Background and Context

The Gayo Coffee Producer Empowerment Initiative Second Phase project began on April 1, 2014 and runs until December 2015 as a continuation and expansion of the First Phase which was implemented from April 1, 2013 to March 2014. The project was funded by Rabobank Foundation trough Fair Trade USA.

The goal of the second phase project is to improve the productivity, quality, and market access of 2,590 coffee producers in 2 districts of Gayo Region, Aceh, Indonesia. The goal for the first phase was the same with a different number of project beneficiaries.

The first phase of the project focused on two cooperatives: Koperasi Permata Gayo and Gayo Linge Organic Cooperative (GLOC) with 2,625 project beneficiaries in 75 villages. The project had four objectives.

Two objectives were under LWR’s responsibility, and the other two were under Fair Trade USA’s intervention. The two objectives under LWR are:
1.       Strengthen the capacity of the Permata Gayo and GLOC cooperatives to provide training and technical support to members while improving levels of governance, accountability and member participation to increase market access and benefits.
2.       Over a 12-month period, build the capacity of 2,625 coffee farmers to improve on-farm management of their cultivations, including pest control, soil management, organic fertilization and value-added post-harvest management techniques.

The second phase focused on two additional cooperatives: Ketiara and Koperasi Baitul Qiradh Babburayan (KBQB) with continued assistance to Permata Gayo and GLOC. The activities involving Ketiara and KBQB in the second phase are the same as the ones carried out with Permata Gayo and GLOC during the first phase. The only difference is the number of wet-mill processing units and organic fertilizers constructed. 

LWR is seeking an external evaluator or team of evaluators to assess both phases of this project. This assessment should be completed within a maximum of one month and reports should be submitted in accordance with the given schedule.

The purposes of the evaluation are:
1.       To assess and explore the major socio-economic impact of the project at the community and household level from both project phases.
2.       To examine LWR’s working and partnership approaches with cooperatives in implementing the projects.
3.       To document key achievements, strengths, weaknesses and lessons learnt from the projects and make specific recommendations for scaling up such projects in the future.
The evaluation report will be used by LWR to identify lessons learn or programmatic approaches that can be replicated. The evaluation report may also be distributed to other organizations such as Rabobank Foundation and Fair Trade USA as well as
Evaluation Scope and Key Question
This evaluation includes the assessment of the two phases of the project. In summary, these are:
Phase I:
Two cooperatives in Bener Meriah
2,625 farmers
75 delegates
20 cooperative staff and board
Phase II:
Four cooperatives, two in Bener Meriah, two in Aceh Tengah
2,620 farmers
80 delegates
22 cooperative staff
Bener Meriah is 20-30kms from Aceh Tengah
The consultants should consider these key questions during the design of the study instruments – methods, questionnaires, checklists or any evaluation tools. These are just guiding questions. The evaluation should not be limited to them.
  1. What are the most significant socio-economic changes from this project at the coffee producers’ level?
    • Is there any significant improvement in terms of the quality of the coffee that the farmers produce?
    • Is there any change in price due to the difference in the quality of the coffee the farmers produce?
Do farmers produce a greater yield because of the project’s assistance?
Did the changes (in yield/quality) affect the buyers’/farmers’ behavior? For instance, were there changes in the coffee that the buyers purchase?
·       Do farmers think that coffee farming is a worthwhile source of income?
    • Are farmers’ incomes sufficient to support the needs of their entire family (food, health, education)? [1]
    • How does LWR’s approach to increasing yield per ha compare with other organizations’/companies’ approaches?
    • Were farmers’ production losses reduced because of LWR’s assistance?
    • Do farmers still depend on loan sharks’/collectors’ pre-finance prior to harvest season?
    • Has there been any significant impact on farmers’ livelihoods, family health and education? Is LWR’s project contributing to that impact?
  1. What are the most significant socio-economic changes from this project at cooperative level?
    • Has the cooperative received new funding because of LWR’s assistance?
    • Do farmers think that cooperatives are a good place to sell their coffee?
    • What are the sustainability plans of the cooperatives? Are they able to run their business on their own?
  1. What is the cost-benefit analysis when assessing efficiency and effectiveness of the projects?
    • What is the cost:benefit ratio of the project?
    • What were the major benefits of the project to the target households’ incomes?
    • How many farmers benefited from the project in total?
    • What is the income increase: project investment ratio?
  1. Have the coffee projects impacted gender roles at the household or community level?
    • What were women’s/men’s role before the project?
    • How have women’s/men’s roles changed over the course of the project?
    • Is there any support that the project has given to make gender roles worse/better[2]?
    • To what degree has women’s status in the coffee business has been changed by the project intervention?
  1. How has the private sector in these projects helped and contributed to the socio-economic changes of the community and targets households.
    • How many private sector actors work in the region, directly with farmers’ organization (cooperatives)?
    • What support does the private sector provide to the cooperatives?
    • How has the support from the private sector contributed to coffee quality and production?
    • Does the additional price that the company pays to farmers benefit both the company and the farmers (in terms of the sustainability of coffee production)
LWR encourages the consultant to bring or propose relevant and innovative study methods and tools. The consultant will design an impact study framework on how the studies will be carried out, taking into account the study context, purpose and use, criteria and questions. The data will come from primary and secondary sources such as the project participants, project implementers/LWR partners, and other stakeholders; project documents; and other relevant sources. The study may use data collection tools that range from household surveys, key informant interviews, focus group discussions, in depth case studies etc. LWR encourages the use of participatory evaluation tools. The consultant may decide on the other appropriate methodologies based on their consultations with LWR, the partners, and project participants.

