Consultant for ICSP Lebanon Learning Initiative on Adaptive Protection Programming and Service Linkages

About Trócaire

Trócaire is an international NGO. We work with local partners in the world’s most at-risk communities and with people in Ire-land to tackle the underlying causes of poverty and injustice and respond to the crises they create. Together we bring about positive and lasting change for a just world. Trócaire works in up to 20 countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East.

We work towards five goals:

• Promote Access to Justice;
• Achieve Climate & Environmental Justice;
• Ensure Women & Girls’ Protection, Voice & Influence;
• Save Lives and Protect Human Dignity and
• Mobilise the Public on the island of Ireland to achieve Global Justice.

Find out more about the organisation at www.Trócaire.org

Trócaire works through national and local partners in Lebanon and Syria delivering an integrated humanitarian & development programme that includes the provision of basic assistance, food security, livelihood, and protection assistance and strengthening social cohesion within conflict affected and displaced communities. As a partnership agency, Trócaire works with a portfolio of national and local partner organisations to strengthen their capacities to deliver humanitarian assistance and implement development-oriented programmes in a way that ensures compliance with international standards.

1. Background

Trócaire received funding from Irish Aid under the five-year Ireland Civil Society Partnership (ICSP - 2023-2027) funding scheme to implement a programme in Lebanon. The programme responds to a complex and rapidly changing context through local partners and includes protection, specialised services, cash assistance, livelihoods, and other forms of support for vulnerable communities.

Across the ICSP period, protection programming has had to respond to changing needs, repeated shocks, conflict, displacement, economic pressure, and shifts in the operating environment. At the same time, Trócaire and its partners have worked to strengthen disability inclusion, age and gender responsiveness, accountability to affected populations, protection mainstreaming, referral pathways and links between protection, cash and other relevant interventions.

As Trócaire prepares for the final year of the current five-year ICSP cycle and the next programme development cycle, there is an opportunity to bring together the learning generated since 2023 and use it to inform future protection programming. Trócaire therefore intends to commission a learning initiative focused on how protection programming can remain adaptive, safe and relevant, how existing formal and informal linkages with other forms of assistance and specialised services have worked in practice, and what these experiences imply for more intentional integration in future programming.

2. Purpose of the consultancy

The purpose of this consultancy is to document, analyse and synthesise practical learning from ICSP Lebanon since 2023, with a primary focus on women and girls’ protection and GBV programming. The learning will focus on two main areas: (1) how protection programming has adapted to changing needs, shocks and operating conditions; and (2) how protection pathways and linkages with other relevant services have worked in practice, including through formal or informal referrals, coordination and sequencing. Disability inclusion will be examined as a key cross-cutting learning strand, drawing on the experience of the three-year disability inclusion initiative. The exercise will explore what these experiences suggest for future programme design, including where more intentional service linkages may add value and where specialised or standalone approaches remain more appropriate. It will not assume that ICSP Lebanon currently operates an embedded integration model or that greater integration is always desirable.

This is a learning and improvement exercise and should not be treated as a programme evaluation. It is not expected to measure impact, attribute outcomes to ICSP, score partner performance, or assess the effectiveness or merit of the programme as a whole against evaluation criteria. The learning focus is to understand and explore how programming adapted, how linkages and referral pathways operate in practice, what approaches and practices appear useful, where important gaps or constraints remain, and what should inform future design. The consultant should build on existing monitoring and evaluation evidence, programme documentation, partner and staff experience, and limited primary qualitative inquiry appropriate to the protection context to identify patterns, practical lessons and actionable learning.

3. Objective

The overall objective of the consultancy is to strengthen Trócaire Lebanon and partners’ future protection programming by generating practical learning from ICSP experience since 2023 on adaptation, protection pathways and service linkages, with disability inclusion as a key cross-cutting lens, and translating this learning into concrete implications for the next programme design cycle.

4. Specific objectives

• Document how protection programming under ICSP Lebanon has evolved and adapted since 2023 in response to conflict, displacement, social tensions, economic pressures and other changes in needs and operating conditions.
• Understand how protection programming has connected with other relevant ICSP or external services through formal or informal referrals, sequencing, coordination and follow-up, including where cash or basic assistance has been used alongside protection support.
• Identify practical approaches and learning from the three-year disability inclusion initiative, alongside the application of age, gender, accountability to affected populations and protection mainstreaming across protection programming.
• Identify the main enabling factors, constraints, risks and gaps affecting adaptive protection programming and coherent referral or service pathways, including partner roles, capacities, service availability, coordination and operational flexibility.
• Explore, based on actual ICSP Lebanon experience, where more intentional linkages or integration could add value in future programming and where specialised, standalone or protection-led approaches remain more appropriate to safeguard service quality, confidentiality and do-no-harm principles. This is not intended as a formal assessment of integration between ICSP goals.
• Translate the learning into clear recommendations and practical guidance that can directly inform the next ICSP programme design cycle.

