GPC 2026 Protection Series - Your Guide to Protection Case Management

Um hi, welcome everybody who's joining this session today, the GPC session on your guide to protection case management. Um we see that many people are still joining the call. So please uh bear with us a few more minutes and we allow everybody else to get into the the call. So thanks for joining today. Um colleagues, thank you to everybody that's still joining. So just to let you know, we're waiting a few minutes for others to join today's session. Um I see there's a few hands up already. Um we will not be taking um inputs at this point in time, but if you want to write in the chat, please feel free to write in the chat and we can see your questions there. Um Leah Emily perhaps we get going. Um good afternoon, good morning, good evening colleagues that have joined. So um for those of you who haven't met me, my name is Lisa. I work at uh the global protection cluster and throughout 2026 we've been running uh sessions called protection partner series they are somewhat as described we have protection partners have developed an incredible repository of tools and guidance that inform how we do protection programming 2025 was a very busy year for all of us um and so I think some of the some of the initiatives may be dropped off the radar so we want to get them back on the table so today we're incredibly lucky to be joined by Leah and Emily. So from NRC and IRC who were involved in preparing the guide to protection case management. So without further ado um I will hand over but firstly just two quick pieces of house rules. I just ask everybody to keep themselves muted. Um I see some hands are going up. I think we won't be taking uh questions in the early sections of the presentation, but please feel free to write in the chat. If there's any colleagues that you think it would have been incredible for them to be here, you will be able to see the recording afterwards. So, um thank you everybody so far that is uh here and those that are continuing to join. And Emily and Leah, I'm really looking forward to this presentation today. >> Great. Thank you so much, Lisa. and thank you so much for having us here. Um, my name is Leah. I'm the global lead for protection from violence at NRC. I'm really thrilled to see so much interest in protection case management. Um, and I'll let Emily introduce herself as well. >> Hi Ron. Uh, I'm Emily. I'm a protection rule of law technical adviser with international rescue committee. Um, and I've been involved in a number of iterations of the protection case management guidance from when it started. um maybe about five seven years ago um and tell you what it is now. So I was on the project team that worked on this um project with uh NRC and UNHCR. So super excited to um talk to you about it. Great. So why don't we get started? As Lisa said, please do feel free to um put any questions in the chat. We'll try to track them as we go and then um there'll be ample time for questions at the end as well. So um Lisa, if you could move us to the next slide. Um or maybe I can do it. Does it? Anyway, um the technology is advancing too quickly. Um so case management, as Emily um said, there's been work technical work being done on this at the global level for 5 to seven years. This iteration of the project came out because it was sort of recognized a few years ago that there needed to be a revision of the last iteration of the guidance with a couple of goals. So one is to make it more protection risk focused. How are we really supporting individuals subject to protection risks in all of the contexts that we work in um as well as looking at an increased focus on MHPSS and a specific area on that and meal how are we measuring outcomes um for people working um people who we work with on protection case management. So this most recent iteration of the project led by NRC and IRC um actually maybe we'll move to the next slide Lisa um really looked at a few things. So there was a a large investment in the coordination aspect. Um so and I have to to shout out a couple people who are no longer here in Christy with NRC and Ricardo with UNHCR played a really huge role in the development and drafting of this. Um there was a lot of engagement from DRC as well from UNHCR as well as really heavy engagement with the GBV and child protection AOS. Um and all of that was to make sure that really we're investing the time in a guidance that is um comes out of the expertise that exists in the GBV and child protection spaces. Um is really well coordinated with those areas of work and is well suited to a broad range of organizations. um the global protection hugely supportive um through this process and supporting the coordination on it. Um and then ended with a GPC endorsement of the guidance which we're very um grateful for and happy to have received. Um the other phase of the this project that that ended in in 2025 or end of 2024 um was field implementation. So there was a development process, there was an implementation process um initially tested with NRC and IRC teams in various field locations um to sort of test the guidance as it was being developed um provide real time feedback and so the final guidance could be the most um applicable as possible um and now of course we know that it's being implemented by a variety of organizations and a wide variety of field context. The third piece was really focused on learning. So there was the initial learning processes to really understand um those how those pilots were going and and how that initial implementation was going. Now we are I I would sort of consider us still in a learning mode. The guidance is finished. It's been launched. It's being used but we recognize that we still have a lot of learning to do. Um unfortunately we don't really have a structured inter agency learning process right now. We don't have the resources for that. It is something we're still interested in pursuing. I think the interest in this session demonstrates the the need for something like that. But we are are hope hoping to to be able to use internal learning from our organizations and and maybe do some work with the global profession cluster about how we can bring some of that learning together to benefit the sector as a whole. So moving into sort of what this is about. I'm sure many of you on the call are well aware but I will sort of start at the beginning. So what is protection case management? Why are we here? Um, it's a method drawn from social work, working individually with clients and service users who are at risk of or requiring support to recover from protection risks of violence, coercion, and deliberate deprivation that they experience in humanitarian situations. Um, it's based in social work principles and case management approaches. So, looking at that individual support, one-on-one relationship with case worker is a core model of this. um working with uh with a person to access and coordinate and advocate for services or other interventions that is needed in order to address largely complex or multiple protection risks and needs. Right? So we see this as a way um a lot of organizations have a sort of one-off cash for protection or individual protection assistance or some kind of modality and this is protection case management is really where we come into these more complicated slightly longer term cases. Um we will talk a little bit more about this in terms of criteria and intake and and targeting. Um but really the the the targeting overall is individuals who are experiencing or recovering from or at risk of experiencing further protection risks looking at violence coercion and deliveration. Um did that work if I moved it myself? No. Okay. Next slide. Sorry Lisa. Um so just some of our core principles and approaches again I don't think any of this will be a surprise to any of you um but this is what we have identified as ensuring that all of our implementation comes back to these core principles. So accountability um to affected populations accountability to the people that we are working with. So it's really important that these systems set up mechanisms through which the users um can measure the adequacy can bring out complaints or concerns um as quickly and as safely um as is possible. Um we also have as a primary um uh core principle prioritize safety and dignity, avoid causing harm. Again, not a surprise, but making sure that as we both design and implement this program that we are prioritizing the immediate and future safety of everyone that we're working with and that that do no harm approach is really integrated into all of the aspects of the program. um meaningful access, making sure that people are able to access um able to access the services through a variety of barriers and that that has to do with targeting, that has to do with availability, has to do with physical accessibility, it also has to do with safety, right? All of these things to make sure that we are um prioritizing people at the most risk and making sure that those those people who are at the most risk have full equitable meaningful access to the services that we're providing. Of course, participation and empowerment. A a key component of this is working with people's self-p protection capacities, right? So, what is the support that we can provide, but also what is the support that we can help you to provide for yourself? How can we connect you with community- based capacities and support that exist? Um, and so it is a sort of externally run program, but we want to make sure that that that participation piece is really crucial and that we're really looking at a at a strength-based approach approach and a capacities based approach for people to be able to to support themselves um in the in the protection risks that they face. Um, we also have a couple other core principles here. So traumainformed principles which make sure that we are thinking about the way that different people react differently to trauma and and all of that range of response there. Um so looking at integrating an understanding of trauma into all design and practice elements and creating a supportive and empowering environment for all users of the service. Um and that should be individually tailored of course to make sure we're responding to each person's individual experience and needs in that area. And then finally, individual's right to privacy and self-determination. So, as with all case management approaches, very important that the the individual is able to make choices, right? That the the services that we provide, the support that we provide, the interventions that are done are all done in collaboration and with the decision maker, primary decision maker as the person involved in the service. um huge responsibility for privacy and confidentiality both in terms of data protection as well as other um privacy concerns. Um and so this is another one of those that really runs through the design and implementation