Consultant for Mid-Term Evaluation UASC Project Morocco

Job Description

Morocco occupies an important geopolitical position along the Atlantic and Western Mediterranean Routes and at the crossroads between the African and European continents, and one can see this reflected in its response to increasing immigration and transit migration. Morocco has become a country of origin, transit, destination and return for migrants from the African continent mainly.

Due to Morocco’s strategic geopolitical location, it continues to be an attraction pole for the growing number of unaccompanied and separated children (UASC) on the move. Most of the children aim at arriving to Spain and Italy, amongst which are Moroccan nationals (among other nationalities). Although there are no official statistics or a profiling of the UASC in Morocco (at a national level), the work done through IOM’s partners in the past years highlights the vulnerabilities of these children, which are further exacerbated with the lack of an efficient state-owned protection mechanism in Morocco. This leads them to be exposed to further exploitation and falling into trafficking networks. Unaccompanied and separated children (UASC), nationals and non-nationals, represent a growing share of people in migratory situations on Moroccan territory. A study conducted in 2016 by Caritas and Doctors of the World Belgium allowed the identification of a typology of UASC profiles in the Kingdom of Morocco. According to the same study, there are four predominant profiles: adventurous minors, young wanderers, which include refugees, victims of violence or children in street situations, footballers, and children trafficked for sexual or labor exploitation. 

According to IOM’s preparatory studies on migration flow of unaccompanied and separated children in Morocco, undertaken in previous phases, it outlined that; for foreign unaccompanied migrant children in Morocco often the journey is a project shared and supported by the family or the community in the country of origin, with the aim to seek better life opportunities or to flee environmental or political crisis. The root causes are usually poverty and low social mobility that make it extremely difficult for migrant children to improve their social status and economic resources, therefore not allowing them to access basic services such as health and education in their countries of origin. Differently from the first profile, Moroccan children migrate to escape from a violent family and social isolation context where multiple factors contribute to the marginalization and alienation of Moroccan youth, including lack of access to quality education and high rates of unemployment. Independently from their migration path, all unaccompanied and separated children are highly exposed to human trafficking, sexual and labor exploitation throughout all their migration journey. 

Funded since 2018 by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark, the project’s previous phases (respectively from January 2018 to September 2019 for the first phase, and from September 2019 to June 2023 for the second) have allowed IOM to gather information and best practices on the assistance of children on the move; as well as undertake field studies to enrich the literature on UASC.

This is the third phase of this IOM project centering UASC, titled “Strengthening child protection and assistance, particularly for unaccompanied and separated children (UASC) in selected regions in Morocco”.

Its central objective is contributing to the reinforcement of the child protection system and access to child protection services for UASC and children at risk of trafficking, exploitation and abuse in Morocco.

IOM Morocco, through this intervention, aims to identify UASC and deliver different levels of services (humanitarian, medical, legal, shelter, educational etc.), as well as strengthen capacity at the institutional and civil society levels through trainings of professionals and the elaboration of a referral mechanism in the Oriental region, where a significant proportion of UASC have been identified. Finally, the project furthermore aims to sensitize UASC and youth to the risks of irregular migration and its alternatives.

 

The purpose of this mid-term evaluation is to assess the relevance and efficiency of the project at a mid-point of implementation. The evaluation’s specific objectives are to:

• Examine the adequacy of the implementation strategies to meet intended results and the accuracy of the initial assumptions
• Assess the relevance of project activities to the protection needs of the target population (UASC) and the added value from the trainings conducted for institutional and civil society capacity building.
• Extract lessons learned and good practices, as well as suggest recommendations for adjustment or reprioritization for the remainder of the project duration.

 

This evaluation is intended to be for the use of the project manager and project team, to design and implement more efficient intervention in the second part of this phase of the project; complying with engagement with donor standards regarding evidence-based implementation. This mid-term assessment will furthermore serve to assess the relevance of the intervention and accountability towards UASC beneficiaries; as well as draw recommendations and benefit from lessons learned through the evaluation.

 

The mid-term evaluation will cover implementation of the first half of the UASC project’s third phase; from January 2024 to December 2024. Geographical areas to be covered are the zones in which the intervention is taking place; the regions of Casablanca-Settat, Marrakech-Safi, and Oriental, with a focus on the cities of Casablanca, Marrakech and Nador respectively according to the location of civil society partners of the project. 

Among project activities to be evaluated are direct assistance to UASC, both in and outside the partner CSO shelters, as well as sensitization sessions conducted for UASC and trainings for institutional and civil society capacity building. The evaluation will cover the activities and the indicators they respond to, as per the result matrix, while also taking into consideration the cross-cutting themes of gender and rights-based approaches.

