January 2013
Partners in Development Services (PDS)
USAID/Sudan: dg fixed obligation grants (FOGs)
Evaluation report
Report Submitted to USAID/Sudan’s Democracy and Governance Office
Khartoum, Sudan
January 7, 2013
Page
2
Acknowledgement 
PDS is a Sudanese Consultancy Firm with a main focus on research and training (Annex 6). During 
2012 PDS was assigned by USAID/OFDA, AECOM, UNDP, JICA and the World Bank to assess and 
evaluate some of the projects for which they had provided funds. 
The evaluation team owes the largest debts to all Fixed Obligation Grants (FOGs) recipients, their 
respective implementing partners and USAID Democracy and Governance (USAID DG) staff who 
agreed to meet us with short notice and in some cases during the EID vacations and allowed us to 
ask sometimes uncomfortable questions. The names of each are included in Appendix (4): People 
met at the end of this document. 
The team has also had the unique advantage of benefiting from the insights of stakeholders and 
USAID-DG staff who attended the debriefing sessions. 
 
The team expresses gratitude to Partners in Development Services (PDS - Annex 6) support 
personnel for their invaluable contribution and in particular during the analysis and conclusions 
contained in this report. 
Page
3
Table of Contents 
 Page 
List of Acronyms 4
1. Background and Purpose 7 
2. Study Approach and Methodology 7 
2 Findings 8 
2.1 Relevance of the project activities to context 8 
2.2 Measuring the program results of the completed FOGs 9 
2.2.1. Contribute to Educating Sudanese People on constitution making 9 
2.2.2. Support the Role of Women in Promoting Democratic Values 12
2.2.3. Building the Capacity of Selected Civil Society Organizations 14
 2.3 Tracking Progress of the Active FOGs 15
 2.4 Measuring the Overall Effectiveness of the FOGS as Programming Mechanism 18
 Conclusion 21
 Recommendations 23
Page
4
Acronyms 
AO Agreement Officer
AUW Ahfad University for Women 
CBOs Community-Based Organizations 
COR Contracting Officer Representative
CPA Comprehensive Peace Agreement 
CSOs Civil Society Organizations 
EU European Union 
FOGs Fixed Obligation Grants 
GJD Governing Justly and Democratically 
HAC Humanitarian Aid Commission
IDCS Institute for Development of Civil Society 
IDPs Internally Displaced Persons 
INGOs International Non-Governmental Organizations
NCF National Civic Forum 
NED National Endowment for Democracy
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations 
NORAD Norwegian Organization for Relief and Development
PDS Partners in Development Services 
REED Rural Extension, Education and Development,
RIG/PDR Regional Institute for Gender, Peace, Diversity and Rights 
SCDD Sudanese Centre for Democracy and Development
SCLS Sudan Comparative Law Society
SICM Sudanese Initiative for Constitution-Making
ToT Training-of-Trainers 
UNDP United Nations Development Programme 
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
USAID United States Agency for International Development 
USAID DG United States Agency for International Development’s Democracy and 
 Governance Office 
USIP United States Institute for Peace 
Page
5
Executive Summary: 
Background: This report presents the purpose, findings and conclusions of an evaluation carried 
out by Partners in Development Services (PDS). PDS was contracted by USAID to evaluate the 
performance and impact of three completed projects, track the performance of two active projects 
and observe the status of a newly awarded grant. Since June 2011, the USAID-DG office funded 
under the newly established Fixed Obligation Grants (FOGs) mechanism, six projects in Sudan with 
a total of $1,297,672. All the projects were/are implemented by four Sudanese civil society 
organizations (CSOs). 
The main focus of the projects was to empower the Sudanese CSOs and to enable them to play a role 
in determining the future of their country and people. They addressed a wide range of issues such 
as human rights, gender, capacity building, rule of law and good governance, democracy, 
transparency, accountability and public participation which all are highly relevant to the present 
socio-political context in Sudan. In general, the funded projects deal with two of the program areas 
of GJD (governing justly and democratically). The first area is Rule of Law which aims at advancing 
and protecting human and individual rights and the second area is Civil Society which focuses on 
empowering individuals to peacefully exercise their rights of expression, association, and assembly. 
The projects are monitored by the Khartoum-based USAID-DG technical officers who developed 
mechanisms and strategies for assessing the performance of these projects by collecting and 
reviewing performance reports from implementing partners and conducting site visits. 
Funded projects are demand driven and their project documents were designed in a manner that 
would ensure achievement of the overall objectives. The evaluation team examined the project 
documents and concluded that they are appropriate and relevant to Sudan’s contextual realities. 
The Evaluation: The purpose of this evaluation is to better understand, not only how the DG FOGs 
have performed to-date, but also how effective FOGs are as a programming mechanism for DG 
activities in Sudan. Areas of focus for this evaluation include, but are not limited to, what USAID 
and partners are obtaining from the FOGs, what is going well and what is not, and how lessons 
learnt can be applied to future programming. The end result of this exercise will serve the 
following purposes: 
1. measure program results for completed FOGs; 
2. track progress of active FOGs; 
3. provide lessons learned for USAID, assessing the potential for key successes to be 
replicated; and 
4. measure the overall effectiveness of the FOGs as a programming mechanism with respect to 
DG’s overall strategy in Sudan and in light of management burden and technical staff 
capacity. 
This report assesses the extent to which each of the completed FOGs met its overall goal; how 
realistic and appropriate the design of the projects was; whether the appropriate stakeholders 
were involved in the program and to what extent the program could promote better coordination 
and collaboration between them? 
The evaluation team used a number of methods that included review and analysis of project 
documents, reports, agreements and other relevant documents, This is in addition to collection of 
Page
6
quantitative and qualitative data, focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews, 
questionnaires and views and inputs of critical stakeholders. 
Given the hostile and difficult environment, the wide geographical area of operation and the limited 
human and financial resources of the implementing partners, the evaluation team feel confident to 
argue that the projects had managed to achieve the stated milestones. However, the attempt of 
assessing the extent to which each FOG met its overall goal and analyzing the internal validity of the 
projects proved challenging due to the lack of a parameter to measure against before the 
intervention or having the opportunity to spatial equivalence between treatment and control 
groups. However, they are strong indications of positive impact, in particular, with regards to the 
forthcoming constitution making related projects that experienced wider participation and 
dialogue compared to former Sudanese experiences in the same field. 
The Projects’ Design: As indicated earlier, the design of the projects is realistic and appropriate. 
The recipients proved capable of generating a huge multiplier effect. Their 
membership/implementing partners consist of some 40-70 NGOs as in the case of SICM and NCF, or 
having the enabling environment and suitable constituency as in the case of the AUW, or the 
credibility and respect of the targeted groups and authorities as in the case of the SCLS. USAID DG, 
therefore, had succeeded in identifying CSO partners with a proven capacity in relation to achieving 
milestones/outcomes. 
In relation to appropriateness, application, awarding and administration procedures of FOGs as a 
mechanism for DG programming, all the recipients stated that the mechanism proved effective, and 
appropriate. They believed it to be time-saving and having specific milestones to deliver. This, they 
argued, helps achieving outcomes. In general, FOG’s pros outweighed by far the cons. 
Recommendations: The evaluation came up with two sets of recommendations. The first 
addresses USAID whereas the second addresses FOG recipients. The first set stresses on the 
continued use of FOGs as a DG programming mechanism; continued support to democracy 
advocates in Sudan and providing funding to some of the current projects for at least two years. In 
particular, to the capacity building efforts of projects that focus mainly on women and youth. USAID 
DG is also encouraged to consider funding for other GJD areas and in particular key elements of 
good governance such as legislative functions and processes, local government and 
decentralization, and anticorruption reforms. FOG’s recipients call for more concerted networking 
between actors, engagement with political parties and media; opting to use of communication 
channels that appeal to youth and women; and developing benchmarks or other measures to 
integrate women as important allies in constitution-making. 
Page
7
Main Part of the Report 
1. Background and Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is to (i) evaluate three completed DG FOGs, (ii) track progress of 
two active FOGs and (iii) report on the status of one newly awarded project. The main focus, 
however, will be on the completed FOGs. 
This report assesses the extent to which each of the completed FOGs met its overall goal; how 
realistic and appropriate was the design of the projects; whether the appropriate stakeholders 
were involved in the program and to what extent did the program could promote better 
coordination and collaboration between them?; The report also assesses how effective FOGs are as 
a mechanism for DG programming in respect to DG’s overall strategy in Sudan and in light of 
management burdens and technical staff capacity. 
The evaluation was guided by the USAID’s standards; objectives of the USAID FOGs and the FY 
2012-2014 Strategic Framework for Sudan; questions raised by USAID in the evaluation terms of 
reference (ToR); and FOGs recipients' strategies. In addition, the team developed and used 
performance and effectiveness indicators in line with the log-frames or project documents. The 
team also developed checklists: and considered relevance, efficiency, value added for USAID/CSOs, 
lessons learned and case studies for success, short falls, and failure stories. 
2. Study Approach and Methodology 
The evaluation process was grounded in a comprehensive and standardized methodological 
approach (Annex 1) based on USAID’s guiding policies, principles and criteria for similar 
evaluations. This involved collection of primary and secondary data. Secondary data collection was 
intended to improve and shape understanding of the whole exercise. In this respect the following 
sources were consulted and reviewed: USAID policy documents (FOGs/USAID Forward etc.), 
original unsolicited proposal for each FOG, grant documents and work plans, and the 
final/evaluation reports for each of the completed FOGs. 
