Closing date: 03 Nov 2019
Terms of Reference (ToR) - Emergency Roster evaluation
Background
In line with the revised Norwegian Red Cross (NorCross) International Strategy (2015-2020), and in support of ongoing IFRC and ICRC surge processes, as well as in light of the new strategic direction the organization has taken in emergency response and defined in the Intervention Principles guiding document, NorCross’ International HR Unit (IHRU) and Disaster Risk Management Unit (DRM), are commissioning an evaluation of the current emergency roster aimed at strengthening and expanding the organisation's capacity for timely and predictable emergency response to sudden onset disasters and protracted crises.
The delegates recruited by NorCross have up till now been recruited and trained for sudden onset disasters and IFRC operations. The above-mentioned shift in NorCross strategy warrants an evaluation of the current and future roster mechanism. Only a few delegates in the roster have stepped forward for deployment to ICRC operations, mainly as members of ICRC surgical teams that support existing health structures in conflict/protracted crisis settings.
Current roster system:
The Norwegian Red Cross current ER Roster consists of 255 specialized and trained "ERU delegates". These delegates are deployed within emergency operations through NorCross existing field hospital's clinical response mechanism (ERU) as well as with WASH and Public Health in Emergencies ERU modalities.
Most of the 255 delegates have health profiles related to the needs of the NorCross field hospital. In addition, there are technical delegates; TEK, PSS, PHiE and WASH who can be deployed with the RC Emergency Clinic or hospital, and/or the WASH and PHiE ERU, or as stand-alone delegates.
All delegates in the roster are employed by other employers outside the Norwegian Red Cross and are only contracted by the Norwegian Red Cross after having responded to an alert (from NorCross HQ) and thereafter selected by NorCross to be deployed.
Norwegian Red Cross deployed a Red Cross Emergency hospital with IFRC to Bangladesh autumn 2017/18 and with ICRC to Syria in 2019. During both deployments there were critical profile gaps in the field due to lack of available delegates. At times, NorCross was unable to find needed personnel neither from our own ER roster, nor from other PNS.
For the Syria deployment, 111 delegate rotations have been recorded (every delegate rotation is approx. 5 weeks and some delegates stay for more rotations), 53 rotations were NorCross ER Roster members. Other delegate rotations were secured through other National Societies or ICRC.
Further to this, we have not been able to find appropriate delegates in the ER Roster for PHiE FACT mission to Bahamas and several other emergency contexts.
There are a number of reasons why the current roster system faces challenges to deploy at the necessary scale, and with the needed delegate profiles, for emergency deployments:
a delegate does not get 5 weeks off from work;
(s)he is already deployed to another emergency context previously in the year and is not granted a second round of leave of absence by the employer;
not willing to deploy with ICRC/conflict area;
not enough people with a particular profile in the roster;
timing of the deployment coincides with time often spent with family; eg. summer holiday/Christmas; or at times when it is difficult to get leave of absence from the health care system due to holidays;
delegate not able to obtain a VISA for the country of deployment.
Hence, there is a significant need to evaluate the current Norwegian Red Cross' ER Roster model to explore measures that can ensure a more sustainable and reliable model with relevant and available HR capacity.
Purpose and scope
The roster project will aim at strengthening the Norwegian Red Cross' response capacity and build a sustainable and reliable Emergency Response (ER) Roster Model with relevant trained and available HR capacity which efficiently can deploy to the contexts strategically important to the Norwegian Red Cross.
The assessment should explore alternative models (at least three) to the current NorCross ER Roster model which can be more efficient and with bigger impact in responding to sudden onset disasters and protracted crises.
When a disaster happens, NorCross needs to be able to secure available delegates to deploy within a short amount of time. With strategic changes in where, how and when NorCross deploy its ERU's and support IFRC/ICRC operations with “stand alone” delegates, the ER Roster model will be under pressure to have the capacity to support an efficient and sustainable deployment of field personnel.
The evaluation needs to take into consideration strategic developments:
In the future, NorCross will more often deploy to protracted crises and areas of conflict
New ERU configurations such as the PHiE and WASH ERU
Surgical teams with ICRC
Trends within the movement with regards to: The request for surge capacities: Which profiles are being requested, has the surge capacity from regional level an impact on the number and profiles requested.
