JOB PROFILE

JOB TITLE: Myanmar Education Consortium (MEC) Monitoring and EvaluationConsultant (International)
TEAM/PROGRAMME: Myanmar Education Consortium (MEC) / LOCATION: Yangon
Number of Positions: 1 / Type of Contract: Agreement (20 Nov 2017 – 21 Feb 2018)
CHILD SAFEGUARDING:
Level 2:either the role holder will have access to personal data about children and/or young people as part of their work; or they will be working in a ‘regulated’ position (accountant, barrister, solicitor, legal executive); therefore, a police check will be required (at ‘standard’ level in the UK or equivalent in other countries).
Consultancy Role:
In close collaboration with the MEC team, scope the current context and status of the MEC Strategy and Operational Planning Frameworks, ResultsFramework and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan, lead their revision and strengthening and develop a road map of next steps to ensuretheir effective finalisation and implementation.
Introduction and Background:
The Myanmar Education Consortium (MEC) started in early 2013 as a long-term programme hosted by Save the Children, with support from DFAT (Australia), DFID (UK) and Denmark, with the overall goal of quality education for all children in Myanmar.
The MEC Strategy was finalised in Feb 2016 and sets out a Theory of Change (ToC) for the period 2016-2020, to achieve two goals of1- a. Improved retention, completion and learning outcomes in ethnic and monastic schools and b. Ethnic and monastic schools are able to demonstrate progress towards a level of parity with government schools; and 2-Positive changes in policy and practice to address barriers to education and enable a more coherent, inclusive national education system.
The Strategy included outputs, Intermediate Outcomes (IOs) and End of Programme Outcomes (EPOs) and tentative indicators, which formed the basis for a draft Results Framework.
MEC’s strategy has since evolved into four major programming areas. These are:
1. Intensive, direct ‘systems strengthening’ support to selected major complementary education systems.
So far, MEC has entered into partnership (in mid-2017) with four complementary education partners, namely:
  • Mon National Education Committee-MNEC
  • Karen Education Department-KED and Karen Teachers Working Group-KTWG
  • The Kachin Education Consortium-KEC (consisting of Kachin Independence Organisation Education Department-KIO-ED and four non-government organisations)
  • The Monastic Education Development Group-MEDG.
MEC is also exploring possibilities to further complementary education partners from 2018. Systems strengthening support constitutes the largest investment of MEC’s human and financial resources.
2. ‘Broad-based Capacity Development’ (BBCD): MEC is evolving technical assistance programmes that will enable intensive joined-up support both to our current systems partners and to a broader group of complementary education stakeholders, in key priority areas. It is aimed that the high quality mentoring and support inputs, carefully facilitated by MEC, will also support the development of advocacy capacity, collaboration and an evidence base that will strengthen policy engagement and influence. MEC has drafted a BBCD Strategy. The first major programme will be to ‘teaching/learning in multilingual contexts’.
3. Policy Engagement MEC is also developing a Policy Engagement strategy that will support a multi-pronged and systematic approach, through building relationships with key leaders/ influencers, political economy analysis, tracking and analysis of political and educational trends/ ‘best practice’ (nationally and internationally), coalition-building, developing advocacy capacity of key actors, public education and research.
4. Strategic Facilitation Fund: The Strategic Facilitation Fund provides grants to focused strategic initiatives, research and innovationin MEC’s key priority areas.
MEC’s Current M&E Status and Challenges
Systems Strengthening Partners
MEC’s four new partners have undertaken structured situational analyses, on the basis of which they have developed comprehensive 3.5 year systems strengthening / strategic plans, with goals (end of programme outcomes) linked to MEC’s goals. Partners will implement systems strengthening strategies around 7 ‘Change Areas’ (CA) as follows:
  • Quality: CA1- curriculum/pedagogy; CA2- teacher education and CPD; CA3- school leadership and development.
  • Access: CA4- ECCD, NFE, Youth programmes and other access/retention/transition strategies.
  • Management: CA5- Human and financial resources; CA6-Planning, monitoring and evaluation.
  • Policy and Governance: CA7: Policy/ advocacy/external engagement, system leadership.
The partners have developed results frameworks (in logical framework format) that identify draft measures, indicators and targets for their outcomes and outputs across the change areas and this represents a more systematic, results-focused approach than previous practices.However, there remain considerable challenges in ensuring all partners adopt appropriate and feasible measures, benchmarks and targets for both progress monitoringand impactevaluation and identifying a core set of measures to be adopted consistently across systems to enable some measurement of MEC’s overall reach, progress and impacts.
