Interpeace is an international organization for peacebuilding that supports locally-led initiatives around the world. Interpeace tailors its approach to each society and ensures that the work is locally owned and driven

Final external evaluation of the Dukire Twubake (to Heal, to Build) project, including an endline survey 


Interpeace is an international peacebuilding organization based in Geneva, Switzerland. It aims to strengthen the capacities of societies to manage conflict non-violently and non-coercively, by assisting national actors in their efforts to develop social and political cohesion. Interpeace also strives to help the international community (and in particular the United Nations) play a more effective role in supporting peacebuilding efforts around the world, through a better understanding and ability to address the challenges of building local capacities that strengthen social and political cohesion. For more information on Interpeace, please visit .


Interpeace has been active in Burundi since 2007. In line with Burundi's National Development Plan and National Peacebuilding Plan, Interpeace's programme aims to support the sustainable and equitable development of Burundi through the entrenchment of peace and stability. It contributes to a united and prosperous Burundi by improving governance, consolidating democracy, supporting reconciliation and strengthening the resilience of the population, particularly the most vulnerable.

About the project

The Dukire Twubake-To Heal, To Build is a three-year project (December 2021- December 2024), funded by the Government of Norway. It is implemented by Interpeace and its partner Centre d’Alerte et de Prévention des Conflits (CENAP) in Burundi. The main goal of the project is to enhance social, political, and economic cohesion for sustainable peace in the Great Lakes with a specific focus on Burundi. The project delves more deeply into addressing and bringing to light how trauma from the past, gender and age affect people’s ability to fully participate, and the inclusion of vulnerable people, in peacebuilding, development and decision-making processes through development and adaptation of approaches and tools for psychosocial recovery, capacity and confidence building. Thus, the Dukire Twubake project strives to empower communities affected by trauma, women and youth to advocate for/articulate their own needs, mobilize others around those needs and undertake leadership and initiatives that build social & political cohesion and improve livelihoods in their communities.

Project outcomes:

  • Community members affected by the crises of the past play a leadership role in inclusive processes for dealing with the past in their communities.
  • Women are more meaningfully included and have more influence on decision-making and development in their communities.
  • Young people are more meaningfully included and have more influence on decision-making and development in their communities.

The project supports 18 psychosocial community facilitators and 270 participants who are members of the following groups in the 3 implementation areas[1]:

  • 3 Psychosocial support groups each comprising of 30 members in each locality (90 members)
  • 3 Women groups each comprising of 30 members in each locality (90 members)
  • 3 Youth groups each comprising of 30 members in each locality (90 members)

In addition to these participants, the project reached the following categories of people through various project activities (see the table).

Purpose of the final evaluation

The purpose of this final external evaluation is to assess the overall performance of the project against the planned project objectives, key performance indicators as well as assess the impact of the overall project to the intended beneficiaries.

To this end, Interpeace and CENAP are looking for a consultant or a team of consultants to carry out the final evaluation for the Dukire Twubake project. The specific objectives of the end-line evaluation include:

  • To assess the extent to which the project achieved its objectives.
  • To identify major external factors that influenced or impacted the implementation of the project and the effectiveness of project adaptations to respond to these factors.
  • To assess the sustainability of the project results and satisfaction of the project participants in line with the key project deliverables and impact.
  • To assess the effectiveness of project partner’s partnership and management approach.
  • To identify and document challenges, best practices and lessons learned from the project implementation, including partnership and MHPSS approaches, providing recommendations for future programming and/or adaptation to contextual changes.

The evaluation is expected to utilise and respond to the OECD-DAC criteria. The evaluation is of interest to and will inform the project’s key stakeholders including, direct and indirect participants, donors, project implementing staff, authorities and the community at large.

Timeframe, Methodology and Deliverables

The evaluator/evaluators are expected to use participatory methodologies of evaluation which may include but are not limited to, outcome harvesting, most significant change in the project intervention areas and with involvement of project’s partners, participants and other relevant actors. Primary and secondary data is expected to be gathered using a mixed method to evaluate project’s implementation processes and outcomes. The consultant/consultants is/are also encouraged to propose methodologies that support gender sensitive, conflict sensitive and respect the principles of Do No Harm approach. Final methodologies will be decided upon at the inception phase of the evaluation.

To note, a noncomprehensive baseline survey was conducted with the project group members to represent their opinions and feelings in order to better understand them, better adapt the project to their needs and expectations, and enable us to follow their evolution and establish adaptation process throughout the project. Thus, this final evaluation will also include a qualitative endline survey and the consultant will be expected to:

  • replicate the same sample size consulted (262 people consulted) during the baseline survey.
  • capture elements measured during baseline and include additional scales, potentially including retrospective focused questions, to capture changes related to psychosocial well-being, intergroup relationships, leadership, advocacy and livelihoods strengthening between the baseline and the end of the intervention from the perspective of the participants.
  • capture both expected and unexpected results and evolutions in psychosocial well-being, intergroup relationships, leadership, advocacy and livelihoods strengthening, using narrative and storytelling approaches.

The evaluation will be both an objective and a consultative/participatory exercise thus the assessment will involve collecting the following data.

While Interpeace and CENAP anticipate the use of the elements listed above, the list is not exhaustive. The evaluation may include additional elements and approaches as appropriate for responding to the final evaluation questions. The applicant/s is/are encouraged to suggest a comprehensive methodology that includes these elements and others that the evaluators deem fit for meeting the evaluation objectives. The methodology for data collection should be described in the proposals. The final list of elements will be discussed with the selected team of consultants.

