 Let's see. Thank you so much for the excellent energy in which you've run the whole week. Colleagues, how fitting it is to have the last session of our forum on protection case management. At the end, the measure of our work is simple. Did we manage to prevent harm, support the resilience of someone to slide back into normality and take care of themselves and their own? That's it. That's a measure. So how fitting it is to close our forum today with this session. I did open the forum by saying that what hurts the most for survivors of protection crimes goes beyond the crime itself. It is invisibility. Millions of people go through all their challenges and total solitude, wondering if anyone knows or cares, wondering if they matter at all. And how fitting it is after we have gone through several discussions, 12 this week, to come back full circle and say whatever the challenges are and the reasons for them is and partnerships we build to combat them. At the end, we have this one simple powerful tool to knock out invisibility, recognize individual and address the challenges. Case management. Protection case management is a core program, a non-negotiable element of protection response efforts. I can't be clearer. It's not an add-on or simply something that is nice to have. Instead, it's a key tool to support protection outcomes for some of the most at-risk members of the community living in displacement or in crisis. And managing cases is not a general generic function. It's a specialized area of intervention requiring technical staff, specialized staff and guidance. Why? Well, because the risk of doing harm when ill equipped is as great as the opportunity of finding a solution if well equipped. Well thought through and resource case management system could be the difference between protecting and doing harm. Other agency guidelines developed in 2019 on protection case management with thanks to IRC and UNATR and many partners who supported them are an essential piece. As we across the protection cluster look to further socialize protection case management and support different protection leaders, particularly at local and national levels, to take such programming in ways that fully ensure the do no harm approach at its core. So in opening this final session, I'm proud of your discussions throughout the week. I'm proud of the amount of work that is behind these discussions, actual work on the ground that allows us to bring our experiences to for us like this. I am proud that we are a sector that can debate global challenges, advocate at the Security Council, develop policies and systems. But at the end, we go back to the one day to day focus that drives us all the dignity of the individual. Before we hear more from the panelists today, how we're going to do that in this, should I call it protection in practice session. Thank you and have a good, good session. Thank you so much William that was a wonderful introduction. My name is Hannah Jordan and I am the Regional Protection Advisor for NRC in our Asia Europe and Latin America region. And I have the honor of moderating today's event, shaping protection case management, identifying challenges and opportunities alongside Emily Krem, our colleague at IRC. Emily, do you want to introduce yourself. Sure. Hi, my name is Emily Krem, and I'm a protection rule of law technical advisor with IRC, normally based in New York, but currently in Uganda. Thanks so much for the intro. We're really excited for this session today. Great. Next slide please. Just a couple of housekeeping rules. Unless you're a speaker please kindly mute your microphone. We would love to see you. So if the bandwidth is good enough please keep your video on. If you have any questions or comments please type it in the chat box and while our speakers are presenting I will be looking at the questions for having a little bit of Q&A at the end. So please also type into the chat what country you're working in and what organization you're with with. And then please don't forget the translation at the bottom so we have French and Spanish with us today. And yeah. So, next slide please. The agenda we just today what we want to do is go over protection case management so we'll have some overview on protection case management in the UNHCR, and then we'll go through an introduction to the new approach. And then we'll pass it off to our colleague in Uganda, and he will discuss a coordinated and system strengthening response and protection case management. Then we'll pass it off to our colleague with humanitarian mind action will look at victim assistance. And then the last panelist will look at challenges and opportunities. And then if we have some time we'll do some question and answer and next steps and wrapping up. Next slide. I've just introduced I'll let the panelists introduce themselves, and I will pass it over to Emily. Great. Thanks so much. So next slide. So today I'm not sure if you can really see but this is really a sort of a global map of where protection case management is already taking place. I don't know what these really see these new guidelines but the guidelines were a result of really a need on the ground and this is already happening in loads of areas. Now as you will see this is very IRC and NRC heavy so this is clearly not an indication of where all the work is being done, and we're very interested in hearing from you, where this is actually happening organically so please do. I would be really thrilled to understand how this is taking place on the ground. Next slide. So you will hear in a moment from Esther, who's going to talk about why protection case management, or how it really came about. And why why this took place, but just to give a little bit of a background that William mentioned is this started happening sort of organically without a standardized guidance at least for IRC in Lebanon and Uganda, starting in 2019 IRC developed a first guidance or a first draft of this. However, we felt upon reflection that it was really more of a framed in the negatives that it was not gender based violence case management, and it was not case management for children. We didn't really have to really articulate who we were supporting in a clear way. The response was not case management for men. It was something more nuanced than that, but we weren't really articulating in a clear way. Starting in late 2019 and finished in 2020 IRC and UNHCR collaborated to develop the first multi agency protection case management guidance. And we're lucky enough to have a number of those people who really worked on this guidance presenting today on this call. It was the Esther, Dennis and myself all contributed to this guidance and it was actually led by Colette Hogg who I will be handing off to in a moment. These guidelines really emphasize the importance that we shift as a sector and as an industry from a charity based model to more of a rights based approach and Esther will go into that in a little bit more detail. Next slide please. So here really just emphasizes that while this was initially created by IRC and UNHCR it was much more than that and there was a reference group that included IMC, DRC, as much as possible this is really meant to be an interagency or multiagency approach. The guidance aims to bring together the wider protection community to provide a common language, standardized definitions, tools and approaches across agencies that would like to engage in this approach. We're not quite there yet in terms of mandating everybody uses the exact same tools and the exact same language, but really really hope that as a start as a start to have that common framing. And we hope that this approach will be piloted and it is being piloted which Hannah will speak to a little bit at the end in multiple countries. So thank you so much and I am very excited to introduce Colette Hogg, who will be speaking a little bit about how UNHCRs roll around protection case management. Thank you Emily. And it's great to be on the webinar today. So thanks very much for the invitation. I, as Emily said, I'm Colette Hogg and working as the interim protection sets coordinator for the moment with the interagency in Lebanon. I mean, I think in terms of protection case management and UNHCR, William spoke very passionately at the beginning about how protection case management is part of UNHCRs mandate to provide protection for displaced persons and vulnerable individuals. So protection case management and this guidance is a really important step towards achieving that broader protection mandates. And then also to providing and you know, supporting people to realize and find durable