1

Cross cutting RKLA evaluation

Draft Terms of Reference (250414)Consultancy assignment for

An evaluation of the Young People’s Media Network Initiative Increasing young people’s capacity to advocate for child rights through media in CEE/CIS

1. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION: This TOR proposes an evaluation of the Young People’s Media Network Initiative on youth advocacy, which has been supported by UNICEF during 2002 – 2014 in CEE/CIS1. The initiative is an umbrella for three main activities: 1. the OneMinutesJr short video initiative, including video skills-building, video dissemination and advocacy, involving adolescents boys and girls and youth on issues that are important to them, 2) youth reporting, where youth advocates act as reporters in key national and international conferences on child rights; 3) an information service (through a mailing list/Facebook account) where subscribers/followers get information on upcoming media and youth participation opportunities and events.

A 2005 evaluation of the initiative found that in 2002-2004, some 200 adolescent boys and girls and youth were trained in advocacy skills building. Hundreds more have benefited from networking opportunities. It recommended forging closer relationship with local media organizations, training local trainers and improving the dissemination of outputs to reach a wider range of stakeholders. Since more than 10 years have passed, another evaluation will greatly add insights to the initiative`s achievements and lessons learned and how it has evolved.

The 2014 evaluation will assess the soundness of the initiative`s strategies and its sustainability. Although there will be linkages, this effort will not evaluate the wider adolescence and youth programming in relation to participation. The evaluation will limit itself ton how media/communication activities by and for young people, coordinated by the UNICEF CEE/CIS Regional Office are improving the capacity of young people to act as advocates on issues affecting them. The evaluation will also assess the effects of that advocacy on audiences reached by young people, including local authorities, decision makers and community leaders, etc.

2. CONTEXT

2.1 Social, economic and political background:

Adolescents and youth in CEE/CIS, as elsewhere in the world, are as diverse as adults with differing interests and perceptions on how best to influence policy decisions that impact their lives. The issues faced by adolescents in this region are notable, and the resources available to assist them are generally few. In most countries of the region, families and society in general place value on authoritarian, top-down approaches with little input from younger members of society. This particularly true for under-privileged children in CEE/CIS– children who are socially excluded (e.g. Roma children, street children), children affected by HIV and AIDS, abandoned in institutions and/or who lack good access to ICT.

1 The 21 countries and one territory in the CEE/CIS are: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, Kosovo under UNSCR 1244, Tajikistan, the Russian Federation, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Ukraine and Uzbekistan.

2

A 2001 study by Intermedia2 showed that young people in CEE/CIS felt limited in their right to express themselves through the media in their respective countries. Youth media projects were isolated, poorly funded and technically challenged. Young people did not feel their ideas and opinions were voiced through media outlets. When the media does address this age group, it typically stereotypes young people in overly positive or negative ways — as trendsetters and high-achievers or as problems and victims.

On the other hand, as part of the societal, economic and political transformations that were affecting countries in the former Soviet Union and in the ex-Yugoslavia in the early 2000s, there were growing opportunities for young people to get involved in the media with the rise of new newspapers, TV and other media outlets. It was noted that these opportunities were somewhat sporadic, and were mostly confined to large cities. Interest was high, though, among young people in communicating through various media channels with other such young people in their own countries, in neighbouring countries and/or in Western countries. Therefore the creation and maintenance of a Young People’s Media Network would help build the capacity of young people to advocate through the media for their issues using their own perspectives, the 2001 study noted.

2.2 UNICEF contribution

UNICEF has supported efforts to give young people a voice in the region under an umbrella initiative called Young People’s Media Network (YPMN) since 2002. Adolescents boys and girls and youth in all 21 countries and one territory in the region have taken part in YMPN initiative managed by the UNICEF Regional office for CEE/CIS. Similar initiatives have also been held in 50 other countries outside the region and managed directly by UNICEF Headquarters.

Throughout its implementation, YPMN has been informed by key global and national policies and strategies, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, in particular, articles 12, 13 and 17 (the right to information, communication and participation) and General Comment #12, (the right of the child to be heard) of the CRC; the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) as well as Youth Policies and Strategies current in countries of the Region. YPMN initiatives have also been developed in line with Global UNICEF strategies, including the UNICEF Medium-Term Strategic Plans for 2002-2005 and 2006-2013; the UNICEF Global Gender Policy 2010 and currently, the UNICEF Strategic Plan 2014-2017.

The Initiative is a way of increasing adolescent and youth advocacy through communication for social change (C4SC) approach which has been globally defined by UNICEF as “a social process based on dialogue using a broad range of tools and methods. C4SC is about seeking change at different levels, including listening, building trust, sharing knowledge and skills, building policies, debating and learning for sustained and meaningful change”. C4SC principles are equity focused and based on the human-rights based approach to programming, particularly on the rights to information, communication and participation and the right to be heard as mentioned above.

