Consultant – Mid Term Evaluation for the Resilience in Pastoral Areas Activity in the Lowlands of Ethiopia – Somali, Afar, Oromia Regions Consultancy

Background:

Mercy Corps is a leading global organization powered by the belief that a better world is possible. In disaster, in hardship, in more than 40 countries around the world, we partner to put bold solutions into action — helping people triumph over adversity and build stronger communities from within.

Historically, livestock acts as the main economic driver, employer and source of wealth in the lowlands of Ethiopia and is also a determinant of social status. Despite 51% of households engaged in livestock as their sole source of income, productivity remains below potential and is highly susceptible to shocks and stresses. Approximately 50% of households are engaged in agro-pastoralism, primarily in the greenbelts, including Fafan Zone (Somali) and Zone 3 (Afar).

Increased production and productivity of livestock and agriculture sectors, along with diversified livelihoods and inclusive and efficient markets, has the ability to improve and stabilize household income, leading to increased purchasing power. Appropriate financial services across value chains can stabilize and manage cash flow to meet immediate purchasing needs, thus making markets more reliable for consumers and sellers alike. However, MFIs generally have limited risk appetite and restrictive collateral requirements, compounded by MFIs lacking a clear business case to expand into rural areas, limits pastoralists’ ability to shift from “head accounts” (family wealth stored in the form of livestock) to cash-based savings (with sale of animals in favor of commercially focused livestock-based livelihoods. Beyond finance, constraints on market availability of inputs, including improved seeds, veterinary services and inputs, and feed/fodder, along with high transaction costs to access these, reduces overall production and productivity of the livestock and agricultural markets.

Push and pull factors have generated a steady flow of (primarily young) men and women transitioning out of pastoralism (ToPs) and actively seeking alternative livelihoods. Peri-urban and urban areas offer improved services and infrastructure compared to the more rural areas and are perceived to have lucrative livelihood opportunities and offer a better life for rural individuals, which act as strong pull factors. Migration to areas such as Jijiga and Addis Ababa is increasingly common. Yet, despite an eagerness for doing so, male and female youth ToPs lack clear pathways to self-employment or employment. Many face multiple structural barriers including inadequate skills and knowledge (including language skills), capital, information, social and market connections, and social norms and ethnic divisions. Individuals, especially females, when faced with such barriers become vulnerable and are at risk of unsafe situations.

Shocks and stresses are a frequent occurrence in the lowlands of Ethiopia. Environmental shocks, including drought, flooding and pest/disease outbreaks, alongside conflict, often undermine the small gains made at household, markets and governance level. Recent droughts have ravaged the region, resulting in widespread livestock loss and income drops. Lack of health inclusive DRR plans and weak information sharing, in addition to poor nutrition, sanitation and hygiene practices, undermine resilience to health shocks.

The Resilience in Pastoral Areas (RIPA-North) Activity (hereafter referred to as ‘RIPA’) is a five-year $31 million initiative funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), being implemented by Mercy Corps in a consortium with CARE International and four local NGO partners between February 2020 and February 2022. The goal of RIPA is to improve the resilience of households, markets and governance institutions across the Somali, Oromia and Afar regions, collectively contributing to enhanced food security and inclusive economic growth for over 129,000 households. This will be achieved through a multi-sectoral approach working through the following four components:

• Component 1: Improved Disaster Risk Management Systems and Capacity
• Component 2: Diversified and Sustainable Economic Opportunities for People Transitioning out of Pastoralism (ToPs) particularly youth and women
• Component 3: Intensified and Sustained Pastoral and Agro-Pastoral Production and Marketing
• Component 4: Improved and Sustained Nutrition and Hygiene Practices

RIPA is being implemented using a market systems development approach, aiming to stimulate sustainable, systemic change at scale. Components 1 and 4 are seeking to create system change in the way that government delivers DRM and Nutrition services, respectively, primarily involving partnerships with formal and informal governance institutions. Components 2 and 3 are seeking to create system change in economic sectors and these primarily involve partnerships with private sector actors, though also with government and quasi-government agencies providing supporting functions and influencing the rules and norms.

