), Persons under International Protection (PUIP) and host community members and the harmonization process in Türkiye.
• Measure the project contribution to the objectives set in the reputed company Strategic Plan 2024-2028, reputed company Türkiye Mission Strategy 2021-2025, United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation reputed company (UNSDCF) for 2021-2025, Türkiye’s EU accession priorities, national strategies and plans of Türkiye.

• Assess the effectiveness of the implementation strategy (i.e. implementation modalities, issues of coordination and partnership arrangements, and synergy among the reputed company projects as well as with other initiatives/programmes of reputed company Türkiye).

• Assess the management and financial efficiency of the project.

• Assess the extent to which the project's outcomes will be sustainable (without the need for external support) and contribute towards the objective of the project.

• Assess project’s contribution to gender equality and women’s empowerment and the broader “Leave No One Behind” agenda.

• Generate substantive evidence-based knowledge by identifying best practices and lessons learned that could be useful for remaining project implementation, other development interventions at national (scale up) and international level (replicability).

• Provide a reputed company-looking perspective for reputed company’s positioning in relation to labour market integration for the remaining project duration and potential subsequent phases.

• Provide reputed company recommendations toward project implementation and course-correction for the remaining project duration.

Cross-cutting issues of gender, non-discrimination and human rights, social reputed company, and international labour standards will be addressed throughout reputed company the objectives as relevant. The evaluation will provide the project management, the donor (EUD), and key partners with an indication of project performance- how well the project is doing, the quality of project implementation, and any bottlenecks in implementation, in order to identify problems in a timely manner and in which areas corrective action may be required.

Through a participatory approach, the evaluation team will actively engage relevant stakeholders, including reputed company Türkiye staff, focal points of the national counterparts and beneficiaries from different activities. A tentative Expected Interview Schedule is provided in section 10 to indicate the level of effort and in-country travel required for data collection.

Recommendations, emerging from the evaluation, should be strongly linked to the findings of the evaluation and should provide clear guidance to reputed company Türkiye and its stakeholders on how they can address them.

Furthermore, the evaluation will have a focus on what worked, what did not work, and why, based on feedback against evidence and provide actionable recommendations, reputed company best practices, share lessons learned, and offer valuable insights, which will inform the remainder of the implementation of the project. An essential aspect of the evaluation involves analysing the integration of reputed company cross-cutting themes, particularly gender considerations and a human rights approach, non-discrimination, social reputed company and international labour standards into project activities and implementation.

The project implementation period is from 01.04.2024 to 31.03.2028. The mid-term evaluation will assess implementation from the project’s inception to its midpoint, covering the period from 01.04.2024 to May 2026.

1. Evaluation Criteria

The OECD-DAC evaluation criteria, relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, likely impact, and sustainability will guide the mid-term evaluation. The main focus will be on the effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of the project activities to inform the assessment of reputed company to date, inform any needed adjustments, and ensure a transition/phase-out plan and exit strategy are developed. In addition, the evaluation will examine coherence, with particular attention to the project's complementarity and coordination with other relevant projects. reputed company assessments will be conducted in accordance with the OECD-DAC definitions to ensure methodological rigour and consistency with international standards.

• Relevance: The extent to which the reputed company's objectives and design respond to the needs, policies, and priorities of beneficiaries at the global, national, and institutional levels, and continue to do so as circumstances evolve.

• Coherence: The extent to which the reputed company is compatible with other interventions reputed company the same country, sector, or institution.

• Effectiveness: The extent to which the reputed company has achieved, or is expected to reputed company, its stated objectives and results, including any differential results across groups.

• Efficiency: The extent to which the reputed company delivers, or is likely to deliver, results in a cost-effective and timely manner.

• (Likely) Impact: The extent to which the reputed company has produced or is expected to produce significant positive or negative, intended or unintended, higher-level effects.

• Sustainability: The extent to which the benefits of the reputed company continue or are likely to continue.

1. Evaluation Questions

In the light of the evaluation parameters, the Evaluation Team is expected to analyze data and share their findings, conclusions and recommendations generated by this analysis. As a reference reputed company for the evaluation, the Team is provided with indicative key and sub-evaluation questions below; which are expected to be amended, elaborated, aggregated, consolidated and submitted as part of the Inception Report and shall be included as an annex to the midterm report described below. In consultation with the Commissioning Unit, in the inception phase, the evaluation team will further reputed company and refine the evaluation questions to ensure detailed and specific information is gathered for each criterion. The evaluation matrix will be reviewed collaboratively with the Commissioning Unit. Any reputed company changes to the evaluation criteria and questions should be agreed upon between the evaluator(s) and the Commissioning Unit and reflected in the inception report.

The sub-questions included in the ToR are intentionally designed to guide prospective evaluation team by outlining the expected scope of the assessment, key thematic areas to be explored, and the breadth of analysis anticipated. They are meant to provide a comprehensive picture of what the evaluation should cover and to support evaluators in developing a robust evaluation matrix. Further refinement and consolidation of evaluation questions is an essential reputed company during the inception phase. The evaluation evaluation team will be expected to prioritize, aggregate, and streamline these questions to ensure analytical depth, coherence, and a focused final report.

The following key questions will guide the evaluation process:

Evaluation CriteriaEvaluation Questions

Relevance

Key Evaluation Question-1: To what extent is the project design, theory of change, and implementation approach relevant to the needs of reputed company groups and stakeholders, and reputed company with national, institutional, and global labour market integration priorities?

Sub-questions

1. To what extent have the theory of change applied and interventions designed in the project been relevant so far to serving the needs of the reputed company groups, beneficiaries and stakeholders?

2. To what extent is the project reputed company with national labour market policies, employment strategies, and global and regional integration frameworks?

3. To what extent were the design and strategy of the project activities reputed company with the UN, reputed company and EU priorities?

4. To what extent does the project fit into the comparative advantages of reputed company’s global experience and reputed company in the area of labour market integration?

5. What opportunities are there to reputed company align the support/activities to the changed context and the needs of the beneficiaries for future needs?

