Consultant

Africa Enterprise Challenge Fund

The Final Evaluation will review the Relevance of design, Effectiveness, Efficiency of planning and implementation, Impact, and Potential for Sustainability and Replication. Issues or factors that have impeded or accelerated the implementation of the programme or any of its components, including actions taken and resolutions made, should be highlighted. The evaluation will go beyond reporting the quantitative outcomes and examine how results were measured, particularly at the beneficiary level. It will analyze the robustness of the methodologies used to estimate indirect job creation, household income, and examine assumptions applied that influenced the measurement approach.

This Final Evaluation will be carried out in conformity with the AECF Evaluation standards and will use the widely accepted OECD/ DAC Evaluation criteria. An initial set of questions that should guide the Final Evaluation in assessing the Programme against each given criterion has been developed as follows:

Criteria

Evaluation Questions

Relevance

• To what extent was the Programme relevant to the needs and priorities in Somalia and the relevant stakeholders?
• To what extent were the objectives of the Programme valid to address the identified problem?
• To what extent has the programme design supported the increased access to finance for women and young people in productive sectors in Somalia?
• To what extent has the programme been impacted by government policies affecting lending in Somalia, and what can be done by the FGS, EU and other stakeholders to improve the financial business environment?

Coherence

• How effectively was the Programme integrated with existing national and regional policies?
• To what extent did the Programme complement or duplicate other donor-funded initiatives in the same sector?
• What mechanisms were in place to ensure alignment with external actors (government, donors, NGOs, private sector)?
• Did the activity build sufficiently on findings and outcomes of the Mid-Term Evaluation of FIG?

Effectiveness

• To what extent has the Programme achieved its intended objectives and targets?
• What progress has been made towards key Programme outcomes and indicators?
• What factors facilitated or hindered the achievement of intended results?
• How effectively were Programme strategies adjusted based on real-time feedback and learning?
• How flexible was the Programme in adapting to emerging needs and challenges during implementation?
• How did Programme management, governance, and decision-making structures contribute to effectiveness in implementation?
• Have the financial intermediaries disbursed the funding made available?
• Who has been reached with concessional financing?
• Has the technical assistance training provided to the MFIs staff been effective in addressing identified capacity gaps?
• Has the technical assistance provided to end beneficiaries improved business performance and improved repayment rates?
• Was the PGF effective in de-risking lending and incentivizing MFIs to reach target groups?

Criteria

Evaluation Questions

• Does the programme generate the expected development impact on end beneficiaries?

Efficiency

• How efficiently were financial and human resources allocated and utilized?
• Were the Programme's interventions cost-effective compared to alternative approaches?
• Were there any areas where resources could have been used more effectively?
• How did Programme management, governance, and decision-making structures contribute to efficiency in implementation?

Impact

• What are the direct and indirect effects of the Programme?
• To what extent has the Programme met its goals?
• How confident can we be that Programme activities contributed to the perceived changes?
• How could the Programme's impacts have been increased?
• What have been the development impacts achieved to date for the various categories of beneficiaries, particularly on the number of jobs created and the average income generated per beneficiary?
• How has the programme impacted the business performance of the six financial intermediaries? This should focus on their revenues, profits, jobs, branches, geographic coverage, products, technology, etc.
• How were indirect jobs at the beneficiary level measured and validated?
• Which types of micro enterprises contribute significantly to indirect job creation, and what factors explain this variation?

Sustainability

• Is there an exit strategy, and to what extent has it been implemented? If not, what can still be implemented to ensure sustainability?
• Did the Programme contribute to lasting capacities or other benefits for the local MFIs and their clients?
• Based upon existing plans and observations made during the evaluation, what are the key strategic options for future Programmes (e.g. exit, scale down, replicate, scale-up, continue business-as-usual, major changes to approach)?
• How likely are the Programme's benefits, skills, and resources to be sustained after funding ends?
• To what extent have local MFIs taken ownership of interventions?
• What measures were in place to ensure accountability and transparency in Programme implementation? Could they be improved? If so, how?
• What strategies were put in place to ensure institutionalisation and long-term sustainability?
• What are the key risks or barriers to sustaining Programme outcomes, and how can they be mitigated?