This study encourages the use of both quantitative and qualitative methodologies, “with and without” communities, and “before and after” (the intervention) evaluation as suggested methods for rigorous analysis. LWR Regional Monitoring and Evaluation Manager will provide support to finalize the evaluation study tools.
The consultant is expected to deliver:
1.       Evaluation plan (inception plan, inception report) - The consultant/evaluator, with guidance from LWR, will prepare an Assessment Plan/inception Report before initiating data collection. The assessment plan will include an evaluation matrix: what is being evaluated, and how each evaluation question will be answered by way of: proposed methods, proposed data sources, sampling methodology, data collection procedures, and who will use the report findings, and how.

2.       Draft evaluation report: The consultant/evaluator will submit a draft assessment report to the Country Director (CD) for feedback and input. CD may share the draft report with other concerned LWR staff for their input and feedback. The consultant will incorporate LWR’s relevant input, feedback and comments into the final report.
Final evaluation report: The consultant will finalize the report incorporating relevant input and feedback from LWR. The final evaluation report is to be submitted by December 18, 2015. The consultant must use the LWR report template. It is available on request from the contact person.
Roles and responsibilities of LWR:
·       Assist the consultant in the coordination of meetings and scheduling of data gathering activities with the implementing partners and project participants in the covered project areas.
·       From time to time monitor the progress of study activities.
·       Assign an evaluation manager/officer as the point person for this study, including communication, logistics, and guidance.
·       LWR will facilitate communication with various stakeholders, private coffee companies, and implementing partners and beneficiaries.
·       Assist the consultants in identifying and linking with the beneficiaries and other identified respondents for the study.
Roles and responsibilities of consultant:
·       Provide LWR with details of the role of team members if there is more than one evaluator.
·       Work closely with the LWR point person in carrying out the evaluation work.
·       Conduct document review.
·       Provide all the deliverables as mentioned in the ToR below on time.
The consultant will complete all above deliverables within a maximum of twenty-three (23) days. The consultant can revise schedule and days required jointly with LWR. The proposed major deliverables and days required are given as below:
Desk Review of all the project documents including the project proposal, logframe, and other DMEL tools  - ITT/ATT and progress report
3 days
Briefing, discussion and interaction with LWR Country Directors and relevant staff involved in the project (Program Manager, Senior and Project Officer, Finance staff).
2 days
Finalization of survey instrument (Inception Report) including study methods, questionnaires, checklists, field schedules
2 days
Field work : Field work, primary data collection, observation, meeting and interactions,
6 days
Cost benefit analysis : measuring efficiency and effectiveness of the projects
3 days
Drafting the final report
4 days
Debriefing and taking feedback about field work to country team and staff
1 days
Preparation of final report with inclusion of LWR input/ comments and comprehensive presentation on sharing the lessons, opportunities and challenges identified through the process
2 days
Total days required
23 working days
LWR is open to a consultant or team or firm for this assignment. The submitted  proposals will be assessed with the following 3 major criteria:
1.       Demonstrated capacity to conduct an impact study, cost-benefit analysis, and research/studies/assessments of coffee projects.
2.       Technical proposal outlining an understanding of the assignment, and proposed impact study plan and methodology.
3.       Cost-effectiveness of the proposed budget to achieve these deliverables.
LWR is looking for consultants with the following qualifications and experience:
·       At least 5 years of progressive professional experience in conducting impact studies, cost benefit analyses, surveys, project evaluations with solid experience in conducting and managing coffee or similar cash crop projects (CVs will be reviewed).
·       Demonstrated capacity to analyze qualitative and quantitative data in a systematic way.
·       Demonstrated ability to present complex information in a concise, clear and accessible way.
·       Extensive knowledge on standards and procedures about cost-benefits analysis.
·       Demonstrated experience applying participatory evaluation methodologies in cross-cultural settings.
·       Capacity to conduct gender analysis and its impact in livelihoods.
·       Experience collecting data in rural areas of Indonesia and target project sites is considered an asset, although is not a prerequisite for applying.
·       Have excellent writing skills (in English), and have outstanding analysis, and communication skills.
·       Working knowledge of Bahasa is an asset. 
·       Feedback or comments on this TOR, and questions
·       A short proposal (not more than 5 pages) on how to fulfill the TOR, which should include impact study methods, evaluation plan and cost detail including fees
·       Resumes/CVs with references
·       A sample similar evaluation report
Expression of Interest with the full proposal is to be sent to and also copied to before 20 November 2015
Any decision for disqualification rests solely with LWR.
The evaluator should submit the proposal with budget including, but not limited to,:
·       Travel cost to and from Takengon
·       Translator cost, if needed
·       Accommodation and meals when in Medan / field
·       Field enumerator fee
These annexes are available upon consultant being determined:
·       Project proposals
·       All periodic project progress reports
·       M&E Plan Matrix,
·       Logframe
·       Monitoring report

[1] Sufficient will be compare with minimum monthly pay for daily labor (UMP – Upah Minimum Provinsi/ Province Minimum Payment)
[2] Better/worse: more equitable/less equitable, where man and woman have better partnership in household level as well as in community level