of the whole program. Um so I'm going to talk a little bit about criteria and targeting. So next slide, Lisa. Sorry. Okay. Um, so yes, so when when we're looking at sort of the criteria, so initially in baseline, all of this criteria needs to be based on a protection analysis. Emily will talk a little bit more about what that looks like in the guidance itself, including a context analysis to understand and and set an eligibility criteria and make sure that all of our case workers and staff understand what that eligibility criteria is. Other aspects that we want to be looking at include existing formal and informal systems. So if there are formal social work systems in the country, what do those look like? How can we align and and um support them, which we'll talk a little bit more about later as well, but also what are informal support systems that exist in communities and and how can we understand that how that impacts people's risks as well. Um we also um really advocate for bringing together multi-disiplinary teams to do a sort of analysis and and develop of intake and and criteria for eligibility for case management. And so sometimes that might include bringing in outsiders to the organization, bringing in your teams working on other issues to make sure we have the sort of most nuance and holistic understanding of who is at the highest need for this kind of service. Um and of course reviewing this on a regular basis. So, making sure that we are are responding to changes in the context. Maybe we're seeing trends emerge in our existing case load that weren't there before. Um, so making sure that we're reviewing that analysis on a regular basis and therefore reviewing the eligibility criteria as we go. Uh, next slide, Lisa. So when we're looking at types of risks, I'm not going to go through this entire list, but we do always come back to those violence, coercion, deliberate deprivation, those set of risks that we see. Um, but it's going to be different in each context, right? So um Emily will will walk you through some of the the tools here, but there are tools for doing a specific protection analysis to identify the specific priority risks in your context that you want to respond to with your protection case management program. So what that means is that the case loads in different contexts are going to look different but it means that we're able to respond to the most urgent risks and needs that we see in each context. So some of the risks looking at um violence, abduction, kidnapping, assault and abuse um as well as psychological and emotional abuse. This is looking at those those that don't fall under GBV. Um mutilation, maming, torture or inhuman cruel degrading treatment. people who are subject to those either in the past or at risk of being subject in the future. Um also looking at issues of coercion, forcible separation, forced displacement, um particularly due to discrimination, stigma, um enforced disappearance, forced labor, forced recruitment, forc um all of those sort of aspects of um of deliberate uh sorry of coercion and then deliberate deprivation. We also see see some examples around um arbitrary and unlawful arrest or detention and denial of access to services or um other interventions that people need to survive. This is not an exhaustive list, but we do find that some of these examples sort of help prompt the thinking that will go into your protection analysis at the beginning of this process. Um next slide, thank you. And here's just some specific examples that have come out of our actual case loads in the field. Right? So, um, again, not an exhaustive list, but we find it useful to sometimes look at some of these specific examples. So, we've worked with displaced people who are threatened with abduction by armed actors related to their place of origin. People who have crossed borders and uh moved to new places who are now being specifically targeted. Um, we have worked with people at risk whose family members are perceived to be affiliated with specific groups and therefore face discrimination and violence in communities and need complex support to be able to either return safely home or access the services they need or diffuse the violence um happening. Uh, survivors of torture or of trafficking who need specialized support to return to their lives and recover from their experiences as well as preventing sort of future um incidences. um individuals who are targeted by violence for identity, leadership status, um place of origin, perceived affiliation. We've worked with people who have been targeted for accusations of witchcraft, ethnic identity, leadership status, sort of the work that you're doing in the community, a whole range of people who end up targeting for being targeted for specific reasons. um at risk older people unable to relocate, people who are not able to respond appropriately to the protection risks that come their way. These are just a few examples. I think if we sort of pulled all 300 people on this call, we would probably hear dozens more examples of the kind of risks that people face um in the communities that we work in. And the last thing I'll say about this is we really wanted to make sure that this um toolkit and this this program model enables us to respond to the risks that are in a specific context. Right? So we know that protection risks are incredibly diverse and really vary even sometimes village to village or um you know location to location in the same country. So we want to make sure that the tools and the materials here really start with that context specific analysis and enable us to respond to the specific most urgent risks that people are facing um at the time. Uh next slide. Sorry Leah I'm also copying and pasting uh some of the questions. Look a few people have I'm just going to take a second here. A few people have been asking throughout. Are we going to share the presentation? Absolutely. We will share the presentation but we'll also share the toolkit. So remember the presentation is to guide you through what is in the guide guidance. So we'll share both confirmed everybody asking sorry and then is this next slide. >> Yes please. Yes. Perfect. Excuse me. This is a nice little diagram that you'll see in the guidance itself but really what it's getting at is that we are trying to really reach people who are at the highest level of risk for this service. Right? So if we're looking at the broad range of people facing barriers to access to services, we can do referrals, we can do advocacy, we can do information services, there's a whole set of responses and case management is really meant to to aim at those people who need additional support to address and and confront their protection risk. So it often means that you end up with relatively small case loads, but the idea is to really target the people who are essentially not able to solve their problems through access to the rest of services that are available to them. Um, and specialized interventions. Oh no. Um, okay. My computer might update in a minute. So if I disappear, I'll come back quickly. Um, next slide. Let me finish my section. Apologies. Um and then finally just going to talk about um ensuring alignment with other services. So this case management system is not intended to replace or substitute for child protection and gender-based violence case management. It is meant to augment and to supplement those existing systems that are there. Um so we worked a lot with the AOS and with agencies who have invested over years and decades in GBV and child protection case management. Um, and we feel that we have a a a program model that really aligns with the work that they do and allows us as a whole, protection community to confront the issues that communities face holistically. So, we would expect that anyone implementing protection case management knows and understands how to implement frontline worker standards for GBV and child protection um along the way. So, that's that's around referrals, that's around safe identification. Um and then along in the guidance itself there are a number of places where we see and prioritize coordination and collaboration um at all stages. So around the analysis um and criteria development that is one place where we need to be collaborating with other services in the area to make sure that we are not overlapping but also meeting the holistic needs that are there. um looking at referral mechanisms of course and case coordination mechanisms where needed establishing those from the get-go and making sure whatever SOPs um information sharing protocols are in place um making sure that the people using our services are aware of of other opportunities available to them and and that people have the option to select other services as appropriate making their own decisions around that. Um, and then also looking for opportunities, and I think this one is particularly appropriate in our current um, hyper prioritized funding environment. Making sure that we're always looking for opportunities to strengthen relationships and collaboration, shared professional development opportunities, um, working to augment all of our skills as we um, as we work together, particularly when we're working in the same um, contexts. Um, next slide, Lisa. And I think this is where I hand it over. Ah um we NRC I will say uses this uses these guidelines across um across contexts. They were intended to be used but different organizations can make um make their own decisions around where they choose to implement it but we see it as applicable across a variety of protection contexts including different kinds of um of situations. So we use it in armed conflict, we use it in other situations of violence. Um, and it's in use in my understanding in natural disaster contexts as well. Um, next slide, Lisa. And this is where I hand it over to Emily to really dive into the guidance itself. So, I will be coming back to chat a little bit later. Thanks for everyone. >> Thanks, Leah. Okay, now we get to go through uh the guidance itself. So, I'm going to go through chapter by chapter. Um, hopefully by the end of this session, you'll have an understanding of where you can look and dive into the actual guidance itself to get the information that you need. Um, as I know many of you on this chat are familiar with the guidance. Um, a lot of familiar faces. It's a very it's very long, so that's a caveat. Um, I don't know if we would necessarily if we did it again, we would make it quite as long. Uh, but there's lots of great information in there and I really recommend diving into the table of contents to see what you need rather than sort of taking it all in one go. Um, the guide is five modules. Each one is sort of uh written for a different role in mind. Um, we've got uh managers, technical staff, case workers, supervisors, um, senior leadership, donors. Um each of them might have a will have a different use case depending on uh what the chapter is. Um each module