RIPA also has a built-in Crisis Modifier, initially for a value of $7.1 million. This is intended to allow the RIPA team to pivot and respond to crises such as conflict and drought using approaches that foster, not undermine, nascent markets and systems. Despite multiple crises in the country, in particular the COVID-19 pandemic, RIPA was not able to activate the Crisis Modifier until March 2022. Between March and September 2022 RIPA implemented a $1.5 million response to the drought in Somali and Oromia regions, and in October began implementation of a second $9.66 million Crisis Modifier (CM2) in all three target regions.

RIPA has two cross-cutting themes: i) Conflict sensitivity and social cohesion; and ii) Gender and Social Inclusion.

Purpose / Project Description:

The scope of the mid-term evaluation is to evaluate progress and effectiveness of activities implemented by RIPA under Components 2 and 3 towards achievement of the set goals and objectives since inception (February 2020) to date. The review will assess the overall approach, successes and learning of RIPA in its progress towards meeting RIPA’s outcomes and impact and provide insight on RIPA’s relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, performance, and progress towards meeting results against targets that would help to review RIPA results framework and theory of change (design). Considering the implementation status of RIPA and the resource disbursements made to date, the evaluation will also seek to assess RIPA’s Return on Investments dimension. This process will involve a review of RIPA’s results and achievement to date, relevance of the program and logframe indicators that would determine how the program progresses towards achieving its set results, as well as implementation strategies towards improved efficiency and effectiveness as well-informed decision making within the remaining period of RIPA implementation.

The midterm evaluation will contribute to the following general objectives:

1. Enable RIPA, its partners, and beneficiaries to assess and improve the efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, and anticipated outcomes and impact of the program.
2. Provide feedback to the RIPA team and other relevant stakeholders to improve the planning, program formulation, appraisal, and effective implementation of the program in the remaining period of program implementation,
3. Ensure accountability for results to the program actors (donors) stakeholders and participants.
4. Generate insights and lessons that can be leveraged towards enhanced performance of the project during implementation and sustainability of project outcomes after implementation.

RIPA established the first private sector partnerships in December 2021, significantly later than anticipated due to disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The evaluation will therefore review interventions that are in various stages of implementation progress.

Under Component 2, the interventions are: i) Digital psychosocial and pathway support for youth TOPs; ii) Short-course technical skills training; iii) MicroMentor – peer-to-peer mentoring; iv) Local BDS service provision; v) Last-mile retail of solar energy products; vi) Last-mile retail of fast-moving consumables and socially beneficial goods; vii) Business start-up competitions and training; viii) Investment forums, trade fairs and job fairs; ix) Transforming digital financial services; x) VSLAs and digital linkages to financial services.

Under Component 3, the interventions are: i) 8028 agriculture extension hotline in Somali Region; ii) Lersha digital platform for integrated services; iii) Last-mile private sector animal health services; iv) Last-mile agri-input services; v) Commercial fodder production and marketing; vi) Concentrated feed processing and last-mile retail; vii) Vertically integrated livestock supply chains; viii) Inclusive and effective dairy market systems; ix) Private sector water services on livestock trading routes; x) Public-private partnerships for livestock marketplace management; xi) Agri-processing and embedded services for farmers; xii) Community ownership of participatory rangeland management.

The final list of interventions to review will be decided in consultant with the RIPA team and may not include all of the above.

Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation will be undertaken in accordance with the RIPA Monitoring and Results Measurement strategy and guidelines with the support of an independent consultant(s). The evaluation process be consultative to deploy a qualitative participatory approach that engages a range of program stakeholders who will include direct participants (primarily livestock producers, farmers and youth), institutional partners (private sector and government), RIPA staff and other stakeholders including USAID.

