Consultant for Mid Term Evaluation of the project "Promoting the Integration of Venezuelan Migrants and Refugees into the Peruvian Host Community through Socioeconomic Interventions

Evaluation Requester: Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) 

Evaluation Manager: IOM Peru Office | Program Support Unit | Senior Monitoring and Evaluation Assistant 

IOM are/unit: PSU 

Duty Station: Lima, Perú 

Consultant type: B 

Service duration: 15 weeks / 102 days / 3.5 months 

Total budget: 15,000 USD 

WBL: IS0137 / Task X:1:2:001 

1. Evaluation Context 

The political, human rights, and socio-economic situation in the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (hereinafter Venezuela) has triggered the departure of over 5.1 million Venezuelans to neighboring countries and beyond. Peru is the second largest recipient country and, as of August 2021, hosts around 1.1 million Venezuelan refugees and migrants living in communities with limited capacity to absorb them, particularly in terms of providing basic services and access to livelihoods. 

ata collected through the 2021 Joint Needs Assessment (JNA), as well as information compiled and analyzed by the Refugee and Migrant Working Group (GTRM), aligned with the 2021 Refugee and Migrant Response Plan (RMRP), indicate that access to essential goods and services to meet basic immediate needs (Outcome 1.1)1 and opportunities for socio-economic integration (Outcome 1.2) 2are among the most urgent priority needs for Venezuelans residing in Peru. 

The GTRM estimated that around 100,000 Venezuelan refugee and migrant children and adolescents were out of the Peruvian school system in 2020. To ensure school enrollment and prevent dropout, schools in Peru must promote safe environments free from xenophobia and discrimination (Outcome 1.3)3. Despite governmental efforts, a lack of school capacity persists, along with other barriers such as insufficient teacher capacity to provide inclusive education and a shortage of school infrastructure. Since education has been virtual in both Peru and Venezuela since March 2020, there has been no interaction between students from both countries, affecting integration efforts. 

Additionally, the GTRM’s Joint Needs Assessment reported that \"access to health services, including mental health, is hindered due to the lack of inclusion of refugees and migrants in the national health system.\" Improving mental and emotional health plays a key role in fostering integration. 

In this context, under Outcome 1.44, the project seeks to address immediate humanitarian needs exacerbated by the long-term impact of the pandemic while promoting self-sufficiency activities aimed at improving livelihoods, employment opportunities, income generation, and access to key services such as education and mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS). 

To support the integration of Venezuelan refugees and migrants into Peruvian host communities through socioeconomic interventions, the project aims to contribute to stable and inclusive community development by promoting peacebuilding between host communities and Venezuelan refugees and migrants. The intervention has a national scope and intends to improve the integration of Venezuelan migrants and refugees with their Peruvian host communities. As such, the project seeks to increase the percentage of refugees and migrants who feel economically and socially integrated. 

The main outputs planned in this initiative were: 

Vulnerable Migrants and refugees from Venezuela will have work experience implementing sustainable community development initiatives in their host communities through labour market inclusion (LMI) interventions in prioritized areas. 

Refugees and migrants from Venezuela and members of the host community have improved entrepreneurship skills and business management knowledge  

Refugee, Migrant and host communities have access to education and increased knowledge of migration issues  

Vulnerable refugees and migrants have improved socio-emotional stability through inclusion and social development 

The project includes two external evaluations: a mid-term evaluation and a final evaluation. The mid-term evaluation aligns with IOM’s Evaluation Policy 5and guidelines6 and will focus on assessing efficiency, effectiveness, and impact to provide useful recommendations for the remaining implementation period. The final evaluation will also measure relevance, coherence, and sustainability to generate recommendations for future projects. 

2. Purpose and objectives of the evaluation 

The performance evaluation of the project “Promoting the Integration of Venezuelan Migrants and Refugees into the Peruvian Host Community through Socioeconomic Interventions” has as its main purpose accountability to the donor, and additionally, to support learning. The evaluation will help provide evidence of both planned and unplanned results—what is working, what is not, and why. Likewise, the evaluation will help identify lessons learned and gather evidence of potential good practices, which may be adopted and implemented during the remainder of this project and in future projects, within the framework of IOM’s institutional strategy on migration, integration, and mental health. 

Main objective 

Evaluate the progress of the project/program concerning the established objectives, identify possible implementation adjustments, and provide recommendations to improve effectiveness and efficiency in the following project phases. 

Specific objectives 

Analyze the extent to which the project results have been achieved so far and whether key indicators are being met. 

Evaluate the effectiveness, efficiency and impact7 of the intervention proposed in the project, and assess strategies, approaches, and implementation processes in terms of performance, gender sensitivity, and inclusiveness. 

Obtain recommendations, identify implementation gaps, and document independent lessons and good evidence-based practices to enhance strategies and interventions for strengthening project implementation. 

Target audience of the evaluation: The implementing team, Government counterparts (e.g., Ministry of Education), Other sector directors participating in workshops, Other relevant actors, The Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) 

Expected uses for the evaluation:  

IOM Peru Mission leadership and team will use the evaluation as a reflection document on the project and its methodology, develop and follow up on a management response matrix to the evaluation's recommendations including corresponding updates in the Project Information and Management Application - PRIMA, and formulate and implement a communication plan for the results.8 

KOICA will use the conclusions and performance ratings under each criterion to assess the value generated by the resources allocated to fund the set of activities. 

Government entities directly involved, implementing partners, and other relevant stakeholders involved in the project implementation process will use the conclusions to improve the quality of their work and institutional relationship with IOM regarding the project objectives. 

