Job Description

1. Summary

CARE and its consortium members implemented SSF III Joint Galmudug & Puntland Peace Initiative Project in Mudug region. CARE is seeking to procure the service of an external consultant to undertake endline evaluation for the SSF III project that has high demands in terms of the quality of data and information to be collected, in order to generate robust evidence in peace building process, outcomes and impact.

CARE has been working in Somalia since 1981, providing humanitarian relief and long-term development support with a strong focus on women and girls. Its work addresses the root causes of poverty through three mutually reinforcing areas: promoting education and gender equality by strengthening government capacity, building youth life skills, and supporting local organizations; advancing climate justice, food security, and nutrition through climate-smart agriculture, diversified livelihoods, WASH, and early warning systems; and delivering humanitarian assistance in emergencies, including food security, health, nutrition, education, protection, and recovery support, while promoting women’s leadership in crisis response.

1. Background

Mudug sits at the administrative and social frontier between Puntland (to the north) and Galmudug (to the south), with Galkayo as the region’s economic and political hub. The city itself is historically divided into northern and southern administrations, and the wider rural periphery is traversed by pastoral migration routes that shift seasonally with rainfall and rangeland conditions. This geography produces both interdependence and friction. Access to water points, rangeland, and markets links communities across the state line, while layered authority structures including state administrations, district councils, traditional elders, religious leaders, security actors, and civic groups compete or collaborate in managing everyday disputes.

Over the last decade, localized violence in Mudug has periodically flared around land tenure and settlement growth in peri‑urban areas, taxation and control of transport corridors, and resource use in dry seasons when herds concentrate around boreholes and berkads. These pressures are amplified by climatic shocks (droughts/floods), population movements (IDPs and returnees), and the proliferation of small arms. Clan relations, particularly among communities on both sides of the administrative boundary remain a critical factor shaping risk and resilience. While ceasefire understandings and dialogue platforms have reduced large‑scale confrontations in the region, the peace is fragile, with recurrent triggers including rumors and misinformation, youth mobilization, competition, and unresolved grievances from past incidents.

At the same time, there are important peace assets to build on: established elders’ councils and district‑level peace and security committees; joint incident‑management practices that have emerged around hotlines and ad‑hoc negotiations; active women’s and youth groups engaged in social reconciliation; and trusted radio and community media voices that can carry credible information across communities. However, these mechanisms are uneven in capacity and inclusivity, and they are not consistently linked across the state boundary limiting their ability to prevent escalation or to enforce agreements.

Joint Puntland & Galmudug Peace Initiative (SSF III) was designed to consolidate and extend the fragile gains in Mudug region cross‑border corridor. Led by CARE with local partners (PSA and CPD), the project combines four mutually reinforcing workstreams:

1. Strengthening peace architecture at district and inter‑state levels so committees can mediate disputes, monitor agreements, and coordinate with security and administrative actors.
2. Community conciliation and trauma‑informed social healing, using inclusive dialogue forums and follow‑up support that connect elders, women, youth, IDPs, and minorities to practical problem‑solving.
3. Early warning that integrates community reporting with local government decision‑making and links conflict monitoring to climatic and seasonal risk information.
4. Peace journalism and media literacy, supporting ethical content production, rumor management, and public information that counters hate speech and reduce the risk of incitement.

Geographically, implementation prioritizes active conflict corridors surrounding Mudug districts on both sides of the administrative boundary, with attention to grazing corridors, market towns, and transport routes where tensions concentrate. The approach is adaptive (Thinking and Working Politically), grounded in conflict‑sensitivity and Do‑No‑Harm, and explicitly targets gender equality and social inclusion.

The project’s theory of change assumes that credible, connected, and inclusive local institutions, when paired with timely information and constructive narratives, can prevent escalation and transform dispute handling norms. To achieve this, the intervention formalized collaboration between Puntland and Galmudug peace and security structures through joint protocols, referral pathways, and shared incident tracking; enhanced dispute resolution quality by equipping committees with training, tools, and case management follow-up while ensuring women’s and youth participation and accountability to communities; links climate and conflict risks via early warning and early response systems that track seasonal stressors such as water scarcity and migration surges; reduces rumor-driven violence through peace journalism and media literacy that elevate trusted voices and verification routines; and generates peace dividends by coupling conciliation with practical actions like access arrangements at water points or market regulations, thereby reinforcing trust and demonstrating tangible benefits from agreements.

