Advertising the Application for the Role of External Evaluator for the Project “Responding to Covid19 by Meeting the Human Rights Needs of Vulnerable Communities in Malaysia”


This document provides the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the External Evaluation of the European Union-funded Project, “Responding to Covid19 by Meeting the Human Rights Needs of Vulnerable Communities in Malaysia”. This document includes the background information about the Project, describes the purpose of the evaluation, its objectives, scope, methodology, deliverables, timeframe, budget, required competencies of an evaluator and requirements for submission of application.

The duration of the project is 19 months, thus the project which started on 28 September 2020 will end on 28 April 2022. The evaluation of the project will take place whilst the project is technically on-going, however most, if not all, activities would have been completed by the time of evaluation.

The project was designed as a direct response to the worst public health and economic crisis the world has encountered in decades; with particular emphasis on vulnerable communities in Malaysia whose health, economic and social rights have been grossly impacted. Alike other countries around the world, the Malaysian Government introduced movement restrictions to curb the spread of Covid19. This led to a greater regression of socioeconomic rights among vulnerable communities as they lost access to various needs such as water, food, adequate housing, work/livelihood, health, corresponding with a national inability to meet the basic economic and social rights of these groups.

The Overall Objective of the project is to improve advocacy on human rights issues in Malaysia based on increased information sharing and improved capacity of Malaysian CSOs during the Covid19 pandemic. The Specific Objective of the project is 3-fold; Specific Objective 1 is to enhance information sharing and data gathering on serious human rights issues among CSOs/NGOs as well as among CSOs and SUHAKAM. This platform shall also serve to promote long-term partnerships between SUHAKAM and local human rights NGOs/CSOs. Specific Objective 2 is to strengthen the role and capacity of local NGOs/CSOs in responding to humanitarian crisis and protection of human rights. Specific Objective 3 is to build resilience among selected local communities to better counter social and economic shocks and disasters.

The Project intended to achieve 5 main outputs:
1) Strengthened advocacy on human rights issues across Malaysia.
2) Improved mapping and monitoring of human rights issues in Malaysia, based on collected data and enhanced sharing of information.
3) Improved capacity amongst grass root civil society organisations to implement projects benefitting the most vulnerable.
4) Increased livelihoods, skills and knowledge among selected local communities.
5) Establish/strengthen relations between relevant state authorities, vulnerable groups and local NGOs.

Among the main activities planned for the project are; the development of an online platform including promotion of the platform on social media and e-infographics created on its use; Development of advocacy briefs based on facts from across Malaysia (obtained from the online platform); Aid distribution to vulnerable communities most in need; Capacity building/Upskilling workshops for vulnerable communities; Collaboration with relevant state authorities in running certain activities such as workshops. SUHAKAM had officially partnered with three (3) local CSOs as Subgrantees (located in Penang, Sabah and Sarawak respectively) under this project to conduct a majority of upskilling workshops as well as aid distribution activities. The target communities comprise the Stateless and Undocumented Community in Sabah (Semporna), the refugee community in Penang, Urban-dwelling natives in Sarawak and the Orang Asli in Johor. The Logframe/Theory of Change will be provided to the appointed applicant.

The project team comprise one (1) Project Manager responsible for project implementation and operations; assisted by one (1) Project Officer tasked to support the Project Manager in all programme-related functions and one (1) clerical staff . SUHAKAM Commissioners had set the overall strategic direction of the project implementation, as well as performed important tasks such as engaging with external stakeholders and delivering speeches at certain events. The Secretary was responsible for overseeing and supervising the project team’s overall operations, including recruitment of project manager and officers. The Head of Divisions and officers from Divisions provided guidance and additional technical support when needed. The Corporate Service Head of Division and accountant (for all matters related to finance) worked in close collaboration with the Project Manager to ensure the EU financial rules were complied with and provided any administrative support in the conduct of its daily activities.

Access to the shared folder containing all relevant documentation will be provided to the consultant conducting the evaluation.


This is an end-of-project evaluation, which shall focus on assessing the implementation of the project activities (in accordance to the agreement between the European Union and SUHAKAM) and whether the activities had led to the achievement of the intended results and project objectives. As a result of this evaluation, relevant recommendations by the evaluator are expected in order to improve the quality of SUHAKAM’s future projects. The report will also be made available to the European Union for their information and record.


The final report should be introduced by an initial discussion of the socio-political and human rights context of the project and the development of this context during the project period.

It should then discuss, provide conclusions and recommendations on the following questions:

• Effectiveness: To which degree did the activities meet the objectives and results set out in the project (as outlined in the logical framework)?
• Matching needs: Did the project/activities meet relevant needs of the beneficiaries?
• Relevance: Was the project designed in a way that is relevant to reach its goals?
• Efficiency: Was the project run in an efficient way?
• Sustainability: Are the results achieved so far sustainable?
• Internal coherence: Were the result indicators and their means of verification adequate? What possible adjustments would the consultants recommend?
• Gender mainstreaming: To which extent did the project succeed in including a gender perspective?
• Impact and spill-over: Where there any unforeseen positive/negative effects of the activities?
• Synergies: to which extent were synergies achieved with other activities, as well as with local/international policies and donor policies?
• Which unmet needs did the evaluators identify that would be relevant for SUHAKAM to look into in an eventual continuation of the project?
• Identify lessons learned and provide recommendations.
• Visibility: Had the project sufficiently adhered to the communication and visibility plan?

In addition, the evaluator/s will have access to the following information:

– Grant Contract
– Interim Reports (if applicable)
– Financial reports
– Visibility material
– Other relevant documents produced during the implementation of the project


The criteria and questions serve as a general reference and may be expanded as deemed necessary by the evaluator.

