|
Request for proposals for Endline Evaluation of the Circular Food Systems for Rwanda Project The Circular Food Systems for Rwanda (CIRF) Project Enabling a Locally Led Circular Economy for Food Transition in Rwanda is implemented by WRI Rwanda together with consortium partners Resonance, Africa Circular Economy Alliance (ACEA), African Circular Economy Network (ACEN) and Cleaner Production and Climate Innovation Center (CPCIC), with funding from the IKEA Foundation. The project runs from October 2021 to December 2026 and works to accelerate Rwandas transition to a circular economy for food, aimed at increasing the adoption of circular business practices in Rwanda by promoting the business case for circularity. The Facility pursued this objective by providing circular technical assistance (TA) services designed to accelerate growth, enhance competitiveness, and mitigate risks for agri-food small and medium enterprises (SMEs). The project also convenes government, private sector, finance, and civil society actors to strengthen the enabling policy environment for a circular food economy, including through issue papers and policy recommendations developed through quarterly MultiStakeholder Platform (MSP) meetings co-chaired by the Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) and the Ministry of Environment (MoE). The project operates through three complementary workstreams: SME Development/Technical Assistance (TA) Facility: provided tailored technical assistance to circular food economy SMEs, across two cohorts (20 SMEs in total), to strengthen business models, unlock investment, and scale circular practices. Policy and Stakeholder Engagement/Multi-Stakeholder Platform (MSP): convenes government, private sector, finance, and civil society actors to strengthen the enabling policy environment for a circular food economy, including through issue papers and policy recommendations. Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning and Communication serve as cross-cutting workstreams that complement the two core workstreams. In 2024, a mid-term evaluation (MTE) was conducted by an external evaluator using Outcome Harvesting. The MTE substantiated 71 of 87 harvested outcomes, including SMEs launching new circular products and market linkages, and the integration of circular economy considerations into national frameworks such as PSTA 5. The endline evaluation is expected to build on these findings by updating the status of the substantiated outcomes, with a clear account of how the project contributed to each, and by assessing how far the project implemented the MTE recommendations. As the project approaches closure in December 2026, World Resources Institute (WRI) Rwanda seeks to engage a qualified independent evaluator or firm to conduct the endline evaluation of the project. These Terms of Reference set out the purpose, scope, questions, methodology, deliverables, and requirements for the assignment. 2. Purpose and Objectives The evaluation serves a dual purpose of accountability and learning. It will provide the IKEA Foundation, WRI, and consortium partners with an independent and credible assessment of what the project achieved, how, and why. Its objectives are to: Assess the extent to which the project achieved its intended outcomes in supporting small and medium enterprises and strengthening the enabling environment through the multi-stakeholder platform, drawing primarily on the outcomes harvested at mid-term and their trajectories since, with KPI values from the MEL system as supporting evidence. Assess the strength of the projects contribution to observed outcome-level changes, considering other actors, initiatives and contextual factors. This includes assessing whether the outcomes substantiated at mid-term have been sustained, scaled, institutionalised or replicated, as evidence of CIRFs lasting, systems-level contribution, and tracking how far the project implemented the recommendations of the 2024 mid-term evaluation. Assess the relevance, coherence, efficiency, and likely sustainability of the projects approach and results, including the inclusion of women and youth, environmental results, and any unintended effects. Distil transferable lessons and actionable recommendations for future circular economy programming by consortium members, including the ongoing Accelerating the Circular Economy for Food (ACE4Food) initiative. The primary users of the evaluation are WRI Rwanda, consortium partners, the IKEA Foundation, multistakeholder platform members, government institutions, and other circular economy actors in Rwanda. 3. Scope Temporal: the full implementation period, October 2021 November 2026. Geographic: areas in Rwanda where the supported 20 enterprises are located (Nyagatare, Gicumbi, Rwamagana, Rubavu, Musanze, Kamonyi, Rulindo, Muhanga, Bugesera, Karongi, and Rusizi). Programmatic: all outputs and outcomes in the project results framework (summarised in Section 5.2), including SME-level results (Technical Assistance Facility) and policy/enabling-environment results (multi-stakeholder platform), with gender and youth inclusion as a cross-cutting lens. Analytical: contribution to outcome-level change is assessed through Contribution Analysis; the evaluation does not require experimental or quasi-experimental attribution. 4. Evaluation Criteria and Questions The evaluation is structured around the OECD-DAC criteria. During inception, the evaluator will refine them, develop sub-questions, and propose a full evaluation matrix. Criterion Headline Question Relevance Did the Technical Assistance Facility and the policy and multi-stakeholder engagement workstream match the actual and evolving needs of circular food SMEs and Rwandas policy priorities (e.g. NST2, PSTA 5) over 20212026? Coherence How well did the two workstreams (SME and policy) complement each other and align with other interventions in Rwandas circular economy and food systems space? Effectiveness To what extent were intended outcomes achieved, as evidenced primarily by the outcomes harvested at mid-term and significant new outcomes since KPI values from the MEL system? Have market linkages, business model innovations and technology adoption translated into sustained business performance and investment readiness? Efficiency How well were resources converted into results? Contribution/ Impact What is the strength of evidence that CIRF contributed to observed outcome-level changes, and what alternative explanations or contextual factors were at play? Sustainability How likely are SME-level results and MSP-driven policy gains to be sustained beyond project closure, and what conditions support or threaten this? Tender Link : https://www.wri.org/about/procurement-opportunities
|