Primary data constituted the core of the analysis and the evaluation process. The data was collected 
through direct fieldwork conducted in 9 States namely: Red Sea, Khartoum, River Nile, Kassala, 
Gedarif, South Kordofan, South Darfur, Gezira and Blue Nile (Annex 2). The distribution of these 
States through the presence of SICM, NCF, SCLS and AUW is provided in the table below. 
KRT R. Nile R. Sea Kassala Gedarif B. Nile S. Kor S. Dar Gezira
SICM         
NCF      
AUW    
SCLS 
The selection of the 9 states took into consideration the following: 
Enabling and disabling contexts in relation to security issues and constraints. 
States with perceived higher and lower achievements as maintained by previous 
evaluations of completed FOGs. 
Accessibility 
Page
8
Innovative approaches adopted in specific states that could provide for future learning 
The field work was based on a participatory and cross learning process using the following tools: 
 Checklist: 
A check list (Annex 3) capturing the four key questions and other questions on relevance of 
activities to context; role of improvement (How) in relation to main programme thematic areas; 
identification of stakeholders, capacity needs, people empowerment (political – socio-cultural and 
other issues of rights) was prepared and shared with USAID. Comments received from USAID were 
incorporated to refine the final check list. The relevance of the check list to the interviewees was 
seriously considered. 
 Focus Group discussion: 
A group discussion was held in specific with M.Sc. students who benefited from Ahfad University 
scholarships with the objective of capturing their own assessment of the USAID funded projects. A 
group discussion was also held with the SICM Coordination Committee.. 
 Semi structured interviews with a wide range of stakeholders and key resource persons 
(Annex 4).
 Interviews with USAID DG, recipients and implementing partners.
 Debriefing: The evaluation team held a debriefing meeting and shared its findings and 
conclusions with USAID and the recipients of FOGS (Annex 5). 
Limitations: 
 The deteriorating security situation in South Kordofan as a result of the fighting between 
Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) and the SPLM/A-North had left SICM with the only option of 
shifting their work to Khartoum. As a result, the field work of SICM-South Kordofan was 
conducted in Khartoum where interviews were held with SICM partner CSOs currently 
based in Khartoum. With reference to NCF training activities were shifted from South to 
North Kordofan State where the interview was conducted in collaboration with El Obied 
Voluntary organization which acts as a liaison and logistic partner to NCF. 
 The field work was conducted immediately after the Eid Holidays at a time when some of 
the leaders of the targeted CSOs were still at their home areas to spend the Eid holidays 
with their families. However, the evaluation team had managed to interview them in 
Khartoum, Gedarif and Kassala. 
2. Findings:
2.1. Relevance of the project activities to context 
In general, the funded projects deal with two of the program areas of GJD (governing justly and 
democratically). The first area is the rule of law that aims at advancing and protecting human and 
individual rights. The second is civil society which focuses on empowering individuals to exercise 
peacefully their rights of expression, association, and assembly. 
Page
9
Examining the activities of each FOG, reiterates their relevance to the present Sudanese contexts as 
detailed below: 
The activities of the SCLS project are high on the agenda of the human rights activists. 
Judicial independence and justice systems are key elements of the role of law. 
Appropriateness and relevance of key activities is examined below: on the national level, 
they seek engaging all members of the legal profession (judges, practicing lawyers, legal 
advisors of the Court, law Professors and students) in serious discussions about the legal 
system in the Sudan. It also aims at reaching members of parliament and policy makers, on 
the pressing issue of law reform through its varied program of lectures, seminars, 
workshops, group discussions and publications; it also aims to reach Sudanese lawyers 
within and outside the Sudan. Many of its activities will also be open to ordinary lay men in 
order to enhance their legal knowledge. It also aims to collaborate fully with civil society 
organizations in promoting the principles of good governance, the Rule of Law and the 
protection of fundamental rights in the Sudan. Should the two-year plan be implemented, 
then this will no doubt be a yardstick for gauging the activities of the Sudan Comparative 
Law society and the success of its efforts in promoting the cause of the Rule of Law and 
justice in Sudanese Society. 
The activities of the completed SICM project aim at preparing the Sudanese people to 
participate actively and effectively in the forthcoming constitution-making process through 
a nationwide civic education and public awareness campaign. A task highly required in 
Sudan where few elites and politicians were involved in the constitution drafting excluding 
the masses of the population and in particular women, youth and the marginalized groups 
such as the IDPs, urban poor and persons with disabilities. 
The activities of the AUW active project aim at coordinating the varied initiatives and efforts 
of the civil society sector for the upcoming constitutional review by bridging the gap of 
information’s non-existence, establishing more structured and consistent networking, 
sharing and exchanging of information and lessons learned and documentation of the 
process and hence the project advocate for the principles of participation, inclusion and 
transparency..
The NCF deals with empowering individuals to exercise peacefully their rights of 
expression, association, and assembly, including through their establishing and 
participating in NGOs, unions, and other civil society organizations 
2.2.Measuring the programme results of the completed FOGs 
2.2.1 Institute for the Development of Civil Society (IDCS) in collaboration with the Sudan 
Initiative for the Constitution Making Process (SICM): “To promote a nation-wide debate 
on the development of Sudan’s permanent constitution following the end of the 
Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA)”. Project Period was June 21, 2011 to September 
20, 2011 with a fund of $ 99,997.
The project included three outcomes which are as follows: 
1) Training of 60 trainers/facilitators ; 
2) Developing of a civic education curriculum and advocacy material; and 
Page10
3) Conducting 90 forums (6 in each of the 15 states). 
All of the above results were achieved. The training of 68 participants was successfully completed, 
one of the ToT training workshops was held in Khartoum in July 2011; a training manual, 
educational and promotional material were prepared, pretested, published and circulated to the 15 
states; and 75 forums were organized (6 in each state including Khartoum). That means SICM was 
able to organize an additional number of forums in collaboration with other CSOs and local 
authorities. In total, 4,232 people attended these forums. However, it is to be noted that some of the 
activities, namely the development of the civic education curriculum, advocacy material and forums 
were delivered after the dates stipulated in the grant’s document. 
The overall goal for the project was to “Prepare the Sudanese people to participate actively and 
effectively in the forthcoming constitution-making process through nationwide civic education 
and public awareness campaign”. The extent to which actual results contributed to achieving this 
overall goal is discussed below: 
There were many challenges and constrains which hindered the implementation of the project. In 
addition, there were opportunities for improvement in relation to the main thematic areas, 
identification of stakeholders, extent of participation, capacity needs and how people are 
empowered. 
The information collected through the review of SICM’s reports and interviews with SICM staff and 
focal points revealed that SICM had a wide geographical coverage as it had conducted forums and 
workshops in all the 15 states. However, coverage within the states had, in most cases, focused on 
state capitals for two main reasons: 
(i) 90% of the trainees were chosen from the state capitals to the extent that some localities 
were not represented. This fact posed a serious problem as the forums were conducted in 
the state capitals and the surrounding localities. The evaluation team noted that SICM’s 
project proposal did not mention where the forums should be held. The proposal mentions 
only the number of forums to be organized in each state. Since SICM’s intent was to develop 
a cadre of focal points at each state, it is natural that they had focused on state capitals. 
However, the evaluation team feels that issues of access to remote localities should be 
considered in future. 
(ii) Reaching localities and in particular the distant ones requires additional funding taking into 
consideration the flat rate fund per a forum and a workshop. 
Many of the trained facilitators did not take part in the state-level activities. To quote examples: 
only one trainer in South Darfur was expected to take part, in collaboration with one focal point, to 
cover the 21 localities of the state. In the Blue Nile State, one focal point was appointed a minister in 
the state (government) and another focal point had joined the SPLM-(N). Although the movement of 
these individuals had its impact on the activities of the project, it has a positive effect as they would 
sow the seeds of constitutional awareness elsewhere. The creation of two new states (Eastern and 
Central Darfur) meant that four states had to be covered by the focal points who were trained to 
facilitate SICM’s work in the two old states (South and Western Darfur).The inability to retrain 
some of the focal points is attributed to the fact that the focal points were involved on the basis of 
three-months renewable contracts. In most states the focal points were found to be active only 
when they receive funds required for implementing specific activities. In the event that SICM and 
USAID find it appropriate to extend the project for another period, improving the terms of 
Page11
engagement of the focal points and strengthening SICM’s relationship with the focal points is a 
matter of high importance and a fundamental factor for achieving the overall objectives of its 
project. 
In this context, it might be appropriate to consider serious options of alternative outreach 
instrument such as producing CDs, theatrical improvisation DVDs and utilizing community radio in 
the localities that are difficult to access. In South Darfur, for example, a forum was devoted to the 
“hakamat” (women poets) who are reputed for instigating war, and the Masheesh theatrical group. 
Within the Darfur and Kordofan rural contexts, it is easier and more practical to disseminate 
messages to local communities through such methods and instruments. Unfortunately, due to lack 
of funding perhaps, no subsequent effort was exerted to utilize the acquired knowledge in 
advocating for the principles of the constitution-making process. The project document indicates 
clearly that the new project is meant to pick up where the first one left off. In this regard, the team 
finds it appropriate to report on the excellent initiative of the focal points in Gazira State who 
managed to provide translation into the sign language for some workshops organized for the 
disabled members of society. . 
