The monitoring and evaluation of adaptive learning is an emergent field. Although there is a growing body of literature on adaptive programming more generally, there is a limited knowledge base on the monitoring and evaluation of adaptive learning interventions and their impacts. Unlike other implementation strategies or program management approaches, there are no standard metrics or monitoring and evaluation frameworks to track the integration, implementation, and effectiveness of adaptive learning in health programming. As a result, USAID has released a landscape review on measuring and monitoring adaptive learning.
In June 2022, the Global Public Policy Institute published a report, “The Logic of Protection Approaches: Four Models to Safeguard Civilians from Harm,” which examined the treatment of civilians by armed actors. The report provides four protection-based approaches to influence how armed actors interact with civilians and the community. Each section is broken down to explain the logic behind the approach, the impact it can have on the armed actors’ behaviors, and how the approach can backfire. The four approaches discussed are (1) “naming and shaming” armed actors (2) mobilizing influencers (3) capacitating communities and (4) training armed actors.
The Quality Assessment Framework (QAF) (field testing version) is a tool developed to enable Child Protection actors to meet the quality and monitoring requirements of operating a case management system in humanitarian contexts. Quality assessments help ensure case management activities are carried out following agreed upon processes and result in quality outputs and outcomes. The framework focuses on HOW the activity is implement, rather than WHAT activities should be done to achieve a specific result.
Save the Children has released a report reviewing ten of its programs to assess the effects that CVA has on CP outcomes, identify evidence gaps, and document best programmatic practices for learning.
In January 2022, the Alliance for Child Protection in Humanitarian Action (ACPHA) and USAID published a Primary Prevention Framework for Child Protection in Humanitarian Action. The guiding principles of the framework echo many of the principles of Results-Based Protection, including the focus on prevention as well as the importance of context-specific protection risk analysis.
ODI’s recent publication, ‘Collaborative advocacy between humanitarian and human rights actors’ takes a look at potential roadblocks to achieving effective cross-sectoral collaboration and outlines a set of recommendations to overcome these hurdles.
Following a recent internal evaluation, InterAction began working on an engaging, ‘easy to reference’ and ‘easy to hang on a wall’ visual set of handouts for NGO senior leadership including Country Directors and equivalent who are responsible for programming and strategy. Given the wide range of responsibilities NGO senior leaders have, these handouts attempt to distill the core messages on protection that are relevant to a leader’s role.
Though relatively new, there is a substantive body of work that indicates that SCLR is effective. With its partners, L2GP has published a paper titled ‘Survivor and Community-led response: Practical Experience and Learning by Justin Corbett, Nils Carstensen and Simone DI Vicenz.