Summary and Analysis Report – Protection Strategy

The consultation findings validated several key elements identified through the Results-Based Protection Program. Although the discussion was rich and provided an opportunity to reflect on the methods and quality of protection strategies, there is still a need to further unpack what it will take for protection strategies to help achieve results.  Factors that may improve the strategic planning process include:

1. Agree what is meant by “protection” and “protection strategy” as a starting point to develop priorities and a collective vision for protective outcomes
2. The quality of the methodological approach used to develop a protection strategy has significant bearing on whether or not protection outcomes can be measured and ultimately achieved. The following components were identified as essential for strategic planning for protection:
   1. Invest in and undertake a context-specific protection analysis
   2. A culture of inclusivity
   3. Build from the ground up and identify community-based protection as the starting point for the response
   4. Articulate how the desired protection outcome will be achieved
   5. Methods and facilitation of the strategic planning process impact the quality, ownership, and uptake of the protection strategy
   6. Regularly monitor the causal logic behind the protection strategy to identify shifts in the situation that may require adjustments in the response.
3. Disaggregation of risk supports a problem-solving approach. A protection strategy must begin by identifying and articulating the actual risks and describing the causal logic behind the necessary action

Although these consultations validated elements of results-based protection which have already been identified and could strengthen the quality of a protection strategy, it remains to be seen whether and how they may enable achievement of protection outcomes?  The relationship of a protection strategy to program design and implementation needs to be further explored in order to assess the relevance of a protection strategy to measurably reduce risk. Some questions for further exploration include:

1. What should drive the prioritization of issues and the response? Does prioritization help with better results when it comes to measurable protection outcomes?
2. How should a protection strategy address the comparative advantage for humanitarian actors alongside other potential actors to address a protection issue?
3. A protection strategy should reflect an agreed vision for addressing a protection issue. Given the need for multiple actors to contribute to the achievement of a protection outcome, what is needed to bring about a common vision? Does the absence of a common vision among actors impact the potential to achieve measurable results? How can a causal logic exercise within strategic planning processes capture the different assumptions and theories of change by multiple actors?
4. How are different actors, including donors, held accountable within the protection strategy?