Call for Proposal for UWS UKAM R5 External Evaluation Study

UWS UKAM R5 Evaluation Terms of Reference

UWS Cambodia & Nepal 2025

1.  Project Title

End-of-Project External Evaluation Study: UWS-UK Aid Match R5: Improving participation in an inclusive, quality education for girls living in small, remote & marginalised communities of Cambodia and Nepal.

2.  Background Information

The UK Aid Match R5 (UKAM R5) project was launched in April 2023 and is due to finish in March 2026. The project seeks to address persistent gender-related barriers that limit girls’ access to quality education. Education systems in both countries remain insufficiently responsive to girls’ needs, with challenges including inadequate WASH facilities, limited adoption of gender-responsive teaching practices, and social norms that restrict girls’ participation and learning opportunities. To respond to these issues, the project has been implemented across 163 remote schools and communities in Cambodia and Nepal, aiming to improve gender-responsive education through strengthened government engagement, upgraded WASH infrastructure, teacher training, and community-level empowerment initiatives. The project was designed to support 11,603 girls, including 4,528 who are out of school or at risk of dropout, by fostering gender-responsive schools, households, and community support networks. Through these interventions, the UKAM R5 project has sought to enhance participation in inclusive, safe, and equitable education, contributing to national education sector priorities in Cambodia and Nepal as well as global commitments under SDGs 4 and 5.

3.  Scope of the evaluation

The evaluation will focus on evaluating the project’s Theory of Change, assessing whether the pathways operated as expected across implementation in Cambodia and Nepal. This includes validating whether key causal pathways worked in practice, examining which links in the Theory of Change were stronger or weaker, and identifying any gaps or missing elements that influenced the project’s ability to achieve its intended outcomes. The evaluation will also assess how effectively gender equity and disability inclusion were mainstreamed across school, community, and government-level interventions. As part of this, the evaluation will explore the extent to which government officials and education stakeholders supported gender-responsive approaches; whether Mothers’ Groups, Girls’ Clubs, and other community structures acted as change-makers; how effectively School Retention Teams (SRTs) or School Management Committees (SMCs) used Personal Retention Plans (PRPs) to support at-risk student retention, and its actual impact on student retention; and whether improvements to WASH facilities, teacher training, and community workshops contributed to more gender-responsive environments and attitudes. It will further measure the project’s overall contribution to reducing gendered barriers and improving participation of girls in small, remote, and marginalised communities. It will also consider adding a question on sustainability and scalability beyond project life.

The evaluation will also analyse the specific contributions and impacts of key intervention areas such as:

• gender-responsive teacher training
• WASH upgrades
• Community workshops
• SRT and SMC training
• development and implementation of Personal Retention Plans for at-risk students

The evaluation will assess how observed changes can be explained in relation to exposure to the above project interventions. As part of this, the evaluation will document impactful results and illustrative stories of change, identify best practices in implementation that contributed to these results, and generate qualitative evidence required to support endline indicator reporting for UKAM R5.

The evaluation will cover activities implemented across the full project period in all 163 participating schools and communities, drawing on existing monitoring and assessment data and generating new evidence where necessary to validate causal linkages. Target groups may include:

• Girls (in-school, at-risk, with disability, and out-of-school)
• Teachers, School Leaders, SMCs and SRTs
• Mothers’ Groups, Girls’ Clubs, parents, and community leaders
• Local and provincial government officials engaged in gender-responsive education
• UWS programme and field staff

The final scope, sampling, and balance between primary and secondary data collection may be refined by the evaluator based on their proposed methodology and approach to evaluating the Theory of Change.

Items outside the scope include activities not funded by UKAM R5, outcomes beyond the targeted geographic areas, and broader education sector changes not directly attributable to the programme.

4.  Purpose/ Objective/ Rationale

The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the extent to which the UK Aid Match Round 5 (UKAM R5) project has achieved its intended outcomes as outlined in the logframe, results framework, and Theory of Change. The evaluation will determine the degree to which the project’s objectives have been met across schools, communities, and government stakeholders, and will generate clear recommendations to inform and improve future gender-responsive programming. It will explore what worked well and what did not, identifying the factors that contributed to or undermined the project’s effectiveness and efficiency. The evaluation will also examine whether the project’s design and underlying Theory of Change operated as expected, and how these can be strengthened to better achieve intended outcomes in similar contexts moving forward.

5.  Intended user(s) and use(s)

The primary users of this evaluation will be UWS senior management, programme teams in Cambodia and Nepal, and project partners, who will use the findings to inform future programme design, strengthen gender-responsive approaches, and refine the organisational Theory of Change. The evaluation will also provide accountability to the funder, UK Aid Match, by demonstrating progress against planned outcomes and use of resources. Additionally, insights generated will be shared with government stakeholders and sector partners to support broader learning and policy influence in gender-responsive education.