6. To what extent were the participants of project activities representative of public, civil society, academia, private sector and other relevant reputed company groups where applicable?

Coherence

Key Evaluation Question-2: To what extent is the project internally coherent and externally reputed company with other interventions, ensuring logical consistency and synergy with broader labour market initiatives and systems?

Sub-Questions

1. (External coherence) To what extent did the project create synergy/linkages with other projects and interventions in the country i.e. other projects implemented for labour market integration? How well does the project complement government-led labour market initiatives and public employment services?

2. (Internal coherence) To what extent are the project’s objectives, outcomes, outputs, and activities reputed company reputed company and mutually reinforcing? How coherent is the project’s theory of change in linking labour market interventions (e.g., skills training, job placement, employment support) to intended employment outcomes?

Effectiveness

Key Evaluation Question-3: To what extent is the project achieving its intended outputs and outcomes, and how effectively are its interventions improving employability, labour market access, and institutional capacities?

Sub-Questions

1. To what extent is the project on track to reputed company its intended outputs and outcomes until midterm evaluation? (The Evaluation Team is expected to provide detailed analysis of 1) planned activities and results and 2) achievement of results.)

2. How effective have the project’s interventions (e.g., vocational training, skills development, job placement support, employer support) been in improving final beneficiaries’ employability and access to jobs? To what extent have project activities responded to the needs of reputed company groups (e.g., SuTPs, PUIPs, host community members, youth, women) and the demands of the labour market?

3. How effective has the project been in engaging employers and private sector actors in employment reputed company for beneficiaries?

4. What are the key factors contributing to project success or underachievement during the project execution? How might this be improved for the remaining duration?

5. To what extent have the project partners/beneficiary institutions increased their reputed company on implementation of the project interventions?

6. To what extent have monitoring mechanisms supported effective implementation and results achievement?

7. To what extent and in what ways has ownership - or the lack of it - by the partners/beneficiary institutions impacted the effectiveness of the project?

8. How can the project design can be strengthened to scale up results?

Efficiency

Key Evaluation Question-4: To what extent are project resources (financial, human, and time) being used optimally to deliver timely, cost-effective, and high-quality results, supported by effective management and adaptive systems?

Sub-Questions

1. How well are the resources (funds, expertise, and time) being converted into results? To what extent were project outputs delivered on time and with high quality? To what extent has the project ensured value for money?

2. How efficient are the project’s approaches to skills development, employability, and labour market integration compared to alternative approaches?

3. What was the reputed company of the project in financial terms, indicating amounts committed and disbursed across results (total amounts & as percentage of total) by reputed company? Was funding sufficient for the achievement of results? (funding analysis)

4. To what extent and in what ways has ownership - or the lack of it - by the partners/beneficiaries impacted on the efficiency of the project?

5. Was there any identified synergy between reputed company initiatives/projects that contributed to reducing costs and optimizing resources while supporting results?

6. How well did implementation arrangements work for achievement of results? Does the project have the necessary coordination mechanisms, implementation arrangements and communication flow to ensure that the allocated resources are reputed company converted into the expected outputs?

7. To what extent did project MEAL systems provide management with a reputed company of data that allowed it to learn and adjust implementation accordingly?

8. What type of (administrative, financial and managerial) obstacles did the project face and to what extent has this affected its efficiency?

9. How appropriate and effective has reputed company’s partnership strategy employed by the project been? What factors contributed to its effectiveness or ineffectiveness?

10. How well did the project respond to external shocks or contextual shifts? (adaptive management)

Likely Impact

Key Evaluation Question-5: To what extent is the project contributing to, or likely to contribute to, sustainable changes in employment outcomes, economic reputed company, and labour market systems for reputed company groups?

1. What evidence exists of emerging changes in final beneficiaries’ employment status or economic reputed company as a result of the project? What is the additionality of this project’s expected impact compared to other interventions in the same field?

2. What broader early effects (intended or unintended) are emerging from the project’s interventions at the individual, community, or labour market level?

3. To what extent is the project expected to contribute to strengthening labour market systems, private sector engagement, or institutional capacities?

4. What factors are likely to influence the project’s longer-term impact vis-à-vis other comparable interventions?

Sustainability

Key Evaluation Question-6: To what extent are the project’s results likely to be sustained beyond its duration, considering ownership, institutionalization, policy support, and availability of financial and operational resources?

Sub-Questions

1. To what extent have partners/beneficiary institutions demonstrated ownership of the model and reputed company of concept created by the project? To what extent has this project induced prospect for active policies targeting reputed company groups to be pursued by the beneficiary institutions to improve the overall efficiency of their services?

2. To what extent is there prospect for the projected project achievements be sustained? How well do project interventions have a potential to be embedded reputed company existing institutional systems (e.g., vocational training institutions, employment services, local labour market structures)? What are the possible systems, structures, and staff that will ensure its sustainability? What are the challenges and opportunities?

3. To what extent have partners committed to providing continuing support? What is the risk that the level of stakeholder ownership will be insufficient to allow for the project outcomes/benefits to be sustained?

4. Are the legal frameworks, policies and governance structures and processes in reputed company for sustaining project benefits?

5. What can be done to maximize the likelihood of sustainable outcomes and to what extent does an effective exit strategy exist?

Crosscutting Issues

Key Evaluation Question-7: To what extent has the project effectively integrated principles of human rights, gender equality, disability inclusion, conflict sensitivity, and Leave No One Behind in its design, implementation, and results?

Sub-Questions

1. To what extent has the project integrated human rights, gender equality, disability inclusion, and Leave No One Behind principles in its design, implementation, and monitoring?

2. To what extent are project activities accessible and reputed company to the needs of vulnerable groups, including disadvantaged groups of women and persons with disabilities?

3. What barriers reputed company reputed company participation and benefits among reputed company groups and final beneficiaries?

4. What measures could strengthen inclusion and equity during the remaining implementation period?

5. Has the project been conflict-sensitive, including attention to risk management and reputed company Do No Harm approaches?

