Background

• Rural poverty and food insecurity in Nigeria remain persistent development challenges, with over 40% of the population living below the international poverty line of $1.90 per day. Agriculture, which is the primary source of livelihood for many rural households, is dominated by smallholder farmers who face multiple constraints, including low productivity, limited access to finance, seasonal and rain-dependent farming, land degradation, and a lack of modern inputs and services. These conditions have perpetuated poverty and made agriculture increasingly unattractive to youth.
• Project Juriya was designed by SCL to address these systemic challenges by promoting Regenerative Agriculture through its Regenerative Agriculture Integrated Crops, Trees, and Livestock (RAICTL) model. This five-year initiative aims to improve the resilience, income, and food security of 72,000 smallholder farmer households across three Nigerian states—Adamawa, Kaduna, and Nasarawa—with an inclusive targeting strategy that prioritizes youth (75%), women (70%), persons with disabilities (5%), and internally displaced persons (1%). The broader outreach goal is 504,360 individuals, with 378,270 targeted under the Youth in Work program. The project engages market system actors and aims to establish regenerative agricultural resource hubs, promote business development services, and facilitate access to financial products and services.
• A baseline study conducted in 2023 confirmed that farming in the intervention areas remains largely conventional—seasonal, monocropped, dependent on chemical inputs, and highly extractive of soil health—contributing to poor yields and environmental degradation. Findings also revealed that only 13% of smallholder farmers are affiliated with cooperatives or mutual trust groups, limiting collective action and knowledge-sharing. Access to financial products (15.08%) and business development services (1.84%) is very low, as is participation in training programs related to agriculture, business development, or regenerative practices. Notably, less than 5% of youth reported receiving start-up kits or agricultural inputs, and no regenerative agriculture resource hubs existed in the target areas at baseline. These gaps reflect the need for holistic support—skills development, input access, institutional strengthening, and ecosystem awareness—to shift smallholder farmers from unsustainable practices to more productive, climate-resilient, and inclusive systems.
• Project Juriya is being implemented through a phased, systems-based approach. It emphasizes capacity-building through training on regenerative practices, supporting entrepreneurship through business services, enhancing market linkages, and strengthening farmer groups. The initiative is also designed to serve as a demonstration of how integrated regenerative systems can improve productivity and livelihoods while restoring ecosystems and creating inclusive economic opportunities, particularly for young people and women.

Purpose of the Midline Assessment
Now in its third year of implementation, Project Juriya requires a comprehensive midline assessment to take stock of progress and inform strategic course corrections for the remaining project period. This evaluation will serve multiple purposes:

• Assess progress against key performance indicators (KPIs) and Theory of Change (ToC) results from the output to the impact level.
• Validate the Theory of Change, assessing whether its assumptions remain relevant, pathways to change are logical, and outcomes are being realized as intended.
• Examine relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and inclusion of project interventions using the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria to ensure a holistic, learning-oriented assessment.
• Understand the level of adoption and early outcomes of regenerative agriculture practices among target populations.
• Identify barriers to participation and benefits for key demographic groups—especially youth, women, persons with disabilities (PWDs), and internally displaced persons (IDPs)—to enhance equity and inclusion.
• Explore unintended outcomes, both positive and negative, that may not have been anticipated in the original project design.
• Generate actionable lessons and recommendations to inform adaptive programming and improve strategy, delivery, and impact for the remainder of the project cycle.

Scope of Work

• The midline assessment will be conducted across Project Juriya’s three focal states—Adamawa, Nasarawa, and Kaduna—covering the same Local Government Areas and, where feasible, the same households and respondents engaged during the baseline assessment.
• The consultant will also consider a comparison of midline data with baseline values, and where longitudinal tracking is possible, examine changes within households over time.

The assessment must:

• Analyze both quantitative and qualitative outcomes of the project to date, drawing on household survey data, interviews, and focus group discussions with project beneficiaries and stakeholders.
• Assess outcome-level changes in key areas including:
  • Household income and livelihood diversification
  • Agricultural productivity and adoption of regenerative practices
  • Mindset and behavioral changes related to farming and entrepreneurship
  • Employment and enterprise development
• Evaluate the degree of inclusion and participation of key demographic groups—youth, women, persons with disabilities (PWDs), and internally displaced persons (IDPs)—to determine how well the project has reached and impacted these populations.
• Compare current findings against baseline values, identifying areas of progress, stagnation, or regression.