2 Young people and the media in Central & Eastern Europe and the CIS and Baltic States accessed on 5 March 2014. http://www.africmil.org/publications/Young%20People%20and%20Media%20in%20Central%20&%20Eastern%20Europe,%20the%20CIS%20&%20Baltic%20States.pdf

3

The principles include facilitating an enabling environment that create spaces for the plurality of voices and narratives of communities, encourage listening, dialogue, debate and consultation, and ensure the active and meaningful participation of children and youth. It also embraces the inclusion of the most marginalized groups (including children of ethnic minorities and children with disabilities) so that they are prioritized and their voices are given high visibility in policy making processes that affect their lives.

The work carried out under YPMN Initiative has been based on an emerging ‘theory of change’ according to which building knowledge (familiarization and understanding of new concepts), skills, networking, self-efficacy (self-confidence, self-esteem, self-respect) of adolescents and young people will increase their intention to advocate and will ultimately contribute to empowering them to act for change on issues affecting their lives. Behaviour change and social theories that underlie this “theory of change” include: 1) Social-cognitive theory, which suggests that increased self-efficacy is a predictor of intention and behaviour that can positively affect a person’s persistence when faced with a difficult situation; 2) the “Stages of Change” (or Transtheoretical) model which describes several stages on the path to behaviour change (pre-contemplative, contemplative, etc.) and which has been interpreted by some to include a final stage, “advocacy,” which follows sustained behaviour change among those who are strongly convinced of the benefits of that change; and 3) the Theory of Innovations, which describes how innovations are communicated by and among members of a social system. “Early adopters” who are respected within their social networks may be more successful in spreading innovations and may thus become “change agents” within those networks.

The knowledge, skills and network building supported through YPMN Initiative includes training young people in media skills, giving them the opportunity to make their voices heard, raising visibility of key youth issues and forging stronger links between and among youth, and with new, strategic partners within their countries and across the region. Thus, the goal is that through sustained engagement, young advocates for adolescent and youth rights will become empowered and take an active role in social change in partnership with a variety of stakeholders, including government, civil society and others and through a range of media-related activities.

The framework for this initiative is currently being realigned within the overall CEE/CIS Regional Knowledge and Leadership Agenda or (RKLA) a regional response to UNICEF global refocus on equity. The RKLA, in essence, is the overarching framework to address 10 priority challenges across the region (see Annex 1), galvanize horizontal cooperation and mutual learning, and document impact level results for children in multiple countries.

The RKLA framework is based on components that have been reconstructed through the UNICEF global “determinants analysis” framework and the Regional Generic Theory of Change (See Annexes 2 and 3).

The work through the YPMN Initiative aims to contribute to an enabling environment to the progressive realization of child rights: helping young people identify and tackle social norms that result in discrimination or exclusion. It helps youth voice in changing behavior and practices that constrain the fulfillment of their rights, or creating demand for services that are youth friendly. The YPMN Initiative compliments the C4SC approach to programming as influencing social norms and addressing cultural practices and beliefs in the region has been less common interventions in some of the KLA areas.

4

As envisioned within the RKLA, adolescent and youth participation should cut across all the priority areas identified. KLA 10 on adolescents explicitly articulates several key goals which are:

to support realization of the rights of all children during their second decade of life and to give a second chance to those who are most vulnerable and in need of support,

to generate knowledge and work collectively on sustainable activities that promote equity, emphasize adolescent participation and have value for cross-country and cross-regional sharing of lessons learned and good practice.

Key objectives include: o to develop and strengthen youth policies, o to increase access among marginalized, vulnerable and most-at-risk

adolescents to youth-friendly health and social services, and o to strengthen young people's engagement, participation and leadership in

issues of concern to them.

There is a need to ensure that future work in youth media initiatives is strengthened along these lines within the context of the KLA areas.

Since its start in 2002, the YPMN `s objectives have included: To promote the participation of young people in line with the principles set forth in the

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. To empower young people by means of education and technical support so they can

voice their opinions; to facilitate access for young people to reach local and national authorities, and advocate for their rights through the media and at public advocacy events.

To serve as a clearing-house for information concerning all kinds of youth media support including networking and funding opportunities.

The network is currently maintained around three key activities: (1) Organizing the OneMinutesJr activity in CEE/CIS3 where topics that adolescents and

youth consider important are selected by a group of participants who are identified for skills-building workshops at national and regional levels. The adolescent boys and girls work with international and national trainers to produce 60-second films often on themes of exclusion. Videos are then promoted and screened at local, national and regional events with government officials and key decision makers present. In 2012-2014, OneMinuteJr activity was applied to the work in several KLA areas such as Justice for Children (KLA 2), child poverty studies and social protection (KLA 8) and on building resilience of children in face of natural disasters (KLA 9).

(2) Organizing youth reporting activities. Youth participants are invited to take part in key UNICEF-sponsored regional advocacy events to present youth statements and/or prepare video interviews of influential youth and adults to present at conferences. Support is provided to help the youth strategize their reporting plans and dissemination through the media/social media channels for advocacy purposes. As the RKLA became more defined, in 2012-2013 youth reporting were conducted at advocacy events on inclusive education (KLA 4) and on cross cutting issues such as the Post-2015 Development Agenda.

