Supporting vulnerable households and conflict affected communities to meet basic needs in the east and south of Ukraine, WHH Ukraine
Welthungerhilfe
Full-time Closing soon: 5 Nov 2025
I have formatted the entire text of the Tender Invitation for you. You can copy and paste the text block below:
Project Title: Evaluation of the AA funded project: “Supporting vulnerable households and conflict affected communities to meet basic needs in the east and south of Ukraine, WHH Ukraine”
CTM-id Ref. RFT: 404455 - 25-1029-135_ AA project Eval - Evaluation of the AA funded project: “Supporting vulnerable households and conflict affected communities to meet basic needs in the east and south of Ukraine, WHH Ukraine”
On behalf of Welthungerhilfe, 13 October 2025
The Joint Emergency Response in Ukraine (JERU) is a joint humanitarian programme by two international non-governmental organisations: Welthungerhilfe (WHH), and Concern Worldwide (CWW). It was established in 2022 to support war affected communities in Ukraine. The joint structure of JERU means that we can draw on the expertise of the two organisations, while also being more cost efficient in pooling funds and resources to support quality programming. JERU’s country office is based in Kyiv with offices in Khmelnytsyki, Poltava, Kharkiv and Mykolaiv. CWW and WHH are also members of Alliance2015, a network of European non-government organisations engaged in humanitarian and development action and have a long-term experience in many crisis-prone countries.
Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e. V. is one of the largest non-governmental organizations in Germany working in the fields of humanitarian assistance and development cooperation. Established in 1962 as the German section of the United Nations’ “Freedom from Hunger Campaign,” it was one of the first international initiatives focused on eradicating hunger. Today, Welthungerhilfe’s work remains guided by its founding vision: All people have a right to a self-determined life in dignity and justice, free from hunger and poverty.
In line with its Strategy 2025 – 2030: Zero Hunger on a healthy Planet, Welthungerhilfe promotes systemic change through evidence-based, impact-oriented approaches that are environmentally sustainable and socially just. The organization works in close partnership with local actors and communities to strengthen resilience, ensure food and nutrition security, and advance the realization of rights and agency among people affected by hunger and poverty.
Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e.V. (WHH) Welthungerhilfe JERU 23 - Б Bohdana Khmelnytskoho Str. 01054 Kyiv, Ukraine
ConcernWW implements a huge diversity of programmes, designed to address specific causes of extreme poverty in communities across 26 countries. These programmes are guided by these six thematic focus areas: Livelihoods, Health and Nutrition, Education, Emergencies, gender equality and climate and environment.
Both Welthungerhilfe and ConcernWW are committed to program quality, accountability, and continuous learning. Comprehensive Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, and Learning (MEAL) systems are embedded across the program cycle to ensure that interventions are effective, context-sensitive, and continuously improved. A central element of this approach is the Defining Impact paper, which outlines how WHH distinguishes between outcomes and impact to enhance clarity, credibility, and learning in its work. The organization fosters a culture of reflection, transparent sharing, and collaboration - ensuring that evaluations contribute to both organizational learning and broader sectoral knowledge.
JERU supports people affected by war in both rural and urban areas, working with internally displaced persons, returnees, and host communities. Together with local partners, we reach even the most remote areas across Ukraine. Our presence extends to the western oblasts of Ternopilska and Khmelnytska, the eastern regions of Poltavska, Dnipropetrovska, Donetska, Sumska, and Kharkivska, as well as the southern oblasts of Zaporizka, Mykolaivska, and Khersonska.
In eastern and southern Ukraine, JERU provides multipurpose cash and in-kind assistance to meet immediate needs. We help people face the harsh winter by covering utility costs and supplying heating materials such as firewood, briquettes, and stoves. Alongside this, we offer psychosocial support for both children and adults affected by trauma, ensuring they receive the care they need.
Our programming also supports livelihoods and recovery. We provide technical, vocational, and soft skills training to improve employability, while connecting job seekers with businesses in need of workers. Small businesses receive grants that aid recovery, stimulate the local economy, and create jobs. Families whose homes have been damaged by the war are supported with repairs, helping them regain safety and dignity.
Working together for stronger communities, we partner with local charities and civil society organizations to better respond to the needs of hromadas. We empower communities to decide which local projects to prioritize and support, and we provide funding for volunteer groups that respond to emergencies and evacuate people from frontline areas. Throughout our work, we uphold core humanitarian principles and ensure that people have safe ways to report misconduct by JERU staff or partners.
For the project: “Supporting vulnerable households and conflict affected communities to meet basic needs in the east and south of Ukraine, WHH Ukraine” JERU is starting this Tendering Procedure to contract with External Consultant(s) to conduct the evaluation of the AA funded project.
Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e.V. (WHH) Welthungerhilfe JERU 23 - Б Bohdana Khmelnytskoho Str. 01054 Kyiv, Ukraine
Tender documents must be submitted exclusively via the eTender platform: https://www.eu-supply.com/ in response to tender ref: 404455 - 25 -1029 -135_ AA project Eval - Evaluation of the AA funded project: “Supporting vulnerable households and conflict affected communities to meet basic needs in the east and south of Ukraine, WHH Ukraine”
Evaluation of the AA funded project: "Supporting vulnerable households and conflict affected communities to meet basic needs in the east and south of Ukraine, WHH Ukraine" On behalf of: Welthungerhilfe, 03 September 2025
Country: Ukraine
Project title: Supporting vulnerable households and conflict affected communities to meet basic needs in the east and south of Ukraine, WHH Ukraine
Project holder: Begum Akdogan, HoP
Approved project budget: 23,100,000 EUR
Project period: 01/07/2024 to 30/06/2026
The Joint Emergency Response in Ukraine (JERU) is a joint humanitarian programme by two international non-governmental organisations: Welthungerhilfe (WHH), and Concern Worldwide (CWW). It was established in 2022 to support war affected communities in Ukraine. The joint structure of JERU means that we can draw on the expertise of the two organisations, while also being more cost efficient in pooling funds and resources to support quality programming. JERU’s country office is based in Kyiv with offices in Khmelnytsyki, Poltava, Kharkiv and Mykolaiv. CWW and WHH are also members of Alliance2015, a network of European non-government organisations engaged in humanitarian and development action and have a long-term experience in many crisis-prone countries.
Deutsche Welthungerhilfe e. V. is one of the largest non-governmental organizations in Germany working in the fields of humanitarian assistance and development cooperation. Established in 1962 as the German section of the United Nations’ “Freedom from Hunger Campaign,” it was one of the first international initiatives focused on eradicating hunger. Today, Welthungerhilfe’s work remains guided by its founding vision: All people have a right to a self-determined life in dignity and justice, free from hunger and poverty.
In line with its Strategy 2025–2030: Zero Hunger on a healthy Planet, Welthungerhilfe promotes systemic change through evidence-based, impact-oriented approaches that are environmentally sustainable and socially just. The organization works in close partnership with local actors and communities to strengthen resilience, ensure food and nutrition security, and advance the realization of rights and agency among people affected by hunger and poverty.
ConcernWW implements a huge diversity of programmes, designed to address specific causes of extreme poverty in communities across 26 countries. These programmes are guided by these six thematic focus areas: Livelihoods, Health and Nutrition, Education , Emergencies, gender equality and climate and enviroment
Both Welthungerhilfe and ConcerWW are committed to program quality, accountability, and continuous learning. Comprehensive Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability, and Learning (MEAL) systems are embedded across the program cycle to ensure that interventions are effective, context-sensitive, and continuously improved. A central element of this approach is the Defining Impact paper, which outlines how WHH distinguishes between outcomes and impact to enhance clarity, credibility, and learning in its work. The organization fosters a culture of reflection, transparent sharing, and collaboration - ensuring that evaluations contribute to both organizational learning and broader sectoral knowledge.
JERU supports people affected by war in both rural and urban areas, working with internally displaced persons, returnees, and host communities. Together with local partners, we reach even the most remote areas across Ukraine. Our presence extends to the western oblasts of Ternopilska and Khmelnytska, the eastern regions of Poltavska, Dnipropetrovska, Donetska, Sumska, and Kharkivska, as well as the southern oblasts of Zaporizka, Mykolaivska, and Khersonska
In eastern and southern Ukraine, JERU provides multipurpose cash and in-kind assistance to meet immediate needs. We help people face the harsh winter by covering utility costs and supplying heating materials such as firewood, briquettes, and stoves. Alongside this, we offer psychosocial support for both children and adults affected by trauma, ensuring they receive the care they need.
Our programming also supports livelihoods and recovery. We provide technical, vocational, and soft skills training to improve employability, while connecting job seekers with businesses in need of workers. Small businesses receive grants that aid recovery, stimulate the local economy, and create jobs. Families whose homes have been damaged by the war are supported with repairs, helping them regain safety and dignity.
Working together for stronger communities, we partner with local charities and civil society organizations to better respond to the needs of hromadas. We empower communities to decide which local projects to prioritize and support, and we provide funding for volunteer groups that respond to emergencies and evacuate people from frontline areas. Throughout our work, we uphold core humanitarian principles and ensure that people have safe ways to report misconduct by JERU staff
This project, funded by the German Federal Foreign Office (AA) and implemented by Welthungerhilfe (WHH) and Concern Worldwide (CWW) under the Joint Emergency Response in Ukraine (JERU), aims to address urgent basic needs and strengthen community-based humanitarian response in five high-risk oblasts in eastern and southern Ukraine: Sumy, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Mykolaiv, and Kherson, with flexibility to respond in Donetsk and other locations as needed. The project is implemented from July 2024 to June 2026 (24 months) and builds on previous AA-funded interventions while integrating lessons learned and coordination with ongoing WHH and BMZ-funded activities. It is delivered in partnership with six local NGOs.