All of MEC’s partners collect some data and have at least a basic data base, but in general they face challenges in identifying and collecting meaningful and relevant data for specific purposes, using an appropriate mix of quantitative, qualitative outcome and process measures and, most critically, interpreting and analysing data and information to obtain ongoing snapshots of system progress (whether for internal monitoring or external reporting purposes), let alone for using that information to make adjustments in strategies, activities or resource allocation. Whilst all partners have identified strategies to improve their M&E capacity and M&E/ EMIS systems under Change Area 6, these have tended to focus on the hardware aspects of their systems.
There are also some additional constraints and challenges of M&E for complementary education systems. Most have quite fluid catchment areas and spheres of influence, so that some schools are solely within the complementary system but others receive a mix of government and non-government support. This complexity, combined with the paucity of reliable population data makes the use of many usual measures of access and participation both difficult and of limited use/ validity and also creates challenges in identifying attribution of any changes at the school level. Some ethnic armed groups have particular concern regarding sharing certain kinds of strategic information (in particular anything that serves to identify school’s locations). Topographical, climatic and security factors create logistical and practical challenges in collecting data and visiting schools.
MEC
In some ways, MEC’s plans and M&E framework now lag behind those of our partners. MEC’s Strategy and ToChave not yet been revisited or developed in a logical framework format that fully captures the evolving programme areas and the partners’ ‘7-part’ ToCs. In the absence of an integrative logical framework for MEC’s 3-year Strategy (i.e., a Strategic Plan), there have been challenges in achieving a coherentMEC Results Framework and it has not yet been possible for partner results frameworks to be fully ‘nested’. Whilst thisyear’sMEC Operational Plan has been revised to better reflect the structure of MECs Strategy and four key programming areas and partners’ToCs, in the absence of a revised Results Framework it has not yet been possible to identify annual targets and indicators, thus MEC’s reporting has so far been narrative and lacking a clear evidence base or in-depth analysis. MEC’s Steering Committee has now requested that MEC both revises its overall Results Framework and develops its annual operational plan into a logical framework format, incorporating annual targets and progress indicators.
In doing this, to some extent, the MEC team faces similar capacity challenges to its partners. There are different levels of exposure and understanding of M&E concepts, terms and effective approaches. During its first phase, MEC did not achieve a fully coherent results framework and took a completely ‘demand driven’ approach to supporting separate partner-led plans and M&E frameworks. Even whilst MEC became aware that partners’ monitoring was often weak, focused on inputs rather than outputs/outcomes, limited to numerical measures and often based on faulty assumptions; MEC’s approach and mechanisms did not allow for effective intervention to rectify matters. Given these factors, combined with the limited identification of any agreed standardised measures, whilst MEC collected and collated quite a lot of data and information, much of this could not be used to account for progress (or lack of progress), inform programmatic decision making or give convincing evidence of any attribution- or even in some cases contribution- ofMEC. MEC’s progress so far in developing a stronger ToC-based approach with partners and the possibilities (of MEC resourcing) to expand and/or further capacitate the MEC team, provide the opportunity to meet the imperative of a much stronger and more strategic M&E framework and approach to meet our strategic goals and objectives.
Purpose of Consultancy
Based on the current situation and priorities, the key purpose of the consultancy is: to scope the current context and status of the MEC Strategy and Operational Planning Frameworks, Results Framework and Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan, lead their revision and strengthening and develop a road map of next steps to ensure their effective finalisation and implementation.
Key Objectives and Tasks
1. Obtain a Clear Understanding of MEC’s Strategy, Context and Needs
  • Gain an in-depth understanding of the MEC strategy/ programs, objectives, scope andfamiliarise with MEC team members, structure and ways of working.
  • Gain an understanding of what is required from the Results Framework and M&E plan, to serve the needs of the program, MEC’s accountability commitments and for MEC and partner users.
  • Gain an overview of the development and content of MEC current partners’ strategic and operational plans and results frameworks.
  • Gain an overview of MEC’s current approaches tooperational monitoring and reporting.
  • Make an initial assessment of partners’ education M&E systems including the kinds of current data and information that they collect, for what purposes.
Deliverable 1: Brief Inception Note on key initial findings and issues, along with a Workplan for the consultancy. Due 8 working days into the consultancy assignment.
2. Lead and Facilitate an Elaboration of MEC’s Strategic and Operational Plan Frameworks
  • Further clarify the outcome, outputs and key activities of the MEC strategy and ToC and elaborate MEC’s 3-year Strategic Plan Logical Framework, to align with the overall goal and purpose and support synergy with the strategic plans and ToC of MEC partners and the developing plans for Broad Based Capacity Development, Policy Engagement and Strategic Facilitation Fund, as well as MEC internal/organisational and professional development strategies.