3 http://www.unicef.org/ceecis/kids_1444.html

5

(3) Maintaining the Youthful Media mailing list and Facebook group which informs about 1,700 followers of upcoming media and youth participation opportunities and events across the region. It is also posted on http://ypmn.blogspot.de and https://www.facebook.com/unicef.ypmn. Subscribers include NGO members and participants of the OneMinuteJr or youth reporting activities or international youth media event participants as well as those who have subscribed through UNICEF channels. Since there is little interaction taking place, it is unclear if participants are using the information provided.

The latter two activities should be seen as supporting the first main activity. The youth reporting is relatively new and only six events have taken place. The third activity used the least funding and time to maintain.

All these activities are supported by Communications Specialists/Officers at the UNICEF Regional Office (RO) and country office (CO) level and local NGOs in each country. It is coordinated by the UNICEF RO and the Youth Media Consulting Schuepp GBr, which has been contracted by the RO from 2002 until December 2014. The initiative has been funded mainly by the CEE/CIS RO, the German National Committee for UNICEF (since 2006) as well as CO and other channel of funding.

The German National Committee for UNICEF has been funding the YPMN Initiative since 2006. They have been able to use the OneMinutesJr videos produced in their fundraising and advocacy campaigns, on their websites and in multimedia presentations at conferences and media briefings. One of the most powerful themes have been the plight of Roma children who migrated to Germany.

The evolution of the initiative has been “organic” with a set of broad objectives and parameters for its development. UNICEF has been able to experiment with new ideas and respond to demand, ensuring that YPMN activities are largely needs-driven. There is a lack of baseline, a logical framework and indicators the initiative has been addressed in documentation under other UNICEF sectoral work. The evaluator will need to work around this limitation.

In the region, UNICEF support to youth engagement overall remains underfunded, sporadic and ad hoc. Therefore, the assumption based on recent UNICEF experience with YPMN, is that better integration, coordination and strategic positioning of YPMN Initiative within the 10-point RKLA can strengthen future results for adolescents boys and girls/young people in in matters affecting their lives.

After more than ten years of implementation, the YPMN Initiative needs to be evaluated by an external, independent party to see how it has worked toward its objectives and how it has risen to new challenges. The landscape is now considerably different. NGO partners have changed. The online and social media landscape has become more interactive in nature (the MAGIC website run by YPMN has been changed into the DOC-managed Voices of Youth microsite with more users uploading independently though it is still moderated), especially with the profusion of social media platforms such as Twitter, Youtube and Facebook.

3. EVALUATION

3.1 Objective

6

The objective of the 2014 evaluation will be to: Assess past performance (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and

sustainability) of the initiative against the changing situation, needs, opportunities for engagement at country and regional level over the 2004-2014 period, as well as vis à vis the UNICEF National Committees’ work on advocacy on child rights including the equity refocus;

Draw and document lessons learned on what has worked and how.

Make recommendations for future communication-related youth participation activities taking into account the RKLA strategic framework, the rapidly-changing media environment, the long-term viability and potential areas for further strengthening of the initiative.

This will be a formative evaluation which will contribute to strengthening the overall youth engagement in the RKLA, in particular RKLA 10.

3.2 Scope of the evaluation: The evaluation will be of the regional approach covering all 21 countries and one territory with a more in-depth case studies focusing on these 5 countries: Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Moldova, Romania and Kyrgyzstan. The choice of these countries is designed to reflect geographical sub-regions and to illustrate variety of strategic choices that the offices have made within the YPMN Initiative to maximise their youth advocacy and the NGO partners they are working with and the different stages of YPMN in the different countries. The evaluation will include a visit to the Regional Office in Geneva and to Cologne, Germany for the preparation of the evaluation and possibly another visit for the regional office for the presentation of results.

3.3 Time frame of the evaluation: The period covered by this evaluation is 2004-2014. This is because there was already an evaluation covering 2002-2004. Thus the time period covered is ten years, with particular emphasis on 2012-2014 because of the recent realignment process with the RKLA (see above 2.2.).

3.4. Evaluability assessment: In the course of preparing this TOR, UNICEF Regional Office did an evaluability assessment and concluded that despite some data gaps, there are enough reliable qualitative disaggregated data available to inform the situation of children in the most recent years covered by the evaluation to conduct adequately this evaluation. The following limitations in the data collection process can be foreseen and will need to be mitigated by the evaluator: lack of baselines, lack of a logical framework, lack of disaggregated quantitative data, difficulties in locating young people involved in earlier part of the initiative and also due to their marginalization in societies (such as street children, children with disabilities, children from remote rural areas). UNICEF will provide support to the evaluators to overcome these limitations.

3.5 Expected users of the review: UNICEF programme colleagues in country, regional and headquarters offices, RKLA reference groups, participating NGO partners, National Committees and donors.

3.6 Key questions:The evaluation questions are grouped according to the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) evaluation criteria as defined in the UNICEF guidance on equity-focused evaluations, 2011.

7

1. Relevance: To what degree are has the YPMN Initiative objectives been relevant to the

priorities and needs of adolescent boys and girls and youth, particularly the most vulnerable groups of children in CEE/CIS?

To what degree does the YPMN Initiative remain relevant to the recently-developed UNICEF 10-point RKLA framework?

To what extent has the YPMN Initiative been relevant to the changing context in between 2004 and 2014 in CEE/CIS?

