1.      Introduction

The Cambodian Center for Independent Media began its operation in 2007 and initially started in producing and broadcasting radio programs on rented airtime and later operated its own radio station Sarika FM in 2009. In August 2017, CCIM had operated five radio stations when these were closed down resulting to the media crackdown of the government. Unable to return to fulltime broadcasting, CCIM managed to rent a one-hour daily airtime to air some of its radio talk shows that are part of the projects it is implementing. The main radio programs under the name of VOD were transformed to online programs and broadcasted on social media, particularly Facebook Live and YouTube channel.

Aside from media activities, CCIM has also engaged in online news reporting and other activities such as: training of professional and aspiring journalists; training and networking of citizen journalists; training on media literacy to the youth; and advocacy on media-related issues. All these activities are supported by a number of core and project donors.

This external evaluation is a mid-project evaluation of the project funded by the Bread for the World from 01 July 2020 up to 30 June 2023, however, it will also cover the previous project period, which began in 01 April 2017 up to 30 June 2020, which are supporting the media activities of CCIM. It should be noted, however, that the media activities of CCIM are also supported by other donors, including its core donors, but the timeline of support of these donors are different from BfdW’s.

2.      Program Outcomes and Indicators

As the external evaluation will cover all the projects funded by the BfdW, the following are the project outcomes and indicators of the different project periods:

  1. Project Title: Catering for Change: Everybody Well-informed, Empowered

Project Period: 01 April 20217 to 30 June 2020

Development Goal (Impact): Independent media, access to information and freedom of expression contribute in democratic governance and respect for human rights

Project Objective (Outcome): People in target areas have increased their access to independent and information until June 2020.

Outcome Indicators:

  1. 10% increase of the no. of radio audience listening the radio programs and radio news broadcasts of Radio Sarika FM
  2. VOD Facebook likes are increased to 15% per year from the 720,000 likes as of December 2016
  3. Increased of % satisfied listeners to 50% by June 2020. Currently, 23% of listeners are satisfied based on the caller survey in December 2015 (2016 data is not yet available)
  • Project Title: Promoting Human Dignity through Media and Information (continuation of the previous project)

Project Period: 01 July 2020 to 30 June 2023

Development goal (impact level): The goal of this project is to contribute in improving Cambodia’s score in global press freedom and freedom of expression indices year-over-year in order to increase the confidence for engaged Cambodian citizens to make informed decision in participating to strengthen good governance and respect for human rights.

Project Objective (Outcome): Access of Cambodian citizens to independent media contents is improved

Outcome Indicators:

  1. Improved VOD’s digital media platforms (VOD websites and social media) with increased number of audience and increased engagement to 15%
  2. Increased participation from target groups and audience to 15% with improved quality of radio and online programs
  3. At least 50% of the online users accessing information from CCIM media platforms are women and girls

3.      Program Target Areas and Groups

As the projects support the operation of the Media Department of CCIM, the target groups include the general public, both local and international online users who will directly benefit from receiving the information from CCIM’s media platforms. The current project’s baseline data of online users in Cambodia is estimated at 8 million users, with around 4.5 million women and girls.

For the online target groups,

Specific target groups will also include the government, NGOs, international NGOs, private sectors, experts, human rights defenders, community activists, and citizen journalists who will engaged in providing information and as resource persons in the radio programs.

4.      Purpose of the Evaluation

This evaluation is being conducted in the middle of the current project to assess its implementation but will also cover of the precedent projects funded by BfdW.

The overall objective of the evaluation is to assess the projects’ implementation and the level of achievement of the projects’ outcomes, documenting the challenges and lessons learned, and making recommendations to improve the continuity of implementation of the current project.

The specific objectives of the evaluation will be to: 1) assess and analyze the impact and progress of the action against the logical framework, and 2) promote accountability and learning through active participation of partners and stakeholders in the evaluation process.

5.      Intended Users of the Evaluation

The evaluation is intended to provide the following information to the management of CCIM with the following purpose:

  • Recommendations from the evaluation will be utilized by the said donor to report to their respective donors the design and implementation of the program, particularly the achievement of impact, outcome and outputs of the program;
  • Findings and recommendations from the evaluation should aim to improve CCIM’s organizational and project capacities in order to enhance their ability to effectively and continually implement the current project and plan for future projects?; and
  • CCIM will use the findings and recommendations from the evaluation to assess its partnership with donors as well as to inform future initiatives.

6.      Scope and Focus of the Evaluation

The evaluation will look at the following areas: project management; project activities; reflection of aid coordination engagement and partnerships with development partners. It will address the results achieved, the partnerships established, as well as issues of capacity and approach.

