Evaluator Vacancy - International Heritage Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) Study

Terms of Reference (TOR)

Background

Over the past decade, members of the Grantmakers for Cultural Heritage Preservation (G-CHeP) network have expressed a shared ambition to strengthen Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) practices across international heritage conservation projects. While individual organisations have developed their own MEL frameworks, efforts to align approaches and identify common indicators have so far produced limited actionable guidance.

Previous work included a review commissioned by the Cultural Protection Fund (CPF), which highlighted areas of overlap and common challenges in evaluation practices. At the same time, ongoing dialogue within the network has generated momentum and a clearer sense of direction for future collaboration.

This study builds on earlier efforts, including the CPF-led scoping work on a shared evaluation framework, and responds to a growing need to better evidence the outcomes and value of international heritage conservation. In a context where funding may be tightening, strengthening MEL approaches is both a technical priority and a strategic opportunity to support advocacy for the sector.

Cultural Protection Fund and the J.M. Kaplan Fund have jointly committed to supporting this study, which will be conducted in collaboration with interested members of the G-CHeP network.

Through this call, we are seeking a consultant to assess existing MEL approaches, test practical methods for evaluating selected outcomes, and generate actionable recommendations to strengthen MEL practice across international heritage conservation.

Goals

• Provide a clear overview of the most commonly claimed outcomes in international heritage conservation and the existing evidence supporting those claims.
• Generate comparable qualitative and/or quantitative data on one to two selected outcome areas across a range of projects.
• Develop a practical, adaptable methodology for data collection, analysis, and comparison that supports longitudinal research across different organisations and contexts.

Scope of work

• Review of MEL frameworks and claimed outcomes: The consultant will review Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) frameworks from related disciplines to identify approaches and tools that could be adapted for international heritage conservation. This review will also compile and categorise the most common outcome or “benefit” claims made by international heritage conservation projects and funders. Key activities include:
• Reviewing MEL approaches used in parallel sectors
• Identifying transferable tools and methodologies
• Mapping and categorise commonly claimed outcomes in heritage conservation
• Selecting one to two outcome areas for detailed study
• Focused study on two selected outcome areas: The consultant will conduct an in‑depth analysis of one to two priority outcome areas relevant to international heritage conservation. Potential topics include: The longevity of conservation interventions, increased access and use, employment generation, surrounding economic development.

Key activities include:

• Developing a practical approach to data collection and coordination on two selected outcome areas
• Identifying and engaging partner organisations and suitable case studies
• Collecting, compiling, and analyzing qualitative and/or quantitative data across diverse geographies and funding contexts
• Develop and disseminate a final report: The consultant will synthesise findings into a final report that combines sector‑wide insights with focused analytical depth, and will support dissemination to relevant stakeholders.

The final report will provide:

• A broad overview of typical outcomes claimed by international heritage conservation projects and funders, forming a foundation for future research
• A focused assessment of one to two selected outcome areas across a diverse set of projects

Key evaluation questions

The study should address, but not be limited to, the following questions:

MEL practice and frameworks

• What are the common approaches to MEL currently used across international heritage projects?
• Where are the key gaps, challenges, and areas of divergence?

Outcomes and evidence

• What outcomes are most commonly claimed by heritage conservation projects and funders?
• To what extent are these outcomes currently evidenced?

Measurement and feasibility

• Which outcomes can realistically be measured across different contexts and organisations?
• What indicators and methods are most appropriate and feasible?

Collaboration and data systems

• What systems could support shared data collection and learning across organisations?
• What are the barriers and enabling factors for collaboration in MEL?

Learning and advocacy

• How can improved MEL contribute to stronger advocacy for international heritage conservation?
• What are the key lessons for future joint initiatives within the network?

Methodology

The consultant is expected to propose a robust and context-sensitive methodology, which may include:

• Desk review of project documentation, MEL frameworks, and relevant literature
• Comparative analysis across organisations and sectors
• Semi-structured interviews with network members and key stakeholders
• Case study selection and analysis
• Surveys or workshops with participating organisations

Deliverables

The consultant will be expected to deliver:

• Phase 1: Inception report
  Detailing methodology, workplan, timeline and selected focus areas.
• Phase 2: Interim update
  The consultant will provide an interim update summarising early findings from the review of MEL frameworks and commonly claimed outcomes in international heritage conservation. This will include an overview of typical MEL approaches, key challenges, and a preliminary description of two selected outcome areas. Findings will be presented to the MEL G‑CHeP Working Group, and feedback will be used to refine the selection of case studies and analytical focus.
• Phase 3: Draft Final Report
  A draft final report will be submitted for review and feedback by commissioning partners. This draft will present the focused analysis of one to two selected outcome areas, describe data collection methods and case study selection, and include preliminary qualitative and/or quantitative findings drawn from the identified case studies.
• Phase 4: final report and dissemination
  The consultant will deliver a final report incorporating feedback from commissioning partners. The report will include an executive summary, key findings, conclusions, and recommendations. It is expected to provide both a broad overview of the typical outcomes claimed by international heritage conservation projects and funders, offering a foundation for ongoing research, and a focused analysis assessing one to two selected outcome areas across a diverse set of projects. The findings will be presented to the G‑CHeP network, either online or in person.

Timeline

• Finalisation of scope and contracting: June 2026
• Data Collection: June– August 2026
• Analysis and report development: August – November 2026

Budget

Indicative budget allocation: 60k EUR

• Coordination: 40,000
• Partner Participation: 15,000
• Dissemination: 5,000

Required expertise

The consultant or team should demonstrate:

• Proven experience in designing or evaluating MEL frameworks
• Strong understanding of cultural heritage conservation and/or development sectors
• Experience working across multiple organisations or networks
• Ability to conduct mixed-methods research and comparative analysis
• Excellent analytical, writing, and facilitation skills

Experience with cross-sectoral evaluation (e.g. environment, arts, development) is an advantage.

Submission of proposals

Interested consultants are invited to send to r.delaporte@culturalemergency.org before May 28.

• A technical proposal outlining methodology and approach
• A financial proposal with budget breakdown
• CV(s) of team members
• Relevant writing sample(s)

Reporting & coordination

The consultant will work in close coordination with the G‑CHeP Coordinator, who will serve as the primary point of contact for engagement with the wider G‑CHeP network, and with CER, which will be responsible for administrative coordination, including contract management and invoicing. Strategic guidance and formal feedback on key deliverables will be provided by the commissioning partners and working group members.

Intellectual property

All outputs produced under this contract, including reports, data, and presentation materials, shall be the property of the G‑CHeP network. The consultant will be credited as the author of the work in all uses and dissemination of the outputs, unless otherwise agreed in writing.

Guiding principles

The study should align with the following principles:

• Learning-focused: Prioritise actionable insights and shared learning
• Collaborative: Engage network members throughout the process
• Context-sensitive: Reflect diverse project contexts and realities
• Practical: Produce outputs that can be realistically applied
• Ethical: Ensure confidentiality, data protection, and respect for partners