Describe the conceptual framework that will be used to undertake this study. 

Explain the methodology proposed with changes as required. 

Set out in detail the data required to answer the key questions, data sources by a specific question, data collection methods, sampling, and selection criteria of respondents for interviews, surveys, and FGDs. 

Detail the work plan for the assessment, indicating its phases, key deliverables, and milestones. 

List the key stakeholders to be interviewed and the tools to be used for interviews and discussions. 

Present a detailed and tentative outline / table of contents for the final Endline Assessment report. 

Prior to the formulation of a first draft of the Endline Assessment Report, the consultant should provide a briefing document and formal presentation of initial findings of the Assessment to the AP Asia team. This presentation should provide the AP Asia Team with an understanding of the results of the Key Questions posed under the Assessment and provide an opportunity for the AP Asia team to provide feedback on the parameters of the assessment prior to report drafting stage. The firm will be required to share a detailed outline of the report to showcase the expected structure and flow of its content prior to commencing work on the actual draft. 

The consultant should provide the first draft of the Endline Assessment Report to the AP Asia team following the agreed schedule. The draft will be improved by incorporating AP Asia’s management team’s comments and input. The AP Asia’s management team holds the responsibility of providing the first round of approval on this draft. This updated draft report will be shared with relevant stakeholders including the European Union (EU) and the firm will be obligated to incorporate their feedback into the final draft, which will then be approved by the EU.  

The consultant(s) will submit the final report, incorporating and responding to all comments from AP, EUand other key stakeholders. 

The consultant should also hand over the complete dataset including filled questionnaires and transcripts of the interviews, survey results, to AP at the end of the assignment. 

The consultant will prepare a PowerPoint of the findings from the final Report and present the findings to AP leadership (including the Executive Committee). 

Over 10 years’ experience in conducting Endline Assessments and Evaluations in Central and South Asia, preferably with experience conducting these types of evaluations for the EU. 

Proven experience in assessing entrepreneurship programs in Central and South Asia. 

Should consist of team members who are subject matter experts with a postgraduate degree in business, research, economics,or other relevant fields. 

Extensive conceptual and methodological skills and experience in quantitative and qualitative assessments, including evaluation designs, participatory and theory-based approaches, and quantitative and qualitative methods. 

Prior work experience in Central and South Asia with proven understanding of the entrepreneurship context in the region. 

Should have excellent facilitation, coordination, negotiation, and English writing skills especially report writing. 

Fluency in regional languages where AP Asia is working will be an advantage (Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan). Alternatively, the firm must have translators onboard to readily support it with interviews, FGDs, and such where communication skills in the local language will be required. The firm should also have access to reliable technological tools or human resources for translations of the survey tool, interview and FGD instrument, and later the qualitative primary data from the interviews and FGDs, as needed.  

The firm must also have HR capacity to run different research activities for the assessment simultaneously.  

Conceptual framework and methodology proposed in the proposal and responsiveness of the proposal to the Terms of Reference (ToRs). 

Evaluation questions as per the DOA of AP Asia Project 

Relevant professional experience of the consulting firmdemonstrated through CVs of the team. 

Organizational profile with 10 years or more of relevant experience 

Quality and relevance of sample evaluation reports (at least two reports from the last five years) 

Financial Quote 

How well does the AP Asia project align with and support national development strategies and policies in the four target countries (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan) aimed at promoting rural economic growth, enterprise development, and gender equality? 

To what extent does the project coordinate with and complement other donor-funded programs and initiatives implemented by AKF focused on economic development, employment generation, and gender equity in the region and beyond? Are there any overlaps or synergies? 

To what extent did the project support or align with local and regional trade policies or initiatives aimed at fostering cross-border trade and economic collaboration among enterprises in the target countries? 

Does the project’s implementation avoid conflicts or contradictions with other ongoing programs in the region, particularly those aimed at economic development, rural enterprise growth, and employment creation? 

How effectively did the project build partnerships and leverage existing networks of private sector, governmental, and non-governmental organizations to ensure coherent and unified efforts toward enterprise growth and self-employment in rural areas? 