Together, these pathways aim to reduce the frequency and severity of incidents, increase perceptions of safety and trust, and institutionalize collaboration across the Puntland–Galmudug boundary so that peace is more resilient to shocks.

1. Purpose & Objectives of the Evaluation

The purpose is to provide an independent, credible assessment of project achievements at closure, and actionable recommendations for future peacebuilding investments in Puntland & Galmudug.

Objectives:

1. To assess the extent to which results (outputs → outcomes) were achieved across the four objectives; identify most/least effective approaches and contribution to reduced violence, social cohesion, and institutional capacity. This will also examine how cross-cutting issues such as gender equality, conflict sensitivity/Do No Harm, safeguarding, and ethical practice were integrated and influenced effectiveness.
2. To assess the extent to which the benefits and social gains of the project have impacted differently the various demographics of the area, in particular women and girls, marginalized groups and the sections of the population more frequently at odds with each other.
3. To examine the fit with conflict dynamics, climate risks, local governance arrangements, and alignment with SSF III strategy and state/national policies.
4. To review timeliness, resource use, partnership arrangements, and delivery modalities, including rapid response and adaptive management.
5. To assess the durability of peace architecture, community platforms, early‑warning practices, and media coalitions; identify conditions for sustaining/replicating gains.
6. Capture lessons learned through detailed case studies and human-interest stories that illustrate pathways of change, community perspectives, and lived experiences.
7. Methodology

The evaluation is expected to apply a mixed-methods approach, combining both quantitative and qualitative tools to generate credible and actionable findings. It should be grounded such as the OECD-DAC criteria, while also being sensitive to the fragile and conflict-affected communities. The overarching approach should emphasize contribution analysis, looking at how the project has influenced observed changes, and ensuring evidence is triangulated from multiple sources.

Appropriate sampling strategies that capture variations across Puntland and Galmudug, with deliberate inclusion of diverse groups such as women, youth, minorities, and displaced populations. This methodology should also demonstrate how both stable and conflict-affected areas will be reflected.

The evaluation should draw on multiple sources, including project documentation, surveys, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and case studies. We are particularly interested in approaches that capture community perspectives, institutional and peace structures experiences.

Ethical standards will be critical and should be highlighted how safeguarding, informed consent, confidentiality, and referral mechanisms will be ensured. Quality assurance mechanisms should also be outlined to guarantee the reliability of data collection and analysis.

Finally, the methodology should clearly describe how evidence will be analyzed and integrated, ensuring that findings are both rigorous and practical for program learning. And potential limitations should be acknowledged (e.g., access constraints, sensitivities, or data gaps) and propose realistic mitigation measures.

1. Scope of Work
2. Develop an inception report. Provide a concise overview of the proposed evaluation approach aligned to the ToR, including a high‑level methodology, sampling outline, analysis frame, ethical safeguards, risk management, data quality assurance (DQA) approach, and a draft workplan/Gantt. Attach draft instruments in annex.
3. Prepare a detailed workplan and methodology. Translate the approach into sequenced tasks, roles, and timelines for evaluation, specifying roles, arrangements, security protocols, and coordination with consortium MEL focal points and state/district counterparts. The methodology will ensure that all data collected will be safely stored and that GDPR protocols will be observed. All population data will be disaggregated by sex, age and disability (using the Washington Group Short set questions). Additionally, the detailed methodology should include a data analysis matrix/plan to indicate how two or more data points, qualitative and quantitative, will be used to reach conclusions on each evaluation question, ensuring sufficient triangulation and diversity of perspectives.
4. A review of available documents relevant to the assignment will provide a clear understanding of the project. Some of the documents to be reviewed include the proposal, inception report, MEAL framework, quarterly reports, BL and Gender conflict analysis data, among others.
5. Conduct stakeholder interviews and group discussions. Engage a diverse set of actors across both states, such as peace and security committees, traditional and religious leaders, women and youth representatives, IDPs/returnees, local officials, security actors, civil society groups, and media practitioners. Ensure inclusion and safeguarding.
6. Undertake data collection. Implement fit‑for‑purpose quantitative and qualitative techniques (e.g., household/individual and institutional surveys; KIIs/FGDs; light media/content scans) and triangulate with administrative/MEL data and context time series, proportionate to risk and burden.
7. Learning Documentation. Systematically identify, document, and package at least 3–4 detailed case studies and success stories that illustrate project outcomes, community perspectives, and pathways of change. This will involve working closely with peace committees, women and youth groups, and other stakeholders to capture narratives that reflect both quantitative results and qualitative lived experiences. The documentation should be developed in formats suitable for donor reporting, policy briefs, and wider learning dissemination (e.g., narrative write-ups, photo essays, and short media-ready pieces).
8. Develop and share reports. Produce a draft evaluation report for review; facilitate a validation/feedback session; then finalize the report incorporating agreed revisions and submit the full handover package (datasets and scripts) as specified in Deliverables.
9. Deliverables

