Final Evaluation of the Music Aid Maternal Health Project

2. Background 2.1 The Sudanese Red Crescent Society SRCS is Sudan's largest humanitarian organisation, working through branches in all 18 states and a large network of trained volunteers. As an auxiliary to the public authorities, SRCS delivers health, disaster response and community resilience programmes, guided by the Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Since the conflict began in April 2023, SRCS has continued to serve communities facing displacement, disrupted health services and rising needs, including in states hosting large numbers of internally displaced people. 2.2 The project With funding from Music Aid and technical support from SRC, SRCS has implemented a maternal health project in White Nile and Northern State. Both states host many displaced families, and pressure already limited maternal and newborn health services has grown since 2023. The project aims to improve access to, and use of, maternal health services for women and their communities, working through SRCS volunteers, community structures and local health facilities. 2.3 Evaluation approach The final evaluation is a donor requirement. In line with its commitment to transparency and accountability, SRCS is commissioning it externally through an open, competitive process. The evaluation follows a collaborative model that SRCS and SRC have used successfully in previous evaluations: the external evaluator leads the design, analysis and reporting; trained SRCS branch volunteers and staff collect the data; and the PMER teams at SRCS HQ and SRC provide technical support. It also includes a Participatory Project Review (PPR), a method used across SRCS–SRC joint programmes. 3. Purpose, objectives and intended users 3.1 Purpose The evaluation will assess how well the project responded to the needs of women and communities, what it achieved, and what is likely to last after it closes. It has two purposes: Accountability : to Music Aid, to the women and communities the project served, and to SRCS and SRC governance. Learning : to give SRCS and SRC practical lessons and recommendations for future maternal and community health programming in Sudan. Taking part in the process will also build the evaluation skills of SRCS branch and PMER staff. 3.2 Specific objectives Assess how relevant the project's design and activities were to the needs, priorities and access barriers of women, including pregnant and lactating women, displaced women and women with disabilities. Measure progress against the logframe outputs and outcomes, using baseline, monitoring and endline data. Assess how far results, community structures and volunteer capacities are likely to continue after the project ends. Identify lessons learned, good practices and challenges, including the effects of the conflict context on delivery. Provide practical, prioritised recommendations that SRCS and SRC can act on. 3.3 Intended users The main users are the SRCS Health Department and branches, SRC, and the donor. Findings will also be shared with the targeted communities, local health authorities and Movement partners. 4. Scope The evaluation covers the whole project as a single intervention, from its start until the time of the evaluation in November 2026. Geographic scope : SRCS HQ, the White Nile State branch, the Northern State branch and all targeted localities and communities in both states. Stakeholders : women who used project services (pregnant and lactating women, women of reproductive age), husbands and other family members, community leaders and committees, SRCS volunteers and project staff, health facility staff, and State and locality Ministry of Health focal points. Cross-cutting areas : protection, gender and inclusion (PGI), community engagement and accountability (CEA), and the influence of the conflict and displacement on implementation. Out of scope : an impact evaluation or statistical attribution of health outcomes, a financial audit, and a full value-for-money analysis. Basic observations on the use of resources are welcome where the evidence allows. 5. Evaluation criteria and key questions The evaluation uses three OECD-DAC criteria: relevance, effectiveness and sustainability. The evaluator will refine the five questions below during the inception phase. Criterion Key question Main sources Relevance R1. To what extent did the project respond to the maternal health needs, priorities and access barriers of women, including displaced women and women with disabilities? Were communities and branches involved in choosing the activities? FGDs, KIIs, PPR workshops Relevance R2. To what extent did the training and materials given to volunteers match their roles and learning needs? Volunteer survey Effectiveness E1. To what extent did the project achieve its logframe outputs and outcomes, and