Consultancy for final joint independent evaluation of JLMP Action and JLMP Lead projects

Project Context and Description: 

Project Description 

The AU-ILO-IOM-ECA Joint Programme on Labour Migration Governance for Development and Integration in Africa (also known as the Joint Labour Migration Programme (JLMP)) is a long-term joint undertaking among the four organizations in coordination with other relevant partners operating in Africa, development cooperation actors, social partners, the private sector, and civil society representatives. It is the instrument dedicated to the implementation of the 5^th Key Priority Area of the Declaration and Plan of Action on Employment, Poverty Eradication and Inclusive Development, which was adopted by the Assembly of Heads of States and Governments (AU/Assembly/AU/20(XXIV)/Annex 3, January 2015) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Its strategy focuses on intra-African labour migration and supports achievements of the Agenda 2063 First and Second Ten Year Implementation Plans of the African Union (AU) and of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the UN. In addition, the JLMP is a critical instrument of implementing the Migration Policy Framework for Africa (MPFA) and Plan of Action (2018-2030) adopted by the AU Executive Council on 25-26 January 2018 in Addis Ababa.

The JLMP is currently being supported by two development partners, Swiss Agency for Development Cooperation (SDC) and Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida), through two complementary but separate projects (i.e., JLMP Action and JLMP Lead) being implemented under the joint partnership of AUC, ILO and IOM. .

The overall objective, outcomes, outputs, and activities of the two JLMP Projects are derived from the JLMP Strategic Framework (2020-2030).

Specifically, the two JLMP Projects focus on four specific objectives namely,

• Outcome 1: Strengthened effective governance and regulation of labour migration and mobility for women and men migrant workers in Africa;
• Outcome 2: Women and men migrant workers in both the formal and informal sectors enjoy safe and secure working environments, access to social protection and mutual recognition of skills and educational levels;
• Outcome 3: Increased utilization of labour migration disaggregated data and statistics by MSs and RECs for evidenced based decision-making, policy planning, formulation and application; and,
• Outcome 4: Strengthened governance and accountability of the JLMP.

In 2021, the JLMP Project “Catalytic Actions of the AU-ILO-IOM-ECA Joint Programme on Labour Migration Governance for Development and Integration in Africa (JLMP Action)” was launched with the support of the SDC. JLMP Action aims to strengthen the effective governance and regulation of labour migration and mobility for enhanced sustainable development for inclusive economic growth and regional integration of the African Continent. It built on and complemented the Sida-funded “Priority Implementation Actions of the AU-ILO-IOM-ECA Joint Programme on Labour Migration Governance for Development and Integration in Africa (JLMP Priority)”, which was implemented from July 2018  to March 2022.

JLMP Action targets the following groups: (a) 5 African Union Member States (MSs) namely, Cameroun, C ô te d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Malawi and Morocco (b) 2 Regional Economic Communities (RECs) Secretariats namely, Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) (c) Social partner organizations, including African Regional Organization of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC-Africa), Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU) and Business Africa, and regional/national workers and employers’ organizations and  (d) Labour Migration Advisory Committee (LMAC) – renamed African Labour and Employment Committee (ALEC). The final beneficiaries of the project are African migrant workers and members of their families.

In 2022, the “Labour, Employment and Migration Actions of the AU-ILO-IOM-ECA Joint Programme on Labour Migration Governance for Development and Integration in Africa (JLMP Lead) project was launched with the support o Sida. JLMP Lead contributes to strengthening  labour migration governance frameworks of the AUC, targeted RECs and MSs towards contributing to the sustainable development and integration of the African continent.

JLMP Lead has been flexible, and demand driven in its approach. It has been supporting different MSs and RECs, including East African Community (EAC), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), and Southern Africa Development Community (SADC); as well as Social Partner organizations, namely African Regional Organization of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC-Africa), Organization of African Trade Union Unity (OATUU), Business Africa, the International Organization of Employers (IOE) and regional/national workers and employers’ organizations;  and the private sector.

