The purpose of the assignment

• Gender equality and social inclusion are critical components of achieving sustainable development. Without understanding the different needs and experiences of young women and men including those who are marginalized, the RAY program will not be able to achieve its defined outcomes.
• The analysis will investigate how the status of young women and men affect their ability to participate and thrive within the value chains identified by the project. The barriers and issues identified will be addressed directly and challenged through the project to achieve progress towards gender equality and social inclusion within the agriculture sector, and especially within the project areas.
• The aim is to identify the key evidence gaps on the intersectionality between age, gender, disability, geographical location and participation in agriculture in the identified value chains. This will be used to develop the project’s learning agenda, guide and inform the strengthening of the gender action plan and ensure that gender transformative approaches are mainstreamed across the programme’s design and implementation.

The specific objectives of the analysis are:

• To better understand the root causes of gender inequalities and their effect on the value chains as guided by the program’s Theory of Change (ToC).
• To support the mainstreaming of gender transformation across RAY project ToC based on analysis findings.
• To facilitate an effective gender and disability inclusion approaches into the project’s Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL) frameworks, project workplan, budget and key program interventions, including the development of project influencing plan
• To support the design and development of effective gender and disability capacity building initiatives for the RAY program participants, partners, and staff.
• The GESI analysis will be framed around the following five key questions:
• What are the practical needs of women and men to be addressed to ensure inclusive participation in regenerative agriculture? i.e.
• What barriers do young women and men face in their attempt to access and control resources, assets, income, social networks, public and private services, employment, technology, and information in the agricultural sector? How do they impact on the participation of young women and men in the identified value chains?
• How do gender roles, responsibilities and use of time prevent or facilitate participation of the young women and men labour market and in particular in the three value chains targeted?
• What are the strategic needs of women and men to be addressed to ensure inclusive participation in regenerative agriculture? i.e.
• How do existing patterns of power and decision-making influence the ability of young women and men to decide, influence, and exercise control over material, human, intellectual, and financial resources in the family, community, and country related to the specific value chains?
• What are the specifics needs and barriers faced by people living with disabilities for them to fully participate in regenerative agriculture?
• Taking an intersectionality lens, what other marginalization dynamics exist and are critical to the engagement of women, men and young people in regenerative agriculture in Kisumu, Siaya, Kakamega, Vihiga, Busia, Bungoma, Homabay, Migori and Kisii Counties
• How favourable is the enabling environment towards inclusive and gender transformative regenerative agriculture practice in Kisumu, Siaya, Kakamega, Vihiga, Busia, Bungoma, Homabay, Migori and Kisii Counties? i.e.
• Do relevant laws, policies, and institutional practices contain clauses that enhance participation of young women and men, and people with disabilities in the value chains and enable them to assume leadership roles and access support provided by the project?
• Do relevant laws, policies, and institutional practices contain implicit or explicit gender and disability biases that may affect the ability of women and
• men with disabilities to participate in the value chains, assume leadership roles, and access the support provided by the project?
• How do existing gender norms and cultural beliefs influence the participation of young women and men, and people with disabilities in the value chains?
• What are the existing structures to support young women, men and people with disabilities to access resources, services and other benefits?

Evaluation Process:

• Before the GESI analysis is conducted, Practical Action will facilitate an internal exploration session with RAY staff, wider agricultural experts and gender experts to gather lessons learnt to frame the analysis.

The consultant will be responsible for the following:

Desk review and preparation
The consultant team will be required to:

• Complete a desk review of project documents to gain a sound understanding of the project’s original plan, objectives, and assumptions.
• Complete desk-based analysis of the project’s monitoring data in preparation for the primary data collection (previously gathered by Practical Action)
• Update the Evaluation Design

A draft GESI analysis design has been developed by Practical Action and KEFEADO. However, the consultant will update this based on: the findings from the design review and the project’s monitoring data, and their experience of engaging evaluation methodologies. In particular they will discuss and agree on the following with Practical Action Kenya:

• The GESI analysis methodologies chosen and develop tools and questions to use with each group and methodology.
• Which groups within the community and stakeholders to engage and how many
• Deciding the sample method and resulting number of locations and numbers of participants
• Any refinements to the make-up of the evaluation team
• Refining the schedule
• Practical Action believes using engaging and empowering qualitative data collection methods. Therefore, also focus group discussions and key informant interviews can be used, we are looking for the inclusion of other methodologies too. These could include:
• Participatory Learning and Action tools
• Most Significant Change Methodology
• Outcome harvesting – especially for assessing the systems change component.
• Photovoice
• Transect Walks
• Qualitative counterfactuals may be considered.
• Change stories could also augment the report.
• Field Work – Kisumu, Siaya, Kakamega, Vihiga, Busia, Bungoma, Homabay, Migori and Nyamira Counties

The consultant and team will be responsible for facilitating the majority of the activities. However, the consultant is responsible for:

• Training the team on the methodologies and approach to be adopted. Observing how they are being used and guiding improvement. This will include a day where the team will use tools in a test community, and then ongoing observing and strengthening in the following days
• Holding debrief sessions with the team (at least daily initially) to review both issues related to the use of the tools as well as to explore the learning to date. Adjust the tools or evaluation plan as needed based on the findings.
• Leading on the key informant interviews in the counties. Interview with County Government and private sector stakeholders is likely to provide some additional secondary data sources which need to be considered.
• Leading a reflection session with the communities (or once for each of the counties in the evaluation) to reflect back on the findings so far, verifying if they are correct or not, and then gaining deeper understanding to the reasons.

National – Nairobi

• For the systems analysis aspect, discussions will be held with national level stakeholders (Government line ministries, private sector, and other key NGOs / CBOs). Such interviews are likely to provide some additional secondary data sources which need to be considered.

Data Analysis

• The consultant will be responsible for doing the analysis of the qualitative data. If relevant this may include some quantitative analysis of qualitative data too. The key findings and recommendations will then need to be drawn from this analysis.

Draft Report

• The consultant will be required to develop a draft report.
• This should follow the template in Annex B of this TOR.
• Both the systems change component and the Gender lens need to be pulled out clearly in the report
• The details of the evaluation tools (explaining the method and the questions) should be included in an annex.
• It should focus on analysis more than stating facts (data can also be included in an annex) with clear findings.
• Clear and actionable recommendations for Practical Action, Mastercard Foundation, beneficiaries, and market actors/collaborators.
• Sharing of Findings
• The consultant will be required to hold a session to share the findings with key staff in Practical Action Kenya. The method is up to the consultant, but it is important to make it visual and engaging giving time for participants to ask questions and interrogate the findings. The session should include a theory of change review and should support the team to strengthen their Gender Action Plan.

Final Report

• The consultant will update the draft report based on any feedback given by Practical Action either during the sharing session or via e-mail. This will then be submitted to Practical Action and, if acceptable, final payment made.

Deliverables:

• The consultant will lead the consultancy process supported by KEFEADO and the technical lead for Gender and Social Inclusion at Practical Action. Other key program staff within Practical Action will also be involved in the gender analysis process, including tool development and as key participants in KIIs and FGDs. This will help to identify and address gender issues, understand their implications on the project’s design and delivery and support a more sustainable and collaborative effort to achieve progress towards gender equality.

Below is a list of key deliverables expected from the consultant during the various stages of the gender analysis process:

• Brief report on findings from the desk review and review of project monitoring data
• Updated detailed analysis design including analysis matrix.
• Training of analysis team carried out including a day of piloting the tools.
• Field trips and national meetings completed according to the plan.
• Draft report
• Sharing Session
• Final Report
• A detailed schedule will be developed and agreed with the successful candidate for these deliverables.

Requirements

Skills Required by the Consultant:

• Engaging GESI analysis Methodologies – Practical Action is looking to use good practice modern GESI analysis methodologies which are engaging and empowering of communities. Although focus group discussions and key informant interview could be included, we are looking for someone with experience in using other methods such as: various participatory learning and action tools, outcome harvesting, most significant change methodology, photovoice etc.

Other skills required are:

• Ability to lead and guide an evaluation team.
• Strong analysis skills
• Strong facilitation skills
• Excellent community engagement skills and proven experience using participatory learning and action tools.
• Confidence to engage with county and national stakeholders.
• Some knowledge of agriculture would be a bonus but is not required.

Terms of Payment:
The payment schedule will be as follows:

• 30% – Inception: Delivery of the brief report on findings from the desk review and review of project monitoring data as well as the updated evaluation design
• 40% – Completion of the field trips and national meetings according to the plan and Submission of the draft report
• 30% – Acceptance of the final report and sharing of findings.