Terms of Reference for Evaluations

The Centre for International Dialogue and Cooperation

Terms of Reference for Evaluations

– Evaluation within Federal Foreign Office programme no. AZ1623RLS3 –

OUTLINE OF THE TERMS OF REFERENCE

   1. BACKGROUND, CONTEXT AND RATIONALE OF THE EVALUATION

The Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung (RLS) is a German political foundation affiliated with the democratic socialist Left Party (Die Linke). Inspired by the life and work of Rosa Luxemburg, the Foundation promotes critical analysis and political education that supports democratic socialism, social justice, and solidarity worldwide.

The RLS Regional Office in Tunis has been operating since 2014. Its academic cooperation program supports progressive research and dialogue through partnerships with universities, scholars, and civil society actors in Tunisia. One of the key outputs of this program has been the publication of books and studies—produced in cooperation with local authors and publishers—on a range of political, social, and economic topics relevant to Tunisia.

The publications aim to strengthen critical academic discourse and to contribute to broader public and policy debates on democracy, justice, gender equality, decolonization, and ecological transformation. They are published in Arabic and French, and disseminated through various channels including academic institutions, bookstores, events, and online platforms.

This evaluation is initiated at a moment of strategic reflection within the RLS Tunis office. As the academic cooperation program enters a new phase (2026–2028), it is important to assess which factors influence the reach, relevance, and impact of its publications. The findings of this evaluation will guide future publishing decisions and enhance the effectiveness of the program.

RLS understands evaluation as a tool for organizational learning. Evaluations should promote reflection, dialog and participatory knowledge generation. This evaluation will follow the usual evaluation standards of DeGEval and in particular the OECD-DAC criteria, with a focus on transparency, the involvement of key stakeholders and the practical usability of the results.

   2.PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES OF THE EVALUATION

The purpose of the evaluation is to generate insights into the performance of RLS Tunis’ academic publications and identify factors that enhance or hinder their success. This knowledge will support strategic decision-making regarding future publications.

The evaluation has the following objectives:

1. To assess the outreach and visibility of selected publications supported by the RLS Tunis office.
2. To analyze the factors (e.g. author profile, publisher type, language, topic, format) that correlate with higher engagement and perceived impact.
3. To evaluate the publications’ relevance to academic, activist, and policy communities in Tunisia.
4. To generate practical recommendations for improving future publishing strategies, including content selection, dissemination methods, and partnerships.

Additional specific questions may be added following discussions with the evaluator, as needed.

   3.SUBJECT MATTER OF THE EVALUATION

The evaluation will focus on a representative sample of academic publications supported by RLS Tunis between 2020 and 2024. The sample will include publications in different languages, formats, thematic areas, and distribution channels.

Key evaluation questions include:

• Which publications have had the most reach and visibility, and why?
• What role do factors such as the author’s background, publisher’s profile, language of publication, and thematic focus play in the reception and impact of a book?
• Who are the main users/readers of the publications (academics, students, activists, policymakers)? How are they accessed?
• Have any publications influenced academic debates, media coverage, or public policy discussions?
• What formats (e.g. monographs, edited volumes, conference readers) are more effective in reaching target audiences?
• How do dissemination strategies affect uptake (e.g. launch events, social media,
• How can future publications be improved to better align with the objectives of the academic cooperation program?

 4.EVALUATION APPROACH, METHODS, AND DELIVERABLES

A consultant or team of evaluators—preferably based in Tunisia—will be contracted to conduct the evaluation. The evaluators will submit an Inception Report detailing the methodology, tools, timeline, and stakeholder engagement plan.

Expected methodology includes:

• Document and content analysis of the selected publications, including thematic mapping and bibliometric indicators.
• Analysis of dissemination data (e.g. print runs, citations, event attendance).
• Interviews and/or questionnaires with authors, publishers, RLS staff, bookshops and key readers.
• Comparative analysis across different languages, topics, and formats.

Participation of stakeholders is essential. RLS Tunis and publication partners will be involved in shaping the evaluation questions and reflecting on preliminary findings.

Deliverables:

• Inception Report (max. 10 pages)
• Draft Evaluation Report (30–40 pages + annexes)
• Final Evaluation Report, including an Executive Summary (4–6 pages, for public use)
• Presentation of findings in a workshop with RLS and relevant stakeholders

The final report will be submitted in English. RLS will translate the executive summary into German.

   5.REPORT AND ADDITIONAL EVALUATION PRODUCTS

The evaluation report is the central “product” of the evaluation and has to adhere to the following standard structure (unless exceptions have been agreed). It must start with the Executive Summary, which is intended for publication, 4-6 pages) and includes final recommendations for each of the areas to be evaluated. The evaluation report has 30-40 pages.

