The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) is the world’s largest humanitarian organization, with a network of 191-member National Societies (NSs). The overall aim of IFRC is “to inspire, encourage, facilitate, and promote at all times all forms of humanitarian activities by NSs with a view to preventing and alleviating human suffering and thereby contributing to the maintenance and promotion of human dignity and peace in the world.” IFRC works to meet the needs and improve the lives of vulnerable people before, during and after disasters, health emergencies and other crises.

IFRC is part of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement (Movement), together with its member National Societies and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). The work of IFRC is guided by the following fundamental principles: humanity, impartiality, neutrality, independence, voluntary service, unity, and universality.

IFRC is led by its Secretary General, and has its Headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. The Headquarters are organized into three main Divisions: (i) National Society Development and Operations Coordination; (ii) Global Relations, Humanitarian Diplomacy and Digitalization; and (iii) Management Policy, Strategy and Corporate Services.

IFRC has five regional offices in Africa, Asia Pacific, Middle East and North Africa, Europe, and the Americas. IFRC also has country cluster delegations and country delegations throughout the world. Together, the Geneva Headquarters and the field structure (regional, cluster and country) comprise the IFRC Secretariat.

IFRC has a zero-tolerance policy on conduct that is incompatible with the aims and objectives of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, including sexual exploitation and abuse, sexual harassment and other forms of harassment, abuse of authority, discrimination, and lack of integrity (including but not limited to financial misconduct). IFRC also adheres to strict child safeguarding principles.

The purpose of this assessment is to evaluate the progress and results of the Ukrainian Red Cross Society (URCS) Inter-regional Offices (IRO) in Vinnytsia, Lviv and Dnipro.

The review will assess their effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of their objectives and generate recommendations in ways of working and of support from partners going forward.

This review is for the use of URCS senior management team and IRO staff and Movement partners.

Job purpose and Background

URCS initiated an internal discussion in 2017 about a statutes revision which envisaged a new branch structure to align to a new local government decentralization, switching from oblast-level branches to regional cluster branches covering several oblasts. In the end, this larger structural change was not approved, but the revised statutes did provide the option for the Governing Board to authorize creation of inter-regional offices (IROs) that could support the oblast and local branches as an arm of the National Committee. This was not immediately put into practice.

After the escalation of the conflict in 2022, the URCS decided that it could be helpful (and the funding opportunities made it possible) to go forward with the concept of IROs. The IFRC supported URCS to institute the first “pilot” IRO in Vinnytsia starting in May 2022, to serve branches in five regions (Vinnytsia, Khmelnitsky, Ternopil, Rivne (later replaced with Chernivtsi) and Zhytomyr).

A second IRO was started in Lviv in late 2023 (now covering Lviv, Ivano Frankivsk, Zakarpattia, Volyn and Rivne) followed by a third in Dnipro in early 2024 (covering Dnipropetrovsk, Kharkiv, Luhansk, Donestk and Zaporihzhia) (the latter with financial support from ICRC). The intention is eventually to establish two more such offices to cover the south and the north.

While the objectives for the IROs have evolved over time, they are currently expressed as follows:

1. Strengthen a profile of strong, quality-approved national services to meet URCS auxiliary roles
2. Contribute to strengthen the URCS structure, setup, capacities and operations by providing a regional support to URCS branches, based on their needs, to be able to operate and perform humanitarian emergency response under new conditions
3. To strengthen the relationship between URCS National Committee and branches and improve coordination of international support to (URCS branches and to the) Ukraine population.
4. Align and harmonize the branch interventions with URCS strategies, policies, approaches and key priorities for the different sectors.

The IROs are expected to provide regional and local branches with services in key areas (e.g. finance, HR, logistics, legal and fundraising – though full staffing was only recently achieved) and eventually also serve as hubs for programmatic National Society Development (NSD).

Project objectives

This review aims to evaluate the pertinence, efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability of the IROs. It will scrutinize the strategies employed, implementation modalities adopted, coordination and management mechanisms in place, as well as the efficacy of quality assurance measures. Bearing in mind that the three existing IROs have operated for a varied amount of time, the review will examine the IROs’ progress to date and make recommendations for their next steps.

Top goals of the evaluation:

• To evaluate the degree to which the IOs have been able to effectively and efficiently deliver on their objectives (as currently articulated – see above), including understanding perspectives on this question from:
• National Committee
• Regional branches
• Local branches
• Red Cross partners
• To identify and assess key lessons, challenges, best practices, and recommendations for the future work of IOs.

Desired outcomes

Inception Report: This foundational document will serve as a comprehensive scoping exercise for the evaluation. It encompasses the background, proposed methodologies, data collection, and reporting plans. It includes draft data collection tools, delineation of roles and responsibilities within the team, a precise timeframe with firm dates for deliverables, and travel and logistical arrangements. The Inception Report requires approval by the Evaluation Management Team.

Presentation/Debriefing to URCS and IFRC: The evaluation team will present its preliminary findings to EMT, offering a firsthand overview of initial insights.