as well has a series of annexes, forms and tools that you can use. Ideally the aim is for that to be super practical and useful for your teams, but they're also meant to be adaptable. So just cuz it's in the guidance doesn't mean you can't contextualize it and change it. This is really meant to be um the guidance that that works for you and your teams. Okay. Uh next slide. Okay, so introduction chapter one. Uh this is really the foundational chapter. Um this is for anyone who's new to the protection case management model. Um it also I would say is more relevant for senior leadership or for donors um who need to understand what it is that they're funding or understand what it is that they are their teams are implementing. Um it includes I would say like five theoretical grounding questions sort of similar to what um Leah just went over. Um but one it is what is actually is protection case management? What is the definition? How are we uh grounding it in social work principles? Um what are sort of like the theoretical underpinnings of the project itself? Um why does it matter? So talking about the significance and the importance of protection case management. why this is a um an approach that we've prioritized and we think is a life-saving approach. Um we also talk about how we coordinate it. Um so these are I imagine there's going to be a number of questions on coordination. Um and we wanted to put this up front because it is so important for uh protection case management to be a coordinated response with both other actors doing case management whether that's child protection, gender based violence, um MHPSs, etc. or that's just such a ins essential part. So that's a key focus. Um we also go through the theory of change. So we have a quite a detailed theory of change um about um what is the impact of protection case management and then as Leah has sort of gone over we overview what the principles are of a quality case management approach. Okay. Next. So here we have annexes tools and forms. Um just something to remember throughout the guide uh we have forms which are used directly in service delivery. We have tools which are going to help planning and assessment and then we have annexes which is additional deep dives or reference materials and templates. So you'll have you'll have that throughout the uh the guide. But for chapter one um we have a protection risk criteria annex which can help um oh no uh we have the yeah the criteria for protection case management. This was a large focus of the project itself. Um this was maybe the number one question we had when we were developing it which is who are our clients? Who are we actually focusing on? Um and that again is like a key function to make sure of quality case management is you have a a clear approach over who you're going to be uh supporting. We also have a detailed a theory of change um which we will go over again in chapter 3. Um and then we have quality standard tool. So this is a sort of an over arc. It's a a tool that sort of gives you an a guidance over what are the quality standards which you will find in the um guidance itself. Okay. Next. So here chapter 2 as I mentioned the eligibility is um was a large focus of of the project itself making sure that that was clear uh and distinct and we almost have a whole chapter on it. Um so chapter two is determining the need and scope for protection case management programming. Um as you can see it is a guide for coordinators for managers and for technical staff. So this is uh for those who are really working on the design of protection case management. And the first question that we asked is is your organization equipped to safely deliver protection case management for those most at risk. So does it make one is it an appropriate approach for us to be doing? Is there a need? Um that's a question that we should ask always uh before we sort of start programming. um is is there the appropriate um tools understanding for your how does that fit into the larger coordination context? Um what is the who are the actors on the ground that are already working? That's a question that we need to um ask. Um and one of the key things that we leaned on and this is something that is important for any protection case management program is to really have a strong uh protection risk analysis. So making sure that is like one of the first things teams do. Um that will be absolutely essential to developing who you're actually going to be focusing on. Um so having that wider context analysis. Now everything that goes in the protection risk analysis may not be relevant for your production case management teams. There might be risks that are not appropriate for your team to support. There might be risks that you have um other qualified team or organizations who support. For example, gender based violence, um child protection risks. Those are not appropriate for protection case management teams to take on. Um but you have to understand basically what those risks are in the first place in order to see how you can work with the actors uh on the ground and making sure that there is that support. So the number one principle we have is quality care for those who need it. Um and that is something that we would sort of like bring into every component of protection case management. Okay. Um and then we have tools and guidance on how do you assess the need for protection case management systems. So understanding again systems resources using the protection analysis and then how how you prioritize those risks once you've identified them. And then we have some practical tools about facilitating a a workshop in order to make those decisions. Um and again we encourage uh the workshop to be um as Leah mentioned interdisciplinary. So not just protection case management teams but maybe if you have GBV teams, CP teams, local partners, um area managers, a broader perspectives is always helpful to really sort of get a a true picture. Okay. Next. Okay. And so here um are really just some of the the key tools um is the project risk matrix template. This is to focus on what are the risks of protection case management for our staff, for our teams and for our clients. Um and so that's you know any quality program needs to think through what are the potential risks and ramifications. We also have the intake and response criteria. So again, what what you are um who you actually are going to be supporting and then you have the annexes are just the tools in order to facilitate that workshop, that protection risk analysis workshop. And uh and this is um uh this is just an example of how you can prioritize based um based on the protection risk whether or not it's going to be high, medium or or low uh priority or not eligible. And so these are distinctions that you can make that are really important for you to adapt for your context and for your teams. Again, these are we have we tried to be as expansive as possible to reach as many different examples, but it's super important to think through what actually works in your context. Okay. Next, um here just on eligibility criteria. So I feel like we are uh going over this a lot, but this is probably one of the most important things to get right um for your teams. And there are four different things that we really want you to keep in mind when you're developing the eligibility criteria. One, as I mentioned, a protection risk analysis um and a context analysis. So like understand and do the analysis with um your teams about the where you're actually working. Um two, making sure you understand what the national systems are. Uh we are never operating in isolation. There is always existing um existing infrastructure that might look different depending on the context of where you're at. But having that understanding of the national systems and the local systems is going to be really important for referrals, making sure you're compliant um and making sure that we are not um doing any harm and we are sort of building for a longer vision of supporting again um a national system after humanitarian actors leave. We also, as I've mentioned numerous times times, but I'll mention again, it's very important to bring multicolor teams to this conversation that we're not doing it just protection case management, but we're thinking through again bring in your colleagues who have experience, particularly GBV and CP are always um great support for this process. Um and then to review on a regular basis. So context change, things change, teams change, capacities change. Um, so maybe risks that you didn't think was appropriate for you to support at the beginning of your um, program might actually be something that you have the capacity to support later. You might have a partner who could support. Um, so it doesn't need to be set in stone. I can change. Okay, next. This is just an overview of the form that every protection case management team should have, which again really shows your eligibility. So who are you actually supporting? Um and to have that written down and that can look uh different for different uh contexts. Again sometimes we have that at a cluster level where clusters take the lead and sort of do um an eligibility sort of process collectively and everyone agrees to that and sometimes it can be based on your own organization. There's no right way to do this. It depends on the coordination. It depends on um the context. Okay. Um again type of risk with the repeat. All right we can go to the next slide. So this is another meaty section um which really focuses on um designing and maintaining quality protection case management um services. And this is for technical teams. It's for case workers. It's for managers. It's also for our meal teams. So this is this is if you're any of their meal colleagues on here. um this is where you shine. Um we worked this was developed in collaboration with um IRC's meal teams as well. So there's a lot of uh meal content here. So we focus on three main questions which really are what are the minimum standards for protection case management? Um what are the expectations um that we have in terms of quality programming? We also go into um some of the nitty-gritty on what is required for good programming such as uh budgeting like how much you should budget in your uh when you're asking for money. Um the use of cash as a tool uh staffing structures there's minimum staffing structures. Case management as um anyone who's implemented knows is a very staffheavy program and there we have certain minimum standards in terms of supervision etc. We also do um deep dives into information management and data protection here uh which is absolutely essential and a very important part of protection case management. And then we have our monitoring, evaluation, accountability and learning standards for protection case management. Um and I just want to shout out here we also have a deep dive into protection outcomes into for protection case management which was um