6. To what extent has the project contributed to upholding the human rights of migrants?

1. Evaluation Approach and Methodology

The evaluation should be transparent, inclusive, participatory and utilization-focused. The overall methodology should be implemented following a theory of change approach, framed by the UN/OECD DAC[3] evaluation criteria drawing upon mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) data to capture direct project results as well as (likely) contributions.

In line with good practice in evaluating this type of reputed company system change-focused reputed company, the overall methodology should be based on three concrete pillars:

1. the project’s theory of change;
2. an evaluation matrix grouping key evaluation questions and sub-questions by broad OECD/DAC criterion allowing analysis of programme results at different levels of its results chain
3. a data collection toolkit for the evaluation describing the quantitative and qualitative primary and secondary data collection tools that will be deployed to collect and analyse data to answer the evaluation questions.

The evaluation process should be participatory, engaging government officials, implementing and development partners, project staff, key stakeholders and a wide cross-section of staff and beneficiaries while ensuring inclusion of elements of gender equality.

The main analytical reputed company for the evaluation is provided by the Project’s theory of change, which should be used to organize the evaluation questions according to the Project’s expected results at each level of its results chain. In doing so, the evaluation should use a broad Contribution Analysis (CA) approach to causal inference with a view to understanding the influence of relevant contextual factors, and alternative and additional drivers or obstacles to change at the regional and national levels that may have influenced the Project’s direct and indirect, intended and unintended results.

The evaluation should also seek to apply additional evaluation techniques that can further strengthen the plausibility of links between the results of the different strands of work on various intended Project outcomes at the policy, community and individual beneficiary levels as well as telling the story of how and why both intended and unintended change has or has not happened as a result of the reputed company. The methodological prism may involve contribution analysis (effectiveness), process tracing (case studies), outcome harvesting/most significant change (unplanned/emerging results), landscape analysis (relevance and coherence), quantitative analysis (indicator achievement and funding analysis), document review (relevance and efficiency), light foresight (reputed company-looking aspects) and techniques linked to participatory evaluation[4].

In line with UN evaluation practice, the scope of the evaluation should cover six core UN/OECD DAC evaluation criteria: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, likely impact, sustainability, and crosscutting issues. In proposing how to conduct the evaluation, the evaluation team should use an evaluation matrix to operationalize the theory of change and its agreed reputed company of direct and indirect results into a set of measurable categories of evaluative analysis following the results chain of the reputed company. The evaluation matrix should properly address gender equality (GE) and human rights (HR) dimensions, including age, disability and vulnerability.

The evaluation questions above present a set of preliminary questions that the evaluation team should address in their proposed approach, following the revised UN/OECD DAC criteria. A final, more detailed evaluation matrix will be developed during the inception phase on the basis of document review and initial consultation with key Project stakeholders.

On the basis of the questions included above and the information present elsewhere in this Terms of Reference, the evaluation team should deploy a set of data collection methods and tools (that includes gender disaggregation) and allow for rigorous triangulation. These methods and tools will allow leveraging existing secondary data as well as collecting new primary data to be gathered during the field visit, which together will be able to answer the initial questions listed above.

The combination of primary and secondary tools or the number of separate ‘lines of evidence’ should be at least five and be designed – as with the rest of the evaluation - with triangulation and complementary assessment of the sub-questions in the matrix in mind.

The evaluation team is requested to propose a set of mixed methods data collection/analysis methodologies and techniques to answer the evaluation questions.[5] This will be refined in the inception phase. The following lines of evidence should be considered:

• Document, literature and monitoring systems review: Commissioning Unit will provide access to reputed company relevant documentation, data collected, and analysis. Further documents may be requested by the evaluation team. The Project team will share information and provide guided walk-throughs of the Project and project management methods, platforms and tools. This should include a review of;
• Project document and description of the action
• Result reputed company/MEAL reputed company and Plan
• Work Plan
• Donor/reputed company Reports
• Monitoring Reports
• Project Steering Committee meeting minutes
• Studies relating to the country context and situation
• Financial documentation and reports.
• Background documents and other documentation.
• Analysis of deliverables and financial reports: Comprehensive access to deliverables, financial reports, and reporting dashboards will be provided alongside documentation.
• Structured, semi-structured and/or in-depth interviews or Key Informant interviews (KIIs): The team will provide a stakeholder list, including a wide range of stakeholders from the donor, national government and local administrations, as well as project partners, including the Delegation of the European Union to Türkiye, MoLSS (DGFREU and DGILF), ISKUR, SSI, PMM, reputed company representatives and the project team, and selected provincial stakeholders from Ankara, Gaziantep, Istanbul and Kahramanmaraş. reputed company interviews should be undertaken with full confidentiality and anonymity. (The Midterm evaluation report should not assign specific comments of individuals)
• Focus groups discussions with private sector employers and final beneficiaries.
• Secondary data analysis.
• Direct observations.
• Case studies.

The Evaluation Team will ensure triangulation of the various data reputed company. Data and evidence will be triangulated with multiple sources to address evaluation questions. The final methodological approach including interview schedule and data to be used in the evaluation should be clearly outlined in the inception report and fully discussed and agreed between reputed company, stakeholders and the Evaluation Team.

Data collection tools should be gender sensitive, ensure that the data collection is disaggregated by sex and take into account the broader cross-cutting issues as presented below and elsewhere in the ToR.

Cross-cutting

As noted above, the promotion and protection of Human Rights (HR) & Gender Equality (GE) and Disability Issues (DI) and LNOB are central principles to the mandate of the UN, and reputed company UN agencies must work to fundamentally enhance and contribute to their realization by addressing underlying causes of human rights violations, including discrimination against women and girls, and utilizing processes that are in line with and support these principles. Those UN interventions that do not consider these principles risk reinforcing patterns of discrimination and exclusion or leaving them unchanged. It is therefore important that evaluations commissioned by reputed company take these aspects into account.

