1

Terms of Reference (ToR) Outcomes Evaluation of ‘Growing Together (GTP)’, an agri-based value chain programme implemented by VSO Bangladesh Contents 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 2

2. VSO Bangladesh and the Growing Together Project (GTP) ............................................................ 2

3. Objectives of Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 5

4. Evaluation Questions ...................................................................................................................... 5

5. Approach and Execution of the Evaluation ..................................................................................... 7

6. Evaluation Process, Timelines and Products ................................................................................... 8

7. Eligibility Criteria ............................................................................................................................. 9

8. Evaluation Governance Structure ................................................................................................... 9

9. Proposal Submission Process ........................................................................................................ 10

Annex A: Quality Evidence Principles ................................................................................................... 11

Annex B: Syngenta Growing Together Programme Background Reading ............................................ 12

Annex C: Research Tools and Evaluation Framework ........................................................................... 12

2

1. Introduction

This evaluation is intended to establish the impact and contribution of strengthened agri-based value chains to positive development outcomes for marginalized people through the Growing Together Project (GTP), implemented by VSO in Bangladesh in collaboration with local partner RDRS. The learnings from this evaluation will be used to further improve the GTP, build evidence about the value of the relational approach and contribute to building the sector-wide evidence base on programmes directed at strengthening value chains for small-scale farmers and landless laborers. This evaluation will be conducted in collaboration with VSO’s Livelihoods Research and Evaluation Specialist. It will be undertaken as a combination of an internal document review and synthesis, followed by the engagement of an independent evaluator.

2. VSO Bangladesh and the Growing Together Project (GTP)

Since it began work in Bangladesh in 1974, VSO Bangladesh has developed programmes focused on empowering disadvantaged people with a stronger voice and transforming power relations that perpetuate poverty. The overall vision of the GTP is to enhance the ability of marginalized women and men in Bangladesh’s poorest districts to participate in, contribute to and benefit from the country’s economic and social development through strengthening agri-based value chains. Current programming areas in Bangladesh are:

Agricultural Value Chains,

Empowered Youth and Women for Employment and Enterprise,

Adolescent Youth and Sexual Reproductive health and Rights

Inclusive Education and Unlocking Talents through Technology and Education in Emergency. Social Accountability, Resilience, Gender, and Inclusion are three core approaches to programming in VSOB. The choice of themes has been influenced by the analysis of poverty, inequality, and exclusion in Bangladesh. VSOB is aiming to strengthen corporate social responsibility, promote the inclusion of public interest in corporate decision making and ensure the honoring of a triple bottom line, i.e. people, the planet and profit. It was in this context that the GTP was developed and implemented since 2014. Since then, GTP has evolved into a programme that engages a diverse range of volunteers and has been able to successfully evolve in response to the needs of landless laborers and small-scale farmers. Syngenta was one of the first partners engaged in GTP, in partnership with VSOB. In 2014 VSO and Syngenta discovered a shared vision: empowering smallholder farmers struggling with market prices, debt-driven cycles of high-interest financing and a lack of access to quality training and agricultural extension services. The project sits within Syngenta’s sustainability strategy ‘The Good Growth Plan’. Syngenta identified volunteering as a tool to give their senior leaders the experience and insight to deliver the Good Growth Plan – especially around their ambitious commitments to empower twenty million smallholder farmers by 2020. Between Oct 2014 and June 2018 Syngenta provided £1,212,031 in funding and 74 senior leaders to co-create the project. Over the three and half years of GTP phase, GTP leveraged the skills and expertise of five types of volunteers to create change.

74 Syngenta volunteers (split into 6 cohorts)

1365 youth/community volunteers

31 ICS volunteers

6 international volunteers

3

1 national volunteer Every 6-12 months a cohort of up to 15 Syngenta volunteers are sent to Bangladesh to work on specific and challenging assignments that leverage their business and agronomy expertise. They receive a 4-month preparation programme before the placement. The first two weeks in the country are about learning. They meet lots of different stakeholders and spend 4 days living with host families in the GT communities to get a first-hand experience of the needs, challenges as aspirations of rural Bangladeshi families. The second half of the placement is spent working intensely on their assignments to come up with recommended solutions. They work alongside VSO and RDRS during this time and also make sure that they test ideas directly with farmers as they develop. Between Syngenta placements, VSO, RDRS, and long-term, national, international and community volunteers help to deliver the recommendations before the next Syngenta team arrive. In the first pilot in October 2014, a cohort of Syngenta volunteers spent one month in Mithapukur and Birampur. They were tasked with producing a holistic livelihoods analysis of the challenges faced by smallholder farmers and their communities in the rice, potato and vegetable value chains. Based on this assessment, a programme was developed by VSO and Syngenta that sought to increase farmers’ disposable income by 60% and foster vibrant, resilient and inclusive communities. On this basis, the evaluation will seek to evidence the value of VSO’s core approaches and the volunteering for development approach. The programme aims to demonstrate significant impact across three broad areas by December 2017. These are:

- Positive and sustainable change for 7000 smallholders; o Community development o Training in Good Agronomic Practice (GAP) o Access to markets

- Transformational impact on the leadership capabilities of volunteer participants; and - Drive inclusive business models across Syngenta.

Five subsequent cohorts of up to fifteen Syngenta employees visited Bangladesh to work with 7000 direct farmers (in GT farmer group) and an approx. 3000 indirect farmers by June 2018. The collaboration has co-created a project based on three areas: community development, agronomic training and access to markets. Pivotal to the success of the project has been the constructions of six for-profit farmer centers which provide access to training, machinery, quality inputs, and new financial services. The Farmer Centres also facilitate contracts with national and international buyers. By growing and selling together farmers have improved the quality and quantity of their yields and are able to negotiate better prices for their collective crops.

Project impact 2014-2017

Project Monitoring: The project conducts an annual data collection exercise. The annual data collection enables VSO to monitor the program’s progress via a set of key performance indicators (KPIs). Data collection is generally conducted using a random cluster sampling for 45 clusters in both the project locations. Data is also collected for imitator and comparator group farmers which enables a direct comparison of the program’s impact with communities living nearby where there were no project interventions. Imitator farmers are

4

those who are not included in the project interventions but attend Growing Together community events, such as Farmer Field Days, and adopt good agronomic practices promoted by the project. The data from the farmer surveys are then compared with the following data sources: • Numbers reported in focus group discussions • Numbers reported in key informant interviews. The data collected for 2017 is under review. The achievements till the last Annual report published show promising progress towards achieving the planned KPIs:

50% increase in net income versus 2015 (average US$912 versus US$613) and a tripling of net income versus the 2014 baseline (US$278)

Since the Growing Together project started, 91% of women report an increase in their confidence to use modern farming practices and 32% say they have increased their decision making power and influence within their families

96% of farmers surveyed reported that they were proactively practicing the new farming techniques, including correct and safe use of agro-inputs

65% of project farmers are engaged in national and international contract farming through the Farmer Centre aggregation service.

58% of families in Mithapukur and 38% of families in Birampur have food security throughout the year.

Scale and sustainability Syngenta’s funding investment in Growing Together is intentionally time-bound and will complete June 2018. Each group of Syngenta volunteers has introduced business solutions to make the project scalable and sustainable as well as innovations in thinking about value chains. The third Syngenta group recommended a social franchise model for the Farmer Centers and the two successive groups have worked to make the Farmer Centers viable and develop this concept. Today Growing Together has a business model in which centers are beginning to show a gross profit. Farmer Centers are run by Entrepreneurs and are supported by mobile Agri-Entrepreneurs who take the services up 5km out into the villages to ensure no one is left behind. The project is advancing its ambition to form a social franchise that holds a growing network of Farmer Centers to account through a standard catalog of fee and no fee-based services. Central to the model is the nested value chain concept that encourages interactions and investments in farming communities that benefit the whole market system. A multi-stakeholder collaboration to develop a social franchise The Farmer Centers are still away from a mature and sustainable model so Growing Together has engaged new partners with the expertise to help develop the social franchise model that will eventually take over the project team: transitioning from a funded project to a self-financing social business that is sustainable and scalable. Growing Together is now working in collaboration with Bank Asia who is providing financial services to farmers through the Centers, Berenschot and Accenture Development Partnerships who are supporting the franchise business modeling, G&S communications who are working on the brand development and Grant Thornton who are providing legal advice. JOIKKO, the social franchise: scaling to reach 100,000 smallholder farmers by 2020 In 2017 Growing Together asked farmers what they thought the franchise should be called. Joikko is the name farmers, VSO and Syngenta came up with. In Bangla Joi means to overcome and oikko means unity. Joikko is now registered as a public limited company in Bangladesh. It has a legal structure and plans to raise equity from individuals and institutions. Whilst Syngenta’s funding investment in Growing

5

Together and Joikko comes to an end in June, remote and potentially in-country technical support from Syngenta volunteers and other partners will continue. In February 2018 Growing Together secured £1m funding from DfID as part of their Business Finance for the Poor Challenge Fund. This will enable two years of start-up support to the social-franchise as well as growing the current network of Farmer Centres to twenty and will entail further developing and proving the model. By January 2020 JOIKKO aims to reach 100,000 farming households through the twenty centers.