The evaluation team will review RIPA’s documents, conduct key in-depth interviews with RIPA’s implementation team, facilitate relevant key informant interviews, and focus group discussions with program participants to understand programme achievements and outcomes to date that can further be explored to generate the required insight and learning and their potential use for resilience and development programming activities and strategies. No primary quantitative data collection will be required, but the evaluation team is expected to review available secondary data from RIPA program records, including institutional performance tracking information and the annual household survey.

The consultant will be responsible for developing the final detailed evaluation methodology in consultation with the RIPA team will be refined to include a detailed stakeholder’s evaluation matrix with a clear evaluation design aligned to the proposed evaluation dimension and evaluation questions.

Evaluation findings Primary users

The primary intended users and uses of the evaluation’s findings will include.

1. USAID as the main funder – We hope that the evaluation findings will be used to decide if and how to further support similar economic recovery and resilience programmes in lowlands of Ethiopia.
2. Mercy Corps Ethiopia and its Partners – We hope that the evaluation findings will be relevant to guide review of the programme achievement and sustainability plans, refine key programme intervention strategies for the remaining course of the implementation period, inform the Year 5 annual planning priorities, and help develop relationships with funders.
3. Implementing partners and the broader international not-for-profit organizations – for implementing partners and not for profit organizations implementing such programmes in the lowlands of Ethiopia, we hope that the findings will be useful to assess their role in designing and implementing similar programmes.

In addition, we hope that the evaluation findings will not only be critical to meet the above highlighted purpose, but also serve as a learning experience, where the process of generating answers to the proposed evaluation questions will provide RIPA and the implementation team with new understanding of RIPA’s achievements and inform an effective implementation strategy for the remaining period of implementation.

This mid-term evaluation is not anticipated to be a MEL type audit – regular data is already being collected against the indicators in the MEL plan. The evaluation would require the external expert to provide constructive qualitative assessment of the evolution of the program, and not as a final assessment.

Proposed Evaluation Questions

The evaluation questions proposed for the midterm review are illustrative and informed by RIPA evaluation design, Theory of Change, and Logical Framework as well as the evaluation minimum standards. At inception, the evaluation team together with Activity implementation team is expected to refine and expand on the following proposed questions that focuses on the five key themes:

1. Technical approaches of interventions under Component 2 and Component 3 (including Crisis Modifier interventions under these components), including the strengths / weaknesses of these approaches and recommendations for improvements.
2. Cross-cutting themes (conflict-sensitivity and gender) and the strengths / weaknesses of how RIPA has integrated these into the program.
3. RIPA’s MEL systems and the degree to which these are enabling effective MSD programming and data-driven decision-making.
4. RIPA’s team structures and management practices and the degree to which these are fostering empowered and high-performing MSD teams.

Scope of the Review

The review will assess the overall approach, successes and learning of RIPA in its progress towards meeting RIPA’s outcomes and impact. All data collected for typical MEL monitoring activities will be available for potential use in answering the following questions, but we will expect the consultant to propose where additional data collection is necessary in order to answer the determined questions. The Review will focus on the following (not all of the below questions will be answered as part of this work – which questions we answer will be decided upon in partnership and discussion with the chosen consultant):

• Intervention Design:

1. What are the strengths and challenges of the overall design and implementation so far? What factors have promoted or impeded operations?
2. Are the assumptions that underpin RIPA’s theory of change robust? Are the Theory of Change assumptions still valid, relevant, and appropriate? Are Theory of Change assumptions accounted for in intervention models?
3. To what extent has the program delivered on its approved workplans? Has the program delivered any additional outcomes outside of the original design?
4. Is RIPA’s approach to market systems development and market systems resilience relevant to the context?
5. In each technical sector, what are the strengths of, and challenges encountered in the interventions’ implementation? What do the technical sectors need to change? How sustainable/scalable are the different models so far implemented by teams? What’s the willingness of the pastoral population to pay for services/inputs?
6. How closely do implementation processes adhere to the underlying principles and conceptual approaches of RIPA? What factors in the implementation and context are associated with greater or lesser efficiency and quality?
7. What benefits or challenges are seen in layering multiple interventions (keeping in mind the crisis modifier) that target the same sets of participants? How does the implementation of layering in practice align with RIPA’s strategy?
8. Is RIPA design and approach fit for purpose? Are there complexities which create challenges for management that need to be reviewed?