Project Objectives and Scope:
The overarching objective is to support war-affected populations to meet their emergency basic needs through cash and in-kind assistance, strengthen access to psychosocial support and protection services, and reinforce the response capacity of local partners and community-based structures. The project is structured around three main outcomes:
Outcome 1: Basic needs of vulnerable households are met through Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance (MPCA), in-kind support (food, hygiene), shelter repairs and winter assistance (cash and solid fuel)
Outcome 2: Community Response Mechanisms of conflict-affected populations are strengthened to provide meaningful access to PSS services and efficient response to community identified needs (through Group Cash Transfers).
Outcome 3: Provision of capacity building of local partners to ensure high quality sustainable humanitarian response and ensure needs of communities are prioritized
A detailed logframe outlining the expected outputs, indicators, and assumptions has been developed and is annexed to this ToR.
Target Population:
The project targets 142,520 unique individuals, including IDPs (56%), host communities (40%), and returnees (4%). Priority is given to populations in frontline, recently de-occupied, and underserved rural areas, as well as to groups with heightened vulnerability: households headed by women, people with disabilities, older individuals, and those with no or limited income. Inclusion and protection mainstreaming are embedded across all sectors, with a focus on accessibility, dignity, and community participation.
Implementation modalities:
The project uses a flexible mix of delivery modalities: cash assistance (Rapid MultiPurpose Cash Assistance (MPCA), MPCA, Winterization cash), in-kind distribution (Ready To Eat food kits, hygiene, solid fuel), group cash transfers (group-based grants to community initiatives), Psychosocial Support (PSS) sessions, awareness raising sessions and referrals, based on local market functionality, population preferences, and access conditions. Cash is delivered via RedRose’s digital platform, with robust deduplication and monitoring systems in place. In-kind distributions are reserved for hard-to-reach or newly displaced populations, especially where markets are constrained. Referral pathways and community protection desks are established through interagency protocols and service mapping. Capacity strengthening includes partner-led training, mentoring, and joint project design.
Contextual Background:
Since 2022, the humanitarian situation in eastern and southern Ukraine has remained critical, with escalating hostilities, mass displacement, and systemic disruption to essential services. As of 2024, 71% of the population in accessible Oblasts in these regions face extreme unmet basic needs. Areas near the frontlines areas (especially in Kharkiv, Sumy, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson) are marked by persistent shelling, infrastructure collapse, and frequent displacement. The hostilities continues to exacerbate socioeconomic vulnerabilities, including income loss, livelihood and shelter loss, movement restriction, isolation and disrupted education, and widespread psychosocial distress.
Particular vulnerabilities affect women, older persons, and persons with disabilities, internally displaced persons, evacuees, as well as men facing conscription risks. Access to PSS remains limited and stigmatized, especially among men and rural populations. Meanwhile, new displacement patterns in early 2024 and attacks on energy infrastructure have further strained coping capacities, especially during winter. In this context, flexibility, speed, community engagement, and partnership-based delivery are critical success factors.
Theory of Change and Logframe:
While a standalone Theory of Change (ToC) diagram is not included in the project narrative, the logframe annexed to this ToR reflects a logic model that links outcomes to clearly defined outputs, indicators, and assumptions. This structure reflects a multi-sectoral intervention logic grounded in humanitarian principles, localization, and adaptive programming.
Current project achievements:
The table below describes the achievements of the ongoing project. Where ‘n/a’ is indicated, it refers to the unavailability of results due to the implementation period not yet officially reported.
Goal: Basic needs of vulnerable households are met through the provision of Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance (MPCA), in-kind support, shelter repairs, and winter assistance.
Activity 1.1: Provision of multipurpose cash assistance Target: 39,000 individuals (including Rapid MPCA) Milestone 2: Planned: 11000, Achieved: 11214 Milestone 3: Planned: 12500, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 7000, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 39000, Total Achieved: 11214
Activity 1.2: Distribution of food kits Target: 10,000 food kits (Ready-to-Eat meal kits) Milestone 2: Planned: 4250, Achieved: 2 500 Milestone 3: Planned: 3500, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 2250, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 10000, Total Achieved: 2 500
Activity 1.3: Distribution of Hygiene kits Target: 26,400 Hygiene kits (22,000 kits and 4,400 PSN) Milestone 2: Planned: 14500, Achieved: 6 636 Milestone 3: Planned: 7200, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 4700, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 26400, Total Achieved: 6636
Activity 1.4: Winterization cash for utilities Target: 4,710 households Milestone 2: Planned: 2000, Achieved: 2 966 Milestone 3: Planned: 0, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 2710, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 4710, Total Achieved: 2 966
Activity 1.5: Winterization solid Fuel (in kind) Target: 650 households Milestone 2: Planned: 650, Achieved: 650 Milestone 3: Planned: 0, Achieved: 0 Milestone 4: Planned: 0, Achieved: 0 Total Target: 650, Total Achieved: 650
Activity 1.6: Emergency shelter repairs Target: 75 shelters (cash or in-kind) Milestone 2: Planned: 0, Achieved: 0 Milestone 3: Planned: 75, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 0, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 75, Total Achieved: n/a
Goal: Community Response Mechanisms of conflict affected populations are strengthened to provide meaningful access to PSS services and efficient response to community identified needs.
