Evaluation Consultant

Over the last three decades, IOM has expanded its engagement across diverse migration-related fields, addressing challenges through initiatives in labour migration, counter-trafficking, migration health, and humanitarian response. Aligned with IOM’s commitment to humane and orderly migration, IOM Egypt works closely with the Government of Egypt and key stakeholders to enhance migration governance, ensuring migration’s benefits while minimizing its challenges.

The project “Responding to Multifaceted Crisis of Migrants and Host Communities in Egypt” is designed to address the urgent humanitarian and protection needs of migrants and host communities affected by economic instability and the Sudan crisis. The war in Sudan has led to the arrival of over 343,230 displaced individuals in Egypt, including Sudanese nationals, third-country nationals (TCNs), and Egyptian returnees, exacerbating existing socioeconomic pressures. These populations face vulnerabilities such as food insecurity, lack of shelter, limited access to healthcare, and protection risks, including gender-based violence (GBV) and human trafficking.

This project aims to provide direct assistance, including medical care, mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS), education support, and social cohesion initiatives. It also strengthens national response capacities by supporting the Ministry of Health and Population (MoHP), the Egyptian Red Crescent (ERC), and other partners with medical equipment, training, and public health initiatives. Additionally, the project enhances border management authorities’ capacity to manage migration effectively while upholding human rights. 

The intervention aligns with Egypt’s national priorities, IOM’s strategic objectives, and global frameworks such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the Humanitarian-Development-Peace Nexus (HDPN).

Project Objective: The project will contribute to reducing the vulnerability of population affected by the Sudan crisis in Egypt.

This is achieved through the below interdependent outcomes: 

1. Outcome 1: Population affected by the crisis in Sudan has improved access to protection and education and live in harmony with the host communities in Egypt.
2. Outcome 2: Border management authorities are better equipped to implement effective humanitarian border management.
3. Outcome 3: Sudanese new arrivals and TCNs entering Egypt from Sudan have improved access to health care services.

As of August 2025, the project has reached over 2,000 individuals through direct multi-sectoral assistance, including 2,004 beneficiaries (491 girls, 489 boys, 759 women, and 265 men) who received protection, legal, financial, or basic needs support. In the health sector, 639 individuals accessed direct medical services, while 140 beneficiaries received focused mental health and psychosocial support. Additionally, 106 individuals participated in MHPSS awareness sessions, and 100 persons with disabilities received disability-related medical aid such as hearing aids and wheelchairs.

In partnership with the Ministry of Health and Population (MoHP), the project supported 2 health facilities, conducted 1 vaccination convoy and 1 medical convoy in Aswan, and trained 195 healthcare workers. Community-level engagement was also emphasized, with 228 community leaders and health volunteers trained and 11 social cohesion events held, reaching approximately 500 attendees. Additionally, 100 beneficiaries were reached with medical assistance through the Egyptian Red Crescent (ERC)

Under the border management component, IOM donated a generator to the Ministry of Transport to support border crossing points. These activities reflect strong progress across all components and provide a solid foundation for sample frame design across different sectors, geographic areas, and stakeholder categories.The primary project stakeholders include:

• Governmental partners: Ministry of Health and Population (MoHP), Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA), Ministry of Education and Technical Education (MoETE), Ministry of Transport (MoT), and Ministry of Interior (MoI)
• National humanitarian actors: Egyptian Red Crescent (ERC)
• UN partners: UNHCR, UNICEF, and WHO
• Community-based organizations (CBOs) and local health providers, engaged in implementation, training, and outreach
• Migrants and host communities, who are both beneficiaries and participants in project activities such as vulnerability assessments, community events, and capacity-building initiatives

1. Evaluation purpose and objective

The final evaluation of the project “Responding to the Multifaceted Crisis of Migrants and Host Communities in Egypt” will assess the extent to which the project has achieved its stated objectives and delivered meaningful outcomes with focus on the achievement of objective and outcomes indicators outlined in the results matrix. It will analyze what worked, what did not, under what conditions, and why. It will also document lessons learned, highlight best practices, and identify implementation challenges.