solutions by enabling those self protective capacities and self reliance pending, you know, longer term solution. So protection case management is one of the core components of UNHCRs border protection response, as you can see here, all of which needs to be, you know, appropriately coordinated and connected to the protection case management is really an essential guidance for our work, typically UNHCR, you know, outside of the child protection and SGBV case management models has tended to act as a sort of broker or a central hub through which people approach and which we kind of respond to by providing a one off service or kind of advocacy action for, but perhaps without the psychosocial accompaniment piece to that, and perhaps without a clear direction as to the steps and attitudes required. So, we haven't say typically viewed this as part of a broader empower a power empowering process where we can support individuals to really heal and make decisions. So this isn't to say that case management hasn't and isn't being done in UNHCR of course it is and that's very much part of what we do and of course what implementing partners do but I think as Emily referred to that hasn't been until now specific guidance through which we can follow and provide more support to staff with. So these components of UNHCR, so yes, I mean, these are the components here that relate to case management within a refugee but also IDP setting. And as you can see through the diagram, and they should be connected at each of those stages so just a little bit in terms of how this fits in to UNHCR's interventions. Thanks a lot Emily. Great, thank you so much for that Colette. Now I'd like to pass over to Esther who is going to take us to our next set of slides. Hi everyone, thank you. Thank you for having me. So today I'll try in this section of the presentation to actually talk about who are our clients and how these guidance contributed significantly in framing the scope of work when we're talking about protection case management. So let me start with a short case study that you can see right now on the slide. In that case study you have Mrs. Beebe, she's 50 years old, she lives with three adult daughters and two grandchildren. She has epilepsy, but she's untreated and undiagnosed. And she lives in a community where witchcraft is a belief. She's supported by her family, but she seems to be more and more isolated, and she's not doing the activity she used to do such as suing. Her status seems to worsen, and she had a seizure lately. And in the society and the community as I mentioned where she lives in, local councils are trying to crack down people practicing witchcraft, and they're associated Mrs. Beebe to witchcraft. And the family is very concerned about being attacked, especially at night, because they think Mrs. Beebe might be practicing witchcraft. We started with that case study to highlight and outline some of the cases. This is not an isolated case or a story. We encountered a lot of this story in the field. And initially, as it was mentioned by my colleagues, I think case management was well outlined and articulated when it came to maybe child protection or gender based violence. A lot of investment has been done in those two fields of expertise. For Mrs. Beebe, you can sense from the start that maybe these two case management activities were not like fit for a purpose, like Mrs. Beebe wouldn't be eligible. Next slide please. So, I, oh, sorry. Hannah. Yeah, Esther. I think, can we go to next slide please. Sorry, did we mess up? Yeah. Yeah, I think so. Okay, sorry about that. So I started with that case study just to introduce that maybe initially we had some of a sense of a gap in services. And if CP and GBD were well articulated, as I mentioned, the story of Mrs. Beebe and Mrs. Beebe, for example, was not covered. So having discussions in the field and being in the field with teams, I am a former protection coordinator for the IRC. We really sense that something was missing. We were not covering all the needs and all the stories and difficulties and challenges faced by clients and population we aimed at serving in the field. It was recognized progressively by clusters and organizations in discussions, and we had also growing demand from clients. So we would do other protection activities like protection monitoring or information dissemination or other type of prevention and response in the field. And we would have more and more people seeking for support and we didn't have like clear guidance or clear frame to actually respond to their needs. So progressively donors' interest was also growing and those discussions were shifting also in talking with donors. Donors would question us about, okay, you are doing child protection case management, you're doing GBD case management. How do you actually respond to other rights violation? For example, in our case study, how do you actually respond and support population when there is a witchcraft accusation and the risk of physical assault or other rights violation? Next slide please. I think that one of the major challenge when you're in the field and working in a rush and sometimes being in an emergency, you don't have the time. Most of the time it's very complicated to pose and actually try to translate standards into practice and have the time to develop like comprehensive tools embedding those standards. And I think this is one of the major strengths of this guidance as it is really the results of lessons learned over the years. I remember having discussion like in 2017 being in Cameroon and organically starting to develop case management activities but let's say general protection case management and not specialize for children or gender-based violence survivors. I think one of the major strengths of this guidance and I cannot go into all the standards which are outlined there. I will just focus on who we serve and how we frame the scope of work in terms of clients. The three standards that you see on that slide being having a human rights-based approach, being protection-sensitive, and William referred to it talking about the do-no-harm principle, for example. Or being inclusive, having inclusive protection case management services is one of the major strengths. I think this is something which was well outlined and actually highlighted through the processes and tools that you will find in that guidance. I cannot go into the details of each and every standard but when we're saying that we have a human rights-based approach, right, it's saying that you're seeing your clients as right-olders and not as vulnerable as vulnerable persons. And the major shift of this guidance in terms of perspective and focus is really trying to shift away from persons with specific needs categories as an entry point for protection case management. Back then we had other guidance and a lot of work was done already in terms of what is protection case management, but I think the main entry point for stakeholders was to use the person with specific needs categories. So let's say if you were to communicate with counterparts and that counterpart would ask you, who are you serving? The first answer would be, oh, we work with persons with specific needs and then we would rely on that list. Being, oh, we work with older persons, we work with persons with disabilities, we work with persons with serious medical condition and so on and so forth. And this guidance and all the work which has been done being the results of discussion is to say we shift away from those categories which can actually entail a component of discrimination, assuming from the start that we would have groups of the categories having specific needs. No, we have persons having all the same needs and we have sometimes an environment bringing obstacles and barriers for them to actually enjoy their rights fully. So this is shifting away from that perspective and saying that protection case management is actually breaking with persons at protection risk, which is a significant shift and I will really focus on that. That guidance includes of course ways and tools to incorporate protection principles and make sure we design, save, dignified, participative and so on and so forth, protection case management services. And it does also a real focus on being inclusive and trying to remove to the best possible extent the barriers to our services but also consider barriers in the protection risk analysis we are doing. Saying that and coming back to how it does relate to how we frame who we serve with this guidance. Next slide please. It means that we are actually grounding our response and our protection case management