1.0 Background

The Tanzania Clean Cooking Project (TCCP) is a four-year initiative funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) through the Africa Enterprise Challenge Fund (AECF LLC), with a total budget of $4.9 million. The project aims to accelerate the transition to clean cooking solutions among rural, peri-urban, and underserved urban populations. The intervention addresses systemic market barriers through a market systems development (MSD) approach, focusing on:

• Supply-side constraints: De-risking private sector investment through matching grants and technical assistance
• Demand-side barriers: Improving the affordability and accessibility of clean cooking solutions

The project is designed to complement existing sector initiatives and catalyze sustainable private-sector engagement in underserved yet high-potential markets.

Goal and Objectives: The program’s goal is to accelerate the adoption of clean cooking solutions among rural and marginalized communities in urban and peri-urban areas. This goal will be achieved through the following objectives:

• Catalyze private-sector participation in clean-cooking solutions in underserved markets.
• Accelerate the uptake of clean cooking solutions by providing innovative financing mechanisms and technical assistance to selected private-sector companies.
• Strengthen coordination in the clean cooking sector and advocate for a conducive policy environment to support a market-led clean cooking sector.

2.0 Objective of the assignment

The overall objective of this assignment is to document success stories and the overall impact of the TCCP, with a focus on capturing the project’s contributions to expanding access to clean energy, promoting gender and youth inclusion, supporting local innovation, creating jobs, and mitigating climate change.

The purpose of this end-of-term evaluation is to:

• Assess the project’s results and impact against its objectives and Theory of Change
• Assess overall project performance and results of the Tanzania Clean Cooking Project using the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria, including achievement of intended outcomes/impact, sustainability, inclusion/gender responsiveness, and contribution to enabling environment improvements.
• Evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the project’s capital deployment approach, focusing on Results-Based Financing (RBF) and milestone-based grants, and generate recommendations for improved design and delivery of future clean cooking financing projects.
• Generate high-impact evidence and learning on clean cooking delivery models and market transformation through three thematic learning studies covering: Households (All technologies deployed) and Institutional stoves.
• Synthesize learning into actionable project and sector recommendations, including best practices, business model drivers, market insights, and operational improvements to inform future clean cooking investments and policy/programming decisions.

The evaluation will serve both learning and accountability purposes, in line with Sida’s evaluation principles.

Evaluation Objectives

The evaluation will:

• Assess the achievement of outcomes and impact
• Examine the validity of the Theory of Change (ToC)
• Evaluate the effectiveness of the MSD approach in catalyzing market development
• Analyze the sustainability and scalability of results
• Identify lessons learned, good practices, and unintended effects.

3.0 Evaluation criteria & key questions

The OECD-DAC criteria will guide the evaluation:

Relevance

• To what extent is the project aligned with:
  • National energy and clean cooking priorities in Tanzania
  • Sida’s development cooperation strategies
• Was the project design appropriate for addressing market failures?

Coherence

• How well does TCCP complement other clean cooking initiatives and policies?
• Are there synergies or overlaps with other donor or government programs?

Effectiveness

• To what extent were the intended outputs and outcomes achieved?
• How effective were:
  • Matching grants
  • Technical assistance in catalyzing private sector participation?

Efficiency

• Were resources used cost-effectively?
• Were implementation arrangements appropriate and timely?

Impact

• What are the long-term and systemic changes attributable to the project?
• To what extent has the project contributed to:
  • Increased adoption of clean cooking solutions
  • Improved health, environmental, and socio-economic outcomes
• Are there any unintended positive or negative effects?

Durabilité

• Are the supported business models financially and operationally viable?
• Is there evidence of crowding in of additional private-sector actors?
• Will benefits continue after project completion?

Cross-Cutting Issues

The evaluation must assess integration and results related to:

• Gender equality
  • Women’s access to clean cooking solutions
  • Women’s participation in the value chain
• Poverty focus
  • Inclusion of low-income and marginalized populations
• Environment and climate
  • Reduction in emissions and deforestation
  • Contribution to climate resilience
• Human rights perspective

Equity in access to energy services

4.0 Scope of the evaluation

The assignment will cover the following workstreams.

1. Workstream 1: End-of-Project Evaluation Activities
   • Inception Phase and Evaluation Design: Prepare an Inception Report that outlines the evaluation approach and methodology, aligned with the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria (relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability). The inception report will include the evaluation framework, evaluation questions, analytical approach, evaluation matrix, data collection methods, work plan, and quality assurance measures.