The evaluation findings will inform:

• Project and Programme Management, to support evidence-based decision-making, improve future interventions, and enhance accountability;
• IOM Senior Management and Regional Office, to assess strategic alignment with institutional priorities and promote organizational learning;
• Governmental and Implementing Partners (e.g., MoHP, ERC, border authorities), to strengthen collaboration, improve service delivery, and ensure alignment with national strategies;
• Donors (particularly the Government of Japan), to assess value for money and impact, and inform decisions on continued or future support;
• Coordination Partners (e.g., UN agencies, NGOs), to share knowledge, promote coordination, and enhance synergy in humanitarian and migration response.

Ultimately, this evaluation will help IOM, and its partners demonstrate accountability, refine programming strategies, and advocate for continued and expanded support that meets the evolving needs of migrants and host communities in Egypt.

1. Evaluation scope

The evaluation will cover the full implementation period of the project “Responding to the Multifaceted Crisis of Migrants and Host Communities in Egypt”, from March 2024 to June 2025. It will assess the entire project cycle, including design, planning and implementation phases.

The evaluation will focus on activities implemented across the three main governorates: Aswan, Alexandria, and Cairo.

The evaluation will assess the following key project components:

• Provision of Direct Assistance: Including health, mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS), and educational support delivered to vulnerable migrants and host community members.
• Capacity Building for National Stakeholders: Evaluating the effectiveness of training and support provided to entities such as MoHP, ERC, and border management authorities.
• Humanitarian Border Management and Protection: Reviewing support for border management systems, including detection of document fraud, migration flow management, and trafficking prevention.
• Social Cohesion and Community Engagement: Assessing the impact of awareness sessions, community events, and educational activities designed to foster inclusivity and reduce tension between migrants and host communities.

Expected Outputs:

• Good practices and innovations
• Lessons learned for future programming
• Practical and actionable recommendations
• Challenges and bottlenecks that impeded implementation
  • Gender Equality: Evaluate if and how gender considerations were mainstreamed throughout the project, including access to services and participation.

• Human Rights: Examine how rights-based approaches were incorporated, particularly with vulnerable groups.
• Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP): Assess beneficiary feedback mechanisms and community engagement.
• .Disability Inclusion: Explore whether activities were accessible to people with disabilities and if specific needs were addressed
• Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA)

• Although no components or locations are expected to be excluded, field access limitations due to security, administrative, or logistical issues may affect data collection in one or more governorates.
• In such cases, the evaluation will rely on alternative methods such as remote interviews, secondary data analysis, and documentation from implementing partners.
• Any such constraints and exclusions will be clearly documented in the final evaluation report.
• Other limitations may include delayed access to certain documents, limited availability of key informants, or low response rates from beneficiaries, which will be transparently noted with mitigation strategies applied where feasible.

1. Evaluation criteria

The evaluation will assess the performance of the project against the OECD-DAC criteria of relevance to evaluate the alignment of projects objectives and activities with the needs, interests and priorities of Sudanese new arrivals in Egypt; effectiveness measuring the extent to which the project's objectives were achieved or are on track to be achieved; coherence examining the project's consistency with other interventions and its internal logical framework; efficiency assessing how economically resources/inputs were converted into results/outputs; and sustainability appraising the likelihood of the project's benefits continuing after project completion. The evaluation is also expected to assess the extent to which the project integrated cross-cutting issues: the extent to which gender considerations were mainstreamed and the project adherence to human rights principles .

1. Evaluation questions

The below questions are indicative questions to be addressed in the evaluation under each evaluation criterion. They may be revised and adapted further by the evaluator in consultation with the Evaluation Manager:

Relevance

• to what extent were project objectives and activities relevant to the urgent humanitarian and protection needs of migrants (Sudanese new arrivals, TCNs, Egyptian returnees) and host communities affected by the Sudan crisis and socioeconomic challenges in Egypt?
• How well did the project adapt to any changes in the context or evolving needs during implementation?
• To what extent were the project's objectives and activities coherent with Egypt's national priorities and IOM's strategic objectives?
•  
• To what extent did the project's design align with the needs of specific vulnerable groups, such as women, children, and people with disabilities?To what extent were beneficiaries/stakeholders involved in the design, planning, implementation, feedback mechanism process of the project?