not a side project but like a a deep dive we did as part of this project and I think they're not used enough and as like a technical adviser I just my life goal would be for people to start using these protection outcomes um I think they're really interesting I think um as a sector we often sort of skip the uh evaluation component because of the sensitivity of our our case load and I just really encourage everybody to do a deep dive into this section to sort of understand what the protection outcomes for case management are and start using them and start analyzing them and testing them. So this is very much um they haven't been like formally tested. They are used in ex existing tools. Uh but I'm just really encouraging everyone to to take a look. Um okay. Uh next. Okay. So here again this is a lot um but we have four different buckets of um tools. You don't have to look at it all at once, but you can pick and choose what makes sense. Um, so we have a lot of work on data analysis. So I mentioned the outcome monitoring guidance. We have like a deep dive into there. We have also how to interpret different indicators. Um, which again I think is an underutilized tool. Um so for example we have key indicators such as uh the percentage of um cases that are closed in a certain time period would be like a quality indicator we have and that could mean if it's really high it could mean oh our our case management team is functioning really well. if it's really low is our elig we can maybe ask questions about our eligibility criteria or maybe the teams are just forgetting to close the cases which happens um or maybe clients are moving away and like teams are leaving it open like there's so many different um prompting questions that indicators can have. So I really also the second life goal would be for teams to really engage with the data that they collect. case management is so data heavy. There's so much information there and we don't always engage with it. Um so that would be again something that is just really important and hopefully this guide facilitates. The other tool I wanted to shout out is um our amazing meal team, specifically Vicki developed this fantastic Excel database that is not being used enough um and is prepopulated with all the key indicators and is a really helpful tracking tool, especially those who are not using in an online information management system, which we'll get to later in the presentation. Um and so if your teams are using paper tools, please check out the Excel. Um, I think it's a really great way to engage with the data and it's already there, already developed. You just need to enter in the data. Okay, we also have inclusion. Sorry, there's so much more. Um, there was a question on disability and just to say that disability was such an important part of this process. Uh, we worked with HI a lot. Uh, Ricardo is a disability sort of expert from UNHCR. Um and so we have a couple of specific tools on the importance of um accessibility, reasonable accommodation, but ideally the principles were mainstream throughout this whole guidance. So it's absolutely appropriate for persons with disability. We also include um some staff roles and responsibilities, caseworker capacity assessment for data protection. Um we have a bunch of tools, SOPs, um software requirements. I'll go into that a little bit later. Um, and then the forms or these are all of the different types of forms that you will use as a part of the protection case management process. Okay. All right. Now, we can go on. So, here is just another plug for another project which is maybe my third life goal um about everyone using an information management system. So we worked this is a parallel project that we worked on um where so for those familiar with interbed violence and child protection programming um there has been a primero iteration for GBV and for child protection the GPV IMS plus CP IMS plus for I don't know a decade a long time um and we are newer to the game and so for the past two years ago we worked on developing a protection case management system um with the support of Ukraine and I think Elena is on call um who was absolutely essential into getting this happen. Um but we they've piloted in Ukraine. It is um an digital online system that is something where we are this is the preferred mechanism. It is um there's a couple of reasons why we prefer primero and why we are encouraging uh primero. One, it's designed for case management programming. There's interoperability between GBV and child protection. Um it is like the way that is cost structured. The more people that they that use it, the cheaper it is. It is designed for low connectivity. We took a lot of lessons learned from GBV and CP. Um and there's also there can be linkages to government systems. Um and it's been endorsed by UNHR which is really exciting. Um, so if anybody is interested in engaging with this from a cluster level or from a programmatic level, please get in touch um, with Leia or myself. I mean, I'm not the focus management as well. This is something that we would love to do. So this is something that's sort of right now in Ukraine being uh and OPT uh and being piloted in Syria, but is not um not ubiquitous and is not necessary. The Excel database is also fine. Um so as long as you're using the proper tools and principles, it's uh agnostic in terms of whether or not you use this, this may not be appropriate for your context, but if it is, we encourage you to use it. Okay. Next, now this is where we actually get into what protection case management is. So, you have to get through four three chapters uh before you actually do what the steps are for protection case management. So, this module is for uh case workers, uh supervisors and managers. Um and it really focuses on one, how do you establish trust? How do you have um a supportive relationship? Um, and then secondly, it goes through in details the steps of protection case management. I'm not going to go over the steps of protection case management. That is a fid training in and of itself. Um, but they're outlined here. Next, actually, sorry, changed my mind. Sorry, Lisa. You go back. I just wanted to reference um especially for those who are again more familiar with GBV and CP um the case management steps really follow that system. So we're not it's not something different. It's not something particularly um new. It is really those it is there's like some small technical um differences but functionality it is the same case management process when you are understanding what the situation is. you are working with the client um in order to identify actions and goals and safety. You follow up and you make sure that it's happening and an empowering process and then you close and do an evaluation. So that sort of overarching uh process is similar across all three. Okay, sorry. Now we can go back. Okay. So for this section what I wanted to um shout out which is another really exciting part of the project which I think has been really uh useful is we have a deep dive into MHPSS. So in chapter one you will notice that we promote case management as a level three um on the IA focus IA MHPSS pyramid as a focused support. Um now when we were developing this our teams were like okay it's an MHPSS um approach but like how do we do PSS what do you mean um and we got that question all the time and so we really wanted to focus to make it very clear about how you actually can do um MHPSS. So we have a very detailed guide that I think is absolutely fantastic if I have to say shout out to Cat Boland um from IRC who really like led a lot of this process. Um and so it is we have basically there's a couple of different um challenges or issues that we identified through um a lot of the field teams but what our clients were struggling with and where they would could could use MHBSS and that include um identifying and regulating um overwhelming emotions engaging in difficult conversations enhancing self-esteem and building healthy relationships and then managing ing acute distress. This is not um the only challenges that people might be facing, but these we found were common ones that you can build off of with MHPSS teams. You can build this out long more. There's like many ways to iterate, but this is like the the top five that we um sort of chose to focus on. And in the tools themselves, we have like four different ways of um or different types of activities. one are creative expression activities. Um so using art, play, song, etc. something more like activity based. Um we have solutions focused activities. So ones that are really focusing on um addressing a problem and like working through it with your clients. We have emotional regulation um activities. We have psycho education um which are sort of like educating about like certain issues etc. and they all of those different types of activities map onto those five different um um challenges that that we spoke about. There's also an overarching guide around how to conduct MHPSS. There is a coping plan. Um and then the other piece of work which I think is so important and really helpful and this honestly is not uh just for protection case management. I think it could be for a wider scope. Um but we have a guidance on working with clients who are in severe distress, self harm or talking about suicidal ideation. Um and so what to do if your your client is really in trouble and so there it's meant to be as practical um as possible talks about coordination. It talks about um how to address it in the moment. And then we also have a suicide safety plan. So if your clients are expressing suicidal ideation or they are at risk of um suicide, there's a specific tool in order to sort of address that etc. Okay, next chapter. So this chapter um is one that I I feel a lot of teams can skip um but is so important. So uh as a technical adviser when I work with teams uh it is a very quick I would say you know really quickly about how in depth and quality the protection case management programming is based on if the supervisors are engaging with this chapter. So if you have case workers and supervisors that are h are talking about supervision that are enga in in any form it is like a step up. This is truly such an important chapter and um when we took a lot of we took a lot of this from social work practice and social work practice is so important to have discussions with supervisors and talk about cases. you will notice is anybody who is familiar with child protection, this is very similar to child protection supervision um guidance which was developed by Colleen Fitzgerald uh and is just amazing and so it has been adapted uh for protection case management but we did not magic this up um this was adapted from CP. So the two questions that it focuses on is how do we ensure staff care throughout the implementation cycle? Our teams are dealing with high-risisk cases. It is high stress. It is um sometimes they're at risk themselves. This is