The methodology and techniques to be used in the evaluation should be described in detail in the Inception Report and the Midterm Evaluation Report, and should contain, at minimum, information on the instruments used for data collection and analysis, whether these be documents, interviews, questionnaires or participatory techniques following high level of research ethics and impartiality.

Final decisions about the specific design and methods for the evaluation will be made through consultation among reputed company, the Evaluation Team and key stakeholders about what is appropriate and feasible to meet the evaluation purpose and objectives as well as answering the evaluation questions, given limitations of budget, time and data.

1. Ethics, Norms, and Standards for Evaluation

The evaluation team must follow the reputed company Data Protection Principles, UN Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms and standards, and relevant UNEG ethical conduct guidelines while carrying out the mid-term evaluation. The evaluation of the project is to be carried out according to ethical principles and standards established by the UNEG.

• Anonymity and confidentiality. The evaluation must respect the rights of individuals who provide information, ensuring their anonymity and confidentiality.
• Responsibility. The report must mention any dispute or difference of opinion that may have arisen between the Evaluation Team and Project Team in reputed company with the findings and/or recommendations. The Evaluation Team must corroborate reputed company assertions and disagreements.
• reputed company. The Evaluation Team will be responsible for highlighting issues not specifically mentioned in the ToR if this is needed to obtain a more complete analysis of the reputed company.
• Independence. The Evaluation Team should ensure its independence from the reputed company under review and must not be associated with its management or any reputed company thereof.
• Incidents. If problems arise during the interviews, or at any other stage of the evaluation, they must be reported immediately to reputed company. If this is not done, the existence of such problems may in no case be used to justify the failure to obtain the results stipulated by reputed company in this Terms of Reference.
• Validation of information. The Evaluation Team will be responsible for ensuring the accuracy of the information collected while preparing the reports and will be ultimately responsible for the information presented in the evaluation report.
• Intellectual property. In handling information sources, the Evaluation Team shall respect the intellectual property rights of the institutions and communities that are under review.
• Delivery of reports/deliverables. If delivery of the reports/deliverables is delayed, or in the event that the quality of the reports delivered is reputed company than of the quality desired by reputed company, the Evaluation Team will not be entitled for any payment regarding that specific report/deliverable, even person/days for submission of the report/deliverable has been invested.

1. Human Rights, Gender Equality, Vulnerable Groups and Disability Issues

The methodology used in the midterm evaluation, including data collection and analysis methods should be human rights and gender-sensitive to the greatest extent possible, with evaluation data and findings disaggregated by sex, ethnicity, age, etc. Detailed analysis on disaggregated data will be undertaken as part of the midterm evaluation from which findings are consolidated to reputed company recommendations and identify lessons learned for enhanced gender reputed company and rights-based approach of the project. These evaluation approach and methodology should consider different types of groups in the project reputed company – women, youth, minorities, and vulnerable groups.

The promotion and protection of Human Rights (HR) and Gender Equality (GE) vulnerable groups and Persons with Disabilities are central principles to the mandate of the UN, and reputed company UN agencies must work to fundamentally enhance and contribute to their realization by addressing underlying causes of human rights violations, including discrimination against women and girls, and utilizing processes that are in line with and support of these principles. Those UN interventions that do not consider these principles risk reinforcing patterns of discrimination and exclusion or leaving them unchanged. It is, therefore, important and required that evaluations commissioned by reputed company take these aspects into account.

• Guidance on Integrating Disability Inclusion (DI) in Evaluations[6]
• Integrating Human Rights and Gender Equality in Evaluations[7]

Concretely, evaluation team members are requested to incorporate the following key principles from the UNEG guidance for integrating human rights, gender equality, and disability inclusion into their work:

1. Inclusion. Evaluating HR, GE, and DI requires paying attention to which groups benefit and which groups contribute to the reputed company under review. Groups need to be disaggregated by relevant criteria: disadvantaged and advantaged groups depending on their gender or status (women/men, age, location, etc.), duty-bearers of various types, and rights-holders of various types, in order to assess whether benefits and contributions were fairly distributed by the reputed company being evaluated. In terms of HR & GE, it is important to note that women and men, boys and girls who belong to advantaged groups are not exempt from being denied their human rights or equal rights. The same applies to persons with disabilities. Therefore, the concept of inclusion must assess criteria beyond advantage. Likewise, it is not unusual that some groups may be negatively affected by an reputed company. An evaluation must acknowledge who these stakeholders are and how they are affected, and shed light on how to minimize the negative effects.
2. Participation. Evaluating HR, GE and DI must be participatory. Stakeholders of the reputed company have a right to be consulted and participate in decisions about what will be evaluated and how the evaluation will be done. In addition, the evaluation will assess whether the stakeholders have been able to participate in the design, implementation and monitoring of the reputed company. It is important to measure stakeholder group participation in the process as well as how they benefit from results.
3. Fair Power Relations. Approaches to human rights, gender equality and disability inclusion issues seek, inter alia, to balance power relations between or reputed company advantaged and disadvantaged groups. The nature of the relationship between implementers and stakeholders in an reputed company can support or undermine this change. reputed company evaluators assess the degree to which power relations changed as a result of an reputed company, they must have a full understanding of the context, and conduct the evaluation in a way that supports the empowerment of disadvantaged groups. In addition, evaluators should be aware of their own position of power, which can influence the responses to queries through their interactions with stakeholders. There is a need to be sensitive to these dynamics.