Both projects contribute to the achievement of the four JLMP outcomes as outlined in the JLMP Strategic Framework. The projects have supported MSs and RECs in the development of labour migration related policy and legal frameworks, capacity building, advisory services, advocacy, and technical assistance, establishment of information system for the curation of disaggregated and comprehensive data on labour migration that inform evidence-based and gender-responsive policies and programmes design, and decision making. The projects also facilitated cooperation, coordination and experience sharing among RECs towards improved labour migration governance.

In terms of directional modalities of the programme, IOM is the administrative and convening agent of JLMP Lead, in line with the United Nation Sustainable Development Group (UNSDG) Guidelines while for the JLMP Action, the AUC serves as the convening agent, proving coordination and programmatic leadership, while the budget is disbursed to the various implementing agencies separately.  However, coherence and coordination between both projects is enhanced through the established governance structures including through the project support unit (PSU) based at the AUC. GIZ AU manages the SDC’s funds for AUC for JLMP Action and also contributes financially to the AUC’s broader labour migration initiatives.

Evaluation Purpose and Objectives

This evaluation is undertaken for the purpose of accountability, learning, and building knowledge, based on, but not limited to, the assessment of project achievements against the set indicators and targets. The evaluation will look especially at the immediate results and impact of programme. It should be conducted in the context of criteria and approaches for international development assistance as established by the OECD/DAC Evaluation Quality Standard; and the UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluation in the UN System.

The projects underwent an independent mid-term evaluation in 2024 and will undertake their final joint independent evaluation. Both evaluations are managed by a committee of four independent evaluation managers on behalf of AU, GIZ AU, ILO, and IOM and conducted by independent evaluators.

The findings and recommendations, as well as lessons learnt from the evaluation, will be used by the MSs, RECs, the AU- African Labour and Employment Council (ALEC), development partners (i.e., Sida, SDC, and others),  the AU, GIZ AU, IOM and ILO  to inform the development and implementation  of future projects, and further contribute to the JLMP objective of improving labour migration governance to achieve safe, orderly, and regular migration in Africa.

The conclusions, lessons learnt, good practices, and recommendations should include assessing the extent to which the results and outcomes can be used to develop follow-up actions building on the results of the current projects. This should include, to the extent possible, the identification of related interventions and other external factors that may contribute to follow-up initiatives.  Recommendations should also include ways to deal with identified challenges in the future if they have not been overcome during the project implementation period.

The evaluation will cover the projects’ entire implementation period and geographic coverage of MSs, RECs, AUC, social partners and the private sector.   The mid-term evaluation will be source of complementary information to the final evaluation.

The specific objectives of the evaluation are:

1. Assess the relevance and coherence of the projects design, implementation strategy, and results achieved in relation to the AU, RECs, MSs, IOM, ILO, and global development frameworks, policies, and priority needs.
2. Assess the extent to which the projects have achieved their stated objectives at the output, outcome and impact levels, identifying the supporting and constraining factors.
3. Analyse the implementation strategies of the projects regarding their effectiveness in achieving the projects output, outcomes and impacts, including unexpected results and supporting and constraining factors.
4. Assess the efficiency of the projects’ implementation.
5. Assess the extent to which the projects results will be sustainable, beyond donor funding
6. Assess gender-responsiveness of the projects.
7. Identify lessons learned and potential good practices.

Provide recommendations to project stakeholders to promote sustainability and support further development of future projects contributing to broader JLMP envisioned results and outcomes.

This final evaluation will focus on the entire implementation period of both the JLMP Action and JLMP Lead projects (01 June 2021 to 31 June 2025), assessing all the results and contributions of the projects to improved labour migration governance within the AU, RECs and the AU MSs.

This ToR, together with the JLMP Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for the JLMP 2020-2030[1] , IOM[2], and ILO[3] Evaluation Policies and Guidance notes define the overall scope of this evaluation. Recommendations, good practices, and lessons learned emerging from the evaluation should be strongly linked to the findings and conclusions of the evaluation and should provide clear guidance to stakeholders on how they can address them in the implementation of the JLMP Strategic Framework (2020-2030).

