1. Executive Summary
In 2011, as part of its Integrated Strategic Plan, Amnesty International (AI hereafter) established a Growth strategy entitled “Growing Amnesty International for Impact”. Goal 1 of the Growth Strategy was a mandate to
Strengthen AI’s programme of work on and in the BRICS: establish an AI presence in India and Brazil by 2015, increase the impact of and resources for work in Africa
From this goal, a BRICS strategy was created with the impetus that: “If AI is to be more relevant and increase our influence on the domestic and foreign policy landscape in the BRICS countries, we recognize that we must have a strong local presence with the human rights community and a locally relevant agenda of work. This is an exciting and necessary step up for AI in the Global South and is a priority for the coming years. AI has long addressed the domestic human rights concerns in the BRICS countries. These powers have significant and growing impact on human rights beyond their own territories, and AI must have an integrated programme of work including research, campaigning, mobilisation, communications, advocacy, partnerships, and fundraising rooted in these countries.”
In line with this strategy, AI targeted Brazil and India as countries of strategic importance given their role as emerging powers and their ability to influence human rights changes, not just in country but beyond their own borders. AI established new form of entities in each of these countries known as the National Offices.
The purpose of this document is to outline the Terms of Reference for the evaluation of the National Offices, which fall under the remit of the Senior Director of the Office of the Secretary General.
2. Background and Context
National Offices are set-up and managed by Amnesty International Ltd for and on behalf of the Amnesty International movement in specific countries. This is a starkly different model to Amnesty’s traditional membership based “sections”.
National Offices undertake their own country research, campaigning and advocacy for their own human rights activities that are aligned with the Strategic Goals of the International Secretariat (IS hereafter). The staff in these offices are recruited locally thus bringing a new range of skills, expertise, diversity of thought, and most importantly, current national context to the IS.
They are supported by the IS through the provision of enhanced management and governance support services. The initial plan, established back in 2012 under the Design Principles for the National Offices, envisioned that these offices could seek Amnesty International Structure status from the International Executive Committee ideally within three years of establishment and, subject to performance, seek Amnesty International Section status. It should be mentioned that no National Office has yet attained section status and it should be part of the evaluation to review the appropriateness of those initial timelines, as well as the challenges or shifting priorities that have prevented National Offices from achieving this.
The objectives of the National Offices as taken from the Growth Strategy are to:
- Engage with partners and rights-holders in the design of specific programmes of work
- Contribute to the human rights movement working towards the goals of Amnesty International’s global campaigns
- Influence governments to support issues of Amnesty International’s priority concerns in the region and internationally
- Raise funds to achieve financial self-sufficiency within an agreed period of time
- Provide engagement & activism options to diverse individuals and organizations interested in supporting Amnesty International’s work
- Develop a programme of work with young people that empowers them to take action as human rights activists and leaders in the organization
- Establish a human rights education programme that engages grassroots organizations and community-based activists, as well as schools and academia
- Enable Amnesty International entities to become self-governing in these two countries within 10 years.
3. Scope of Work
AI would like to conduct an independent evaluation to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of National Offices in achieving the aims of the wider Growth Strategy and, more specifically, the objectives for each office. Additionally, the evaluation would also assess the processes involved in setting up these offices, as well as the current mechanisms that are in place for continued management and support. The results of this assessment will not only serve to inform and course correct the processes established for setting up and operationalising these offices; they will also act as evidence for decision making on the future of National Offices. This assessment also functions as a reporting and accountability tool to Amnesty’s International Council Meeting and to the movement as part of the overall Growth Strategy.
This assessment will be undertaken for the National Offices in India and Brazil. It is important to note that these 2 offices are operating in completely different environments with regards to political, socio and cultural contexts. Additionally, each National Office has had its share of unique challenges. Hence, the criteria for measuring success in certain areas may need to be tailored per National Office.
The final report should not only include an assessment of the areas above but also recommendations for improvements or changes to existing or future processes, as well as gaps and lessons learned, so that these may be incorporated into AI’s frameworks for establishing and supporting the National Offices.
The final report will be submitted to the Project Manager for National Offices and the Senior Director of the Office of the Secretary General.
Below are the 5 areas that should be assessed. This is not an exhaustive list and the final areas will be decided in consultation with the evaluator.
(a) Human Rights Outcomes / Making an Impact
Is the National Office contributing to significant changes in human rights locally and how? Has the National Office established itself as a credible and visible entity?
Possible key indicators:
- Delivery and frequency of key research outputs and activities
- Extent of access, engagement and support by key targeted stakeholders and civil society organisations [Number of strategic alliances built and the outcomes as a result of those alliances]
- Extent to which the entity is seen as a credible actor on the human rights issues they work on [that is, to what extent the entity is seen as a ‘go to place’ by key stakeholders; for example, key media reaching out for comments; requests to collaborate / participate in key platforms by decision makers and/or civil society actors, etc.]
