Terms of reference

External Project Evaluation

IADK – Empowering youth and women from rural areas to engage in agriculture and food processing.

Organisation: IADK

Place: Kosovo: Vushtrri, Lipjan, Shtimë, Mitrovica South

Evaluation period: approx. 15 days between August and September 2026

Mandated by: Frieda – the Feminist Peace Organisation

1. Background
   1. Information on the mandating organisation: Frieda

The Swiss NGO Frieda (Frieda - the Feminist Peace Organization, www.frieda.org) is a peace and development organisation working towards gender equality, the empowerment of women and participation of women in conflict resolution and peace building efforts. Its regional focus is around the Mediterranean (Southeastern Europe, Maghreb and Middle East).

Frieda’s engagement in Southeastern Europe goes back to 1996 (ex cfd) and remained ever since a key element in the international cooperation program of the organisation. Frieda cooperates with local NGOs, mostly local women’s organisations, human right’s organisations, organisations engaged in inclusive economic development and other NGOs with already defined gender-sensitive approaches or who are interested to further developing their inclusive intervention strategies. Frieda engages in the following sectors: prevention of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV), income generation and social and political inclusion. In Kosovo, Frieda is supporting projects in all three thematic fields.

1. Information on the partner organisation:

Initiative for Agricultural Development in Kosovo IADK is a non-profit, non-governmental organization established in 2004, emerging out of LWF Programme. For 21 years, since its establishment, the organization has implemented above 150 projects, with aim to advance small farmers, women and youth in agriculture. IADK continues to become stronger as by learning and developing along the way, who currently is one of the major players in agriculture development in Kosovo, one of the largest NGO in this sector that provides different agriculture services, closely cooperating with relevant institutions, ministry/policy makers, those that have high valued sector expertise. IADK aims to address particularly the agricultural and rural sector problems by improving the quality and quantity of the agriculture sector, increasing knowledge and competitiveness of farmers and strengthening the role of farmers. Therefore, IADK cooperates closely with farmers in Kosovo and their associations, public and private agricultural advisory specialists, other non-governmental organizations, municipalities and government authorities such as MAFRD. Through the cooperation with Frieda, IADK has accentuated the gender and vulnerability perspective in its work

1. Short description of the project to be evaluated

The project “Empowering youth and women of rural areas to engage in agriculture and food processing” is being implemented from January 2024 until December 2026.

The overall goal of the project is to empower women/men and youth living in rural areas to increase their professional capacities and generate higher income and raise their voice towards public institutions.

Outcome 1: Women/men and youth increase their professional capacities and have access in the labouring market.

Output 1.1: Women/men and youth are capacitated through business skills trainings.

Outcome 2: Women/men and youth are empowered and generate higher income.

Output 2.1: Grant support for women/men and youth for higher family income.

Output 2.2: Create linkages with relevant actors in order to promote the integration of women, men and youth into socio-economic activities.

1. Objectives and scope of the external evaluation:

The general objective of this evaluation is to provide an in-depth reflection on the project’s strategic and operational planning, achievements, successes, challenges, and performance, based on the implementation progress of the current project phase (2024–mid 2026). The evaluation is envisaged to be a formative evaluation that intends to provide a reflection process and in-depth analysis to inform the next programme phase. The evaluation should focus on the following main aspects:

• Assess the extent to which the project interventions have contributed to achieving the overall project goal: The empowerment of women, men, and youth living in rural areas.
• Examine the effectiveness of project strategies and interventions in achieving the defined project outcomes, Namely the professional capacities of the project participants and their access to the labour market, as well as their ability to generate higher income through the project.
• Evaluate the contribution of project results to broader and sustainable outcomes, including shifts in gender norms in the targeted communities and the families of the participants, as well as increased agency and improved livelihoods of the participants.
• Identify key factors that enabled or hindered the project’s contribution to its intended impact and provide evidence-based recommendations to strengthen remaining implementation and future programming.
• Generate actionable lessons on what works in advancing gender-transformative and inclusive rural development approaches.
  1. Specific objectives of the evaluation

The evaluation should assess whether the support provided was sufficient, meaningful, and transformative in enabling participants to achieve sustainable economic and social empowerment. Particular attention should be paid to differences among the participant groups (women, men, youth) as well as to participant’s own perceptions of empowerment and gender equality, agency, confidence, decision-making power, autonomy, and long-term independence.