To what extent has the YPMN Initiative been relevant to the UNICEF National Committees’ work on advocacy on child rights with equity over the period 2006-2014?

2. Effectiveness To what extent was the underlying theory of change valid? To what extent

did the expected results chain occur as planned? To what degree has the YPMN Initiative contributed to remove bottlenecks

hampering the participation, expression, voice, access to information, services and to opportunities for active engagement, and advocacy by adolescent boys and girls and youth, particularly the most vulnerable?

What have been the chief factors responsible for the achievement or failure of the YPMN Initiative objectives?

To what extent could elements of the YPMN Initiative support the achievement of RKLA results in future, particularly for the most vulnerable?

To what extent did gender issues play a role in the roll out of the initiative (selection of adolescent boys and girls, choice of topics, facilitation of the workshops, etc.)?

3. Efficiency How cost effective were YPMN Initiative activities compared to similar

activities in other regions? Did the initiative use resources (funds, expertise, time) in the most

economical manner to achieve the results?

4. Impact Participants

To what extent have the participants (boys and girls) working on media projects experienced growth in self-efficacy, strengthened their capacity to be active citizens or in their leadership skills within the community? Have they experienced increased access to various opportunities, or increased ability to negotiate issues with peers and adults? Have former participants embarked on active community or political work such as student councils? How has the experience been different for boys and girls who took part in the initiative?

To what extent have the participants (boys and girls) in UNICEF-sponsored regional advocacy events perceived that their voices were taken into account and influenced the outcomes of such events? To what extent, as a result of that participation, were they able to create/strengthen networks, plan how to engage with other groups of young people and keep other young people informed of ongoing activities in their own countries?

8

To what extent have subscribers/followers of the information service used the information to take part in youth media advocacy activities (other than the OneMinutesJr activities) or tried to obtain funding for other youth media projects?

Local and national authorities and community stakeholders How did youth media activities or advocacy processes influence local and

national authorities and the wider community to listening more attentively to youth voices? Did such stakeholders do anything differently as a result of exposure to YPMN-inspired youth advocacy?

5. Sustainability What are the chief factors (coordination, strategic alignment with regional

priorities, partnerships, continued funding and support to the wider youth engagement) responsible for YPMN’s sustainability?

What are the emerging issues around youth participation that need to be considered to ensure that YPMN Initiative can remain sustainable and relevant to UNICEF country office programmes and the RKLA framework?

3.7 Evaluation approach and methodology

The evaluator will be requested to propose a detailed methodology, in line with United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) standards and norms, which can be accessed from the link here4.

The approach followed from the onset of the evaluation will be as participative as possible in the qualitative data collection. In gathering data and views from stakeholders through discussion and consultations, the evaluator will ensure that it considers a cross-section of stakeholders with potentially diverse views to ensure the evaluation findings are impartial and have equal representation of men and women, boys and girls, and are presented in a disaggregated manner. The theory of change mentioned on page 3 should be discussed in the context of the overall theory of change in annex 3, page 18 Diagram 2.

The evaluation will employ relevant internationally agreed evaluation criteria of relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impact, and sustainability. The methodology should demonstrate impartiality and lack of bias by relying on a cross-section of information sources (e.g. stakeholder groups, including beneficiaries, etc.) and using a mixed methodology (e.g. quantitative, qualitative, participatory) to ensure triangulation of information through a variety of means.

The evaluation can use a mix of primary and secondary data collection. UNICEF will facilitate access by the evaluator to programme information, to past and current participants in the initiative, as well as to any other individuals or groups of people that will be included in the qualitative data collection phase.

4 http://www.uneval.org/normsandstandards/index.jsp?doc_cat_source_id=4

9

- The secondary data collection includes a desk study of the data produced by the initiative or other sources such as background studies, work plans, programme documentation in communication sections and other sections, donor proposals, progress reports and actual outputs (videos and content on websites/social media platforms).

- The primary data collection will encompass qualitative data such as 1. on-line questionnaire for all communication officers and selected

advisors/programme specialists. Further in-depth interviews can be considered to gain insights into the concept, management, country contexts.

2. online questionnaire for past and current participants of the OneMinuteJr workshops, youth reporters and also mailing list users.

3. Observation of on-going initiatives/workshops. 4. Focus group discussions/in-depth interviews with children and adolescents who

have taken part in the YPMN Initiative activities in the six countries.5. In-depth interviews with selected local and national authorities who have

attended screenings or advocacy events of the OneMinuteJr or the youth reporting activities.

This list is not exhaustive and other approaches, such as participatory evaluation approach involving young people in conducting the evaluation, can be proposed by the consultant or the Regional Office during the preparatory work.

Considering that themes explored in this initiative (Justice for Children, HIV and AIDS, family separation, children with disabilities) include the most vulnerable children and families, there are ethical dimensions to be taken into account by the evaluator with regards to consulting them in the process and ensuring their informed consent. Ethical guidance for evaluations can be accessed through the following link here5,

3.8. Work plan

This dates for this evaluation are proposed: 18 May – 15 August 3 working days in Geneva, Switzerland 2 working days in Cologne, Germany 5 working days in Balti and Chisinau, Moldova5 working days in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

2 working days in Bucharest, Romania 3 working days in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan 5 working days in Armenia, Yerevan

The remaining days are work from home.