The evaluation team finds it difficult to confirm that there is a real partnership between the focal 
points and SICM. However, the team took note of a very positive development in Gazira State where 
the focal points made the initiative of establishing a network of local CSOs that share interest in the 
constitution-making process. The representatives of the Sudanese Centre for Democracy and 
Development (SCDD), one of SICM’s partners in Wad Madani (Gezira State), informed the evaluation 
team that when they are in the process of conducting a forum or a workshop, the other members of 
the network usually send their volunteers to assist the Centre. The present organizational 
relationship between SICM and its focal points is fragile as the latter believe their role as 
implementing agents only when instructed by SICM’s headquarter in Khartoum. In almost all other 
states there is the risk of the focal points pursuing their own personal agenda? In some instances, 
according to SICM State and Training Coordinator, the selection of the trainees was limited to 
family members. According to SICM’s leadership this had happened in one state and they managed 
to avoid repeating it in other states. Currently, SICM is assessing the work of its focal points in an 
effort to address problems encountered. 
The attitude of the official state and national authorities vis-à-vis the SICM network and its 
activities under this project was found to be inconsistent and contradictory. It ranged from the 
negative reaction of the security authorities by hitting hard on the focal points at different levels to 
the positive approach of requesting coordination and collaboration, as in the cases of the Advisory 
Council on Human Rights and some State Legislative Assemblies. The hostile attitude of the 
National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) has not selectively targeted projects funded by 
USAID FOGs or their implementing CSOs. In an article published by the Sudanese electronic 
newspaper, Dr. Amin Makki Madani, a highly respected legal expert and human rights activist, 
expressed the view that the NISS has for some time targeted all the Sudanese civil society 
organizations (CSOs) that advocate for social, economic, cultural and political rights; which means 
all those supporting democratic transformation, the rule of law, human rights and basic freedoms.
According to Madani, the Humanitarian Affairs Commission (HAC), which is currently under the 
framework of the Ministry of Interior (not the Ministry of Social Affairs), and NISS had recently 
carried out investigations with a number of non-governmental organizations such as Alkhatim 
Adlan Centre for Enlightment and the Sudanese Writers Union. The latter was investigated for 
organizing a debate forum on the forthcoming constitution (Funding of Civil Society Organizations, 
www.sudanile.com, 21 November 2012). 
Page12
In relation to this project, the evaluation team has reached the following additional conclusions: 
The evaluation team is of the view that although the project achieved all stated results, it did 
not fully meet its overall objective which was very difficult to achieve by one project that is 
expected to cover 15 states in one year. The reason is that the overall objective was too 
optimistic especially when it relates to “preparing the Sudanese people to participate actively 
and effectively in the constitution-making process”. 
However, the evaluation team believes that given the difficult and complex political 
environment, the project has contributed significantly in exposing to the public the 
importance of the constitution-making process which was considered in the past as the task 
of a selected group of elites and could only be done by officials. 
As a result, constitutional issues have become a part of public debates. The Council of States 
(the second chamber of the national parliament), the Consultative Council on Human Rights, 
State Legislative Assemblies, trade unions, youth and women organizations requested SICM 
in Khartoum and State capitals to organize forums for them on the constitution-making 
process. 
Equally important, the training manual and promotional materials (posters, pamphlets etc.) 
which were prepared by SICM are now used by a number of organizations and other 
initiatives on the constitution-making process. 
According to the focal points interviewed by the evaluation team, SICM’s messages and 
promotional material targeting the public are impartial and of technical nature, hence, do 
not cause provocation of any nature.. In Al Gezira State, for example, the security officer 
who checked the material stated that he had no objection to promotional material. 
One of SICM’s key messages which drew the attention of the public to the importance of the 
constitution-making process was a radio program which discussed household’s daily food 
basket, its relation to the constitution principles and the need for a bill on socio-economic 
rights. 
2.2.2. Support the Role of Women in Democratic Values – AHFAD UNIVERSITY FOR WOMEN . 
Project Period: July 19, 2011 to July 20, 2012 with a funding budget of $ 99,264 .
The project: 
The goal of the project was to contribute to enhancing the human resources capacities of Sudanese 
people for increased empowerment, engagement and awareness. The main objective was to 
increase awareness about the values and principles of peaceful coexistence, equality, sustainable 
development, human rights and good governance. The project had two main components. The first 
was raising the awareness and providing vital skills for AUW students in the fields of democratic 
values, human rights and good governance and the second was enhancing the capacity of young 
female academics in marginalized state universities. 
At the time of the project design and throughout the implementation period, the project was found 
to be relevant to the context (in terms of target, messages and materials/methods used), 
appropriate and realistic as all the milestones were achieved successfully. 
Page13
The Project’s Achievements:
Based on reviewing the project document, project’s evaluation report and interviews conducted 
with AUW director of international relations office, Dean of School of Rural Extension, Education 
and Development (REED), AUW core group and MSc Students, the evaluation team found that: 
The Human Rights, Democracy and Governance Reader was developed, tested and published. In 
addition, 1000 copies of the information, education and communication (IEC) material were 
produced and disseminated. To serve the purpose of using the Reader as part of the student’s field 
trips materials and part of the curriculum of REED, the production will be replicated by AUW. A 
core group of 15 AUW students, representing the undergraduates and post graduates, will be 
trained to test, evaluate and use the Reader. The AUW commitment to rural women and 
communities is translated by its unique Rural Extension Program, established in 1973 with the long 
term goal of empowering rural women, their families and communities, and to mobilize them 
towards sustainable rural development. The program includes scientific field trips to explore the 
life of rural people and the means and ways for proper interventions to improve the quality of their 
life style. In 1976 the rural extension course was integrated into the curriculum of the school of 
Family Science. One year later the course became a university requirement for all the schools. The 
key participants in the program activity are the students and faculty members who train students 
and the rural communities especially women. Other stake holders are government officials and 
NGOs working in the area. 
20 students from the less developed states (South Kordofan and Eastern Sudan 
States) were selected and joined the M.Sc. programme (15 as Gender and Migration 
MSc student and 5 as Sustainable Development MSc students). The M. Sc. Students, 
who are now in the second semester of the programme, are expected to act as 
supervisors in the forthcoming field trips. 
A memorandum of understanding (MOU) was signed with 8 states’ Universities in 
Darfur (El Fasher, Zalinji, and Nyala), Blue Nile and Kassala States to accommodate 
the M. Sc. students after graduation so as to guarantee the involvement of the 
students at their communities’ level.
The enabling environment in AUW with regards to qualified academic staff, large number and 
diversified groups of students, the project’s staff and M.Sc. students all contributed to the success of 
the project. 
The second component of the project was encountered by the challenge of selecting the M. Sc. 
students. The essence of this component is to reach the teaching assistants of the States’ 
Universities who lack access and opportunities for training. Due to difficulties related to 
establishing contacts with the said universities at the time of selection, AUW opened the 
scholarships for female students from the marginalized states who had graduated with a basic 
degree of grade 1 or 2 (distinction or very good). To avoid encountering similar problems in future, 
AUW is advised to publish advertisements in the local newspapers inviting the concerned 
universities to nominate their candidates for these scholarships. 
The outcome of the interviews conducted with 10 (out of 20) M. Sc. Students suggests that there is 
no guarantee that they intend to join the marginalized states’ universities after the completion of 
their studies. Instead, they were found to prefer working with other employers such as 
NGOs/INGOs. 
The sustainability of project impact is guaranteed through: 
Page14
The well-established academic networking and relations with the universities in the 
marginalized states. 
The M.Sc. graduates are expected to act as change agents among their communities, 
whether they join the state universities or work for NGOs/CBOs. 
The Human Rights, Democracy and Governance Reader is the strongest element of 
the project’s sustainability as it will be used in multi-dimensional ways; in the 
REED curriculum and in the annual field trips material/ messages. 
 The AUW had approached the French Embassy to fund the reproduction of the 
Human Rights, Democracy and Governance Reader and to train youth groups 
composed of 30 students each to use the reader for their future activities (as a 
youth groups or as members of CBOs). 
In an effort to ensure the sustainability of the post-graduate scholarships, in case the 
USAID may decide to stop its support, AUW had approached other donors such as 
the Sudan American Foundation, NORAD, UNFPA and Micro-Peace Building Project. 
Internal Validity: 
The project succeeded in introducing new concepts of democracy and governance to large numbers 
of beneficiaries. The list of beneficiaries includes: 
 AUW students (7000). 
 Outreach to grass root communities: the reader became part of the university’s curriculum, 
field trips’ material and outreach activities. This year, the university’s field trips started on the 
15th of November, and reached out to 70 rural areas with the participation of 1,050 
undergraduate students under partial supervision from the M.Sc. students funded by USAID. 
USAID scholarships provided great educational opportunities for 20 M. Sc. Students: 15 in the 
newly introduced field/paradigm of gender and migration and 5 in the Sustainable 
Development program. The project helped build the capacities of the students who will use 
the knowledge and skills they gained in universities and NGOs/CBOs that they would be join 
after their graduation. 
The following comment by one of the students who was interviewed by the evaluation team is self￾explanatory and explains the project’s added value. 
“Although my M. Sc. Degree will be awarded by the university, I think without the USAID scholarship it 
could not have been possible for me to pursue post-graduate studies.” 
2.2.3. Building the Capacity of Selected Civil Society Organizations in Eastern Sudan, Blue 
Nile and South Kordofan – National Civic Forum (NCF) - Project Period: August 28, 2011 to 
February 28, 2012 with a budget of $99,652.
The overall objective of the NCF project is “To strengthen the capacity of selected civil society 
organizations”. NCF’s specific program activities under this grant were: 
A needs assessment survey; 
10 training workshops: three on NGO management, three on budgeting, proposal writing 
and reporting and four on advocacy campaigning and mobilization. 