The evaluation will be based on the OECD/DAC evaluation criteria. As a follow-up to the previous evaluation, it will also assess the extent to which prior recommendations have been implemented, their continued relevance, and any changes in context that may have influenced their applicability, analyse the factors driving eventual changes and identify emerging priorities.

Relevance and Coherence: Is the intervention relevant and coherent to achieve greater gender equality, and economic, social, and civic empowerment of rural women in the targeted communities? What is the added value/comparative advantage of the project compared to similar interventions? To what extent were project interventions responsive to the different needs, vulnerabilities, and realities of different groups of participants (women, men, youth)?

Effectiveness: Assess the extent to which the project has achieved its intended objectives. To what extent is the project design coherent and realistic in relation to its objectives? What changes has the project contributed to at the local level?

• To what extent did the project respond to the actual needs and lived realities of rural women?
• Did women participants perceive the support received as adequate, relevant, and meaningful?
• Which forms of support (trainings, grants, mentoring, networking, follow-up support) were perceived as most transformative?
• What barriers to empowerment remained despite project support?
• Did women feel sufficiently supported throughout the project cycle?

Efficiency: Were the project funds managed effectively? Could the activities and outputs have been delivered with fewer resources without reducing their quality and quantity? Has IADK’s organisational structure, managerial support and coordination mechanisms effectively supported the achievement of the project’s outcomes?

Sustainability: Assess the sustainability of the intervention in achieving rural women’s and youth’ economic, social, and political empowerment.

Key questions for sustainability:

• Are the interventions designed in a way to achieve participants’’s empowerment in the long run?
• Are the interventions designed to achieve greater gender equality in the villages targeted by the project?
• What are the possible partnerships and cooperations needed for IADK to that the project works towards the achievement of long-term objectives?
• To what extent is the project accepted and trusted within the communities?
• Are women likely to maintain and expand their economic activities independently after project completion?
• Did the project create sustainable pathways toward self-reliance and long-term empowerment?
• Were beneficiaries equipped with sufficient capacities, resources, confidence, and networks to continue independently?
• What additional support may still be needed to sustain empowerment outcomes?
  

Impact (road to): Determine the (road to) impact of the intervention with respect to gender equality. What are the intended and unintended, positive and negative, long-term effects of the project?

Long-Term Outcomes achieved with Previous Participants:

This component is included to provide additional insight into the sustainability and longer-term effects of the intervention and does not constitute a full evaluation of previous project phases.

Key questions include:

• Are previous participants still engaged in agriculture or related activities?
• Are skills acquired through earlier support still being applied or further developed?
• Have their income levels or economic activities improved over time?
• What factors contributed to or limited sustainability of results?

The evaluation should capture both intended and unintended changes. The evaluation should assess whether changes experienced by women are likely to be sustained after the project ends.

Cross-Cutting Considerations:

• How are vulnerable groups benefiting from the project and what measures could be taken to make them benefit more?

The design of this component shall show a way to operationalize “empowerment” and may be proposed by the evaluator.

3.2. Conclusions and recommendations

Define what changes/adaptations need to be envisioned in order to address the identified gaps, challenges and obstacles and to improve long-term benefits of the project. Propose measures for and formulate concrete recommendations for the project adaption in the longer run. Recommendations should specifically identify what changes IADK should include in the next phase to strengthen the adequacy, inclusiveness, sustainability, and transformative potential of support provided to women beneficiaries

1. Methodological aspects

The evaluation methodology should include qualitative and participatory approaches that capture women’s lived experiences, perceptions of empowerment, perceived adequacy of support, and changes in household and community dynamics.

Special emphasis should be placed on collecting women participants’ own perspectives regarding whether the intervention meaningfully improved their agency, independence, opportunities, and confidence.

The evaluation should include qualitative methods such as life stories, empowerment narratives, and participatory reflection approaches where feasible.

1. Data collection

The evaluation should apply a feminist and gender-transformative evaluation lens, including quantitative and qualitative data collection to assess the above-mentioned questions.