5. Scope of work

The consultancy will focus primarily on women and girls’ protection and GBV programming under ICSP Lebanon since 2023, while also capturing learning from the three-year disability inclusion initiative and relevant linkages with other services or interventions. It is not intended to review the full ICSP portfolio or to evaluate integration between programme goals. The main partner experience to be considered will be three local partners, while other internal or external actors may be consulted where they are directly relevant to a protection pathway, referral mechanism, specialised service or cross-cutting issue.

The scope may include protection and specialised protection services; formal and informal referral pathways and follow-up; linkages with other relevant ICSP or external services where these directly affect protection pathways or participant experience; disability inclusion; age and gender considerations; accountability to affected populations; and protection mainstreaming.

Particular attention should be given to practical implementation questions, including how adaptation decisions were made; how protection risks and vulnerabilities informed programming; how referrals and sequencing worked in practice; how partners coordinated across different types of support; what helped or limited continuity of protection support; how inclusion and other cross-cutting commitments were translated into day-to-day implementation; and what future programme design should do differently.

The learning should also consider how protection support was adapted across different delivery settings, including partner or community safe spaces and emergency or shelter settings, and how coordination with local authorities and other service providers influenced access and continuity of support.

The consultancy should not assess individual sensitive cases or seek to determine whether one partner or intervention performed better than another. Where specialised protection or GBV-related services are considered, the analysis should remain at an aggregated, anonymised and systems level. No individual GBV case files, case notes or identifiable case information should be shared with the consultant or with third parties outside service provision for the purpose of this learning exercise.

6. Core learning question

What can we learn from ICSP Lebanon since 2023 about how protection programming has adapted to a changing context and how protection pathways and service linkages have worked in practice, and what should this mean for future programme design?

The following sub-questions are intended to guide the exercise and may be refined during inception:

1. Adaptation: How has protection programming adapted since 2023 to changing needs, shocks and operating conditions? What enabled or constrained these adaptations, and what practical lessons emerge?

2. Protection pathways and service linkages: How have formal and informal referrals, coordination, sequencing and other linkages with relevant services worked in practice? What has supported or limited continuity and coherence of support?

3. Disability inclusion and cross-cutting practice: What practical learning emerges from the three-year disability inclusion initiative, and what does ICSP experience show about applying age, gender, accountability to affected populations and protection mainstreaming in practice?

4. Future programme design: What should Trócaire and partners continue, strengthen, adapt or avoid in the next programme cycle? Where could more intentional service linkages add value, under what conditions, and where should specialised or standalone protection approaches remain separate?

7. Methodology

The consultant is expected to propose a robust, feasible, and learning-oriented methodology. The approach should be practical, participatory, and proportionate to the purpose of the assignment.

The methodology should combine a desk review of relevant programme and learning documents; review of existing monitoring and evaluation evidence; key informant interviews with Trócaire staff, partners, technical advisors and other relevant internal or external actors; and structured reflection sessions with Trócaire and partners. Limited consultation with selected PSS, disability inclusion or other relevant protection participants may be considered only where useful, ethically appropriate, and agreed during inception. Individuals should not be recruited on the basis of GBV survivor or case-management status. The consultant may also use anonymised case examples, service-pathway examples or pathway mapping based on existing documentation and staff knowledge to understand how support was connected in practice.

For GBV case management and other specialised protection services, the learning may include consultations with case workers and relevant technical staff to understand aggregated programme experience related to referrals, Cash for Protection where relevant, safety planning, follow-up, service adaptations and implementation challenges. These discussions should not involve the disclosure or review of identifiable individual cases.

Primary data collection should be limited and purposeful and used to deepen understanding, triangulate emerging learning and fill important evidence gaps, rather than recreate an endline or impact evaluation. Participant consultations should focus on practical experiences of the programme, including relevance and accessibility of support, referral and follow-up, application of learning such as coping or stress-management approaches, adaptations for different age groups and contexts, and experiences of different delivery settings where relevant. Questions may explore changes participants associate with the support, while avoiding attribution of outcomes or attempts to measure programme impact. Participants should not be asked to disclose individual GBV experiences or case details.

Where feasible, the consultant should seek to include participants from different implementation periods, including previous cohorts, to capture how experiences may have differed over time and across changing contexts. The preferred approach would be to include representation from at least one relevant cohort per year where participants can be safely contacted and provide informed consent. Final sampling should remain subject to participant availability, ethical considerations and feasibility.

