Final Evaluation Consultant

The International Rescue Committee (IRC) responds to the world's worst humanitarian crises, helping to restore health, safety, education, economic wellbeing, and power to people devastated by conflict and disaster. Founded in 1933 at the call of Albert Einstein, the IRC is one of the world's largest international humanitarian non-governmental organizations (INGO), at work in more than 40 countries and 29 U.S. cities helping people to survive, reclaim control of their future and strengthen their communities. A force for humanity, IRC employees deliver lasting impact by restoring safety, dignity and hope to millions. If you're a solutions-driven, passionate change-maker, come join us in positively impacting the lives of millions of people world-wide for a better future.

TITLE: Regional Integrated Protection and Health Response in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen

DONOR: GAC

LOCATION:  Remote with travel to Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen  

START:  February 2026

END:       June 2026   

1.About IRC

The International Rescue Committee (IRC) is an international non-governmental organization. IRC helps people whose lives and livelihoods are shattered by conflict and disaster to survive, recover, and gain control of their future. IRC has built expertise in supporting societies in their transition to sustainable development, with a focus on assisting subnational institutions to deliver basic social services. The IRC has an exceptional capacity to build the technical capacity of subnational institutions and deliver quality services in sectors including health care, violence prevention and response (protection, including child protection and women’s protection and empowerment (WPE/GBV)), education, economic recovery and development, governance, and research and learning. As a recognized global leader in protection programming, IRC is committed to addressing the world’s humanitarian crises and development challenges through context appropriate, gender transformative, evidence-based, outcome-driven interventions that bring real change to the lives of our clients.

 2. Context

The humanitarian crises in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen remain among the most complex globally, characterized by protracted conflict, economic collapse, and weakened health and protection systems. Women, children (boys and particularly girls), and marginalized groups face heightened risks of gender-based violence (GBV), limited access to basic sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), and mental health and psychosocial support (MHPSS). The IRC has been implementing integrated protection and health interventions to address these needs, guided by feminist principles and localization strategies.

Syria (SY):  considered one of the largest and most complex displacement crises in the world. More than ten million Syrians remain forcibly displaced, including more than 3.5 million refugees hosted in Lebanon, Jordan, and other neighboring countries. Since the fall of the Assad-led government in December 2024, more than 1.1 million refugees and 1.9 million internally displaced persons have reportedly returned to their areas of origin. Yet despite this increase in the return movements, most displaced Syrians are unlikely to return in the near term, with many citing ongoing concerns over safety, access to services, durable solutions, limited civil documentation, and scarce economic opportunities. Lebanon (LB): Five years of economic crisis have left LB with 3.9M people requiring humanitarian aid. Needs are particularly severe in North and Akkar, remote, underserved, and hosting more than 357,000 Syrian refugees.  IRC/partner, GBV Working Group, and Child Protection AoR data/findings show declining access to essential services and decreasing protections, particularly for women & children (girls and boys).  IRC studies also find that lack of documentation for those who are discriminated against, or cannot afford or properly follow legal processes, profoundly affects women, limiting movement for fear of interrogation or detention. Lebanon continues to face overlapping humanitarian pressures driven by ongoing insecurity, economic collapse, and large-scale displacement. Despite a November 2024 ceasefire, hostilities and violations persist, contributing to widespread destruction and leaving over 860,000 people internally displaced, with essential services severely disrupted across multiple regions. Akkar and North Lebanon—already among the country’s poorest areas—have absorbed substantial new arrivals from Syria, hosting over 17,000 newly displaced individuals in Akkar alone, many living in overcrowded shelters or with host families amid significant gaps in WASH, shelter, and protection services. Simultaneously, return movements to Syria have increased following political shifts there, with more than 146,000 Syrians returning from Lebanon since December 2024; however, conditions in Syria remain unstable, and many returnees face obstacles related to documentation, housing, and livelihoods, raising concerns about the sustainability and voluntariness of returns.