it's a very challenging um I mean all of our teams work in challenging contexts. This is a particularly um selfcare is particularly important in protection case management and it is the supervisor's responsibility and the case worker's responsibility to really engage with that um to make sure that they're um that's part of their practice. It also looks at um professional development and supervision plans. So um when we go into the the next slide, we go into all the different tools and approaches for supervision. And so it really goes into the importance of that. Okay. Next. So here are some of the tools um that the team should be using even if they're using a few of these tools um which is the caseworker capacity assessment, an observation tool where um supervisors can fill out and sort of like supervise um their case workers and see how they're conducting and get feedback. There's a shadowing tool for newer case workers to um to observe older uh more experienced case workers um and see how they're doing things and to be able to learn from uh from seeing. We have case valid checklist again um very important for data quality um and a case discussion. So like guiding questions around tough questions. Um we also have for this for supervisors we have group sessions. So we really encourage supervisors to lead collective discussions as well as individual coaching depending on on feedback and that is the guidance that that is the conclusion. Um there's so much in there um and very happy to answer any questions in terms of what um into more of the deep dive before I hand over to um Leah to go about next steps. I'm just going to shout out national systems um because that's an important part and something that we thought about a lot but haven't developed as much guidance specifically on I would say. Um so it's really important to under I mentioned this at the beginning but I'm going to please bear with me as I mention it again. Um so supporting existing systems is really important. Thinking through um what currently exists um thinking through relevant legislation is going to be important. what are their disclosures etc. Um and how do we uh what is support exists in the community? That's like we just really need to figure out what is happening where we are first of all. Um secondly is coordinating. Um it's really important that we have open conversation with national systems. Um that we connect with them around the analysis that we make sure there's no duplication that we're not um that we're working together. that's absolutely essential. And then the other opportunity that we have and we've done um more commonly I would say in like child protection programmings or gender- based violence programming but something I aspire to for protection case management is capacity sharing. So working with government social workers um there's a lot of tools in in this guidance that I think are really useful and really helpful. um how can we work with the government in order to not build up our own team's capacity but also uh government social workers as well or depending on context have government social workers train our teams because they have a depth of experience there's it's going to look different in in each context okay that is it for me back over to Leah it's almost it for me too I comment I just wanted to mention a couple things and then we can turn to um some of the questions that have come in. Um so next slide Lisa just as the last one I promise. Um we just wanted to talk a little bit about where we are and what we think are sort of the next steps. As I said um and somebody sort of asked about this actually you know we we launched this guidance initially I believe it was January 15th 2025. So, we launched it and then the sector was appended as we all know and so a lot of the sort of initial follow-up plans um as with many of our plans in early 2025 got put on the back burner based on on funding reductions and and staffing shifts and all of those issues. So, um as I said before, we don't have current dedicated capacity for some of these um priorities for us, but it's still an area certainly I can speak on behalf of NRC. is an area that we still would like to continue to try to develop um more capacity and resources for and and I'm always happy to talk with other agencies that are interested in in contributing to these efforts as well. Um and hopefully we'll be able to maybe do some of that work around with the GPC and and making sure that that's a full sort of inter agency process. So just a couple of these areas of priorities um capacity strengthening and learning. I think you know again today really demonstrates the need for this. Um we hope that the guidance can stand alone as itself but we do recognize for all of us that there's a need for more um support particularly for our frontline teams who are our case workers and supervisors working um all of on on on these programs in in the field. So um learning being a really important aspect as well. We would love to set up some sort of learning structures so we can can support more peer learning. It's not something we've been able to do, but it's one of my goals is trying to to set up some systems um for for learning across agencies and across contexts. Um Emily talked a little bit about Promeo information management systems, but information management systems as a whole continues to be a priority. Are we providing our teams with sort of sufficient support um sufficient support on um the information management aspect of that whether that is digital or not? though we do think that there are are a lot of advantages to some of these digital systems that are put in place. Um and then Emily really just talked about this but system strengthening as another priority that we have not um I think invested in sufficiently. So I think there's a lot of interesting work and learning coming out already about what teams are doing. Um, but it's another area where we really want to sort of consolidate some of that good practice and and make sure that we're again providing the best possible guidance with folks on how we can be supporting the strengthening of the entire system as we provide good quality services for um affected people who need them. And then one other piece around this that I will just mention is translation. I saw there were a lot of questions. Um, we have an Arabic version that has been completed that we will make sure to send out the link to. And then in process, we have a Spanish version, Ukrainian, and Turkish are all sort of at various levels of development hopefully to be done soon. We are also working on a French version. Um, we know that that's a big a big need and are are figuring out um how to best do that. Um, I will also say on translation, if there are organizations who are interested in supporting translation of this, we've worked for example with a a Turkish organization that has has spearheaded Turkish translation. So if there are organizations that are interested in in looking at translation, we don't have funds to support it, but we can support with providing the the full guidance, the design files, some collaboration on what that looks like and making sure that anything that is translated is therefore usable um across across different organizations. So, we're hoping that as we move forward, it's a little bit of a an inter agency translation process where we each um sort of uh different agencies can provide different resources um as we go. So, I'm going to stop there and then um Lisa, I don't know how you want to handle questions. I know you've been tracking them. Do you want to read them out or should I tackle a couple? >> I How about this? Um, if everybody agrees, we give uh Emily and Leah a second to have a glass of water and thank him for the presentation so far. Um, I think for everybody that is interested in protection case management, whether you're not, you're setting up, you're reflecting on what setting up a new programming, you want to refresh your current programming, you want to update your staff training in your tools, there's a lot in the guidance. We've learned a lot about Emily's life goals, which I'm worried that they're very specific to work. So, I'd like Emily to expend expand some of her life goals. Um, there's two different things. I think it's an incredibly impressive bunch of people when we spend 37 minutes introducing ourselves. So, there's a lot of people on this call from a lot of different uh backgrounds and perspectives on protection. Um, Astred, I just want to highlight Astrid put in the chat and we will send it tomorrow. For some of you, using tools that are uh linked to child protection or GBB programming will be much more appropriate um to the interventions that you are conducting. So, we will make sure that you uh have those resources um and you can follow up with the counterparts um at the either the global level or with the country clusters. You will find technical specialists for CP and GBV who can support you through this process. So I think yes to everybody who is asking for the presentation I do not mean to repeat myself but you will absolutely you'll get the presentation but more importantly than the presentation you will get the guidance itself. The presentation will simply guide you through the resources and the materials that are there. Um I think Claire a lot of your your very specific questions on CPG GBB services and coordination. I think maybe that's merits its own conversation but um I am going to Leah just to get the ball rolling and to give you and Emily a minute to catch up on some of these questions. Do you mind if I read out some of the questions? So let's just go from the top. Um so our very first question is when we're doing the analysis the sort of the protection uh risk analysis are you doing that analysis alone or with other case management services? You answered it but I think it's worth repeating ourselves. I mean I can maybe jump in and take this is that we would say that ideally that analysis should be done with other case management services in whatever form that takes. Right? So, some agencies have all of those services maybe in the same organization. That makes it a little bit easier. Um, some maybe do not and would require some outreach and discussions, whether that's with um, coordination bodies or agencies that you know are running services in your area. But we absolutely, I think Emily said this quite well, that the analysis needs to be a holistic analysis. That doesn't necessarily mean that your case load is going to be everybody involved in that analysis. But in order to identify the appropriate and most um riskaffected case load for protection case management, yes, we would hope that that includes that broader range of risks includes child protection and gender-based violence risks which are then managed by child protection and gender- based violence case management programs. But in order to understand the context, we would want that