Effectiveness

• To what extent were the objectives and outcomes of the project achieved or likely to be achieved? What are the barriers to the achievement of project objectives? Specifically, 
  • To what extent did the project's activities contribute to social cohesion between migrants and host communities?
  • How effective were the capacity-building activities for national stakeholders (MoHP, ERC, border management authorities) in improving their ability to respond to the needs of migrants and host communities?
• How effective is the monitoring system of the project? Did the project use the information from monitoring activities to improve the quality of the project interventions and inform decision making process of the project?

Efficiency

• Is the relation between inputs (materials, financial, services, staff etc.) and results achieved appropriate and justifiable?
• Were resources used efficiently to deliver project activities and achieve outcomes?
• Were there any avoidable delays or bottlenecks in project implementation, and what were their causes?

Sustainability

• To what extent can activities, models, initiatives, results, and effects be expected to continue or replicate at the conclusion of the project?
• Were local capacities strengthened to ensure the sustainability of project benefits? 
• What mechanisms or partnerships have been established to support the continuity of services and outcomes, and what risks may still threaten their sustainability?

Cross-Cutting Themes 

• Gender Equality:
   To what extent did the project consider the specific needs of women and girls in the design and delivery of services, and were additional efforts, costs, or time required to ensure gender-responsive implementation?
• Disability Inclusion:
   To what extent were persons with disabilities able to access medical and psychosocial services under the project?
• Human Rights:
   To what extent did the project ensure a rights-based approach in delivering case management, legal aid, and medical assistance to vulnerable migrants?
• Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP):
  Were beneficiaries engaged in identifying needs and providing feedback on the services delivered?
• Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA):
  Were PSEA considerations integrated into staff training and beneficiary awareness activities?

1. Evaluation methodology

• Desk Review
   A thorough review of relevant project documentation, including the original proposal, interim and final reports, monitoring data, meeting minutes, and related stakeholder communications. IOM will share relevant background documents and project records as needed by the evaluator or evaluation team.
• Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)
   Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with key stakeholders, including:
  • IOM project management and implementing staff
  • Government counterparts (e.g., MoHP, MoFA, MoT)
  • Partners such as the Egyptian Red Crescent (ERC)
  • UN agencies (e.g., UNHCR, WHO)
  • Community-based organizations (CBOs)
• Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)
   FGDs will be held with selected groups of project beneficiaries, such as:
  • Sudanese new arrivals and returnees (including men, women, and youth)
  • Host community members
  • Health workers or trained community leaders
• Survey

A structured survey will be administered to a representative sample of project beneficiaries and stakeholders to collect quantitative data aligned with key outcome indicators in the project’s results framework. Specifically, the survey will measure:

• Outcome 1 (Protection/Education Access): % of people supported by relevant activities who state that their access to protection or education improved after the intervention.
• Outcome 2 (Humanitarian Border Management): % of trained border management officials who report improved capacity for humanitarian border management.
• Outcome 3 (Health Access): % of people supported by relevant activities who state that their access to healthcare services improved after the intervention.
• The survey will aim for a sample size sufficient to ensure a 95% confidence level and a 5% margin of error, enabling statistically reliable analysis across disaggregated groups (e.g., by age, sex, and beneficiary type). Survey tools will be designed to capture quantitative data in alignment with the indicator definitions, using clear and accessible language.

• The evaluator will be responsible for designing a rigorous and inclusive sampling strategy for both qualitative and quantitative data collection. The strategy must:
• Reflect the project’s geographic scope (Cairo, Alexandria, and Aswan)
• Include relevant beneficiary groups (e.g., Sudanese new arrivals, returnees, TCNs, host communities, persons with disabilities)
• Ensure gender and age representation, with intentional inclusion of vulnerable groups (e.g., women, children, persons with disabilities)
• Justify the sample size and selection criteria for all data collection tools (KIIs, FGDs, surveys), with sufficient power to report on results framework indicators
• The evaluator must submit the sampling framework for IOM review and approval before commencing data collection.