  • Work with MEC to revise this year’s operational plan framework to mirror the elaborated MEC Strategic Plan Framework
Deliverable 2: Draft of MEC Strategic Plan (in logical framework format).
Deliverable 3: Draft of MEC Operational Plan (in logical framework format).
Due15 working days into the consultancy assignment.
(It is noted that, once elaborated, the strategies and activities defined in the M&E Plan (deliverable 6) should also be integrated into the subsequent versions of the M&E Strategic Plan and Operational Plan)
3. Lead a Process forConsultation on-and then Development/ Revision of-MEC’s 3-Year Results Framework, MEC’s 1-Year Operational Plan Results Framework and the MEC Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan
  • Based on the findings of the initial scoping, undertake structured meetings and design activities to facilitate the effective development of the MEC Results Framework, a (consequent) 1-Year Operational Plan Results Framework and the MEC M&E Plan.
  • At this point, some of the issues and options raised in the scoping should be further explored, including:
  • Possible options for surveying on a sample basis to enable more in-depth and attributable information at the school and teacher levels.
  • Options and approaches to monitoring MEC’s influence and impact on the policy and governance environments for complementary education
The MEC Results Framework should:
  • Bein line with the elaborated MEC strategic plan framework
  • Be relevant, realistic and feasible in the context of MEC goals and objectives and the context
  • Include all the data, information and measures required in order to:
  • (a) MonitorMEC’s and partners’ programme inputs, activities and outputs to determine whether they are on track to achieve the intended results (effectively leading towards quality improvements and education systems development) and to track relevance, beneficiary perspectives), resource allocation and efficiency of program interventions.
  • (b) Evaluate programme impact and the achievement of IOs and EPOs. whist excluding irrelevant or unfeasible measures.
  • Clearly identify what will be the sources of the above information
  • Include all indicators, milestones and targets-as well as any other information- that must be reported against for progress review by MEC’s Steering Committee
The 1-Year Operational Plan Results Framework should:
  • Incorporate the relevant targets and milestones of the 3-year Results Framework into this years’ MEC Annual Operating Plan, so that the two documents are clearly and consistently linked.
The Draft MEC M&E plan should:
  • Accompany and elaborate the Results Framework
  • Provide a clear explanation and justification ofwhatMEC will:
  • (a) Monitor,to determine whether MEC and partners are on track to achieve the intended results and to track the relevance, resource allocation and efficiency of program interventions.
  • (b) Evaluate, to estimate programme impact and the achievement of desired outcomes.
  • Outlinehow, when and wherebaseline and subsequent monitoring will take place.
  • If some indicators are to be monitoring on a sample survey basis, clearly set out rationale/ methodology for sample selection (e.g. of schools, teachers).
  • Identify a process and timeline for Joint Annual Review of partner progress with MEC and MEC’s donors.
  • Identify roles and responsibilitiesof the M&E team and across MEC (including for any recommended additional or adapted roles/positions)
  • Outline a programme ofrelevant capacity development activities for MEC staff and partners to fulfil their respective M&E-related roles
  • Specify how MEC partners will report to MEC against their results frameworks and how MEC will report to MEC Steering Committee (donors) against the MEC Results Framework.
Deliverable 4: Draft of MEC’s 3-Year Results Framework
Deliverable 5: Draft of MEC’s 1-Year Operational Plan Results Framework
Deliverable 6: Draft of MEC’sMonitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan
Due 27 working days into the consultancy assignment as Annexes to the Draft Report (Deliverable 7)
4.Prepare a clear, concise Reportas Deliverable 7
  • Prepare aDraft Report, to be circulated for comments and feedback
  • Prepare a Final Report on the basis of comments and feedback (to be sent within two weeks of receipt of report)
The Main Body of the Report should include:
  • A summary of scoping findings, considerations, issues etc.
  • A description of the main revision issues/ features/remaining gaps of the (annexed) 3-year Strategic Plan Logical Framework for MEC; Revised MEC Operational Plan Logical Framework; Revised 3-year MEC Results Framework and MEC M&E Plan Outline.
  • List recommendations of next steps to finalise the frameworks and M&E plan and to MEC capacity development and resourcing to implement the M&E plan.
Annexed to the report should be the following:
Draft of MEC Strategic Plan (Deliverable 2, with further revisions)
Draft of MEC Operational Plan (Deliverable 3, with further revisions)
Draft of MEC’s 3-Year Results Framework (Deliverable 4)
Draft of MEC’s 1-Year Operational Plan Results Framework(Deliverable 5)
Draft of MEC’s Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan (Deliverable 6)
Draft Report due 30 working days into the consultancy
Final Report due within two weeks of receipt of feedback (up to 5 working days, to be negotiated).