response into a sorrow like in-depth protection analysis. If we want to see our clients as right holders and not only as assuming okay we are working with a renewable person going to these categories of people, we need to have a clear understanding of power dynamic and dynamic within the communities we're working in and it goes with doing a protection risk analysis. So the process that the guidance is supporting is for you in the field to one view protection risk analysis for you to prioritize what would be the priority, the prioritized rights violation we are going to respond to through case management and then have very clear targeting criteria. And those targeting criteria of course this is then the entry point and for you to communicate with other stakeholders, other service providers. Maybe from like it might look kind of complicated and we might be tempted to be that's maybe easier to refer to categories of person with specific needs for example, but I just wanted to share here quickly my experience working with those categories just very professionally, doing this you will sometimes end up and I don't know maybe guys you have had the same experience, it will result in a high number of referrals because what I observed is that all the individuals who did not see GBV or CP case management criteria would be referred to protection case management so if you would say in a coordination meeting and I am delivering as an organization protection case management. Most of the people that feeding the criteria of CP and GBV case management would end up in your case load, which would be a really stretched case worker, very complicated to respond to all the needs of clients in a qualitative way. And finally, it would lead sometimes to an overlap with basic needs stakeholders mandate and make you shift from the core mandate as William actually referred to in the introduction. We are here as protection stakeholder to prevent and respond to violence and rise violation, and most of the time the referral might be that people would refer to you people in an economic vulnerability, making your case load grow and I'm not saying that those people are not in need of support they are, but as protection stakeholders you're really there to respond to violence and protection risks. So that's why this process and this guidance is critical I think to frame the way we are actually saying who we serve and we are serving person at protection risk. We need to do a protection risk analysis to know what it means in the community we work in because it might differ significantly from one country to the other, and even from one village to the other in the same country. So just as a reminder and just to emphasize what's contained in this guidance, when we are saying that we are doing a protection risk analysis this guidance is going to support you really in doing it balancing risk and protective factors. I think we always have a tendency being in emergencies or in the rush of doing our program management or project management to sometimes focus a lot on risk factors, the threats and and the risk factors people are exposed to let's say like the negative part. This guidance is try to the best possible extent to also outline and make sure in the way you're analyzing your environment and the risk people are exposed to you also take into consideration protective factors which is critical to make sure you have actually a human rights based approach and you are also having an employment approach. Next slide please. Next slide. Next slide please. So, I just wanted to finish this presentation by showing you one example of template that you'll have in this guidance to help you out doing this process of starting to from the protection risk analysis prioritization and then having your targeting criteria. Here, the example is about arbitrary arrest and detention, taking it taking it as a right violation of protection risk you will be analyzing with your team. And so on the left side you see that you have examples of how your rights violation or the protection risk might manifest in your context. And this is very important to reflect as a team on like okay we have arbitrary arrest and detention how does it manifest how does it look like in my context. To help you out the template will have the definition at the international level of what we're talking about what does it mean when when we're talking of arbitrary arrest in detention. At the international level of course you can adapt it with your national legal framework when suitable. And the main part is at the bottom and you have the three columns being giving examples and try to understand the environmental risk factor is the cultural agents and root causes. So what is making what is creating the protection risk in your environment in the environment the population lives in. Here as example you have negative social attitude checkpoints mine by security forces, regular rates by security forces. And then you analyze what are the risk factors at individual level meaning a gender diversity factors that people might be exposed to so in this example you have for example I, if I am liking a nationality I am undocumented I am not registered as a refugee for example, I might be more at risk of being arrested or detained in that specific context if I am a man, I might be more exposed, etc, etc. And then the last column is helping you out think through the protective factors as I mentioned before. For example if you're living in a urban area you might be less exposed because they are less checkpoints if you're registered or if you have documentation, you might be less exposed, etc. So those are examples of protective factors. Going back to that process, you would do that for the guidance is supporting you actually doing that for each in every rights violation and you have a list of it. Once you've done it, you will have the possibility to actually prioritize what rights violation you're going to respond to through your protection case management activity. According to some criteria, such as what is the severity and impact of that right violation where we are intervening, what's the relevance of case management response, and what is the coordination and what are other service providers giving in that same area so that you can avoid for example duplication and what are your capacities as an organization to actually respond properly to that right violation in a protection sensitive way. So that was my part to try to explain what's the process in that guidance so how you can frame who we serve and what are actually the tools and that you can find in that guidance and to conclude I would say that really this guidance is the result of a lesson that we learned in the field and making sure that we're supporting practitioners in the field to actually translate standards into practice in the most easiest way. It covers this guidance will help you cover a gap in services in the protection response by having articulated protection case management. And it will also make sure you ground your services in an in depth understanding of where you're intervening it by doing a protection risk analysis. Thank you very much for having me. Thank you so much for that Esther that's amazing we have some questions that have come out but I have noted those down and we'll keep those for the end. So I would like to pass over to Dennis. This on to you. Thank you and hi everyone. I would like to take a look at the protection coordinator with the IRC Uganda country program. In this next round of presentation we'll be looking at a coordinated and system strengthening response in Uganda. But just to start off our presentation I want to give a very brief general overview of the context. This is a country in East Africa, which currently host the, the greatest number of refugees out of only African countries, and this perhaps may be due to their open door refugee policy. The government has actually made welcoming and caring for refugees and important part of its national policy, and the approach here involves welcoming relatively anyone seeking refuge or asylum in the country regardless of the country of origin. But just also note that Uganda is a post conflict country, and that has transitioned from world that lasted over 20 years of the Lord's resistance army in the northern Uganda, and this eventually so more than 1.8 million internally displaced persons move into approximately 251 camps and other protected villages to now becoming one of the largest refugee hosting country, hosting the largest number of refugees. And as I talk now, within the year 2021, we have approximately about 1.4 million refugees