Terms of reference for outcome harvesting and end-of-programme (endline) evaluation for the Investing in Women in the Blue Economy Kenya Programme (IIW-BEK) 2026

1.0 About the Investing in Women in the Blue Economy in Kenya (IIW-BEK)

Investing in Women in the Blue Economy in Kenya (IIW-BEK) is a five-year gender equality and economic inclusion programme (2022 to 2027) being implemented by AECF with the generous support of Global Affairs Canada (GAC). The programme helps unlock the potential for positive socio-economic and environmental outcomes in Kenya’s blue economy across the Lake Victoria and Indian Ocean regions.

Primarily by providing CAD 5,000,000 in grant funding to eligible women-owned small, medium, and micro enterprises, IIW-BEK will create 1,500 jobs (60% of which will be held by women). Indirectly, the project seeks to reach 50,000 poor and vulnerable people (60% women) through community awareness programming that challenges restrictive social norms against women, and through products and services offered by grant recipients. IIW-BEK will leverage CAD 3.99 million in private-sector financing through matching contributions.

The main goal of IIW-BEK is to contribute to the economic empowerment of women and young women-owned enterprises, their suppliers, and those that produce for them along key supply chains where women face discrimination in Kenya’s blue economy. The programme seeks to:

1. Support women’s economic participation in non-traditional sectors of the blue economy.
2. Enhance private sector engagement of women as economic actors across the blue economy value chain.
3. Increase private- and public-sector investment in women- and young women-owned Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs).
4. Reduce systemic gender inequalities that hinder women’s effective participation in the blue economy.

1.1 Programme components

The overall project outcome is enhanced economic empowerment of women and their enterprises in key supply chains, achieved through increased business performance and climate resilience of women and young women-owned micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises, and reduced systemic gender inequalities that women entrepreneurs and their smallholder suppliers, including informal women workers, face in the targeted counties of Kenya’s Blue Economy. The programme is structured around the following themes:

• Affordable finance for climate-smart investments by women and young women-owned MSMEs.
• Access to resilient markets for women and young women-owned MSMEs in Kenya’s Blue Economy.
• Access to climate-smart technologies for women and young women-owned MSMEs.
• Awareness among community members, particularly men, of promoting equal opportunities and reducing gender barriers against women and young women.
• Private sector engagement of women and young women-owned MSMEs as economic agents in the Blue Economy supply chain.
• Strengthening the capacity of government and other actors to refine and implement gender-responsive economic development and legal frameworks in the Blue Economy.

1.2 Results Chain and Performance Measurement Framework (PMF)

The program’s results are tracked through a Logic Model and Performance Measurement Framework (PMF), organized into ultimate, intermediate, and immediate outcome levels, as summarized below. This resulting architecture provides the analytical spine for both components of this assignment.

A Mid-Term Review (MTR) has been undertaken. With the programme now entering its final phase, a structured effort to harvest outcomes and evaluate overall performance and impact is required, as set out in these Terms of Reference.

2.0 Purpose and structure of the assignment

The Investing in Women in the Blue Economy in Kenya (IIW-BEK) programme is entering its final implementation phase. Since its inception in February 2022, the programme has deployed an integrated model of catalytic finance, technical assistance, climate-smart technology linkages, gender-transformative programming, and policy engagement to advance the economic empowerment of women and young women-owned MSMEs in Kenya’s Lake Victoria and Indian Ocean regions. AECF now wishes to commission a single consultancy, delivered under one contract, comprising two distinct but complementary components:

• Component A: Outcome Harvesting: a participatory, utilization-focused exercise that identifies, describes, and substantiates the outcomes (intended and unintended) that the programme has contributed to since inception.
• Component B: End of Programme (Endline) Evaluation: an independent summative evaluation that assesses the programme’s overall performance and impact against the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria and Global Affairs Canada’s gender-equality commitments and distills lessons and recommendations for future programming.

The two components are designed to reinforce one another. Component A generates rich, actor-centered qualitative evidence of change, including emergent and unintended outcomes, that feeds directly into Component B’s evidence base. Component B, in turn, situates the harvested outcomes within a structured assessment of relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability. Bidders are expected to propose an integrated methodology and fieldwork plan that allows both components to draw on shared data collection where efficient, while preserving the methodological integrity and distinct deliverables of each.