The consultant is expected to apply the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria to guide the analysis and ensure a structured, comprehensive, and comparable assessment. Specifically, the evaluation should address the following:

• Relevance – Are the project’s strategies and interventions aligned with the needs, priorities, and evolving context of the target beneficiaries and communities?
• Effectiveness – To what extent has the project achieved, or is likely to achieve, its stated outputs and outcomes?
• Efficiency – Are the project’s resources (time, funding, human resources) being used optimally to deliver results?
• Sustainability – Are the results and changes introduced by the project likely to be maintained or scaled beyond the project’s duration?
• Impact – What significant positive or negative, intended or unintended, long-term effects can be attributed to the project?
• Coherence – To what extent does the project complement, duplicate, or conflict with other interventions (by government, donors, or other actors) in the same space?

In addition, the consultant should:

• Identify enabling and limiting factors, such as external influences, stakeholder dynamics, policy constraints, or operational challenges that have affected project delivery and outcomes.
• Provide clear, evidence-based, and actionable recommendations to inform improvements in project implementation, strategy, and adaptation for the remaining period of the project.

Methodology
The Consultants is expected to propose a robust and context-appropriate methodology that draws on both quantitative and qualitative approaches to generate credible, inclusive, and actionable findings. The methodology must include:

• A mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative (e.g., surveys) and qualitative (e.g., interviews, focus group discussions) data collection and analysis.
• Use of both primary data (directly collected from project beneficiaries and stakeholders) and secondary data (existing reports, project documentation, baseline data, etc.).
• A clear sampling strategy, including rationale for sample size determination, disaggregation of data by relevant demographic groups (youth, women, PWDs, IDPs), and where applicable, tracking of households from the baseline.
• Development and use of appropriate field-level tools, such as structured questionnaires, key informant interview guides, and FGD guides, aligned with project indicators.
• A data collection framework and logistics plan, detailing timelines, locations, team composition, translation/adaptation of tools, and quality assurance procedures.
• In addition, consultants are expected to:
• Clearly outline data quality assurance measures, including tool pre-testing, enumerator training, data cleaning, and validation protocols.
• Ensure ethical standards are upheld throughout the assessment, including informed consent, confidentiality, voluntary participation, and sensitivity to vulnerable populations.
• Adopt inclusive data collection methods, ensuring that women, youth, PWDs, and IDPs are meaningfully represented in the sample and feel safe and respected during the process.
• Align all tools and the analytical framework with the OECD-DAC evaluation criteria (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and inclusion) to support a structured, comparable, and evidence-based assessment.

Expected Deliverables
The consultant will be expected to produce the following deliverables in line with agreed timelines and quality standards:

Inception Report and Work Plan:

• Outlines the detailed methodology, sampling strategy, evaluation framework, data collection plan, team structure, and timelines.
• Includes draft data collection tools and a clear statement on compliance with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and Nigeria Data Protection Regulation (NDPR) standards.

Finalised Data Collection Tools:

• All tools submitted in editable formats (e.g., Excel, Kobo, or ODK) for review and approval before field deployment.

Clean Data Set:

• Submission of anonymized and cleaned data in Excel or SPSS format, including a data codebook.

Draft Midline Evaluation Report:
Submitted in MS Word format and structured as follows:

• Executive Summary
• Background and Context
• Evaluation Objectives and Methodology
• Key Findings and Analysis (disaggregated by target groups)
• Assumptions and Limitations
• Conclusions and Recommendations
• Annexes (e.g., tools used, list of respondents, ToR)
• Report must be written in clear, concise English and include charts, tables, and visuals to aid understanding.

Final Midline Evaluation Report

• Revised based on stakeholder feedback and submitted in clean, publishable format (MS Word and PDF).

PowerPoint Presentation

• A summary presentation of key findings, conclusions, and recommendations for dissemination to stakeholders.

Summary Briefs

• At least two 2–3-page summaries (e.g., one for policy audiences and one for community/field stakeholders), highlighting major findings, success stories, and recommendations.

All deliverables must be submitted in English and meet both technical and editorial standards suitable for donor and partner dissemination.