Yemen (YM): W&Gs in YM face acute humanitarian and protection needs, resulting from ten years of conflict. An estimated 21.6M people need humanitarian and protection aid, with 6.1M having catastrophic need, and 4.5M internally displaced (77% women and children)

3. Project Background

The IRC’s Regional Integrated Protection and Health Response project (2024–2026) aims to improve safety, health, and well-being for women, children (girls and boys), and vulnerable populations in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. The project integrates GBV prevention and response, SRHR services, MHPSS, and child protection (CP) interventions, alongside capacity strengthening of local actors. The CAD 8 million initiative targets over 127,000 beneficiaries and emphasizes gender equality, GEDI, accountability, and conflict sensitivity.

IRC and partners propose a critical two-year humanitarian intervention in the heavily crisis-impacted regions of northeast Syria, northern Lebanon and Lahj, Yemen, based on the following Theory of Change: IF women and children are able to access quality, lifesaving integrated  GBV, SRH, MHPSS and CP services, AND IF social norms support women and girls’ rights and promote women and girls’ SRHR and condemn GBV, AND IF women-led organizations (WLOs), CBOs, and health systems are strengthened to support SRH rights and leadership to respond to and prevent GBV, THEN women and children will be empowered and safe from GBV, and can achieve their SRH and protection rights (See annex 1 for full Logical Model).

4. Purpose and Objectives of the Evaluation

The final evaluation will assess the project’s relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and impact, aligned with OECD DAC criteria and GAC priorities. Objectives include:

• Measure Key achievements of intended and unintended outcomes and outputs.
• Validate the Theory of Change and Assumptions.
• Identify lessons learned and best practices for future programming and designs specifically for each program area.
• Assess integration of gender-transformative and localization approaches.
• Assess the sustainability approach and to what extent this component has been achieved

5. Evaluation Scope and Key Questions

This evaluation is intended to help the IRC answer the following key questions:

• To what extent did the project in its integrated approach improved protection/safety/well-being and health outcomes including SRHR and, MHPSS for women, girls, and children?

• How effective were integrated service models (GBV + SRHR + MHPSS)?

• How sustainable the HOW services delivery through partners and across the WLOs/feminist org as well as the women led community committees?

• How did gender-transformative approaches effectively influenced social norms?

• Did integration of services enhance client’s uptake in services, and improve their overall wellbeing by receiving comprehensive and complementary services?

• Any unintended effects/impact on the communities targeted by this project?

6. Evaluation Criteria

Based on the OECD DAC evaluation criteria of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability, and with focus on cross-cutting themes: Gender Equality, GEDI, Accountability, and Conflict Sensitivity, it is expected that the evaluation questions should be answered while addressing the following criteria:

• Relevance for meeting the targeted beneficiaries’ needs, interests, and expectations.
• Effectiveness of the project activities in achieving the project objectives, the relation between input/resources and the results achieved on the output, outcome and impact level as relevant.
• Sustainability To what extent activities, results, and effects are expected to continue after the donor intervention has ended. To what extent the project supported institutional capacity building will continue to contribute to the emergency response and building resilience, how realistic the project approach was in achieving sustainable results for beneficiaries including the relation with internal and external stakeholders.
• Efficiency: Were the objectives achieved so far in a cost-efficient manner by the project implementation, were there any alternatives for achieving the same results with less resources 
• Impact: As explained in more details below, because of methodological limitations, it is not expected that the review will be able to infer causality between the project and expected impacts. Instead, the review can offer perceptions, correlations and descriptive inferences about how perceived changes could be associated with (but not unequivocally caused by) the program. This can be also assessed through analyzing the project impact indicators.

Methodology

The final evaluation will be based on a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach and carried out in line with OECD/DAC evaluation principles to answer the key evaluation questions and make recommendations for next programming. The selected service provider, based on their technical proposal, will determine in collaboration with the IRC the final evaluation approach. The offer should include the following as a minimum:

Research Methods

• Primary and secondary Desk Review of project documents
• Quantitative methods, including community and HH surveys.
• Qualitative methods, including Key Informant Interviews (KIIs), Focus Group Discussions (FGDs), case studies, qualitative surveys (Indicators endline)

Sampling

• Using a represented sample approach, select the targeted locations for data collection; map-out the homogenous communities across the targeted countries
• The sample is expected to cover communities at the district/areas level in Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen.

