South Sudan: Conflict Analysis Researcher

We are looking for a highly qualified and dynamic Conflict Analyst to conduct an assessment as outlined further below.

​Across South Sudan, high inflation, disruption of harvests and livelihoods, soaring food prices and compounding effects of economic crisis and conflict continue to devastate the country’s population. By July 2016, some 4.8 million people - more than one in every three people in South Sudan - were estimated to be severely food insecure across South Sudan[1]. Livelihoods have been decimated by continued conflict and escalating economic decline, with livestock looted, killed and disease-prone and crops destroyed or planting delayed or missed due to violence, displacement and unfavourable weather. The fighting in Juba during July 2016 has raised political tensions to a point where the security outlook is dire, with most analysis pointing to further protracted conflict and the continuation of human rights abuses against the civilian population[2], including torture, sexual and gender based violence (SGBV), and the destruction of civilian property. Populations in Unity State[3] remain in need of emergency food assistance while those in most parts of Upper Nile State are experiencing stressed food insecurity levels. Many households have exhausted their own production food stock during the extended lean season as the 2015/16 harvest was significantly below average. Income earning opportunities also continue to be limited for the displaced and host households.

​‘DRC’s Humanitarian Response to the South Sudan Crisis’ is an emergency assistance project designed to expand DRC’s reach to currently underserved populations beyond existing areas of operation located within and directly surrounding camp settings. The project will be implemented in Rubkhona County, Unity State, and Fashoda County, Upper Nile State – two areas that have acted as stages for recent conflict, yet continue to receive relatively little assistance in areas outside of Protection of Civilians (PoC) camps.[4] The project’s stated objective is “to improve the protective environment, food security and access to humanitarian assistance for internally displaced people (IDPs), refugees and communities affected by the crisis in South Sudan, with specific emphasis on improving conditions for the most vulnerable individuals and groups with specific needs.” In terms of specific sectors, the project is designed to provide emergency Food Security and Livelihoods (FSL) emergency activities aimed at meeting immediate needs in areas where purchasing power, and access to food and livelihood opportunities have been heavily affected by recent conflict, to assist communities in recovering from conflict and displacement within the target areas, including addressing immediate protection concerns.

​Protection activities conducted during the project will consist of mine risk education (MRE) and clearance (to be implemented by DDG) - a technical unit within delivering armed violence reduction and mine action programming) and protection monitoring / vulnerability screening (DRC- implemented). Food Security and Livelihoods (FSL) activities implemented by DRC will primarily include distribution of emergency livelihood kits (including accompanying training) and cash-for-work projects resulting in the development of community infrastructure/socio-economic assets. All activities under the project are geared towards emergency rather than long-term assistance to populations that have received little support from humanitarian agencies until now, largely due to a focus on camp settings under the UN-led IDP response. Despite the emergency nature of the project, activities are intended to set the groundwork for a longer term humanitarian response in these areas, including interventions that will empower households with skills and knowledge that have a demand in the labour market to increase their livelihood options; DRC anticipates returns and resettlement in these areas to be increasingly likely in the next year, as long as major political conflict does not emerge in either county. The conflict analysis detailed in this terms of reference will feed into a better understanding of whether this assumption is justified, as well as approaches required within the project to maximize the benefits reaped from project activities by target populations.

​**CONFLICT ANALYSIS OBJECTIVES**

​This analysis will consider the perceived administrative, political, security and informal power structures, and existing interventions in the counties, in a two-stage process aimed at informing DRC/DDG on entry points to ensure the following objectives:

• Supporting DRC/DDG practitioners to better understand the political, security and economic environment in the target counties (to a greater level of detail in planned areas of operation), and identifying the underlying dynamics that drive or hinder positive change
• Identifying appropriate approaches to planned activities (eg. suitable types of cash-for-work, infrastructure projects, MRE delivery methods) in relation to the context and target population. This element should include analysis helping to identify approaches that can ensure a degree of sustainability, even in the event of renewed conflict / displacement
• Identifying risks to adhere to ‘Do No Harm’ principles and avoid implementing impractical interventions. This element should include analysis regarding the saturation limit for population settlement, given the possibility of renewed conflict in target counties.
• In particular the analysis will aim at capturing the following as far as possible:
• Which groups are most vulnerable should conflict erupt and how can this be addressed
• Does the potential for renewed conflict affect the economic / social behaviour of residents (eg. focus on short-term/unsustainable income generation)?
• How has conflict affected purchasing power / economic assets?[5]
• What are the main protection concerns for residents?
• What implications does forced recruitment have for DRC/DDG programming?
• What security / economic / social considerations are motivating returns to / departures from the PoC in each location (Malakal PoC / Fashoda, Bentiu PoC / Rubkhona)
• For both locations, what is the likelihood of returns and resettlement from the PoCs/other displacement sites to target areas
• What is the saturation point for population settlement at main points of refuge outside the PoC; how could this lead to growing tensions in those locations?
• For Kodok / Fashoda, confirm / disprove DRC’s current findings that low-level conflict between residents is relatively low
• For Kodok / Fashoda, Confirm / disprove DRC’s current findings that SGBV cases are relatively low compared to other areas / PoC sites in SS

​OUTPUTS**

​Over two missions, the Conflict Analyst is expected to produce the following outputs:

• Brief inception note with methodology and implementation plan
• Draft phase 1 report
• Final phase 1 report – including recommendations regarding how to approach FSL, DDG and other Protection programming in coming months to as relevant
• Conflict mapping – including recent significant conflicts and relationships that exist between different groups, and predictive analysis regarding the likelihood of conflict, both intra-/inter-communal, and as an external threat from government security forces / local militias.[6] The conflict mapping will also include armed and non-armed conflict over land, water and other local resources, as well as recent political alliances or dynamics that could be affected by DRC/DDG interventions in a positive or negative way
• Final report (no more than 20 pages) – this output will be an updated version of the phase 1 report, including an analysis (drawn from information gathered during the second visit) regarding the appropriateness and relevance of DRC/DDG activities under the project. Whilst this report will not require as much detail regarding the project’s impact as a programme / project evaluation would, where relevant the final report should also include recommendations for taking forward DRC/DDG activities in areas of interest, including relevance of selected beneficiaries, approaches adopted to planned activities, and potential risks to the success of interventions undertaken.
• Edited final report for external publication – a briefer, reduced version of the report will be required

​IMPLEMENTATION AND TIMELINE**

​The conflict analysis will be implemented by DDG in close collaboration with DRC field teams and programme management. DDG non-technical survey (NTS) / MRE staff will be made available for household-level data collection as required (3 staff in each county, including 2 local staff per location), with additional support on data management from DDG’s national Senior M&E Officer. DDG will work closely with DRC’s Safety Advisers (1 in Malakal, Upper Nile State, and 1 in Bentiu, Unity State) to collate third party data on violent incidents and broader regional security trends.

​The conflict analysis will include the following components:

​Desk research (January 2017): the Conflict Analyst will undertake desk research with focus on areas of immediate interest within the target counties wherever possible – Rubkhona and Bentiu Towns, Rubkhona County, and Kodok Town, Obriny and Abrok, Fashoda County. As data may be limited regarding these areas, it is expected that this phase may rely on drawing assumptions from data sources concerning larger geographical areas that will subsequently require validation through field-level survey. As such, the desk study will inform the methodology and planning for the field research, with the DDG Operations Manager having the final decision making authority. The desk study shall produce a list of issues to be further examined through field research.

Development of research methodology (January 2017): the selected Conflict Analyst will lead the development of the methodology and tools for the field data collection in collaboration with the the DRC/DDG team. The methodology will draw on DDG’s ‘How To’ notes on conducting a conflict analysis and on conflict sensitive programming. Data will be collected using key informant interviews (KII), focus group discussions (FGD), and participatory mapping and analysis approaches, as well as a perception survey if deemed necessary.