Page15
A training workshop on monitoring State Assembly performance; 
Dialogue forums (one in each State), and 
Six public lectures on democratic transformation, socio-economic rights and civil society 
roles. 
Tracing achieved results were also linked to the implementing organization’s evaluation report that 
bluntly stated: “There is evidence that NCF managed to fully implement the needs assessment survey; 
9 out of the 10 training workshops; the training workshop on monitoring the performance of state 
parliaments; and 6 public lectures on democratic transformation, socio-economic rights and civil 
society.”
For the purposes of evaluating this project, the evaluation team reviewed the project document, 
some of the project’s progress reports and the project evaluation report which was prepared by the 
implementing USAID partner (NCF). The team had conducted interviews with the NCF chairperson, 
two of its partner organizations in Kassala (Delta and the Union of Persons with Disability) and El 
Obied Voluntary Association in North Kordofan. 
Based on information collected through this process, the evaluation team came up with the 
following conclusions: 
The training workshops contributed significantly to building the capacities of the CSOs in 
the five states, specifically in relation to coordination and networking. 
A group of skilled trainers in the area of civic education was created in the five states. 
The workshops enhanced the NGOs/CSOs capacity to campaign and advocate for 
democratic transformation, public accountability and socio-economic rights.
Networking and exchange of experience among NCF partners in different states was 
strengthened. 
The project design was very appropriate and facilitated the monitoring and evaluation task 
despite the disenabling political environment. 
Elements of sustainability were maintained, in addition to creating a pool of trainers and 
training material by securing funds from the Arab NGO Network to fund engagement of the 
trained trainers in training other CSOs in their respective states. 
However, the evaluation team failed to realize the role of NCF implementing partners beyond 
the logistical preparation. Taking part in selection of the participants was limited to those 
coming from Kassala and North Kodofan. It is difficult to assume that delivering a training 
workshop on monitoring the performance of the state legislative assemblies in Kassala (for 
Kassala and Gedarif States) would mean that a model for CSOs monitoring of parliamentary 
work in the two states had been initiated. 
2.3. Tracking progress of the Active FOGs: 
2.3.1. Constitution Building Project- Ahfad University for Women - The Regional Institute 
of Gender, Diversity, Peace and Rights: Project period: March 23, 2012- March 27, 2013 
with a funding budget of $499,476.
The goal of the project is to coordinate the varied initiatives and efforts of the civil society sector for 
the upcoming constitutional review by bridging the gap of information, establish structured and 
consistent networking, sharing and exchanging of information and lessons learned and 
documentation of the process. The project has four main components; the establishment of and 
information hub on constitution/human rights/legal issues, mapping survey and documentation, 
Page16
capacity building on critical analysis and assessment of legislations and exchanging experiences on 
constitution context. 
At the time of design, the project was very realistic and aims at achieving a couple of objectives: 
Raising awareness on the constitution building process and human rights. 
Educating the public and policy makers on some important issues such as diversity, citizenship 
rights and decentralization of powers (federalism). 
Broadcast the concept of public participation in building our social contract which will 
contribute to the state of sustainable peace, democracy and development. 
Offer a space to discuss and come to agreement/options about elements of the constitution. 
Building the capacity of stakeholders in constitution building issues. 
Achievements: 
Four capacity building workshops/state-based dialogues in Khartoum, Gezira, Gedarif and 
North Kodofan. The papers presented and the groups’ recommendations were amalgamated 
into a report which was distributed to the participants in the Legal Analysis Course. . 
A two weeks training course on legal analysis and one training course for curriculum 
development. 
One ToT program for 15 future trainers in the field of constitution building and legal analysis. 
A Constitution Development Manual developed and produced. 
Mapping of entities active in civic education on constitutional issues covered 965 entities in 15 
states. An effective link with universities and peace centers in Darfur, South and North 
Kordofan, Gedarif, Blue Nile and White Nile. 
For the website, the contracting step with the website’s company is completed and data entry is 
under process. 
Creation of face book group ( ) to make use of the social media space.
Establishment of a coordination committee representing the 12 universities aiming to reach a 
consensus on the new well-articulated constitution. 
To ensure the involvement of the appropriate stakeholders, the project incorporated the 
experience and participation of legislative bodies, executive boards, youth, and women’s 
groups, political parties in collaboration with national and international experts, academicians 
and project’s staff.
The project activities are progressing well and on the right track. The evaluation team has the 
impression that the AUW has the capacity and commitment to complete the implementation of this 
project in time and as stated in the project document. 
The survey encountered by serious challenges with the security authorities in some states. This has 
resulted in limited access to some entities. To overcome this problem, AUW is planning to upload 
the questionnaire in its website so that it can be accessible to all entities that missed the 
opportunity during the time of the survey. 
At the beginning, the AUW faced serious challenges in developing and managing the constitution’s 
website due to the difficulty of recruiting technical personnel who have good IT skills or contracting 
a reliable and efficient company to do the business. Eventually, however, the AUW managed to 
recruit skilled personnel who have the capacity to develop the website. At the time of field work, 
the evaluation team noted that a considerable progress had been achieved in developing the 
website. 
Page17
The sustainability of the project impact could be guaranteed through: 
Sustainability of the website. 
Ongoing courses; curriculum at both levels of the B. Sc. and M. Sc. 
Replication of the training workshop by states’ universities. 
Continuous public lectures within AUW. 
 Part of the AUW M.Sc. program was to attach each student to one of the organizations 
working in the field of constitution-making. Therefore, the first AUW project on 
empowering women compliments and serves the objectives of the second project on 
constitution-making. 
Working in collaboration with the local media outlets. 
A specialized manual on women’s constitutional rights
2.3.2. Sudan Comparative Law Society (SCLS) - Project period from April 18, 2012 to April 14, 
2014, with a fund of $99,648. 
Project’s objectives are:
To explain and evaluate current legislations with reference, in alia to legislations and other 
similar situations. 
To report and comment on current judicial precedents, including judgment of the 
constitutional court. 
 To exercise continuous surveillance of the application of the rule of law. 
 To undertake and encourage legal research, with emphasis on the comparative based 
research; 
To promote law-abiding spirit and public awareness of the duty to abide by the law. 
To undertake and encourage the research is the Sudan customary laws. 
To undertake researches relating to law reform. 
To undertake continuous evaluation of the curricula of Sudan Law schools and legal training 
programs. 
SCLS intends to achieve the above objective through activities that include conducting studies and 
research, workshop, seminars and group discussions, public lectures, training, and establishment of 
legal data base in addition to curriculum development of law schools, publishing of a periodical, 
translation and exchange visits. 
Achievements: 
The only milestone achieved so far is related to staffing and furnishing the SCLS office in 
preparation for activity implementation1. A workshop on “Imposed By-Laws that are not Endorsed 
by the Parliament” is scheduled to take place on December 24, 2012, in addition SCLS is organizing 
for a forum and a lecture on two major constitution issues namely independence of the judiciary 
and power and wealth sharing. 
 
1
SCLS subsequently organized its first forum under the theme “Key Issues for the Future Constitution.” Upon an AOR 
recommendation, the AO issued a letter reminding SLCS to speed up implementation and offering to revise the benchmark 
calendar if deemed necessary.
Page18
SCLS members are well reputed and highly experienced professionals; they all are known for their 
integrity and neutrality. However, 5 out of the 11 members (around 45.5%) of the Executive 
Committee are above 71 years of age. Many of the new SCLS members are young and prominent 
community figures who, even though they add positively to the image of SCLS, are not empowered 
by the SCLS elders. This factor led to slow and limited deliverables in the first six months of this 
two-year project. 
To overcome this constraint a number of propositions were discussed separately with the SCLS 
Secretary General and a member of the Executive Committee which are as follows: 
Injecting new blood into SCLS. Young staff members of law schools who believe in principles 
of Rule of Law and Human Rights should be head-hunted and mobilized. 
Establishing operational committees composed of the above mentioned groups and 
delegating them to carry out specific tasks; 
Initiate a web-page and make use of the social media to secure participation of wider 
groups of public in relation to by-laws. 
2.3.3. Popular Sovereignty and the New Constitution 
 (IDCS/SICM, US$ 399,635 - 30 September 2012-29 September 2013): 
The grant for the IDCS/SICM popular sovereignty and the new constitution project (30 September 
2012 – 29 September 2013) was just approved at the time of the evaluation. Therefore, it was not 
possible for the evaluation team to report on progress in implementation. 
2.4. Measuring the overall effectiveness of the FOGs as a programming mechanism 
FOGs Objectives, Guidelines and 
Requirements
Recipient Feedback
FOG format allows performance 
without monitoring the actual costs 
incurred by the recipient
All recipients informed that the FOGs system is a 
time-saving funding/programming mechanism and 
facilitates implementation and monitoring.
USAID pays the recipient a set amount 
when it accomplishes a milestone.
FOGs recipient confirmed receiving the agreed 
amount following achievement of a milestone. 
USAID must assess the risk factors 
that could prevent the proposed 
recipient from completing the activity 
or require a substantial change in 
milestones (risks are assessed and 
mitigated).
The feedback from USAID FOGs staff and the 
recipient CSOs suggests that project proposals were 
reviewed thoroughly and critically before awarding 
grants. 
For non-US NGOs, the total value for 
each year of the FOG must not exceed 
$ 500,000.
