Description

Eligibility: Open to Individual Consultants and Consulting Firms / Consortia 
Project Location(s): Remote  

Background:
Mercy Corps is a leading global organization powered by the belief that a better world is possible. In disaster, in hardship, in more than 40 countries around the world, we partner to put bold solutions into action — helping people triumph over adversity and build stronger communities from within. Mercy Corps’ Sudan crisis response seeks to meet the humanitarian needs of vulnerable Sudanese and other conflict-affected people across the country. Mercy Corps Sudan is recognized as a leader in market systems, agricultural, and food security. Mercy Corps is scaling up to reach upwards of 300,000 conflict affected people with multi-purpose cash assistance, targeted voucher programs, in-kind and services provision across the country.

The Cash Consortium of Sudan (CCS) is a collaborative platform to advance a progressive vision of the potential of cash assistance to transform humanitarian response and recovery in partnership with vulnerable conflict-affected populations. CCS is led by Mercy Corps, building on its global experience and learning on leading cash consortia in multiple country contexts, as well as general expertise in cash coordination and breadth of technical resources. International partners include Acted, CARE, CORE, the International Rescue Committee (IRC), Concern, GOAL and the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC), each of which bring strong cash and complementary technical competencies, as well as expansive operational coverage in Sudan.

The CCS also includes twelve Sudanese NGOs as partners in alignment with global aid sector commitments to enhance the prominence of local actors in driving humanitarian response and recovery. IMPACT is a non-implementing partner dedicated to Monitoring, Evaluation, Research and Learning strengthening. IMPACT will support quality data systems, and an objective evidence base that will be essential to CCS’ accountability and adaptive management to refine programming approaches to enhance impact as the Sudan crisis context evolves. The CCS will work closely with other consortia and actors in Sudan to deliver an effective CVA response for communities affected by the crisis. 

The core pillars of the CCS response include:

1) basic needs through cash assistance both at the community level through Group Cash Transfers (GCTs) delivered to Community-Based Organizations (CBOs), as well as at the household-level through Multi-Purpose Cash Assistance (MPCA);

2) strengthening market systems to ensure resilience of key market actors and supply chains as well as strengthening the availability and affordability of key commodities;

Purpose / Project Description:
The purpose of the Mid-Term Evaluation is to assess how effectively the Cash Consortium of Sudan is delivering its modalities and achieving its intended outcomes in an extremely fragile, access-constrained environment. The evaluation will examine the extent to which the governance model, the Secretariat, the Steering Committee, and the Technical Working Groups enable harmonized, timely, coordinated and adaptive implementation across Multi-purpose Cash Assistance, Group Cash Transfers and Market System Strengthening. It will also analyze how evidence is generated and used for decision making. The evaluation will not seek to estimate causal impact or attribution at the household or market level, nor will it involve primary outcome measurement. Instead, it will assess the plausibility, coherence, and strength of CCS’s contribution using existing evidence.
A central purpose of the evaluation is to rely primarily on existing evidence rather than new data collection. The evaluators will therefore be required to draw extensively on current CCS MEL systems, including Registration and Post Distribution Monitoring datasets, Third Part Monitoring (TPM) findings, Joint Market Monitoring Initiative (JMMI) trends, Community Accountability 
Reporting Mechanism (CARM) reports and partner documentation. The evaluation must use these datasets to back up findings, test assumptions, compare outcome patterns across states and partners and verify or challenge qualitative insights. This will include descriptive and comparative analysis of existing datasets (e.g. trend analysis, cross-state or cross-partner comparisons, and consistency checks across modalities), rather than new statistical impact estimation. This ensures that the evaluation remains rigorous and feasible while generating actionable, operational and strategic insights for program adaptation during the second phase. 

Evaluation Questions:
1. Implementation Quality and Operational Performance
• Fidelity and variation: To what extent are MPCA, GCT, and market-strengthening activities being implemented as designed, and what operational variations, bottlenecks, or adaptations have emerged in response to context shifts (e.g., access, conflict, liquidity, market disruptions, etc.)?
• Risk and protection: To what extent do partners demonstrate awareness and understanding of key protection risks and principles, and how is this reflected in their day-to-day implementation decisions?
• Referral Pathways: To what extent are referral pathways, both internal (within CCS partners) and external(between CCS and non-CCS actors), functioning effectively to ensure timely, appropriate, and safe support for households, and what factors enable or hinder the quality, follow-up, and closure of referrals across modalities and sectors?
• Market integration: How well are market analysis activities and, where feasible, emerging market support efforts informing and complementing MPCA delivery?
• Accountability: To what extent are community engagement, feedback, and accountability mechanisms functioning effectively across partners, and how does community feedback influence program decisions, adaptations, and alignment with community priorities across modalities?

