1.0 Background

The AECF is a leading development organization that supports innovative enterprises in the agribusiness and renewable energy sectors with the aim of reducing rural poverty, promoting climate-resilient communities, and creating jobs.

We catalyze the private sector by surfacing and commercializing new ideas, business models, and technologies designed to increase agricultural productivity, improve farmer incomes, expand clean energy access, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and improve resilience to the effects of climate change. We finance high-risk businesses that struggle to access commercial funding; we are committed to working in frontier markets, fragile contexts, and high-risk economies where few mainstream financing institutions dare to go.

To date, we have supported over 576 businesses in 26 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, impacted more than 36 million lives, and created over 38,000 direct jobs.

AECF is headquartered in Kenya and has offices in Côte d’Ivoire, Tanzania, Nigeria, South Sudan, Benin, and Somalia.

2.0 About Seeds for Impact Programme (SIP) – Tanzania Window

The Seeds for Impact Programme, originally a six-year initiative funded by AGRA and SFSA and operating in Tanzania, Ghana, Nigeria, Malawi, and Mozambique, expanded its reach in Tanzania with dedicated support from the Swedish Government and is now implemented by AECF. The programme aims to transform Tanzania’s seed sector by enabling smallholder farmers (SHFs) to access certified, climate-resilient, and high-yielding crop varieties, particularly common beans, sorghum, and sesame.

The programme combines performance-based grants with structured technical assistance to private seed enterprises, leveraging private co-investment to address systemic constraints in seed production, processing, and distribution. The programme prioritizes underserved and high-potential agroecological regions, including Mbeya, Songwe, Kilimanjaro, Manyara, Dodoma, Katavi, Ruvuma, Lindi, and Mtwara. Core programme features include:

• Scaling production and commercialization of publicly released certified climate-resilient seed varieties.
• Infrastructure investments (warehouses, processing lines, logistics).
• Technical assistance covering governance, seed production, quality assurance, marketing, and ESG compliance.
• Strong emphasis on gender, youth inclusion, and private sector additionality.

3.0 Purpose & Scope of the evaluation

The final evaluation of the SIP programme will provide a thorough assessment of its overall impact against the Theory of Change, emphasizing its effectiveness in achieving established objectives and the positive changes experienced by target groups. The evaluation will provide a clear and detailed overview of the programme’s successes, the challenges encountered, and any gaps in implementation. In addition, the evaluation will assess lessons learned throughout the programme, providing insights to inform future initiatives and strengthen evidence-based decision-making. It will also evaluate the sustainability of the programme’s outcomes and identify strategies to ensure the benefits endure beyond the programme’s duration.

Specifically, the evaluation will:

• Conduct a comprehensive analysis of the measures and activities implemented in the programme, and evaluate its achievements against the programme logframe
• Examine how programme design and implementation responded to contextual, market, and institutional dynamics.
• Evaluate the effectiveness of blended finance and technical assistance in strengthening investee performance.
• Assess the sustainability, scalability, and potential for systemic change in the seed sector.
• Provide actionable recommendations for future programme design, implementation, and measurement results.
• Identify any gaps during implementation.
• Identify and analyze the underlying causes for any objectives that were not fully achieved (if).
• Provide Lessons Learned and offer recommendations for future

4.0 Scope of the Evaluation

The scope of the Final Evaluation is to provide the programme and its stakeholders with an independent assessment of all programme components and the progress made towards the outlined objectives. The Final Evaluation will review the Relevance of Design, Effectiveness, Efficiency of planning and implementation, Impact, and Potential for Sustainability and Replication. Issues or factors that have impeded or accelerated the implementation of the programme or any of its components, including actions taken and resolutions made, should be highlighted.

The evaluation will go beyond reporting the quantitative outcomes and examine how results were measured, particularly at the beneficiary level. It will analyze the robustness of the methodologies used to estimate indirect job creation and household income, and examine the assumptions applied that influence the measurement approach.

5.0 Objectives of the assignment

The specific objectives of the Final Evaluation are to:

• Assess programme performance against the approved log frame, targets, and impact indicators.
• Analyze the contribution of SIP 2.0 to improved access to certified climate-resilient seeds for smallholder farmers.
• Evaluate and report any verifiable system change that has been realized through the SIP intervention.
• Examine enterprise-level outcomes, including business growth, productivity, revenues, employment, and governance.
• Identify factors that enabled or constrained programme implementation and achievement results.
• Assess cross-cutting results related to gender equality, youth inclusion, and vulnerable groups.
• Evaluate the sustainability and replicability of programme outcomes beyond donor funding.
• Document lessons learned and provide practical recommendations for AECF, Sida, and ecosystem stakeholders.
• Assess the difference in yield per acre between farmers using certified seeds and those using non- certified seeds
• Evaluate the change in the affordability of certified seeds over the project period (Affordability Index)
• Assess improvements in access to certified seeds among target farmers
• Measure changes in income levels of target beneficiaries, including seed producers and farmers using certified seeds.
• Determine whether the nutritional status of target households has improved.
• Clear treatment vs non- treatment farmers comparisons(especially for yield, incomen, affordability)

Overall, the programme aims to achieve the following results during its duration:

Table 2. SIP impact indicators

6.0 Evaluation & Guiding questions

This Final Evaluation will be conducted in accordance with the AECF Evaluation standards and will use the widely accepted OECD/DAC Evaluation criteria. An initial set of questions that should guide the Final Evaluation in assessing the Programme against each given criterion has been developed as follows:

Table 3. Evaluation Questions.