The suggested timelines are below which includes travel days.

PHASE 1: Inception (18 May - 25 May) in Geneva, Switzerland and Cologne Germany

5 http://www.uneval.org/papersandpubs/documentdetail.jsp?doc_id=980).

10

Deliverables: Inception Report, including evaluation framework, methodology (data collection tools and list of documents to be reviewed), interview questionnaire, list of stakeholders, updated timelines of country visits as per agreements with country offices.

The inception phase will start with a briefing in the Regional Office and include a video conference with the Reference Group. The evaluator will then design the evaluation methodology to be presented in the inception report. The evaluation framework will be based on the above-mentioned list of questions, with corresponding indicators and sources of information. Disparities affecting vulnerable groups of children (such as children from ethnic minorities, poor families, children with HIV and Aids, children with disabilities) will be captured in the evaluation. The evaluator will advise in the Inception report whether the timing for the country visits should be adjusted.

PHASE 2: Data gathering and analysis (25 May – 12 July)Deliverables: trip reports, an initial findings report based on the field trips

This phase will include field data collection in the five countries to be visited and also data collection conducted remotely/from home base for remaining countries.

During country visits, the evaluation process should include interviews and focus group discussions with the relevant stakeholders. In order to ensure compliance with ethical standards in the matter, any support (translators etc.) requested should be experienced in carrying out such interviews with children. At the end of each country mission, the evaluator will present initial findings with the country office focal points at the debrief session.

Field trip I 25-31 May in Chisinau, Moldova 1-7 June in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina

7-25 June The consultant will be working from home for data collection conducted remotely for the other countries.

Field trip II 25– 28 June in Bucharest, Romania28 June -2 July in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan (return to home base or proceed to the next country)6– 12 July in Yerevan, Armenia

PHASE 3: Report writing (12 July – 15 August) The consultant will be working from home for the report writing phase. It is proposed to have a presentation of findings in Geneva and if not possible then remotely through a video presentation.

The final report will cover: 1. the title page with key basic information of the evaluation, 2. An executive summary (1-3 pages), 3. Evaluation objectives 4. Evaluation methodology 5. Most important findings (including an analysis of the theory of change, cases studies) and conclusions, 6. Main recommendations 7. Annexes.

Deliverables: - 1. An inception report by 25 May- 2. An initial finding report based on of the trip reports of the six countries by 12 July- 3. A final evaluation Report by 15 August.

11

For more references on UNICEF-Adapted UNEG Evaluation Reports Standards, please see link here 6 .

3.9 Payment Schedule Payment 1: 30% after finalisation and clearance of deliverable 1

Payment 2: 70 % after finalisation and clearance of deliverable 2 and 3

All deliverables should be given in word document and submitted electronically. UNICEF will take up to a maximum of one week to review and provide consolidated comments on each of the three main deliverables of the evaluation. Potential applicants must be aware that, depending on the quality of the draft deliverables and the depth of comments following UNICEF’s review, more than one round of revision might be required for each of the two deliverables, before their clearance. As such, the above calendar should be considered as tentative and flexibility and adjustments in the timetable are to be expected as the process unfolds.

3.6 Duty station: The consultant will need to spend preparation work based at the UNICEF Offices in Geneva and in Cologne during phase 1 and at the Country Offices and at home base during phase 2. For the phase 3, the consultant will be home base. The consultant will also need to spend one day for report presentation, either virtually or physically with the regional office.

3.10 Management The consultant will report to the Regional Communication Chief for overall strategic direction and the Regional Communication Specialist for day to day management.

A reference group will be set up comprised of: The RO Communication Chief/Specialist, the RKLA 10 Chairperson, Adolescent Development Advisor, Specialist, the RO M&E focal point, selected communication officers in the country offices.

The consultant shall have independent engagement with all external stakeholders relevant to the evaluation, but will need to inform the UNICEF Regional Office and Country Offices of the reasons for engaging with which stakeholder and justify the timing.

4. QUALIFICATIONS OF EVALUATOR: 1. Advanced university degree in humanities or communication or a related field, or an

undergraduate degree plus at least 10 years of demonstrated professional experience in the fields of communications, external relations, or public affairs or a related field.

2. At least 3 years of experience in equity-focused monitoring and evaluation with proven commitment to equity and gender sensitive analysis; the ability to design and conduct interviews and focus group discussions; strong analytical skills;

3. Experience in media capacity building with marginalized youth in CEE/CIS or another region is an advantage.

4. Availability for the allocated time frame in 18 May till 15 August.

6 http://www.unicef.org/evaldatabase/files/UNEG_UNICEF_Eval_Report_Standards.pdf

12

5. Excellent English speaking and writing skills. Russian language skill is an added advantage.

How to apply:

Deadline for application: By Monday, 5 May 2014 at 5 p.m. Geneva time. Please send to UNICEF Regional Office for CEE/CIS Communication Specialist Lely Djuhari ldjuhari@unicef.org and Communication Assistant Ekaterina Zimianina ezimianina@unicef.org with subject line: Consultancy assignment: An individual consultant to review of the Young People`s Media Network.