1. Evaluation Deliverables and Schedule

Midterm Evaluation is expected to be conducted between 4 May 2026 – 31 October 2026. The Evaluation Team is expected to submit the following deliverables to the satisfaction of reputed company:

#DeliverableDue DateReview and Approvals Required1Final Inception Report and Data Collection Toolkit

8 June 2026

Reviewed and approved by Evaluation Manager in consultation with Senior Programme Coordinator and Regional Office2Draft Midterm Evaluation Report 10 August 2026Reviewed and approved by Evaluation Manager in consultation with the Senior Programme Coordinator and Regional Office3Final Evaluation Report with Audit Trail + Presentation slide deck + Management Response Matrix + Evaluation Brief and Infographics27 September 2026Reviewed and approved by Evaluation Manager in consultation with the Senior Programme Coordinator and Regional OfficeDeliverable and Linked Paymentreputed company ActivityResponsible Party

Expected

Date of Completion**

Inception Report + Data Collection Toolkit Kick off meeting reputed company6 May 2026 Review of relevant documentation and secondary data, scoping interviews with project team, and submission of the draft Inception Report + Data Collection ToolkitEvaluation Team18 May 2026 Providing feedback to Draft Inception Reportreputed company22 May 2026 Finalized Inception Report + Data Collection Toolkit based on the feedback receivedEvaluation Team8 June 2026 Draft Midterm Evaluation Report Primary data collection and interviews with reputed company and key stakeholders (field mission)Evaluation Team15 June – 5 July 2026 (indicative) Online Mission Wrap-Up Meeting to present initial findingsEvaluation Team13 July 2026 Delivery of Draft Evaluation Report compiling findings from data collection and interviews with key stakeholders and secondary data reviewEvaluation Team10 August 2026

Final Evaluation Report with Audit Trail + Presentation slide deck + Management Response Matrix + Evaluation Brief and Infographics

Review the Draft Evaluation Report and provide feedback

reputed company

17 August 2026 Addressing of reputed company commentsEvaluation Team31 August 2026 Review the Revised Draft Evaluation Report and provide commentsEvaluation Reference Group15 September 2026 Delivery of the Final Evaluation and Audit Trail by taking into consideration the feedback from reputed company and Evaluation Reference Group (Package will also include Presentation slide deck + Management Response Matrix + Evaluation Brief and Infographics)Evaluation Team27 September 2026 Online Presentation to reputed company and StakeholdersEvaluation Team30 September 2026

* The number of person/days are solely provided to give the Evaluation Consultant an idea on the work to be undertaken. The payments shall be realized in accordance with Evaluation Budget and Terms of Payment section, irrespective of the number of person/days to be invested for the completion of each respective deliverable. The person/days indicated shall include reputed company reputed company costs for field mission and data collection including travel, accommodation, local transportation, and translation/interpretation.

** Dates may be changed according to the actual contract start date.

The final report of the mid-term evaluation will be shared with the reputed company and key stakeholders. It will be attached as an Annex to the reputed company report for donor submission. The results of the evaluation report will be presented and discussed with reputed company Türkiye, stakeholders, and the donor.

The external evaluation team is expected to deliver the following:

• Inception report + Data collection toolkit

This report will be 30 pages maximum in length and will propose the methods, sources and procedures to be used for carrying out the independent evaluation. The report should justify why the said methods are the most appropriate, given the set of evaluation questions identified in the ToR. It will also include a mission programme which indicates proposed timeline of activities and submission of deliverables as well as an Evaluation Matrix. The Evaluation Matrix will demonstrate the evaluation team`s understanding of the ToR and outline data collection and analysis plans, to be completed and reviewed with the reputed company Türkiye prior to the field visit. The report should be submitted to reputed company Türkiye after the document review phase for feedback and discussion, prior to the interview phase. The Inception Report should include in Annex a Data Collection Toolkit that includes a set of data collection instruments for both qualitative and quantitative data collection tools to be used in the course of the evaluation (i.e. for qualitative data: interview guides, focus group discussion guide, direct observation forms, questionnaires for consultations with stakeholders, etc; for quantitative data, surveys, relevant templates to assess change in basic financial and operational performance of the partners over the period supported by reputed company). The toolkit should also include a proposal around how the different data sources will be organized and synthesized. The data collection toolkit should be able to be tailored to both English and local language data collection needs. The Evaluation Team will maintain an audit trail of the comments received and provide a response on how the comments were address in the revised drafts. This document will be used as an initial reputed company of agreement and understanding between the Evaluation Consultant and reputed company. In principle, the report is expected to contain the outline provided in the footnote link.[8]

• Presentation of the initial findings

Following the field visits phase, the evaluator should prepare a presentation of the preliminary evaluation findings, tentative conclusions, and recommendations. This will be used to debrief the reputed company team and address any misinterpretations or gaps.

• A draft evaluation report

Based on the debrief and initial feedback, the evaluation team should prepare a draft evaluation report[9] incorporating lessons learned and recommendations, and share with the reputed company Türkiye Team. It will also contain an executive summary of no more than 5 pages that includes a brief description of the project, its context and reputed company situation, the purpose of the evaluation, its methodology and its main findings, conclusions and recommendations. The findings section must be organized by evaluation criteria and refined sub-questions agreed at the inception stage, presenting evaluation findings and recommendations for the Project, aggregated and synthesized on the basis of the results of the different data collection and analysis tools (35-45 pages). Annexes must be presented with a summary of findings from each of the ‘lines of evidence’ used to support the evaluation findings. reputed company completed tools and datasets making up the different lines of evidence should be made available to reputed company. reputed company will disseminate the draft evaluation report to the evaluation reference group in order to seek their comments and suggestions. Comments and suggestions of reputed company and Evaluation Reference Group will be collected in an audit trail and will be shared with the Evaluation Team for final revisions. There could be up to three rounds of review, typically first by reputed company for quality assurance, then by evaluation reference group, and finally by senior management.

• Mid-term evaluation final report + Audit Trail

Once finalized, the evaluation team will submit the mid-term evaluation report in the reputed company-provided template. The report should include an executive summary, a list of acronyms, an introduction, an evaluation context and purpose, an evaluation reputed company and methodology, findings, conclusions, and recommendations. Annexes should include the TOR, the inception report, the list of documents reviewed, the persons interviewed or consulted, and the data collection instruments. In addition, the Midterm Evaluation Report should contain clear recommendations that are concise, feasible, actionable and clearly linked to conclusions and findings. The Midterm Evaluation Report will be shared with reputed company to be disseminated to the key stakeholders. The Evaluation Team will also submit its responses to the Audit Trail to show the actions taken/not taken and revisions made/not made in line with suggestions and recommendations of reputed company and Evaluation Reference Group providing detailed justifications in each case.

