TERMS OF REFERENCE
Burundi has since the mid 2000s experienced peace after having been engaged in a civil war for more
than a decade. The civil war has been linked to ethnic violence, which again caused an estimated 300
000 civilian casualties since 1993. More than 500 000 people were displaced during the conflict, Since
2005 though, almost all those displaced have returned, mainly from Tanzania, but also from
neighboring Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). In 2005 the people of
Burundi exercised their democratic right to vote in a peaceful election and followed up by a new round
of elections in 2010. Despite peace and relative stability, Burundi remains one of the poorest countries
in the world and finds itself in a fragile regional context.
NRC has been present in Burundi since 1997, providing protection and humanitarian assistance to
refugees, internally displaced persons and returnees. An important part of NRC’s work has been the
Teacher’s Emergency Package (TEP) Programme. The TEP programme was initially developed by
UNESCO-PEER. In Burundi, NRC’s TEP programme provides a one-year catch-up programme
(comprising the two first years of primary school) for 9-14 year old children who have not had the
possibility to attend school due to displacement. At the end of the TEP year, the authorities organize
an examination where approximately 95 % of the children are either integrated into the third or the
second year of the formal school system.
TEP has been implemented by NRC in Burundi since 1999. During 12 years of TEP implementation in
Burundi, more than 94,000 children were registered in NRC’s TEP schools and more than 75,000
were reintegrated in public primary schools.
General objective of the TEP project is;
to contribute to increased literacy and access to basic education for returnee children and youth in
Burundi (with special focus on girls’ enrolment), by promoting and protecting children’s right to
education and their reintegration into the formal school system.
Objectives of the TEP project can be summarised as follows;
To provide a catch-up programme (of teaching and learning primary literacy, mathematics and
selected relevant subjects) for displaced, returned or other out-of-school children aged 9 to 14,
who did not have access to the basic education due to war, displacement or other reasons.
The project aims to support children to catch up on their learning and enter the formal school
Successful completion of the TEP year qualifies for entry into the public school system.
To build the capacity and competence of teachers and local education authority staff
A. Purpose of the evaluation and intended use
The main purpose of the evaluation is to obtain an independent assessment of the TEP programme in
Burundi, to get an understanding of its relevance, how effectively NRC has implemented the
programme and to assess the impact on the beneficiaries and the community at large.
Teacher Emergency Package (TEP)
Date Final version:
Moreover, to look at the TEP programme’s impact on the authorities’ education policies and the formal
schooling system in providing access to education in Burundi.
The evaluation report will provide recommendations and lessons learned for NRC globally.
B. Scope of work and methods
The evaluator will:
mainly focus on the time period: 2005 and onwards (after the last evaluation done in 2005).
However, for some focus areas, the whole time period 1999 -2011 shall be covered. This is
specified further under section D.
cover the following geographical implementation areas; Muyinga, Ruyigi, Makamba,
Bujumbura Mairie and Rural.
keep a thematic focus; 1) on access to quality education for displacement affected children &
2) NRC’s achievements in building capacity within the education sector/authorities
The methodology will include:
As a general background, the evaluator should study relevant material in NRC,
such as country information, the NRC country strategy for Burundi, the NRC Education policy,
the NRC Education exit strategy, the NRC TEP teachers’ modules, action plans, project
applications, agreements, (evaluation) reports and correspondence, Core Activity Database
Interviews with stakeholders.
Consultations in the field will be held with all relevant
stakeholders: TEP staff, teachers and trainers, local residents, local authorities and national
authorities, beneficiaries including former TEP pupils.
with current and previous TEP learners (equal representation of boys and
Further it will be requested to provide a presentation (in French) by the evaluation team on his/her
conclusions for the education team in Bujumbura and the Country Director. Moreover, the report shall
be written in English and the evaluation team will be asked to produce a Power Point Presentation,
summarizing the findings and recommendations, for NRC’s use.
The evaluation will be guided by the following ethical rules/considerations:
Openness – of information given, to the highest possible degree to all parties, when there are
no special considerations against this
Publicity/public access – to the results when there are no special considerations against this
Broad participation – the interested parties should be involved when relevant / possible
Reliability and independence – the evaluation should be conducted so that findings and
conclusions are correct and trustworthy
Issues to be covered
The following questions linked to the DAC criteria are of key of interest for NRC and should be the
main focus for the evaluator (the questions are not limitations but a minimum);
To what extent did the design of the TEP programme (eg. curriculum, length, no of students
per class etc) qualify the target group to access formal education? Timeperiod: 1999-2011.