• Activity Management

1. How does RIPA’s management system contribute in a positive and/or negative manner to the program’s efficiency and effectiveness in achieving outcomes, via just-in-time expertise sourcing, personnel management, and contracting structures? To what extent do Mercy Corps’ staffing structure, grant management, or procurement practices positively or negatively affect program implementation and spending?

• Implementation: Assess progress towards implementation of the principles of a flexible and adaptive Activity

1. Does RIPA recognize uncertainty, and adopts a deliberately experimental approach, testing viable solutions, with rapid feedback loops to identify where progress can be made, and flexibility to adjust strategy accordingly?
2. Is RIPA focusing on solving local problems that are debated, defined, and refined by local actors in an ongoing process?
3. Is RIPA building ownership and momentum among key stakeholders (private sector partners, participants, and government) throughout the process?
4. Is RIPA’s adapted work planning approach more appropriate than its original approach given the expected outcomes?

• Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning: Assess the effectiveness and use of RIPA’s CLA/M&E System:

1. Are there challenges faced in receiving information and data from market facilitators (private sector partners)/market actors participating in RIPA? How have these been addressed?
2. To what extent has the program’s evidence-based learning been used to modify/adapt existing approaches and strategies and/or develop new ones?
3. How is information shared with participants and other key stakeholders? How have other stakeholders been influenced by RIPA’s data, research, or reporting?
4. Are RIPA’s CLA/M&E systems fit for purpose? Is the Results Framework sufficient for monitoring and evaluating RIPA’s activities? Are there elements of complexity in the program design which are not sufficiently captured?

• Engagement, Partnership and Communication: Assess the degree and benefits of effective coordination, collaboration, and convergence with external organizations that are critical to achieve project goals and purposes. This includes actors that provide complementary services necessary to achieve the project outcomes, actors that will provide essential services to sustain the outcomes, actors that influence people’s access to goods and services, and organizations that promote or impede an “enabling environment.” Illustrative questions under this objective may include:

1. How has RIPA’s engagement with key stakeholders (including states actors, other FTF Activities, non-state actors) progressed in the period under review? What have been key successes or challenges? Which actors or stakeholders have been most influential (positively or negatively) on RIPA’s ability to implement effectively?

• Sustainability: Assess early evidence of sustainability and scale produced by RIPA, thereby determining the extent to which outcomes, systems, and services are designed and being implemented to continue after the project ends. Illustrative questions include:

1. Has RIPA identified in its sustainability strategy which project outcomes (services, goods, or structures) are necessary for sustainable project impact?
2. Has RIPA identified assumptions detailing how positive results will be sustained after the project ends, including?
   1. Which partners or institutions are expected to sustain project outcomes and how? Which resources, capacities, motivations, and linkages will they be equipped with to sustain project outcomes?
   2. How is RIPA contributing to those resources, capacities, motivations, and linkages?

Required Sources of Information

For each evaluation question, the evaluators are expected to define the information required, sources of information, procedure for collecting data and ensuring its validity and credibility, and the method of analysis (Data Analysis Plan), interpretation, and synthesis. This will be an iterative process between the evaluation team and the programme teams at the inception stage. This process will also anchor the review of the original evaluation questions in the SoW to refine and finalize the learning evaluation questions. In addition, the recommended sources of information, the RIPA implementation team will provide the programme’s logframe and work plans to enable extraction of further learning questions for in-depth analysis.