Evaluation Audience

• The AECF LLC
• SIDA
• Investee Enterprises
• Ecosystem stakeholders and partners

7.0 Methodology

During this final evaluation, the selected evaluation firm is invited to assess the Programme and its components against the evaluation criteria and specific evaluation questions listed above. The methodology described in this section is indicative, and the evaluation teams applying it are expected to adapt, elaborate, and integrate the approach and to propose any adjustments needed to undertake the assignment. These can include additions to the evaluation design, approaches to be adopted, an appropriate sampling strategy, data collection and analysis methods, and an evaluation framework. The proposals should also refer to methodological limitations and mitigation measures. At all times, evaluators are to adhere to the ‘principles for ensuring quality evaluations’ according to OECD/ DAC quality standards. Mixed data collection methods are recommended. The evaluation will be rolled out in three phases:

1. Inception phase: The evaluator(s) will review key Programme documents and engage with the AECF/SIP team to finalize the evaluation objectives, questions, criteria and Against the above, the evaluator(s) will identify appropriate evidence that needs to be gathered and synthesized to fully inform the evaluation process, as well as sources of information, including key individuals to be interviewed. The output of this phase will be an inception report, which will include a methodological note and an evaluation framework presenting how each evaluation question will be addressed, data sources and data collection methods that will be used to gather additional information needed, and a set of criteria to rate the strength of the evidence collected. The inception report should not exceed 10 pages.
2. Data collection and analysis phase: The second phase will further assess the programme and collect information and evidence that respond to the objectives and criteria set in this ToR, and align with the scope refined during the inception phase. The evaluation framework should be the guiding tool for collecting data through various methods related to the evaluation questions. A mixed-method approach will be used to combine qualitative and quantitative data collection methods. At the end of this phase, the evaluator(s) are expected to present their preliminary findings to the key audience for this evaluation.
3. Reporting and dissemination phase: The third phase will include reporting, validating, and prioritizing findings and recommendations, and disseminating the results to AECF and its stakeholders. The evaluator(s) will submit a final evaluation report in both Word and PDF formats. The final report should not exceed 25 pages and clearly and transparently demonstrate links between review questions, data collection, analysis, findings, and conclusions. The conclusion and recommendations presented in the final report should be supported by strong evidence and will be further explained during the final presentation.

8.0 Deliverables

The consultant will produce the following deliverables:

• Inception report: A report outlining the evaluation methodology, data collection tools, stakeholder engagement process, and updated work plan.
• Draft report: A report presenting the evaluation findings, conclusions, and recommendations.
• Final report: A report incorporating feedback from the AECF, including an insights paper
• Presentation of findings: A presentation of the evaluation findings and recommendations to the AECF, SIDA, and other relevant stakeholders.

9.0 Duration of service

The service is expected to be completed within three (3) months

10.0 Reporting

The consultant will be accountable and report to the Director of Programmes, AECF, with support from the Country Senior Programme Officer.

11.0 Qualifications and experience from the Firm and Personnel

• A consultancy firm with substantial experience (5–7 years) in conducting development and Agribusiness research, monitoring, and evaluation assignments in enterprise or MSME support
• Proven experience in Tanzania or East Africa (understanding of the Tanzania context will be an added advantage)
• Strong expertise in seed financing, entrepreneurship, and private sector development.
• Demonstrated application of OECD/DAC evaluation standards.
• Excellent analytical, facilitation, and reporting skills.
• A team leader with an advanced degree in a relevant field such as economics, development studies, monitoring and evaluation, or a related discipline.
• A multidisciplinary team of experts with strong technical backgrounds in programme evaluation, economics, finance, and monitoring and evaluation.
• Demonstrated experience in applying participatory and evidence-based evaluation methodologies, in line with recognized international evaluation standards and best practices.
• Prior experience implementing or evaluating Agribusiness donor-funded programmes in the region (experience with SIDA-funded projects will be considered an added advantage).
• Excellent communication, analytical, and reporting skills, with the ability to present complex findings and recommendations clearly to diverse stakeholders.