2.1 Component A: Outcome Harvesting

2.1.1 Purpose

The program’s PMF tracks progress across a defined set of quantitative and qualitative indicators at the ultimate, intermediate, and immediate outcome levels. While routine monitoring and the Mid-Term Review (MTR) have established a strong evidence base on indicator performance, the PMF is by design a structured tracking tool that captures anticipated results against pre-set targets. It does not systematically surface unintended outcomes, emergent changes within the broader enabling environment, or the nuanced pathways through which change is occurring among women entrepreneurs, their households, supply chains, and institutional actors.

The purpose of Component A is therefore to carry out an Outcome Harvesting exercise that complements the program’s existing monitoring and evaluation architecture by identifying, describing, and substantiating outcomes- intended and unintended- that IIW-BEK has contributed to since inception. It will assess what has changed in the behaviour, relationships, actions, and activities of the people, enterprises, and institutions engaged by the programme, and the extent to which IIW-BEK contributed to those changes, including environmental changes (climate resilience, resource efficiency, waste management, pollution prevention, ecosystem protection), social changes (inclusion, job quality, occupational health and safety, safeguarding, community wellbeing, equitable participation), and governance changes (business formalization, compliance, transparency, accountability, stakeholder engagement, responsible enterprise practices).

Specifically, the exercise will:

• Generate outcome evidence beyond the PMF: harvest substantiated outcome statements describing real, observable changes among women entrepreneurs, gender champions, enterprise employees, community members, financial service providers, private sector actors, government officials, and other boundary partners, complementing PMF data by capturing how change happened, for whom, under what conditions, and with what significance.
• Support the program’s final evaluation: provide evidence that feeds directly into Component B and the final programme report to GAC, strengthening the narrative of the program’s contribution to its Theory of Change at the immediate, intermediate, and ultimate outcome levels.
• Strengthen adaptive management: surface what is working, what has changed unexpectedly, and where gaps or weak links in the Theory of Change remain, to guide prioritization, partnership decisions, and resource allocation in the remaining implementation period.
• Document the program’s contribution to systemic change: capture emergent signals of systemic change, including shifts in institutional policies and practices, changes in social norms and power dynamics, and progress toward a more enabling business and regulatory environment for women.

2.1.2 Outcome harvesting approach and principles

Please follow the Outcome Harvesting approach: collect evidence of what has changed, then work backwards to assess whether and how the programme contributed to those changes. Outcomes shall be understood as changes in the behaviour, relationships, actions, activities, policies, or practices of individuals, groups, communities, organisations, or institutions. The harvest shall include positive and negative, intended and unintended, planned and emergent outcomes, provided the connection to IIW-BEK can be plausibly described and substantiated.

The consultant shall apply an iterative and utilization-focused process comprising designing the harvest with intended users; reviewing documentation and drafting candidate outcomes; engaging change agents, social actors, and other informants to refine outcome descriptions; substantiating selected outcomes with knowledgeable verifiers; analyzing and interpreting patterns of change and contribution; and supporting use of findings for adaptive management, final evaluation, and reporting. Harvest users include AECF, the IIW-BEK programme team, and other decision-makers; the consultant will serve as the harvester; change agents and informants will include programme staff, investees, implementing partners, financial service providers, private sector actors, government actors, male champions, community actors, and others directly engaged by the programme.

2.2 Component B: End of Programme (Endline) Evaluation

2.2.1 Purpose

The purpose of Component B is to conduct an independent end of programme (endline) evaluation that assesses the overall performance, results, and impact of the IIW-BEK programme from inception to close, and provides evidence-based conclusions, lessons, and actionable recommendations to inform AECF and GAC’s future gender-responsive, private sector development programming in the blue economy and comparable contexts.

