Terms of Reference Feasibility Study

1. Feasibility Study Summary

Program/Project,

Project Number

Improved access to inclusive early childhood development and education (ECDE) of children from refugees and host communities in Kalobeyei settlement, Turkana West sub-county, Turkana County, Kenya.

Partner Organisation

Waldorf Kakuma Project (WKP)

Project start and end dates; phase of project if applicable

1st September 2021 – 31st August 2025

Feasibility study Purpose

Assess the feasibility of the expected new project “Improved access to inclusive early childhood development and education of children from refugees and host communities” in terms of its relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, potential impact and sustainability in Kalobeyei settlement, Turkana West sub-county, Turkana County, Kenya.

Feasibility study Type

Ex-ante

Commissioning organisation/contact person

CBM Country Office, Kenya: David Munyendo

Feasibility study Team members (if known)

External Consulting team – to be recruited

Primary Methodology

The feasibility study is to be designed and conducted as a country-specific desk study combined with interviews as well as field visits to potential implementation sites in the target Sub-County. The study shall use mixed methods including quantitative and qualitative methods.

Proposed Feasibility study Start and End Dates

15^th February – 4^th March 2021 – 10^th February 2021 (18 calendar ) and additional 4 days to incorporate stakeholders feedback.

Anticipated Feasibility study Report Release Date

9^th March 2021

Recipient of Final Feasibility study Report

CBM Kenya Country Office

1. Background of the Project

CBM is an international Christian development organization, committed to improving the quality of life of people with disabilities. We work in partnership addressing disability as a cause and consequence of poverty so as to create an inclusive society for all. We recognize that this desire can only be achieved through systemic change, transforming communities and supporting others to make inclusion a reality. Our programme work is in the areas of Inclusive Eye Health (IEH), Community Based Inclusive Development (CBID), Community Mental Health (CMH) and Inclusive Humanitarian Action (IHA). www.cbm.org

About Waldorf Kakuma Project: Waldorf Kakuma Project (WKP) is a Kenyan registered NGO implementing early childhood development and child protection programming in Kakuma and Kalobeyei. WKP is one of UNICEF’S implementing partner for the UNICEF Kenya Country programme. WKP’s approach is derived from the Waldorf Pedagogy based on a curriculum and methodology which integrates academics, arts and practical skills. Currently WKP is managing Furaha centres which are safe spaces for children emphasising art as a therapeutic technique to foster healing and mental wellbeing of children at risk.

Inclusive Education: Under Vision 2030, Kenya’s strategy for 2008–2030, education is seen as a key pillar towards transforming the country into an industrialized, middle-income economy. Children with disabilities have a fundamental right to education just like any other children, as outlined in several International and National legislative and policy instruments. Some of these instruments include the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC, 1989), the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD, 2006) and the Basic Education Act, 2013 among others.

The 2018 Sector Policy for learners and trainees with disabilities emphasizes the need to increase access, enhance retention, and improve quality and relevance of education to all. It also stresses on strengthening early identification and assessment to ensure equal opportunities in provision of education. In line with Kenya Vision 2030, in particular this social pillar envisions attainment of globally competitive quality education for all children including those with disabilities. In addition, the Basic Education Act, (2013) provides for free and compulsory basic education for all, promotion of quality and relevant education. It also provides for the right to equal standards of education. The Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4 requires member states like Kenya to ensure inclusive and quality education for all and promote lifelong learning.

The National Survey on Children with Disabilities and Special Needs in Education (KISE 2017) indicate that the prevalence rate of children with special needs and disabilities aged between 3 and 21 years in Kenya is 11.4%. This is further compounded by a relatively even distribution of disabilities among male and female children where 51.2% were males and 48.8% were females. There were more boys with disabilities than girls and 72.6% of children with disabilities and special needs live in rural areas while 27.4% of them live in urban areas.