to be as interdicciplinary as possible while of course recognizing that there are practical constraints and you can't necessarily have a workshop with 85 people in it but we would hope that that would be the starting point and there are some tools around um having that workshop some guidance for that. I can say for us within NRC for example we have our colleagues on the LA teams that work on legal protection and specific legal issues. we have found it incredibly useful to do some joint analysis workshops with them. So that really brings in that legal side. I know that with IRC in house you already have GBV and child protection. So I think those are just two examples of of how to make that interdisiplinary area but that would definitely be our our recommendation. um you know I don't know cla I mean I think you know again it's the difference between sort of aspirations and not I think some responses are looking at case management more broadly in an inter agency approach through the cluster um and some is a little bit more agencyled so it would vary quite a bit but certainly the recommendation is that we would we would want to be as inclusive as possible from the beginning and and leave it to specific responses to figure out the best ways to do it because it also might be quite location specific right so that conversation might not be appropriate at a national level but more appropriate at an area level depending on on your context. >> I think sorry some of you might have noticed a small child appear on my end of the call. Uh which actually brings me to one of the very frequent questions that we got throughout the session is sorry is a little protection nepo baby who is looking for uh employment in the in the protection program sphere >> starting his capacity building journey early. >> Exactly. One of the common questions and I think is how does who what case load is included in this case man this uh guide. So I think quite a few people have asked are people with disabilities included are children included is it linked to GBV services. So I think would you mind for everybody where is this position within um the thinking and the programming around uh case management? Do you want to take >> sure um so case management protection case management is for adults. So just to be like super clear, um we uh obviously recognize that families exist in terms of our our clients. Um and so to be very important to coordinate with uh child protection actors if there are specific child protection risks. Um but it is super clear uh in the guidance we use adults. It is for adults. Um, now of course contextually specific, if you would like to include 17 and 1/ half year olds in your case load, like we expect you to coordinate with the child protection actors in terms of like who is more appropriate. Um, definitely can include young adults, but this is designed uh for adults in mind. >> And what about with disabilities? >> Oh, um, sorry, sorry I mentioned that, but I also absolutely um, this was like a core function part of our um, our design process as much as possible. person disabilities is uh amongst the entire case load but it also should be in the case load for gender based violence and child protection. Um we have specific guidance to support teams on working with clients with disability but also we had an effort to imbue disability um principles throughout the entire um program in of itself. So absolutely persons disabilities particularly in context where persons disabilities are um are targeted. So for example with um people who with epilepsy for example in some contexts can be um targeted and have safety concerns um and this would absolutely be um appropriate for that that group. >> Thanks. Sorry. Sorry Leah. >> No no just to to repeat what I sort of said at the beginning is that you know we we feel that this this was developed with a lot of conversation and collaboration with our colleagues in the in the gender based violence and child protection worlds that have been doing case management for a really long time. and that we really hope that this is is seen as complimentary, right? That we are sort of coming at this and and as a protection sector as a whole, we can now say, okay, well, how can we then meet the the needs for communities as a whole while recognizing these sort of specializations within that. So that was very much in in the design process. This is not intended to replace those services to augment um from a community level to make sure that we are are meeting as many needs as possible. Again recognizing that in this particular context that is has only become more difficult but that's the aim. Yeah. >> Great. And now the question start to get a lot more specific into sort of like program program design and intervention. Uh colleagues for we have 25 minutes left in this session. You are welcome to stick around if some of you have uh you came for the presentation and you're you're want to head on understandable. But we will go through all of the questions um and see if Emily and are best to guide us. I think other colleagues on the chat have other suggestions for the people asking the questions. Again, I think uh we as someone said peer exchange is incredibly useful. So please feel free to jump in. So in difficult question number one um are there existing or planned guidance on determining risk level so like high, medium, low with protection case management with operational criteria other than response uh time frames. So this person was asking that the guide defines risk levels essentially through response time frames. So 24 hours 1 to 7 days without operational criteria for the risk categoration categorization itself. So um yes, we did it as much as as possible. So something that we tried to balance is um being overly pedantic as maybe we sort of missed the mark because it's like a 500page guidance. Um and then also with um allowing sort of contextualization. So under the types of risks and in uh form zero we provide we try to provide examples of what would be a high risk or medium high priority medium priority or low priority in terms of how you are categorizing them. Um but what I also think is absolutely essential is for case workers and for the supervisors themselves to make operational decisions and does not make sense to come from uh global guidance. that has to come from um teams themselves in terms of what makes sense for the clients and what is possible in that context and what is possible for the case workers. Um the clearest distinction being like high priority being an immediate response versus something that could take a week or two in terms of referrals. So we did our best in terms of operational um suggestions in terms of how you um how you can prioritize the different types of risks between high priority versus like low. Um but unfortunately I think it has to go back to the uh the supervisors in terms of making decisions. >> Thanks. So the next question is so as this person understands that protection case management should be strictly based on identify protection risks whereas social compliment care may also target people facing extreme vulnerability. So for this person they find that the term extreme vulnerability increasingly pops up in their conversations with echo. So I don't know if there's any echo uh colleagues on the call or echo whispering um but these they've not been able to find a definition of extreme vulnerability in global guidance for echo materials. So do you do you have any sense of this conversation between the difference between protection risks and extreme vulnerability and would you have any advice for this colleague on on where to find definition of extreme vulnerability? Slide like the mountainutely. Yeah. Yeah. Short answer is no. And if anybody has any is any more up to date on the conversation with Echo on extreme vulnerability, please someone else jump in. But I do think what this is touching on is sort of a conversation between the balance between um risks um which is a more of a protection case management response and then vulnerability I assume being socioeconomic like access to basic needs. And so we spent a lot of time talking about this because a lot of our case loads sort of include clients that would maybe fall into the more extreme vulnerability criteria but have less of a protection case management um risk like approach would benefit from. And so I would we again as much as possible tried to I mean this is the visual that we came up with to try to help teams make that distinction because obviously there's a very there's a ven diagram like there's a lot of overlap between our those types of clients. Um and for me it's like if you are providing a referral so um if you are connecting them to basic needs programming and that is all you are doing that is not a protection case management approach. it is important maybe our teams would do that but we don't necessarily need to include them as in our client um like case load and again as you have increased levels of risk and you're required increased levels of specialization and dedicated support and all additional MH MHPSS support and all the additional safety planning and all all of that sort of feeds into more of a protection case management approach rather than supported uh referrals. Now, obviously, again, as you can hopefully see in our beautiful visual of a mountain, there isn't like some sort of complete separation between the two. Obviously, there's going to be levels um and as much as possible, you need to consider what is appropriate for your case load, how many case workers do you have, do they have the bandwidth for etc. What is important to me is that maybe not life uh is that clients receive services. So if they are able to if you need to do the referral do I care if they're client for me like no let's just make sure people get the services that they need and I think that's important and the message that I hope to send to to our teams that are working on the ground. Um but hopefully through working through this guidance you can make a delineation in terms of the case load based on the protection risks. Those are the that's the focus of this program. And just just to real quick to add, I mean, I think that's exactly right. And and where that those extreme vulnerabilities intersect with protection risk, that's where your analysis process should really try to figure out, okay, is this sort of purely economic vulnerability? Do we need to be doing advocacy and sort of referrals for other services or is this connected to some protection risks that we want to prioritize? I will also just say I certainly cannot um and will not speak for Ekko um on this but Ekko was involved in the development of this and and you know did did participate in some of the review processes for this guidance. So um they would be aware of of what's here but certainly if if anyone is is aware of the intersections of those conversations. We would also be very happy to to hear about