Interested candidates are requested to submit: 1. A short proposal should be submitted detailing why the individual consultant has

the competencies (education and experience) to take on this review. It should also include links or samples of relevant work, statement of availability during preferred months of work. The budget should state an all-inclusive lump sum (including the total assignment fee, per diem, communication costs and any other costs including hiring translators and interpreters. UNICEF will help in identifying translators, interpreters and in country land transportation but the consultant must pay for them directly. The consultant’s invoice must include fee and itemized travel and other expenses costs.

2. The consultant should submit the P11 and CV. Other documents such as references, Health Certificates, Insurance and other relevant documents will be required after selection as stipulated by UNICEF.

3. Contact details including mobile phone, email and address of consultant.

The proposals will be marked against the following criteria:

REF Category Points

TP1 Description of the consultant`s understanding of the review objectives. Completeness of the proposal including elaboration of the proposed approach/methodology, CVs, timeline or days proposed and budget.

40

TP2 Method for reviewDescription of methodology proposed including tools

30

TP3 Appropriateness of expertise in citizen media engagement in particular youth participation. Knowledge of oral and written English required. Knowledge of the region and Russian an asset.

30

13

Annex 1 UNICEF CEE/CIS Regional Knowledge and Leadership Agenda

Our 10-point agenda for action

We are committed to addressing unfinished business by supporting the realization of 10 key child rights that we have identified as being the most critical for children to enjoy a rich and fulfilling childhood.

1. A child’s right to health: ‘A promise renewed’Addressing gaps in access to health services that have led to disparities in child mortality, immunization and nutrition.

2. A child’s right to a supportive and caring family environmentPreventing the placement of children in institutions, which can perpetuate exclusion, vulnerability and inequity, rather than protect children.

3. A child’s right to access justiceSupporting juvenile justice reform and children’s access to a fair, timely, affordable and effective remedy when their rights have been violated.

4. A child’s right to early learningIncreasing access for every child to preschool education, especially children from the most marginalized groups.

5. A child’s right to an inclusive quality educationIncluding all children in quality learning, especially children from the most marginalized groups.

6. A child’s right to be born free of HIVAddressing the social inequalities, service access barriers and stigma that are preventing vulnerable mothers and young people from accessing HIV prevention and care.

7. A young child’s right to comprehensive well-beingPromoting every child’s right to reach their full potential through early childhood education and care.

8. A child’s right to social protectionImproving the effectiveness and efficiency of social protection systems so that they are more inclusive, and child poverty and deprivation may be reduced.

9. A child’s right to protection from the risks of disastersReducing the vulnerability and increasing the resilience of all children to disasters associated with natural hazards and climate change.

10. An adolescent child’s right to equal opportunities, inclusion and second chancesEngaging with teenagers most at risk of going ‘off track’ by early detection of vulnerabilities, provision of supportive services, and keeping them in school.

14

Annex 2:

To identify barriers, bottlenecks and enablersMay 2012

Determinants Description CommentEnabling environmentSocial Norms Widely followed

social rules of behavior

This sub-category refers to social rules of behaviors that are widely followed within a society. While these vary according to contexts, it will be essential to identify social norms that result in discrimination or exclusion and that may be common across different contexts. Addressing these social norms is critical to realizing children’s rights, changing behavior and practices that constrain the fulfillment of rights, or creating demand for services

Legislation / Policy

Adequacy of laws and policies

This refers to the existence and implementation of laws and policies at different levels of society. In each country, we must focus our monitoring on the legal and policy issues that promote or deter our objectives. In some cases, national legislation may be a critical factor; in others, the subnational policy framework may represent a crucial bottleneck

Budget / Expenditure

Allocation and disbursement of required resources

The efficient and equitable allocation and utilization of resources is a common constraint to effective coverage. The precise nature of this constraint will vary by context. The bottleneck to be monitored may be the allocation of resources to a specific sector of the system, or the allocation for particular groups (deprived communities), or the actual levels of expenditure.

Management / Coordination

Roles and accountability / coordination / partnerships

While the term “governance” has broad and varied connotations, we are focusing on the bottlenecks that obstruct accountability and transparency, as well the impediments to coordination and partnership.

Supply Availability of essential commodities /inputs

Essential commodities / Inputs required to deliver a service or adopt a practice

Most services, facilities and practices require a certain amount of essential commodities or inputs to function.

Access to adequately staffed services, facilities and information

Physical access (services, facilities, information)

This refers to the target population’s physical access to the relevant services, facilities and information. Depending on the sector, the most critical determinant for access may relate to infrastructure, the presence of qualified personnel, the information channels, or a combination of these factors

DemandFinancial access Direct and indirect

cost of services /practices

Financial barriers often prevent deprived groups from utilizing available services or adopting certain practices. These barriers can be direct (e.g. user fees, purchase of required inputs by households) or indirect (cost of transportation, time, etc.).

Social and cultural practices

Individual / community beliefs,

Social and cultural barriers may prevent deprived groups from using services or adopting practices.

