New Scots Refugee Integration Evaluation

Tender description

The aims of the evaluation are to: - Evaluate the New Scots strategy and approach, including whether the New Scots outcomes, objectives and actions are being met. - Assess the implementation of the AMIF-funded projects, including the extent to which they are achieving their intended outcomes. - Support funded projects to develop their own self-evaluation, and support sharing of learning between funded projects. - Generate insight, learning and recommendations from the projects and New Scots in relation to good practice, widening impact and innovation, including exploration of what has worked well and what hasn’t. - Present and communicate findings and outputs in ways that are accessible and useful to a wide range of audiences, including for policymakers and practitioners. The outputs of this work, alongside the other research and learning activity being carried out, will form part of a series of outputs from the AMIF-funded programme which are intended to contribute to a resource or ‘exemplar’ that will be useful to others working in this field, and which can be referred to as an example international good practice in refugee integration. It will also contribute to the existing evidence-base on refugee integration and help to guide the future New Scots approach in Scotland. A range of potential questions for the evaluation have been identified, both in relation to the evaluation of the New Scots strategy (Table 1) and the evaluation of the AMIF-funded projects (Table 2), which provide a starting point for types of questions the evaluation should seek to answer. The questions draw on the evaluation questions set out in the MEL framework and cover three key areas: process, outcomes, and learning. It should be noted that the questions identified do not need to be taken as a definitive list, but should instead act as a guide to the sort of questions we would anticipate the evaluation to address in order to meet the overarching aims outlined above. Tenderers are free to modify, add to, or replace questions in the proposed list, providing that a clear rationale is given, and it is apparent how the alternatives will address the evaluation aims. The successful supplier will fulfil the aims of the evaluation which are to: - Evaluate the New Scots strategy and approach, including whether the New Scots outcomes, objectives and actions are being met. - Assess the implementation of the AMIF-funded projects, including the extent to which they are achieving their intended outcomes. - Support funded projects to develop their own self-evaluation, and support sharing of learning between funded projects. - Generate insight, learning and recommendations from the projects and New Scots in relation to good practice, widening impact and innovation, including exploration of what has worked well and what hasn’t. - Present and communicate findings and outputs in ways that are accessible and useful to a wide range of audiences, including for policymakers and practitioners. The outputs of this work, alongside the other research and learning activity being carried out, will form part of a series of outputs from the AMIF-funded programme which are intended to contribute to a resource or ‘exemplar’ that will be useful to others working in this field, and which can be referred to as an example international good practice in refugee integration. It will also contribute to the existing evidence-base on refugee integration and help to guide the future New Scots approach in Scotland. A range of potential questions for the evaluation have been identified, both in relation to the evaluation of the New Scots strategy (Table 1) and the evaluation of the AMIF-funded projects (Table 2), which provide a starting point for types of questions the evaluation should seek to answer. The questions draw on the evaluation questions set out in the MEL framework and cover three key areas: process, outcomes, and learning. It should be noted that the questions identified do not need to be taken as a definitive list, but should instead act as a guide to the sort of questions we would anticipate the evaluation to address in order to meet the overarching aims outlined above. Tenderers are free to modify, add to, or replace questions in the proposed list, providing that a clear rationale is given, and it is apparent how the alternatives will address the evaluation aims.