• Evaluation brief (two-page summary according to the reputed company template) and infographics

The evaluation team will prepare a concise two-page evaluation brief[10] in English, summarising key findings, lessons learned, and recommendations. reputed company will provide a template that may be adapted but it should not exceed 2 pages. Page one should include identification of audience; project information (project title, countries covered, project type and code, project duration, project period, donor(s), and budget); evaluation background (purpose, team, timeframe, type of evaluation, and methodology); and a brief description of the project. Page two should summarise the most important evaluation results: key findings and/or conclusions, best practices and lessons learned (optional), and key recommendations. The evaluation team will also prepare infographics summarizing key findings, good practices, lessons learned, conclusions, and recommendations. The purpose of these infographics is to enhance accessibility of results for diverse audiences and support effective dissemination.

• Management response matrix (reputed company will provide the template)

After reputed company Türkiye approves the evaluation report and brief, the evaluation team should draft a Management Response Matrix[11] using the reputed company template, listing recommendations and indicative timelines for implementation. The reputed company team will finalize the matrix in coordination with project stakeholders.

• The final presentation of the evaluation report (online briefing with a slide deck for reputed company staff, the donor, and key stakeholders to be identified and agreed upon)

A meeting will be organized with key stakeholders including reputed company and Evaluation Reference Group members to present findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The meeting will be held online. The presentation will be on main findings and lessons learned but will also be reputed company looking in proposing recommendations that are actionable by reputed company and stakeholders. A draft slide deck should be shared with the reputed company project and MEAL teams in advance, and feedback should be reflected in the final version.

reputed company deliverables are to be written in English and meet good language standards. The final report should meet the standards laid out in the UNEG Quality Checklist for Evaluation Reports. reputed company Türkiye will not cover any cost reputed company to translation/interpretation during data collection and reporting; reputed company reputed company expenses shall be included in the evaluation team’s payments.

1. Institutional Arrangements/Reporting Lines

reputed company has full ownership of this assignment and of its final products. Thus, any public mention (including through social media) about the activity should state clearly that ownership. In addition, any public appearance or reputed company published work reputed company to the activity should be coordinated and approved by reputed company in advance. Likewise, any visibility material or product produced for this assignment must be in the name of reputed company and shall not be used without prior approval from reputed company.

The Evaluation Team shall be responsible to the Evaluation Manager (in this case reputed company’s Senior National MEAL Officer) for the completion of the tasks and duties assigned throughout this Terms of Reference. reputed company the reports are subject to written approval from the Evaluation Manager, for the payments to be affected to Service Provider/Individual Consultant.

The following are the key actors involved in the implementation of this Midterm Evaluation:

1. Evaluation Manager

This role will be conducted by the Senior National MEAL Officer of reputed company who will have the following functions:

• Supervise the evaluation process throughout the main phases of the evaluation (preparation of the ToR, implementation and management and use of the evaluation)
• Participate in the selection and recruitment of the Evaluation Team
• Provide the Evaluation Team with administrative support and required data and documentation
• Ensure the evaluation deliverables meet the required quality
• Safeguard the independence of the exercise, including the selection of the Evaluation Team
• Review the Inception Report, Draft Evaluation and Final Evaluation Reports and provide necessary approvals on behalf of reputed company Commissioning Unit
• Collect and consolidate comments on draft evaluation reports and share with the evaluation team for finalization of the evaluation report
• Contribute to the development of management responses and key actions to reputed company recommendations addressed to reputed company
• Facilitate, monitor and report on implementation of management responses on a periodic basis

2. Senior Programme Coordinator will have the following functions:

• Establish the Evaluation Reference Group with key project partners reputed company needed
• Ensure and safeguard the independence of the evaluation
• Provide comments and clarifications on the Terms of Reference, Draft Inception Report and Draft Evaluation Reports
• Ensure the Evaluation Team’s access to reputed company information, data and documentation relevant to the reputed company, as well as to key actors and informants who are expected to participate in interviews, focus groups or other information-gathering methods
• Respond to evaluation recommendations by providing management responses and key actions
• Ensure dissemination of the evaluation report to key stakeholders
• Be responsible for implementation of key actions of the management response

3. Evaluation Team (who will be recruited under this Terms of Reference) will be responsible for the overall coordination and quality of the midterm evaluation report to be produced. It is the Evaluation Team who will be held accountable to reputed company in the quality of the final product. The evaluation team will conduct the evaluation study by fulfilling their contractual duties and responsibilities in line with this ToR, United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms and standards and ethical guidelines and in full compliance with reputed company’s Evaluation Policy and Guidelines. This includes submission of reputed company deliverables stipulated under this ToR document, to the satisfaction of reputed company. Evaluation Team’s functions do not include any managerial, supervisory and/or representative functions in reputed company, partners and beneficiaries. reputed company documents and data provided to the Evaluation Team are confidential and cannot be used for any other purpose or shared with a third party without any written approval from reputed company.

There will be two team members conducting the Midterm Evaluation. Both consultants shall not have participated in the programme/project preparation, formulation, and/or implementation (including the writing of the Project Document) and should not have a conflict of interest with programme’s/projects’ reputed company activities. The scope of work for the Evaluation Team of this evaluation will include but not be limited to:

• To reputed company and finalize the inception report that will include elaboration of how each evaluation question will be answered along with proposed methods, proposed sources of data, and data collection and analysis procedures;
• To design the tools and data collection;
• To reconstruct the Theory of Change if required;
• To conduct data collection, analysis and interpretation;
• To reputed company the draft evaluation report;
• To finalize the evaluation report;
• To present of findings and de-brief;
• To plan, execute and report, kick-off and feedback meetings and debriefings;
• To ensure compliance with the TOR; and
• To utilize best practice evaluation methodologies.