                        Standard structure for evaluation reports

I. Summary

Important: Executive Summary for the contracting authority; central findings and corresponding recommendations, including the primary recipients of the particular recommendations

II. Preliminary Remarks

Issues to be addressed: methodology (short description, more detailed in chapter III.), activities, timeframe of the evaluation, set up of the evaluation team, participation of partner organisations in the evaluation

III. Presentation and Rationale of the Evaluation Study Design

More detailed and comprehensible description and justification of the evaluation study design, i.e. methodology, specific proceedings, self-reflection or self-review of the evaluator with regard to the evaluation process, limits/scope of the findings, quality criteria.

IV. Short Description of the of Programme Components within the Framework of the Regional Programme

Idea and concept, functioning, target group, objectives of programme components, integration into the overall RLS programme

V. Short Presentation of Framework Conditions

VI. Results of the Evaluation

Findings / Results of the respective evaluation questions

VII. Conclusions

Conclusions from findings; starting from project-specific (if any) to programme-related to overall conclusions; referring to evaluation questions

VIII. Recommendations

Any recommendations assigned to the underlying findings and primary recipient of the recommendations

IX. Supplementary Remarks

X. Appendix

Work flow, travel itinerary, questionnaire, sources

The Inception Report is another important product, which is to be coordinated with the PME staff unit following preliminary talks and reviewing of records. The Inception Report is based on the TOR and oral, recorded agreements with the CID-RLS’ PME staff unit and, if appropriate, with the respective regional unit and/or the CID-RLS regional office. The Inception Report is to be prepared in English.

Other evaluation products to be prepared, for example presentations from the final on-site workshop, minutes of the final discussion, etc. have to be attached to the final report.

If appropriate, publications in internal periodicals (newsletters, RLS newsletters) and publications/presentations in external expert forums can be provided.

In general, the CID/RLS is interested in publishing findings regarding its work and the cooperation with partners worldwide. If one of the parties of this evaluation wishes to publish evaluation findings, data, or information about the evaluation process, this requires the written consent of the CID/ RLS.

   6.EXTENT OF THE EVALUATION

This evaluation contains both formative and summative elements. The evaluation supports organizational learning and is intended to be incorporated directly into the planning process for the next funding application.

The scope will include analysis of relevant documents, structured interviews and surveys with key stakeholders, and assessment of the role and impact of the office’s publications within the socio-political and academic landscape in Tunis. The fieldwork phase will last approximately 10 to 12 days and can also be conducted digitally if appropriate. It will be preceded by a comprehensive study of the documentation. The evaluators will then present an evaluation report with key findings and recommendations (see above).

The evaluation will take place between July 2025 and January 2026. The final evaluation report should be available by the end of January 2026 at the latest.

Individuals or teams can apply. Please note that the RLS reserves the right to form a team from two individual applications if necessary, provided they are suitably qualified.

7.TIMELINE AND MANAGEMENT

• Launch of tender:             28.05.2025 (open until 25.06.2025)
• Selection of evaluator(s): 03.07.2025
• Kick-off meeting:             08.07.2025
• Inception report due:        01.09.2025
• Field research period:       01.09 until 15.11.2025
• Draft report due:              15.11.2025
• Feedback and final report:          31.12.2025
• Presentation of results:     January 2026

The evaluation will be coordinated by the RLS Tunis Office, which will provide access to relevant documentation, contacts with authors and publishers, and support logistical arrangements for interviews and workshops.

   8.TENDER

Search for an evaluator for an evaluation in Tunis

The RLS is looking for an evaluator for the evaluation of the work of its office in Tunis.

The evaluation will be conducted in English and will cover the period July 2025 – January 2026.

The evaluation is formative in its focus and is intended to support organizational learning and contribute to the upcoming strategic planning process of the regional program.

Applications are possible as an individual as well as in a team.

Offer and deadlines

Please submit the following documents:

1. A substantive proposal for an evaluation study according to the Terms of Reference, including a time schedule
2. Total fees and daily rates; travel expenses will be reimbursed according to BRKG (daily allowances will not be reimbursed additionally)
3. A detailed and comprehensive CV
4. Informal explanations of your work and working methods, indicating your experience with impact analysis of activities of social organizations in an international context, especially with political education projects, and with related evaluations
5. If you have experience with other important aspects of our tender / terms of reference, please refer to them as well

Expected qualifications

• High methodological competence, especially in qualitative and participatory methods, high analytical skills
• Evaluation experience, especially in the field of political education work
• Experiences with feminist approaches in educational and political work and their evaluation
• Advanced knowledge on result based management
• Very good knowledge of the English language
• Good knowledge of the region and its actors, especially of the publishing sector in Tunisia
• Knowledge of the work of political foundations is an advantage
• Intercultural competence

Documents from interested parties in English should reach us electronically by 25^th June 2025. The final order will be placed by 3^th July.

Contact

Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung – North Africa Office

Nadia elOuerghemmi

Phone: +216 52 288 805

infotunis@rosalux.org