The amounts of grants awarded to the Sudanese 
CSOs range from a minimum of US$ 99,264 to a 
maximum of US$ 499,476 (both were awarded to 
AUW).
The duration of the FOG must not 
exceed three years.
The duration of the six projects under evaluation is 3-
24 months.
The AO may amend milestones during No AO amendments were made to scope or 
Page19
period of grant, if original milestones 
no longer feasible or appropriate due 
to circumstances beyond the control of 
recipient, and if amended milestones 
compatible with and satisfy original 
purpose of grant.
deliverables of any of the grants. USAID, however, 
allowed some flexibility in achieving some of the 
deliverables, such as in the selection of the students in
the Ahfad university’s M.Sc. scholarship program. 
While students were from the marginalized states 
specified in the project document, they were not all 
staff members of the universities in those areas as 
initially planned.
The recipient can fulfill the objectives 
of the grant
Both the USAID FOGs staff and the recipient CSOs 
provided information confirming that the integrity 
and capacity of the recipient organizations to deliver 
and fulfill the objectives of the grant were reviewed 
and assessed before the award of the grant. 
USAID can close out the grant and 
evaluate the results. 
FOGs recipient made their own evaluation for the 
three completed projects and provided copies of 
their evaluation reports to USAID. Following the 
submission of this evaluation report USAID can easily 
close out the completed grants.
Simplify the USAID procedures for 
award of FOG.
Recipients of USAID FOGs informed that compared to 
the funding mechanisms of other donors such as the 
EU and UNDP, FOGs mechanism is simple, time￾saving and flexible.
Provide for technical assistance to 
recipients, to strengthen them as 
USAID partners.
The grant recipient informed that unlike the funding 
mechanisms of other donors, FOGs can benefit small 
and newly established CSOs. The grant awarded to 
the Sudan Comparative Law Society (SCLS) is an 
evidence of an effort that aims at strengthening 
USAID partners.
The positive feedback from the four CSOs which were awarded FOGs is consistent with and supports 
one of the main objectives of the USAID implementation and procurement reform plan which is “to 
strengthen local civil society and private sector capacity to improve aid effectiveness and 
sustainability” (USAID Forward, P. 6). 
The views of the recipient organizations on the overall effectiveness of FOGs as a programming 
mechanism can be summarized as follows: 
The FOGs mechanism is the best if compared with the bureaucratic and time-consuming 
funding requirements of other donors such as the EU and UNDP. 
The FOGs mechanism which is based on specific milestones and time-frames facilitates 
planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and liquidation processes. 
FOGs is a flexible mechanism as it allows for implementing more than one milestone at the 
same time without having to follow the sequence (matrix) of activities as stated in the 
project document. . 
The mechanism is very flexible and responsive to the circumstances and unexpected 
developments on the ground. For example, when the National Civic Forum (NCF) realized 
that, for security reasons, it was not possible to organize training workshops in South 
Kordofan State, it contacted one of its CSO partners to assist in conducting the workshops in 
Page20
North Kordofan State. The NCF partner managed to host the workshops which were 
attended by participants representing CSOs in South and North Kordofan States. 
Small and newly established NGOs/CSOs such as the Sudan Comparative Law Society (SCLS) 
can benefit from the FOGs funding mechanism. FOGs support will help building and 
strengthening the capacity of the SCLS. It is very difficult for CSOs like SCLS to receive 
funding from other international donors in Sudan. 
Linking release of grant funds to achieving milestones ensures financial accountability and, 
therefore, minimizes the possibility of corruption and abuse of project funds. Furthermore, 
it is seen by the recipients as a tool for organizing their work and activities. 
FOGs mechanism requires a brief and simple concept note/proposal. 
USAID FOGs staff follows up closely the other activities implemented by their partners. For 
example, when the newspapers published information on NCF work on environment, NCF 
received a message of congratulations from USAID. 
FOGs staff develop an effective and smooth system of communication with their partners. 
USAID staffs overseeing FOGs are deeply involved in all the steps of project implementation. 
USAID staff overseeing FOGs are well engaged with the Sudanese civil society especially on 
issues of democracy and governance unlike the UNDP which deals only with the 
government and perceives civil society as a complementary component. 
FOGs mechanism requires a very brief report on each milestone achieved. 
The mechanism is better than those of the other international donors in terms of the quick 
response to project proposals. 
The evaluation team noted that a maximum period of one month, after the submission of 
the final proposal, is required for issuing a letter of award and a contract for the recipient 
CSO. 
The mechanism is very good as the payments are made in time and as agreed. 
Gender equality is a prerequisite in the project design, implementation, activities and 
evaluation. 
The above summary of the views of the grant recipient CSOs are relevant and consistent with 
the USAID strategic objective which states that “our goal at USAID is to create the conditions 
whereby, one day, aid will no longer be necessary in the countries where we work. That goal 
can only be realized if the assistance we deliver strengthens the local actors and institutions 
that are ultimately responsible for transforming their countries” (USAID Forward: 
Implementation and Procurement Reform, (P. 6). 
It is also consistent with and serves the purpose of the USAID Strategic Framework for Sudan 
(FY 2012-2014) when it informs that “this strategy framework focuses on conflict mitigation, 
governance and the transformation of humanitarian relief to development and builds upon 
lessons learned about how such programming can be carried out most effectively” p (5).
Moreover, the recipient feedback is in line with the USAID operating principles of promotion of 
gender equality and female empowerment, measurement and evaluation of impact, building-in 
sustainability (where appropriate) from the start, application of integrated approaches to 
development, and creation of strategic partnerships (p. 8) 
Two out of the four recipients (SICM and NCF) considered the security situation in Khartoum, 
South Kordofan, Blue Nile and Darfur as the main factor which had negatively impacted the 
Page21
implementation of their activities. The security restrictions had also limited the movements of 
the USAID staff to attend and monitor some activities implemented by their partners. 
2.4. Conclusions 
 SICM completed project achieved all stated results but did not meet fully its overall 
objective which was very difficult to achieve due to the large geographical area it 
planned to cover (more than15 states). Another reason is that the overall objective was 
very optimistic especially when it relates to “preparing the Sudanese people to 
participate actively and effectively in the constitution-making process”. However, the 
evaluation team believes that given the difficult and complex political environment, the 
project has contributed significantly to making the constitution process as a big issue, 
which was considered in the past as the task of a selected group of elites, a public as 
well as an official concern.The intermittent relation between SICM and focal points is 
vivid; the relation is tangible when an activity is being implemented; otherwise focal 
points maintain own roles as separate entities. 
 NCF completed project has contributed significantly to empowering and building the 
capacities of the CSOs in the targeted number of states. Training CSOs in management, 
proposal writing, and lobbying and advocacy campaigns is a well-deserved service for 
NGOs/CBOs especially in Sudan marginalized areas. NCF: The evaluation team did not 
foresee a strong monitoring and follow up mechanism in many cases between NCF and 
its implementing partners.
 SCLS: The slow pace of implementation characterizes the decision-making process and 
implementation. Board members, have, high demand on their effort and time. 
Delegating younger members and mobilizing others can be considered.
 AUW is well known for its long history in empowering the Sudanese women through 
education. There is no doubt that the 20 women who are now enrolled in the M.Sc. 
program will be empowered by being awarded the M.Sc. degree whether they join the 
state universities or not. There is, probably, no other institution in Sudan that is well 
placed and has the potential of empowering women than the AUW. AUW came up with a 
feasible alternative to the rather passive response of the universities in the targeted 
areas to nominate some of their staff members to benefit from the M.SC scholarships by 
nominating individual students from the targeted locations. However, no strong 
measures to ensure that the nominated students would serve their communities for a 
specified period of time upon the completion of their study were taken.
Security Constraints: 
Three out of the four USAID partner CSOs have encountered security problems while in the 
processes of implementing their projects. The three CSOs are SICM, NCF and AUW. The attitude of 
the official authorities was found to be inconsistent and contradicting ranging from the reaction of 
the security authorities of hitting hard on the focal points at different levels to the positive 
approach of requesting coordination and collaboration as in the cases of the Advisory Council on 
Human Rights and some State Legislative Assemblies. The evaluation team found out that the NISS 
is targeting all the civil society organizations that are active in the field of democracy, human rights, 
Page22
rule of law and good governance. However, FOGs recipients preserved in implementing their 
activities and adapting to challenges encountered. 
The working environment is hostile and harsh. To mitigate harassment of the security to CSOs, 
revealing these incidents to the outside world and advocating for the right of SCOs to act as 
stipulated in the humanitarian instrument, human rights conventions and the interim constitution 
of Sudan 
Lessons Learned: 
Initiatives on engaging the “hakamat” (women poets) in dissemination of information to 
the public especially in Darfur and Kordofan should be financially supported. 
It is necessary to adopt innovative approaches. The translation into the sign language in 
forums organized by SICM for the disabled in Wad Madani (Al Jazeera State) is a good 
example in this regard. 
Networking with other CSOs is crucial for the implementation of the project activities. In 
Al Gezira State the (SCDD) had benefited significantly from the assistance provided by 
its network member organizations that made their volunteers available for 
implementation of forums and workshops. 
Collaboration and coordination with the State authorities helps the smooth 
implementation of planned activities and facilitates the work of the CSOs. 
The stakeholders who are expected to benefit from the services implemented by USAID 
partner organizations should be consulted to ensure their collaboration before 
finalizing the objectives and milestones of each project. 
Follow up mechanisms need to be established for workshops and activities that are 
conducted for purposes of coordination and networking between civil society 
organizations. 