All tools and sampling frameworks will be developed in consultation with IOM and subject to approval prior to fieldwork.

1. Ethics, norms and standards for evaluation 
   • The UNEG Ethical Guidelines for Evaluation

This evaluation must adhere to the IOM Data Protection Principles, the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) Norms and Standards for Evaluation, and all relevant ethical guidelines.

IOM expects all evaluation stakeholders, including internal staff, partners, and the external evaluator(s), to uphold the highest ethical standards throughout the evaluation process. This includes ensuring informed consent, confidentiality, voluntary participation, data security, and do-no-harm principles, particularly when engaging with vulnerable groups such as migrants, women, children, and persons with disabilities.

The evaluator(s) will be required to review and comply with:

• The UNEG Code of Conduct for Evaluators
• IOM’s Data Protection Manual and any applicable guidance on working with human subjects

All data collection activities must ensure the dignity, safety, and rights of participants are fully respected.

1. Inception Report (within 7 days of signing the contract): The Evaluation consultant will conduct initial desk research and tool review and develop and submit the Inception report that will include:

• evaluation objectives and key evaluation questions
• description of the methodology, Evalaution matrix, data sources, draft data collection tools (preferably against the key evaluation questions and selected indicators) and sampling considerations
• limitations and caveats of evaluation
• key deliverables, milestones, and timelines
• risk management plan
• a stakeholder communication and engagement plan
• consultation protocols for consulting with vulnerable groups (if applicable)
• Logistical or other support required from IOM
• Once the report is finalized and accepted, the evaluation consultant must submit a request for any change in strategy or approach to the Project Manager.

To be submitted within 15 days after signed contract.

1. Feedback by IOM: Within five working days after receiving the inception report.

IOM Approval of Inception Report and data collection tools: Within one week after review completed

       2. Validation Session ( After Data collection and before drafting the report): Presentation of preliminary Preliminary findings presentation and verification workshop with partners Summary of interim findings

• Any emerging program issues or risks (if applicable)

       3. Evaluation report ( As per the timeline section): Draft Evaluation Report including the following elements:

• Executive summary
• Background description of the Project and context relevant to the evaluation
• Scope and focus of the evaluation
• Overview of the evaluation methodology and data collection methods, including an evaluation matrix
• Findings aligned to each of the key evaluation questions
• Specific caveats or methodological limitations of the evaluation
• Conclusions outlining implications of the findings or learnings
• Recommendations
• Annexes (Project logframe, Evaluation TOR, Inception Report, Study schedule, List of people involved)

1. Feedback and approval by IOM (Within one week after receiving the inception report)
2. Final Evaluation Report with submission of data and analysis incorporating feedback from consultation on the Draft Evaluation Report (First week in April)

Evaluation Brief: The Evaluation Brief will be a one-pages and will summarize the key takeaways, particularly lessons learned.

       4. Management Reponse Matrix: Filled out by the recommendations and IOM response to it. 

    Specifications of roles:

• Evaluation Consultant/Team: Responsible for developing the inception report, conducting fieldwork, analyzing findings, preparing evaluation deliverables (draft and final reports, presentations), and ensuring compliance with IOM and UNEG ethical standards.
• Evaluation/Project  manager will be responsible for timely reviewing deliverables and any necessary internal and inter-agency coordination to facilitate the evaluation, including stakeholders' inputs to the evaluation report. They will also coordinate information provision, document compilation, and liaison with relevant parties as needed.  In addition,  the manager will  be responsible for completing the joint Management Response Matrix and implementing recommendations. 
• IOM Egypt M&E Officer: Provides technical guidance, supports quality assurance for methodology and tools, and reviews deliverables.