Direct consultation with GBV survivors or participants specifically identified through GBV case management is not expected for this assignment and should not be undertaken for learning purposes. No individual GBV case information should be shared outside service provision. Learning related to GBV and other specialised protection services should rely on anonymised and aggregated evidence, programme documentation and consultations with relevant staff and technical actors.

The methodology should actively consider accessibility and reasonable accommodation for consultations with persons with disabilities, where relevant. It should also distinguish clearly between findings supported by existing evidence, stakeholder perceptions, examples of practice, and areas where evidence remains limited.

8. Key tasks and responsibilities

Phase 1: Inception and design

• Review the relevant background documents provided by Trócaire.
• Hold inception discussions with Trócaire to refine the scope, learning questions, stakeholders and priority areas.
• Develop an inception report including refined methodology, workplan, learning framework, stakeholder map and data collection plan.
• Develop or adapt practical data collection and reflection tools.

Phase 2: Evidence review and learning inquiry

• Map the main protection pathways, adaptations, referral mechanisms and relevant formal or informal linkages with cash, livelihoods and specialised services, including external referral pathways where relevant.
• Conduct agreed KIIs and, where appropriate and agreed during inception, limited consultations with current or former PSS, disability inclusion and other relevant protection participants, as well as PSS facilitators, GBV case workers and relevant protection staff.
• Conduct a desk review of relevant programme, monitoring, evaluation, learning and technical documents, including available PSS ECA findings, GBV case-management RCA findings, partner reports and other relevant existing evidence.
• Facilitate structured reflection discussions with Trócaire, Women Now, LUPD and RDFL, and with other relevant actors where needed.
• Identify examples that illustrate what enabled, constrained or changed the way protection support was delivered.

Phase 3: Analysis and synthesis

• Analyse findings across key themes such as adaptation since 2023, referrals, sequencing, coordination, disability inclusion, other cross-cutting priorities, partner roles, opportunities for more intentional linkages and protection-sensitive limits to integration.
• Distinguish between evidence, stakeholder perception, emerging practice and areas where the evidence is insufficient for a conclusion.
• Identify practical implications for future protection programming and the next ICSP design cycle.
• Develop concise, actionable recommendations rather than broad or generic recommendations.

Phase 4: Validation and finalisation

• Facilitate at least one validation workshop or structured validation session with Trócaire and relevant partners.
• Test the practicality of the proposed recommendations with programme and technical colleagues.
• Revise outputs based on feedback.
• Finalise the learning paper and practical programming guidance.

9. Expected deliverables

Deliverable

Description

Inception report

Including refined scope, methodology, learning questions, stakeholder mapping, workplan, ethical considerations and proposed outline of outputs.

Data collection and reflection tools

Including KII guides, partner reflection tools and, only where relevant and ethically appropriate, consultation tools for selected PSS, disability inclusion and other relevant protection participants, where ethically appropriate.

Evidence synthesis / learning matrix

A concise synthesis of key documents, existing evidence and emerging learning, clearly noting evidence of strength and gaps.

Protection pathway / service-linkage map

A practical visual or narrative mapping of key protection pathways and relevant formal or informal linkages with cash, livelihoods and specialised services, including internal and external referral, sequencing or coordination points.

Draft learning paper

A clear draft presenting purpose, methodology, limitations, key learning, examples, implications and practical recommendations.

Validation workshop/session materials

Including agenda, facilitation approach, slides or discussion materials and concise summary notes.

Practical programming guidance

A short operational output for the next programme design cycle, summarising what to continue, strengthen, adapt or avoid. It should include practical considerations for cash or basic assistance within protection programming, formal and informal service linkages and referrals, opportunities and limits for more intentional integration, the three-year disability inclusion learning, and other cross-cutting priorities. Existing Trócaire tools should be used or adapted where possible rather than creating new tools without a clear need.

Final learning paper

Incorporating Trócaire feedback and validation inputs.

Final presentation / debrief

A concise presentation of the main learning, recommendations and implications for future protection programming in Lebanon.

10. Expected structure of the learning paper

• Executive summary
• Background and purpose
• Scope and methodology
• Limitations and interpretation of the learning exercise
• Overview of protection programming and relevant linkages under ICSP Lebanon
• Learning Area 1: Adaptation in protection programming since 2023
• Learning Area 2: Protection pathways, referrals and service linkages
• Disability inclusion and other cross-cutting learning
• Conditions, opportunities and limits for more intentional service linkages
• Practical implications for future ICSP design
• Recommendations
• Annexes as needed

11. Stakeholders to be consulted

• Trócaire Lebanon programme and MEAL team
• Relevant Trócaire protection, disability inclusion and other technical advisors
• Women Now
• LUPD
• RDFL
• Selected current and former PSS participants, disability inclusion participants and participants from other relevant non-sensitive protection activities, where appropriate and subject to informed consent and safeguarding considerations.
• PSS facilitators, GBV case workers and other relevant protection or specialised-service staff.
• Relevant specialised service providers, organisations of persons with disabilities (OPDs), local authorities or other actors directly linked to the learning questions, where useful and feasible
• Final stakeholder selection and partner participation will be agreed during inception, with partners appropriately briefed on the purpose and limits of the learning exercise before consultation.