In reference to the Scope of Work, the consultant/team will submit the following:

1. Inception Report: methodology, sampling outline, analysis framework, ethics & safeguarding plan, DQA approach), detailed workplan, and draft data collection instruments and field protocols (enumerator guide, , data protection, and checklists).
2. Data & Analysis: Clean, anonymized quantitative dataset(s) (CSV/SPSS/Stata/R) and qualitative materials (transcripts); reproducible analysis files (Stata/R/Python scripts/syntax) and key outputs sufficient to replicate tables/figures; a brief DQA summary.
3. Draft Evaluation Report: (MS Word, per agreed template) and a slide‑deck of preliminary findings and recommendations; facilitation of one validation/feedback session with CARE/partners and stakeholders.
4. Case Studies and Success Stories: A dedicated section or annex compiling a minimum of 3–4 documented case studies and success stories. These should present concrete examples of project effectiveness, innovation, and lessons learned in an engaging and easy-to-share format for donors, partners, and communities.
5. Final Evaluation Package — Final report (English) with finalized annexes (tools, sampling note, ethics & safeguarding summary, DQA summary, case studies/human‑interest stories compendium, updated project MEAL framework) and the finalized Data & Analysis Package.
6. Timeline

Milestones

Days

Inception report + tools (drafting and finalized)

3 days

Field work data collection (inclusive training, piloting)

7 days

Draft report submitted

4 days

Review by Project Management and stakeholders completed / comments provided to Supplier

2 days

Consultant addresses comments and revises study report

2 days

Final report submitted

2 days

Total days

20 days

Experiences and Qualifications

1. Consultant qualifications

The selected firm/consultant(s) shall possess the following qualifications:

• Advanced university degree in Peace & Conflict Studies, Social Sciences, Development Studies, or a related field, with a minimum of 5 years conducting similar evaluation assignments in fragile/conflict-affected settings. Previous experience leading studies of comparable scope in Somalia.
• Demonstrated experience designing, organizing, and conducting qualitative and quantitative research, including tool development, field team supervision, data analysis, and triangulation.
• Proven experience evaluating peacebuilding and social cohesion programmes in Somalia, applying conflict sensitivity, Do-No-Harm, and safeguarding throughout the evaluation cycle.
• Thorough knowledge of peacebuilding standards and frameworks, including conflict analysis, social cohesion approaches, and application of GESI (Gender Equality & Social Inclusion) in evaluations.
• Appropriate country knowledge/experience and ability to interpret findings within the Somali context.
• Strong analytical and writing skills with a track record of delivering high-quality reports and clear, actionable recommendations to diverse stakeholders.
• Excellent stakeholder facilitation skills, including engagement with authorities, community leaders, women and youth groups, civil society, and media actors.
• Solid data ethics and quality assurance, including informed consent, confidentiality, data protection, and systematic field QA (pilots, back/spot checks).

Evaluation Criteria

• Technical approach & methodology

• Contextual understanding & conflict-sensitive design

• Team qualifications

• Workplan & feasibility

• Financial proposal

The applications should be submitted to som.consultant@care.org not late then 20-09-2025**.**

Skills Required

Follow us on social media