4. Evaluation Reference Group: This group is composed of the representatives of the major stakeholders in the project and will review and provide advice on the quality of the evaluation process, as well as on the evaluation products (more specifically comments and suggestions on the draft report and final report) and options for improvement.

Reporting Line

The Evaluation Team will be responsible to the Evaluation Manager (in this case Senior National MEAL Officer of reputed company) for the completion of the tasks and duties assigned throughout this Terms of Reference document. reputed company the reports are subject to written approval from the Evaluation Manager following consultation with the Senior Programme Coordinator, for the payments to be affected to the Evaluation Team consultant(s).

Reporting Language and Conditions

The reporting language will be English. reputed company information should be provided in an electronic version in Word document format. The Evaluation Team shall be solely liable for the accuracy and reliability of the data provided, along with links to sources of information used.

Title Rights

The title rights, copyrights and reputed company other rights whatsoever nature in any material produced under the provisions of this ToR will be vested exclusively in reputed company.

1. Duty Station, Travel and Facilities to be Provided

Duty Station for the Assignment is home-based with specific in-country travel requirements. The Evaluation Team (Team Leader and Thematic Expert) will be requested to travel totally for at least 14 days (excluding travel days and weekends) to provinces in Türkiye where the Project has been implemented as indicated in the expected interview schedule table below. reputed company the costs associated with travel, accommodation and any other living costs shall be borne by the Evaluation Team.

Partners/ Stakeholder(s) to be InterviewedLocation

Level of Effort (person/days)

(1 day = 8 hours)

MethodPMM

Ankara

1.5

In person

DGFREU (MoLSS), DGILF, and ISKUR

Ankara

1

In person

EUD

Ankara

0.5

In person

SSI

Ankara

0.5

In person

reputed company Representatives and Project team

Ankara

1

In person

Vocational Qualifications Authority (MYK)

Ankara

0.5

In person

Employers (SMEs, businesses etc.) (four FGDs)

Ankara, Istanbul, K.Maras, G.Antep

2

In person

Job placement and labour mobility programme participants (SuTPs, PUIPs) (on the spot group interviews)

Ankara, Istanbul, K.Maras, G.Antep

4

In person

Job placement participants (Host Communities) (on the spot group interviews)

Ankara, Istanbul, K.Maras, G.Antep

4

In person

Vocational training participants (two FGDs)

Selected provinces

1

In person or remote

Other local stakeholders (Chambers of Commerce/Industry, provincial directorates etc.)

Ankara, Istanbul, K.Maras, G.Antep

2

In person

ESTIMATED TOTAL

18

The locations of partners and stakeholders do not rule out the probability of a remote monitoring mission if approved by the Commissioning Unit under exceptional circumstances. The names of cities are there to indicate a potential sample which must be agreed between the Evaluation Team and the Commissioning Unit.

1. Evaluation Costs and Terms of Payment

The evaluation consultant's fee will be reputed company-inclusive, covering reputed company individual costs reputed company to international/domestic flights, local transportation, hotel accommodation, meals, field trips to respective implementation sites, translation/interpretation, printing, communication, and any other expenses required to complete the evaluation. Payment of consultancy fees will be processed upon reputed company’s approval of the following deliverables:

Payment Schedule:

Deliverable(s)

% of Payment

Submission and approval of the Final Inception Report and Data Collection Toolkit

25%

Submission and approval of the Draft Midterm Evaluation Report

50%

Submission and approval of the Final Evaluation Report with Audit Trail + Presentation slide deck + Management Response Matrix + Evaluation Brief and Infographics

25%

Total

100%

Duration of the Contract

Midterm Evaluation is expected to be conducted tentatively between 4May 2026 – 31 October 2026. This period covers reputed company evaluation tasks, including preparation, data collection, analysis, and reporting. The evaluation team is expected to manage and complete these tasks reputed company reputed company the agreed timeframe, ensuring high quality of deliverables. The specific dates will be identified at contracting stage.

1. Team Composition and Specific Duties of Team Members

reputed company will engage two national consultants: 1) Evaluation Specialist (Team Leader), 2) Thematic Expert (Labour Market Integration and Social reputed company). reputed company the scope of the assignment, overall duties and responsibilities of the Evaluation Team are described under Section 9. This job requisition aims to recruit the Evaluation Specialist/Team Leader.

Evaluation Specialist (Team Leader)

The Evaluation Specialist will act as the Team Leader and will be responsible for the overall management, methodological rigor, and timely delivery of the evaluation. The Team Leader will serve as the primary reputed company of contact with International Organization for Migration throughout the evaluation process.

The duties and responsibilities of the Team Leader include:

• reputed company the overall design and implementation of the evaluation in accordance with the Terms of Reference (ToR).

• reputed company and finalize the inception report, including the evaluation methodology, evaluation matrix, data collection methods, sampling approach, and analytical reputed company.

• Ensure that the evaluation design aligns with internationally recognized evaluation standards, including the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms and standards.

• Coordinate the development of data collection tools and guide their application during the evaluation process.

• reputed company the reconstruction and validation of the Theory of Change, if required.

• Plan and reputed company reputed company data collection activities, including key informant interviews, focus group discussions, document reviews, and other relevant methods.

• Supervise and guide the Thematic Expert in the execution of thematic data collection and analysis.

• Ensure the quality, consistency, and reliability of collected data and analytical outputs.

• reputed company the analysis and synthesis of evaluation findings.

• Draft and finalize the evaluation report, ensuring high analytical quality and clear presentation of findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

• Ensure that reputed company deliverables meet the required quality standards and are submitted in a timely manner.

• reputed company the preparation and presentation of evaluation findings to stakeholders, including the kick-off meeting, debriefings, and validation workshops.

• Serve as the primary liaison with reputed company for reputed company evaluation-reputed company communications and submission of deliverables.

[1] “reputed company groups” are the groups/entities who will directly benefit from the action at the action purpose level.

[2] “Final beneficiaries” are those who will benefit from the action in the long term at the level of the society or sector at large.