Project background information: In line with CBM Kenya’s Country Office (CO) implementation plan priorities in targeting communities in most marginalized geographic regions and aligning programme delivery with government plans and priorities, the partnership with Waldorf Kakuma Project (WKP) aims to expand and improve equitable access to quality early childhood development education (ECDE) and basic education for all children in Turkana West sub-County, Turkana County. The project seeks to complement the on-going CBM supported project for prevention of blindness among children in Kakuma refugee camp and host community.

The Waldorf Kakuma Project is part of a larger Waldorf community which is involved in education in emergencies all over the world and has experience in implementing ECDE programmes targeting both refugees and host community. Capacity of WKP shall be strengthened to deliver the ECDE programme through comprehensive and inclusive disability approaches within community based inclusive development framework.

Among the refugee population in Kenya, over half are children of school age (4-18 years). One-third of refugees have access to secondary education in Kenya, and less than one-sixth have access to tertiary education, including technical and vocational education and training (www.unhcr.org). For children who have been forced to flee their homes, education is their lifeline. This project is designed on a backdrop to transform the lives of all children in Kalobeyei refugee camp and host community through access to quality inclusive education.

The project has both direct and indirect beneficiaries. The direct beneficiaries of the project will include 8,000 learners with disabilities aged 3-17 years; 80 WKP staff; 160 mainstream teachers; 500 Parents Teachers Association (PTAs); 30 members of Sub-County ECDE Working Group; and 20 ECDE Officers in Kalobeyei settlement of Turkana West Sub-County. The project will indirectly benefit 150,000 children from host community schools in Turkana West Sub-County through integrated planning and coordination on inclusive education. General community population shall be reached with information on children rights and disability inclusion.

This project seeks to bridge the gap and secure education for children with disabilities through various interventions that include but not limited to baseline survey, awareness creation on the rights of children with disabilities, capacity building of WKP staff and teachers on screening and working with children with disabilities / developmental delays / learning , facilitate increased access to inclusive education and other services at ECDE institutions, support improved accessibility and functionality of Education Assessment and Resource Centres (EARCs), coordination and collaboration towards inclusive education, and promoting learning and sharing of good practices among the various stakeholders.

Project summary:

Overall Objective: Sustainable inclusive quality Early Childhood Development Education programmes delivered equitably and at scale to all children in Refugee Camp and host communities in Turkana County, Kenya.

Specific Objective: To improve access to inclusive Early Childhood Development and Education (ECDE) of children from refugees and host communities in Kalobeyei settlement, Turkana West sub-County, Turkana County, Kenya.

Indicators:

· Number of parents, including parents of learners with disabilities advocating for inclusive education in the sub-county.

· Number of children accessing the EARC Centre for assessment and referral.

· Proportion of learners with disabilities out of the education system in Turkana West Sub-County.

· % of learner enrolment, retention and transition at ECDE level disaggregated by gender and type of disability.

· Measure of children’s learning achievement in school.

· Women, men and youth with disabilities report improved participation in basic education activities.

· Inclusive ECDE standard operational plan developed and operationalized.

·

Results:

· Enhanced technical capacity of mainstream teachers from refugee population and host community schools in provision of ECDE;

· Strengthened capacity of community structures such as Parents Associations, organizations of persons with disabilities and community health volunteers to support early identification and referral of children with disabilities / developmental delays / learning needs; and

· Improved education sector coordination mechanisms and continuity of provision of inclusive education in Turkana West sub-County.

Project location: Turkana County is characterized with high poverty levels of 79.4% and about 60% of the population is food insecure[1]. The County experiences recurrent droughts and floods; inadequate basic social services (health, education and water); and inadequate infrastructure to support inclusive socio-economic growth. This situation is further reinforced by the low Human Development Index (HDI) – a measure for achievements in health, education and income – which stands at 0.37 compared to the national score of 0.52.3[2]. With a large share of a relatively young population and limited livelihood opportunities, only 46% of Turkana’s population and 49% of the refugee population is of working age which is lower than the national average 55%. In addition, 63% of the host community and refugee population in Kalobeyei are unemployed, making the majority of them unable to meet their household basic needs.