The Evaluation Questions

The evaluation team is required to assess the four key questions as outlined below. The key questions and its bulleted sub-questions should be considered mandatory for incorporation by the evaluation team:

  1. Did the program fulfill the OECD’s DAC criteria?

Determine whether the objectives, results and impact as stated in the proposal have been achieved, according to the DAC criteria outlined below:

  1. Relevance

The extent to which the aid activity is suited to the priorities and policies of the target group, recipient and donor. In evaluating the relevance of a project, the following questions should be considered

  • To what extent are the objectives of the project still valid? To what extend are the objectives of the project aligning with the needs of the beneficiaries?
    • Are the activities and outputs of the project consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives?
    • Are the activities and outputs of the project consistent with the intended impacts and effects?
  • Effectiveness

A measure of the extent to which an aid activity attains its objectives. In evaluating the effectiveness of a project, the following questions should be considered/answered:

  • To what extent were the objectives achieved / are likely to be achieved?
    • What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non-achievement of the objectives?
  • Efficiency

Efficiency measures the outputs — qualitative and quantitative — in relation to the inputs. It is an economic term which signifies that the aid uses the least costly resources possible in order to achieve the desired results. This generally requires comparing alternative approaches to achieving the same outputs, to see whether the most efficient process has been adopted. When evaluating the efficiency of a project, it is useful to consider the following questions:

  • Were activities cost-efficient? Were objectives achieved on time?
    • Was the project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives?
  • Impact

The positive and negative changes produced by a development intervention, directly or indirectly, intended or unintended. This involves the main impacts and effects resulting from the activity on the local social, economic, environmental and other development indicators. The examination should be concerned with both intended and unintended results and must also include the positive and negative impact of external factors, such as changes in terms of trade and financial conditions. When evaluating the impact of the project, the following questions should be considered/answered:

  • Will the project contribute to the attainment of overall development goal?
    • What has happened as a result of the project?
    • What real difference has the activity made to the beneficiaries?
    • How many people have been affected?
    • Which other positive and negative changes have occurred will be investigated?
  • Sustainability

Sustainability is concerned with measuring whether the benefits of an activity are likely to continue after donor funding has been withdrawn. Projects need to be environmentally as well as financially sustainable. When evaluating the sustainability of a project, it is useful to consider the following questions:

  • To what extent did the benefits of the project continue after donor funding ceased?
    • What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non-achievement of sustainability of the project?
    • Will the intended positive changes (foreseeably) have a lasting effect?
  • To what extend did the program live up to the core humanitarian standards (CHS)?

See the “CHS on Quality and Accountability document for more information. Particular attention should be paid to the action’s ability to meet CHS commitments related to:  

  • Appropriateness and relevance (Commitment 1)
    • Effectiveness (Commitment 2)
    • Strengthening local capacities and avoiding negative effects (Commitment 3)
    • Communication, participation and feedback (Commitments 4 and 5)
    • Coordination and complementarity (Commitment 6)
    • Continuous learning and improvement (Commitment 7)
  • To what extent was the program rights-based?

This question should be answered at both the design (was the program designed to be rights-based) and implementation (did the program implement a rights-based approach) stages.

The PANEL approach can be used to assess this question (Participation, Accountability, Nondiscrimination, Empowerment and Linking to human rights). 

  1. Participation

Equal voice for all women and men; meaningful and active; addressing barriers to participation. Example: Have rights-holders participated in project design, implementation and this evaluation?

  • Accountability

Addressing duty-bearers; addressing and sharing information; handling complaints. Example: Has the project made its commitments clear to the rights-holders?

  • Non-Discrimination and Equality

Combating discrimination; including marginalized women and men; using disaggregated data; ensuring equal rights for all. Example: Has the project taken specific steps to include vulnerable groups?

  • Empowerment

Knowing and claiming rights; control over resources; influencing decisions; organizing and networking. Example: Has the project made the rights-holders more capable of Claiming their rights?

  • Link to Human rights

Abiding by human rights standards; using national constitutions and laws; facilitating access to justice; appealing to human rights mechanisms. Example: Are the specific Local and global human rights mechanisms relevant to the project identified?

  • Questions related to gender perspectivesHas the project contributed to more gender equality? If yes, how? What made it possible? If no, why not? What were the barriers?
  • Lessons Learned and Recommendations  What are the main successes of the action? Why can these be considered successes and what were the factors contributing to this? What were the main challenges of the action? Why can these be considered challenges and what were the factors contributing to this? What could have been done differently in the planning and implementation of the action? 

7.      Methodology of Evaluation

The evaluation approach shall be utilization focused. As such, the evaluator should arrange a workshop or individual meetings with individual intended users before and during evaluation. The consultant/team should prepare a brief inception report outlining the detailed methodology of the evaluation and framework of inquiry/interview guides. The methodology must use a participatory and consultative approach. At a minimum, it must include the following:

  • Literature review of relevant legal and policy instruments and project documents. A partial list of documents for review is provided below under “background documents.” A full list will be provided to the consultant by partners upon contract signing.
    • Key informant interviews and/or focus group discussions to collect information from all types of stakeholders, including citizen journalists, provincial broadcasters, CBO representatives and members of target communities, with special focus on vulnerable and marginalized groups and special attention to both men and women within these groups. 
    • Opportunities for partners to provide meaningful feedback after a debriefing meeting presenting initial findings and recommendations, so that they can have an opportunity to discuss and provide further input prior to the report’s finalization
    • A formal presentation of the final report for project partners to equip them to take action on recommendations to ensure project sustainability

8.      Duration of the Consultancy

The evaluation is expected to be undertaken for the whole month of January 2022. This will include desk reviews, field work – interviews, report writing, and presentation of final report.