Were there any coordination challenges between the AP Asia project and other initiatives in the region? If so, how were these challenges addressed to maintain coherence across the different programs? 

How does the project align with broader international initiatives or policies? 

What measures were taken to avoid overlap or duplication with other projects in the same sector? 

How effectively has the EU’s role and contribution been communicated to stakeholders associated with the action? 

Does the program’s logic and theory of change effectively support the project’s objectives, such as promoting equitable economic well-being and increasing employment opportunities for women and youth in rural areas? 

Were the targets set by the AP Asia project, such as the growth of supported enterprises and increased trade, realistic given the socio-economic conditions in the four target countries (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan)? 

Do the project’s objectives reflect the actual economic needs of the target groups, including women, youth, and rural communities, in the host countries? How well do they align with the local priorities and policies? 

Did the planning and implementation of interventions account for local contexts, including (a) conducting adequate needs assessments, and (b) understanding and supporting the livelihoods, capacities, and socio-economic conditions of the target populations? 

Did the project team and local partners (e.g., local governments, business centers, community leaders) have the necessary institutional capacity, including staffing, local knowledge, and experience, to effectively implement the project’s objectives and respond to the evolving needs of the communities? 

To what extent did the community and key stakeholders (e.g., women-led enterprises, youth groups, local business associations) participate in the planning and implementation of the project interventions? Were their insights integrated into the project design? 

Did the AP Asia project effectively respond to the needs and priorities of the target groups, including addressing gender-specific economic barriers and fostering youth employment, while also adapting to any changes in circumstances or needs over the project’s 60-month timeline? 

To what extent are the principles of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) being integrated in the initiative? 

How have changing needs or external factors influenced the project’s relevance over time? 

Were beneficiaries involved in the design process to ensure the project’s relevance to their needs? 

Did the project’s interventions lead to significant changes in the economic status of the target beneficiaries, particularly women and youth in rural settings? Were there observable improvements in income, employment, or enterprise growth? 

To what extent did the project’s interventions, such as business training, mentorship, and financial support, directly contribute to the growth of women- and youth-led ventures? Were these interventions effective in overcoming barriers to economic participation for these groups? 

To what extent did the programme achieve its outputs, outcome and goals? Following are the key outcome level indicators to assess: 

To what extent has the visibility of the EU contributed to achieving the project’s objectives? 

To what extent did the AP Asia project use its financial and human resources efficiently to achieve its objectives of enterprise growth, employment creation, and trade facilitation in rural areas? Were the resources allocated appropriately across the four countries (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan)? 

Were the project’s interventions cost-effective in achieving the desired outcomes, such as increased enterprise growth, self-employment opportunities, and enhanced trade? Did the benefits of the interventions justify the costs? 

Were there any areas where the project could have reduced costs without compromising quality or results? Were there alternative approaches that could have achieved similar outcomes at a lower cost? 

Was the project delivered on time and within budget, and were any deviations from the plan managed effectively to maintain efficiency 

What were the positive and negative, intended and unintended, changes produced by the project? 

What unforeseen positive or negative impacts (if any) have resulted from the project’s interventions, and how have these affected the local economic or social conditions in the target regions? 

Did the AP Asia project lead to systemic changes in the entrepreneurial ecosystem of the target countries (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan), such as better access to markets, improved business networks, or increased support for start-ups and SGBs? 

To what extent has the project influenced broader policy or systemic change? 

To what extent are the benefits of the AP Asia project, such as enterprise growth, self-employment, and increased trade, likely to be sustained beyond the project’s completion? 

Have the project’s interventions (e.g., training, capacity building, business development services) equipped women, youth, and rural entrepreneurs with the skills and resources necessary to continue growing their businesses without external support? 

What mechanisms (e.g., partnerships, business networks, access to finance, market linkages) have been put in place to ensure the ongoing success of enterprises supported by the project? Are these mechanisms sustainable over time? 

To what extent has the project built local ownership and capacity among stakeholders (e.g., local governments, business associations, educational institutions) to sustain the impacts of the project, particularly in promoting economic well-being and enterprise development? 

How well are local institutions equipped to maintain and expand the project’s impact?