- Level of participation of activists, partners and rights holders in planning and implementation
- Extent of media engagement on the Office’s priority issues and via the number and quality of mentions in local and international media
- Key target decision makers’ attitudes and engagement with regard to AI positions · Introduction, amendment or repeal of laws, policies and standards
- Level of advocacy [access to government ministers, PMs, and other influencers; Number of high level meetings that have happened and the outcomes achieved]
- Evidence of real changes in peoples’ lives [evidence of change for rights holders]
(b) Growth
Has the National Office been able to recruit, retain and involve supporters who engage with the organization as contributors to activism and financial health (where applicable)?
Possible key indicators and questions ·
- Number, as well as increasing/decreasing trends, in the total supporter and activist base
- Number and increase in the paying constituency
- Increase in number of actions taken and quality of actions
- Level of financial self-reliance and level of contribution to international funds
- Diversity of the entity’s supporter base (with measures dependent on local context as diversity varies in different contexts)
- Is the level of investment in growth parallel to the growth achieved?
- What are some of the challenges hindering growth plans and do the offices receive sufficient support?
(c) Organisational Health
Is the National Office robust in its operations with established and transparent policies in finance, human resources and security; with clear mechanisms for accountability?
Possible key indicators and questions
- Compliance with AI’s Core Standards where applicable (governance and management indicators; financial management indicators; human resources indicators; compliance management indicators; risk management indicators)
- Relationship between the National Office and the Advisory board
- What are the decision making and conflict resolution processes in the National Office and are they effective?
- Level of staff satisfaction / turnover
- Security mechanisms and protocols in place for physical location, missions and communications
(d) Alignment with the wider IS and movement
Is the National Office aligned with the rest of the Amnesty and its Strategic Goals?
Possible key indicators:
- Level of alignment of outputs and campaign actions to strategic goals / global campaigns
- Incidences of joint planning between the National Office and IS and/or sections
- Relationship between the National Office and the wider IS – global solidarity
(e) Setting up and supporting the National Offices
As mentioned, the National Offices are set up and managed by AI. It is therefore important to retrospectively assess whether the processes involved in the set up phase were efficient and if the current mechanisms for management and support are adequate to ensure that the National Offices flourish to meet their objectives. Some of the key questions framing this assessment are:
- Was the setup process and the support rendered by relevant AI teams effective and efficient?
- Are the current management processes and communications effective and adequate?
- Has there been sufficient support from AI for the National Offices along their growth path? Is the current provision and services from the IS efficient e.g. Law and Policy from the IS to National Offices (where applicable)
- Is the approach, time and resources that we invested in establishing the National Offices represent good value for money given our level of achievement, and in comparison to other global organisations?
- Are the National Offices structured appropriately to support its objectives and growth targets?
- What have been the challenges, obstacles encountered along the way? Could these have been avoided?
4. Methodology
The evaluator should note that there are existing methods of data collection that take place within various departments of Amnesty International. It is recommended that the evaluator review the data collected via these tools as part of their assessment. In addition, it is expected that a range of other methods are used including interviews, focus groups, questionnaires and surveys. The participating audience should include:
- National Office Directors and staff members
- Relevant IS London staff
- Senior Management of the relevant Regional offices
- Interviews with external stakeholders such as partners, CSOs and rights holders
Please note that there is no baseline data with which to assess or compare the outcomes of this evaluation.
5. Deliverables
Key deliverables expected from the evaluator are:
- A detailed evaluation methodology and an evaluation plan (with timeline)
- Final evaluation report of a maximum of 30 pages including an executive summary which includes key findings, major learning points and main actions for improvement (in English)
- Presentation of key findings
6. Timeline
Deadline for submission of proposal - September 2nd 2016
Selection of vendor - September 15th 2016
Start Date - October 1st 2016
Submission of draft report for comments - November 2016
Submission of final report - End of November 2016
Presentation of key findings - December 5th 2016
HOW TO APPLY:
For all applicants, your proposal should include:
- · You or your organization’s full name, address, and contact information
- · Description of the process, methods, and timeline your organization proposes to use in the evaluation
- · A list the assumptions on which your proposed approach and successful completion of deliverables are based
- · List each person (i.e. key personnel) who will be performing work. Please state their role and provide a resume/curriculum vitae for each person.
- · A portfolio describing previous work experience undertaken in a similar capacity by your organisation with examples where possible
- · A detailed breakdown before and including VAT or other charges, of all their estimated costs inclusive of hourly rate per staff member, travel, accommodation and per diems, materials etc
Applications should be sent by email to the Project Manager of National Offices, Kavita Rajah, atkavita.rajah@amnesty.org by close of business on September 2nd 2016. Please indicate “Evaluation of Amnesty International National Offices” in the subject line of your email.
