The main objective of this project is to provide an overall independent assessment of the past performance of the “ENPARD Moldova – Support to Agriculture and Rural Development" program, paying particular attention to its results measured against its expected objectives, and the reasons underpinning such results. Meanwhile, key lessons learned, conclusions, and corresponding recommendations will be presented in order to improve future budget support programs.

The evaluation will be carried out according to the EU’s guiding documents and methodologies – notably complying with Better Regulation Guidelines and Evaluation methods, the relevant regulations for financing external actions and instruments, scoping the whole results chain (intervention logic), the priority guidelines of the European Consensus and the related EU Development and Cooperation Results Framework, the OECD’s DAC quality standards and criteria for evaluation, the OECD’s methodological approach for evaluating budget support (the latter relates to only Step 1 and part of Step 2), and using the methods and techniques for intervention logic, eligibility criteria, and performance assessment reflected in the EU’s Budget Support Guidelines.

The evaluation will be conducted using five DAC evaluation criteria (relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability) as well as the EU-specific evaluation criteria known as EU added value. It will take into account cross-cutting issues and interlinkages with SDGs as well as whether the principle of “leave no-one behind” and the rights-based methodology were followed in the identification/formulation documents and the extent to which these were followed during implementation.

While the main focus of the evaluation will be on the achievements and results, it will also pay attention to the quality of design, the coordination of planning of different modalities, the efficiency of BS and CS inputs to attain direct outputs, the achievement of the induced outputs by the main stakeholders, the effectiveness of the attainment of outcomes, as well as actual impacts and sustainability factors.

Based on the indicative evaluation questions listed in the ToR, after initial consultations and document analysis during the inception phase, the evaluation team will propose in the Inception Report a complete and finalized set of evaluation questions with an indication of specific judgement criteria and indicators, as well as the relevant data collection sources and tools.

One of the first steps of the evaluation process is to reconstruct the intervention logic of the Program to evaluate how this relates to the choice of BS performance indicators/specific disbursement conditions and the nature of complementary assistance ToRs and mechanisms. These aspects will be examined for consistency with program objectives and rationales in the relevant identification and action documents and the Technical and Administrative Provisions (TAPs) and the appendices of the financing agreement.

Determining the evaluation questions and agreeing on the evaluation matrix are the key tasks of the evaluation, with a focus on the achievement of a common understanding of their scope and content with the EU Delegation and the key government stakeholders that make up the Evaluation Reference Group. Once the evaluation questions are finalized as well as the judgement criteria and indicators, the collection of relevant sources of information and data can begin, followed by analysis and validation. Thereafter, the findings will be synthesized into conclusions, lessons learned and, where appropriate, recommendations.

The evaluation will comprise the following phases:

• Inception and Desk Phase: the program’s intervention logic is clarified or reconstructed; the evaluation questions (EQs) and related criteria and indicators to be addressed by the final report are agreed; key stakeholders as sources of documentation and potential interviewees are identified; and a future evaluation workplan and schedule is agreed. An initial examination of documentation will inform the evaluation matrix and the planning of activities and objectives for the Field and Synthesis Phase. This phase is to conclude with an Inception Report, including agreed/reconstructed intervention logic, an evaluation matrix, stakeholder analysis, and a workplan;
• Field and Synthesis Phase: interviews are conducted with relevant representatives of key stakeholders, culminating in an Intermediary Note providing initial findings with respect to the EQs in light of discussions held and analysis of documents. The main output of the Field and Synthesis Phase is a draft final report, detailing and justifying the key findings. This will be presented to the reference group for comment prior to finalization.