of different nationalities, and this includes the South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan, Somalia, Burundi, among others, and all these refugees from the different countries are being hosted in a close to 11 settlements across the different regions of the country. But other than that, we see Uganda also experiencing other ongoing crisis just like any other part of the world, notably the global pandemic COVID, the non COVID disease outbreaks, for example, missiles and polyamide. But now in terms of protection case management as already hinted by Emily, we did start this in the year 2018 through a phase out rollout plan, which included among others the community building, the capacity building training for our protection team. And now as we talk, we have protection case management being delivered in five program implementation locations, which includes both the urban setting and the settlement. I established more say in the rural askers of the country. So given this brief background, I would wish to point that we have seen our operating context increasingly urging us to deliver programs by sharing and building capacity with local and national actors to ensure sustainability, which is one of the key part of system strengthening response approach as we proceed. Next slide. So we, we look at case management and system strengthening as a direct service delivery in line with about three key things has been as has been pointed. The first area is around the more the moral obligation. And so here we do appreciate that states have the primary responsibility for social services to provide identity and ensure support provision. So we continue to ensure that the localization agenda in humanitarian work is implemented. We must be able to consider how they support, how we support the existing systems in the existing context where we want to provide such needed support. The other area is around the contextual necessity. As already given by the previous presenter protection case management programming is implemented in a range of context lying in the form of emergency. We have the GDP setup, the refugee setup, the demand driven context, just to mention but a few that tends to address fear and vulnerabilities, many of which intersect the humanitarian and the development fears. So, particularly in Uganda, we have seen a sort of a shift away from the protection programming where we look at our response, not only in one hour, but rather in a multifaceted approach, as in not any response is the same, and no one size fits on. The settlements in Uganda have some of which have existed over 20 years, and in other, over 20 years in other instances with refugees, you know, producing children and having children to run in those settlements, and we continue to have spontaneous new arrivals coming in through the porous borders of the country, Uganda being really a landlocked country. So we also have refugees integrated into the urban host communities, necessarily not a settlement, but people who have found their ways to live in this urban location, while others live in the designated settlements. Given the complexities around the context, perhaps this could be one of the fronted reasons for multi-layered approach that we determine in terms of ensuring the protection and decision-sensing approach around our work. The aspect of sustainability is more effective response to address things in a sort of a systematic way that can get to the root of the problem. So as the IRC in our program, we do try as much as possible to appreciate the fundamental role of government in the international refugee and humanitarian framework that obligates states to protect and ensure service delivery. Apart from the works we have done and perhaps in other country programs that you could have witnessed, sometimes the government is overwhelmed with demands, and this is one of the reasons that warrants CSOs to come in to support. For example, in cases of influxes, in the case of Uganda, we have had situations of natural disasters, but it's important that we come and share best practices and adaptability, and also coupled with joint research ventures and intervention. So as such, we see high NGOs becoming very fundamental and playing a fundamental role in this process. Now, just again slightly on that aspect of sustainability, if I have to throw more light in the international context, sustainability is considered for both the people, which I think should be the best practice, not only in Uganda but for any other program. For both the people and the system where humanitarian actors should be seen as a temporary gap filler for the state systems that are unwilling or perhaps unable to fulfill the obligation of protecting and ensuring service delivery for the people. And as we do this, it is important to think through a sort of the eventual withdrawal and transfer of services right from the beginning of our programming, okay, or the start of our program, if we really have to attain the aspect of sustainability. But as we do all this, we know that we cannot support forever as humanitarian workers, there is need to build capacity of the government, system holders, through undertaking the necessary training, ensuring that we work around as much as possible, build efforts around coalition and help to set up systems and standards that will enable or contribute to popularizing the best practices. For example, for instance in refugee management among others. Next slide. Next slide please. Thank you. And again, we have the overall coordination office, that is the office of the Prime Minister. Sorry, previous slide. I think there's a sort of delay in the previous slides. Oh yes, there right there. Thank you. So the office of the Prime Minister is charged with the overall coordination role around refugee programming. And we system strengthening is not only about the government, but also about the community structures. And this includes both the formal and informal structures and working towards integrating all this together. So we see that integrating both the formal and informal systems is important for referrals and for negotiating solutions in some cases for the clients, where civil society complements the work of the government. In the NRC Uganda, we have tried as much as possible to engage local national organizations, I can make reference to Uganda network on low ethics and HIV AIDS, that is you can add, but also at a more national level we have the Center for Justice studies and integration and perhaps also getting down at the refugee settlement level to work very closely and strengthen the capacity of the refugee welfare council members, the state and non state actors to be able to deliver on these aspects of the work as part of the response. As we know the government and the civil society both have different strengths in case management for instance, the civil society working with the dissentments, majorly, and then also the government have different access to power so we should now ourselves working closely to tap onto all these components. There is a need aside to strengthen the government and civil society and ensure that they are brought together to foster a sort of information exchange, building common understanding of the problems, designing solutions together and capacity sharing. Again, as an example we have done this in Uganda through a refugee engagement forum platform. And this is a platform that brings together all the refugee representatives from across the 11 refugee settlements that I mentioned about or talked about this in the previous slide to elaborate on issues, on challenges, on some of these areas that they need support from government and civil society so that their life continues and their rights are not violated in this case. Because a lot of our clients also intersect with the legal aspects, we have tried as much as possible to explore opportunities around court open days which has contributed significantly to scalable innovations with best practices, including showcasing of expertise on how we can differently work. So in all this as we try to do this, it is important to emphasize that as humanitarian workers, and in this case particularly IRC and all the other organization, we are just mere facilitators and not owners or drivers of system strengthening, but rather the actual system users in this case who are the people are the key drivers to bring change and advocate on issues affecting them, both in terms of the demand and on the supply angle, each have a role to play to strengthen the systems for refugees in this case. However, as we try to do all this, there are challenges