The appropriateness of project objectives to the problems that it was supposed to address, taking into consideration the environment within which it operated. It should include an assessment of the quality of project preparation and design – i.e. the logic and completeness of the project planning process, and the internal logic and coherence of the project design.

The fact that the project results have been achieved at reasonable cost, i.e. how well inputs/means have been converted into activities, in terms of quality, quantity and time, and the quality of the results achieved. This generally requires comparing alternative approaches to achieving the same results, to see whether the most efficient process has been adopted.

An assessment of the contribution made by results to achievement of the project purpose, and how assumptions have affected project achievements. This should include specific assessment of the benefits accruing to target groups, including women and men and identified vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly and disabled.

The effect of the project on its wider environment, and its contribution to the wider policy or sector objectives (as summarized in the project’s overall objective).

An assessment of the likelihood of benefits produced by the project to continue to flow after external funding has ended, with particular reference to factors of ownership by beneficiaries, policy support, economic and financial factors, socio-cultural aspects, gender equality, appropriate technology, environmental aspects, and institutional and management capacity.


The evaluator is expected to engage with stakeholders and partners (including Subgrantees) not only to collect information and insights, but also to make a (collective) sense of the activities implemented in order to understand the following:

– Their engagement in the activity, how it has been promoted and how it fits with their own work/aims.
– Their perspectives on the issues.
– The capacity, awareness, relationships and resources developed during their engagement with the project and what they have been able to do with that.


The consultancy should be carried on the basis of a desk study. The desk study should cover the following documents:
• Project contractual documents and further amendments;
• Documents produced throughout the project;
• Evidence of impact collected by the project, including mid-term/monthly reports (whichever relevant)
• Other relevant documentation.

Furthermore, the evaluation should be conducted via virtual meetings or telephone interviews with:

• Subgrantees;
• Beneficiaries as well as partner/s and participants;
• SUHAKAM Team involved in project implementation and overview;
• Other stakeholders


The deliverables should include:

• An inception report, the detailed description of the methodology to answer the evaluation questions as well as the proposed source of information and data collection procedure. The inception report should also indicate the detailed schedule for the tasks to be undergone (work plan), the activities to be implemented and the deliverables. The role and responsibilities of evaluator should be stated as well.
• A draft evaluation report, to be discussed with SUHAKAM project team and Commissioners (if need be) in order to provide comments;
• A final evaluation report not exceeding 20 pages, including:

i. Executive Summary
ii. Introduction
a. Intervention description
b. Evaluation purpose
c. Evaluation methodology
d. Challenges encountered during evaluation
iii. Findings
a. Findings related to each evaluation question
b. Country-related assessments, including overall conclusions and country-specific recommendations
c. Additional findings
iv. Conclusions (answers to the Evaluation Questions)
v. Recommendations
vi. Lessons Learnt
vii. Annexes (list of people interviewed, key documents consulted, data collection instruments)


The evaluator is given 40 days to complete all evaluation processes and to conclude the final report.

21 February – 28 February

Desk review of core documents (Upon request by the Evaluator, documents may be submitted immediately upon confirmation of appointment prior to 21 February 2022.)

3 March – 4 March

Meeting/briefing with SUHAKAM Team, drafting and validation of inception report

[Meeting with Team: To brief on the methodology & preliminary discussions on intervention’s organisational structure, management arrangements, finance administration, internal monitoring & progress so far on achievements and challenges]

8 March -14 March

Stakeholder interviews, 5 days (approximately 20 interview sessions). The SUHAKAM team shall assist in reaching out to relevant stakeholders and arranging the interviews.

18 March

Debriefing: For reviewer to share preliminary conclusions (draft evaluation report) via Powerpoint Presentation with the project team and to ensure all information obtained are accurate.

30 March

Submission of Draft Final Report

1 April

Submission of Final Report


RM 10,000.

• 40% within two (2) weeks upon signing the Letter of Acceptance.
• 60% within two (2) weeks upon the Commission’s endorsement of the final report without further amendments


The contract shall start on 21 February 2022 – 1 April 2022.


The evaluator shall:
• Have a university degree or equivalent background in relevant disciplines, with specialized training in areas such as evaluation and project management.
• Have documented extensive experience on similar end-of-project evaluations of civil society projects in the field of human rights.
• Have sound knowledge of project and evaluation processes, including quantitative and qualitative data-collection methods and analysis for end-of-cycle project  evaluations.
• Have process management skills such as facilitation skills.
• Have the ability to draft concise evaluation reports of high quality in English.
• Working languages (written and spoken proficiency): English and Bahasa Malaysia.


Applicants shall submit the following documents in English:
a) A cover letter with a brief description of relevant previous experiences in evaluation of projects. [1 page maximum]b) A brief breakdown of costs based on the budget stipulated in para 9 (e.g. data collection, report preparation, profession fee per day) [1 page maximum]c) At least 2 comparable final report of comparable evaluation carried out.
d) A Curriculum vitae (CV) detailing certifications, accreditations etc.
e) A brief proposed workplan detailing evaluation timelines and methodology of evaluation process. [2 pages maximum]


The applicant shall submit relevant documents in softcopy to Mr. Ahmad Firdaus with Ms. Nicole Tan in copy(cc). For further information please contact

Deadline to submit applications is 24 January 2022 at 12 noon.

External Evaluation TOR (Responding to Covid19 by Meeting the Human Rights Needs of Vulnerable Communities in Malaysia)

Tags: No tags

Comments are closed.