Consultancy for a Regional Civil Society Landscape and Pathways for Engagement with IGAD

About the Civil Society Resource Center

Founded in 2019 and based in Addis Ababa, the Civil Society Resource Center (CSRC) is a board-led civil society support and knowledge hub. CSRC brings together research and information access, technical support, learning programmes, public dialogue and partnership delivery to help civil society organisations, emerging civic actors and sector partners become stronger, more connected and better prepared for the future. Its programme areas include leadership and fellowship pathways; knowledge and regulatory support; human rights education and advocacy; public-interest legal learning; networks and ecosystem strengthening; and communications and digital capacity.

Further information is available at www.csrc-et.org

Project context

CSRC is implementing the regional initiative “Strengthening Democratic and Independent Institutions in the IGAD Region.” The initiative seeks to strengthen democratic oversight institutions, improve regional institutional cooperation and expand structured and meaningful civil society participation in governance processes of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD). It supports evidence generation, institutional learning, knowledge exchange and more sustainable relationships among IGAD, Member States, democratic oversight institutions and civil society.

The initiative recognises that civil society participation in IGAD governance processes has often been limited, informal or dependent on particular events. It therefore seeks to identify practical and inclusive pathways through which civil society, including grassroots organisations, women-led and youth-led organisations, networks, coalitions, professional associations, labour organisations, social movements and other citizen-led formations, can contribute to regional governance dialogue and institutional learning.

To inform this work, CSRC invites qualified consultants to undertake a regional desk-based scoping assessment covering Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Uganda. The study will examine both sides of the engagement relationship: the civil society and civic-space landscape within Member States, and IGAD’s institutional, legal and policy architecture through which civil society engagement may occur.

Purpose of the assignment

The purpose of the assignment is to generate an applied evidence base that enables CSRC and its partners to understand the regional civil society landscape, assess the formal and documented opportunities for civil society engagement with IGAD, identify institutional and procedural gaps, and develop feasible options for structured, inclusive, safe and sustainable engagement with the IGAD Governance Forum and other relevant IGAD mechanisms.

Specific objectives

• Provide an indicative overview of civil society actors, networks and civic-space conditions across the seven countries in scope.
• Map relevant IGAD organs, divisions, specialised institutions, forums, programmes and regional networks that have mandates or functions relevant to civil society participation and democratic governance.
• Analyse the legal, policy, strategic and procedural foundations for civil society consultation, participation, partnership, accreditation, observer engagement or other forms of access within IGAD.
• Identify formal, policy-based, administrative and documented informal pathways through which civil society actors may engage IGAD governance processes.
• Assess barriers affecting participation, with particular attention to grassroots, women-led, youth-led, disability-led and other underrepresented civic actors, as well as actors operating in constrained or conflict-affected environments.
• Develop practical institutional options and recommendations for more predictable, representative, inclusive and sustainable civil society engagement with IGAD.
• Identify evidence gaps and issues requiring subsequent consultation, political dialogue or validation by CSRC, IGAD and civil society stakeholders.

Scope of work

Regional civil society and civic-space scoping

Using publicly available and appropriately cited sources, the consultant shall prepare a concise comparative assessment that considers:

• constitutional and legal protections relevant to freedom of association, peaceful assembly, expression and civic participation;
• principal CSO registration, regulation, reporting and operational frameworks;
• major enabling factors, restrictions and recent trends affecting civic action;
• principal national and regional CSO networks, coalitions and civic formations relevant to governance, human rights, elections, accountability, anti-corruption, peacebuilding, gender and youth participation;
• the position of grassroots, women-led, youth-led, disability-led and informal civic actors within national and regional ecosystems;
• documented examples of cross-border, regional or IGAD-facing civil society engagement; and
• important limitations in the availability, quality and comparability of public information.

IGAD institutional mapping

The consultant shall map and analyse relevant IGAD structures and mechanisms, subject to the availability of authoritative documentation. These may include:

• the Assembly of Heads of State and Government, Council of Ministers, Committee of Ambassadors and IGAD Secretariat;
• the division or unit responsible for political affairs, governance and peacebuilding, and other Secretariat units relevant to civil society engagement;
• the IGAD Governance Forum and its documented procedures, outcome instruments and participation practices;
• regional networks or platforms involving national human rights institutions, electoral management bodies, anti-corruption institutions and other democratic oversight bodies;
• IGAD programmes, specialised institutions and thematic platforms in peace and security, mediation, gender, migration, resilience and other areas offering relevant engagement lessons;
• any existing or proposed civil society forum, advisory mechanism, accreditation arrangement, observer channel, focal-point system or partnership mechanism; and
• the institutional relationships among these mechanisms and their potential relevance to civil society participation.

Institutional, legal and policy analysis

The consultant shall review authoritative IGAD instruments and records, including, as available, the Agreement Establishing IGAD; strategic plans; protocols; policies; declarations; communiqués; forum outcome documents; rules, guidelines and programme documents; partnership frameworks; and relevant provisions concerning stakeholder or civil society participation. The analysis shall also consider relevant African Union instruments and selected comparative practices from African regional economic communities where these provide useful and context-sensitive lessons.

The analysis should distinguish among engagement that is: (i) expressly grounded in a legal or institutional instrument; (ii) supported by policy; (iii) administratively enabled; (iv) evidenced only by documented practice; or (v) inferred and therefore requiring validation.