Time schedule

Activity

Responsible party

Number of days

Timing  

Finalization of ToR & Recruitment

5 days

1. Evaluation budget

The total budget allocated for the external evaluation should be inclusive of:

•                Evaluator fees
•                Local travel and accommodation
•                Data collection costs (enumerators, transcription, etc.)
•                Translation and interpretation (if needed)
•                Report production
•                Any required taxes or overheads

The consultant must submit a detailed financial proposal as part of their application. The budget should clearly outline all anticipated costs, including those related to data collection, logistics, translation services, and any other expenses necessary for completing the evaluation.

While IOM Egypt may provide logistical and coordination support (e.g., arranging meetings or site access), the evaluator remains responsible for managing all activities within the budget ceiling.

Disbursement of the evaluation consultancy fees will be made in two instalments, subject to the satisfactory submission and approval of deliverables by IOM:

• First Payment – 50%: Payable at the end of the first month, upon submission and approval of the Inception Report and completion of data collection activities.

1. Final Payment – 50%: Payable at the end of the second month, upon submission and approval of all final deliverables, including the Final Evaluation Report, Management Response Matrix and Evaluation brief.Evaluation requirements

When selecting an external evaluator, a “requirements” section must be included in the evaluation ToR. This section outlines the list of competences required for any individual consultant in order to be considered for selection. 

Applicants must meet the following requirements:

• Advanced university degree in evaluation, social sciences, public health, international development, or related field
• Minimum 5 years of experience conducting external evaluations, preferably in migration, humanitarian or health contexts
• Demonstrated experience with OECD-DAC evaluation criteria and qualitative/quantitative mixed methods
• Proven experience working with UN agencies or international organizations
• Strong analytical and report writing skills in English
• Familiarity with the context in Egypt and the region is desirable
• Ability to conduct participatory and gender-sensitive evaluations

• Inclusion and respect for diversity: Respects and promotes individual and cultural differences. Encourages diversity and inclusion.
• Integrity and transparency: Maintains high ethical standards and acts in a manner consistent with organizational principles/rules and standards of conduct.
• Professionalism: Demonstrates ability to work in a composed, competent and committed manner and exercises careful judgment in meeting day-to-day challenges.
• Courage: Demonstrates willingness to take a stand on issues of importance.
• Empathy: Shows compassion for others, makes people feel safe, respected and fairly treated.

• Teamwork: Develops and promotes effective collaboration within and across units to achieve shared goals and optimize results.
• Delivering results: Produces and delivers quality results in a service-oriented and timely manner. Is action oriented and committed to achieving agreed outcomes.
• Managing and sharing knowledge: Continuously seeks to learn, share knowledge and innovate.
• Accountability: Takes ownership for achieving the Organization’s priorities and assumes responsibility for own actions and delegated work.
• Communication: Encourages and contributes to clear and open communication. Explains complex matters in an informative, inspiring and motivational way.

1. Any offer made to the candidate in relation to this vacancy notice is subject to funding confirmation.
2. Appointment will be subject to certification that the candidate is medically fit for appointment, verification of residency, visa, and authorizations by the concerned Government, where applicable.
3. IOM covers Consultants against occupational accidents and illnesses under the Compensation Plan (CP), free of charge, for the duration of the consultancy. IOM does not provide evacuation or medical insurance for reasons related to non-occupational accidents and illnesses. Consultants are responsible for their own medical insurance for non-occupational accident or illness and will be required to provide written proof of such coverage before commencing work.
4. IOM has a zero-tolerance policy on conduct that is incompatible with the aims and objectives of the United Nations and IOM, including sexual exploitation and abuse, sexual harassment, abuse of authority and discrimination based on gender, nationality, age, race, sexual orientation, religious or ethnic background or disabilities.
5. IOM does not charge a fee at any stage of its recruitment process (application, interview, processing, training or other fee). IOM does not request any information related to bank accounts.
6. IOM only accepts duly completed applications submitted through the IOM online recruitment system. The online tool also allows candidates to track the status of their application.