Evaluation criteria 

The evaluation will use six main OECD-DAC criteria of relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability. Moreover, cross-cutting issues (rights-based approach, gender and non-discrimination (related to relevant vulnerable groups), social dialogue and tripartism, and international labour standards) shall be assessed throughout the different evaluation criteria as relevant.

All findings are expected to be analysed and reported using gender lenses as relevant and to the extent possible.

Specifically, the final evaluation will cover the following evaluation criteria:

1. Relevance
2. Coherence
3. Effectiveness
4. Efficiency
5. Impact
6. Sustainability

Evaluation questions

The evaluation questions will guide the overall evaluation process, particularly data collection  and analysis as well as formulating evaluation,  conclusions, recommendations, and identifying lessons learnt and good practices. The evaluators can refine the evaluation questions in agreement with the Evaluation Management Committee (EMC) and reflect all changes in the inception report.

1.        Relevance:

• Have the projects addressed the needs of their target beneficiaries and constituents? Were the interventions demand-driven?
• Have gender-specific needs been addressed during the projects’ design and implementation? To what extent have the projects responded to both women and men beneficiaries’ needs, including in the output and outcome results and indicators? How have the JLMP gender analysis been incorporated in programme implementation?
• Does the project team have relevant gender expertise and how has the programme’s gender expert accelerated the achievement of the gender-related objectives of the programme?
• Do the interventions’ expected outcomes and outputs remain valid and pertinent either as originally planned or as subsequently modified?
• How does the interventions logic align with the objectives of the programme?
• Was the planning and design process for the projects participatory and non-discriminatory?
• Was the implementation approach valid and realistic in comparison with set objectives?
• Have the projects provided for adequate tripartite involvement and consultations in project planning, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation? How visible have the projects been in acknowledging their contribution to improved labour migration governance in Africa and the contribution of migrant workers to Africa’s developme

2.         Coherence:

• How did the project interventions align and support the implementation of (i) the 5th Key Priority Area of the Declaration and Plan of Action on Employment, Poverty Eradication, and Inclusive Development, which was adopted by the Assembly of Heads of States and Governments (AU/Assembly/AU/20(XXIV)/Annex 3, January 2015); (ii) the Migration Policy Framework for Africa (MPFA) and Plan of Action (2018-2030); and (iii) the Strategic Framework and Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (2020-2030) for the AU-ILO-IOM-ECA Joint Programme on Labour Migration Governance for Development and Integration (JLMP) outcomes, with special focus on labour migration governance and regional integration?
• How did the interventions align and contribute to the priorities, and needs of the MSs, RECS, AU, ILO, IOM, social partners, and other stakeholders in migration and labour migration governance including their policies frameworks and the SDGs?
• How have the projects promoted coherence with, complemented, and aligned with other priorities/projects/programmes being implemented by the AUC and RECs as well as programmes implemented by ILO and IOM? Specifically, how were the two projects, JLMP Action and JLMP Lead coherent?
• Do synergies/complementarities exist with other interventions carried out by ILO, IOM, SDC and SIDA considering their national, regional, and/or global strategies, frameworks, and projects/programmes? What is the impact of these synergies?
• To what extent have both projects added value/avoided duplication in their implementation?
• Were project interventions, including capacity development and knowledge products, designed to maximize AUC, IOM, and ILO’s comparative advantage in the field of labour migration governance? Were any lessons learned from previous projects by AUC, IOM, and ILO or policy interventions considered in the design and implementation of the project.