As part of the inception phase, the Consultant will also develop and document a sampling strategy to guide the selection of investees, geographies, and stakeholder groups for inclusion in the evaluation. The sampling framework should ensure adequate representation across:

• Technology categories
• Geographic regions
• Market segments (household, institutional, and productive use)
• Financing modalities (Results-Based Financing and milestone-based grants)
• Investee performance levels (high, medium, and low performers)

The sampling approach and data collection tools will be validated with the AECF before commencement of the fieldwork phase.

• Project Document Review and Evidence Mapping: Conduct a comprehensive desk review of project documentation to understand the project’s design, implementation, and results. This will include the program Theory of Change, results framework, MEL documentation, grant agreements, progress and verification reports, technical assistance records, portfolio performance data, annual reports, and relevant sector studies. The review will support the development of an evidence map that identifies key data sources to address the evaluation questions.
• Theory of Change (ToC) Assessment: Assess the project’s Theory of Change, including its assumptions, causal pathways, and expected contribution to sector outcomes. The analysis will examine the extent to which program activities contributed to observed results and whether the underlying assumptions remained valid during implementation.
• Review of Project Monitoring and Results Data: Review program monitoring systems and investee-reported results to assess the reliability, completeness, and consistency of the data. This review will examine the quality of evidence supporting program results and the robustness of reporting across different financing modalities, including Results-Based Financing (RBF) and milestone-based grant mechanisms.
• Stakeholder Consultations and Key Informant Interviews: Conduct interviews and consultations with project management teams, investees, distributors/agents, government stakeholders, regulators, sector associations, peer funders, and subject-matter experts. These consultations will provide qualitative insights to support the assessment of projects’ performance against OECD-DAC criteria.
• Assessment of Financing Mechanisms: Assess the design and performance of the project’s financing mechanisms. The analysis will examine their effectiveness in catalyzing investment, supporting enterprise growth, and accelerating market development, and will also assess operational efficiency and value for money.
• Gender Equality, Inclusion, and Equity Assessment: Assess how gender equality and inclusion objectives were integrated into program design and implementation. The analysis will examine outcomes related to access, affordability, last-mile reach, women’s participation in enterprise models, and impacts on vulnerable or underserved populations.
• Enabling Environment and Market Systems Influence Analysis: Analyze the project’s contribution to strengthening the enabling environment and market systems, including support for policy dialogue, regulatory improvements, standards development, sector coordination, and partnerships with public- and private-sector actors.
• Draft Evaluation Report Development and Validation Workshop: Prepare the draft End-of-Project evaluation report and facilitate a validation session with key stakeholders to validate findings, refine conclusions, and strengthen recommendations.
• Final Evaluation Report and Presentation: Submit the final EoP evaluation Report incorporating feedback from the validation process. The final report will present evidence-based conclusions, lessons learned, and actionable recommendations to inform future program design and implementation.

2. Workstream 2: Impact Learning Studies Activities (Three Thematic Studies- LPG, Institutional cooking, Biomass stoves)

• Thematic Studies Inception and Analytical Framework: Develop an analytical framework for each thematic study outlining the key learning questions, analytical lenses (e.g., market transformation, business models, value chains), tools, data sources, timelines, and the reporting structure.
• Thematic Evidence Review: Conduct a desk review of project documentation and sector literature relevant to each theme. This will include review of investee reporting, project results, and verification records, financing milestones, and relevant market and sector studies.
• Thematic Portfolio Data Extraction and Validation: Extract and validate theme-specific portfolio data to support the analysis. This will include information on RBF claims and milestone achievement records, technology distribution volumes, geographic coverage, customer segmentation, and reported outcomes.
• Sampling Strategy and Case Study Selection: Develop and document a sampling approach for each thematic study to select a representative set of investees. This will include a mix of leading and emerging business models: high and low-performing investees; different geographic contexts; household and institutional customer segments; and diverse supply chain setups (direct distribution, agent networks, institutional procurement). Selected cases will be used to generate deeper insights into business models and market dynamics.
• Business Model and Value Chain Mapping: For each theme, analyze the structure and evolution of the business model and value chains, including supply chains and distribution mechanisms, last-mile delivery, customer acquisition, after-sales/service, partnerships, and compliance with relevant standards.
• Assessment of Financing Influence: Assess how financing instruments influenced enterprise behavior and business model structure, including pricing strategies, target markets, distribution expansion, product or service bundling, customer financing mechanisms, and operational system strengthening.
• Market Dynamics and Technology Adoption: Analyze market dynamics and technology adoption trends within each thematic area. This includes identifying key barriers and enablers to adoption, affordability and willingness-to-pay considerations, sustained usage patterns, competitive dynamics (e.g., LPG versus charcoal or traditional biomass), and procurement processes in the institutional cooking market.
• Intended and Unintended Effects: Assess both intended and unintended outcomes associated with the interventions, including stove stacking, safety practices, and risks (particularly for LPG), potential market distortions, risks of exclusion for low-income households, and sustainability challenges after the project ends.
• Key Lessons and Sector Transformation Opportunities: Synthesize findings to identify key lessons, knowledge gaps, and opportunities to strengthen future program design, financing instruments, and sector development strategies.
• Final Learning Reports and Dissemination: Prepare final publishable-quality thematic reports with clear analysis, visualizations, and evidence. The Consultant will also prepare dissemination materials, such as presentation slides and/or learning briefs, to support knowledge sharing with program stakeholders and the wider sector.