what changed in women's knowledge and use of maternal health services compared with the baseline? Endline survey, baseline, monitoring reports, FGDs Effectiveness E2. How well did the project involve women in decisions and apply PGI and CEA commitments (feedback, safeguarding, safe referral)? FGDs, KIIs, PGI scorecard Sustainability S1. What is likely to continue after November 2026 (volunteer and community activities, referral links, support to health facilities), and was an exit plan agreed with the Ministry of Health and communities? KIIs, volunteer survey, PPR workshops 6. Methodology The evaluator leads the design, analysis and reporting. Trained SRCS volunteers and branch staff collect the data on KoBoToolbox, with support from SRCS PMER and SRC. Method With whom Indicative number Desk review Proposal, logframe, baseline, indicator tracking table, monitoring and feedback reports – Endline survey Women reached by the project, stratified by state (Yamane formula, 5% margin of error) About 350–400, confirmed at inception Focus group discussions Women by age group; men and community leaders where appropriate 8–12 Key informant interviews Health facility staff, Ministry of Health focal points, community leaders, branch and project staff 10–14 Volunteer survey All project volunteers All PPR workshop with PGI scorecard Branch staff, volunteers, community representatives (women and men), local health authorities 1 per state The Participatory Project Review (PPR) follows a one-day format used in previous SRCS–SRC reviews: participants map the project timeline, identify what changed, then score successes, challenges and recommendations by voting, and end by agreeing who should act on each recommendation. The PGI Minimum Standards scorecard (IFRC tool 4.2, adapted to health) is completed in the same session. PPR is participatory, not independent, so it complements the other methods rather than replacing them. Facilitators will use picture and verbal cards where literacy is low, and make sure women's voices are not overshadowed by more powerful participants. Participants will be told when and how they will hear the results. Analysis. Data will be disaggregated by sex, age, state and displacement status where possible. Qualitative data will be coded against the evaluation questions. Preliminary findings will be shared in an online validation session. Ethics. The evaluator signs the SRCS Code of Conduct, including PSEA and child safeguarding, and a conflict-of-interest declaration. Every participant gives informed consent, and personal data stays confidential. Women are interviewed by female data collectors where possible, and data collectors are trained on safe referral. Expected limitations , based on SRCS experience with similar evaluations: A very short timeframe, so the tools must stay few and short. Long distances and limited transport between communities. Branches will plan logistics before training day. Staff turnover may limit institutional memory. The desk review and the PPR timeline exercise will help fill gaps. Data collectors' FGD skills vary. The training includes a practice session, and the evaluator follows up remotely. Self-reported data may be biased. Findings will be triangulated across methods and groups. 7. Deliverables All deliverables are in English, submitted electronically to the SRCS PMER and Health Departments and copied to SRC. # Deliverable Content Due 1 Inception report (max. 8 pages) Refined evaluation matrix, sampling plan, data collection tools (Arabic and English), analysis plan and detailed work plan 17 Nov 2026 2 Data collector training One-day training for branch data collectors in both states, in person or online, with a short training guide 18 Nov 2026 3 Validation session Presentation of preliminary findings to SRCS and SRC (online) 25 Nov 2026 4 Draft evaluation report Following the structure below 26 Nov 2026 5 Final evaluation report Revised after one round of consolidated comments from SRCS and SRC, with clean datasets, transcripts and a short PowerPoint summary of findings 29 Nov 2026 Report structure (max. 25 pages, excluding annexes): executive summary (max. 3 pages); introduction and project background; methodology and limitations, findings by evaluation criterion; conclusions; lessons learned; and prioritised, practical recommendations, each with a suggested responsible party and timeframe. Annexes include this ToR, the tools, the list of people consulted (without personal identifiers of community members), the logframe with achieved values, and the clean datasets. After the final report, SRCS and SRC will prepare a joint Management Response Plan setting out actions, responsibilities and timelines for each recommendation. This is not part of the consultancy. 