6.  Evaluation Questions

1. To what extent was the project’s Theory of Change and overall design appropriate for addressing the key gender-related barriers faced by girls in the target communities?
2. To what extent did the key assumptions and risks in the Theory of Change hold true during implementation, and how did they influence the functioning and strength of the project’s causal pathways and results?
3. To what extent were the project’s intended outputs and outcomes achieved across student, school, community, and government levels, in line with the pathways outlined in the Theory of Change? What factors contributed to or undermined the project's effectiveness and efficiency?
4. To what extent did key project interventions contribute to observable changes in gender-responsive practices, attitudes, and learning environments, and how can these changes be attributed to the project?
5. How effectively were gender equity and disability inclusion integrated and operationalised across the project’s pathways of change?
6. To what extent did student and beneficiary feedback shape the design and iterative adaptation of project activities, and how effectively did the project respond to emerging needs and insights throughout implementation?
7. What aspects of the project’s design and Theory of Change could be improved to better achieve the project objectives or intended outcomes in future programming?
8. What elements of the project’s change pathways show potential for sustained adoption or continuation after the project ends?

The evaluation should go beyond descriptive reporting and provide an analytical, evidence-based assessment. Responses to all KEQs should use disaggregated data and examine contextual variations (e.g., geography, gender, disability, risk profiles) to explain not only what happened, but why and how results differed across groups. The evaluation should apply a rigorous contribution analysis to assess the strength and plausibility of the project’s contribution to observed outcomes, rather than simply mapping activities to results.

7.  Guiding principles and approach

The evaluator should complete this section.

Detail the principles and approach that will guide the evaluation (e.g., transparency, partnership, openness, cost-effectiveness, gender awareness, cultural sensitivity, safeguarding and ‘Do No Harm’, stakeholder participation, data protection etc.), should be articulated.

Detail how appropriate ethical procedures will be followed.

8. Methodology

The evaluator should complete this section. Mixed-methods are encouraged, including the use of existing data and new primary data collection to generate new knowledge or to triangulate findings. 

The methodology section should specify as much detail as possible on:

• Existing information sources/data collection instruments, protocols and procedures 
• Additional new data collection efforts: information sources/ data collection instruments, protocols, and procedures
• Sampling procedures
• Provisions to obtain needed permissions to collect and report data
• Provisions to store and maintain the security of collected information
• Procedures for analysing quantitative and qualitative data
• Protocols for anonymity/confidentiality
• Inclusion or not of response from those being evaluated
• Data presentation and dissemination methods

Create an evaluation matrix that specifies which selected methods will answer each KEQ.

Existing data includes:

• Training records
• Teacher gender-responsive lesson observations
• WASH audit data, including student feedback
• School-level paper-based records e.g. enrolment, attendance, retention
• Dropout prevention data: Risk profiles and PRPs of girls at-risk of dropout; child functioning assessment data; type/ number of interventions provided to girls at-risk of dropout
• Community and SMC surveys
• Policy recommendations, Inclusion Working Group and project event reports
• Participant records in Mothers’ Groups and Girls’ Clubs meetings 
• UWS Mothers’ Group and Girls’ Club evaluation (qualitative)

UWS will discuss and approve the methodology as part of the evaluator’s scope of work.

9. Roles and Responsibilities

Qualifications:

UWS is looking for a lead evaluator(s) / Consultant firm with a strong track record in conducting evaluations and direct programme interventions.

• Successful consultant firms will be able to demonstrate the following skills and experience: 
• Demonstrated experience in conducting external evaluations of development projects;
• Previous work experience in education programmes, particularly with vulnerable or marginalised groups;
• Knowledge and expertise in participatory, qualitative, and quantitative data collection methodology, tools, and analysis;
• High level of research and analytical skills;
• Proven experience in implementing and supervising data collection;
• Ability to produce concise, readable, and analytical reports;
• Proven experience in managing evaluation teams and facilitation skills, and the capability to handle necessary logistics and, if required and agreed upon, including sub-contracting;
• Previous work experience in Cambodia and Nepal is an advantage;
• Excellent spoken and written English spoken and written language skills;

It is the responsibility of the company and consultant(s) to ensure that all personnel have valid working visas and permits when conducting the data collection in Cambodia and Nepal.