Kalobeyei settlement is located in Turkana West Sub-County, north west of Kenya, bordering with South Sudan, Ethiopia and Uganda. According to the 2019 Kenya Population and Housing Census[3], Turkana West Sub County has a total host community population of 239,627 (123,867 males and 115,758 female) and 196,120 (91,751 female and 104,369 male) refugees and asylum seekers from about twenty (20) countries. Since establishment of Kakuma refugee camp in 1992 (following civil strife in Sudan), Turkana West Sub-County has continuously seen an exponential increase and large-scale humanitarian activities due to protracted refugee crises and refugee influx due to political and socio-economic instability in neighbouring countries of the Lakes and Greater horn of Africa.

Since 1992, Turkana West sub-County has witnessed an increase in the number of school age children due to the influx of refugees from neighbouring countries and internal cultural conflicts witnessed within Turkana County. Considering the significant population increase and surge in number of children, this has overwhelmed the already limited number of accessible education facilities established in the Kakuma refugee camp and Kalobeyei settlement[4]. While there has been significant progress in improving education access for refugee and host community children, nearly half of school aged children are out of school and there exists inadequate schooling facilities; insufficient number of qualified teachers and school materials with girls and children with disabilities at a disproportionate disadvantage. Further, the Government of Kenya has committed towards integrating refugees and host children in accessing education services. This is reflected in the County legal framework, with a national refugee framework in discussion. However, even then, refugee and host community children share similar challenges and needs related to access to schools, participation, completion, and inclusive learning compared to the rest of the country.

According to United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and Ministry of Education (MoE) data in 2018, there were 121,820 refugees and host community children and students enrolled in pre-primary, primary and secondary public school across Turkana West. As of January 2019, there were a total of 122 education facilities and 894 staff (675 qualified and 219 incentive staff) in Turkana West funded by the Turkana County government. Additionally, there are 24 schools and 645 teachers in Kakuma and Kalobeyei refugee camps. Due to limited funding from government and development partners, there is a shortage of trained teachers with more than 67% at the camps[5] and learning materials such as textbooks, teacher guides & preparatory materials, supplementary learning materials, and teaching aids that is accessible to all children.

Study conducted by the Ministry of Public Health and Sanitation (2010) highlights that children with disabilities are especially disadvantaged because of barriers like ignorance, little attention given to identification, attention, cost of technical intervention and management that goes a long way throughout their lives[6]. Even though the Population Census 2019 shows that 2.2% of the population has one form of disability, Ministry of Education 2016 survey indicates one out of every 10 Kenyans below the age of 21 has one form of disability. In a Study conducted by Kenya Institute of Special Education (2018), the Ministry of Education observes that a number of challenges that face learners with disabilities in Kenya range from ‘’inadequate data on the number of children with disability; ineffectiveness of the Education Assessment and Resource Centres (EARCs); poor understanding of the concept of ‘special needs and disability’ among education stakeholders; inadequate adaptable facilities to support children with special needs; inadequate poor maintenance of available facilities and assistive devices in learning institutions and EARCs; poor adoption and integration of Information Communication and Technology (ICT) in teaching and learning; inadequate number of teachers with prerequisite knowledge and skills to support learners with special needs and/or disabilities; inadequate capacity of teachers and Education Assessment Resource Centres (EARCs) to carry out early identification, assessment and placement of learners; inadequate support to schools and teachers by EARC staff, Curriculum Support Officers, and Quality Assurance Officers; stigmatization of learners with disabilities in learning institutions, homes and in the community; inflexible curriculum that is not responsive to the needs of all learners including learners with disabilities; low transitions rates of learners with disabilities across all levels of education; and lack of policy and structures for recruitment and deployment of learning support assistants, as well as inadequate preparation of teachers to implement inclusive education.