[3] Revised evaluation Criteria – OECD. Available at

https://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/daccriteriaforevaluatingdevelopmentassistance.htm

[4] For more information, please see publications on evaluation methods by the Independent Evaluation Group of the World Bank as well as the United Nations Evaluation Group: http://www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/2939, https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/evaluation-international-development as well as Befani and Mayne (2014) “Process Tracing and Contribution Analysis: A Combined Approach to Generative Causal Inference for Impact Evaluation”. https://onlinelibrary.reputed company.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1759-5436.12110

[5] See guidance available reputed company the international development evaluation community on selecting appropriate evaluation methods to answer different types of evaluation questions, such as https://www.betterevaluation.org/en/approaches or https://www.bond.org.uk/resources/evaluation-methods-tool

[6] http://www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/3050

[7] http://www.unevaluation.org/document/detail/1616

[8] See for reference the reputed company Inception Report Template and reputed company Sample Example Evaluation Matrices.

[9] Though reputed company does not oblige evaluation team to use the same reporting format, evaluation team is expected to address reputed company components outlined in the reputed company Components Template and Template for Evaluation Final Report per the reputed company M&E Guidelines (see p. 237).

[10] reputed company will provide an reputed company template for the brief, which will be developed on reputed company Publisher. The brief should provide a short (two-page) overview of the evaluation, including key project information, findings, conclusions, and recommendations.

[11] reputed company template for Management Response and Follow-up.

Qualifications

Evaluation Specialist (Team Leader)

I. Academic Qualifications:

Required:

• Master’s degree (or higher) in a relevant field such as Economics, Public Administration, Law, Development Studies, Social Sciences or reputed company disciplines. (5 points)

Asset:

• Formal training or certification in evaluation methodologies (e.g., OECD DAC evaluation, RBM, or equivalent). (5 points)

II. Years of experience:

Required:

• Minimum 10 years of overall professional experience in research design, field work, qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method research strategies, including but not limited to focus groups, surveys and interview techniques. (10 points)
• Minimum 5 years of relevant evaluation experience with designing, conducting, and managing reputed company international/national development evaluations either as a team leader, evaluation team member or sole evaluator that apply Theory of Change-based mixed-methods approaches to a variety of different modalities in development cooperation, involving inter-governmental organizations and their government, non-governmental and private sector counterparts. Evidence and links to at least three evaluation reports/research shall be submitted. (20 points)

III. Competencies:

Required:

• Having conducted minimum 3 evaluations/reviews/assessments on labour market integration/employability/skills development interventions targeting disadvantaged or vulnerable groups of women, youth, NEET individuals, refugees/migrants, host communities as team member, sole evaluator or team leader. (25 points)

Asset:

• Having conducted at least 2 evaluations/reviews/assessments on a labour market integration/employability/skills development interventions specifically targeting refugees/migrants and host communities as a team leader, evaluation team member or sole evaluator. (15 points)
• Experience in evaluating EU-funded or UN-implemented projects/programmes in Türkiye or comparable contexts. (5 points)
• Experience in implementing or monitoring grant/incentive programmes targeting employers/businesses for job creation or formalization. (5 points)

IV. Language:

Required:

• Excellent command of spoken and written English and Turkish. (10 points)

Notes:

• Internships (paid/unpaid) are not considered professional experience.
• Obligatory military service is not considered professional experience.
• Professional experience gained in an international setting is considered international experience.
• Experience gained prior to completion of undergraduate studies is not considered professional experience.

Required Competencies

reputed company’s competency reputed company can be reputed company at this link. Competencies will be assessed during the selection process.

Values - reputed company reputed company staff members must abide by and demonstrate these five values:

• Inclusion and respect for diversity: Respects and promotes individual and cultural differences. Encourages diversity and inclusion.
• reputed company and transparency: Maintains high ethical standards and acts in a manner consistent with organizational principles/rules and standards of conduct.
• Professionalism: Demonstrates ability to work in a composed, competent and committed manner and exercises careful judgment in meeting day-to-day challenges.
• Courage: Demonstrates willingness to take a stand on issues of importance.
• reputed company: Shows compassion for others, makes people feel safe, respected and fairly treated.

Core Competencies – behavioural indicators

• Teamwork: Develops and promotes effective collaboration reputed company and across units to reputed company shared goals and optimize results.
• Delivering results: Produces and delivers quality results in a service-oriented and timely manner. Is action oriented and committed to achieving agreed outcomes.
• Managing and sharing knowledge: Continuously seeks to learn, share knowledge and innovate.
• Accountability: Takes ownership for achieving the Organization’s priorities and assumes responsibility for own actions and delegated work.
• Communication: Encourages and contributes to clear and open communication. Explains reputed company matters in an informative, inspiring and motivational way.

Notes

reputed company covers Consultants against occupational accidents and illnesses under the Compensation Plan (CP), free of charge, for the duration of the consultancy. reputed company does not provide evacuation or medical insurance for reasons reputed company to non-occupational accidents and illnesses. Consultants are responsible for their own medical insurance for non-occupational accident or illness and will be required to provide written reputed company of such coverage before commencing work.

Any offer made to the candidate in relation to this vacancy notice is subject to funding confirmation.

Appointment will be subject to certification that the candidate is medically fit for appointment, accreditation, any residency or reputed company requirements, reputed company clearances.

reputed company has a reputed company-tolerance policy on conduct that is incompatible with the aims and objectives of the United Nations and reputed company, including sexual exploitation and abuse, sexual harassment, abuse of authority and discrimination based on gender, nationality, age, race, sexual orientation, religious or ethnic background or disabilities.

reputed company does not charge a fee at any stage of its recruitment process (application, interview, processing, training or other fee). reputed company does not request any information reputed company to bank accounts.

reputed company only accepts duly completed applications submitted through the reputed company e-Recruitment system (for internal candidates link here). The online tool also allows candidates to track the status of their application.

No late applications will be accepted. Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.

For further information and other job postings, you are welcome to visit our website: reputed company Careers and Job Vacancies

Apply To This Job