15

and beliefs awareness, behaviors, practices, attitudes

These factors include social practices that reflect social roles and responsibilities (e.g. children with disabilities are a source of shame and should be hidden) and individual or collective beliefs about cause and effect that support customary practices (e.g. the colostrum will harm the newborn). These factors may affect service access and provision (e.g. language, attitudes of providers regarding different ethnic groups).

Timing and continuity of use

Completion / continuity in service, practice

The effectiveness of a service, practice, or other intervention generally depends on the continuity of use over the medium to long term. While many target groups may start using a specific service or facility or adopting a desired behavior, it is often the case that participants drop out after a period or do not complete all the required aspects or steps.Note that while some financial and socio-cultural barriers can be measured directly, others are measured indirectly by measuring the actual utilization of the service or the adoption of the practice.

QualityQuality of care Adherence to

required quality standards (national or international norms

While quality is subject to interpretation across contexts, for our purposes, “quality” implies adherence to the minimum required standards, as defined by national or international norms

16

Annex 3

Regional Knowledge and Leadership AgendaGeneric Theory of Change underlying UNICEF’s approach in CEE/CIS

Region

January 2013

TO NOTE: The main objective of this note is to formulate in a simple manner the main theory of change framing most of UNICEF Engagement in the Region as reflected in the Regional Knowledge and Leadership Agenda. This generic theory of change is based on a consensus in the Region that the progressive realization of child rights and reduction of equity gaps is best achieved through changes in systems at national/regional/local levels and that sustained UNICEF engagement through its core roles contributes to these system changes. This theory of change can be adapted to each the Key Leadership Area to frame both their prospective and retrospective dimensions and to Country Office (CO) according to their realities and context.

Theory of change : what does that mean?

As per the Programme, Policy and Procedure Manual “A Theory of Change (ToC) provides a blueprint of the building blocks needed to achieve long-term goals of a social change initiative. It can be viewed as a representation of how results will be achieved in a development undertaking and the markers that will permit measurement of whether or not it remains on track. At its core, a ToC identifies:

a) the results a development effort seeks to achieve; b) the actions necessary to produce the results –in terms of outputs, outcomes or impact of that effort; c) the events and conditions likely to affect the achievement of results; d) any assumptions about cause and effect linkages and e) an understanding of the broader context in which the programme operates.”7.

As this short definition and corresponding summary graphic presentation below show clearly, theory of changes are very closely related to the logical framework approach and to result based management. It includes a set of connected blocks which together constitute the pathway to change. All theory of change development requires articulation and management of risks and assumptions underlying the process towards change at various levels. Assumptions explain both the connections between the various blocks and the expectations about how and why proposed interventions will bring them about. Often, assumptions are supported by research, strengthening the case to be made about the plausibility of theory and the likelihood that stated goals will be accomplished. Stakeholders value theories of change as part of program planning and evaluation because they create a

7 PPP Manual, Para 3.67.

17

commonly understood vision of the long-term goals, how they will be reached, and what will be used to measure progress along the way.8

Diagram 1

Without going into too many details, the following questions show briefly what any theory of change need to address:

The context for changeo Who are we aiming to support and why?o Who are the groups and what are the structures and processes that

influence changes in the target groups? Contribution to change

o What are the long term changes that need to happen in target group’s lives?o Who and what needs to change to achieve these long term changes?o What factors, relationships, approaches, pathways influence changes at

each level?o What are the key factors to which it is possible to contribute, that will be

vital to bring about change?o What are the other stakeholders key contributions to the expected changes?

Generic theory of change of UNICEF Engagement in CEE/CIS9

As mentioned earlier this generic theory of change is based on a consensus in the Region that the progressive realization of child rights and reduction of equity gaps is best achieved through changes in systems at national/regional/local levels and that sustained UNICEF engagement through its core roles contributes to these system

8 For further details see http://www.theoryofchange.org/9 This generic Theory of Change was presented for the first time during the Regional Management Meeting in April 2012.

Progressive realisation of children’s rights

Outcomes

Outputs

Activities

Inputs

Behavioural changes

(Set of) Tasks/Processes

Financial and human resources

Products / services produced

Implementation

Area of control

internal to organisation

Reach direct beneficiaries

Area of influence

external to organisation

Risks /AssumptionsImpacts

18

change. All building blocks of the theory of change have to be explicitly developed so that they benefit the most vulnerable.

Each KLA can adapt this generic theory of change to guide both their prospective and retrospective dimensions. Similarly each CO would align this generic theory of change with its strategic positioning to support changes in the system needed to improve the situation of most vulnerable children in their country.

Enablers: UNICEF contribution is only possible with timely adequate human capacities, financial resources and good governance and stewardship.

Diagram 2

19

UNICEF Contribution: Across the Region UNICEF fulfils core roles indispensable to contribute to changes in systems at national, regional or local levels with the strategic intent of ensuring the realization of the rights of children everywhere. These core roles reflect UNICEF foundational normative principles of Human Rights Based Approach to Development, Gender Mainstreaming and Environmental Sustainability. These core roles also translate in essential functions which are common to most context in which UNICEF operates such as advocacy and partnership, policy work, M&E, social change communication, Communication for development and operations management. UNICEF contribution comes along side contributions of other partners, civil society, etc.

