Consultancy – End of Project Evaluation – Jane Goodall Institute (JGI)

Consultancy Title:  End of Project Evaluation

Organisation: Jane Goodall Institute (JGI)

Duty Station:  Kampala, Uganda


1.0 Project Overview.

The Jane Goodall Institute (JGI) is implementing a three year (2021-2023) “Growing Together II” project built on lessons learnt during the implementation of the previous phase of Growing Together Project. It aims at: 1) addressing identified gaps and emerging threats including gender equity and equality issues in natural resources management, land use change driven by charcoal production and unsustainable addressing catchment management gaps so as to achieve production targets while helping to conserve biodiversity in a rapidly transforming forest landscape and 2) reinforcing best practices by scaling to a wider impact the regeneration of critical riparian forests, and strengthening Climate-Smart Agriculture and Non-Agricultural Livelihood options.


Geographically, the broader project site is the Budongo-Bugoma landscape that is located within the Albertine Rift. The main forests Budongo and Bugoma are highly degraded and exist predominantly in valleys along rivers such as the Waaki, Siiba, Wambabya, Rwamatonga, Hoima, and Kafu which all pour their waters into Lake Albert. The Growing Together Project II targets the river Waaki and its tributaries including River Siiba. Specifically, the project works in 20 villages in two parishes (Nyantonzi and Kasongoire) in Masindi District. These villages are home to the micro-catchments and feeder streams for River Waaki.


1.1 Project Goal.

The overall goal of the project is to establish an inclusive climate resilient landscape and livelihoods, where multiple stakeholders collaborate on managing the role ecosystems play in climate resilience and sustainable development.


1.2 Project Objectives.

The specific project objective is adoption of an integrated catchment management approach for the management of forest and land resources in the wildlife corridor between the Bugoma-Budongo Forest Reserves in Western Uganda that fosters increased ecosystem benefits, climate resilience and improved rural livelihoods.


1.3 Expected outcomes.


The project aimed at achieving following key intermediate results,


KRA 1: Enabling Institutional Environment – institutional, regulatory and implementation systems for Catchment Management Plans have been strengthened and are operational.


KRA 2: Adaptation Component – restoration of 1,700 hectares from multiple degraded land holdings and forest areas in the target landscape is achieved through Famer-led Landscape Restoration (FLR) and improved management.


KRA 3: Improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the charcoal value chain to mitigate a major driver of deforestation.


KRA 4: Gender Component – gender inclusive and participatory planning and integrated in all project components to ensure gender responsiveness and equity.


2.0 Evaluation Purpose and use, Objectives, and Scope.


As a requirement by JGI policy and Donors, a final evaluation should be undertaken at the close-out stage of the project. JGI Uganda therefore seeks to hire the services of a consultant(s)/ firm to undertake an end line evaluation of the project.


2.1 Purpose of the Evaluation.


The primary purpose of the evaluation is to assess the extent to which the program has achieved set results and objectives across all program components. This is intended to support stronger accountability to donors and stakeholders, create an evidence base for ongoing fundraising efforts, and generate learnings that can be used to inform the design of a new program under Jane Goodall Institute Austria and other relevant programs and initiatives. To this end, the evaluation will assess the changes that have occurred the intermediary results and the effects in relation to the program’s results and objectives.


The specific objectives of the evaluation include:

  1. Assess the effectiveness of the project towards achieving its intended objectives and establish the factors that could have limited or facilitated their realization.
  2. Make recommendations to enhance the relevance of the project in terms of design and focus, with particular emphasis on Forestry, Climate-smart agriculture, non-agricultural livelihood options, resilience, gender and where there are opportunities for innovation.
  3. Make recommendations to improve the efficiency of the project interventions in terms of quality, cost and timeliness.
  4. Make recommendations to enhance the sustainability and potential scalability of the project with a particular focus on the forest components.
  5. Assess the adoption/ domestication of cross-cutting approaches that include – but not limited to – community capacity strengthening, gender equality, gender equity, youth empowerment, market-based approaches to conservation and private sector engagement.


  1. Assess the level of achievement of project milestones and targets (as presented in the log frame)


  1. Identify and document lessons, best practices and recommendations that can inform future initiatives.


2.2 Evaluation Targeted Audience


The results of the final project evaluation are envisaged to benefit a wide array of stakeholders including the project team, Government Ministries, Departments, and Authorities (MDAs), JGI implementing office (Uganda Country Office) District local governments, Private sector, Cultural institutions, Education Institutions, NGOs/CSOs and the community.


2.3 Scope


Jane Goodall Institute Uganda plans to commission an external evaluator to conduct an End line project evaluation in order to assess its results and potential in line with the project indicators as set in the log frame. The evaluation will use a mixed-methods approach that are appropriate to collect adequate and quality data for each of the specific intermediate results areas in section 1.3 above. Relatedly, methods of analysing quantitative and qualitative data that are technically appropriate in evaluation studies will be used.