that come along with such. And for example, there are aspects to do with around changing attitudes, practices, and mindset which in other instances is very, very difficult. We know systems are driven by the people. So for example, there could be the government structures that we try to work on closely have primary interest in refugee work and issues around land cropping up in refugee hosting districts just to mention. And again, as we do this, it's important as a challenge that dealing with the winners, sort of winners and losers in systems strengthening. So every system has defenders. So need to identify and address the fears and vested interests of these defenders and the losers. Otherwise, if this is not identified at the early stage, you are bound to, you know, experience a lot more challenges than what it is. And of course, around this we know system strengthening sometimes requires hardware investments, which comes with a lot more additional resources than we can think, for example, in cases of automation, training and capacity building, which requires a lot more of continuous engagement, and indeed it's not a one off approach. Next slide. So, again, before talking about system strengthening, we need to understand that the gaps, what the gaps are, and how do you go about system strengthening upon identifying the gaps. There's need for general assessment to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the prevailing system. So it is important as you try as much as possible to do this to have a self reflection on what our value is by, for example, focusing on building the skills and attitudes for the case of Uganda. And we have considered working with the government with the lead coordination role the OPM office of the prime minister, but also other due to better support clients in a much more trauma centered and client centered way, which is one of the things that in the other aspect is considered programmatic approach and pools. There's need to support civil society that has already been working with these groups. So as to do so in a much more systematic way, using, for example, the tools. In the case of in our case we have done this using the tools developed in the protection case management guidance. And in this I make reference to our work with again the Center for Justice Studies and Innovation, which is a national NGO, we built onto their skills and expertise under one of the projects that looked at enhancing and powering and strengthening the level of government and this capacity, and this basically was delivered to the workshops to understand and harmonize linkages between government systems, not in a range of spheres of social protection, humanitarian protection case management, database handling and more. So we still think that this still remains an area to advocate on, especially around the challenges of harmonization, but this is something that we hope to replicate as we continue to strengthen our case management practice in the next future. Advocacy is a very important component that we need to consider on with the government so that they are able to include groups that might be otherwise excluded from service provision. You know, so in Uganda again we have capitalized this based on the enjoyment of the comprehensive and progressive refugee framework that that we have perhaps is one of the best in the world, coupled with the good policies that we have in place. And looking at the way things, the trend of things, there's already transition from the emergency to development. And as we try to fit ourselves into this, it's no longer deliver and go away, but take into play and powering approaches to refugee self-reliance that leads to independence. And lastly around this week, it's about exchanging knowledge and experience. For this to be billed, let's consider working with actual members of the groups themselves. For example, in the case of the marginalized groups and facilitate sessions where you can bring the duty bearers together with those groups directly. If at all we find it is safe and accessible for them, but also taking into consideration the ability to reevaluate with the team, foster reflections, and remember that again at the back of our mind that one solution might not be relevant for all the challenges and the problems that we have. And as such it is important to remember that we are not the experts. So we have to facilitate, be facilitators of the process where we need to learn from the people we are working with, but also as much as they are learning from us. Next slide. So protection case management is at the center of different service intervention for both the specialized and non-specialized services. And therefore it is important to work and coordinate with other protection actors along several areas. And some of these areas include the targeting criteria, developing, coordinating the targeting criteria for the individuals in need, having to undertake joint case conferences, referrals, including sharing of experiences and learning among others. So again, for instance, as we try to do this, there could be very complex situations. For instance, how do we coordinate if there are overlaps with the GBV case law? For example, male survivors of sexual violence, or if someone who had previously identified a protection risk discloses that she's experiencing intimate partner violence. So how do you deal with such situation? I think in all these cases, there is need to make sure that each case management stream knows what the targeting criteria is. It is important to note that a client should not be enrolled in two different case management programs at the same time. And a client should only have one primary case worker, which is the basic transfer guideline. However, you must ask the client what their preference is. This could be something that is put on paper, but what is the preference of the client? If it often might be the case worker that has an ongoing relationship with the client, so as to remain the main case worker, so that the client doesn't have to repel or recall their story several times, which could lead to more harm than it should be deserving. So how do we coordinate closely with the other case management team to ensure appropriate services are in place to respond to the risk they are exposed to? So for me, I think this is a perfect way of how we can coordinate with other actors. For the IRS Uganda, we are privileged in other areas of operation to have different services available within the organization. For example, when you talk about GBV, you talk about child protection, you talk about access to justice in terms of the legal MHVS. This is entirely within the organization as the IRS. So it is rather easy to coordinate and follow up. How have in other instances that could be challenges in such scenarios, and this could lead to issues around overlapping criteria for the mental health and social support. So in other instances, the perception that people have built, other people have built that protection case management is geared towards supporting perpetrators of violence, other than supporting the victim in this case. Next slide. So again, just like in the previous section, it still pre-reports protection case management at the center of different service intervention for the specialized and unspecialized. As already put previously, it's important for coordination. In this case, not only with other protection actors but other sectors which is key. And the areas of coordination still very importantly to note is around referrals, is around advocacy, is around inclusion, but also you can build further issues around research and documentation. We talked about innovative scalable pilots among others. If I have to pick one of the cases study in one of the settlements where we're working, we received this client who entered Uganda through the Democratic Republic of Congo, but way back in his home during his time to run away from the situation or insecurity that was in the country. He got shot and later his legs, these two legs, I got amputated. So he reached Uganda and he didn't have legs so he would be carried and all that. Having been relocated to the settlement, given a proper way to live and a temporary house to start living, he could keep on crying, crying, crying, feeling as if he has become so useless to the world. He had nothing now to mean to him to be alive in the world. Way back in his country was a tailor, he could no longer do anything to find for himself and a few other family members he had moved with. So in such a situation that our team were able to identify, we started to engage slowly with other