Considering that more than 50% of the total population in Turkana West sub county is of school age[7], the limited number of accessible education facilities have meant that the primary school key indicators are not only lower than for Turkana County but also much lower than national averages. As more than 50% of children are refugees, language fluency and teacher qualification often relate to language skills; thus many challenges are reduced where we have countries with shared linguistic and cultural commonalities[8]. Teachers in displacement contexts have limited capacity to be sensitive towards the timely and safe identification of learners with disabilities and referring them for early intervention to access education.

According to United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ (UNHCR) Education Strategy 2012 – 2016, milestones for tracking education include monitoring enrolment, school drop-out and retention by age and sex; measuring children’s learning achievement in school; identify problem areas related to learning and protection; and respond more effectively to improved education services and monitor progress. The proposed project will seek to embed such milestones in monitoring and evaluation framework to assess the success of the project.

The benefits of schooling can be fully realized only when accompanied by investment in public safety[9]. Therefore, there is a need to establish an EAR centre linked to formal (ECDE) and informal (child friendly spaces) education facilities to provide learners with disabilities access to services through formal screening, early detection and referrals for appropriate interventions in order to access inclusive education.

2. Feasibility Study Objective, Scope and Intended Use

Assess the feasibility of the expected new project “Improved access to inclusive early childhood development and education of children from refugees and host communities” in terms of its relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, potential impact and sustainability in Kalobeyei settlement, Turkana West sub-county, Turkana County, Kenya. Moreover, the prerequisites, opportunities and risks of the development of the project concept shall be identified. The study is also expected to review the concept note and provide baseline information and give recommendations for the programme design and proposal development so as to achieve desired results. Mapping of potential organizations of persons with disabilities, and other like like-minded organization with the aim of mainstreaming disability and creating synergies shall also be conducted.

The study results will be used to develop a project proposal for submission to the public donor BMZ, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development. The study will be submitted as an annex to the proposal which is a funding requirement of BMZ.

Scope of the Feasibility Study

The focus, scope and depth of the study shall be in line with DAC criteria, inclusion, gender and safeguarding taking into consideration the social-cultural, education policy, demographic, development priorities, political and economic context of the Turkana County. The study overall shall assess the education system for refugees and host community with special focus on Early Childhood Development Education (ECDE) in close coordination with County Government State Department of Education, UNHCR and implementing agencies, Educator Sector lead organizations, organizations of persons with disabilities and Disability Sector Actors (public and private).

Target audience of the feasibility study

The feasibility study will target government officers; development partners; adults, learners with disabilities and their care givers; general refugee population; host community; women, men, girls and boys with disabilities; and community leaders. The Consultant shall use participatory methods in involving the target audience. By getting involved, the target audience will become more aware of the situation, appreciate locally available resources, hold the duty bearers to account, become aware of their role and take action to remedy the situation. The draft report shall be presented to the target audience for validation and thereafter launched officially so as to sensitize policy makers and development partners on the situation and needed action in decision making, resource allocation and designing of programmes to ensure no child is left behind in enjoying their rights to access quality education as well access to other support services, especially for children with disability. Dissemination methods of the findings shall be expanded to ensure accessibility and utilization, that is, conduct dialogue sessions through local radio stations and local authority, and use the recommendations to produce and display appropriate posters on the rights of children.

4. Feasibility study Questions

4.1. Relevance/Appropriateness and quality of design

This measures the extent to which the project is suited to the priorities and policies of the target group, the partner organisation, to local and national development priorities, to CBM policies, including changes over time.

• are we planning the right interventions?

• assess the relevance of the objective for the beneficiaries and defined problem;

• assess the validity of the defined action in addressing the issue(s) identified;

• assess the relevance of the proposed action to national development priorities and policy gaps; To what extend is government support for the project likely and / or necessary?

• establish what other agencies are doing and make follow-up recommendations to avoid duplication of effort and strengthen disability mainstreaming in a meaningful way?