3.         Effectiveness 

• To what extent have the projects achieved their objectives?
• Has this been done through the planned outputs or have new outputs been included? Why and how effective have these been?
• What, if any, unintended results of the projects have been identified or perceived? What mitigating strategy has been put in place to address negative results.
• Have any adverse effects on gender equality been observed? Have women and men benefitted differently from the projects’ activities and results?
• How did the projects establish and maintain relationships and cooperation with relevant stakeholders (e.g., AUC, JLMP partners, REC Secretariats, the LMAC, and development partners) to achieve the project results more effectively?
• Which have been the main contributing and challenging factors towards the projects’ success in attaining their objectives?
• Which is/are the projects thematic area(s) of more and least success? What factors have contributed and why?
• How has the M&E processes and tools facilitated proactive monitoring, tracking of results and learning?
• How has the findings of the mid-term evaluation informed programme implementation? What aspects of the current programme should be carried forward in the next phase?

4.       Efficiency:

• How efficiently have resources (human resources, time, expertise, funds, etc.) been allocated and used to provide the necessary support to achieve broader project objectives?
• To what extent were the disbursements and project expenditures in line with expected budgetary plans?
• To what extent were the projects able to build on other AUC, ILO, and IOM initiatives/projects and other actors (e.g., AU and RECs) and create synergies? How did this affect the efficiency in the use of resources?
• Were specific resources allocated to achieve gender-related objectives?
• To what extent were the backstopping, guidance, and support on technical, programmatic, administrative, and financial services from relevant AUC, IOM, and ILO units (i.e., headquarters, Country Offices and Regional Offices) effective?.
• To what extent were the projects’ management and governance structures effective in facilitating the attainment of the expected results. Specifically assess the leadership role of the African Union Commission in the programme and how it can be enhanced.
• How did the projects establish and maintain cooperation with SDC, SIDA and other donors?

5.            Impact:

• To what extent is there evidence of positive changes on targeted beneficiaries due to projects intervention in areas such as policy development and capacity building of relevant stakeholders?
• Were any unexpected, positive or negative, impacts of the projects observed? What measures were taken to mitigate the effects of the unexpected negative impacts?
• To what extent have the projects helped to ensure respect and protection of relevant human rights of men and women migrant workers?

6.         Sustainability: 

• Did the projects design include a strategy for sustainability?
• Are structures, resources, and processes in place to ensure that project gains are continued after external support ceases? Have the projects developed and integrated an exit strategy in their work? To what extent have target groups, and possibly other relevant interest groups and stakeholders, been involved in discussions about sustainability?
• Do the partners benefiting from the projects have adequate capacities (i.e., technical, financial, managerial) for ensuring that the benefits are retained in the long run, and are they committed to doing so? Do the target groups have any plans to continue making use of the  projects’ outputs and deliverables?
• How can the projects stakeholders strengthen project achievements after the end of the projects? To what extent have the AUC, MSs, RECs and other stakeholders-built ownership of the projects’ outcomes?

Evaluation Approach and Modalities

Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation is expected to apply a mixed-methods approach, using both quantitative and qualitative data to address the evaluation questions and triangulating data sources and methods to increase the validity and rigor of the evaluation findings and recommendations. The evaluation should also be participatory, engaging, as much as feasible, with the key stakeholders of the projects at all stages of the evaluation process. The bidding consultants are encouraged to propose innovative approaches and methods to allow the evaluation to rigorously assess the interventions’ results and impacts across implementation countries, to derive holistic and integrated lessons learned on the support to enhanced labor migration governance, as well as to formulate strategic and actionable recommendations to guide future interventions on the thematic area. In addition, to the extent possible, the data collection, analysis, and presentation should be responsive to and include issues relating to diversity and non-discrimination, including gender, disability, and migrants.

Recommendations, emerging from the evaluation, should be strongly linked to the findings and conclusions of the evaluation and should provide clear guidance to all stakeholders on how they can address them, indicating in each one to whom is directed, Priority, Resources required, and timeframe (long, medium, or short).