The evaluation will be summative and theory-based. It will measure the program’s achievement against its Logic Model, PMF targets, and Theory of Change. It will assess the programme using the internationally recognised OECD-DAC evaluation criteria: relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability, applied through a gender equality and social inclusion (GESI) lens consistent with Global Affairs Canada’s Feminist International Assistance Policy. The evaluation will draw on and triangulate existing evidence, including the baseline, the mid-term review (MTR), performance measurement framework (PMF) and monitoring data, annual results reports, and the outcome statements harvested under Component A, and will generate primary evidence as needed. It is not expected to repeat a full baseline-style household census, although targeted primary data collection with beneficiaries and boundary partners is expected.

2.2.2 Evaluation criteria and questions

We’ll structure the evaluation around the following criteria and guiding questions. Bidders should refine and expand these into a full evaluation matrix at inception (indicative matrix at Annex 2):

The technical proposal should include the following information:

• A profile of the lead consultant (maximum three (3) pages) clearly demonstrating suitability for the assignment and relevant experience.
• Curriculum Vitae (CVs) of the proposed team members, outlining roles and relevant expertise.
• A detailed approach, methodology, and work plan for undertaking the assignment, including a clear demonstration of value for money.
• Signed letters of reference or recommendation from previous clients or organizations for similar assignments.
• A detailed reference list, including contact details, clearly indicating the scope and scale of comparable assignments undertaken.
• Samples of previous work: applicants are required to submit samples from at least three (3) similar past projects or provide links to completed assignments demonstrating relevant experience in line with these Terms of Reference.
• Evidence of compliance with the mandatory requirements, evaluation criteria, and experience requirements outlined in this ToR.
• A clear explanation of how the consultant plans to utilize the 35‑day assignment period, including key activities and milestones.
• Proposals should be submitted in English.

3.0 Scope of work

The assignment covers the full project period, from inception in February 2022 through to the data collection date, and both regional implementation areas of the programme. All work will be conducted in close coordination with the AECF IIW-BEK programme team, which will serve as a primary source of institutional memory, documentation, and access to stakeholders. The programme will include an annex that maps the locations of individual stakeholders to guide sampling, stakeholder engagement, and fieldwork planning.

3.1 Evaluation criteria and questions

Both components will cover the two regional implementation areas of the IIW-BEK programme:
• Lake Victoria Region: counties where the programme has supported MSMEs and community-level interventions in fisheries, aquaculture, value addition, and related blue economy chains, including Kisumu, Siaya, Homa Bay, and Migori.
• Indian Ocean Region: counties where the programme has supported MSMEs and interventions in marine fisheries, coastal tourism-adjacent enterprises, seaweed farming, waste-to-value, and related coastal value chains, including Mombasa, Kwale, Kilifi, and Lamu.

The project reach to be considered within the scope comprises 127 MSMEs (7 SMEs, 46 small businesses, and 74 micro enterprises); 2 financial service providers; 1 women’s rights organisation; 10 target counties; relevant national government actors; county government departments; 15 Beach Management Units; male champions; over 1,000 gender change agents; media and community structures; private sector actors; and other institutions or boundary partners engaged through the programme. The consultant, together with AECF, will determine the optimal distribution of fieldwork across the two regions.

3.2 Component A Scope: Outcome harvesting

The Outcome Harvesting will cover changes across all five levels of the IIW-BEK results chain, as defined in the program’s Logic Model and PMF. This includes, but is not limited to: investee-level outcomes (business performance, profitability, climate resilience, access to affordable and climate-smart finance, market access, technology adoption, investment readiness); women’s empowerment outcomes (economic agency, household decision-making, control of assets, gender roles, unpaid care, experiences of GBV, financial autonomy, leadership, and progress across the domains of the Women’s Empowerment Index); social norms and gender outcomes (attitudes and behaviors among men, community members, male champions, households, and male-dominated institutions); private sector and market-system outcomes (behaviour of financial service providers, off-takers, buyers, and industry associations); policy and enabling-environment outcomes (knowledge, capacity, practices, or formal decisions of government and institutional actors); and ESG outcomes (environmental, social, and governance changes associated with programme-supported enterprises, value chains, technologies, financing, and institutional engagement).

The consultant(s) must actively surface unintended outcomes, positive or negative, that are not captured within the existing PMF but that represent meaningful change attributable to the program’s intervention. Annex 1 provides a detailed Outcome Harvesting focus matrix that maps key PMF areas to focus questions to guide the harvest; it is not meant to limit the inquiry.