that. It's always interesting to to hear what those ongoing conversations are. >> Um thanks colleague for that. I see there's a really lively chat between the child protection specialists in the chat. So I think that's uh one that we'll we'll pass on to our colleagues because it's it's its own um there's a lot of unique considerations over there. So please feel discussing and then we'll flag some of our own specialists for a follow-up conversation on child protection specific issues. But one of our colleagues in Sudan I think was sort of reflecting in the other direction. And so they see a lot of community volunteers are engaging in work um that calling it case management but they don't necessarily have the uh capacity or the qualifications. So they're engaging in what they perceive to be case management practices without the tools, funds or even anyone to refer it to. So this person is asking from a do no harm perspective is there anything that uh partners can do for these types of organizations to make operating higher standards and and they were asking for any advice on how um how to adopt these kind of approaches in fragile underresourced contexts. >> Yeah. So I I think Colleen actually answered that question in the chat but I'll I'll say it uh out loud as well. Uh the short answer is no in the sense that we did not design this stuff for uh volunteers instead for staff members just in terms of the amount of like work and um you'll see the level of detail. Uh that being said um I know plan um works on a child protection focused guide on engaging with volunteers um and there is definitely a lot of learning and a lot of um work I would take from that. Okay. Adapted not for child protection. Um but I think practitioners and experts would be able to sort of discern what is appropriate for children versus for um for adults. So I really it's in the chat um that can be sort of sent out after as well. But I I recommend going into that guidance um specifically. And then just from like a personal perspective, I think it is so important to engage with sort of um the spectrum of local actors and include as them as much as is appropriate into capacity building initiatives that your teams are doing etc. and figuring out ways um that is not of getting them to do labor but and making sure that they are safe but are engaging with some of these core principles. Um but really recommend that uh child protection guidance uh for the Sudan uh folks. >> Excellent. And I think again there's a few colleagues in the chat that are discussing u maybe points of entry that they can pursue. Um so uh this one is is there guidance on the threshold for referring a case from protection case management to MHPSS services? >> So great question. Um in chapter 4 in the annex we have have um specific guidance on when it needs to be referred um specifically for um level four support. So we don't necessarily make the distinction between MHPSs case management and protection case management because there can be a lot of overlap. Again if you and protection case management teams can look very different. So in some context we actually have psychologists, qualified mental health um practitioners, um psychiatrists who can be engaged and involved in supervising protection case management teams. Sometimes teams look different and they and they don't have that dedicated support. So again, it's up to like the management and structure to see what level of um MHPS is incorporated into your casework. But there's no there's nothing in protection case management in and of itself that does not mean it is not a focused level four level three support and there sometimes moves into level four when it comes to safety planning around suicidal ideation. Again depending on the uh training and supervision of your case workers. So it's a it's not a universal answer. Um but that being said at no point are social workers um medical doctors or professionals. they cannot prescribe medication. Um and often it is very important important to have that sort of connection with mental health uh service providers in um in the context. So specifically in uh working with clients with acute distress there's um discussion about referrals to our our mental health teams. >> And I just want to sorry can I jump in again on that? I think two other points that I think are really useful. One is again sort of I've said this before but bringing us back to that analysis right so your different team composition should be reflective of what you see perceive and see as the highest needs and risks in the context that you're working in but one other thing that I think is quite useful is is also coming to that outcomes piece because there is some some really useful tools in the guidance around well-being outcomes and how we can measure some and that's been useful for us and sort of understanding um you know there's a few of different outcomes that you see in protection case management and understanding directly from participants what they see as the primary outcomes around protection risk reduction but also around their own well-being I think is a really useful sort of aspect in terms of of us really listening to hear what that what they perceive as those outcomes are and that could also help us sort of continue to shape our programs to be providing the the the nuance services that that we know that people need in the context >> thank you both and I think this this colleague has sort of flagged maybe a frustration that um for MHPSS there's a lot of organizations that say they're doing MHPSS and mental health support but it's actually PSS and you know and I think the same comment was made about organizations claiming to do case management they are doing communication but maybe not doing case management as understood so I think again seeing the um seeing the the some of the the tools and materials that are are flagging how to work with volunteer networks and how to meet organizations where they're at and the service the the services they are providing. But another big block of questions um and I think after this I've completely lost the thread of who's asked what because the chat is so lively. So trying to find the questions in the chat but is can you do protection case management when there are no services to refer people into? So people are asking about low government services. I'm very concerned about the lack of resources to be able to sort of continue referrals onto. And then after that I think we'll have to take some calls from the the questions from the floor if you've been skipped out because um there's a lot going on in there which is great to see. Um so low services um that is a great question probably the number one question that we get from our our teams on the ground which is what do we do when there isn't like when we don't have comprehensive referral services and I think there's uh teams struggle with that in probably every single context um to some degree uh obviously some is way uh way more challenging than others but broadly it's such a common um a common issue So that really is I would say a question to think through in chapter uh two. So similarly to GBV and CP I think there is um a lot of value in the supportive relationship but there is a lot of value in terms of the MHSS services that you can provide but ultimately you need to provide other services as well. Um there's some argument around advocacy being really important for other services to access but um there can be a real risk of harm for our clients and then also for our teams to be operating and providing protection services. There's no other services access is a challenge etc. So it's a again program team need to make decisions for themselves. Um as much as possible I would not recommend doing a protection case management if there are no other services. Uh um however, no services, not enough services, uh not regular services, not quality services. All those questions are still going to operate even if you do have like on a service mapping a bunch of services in the location, they still may not be appropriate or sufficient. Um so it's a tough like um response. Uh sorry I don't have anything clearer other than um a decision- making sort of like rubric to think through if you can operate there. And just to confirm the toolkit has has a a framework to help organizations think this through >> but it doesn't come up with the conclusion. Um I think I mean I mean mean the important thing is you're not telling people how to do programming right you're you're giving them the guide to make decisions um the best decisions within their context. Abdah you have had your hand up forever so I am going to uh allow your mic on. Would you like to jump in? >> Yes for sure. I would keep my hand up uh for a very long time to have the opportunity to say hello for both of you. Uh happy to be here with you. This is Abdah Ali. I am the protection manager for North Dar for DRC. Um and frankly speaking two of my questions were um were answered one related to referrals in sorry um service where we don't have referrals. I am in Dur now and you can imagine this is the situation that we are dealing with in 90% of the cases and frankly speaking as you mentioned in the in the toolkit itself we don't have an answer that could support us in the advocacy with donors with decision makers about why we are pushing back on provision of protection case management in such contexts >> and uh we have all of this push back uh uh from donors from our supervisors on no you need to but we are not in a situation where we can do do. So this is a different uh different kind of conversation and the other point is related also to the to the to the point you mentioned about um uh when we call things case management and when we don't call them case management and this is exactly what I wanted to elaborate on >> um in in the toolkit itself we don't have a place where we differentiate between individual PSS case management and IPA for example >> and a lot of staff in the field especially in cases where we don't have referral options. They are mixing a lot of those things together. >> So they would assume that we cannot provide individual PSS unless it's part of protection case management. We cannot provide referrals unless it's a part of protction case management. Uh IBA should be always aligned with protection case management. And this is something that we need a guidance that we can rely on not only because we don't know but because we need to keep reference because people have different understandings of those services. So if we can create a table where we can describe referrals as activity itself and referrals as part of a system of protection case management same for individual PSS and differentiate between the tools because it's a big struggle when we have case management tools used for um provision of PSS but without safety planning without referrals because they are not needed. So a lot of stuff because they don't have tools