Whenever possible media outlets such as the state radios should be considered as an 
effective means for dissemination of information and messages to the public. The 
interviewees who had experiences in using local radios and TV estimated that the 
budget for one forum could be used for conducting two or three radio sessions. 
Success Stories: 
IDCS/SICM: The focal points in Al Gezira and Nahr Al Neel (River Nile) states were able to 
conduct additional workshops and forums without using the project funds as a result of 
their coordination and collaboration with other civil society organizations and state 
authorities. 
NCF: The participation of the HAC Commissioner in North Kordofan State in the training 
workshops conducted by NCF and its local partners had facilitated for the participant 
organizations to establish and officially register a network under the name of Basma. 
Subsequently, the network had implemented a number of good projects. 
AUW: Through USAID support the AUW has been able to incorporate issues of gender, 
democracy and human rights in its curriculum for the undergraduate and postgraduate 
students. 
Page23
2.5. Recommendations: 
USAID-DG
Make the most of relative donor influence in Sudan by building a unified, strong donor and 
diplomatic front to press the government to make a commitment to ensure participation of 
political parties and CSOs in the constitution making process. 
Encourage FOG recipients’ coordination with political parties and the populations of Darfur, 
Blue Nile and South Kordofan in order to reach consensus on the principles of inclusion, 
participation and transparency in the making of the upcoming constitution. 
Continue use of FOGs as a DG programming mechanism and expand funding to build on 
current projects to support capacity building and focus on women and youth. 
Consider funding other GJD areas and in particular key elements of good governance such 
as legislative functions and processes, local government and decentralization and 
anticorruption reforms. 
FOG Recipients 
More concerted efforts to promote networking between actors, involvement with political 
parties and media; 
More effective collaboration with mass media channels in educating the masses and opting 
to use of other channels of communication that appeal to youth and women including but 
not limited to use of folk arts, text messaging and rap in the case of addressing urban youth. 
Develop benchmarks or other measures to integrate women and women’s organizations as 
important allies in constitution making. 
. 
Page24
Annex 1 
SCOPE OF WORK 
USAID/Sudan Office of Democracy & Governance Fixed Obligation Grants 
I. BACKGROUND 
This evaluation will focus on Fixed Obligation Grants (FOGs) given to local Sudanese organizations by 
USAID/Sudan’s Office of Democracy and Governance (DG). The Evaluator will address seven FOGs to 
Sudanese CSOs in total, two completed ones, three operating and two are currently underway. The 
evaluation will cover both the performance of the projects funded, as well as an assessment of 
USAID/Sudan’s experience in using FOGs as a direct funding mechanism to support local civil society 
organizations (CSOs) in furtherance of DG objectives. As a matter of practicality, the main focus of the 
evaluation will be on completed grants; however, a key objective of this evaluation is to inform Mission 
management on the progress of newly-awarded grants and provide guidance on the desirability, 
feasibility, and scale of future assistance through FOGs. 
Background information on the FOGs administered by the Democracy and Governance (DG) Office will 
be provided to the evaluator who has been selected. 
II. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION 
USAID/Sudan is commissioning this evaluation to better understand not only how several DG FOGs have 
performed to date, but also how well FOGs are working as a programming mechanism for DG activities 
in Sudan. Areas of focus for this evaluation include, but are not limited to, what USAID and partners are 
obtaining from the FOGs, what is going well and what is not, and how lessons can be applied to future 
programming. USAID/Sudan requires the Evaluation Team to design and implement an evaluation of 
three completed DG FOGs, and also to observe two additional FOGs that will be underway at the time of 
the evaluation. The end result of these efforts will serve the following purposes: (1) measure program 
results for completed FOGs; (2) track progress of active FOGs; (3) provide lessons learned for USAID, 
assessing the potential for key successes to be replicated; and (4) measure the overall effectiveness of 
FOGs as a programming mechanism with respect to DG’s overall strategy in Sudan and in light of 
management burden and technical staff capacity. 
The Contractor shall discuss and analyze program performance and success, and shall also address 
opportunities missed or accomplishments that fell short of potential or expectations, as these findings 
could inform future USAID/Sudan grant-making processes, particularly as the Mission’s development 
strategy for Sudan evolves. As USAID/Sudan eventually transitions to a Country Development 
Cooperation Strategy (CDCS), the use of a methodology to improve development efforts through 
Page25
increased coordination and collaboration, testing of promising new approaches, and adaptation of 
approaches when appropriate to improve effectiveness, will be increasingly important focal points. To 
that extent, the evaluation will be expected to analyze each FOG recipient’s strategy and approach and 
make recommendations based on those findings. 
III. EVALUATION OBJECTIVES: 
The Automated Directive System (ADS) 203.3.6.1 requires that an evaluation is conducted when there is 
a distinct and clear management need to address an issue. This review is to critically examine the overall 
performance of the selected FOGs, as well as to analyze the efficacy of FOGs as means of civil society 
development programming in Sudan. The evaluation methodology and process shall address the questions 
outlined below for each FOG: 
1. To what extent did each FOG meet its overall goal? The Contractor shall review the 
project performance of each FOG and establish the extent to which the intended goal and 
results have been met. What were the success factors and challenges that have hindered the 
achievement of the results? Analysis of performance shall also establish the degree to which 
the program design and management were conducive to post-project sustainability of the 
grantees and replication by others. 
2. How effective were the FOGs as a mechanism for DG programming? The Contractor shall 
analyze how well the fixed obligation grants worked as a programming mechanism for DG activities 
in Sudan, especially at the particular time immediately after the separation of South Sudan and the 
early transition to a new country and Mission context. Was the FOG mechanism effective in meeting 
short-term results of the DG team’s strategy, or would another mechanism have been more 
appropriate? What were the pros and cons of using the FOG mechanism for these DG activities at the 
time they were used? 
3. How realistic and appropriate was the design of the project? The Contractor shall review the 
project concept and design to assess whether it was responsive to the need at that time, realistic in 
approach, and appropriate in light of recipient capacity. To what extent did the design of each FOG, 
especially the way project milestones were identified and sequenced, influence the outcomes? 
4. Were the appropriate stakeholders involved in the program and to what extent did the program 
promote better coordination and collaboration between them? The Contracto shall establish and 
assess the extent to which the critical stakeholders and inter-relationships were correctly identified, 
structured and involved in the delivery and management of the activity. To what extent did each 
project address the core issues for which its grant was given? 
IV. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY 
The Contractor shall propose a clear methodology to answer all the evaluation questions, using both 
quantitative and qualitative methodologies such as focus groups, structured interviews and/or 
questionnaires, as appropriate. The final evaluation report shall describe the techniques used in the 
methodology, including sampling techniques, and shall also include a brief assessment of the relative 
Page26
strengths and weaknesses of each method employed (e.g. possibly sampling bias, inadequate sample size, 
etc.). 
Preliminary analysis and review of relevant documentation will be conducted to gain an 
understanding of contextual issues, including transition priorities, legal authority and the 
cooperation framework. The Contractor shall also review project documents including grant 
agreements and reports. In analyzing program performance, the Contractor shall gather views 
and inputs of critical stakeholders who have been involved with each of the FOGs. These 
stakeholders include, but are not limited to, the USAID DG team and supporting offices, grantee 
personnel, associated civil society organizations, participants and beneficiaries and other donors 
in the sector. 
With regard to data quality, the Contractor shall be familiar with and follow USAID data quality 
standards for objectivity, validity, reliability, precision, utility and integrity and be able to apply them in 
the final report, by identifying such data limitations as may exist with respect to these standards (ADS 
578.3.4.2 - http://transition.usaid.gov/policy/ads/500/578.pdf ) and ADS 203.3.5.1 - 
http://transition.usaid.gov/policy/ads/200/203.pdf ). 
Findings of the evaluation will be shared with USAID and other development parties to inform of better 
administration and execution of democracy and governance grants in Sudan and other post-conflict 
developing countries. 
V. PROGRAM INFORMATION 
The following information documents and sources are available and relevant to the review: 
USAID policy documents (FOGs, USAID Forward, etc.) 
Original Unsolicited Proposals for each FOG. 
Grant documents and work plans. Grant deliverables associated with agreed milestones. 
Final reports. 
VI. EVALUATION TEAM COMPOSITION 
The Contractor shall form an evaluation team consists of three experts, one team leader and two team 
members who should possess the skills and experiences below: 
Team Leader: 
Page27
Master’s degree or higher in international studies, sociology, political science, anthropology, or 
other social science discipline; or demonstrated knowledge and experience in monitoring and 
evaluation systems. 
Fluency in English. Fluency or proficiency in Arabic is strongly desired. 
Qualifications and demonstrated experience in the design and management of evaluations. 
Five to ten years of experience with democracy, governance, civil society, and gender issues. 
Extensive experience in Sudan, Africa, and other Arab countries will also be considered. 
Demonstrated strong research, analytical, and writing skills. 
USAID programming experience is desirable. 
Two Team Members: 
Bachelor’s degree or higher in international studies, sociology, political science, anthropology, or 
other social science discipline. 
Ability to communicate with Team Leader in either English or Arabic is required. Native Arabic 
speaker with fluency in English. 
Demonstrated past experience in the design and management of evaluations is desired. 
At least three years of experience with democracy, governance, civil society, and gender issues 
preferable. Must be Sudanese citizen. 
Strong research, analytical, and writing skills is desirable. 
USAID programming experience is desirable. 