• analyse potential benefits from this approach for host communities and refugee communities (as well as Internally Displaced People in the event of new development in the context).

• assess independence of local partner organisation as well as its/their competencies, experiences and capacities in delivering the proposed project.

• recommend design aspects that would ensure relevance of the proposed action.

4.2. Effectiveness

The extent to which the project shall achieve what it has set out to do.

• how can we achieve the set purpose? Is the approach suitable?

• assess the risks/factors that may hamper the project from achieving set outcome(s);

• assess the major factors influencing the likely achievement or non-achievement of the objectives/results;

• assess the design of activities, methods and strategies and make recommendations for ensuring delivery of results;

• assess management practices that derail the project or promote the project? What can be done differently, continued or stopped to ensure likely achievement of project intentions?

• assess the extent to which all mapped project stakeholders’ collaboration can ensure achievement of proposed project results?

4.3. Efficiency or cost-effectiveness (of planning and of implementation)

Whether the most efficient process has been adopted in achieving the outputs in relation to the inputs (costs, both financial, staffing, time) and whether funds are being invested in the least costly way in order to achieve the desired results.

• ascertain and provide rationale for resources needed to deliver the proposed interventions;

• assess if the stated objectives can be achieved within the given time frame;

• evaluate if the programme has been designed in the most efficient way compared to alternatives;

• What would the general outline of an appropriate management structure for an efficient project set up look like in the respective country and for overall programme steering?

• make recommendations for ensuring efficiency of project implementation.

4.4. Impact – Contribution to change

Assesses the positive and negative consequences of the project activities, direct and indirect, intended and unintended.

• Assess how the project contributes towards development goals for Kenya and Turkana County government;

• assess the likelihood of the proposed action to bring about transformation in target population;

• quantify and qualify the likely life changes to target population that can be attributable to the project or the project can contribute to;

• assess the extent to which the proposed action will contribute to the national development priorities and/or cause policy paradigms for persons with disabilities;

• ascertain the likely positive and negative, intended or unintended, political, socio-economic and environmental effects.

4.5. Sustainability

How the intervention will continue to deliver benefits for an extended period of time after completion. The project need to be environmentally as well as financially and socially sustainable.

• how will the results of the project be maintained after project end?

• assess the sustainability strategy and the extent to which it ensures project continuity (structural, economic, social, ecological) in the obtaining context and under the prevailing circumstances;

• assess how the provision of capacity building can contribute towards sustainability?

• assess how both material / financial and social structures of target entities can be supported (CSO, networks, capacities of target groups, etc.) to assure the continuity of the project interventions beyond the project.

• identify opportunities for system strengthening of community development structures, making them inclusive in a sustainable way.

• clarify what role/responsibility will be assumed of governmental and/or civil society organizations? To what extend can local potentials, structures and processes be developed? Which measures and instruments are best suited in utilizing and strengthening local initiatives, participation and capacities?

• assess the clarity of the exit strategy and its potential to allow for a smooth transition of responsibilities (e.g. scope for accompaniment of project torch bearers);

• ascertain the possibility of scaling up and out-scaling the project;

• establish what possible negative consequences and impacts could the project activities or sub-goals entail? To what extend can this be taken into account in the project (concept) (e.g. do-no-harm approach, conflict-sensitive impact monitoring etc.)?

• assess what risks (personnel risks for the implementing parties, institutional and reputational risks, context risks) exist during the project implementation and how can they be minimized?

• assess the extent to which technical, financial, social sustainability can be assured beyond project life-cycle;

• establish the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project.

4.6. Gender

• establish how the needs of different gender are being addressed;

• assess how different gender shall be engaged;

• assess the role and support of women in the project as well as the application of a do no harm approach in the selection of target communities as well as the implementation of project activities;

• mechanisms needed to achieve gender inclusion.

4.7. Child Safeguarding

The Consultant should adhere to child safeguarding ethics during the entire evaluation process where children are involved. Assess the extent to which safeguarding aspects should be considered in the project.