Engagement-pathways and gap analysis

For each relevant IGAD mechanism, the consultant shall assess its mandate, potential relevance to civil society, documented basis for access, existing participation practice, barriers or procedural gaps, and feasible engagement pathway. The assessment should consider transparency, representation, inclusion, continuity, accountability to constituencies, safeguarding, confidentiality, political feasibility and administrative burden.

Institutional options and recommendations

The consultant shall assess a limited set of feasible options, which may include a regional civil society forum for governance; observer or accreditation arrangements; a civil society reference or advisory group; national contact groups; thematic working groups; pre-forum consultations; a CSO focal-point mechanism; an online engagement platform; or a civil society participation protocol. The analysis must compare the purpose, advantages, limitations, risks, representation implications, resource requirements and implementation steps of each shortlisted option. It must not assume that establishing a new permanent structure is necessarily the preferred solution.

Core research questions

1. What principal legal, policy and operating conditions shape civil society action across IGAD Member States?
2. Which categories of civil society actors and networks are most relevant to democratic governance and regional accountability, and which remain underrepresented?
3. Which IGAD organs, divisions, forums, regional networks, programmes and specialised institutions present plausible entry points for civil society engagement?
4. What legal, policy, procedural or documented practice supports, or constrains, civil society access to those mechanisms?
5. How regular, transparent, inclusive and institutionalised are existing engagement arrangements?
6. What barriers affect participation by grassroots, women-led, youth-led, disability-led, informal and conflict-affected civic actors?
7. What safeguards are necessary to avoid tokenism, elite capture, reprisals, exclusion and inappropriate disclosure of sensitive organisational information?
8. Which two or three institutional options are most feasible for structured civil society engagement with the IGAD Governance Forum and related mechanisms?
9. What actions could CSRC and IGAD take in the short, medium and longer term, and which recommendations require consultation or political approval?

Methodology and evidence standards

The assignment is exclusively desk-based. It does not include travel, surveys, interviews, focus-group discussions or other primary data collection. Bidders shall propose a rigorous and feasible methodology appropriate to this limitation. At minimum, the approach should include:

• a structured review protocol and transparent criteria for selecting sources;
• priority use of primary and authoritative sources, including official legal texts, institutional instruments, strategies, policies, communiqués and programme records;
• systematic review of credible secondary sources, including civil society reports, academic literature and assessments by recognised regional and international organisations;
• a comparative analytical framework applied consistently across the seven countries;
• an IGAD institutional and engagement-pathways matrix;
• triangulation across multiple sources wherever practicable;
• clear citation of all factual claims and provision of functional source links where available;
• explicit treatment of missing, outdated, contradictory or inaccessible information; and
• a clear distinction among documented fact, consultant analysis or inference, comparative lesson and recommendation requiring validation.

Sources should normally be current through the study’s cut-off date while retaining older foundational instruments where necessary. The consultant must not present absence of publicly available documentation as proof that a mechanism or practice does not exist.

Deliverables

Indicative timetable and level of effort

The assignment is expected to require up to 20 working days and to be completed within approximately six calendar weeks from contract signature. Bidders may propose refinements to the sequencing while respecting the maximum completion period.

Management and reporting

The consultant will report to the designated CSRC project lead and work in coordination with CSRC’s Technical Assistance Unit. CSRC will provide relevant project documents and available IGAD materials, consolidate comments and approve deliverables. Where appropriate, CSRC may share selected outputs with IGAD for technical review. The consultant shall incorporate consolidated comments within agreed timelines and shall not contact or represent IGAD, Member State institutions or other organisations on behalf of CSRC without prior written authorisation.

Evaluation and selection

Applications will be evaluated using a quality-and-cost approach. Only financial proposals of applicants meeting the minimum technical threshold will be considered.

CSRC reserves the right to invite shortlisted applicants to a clarification discussion, verify references, negotiate the proposed methodology or level of effort, or decide not to award the consultancy. Submission of a proposal does not create an obligation on CSRC to contract any applicant.

Data protection, confidentiality and safeguarding

• The consultant shall use only lawfully accessible information and comply with applicable confidentiality, privacy and data-protection requirements.
• No sensitive personal information shall be collected for the CSO mapping. Public contact channels should be preferred over personal contact details.
• The consultant shall apply a do-no-harm approach, particularly in relation to civic actors operating in constrained, conflict-affected or politically sensitive contexts.
• Inclusion in the mapping shall not be described as endorsement, accreditation, representation or validation by CSRC or IGAD.
• Information presenting a credible protection or reprisal risk shall be excluded, aggregated or retained only in a restricted internal annex as directed by CSRC.
• All non-public documents and communications received through the assignment shall remain confidential and may not be shared without written authorisation.

Ownership, publication and independence

All deliverables and underlying work products produced under the consultancy will become the property of CSRC upon payment, subject to any third-party rights properly identified in advance. The consultant may not publish, circulate, adapt or use the outputs for another purpose without CSRC’s prior written permission. Public release, branding and attribution will be determined by CSRC in consultation with relevant partners. The consultant remains responsible for the accuracy, originality and proper citation of the work. Plagiarism, fabricated sources, misrepresentation of evidence or undisclosed automated generation of substantive analysis may constitute grounds for rejection or termination.

Limitations to be acknowledged in the final study

The final report must state clearly that the assessment is desk-based and indicative. It must not claim to be a census of civil society, a representative account of CSO perspectives or a definitive description of undocumented internal IGAD practice. The consultant shall identify findings requiring stakeholder consultation or institutional validation and shall not treat the absence of public documentation as conclusive evidence of institutional absence.