Activity 2.1: Community awareness raising on key protection issues Target: 5,160 individuals Milestone 2: Planned: 1155, Achieved: 1 470 Milestone 3: Planned: 2155, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 1340, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 5160, Total Achieved: 1470
Activity 2.2: Appropriate and timely referral of vulnerable individuals Target: 1,584 vulnerable individuals Milestone 2: Planned: 344, Achieved: 564 Milestone 3: Planned: 661, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 547, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 1584, Total Achieved: 564
Activity 2.3: Provision of group and individual PSS sessions Target: 8,360 individuals Milestone 2: Planned: 1685, Achieved: 4008 Milestone 3: Planned: 3368, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 2315, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 8360, Total Achieved: 4008
Activity 2.4: Group cash transfer Target: 50 community based and volunteer groups (GCT/Emergency GCT) Milestone 2: Planned: 17, Achieved: 50 Milestone 3: Planned: 15, Achieved: n/a Milestone 4: Planned: 18, Achieved: n/a Total Target: 50, Total Achieved: 50
Goal: Provision of capacity building of local partners to ensure high-quality sustainable humanitarian response and ensure needs of communities are prioritized.
Activity: Capacity strengthening workshops Target: 4 workshops for 6 partners Total Target: 4 workshops, Total Achieved: 2 workshops
Purpose: This is a mid-term external evaluation commissioned to generate strategic learning and support accountability for a complex, multi-sectoral humanitarian project. It is timed to surface actionable insights for adjustments during the remaining six months of implementation and guide future programming.
The evaluation serves a dual purpose:
The evaluation is not intended to inform donor decision-making about future funding for this specific action but will inform internal planning and partner engagement strategies.
Objectives:
Type of Evaluation: Mid-term external evaluation of a multi-sectoral humanitarian project funded by the German Federal Foreign Office (AA) and implemented by WHH and CWW under JERU.
Project Scope (Focus): The evaluation will cover the full scope of the project, but only focusing on two of the three outcomes and specific activities within them:
Outcome 1: Basic needs are met through provision of Multipurpose Cash, in Kind Support and winter assistance. Only Rapid MPCA will be the focus of this evaluation for this outcome.
Outcome 2: Community Response Mechanisms of conflict affected populations are strengthened to provide meaningful access to PSS services and efficient response to community identified needs. Only Group Cash Transfers and Referrals will be the focus of this evaluation for this outcome.
To limit the scope of the evaluation and the primary data collection, this evaluation will not assess the other activities of this project, though evaluators may reference interactions or synergies with these actions where relevant, notably through the Referral systems and to reflect potential complementarity of activities and integration.
Temporal Scope: Covers the project period from 1 July 2024 to the point of data collection.
Geographic Scope: Main oblasts targeted: Sumy, Kharkiv, Zaporizhzhia, Mykolaiv, and Kherson. Coverage may be adjusted based on security and access constraints.
Participant and Stakeholder Scope: The evaluation will engage a broad set of stakeholders:
Sampling Considerations: Evaluators must propose a sampling strategy that ensures meaningful representation across delivery modalities, partner organizations, participant types, and geographic zones. The methodology should consider disaggregation by gender, age, and disability.
The evaluation is intended to serve multiple internal and external user groups. Primary users are those who are expected to act upon the evaluation findings to improve programming, coordination, or learning. Secondary users include actors who may use the findings to understand project outcomes, validate alignment with strategic priorities, or inform broader sectoral reflection. Both the findings and the process of conducting the evaluation are intended to contribute to strengthened evidence-based practice, localization, and adaptive learning.
A summary of the evaluation findings will be shared with communities in appropriate formats, through JERU and its implementing partners, to close the feedback loop and support transparency.
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
Intended Use of Evaluation Findings:
Intended Use of Evaluation Process:
The evaluation will assess performance against the OECD-DAC criteria and other key priorities.
EQ1. To what extent did the project respond effectively, equitably, and timely to acute and emerging needs of conflict-affected populations?
EQ2. How relevant and appropriate were the modalities and targeting approaches used in this project?
EQ3. To what extent did the project strengthen local capacities and support community-led responses?
EQ4. How coherent and coordinated were the interventions with existing systems and actors (humanitarian and local)?