for individual PSS they are using case management tools to do that which is a huge challenge and create a lot confusion. So those are the points that I want based on my field observations. Um I know some of the needs revisions bigger than this kind of conversation but I wanted to let you know these are some of the biggest challenges that we are facing over from my side. Happy happy happy to be with you here with all of you again and greetings from Darur. Thank you. >> I think I I saw lots of hearts and thumbs ups and you know clearly what you said and I think for if anybody else in the call is working in Sudan and and clearly needs someone to think with um Abdahab um is your guy. Um and you have your hand up. Um if you want to jump in and see if um Emily and Leah want to react to the last comment as well. Oh, sorry. I I need to unmute you. I'm very sorry. Here we go. Yes, please. >> Hi everyone. Happy to be with you. I know this is the first time that someone didn't allow me to unmute myself and it felt really weird. Um, thanks a lot for the presentation. Uh no I just wanted to maybe compliment what our colleague from from um DU mentioned earlier I'm I'm now working with the OPT teams with DRC um and the truth is that we do uh face a lot of like challenges let's say when it comes to referrals to MPSS activities versus protection case management I think that it's it's not clear um not only within DRC but also as as an inter agency protect protection response. I think that there there is a bit of confusion when it comes to individual MHPSs versus protection case management and in context where resources are um overstretched. I think that it's good it would be very useful to have have some sort of clear guidance and I know of course that different organization have their own uh uh tools um and assessment processes but also at a cluster level it would be great especially in contexts where yes we don't have that many resources available um it would be important to have some standardized approach uh but also when when uh cases are under protection case management ment and they might or might not be referred to ambs. I think that's also something that needs to to be yes discussed at least or like addressed ideally. Thank you so much for all the hard work and yeah um I know that you have gone through a lot to to to this um uh this guidance. So I'm so happy and glad to see this and moving forward and be utilized by other organizations as well. Thanks a lot. >> Well, a lot of ankle's work is in this guidance and so she did a detailed review flagging. No, >> it's so it's so interesting and useful to bring these up. I mean, we certainly have have our own internal conversations about yes, PSS, IPA, case management, right? Where are those lines? Where do we refer back and forth? How do we distinguish the programs? And so, so I don't have a good answer. It's not easy, but maybe that's something that we in the inter space the gold protection cluster can take forward is sort of understanding that this is a space where we collectively need to do a little bit more thinking on and and I would add a little bit more like learning from country operations in terms of what are the different sort of configurations that are being put into place and what's working well in different contexts. Um I will also say another sort of thread running through this there was a question earlier and around was this guidance developed with an eye towards the current sort of funding and resource constraints and the answer is no it was developed before that right it was completed in January 2025 and so I do think you know that is a theme running through a lot of these questions and conversations around how do we bring our highquality program models into some of the realities where we are now in terms of resource constraints lack of referralability and I think again I don't have good answers to that. I will say what I always say is, you know, these are questions that organizations need to be really considering very specifically in the context that they're in being having really open and honest conversations with donors about what we're able to do and what's most appropriate. But I do think this conversation has also just brought back to me how important it is for us to sort of bring some of those conversations into the the the global programmatic conversation and and really take stock of where we are and what what do we need to to consider as we go forward in this in this current context. So, um I'm apologize there's no clear answers, but I think we are all asking the same questions, right? >> I have like a very annoying technical advisor response to some of these questions, which is um it doesn't actually fully answer your question. I think they're they come up a lot. I think it is absolutely essential and we should need to have these conversations collectively. Um, but if I'm asked this question, which I am often about the differences around like MHPSS and IPA and case management, um, IPA, which is like referrals, cash, if that's how we're defining it, um, the MHPSS, they're tools, right? They're just like tools to be used as a part of the protection case management process. um you would want uh for there to be a cash response, referral response or a lot of the individual um MHPSS components as as a different tool based on your assessment whether or not the client needs it or not. So, for example, like psycho education or some of the um distress like clients in the emotional regulation activities, they're just like they're simple. A box breath, breathing out for one, two, three. Those sorts of tools are something that you would want any frontline staff member to be able to use um and utilize when they're interacting with clients if necessary. So, there's a spectrum, right? Um sometimes it's nec you can use a lot of the MHPSs to as an individual. It's not as a part of case management. Sometimes clients and I imagine this is going to be common in Sudan where you have clients that you see for one day or two days. It's not really case management. You just can't provide that comprehensive care. But there might be tools that you can take from this guidance or from this um in order to provide a one-off support. And that is important and um essential. >> We often use for example the form zero the protection analysis tools from this case management guidance. We often use that internally for our individual protection assistance identification and eligibility process. So it's doesn't mean it's a case management process but it is a similar way of thinking around identification and eligility and then the service that is offered then is a different service. Yeah. >> Sorry Emily I didn't mean to cut you off. >> No, no, no. Absolutely. Um sorry I was reading a response to the question. So yeah, they're great questions um and ones that we haven't like fully formed but are um a part of the the process. Anyway, >> I think what else you got, Lisa? >> Well, James put his hand up, thought again, and then put it back down. So, I think it is an hour 30 minutes. Oh, James, go on. One last question. >> Okay. Yeah. Thank Thank you so much. Uh this is James from uh NRC South Sudan and um I I totally agree with our colleagues from from Dur and I just wanted to share with you some uh experience that we have in uh one of the fun that we are in. uh previously we look at the the the PFA the the psychological first aid has the first services that are provide to individual that are at risk to access a protection services. So just to share with you the experience, we provide psychosocial uh first aid to allow the individual come and then after that we the protection risk assessment decide or this case need to be rolled into protection case management or need to be referred to MIPSS. So the link is the ling is still a challenge to all based on the guideline and the tool but it's still this is a practice that we try to to do to make sure that we we don't force people to talk yet they are upset and they may experience a lot of violence and and they don't want to talk when there is a need for them to actually express themselves. So I think providing psychological cost aid first before conducting the protection risk assessment is a key to service for Thank you. I think I want to take a minute acknowledging that we have over 200 people here and are 90 minutes into a session. I think uh Leah, you were saying at the start that one of the things that you'd really love to do is is sort of a practitioners conversation where you there are no perfect answers, but you're all grappling with different questions that you can lend each other advice and there's again there's some incredible chat of people advising each other. I I just want to to thank you. So firstly, we we will run this series through through the rest of the year. If you are sitting listening to this thinking, wait, we have an amazing toolkit. We have an amazing guidance. Actually, it's we forgot about it. It's on our shelf or we use it all the time. Please reach out to us and we're more than happy to have this this exchange. Um Emily and Leah do not work for the GPC. They do not work as coordinators. There are two technical specialists within their organizations who put a lot of thought into how to run good programming and how to learn from other programming. There's a lot of great questions and coordination, but I think that's for a slightly different house. Um, so I can only thank you for so much for your time and to everybody's uh interest and engagement and I suspect we could run this session for another three and a half hours with a bit of bit of warning. Um, so I'm really to see what comes next and and thank you so much Lee and Emily for for taking the time to walk through the your guide to protection case management and and we will share this, we will share the presentation, we will share the recording and we will share the resources that are specific and have been developed for um child protection and case management too which are again just a reminder um they they a lot of thought has been put into that to guide interventions in that that sphere. Um, so I think if any final words I have Victoria, why not? We're all still here. Victoria, do you have one more one more question or comment? Oh, I have to unmute Victoria. So, and you you you said Oh, no. I have lost her. I'm sorry. I didn't unmute you in time. So, that just says we need to do this another day. Victoria gets to answer her question first. Ukraine. You're like your own world of an incredible conversation going over there. So, I think we're all going to be really excited to watch how this conversation evolves in Ukraine, too. So, Leah, um, Emily, thank you very much. And, um, everybody have a great rest of day. >> Thank you all. Really appreciate everyone's time and looking forward to continuing this conversation. >> Thanks everyone. >> Next time we'll unmute you all. >> Love it. I'm ready. Take care everyone. Thanks.