5.0 Deliverables

The consultant is expected to deliver:

1. An End-of-Project Evaluation Report.
2. Three impact studies per technology deployed.
3. Three knowledge products on:

• Comparative Analytical Note: Effectiveness of different capital deployment models in accelerating the adoption of clean cooking technologies.
• Policy Brief: What Works in Clean Cooking Finance — key lessons and policy recommendations for scaling clean cooking markets.
• Inclusion and Gender Learning Note: Opportunities for women and youth employment across the clean cooking value chain.

The findings will be presented to relevant stakeholders via dissemination workshops organized by AECF.

6.0 Duration of service

The assignment will run from May 2026 to July 2026. Consultants are required to submit a detailed work plan and timeline in their proposal, clearly indicating how time is allocated across the different phases of the assignment.

7.0 Rapports

The consultant will be accountable and report to the Director of Programmes, AECF with support from the Country Senior Programme Officer.

8.0 Qualifications and experience from the Firm and Personnel

The consultant is expected to be a firm with demonstrated corporate capacity to deliver high-quality evaluations in the renewable energy and development finance sectors. Consortia or joint tenders will not be accepted. The selected firm must have a strong institutional track record and thematic expertise aligned with the objectives and scope of this assignment.

A designated team Leader must be identified and supported by specialists organized to respond to the technical, methodological, and thematic requirements of the evaluation. Tenderers may propose any combination of team members appropriate to the methodology.

Institutional Qualifications

At the firm level, the contractor must demonstrate:

• Proven experience in delivering evaluations for development partners, including Sida, other bilateral donors, multilateral agencies (e.g., World Bank, AfDB), or major foundations.
• A track record in evaluating at least five renewable energy programs or challenge funds in Sub-Saharan Africa, with experience in Tanzania, is an added advantage.
• A minimum of 10 years’ experience managing assignments related to energy access, concessional finance, private sector development, gender inclusion, and market systems development.
• Robust internal systems for quality assurance, project management, and coordination of multidisciplinary and multilingual teams.

The evaluation team must collectively include the following qualifications:

• Demonstrated experience in managing or evaluating at least five concessional finance programs targeting SMEs and supporting inclusion in Africa, particularly in energy access, energy efficiency, rural development, or agriculture.
• Demonstrated experience in analyzing program design frameworks (e.g., Theories of Change), evaluating tool effectiveness
• Demonstrated experience in generating insights for program adaptation and scale-up.
• At least 10 years of experience in designing and conducting program evaluations, including evaluation methodology and high-quality report writing.
• A minimum of 6 years of technical experience in the renewable energy sector in Sub-Saharan Africa, including clean cooking market-based energy solutions.
• Expertise in development finance, including results- based financing, concessional funding mechanisms, blended finance, and investment facilitation.
• Strong experience in gender analysis, gender-responsive evaluation, and inclusive programming.
• Team Leader Requirements
• Must have expertise in one of the technical areas listed above
• Proven expertise in designing evaluation methodology and tools
• Demonstrated leadership in similar multi-country reviews/evaluations.

Other requirements

• At least one team member with expertise in gender data collection and analysis.
• Demonstrated capacity in data entry, processing, analysis, and preparation of reports to a high standard.
• Fluency in written and spoken English is essential, including the ability to draft academically rigorous reports.