How has the design of the TEP programme been adjusted according to a changing
political/social context (from war to post conflict)? Timeperiod: 1999 -2011.
Has the TEP programme provided protection (physical & legal)? Timeperiod: 2005 -2011.
To what extent has TEP ensured
, looking specifically at displacement,
disability, age and gender? Timeperiod: 2005 -2011.
To what extent has TEP managed to address different needs of the learners (eg. gender,
disabilities, age) Timeperiod: 2005- 2011.
To what extent have the planned results been achieved (outputs & outcomes)?;
-how has the TEP programme facilitated and contributed to a) TEP learners transition to
formal school and b) completion of primary school? Timeperiod: 1999 -2011.
-Learners performance: compare the performance of TEP learners versus Grade 2 learners in
the final exam, and explain the findings
Teacher’s performance: do the TEP teachers / formal teachers (trained by TEP) continue
using a participatory teaching approach when entering/ while in the formal school system?
Timeperiod: 2005- 2011.
4. Impact and sustainability
Has the TEP programme’s community approach increased awareness about the importance
How has it affected enrolment and/or drop out rates in general and for girls in particular?
Timeperiod: 2005- 2011.
Did the TEP programme create any harm - negative effects - or any unexpected outcomes?
Timeperiod: 1999- 2011.
Has the TEP programme contributed to strengthening the education sector in Burundi,
including teacher training/qualification, capacity building of education authorities, policy
development? Timeperiod: 1999- 2011.
Have the infrastructures (classrooms, latrines etc) that we have built and materials we have
purchased contributed to a sustainable improved learning environment. Timeperiod: 2005-
To what extent has the TEP programme has contributed to positive changes in behavior in
relation to the education of girls and addressed gender discrimination in the community.
Timeperiod: 2005- 2011.
The evaluation team will be composed of two international and one national consultant. All team
members should have strong language skills in English and French, both written and verbal.
The team leader will lead the work of the team through the evaluation and be responsible for
completing the report.
The team should have the following qualifications;
Experience from evaluations of humanitarian assistance programmes
Pedagogical background, preferably within the area of accelerated learning programmes
Knowledge of humanitarian assistance and protection of children in war and post war conflict
Strong analytical skills and extensive evaluation experience
Knowledge of gender mainstreaming and targeting
Fluency in French and also in English, as the report will be in English
Knowledge of the political and humanitarian context in the Great Lakes Region.
An Evaluation Steering Committee is established, with the following members:
Kate Norton, Country Director Burundi
Silje Besseberg Bråthen, Education Program Manager , Burundi
Marit Backe, Head of Central and Western Africa Section, Oslo
Oddhild Günther, Evaluation Advisor, Oslo
Arild Karlsbakk, Program Coordinator, Burundi, Oslo
Silje Sjøvåg Skeie, Education Adviser, Oslo
The main function of the Steering Committee is to select the external evaluators, review preliminary
findings and recommendations and establishing a dissemination and utilization strategy.
In regards to international travel and visas, the consultants will normally make their own travel
arrangements. In some cases due to particular circumstances, the consultants are assisted by the
Programme Coordinator. For travels within Burundi, NRC Burundi will provide necessary assistance
linked to transport, security measures, accommodation etc.
Timeframe and budget considerations
Desk study; Early June, 1 week
Briefing in Oslo: Early to mid June, 1- 2 days
Field work Burundi; Mid to end of June (2 weeks)
Draft and final reports; to be further discussed (timing to be adjusted to summer holidays).
Total budget frame:
300 000 NOK (approx. 38 000 Euros).
The size of the report should be approximately 40 pages (excluding annexes), clearly written in
English, using Arial 11 font.
The evaluation report should consist of:
Executive summary and recommendations not more than five pages
Main text, to include index, emergency context, NRC mandate, evaluation methodology,
commentary and analysis addressing evaluation purpose and outputs to include a section
dedicated to the issue of particular lessons-learning focus, conclusions (not more than 35
include evaluation terms of reference, maps, sample framework and
All material collected in the undertaking of the evaluation process should be lodged with the
evaluation manager prior to the termination of the contract.
Potential differences in opinion between team members regarding conclusions/ recommendations
should be reflected in the report.
For the follow up of the evaluation in the filed, the Country Director for Burundi is the main person
responsible, at HO the Head of Central and Western Africa Section is to ensure that the realisation of
these plans are implemented, monitored and documented. The nature of the report will require
responses and follow up from both field and HO – and this should be reflected in the management