 So welcome everybody. Good morning or afternoon. My name is Francesco Michele and I'm the strategic analysis and advocacy officer in the global protection cluster. And I've been coordinating the review of the protection analysis updates, protection risk analysis and so on and so forth. Today is the second webinar. We had the first webinar last Wednesday where we have been looking into the new guidance, the global program that we worked out the global protection cluster on the protection analysis update. So today the idea is to actually have a better focus on protection risks and specifically the definitions that we have been developing together with the global areas of responsibility. Again, please stop me at any time to ask questions if you have any doubts or you want to actually share some reflections also from operations. As you can see, we organized today's webinar in two parts. In the first part we're going to do a very quick refresher of last week's session. And then I'm going to provide a bit of an illustration of the protection risk definitions, the objectives and what are you going to find in the guidance. Then in the second part we're going to look at practicalities. So more on how to use the protection analysis update to show the protection and then a bit of examples from operation that already started applying the new guidance and start using the definitions. Please stop me at any time, even though we'll have a pause each once in a while but also after each session if you have specific questions. Before we start, is there any initial question or something that is not clear before we jump into the actual content of the webinar? Just give me some thumbs up if it's okay to start. Thank you. So let's have a look a bit of a couple of slides on the presentation we had last week on the guidance to situate ourselves for today's webinar. So last week we showed what the protection analysis update new guidance contains. So you can find all of it in the website of the Global Protection Cluster in the section of the protection analytical framework. The package includes two new formats for the protection analysis update, one standard and one brief. The logic is to have a much more flexible approach so you can start adapting the protection analysis update and more your needs in the operation and the efforts that we try to do is not just to develop the format but to develop a sample of an analysis. So it might not be perfect but the idea is to give you already something that can inspire the way the analysis should be shaped into the PAE. The second guidance is the what we call protection risk explanatory notes that contains the definition and a bit how to adapt those definitions to the protection analysis updates that goes together with a two-pager where we actually as we will explore today will link the protection risk analysis in the samples of the PAE with the protection analytical framework. Lastly, there is another tool that basically guides on the use of the format of the PAE and also provides a bit of indication to develop the content and how to include certain information and management graphs and other pieces. Today specifically we are going to look at these two so the protection risk explanatory note and the two tutorials, just for your reference and last week we actually dealt more into the first two. In the refresher let's look a bit on the changes that we introduced in 2023 when it comes to protection analysis and protection analysis update. First of all, two standards, two formats one standard, one brief, which is already a novelty and the second aspect is that they are limited in pages so we have been introducing some criteria for the publishing of the protection analysis updates and the maximum number of pages is one of them because from your actual experience in the last year and a half we have seen that can really help you focus the analysis. Then when it comes to protection risks we introduce the identification of maximum pipeline priority protection risks in the protection analysis update and they use an adaptation of the definition that we are going to actually look into today. The third area of changes in the formats is that now you have standard sections a bit more structured that can simplify actually the drafting of the protection analysis update. We introduce the publishing criteria specifically to ensure a bit of consistency and to ensure that the PAU are much more efficient when we want to use them for advocacy or for other purposes. One thing that is important is that as a global protection cluster we're going to publish all analysis you're going to develop in the operations but what we're going to discuss well together this year is if we want to publish them as protection analysis update so they have to just follow some criteria and use the language of protection risk or as another document. In the process the global protection cluster and regional focal point are now in charge to follow the processes with you and actually to discuss better strategically together. The overall change basically is let's try to be more strategic in the use and actually the planning of the PAU and one of the requests that we had last week was to try to plan the protection analysis updates that you foresee that you're going to work for 2023 so after you have seen the guidance so that can allow us the global protection cluster to provide you support but even in a specific session where you need them. Today again to focus on today we're going to look very specifically to these two parts so how to identify the five risks and the definitions but also we're going to look a bit on some aspects related to the publishing criteria. In the reflection from last week let's have a quick look to the core publishing criteria so there are several quality ones but those four is what we're going to use with you to decide together when and how to publish the PAU. The first nobody's going to check specifically but we really try to push for this year try to be as much consultative as we can in terms of accessibility and even beyond the sector if possible. What we introduced in terms of simplification was to ensure that the process at country level is a bit less cumbersome so it's a bit easier because there are much more standard elements much more structured approach. The other criteria relates to the risks as we say maximum five a bit of format requirement and then the introduction of a standard executive summary for the protection analysis date. Again today we're going to see the first two so many of the elements we're going to discuss today serve the purpose of those two criteria specifically. So again zooming back to the guidance itself everything that we're going to discuss today is included in these two documents the protection risk explanatory note and the tutorial where you're going to find the list of 15 protection risks which we are going to see today a bit of guidance on how to use them, adapt them for protection analysis update but also generally