 

Evaluation criteria for this evaluation are as follows, according to OECD-DAC Evaluation standards, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and sustainability (detailed questions relevant to each standard are included in the next section).

The below questions are indicative questions to be addressed in the evaluation under each evaluation criterion:  

1. Relevance

• Did the project implementation strategy (Result Matrix, Theory of Change) remain relevant to the needs of its target population (UASC) and institutional beneficiaries? How?
• How well do the project’s objective and activities remain aligned with the current needs and priorities of UASC?
• Is the project aligned with and supportive of national strategies?  How?
• Is the project in line with donor priorities? How? 
• Are the project activities and outputs consistent with the intended outcomes and objectives?
• Were critical cause-effect relationships missed in the elaboration of the intervention/theory of change? 
• To what extent has the project adapted to contextual challenges and/or changing external conditions in order to ensure project outcomes?

1. Effectiveness

• Are the project outputs and outcomes progressing in accordance with the stated plans? 
• What factors have contributed to achieved results?  
• Were the strategies adopted, tools applied, and inputs identified realistic, appropriate, and adequate for the achievement of results?  
• What hindering factors have affected achievement or outputs and progress towards outcomes? How did the project address these hinderers? 
• Which specific activities have been most effective in meeting the needs of the beneficiaries so far?
• How effectively were the project results monitored?  

1. Efficiency

• Was the project implemented in the most cost-efficient way compared to alternative means of implementation? Specifically did the actual results (output/outcome) justify the cost incurred?  
• How successful has the project been in leveraging non-project resources for guaranteeing sustainability of project results, including but not limited to other IOM projects?  
• How timely were resources made available to implement activities from all parties involved?  
• To what extent were the activities implemented as scheduled?

1. Coherence 

• How does the project align with and contribute to IOM’s national, regional and global strategies, as well as the Migration Governance Framework? As well as policies and strategies regarding UASC?
• Does the project undermine, duplicate, or supplement the efforts of any existing programs or policies by IOM or other actors in the same context?   
• Do synergies exist with other interventions carried out by IOM/United Nations as well as intervention partners? 

1. Sustainability

• Are structures, resources, and processes in place to ensure that benefits generated by the project continue once external support ceases?
• Do the project partners have adequate financial, technical, and managerial capacities to maintain the benefits of the interventions, and are they committed to maintaining the benefits of the project in the long run, especially for sustaining support services for UASC beyond this project phase?  
• Is the project supported by local institutions and well-integrated into local, social, and political structures?
• Are there any signs that the project results and activities will be scaled up, replicated, or continued by project partners/stakeholders?  
• What can be done differently to improve the sustainability of the project?  

1. Cross-cutting issues

• To what extent have cross-cutting issues, such as protection, gender equality, and rights-based approaches, been integrated into the project's planning and implementation?
• Do the project activities adequately target modes of discrimination, inequality and/or marginalization; or consciously integrate groups of beneficiaries that may be left behind?
• To what extent are the safety and security of beneficiaries taken into account during assistance provision? If obstacles have been/are identified, what measures have been taken to diminish them?

Evaluation Methodology

The approach for this evaluation will give a larger (but not exclusive) focus to qualitative techniques due to the nature of the project and the availability of data. Quantitative analysis could be considered.

The approach for this evaluation must abide by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and more specifically by the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC). All informants will be offered informed consent and the option of confidentiality, for all methods used.

The evaluation team is expected to use evaluation methods such as:

• A desk review of the project proposal, project reports, documentation provided by the project team including activity reports, technical documentation reports and data collection tools
• Fields visits in Casablanca, Marrakech and Nador to meet with partner CSOs Bayti, Al Karam and Asticude providing assistance to UASC in their respective regions.
• Informant interviews with donor representatives and key stakeholders (such as institutional partners, CSOs)
• Focus group discussions with UASC if feasible and if authorizations are obtained

The evaluator will be expected to develop a more detailed evaluation methodology to meet expectations in line with this evaluation’s overall purpose.

Guidelines related to interviewing UASC and limitations of the evaluation 

Normally, as UASC are unaccompanied minors without an available legal guardian, they cannot consent to being interviewed through focus groups or any other data collection method that requires their voice or input. The only case in which this can happen is if the civil society organization shelter at which they reside is legally allowed to vouch for them as their tutor and gives consent for them to participate in such an exercise. This has notably been pointed out as one of the main difficulties encountered by previous evaluators of the project.

Considering the context of assistance of children in Morocco, and the nature of the cases assisted through the project, IOM Morocco nonetheless finds itself under the contextual obligation of interacting with and interviewing unaccompanied minors during case management; to assess needs and redirect them towards child protection shelters. This is a component that the evaluator will have to take into account in their methodology during this midterm evaluation.