sectors, for in this case the health team at first to be able to see how this gentleman can be supported. Medical assessments conducted and eventually was recommended for an artificial limb, which was eventually brought to him, but to ensure that his life continued as any other human being. We thought it would be important to link him to the livelihood sector to see how he can further his life along these areas. And I must really also say that with the livelihood partner and sector in the settlement, around his needs was if he could be given a tailor machine, because he was a tailor back in his country. This was eventually issued to him. He started his stall around his home and people started bringing their different clothes around his home. And so we see that there has been a transition sort of with this coordination with health sector with livelihood to ensure that this gentleman continue to live a meaningful life. And this has helped so much so that even if I are a CEO and other sector leaves, the settlement to God will still be able to see all this gentleman continue to fend for himself and the family. So there's that self reliance for that. So, ladies and gentlemen, this is what I had for you. Thank you and over to Johanna. Thank you so much Dennis. I think it's fantastic that you brought in at the very end linking with other sectors and really working together as a humanitarian community. And on that note, I would like to pass it over to Henry. Yeah, can you hear me? I can hear you. Okay, merci Anna. Je vais parler en français, donc ça va changer un peu l'oreille de la présentation. Je suis Henri, je travaille pour UN mine action service, une masse. Je suis conseillé en opération et plus spécialement pour les opérations d'assistance aux victimes, qui est l'un des cinq piliers de l'action contre les mines. Je vous remercie tout d'abord d'avoir associé le secteur de l'action contre les mines à cet événement à ce webinar. Et je vous remercie de me donner l'opportunité de présenter ce qu'une masse développe ces jours, ces mois derniers et notamment dans le cadre de la protection. Comme vous le savez, les acteurs de l'action contre les mines interviennent dans des environnements où il y a de la violence armée, des victimes de cette violence armée et des risques de protection aiguë. Personnellement, je conseille les programmes de Syrie, du Nord-Est, du Nigeria et tout récemment d'Afghanistan. Dans tous ces contextes-là, nous devons faire face à des populations qui sont confrontées quotidiennement aux explosions d'engin explosifs, des mines, engin explosifs improvisés et autres explosions en anglais. J'ai une expérience d'ergothérapeute, opupational therapist en anglais. Je suis spécialisé dans la prise en charge des blessés et des personnes handicapées. Le lien est assez logique entre l'assistance aux victimes et le handicap. Et dans le domaine de l'action contre les mines, les victimes directes d'accidents d'engin explosifs bien souvent développent des handicaps qu'ils vont garder toute leur vie. Les acteurs de l'action contre les mines n'ont pas vocation à être des acteurs de case management. Les activités principales de l'action contre les mines sont l'éducation en risque, sont la clearance, le déminage, l'advocacy, la gestion de stock de munitions et puis l'assistance aux victimes. Mais les standards qui existent aujourd'hui et qui sont de plus en plus développés, limitent l'action des acteurs de l'action contre les mines à de l'identification de victimes, de l'orientation et de l'information. Si possible, on pourrait aller jusqu'au référol, au référencement mais cela nécessite des formations particulières pour les équipes de terrain. Je vous donne un exemple, tout récemment a été édité la première version de l'International Mine Action Standards pour l'assistance aux victimes au mois d'octobre de cette année. Donc vraiment tout récemment et ça donne un cadre aux acteurs de l'action contre les mines qui va au-delà de juste identifier les victimes. C'est une problématique qui a été soulevée par de nombreux acteurs à savoir que les équipes de liaison, de communauté et les équipes d'éducation au risque se rendaient dans des communautés pour certaines activités, identifiées des victimes, collectées des données et s'arrêter là. Les acteurs d'action contre les mines sont des acteurs de protection et donc ils ont une responsabilité qui est au-delà de collecter de la données, au moins d'informer sur les services disponibles et accessibles autour des victimes et d'autres personnes qui ont des besoins similaires. Il a donc été introduit dans les standards d'éducation au risque et de victimes assistance, une notion de référol, d'orientation et de mapping de services de manière à ce que les acteurs de l'action contre les mines jouent ce rôle de première étape dans le case management qui va être d'identifier et d'orienter vers le bon service. Aujourd'hui, cela nécessite des ressources additionnelles puisqu'il faut former les équipes de terrain. Il faut aussi développer de la coordination, comme Denis le précisait très justement, avec les autres secteurs, que ce soit la santé, que ce soit la protection, mais aussi la livelihood, wash, etc. Donc il y a tout un travail de coordination et d'intersectorialité qui est menée par le secteur action contre les mines aujourd'hui sur ces différents terrains. Donc vous, acteurs de protection entendrez de plus en plus parler des acteurs de l'action contre les mines dans l'identification mais aussi l'orientation et le référencement de victimes et d'autres personnes qui ont des besoins similaires. Et je voulais juste préciser également dans le cadre des frameworks, des cadres dans lesquels l'assistance aux victimes est développée par le secteur de l'action contre les mines qu'on s'appuie également sur des cadres plus larges de respect des droits humains et notamment la convention sur les droits des personnes handicapées. Et on va suivre des guidelines qui sont aussi, par exemple, l'inclusion des personnes handicapées dans la réponse humanitaire. Les guidelines YASC, qui sont assez récents également. Et puis aussi pour certains pays qui sont state parties des conventions liées à l'interdiction des mines, à l'interdiction des cluster munitions, ou à l'interdiction d'autres certaines armes conventionnelles. Donc l'assistance aux victimes prend aussi son empreinte dans toutes ces obligations légales que les gouvernements doivent mettre en œuvre. Et le secteur de l'action contre les mines vient appuyer aussi d'autres initiatives dans ce sens qui contribuent au case management. Next slide please. I think we will jump to the other one directly next slide please. Can we go to the next slide? Je vais vous donner, vous parlez maintenant brièvement de deux exemples. Can we move to the next slide please? Example from Syria. Je vais juste vous introduire un exemple, deux exemples, un exemple de Syrie, un exemple du Nigeria. En Syrie, on a créé avec le soutien du cluster protection, un working group, Victim Assistance Working Group, un groupe de travail donc pour l'assistance aux victimes dans lequel on a rassemblé différents acteurs de différents secteurs qui s'intéressent à la situation des personnes blessées, à la situation des personnes handicapées, y compris les victimes d'engin explosifs. Pourquoi on a décidé de monter ce working group? Vous me direz, c'est un working group supplémentaire, encore un. Il a été identifié la nécessité de faire un mapping des services qui pouvait recevoir les personnes handicapées car ça n'existait pas en Syrie et c'était absolument nécessaire de se pencher sur cette thématique là. Le Victim Assistance Working Group a aidé et a coordonné la création d'un mapping des services avec un dashboard qui est en ligne et accessible pour tous les acteurs. Ce qui permet aux acteurs, notamment de l'action contre les mines, d'avoir des informations sur les services existants et vers lesquels ils peuvent orienter et référer les victimes. Can we move to the last slide for Nigeria? Au Nigeria, on a déployé des équipes car nous avions une image très cloisonnée et très parcellaire de la situation des victimes et c'est encore le cas aujourd'hui. Donc il a été décidé de faire une étude sur la situation des victimes d'engin explosifs et pour cela nous avons déployé des équipes spécifiques qui vont déterminer le profil des victimes, qui vont identifier les barrières d'accès aux services, qui vont consulter avec les survivants et les personnes avec des besoins similaires et qui vont aussi établir un mapping des services. Vous voyez par ces exemples très concrets de ce qu'une masse fait sur le terrain, on voit le lien qui se fait avec ce que