Summary of Deliverables
  • Deliverable 1: Brief Inception Note on key initial findings and issues, along with a Workplan for the consultancy. Due 8 working days into the consultancy assignment.
  • Deliverable 2: Draft of MEC Strategic Plan (in logical framework format).
  • Deliverable 3: Draft of MEC Operational Plan (in logical framework format).
  • Deliverable 4: Draft of MEC’s 3-Year Results Framework
  • Deliverable 5: Draft of MEC’s 1-Year Operational Plan Results Framework
  • Deliverable 6: Draft of MEC’s Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Plan
  • Deliverable 7: Report
Timing and Duration:
The input is designed for up to working 35 days in total, to include:
  • Up to 4 days travel for up to 2 trips to and from home base
  • Up to 3 days preparatory reading of key documents from home base
  • Up to 23 days in Yangon to undertaking scoping, analysis and drafting of report including required annexes
  • Up to five further days for report finalisation or further inputs as negotiated
Ideally, the consultant willbe contracted by 20th November 2017 and should have completed all inputs by 21st February2018, making one visit to Yangon before the Christmas break.
SCOPE OF ROLE:
Reports to:
  • The Programme Partnerships (PP) Director on a day-to-day basis
  • The MEC Senior Management Team (SMT), under the oversight of the MEC Director– at regular intervals
Travel: To be confirmed. There might be the opportunity to make a brief visit to one or more MEC partners to gain more direct understanding of partners’ contexts, needs and systems.
Person Specifications:
Essential
  • Ability to quickly grasp and process complex information
  • Significant and varied expertise in planning, monitoring and evaluation of education programmes, including strong understanding of a Theory of Change/ programme logic approach
  • Strong and varied experience of support the development of results frameworks for complex education programmes, ideally including frameworks that involve multiple partners
  • Experience in identifying and using a range of M&E tools and approaches to support quantitative and qualitative outcome and process change measures, including measures of access and participation, quality and learning and education management
  • Ability to bring ideas regarding effective progress and impact monitoring of MEC’s and partners’ influence on the wider policy and institutional contexts for complementary education
Desirable
  • Excellent conceptual, analytical and writing skills
  • Relevant post graduate qualification
  • Ability and willingness to work collaboratively and with sensitivity, to address existing weaknesses and advise on future capacity development measures
  • Prior experience supporting education in Myanmar, or a comparable contextin Asia.

Feesand expenses
  • Proposed daily fee rate on the basis of past proven enumeration. The fee rate should include be sufficient to cover food, travel within Yangon and incidental expenses (no separate per diem will be paid).
  • The selected candidate is required to provide his/her own laptop
SCI/MEC will cover:
  • Direct booking of up to two economy return flights between home base and Yangon
  • Cost of appropriate accommodation in Yangon for the duration of the in-country work, in liaison with the consultant. This will include a reasonable space and desk for hotel-based working.
  • Refund of costs of visa and reasonable costs of travel to and from airport in home country and Yangon.
  • MEC will either refund or cover directly the costs of travel and accommodation for approved fieldwork.

Application Process
Please send CV as well as a cover letter,of maximum two pages, summarising your understanding of the ToR, outlining how your experience relates to the required outputs and how you meet the person specifications.
SCI values are indicated below and we expect all candidates to align with such values.
  • Accountability
  • Ambition
  • Collaboration
  • Creativity
  • Integrity

For Contract (Not to be mentioned in Vacancy Announcement)
  1. 1. Duration35 days
  2. Facilities to be provided by Save the Children/ MEC
  • Direct booking of up to2x economy return flights between home base and Yangon- through Diversity Travel
  • SC will cover the cost of appropriate accommodation in Yangon for the duration of the in-country work, in liaison with the consultant.
  • Refund of costs of visa and reasonable costs of travel to and from airport in home country and Yangon.
  • MEC will either directly cover or reimburse on receipt the costs of domestic travel, accommodation and food/meals for agreed fieldwork (outside of Yangon)
  • MEC will provide adequate office space as far as possible as well as ensure a hotel room that has adequate desk and working environment.
  1. Payment Breakdown
Monthly for days worked against timesheet, brief progress report and attachment of relevant deliverables for the payment period.
Equal Opportunities
The role holder is required to carry out the duties in accordance with the SCI Equal Opportunities and Diversity policies and procedures.
Child Safeguarding:
We need to keep children safe so our selection process, which includes rigorous background checks, reflects our commitment to the protection of children from abuse.
Health and Safety
The role holder is required to carry out the duties in accordance with SCI Health and Safety policies and procedures.
JD written by: / Date:
JD agreed by: / Date:
Updated By: / Date:
Evaluated: / Date:

1