Consultant Activities:

The Consultant will:

Successful consultant will work closely with RIPA CLA Team Lead, Chief of Party, Component 2 Team Lead and Component 3 Team Lead to design and conduct this mixed-methods evaluation and post-evaluation workshop deliverables.

The consultant will be expected to:

1. Attend initial kick off meeting.
2. Review program updated work plans and quarterly/semi-annual/annual reports.
3. Review and use the program’s up to date IPTT and other data including:
   1. Institutional Performance Tracking System (IPTS) data
   2. Recurrent Monitoring Survey (RMS) and annual participant survey data
   3. Post Distribution Monitoring (PDM) data
4. Gathering some contextual data to validate some of the critical assumptions surrounding market functioning.
5. Review other key program documents (e.g., gender analysis, formative studies conducted for the program, etc.)
6. Review any data/information used to monitor the quality of the program’s key services/interventions (including but not limited to CARM data)
7. Prepare an inception report* including the evaluation design, a draft data analysis plan (DAP) appropriate for the qualitative methods study (i.e., analysis using qualitative data), sample design(s) and size(s), a practical method to assess the quality of the program’s key services/interventions, a revised and final timeline for conducting the MTE (one round of revisions to inception report and DAP anticipated).
8. Prepare and present a 1-day remote workshop to present the evaluation plan to key staff.
9. Develop evaluation instruments (one round of revisions anticipated)
   1. Translated into local languages (Somali, Afar and Oromia) as appropriate (Mercy Corps will manage translations, if needed)
   2. Including finalizing and testing of these tools as appropriate
10. Develop a final Data Analysis Plan (DAP)
11. Conduct secondary analysis of data.
12. Training of FGD/KII facilitators & note takers (and enumerators if applicable) (Mercy Corps will be responsible for hiring all facilitators, note takers, and enumerators)
13. Conduct and analyze key informant interviews (KII) and focus group discussions (FGD) and manage that new qualitative data.
14. Collect and oversee data collection in addition to the above as applicable.
15. Conduct direct observations of interventions (if applicable)
16. Encode and analyze data.
17. Prepare and present a 2-day preliminary results analysis workshop (In-country)
18. Prepare and present a 1-day presentation of results to USAID (remote)
19. Draft report (3 drafts total anticipated), based on the following rounds of feedback:
    1. Feedback from RIPA (2 rounds of feedback anticipated; one general round with RIPA technical teams & a second round with leadership group – i.e. COP/DCOP, Team Lead, CLA Lead)
    2. Feedback from USAID
20. Edit and finalize report (Not more than 25 pages – excluding tables and annexes)

The Team Leader’s roles include to:

• organize and lead the overall evaluation.
• assure a thorough review and analysis of available secondary data by the appropriate team member(s).
• lead the selection of a purposely selected sample of activity sites and outputs for primary data collection and assure adequate triangulation and validation of findings.
• lead the collection and analysis of primary and secondary data to evaluate the program’s MRM processes and the integration of program sectors and activities.
• assure that 1) final report presentation is logical and presented in a way that clearly separates findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and 2) all findings, conclusions and recommendations are based on evidence presented in the report.
• to liaise, on the part of the evaluation team, with the awardee and USAID.

The Technical Specialists would be responsible to:

• lead the collection and analyses of primary and secondary technical data related to his/her field(s) of expertise and form recommendations.
• consider all general aspects of the implementation of all activities related to his/her sector, i.e., resource management, staffing, linkages/partnerships, branding, community involvement, cultural acceptability, gender, exit/sustainability measures, environmental protection, adherence to schedules, and integration with other sectors.

Note: Mercy Corps will hire a team of local researchers with strong background and experience in qualitative interviewers and field note documentation to work closely with the consultant. Mercy Corps will manage all in-country logistics during evaluation.