The evaluation is expected to follow a mixed-methods design that enables triangulation across multiple data sources and perspectives, while remaining feasible within the operational and security constraints of the Ukrainian humanitarian context. The purpose of the evaluation is both learning and accountability, and the methodology must support a critical and balanced inquiry into project outcomes, operational models, and cross-cutting priorities, such as participation, equity, and localization.
Evaluators are encouraged to propose a design that includes a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, suited to the evaluation questions and grounded in the project’s existing MEAL ecosystem. Comparative and disaggregated analysis should be pursued where the data allow, but methodological flexibility is retained to ensure contextual fit and feasibility. The final design will be confirmed during the inception phase and documented in the Inception Report.
The sampling strategy should ensure representation across the main intervention types (rapid MPCA,group cash transfers, referrals), while capturing variation across geographic areas, implementing partners, and target population groups. Full geographic or partner coverage is not required, as long as the sample is sufficiently diverse to answer the evaluation questions credibly. Data should be disaggregated by sex whenever possible, and further disaggregation by age and disability is strongly encouraged to support equity and inclusion analysis.
Evaluation teams must draw on existing data sources, including but not limited to:
• Registration, verification datasets, and distribution lists
• Post-distribution monitoring (PDM) data
• Referral tracking data
• FCRM datasets
• WHH’s Measuring Success indicators and relevant MEAL monitoring tools
• Baseline assessments, partner reporting, and available secondary data
• Indicator Tracking table
• Cluster guidance, WHH internal SOPs
Primary data collection is expected to include:
• Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) with WHH and partner staff, initiative groups, and local authorities (as relevant)
• Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) with project participants, ideally stratified by modality and participant profile
• At least one structured participatory or reflective method, such as an Influence Matrix, ranking exercises, outcome mapping, or Most Significant Change, to support deeper inquiry into decision-making, empowerment, or adaptation
The evaluation should include descriptive and comparative analysis, with efforts made to explore correlations or contrasts between locations, delivery mechanisms, and participant experiences where the data indicate significant divergence. Causal analysis is not expected, but evaluators should seek to identify success factors, operational bottlenecks, and potential failure points through triangulation and pattern recognition.
Innovative approaches to data collection or analysis (e.g. mobile-based surveys, participatory digital tools, storytelling, or community-led ranking) are welcome, provided they are feasible, ethical, and clearly linked to the evaluation questions. All methods must adhere to ethical standards, ensure informed consent, and safeguard participant confidentiality.
In-person data collection with project participants is highly preferred and should be prioritized wherever feasible. Evaluators are expected to develop an adaptive data collection plan that includes clear contingencies in the event that the security situation or access restrictions prevent field-based engagement at the time of implementation. This contingency should detail how remote data collection will be conducted as a Plan B, including approaches for reaching diverse participant groups (e.g., phone interviews, online FGDs, local enumerator networks), ensuring informed consent and data quality, and mitigating the risk of excluding the most vulnerable or hard-to-reach populations. Evaluators must also anticipate and proactively address potential barriers related to connectivity, digital literacy, trust, or privacy when proposing any remote methods.
Financial Resources:
A dedicated budget line has been allocated for this external mid-term evaluation under the current AA-funded project. Number of working days should be used as an indicative ceiling to guide the development of financial and technical offers. This envelope is expected to cover all costs associated with evaluator fees, travel and accommodation, data collection (travels, data collection team, etc), translation if required, analysis, and reporting.
Proposals should include a scalable costed methodology with options based on varying levels of geographic and modality coverage.
Human Resources:
The WHH Ukraine (JERU) MEAL team will provide limited support to the evaluation team, primarily through:
• A designated Evaluation Focal Point (MEAL Coordinator) to coordinate inception, validation, and reporting phases, with the support of the Head of Project
• Access to the MEAL and project team’s documentation, tools, and databases
• Support from the Head of Project and MEAL Focal point in refining sampling and site selection using existing datasets
No enumerators will be made available for primary data collection. The evaluator(s) should be prepared to lead all data collection directly or subcontract local enumerators. The evaluator(s) are expected to mention in their proposal what existing resources and/or networks they have in Ukraine.
No translators or local language support will be provided for FGDs and KIIs in Ukrainian, thus this should be planned in the Evaluation Budget.
Logistical Support:
Depending on the evaluation locations and timing, the following support may be available:
• Support letters or liaison with local authorities to facilitate community entry and stakeholder access
• Remote access and introductions to partner staff or coordination actors for KIIs
Proposers should clearly indicate any logistical support they would require and differentiate between core needs and value-adding options.
Available Data and Documentation:
The evaluation team will have access to a robust set of MEAL, programme, and coordination documents. These include:
• Project proposal and narrative (AA Application Form)
• JERU programmatic SOPs
• Corrected Logframe, with baseline and target values
• Registration and verification datasets (RedRose and partner tools)
• Post-Distribution Monitoring (PDM) data for MPCA, Group Cash Transfers
• Referral tracking database
• Project-level FCRM data
• Baseline or pre-distribution datasets, where available
• Measuring Success indicators, already reported or tracked internally
These documents will be made available during the inception phase, with additional materials shared upon request or as needed. Where datasets are incomplete or require cleaning, the MEAL team will provide clarification and support.
