Annex 1
Terms of Reference (ToR):
Mid-term Review of Norwegian Cooperation with ACCORD
Core Support to Program for Constructive Resolution of Conflicts in Africa and support for
Post-Conflict Peacebuilding in Burundi: Promoting Peace, Reconciliation and Effective
Governance.
In 2010 Norway entered into a core support agreement with the African Centre for the Constructive
Resolution of Disputes (ACCORD). The agreement covers the period 2011 – 2014 with a financial grant
contribution from Norway of up to 15 000 000 NOK for the period. The agreement requires that a midterm review focusing on the effectiveness of the program and outcomes/ early impact up to date should
be conducted. Through this core support, Norway also supports ACCORD’s activities in South Sudan.1
Furthermore, Norway entered into an agreement with ACCORD to support ACCORD’s program in
Burundi for the period 2011 – 2013 with a financial grant contribution of up to 12 000 000 NOK for the
three-year period, also with a requirement that a mid-term review should be conducted. This
assignment covers the mid-term review required for these two agreements.
The main emphasis of this assignment is on the relevance and outcomes/ early impact of Norway’s
cooperation with ACCORD. In addition, efficiency, sustainability, program design and knowledge
production and dissemination are included.
The assignment requires review of documents (contracts, annual reports, knowledge products and so on)
as well as interviews with relevant personnel in South Africa, Burundi and South Sudan.
1 Background
ACCORD is a South Africa-based civil society organization working throughout Africa, whose primary aim
is to influence political developments by bringing conflict resolution, dialogue and institutional
development to the forefront as an alternative to armed violence and protracted conflict. ACCORD
specializes in conflict management, conflict mediation, conflict analysis and conflict prevention, as well
as training and policy development.2
Activities are undertaken by the two operational arms of ACCORD, the Knowledge Production
Department (KPD) and the Interventions Department (ID). KPD plays a key organisational role in terms of
establishing ACCORD as a positive and constructive learning and research-oriented institution.
Specifically, the KPD seeks to strengthen and inform ACCORD’s interventions, whilst providing a platform
1
Please note that Norway had a separate agreement with ACCORD 4 768 000 NOK for perioden 2010-2011for
activities in Sudan for the period 2010-2011.
2
http://www.accord.org.za/
1
for learning and reflection, as well as contributing to in-house capacity building. The ID plays a key
organisational role in terms of bolstering conflict management initiatives in Africa through targeted
programmes and interventions, as well as in overall support to conflict affected states across Africa. The
ID is comprised of dedicated Peacemaking, Peacekeeping, Peacebuilding and Training Units, as well as
ACCORD’s South Sudan Initiative (SSI) and the Burundi Country Program.
Core support: The overall goal of Norway’s cooperation with ACCORD as defined in the agreement on
core support is that peace and security in Africa is promoted and maintained. The objectives are focused
on conflict mitigation and post-conflict reconstruction:

Facilitate the introduction, support for and sustainability of conflict management initiatives in
conflict affected societies through intervening in conflict situations

Nurture innovation and enhance the quality of ACCORDs contribution to the field of conflict
resolution by linking ACCORD’s practical experiences and peace and conflict research to add
knowledge to the field of conflict management through best practices and knowledge
production

Advance the analysis of conflict by developing programs that are aligned and seek to promote
the corresponding organizational objectives to provide tools and approaches for developing
capacity and capability to respond to different phases of conflict.
Burundi: ACCORD started working in Burundi in 1995 and has offices in Bujumbura, Ruyigi, Rumonge and
of Rutana. Since 1995, ACCORD’s work in the country focuses on facilitating interactions among key
stakeholders in Burundi and between relevant stakeholders and their counterparts in Africa. In addition,
activities in Burundi concentrate on skills development to build the capacity of community leaders, civil
society, political actors and other relevant roleplayers in conflict prevention, management and
transformation. Lastly, ACCORD contributes to ensuring that the ongoing process of the repatriation and
reintegration of Burundian refugees takes place in a smooth and conflict-free manner by providing legal
assistance and mediation services to both returning refugees as well as welcoming communities.
The goals of Norway’s agreement with ACCORD for the program Post-Conflict Peacebuilding in Burundi:
Promoting Peace, Reconciliation and Effective Governance are: Strengthening local capacities for peace;
to contribute towards sustainable peace; national cohesion; reconciliation; effective governance and
development in Burundi. These goals are sought achieved through various training, policy development,
research and capacity-building activities with various peacebuilding stakeholders.
2 Purpose
The main purpose of the review is to assess the relevance and outcomes/ impact of Norway’s
cooperation with ACCORD up to date, i.e. assess the extent to which the purposes described in the
agreements are being/ have been achieved. The review should assess advantages / disadvantages with
2
core support and earmarked program support, and the overall efficiency and sustainability of the
program.
The review should assess the knowledge production and dissemination activities of ACCORD, its
organizational efficiency (sufficient competence and capacity) and particularly outcomes and impact of
its operational work on the African continent, with a special emphasis on South Sudan and Burundi.
In addition, the review is expected to provide advice on how to further improve the cooperation
between Norway and ACCORD.
3 Scope of work
Where otherwise not stated, the questions below refer to both the agreements.
Relevance