Consultant Deliverables:

The Consultant will provide the following during their contract:

1. An evaluation plan, including:
   1. Mixed-methods evaluation design, methodologies used and sampling design/criteria, frame, size(s) for the qualitative data collection
   2. the Data Analysis Plan (DAP) for the mixed methods study
   3. Suggested improvements to the evaluation scope
   4. Revised evaluation timeline
   5. Ethical considerations
2. All additional documentation requested for USAID approval
3. 1-day workshop to present the evaluation plan to key staff (remote)
4. Training of facilitators, interviewers and/or enumerators (in-country)
5. 2-day preliminary results analysis workshop (in-country)
6. 1-day presentation of results to USAID (remote)
7. Draft Evaluation Report (3 drafts anticipated)
8. Final Evaluation Report (to include sections listed below & not more than 25 pages excluding annexes)
9. All Data sets, code books, syntax, etc
10. 1-2 day presentation of key findings and recommendations for RIPA staff (remote)

Timeframe / Schedule:

RIPA Chief of Party and the CLA Team Lead will manage the evaluation process in coordination with the evaluation team (external consultant) to provide technical support in the refinement of the evaluation methodology and – in the case of data collection tools, inputs, and all supporting documents – to guide design and finalization of the evaluation methodology and data collection instruments.

The Consultancy will run for approximately 35 days between May 2023 and end of June 2023. Applicants should propose edits where needed to the timelines estimated below. Activities are outlined below:

• Entry and Inception – Review the evaluation SOW with the External Evaluators to clarify timeframe, assignment objectives and deliverables aligned to budget. Agree on evaluation tools, time schedules, and delivery period for data collection activities.
• Undertake desk review of the relevant Activity documents that include the proposal, workplan narrative, implementation plans, revised program design and timelines, program implementation reports, implementation strategy documents, research study reports, PDM reports, assessment reports, and any other relevant documents.
• Develop an inception report detailing the process and methodologies to be deployed to answer the evaluation questions. This should include all evaluation tools and crucial time schedules for this exercise and be presented to Activity Implementation team for review and further inputs before going to the field.
• Provide feedback to inception report and tools for External Evaluator to incorporate (feedback will be consolidated from all reviewers before returning to External Evaluator)
• With input from RIPA’s technical team and CLA team, refine data collection tools and translate them in local languages as appropriate
• Provide final versions of inception report and data collection tools to Mercy Corps
• Consultant submits complete draft of the DATA ANALYSIS PLAN (DAP) to Mercy Corps’ POC description of how data triangulation/synthesis will be conducted, how qualitative data will be analyzed, etc.)
• Mercy Corps’ POC distributes DAP complete draft to ALL Mercy Corps reviewers (and donor reviewers if, required) and consolidates feedback returning this to consultant
• Consultant submits FINAL DAP to Mercy Corps’ POC having addressed all feedback
• Train qualitative research assistants & pre-test data collection instruments
• Finalize and test data collection instruments / tools
• Conduct and oversee data collection
• Encode and analyze data
• Prepare a draft evaluation report and learning summary
• Provide detailed feedback to draft report
• Finalize report, produce a presentation of findings, and share back with MC (max. 25 pages– all other additions can be included as annexes)
• After donor review of report, incorporate any feedback from donor for final donor reviewed version.
• Qualitative field notes, code books, syntax, etc. are delivered to Mercy Corps’ POC

The evaluation team (consultant) is expected to deliver a comprehensive, professional quality final assessment report. The assessment report should be soft copy (PDF and Word – submitted electronically) along with the analysis plan and the qualitative field notes.

Timeframe & Payment Schedule:

It is expected that evaluators/consultants will be available to start on roughly 1st of May 2023, with an initial meeting with RIPA Implementation team. The consultants will then work through 30th June 2023, where the final evaluation report (refined to include donor’s feedback) is to be shared. Note that Mercy Corps will only pay consultants for days worked.