Desk study – Review of secondary sources (to be edited accordingly):

1. Media reports/articles
2. Statements from the families of participants
3. Market organizers, agriculture businesses (study visits and B2B participants), and customers from the local markets
4. Representatives of local authorities
5. Other projects that have been or are being implemented in similar fields

Review relevant project documentation and data covering the evaluation period (2024–2026):

1. Project documents
2. Social media posts from IADK concerning the project (announcements etc.)
   
3. Focus groups and interviews with participants to gather information around project outcomes
   1. Evaluation Report

The evaluation will cover the project implementation period from 01.01.2024 - 30.06.2026 in project target municipalities: Vushtrri, Lipjan, Shtime, and Mitrovica.

The consultant will propose the methodological approach as a part of his/her offer. Detailed methodology will be finalized in cooperation with IADK and Frieda.

• Submission of draft report in English and executive summary in English and Albanian.
• Realization of feedback session in English for Frieda and IADK
• Preparation of final report in English and an executive summary in English and Albanian, incorporating results from the feedback session
  1. Dissemination of the research results
     

Presentation of final report findings to Frieda, participants and involved stakeholders (see target group) in Albanian.

1. Relevant sources of information

The participants in this evaluation project include:

• Director and project staff members of the partner organisation
• Direct project participants (from all phases, please see above) and their families
• External partners/stakeholders
• Frieda Programme Manager and Local Coordinator.
  

1. Timeframe

A maximum of 15 days in the timeframe of up to 1.5 months starting in August, final report submission latest the end September 2026.

Timeframe needs to include the following steps

• Document review and preparation of inception report, including detailed evaluation scope and methodology
• Presentation of draft inception report and incorporation of feedback from Frieda and IADK
• Data Collection, including secondary sources and qualitative methodologies
• Data Analysis
• Elaboration of draft report with recommendations
• Presentation of draft report to Frieda and IADK for comments, data cross check and suggestions in feedback session
• Incorporation of comments and additional findings into a finalized version of the report
• Official presentation of evaluation findings to Frieda, IADK, and relevant stakeholders

Workplan/Time frame

1. Deliverables
   • Inception report with proposed methodologies, no longer than 5 pages

The output will be an Evaluation Report in English, with summary and recommendations in English and Albanian.

The final evaluation report comprises:

• Draft final report for Frieda’s & IADK’s feedback
• The final report of the assessment will contain an executive summary of not more than 3 pages in English and Albanian language, analysis, findings / lessons learnt, conclusions and recommendations for the next project phase (in English). The report will also incorporate the results of the feedback session. The report should not exceed 20 pages (excluding the annexes in which the questionnaires and instruments developed are included).
  

1. Required Qualification

• University Degree in Social, Gender, Human Rights or Political Science
• Profound knowledge and experience in Kosovo; understanding of the specifics of the current context, its challenges and the dynamics of political, economic, social and technological transition
• Practical experience of advising non-government organisations on designing, implementing and evaluating projects from a feminist perspective
• Proven experience in women’s rights, gender-based violence and discrimination
• Excellent social scientific methodological data collection skills (qualitative and quantitative)
• Excellent writing and analytical skills
• Fluency in English (oral and written) and Albanian required, Serbian is optional
  

1. Roles and Responsibilities

Obligations of Frieda and IADK

Consultant fee: agreed after submission between Frieda and consultant.

1. Local travelling and tentative workshop costs are included in the consultant’s fee.

2. Travel during data collection is assured by IADK

Obligation of Consultant

1. Execute all tasks as agreed in the contract and adhere to proposed methods.

2. Submit the above specified deliverables in time.

3. Organize the data collection and field visit in coordination with IADK and according to availability of participants.

10. Application process

Interested consultants/teams of consultants are asked to provide a written proposal (max. 5 pages) including the proposed methodology, time schedule, financial offer, as well as the CV of the consultant(s) until, 2026, June 10th 2026 by email to: [email protected]

12. Selection criteria

Criteria for the selection of the offer will be:

1) Previous experience of consultant (specifically in gender-responsive evaluation)

2) quality of proposal, including the proposed methodology;

4) proposed timeframe;

5) financial offer