• assess which safeguarding mechanisms have been considered and propose ways safeguarding can be strengthened;

• evaluate feedback and complaints systems that are foreseen.

4.8. Coherence

*The need to assess security, developmental and human policies as well as humanitarian policies, to ensure that there is consistency and, in particular, that all policies take into account humanitarian and human-rights considerations.**

• assess how the project aligned with Government (national and county) policy framework/priorities;**

• analyse camp management structures and relevant stakeholders – who is responsible for what? What sort of cooperation can be expected or aimed for in this project to assure that it is well integrated into the overall effort of the camp management and other stakeholders in the area? Study relevance of UNHCR and national structures in perspective for this project, as well as cooperation and coordination mechanisms in place such as education sector lead organisation in the camp and why further support needed; synergies being created through this project and role segregation among the stakeholders.

• assess the added value of the project in regards to support of local / regional civil society structures, working in this subject – How will the different sets of communities, Civil Society Organizations, Youth Groups, organizations of persons with disability e.t.c be strengthened? Integrating measures for the capacity development of host and refugee communities as well as relevant stakeholders in regards to: conflict management, conflict transformation and transition to peaceful co-habitation, integration of refugees into host communities e.t.c. The feasibility study should therefore elaborate the needs in these different areas for the different target groups, as well as provide recommendations key in achieving increased stabilisation of the project region, as well an increasingly peaceful cohabitation of displaced and host communities alike and increased resilience of all target communities.

• elaborate possibility of clear separation from other projects in the area and how duplication of activities, geographical scope, target communities and funding will be avoided. At the same time the potential for synergies and networking activities, should be studied and described in the report.

• evaluate the extent the project is aligned and compliments on-going and other planned initiatives by key stakeholders.

4.9. Inclusion

No one, and in particular persons with disabilities should be left behind at all stages of the project.

• ascertain how women, men, girls and boys with disabilities are being involved and how the project is responsive to their needs;

• assess the appropriateness of the activities to local needs, increasing ownership, accountability and cost-effectiveness;

• evaluate the extent all project interventions have taken accessibility into consideration;

• clarify ways the project shall build capacity of key stakeholders on disability inclusive development.

• assess how accessible is the environment and what needs to be done to address physical or attitudinal barriers.

• assess how persons with disabilities and caregivers of children with disabilities are being addressed and how they going to be engaged.

• assess and recommend strategies that can be used to enhance active and meaningful participation of target group towards achieving inclusion and co-habitation of host communities and refugees.

4.10. Crosscutting

• The consultant will assess the different needs of specific groups of people taking cognizant of heterogeneity in the target group and general population in the project geography. This includes, but not limited to gender, disability, safeguarding especially of children and adults at risk (in particular children with disabilities), HIV/AIDS, old persons, chronic illnesses, cultural diversity, human-rights, conflict-sensitive and local values and principles.

4.11. Baseline data

The need to conduct baseline data on all the result areas.

• assess and document baseline data related to each result area and relevant qualitative and quantitative indicators.

• evaluate current technical capacity of mainstream teachers from refugee population and host community schools in provision of ECDE.

• assess current capacity of community structures such as Parents Associations, organizations of persons with disabilities and community health volunteers to support early identification and referral of children with disabilities / developmental delays / learning needs.

• establish current level of coordination mechanisms in the education sector and provision of inclusive education in Turkana West sub-County.

• clarify what role/responsibility will be assumed of governmental and/or civil society, including organizations of persons with disabilities and inclusive Parents Teachers Associations or relevant parent groups.

• assess existing relationship with the host community and how coordination and ownership can be facilitated.

NOTE: Additional questions shall be jointly discussed with CBM and the successful Consultant to ensure collection of data in the areas of Gap analysis around disability inclusion, Problem analysist and context analysis, Baseline data, and Stakeholder analysis.