présentait de nits précédemment l'intersectorialité et la nécessité d'identifier, de faire des analyses de barrières aux services et pour pouvoir correctement orienter les victimes vers les services dont ils ont besoin. Je vous remercie de votre attention. Thank you so much. We have a great question that is on self-reliance, but I will ask you that after Carolina. So Carolina, I pass it off to you. Yes, thank you very much. Anna and apologies if I need to keep my cameras off. Just the connection here in Santa is pretty weak. So in my presentation, I do not know if you want to just share the main slide. Is it possible to share the slides on its, I think it's challenges and opportunity. The slide should be right after honorees. Julie is just pulling it up now. It's just one main slide with challenges and opportunities. And I'm going to briefly talk about digitalization, program cycle management and complexity. So these are some of the key challenges that we have identified when we talk about implementation of case management programming. Starting from digitalization, we want to speak a little bit about its challenges around the paper based systems and having proper organizations ensuring that protection protocols are in place and followed and possible opportunities or solutions. For example, moving towards having online protection information management platform. What we talk about case management is a form of protection assistance. We are talking about being presence within the affected communities. And there is a large number and there is a large growing number of protection actors on the ground, gathering different information and analyzing protection information. So we see a need to have a common understanding of mainly primary concept of protection information management, which should be particularly important for the protection community. So understanding the protection information management concepts within the humanitarian community should facilitate the targeted use of protection resources as well as supporting us to coordinate the protection responses. If you think about prior to the pandemic, despite the myriad of operating challenges on the ground, including, for example, insecurity, access challenges, bureaucratic impediments, to mention just a few, most of the pre-COVID-19 protection work was conducted face to face, especially to promote and create safe environment, respecting privacy of those beneficiary who were assisted. However, the need to ensure infectious prevention and control following the onset of COVID-19 put an upper limit to movements. And most of the time also access to communities and individuals that required humanitarian aid. And almost overnight we have seen that the access to individuals and communities became extremely limited in many places. And these provided major pressures on protection partners' ability to conduct individual case management and other services. And with the reduced mobility, loss of face-to-face contact, there has been a push towards digitalizations, including of cage management, which is an activity that continues to be mostly paper-based and still rely heavily on paper-based data entry. And we know that the paperwork often requires a lot of time, a lot of coordination and ability from different organizations to respond to single-case might also be a challenge when, for example, systems among organizations are different. And so we see moving into having protection information management systems in places such as PIM represent an opportunity to mainly achieve better protection outcomes and also to increase collaborations between humanitarian actors to be able to provide a more effective response. So the overhauled objectives of having a protection information management system should be to provide quality information and data on protections of displaced individuals and groups in the different types and phases of an operation and of a situation and to do so in a safe, reliable and meaningful way. So we see information management as an opportunity not only to conduct case management activities, but also to use information that are collected to produce protection analysis, but also to enable evidence-based decision making and protection responses. So we see having to rely a lot on a paperwork paper-based work as a challenge for organizations, but moving towards digitalizations and establishing a strong information management system has a unique opportunity to put also the management of personal data at the center of case management activities programming. Moving into the program cycle management, I just want to speak a little bit how sometimes protection organizations having to design case management programming, they found themselves a little bit constrain having to follow grants that define the risks and cases predeterminately and what we see as an opportunity to basically keep a little bit more space to write grant broad enough to allow protection organizations to take cases based off risks and needs. Designing a case management program and usually prior to the design, it is really crucial to, for example, understand context, conducts protection analysis to identify protection risks among the populations, including persons who are at high risk of protection dilation, map resources, capacity services, also understand the extent of the availability and accessibility of the services to the populations and possibly conduct cost analysis. And this is because costs for case management can somehow be predicts, but my significantly vary because on the case individual needs and services that the case will need to access. So the whole value of material support, for example, accommodation, referral services can have a significant impact on the cost level. So in the case of case management, it is important to establish a robust staffing plan on the onset of the program to ensure that the staff resources are matched to the needs. So generating costs estimates from an office operating budget and expenses rather than individual donor reports can help to better capture the true resource cost. And based on these, with donor budgeting is sometimes like difficult to calculate fixed costs for implementing case management programming, especially when there is so much unknown about the case, for example, how much they will eventually cost, how long they will take the number of staffs to hire for cases and maybe challenges around them. So we see that there is a need to increase the awareness towards donor to allow flexibility in budgeting case management activities and programming, including for example, allowing for having flexible budget lines and promote cost efficiency analysis for case management to main improve results by making the cost of the organization providing case management services in a given setting during a given time. So of course specifying such costs and doing this analysis can be time consuming, but it's really important because we think that it provides lessons about the structure of the program inputs and can really have an important impact on how our case management programming and activities. One last challenge and opportunity that we have identified is related to the complexity mainly related to how risk based programming versus the needs is still relatively new to the humanitarian sector and with case management programming we need to acknowledge the complexities that we can have when coming across cases we might get and working together with the clients to support them to achieve their goals and despite also the various steps and follow ups that we might have to make that might take different time based on the needs of the case. Also the complexity around case management might rely on for example service providers that are available in our areas of intervention and service providers who may or may not take up a case and this sometimes can depend on the grants and the criteria and how we as protection organization implementing case management programming we are meant to find solutions despite all these different obstacles and opportunities that we see here are related for example to promotion of interagency case management which could lead to for example increasing the capacities for referrals by increasing the participation of agency providing different kind of services including not only protection agencies but also non-protection agencies working on for example integration on having joint training and developing for example joint learning events so here just some of the challenges and opportunities in a broad I would say spectrum so Hannah Hover to you thank you so much Carolina that was really wonderful