Evaluation of ALIPH’s Beirut Action Plan Terms of Reference
As part of its evaluation policy, ALIPH seeks a reviewer to evaluate its Beirut Action Plan, initiated shortly after the explosion of August 4th, 2020, and implemented in partnership with international and local partners. While some parts of the program are still ongoing, a significant amount of activities have been implemented, , thus justifying the implementation of an evaluation. Overall, the Beirut Action Plan aimed to provide emergency support immediately following the tragedy, in close collaboration with the Direction Générale des Antiquités. The Action Plan allowed the implementation of 21 different projects listed in Annex 1.
I – Targets of the evaluation
The evaluation will focus on two targets:
a. The Beirut Action Plan as a whole and how it was shaped and implemented, to identify and highlight lessons learned and good practices. ALIPH is particularly interested in the evaluation of the objectives of the Action Plan as well as the strategic decisions that led to its development and its fast implementation.
b. A selection of 5 projects within the Action Plan, including the four selected projects below as well as an additional project selected by the reviewer from the list provided in Annex 1. This analysis will specifically address the technical quality of the conservation work.
a. Urgent roof coverings for 18 historical houses in Rmeil and Medawar quarters, Fondation Nationale du Patrimoine (FNP) within the framework of the « Beirut Heritage Initiative (BHI) » (Lebanon), in cooperation with the École Supérieure des Affaires (ESA, Lebanon).
b. Stabilization of 12 historical houses in Rmeil and Medawar quarters, Institut français du Proche-Orient (IFPO, France), in cooperation with the Direction Générale des Antiquités (Lebanon).
c. Recovery of the Beirut National Museum and DGA Headquarters –Phase 1, Musée du Louvre (France), in cooperation with the Direction Générale des Antiquités (DGA, Lebanon).
d. Waterproofing the Sursock Museum, Fonds arabe pour les Arts et la Culture (AFAC, Switzerland), in cooperation with the Sursock museum (Lebanon)
II – Objectives of the evaluation
The analysis will address the following questions:
a. Overall quality of the Action Plan:
• How was the Action Plan shaped (goals, structure, strategy) and was it adapted to the needs?
• What emergency mechanisms were put in place to ensure a fast and appropriate response? What supported or prevented said response?
• How did the Beirut Action Plan interact with other cultural heritage initiatives?
b. Contribution of the Action Plan to the socio-economic impact and capacity building:
• Assessment of the number and quality of training opportunities.
• Assessment of the number and quality of job opportunities
c. Contribution of the Action Plan to community needs:
• Did the Action Plan contribute to raising awareness of the need to protect cultural heritage for its potential role in dialogue and mutual respect?
• Did the action plan improve community resilience?
d. Quality and durability of conservation measures of the heritage addressed in the five selected projects.
• Technical assessment outcomes for the five projects, including the respect of existing technical standards, the methodology, the quality of the material used, and the team’s expertise.
• Sustainability of the result, capacity-building of the local communities involved in the five projects.
III – Methodology of the evaluation
The evaluation will need to define a clear methodological framework and analyze the main learning components to identify lessons learned and extract clear recommendations. See the list below:
a. Create a methodological framework that identifies the standards of reference for the evaluation. The reviewer may employ any appropriate quantitative or qualitative method as needed.
b. Carry out a comprehensive desk review of relevant Action Plan and projectrelated documents.
c. Carry out interviews with members of the ALIPH staff, conservators, and teams from the selected projects within the Action Plan.
d. Carry out field visits to produce technical evaluations of the five selected projects.
e. Analyze the main lessons learned and identify potential indicators. Identify the strengths of the Action Plan.
f. Identify weaknesses and provide recommendations on how to address them later.
IV – Proposal
a. Required experience.
• Evaluation of cultural heritage projects involving capacity building.
• Creation and implementation of an evaluation methodology relying on quantitative and qualitative data.
• Scientific assessment of conservation work using the data available.
• Availability to carry out fieldwork in Lebanon.
• Demonstrated ability to carry out interviews with a diversity of stakeholders.
• Compilation and analysis of the collected data into a coherent report.
b. Elements of the proposal
• Description of the applicant’s approach and methodology tailored to the project and the needs of the evaluation
• Brief description of the applicant’s track record in relevant projects
• CV of the lead applicant
• Budget with daily fees and planned travel expenses
V – Administration
a. Timeline
The timeline will be as follow:
• 7 June 2023: publication of the RFP
• 28 June 2023: deadline for submission of proposals
• 5 July 2023: attribution of evaluation by ALIPH
• Mid-July 2023: signing of the review contract, beginning of work
• August 2023: submission of inception report
• Late-November 2023: submission of a draft report, feedback from ALIPH and online meeting with ALIPH’s staff
• Late-December 2023: final report
b. Budget
ALIPH estimates a total of 55 to 65 days to carry out this project. The budget of this evaluation will need to remain at 40,000 USD, inclusive of taxes and travel expenses, and be paid in two instalments (50% at signature, 50% at approval of the final report).
c. Deliverables
The reviewer will be requested to produce an inception report that presents the methodology of the evaluation, and work plan and a list of the tools and information necessary for the project. Towards the end of the evaluation, a preliminary report will be presented and will need to be approved by the team at the ALIPH Foundation. A final report will be presented to the ALIPH Foundation to share the main lessons learned.
d. Language
The reports will be written in English. Knowledge of French and Arabic is desirable but not required.
Evaluation of ALIPH`s Beirut Action Plan