2. Outcomes across modalities:
• Progress towards intended outcomes: Based on CCS existing data, to what extent is the CCS making progress toward its intended outcomes across all components (MPCA, GCTs, Market Strengthening) particularly in improving households’ ability to meet basic needs, reducing negative coping strategies, strengthening community responder capacity, and enhancing market functionality and vendor resilience?
• Evidence adequacy: To what extent do existing MEL systems, tools, partner reporting approaches, and program implementation practices collectively provide reliable, timely, and adequate evidence to assess these outcomes across modalities, and what key evidence gaps remain?
• Variation and learning: How do outcomes and implementation experiences appear to vary by state, partner, modality, and operational context, and what does this imply for program adaptation and prioritization in the future?

3. Contribution of Governance Model to Program Results:
• Governance coherence: To what extent has the CCS governance model (Secretariat, Steering Committee, Technical Working Groups, partner roles) enabled effective, timely, and harmonized implementation across modalities (MPCA, GCTs, Market Strengthening), including addressing synergies and disconnects between modalities?
• Evidence based decision making: How effectively has the governance model supported evidence-based decisionmaking, including the use of MEL, TPM, JMMI, and research findings at operational and strategic levels?
• Technical coordination: To what extent do CCS technical groups contribute to harmonizing tools, processes, and technical standards across the consortium, and how has this influenced implementation quality and outcome-level performance?
• Adaptive management: How well does the governance and coordination structure enable adaptive management when shocks occur (access changes, market disruptions, security shifts), how has this influenced operational continuity, and what adjustments would most strengthen adaptation going forward?

Consultant Deliverables:
The Consultant (whether individual or firm) will produce the following deliverables:
• Inception Report and Evaluation Matrix detailing how the consultant will apply Contribution Analysis and Process Tracing in this context, outlining the analytical approach, evidence-mapping of all CCS datasets, initial causal pathways,identified evidence gaps, and the full evaluation workplan.
• Initial Contribution Story outlining preliminary causal pathways and assumptions, clearly grounded in existing CCS data and specifying which assumptions will require further verification through qualitative inquiry.
• Summary of Qualitative Consultations synthesizing insights from KIIs and coordination discussions, explicitly identifying where qualitative findings are supported, challenged, or require verification through CCS datasets.
• Evidence Triangulation and Analysis Pack presenting structured analysis across MEL, PDM, TPM, JMMI, CARM, and partner documentation, comparing patterns across states, partners, and modalities, and using CCS to confirm or challenge qualitative findings.
• Sense-Making Workshop Materials, including slides or briefs that present preliminary evidence, data-triangulated insights, and emerging contribution story elements for partner validation.
• Draft Mid-Term Evaluation Report and Summary products incorporating feedback, strengthening analytical rigor, ensuring all conclusions are supported by CCS evidence, and providing a concise dissemination brief or slide deck.

Required Experience & Skills:
- Proven track record in complex evaluations of multi-modal humanitarian or development programs, ideally in fragile, conflictaffected, or access-constrained contexts.
- Demonstrated expertise in theory-based evaluation methods, with documented examples of building credible contribution stories using existing data systems.
- Strong proficiency in Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL), including systematic use of multiple data sources (quantitative and qualitative) to triangulate findings, interpret patterns, and support evidence-based conclusions.
- Experience working with major international donors (e.g., ECHO, FCDO), including familiarity with their evaluation expectations, quality standards, reporting requirements, and learning-oriented designs.
- Capability to operate under high uncertainty and limited new data collection, drawing rigorously on existing datasets and documentation to validate findings and generate actionable recommendations.
 - Demonstrated ability to lead qualitative inquiry (e.g., KIIs, stakeholder consultations) and integrate these insights with secondary data in contribution and process-tracing analyses.
- Track record of facilitating inclusive sense-making approaches with consortiums or multi-stakeholder groups to validate evidence, unpack operational trends, and co-identify adaptation priorities
- Excellent analytical, synthesis, and writing skills with experience producing high-quality evaluation products that are clear,evidence-backed, and fit for strategic decision-making by consortium leadership and donors.
- Strong organizational and project management skills, including overseeing complex evidence reviews, managing deliverables, and meeting deadlines in dynamic environments.
- Demonstrated commitment to quality, integrity, and ethical engagement with partners and communities, and sensitivity to protection, inclusion, and local context dynamics.

Application Requirements: 
Interested applicants (individual consultants, consulting firms, or consultant teams) are required to submit the following as part of their application:
- Curriculum Vitae (CVs): For individual consultants, one CV; for firms or teams, CVs of proposed team members, clearly indicating roles.
- Methodological Proposal (maximum 3 pages): A concise proposal outlining the applicant’s understanding of the assignment, proposed evaluation approach (including use of existing CCS data and theory-based methods), and an indicative workplan based on deliverables.
- Financial Proposal: A summary budget in USD outlining professional fees and level of effort, with any key assumptions clearly stated.

Team Efficiency and Effectiveness 
Achieving our mission starts with how we build our team and collaborate. By bringing together individuals with a variety of experiences, backgrounds, and perspectives, we strengthen our ability to solve complex challenges and drive innovation. We foster a culture of trust and respect, where every team member is valued for their contributions, empowered to reach their full potential, and motivated 
to do their best work. We recognize that building a strong and effective team is an ongoing process, and we remain committed to learning, improving, and growing together.