so we're a little bit behind on time but I want to pass over to Emily who's going to talk to us about the next steps we'll have time for a couple of questions and answers and then we'll close Emily over to you thanks so much so I'll be trying to be super quick this is definitely something we would like to pilot and so if you're interested in learning more and I mean I sent through the guidance in the chat but we can also send it through afterwards and you would like to pilot please do get in touch with Hannah or myself we're very interested to see how it goes for you one of the things we would like to do moving forward when we sort of learn and grow with this guidance is have more systematic engagement with national partners as well as with the reference group we did not have any national partners on on the reference group which is a real failing on our part but we're hoping to over the next iterations and as we learn to be able to have that engagement more systematically and then lastly as you I'm sure many of you know GBV and CP have their own information management does not have an agreed upon information management system and that is definitely something that we think is a real need and we would love to see in the future okay I think that was quick and we can shift to a couple of questions before we close with BHA okay fantastic well just to say is that we know that there have been a lot of really fantastic questions coming out so I think I'm okay saying this we're going to try and put all of those into an FAQ and then we'll put that on to the website wherever the PowerPoint's going to be so people's questions are actually going to be answered but I think for a couple of minutes I have two questions one for Emily and one for Esther so I wanted to know if you could talk a little bit about someone that had asked about PSNs so potentially the framing around the case management guidance in terms of persons with heightened risk and then also the question about what happens with persons with special needs and then Emily following that you could speak a little bit about the how protection case management is connected to the protection analysis framework so Esther over to you okay I don't know if the person wants to ask exactly the question if we have time for this I've read it but I think it would be helpful I think it was about discrimination if we're not including person with specific needs so I'll try to answer but please feel free I am not saying that we are not serving persons with specific needs I was just trying to say that this is not the entry point for protection case management and that the major shift is to say we are supporting person at protection risk and we are also supporting victims of right violation if I go back to the example I was giving in the presentation in the example the woman was a widow she had epilepsy she was untreated and diagnosed so you had a lot of elements where you could actually say that woman might have specific needs might is very important but it seems she might have specific needs for protection case management in that example was the risk for her to be physically assaulted with her family because of witchcraft accusation okay so I'm not saying that through protection case management you wouldn't address the serious medical conditions or maybe the specific needs she might face but I was saying that as protection stakeholders the entry point is the risk of physical assault and this is the right violation or the violence we are trying to respond to and we are not just assuming that we are working with all widows or all people with serious medical conditions we are working with those people of course but if they are facing a risk or if they have been victim of the right violation of violence I hope this is clear and please feel free to ask if it wasn't clear so much Esther and yeah if that wasn't clear just put it into the chat and as I said we will put it into an FAQ that will create after the presentation Emily over to you great I'm super excited that the protection analytical framework was brought up so thank you for that question that's great it was actually they were developed or they were conceptualized at around the same time and a lot of the approach that is outlined in the path is actually in the protection case management guidance itself the whole shift around risk analysis is articulated together and we are actually working super closely with them the visuals don't match as much because that project has a lot of really amazing designers and our project was a little bit more excel based so it doesn't look the same but the theory behind it is the same and as we go through different iterations we hope to sort of match that up but the protection risk equation and that engagement is 100% included in all of the different components of protection case management both as Esther was talking about the importance of the contextual protection risk analysis as a way to inform our targeting criteria and as well as how we support each individual and the risks they face and their own strengths and capacities and their individual vulnerabilities so that balance is incorporated on those levels so thanks for that question Thanks so much Emily so now we have about two minutes left so I have the great pleasure to pass it off to our end speaker Laura humanitarian assistance. Laura over to you. Great. Hi everyone. Hi Hannah. Thank you. I'm really happy to be here to represent the U.S. government to provide a donor perspective but really just to be here to learn how this initiative will move forward. It's very timely. We like you all have been seeing a clear need to broaden our protection support. This really hit our radar in the Venezuela crisis response. It just keeps coming up for me personally and ones I've covered in Central America and Afghanistan. I was also thinking earlier today there was a session on preparedness for climate change protection needs that also I think really underscored the need for broader protection support, how it's always going to increase and we just need to be better prepared as a community. And this sinks well with several of the initiatives on our minds currently just in terms of our priorities for the coming year. From the U.S. government perspective, meeting these growing broader protection needs involves focusing attention and resources on supporting the people that are most often providing case management. And we've been looking very closely at the social worker workforce. So looking forward we're hoping to work across the nexus within our own agency to see if there are ways that we could support the growth of the social worker workforce in different contexts in different disaster affected areas. And to make good on that effort we also both we in the U.S. government and as a community must continue to generate and roll out resources like this that are fit for purpose and user friendly for the use of central staff that will be using them. It's challenging because we need to build on what's already there as a foundation yet also innovate and streamline to bridge gaps. I really also appreciated Caroline's point that we need to build flexibility into budgets and timelines in recognition that one size just does not fit all. All this was part of the logic behind their support for the child and adolescent survivors initiative which in a way similarly addressed this issue of adapting case management systems to better serve a specific group of clients. And as William said so beautifully earlier and as Esther, Dennis, Henri and Carolina demonstrated protection case management speaks to a significant part of our mandate yet we're still on a path to institutionalizing the approach and really scaling it to the great need. We often say among the USA protection team and also to our PRM counterparts that we really strive to support the whole community to build on what works and this session is such a strong example of how experts from so many specialties in different contexts can come together to do exactly that. So thanks again to the organizers and the presenters and all the participants and really a huge thank you to everyone who works on finding these tough solutions day in and day out. That's it, thanks Hannah. Thank you so much Lara. Well thank you everybody for taking the time out of your Friday and being with us today. We really appreciated to have this conversation into the session and we have our information on the screen here if you have any questions for Emily or I and yeah have a fantastic either end of your Friday or beginning of your Friday for those of us those of you who are in Latin America. Thank you.