[newdevjobsindo] RFP | FINAL EVALUATION PROTECT PROJECT (2021-2025) - Search for Common Ground

Juli 11, 2025   Comment  

Project Name	PROTECT (Promoting Collective Efforts Towards Resilience and Tolerance in Indonesia)
Project Areas	Jakarta, Bogor, Bandung, Solo
Project Issues	Freedom of religion and belief (FORB), tolerance, human rights, conflict transformation
Project Beneficiaries	Local CSOs, religious leaders, spiritual leaders, religious harmony forum (FKUB), vulnerable groups, youths, journalists, content creators
Project Duration	54-month (July 2021 – December 2025)
Consortium Lead	Search for Common Ground Indonesia (Search)
Evaluation Duration	12 weeks (August – November 2025)
Estimated Start Date	August 15, 2025

PROJECT BACKGROUND

Indonesia, despite its reputation for cultural and religious diversity, has witnessed a growing intolerance in both online and offline spaces, particularly targeting underrepresented and vulnerable groups. This trend is driven by deep-rooted social biases, political divisions, discriminatory regulations, and the rapid spread of online content. Compounding the issue is the lack of sustained, locally grounded efforts to strengthen community resilience and foster cross-community collaboration. Addressing these challenges requires a whole-of-community approach that promotes inclusive dialogue, shared decision-making, and collective action to cultivate a more inclusive and peaceful society.

In this context, Search, in collaboration with Yayasan Satu Keadilan (YSK) in Bogor, Jaringan Kerjasama Antar Umat Beragama (Jakatarub) in Bandung, and KAKAK Foundation in Solo has implemented the PROTECT Program to strengthen the capacity of local actors in advocating for FORB and human rights protection. The program promotes cross-sector collaboration and works to elevate the voices of vulnerable groups through locally grounded approaches, aiming to foster broader community understanding and support for tolerance, FORB, and human rights.

The project, which began in July 2021 and is set to conclude in December 2025, is now nearing completion and requires a comprehensive endline evaluation. This process aims to assess overall impact, document key achievements, and capture lessons learned throughout the project's implementation. The results will serve as a reference for shaping future initiatives that seek to promote tolerance, FORB, and human rights.      

PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The overall goal of the project is to address barriers to human rights and fundamental freedoms in Indonesia.

This goal is supported by three specific objectives which guide the project's activities:

Objective 1:      Build the capacity of civil society organizations (CSOs) working on tolerance to perform outreach and engage with communities to promote human rights and fundamental freedoms within their communities.

Objective 2:  Empower media actors to detect and respond to threats to information integrity, particularly against religious populations experiencing persecution.

Objective 3:  Provide religious leaders with the skills and opportunities to collectively advocate for religious tolerance and protection of rights.

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION

The final evaluation aims to provide an independent, comprehensive assessment of the project's overall performance and results. It will examine the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, and contributions of the project in advancing human rights, gender equality, and disability inclusion. Where applicable, it will also assess the project's broader impact and potential for sustainability. 

A key focus is to identify lessons learned that can enhance the sustainability of outcomes and inform future programming strategies within Search.

The evaluation will measure performance against specific indicators outlined in the Project Tracking and Monitoring Evaluation Plan, including:

• Percentage of underrepresented group members in target areas who report having stronger support systems to secure their rights (disaggregated by location, gender, and age)

• Percentage of trained CSOs that report increased inclusion of underrepresented groups in their initiatives (disaggregated by location)

• Percentage of fellowship participants who continue reporting on tolerance-related topics beyond the fellowship (disaggregated by location, gender, and age)

• Percentage of religious leaders who developed new partnerships as a result of project activities (disaggregated by location, gender, and age)

• Percentage of advocacy training participants invited to advise government institutions on issues related to FORB or human rights protection (disaggregated by location, gender, and age)

Additionally, the evaluation will integrate key learning questions from the Peace Impact Framework to understand how the project contributes to broader societal change. These include:

• Do individuals feel capable of making a positive difference in their community? (Question on Personal Agency)

• Are people satisfied with local institutions (local government institutions and CSOs) and their role in protecting rights? (Question on Institutional Legitimacy)

Insights generated through these questions will be fed into Search's global learning database to contribute to broader organizational knowledge and inform future peacebuilding efforts.

SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION

The evaluation will cover the entire duration of the project, from its start in July 2021 through to its conclusion in December 2025, and will assess all aspects of the program. The final evaluation will be guided by the OECD-DAC Peacebuilding Evaluation Criteria, incorporating relevant evaluation questions and performance indicators outlined in the project documentation. The evaluation will be structured around the following key questions:

Evaluation Criteria	Key Evaluation Questions
Relevance	To what extent does the project contribute to addressing the conflict dynamics related to freedom of religion and belief in the target areas? How well has the project engaged relevant community groups and stakeholders in a way that aligns with their needs and local issues? How appropriate and effective were the project's approaches (non-adversarial and human rights) and tools (e.g. capacity strengthening, dialogue sessions) in responding to the specific needs and capacities of the target communities?
Effectiveness	To what extent has the project achieved its intended outputs and outcomes as outlined in the log frame, and what factors have contributed to or hindered these achievements? How effective has the project been in strengthening multi-stakeholder coordination and collaboration in promoting FORB in the target areas? How effective were the project initiatives (e.g. training, dialogues, fellowships) in improving participants' capacities and influencing their attitudes and behaviors towards tolerance and diversity?
Efficiency	Have resources (funds, human resources, time, expertise, etc.) been allocated strategically and used in the most efficient way? Have any problems or risks come up during the project, and have any amicable solutions or agreements been taken to solve the issues?
Human Rights	To what extent has the project contributed to promoting inclusive values and upholding human rights, particularly in the context of FORB? Has the project's design and implementation been explicitly or implicitly guided by a human rights-based approach?
Gender Equality	To what extent has the project promoted gender equality and the meaningful empowerment of women and gender-diverse groups throughout its design, implementation, and monitoring? Have there been any unintended positive or negative effects on women, men, or other vulnerable groups as a result of the project?
Disability Inclusion	To what extent has the project been inclusive of persons with disabilities in its design, implementation, and monitoring? Have the project activities and materials been accessible and responsive to the specific needs of persons with disabilities, and were there any unintended effects, positive or negative, on this group?
Sustainability	To what extent have local stakeholders (including government agencies, youth, and community leaders) taken ownership of the project and initiated or planned actions to sustain its outcomes beyond the project period? What mechanisms or capacities, such as project management, financial skills, or knowledge application, have been strengthened to support the continuation of project efforts, and what factors have influenced their sustainability?

DESIGN AND APPROACH

The evaluation will be guided by Search's core principles: participatory, culturally sensitive, capacity-building, affirming and positive, and grounded in local context. The evaluator and Search will agree on shared evaluation standards during the contracting process.

A mixed-methods approach will be used, combining qualitative and quantitative data, disaggregated by gender, age, location, and religion, and aligned with project indicators. 

Data collection will include:

• Document Review: Analysis of project reports, deliverables, and success stories.

• Focus Group Discussions (FGDs): At least four (4) FGDs, with three (3) meetings involving 15 beneficiaries from each three project areas, and one (1) with the Consortium (Search and local implementing partners).

• Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): At least 15 semi-structured interviews with project beneficiaries from three project areas (prioritizing vulnerable groups).

• Online Survey: Distributed to remaining beneficiaries not involved in FGDs or KIIs, with a minimum of 60% response rate from across the three project areas.