3. Scope of the evaluation 

Temporal Scope : The implementation period of the project runs from August 2023 to December 2026. The mid-term evaluation will cover the design phase of the intervention and its implementation from August 2023 to December 2024. 

Thematic -scope : The evaluation will cover all results, outputs, and activities of the project according to the Project Results Matrix (see Annex 1). 

 All related activities (e.g., training, fairs, campaigns, support services) will be reviewed only in terms of their contribution to achieving outputs. 

Output 

Key Indicator 

1.1 – Labour Market Inclusion 

% increase in perception of refugees and migrants feeling economically/socially integrated 

1.2 – Entrepreneurship 

% of refugees and migrants supported who initiated a job 

1.3 – Education and Migration Awareness 

% of refugees/migrants declaring improvement in sales due to training/seed capital 

1.4 – Social and Emotional Stability 

% of parents/legal tutors trained who know the school enrollment procedure 

Geographic scope : The evaluation will consider national-level actions and complementary actions in the regions of Lima, Callao, Tumbes, and Tacna. 

Cross-cutting issues: The evaluation must consider a series of cross-cutting themes relevant to the intervention, in accordance with IOM and United Nations guidelines on the matter: the Rights-Based Approach to Programming9, gender10, and disability11. These cross-cutting issues must be integrated into the evaluation questions, the design and implementation of the evaluation, and the presentation of its results. 

In line with its purpose and objectives, the evaluation is expected to identify and document lessons learned and potential good practices, and present action12-oriented recommendations, all of which must be clearly supported by findings and conclusions based on triangulated evidence. 

It is also important to consider potential limitations regarding the development of the mid-term evaluation. The timeline could be extended due to delays in the information-gathering process. IOM has the contact information of beneficiaries served; however, there is a 20% non-response rate, based on past experiences. To address this, IOM maintains backup databases to replace non-respondents in the sample until the desired sample size is met. 

4. Criteria of Evaluation 

This evaluation will apply the standard evaluation criteria for development projects, following the definitions and guidelines of the OECD-DAC (Development Assistance Committee of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) as revised in 201913. 

Aligned with the principles of utility of evaluation criteria, the objectives of the evaluation exercise, and the Utility Norm and Evaluability Standard of the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG)14, the following three criteria will be considered: 

Effectiveness: The extent to which the intervention has achieved, or is expected to achieve, its objectives and results, including differentiated results among groups. 

Efficiency: The extent to which the intervention delivers, or is likely to deliver, results in an economic and timely manner. 

Impact: The extent to which the intervention has generated, or is expected to generate, significant effects -positive or negative, intended or unintended-at the highest level. 

5. Questions of Evaluation 

Below is a list of questions derived from the previously mentioned objectives and criteria. This list is not exhaustive and may be adjusted depending on the scope of the evaluation and the available resources and duration. A finalized version will be included in the inception report. 

The inception report must include an evaluation matrix in which the evaluator specifies sub-questions, measurement indicators, sources of verification, and data collection and analysis methods aligned with the project performance rating matrix. 

Criterios  

Evaluation questions 

Effectiveness 

To what extent has the project achieved the proposed results, and what factors supported or hindered the observed achievement level? What were considered the project’s main achievements to date? 

Were the coordination and collaboration mechanisms with national and local authorities and other project partners adequate and sufficient to facilitate the achievement of results? 

How effective has the inclusion of Venezuelan migrants and refugees in project activities been in achieving the expected outcomes? 

Did the indicators accurately reflect the intended results in the intervention logic? Were any adjustments needed or recommended to ensure the indicators effectively measure impact-level results? 

What main challenges has the project faced in achieving its objectives? How have these challenges been addressed? 

Were the risks and external factors (e.g. instutional instability) faced by the project monitored and managed throughout project implementation? 

Efficiency 

Were the human and financial resources invested in the project reasonable concerning the results generated? 

To what extent was the project team/implementing partners able to complete activities and deliver results within the expected timeline, and why? 

Were the monitoring/donors’ reports prepared relevant, reliable, and complete following donor requirements? 

Impact 

Is there systematic evidence of improvement in the perception of socioeconomic integration among the Venezuelan migrant population, to which the project has contributed at the national and local levels? 

Has a positive change in behaviors and wellbeing been objectively observed among beneficiaries who received MHPSS (Mental Health and Psychosocial Support) assistance? 

Did the project produce any unintended results, either positive or negative, in terms of migrant integration or institutional relationships? 

Cross-cutting issues 

Did the project design include gender-sensitive participation of diverse stakeholders in the holistic management of migrant integration in Peru? 

To what extent did the project include considerations of gender equality, rights-based approaches, and disability in its design and implementation, in line with applicable IOM frameworks? 

Did the project’s outputs and activities reflect differentiated needs based on age, disability, displacement, gender, nationality, migratory status, and vulnerability conditions? 

Were safe and accessible spaces guaranteed for the participation of vulnerable populations? 

Did beneficiaries receive clear, accessible, and culturally appropriate information about their rights and the services offered through the project? 

6. Methodology and methods 

This results-based evaluation will have a non-experimental design and will apply a Utilization-Focused Evaluation (UFE) approach along with a Theory-Driven Evaluation based on the project’s Theory of Change15. The evaluator is expected to propose an approach and data collection and analysis methods that enable credible, valid, and reliable answers to the evaluation questions, generate practical recommendations, and identify lessons and potential good practices from the project’s design, implementation, and monitoring processes—all while considering the cross-cutting issues mentioned earlier. Basic parameters for methodological proposal: 

Data Collection Methods May Include (but are not limited to):