​A stakeholder mapping exercise will be carried out to ensure that as many relevant stakeholders as possible are targeted during KIIs and FGDs. Through these surveys, local perspectives and up-to-date information will be gathered. This will supplement the information already available and identified through the desk study. In addition to addressing conflict dynamics, the KIIs will collect stakeholder views on risks and opportunities for promoting peaceful returns from the PoC and local reintegration. Household-level data should aim to verify / nullify findings gathered from key informants and focus group participants. Indicators should be developed to aid in identifying suitable activities for future programming. A detailed implementation plan for the field work will be developed in consultation with DRC and the DRC safety and security team in country.

​Field level data collection – phase 1 (January/February 2017): Staff will be made available to assist field data collection, with training provided upon entry to target counties. Support on training will be provided by the Senior M&E Officer. The Conflict Analyst and Senior M&E Officer will conduct KIIs and FGDs, whereas NTS/MRE staff will be utilised to gather household-level data. The Senior M&E Officer will assure the quality of the data collected, both through training and feedback provided throughout survey activities. The data will be reviewed by the Conflict Analyst on an ongoing basis, with feedback provided by the DDG Operations Manager and Programme Support Officer, as well as the DRC team, to identify possible needs for adjusting the research tools and inform the ongoing implementation of activities within the broader project.

​This phase will form the majority of time spent during analysis, with the Conflict Analyst expected to spend most of their working time directly gathering information in target counties.

​Data analysis and drafting of the phase 1 report (January / February 2017): The Conflict Analyst will be responsible for analysing the data and writing the draft report. The Operations Manager and Programme Support Officer will support this process and review draft sections as they are prepared. Relevant DRC staff will also be invited to provide feedback on findings.

​Finalisation and presentation of the phase 1 report (February 2017): the Conflict Analyst will finalise the phase 1 report in a format and structure agreed with the Operations Manager and Programme Support Officer. The report will be shared with these two DDG staff, as well as relevant DRC programme managers and Technical Coordinators responsible for oversight and delivery of activities under the DANIDA project. The Conflict Analyst will present findings to DRC/DDG project staff, facilitating a discussion on practical ramifications for programming.

​Field level data collection – phase 2 (May 2017): The same staff input and data collection methodology will apply as for phase 1. The data collection at this stage will be conducted to update the initial report, including addition of recent developments within the local contexts (including new risks / security threats) and assessment determining the appropriateness of activities selected/approach adopted for DRC/DDG activities. Follow up data will be gathered through collection of household-level data, FGDs and KIIs, to allow for comparative analysis against specific indicators measured during phase 1 where relevant.

​Phase 2 data analysis, and updating of the phase 1 report (May 2017): roles and responsibilities outlined under phase 1 will also apply here.

​Finalisation and presentation of the conflict analysis (May/June 2017): after information / trends have been updated, the same review and presentation will take place through consultation with DRC/DDG staff as for phase 1. The final presentation will also include review of programme activities implemented in target locations to date, and how approaches / activity sets could be amended to improve service delivery.

DRC OFFERS:

​Documents of reference relevant to the assignment .

• Logistical support to the consultant while undertaking the assignment, including data collection by 6 DDG staff, and assistance from DDG’s National Senior M&E Officer.
• Pay commensurate with experience for the Consultancy upon completion of major milestones and submission of the deliverables to DRC.

APPLICATION PROCESS

​Consultants who meet the above requirements and are interested in undertaking the project should submit the following items on the DRC Vacancies web page.

​If the applicant experiences any issues uploading documents via the website (ie. poor internet connection), these items can be sent via e-mail to the following persons: William Maina (ta2ddgsudan@drc.dk), Ben McCabe (pso-ddgssudan@drc.dk) and Hilde Bergsma (head.programme@drc-ssudan.org).

• ​A capability statement (not exceeding one page) summarizing applicant qualifications to undertake the Consultancy;
• A briefing (not exceeding two pages) demonstrating understanding and interpretation of the ToR, including methodology to be used in undertaking the assignment.
• An updated CV;
• 2 writing samples, preferably research conducted on humanitarian service delivery or policy.

Application close on 3rd January 2017