TASKS AND DELIVERABLES

Phase	Tasks	Deliverables	Timeline
Contract	Contract signing		August 15
Inception	Kick-off and clarification meeting An online meeting between the evaluator and Search to: Align on the evaluation objectives, roles, and shared understanding of the evaluation process Address any administrative and logistical matters Share project background, initial stakeholder mapping, and relevant documents and data needed for the evaluation	Minutes of meeting	August 18
	Draft inception report The evaluator will submit a draft inception report outlining the proposed evaluation design, data collection and analysis methods, potential risks and limitations, along with strategies to mitigate them. If necessary, the evaluator may propose an alternative approach to what is outlined in the TOR. The report should include: A summary of the initial desk review An evaluation matrix with criteria, questions, indicators, data sources, and collection methods A stakeholder mapping A detailed work plan	Draft inception report	August 22
	Review of the draft inception report by Search		August 27
	Final inception report	Final inception report	August 29
Inquiry	Data collection and analysis The evaluator will carry out data collection, analysis, and synthesis, then present their preliminary findings to the evaluation manager. Following this, feedback will be given, clarifications addressed, and the next steps and deadlines will be jointly agreed upon.	Raw data collection (minutes, records, statistics, survey feedback)	September 30
Synthesis	Findings, conclusions, and recommendations Findings from the inquiry phase should logically lead to clear conclusions and recommendations, structured around the evaluation questions. Recommendations must be specific, actionable, and directed to relevant stakeholders.	Evaluation summary report (3-4 pages)	October 10
	Draft evaluation report The final evaluation report must be written in polished English, not exceeding 30 pages (excluding appendices). It should include a cover page, executive summary, project context and overview, methodology, detailed findings with supporting and clear illustrations of data, and conclusions. Findings must be organized by evaluation criteria, with practical recommendations directly linked to the analysis. Appendices should include evaluation tools, questionnaires, and the evaluator's bio.	Draft evaluation report	October 24
	Review of the draft evaluation report by Search		October 29
	Final evaluation report	Final evaluation report	November 7

Search will respect consultants' independence in presenting their findings. Both the full and summary reports will be attributed to the consultancy team and made publicly available, including on Search's website (www.sfcg.org/ilt/evaluations) and the ConnexUs global learning platform (www.cnxus.org).  

MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

The evaluator will report to a review panel consisting of the Program Director, Program Manager, and Design, Monitoring & Evaluation (DM&E) Officer. The Program Manager and DM&E Officer will offer technical guidance, ensure the evaluation process remains independent, and confirm compliance with relevant policies, with additional technical oversight provided by the Senior Manager of the Institutional Learning Team from Search's Asia Regional Office. The DM&E Officer will also support the evaluator by providing necessary documents, stakeholder contacts, and logistical assistance as needed.

CONTRACT AND SCHEDULE OF PAYMENTS

The maximum fee for this consultancy is IDR 115,000,000. This amount includes all associated costs, income taxes, and any other amount payable or cost that may be required for the completion of the work/ service, including VAT.

The overall duration of the contract will be a maximum of 3 months from the date of contract signature.

Payments will be made upon acceptance and verification of the related deliverables, as follows:

• Final inception report                                : 30% of total contract amount

• Raw data and evaluation summary report : 20% of total contract amount

• Draft evaluation report                               : 40% of total contract amount

• Final evaluation report                                : 10% of total contract amount

The duty station of the work is Indonesia, with flexibility in work location. Preference will be given to consultants based in Jakarta, Bogor, Bandung, or Solo, as the evaluator may be required to travel to project areas.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Criteria	Weight	Point
At least a master's degree in conflict resolution, international relations, social sciences, statistics, or a related field	10%	10
Extensive expertise, knowledge, and experience in doing reviews, evaluations, and research involving quantitative and qualitative data collection in peacebuilding projects	20%	20
Solid understanding of evaluation methodologies and approaches	30%	30
Proven experience in program design, monitoring and evaluation, and working with civil society organizations	10%	10
Strong understanding of the local context, particularly the dynamics of interreligious relations and social cohesion in Indonesia	10%	10
At least 5 years of experience in conducting project evaluations, including baseline and endline assessments, with demonstrated skills in data collection and analysis through interviews, surveys, focus group discussions, etc.	10%	10
Excellent report writing skills. Ability to deliver quality reports within the given time	5%	5
Excellent proficiency in spoken and written English	5%	5
Total	100%	100

HOW TO APPLY

All interested and qualified candidates are invited to apply by submitting the following documents via email to phandayani@sfcg.org, cc hsamantha@sfcg.org. Only shortlisted candidates will be contacted.

Deadline: August 4, 2025, by 18:00 WIB

• One-page summary of experience or Portfolio

• CV of the evaluator or all professionals who will work on the evaluation

• Three (3) samples of previous evaluation reports

• Technical proposal

• Financial proposal