3. Objectives of Evaluation The primary purpose of this evaluation is to understand the impact and sustainability of the VSO Bangladesh GTP, with an emphasis on the complementary role played by diverse stakeholders (e.g. corporate, international, community volunteers). The evaluation is expected to focus on five key aspects:

1. Understanding the extent to which the programme has resulted in the economic empowerment of farmers (disaggregated by category/crop)

2. Gathering evidence on the gender dimension of the impact and results of the GTP to contribute to the wider gender analysis of the programme and agri-based value chains programming in Bangladesh.

3. Understanding the scale and significance of the changes in communities and for different stakeholders from programmes working with volunteers to strengthen agri-based value chains disaggregated by farmer categories.

4. Establishing the feasibility of scaling and sustaining outcomes through the creation of a social enterprise

5. Strengthening VSO Bangladesh monitoring and evaluation methodology for evidencing the impact and contribution of volunteering.

The findings of the evaluation will be used by VSO Bangladesh and other VSO programmes to improve the quality of agri-based value chain programming across VSO.

4. Evaluation Questions

The main focus of the evaluation is to evidence the long-term sustainable changes for target groups in the GTP. The overarching evaluation questions are:

1. What is the sustainable impact of the GTP beyond the monitored increase in income? Specifically what effect has the increase in income had on social and economic inequalities within the communities concerned, and how much has it translated into increased resilience, food security and wellbeing for marginalized and impoverished people and particularly women versus men? What is the role of young people in this programme?

2. What is the distinctive contribution of volunteering in generating such changes? What are the respective strengths and weaknesses of this contribution, and are there ways in which this contribution could still continue to be improved?

The sub-questions below are informed by the five OECD DAC criteria. These criteria are widely recognized and used to assess development results; and focus on key aspects such as efficiency (accountability), effectiveness (quality), sustainability (likelihood of continuing in the absence of VSO/DFID) and impact. Some of the more specific questions that will guide the evaluation include:

6

Relevance and appropriateness

How relevant and appropriate was the programme design and intervention to the priorities and needs of programme stakeholders including programme partners and primary actors (male and female), different types of volunteers, VSO Bangladesh?

How effectively have the partnerships been implemented, and to what extent have they realized the intended goals for each organization or group? How do these partnerships support the achievement of the overall goals of the programme?

What changes were there in the overall context over the course of the programme, particularly in relation to agri-based value chains? Did this require modification of the programme and, if so, to what extent did the programme adapt to remain relevant and context-specific?

How well did the programme address patterns of social exclusion and poverty in the communities where it intervened?

Effectiveness

What challenges and/or barriers did volunteers, partners and VSO encounter in achieving programme outcomes?

Beyond the pre-determined programme outputs/outcomes, were there any additional outcomes? To what extent did these influence implementation of GTP?

How effective has the model of Farmer Centres been in increasing access to markets, finance, and agricultural products or equipment? Are there any factors which have influenced the successful implementation of these Centres?

Impact

What have been the changes at the community and partner level as a result of the work of the volunteers in the programme? Have the impacts differed for women and men?

To what extent did GTP contribute to outcomes achieved in ABVC activities in the participating communities?

To what extent has GTP shifted social norms and attitudes vis a vis the roles of men and women in agriculture? Have there been any changes around women and men’s roles in society and access to and control over resources?

To what extent has the programme intervention contributed to reducing social and economic inequality between men and women? Has the intervention led to changes in the position of women in society?

In terms of the multidimensional and varying scale of poverty, to what extent has the programme impacted upon the poorest and most marginalized people?

To what extent has the social franchising model been taken up by farmers in the targeted communities? What factors have influenced the level of take-up?

Linking to effectiveness, has the volunteering model and ways through which volunteers worked made any lasting contribution to impact?

Have there been any unintended or unexpected positive or negative impacts on women and men?

How effective has the Bank Asia partnership been in providing farmers with additional options for accessing credit to expand their own agricultural production? Has this partnership produced any unanticipated outcomes? How has VSOB managed these without compromising the outcomes of the programme?

Do the farmers and landless laborers see value in the social franchising model?