The evaluation should use, but be not restricted to, the following methods:

• Desk Review: Of the projects’ documentation and literature, including the projects’ documents, progress reports, monitoring reports, financial reports, relevant associated research and studies, and any other documentation related to the interventions. All documents will be made available by the Project Team, in coordination with the Evaluation Management Committee.
• Interviews with the Main Stakeholders: Remote or in-person interviews will be conducted with the main stakeholders of the projects, including the project Partners/Beneficiaries (MSs that benefitted from JLMP Action or/and Lead, RECs (i.e., COMESA, EAC, ECCAS, ECOWAS, IGAD, SADC Secretariat officials)) and related divisions and Units that were involved in project implementation.
• AUC, AU organs, and divisions (HHS, DEA, STATAFRIC, etc.), LMAC/ ALEC, Project Steering Committee and Project Technical Committee, Intermediate beneficiaries of the project – select government officials and social partners, REC employers’ and workers’ organizations and beneficiary institutions e.g., ATUMNET, Business Africa, OATTU, ITUC-Africa, Development partners (SIDA, SDC and GIZ), project staff and technical units (AUC, ILO, IOM) and consultants on the project, where necessary. An indicative list of persons to be interviewed will be prepared by the Project Team in consultation with the Evaluation Management Committee.
• Quantitative Data: Collected by the projects’ management throughout the implementation of the interventions. The evaluation team should analyze any available such data at the country-level and across countries and triangulate the conclusions with the findings from qualitative sources to strengthen the evaluation validity and credibility.

Evaluation Process

The evaluation will be conducted and managed as per the following process:

1. Inception Phase: An inception meeting will be organized by the valuation Management Committee after the completion of the hiring process of the evaluation team and the finalization of the contract. The meeting will gather the project managers, the evaluation team and the evaluation managers, and will be the opportunity to refine the evaluation scope and questions, to discuss its methodological aspects, as well as to clarify its logistical details. At the end of this phase and following the desk review and preliminary interviews with relevant projects’ staff, the evaluation team will submit an inception report detailing the evaluation plan, including its methodological approach, its data collection tools and its timelines. The evaluation Inception Report is to be approved by the Evaluation Management Committee.
2. Data Collection Phase: During which the evaluation will deploy the agreed evaluation approach, including the data collection activities with the identified evaluation respondents. Most interviews and other forms of consultation with the stakeholders will be conducted remotely; however, the evaluator will specify in the methodological approach if field visits in any of the covered countries are justified and necessary.
3. Stakeholders’ Consultation Workshop: To be virtually organized by projects’ management and facilitated by the principal evaluator, gathering the main stakeholders. During the consultation workshop, the evaluator will present the preliminary findings of the evaluation, explore the evaluation stakeholders’ interpretation of the early findings and recommendations, and gather further information with the stakeholders to narrow any data or knowledge gaps related to the evaluation questions.
4. Reporting Phase: After the completion of the evaluation data collection and interpretation, the evaluator will submit a draft evaluation report, to be reviewed and circulated by the Evaluation Management Committee (EMC) to consolidate feedback and comments from the evaluation main stakeholders. A final report will be, subsequently, submitted by the evaluation team addressing the stakeholders’ feedback, before being subjected to quality control as per OECD/DAC and UNEG evaluation guidelines and quality standards by the EMC. The final report should be ultimately validated and approved by EMC.

Ethics, norms, and standards for evaluation 

The evaluation and evaluator must follow IOM, AUC, and ILO, Data Protection Principles, as well as UNEG Norms, and Standards for evaluations and relevant ethical guidelines.

Roles and Responsibilities

 The roles and responsibilities throughout the evaluation process are as follows:

1. The Evaluation Management Committee (EMC): the Committee is composed of representatives from AUC, GIZ AU, ILO, and IOM M&E/Evaluation Offices/Teams. The Committee is established to be independent of the project team and will be responsible for,
   1. Drafting and approving the final terms of reference (ToR) of the evaluation
   2. Hiring the evaluator(s) following a competitive and transparent process.
   3. The supervision of the evaluator(s) and provision of guidance on all technical and methodological matters regarding the evaluation.
   4. Review, revision, and endorsement of the inception report.
   5. Review, and circulation of the draft evaluation report.
   6. Review and endorsement of the final evaluation report
   7. Ensure the final evaluation report is published on the websites of the implementing partners.
2. Project Team (AUC, GIZ AU, ILO & IOM): The project team will provide or coordinate logistic and administrative support to the evaluation throughout the process,

• Provide all documentation about the projects’ design and implementation as required by the evaluation
• Facilitating access to project-related documents or key stakeholders, as well as highlighting the set-up of any evaluation reference group or steering committee.
• Provide support to the evaluator(s) during the data collection phase, follow up and final stakeholders’ workshop.