The scope of the entire assignment involves:


  1. Reviewing literature and existing projects documents relevant to the objectives of the evaluation i.e. original project document, Redesigned project concept, Project progress reports, Updated log frame and the indicator trackers among others.


  1. Designing appropriate methodology including sampling and sample size that will collect adequate data, and defining methods of data analysis that will address the above stated objectives of the study


  1. Interpreting the analysed data in context to respective sub-sectoral and Project performance and presenting it in a report of findings and recommendations which will be verified by Jane Goodall Institute management in a workshop.


Project districts and Parishes.


Project District. Parishes and Villages.
Masindi. Nyantonzi Parish: Rwangara, Siiba, Akerakaveni I, Ekarakeveni II, Nyantonzi,
Rwentale I, Rwentale II, Bineneza, Rwempisi, Ambaka, Kyamongi and
Kimanya, Nyantonzi villages.
Kasongoire Parish: Bulyango, Kasongoire, Kimanya, Kiryamwongo, Kisagura,
Kyabijwenge, Nyakyeju, Waipachu villages.

2.4 Specific Objectives


  1. a) Effectiveness:

To what extent have the planned objectives in the log frame of the project, been reached, per indicator, disaggregated by gender and age?

To what extent have the project activities contributed to the overall goal? Was the project effective in increasing the resilience of farmers and communities?

What were the major factors influencing the achievement of the objectives of the project?

What opportunities for collaboration have been, utilized and how have these contributed to increased effectiveness? or otherwise?


  1. b) Relevance:

How  the  project  aligned  with  the  mission,  objectives  and  the  mandate  of  meeting  the expectations of the beneficiaries.

To what extent did the project achieve its overall objectives?

What and how much progress has been made towards achieving the overall outputs and outcomes of the project?

Has the project been designed adequately with regard to?


  • Has the timeline been adequate?
  • Have the planned measures been adequate? o Which differing results have been achieved?


Were external assumptions identified realistically? How were mitigation strategies identified and responded to by the project?


  1. c)

To what extent did the intervention deliver results in an economic, quality and timely way (maximization of outputs with the given inputs)

Was the process of achieving results efficient? Specifically did the actual or expected results outputs and outcomes) justify the costs incurred?

Did project activities overlap and duplicate other similar interventions (funded nationally and/or by other donors? Are there more efficient ways and means of delivering more and better results (outputs and outcomes) with the available inputs?

Were the resources effectively utilized? Is the project/program delivering value for money in that costs are reasonable given the outputs and outcomes generated?

How efficient were the management and accountability structures of the project? Are human resources appropriate, adequate, efficiently organized, and operating effectively (e.g., include considerations of capacity needs and gaps, communications, division and clarity of roles and responsibilities, processes for evaluation and improvement)?


  1. d) Gender equality and Social Inclusion

To what extent have issues of gender and marginalized groups been addressed in the design, implementation and monitoring of the project?

To what extent the project approach was effective in promoting gender equality and social inclusion particularly focusing on women and socially disadvantaged groups?

To what extent has the project promoted positive changes of women and marginalized group?

Were there any unintended effects?


  1. e) Sustainability:

What strategies were put in place to ensure replication and scaling up of the projects results even after the project is phased out?

What is the likelihood of continuation and sustainability of project outcomes and benefits after completion of the project?

How effective are the exit strategies, and approaches to phase out assistance provided by the project including contributing factors and constraints?

How were capacities strengthened at the individual and organizational level (including contributing factors and constraints)?

What external factors could have a high or medium likelihood of undoing or undermining the future sustainability of project positive impacts? (e.g., Political stability, economic crises, overall level of development, organizational skills). Is the project/program adequately anticipating and taking measures to ensure resilience to these?

Describe the main lessons that have emerged. What are the recommendations for s for future interventions based on the current evaluation findings?


3.0 Methodology Considerations


The Consultant is expected to provide a detailed and robust evaluation methodology in line with the scope, objectives and evaluation questions. The choice of methods will be dependent on the anticipated information, although preference is for a mixed methods approach to maximize the rigor and reliability of the findings. The sampling should be representative when selecting data collection methods, the context in relation to the sectors and enterprises engaged. The consultant will utilize among others the following methods in collecting data.


Document Review: The consultant shall undertake in depth review of relevant documents such as the project proposal, annual work plans, activity and technical progress reports, financial reports, evaluation reports, internal Result-Oriented Monitoring report and other documents produced by the project. The consultant shall also review relevant partner documents.


Interviews and consultations: The consultant shall interview the project team and other relevant staff at JGI-Uganda, peer conservation organizations, government, civil society actors, private sector and beneficiaries. Structured /non-structured interview questions shall be administered either through face-to-face meetings, online call, email, etc.


Field visits: The consultant shall undertake visits to project sites in targeted Districts to verify project results on ground. During the field visit, the consultant shall assess the impact of the project on people and nature. The consultant shall elaborate on the methodology to be undertaken based on the objective, scope and focus of the evaluation presented above.