Guidelines

The consultant will be expected to take responsibility for all the activities identified in the Terms of Reference (ToRs). The Technical and Financial Proposal should contain:

1. Consultant’s interpretation of the ToRs.
2. Complete description and elaborate explanation of the proposed methodology.
3. Names and qualifications of allocated personnel and any other resources that the consultant will make available to execute the assignment and achieve the objectives.
4. The financial proposal should stipulate the consultancy fees and all associated costs for the assignment, expressed in US$ and inclusive of taxes.
5. A detailed work plan within the stipulated timeline

Mandatory Requirements for firms: –

1. Company profile.
2. Trading license, Certificate of incorporation, Certificate of Registration, and other statutory documents.
3. Valid Tax Compliance certificate (Applicable to firms).
4. Passport/National Identification of the lead consultant and key personnel

N/B: FAILURE TO ATTACH AND ADHERE TO THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS WILL RESULT IN AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION

1. An evaluation committee will be formed by the AECF and may include employees of the businesses it supports. All members will be bound by the same standards of confidentiality. The consultant should ensure they fully address all criteria for a comprehensive evaluation.

The AECF may request and receive clarification from any consultant during the evaluation of a proposal. The evaluation committee may invite some or all of the consultants to appear before it to clarify their proposals. In such an event, the evaluation committee may consider such clarifications in evaluating proposals.

In deciding on the final selection of a qualified bidder, the technical quality of the proposal will be weighted at 70% under the evaluation criteria. Only the financial proposal of those bidders who qualify technically will be opened. The financial proposal will be given a 30% weighting, and proposals will be ranked by total points scored.

The mandatory and desirable criteria for evaluating proposals are listed in the table below.

12.0 Proposal submission

Qualified consultants are invited to submit a proposal that includes the following:

• An understanding of the consultancy requirements.
• Methodology and work plan for performing the assignment.
• Detailed reference list indicating the scope and magnitude of similar assignments.
• Relevant services that have been done in the past five (5) years, preferably in Tanzania.
• Signed letters of reference from 3 previous institutions/programmes.
• Registration and other relevant statutory documents.
• The technical and financial proposals must be submitted separately in PDF format.
• The financial proposal (in USD) clearly shows the budgeted cost for the consulting firm to conduct the work outlined above.

N/B: SUBMITTING THE FINANCIAL AND TECHNICAL DOCUMENT AS ONE DOCUMENT WILL AUTOMATICALLY LEAD TO DISQUALIFICATION OF THE APPLICANT.

13.0 Pricing

The AECF is obliged by the Kenyan tax authorities to withhold tax on service contract fees and to ensure that VAT is charged where applicable. Applicants are advised to ensure they have a clear understanding of their tax position under Kenya tax legislation when developing their proposals.

14.0 Evaluation criteria

MANDATORY EVALUATION CRITERIA.

1. Mandatory Requirements for firms: –

1. Company profile.
2. Trading license, Certificate of incorporation, Certificate of Registration, and other statutory documents.
3. Valid Tax Compliance certificate (Applicable to firms).
4. Passport/National Identification of the lead consultant and key personnel

N/B: FAILURE TO ATTACH AND ADHERE TO THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS WILL RESULT IN AUTOMATIC DISQUALIFICATION

1. An evaluation committee will be formed by the AECF and may include employees of the businesses to be supported. All members will be bound by the same standards of confidentiality. The consultant should ensure they fully respond to all criteria for comprehensive evaluation.

The AECF may request and receive clarification from any consultant during the evaluation of a proposal. The evaluation committee may invite some or all of the consultants to appear before it to clarify their proposals. In such an event, the evaluation committee may consider such clarifications in evaluating proposals.

In deciding on the final selection of a qualified bidder, the technical quality of the proposal will be weighted at 70% under the evaluation criteria. Only the financial proposal of those bidders who qualify technically will be opened. The financial proposal will be given a 30% weighting, and proposals will be ranked by total points scored.

The mandatory and desirable criteria for evaluating proposals are listed in the table below.

15.0 Application details

The AECF is an Equal Opportunity Employer. The AECF considers all interested candidates based on merit without regard to race, gender, colour, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, age, marital status, veteran status, disability, or any other characteristic protected by applicable law.

• Interested firms/consultants or consortia are requested to submit their technical and financial proposal to aecfprocurement@aecfafrica.org by 23^rd February 2026, 5 pm (EAT).
• All questions should be directed to the procurement email by 13^th February 2026, 5 pm (EAT).
• The subject of the email should be ‘’FINAL EVALUATION OF THE SEED FOR IMPACT 2026”. The AECF shall not be liable for not opening proposals submitted under a different subject or for responding to questions that did not meet the indicated deadline.

16.0 Disclaimer

AECF reserves the right to determine the structure of the process, the number of short-listed participants, the right to withdraw from the proposal process, the right to change this timetable at any time without notice, and reserves the right to withdraw this tender at any time, without prior notice and without liability to compensate and/or reimburse any party.

The AECF does not charge an application fee for participation in the tendering process and has not appointed any agents or intermediaries to facilitate applications. Applicants are advised to contact the AECF Procurement Department directly.