7

Sustainability

To what extent did GTP contribute to long-term sustainable change for women and men in communities and partners or programme stakeholders?

To what extent have changes in gender norms and attitudes about the role of men and women in agriculture been sustained over the lifetime of the programme?

How has the social franchising model been taken up at the community level? To what extent has this ensured the sustainability of community development facilities?

To what extent have key outputs remained relevant and adaptable to the needs of partners and communities? (Suggestions for using the willingness to pay methodology and ask partners and communities how willingly they would have been to pay for those outcomes and how much?)

Are there any distinctive contributions of the volunteering model and ways through which volunteers worked that increased the sustainability of positive impacts?

What were the challenges the programme faced in bringing about sustainable change?

5. Approach and Execution of the Evaluation

- The evaluation approach will embed the VSO Evidence principles of Voice and inclusion, contribution, methodologies, and transparency (see Annex A for a full description of the evidence principles). The evaluation will have a strong participatory approach, in which VSO staff, volunteers and staff of the implementing partners and primary actors will be actively engaged. They will have an active role in data collection and analysis.

- Learning: The evaluation also has an explicit learning character. This will require the involvement of all relevant stakeholders in data collection and analysis where appropriate. The evaluation will adopt a gender lens and will use participatory methods that ensure the equal participation of both women and men.

- The evaluation will include a) Collecting data from diverse information sources representing the different

programme stakeholders and target groups. The focus of this data collection will be on changes for women and men in the target groups

b) Interviews and group discussions with primary actors including farmers, traders/processors, government officials, resource persons, community leaders

c) In-depth analysis of this information, including from a gender perspective, so that the underlying processes or causes of change will be sufficiently understood, as well as the extent to which challenges and constraints facing particular groups and their ability to participate in value chain activities, such as poorer households, women, and youth, have been identified and addressed adequately.

d) Formulating the lessons learned and its implications for programme improvement and future monitoring and evaluation practice, particularly in the area of gender and social inclusion.

- Scope and coverage The wider primary actor consultation and field data collection will take place in both Programme locations - Mithapukur and Birampur. The team will visit these locations and engage primary actors according to the detailed fieldwork schedule to be developed and agreed with VSOB.

- Target participants and stakeholders Programme stakeholders will be appropriately mapped at the start of the study and relevant data collection methods and tools designed for their engagement. The stakeholder groups to

8

be involved will include the VSO volunteers, programme staff, partner staff and management, and other relevant programme stakeholders.

Data collection and analysis methods At its inception stage, a thorough document review will be conducted in order to better understand the intervention and the context in which it takes place. Amongst others, the following documents will be reviewed:

Monitoring data

Case studies

Programme reporting framework

TOC/logic model (incl. KPIs)

Programme documents

RDRS’s relevant documents

Volunteers/cohorts reports

Farmers’ center service catalog and report

Syngenta – VSO Annual Programme Report 2014-15

Syngenta – VSO Annual Programme Report 2015 and 2016 The study will collect data from a variety of sources to help boost the quality of the evidence from which conclusions can be drawn. Depending on the stakeholder type, ethical and contextual considerations, interviews, focus groups, and other participatory methods of data collection may be used, both in person and remotely. Disaggregated data (by age, sex and disability and any other variables relevant to the programme) will be collected and analyzed where appropriate. Stakeholders involved in the evaluation will include, but not be limited, to:

Programme staff

Syngenta returning volunteers

Other volunteers –national, youth, community and international

RDRS staff

Private sector partners- Agri-concern, SEBA, ACI, and PRAN

Primary actors- farmers, farmer groups, farmer hub centers, local traders, input suppliers

Government officials-DAE, BARI, BRRI and BADC

Bank Asia staff

6. Evaluation Process, Timelines and Products

1. Planning and design – planning meetings, analysis of existing data, Inception Report confirming approach and methodology and draft data collection tools Outputs: Inception Report with data collection tools 2. Data collection (e.g. interviews with returning volunteers, programme staff, partner as well as document review) preliminary analysis and sharing of emerging findings. Outputs: Primary data collected from relevant stakeholders in programme locations. Emerging findings shared with the Programme team for feedback.

9

3. Analysis of findings and report drafting Outputs: Draft report and presentation of findings to evaluation steering group and Programme team. Feedback received, considered and incorporated into Final Report. 4. Finalization of report Outputs: Final evaluation report including key learnings and recommendations and process of dissemination with relevant stakeholders agreed.

