Terms Of Reference - Shoruq Organization - Mid-term Evaluation

  • Terms Of Reference - Shoruq Organization - Mid-term Evaluation

Terms Of Reference - Shoruq Organization - Mid-term Evaluation


Shoruq is a non-profit organization founded in Dheisheh refugee camp in 2012. Shoruq’s vision, mission, objectives and programs are geared towards a political, social, cultural and economic prosperity and dignified life for all refugees in Occupied Palestine and the Diaspora, and empowering refugees in shaping a just solution and a better future for themselves and their offspring.


We envision Palestinian refugees, whether living in occupied Palestine or in the Diaspora, striving individually and collectively to attain and exercise their rights including the right of return to their original lands, and realizing dignified lives for themselves in the meanwhile.


Mission: Shoruq aims at defending and protecting the inalienable rights of indigenous Palestinian refugees, to act as a voice for Palestinian people, and demand implementation of their rights locally and internationally. Shoruq seeks to empower the most marginalized refugee groups who are affected by the Israeli occupation policies, and lack any social and legal protection in Occupied Palestine and host countries. Shoruq does this by developing their capabilities and empowering them to depend on themselves and the local resources.

 Objectives of the evaluation: 

  Evaluations are conducted with a view to: 

  • enhancing the work impact. 

  • developing recommendations for further developments of the project or the guidance of similar projects in the future

  • providing an analysis of accountability with respect to the use of project funds 

  • drawing key lessons learned to contribute to organizational learning

  • Accountability to affected population 

1. Project Background and Context 

Provide also the following key information:

Project Location 

Bethlehem Governorate 

Project Name

Towards a More Protective and Enabling Environment for Children in Conflict with Law

Donor(s)/ funding sources


Project duration

12 months 

implementing agency and partners

Shoruq Organization 

2. Purpose and Objectives of the Evaluation 

The purpose of the Mid-Term Evaluation of the project is to highlight progress made towards the implementation of project’s objectives to-date, and to identify key recommendations to take into account during the implementation of the project over the course of six months 

3. Audience for the Evaluation 

65 children who received psychosocial support 

20 children who received legal support 

22 families who received psychosocial counselling and support  

4. Evaluation Issues and Key Questions – Evaluation Matrix

The scope of the mid-term evaluation will cover Shoruq’s project: towards a more protective and enabling environment for children. 

The analysis should contain recommendations on future courses of action. The evaluation should be a document that can function as a learning tool for Shoruq.

In addition to the governance structure of the project, whether the project set up leads to the desired result by measuring to what extent the objective/outputs/activities have been achieved against the results and resources over the course of six months. 

4.1 Quality and Relevance of Design

Assess the continuing appropriateness and relevance of the Design. The project context, threats and opportunities may have changed during the course of the project. Assess what adjustments have been made and what others might be necessary. In particular:

  • To what extent does the project respond to priority issues? 

  • To what extent are the objectives of the project still valid?

  • Is the project team planning the most appropriate strategies? 

  • Are there any major risks or ‘killer assumptions’ that are currently not being taken into account? 

  • Do stakeholders care about the project and believe it makes sense?

4.2 Effectiveness 

Assess the major achievements of the project to date in relation to its stated objectives and intended results. As far as possible this should be a systematic assessment of progress based on monitoring data for the planned Goal, Objectives and Strategic Activities. (Data already collected by the project’s monitoring and reporting systems should provide much of the basic information).

  • Focus on the higher-level results.

  • Assess what has been achieved, the likelihood of future achievements, and the significance/ strategic importance of the achievements 

  • Refer to quantitative assessments as far as possible 

  • Include also qualitative evidence e.g. opinions on the project’s effectiveness based on impressions and interviews with target groups, partners, government, etc.

Describe any major failures of the project to date, explaining why they have occurred.

Describe any unforeseen impacts (whether positive or negative).

Identify any exceptional experiences that should be highlighted e.g. case-studies, stories, best practice

4.3 Efficiency of Planning and Implementation

Assess to what extent resources are being used economically to deliver the project. 

Are plans being used, implemented and adapted as necessary? For example:

  • Is the overall project action plan used and up to date?

  • What % of activities in the workplan is being delivered?

  • Is financial spend in line with plan?

  • Is monitoring data being collected as planned, stored and used to inform future plans

Assess other programme management factors important for delivery, such as:

  • Capacity gaps (these could be in the project team, other internal functions such as HR or Finance, or external organisations as appropriate). 

  • Working relationships within the team 

  • Working relationships with partners, stakeholders and donors

  • Learning processes such as self-evaluation, coordination and exchange with related projects.

  • Internal and external communication. 

4.4 Impact

To what extent is the project contributing to a long-term positive effect on people and nature? How is the project making a difference?

Normally this should assess to what extent the project is achieving its Vision and Goal. It can be combined with Section 4.2 Effectiveness if it makes sense to do so.

4.5 Potential for sustainability, replication and magnification

Assess the key factors affecting sustainability of the project, such as:

  • What is the social and political environment/ acceptance of the project? 

  • Will the project contribute to lasting benefits? Which organisations could/ will ensure continuity of project activities in the project area?

  • Is there evidence of organisations/partners/communities that have copied, upscaled or replicated project activities beyond the immediate project area. Is such replication or magnification likely?

Assess whether the programme be considered as delivering value for money for its present scope/ scale of impact (it is recognised this will be a somewhat subjective view)? 

  • What are the cost implications for scaling up impact? 

  • Are there savings that could be made without compromising delivery?

