[Consultancy] ACTIVATE Program Midterm Review

Phase

Indicative Timing

Launch a call for proposals

September 21, 2026

Review and conduct selection interviews, and due diligence 

October 2026

Contracting and start-up

November 2026 

Document review and inception report

November–December 2026 

Tool finalization and data collection preparation

December 2026 

Primary data collection

December 2026–January 2027 

Data analysis and draft report

January–February 2027 

Review of Draft report and Provide feedback- WUSC

February 2027

Validation workshop and report revision

February 2027 

Final Draft report presentation and final feedback from Project management

March 2027

Submission of Final report

March 2027 

VI. Team Composition and Qualifications

• Team Leader / Evaluation and Systems Specialist: Advanced degree in Development Studies, Economics, Public Policy, Monitoring and Evaluation, Education, Agriculture, or a related field. At least 15 years of experience leading complex mixed-method evaluations of large development programs. Demonstrated expertise in evaluation design, systems thinking, results measurement, policy analysis, adaptive management, and institutional strengthening. Experience evaluating TVET, education, youth employment, agriculture, or market systems programs is highly desirable. Proven ability to lead multidisciplinary teams and produce high-quality evaluation reports. 
• ATVET and Workforce Development Specialist: Advanced degree in TVET, Education, Agricultural Education, Human Resource Development, or a related field. At least 10 years of experience in TVET systems reform, Competency-Based Training (CBT), curriculum development, Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL), Workplace Experience Learning (WEL), industry partnerships, and workforce development. Demonstrated understanding of institutional strengthening, quality assurance, accreditation systems, and labour market-responsive skills development. 
• Youth Employment, Research and Inclusion Specialist: Advanced degree in Development Studies, Economics, Statistics, Social Sciences, Agriculture, or a related discipline. At least 10 years of experience in youth employment, entrepreneurship, agribusiness, labour market analysis, and mixed-methods research. Demonstrated expertise in quantitative and qualitative evaluation methods, tracer studies, surveys, outcome harvesting, and data analysis. Strong experience integrating Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI), disability inclusion, refugee and displaced persons (RDP) inclusion, safeguarding, and ethical research practices into programme evaluations. Experience assessing employment outcomes, enterprise development, and market systems is highly desirable. 
• GESI and Safeguarding Specialist: Advanced degree in Gender Studies, Social Sciences, Development Studies, Social Work, Human Rights, or a related field. At least 10 years of experience in gender equality, social inclusion, safeguarding, protection, and disability inclusion, preferably within skills development, youth, or development programmes. Demonstrated expertise in integrating GESI and safeguarding principles into programme design and implementation, conducting risk assessments, strengthening safeguarding systems, and promoting safe, inclusive, gender-responsive and disability-inclusive learning and workplace environments. 
• Market Systems Development Advisor: Advanced degree in Economics, Development Studies, Business Administration, Agricultural Economics, or a related field. At least 10 years of experience in market systems development, private sector engagement, value chain development, inclusive business models, and economic opportunities for youth and women. Demonstrated expertise in market analysis, facilitation of market linkages, strengthening private sector partnerships, identifying market-driven employment and enterprise opportunities, and designing interventions that improve the sustainability, inclusiveness, and competitiveness of agricultural and workforce development systems. 

VII. Roles and Responsibilities

Actor

Key Responsibilities

Mastercard Foundation Impact Team

Provide strategic guidance, approve TOR and deliverables where applicable, the Mastercard Foundation Impact Team will review and approve the Inception Report and the Final Evaluation Report. Other deliverables require WUSC approval only 

WUSC/ACTIVATE Project Management

Facilitate access to documents, staff, partners, institutions, and stakeholders; review deliverables; provide factual clarifications; and coordinate management response.

ACTIVATE MERL Team

Provide datasets, indicator definitions, PIRS, dashboards, monitoring data, baseline/outcome/tracer reports, DQA reports, and technical support to the evaluation team.

ACTIVATE GESI and Safeguarding Leads

Provide relevant strategies, tools and implementation evidence; advise on contextual inclusion and safeguarding considerations; support ethical referral pathway mapping; and review evaluation design, tools and findings for GESI and safeguarding quality.

Anchor Partners and Technical Partners

Provide implementation records, participate in interviews, support access to training providers, institutions, employers, and youth participants.

Evaluation Team

Design and implement the evaluation, ensure ethical and high-quality data collection and analysis, prepare all deliverables, and present findings and recommendations.

Team Communication Requirement

The evaluation team will join a weekly virtual check-in during the data collection phase to update WUSC on progress and emerging issues 

VIII. Reporting Requirements

The final evaluation report should be concise, evidence-based, and action-oriented. It should include an executive summary, background, methodology, limitations, findings by evaluation question, conclusions, prioritized recommendations, and annexes. Recommendations should be specific, feasible, assigned to relevant actors where possible, and categorized by urgency and strategic importance. Findings should identify differential outcomes and experiences across relevant groups and examine intersectional patterns where evidence permits. The report should avoid treating young women, PWDs, RDPs or other underserved youth as homogeneous categories. Include a section mapping findings to the Theory of Change, Learning Agenda, and relevant Mastercard Foundation Shared Measures, together with clear management implications and adaptive actions. 

IX. Proposal Evaluation Criteria 

The technical proposal will be evaluated in line with the criteria in the table below. The technical proposal shall be evaluated separately. After the evaluation of the technical proposal, the financial proposal of the offeror with the best technical proposal shall be evaluated. Technical Approach should explicitly assess the quality of the proposed GESI-responsive, disability-inclusive, participatory and safeguarding methodology, including intersectional analysis, inclusion sampling, accessibility, ethical engagement with minors and disclosure/referral protocols. WUSC may negotiate with the offeror with the best financial proposal on the financial proposal. The WUSC reserves the sole right to take the final decision on the final budget after the negotiation. Proposals scoring below 28 out of 40 on technical approach will not be considered for financial evaluation 

Experience of the proposed evaluation team 

30%

Technical Approach 

40%

Management Structure 

15%

Proposed Innovations 

15%

X. Budget and Resource Requirements

The Consultant/Firm shall submit a detailed financial proposal that demonstrates the resources required to successfully deliver the midterm review. The proposed budget should be realistic, cost-effective, and aligned with the scope of work and methodology.

The financial proposal should, at a minimum, include the following cost categories:

• Personnel Costs: Fees for the Team Leader and all proposed team members, indicating the expected level of effort (number of days) for each key personnel.
• Fieldwork and Logistics: Costs associated with field data collection, including transportation, accommodation, per diem, and other operational expenses.
• Data Collection and Analysis: Costs related to data collection tools, data management, transcription, cleaning, analysis, and reporting.
• Field Teams: Costs associated with recruiting, training, supervising, and managing enumerators or other field personnel.
• Software and Technology: virtual meeting platforms, or any other specialized tools required to undertake the assignment.
• Administrative and Other Direct Costs: Any additional direct costs necessary to complete the assignment.

The technical proposal should clearly describe the composition of the review team, including the roles and responsibilities of each key personnel and the proposed level of effort. The Consultant/Firm should ensure that sufficient resources are allocated to guarantee quality assurance throughout the assignment, including data collection, data validation, analysis, and report production.

Any assumptions underpinning the proposed budget should be clearly stated. The Consultant/Firm is expected to optimize available resources while ensuring that the quality and credibility of the review are not compromised.

XI. Submission of Proposal 

The technical and financial proposals, along with three (3) previous evaluation reports, must be submitted as separate PDF documents to the link below by  October 12, 2026.