3.3 Component B Scope: End of programme evaluation

The endline evaluation shall cover the full programme period and geographic scope described above and shall assess the programme against the criteria and questions set out in Section 3.2.2. In carrying out the evaluation, the consultant will:

• Conduct a comprehensive review of the programme’s objectives, design, activities, and results achieved, and assess the extent to which the programme achieved its intended outputs, outcomes, and impact against the Logic Model, PMF targets, and Theory of Change.
• Assess the programme against the OECD-DAC criteria (relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability) and the GAC gender-equality/GESI and environmental cross-cutting lens.
• Analyze the validity of the Theory of Change and the assumptions and risks underpinning it, and assess the program’s contribution to observed changes using contribution analysis and the outcomes harvested under Component A.
• Assess the program’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges in design, implementation, and results, including the ‘missing middle’, inception delays, and adaptive management responses.
• Review the program’s financial management, budget utilization, and value for money, including the catalytic grant plus technical assistance model and the leveraging of private capital.
• Evaluate the effectiveness of partnerships and coordination mechanisms with investees, financial service providers, government (national and county), Beach Management Units, women’s rights organisations, and private sector actors.
• Analyze the program’s monitoring and evaluation framework, data quality, and disaggregation, and the extent to which it captured results for women, young women, and different enterprise categories and regions.
• Conduct stakeholder consultations with beneficiaries, investees, partners, and duty bearers, and integrate their perspectives into the findings.
• Identify best practices and lessons learned, and provide clear, prioritized, actionable recommendations for AECF, GAC, and future programming.
• Ensure the evaluation is conducted objectively, independently, ethically, and transparently, following recognised evaluation standards and safeguarding and ‘Do No Harm’ principles, with all findings disaggregated by sex, age, enterprise category, region, and outcome level where evidence permits.

4.0 Specific tasks

The consultant will carry out the following tasks. A single joint inception phase will cover both components; thereafter, tasks are organized by component, with data collection coordinated to avoid duplication.

4.1 Joint inception

Review programme documentation, including the Project Implementation Plan (PIP), Logic Model, PMF, baseline, MTR report, annual results reports, and operations reports. Hold an inception meeting with the AECF programme team. Submit a single inception report covering both components: including a refined Outcome Harvesting methodology and a full endline evaluation methodology and evaluation matrix, a reconstructed/validated Theory of Change, gender-analysis tools, a stakeholder engagement plan, a combined fieldwork schedule across both regions, all data collection instruments, sampling, quality-assurance and substantiation/verification approaches, ethics and safeguarding protocols, and a risk and mitigation register.

4.2 Component A Tasks: Outcome harvesting

• Task A1: Document review and initial outcome identification. Systematically review programme documents, monitoring data, progress markers, stories of change, and secondary sources to develop an initial list of candidate outcome statements before primary data collection.
• Task A2: Primary data collection. Conduct fieldwork in both regions using key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and direct observation (and other agreed methods), using a structured outcome-statement format capturing: (i) who changed; (ii) what changed; (iii) when the change occurred; (iv) the significance of the change; and (v) the program’s contribution.
• Task A3: Outcome verification and substantiation. Subject harvested outcome statements to structured triangulation, review with the AECF programme team for factual accuracy, and substantiation of a purposive sample of outcomes by knowledgeable, sufficiently independent verifiers. Document substantiation status, evidence of strength, and any contested outcomes.
• Task A4: Analysis and synthesis. Analyze the verified outcome set to identify patterns, assess contribution to the Theory of Change, highlight unintended/emergent outcomes, and identify ESG outcomes, trade-offs, and risks, disaggregated by gender, age, enterprise category, region, and outcome level.

4.3 Component A tasks: Outcome harvesting

• Task B1: Evaluation design and data collection. Operationalize the evaluation matrix; collect and triangulate quantitative and qualitative data against the OECD-DAC criteria and PMF, drawing on baseline, MTR, monitoring data, and Component A outcomes, and generating targeted primary data with beneficiaries and boundary partners.
• Task B2: Analysis against criteria. Assess relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability; apply the GESI and environmental lenses; and conduct contribution and value-for-money analyses.
• Task B3: Conclusions, lessons, and recommendations. Draw evidence-based conclusions, distil lessons, and formulate prioritised, actionable recommendations for AECF, GAC, and future programming.