Key evaluation Questions


  • To what extent was the overall goal of the intervention relevant for the context of peacebuilding, psychosocial recovery, socio-political and economic empowermentin Burundi?
  • To what extent was the overall strategy of the programme relevant for achieving the projects objectives or outcomes?
  • To what extent was the overall goal of the project relevant for the consortium partners and project participants?

Effectiveness and Impact

  • What progress has the project made towards its expected outcomes?
  • How has the achievement (or not) of these outcomes influenced the broader context of peacebuilding, psychosocial recovery, political and economic empowermentin the areas of programming?
  • What were the main factors that influenced whether the intervention reached its expected outcomes/changes or not?


  • How likely are the project results and outcomes to be sustained after the project?
  • How effective are the project’s sustainability strategies?


  • To what extent have the programme’s strategies and activities been sufficient for meeting expected outcomes?
  • How did the project adapt to changes in the context and emerging challenges during implementation? Were the appropriate implementation methodologies applied in the specific context and different circumstances of the project?
  • To what extent do the implementing partners have sufficient capacities to achieve the project’s outcomes?
  • To what extent were the project resources used efficiently?


  • To what extent did the project work with and complement the efforts of other humanitarian, development and peace actors and relevant government institutions?
  • To what extent did the project activities and results complement and contribute to other Interpeace’s and CENAP’s peacebuilding projects in Burundi?

Cross cutting issues:

  • To what extent did the project integrate gender equality into the project’s strategy?
  • How effective are the project’s efforts to integrate gender equality into the project strategy?
  • To what extent did the project adhere to the principles of Do No Harm and employ conflict sensitivity while implementing and adapting the project strategies?
  • To what extent has the projected adapted to and mitigated climate change and environmental factors?

Partnership and localization

  • How effective was the partnership approach in meeting the project’s expected outcomes?
  • How effective was the overall quality of partnership in terms of the relationship between Interpeace and CENAP, including adherence to the partnership principles set out by both partners?
  • To what extent did the consortium approach enable local actors to be meaningfully engaged in the process of designing, implementing, monitoring and reviewing the project?

Project Design Improvement

  • What lessons learned and best practices can be replicated in the future by donors and other major stakeholders?
  • What should project partners take into consideration to improve the overall design of the project’s next phase?
  • What areas/themes would be most relevant for the project (and any spin-off projects) to focus on in future programming?
  • What do the outcomes of the project imply for initiatives for sustainable peace in Burundi?

Interpeace and CENAP anticipate that these key evaluation questions will be further refined with the selected evaluation consultants and adaptations made be included in the inception report.

Reporting and Feedback

The evaluators will hold a feedback meeting (or meetings) for the Dukire Twubake project staff (dates and venue to be agreed upon later). This will be an opportunity to debrief on the evaluation, and to exchange views on preliminary findings and recommendations.

The evaluation report (English version) will include a main text of no more than 30 pages with findings and recommendations. The report will be expected to be structured in the following manner:


Executive Summary

  • Introduction and brief background
  • Methodology
  • Major findings
  • Relevance
  • Effectiveness and Impact (including major accomplishments to date)
  • Sustainability
  • Efficiency
  • Coherence
  • Cross-cutting issues
  • Partnership and localization
  • Overall Assessment
  • Challenges
  • Best Practices and lessons learned
  • Recommendations for improvement


  • Terms of Reference
  • List of documents assessed
  • List of persons interviewed
  • Evaluation Matrix
  • Transcripts of KIIS and FGDS
  • Clean and final data sets of surveys
  • Powerpoint presentation of key findings


The consultant(s) should have at least the following skills and experience:

  • At least a bachelor's degree in social sciences, peacebuilding management, evaluation, social research, or related field.
  • At least 5 years of experience in the design and implementation of evaluations, assessments, or baseline surveys including qualitative and quantitative data collection methods.
  • Proven experience in conducting gender-sensitive evaluations.
  • Strong data collection, analytical and writing skills.
  • In-depth knowledge and experience of conflict resolution, peacebuilding and reconciliation, Mental health and psychological support (MHPSS), gender inclusion and socio-economic and political empowerment.
  • Experience of working in Burundi, the Great Lakes region or other conflict or post-conflict environments.
  • Experience managing a diverse team and providing capacity-building and training support.
  • Proven ability to manage highly confidential and sensitive information.
  • Excellent English and French speaking and writing skills.
  • Ability to collect data in Kirundi.
  • An ability to work within tight deadlines

Applications from gender balanced teams of multidisciplinary consultants with relevant thematic and geographical expertise are highly desired and will be considered favorably in selecting the successful proposal.

*Only short-listed candidates will be contacted.

  • [1] Ruhororo Commune, Ngozi Province
  • Kabezi Commune, Bujumbura Rural Province
  • Nyanza Lac Commune, Makamba Province

How to apply

Interested candidates should submit their application by July 28, 2024 to:

The words "Burundi- Dukire Twubake (To heal, To build) – Final Evaluation Consultancy" MUST appear in the subject line of the e-mail.

All applicants must attach the following documents:

  • The CV(s) of the candidate(s).
  • A detailed technical proposal (maximum 6 pages) describing their understanding of these terms of reference and how they intend to approach the assignment with expected results, methodology/research techniques to be used and a timetable.
  • A detailed financial proposal.
  • At least one sample of a similar previous assignment.