VII. DELIVERABLES 
The Contractor shall deliver the following outputs to USAID/Sudan: 
Deliverable Level of Effort Total Level 
of Effort
1. In-brief meeting for an introduction of the evaluation team, 
discussion of the SOW and initial presentation of the proposed 
evaluation work plan. 
1 day x 3 persons 3
Page28
2. An implementation report submitted to USAID within one 
week after the in-brief. The report will include: 
activity to be undertaken, including field work. 
-grantees and field sites to be 
visited, data collection instruments. 
2 days x 3 persons 6
3. Field work/Data collection 7 days x 3 persons 21
4. Oral debriefing to USAID, FOG recipients, and selected 
partners to present key findings prior to submission of draft 
report. 
1 day x 3 persons 3
5. Draft evaluation report in both hard copies (2) and one 
electronic copy for review by USAID. *Please see the 
Illustrative Report Outline at the end. Requirements for the 
evaluation report are also attached. 
3 days x 3 persons 9
6. Meeting between Evaluation Team, USAID, and possibly 
FOG recipients to discuss draft evaluation report questions, 
comments, and desired edits. (Attendees will be agreed upon 
with USAID.) 
1 day X 3 persons 3
7. Final evaluation report in both hard copies (2) and one 
electronic copy incorporating feedback from USAID. 
1 day x 1 person 1 
Total 46
VIII. ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES 
Contractor: 
Conduct evaluation, per the requirements set forth in this scope of work. 
Make own meeting and logistical arrangements. 
USAID: 
Appoint a point of contact for the assignment to coordinate USAID inputs. 
Approve the Contractor’s methodologies and work plan. 
Facilitate initial introduction of the Evaluation Team to grantees. 
Participate in briefings. 
Review draft evaluation reports and provide feedback. 
Page29
Sign off on final report. 
IX. ILLUSTRATIVE REPORT OUTLINE 
Introductory Section of Report: 
Cover page: Title of the study, the date of the study, recipient’s name, name of the Evaluator. 
Preface or Acknowledgements (Optional) 
Table of Contents 
List of Acronyms 
Executive Summary: Stand-alone, 1-2 pages, summary of report. This section should not 
contain any material not found in the main part of the report. 
Main Part of the Report: (Not to exceed 15 pages)
1. Introduction/Background and Purpose: Overview of the final evaluation. Covers the purpose and 
intended audiences for the final evaluation and the key questions as identified in the SOW 
2. Study Approach and Methodology: Outline how the evaluation was designed, conducted, and what 
specific methods were used. 
3. Findings: This section, organized in whatever way the team wishes, must present the basic answers 
to the key evaluation questions, i.e., the empirical facts and other types of evidence the study team 
collected, including any assumptions. 
4. Conclusions: This section should present the team‘s interpretations or judgments about its findings. 
5. Lessons Learned: In this section, the team should present any information that would be useful to 
people who are designing/manning similar or related new or on-going programs in Sudan 
6. Recommendations: This section should make it clear what actions should be taken as a result of the 
study. 
X. CRITERIA TO CHECK THE QUALITY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT 
The evaluation report shall represent a thoughtful, well-researched and well-organized effort to 
objectively evaluate what worked in each project, what did not work, and why. 
The evaluation report shall address all evaluation questions included in the scope of work. 
The evaluation report shall include the scope of work as an annex. All modifications to the scope 
of work, whether in technical requirements, evaluation questions, evaluation team composition, 
methodology or timeline need to be agreed upon in writing by USAID/Sudan. 
Evaluation methodology shall be explained in detail and all tools used in conducting the 
evaluation such as questionnaires, checklists, and discussion guides will be included in an annex 
in the final report. 
Page30
Where applicable, evaluation findings shall take into account each project’s impact on both males 
and females. 
Limitations to the evaluation shall be disclosed in the report, with particular attention to the 
limitations associated with the evaluation methodology (selection bias, recall bias, unobservable 
differences between comparator groups, etc.). 
Evaluation findings shall be presented as analyzed facts, evidence and data and not based on 
anecdotes, hearsay or the compilation of people‘s opinions. Findings should be specific, concise 
and supported by strong quantitative or qualitative evidence. 
Sources of information need to be properly identified and listed in an annex. 
Recommendations need to be supported by a specific set of findings. 
Recommendations shall be action-oriented, practical and specific, with defined responsibility for 
the action. 
Page31
Annex (2) 
Ref: Purchase Order AID-66-O-12-00007 with Partners in Development Services (PDS) 
Implementation Plan 
FOGs Evaluation 
Following being introduced by USAID to grantees the evaluation team will contact grantees to 
schedule day and time e for each interview (within the specified time frame set in the plan. It is not 
practical for them to schedule dates for field work before receiving the 1st installment. However, it is 
likely that the team can only interview USAID partners in Khartoum before the Eid which is due in 
less than two weeks time. Therefore, the field work can be conducted immediately after the Eid. 
USAID-DG
CSO/Entity People to Meet Methods to Use Time-Frame
IDSC and SUGDE COR/Project Management 
Specialist
Acquisition & Assurance 
Specialist
Any other available staff 
USAID-DG invites to attend. 
Structured Interview 16-22 October 
2012
1. SICM2
CSO/Entity People to Meet Methods to Use Responsibility Time-Frame
IDSC and SUGDE Director IDSC & 
Chair SUGDE
Structured Interview Gadallah & 
Omer
16-22 
October 2012
SICM 
Coordination 
Committee (SCC)
Members to SCC Focused Group 
Discussion
Gadallah & 
Omer
16-21 Octobrt 
2012
SICM Secretariat Training and 
media 
coordinators
Structured Interview Gadallah & 
Omer
16-21 
October 2012
Beneficiaries 
(Trained trainers 
and Focal Points)
Focal point and 
trainer in five 
selected states
Sampling techniques
Structured Interview
To be set 
after 
receiving 1st
installment 
2. NCF
Board/Executive 
Committee
Chairperson & 
Secretary General
Structured Interview Gadallah & 
Omer
16-21 
October 2012
Trainers Structured Gadallah & 
Omer
16-21 
October 2012
Beneficiaries Sampling techniques
Structured Interview
Gadallah & 
Omer
To be set 
after 
receiving 1st
installment
 
Page32
3. AUW
AUW
International and 
External 
Relations office
Rural, Extension, 
Education & 
Development 
(REED)- project’s 
coordinator
Vice Chancellor
Director of 
International and 
External 
Relations office –
Project 
Coordinator
Dean, REED
Trained core 
group
Structured interview
Structured Interview
Structured interview
Nabawia
Nabawia
Nabawia
16-21 
October 2012
Dalanj Peace 
Studies Centre
Director
Involved Staff
MA gradutes
Focus Group 
Discussion & semi￾structured interview
Nabawia To be set 
after 
receiving 1st
installment
Gedarif Peace 
Studies Centre 
Director
Involved Staff
MA gradutes
Structured Interview Nabawia To be set 
after 
receiving 1st
installment
Gedarif Faculty of 
Community 
Development 
Dean
Involved Staff
Msc gradutes
Focus Group 
Discussion & semi￾structured interview
Nabawia To be set 
after 
receiving 1st
installment
SCLS
SCLS Governing 
Body
SCLS leadership 
and office staff
Structured Interview Gadallah & 
Omer
16-21 
October 2012
AUW
AUW-RIG/DPR Director of 
RIG/DPR 
Project’s 
Coordinator
Database & 
webpage staff 
Structured Interview Gadallah & 
Omer
16-21 
October 2012
Debriefing to 
USAID before 
submission of 
draft report
Oral 
debriefing/Discussion
Nabawia, 
Gadallah & 
Omer
Towards the 
end of the 
first week of 
November3
Submission of 
draft report
Second week 
of November
Meeting between 
USAID, Evaluation 
team and possibly 
FOG recipients
Second week 
of November
Submission of Second week 
 
Page33
final evaluation of November
Annex (3) 
Ref: Purchase Order AID-66-O-12-00007 with Partners in Development Services (PDS) 
FOGs Evaluation 
Check List 
1. USAID 
 How effective were the FGOs as a mechanism for DG programming compared to 
previous programming mechanisms? 
 How would you assess FOG mechanism in terms of paperwork, time involved when 
reviewing project proposals and awarding grants? 
 What are the risks of focusing on milestones/deliverables rather than on usual 
procedures followed by other donors? And if such risk exists how you would manage 
reimbursing already awarded funds? 
 How would assess access of Sudanese CSOs to FOGs? 
 Did you have any incident where the situation requires introducing changes in the 
milestones or the program objectives in consultation with USAID? 
 Were the appropriate stakeholders involved in the program? 
 To what extent did the program promote better coordination and collaboration 
between stakeholders? 
 What are the criteria for selecting projects? 
 To what extent did the project meet its rationale and overall objectives? 
 What were the opportunities missed or accomplishments that fell short of potential or 
expectations?
2. Grantees
 Director IDSC & Chair SUGDE 
 How effective were the FGOs as a mechanism for DG programming? 
 How would you compare FOGs Application and awarding procedures in terms of 
paperwork, time involved and scope of funding to other donors such as UNDP and USIP? 
 Cons and Pros of FOGs
 How realistic, appropriate and flexible was the design of the project? 
 To what extent did the project meet its overall goal? 
 SICM-CC
 To what extent did the project meet its overall goal? 
 What are the Challenges and constraints met? 
 What elements of sustainability are incorporated in the project design? Pending receipt 
of first installment 
 How did FOG funding help in achieving SICM objectives 
 What are the key successes? 
 What are the lessons learned? 
 AUW INVOLVED STAFF: 
 Levels students and institution.