The final invoice for services provided by the consultant should be provided to Mercy Corps immediately after the delivery of the final evaluation after 30th of June 2023. The following are the key deliverables aligned to the deadlines and payment schedule:

• Engagement and signing of contract – April, 2023
• Finalized Inception Report – May, 2022
• Progress Draft report with preliminary findings and analysis – June, 2022
• Final Assessment report with key findings and recommendations and updated program Documents – June, 2022

Evaluation Roles and Responsibilities

Mercy Corps Support:

To ensure adequate support towards accomplishment of the above-mentioned tasks, Mercy Corps will:

• Share all relevant background documents needed for a desk review and to understand the details of the assessment.
• Provide input to all tool designs and any support necessary during the assessment.
• Provide feedback to the draft report.
• Support with coordination and planning including accommodation and field movement, mobilization of fieldwork qualitative interview teams, among others. (To be clarified during inception phase)
• Intervention technical team and the CLA Team Lead will be available to work directly with the consultants throughout the consultancy and to answer any question as they emerge.
• Consultant’s movement and travel is subject to Mercy Corps security clearance.
• Mercy Corps can support with identifying and hiring qualitative interview teams. Consultants do not need to include interviewers’ costs in their proposed budgets. Similarly, Mercy Corps will support with all in-country logistics, and so consultants do not need to budget for in country travel costs in their proposed budgets.

The Consultant will:

• Ensure timely delivery of the assigned tasks.
• Oversee data-collection with all involved stakeholders and program teams in all the assessment locations.
• Share all data collected as part of the deliverables.

The Consultant will report to:

RIPA’s CLA/M&E, Team Lead (supported by Chief of Party)

The Consultant will work closely with:

• RIPA’s Chief of Party
• Component 2 and Component 3 Team Leads
• RIPA’s MEL Manager and MEL Team
• RIPA’s Implementation Team

Required Experience & Skills:

• 5-10 years of experience in relevant technical field (required)
• Substantial application of strong qualitative and quantitative research and evaluation skills and prior evidence conducting similar reviews.
• Significant formal education at the postgraduate level (Applicants that do not hold a graduate degree in a field should document relevant formal education in the field) in a field relevant to evaluation (e.g., program evaluation, statistics, anthropology, applied research, organizational development, sociology, organizational change, etc.) and extensive experience using mixed methods of investigation (qualitative and quantitative) in developing countries.
• Knowledge in Market Systems Development (MSD), agriculture value chains and livelihoods is essential.
• A postgraduate degree (M.S., M.A., or Ph.D.) in a field related to at least one of the technical sectors of the project, plus extensive practical experience in developing countries.

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
Achieving our mission begins with how we build our team and work together. Through our commitment to enriching our organization with people of different origins, beliefs, backgrounds, and ways of thinking, we are better able to leverage the collective power of our teams and solve the world’s most complex challenges. We strive for a culture of trust and respect, where everyone contributes their perspectives and authentic selves, reaches their potential as individuals and teams, and collaborates to do the best work of their lives.

We recognize that diversity and inclusion is a journey, and we are committed to learning, listening and evolving to become more diverse, equitable and inclusive than we are today.

Equal Employment Opportunity
We are committed to providing an environment of respect and psychological safety where equal employment opportunities are available to all. We do not engage in or tolerate discrimination on the basis of race, color, gender identity, gender expression, religion, age, sexual orientation, national or ethnic origin, disability (including HIV/AIDS status), marital status, military veteran status or any other protected group in the locations where we work.

Safeguarding & Ethics
Mercy Corps team members are expected to support all efforts toward accountability, specifically to our stakeholders and to international standards guiding international relief and development work, while actively engaging communities as equal partners in the design, monitoring and evaluation of our field projects. Team members are expected to conduct themselves in a professional manner and respect local laws, customs and MC’s policies, procedures, and values at all times and in all in-country venues.

To apply: http://app.jobvite.com/m?3FhzOmwa

Tagged as: Ethiopia, Mercy Corps