5. Methodology

The feasibility study shall be limited to Turkana West sub-County, Kakuma Refugee camp, host community and key stakeholders. The study will have primary focus on the disability sector with key government line Ministries – Ministry of Education, Ministry of Labour and Social Protection and Ministry of Health. The depth and complexity will be determined by the consultant in consultation with CBM in the context of proposed feasibility study questions. The feasibility study is to be designed and conducted through participatory process combining both quantitative and qualitative methods and adapted to Covid-19 regulations. In order to assure participation of the participants, play groups from host and refugee communities, caregivers, self help groups, etc. shall be considered to be included into the methodology chosen. Already existing groups, like women groups, ECD centers and sports centers, shall be considered as well.

6. Limitations

Due to covid-19 pandemic limiting physical interactions, most interviews maybe conducted virtually with less field visits or even restricted access to refugee camp and the school re-opening which took place on 4^th of January 2021 has come increased restrictions to learning institutions in the effort to curb Covid-19 transmission. All these limitations may affect target audience full participation in the feasibility study.

7. Feasibility study Team and Management Responsibilities

Commissioning responsibility

The feasibility study will be commissioned and managed by the Country CBM Kenya Country Office, which will oversee the implementation and quality of the feasibility study. The external consultant will report to the Country Director. CBM will have the following responsibilities to assure the quality of the data produced:

· Ensure within the Kick-off meeting that roles, responsibilities, and scope of the consultancy is clear;

· Monitor and assess the quality of the feasibility study and its process regularly;

· Provide guidance and support to the external consultant as maybe required;

· Facilitate the consultant’s access to key stakeholders and specific information or expertise needed to perform the assessment;

· Ensure that all stakeholders are kept informed and engaged;

· Approve the final report; all deliverables related to the feasibility study shall be submitted to CBM Kenya Country Officer as per the agreed milestone schedule.

Feasibility study Team

The feasibility study will be conducted by an independent consultant/consulting team who will work in close collaboration with CBM Kenya Country Office and the prospective partner – Waldorf Kakuma. Persons with disabilities will be involved in conducting the feasibility study to best assess the inclusiveness of the proposed project components.

The consultant / Consulting team should have the following attributes among others:

· Extensive expertise and experience in Disability Inclusive Development (DID);

· Demonstrable expertise in inclusive education or Special Needs Education;

· Knowledge of international instruments and national statutes on disability;

· Proven ability to conduct high quality research, meet deadlines and respond to requests and feedback provided timely and appropriately;

· Must have strong background in conducting feasibility studies, experience with BMZ or international donor funded projects is an asset.

· Proven record of carrying out similar tasks in the global south or Kenya;

· Experience in undertaking research with remote and marginalized communities;

· Excellent track record in designing and conducting quantitative and qualitative research, analysis and evaluation;

· Ability to provide strategic recommendations to key stakeholders;

· Excellent interpersonal and communication skills including ability to facilitate and work in a multidisciplinary team;

· Strong analytical skills and ability to clearly synthesise and present findings;

· Ability to draw practical conclusions and to prepare well‐written reports in a timely manner and availability during the proposed period;

· Ability to fluently speak Kiswahili; Turkana language will be an added advantage.

In line with best practice for disability inclusive development, organization of persons with disabilities representative or person with disability should participate in the evaluation as an evaluation team member or as a specific evaluation advisory group.

8. Management of the feasibility study and logistics

CBM Kenya Country Office in liaison with Waldorf Kakuma Project will avail relevant documents or information pertaining the study. CBM Kenya Country Office through 3-way collaboration shall coordinate the Consultant selection, debriefing sessions; review and provide feedback on the deliverables of the consultancy. Besides, Waldorf Kakuma Project shall ensure sustained involvement of key stakeholders on the ground so as to improve the quality of work and access to available information.