9.0 Soumission des propositions

Qualified consulting   Firms  are invited to submit a proposal that includes the following:

• A comprehensive description of the consulting firm’s understanding of the Terms of Reference, indicating any major inconsistency or deficiency in the Terms of Reference and proposed amendments.
• A detailed methodology for the review, including the tools to be used in the review.
• The proposed team members and a description of their respective roles.
• A complete work plan for the entire review period.
• Liste de références détaillée indiquant la portée et l'ampleur de missions similaires.
• Relevant services that have been done in the past five (5) years.
• Signed letters of reference from 3 previous institutions/programmes.
• Company Registration, Tax compliance Certificates, and other relevant statutory documents.
• The technical and financial proposals are to be submitted separately in PDF format. NO LINKS.
• The financial proposal (in USD) clearly shows the budgeted cost for the consulting firm to perform the work within the scope outlined above.

N/B : LA SOUMISSION DU DOCUMENT FINANCIER ET DU DOCUMENT TECHNIQUE EN UN SEUL DOCUMENT ENTRAÎNERA AUTOMATIQUEMENT LA DISQUALIFICATION DU DEMANDEUR.

11.0 Pricing

The AECF is obliged by the Tanzania tax authorities to withhold taxes on service contract fees and to ensure that VAT at 18% is charged where applicable. Applicants are advised to ensure they have a clear understanding of their tax position with regard to the provisions of Kenyan tax legislation when developing their proposals.

12.0 Evaluation Criteria

Mandatory evaluation criteria

1. Exigences obligatoires pour les entreprises
2. Profil de l'entreprise.
3. Trading license, Certificate of incorporation, Certificate of Registration, and other statutory documents.
4. Certificat de conformité fiscale valide (applicable aux entreprises).
5. Passport/National Identification of the lead consultant and key personnel
6. Demonstrated financial capacity – 3 years audited accounts (2022,2023 & 2024)

Critères d'éligibilité

Eligible firms must meet the following criteria.

• Proven expertise in the relevant field.
• The availability of qualified personnel with experience in relevant areas, and of consultants based in Tanzania, will be an added advantage.
• Minimum of 5 years of experience in similar assignments with reference letters/completion certificates. Donor-funded organizations will be an added advantage.

N/B : LE FAIT DE NE PAS JOINDRE ET DE NE PAS RESPECTER LES EXIGENCES CI-DESSUS ENTRAÎNERA UNE DISQUALIFICATION AUTOMATIQUE.

An evaluation committee will be formed by the AECF and may include employees of the businesses it supports. All members will be bound by the same standards of confidentiality. The consultant should ensure that 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 a qualified bidder, the technical quality of the proposal will be weighted 70% in the evaluation. Only the financial proposal of those bidders who qualify technically will be opened. The financial proposal will be assigned a weight of 30%, and the proposals will be ranked by total points scored.

Les critères obligatoires et souhaitables sur la base desquels les propositions seront évaluées sont indiqués dans le tableau ci-dessous.

13.0 Application details

L'AECF est un employeur qui souscrit au principe de l'égalité des chances. L'AECF examine tous les candidats intéressés en fonction de leur mérite, sans tenir compte de la race, du sexe, de la couleur, de l'origine nationale, de la religion, de l'orientation sexuelle, de l'âge, de l'état civil, du statut d'ancien combattant, du handicap ou de toute autre caractéristique protégée par la législation en vigueur.

• Interested firms/consultants or consortia are requested to submit their technical and financial proposal to aecfprocurement@aecfafrica.org by 27^th April 2026, 5 pm (EAT).
• All questions should be directed to the procurement email by 16^th April 2026, 5 pm (EAT).
• The subject of the email should be ‘’END OF PROGRAMME EVALUATION AND HIGH IMPACT STUDIES FOR TANZANIA CLEAN COOKING PROJECT 2026”. The AECF shall not be liable for failing to open proposals submitted with a different subject or for responding to questions that did not meet the indicated deadline.

14.0 Disclaimer

L'AECF se réserve le droit de déterminer la structure du processus, le nombre de participants présélectionnés, le droit de se retirer du processus de proposition, le droit de modifier ce calendrier à tout moment sans préavis, et se réserve le droit de retirer cet appel d'offres à tout moment, sans préavis et sans obligation de dédommagement et/ou de remboursement à l'égard de toute partie.

The AECF does not charge an application fee for participation in the tendering process and has not appointed any agents or intermediaries to facilitate applications. Applicants are advised to contact the AECF Procurement Department directly.