12. Management and reporting lines

The consultant will work under the overall supervision of the Trócaire MEAL Manager and Grants Manager.

Technical oversight and review of deliverables will be provided by relevant Trócaire colleagues, including programme, protection and other technical team members designated by Trócaire.

The consultant will be expected to maintain regular communication with Trócaire throughout the assignment and to incorporate feedback at agreed milestones.

13. Ethical, safeguarding and quality requirements

• Informed consent for all primary consultations.
• Confidentiality and safe handling of information.
• Protection of participants from harm and application of a do-no-harm approach.
• Accessible and inclusive consultation approaches, including reasonable accommodation where needed.
• No unnecessary collection of sensitive personal or case-level data, and no sharing of individual GBV case files, case notes or identifiable case information with the consultant or third parties outside service provision.
• No direct consultation with GBV survivors or participants specifically identified through GBV case management for the purpose of this learning exercise.
• All participant selection approaches, consultation tools and ethical protocols related to protection, PSS and specialised GBV services must be reviewed and agreed with Trócaire’s Protection Manager before primary data collection begins. This should include informed consent procedures, safeguarding and referral protocols, confidentiality, safe recruitment, management of sensitive disclosures and any necessary accessibility measures.
• Clear communication of the purpose and limits of the learning exercise.
• Clear distinction between evidence, perception, emerging examples, and areas where evidence is insufficient.
• Commitment to agreed timelines and feedback rounds.

Safeguarding should be treated as a cross-cutting consideration throughout the learning process, including in tool design, stakeholder selection, consultations, analysis, and recommendations. Particular attention should be given to confidentiality, safe referral practice, role clarity, and the risk that more intentional integration could unintentionally weaken the quality or independence of specialised services.

14. Duration and level of effort

The consultancy is expected to take place over approximately two months between [start date] and [end date], with the final learning paper and practical outputs completed no later than [final deadline].

The consultant should propose a realistic level of effort aligned with the scope, methodology, and deliverables. The workplan should allow sufficient time for evidence of review, consultations, reflection, validation, and revision.

15. Budget

The total available budget for the consultancy is expected to be between USD 6,000 and USD 7,000, inclusive of professional fees and other anticipated costs. Financial proposals should provide a clear breakdown and demonstrate value for money.

16. Consultant profile and qualifications

Essential

• Proven experience in conducting learning reviews, applied research, programme learning, or similar analytical assignments in humanitarian or fragile contexts.
• Strong background in GBV Programming in Emergencies (GBViE)
• Experience in analysing multi-sectoral programming and service linkages, including referrals and linkages between protection and cash assistance.
• Demonstrated experience in protection-sensitive programming, protection mainstreaming and inter-sectoral referral or service pathways.
• Strong facilitation and qualitative analysis skills, with the ability to translate evidence and stakeholder experience into practical learning.
• Experience working with NGOs, local partners, and partnership-based programming models.
• Familiarity with the Lebanon humanitarian context and local partnership landscape.
• Strong understanding of safeguarding, confidentiality, and ethical considerations in protection-related learning.
• Strong written English and ability to produce clear, practical, high-quality outputs for operational use.

Preferred

• Experience in disability-inclusive humanitarian programming and/or age, gender, accountability to affected populations and protection mainstreaming.
• Experience working with specialised protection services in an ethical and appropriate manner.
• Familiarity with the Lebanon humanitarian context and local partnership landscape.

17. Proposal submission requirements

• A technical proposal including understanding of the assignment, proposed learning-oriented methodology, draft workplan and timeline, key risks and mitigation measures, and team composition if applicable.
• A financial proposal with a clear budget breakdown.
• CV(s) of the consultant(s).
• At least two relevant examples of similar learning, applied research or protection-related analytical work previously completed.
• Two references from recent comparable assignments.

18. Evaluation criteria for proposals

Criterion

Weight

Understanding of the assignment and quality of proposed learning-oriented approach and methodology 20%

Relevant technical experience in protection, programme learning / applied research and multi-sectoral linkages or referral pathways 25%

Experience in Lebanon or similar fragile / rapidly changing humanitarian contexts 15%

Quality and relevance of previous work samples 10%

Financial proposal / value for money 30%