The roles and responsibilities of the Consultant and CBM shall be as follows:

8.1. Responsibilities of the Consultant

· Design the feasibility study

· Draw feasibility study budget

· Collect and analyse data

· Produce draft report

· Facilitate research findings workshop

· Produce final feasibility study report

8.2. Responsibilities of CBM Kenya Country Office

· Contract the consultant

· Provide project specific and other relevant resource documents

· Facilitate access to study areas

· Participate in research findings workshop

· Review draft feasibility report and approve final report

· Pay the consultant based on the agreed terms and conditions specified in the expression of interest

8.3. Responsibilities of Waldorf Kakuma Project

· Debrief on the project

· Avail and provide relevant resource documents

· Coordinate introduction of the consulting team to relevant key stakeholders

· Participate in research debriefing sessions

· Provide input in draft feasibility report

9. Expected Results

The successful consultant shall submit an inception report detailing the plans in undertaking the study. Both the draft and final report shall be soft copy in accessible format providing detailed description of the context on various levels, stakeholder analysis matrix, project relevant base-line data, description of existing structures for delivery of inclusive education project, an in-depth analysis of intended approach/problem, an analysis according to OECD DAC criteria, and recommendations for project design. The report shall be in English and in CBM format. The final report shall undergo stakeholders’ validation process before adoption. The final report shall be widely shared with all stakeholders and the recommendations discussed for wider adoption and implementation. For increased utilization, the report shall not be longer than 20 (max.30) pages plus annexes. In summary, the main deliverables are as follows:

• Detailed study design including draft data collection tools and table of contents for the feasibility study;

• 3W map of Who is Where doing What;

• Final report (incl. Annexes) of feasibility study;

• Submission of hard and electronic copies of materials, data collected / analysed and other documents related to the feasibility study;

• A summary Power Point presentation of highlighting main findings and recommendations.

Inception Report due by: 17^th February 2021

Draft Report due by: 1^st March 2021

Finalised Report due by: 9^th March 2021

10. **Duration and Phasing

**

The study is expected to start on 15^th February 2021 and last for 18 calendar days with additional 4 days to incorporate stakeholders’ feedback. An itemised action plan (indicating description of activities in chronological sequence and dates for each activity) should be submitted with the expression of interest.

s/n

11. Task : Location: Number of days/remarks

**

*Compliance to Covid 19 regulations to observed for all on-site meetings.**

1. Desk review of technical and financial bids (CBM KCO)- Virtual

0.5 days

The consultant will be selected based on clearly set criteria and notified in writing; contract will be signed.

1. Interviews for selection of successful candidate: Virtual

0.5 days

Successful candidate selected.

1. Briefing of consultant and review of relevant documents: On-site

1 day

Consent on (time) plan for feasibility study and methodology, approved by CBM.

1. Inception Report and sign-off contract : On-site

2 days

An initial inception report summarizing the desk review and details of how the consultant will proceed with the study and other relevant information.

1. Data collection in the field : Both virtual and physical visits.

9 days

Field data collected

1. Data analysis and preparation of draft report : On-site by Consulting team.

6 days

Draft report generated

1. Feedback by CBM: Both On-site and virtual

2 days

Feedback collected and incorporated

1. Stakeholder validation workshop: On-site with provision for virtual connection.

1 day

Stakeholder input documented for incorporation into the report

1. Finalisation of feasibility study and submitting final report : Both on-site and virtual.

4 days

Final report of feasibility study is produced and presented

12. Costs and payments

The Consultant’s fee + all auxiliary costs: in KES

The consultant shall submit to CBM an expression of interest indicating the evaluation team’s daily rates for the assignment. CBM will negotiate for the final fees in line with the budget available for this evaluation and based on the experience of the chosen candidates.

Please detail in the TOR what costs have to be covered by whom, such as:

· Consultant costs: fee, airfares, accommodation, visa fee, local transport (those costs will be reimbursed upon receipt of proper invoices)

· RO and partner travel and accommodation costs

· Make sure that VAT is added onto fees either by the consultant or by your office.

· You may need to refer to country specific contractor agreement if you engage external evaluators – please check with your funding MA.