Assess and make recommendations on the key strategic options for the future of the project i.e. exit strategy, scale down, replication, scale-up, continuation, major modifications to strategy

  • Comment on any existing plans

  • Make recommendations in addition

5. Methodology 

Provide specific suggestions for data collection methods to be used (e.g. field observations, interviews, focus groups, questionnaires, participatory methodologies, etc.). Note the possible geographic scope of the sampling and any cultural conditions that may affect the methodology. Lists of key informants and important background documents are attached as Annexes 2 and 3.

N.B. Direct observation is critical for gathering evidence and opinion. However for most WWF evaluations, the evaluation team will not collect primary data on populations, threats or socio-economic status. Therefore the precision of the evaluation results will depend to a large extent on the quality of the monitoring data already collected by the project.

6. Profile of the Evaluation Team. 

Detail The specific skills or characteristics needed in the evaluator or evaluation team, e.g. technical knowledge, familiarity with the country / culture, language proficiency, evaluation experience, facilitation and interviewing skills, etc. Define the structure of the team, including roles and responsibilities.

7. Outputs and Deliverables 

List of key deliverables and deadlines (e.g. workplan, briefings, draft report, final report). The required format for the evaluation report is attached as Annex 4.

8. Evaluation Timetable 

A suggested timetable for the evaluation. To be realistic, a timetable must allocate adequate time for:

  • Development of the evaluation design; finalization of the evaluation matrix; sampling strategy

  • Development of research instruments (questionnaires, interview guidelines, etc.)

  • Review of documentation

  • International travel; domestic travel

  • Field (or desk) research

  • Data analysis (usually half the number of days of the research)

  • Meeting with project staff and stakeholders on the initial findings and recommendations

  • Preparation of the draft report

  • Incorporation of comments and finalization of the evaluation report.

9. Cost 

General allocations (not a detailed budget) of resources available for the evaluation (consultant fees, travel, subsistence allowance, etc.).

10. Logistical Support (normally provided by the implementing office).

Support to be provided to the evaluation team and by whom (provision of documentation, scheduling of interviews, local travel, arrangement of accommodation, access to office facilities, etc.).


Annex 1. Evaluation Matrix

The evaluation matrix is an important tool summarizing the evaluation design. First the key questions for the evaluation are defined. These then are broken down into specific research questions. Then for each specific research question, data sources are identified, together with data collection tools or methods appropriate for each data source. It may also be useful to specify indicators by which the specific questions will be evaluated.


Key Questions

Specific Research Questions

Data Sources

Methods / Tools







(other key issues as necessary)

Annex 2. Key Informants 

A list of individuals who should be consulted, together with their contact information and organizational affiliation. The list of individuals/ groups will normally include, but not be limited to, the following:

  • Project Team members

  • Implementing Partners

  • Direct stakeholders such as local community groups, private sector, local and national government agencies. (It may be helpful to consult the original stakeholder analysis for the project).

  • Donors

Specify also the locations to be visited.  

Incorporate the information in the Evaluation Matrix, if that is helpful. 

Annex 3. Documents to be Consulted 

A list of important documents that the evaluators should read at the outset of the evaluation and before finalizing the evaluation design. This should be limited to the critical information that the evaluation team needs. Data sources and documents may include:

  • Standards for Project/ Programme Management 

  • Project proposal

  • Action Plan (e.g. (atest) log frame/ Results Chains) 

  • (Latest) Annual work plans

  • Monitoring data and analysis of that data

  • (Latest full year) technical report

  • Key outputs produced: research/ surveys conducted, Regulations and policies developed

  • Partnership arrangements e.g. agreements of cooperation with local governments

  • Newsletters and publicity information

  • Output of any organizational learning initiatives 

  • Other assessments e.g. self-assessments, previous evaluations

Annex 4. Required Format for the Evaluation Report 

Title Page, including project title and number, date of report, authors and their affiliations, WWF contact point for the evaluation, etc.

Executive Summary (1-4 pages):

  • Brief project description and context

  • Purpose and expected use of the evaluation

  • Objectives of the evaluation 

  • Summary of the evaluation methodology

  • Principle findings and conclusions, especially relating to project goals / targets

  • Key recommendations

  • Summary of lessons learned


Table of Contents

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

Main Report

  • Purpose of the evaluation

  • Audience for and use of the evaluation

  • Objectives of the evaluation 

  • Evaluation methodology, including: rationale for choice of methodology, data sources, methods for data collection and analysis, participatory techniques, ethical and equity considerations, major limitations of the methodology 

  • Composition of the evaluation team, including any specific roles of team members

  • Project description, including: context, underlying rationale, stakeholders and beneficiaries, conceptual model, results chain or logical framework, and project monitoring system 

  • Evaluation findings, documented by evidence: 

  • Design: quality and relevance

  • Effectiveness (progress towards objectives and results); contributions of stakeholders; constraints or problems encountered

  • Efficiency of Planning and Implementation

  • Impact; progress towards Vision and Goals (often the impact on biodiversity and livelihoods) 

  • Sustainability and replicability of project / programme impacts; capacity built; institutional and stakeholder issues

  • Conclusions: insights into the findings; reasons for successes and failures; innovations

  • Recommendations (based on evidence and insights)

  • Lessons learned with wider relevance and that can be generalized beyond the project

Annexes to the evaluation report:

  1. Terms of Reference for the evaluation

  2. Evaluation matrix

  3. Timetable

  4. List of individuals interviewed and of stakeholder groups and/or communities consulted

  5. List of supporting documentation reviewed

  6. Research instruments: questionnaire, interview guide(s), etc. as appropriate

  7. Project logical framework

  8. Specific monitoring data, as appropriate

  9. Summary tables of progress towards outputs, targets, goals – referring directly to the indicators established for these in the project logframe

  10. Short biographies of the evaluators.

Individual Proposals and the consultant CV should be submitted to Shoruq Organization by 17/9/2022 to the following email: info@shoruq.org

Timeline of the consultancy: 2 weeks.