9.      Expected Deliverables

The following deliverables are expected.

  1. Inception Report – A report outlining the key scope of the work and intended work plan of the analysis, and evaluation questions, shall be submitted after 3 days of commencing the consultancy. The inception report will provide CCIM the opportunity to verify that they share the same understanding about the evaluation objectives. The inception report should detail the evaluators’ understanding of what is being evaluated and why, showing how each evaluation question will be answered by way of: proposed methods; proposed sources of data; and data collection procedures. The inception report should include a proposed schedule of tasks, activities and deliverables, designating a team member with the lead responsibility for each task or product. The inception report will be discussed and agreed upon by CCIM and the evaluators.
  • Draft Report – A draft comprehensive report that will inform CCIM Management Committee, CCIM Board of Directors, and BfdW. The report will be produced in English. The report should provide options for strategy and policy as well as recommendations. CCIM responsible for ensuring timely arrangement for a presentation meeting. CCIM Management Committee, Board, and BfdW will provide comments within 14 days after the reception of the Draft Report. The project unit and key stakeholders in the evaluation should review the draft evaluation report to ensure that the evaluation meets the required quality criteria.
  • The Final Report – The final report will be submitted 10 days after receiving comments from the CCIM Management Committee and Board of Directors. The final report will have 25 to 30 pages, excluding appendices. The content and structure of the final analytical report with findings, recommendations and lessons learnt covering the scope of the evaluation should include the following sections:
  • Executive summary
  • Introduction
  • Description of the evaluation methodology
  • Results / Situational analysis with regard to the outcome, outputs, and partnership strategy
  • Results and analysis for each of the OECD’s DAC criteria
  • Analysis of opportunities to provide guidance for future programming
  • Key findings, including best practices and lessons learned
  • Recommendations
  • Conclusions
  • Appendices: Charts, terms of reference, field visits, people interviewed, documents reviewed

10.  Required Expertise and Qualifications of the Evaluator/s

The evaluator or evaluation team must demonstrate the following qualifications and experience:

  • Bachelor’s degree or higher in social science or a related field.
  • Experience in current evaluation theory and practice, including statistical methods, with at least seven years’ experience evaluating development projects.
  • Subject-matter expertise in civil and political rights, including press freedom and access to information, and familiarity with cross-cutting priorities including the Rights-Based Approach and gender in development projects.
  • Experience with NGO- and CBO-based development assistance in Cambodia.
  • Understanding and experience of gender mainstreaming in development
  • Proven evaluation skills on previous EU-funded projects and familiarity with EU requirements on indicator development, sampling, participation methodology, focus group interviews, etc.
  • Demonstrable English-language report writing skills. The consultant / consulting team should be fluent in written and spoken English and Khmer (or should demonstrate how language barriers will be overcome in the literature review, data gathering and analysis process).

11.  Budget and Payment

The consulting team must develop and submit a budget detailing all costs relating to the evaluation. The total cost of the consultancy must include consultants’ fee, travel costs, meals, accommodation, translation and other related expenses including value-added tax (VAT). In accordance with Cambodian tax law, CCIM will withhold tax from the consultancy fee if the consultant team is from unregistered agency/freelance.

Payments will be made in two instalments. The first payment 40% will be paid by cheque/bank transfer upon signature of the contract between CCIM and the consultant and submission of the consultant’s invoice. The remaining 60% will be paid upon the satisfactory completion of the assignment and submission of the consultant’s invoice, and related original receipts, invoices and supported documents if any.

d)     Submission Guidelines

CCIM will entertain proposals from consulting firms and other incorporated entities as well as individuals and teams formed specifically for the purpose of this evaluation. To apply for consideration, applicants should submit a technical and financial proposal (following the format outlined below) electronically in PDF format along with CVs of all consulting team members by 17:00 (Cambodia Time) on 06 May 2022 to [email protected]

Proposals should follow the format below:

  1. Technical Proposal
  2. Proposed methodology expanding on the information provided in this TOR and including proposals for qualitative and quantitative data analysis (interviews, surveys, document analysis, etc.), and methods for ensuring stakeholder participation 
  3. Workplan showing tasks and deliverables with timelines and allocation of work
  4. Profile of the evaluation firm or team (no more than 1 page) 
  5. References, including contact information, from two organizations/clients that have recently employed the firm’s /individual’s/team’s consulting services
  6. Financial Proposal
    1. Specify the total budget for the evaluation (including VAT), itemized by consultant fee per days
  7. Attachments
    1. CVs of all team members (individual CVs should not exceed 3 pages)
    1. Sample of a previous external evaluation report

For more information, contact Mr. Danilo Caspe, 078 222 155