1. Evaluation Team: The evaluation will be conducted by an external independent evaluation company or institution responsible for conducting a participatory and inclusive evaluation process. The principal evaluator will produce the evaluation deliverables listed above based on the methodology agreed on in the Inception report.

Evaluation deliverables 

Inception report (with a detailed workplan and data collection instruments). The report should include,

• Description of the evaluation methodology and instruments to be used in sampling, data collection and analysis, and the data collection plan mentioned above.
• Evaluation matrix (questions and indicators and data collection matrix)
• Guide questions for questionnaires and interviews.
• A detailed work plan (including virtual interview schedules) should be developed in consultation with the Evaluation Manager and project team.
• The proposed report outline’s structure.
• Stakeholders’ workshop agenda and logistics organization.
• PowerPoint presentation for the virtual evaluation validation workshop and presenting the evaluation findings.

The draft report and a final report in English (maximum 30 pages, excluding annexes) as per the following proposed structure:

• Cover page (template)
• Acronyms
• Executive Summary
• Description of the project
• Purpose, scope, and clients of the evaluation
• Methodology, data, and limitations
• Findings (this section’s content should be organized around evaluation criteria and questions)
• Conclusions
• Recommendations and possible future directions towards the sustainability of the projects’ achievements (i.e., for the different key stakeholders including to whom it is directed, priority, resources implication, and timeframe)
• Lessons learned and good practices
• Annexes, including,
  1. TOR
  2. Evaluation matrix
  3. List of people interviewed
  4. Detail schedule of work
  5. Documents examined
  6. Lessons learned and good practices (templates)
  7. Others (optional)
• 2-4-page Evaluation briefs (English) addressing needs of AU, ILO, and IOM according to the templates to be provided by the Evaluation Management Committee.
• Management response partially filled out (template will be provided by the Evaluation Management Committee).

The quality of the report will be assessed against checklists provided by the Evaluation Management Committee⁴.

The Evaluation Management Committee will circulate the draft report, after a methodological review and its approval at this stage, to key stakeholders, the project staff, and the development partners for their review and forward the consolidated comments to the evaluator.

The Evaluation Management Committee will review the final version and submit it to evaluation divisions for the AUC, IOM, and ILO for final review. Once approved at that level, the evaluation report will be distributed to the key stakeholders to ensure enhanced learning and make public at the websites of project implementing partners.

Evaluation Timelines

The evaluation is expected to be conducted between March and June 2025, as outlined in in the approximate timeline below.

Category B Consultants: Tangible and measurable outputs of the work assignment 

Category B Consultant hired to deliver a report on a three-instalment payment basis:

1. First deliverable – First instalment payment – Deliverable by email by 25 March 2025 (20% of overall contract value upon submission and approval of inception report by the EMC)
2. Second deliverable – Second instalment payment – Deliverable by email by 25 May 2025 (30% of overall contract value upon submission and approval of draft evaluation report)
3. Final deliverable – Third and Final instalment payment – Deliverable by email by 15 June 2025 (50% of overall contract value upon submission and approval of the final report)

Required Qualifications

The evaluator(s) should submit:

• A technical proposal outlining their understanding of the assignment, their proposed evaluation approach and methodology, the composition of the evaluation team, and the extent to which they possess the required qualifications and experience to successfully conduct the assignment.
• A financial proposal proposing the total budget of the evaluation including daily rates. The financial proposal should also include any foreseen travel or communication costs.

Values – all IOM staff members must abide by and demonstrate these three values:

Core Competencies – behavioural indicators