This cheat sheet is intended to serve as a reference guide for key terms and concepts frequently used when talking about results-based approaches to protection (RBP).
In this series of tip sheets, InterAction highlights helpful considerations, resources, and examples of good practice to cultivate an evaluative mindset and using evaluation to adapt interventions for protective impact. The previous installments in this series of tips focused on establishing “evaluability” for protection interventions, defining the purpose and determining the criteria for success, and selecting evaluation approaches and methods. Iterative evaluation practice requires an enabling environment that supports feedback loops, whereby analysis and recommendations feed into decision-making and programmatic and strategic adaptation. This final tip sheet highlights a few considerations for the resources, processes, and organizational culture which support iterative evaluation for protection.
In this series of tip sheets, InterAction highlights helpful considerations, resources, and examples of good practice to cultivate an evaluative mindset and using evaluation to adapt interventions for protective impact. The first installment of this series of tips focused on establishing “evaluability” for protection interventions, defining the purpose and determining the criteria for success. This tip sheet outlines the next stages in the process – from refining our evaluation questions to considering which methods and approaches can help us learn and adapt in an iterative way.
In this series of tip sheets, InterAction will highlight helpful considerations, resources, and examples of good practice as it relates to cultivating an evaluative mindset and using evaluation to adapt interventions for protective impact. The first installment of this series of tips focuses on establishing “evaluability” for protection interventions, defining the purpose and determining the criteria for success.
The 2012 Independent Review Panel Report on UN’s Sri Lanka Response highlighted inadequate contextual analysis, little investment in local capacities, and lack of strategic orientation towards protection outcomes
These discussions dug deeply into how peace and development programs consider the pressing issues of safety, security, privacy, flexibility, and accessibility in an increasingly tech-enabled world.
The Results-Based Protection Program continues to explore key components in current practice to better adjust and refine the approach and guidance needed to support both program and situation monitoring of a response.
What does it mean to do a historical, Cultural, and Contextual analysis to understand the threat, vulnerability, and capacity? InterAction aims to respond to this question noting why it is necessary and how it can be done.
To better understand the lack of accountability within the humanitarian system, the Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) at the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) published a report titled ‘Collective Approaches to Communication and Community Engagement: Models, Challenges and Ways forward.’
Led by Lisa Attygalle, the Tamarack institute released a publication that looked at the discrepancy in ‘community-led verbiage’ to ensure that communities are not inadvertently acted-upon but rather empowered through leadership.