10Changes in the systems. In order to contribute to changes in the systems, UNICEF has a critical role to play in identifying and ensuring that key bottlenecks, hampering the progressive realization of children rights, are addressed. These bottlenecks can be grouped around 4 main categories as per the determinant analytical framework developed under MoRES. Changes in the systems are the results of complex process and interactions between the various determinants. The understanding of these processes and interaction as well as the role of other partners is critical for an adequate prioritization of UNICEF contribution to focus on some bottlenecks rather than others.

Progressive realization of child rights and equity. This is the ultimate goal of all UNICEF engagement in the Region. Understanding the elements conducive of the flow from one level to another is of critical importance to ensure that changes actually taking place are those that are benefitting the most vulnerable.

Assumptions and risks. The assumptions are the necessary conditions for the achievement of results at different levels. These can refer to the commitment of the Government related to the programme, the expected contributions of other partners, etc. The risks refer to a potential event or occurrence beyond the control UNICEF but which could adversely affect its contribution, changes in the systems and impact negatively the most vulnerable children. Both assumptions and risks are critically important to articulate explicitly at each TOC level.

Linkages between the theory of change building blocks, MoRES levels and evaluation criteria

Theory of change elements MoRES levels Evaluation criteriaProgressive realization of children’s rights and equity Levels 1 & 4 ImpactChanges in system at national, (regional/ local) levels Level 3 EffectivenessContribution of UNICEF to these changes Level 2 Efficiency

In more details

10* System changes to be analysed as per the 10 determinant analytical framework grouped in 4 main categories mentioned in the table, while making sure that the human right based approach is kept explicit.

20

Across each level risks and assumptions need to be carefully made explicit

Progressive realization of children’s rights and equity “The Mandate of UNICEF is the protection of children's rights, to help meet their basic needs and to expand their opportunities to reach their full potential. UNICEF is committed to ensuring special protection for the most disadvantaged children” (mission statement).

For each KLA it is necessary to identify the most vulnerable children as well as the main children’s rights violations and equity gaps that UNICEF wants to see addressed. In depth situation analysis is required to understand the nature of these inequities and their causes. This analysis can be supported by various analytical tools and approaches (as per SITAN Guidance). The Reference Groups need to identify few key indicators related to children’s situation that will be regularly monitored across countries. It is recognized that some indicators might be monitored only by a subset of the countries facing specific equity gaps.

Changes at system level (national, regional, local)

In order to reduce child rights violations and equity gaps, changes have to take place in systems at various levels (national, regional, local) to ensure that they are fully operational. Fully operational systems require:

An enabling environment with1. Conducive social norms2. Adequate legislations in place3. Adapted budgets4. Operational coordination mechanisms

Appropriate supply5. Availability of essential commodities6. Access to adequately staff services, facilities and information

Ability to express demand7. Financial capacity to access the services8. Enabling social and cultural practices9. Continued ability to timely use the services

Quality10. Adherence to required quality of services

For each KLA, in depth understanding of the systems and the way they operate is critical to develop the most relevant, effective and efficient intervention that can contribute to ensuring sustainable impact on children. Depending on child rights violations and equity gaps identified, some categories of determinants might play a more important role than others. The Reference Groups need to identify the key bottlenecks affecting operationalization of the systems, their interrelations as well as ways to prioritize them for en effective UNICEF contribution taking into consideration other stakeholders’ contributions. They also need to identify the corresponding indicators that will be monitored to assess progress towards changes in those systems. It is recognized that some indicators might be country specific.

21

Contribution of UNICEF

UNICEF plays a key role supporting changes in the system conducive of reduction of equity gaps and child rights violations. There is consensus that the following Core Roles are indispensable for a sustainable UNICEF engagement and its universal presence in support of results and the realization of the rights of children everywhere: The ‘Voice’ for children and adolescents -- advocating and communicating around key

national policies, social issues, mindsets and attitudes; Monitoring and evaluation – assisting independent assessments of the functioning of

the Child Rights guarantee systems, the progressive realisation of child rights and the reduction in equity gaps in child well-being;

Policy advice and technical assistance – through well-designed UNICEF positions (based on local, regional, international best practices) on key issues, supporting the development of the normative frameworks related to specific national legislation, policy or programme as well as private sector standards that can improve equity;

Leveraging resources from the public and private sectors – accompanying and redirecting reforms, including those supported by the EU, IFIs, bilaterals and national/multi-national corporations;

Facilitating national dialogue towards child friendly social norms – bringing together government, private sector and civil society, as well as convening divergent forces to enhance public debate, participation and action around equity and child rights;

Enabling knowledge exchange – fostering horizontal cooperation and exchange of experience among countries and regions on ‘what works’ for enhancing child well-being and equity.

modeling/piloting demonstrating how system could meaningfully evolve to reduce equity gaps and children’s rights violations

For each KLA. UNICEF is one of the stakeholders in any given KLA. It is therefore important to conduct a stakeholder mapping to identify the other key actors in any given area and identify UNICEF specific roles within this map. The reference groups need to identify the key UNICEF core roles required to address the main determinants

Enablers/inputs

No contribution of UNICEF would be possible without the adequate human capacities, financial resources and stewardship and governance. The reference groups need to identify the relevant inputs required to bring the agenda forward.