8. Timeline and work plan All work must be completed by 30 November 2026, when the project closes. The indicative plan below assumes contract signature by 15 November 2026. The selected evaluator will confirm the detailed work plan in the inception report. Dates (2026) Activity Lead Evaluator days 15–17 Nov Inception report and tools Evaluator, PMER 3 18 Nov Data collector training Evaluator, branches 1 19–23 Nov Data collection, including one PPR workshop per state Branches, evaluator 3 23–26 Nov Analysis, validation session and draft report Evaluator, PMER 5 27–29 Nov Comments from SRCS and SRC, then final report Health Dept, SRC, evaluator 2 30 Nov Approval and final payment Health Dept, Finance – Total 14 9. Management and roles Party Responsibilities SRCS Health Department (evaluation manager) Owns the evaluation; approves the ToR, inception report and final report; provides project documents; leads the management response SRCS PMER Department Technical support on tools, sampling, KoBoToolbox, data quality and analysis; quality assurance of deliverables White Nile and Northern State branches Recruit and supervise data collectors; organise logistics, community entry and appointments; hold safe referral contacts SRCS HR Department Advertisement, selection and contracting, in line with SRCS procedures Swedish Red Cross Reviews the ToR, inception and draft reports to make sure they meet donor requirements; offers technical PMER support External evaluator Leads the design, analysis and reporting; trains and guides data collectors; delivers all outputs on time and to standard An Evaluation Reference Group made up of the Health Department, PMER and SRC will review each deliverable and send one set of consolidated comments. Financial terms. The financial proposal should state an all-inclusive daily rate and total fee in EUR, covering professional fees, communication and any travel the applicant proposes. Data collection costs in the branches (data collectors, transport and workshops) are covered by SRCS and should not be included. Payment follows SRCS finance procedures: 30% on approval of the inception report and 70% on approval of the final report. Applicable taxes are handled in line with Sudanese law and SRCS procedures. Insurance and security. The evaluator is responsible for their own health, life and travel insurance. The assignment can be delivered remotely or with travel inside Sudan; any field travel must be agreed with SRCS in advance and follows SRCS security rules. 10. Evaluator profile This assignment suits an individual consultant or a small team with a named team leader. Required Master's degree in public health, maternal and reproductive health, social sciences, development studies or a related field. At least 5 years of experience evaluating health or humanitarian programmes, including at least two final evaluations as team leader. Proven skills in mixed methods: survey design and sampling, KoBoToolbox or similar, quantitative analysis (Excel, SPSS, Stata or R) and qualitative coding. Experience with participatory, gender-sensitive data collection with women and communities. Excellent written English and working Arabic. Availability to start immediately and deliver within the timeline above. Desirable Experience in Sudan or similar fragile and conflict-affected settings. Experience with the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement, including SRCS or SRC. Knowledge of IFRC evaluation standards, PGI and CEA. Applicants who have worked with SRCS before are welcome to apply. They must declare any past or current relationship with the project or its staff, and the selection panel will assess it for conflict of interest. 11. How to apply Please send the following, in English, to hiba.osman@rc-srcs.org with the subject line "Final Evaluation – Music Aid Maternal Health Project" by 12 November 2026, 17:00 Sudan time : A technical proposal (max. 5 pages): understanding of the assignment, proposed approach and methods, and a work plan that fits the timeline. A financial proposal in EUR: daily rate and total fee. An up-to-date CV (and CVs of any team members). One recent evaluation report written by the applicant, or a link to one. Two professional references. A signed declaration of availability for 15–29 November 2026 and of any potential conflict of interest. Late or incomplete applications will not be considered. Proposals will be scored 70% technical and 30% financial, and only shortlisted applicants will be contacted. SRCS does not charge any fee at any stage of the recruitment process. SRCS is an equal opportunities organisation and particularly encourages applications from women. 12. Ownership and confidentiality All data, tools and reports produced under this assignment belong to SRCS and SRC. The evaluator may not share or publish any material without written permission. The final report may be shared with the donor and published by SRCS or SRC.