The evaluation will be commissioned by Welthungerhilfe Ukraine Country Office, under the framework of the AA-funded Joint Emergency Response in Ukraine (JERU) project. The evaluation will be led by the JERU MEAL Coordinator (highly supported by the Head of Project and Head of Programs), who will act as the primary Evaluation Manager and serve as the focal point for all technical, methodological, and coordination matters throughout the evaluation process.
MEAL Coordinator:
Name: Valeriia Nikiforova
Organisation: Welthungerhilfe Ukraine
Role: Evaluation management and coordination, technical oversight, quality assurance, validation of deliverables, and liaison with partners and donors as needed.
The MEAL Coordinator, with support of Head of Programs and Head of project will:
Review and validate the inception report, tools, and final outputs
Facilitate access to key project documents and MEAL data
Coordinate internal feedback and validation processes for deliverables
Programme and Operational Support:
The evaluation team will be supported by relevant programme and MEAL staff at the base and country levels.
This includes: MEAL and JERU project Officers and partner focal points to support access to data and beneficiary feedback
Head of Project for context, implementation insights and support in coordinating with project officers and partners
Area Managers, Partnership officers and Logistics focal points to coordinate field access or travel support
Evaluation Advisory Group:
An Evaluation Advisory or Reference Group may be established to ensure balanced review of tools and findings and to increase ownership and use of results. Its composition may include:
• Representatives of JERU MEAL, Head of Programs, Grants departments, Country Director (for key steps of findings and report review)
• Partner organisation focal points
• Head of Project
• Technical advisors (TA): Partnership, Protection, Cash & Vouchers TAs
This group would be consulted at key moments (e.g. inception, draft reporting) and may support the validation or use of recommendations following the final report.
Evaluator Liaison:
The evaluator(s) will report directly to the Evaluation Manager and may interact with other internal or partner staff as agreed during the inception phase. All data collection and external communications should be coordinated through the Evaluation Manager to ensure consistency, security, and appropriateness.
The consultant(s) are expected to adhere to the Core Humanitarian Standard (CHS), the organizational Code of Conduct, and strong safeguarding principles (PSEAH).
Key Ethical Requirements:
WHH is committed to uphold the Core Humanitarian Standard on Quality and Accountability, the organizational Code of Conduct and strong safeguarding principles, especially on the Protection from Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment (PSEAH). These standards guide all activities carried out by internal and external stakeholders, and require that all actions respect the dignity, rights and safety of individuals, especially project participants and those in vulnerable situations.
The consultants(s) are expected to adhere to these principles throughout the evaluation process.
This include but is not limited to:
Respectful, non-discriminatory and safe interactions
They must treat all participants with dignity and respect, regardless of gender, age, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, religion or other identity markers. They must actively avoid any behaviour that could be perceived as discriminatory, intrusive or intimidating. Extra care must be taken when working with children, women, persons with disabilities and other potentially at-risk groups to ensure that their participation is voluntary, safe and culturally appropriate.
Prevent and report any suspected cases of SEAH in line with WHH’s Policy against Sexual Violence.
Evaluators have a duty of care to prevent any form of sexual exploitation, abuse or harassment during the evaluation. If any suspicion or disclosure of SEAH arises, it must be treated seriously and reported immediately through WHH’s Reporting Channel: https://welthungerhilfe.whispli.com/reportconcerns. Evaluators must avoid any situations that could create a real or perceived power imbalance or misuse of authority.
Sign WHH’s Code of Conducts prior to the start of the assignment.
Before the assignment begins, all evaluators must formally confirm their commitment to WHH’s ethical standards by signing the organization’s Code of Conduct, which sets clear expectations for professional and ethical behavior. Additional declarations related to safeguarding, data protection and PSEAH compliance may also be required.
In addition, the evaluator(s) must follow ethical standards for research and evaluation, such as:
Consent
The evaluator(s) must ensure that informed consent is obtained from all participants prior to any kind of data collection. This includes providing clear information about the purpose of the data collection, how the data will be used, and the voluntary nature of participation, including the right to withdraw at any time without consequences.
Confidentiality
All documents and data acquired from documents as well as during interviews and meetings are confidential and to be used solely for the purpose of the evaluation. Any deliverables as well as all material linked to the evaluation (produced by the evaluator(s) or the organisation itself) is confidential and remains at all times the property of the contracting party.
The evaluator(s) are expected to produce a set of core deliverables that ensure the evaluation contributes meaningfully to learning, accountability, and adaptive decision-making. All deliverables must meet WHH’s quality standards, including ethical, safeguarding, and data protection requirements.