in the context. Then each definition what we try to do is to develop it as on one page so you can also use them independently if you need to publish one or to share just one of them with full support of any goal you might have then so you have also that possibility Lastly there is the tutorial on the protection analytical framework that we actually we are going to see today together and the refresher is that part I think it's finished I wanted just to provide you the basics we discussed last week and now we're going to move into the definition but before I move on let me pause a second if there is any question any other aspects that is not clear or remind me to actually explicate again otherwise just thumbs up if it's okay so when I see some of them I can continue thank you the definition so before entering in what the definition contains I wanted to give you a bit of a background of the history because I realized that sometimes you might be asked where those definition are coming from so the global protection cluster has a protection risks global trackers since March 2021 that was the original one and you use some several concepts that has been revised fully after the finalization of the protection analytical framework so the language included in the concept matrix of the protection analytical framework has been revised because that was already discussed and agreed very widely with protection partners including the ICRC or ICHR so the idea was to actually align the language with that exercise that was a consultative one and what we've been doing now that's what we're introducing we have been looking at the old methodology and we are revising it completely starting from the definition but also starting also developing criteria for severity the second elements from the background is that normally we use the protection risks tracker and all the information you develop on protection risk for the global protection updates that are published quarterly and they have become sort of the flagship documents for our advocacy communication is what our donors and specific actors come back to us to actually be engaged after the publication so we really use the protection risk and uphold the protection risk in the tracker and in the updates for engagement with donors the third element relates to what you know the protection analysis updates and all this exercise all the new guidance that we are rolling out now comes from a lessons learn exercise that we have been doing the last 3-4 months then look back at all the protection analysis updates that has been produced by operations since April 2021 to December 2022 we looked at around 45 to 50 protection analysis updates and most of the guidance actually come from practice that you in the operation has been actually developing for those updates what we change in the PAEU specifically for 2023 is a much more consistent approach on protection risks then sort of the major change and the goal what we are going to see now is to be much more systematic in advocacy to have a better language that can really support our efforts with humanitarian countries with humanitarian coordinators and so on and so forth the idea of working together on the protection risks and having a much more solid approach was discussed between the global protection cluster and the overall area of responsibility at global level with three core objective in mind one is to ensure consistency across us, across all the other responsibility and the protection cluster but also across the sector overall and then the main goal is to start using the analysis, showing the analysis to present a common voice a common position a common sector position because the protection sector is really wide we have many expertise between the areas of responsibility but also partners we do many many many types of actions so sometimes we are not able to show this unique approach so the idea is to use the protection risk for that purpose and of course the goal is to better engage externally with the federal dollars, duty barrier leadership but also internally by focusing a bit the approach on core outcomes on the risks and can help in actually looking better at our operations, the recommendation and etc for the use I'm repeating we use the global protection day, the PA use but also for advocacy messages brief, red boards and other briefing sometimes we have opportunities at global level and of course we are constant communication with you, the operation but sometimes we just use the analysis you produce automatically for certain engagement in the process because that might be another question that you have been asked how did we develop the definitions so we spend since October even September then there was initial steps of having two to three rounds of consultation feedback with working group with the global protection cluster but with all AOS since the very onset we even discussed what is the best way of presenting the definition what is the best way to develop the guidance even before starting developing the definition themselves one of the core aspects that we try to ensure as some of you have been involved is to test whatever we were developing together at global level with some operations so also together a reality check so whether we were going in a good direction or we were developing elements that might not be applicable so this just to give you some confidence when you are going to describe a bit partner constituency and other actor where the definition comes from now let's go into the standard definitions if there is any question of this first part please stop me because now we are going to move into the definition themselves so the standard definition of protection risk is what you have in the protection ethical framework which is that is written there a protection risk is the actual or potential exposure of the affected population to violence question and delivery deprivation in doing this exercise I mean also building on the lessons learned from the protection ethical framework we realize there are two elements that are quite complicated when it comes to information data monitoring or doing analysis which are the fact that definition includes both actual or potential which require two different approaches and and also it's difficult to present both elements at the same time but also it's a bit of a challenge I think as a sector we have been challenged sometimes because it's not being very strongly clear whether we refer to current risk to potential risks and so on and so forth the second element relates to violence question and delivery deprivation which are three concepts that also are very general the same and are not easy to be shown and to be reflected in monitoring and in the analysis so for this purpose in the guidance that you're going to find we introduce we of course we make always reference to the standard definition but we introduce a bit of an operational approach that we can use for the protection analysis starting this year the operational