How does the work performed by ACCORD and ACCORD’s strategic approach in peacemaking,
peacekeeping, peacebuilding, training and knowledge production correspond to demands for
knowledge products and operational services provided by ACCORD, based on perception of
relevant actors such as the UN and its agencies,3 the AU and its various bodies and programs,4
the Regional Economic Communities (RECs) in Africa5and the g7+? Please provide examples.

How does the work performed by ACCORD (research, training, conflict resolution, conflict
prevention, peacebuilding) relate to other organizations / institutions performing similar work
(i.e. overlap, additionally, synergies) in the African region? Please provide examples.

How does the agreement between Norway and ACCORD contribute to the advancement of the
overall goal of ACCORD (peace and security in Africa is promoted and maintained?) Please
provide examples.

How does the partnership with ACCORD contribute to enhancing Norway’s capacity to play an
active role in development, peacebuilding, conflict prevention, conflict resolution and peace and
reconciliation in Africa (and globally)?
Outcomes/ early impact of the partnership: How has ACCORD contributed to the promotion and
maintenance of peace and security in Africa?

To what degree has ACCORD succeeded in nurturing innovation and enhance the quality of
ACCORD’s contribution to the field of conflict resolution by linking ACCORD’s practical
3
Including UN Women, DPKO, the Peacebuilding Fund, Political Affairs, UNHCR etc.
Including the PSOD, the CMD, NEPAD etc.
5 Including SADC, IGAD, ECOWAS, the ICGLR etc.
4
3
experiences and peace and conflict research to add knowledge to the field of conflict
management through best practices and knowledge production? Please provide examples from
both rapid response activities and longer-term engagements.

To what degree and how has ACCORD succeeded in facilitating the introduction, support for and
sustainability of conflict management (including training and other capacity building
interventions) in conflict affected societies through contributing to peace? Please provide
examples.

To what extent has proposed outputs (both interventions and knowledge production) been
produced, and to what degree have these outputs contributed to the overall goal and objectives
for the program? Please provide examples.
Specific questions for Burundi:

To what degree and how has ACCORD succeeded in strengthening local capacities for peace, to
contribute towards sustainable peace, national cohesion, reconciliation, effective governance
and development in Burundi? Please provide examples.

To what degree and how has ACCORD strengthened capacity of civil society, government and
political actors to build sustainable peace? Please provide examples.

To what degree and how has ACCORD contributed to improving the culture of dialogue at the
political level in Burundi? Please provide examples.
Programme Design, including monitoring, evaluation, governance structure and risk assessment/ risk
management

Please assess the quality and relevance of ACCORD’s overall strategy and how it relates to
selecting activities. How are projects selected and approved? Is the planning process considered
as satisfactory?

What are the main advantages and disadvantages of providing core support as opposed to
earmarked support to ACCORD, including an assessment of sustainability elements?

To what degree does ACCORD possess sufficient capacity and competence to sustain its current
level of activities?
4

Please assess the results framework, including indicators, used by ACCORD to monitor its
activities for both the agreements. What are the major areas for improvement with regard to the
monitoring, reporting and evaluation system(s)? Please provide specific recommendations.

Have adequate risk analysis been conducted and up-dated? Are adequate risk management
systems in place, including for financial risks? Are risks for corruption analyzed and mitigated?