4.4 Joint reporting, validation, and use of findings

Produce the reports and the outcomes database set out in Section 6; present findings to the AECF programme team and, if required, to the Programme Steering Committee or GAC; and facilitate a joint learning and validation session to review harvested outcomes and evaluation findings, interpret implications for the Theory of Change, agree priority actions for the remaining implementation period, and clarify how the findings will inform the final programme report to GAC.

5.0 Deliverables and expected outputs

The consultant(s) or firm will provide the following deliverables. Timelines run from contract signature or from the preceding milestone as indicated.

6.0 Qualifications and experience

The consultant is expected to be a firm with a multidisciplinary team and a clear matrix of leadership and roles. Given the combined scope, the team must demonstrate strength in both Outcome Harvesting and summative, OECD-DAC-based programme evaluation, alongside deep gender and blue economy expertise. The minimum competencies required across the team are:

Outcome harvesting and evaluation methodology

• Demonstrated practical experience designing and implementing Outcome Harvesting exercises, including outcome-statement frameworks, boundary-partner engagement plans, and verification/substantiation processes. Experience with Outcome Harvesting as developed by Ricardo Wilson-Grau is an asset.
• Demonstrated experience leading summative and/or end-of-programme (endline) evaluations using the OECD-DAC criteria, contribution analysis, and mixed (quantitative and qualitative) methods, and producing evaluation reports to international-donor standards.
• Familiarity with complementary participatory methodologies (Most Significant Change, Developmental Evaluation), and experience presenting findings to donors and steering structures in an actionable format.
• Familiarity with GAC’s evaluation expectations and results-based management, and with gender-responsive and utilisation-focused evaluation approaches.

Women’s economic empowerment and GESI

• Demonstrated experience evaluating or researching women’s economic empowerment programmes, with a strong understanding of gender-transformative approaches, women’s entrepreneurship, and the structural barriers women face in accessing finance, markets, and technology.
• Familiarity with gender measurement frameworks, including the Women’s Empowerment Index (WEI), and the ability to interpret gendered outcome evidence within the IIW-BEK results framework, including for young women.

Blue economy, private sector development, and policy

• Knowledge of, or experience working in, Kenya’s blue economy value chains (fisheries, aquaculture, coastal tourism, waste management) and the market-systems and enabling-environment challenges facing women-owned MSMEs.
• Experience evaluating grant-supported enterprise development, business incubation, or blended-finance models, and assessing the role of financial service providers, off-takers, and industry associations.
• Experience assessing policy and institutional outcomes; familiarity with Kenya’s relevant policy landscape (e.g., the Fisheries Management and Development Act, county gender policies, national women’s economic empowerment strategies) is an advantage.

 ESG, research, and leadership

• Demonstrated ESG expertise: ability to identify and assess environmental (resource efficiency, waste, emissions, climate adaptation, ecosystem protection), social (job quality, OHS, labour, safeguarding, inclusion, grievance handling), and governance (formalisation, compliance, transparency, responsible finance) outcomes and risks.
• Strong qualitative and quantitative research and analytical skills, and the ability to disaggregate and synthesise complex evidence into clear reports for non-technical and donor audiences.
• The Team Leader must hold a minimum of a master’s degree in a relevant discipline (development studies, gender studies, economics, social sciences, monitoring and evaluation, or related). Fluency in written and spoken English is required; Kiswahili is an added advantage.

7.0 Duration

The combined assignment (both components) should be executed within 150 working days of contract signature, with the endline evaluation phase timed to coincide with the program’s final period to draw on end-of-programme data. The final consolidated deliverables shall be submitted in line with the program’s closure and GAC final-reporting schedule. The precise start date, milestone dates, and the interface between the outcome harvesting and evaluation phases will be confirmed with the selected consultant at inception.

8.0 Reporting

The consultant will report to the Head of Impact at AECF and work closely with the IIW-BEK programme team.