7. Eligibility Criteria

The selected evaluator should have

Experience in evaluating social enterprise models in the context of smallholder farming/agriculture

Understanding and experience in evaluating market systems development programmes

Extensive experience in using qualitative methods

Demonstrated success conducting evaluations in culturally diverse contexts

Understanding the Volunteering for Development Approach

Access to local language researchers to ensure smooth communication with primary actors

8. Evaluation Governance Structure

VSO will use the following mechanisms to guide this evaluation process and provide quality assurance to the evaluation process.

Stakeholder Group Role Role and Responsibilities

Knowledge for Impact Team - Technical input into TOR - Participation in Steering Committee - Review of report

Evaluation Team:

Evaluation design fieldwork data analysis and report writing

- Desk research and field work - Analysis of findings - Draft evaluation report and present

findings - Finalization of Report - Communication of research findings

Steering Committee : Zoe Ives Ashish Veristava Alfred Kuma Michael Drinkwater

Oversight and quality assurance

- Provide feedback on evaluation methods, questions, and tools

- Feedback on learnings and recommendations

- Regular meetings at appropriate points in the process to review progress and shape process

- Share learning for programme improvement

VSO Bangladesh Team and partner organization staff

Facilitation of field visit and preparation of community stakeholders and

- Organize transport, accommodation - Set up meetings and prepare

stakeholders for a field visit - Support with carrying out research

10

Stakeholder Group Role Role and Responsibilities

logistical arrangements

- Share learning on a process with colleagues

9. Proposal Submission Process

Interested parties should submit a proposal and detailed budget (professional fees and estimated

direct costs) to Rebecca Pursell-Gotz on rebecca.pursellgotz@vsoint.org by 08 January 2019. The detailed budget should indicate the person days allocated per person per phase. The proposal should be a maximum of 15 pages and should include the following: 1. Understanding the task 2. Proposed approach and methodologies to be used 3. Possible risks and mitigation strategies 4. Experience of proposed team and organization in undertaking similar evaluations 5. Proposed work plan CV’s of the proposed team should be included as an annex to the proposal. For any clarification related with project and evaluation please contact Md. Mehedi Hasan, Programme Manager-Secure Livelihoods to the following email address: mehedi.hasan@vsoint.org

11

Annex A: Quality Evidence Principles

1. Voice and Inclusion

- the perspectives of the most excluded and marginalized groups are included in the evidence

- we understand the power dynamics – assess power, interest, and influence – levels of interest

and importance in each context

- data collectors are well prepared and suited to capture the voices of all the people affected

by the intervention

- the primary actors and stakeholders play an active role in the assessment process

- the findings are disaggregated according to sex, disability, and other relevant social

differences

- data collected is interpreted through on-going dialogue with primary actors/ stakeholders

2. Contribution

- data is available to show that change has happened

- the explanation of how the intervention contributes to change is explored

- alternative factors (eg. the contribution of other actors) are explored to explain the observed

result alongside an intervention’s contribution

- unintended and unexpected changes (positive or negative) are identified and explained

Our evidence:

- helps us learn from failure

- identifies the limits of the research

- clearly demonstrates what and how we have contributed to change

- illustrates how different approaches to volunteering adds value to change

- illustrates how continuous analysis (assumptions, contributions, context) is built into our

programmes

3. Methodologies

- we ensure that our approaches and designs are ethical and reasonable

- we build in continuous and on-going analysis into the methodology

- we ensure the methods are appropriate and relevant for the purpose

- we test and peer review our methodological approaches

- we document and ensure an ethical approach to evidence collection, analysis, and use

- data is analyzed in a systematic way that leads to convincing conclusions

- the perspectives of different stakeholders are compared and analyzed in establishing if and

how change has occurred

- conflicting findings and divergent perspectives are presented and explained in the analysis

and conclusions

4. Transparency

- we commit to reporting both negatives and positives, intended and unintended outcomes

- we always ask consent, respect confidentiality and decisions

- we commit to always being clear to participants on how and where data will be used

- we state clearly the levels of independence of research

- we commit wherever possible to compare our data with other data sources

- findings and conclusions of the assessment are shared with and validated by, a range of key

stakeholders (e.g. beneficiaries, partners, peers)

12

Annex B: Syngenta Growing Together Programme Background Reading

1. Annual Report 2015-16

2. Datasets

3. Case studies

4. Programme reporting framework

Annex C: Research Tools and Evaluation Framework 1. Interview Guide for Syngenta Volunteers

2. Interview guide for Partner staff

3. Questionnaires for data collection from farmers and KII