To what extent does the annual progress report provide useful information on - and analysis ofresults (outcomes and possibly impact)? How are risks, challenges, shortcomings and deviations
described, analyzed and accounted for? Have there been any adjustments of ongoing activities?
Please provide examples.

Does ACCORD initiate periodical, independent evaluation and / or reviews of its overall work?
What are the main lessons from previous evaluations and to what degree are these lessons
integrated in the agreement with Norway and in the overall work of ACCORD?
Research, Dissemination and Use of Knowledge Products

To what degree is research undertaken and disseminated by ACCORD considered as relevant by
major actors? Who benefit from this research, and how is it applied in ACCORD’s operational
work? Please provide examples.

To what extent has ACCORD succeeded in reaching a broad and diverse audience through the
dissemination of ACCORD’s research, policy analysis, and training outcomes?
Financial management of the framework agreement

Does the use of finances comply with the agreement and annual working plans?

Does financial reporting and audits comply with the requirements as stated in the agreement,
and is the reporting considered as satisfactory? If not, what is missing of information?

Assess the financial aspects of the proposed activities. What measures have been taken in order
to obtain financial sustainability? What are the risks involved should Norway chose not to
finance (all of) the proposed activities?
The agreements do not address gender equality issues in particular or the role of women in
peacebuidling and conflict resolution. However, this should, if feasible, be included in discussion with
5
ACCORD, with an emphasis on ACCORD’s strategic approach to mainstreaming gender equality in its
work, and how Norway can contribute to the further advancement of this agenda.
4 Presentation of Proposal
The technical part of the Proposal shall include, but not necessarily be limited to:

A work plan with proposed work methodology and (tentative) time schedule for the deliverables.
Reference is made to chapter 5 in this ToR.

List of personnel with input and role in the assignment

CVs
If the Consultant has any comments to the ToR, they could also be included in the technical part of the
Proposal.
Reference assignments (maximum 5 references, maximum ½ pages for each assignment)
Financial part of the assignment:

Fee rates for all personnel

Specified budget with input (man weeks) for all personnel and other expenses (travels, per
Diems, equipment). The budget should include an amount of 5% for unforeseen expenses
(physical contingency) and shall serve as a ceiling for the services to be rendered.
All rates and other expenses shall be given in NOK. The proposal should be written in English and should
not exceed 5 pages (CVs not included).
5 Implementation
Information sources and methodology
The assignment should be based on document analysis and interviews with relevant actors such as
ACCORD’s staff, regional organisations, government representatives and civil society organisations.
Norad will assist in identifying relevant actors. The assignment will include field visits to South Africa,
Burundi and South Sudan.
Team composition
The team should consist of 1-2 people with formal background and working experience from social,
economic or political sciences with a strong methodological background. The team leader (if two
people) should have a minimum of 6 years of direct relevant working experience, including experience
6
from working/ conducting fieldwork in fragile situations. English proficiency is a prerequisite and working
knowledge of French is desirable. Further, it is expected that the team should:

Have well-documented knowledge of the thematic areas of peace and reconciliation, conflict
analysis, conflict prevention and peacebuidling. Knowledge of major international organisations
working on these thematic issues, both in Africa and globally is desirable. Up-dated knowledge of
international discourse and research is an asset.

At least one of the team members should possess strong, documented methodological
competence in particularly qualitative research methods, including conducting interviews.

Have experience from similar assignments

Have excellent analytical skills
Furthermore, a local consultant could be hired to assist during fieldwork and the conduction of the
interviews in South Africa, Burundi and South Sudan. Expenses of this will, if relevant, be covered by the
Norwegian embassy in Pretoria.
In addition, Norad could contribute in the preparation phase and document analysis with approximately
two working weeks. Norad will consider participation in parts of the fieldwork.
Please refer “Konkurransegrunnlaget” for further details and criteria for the assessment of the tender.
Deliverables / Schedule:
Phase
Report
Deadline
Implementing phase
Draft report
17 June 2013*
Finalisation
Final report
28 June 2013
Dissemination
Presentation of the report to
the donor (the Norwegian
Ministry of Foreign Affairs in
Oslo)
June 2013/ August 2013
*Tentative date that depends on start of fieldwork.
The final report should be approximately 25 single-spaced pages (annexes not included). The report
should include an executive summary (major findings, conclusions and recommendation, not exceeding
2 pages). Note that dissemination of findings is included as a part of the assignment.
Place and date
Signature
7