9.0 Proposal submission

Interested companies/individuals must submit the following to demonstrate their qualifications:

• A technical proposal of no more than 15 pages (excluding annexes), including a profile of the lead consultant (max. 3 pages) explaining suitability; CVs of proposed team members showing expertise and roles; a comprehensive description of the consultant’s understanding of the Terms of Reference (noting any inconsistency or proposed amendment); the proposed methodology for both components; and a work plan.
• A detailed reference list indicating the scope and magnitude of similar assignments, reference/recommendation letters, samples of similar past work, and registration and other statutory documents (for institutional consultants).
• A financial proposal, submitted in USD, clearly showing each proposed team member, role, level of effort, number of days, professional fees, and applicable taxes, and distinguishing (where possible) the level of effort for each of the two components.

10.0 Pricing

AECF is obliged by the Kenyan tax authorities to withhold tax on service contract fees and to ensure that value-added tax (VAT) is charged where applicable. Applicants are advised to ensure they have a clear understanding of their tax position under Kenyan tax legislation when developing their proposals.

11.0 Evaluation criteria

Mandatory Requirements for firms:
1. Company profile.
2. Trading license or Certificate of incorporation or Certificate of Registration and other statutory documents.
3. Valid Tax Compliance certificate (Applicable to firms).
4. Passport/National Identification of the lead consultant and team members.

N/B: FAILURE TO ATTACH AND ADHERE TO THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS WILL RESULT IN AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION

The AECF will form an evaluation committee and may include employees of the businesses to be supported. The same standards of confidentiality will bind all members. The consultant should ensure they fully address all criteria for comprehensive evaluation.

The AECF may request and receive clarification from any consultant when evaluating a proposal. The evaluation committee may invite some or all of the consultants to appear before it to clarify their proposals. In such an event, the evaluation committee may consider such clarifications in evaluating proposals.

In making the final selection of the qualified bidder, the technical quality of the proposal will be weighted at 80% based on the evaluation criteria. Only the financial proposal of those bidders who qualify technically will be opened. The financial proposal will be weighted at 20%, and the proposals will be ranked by total points scored.

The mandatory and desirable criteria against which proposals will be evaluated are identified in the table below.

12.0 Application details

The AECF is an Equal Opportunity Employer and considers all interested candidates on merit without regard to race, gender, colour, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, age, marital status, veteran status, disability, or any other characteristic protected by applicable law.

• Interested firms/consultants or consortia are requested to submit their technical and financial proposal via the procurement portal https://procurement.aecfafrica.org/ by 23^rd September 2026, 5 pm (EAT).
• All questions should be directed to the procurement email aecfprocurement@aecfafrica.org by 16^th September 2026, 5 pm (EAT).
• The subject of the email should be ‘“IIW-BEK OUTCOME HARVESTING AND END OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION”. The AECF shall not be liable for failing to open proposals submitted with a different subject or for failing to respond to questions that did not meet the indicated deadline.

13.0 Disclaimer

AECF reserves the right to determine the structure of the process and the number of short-listed participants, the right to withdraw from the proposal process, and the right to change this timetable at any time without notice and without liability to compensate or reimburse any party. 

NB: The AECF does not charge an application fee for participation in the tender process and has not appointed any agents or intermediaries to facilitate applications. Applicants are advised to contact the AECF PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT directly. 

Annex 1: Outcome Harvesting Focus Matrix (Component A)

The matrix below maps key PMF areas of focus to Outcome Harvesting focus areas and guiding questions. It is intended to guide the harvest and support alignment with the results framework; it shall not limit the inquiry. Consultants must actively search for additional emergent outcomes, including outcomes outside the PMF, where these represent meaningful change linked to the programme.

Across all areas, the consultant(s) should identify environmental, social, and governance outcomes and risks: including whether supported enterprises improved environmental management, resource use, waste handling, pollution prevention, occupational health and safety, labour practices, safeguarding, grievance mechanisms, compliance, recordkeeping, transparency, and stakeholder engagement.

Annex 2: Indicative Endline Evaluation Matrix (Component B)

The indicative matrix below is to be refined and completed by the consultant at inception, with judgement criteria, indicators, data sources, and methods specified for each question. It applies the OECD-DAC criteria through a GAC gender equality and social inclusion lens.