Data collection

• Select and design quantitative and qualitative data collection tools based on the identified requirements – Surveys, FGDs and KIIs.  Tools should be in-line with global tools, eg, MISP, SPHERE, IRC and WHO.
• Ensure data collection tools are standardized to support analysis and visualization using Power BI and SPSS
• Create a detailed evaluation question matrix to map which data collection tools will be used to answer each evaluation question.
• Select the appropriate data collection tools for specific groups (for example surveys + FGD for community members, KIIs for civil society organizations, municipalities, and other local administration bodies).
• Recruit and train enumerators in all countries Syria, Yemen and Lebanon.
• Train the enumerators on the data collection tools.
• Pilot and roll-out the data collection tools.
• Ensure data collection processes are aligned with IRC’s approach to Monitoring, Evaluation, Accountability and Learning (MEAL) and in close collaboration with the MEAL unit at IRC Country Program.

Analysis and Reporting

• Perform data analysis using relevant tools such as SPSS, PowerBI and qualitative tools.
• Provide insights and recommendations on IRC’s values.
• Present the preliminary findings and recommendations of the study.
• Deliver a final narrative and statistical report, and presentation of the study.

8. Deliverables

The evaluation team should be committed to providing the IRC with unlimited access to all produced materials as part of this assignment. The evaluation team should ensure data security and data storage for all documents including evaluation data and analysis. Any data sharing is always subject to the IRC prior approval.

The evaluators will produce the following documentation and actions in the process of conducting the review:

Inception report to include review objectives and scope, review questions, data sources, analytical approaches and methodologies to be employed, data collection tools, relevant theories of change, a work plan and ways of working with key stakeholders, a dissemination strategy, as well as an updated review timeline and budget Bi-weekly progress reports (one page) to be submitted to IRC to summarize review progress and identify any challenges Three participatory review meetings (one for each country team) Draft evaluation report for review Review meeting with key IRC staff to discuss and validate findings and recommendations Final evaluation report in standard required format:

• Executive summary
• Introduction/Background (Context, Theory of Change, Evaluation Questions)
• Purpose, scope and methods
• Evaluation work plan
• Limitations
• Findings
• Conclusions
• Concrete and feasible Recommendations
• Learning
•  Annexes

Final evaluation report summary in Arabic (5-10 pages) Final evaluation report summary in PowerPoint format Case studies (one for each country program) Online presentation of final evaluation report for IRC, partners and GAC.

9. Timeline

The following is an indicative timeline of the proposed major milestones of the evaluation:

 FEB: Consultancy advertised

MAR: Consultant selection and contracting

MAR: Methodology development and approval by IRC and GAC

Evaluation planning and preparation including logistics

MAR-APRIL: Inception report

APRIL-MAY: Field work

MAY: Participatory review workshops

JUNE: Final Evaluation report drafted

IRC review final report and provide feedback

Evaluation report reviewed and approved by GAC

JUNE: Evaluation report finalized and presented (Final presentation with PowerPoint, Evaluation summary in Arabic)

10. Key Working Relationships

The consultancy will be managed through the IRC Regional Measurement Advisor and will be working closely with the Country MEAL Coordinators, Country Deputy Directors of programs, Program coordinators, Technical Advisors, local partners, and GAC focal person.

11. Consultant Requirements

The service provider must have a strong background in the context of the region, with proven experience in relevant and multi-countries research and evaluation studies. The service provider should have strong research and field presence in Jordan, Lebanon, and Yemen.