 

Specification of roles

The Project Manager is responsible for managing the evaluation process and all the steps that come with it. She is responsible for making sure the project documents and necessary contact information with the stakeholders, including donors and government partners, are available to the evaluator. The National M&E Officer, in close coordination with the Cairo regional office ROMEO, is responsible for the quality check of the deliverables and their compliance with the IOM Monitoring & Evaluation policies and guidelines. The Project Manager can share deliverables of the mission with other secondary reviewers such as national partners, regional thematic specialists or keys stakeholders. Processes for quality assurance include the following:

1. An agreement on the final terms of reference (ToR) between the evaluation manager and the evaluator
2. Review, revision and acceptance of the inception report
3. Review revision and acceptance of the draft and final report

Finally, the evaluator or evaluation team is responsible for conducting the evaluation: implementation of the evaluation plan, collecting data, analyzing said data and drafting the evaluation deliverables according to the agreed-upon ToRs. All the while abiding by the relevant ethics and data protection norms and standards and guidelines according to the agreed-upon ToRs.

Responsibilities

• Inception report – 25%  

The inception report should clearly outline the evaluation approach and tools to be used. It must also include an evaluation matrix which includes the methodology used, indicators, evaluation questions and detailed work plan (the template will be provided by IOM).

• Draft evaluation report with an evaluation workshop to present and validate the initial findings – 25%  

A maximum of 40-pages long draft evaluation report in English and without annexes (including an executive summary and outlining the progress of the project indicators, data sources and findings of the evaluation, good practices, lessons learned, missed opportunities, strengths and weaknesses, gaps and challenges on the design, management and implementation of the project, theory of changes TOC ). The draft report will be presented to IOM for comments and inputs, after which the evaluator will finalize the report and submit the final evaluation report to IOM. (the template will be provided by IOM)

• Final evaluation report according to the IOM evaluation template with relevant annexes – 50%

A final evaluation report that reflects comments/feedback from IOM. The final report should be structured according to IOM’s evaluation report template (will be provided by IOM) and include the following key sections

1. Title Page
2. Acronyms
3. Executive summary
4. Context and purpose of evaluation
5. Evaluation findings
6. Conclusions and recommendations
7. Annexes (tools, list of respondents, etc.)

A two-page evaluation brief in English and French (template to be provided by IOM)

A management response matrix partially filled out (template to be provided by IOM)
 

The consultant’s performance will be evaluated in accordance with the quality of deliverables, and their compliance with the following criteria: relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, compliance with IOM data protection principles, and timely delivery of consultancy products (see table below).

Activity	Responsible party	Working days	Timing
Start of consultancy and kick-off meeting	Evaluator, Project Manager, IOM M&E staff	Number of days the activity is estimated to take	12th of May 2025
Inception report; document review, development of evaluation tools and evaluation matrix and TOC	Evaluator	15 days	26th of May 2025
IOM review and feedback on the inception report	IOM	7 days	2nd of June 2025
Primary data collection	Evaluator	20 days	22nd of June 2025
Draft evaluation report: drafting and submission to IOM feedback	Evaluator	10 days	July 2nd 2025
Final evaluation report: Submission of the final report (including management response matrix and evaluation brief)	Evaluator	15 days	16th of July 2025
IOM review and feedback	Project Manager and IOM M&E staff	7 days	23rd of July, 2025
Workshop and presentation of results	Evaluator	1 day	July 25th, 2025

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IOM abides by the norms and standards of UNEG and expects all evaluation stakeholders to be familiar with the ethical conduct guidelines of UNEG and the consultant(s) with the UNEG codes of conduct as well.

The evaluator must also follow IOM’s Data Protection Principles, as well as IOM’s own Evaluation guidelines.  

The evaluation may cover sensitive and confidential information, and the evaluation team may have contact with UASC as informants and have access to data on specific cases in which case the confidentiality of the individuals and the case details must be respected and maintained. In all contacts with children, the ethical guidelines regarding the issues of confidentiality, informed consent and, not exposing the child to danger must be respected. If consent cannot be given by the child, it must be sought from a parent or a legal guardian.

Qualifications

Required Skills

• • Demonstrated experience and familiarity with interventions related to child protection and unaccompanied and separated children (UASC)
• • Demonstrated experience and familiarity with migration dynamics and knowledge of Middle East and North Africa (MENA) context.
• • Demonstrated expertise and experience in conducting mixed methods research on relevant issues. 
• • Prior experience related to the Moroccan migration and child protection context is an advantage.
• • Proven experience with logical framework approaches and other strategic planning approaches, M&E methods and approaches, information analysis and report writing.

Job info

Contract Type: Consultancy (Up to 11 months)
Initial Contract Duration: 4
Vacancy Type: Consultancy
Recruiting Type: Consultant
Grade: UG
Alternative Required Language 1: Arabic