Areas the evaluation should consider:
Roster composition/HR availability/sourcing channels
Exploring new profiles needed in line with the needs and NorCross priorities
Compensation models
Availability of delegates (timing, leave cycles etc)
Willingness of delegates to deploy to active conflicts and protracted crisis (ICRC)
Cooperation with other NS
Recruitment model (how, when, where …)
Training models
Maintenances/development of roster (i.e individuals)
Methodology
The technical proposal should outline an overall methodological framework for the consultancy. It should include, but not be limited to, a needs and gap analysis, a cost-benefit analysis and a risk analysis for each of the three suggested models.
In addition, it is expected that the evaluation will gather information about the Norwegian Red Cross ER roster and its current rationale from relevant systems and personnel and explore other NS Emergency response HR models as well as other relevant deploying organizations for better practice.
Deliverables (or outputs)
Key deliverables include:
Inception report with a detailed description of methodology to be used, a data collection plan, information sources and solutions to purpose and questions in ToR
Regular (weekly) status updates
Complete draft of narrative report for commenting
Final report submission including executive summary of main findings and recommendations
Presentation of final report to NorCross management and other stakeholders
The study is to be carried out between 1st November and 1st December 2019. The report should abide by the purpose, scope and methodology set out above, and deliver on the proposal as agreed with NorCross.
Evaluation quality and ethical standards
The evaluators should take all reasonable steps to ensure that the evaluation is designed and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of people and the communities of which they are members, and to ensure that the evaluation is technically accurate, reliable, and legitimate, conducted in a transparent and impartial manner, and contributes to organizational learning and accountability. Therefore, the evaluation team should adhere to the evaluation standards and specific, applicable process outlined in the IFRC Framework for Evaluation.
The IFRC Evaluation Standards are:
Utility: Evaluations must be useful and used.
Feasibility: Evaluations must be realistic, diplomatic, and managed in a sensible, cost effective manner.
Ethics & Legality: Evaluations must be conducted in an ethical and legal manner, with particular regard for the welfare of those involved in and affected by the evaluation.
Impartiality & Independence; Evaluations should be impartial, providing a comprehensive and unbiased assessment that takes into account the views of all stakeholders.
Transparency: Evaluation activities should reflect an attitude of openness and transparency.
Accuracy: Evaluations should be technical accurate, providing sufficient information about the data collection, analysis, and interpretation methods so that its worth or merit can be determined.
Participation: Stakeholders should be consulted and meaningfully involved in the evaluation process when feasible and appropriate.
Collaboration: Collaboration between key operating partners in the evaluation process improves the legitimacy and utility of the evaluation.
It is also expected that the evaluation will respect the seven Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross and Red Crescent: 1) humanity, 2) impartiality, 3) neutrality, 4) independence, 5) voluntary service, 6) unity, and 7) universality.
Evaluator(s) qualifications
Demonstrated competence in managing quantitative data and carrying out inferential statistics required.
Proven track record of conducting qualitative research including the development of interview schedules and qualitative data analysis required.
Excellent written and spoken English skills required or Excellent analytical, writing and presentation skills.
Knowledge and experience working with the Red Cross Red Crescent Movement is necessary.
Familiarity with trends and developments in international Emergency response, Red Cross/Red Crescent response in particular
Extensive experience with ERU deployment and RCRC Movement roster systems
How to apply:
Interested candidates should submit their application material by3rd November 2019** to delegateadmin@redcross.no
The e-mail must also have the Curricula Vitae (CV) for all members of the team applying for consideration.
Cover letter clearly summarizing your experience as it pertains to this assignment, your daily rate, and three professional references.
A brief description of your firm or institution (for applicants other than individual contractors).
Technical proposal not exceeding five pages expressing an understanding and interpretation of the TOR, the proposed methodology, and a time and activity schedule.
Financial proposal itemizing estimated costs for services rendered (daily consultancy fees), accommodation and living costs, transport costs, stationery costs, and any other related supplies or services required for the evaluation.
At least one example of an evaluation report most similar to that described in this TOR.
Application material are non-returnable, and we thank you in advance for understanding that only short-listed candidates will be contacted for the next step in the application process.