4.0. Key Deliverables

The consultant(s) is expected to deliver the following to the JGI team:

  1. Inception report that clearly and comprehensively highlight the consultants’ understanding of the assignment, methodology for conducting the study including an inquiry matrix on how key evaluation questions will be approached; Timelines; Data collection tools, a breakdown of costs and a detailed work plan for the entire assignment.
  2. A digital copy in MS Word format of the draft evaluation report (main text excluding summary and annexes not exceeding 30 pages)
  3. A PowerPoint presentation indicating the key findings and recommendations for validation purposes.
  4. A digital copy in MS Word format of the final evaluation report (main text excluding summary and annexes not exceeding 50 pages), as per the report format.
  5. The final report should include at a minimum the following elements:
    • Executive summary
    • Background
    • Brief project description and context
    • Evaluation purpose
    • Methodology including sampling procedure and size.
    • Main findings per project component
    • Emerging issues per component
    • Lessons learnt per project component.
    • Recommendations per project component
    • At least 15 original photos (annotated) of the key successes of the project


5.0. Desired Skills and Competences of Consultants.


The selected consultant shall demonstrate a proven experience in evaluating conservation and/or development programs within the Ugandan context. If applying as a consultancy team, the lead consultant will be required to clearly describe the roles and responsibility of the team and share during the inception phase.


The consulting firm or consultant(s) will be selected based on their proven experience, technical knowledge, qualifications, methodology presented and ability to deliver a quality product in a timely and efficient manner.


At the minimum, the consultant(s) shall have the following.


The lead consultant should hold a minimum of MSc. Degree in Forestry, Natural Resources Management or any other related field, and a graduate degree in Monitoring and Evaluation or Project Planning and Management.


The team should include skills and/or qualifications and/or expertise in Community-based management of natural resources and community development; Local governance and participatory planning processes; community livelihood development.


Other desired skills and competencies

  • At least 10 years of professional experience in Forestry, Natural Resources Management, Project, Project Planning and Management or related fields.
  • A minimum of 5 years of experience in assessing conservation, biodiversity and/or development donor programs.
  • Proven experience in more than one country in conducting endline evaluations for conservation programs.
  • Proven international experience and must have worked in Uganda, and on conservation of biodiversity.
  • Proven excellent analytical skills and ability to collect and process large data sets in a short period of time.
  • Ability to review relevant documentation, engage stakeholders efficiently and effectively and to produce excellent written reports.
  • Excellent oral and writing skills in English as well as computer literacy (Microsoft: Word, Excel, and Power Point)
  • The preferred consultant(s) for this assignment should have diverse skills in conservation program evaluations and research with a bias to georeferenced data collection, analysis interpretation and presentation, Strong experience in Integrated conservation & development approaches.
  • Exposure and up to-date with new conservation approaches.
  • As the evaluation will involve the operation sections, the team should consist of members with relevant background experience and skills.


6.0 Timeframe for the Evaluation Process


The evaluation will be conducted in December 2023-January 2024 for an estimated 30 working days. The consultant will be provided with information to prepare (with the support of the JGI-UG Office) a table with tasks, timelines, and deliverables, for which the consultants will be responsible and accountable.


7.0. Application Procedure.

Firms /Institutions/Consultants that wish to bid for the prescribed assignment are requested to email the following:


A detailed technical proposal, not more than 15 pages, containing the following sections:

  1. A cover letter to confirm your interest and availability for the TOR’s assignment addressed to the Executive Director JGI Uganda.
  2. An understanding and interpretation of the TOR.
  3. Detailed scientific methodology and detailed scientific tool proposed, to be used in undertaking the assignment.
  4. Time and activity schedule.
  5. Evidence of relevant experience and samples of products related to the assignment.
  6. Curriculum vitae of the lead team leader and the rest of the team members.
  7. Information on any representative of your team, or any member of your team, that may give rise to a direct or indirect conflict of interest, including identifying other current contractual works being conducted for JGI, Funder and affiliations with national and local focal points.


A financial proposal showing:

  1. Consultant’s daily rates in UGX
  2. Any other related costs for undertaking the assignment in UGX


8.0. Proposal Submission: Procedure and Guidelines.


8.1. Mode of submission

The Technical and Financial Proposal (in pdf format) should ONLY be submitted by email to The email subject should be: “End of Project Evaluation of the Growing Together II Project”


8.2. Submission Deadline

The deadline for submission of proposals is Tuesday December 12, 2023, by 5:00PM East African Standard Time (EST), strictly. Any late submission will not be honored.


For more of the latest jobs, please visit or find us on our facebook page

Date Posted 2023-12-06
Valid Through 2023-12-12
Employment Type CONTRACTOR
Hiring Organization Jane Goodall Institute (JGI)
Job Location Kampala, Kampala, Kampala, 0256, Uganda