 What are the key successes? 
 What are the lessons learned? 
 What are the missed opportunities? 
Page34
 The quality of the Reader; incorporation of human rights, Democracy and Governance, 
user friendly as it will be used as trainer guideline and the validity of reader’s 
component o be part of University Rural Extension Programme; 
 Validity of information to be disseminated during the forthcoming fieldtrips. 
 The quality of brochures; inclusiveness of the main messages/information about 
human rights, democracy and governance 
 M.Sc. Students 
 Relevance of the programme to their communities’ needs and expectations.
 Efficiency of MSc graduates in disseminating the gained knowledge. 
 The impact of the programme at graduates and university level. 
 Sustainability of impact. 
 Recommendations for further assistance. 
 Relevance of the programme to their communities’ needs and expectations.
 Means to integrate the gained knowledge in the messages of rural Extension Field trips. 
 Contribution in building the capacities of home university colleagues and others works in 
the field of relevance. 
 Impact of the programme at personal and institutional level. 
 RIG/PDR-AUW 
 Achievements so far and the need for possible adjustment. 
 Relevance of the activities being undertaken. 
 Challenges and constraints encountered 
 Elements of sustainability are incorporated in the project design? 
 How did FOG funding help in are on track. 
 achieving RIG/DPR objectives; 
 What are the key successes? 
 What are the lessons learned so far? 
 What are the missed opportunities? 
 Impact of the project at network and institutional level. 
 Recommendations with regard to the remaining project period and beyond. 
 
Page35
(Annex (4) 
Ref: Purchase Order AID-66-O-12-00007 with Partners in Development Services (PDS) 
FOGs Evaluation
Annex (4) – People Met 
SICM
Entity People Met Methods to Use Responsibility Time-Frame
IDSC and SUGDE Dr. Girshab 
(Director, IDSC & 
Chair SUGDE) Ms 
Manal Allah Gabo
Semi-structured 
Interview
Gadallah & Omer 17 October 
2012
SICM States and 
Training
Coordinator
Awad Al Kareem Semi-structured 
Interview
Gadallah & Omer 17 October 
2012
SICM Secretariat Mohammed 
Fielabi, Media 
coordinators
Semi-structured 
Interview
Gadallah & Omer 17October 2012
SICM 
Coordination 
Committee (SCC)
Dr Girshab
Omiema Al Mardi 
Mashayir 
Mohamed Al Amin
Awad Al Karim
Khalid
Laila Ali Al Haj
Focused Group 
Discussion
Gadallah & Omer 18 October 
2012
SICM Focal Points Port Sudan4
Aisha Hamad & Al 
Tayib Al Hadi (East 
Sudan Hawa 
Development 
Society)
Semi-structured 
Interview
Omer 26 October
River Nile5
Ahmed Fuaad
Semi-structured 
Interview
Omer 27 October
Kassala
Al Tahir Bashari 
(AL Sharg Center 
for Culture and 
Legal Aid)
Jawahir Awad 
Allah (Women 
Organization for 
Peace & 
Development) 
Lutfi Fouad Abdo 
Semi-structured 
Interview
Semi-structured 
Interview
Phone Interview
Amin, 
Ilham
Ilham
Ilham
30 October 
30 October
31October
 
4
Husna Tahir”Hai Al Shajarah Society” was not reachable by phone during the evaluation visit to Port Sudan
5
 The other 2 focal points reside in Shendi and Berber 
Page36
(Afaq)
Gedarif
Friends of Peace 
and Development 
organization. 
Haram Sir Elkhatim 
Haram
Zienab Women 
Development 
Organization Fatma Samahen , 
Mohmed Omer 
Hajana 
Raidat AZA: Faiza 
Wargo Ridaat 
1st November 
2012
South Kordofan
6
Yousif Marfaeen, 
Director Elgoghan 
Organization for 
Development and 
Reconstruction 
Kamilia koko
-
Director, 
Nuba Women for 
Education and 
Development 
(NUWEDA) 
Blue Nile
7
Al Rasheed Abdel 
Majid; Paralegal 
Association Wafaa 
Sirel Khatim, 
Friends of Peace & 
Development 
Society
Gazira
Bakikir Bello and 
Afraa Ibrahim, the 
Sudanese Center 
for Democracy & 
Development
 6
 All met in Khartoum 
7
 First met in Khartoum whereas second met in Gedarif 
Page37
South Darfur
Mohammed
Zakaria, Union of 
Plastic Artists
31 October 
2012
Geda
Wafaa Sirel Khatim 
of the Friends of 
Peace and 
Development 
Society
AUW
Prof. Balghis Badri
-
Director of the 
Regional Institute 
of Gender, Peace, 
Diversity and 
Rights.
Dr. Nafisa 
Mohamed Badr
i
-
AUW
- Director, 
International & 
External Relations.
Dr. Abu Bakr 
Abdelazeem
-AUW
-
Dean of school of 
Rural Extension, 
Education and 
Development.
Uz. Hafiz Mohamed 
Malik
- Assistant 
Coordinator
-
Constitution 
Building Project
-
Training 
Component.
Uz. Sunia Aziz 
Malik 
- Assistant 
Coordinator
-
Constitution 
Building Project 
–
Legal Analysis 
Component.
Uz. Abu Bakr 
Ahmed Mohamed 
Elkhair
- Post
-
Graduate Registrar - Regional Institute 
of Gender, Peace, 
Diversity and 
Rights.
Page38
Uz. Rasha Awad 
Abdella
- Assistant 
Coordinator
-
Constitution 
Building Project 
–
Directory and Data 
Base Component.
Alia Abdella Ali 
Elfaig
- MSc 
Student
- Gender 
and Migration.
Ikhlas Omer 
Ibrahim Kajo
- MSc 
Student
- Gender 
and Migration.
Nada Ibrahim Taha – MSc Student￾Gender and 
Migration.
Hamida Ali Aldow – MSc Student￾Gender and 
Migration.
Huda Ibrahim 
Aglian 
– MSc 
Student
- Gender 
and
Migration.
Thoiba Hashim 
Galad 
– MSc 
Student
- Gender 
and Migration.
Aida Hakim 
Abashir 
– MSc 
Student
- Gender 
and Migration.
Amna Ahmed 
Mukhtar 
– MSc 
Student
- Gender 
and Migration.
Ezdihar Omer 
Mohamed 
– MSc 
Student
-
Sustainable 
Development
Shahinda Saeed Ali - MSc Student￾Sustainable 
Development
Page39
Civic Forum
Gadarif .
Disabled Union 
Husham 
Mai A. Gadir 
1st November 
2012
Kassala
Mohmoud A Tirik, 
M A Tirik & Ahmed 
Tahir (Delta 
Semi-structured 
Interview
Gadallah/Ilham 25 October 
2012
Obied Voluntary 
Society
Yousif Abdallah 
Mahmoud
Sami Mohammed 
Al Nour
31 October 
2012
SCLS
Ali Sulieman
Nawal Abu 
Gisie3sa
Naafisa Badri
Page40
(Annex 5)
Ref: Purchase Order AID-66-O-12-00007 with Partners in Development Services (PDS) 
Evaluation of USAID Fixed Obligation Grants (FOGs) 
Debriefing Meeting 
Thursday 29th November, 2012 
From 11:00 to 13:00 
PDS office 
Attendance from – USAID: 
1. Zaria Elnour Ali Sulieman 
Attendance from – FOGs : 
2. Prof. Ali Sulieman - SSCL 
3. Dr. Hassan Abdel Ati - NCF￾edgesudan@yahoo.com 
4. Mr. Hafiz A. Elbasheer - AUW-RIG/DPR- balghis.badri@yahoo.com 
5. Mr. Awad Elkareem Fadl Almola-SICM – hsmba32@gmail.com 
Attendance from – PDS: 
6. Dr. Ahmed Abusin 
7. Mr. Omer Sir Elkhatim 
8. Mr. Gadallah Elradi 
9. Mrs. Nabawia Harbi 
Agenda of meeting: 
Debriefing on the evaluation’s key findings, lessons learned and recommendations.
Page41
Annex (6) 
Partners in Development Services (PDS) 
Vision and Mission 
‘Partners in Development Services’ is a Sudanese consultancy group founded to mobilize national 
expertise in a new multi-disciplinary approach with a view of developing new and appropriate 
approaches and models for development. The challenges for development of the forthcoming 
millennium call for new thinking and strategies that cope with the tremendous advances in 
knowledge that surely completely globalizes through speedy information super-highways. 
Partners is unique among sister service organizations, in its unfailing belief in shaping the 
mainstream development efforts through participation of people as the main responsible about 
their development. Our role therefore, besides availing the necessary technical assistance, rests on 
facilitation of the development process as a whole and help influence related policy and practice 
changes. 
Taking the special Sudanese context, where partners mainly operate, social, agricultural and 
community development themes make the overriding challenge domain. Issues of conflicts, peace 
culture, are not under estimated within this context. 
Moreover, Partners competence and ability to mobilize the necessary expertise and resource 
persons defined our course of action to meet that challenge. What we can provide therefore, are 
technical assistance, research and studies, and training inputs. Mainstreaming of gender, 
environment and capacity building of grassroots organizations and support to civil society 
institutions is what makes Partners a development need in Sudan. 
PDS is a Sudanese Consultancy Firm with a main focus on research and training (Annex 6). During 
2012 PDS was assigned by USAID/OFDA, AECOM, UNDP, JICA and the World bank to assess and 
evaluate some of the projects for which they had provided funds.