Draft Report: A preliminary report (in English) will present key findings grounded in facts, avoiding opinions or rumours. It will include conclusions, recommendations, and lessons for current and future IOs. Initial findings and results will be briefed to IFRC EMT and URCS before submitting the final report.

Final Report: This comprehensive document comprises a concise executive summary (up to 1,000 words) and a main body (up to 5,000 words) (both in English). It should cover the background of the evaluated intervention, a description of evaluation methods and limitations, findings, conclusions, lessons learned, and clear, actionable recommendations. Appendices would include the Terms of Reference (ToR), cited resources or bibliography/reference, a list of interviewees, list of consulted material and other pertinent materials. The final report is submitted one week after receiving consolidated feedback from the EMT.

Facilitation of a Presentation: Aimed at providing an encompassing view of best practices, challenges, and program modalities, the presentation will communicate findings, emphasizing success, challenges, stories, needed best practices and recommendations.

Ownership and Usage: All products resulting from this evaluation are owned by the IFRC and URCS. Evaluators are prohibited from presenting analytical results as their own work or using the evaluation results for private publication without prior written authorization.

Review Process: The draft and final reports will be submitted to the Evaluation Management Team (IFRC and URCS), ensuring report quality with input if necessary. The EMT will then submit the report to key stakeholders for review and clarifications. Commissioners will oversee a management response and ensure subsequent follow-up.

Evaluation methodology:

The proposed methodology will strictly adhere to the ethical guidelines set forth by the IFRC for evaluations, with a specific focus on ensuring that all processes align with the prescribed standards for planning, management, execution, and utilization of evaluations. Prospective consultants are expected to outline their technical approach to the evaluation, presenting a well-defined design and methodology that integrates with the financial components of the proposal.

The concrete evaluation methodology will be developed collaboratively through extensive consultation involving the consultant/consultancy firm, the Evaluation Management Team (EMT), commissioners, and pertinent stakeholders. The consultant, in coordination with the EMT, will craft a detailed evaluation design incorporating a mixed-methods approach that encompasses both quantitative and qualitative data collection methods.

The envisaged methodology encompasses the following key elements:

Desk Review: Review of pertinent organizational and operational background documents and historical data related to URCS and IFRC, including national policies, standard operating procedures (SOPs), existing documents, and reports on interactions with URCS and IFRC. This will also encompass an analysis of prior assessment reports, learning review reports, and other evaluations conducted by URCS, IFRC, and other stakeholders. Documents for review will be supplied by the EMT.

Questionnaire Survey: If deemed necessary, a questionnaire survey will be conducted with stakeholders such as URCS and IFRC staff, branch heads, and potentially volunteers. The questionnaire will be subject to validation by the EMT.

Key Informant Interviews (KIIs): In-depth interviews will be conducted with staff at various levels within URCS (headquarters, clusters, and branches), institutional representatives (IFRC, PNSs). Interviews may extend to service providers and suppliers as deemed necessary. The EMT will provide a list of interviewees.

Focus Group Discussions: Appropriate focus group discussions will be conducted with institutional representatives, as applicable.

Field Visits/Observations: On-site visits and observations will be carried out at IO locations to garner firsthand insights.

PMER Reports: A synthesis of quantitative and qualitative data will be presented through PMER reports, with documents for this purpose supplied by the EMT.

Qualifications:

The consultant will spearhead and execute the entire evaluation process. The selected candidate should possess a demonstrable track record in successfully conducting humanitarian evaluations, preferably with a background in management and with excellent analytical and communication skills. Familiarity with the Ukrainian country systems and working culture is essential, and proficiency in both spoken and written English is a prerequisite. Ukrainian language proficiency is preferred.

While not mandatory, it is highly desirable for the consultant to have prior experience or substantial knowledge of the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement, including an understanding of its Fundamental Principles and working philosophy. However, it is important to note that the chosen consultant should not currently be a staff member of the IFRC or URCS. This ensures an unbiased and impartial perspective in carrying out the evaluation

Management of consultancy:

URCS Deputy Director General for National Society Development, IFRC Head of Delegation, PMER representatives for URCS and IFRC.

Suggested Final Report Outline:

Executive summary: Summarizes key findings, conclusions, and no more than 10 key recommendations, specific to the review’s context.

Background and context analysis: Outlines overall objectives, aims, intervention strategy, policy frameworks, targets, stakeholders, financial framework, institutional arrangements, and a brief context analysis highlighting on-the-ground challenges and issues.

Methodology: Describes the overall approach, rationale, tools, key assumptions, and considerations for relevance, appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and connectedness in view of internal and external issues.

Findings: Outlines the findings of the review.

Conclusions: Outlines the main conclusions that have emerged from the findings.

Lessons learned and recommendations: Provides recommendations, including on cross-cutting issues.

Timeline:

1. Start date: Mid-August
2. Interim progress report to the Evaluation Management Team (EMT)- End August
3. Final report submission date along with a presentation to the commissioners – Mid-September