Purpose of the evaluation
This evaluation is occurring as the 8th year of the campaign and as the APHEDA board considers the future of the campaign. The results of the evaluation will assist the APHEDA Board in planning and consider possible future program actions and priorities.
The evaluation will review progress and impacts in Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Indonesia and regionally against the objectives and key markers and theories of change developed. The evaluation will review reports, evaluations and other related documents to seek to identify the role the program has played, and outcomes achieved.
The evaluation will also seek feedback from partners in SE Asia and Australia on outcomes for them, the perceived quality of APHEDA’s engagement with them, support to coordination and technical inputs provided to them or through them.
The evaluation will be led by an external consultant but will engage local consultants where necessary to undertake surveys and collect data and information from partner organisations and others.
Objectives of the campaign
‘Asbestos. Not Here Not Anywhere.’
Original objectives 2017-2019
1/Win country ban announcements in at least three countries in Southeast Asia
2/ Reform the voting process at the Rotterdam Convention.
3/Help secure a regulatory regime in Australia which can more effectively block imported goods containing asbestos.
4/Build membership for Union Aid Abroad and increase union and community support.
Project Goal and Objectives 2020-2024
|Goal:||Contribute to banning asbestos in South-East Asia and reducing future asbestos related diseases, with a primary focus on Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and Indonesia|
|Specific Objectives:||1/ Civil society networks strengthened and advocating bans on asbestos and future ARD reduction in 4 countries|
|2/Specific planning and regulation support to asbestos bans achieved in all 4 countries
|3/ Strengthened global regulation of trade in asbestos and asbestos containing materials (ACM)
- Assess outcomes and impacts of the campaign in target countries, regionally and globally. Specifically:
- Reach and effectiveness of awareness raising components including media/social media and events`
- changes to consumption of asbestos that can be reasonably regarded as being contributed to by the campaign.
- listing national, regional or global policies, regulations, agreement or plans in the target area of the campaign, related to asbestos exposure risk reduction and bans.
- evidence of strengthened regional or global level alliances and action attributable to the program.
- the contribution of movement-building in achieving these outcomes
- the programs contribution to ASEA’s Priority 4
- An outline of the campaign’s contribution to DFAT’s development priorities and ACTU International program.
- Make recommendations on possible next steps for the campaign.
- In terms of effectiveness:
- In which areas has the program been successful?
- What strategies have proved most successful?
- What has been the perceived quality of APHEDA’s engagement with partners, coordination, and technical inputs?
- In terms of relevance: How relevant is this campaign in terms of need and to partners?
- In terms of efficiency and long-term impact:
- How has the program performed in terms of value for money?
- Is it bringing sustainable long-term change (behavior, policy, systems)?
- How has the program engaged with networks and stakeholders?
- What are the lessons learned between country campaigns on asbestos banning and eliminating ARD?
- In terms of cross-cutting issues: How does the campaign engage and contribute too:
- Gender equality
- Disability inclusion
- Child protection
- Environmental safeguard
The evaluation is planned as an outcome evaluation. This evaluation will measure the campaign results and determine what level of change the campaign and strategy approach produced in regard reducing consumption of ACM and exposure risks for workers and community as well as policy reform on chrysotile asbestos movement building and capacity of partners.
The evaluation will focus on reviewing existing documentation with scope for verification interviews and surveys. Documentation available includes media, reports and evaluations from each country. Interviews or surveys with partners in all 4 countries via local consultants or zoom interview as well as other relevant stakeholders. It is not planned for the evaluating consultant to travel personally to project sites.
- a methodology and plan for the evaluation submitted,
- a draft evaluation reports.
- a final report
The final report should include the following chapters and be no more than 25 pages plus Annexes:
- Executive summary
- Description of methods used (and limitations)
- findings of the study in regard objectives and outcomes as outlined.
- Lessons learned.
|Advertisement for consultancy||November 15 2023|
|Submission of offers||December 8th|
|Selection of consultant(s)||December 20th 2023|
|Evaluation data collection||January/February|
|Submission of draft evaluation report||March 10th 2024|
|Union Aid Abroad – APHEDA provides comments on draft report||March 14th 2024|
|Submission of final report||March 21st 2024|
APHEDA will assist facilitate the consultant(s) work in particular with regards to the organisation of meetings and interviews. A budget for local interview consultants, if needed, should also be included.