12.  Reporting requirements

The deliverables are listed below:

• Inception report, including the following:

o   The evaluation methodology, including sampling, data collection plan and tools;

o   Site selection criteria and respondent selection criteria;

o   Methods for data analysis;

o   Justification of the methods and techniques to be used (including relevant underlying values and assumptions/theories) with a justification of the selections made (e.g. interviewees);

o   Explanation of how gender and disability inclusion, child protection, safeguarding and ethical standards will be followed during the data collection;

o   Provisions to store and maintain the security of collected information

o   Protocols for anonymity/confidentiality

o   Stakeholder and beneficiary mapping (input will be provided by UWS);·

• Test data collection tools and make necessary changes;
• Facilitate a half-day workshop with UWS on inception report, methodology, data collection tools, and sampling methods;
• Supervision of data collection (including travel to target areas, where required)
• Final external evaluation report (~30 pages), including:

o   Executive summary

o   Analysis of evaluation data, including charts, tables, and graphs;

o   Analysis of results against evaluation methodology and key research questions;

o   Recommendations;

o   Completed consent forms (including for children and their caregivers and adults);

o   Cleaned data (including data files, transcripts of qualitative data, syntax/ code books etc.);

o   Final sampling methodology (including unit of sampling and sampling frame) and size;

o   Final data collection tools.

Develop a brief PowerPoint presentation (approx. 10-15 slides) that summarises the key findings of the evaluation;Present the key findings in a half-day workshop with UWS;Deliver the final report based on feedback from UWS (due within 1 week upon receiving feedback);UWS will have unrestricted permissions to publish information from or based on the evaluation.

13. Estimation of the cost

The evaluation budget is capped at £21,000 GBP, covering evaluator fees, reports, travel, and other associated costs.

The evaluators should develop an accurate and detailed estimation of the cost of the evaluation for the Fees or Expenses portion of the contract should be presented.

An evaluation budget should include the costs of:

• Personnel (e.g. evaluator(s), research assistant, support staff, etc.) per day or lump sum
• Travel (transportation, per diem, travel mobilisation expenses, consider class of travel)
• Supplies, equipment and Direct communication costs such as phone, fax, email, postage
• Translation
• Copying and printing
• Workshops (design, findings verification, utilisation, etc.)
• Facilitation of use by intended user

14.  Procedures and logistics

UWS will assist the Evaluation and Enumerator Teams with operational support in Cambodia and Nepal, including local office and site visits, and help with travel and accommodation arrangements. However, the evaluation team is responsible for their own expenses. Office space will be provided in Phnom Penh, Kathmandu and field offices, but the evaluation team must bring their own computers and materials.

The consultant firm is expected to:

• Utilise his/her computer and materials
• Cover all the expenses for the evaluation team and enumerators involved in the study
• Travel and stay in the specified locations by his/her means

UWS will provide the consultant/consulting firms:

• Introduction to the local authorities/stakeholders
• Assistance in organising the meetings with the stakeholders
• Logistics support for internal travel arrangements to project locations

15.  Timeline and milestones 

The final report, with all UWS comments addressed, must be finalised by March 31, 2026. Considering the upcoming national elections in Nepal and the associated pre-election restrictions on field activities, all field-level data collection in Nepal must be completed by mid-January 2026 to avoid disruptions and to allow sufficient time for analysis and reporting before the final report deadline of 31 March 2026.

The evaluator should complete this section:

Detail the timeline and milestones that will need to be achieved. You can do this by specifying the total number of days and timeline for the whole evaluation, and adding the number of days required to complete each milestone. You can break the phases into:

• Planning
• Data collection/collation
• Data analysis
• Reporting
• Facilitation of use
• Payment schedule for fees/expenses if applicable

16.  Evaluation Proposal Selection Criteria

17.  Annexes

The organisations/firms and/or individuals must submit with accompanying CVs of proposed evaluation team members (If a consulting firm or company, please include a company profile with a company name, registered office address, physical address, telephone numbers, date of registration, registration number, copy of registration certificate, names of directors/proprietors and name of contact person).

18.  Application process

UWS invites interested applicants to submit a detailed proposal by completing this TOR template.

Any questions regarding the Proposal should be directed to recruitment@uwsglobal.net before Friday 12^th December 2025. Upon email request, the project TOC will be provided.

Please submit your Proposal and all required documents electronically to recruitment@uwsglobal.net before/by Wednesday 17th December 2025, with the Proposal for "UWS-UKAM R5 End-of-Project External Evaluation" in the subject line.

Proposals will be assessed against the selection criteria, with the top two bidders invited for interview on Friday 19^th December. The successful evaluator will be confirmed on Friday 19^th December, enabling the evaluation to commence immediately thereafter. Please note, given the upcoming national elections in Nepal, all primary data collection in Nepal must be completed by mid-January 2026 to avoid disruptions related to pre-election restrictions.