Templates for key outputs (inception report, evaluation matrix, final report, Measuring Success tools, 2-pager, management response) will be shared by WHH upon contract signature. Deadlines are to be finalized in agreement with the Evaluation Manager at the inception stage.
The consultants will be responsible for developing the evaluation planning, methodology and tools (both Focus group discussions and Key informants); including identifying a relevant sampling methodology, drawing a sample, training enumerators, field testing of the questionnaire and administering the questionnaire in face-to-face interviews with key informants as well as qualitative guides (FGDs, KIIs). In all matters related to proposed methodology, draft proposals will be presented to JERU Senior Management Team (SMT) and MEAL department for their feedback before being finalized. The consultants will also perform data analysis based on the collected data. At the end of the analysis process, a draft report will be shared with the project staff and JERU Senior Management Team for their comments/feedback. Based on the comments/suggestions received, the draft report will be updated to incorporate suggestions.
The following deliverables are expected to be produced by the evaluator(s):
Inception report and evaluation matrix
The inception report should set out the planned design and methodology to meet the above-mentioned purpose and to answer the evaluation questions.
It should also reflect the limits of the suggested design and methodology and explore the feasibility for answering the Evaluation Questions and reflect on the ToR, describe the overall approach of the evaluation and how data will be collected by providing an evaluation matrix breaking down the overarching evaluation questions, drafts of suggested data collection tools such as questionnaires and interview guidelines as well as a tentative evaluation schedule, Ethical considerations, including consent forms, safeguarding risk assessment and referral protocol. The inception report should clearly display the detailed data collection workplan and timeline.
The inception report and the evaluation matrix follow standard outlines which will be provided to the evaluator(s) after contracting and needs the approval of the contracting party. The inception report should highly rely on the desk review completion to ensure the evaluators have a fully informed perspective of the project and exiting data collected.
Deadline: Within 12 days after contract signature.
Primary data sources
All cleaned datasets and analysis generated during the course of the consultancy, code book, consent forms should be cleaned and shared after data collections.
Data collection debriefing
Debriefing notes/presentation outlining the most important observations from the data collection and reporting on any challenges faced during the data collection, for WHH and partners. Deadline: Shortly after the end of data collection.
The evaluator(s) are responsible for developing the evaluation planning, methodology, and tools, including sampling, enumerator training, and data analysis.
Sensemaking session
Comprehensive power point slides summarizing important preliminary findings and recommendations and their presentation to key stakeholders to discuss. The discussion should inform the reporting and ensure recommendations will be actionable and enable WHH feedback on the suggested recommendations to be discussed and to ensure relevance based on context.
Deadline presentation: After submitting the draft report and before submitting the final report.
Evaluation report incl. higher-level project rating along selected evaluation criteria
Evaluation report as draft and final (in English, 25–35 pages main text, including the executive summary but excluding the front page, table of contents and annexes). The evaluation report must contain an executive summary of a maximum of 5 pages and several mandatory annexes, incl. a mandatory project assessment based on the selected evaluation criteria. A template for the criteria assessment as well as an overall outline with key expected content for the evaluation report will be provided to the evaluator(s). The final report should include a section, or separate annex on the analysis of findings related to the WHH Measuring Success indicators: the results of data analysis for the project-relevant quantitative Measuring Success indicators, along with qualitative insights into these results. A concise summary of qualitative findings, highlighting insights and reasons for observed changes in Measuring Success indicators should be reported based on a template that will be submitted by WHH. Moreover, WHH will share a Report Quality Checklist that WHH staff will use to assess the quality of the report. The evaluator(s) are encourage to take a look at the checklist and ensure the report meets the WHH report quality standards. The final report needs the approval of the contracting party. In case of dissent there should be documentation of the matter.
Deadline draft report: At the latest 2-3 weeks prior to the final evaluation deadline.
Deadline final report: 1 to 2 weeks after the submission of the draft report.
Evaluation brief 2-pager A two-paged summary of the project, evaluation design and methodology, findings, conclusion and recommendations using a template provided by WHH. Deadline: same as Final report
Management Response Matrix
Management response matrix with actions derived based on the recommendations. A template will be provided to the evaluator(s). Deadline: same as Final report
Photos: The evaluator(s) should provide a digital file with up to three photos of the evaluation, including photos related to the evaluation process (e.g. of group discussions, interviews, final workshop). The photos should be submitted in a JPEG or GIF format. The informed consent of the person presented is a prerequisite.
Deadline: same as Final report
Final payment is dependent on the submission of a good quality, well-written final report or completion of agreed. In addition to methodology, findings and discussion, the report should include a comprehensive executive summary and a section outlining clear and concise conclusions and recommendations.
A digital copy of all reports will be required by JERU at the end of the piece of work.
Data Protection: Throughout the consultancy, the consultant will take all necessary measures stipulated in order to protect and safeguard personal data and to minimize the risk of attributing findings to specific individuals or households. During the inception phase, the Consultant will liaise with JERU MEAL department to ensure necessary safeguards are in place in this regard. The consultant will undertake to maintain the confidentiality of any information received from JERU and not to discuss any confidential information gained through the consultancy with anyone outside of the Senior Management Team (SMT).