Other's requirements are:

• Strong experience in leading evaluations and capitalization exercises conforming OECD/DAC’s Quality Standards for Development and Humanitarian Evaluation.
• Strong experience in working in the Women Protection and Empowerment sector in protracted crisis including MHPSS and Health sector.
• Strong expertise in project cycle management, project monitoring, and outcome/impact measurement
• Strong conceptual and analytical thinking.
• Excellent communication and writing skills in English and Arabic.
• Prior experience, knowledge, and strong track record in implementing evaluations in the region is required.
• Prior experience working with international Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs)
• Understanding of the culture, safeguarding concerns and standards relating to ethical and confidential data collection

12. Ethical Considerations

The following guiding principles and values should be applied during the final evaluation as much as possible:

• Independence: The final evaluation team should work independently, and measures should be put in place to prevent bias.
• Usefulness: Final evaluation findings must be articulated clearly and in a way that maximises the potential for these findings to inform decision-making.
• Representativeness: The evaluation should strive to include a wide range of beneficiaries, including from different gender roles, age groups, ethnic groups and locations (e.g. urban and rural) as relevant to the project.
• Gender, age and diversity sensitiveness: The evaluation must be gender sensitive and, where possible, try to assess the intended or unintended effects of the project on gender relations.  The evaluation should go beyond disaggregation to look at how women, men, boys and girls engage differently with the project and data gathering methods should take gender considerations into account and include adjustments to ensure that respondents are able to fully and meaningfully participate in the review. All efforts should be made to include respondents from different ethnic and religious groups in Syria in the areas where IRC has been implementing.
• Conflict sensitivity: The evaluation must be conflict sensitive and also, where possible, try to assess the intended or unintended effects of the project on the conflict.
• Disability sensitivity: The evaluation must consider issues of mental and physical disability and, where possible, assess the intended or unintended effects of the project on those living with a disability.
• Accountability: The most vulnerable targeted by the project must be able to input and/or feedback into the design and management of the review.
• Transparency: Best practice is that review findings are made public. IRC should strive to share review findings and lessons with downstream partners, affected populations and other relevant donors.
• Ethical principles: The evaluation team should adhere to the highest standards of integrity using standard ethical principles and practices for research and evaluation

13. Logistics

Under this consultancy, the responsibility for logistics and security lies primarily with the evaluation team. The evaluation service provider should ensure that all evaluation activities have sufficient logistics, and field work should be also fully coordinated with the IR’s Humanitarian and Access teams. The IRC will arrange for the evaluators to have access to staff, partners, and beneficiaries while in the field in selected locations, as per pre-agreed schedules. If needed, it is possible for IRC to provide other reasonable administrative and logistics support to the evaluators while in the field as needed; regardless, all such costs should be covered in the consultant’s cost proposal, including translation and transportation. The evaluation service provider can use local researchers for field activities (local researcher CVs should be approved by IRC).

14. Application requirements

To be considered, interested, and qualified consultant/service provider must submit the following documentation:

• Maximum 10-page proposed approach, plan and timeline for completing the evaluation.
• CVs of all team members including local researchers as needed, clearly indicating roles including the lead evaluator. CVs should not exceed 4 pages each.
• Past performance references for similar assignments (2-3 Final evaluation reports in softcopy format with URL links)
• Separate Cost proposal, including all costs necessary to complete the evaluation, and distinguishing (at a minimum) between:

• Individual consultants’ number of days and daily professional fee rates
• Travel costs (At least the evaluation team leader should be working between Jordan and Lebanon and have field access to monitor activities in both countries)
• Field work costs (Per data collection unit and per field data collectors’ daily rates)
• Other costs

Applications without all four components will not be considered.

PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS

All International Rescue Committee workers must adhere to the core values and principles outlined in IRC Way - Standards for Professional Conduct. Our Standards are Integrity, Service, Equality and Accountability. In accordance with these values, the IRC operates and enforces policies on Safeguarding, Conflicts of Interest, Fiscal Integrity, and Reporting Wrongdoing and Protection from Retaliation. IRC is committed to take all necessary preventive measures and create an environment where people feel safe, and to take all necessary actions and corrective measures when harm occurs. IRC builds teams of professionals who promote critical reflection, power sharing, debate, and objectivity to deliver the best possible services to our clients.

Cookies: https://careers.rescue.org/us/en/cookiesettings

Equal Opportunity Employer: IRC is an Equal Opportunity Employer. IRC considers all applicants on the basis of merit without regard to race, sex, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, age, marital status, veteran status, disability or any other characteristic protected by applicable law.