The evaluation is expected to take place over a period of approximately 45-47 working days, with a combination of desk review, fieldwork, analysis, and reporting, including the feedback phase and findings presentation. Evaluators may propose adjustments to the sequencing or duration based on feasibility, security conditions, or methodology, as long as all deliverables are met within the project timeframe.
The evaluation may be conducted in-person or using a mixed approach, depending on the proposed design and access to field sites. In person data collection is to be prioritized. Remote data collection methods are acceptable when in person data collection is not feasible due to security and access constraints and should be clearly justified and adapted to ensure quality and inclusion.
A tentative timeline is outlined below. The exact dates will be agreed upon with the selected evaluator(s) during the inception phase.
The evaluator(s) are expected to propose a detailed workplan in their technical offer. WHH and the Evaluation Manager will confirm the final schedule during the inception phase and coordinate any necessary adjustments.
An initial tentative timeline for the evaluation is presented below. Proposals are expected to discuss the feasibility and include a workplan. The final timeline/workplan will be agreed upon jointly with the evaluator(s) and WHH.
It is proposed that the consultant will follow the following indicative sequence to complete the assignment:
Phase-I: Inception Phase (remote)
• Initial remote meeting with JERU Senior Management and Program Teams: At the very beginning of the assignment, the consultant will have remote Skype/ Teams meetings with a few JERU staff as necessary. This is a very important aspect of the assignment as the ToRs will be discussed to ensure
that JERU and the consultant create mutual understanding on the volume and quality of work expected, understand the background of the project and identify any potential strengths and weaknesses in implementation and results that may require additional attention in data collection. Following this meeting, JERU will provide all relevant key project documents through email for the desk review.
• The consultants can work with senior management to identify appropriate interviewees such as the Country Director, Head of Programs, Head of Project, MEAL coordinator.
• Desk review: The consultant will undertake a comprehensive desk review of the existing project literature. The literature review will include but is not limited to AA project plans, logical framework, activity reports, program planning tools, monitoring reports, post-distribution monitoring reports, complaints and response system analysis, and other relevant documents.
• Inception Report: Based on the literature review the consultant will develop the methodology for primary data collection. The methodology will be developed in line with project indicators, purpose and objectives of the assignment. The Inception Report, including the research tools (in English and Ukrainian) and Data Collection Plan, will be shared with JERU for comments before finalization, and will include qualitative questions. Notably, the consultant will develop the selection criteria for the selection of Hromadas and Settlements among the three target Oblasts and the sampling approach. It is expected that the Final inception report will be shared with JERU no later than the 10th day from the start of the consultancy (see Timeframe section).
Phase-II: Data Collection Process (field work)
• Initial Briefing Session with JERU and Finalization of Data Collection Plan: Immediately after the arrival of the consultant in JERU’s office in Kyiv1, a briefing session will be held by JERU to cover all the aspects of the field visit and data collection process, including security briefing. The field work plan will be finalized in close consultation with JERU’s program team, Security Manager and Area Manager to confirm schedule and details of field visits/interviews, including target villages for the Final Evaluation.
• Training of enumerators, survey testing and data collection: The consultant will be responsible for the overall planning and implementation of data collection; including the orientation for enumerators/evaluation team on the tools, pre-test (if appropriate) survey tools, conduct field data collection through FGDs, KIIs (from the community and partners).
• Key informant interviews with JERU and partners staff will be conducted to gain more insight on the project’s activities, results and better inform preliminary findings to respond to the evaluation’s research questions and criteria. Some selected staff at more junior levels can be considered as well to ensure a diverse set of perspectives are captured (Cash and Vouchers Officers, Protection Officers, Complaints and response assistants).
Phase-III: Data Management and Report (remote)
• Data Analysis: Data analysis will start parallel to data collection, including data entry, cleaning, processing, analysis and consolidation.
• Presentation of key findings and Report writing: At the end of analysis period, a draft report will be produced and shared with JERU’s Senior Management Team and MEAL Coordinator for their comments/feedback. The consultant will hold a de-briefing session with JERU staff on major findings.
• Final Report: A Final Report will be produced in the agreed format and will be updated in line with comments/feedback of JERU’s SMT and MEAL Coordinator.
Lines of Communication: The Consultant will report directly to the Country Director of JERU Ukraine and will work closely with the MEAL Coordinator, Head of Programs, Head of Project and Area Manager.
The consultant will complete the work over a period of forty-seven (47) working days, including travel to project areas. A suggested timeline is outlined in the below table.
The evaluation is expected to take approximately 45-47 working days.
Phase I: Inception
Phase II: Data Collection
Phase III: Report Writing
Phase IV: Feedback & Finalization
Phase V: Final Submissi