approach what looks into is let's focus first and foremost in our analysis to the current or the actual protection risk so what do we have in the in terms of information knowledge and data that can we can use to showcase what protection risk can impact the equation now then many of you are quite advanced so it's good to present an analysis also of what is coming or now what is the potential protection risks but we realize that let's start to solidify well our analysis on the current situation when we look at the current situation we develop these three elements for a definition they are the same one that we use for each single definitions that you're going to see the protection risk so basically we look at the protection when we look at the protection risks we look at the intensity and damage or harm resulting from a human activity or a product a human activity affecting of course either individuals or groups so for protection risk for us are not completely dependent on the amount of population involved but some protection risks are very severe even if they address very few groups of few or as more group of population there are two in this even we try to be quite concrete but still the concept of harm in protection is quite a broad concept because it includes both physical integrity material safety and violation of rights and at the same time human activity so which relates to the responsibility of the authorities the perpetrators or the actors that hold the responsibilities it's not an easy concept because sometimes it's due to purposeful action so some after they do on purpose those violation of those act that actually cause protection risks but sometimes might be what is called in normatively by omission so by not acting in to mitigate to stop they are actually not complying with their responsibility so these two elements is just to say that this require our analysis not just to use data so not just to use available data but also to use your knowledge expertise of the knowledge and expertise of our partner constituency local colleagues and so on because that's what helps clarifying what harm and other aspects right related to human activity so this is the first what is important about this you're going to see it in the guidance is just that the definition has been developed with these elements on in mind so they are trying to be a bit more operational and not to be an over encompassing definitions that can be used even beyond the set is there any question we're going to look into now the definition of what you're going to see into that so the standard definition that we developed are organized in three paragraphs now I'm going to tell you what you find inside but then we have been doing a parallel exercise with a colleague of OCHR in order to develop for each risk for each of the 15 risks certain element to reinforce our human rights engagement we realize that oftentimes it's a matter of language and concept and sometimes it's a matter of not understanding a bit how to use the analysis so the goal is to have an additional guidance that will guide us on how to engage with human rights as you can see we're still working on it and we plan if everything goes well to have it ready by the second quarter of 2023 in meanwhile we have the exercise with any of you needs specific human rights consideration please come back to us because we already have the work on going with OCHR the three paragraphs the first one describe very simply what acts, events, situations constitute the protection risk so what you can see are present the second looks a bit more on when we are going to analyze, identify, analyze and monitor those protection risks what factors we have to consider so one thing is the event and the situation that we can some of them are can be related to specific data but then there are some factors as we were discussing in the previous slide that might be reflected upon so here in the second part of each definition you're going to see a bit of an illustration of what factors you can take into consideration. Thirdly in the last paragraph of each definition you have an illustration of what data information can be used now we're going to see specifically in the details but we did this on purpose in order to maybe simplify the relation between the colleagues that actually draft the analysis and the colleagues from the information and management side so there can be an elements of connection whereby this initial illustration that we give can guide all your processes when you go and do protection risk analysis so I will not enter really in the full definition but I wanted to show you a bit of an example of what you might expect so here is the related to the risk of denial of resources and opportunities as you can see each paragraph basically it's more or less the same phrasing this protection risk includes and in this case acts that the prime preempt people to write full access to economic resource after learning the opportunities etc but then since some protection risks involve many different types of violations or threats what we did sometimes is to actually provide a clear definition of each of any elements so in this case the whole risk includes discrimination stigma denial of resources opportunities and denial of monetary access when that is happening you're going to have a definition of each single one of them when it comes to the second paragraph as you can see here the monitoring of this protection risk requires and then it provides an illustration of what is interesting to look at in order to monitor this protection risks and then what we try to do specific for some specific risks is to give you some elements on what to look at in situational market conflict or in situation of natural let's say so where there is no armed conflict because some potential risks have a different connotations and also mechanisms and so when it's when we manage given the short paragraph that we want to maintain we just gave an illustration of those two types of crisis and then lastly I think what is interesting in the last paragraph which definition is that we did an effort to provide an illustration of data and information from other sector not specifically the protection that can help us in actually developing the analysis so even in your engagement with other sector with other actors maybe this can help you out and be more focused because it's not easy to engage all actors all cluster and also from the lessons learned that we had sometimes you really need a buying of the other sector so here also can be an element that can help you out in the process of engaging other sector and other partners so to conclude on this side each definition is organized with this three paragraph and then there is the final list of definition which is this one in this list is many of you know it already because it's been used since last year but as you can see I highlighted some words in red and those are specific changes in language that we agreed upon with the areas of responsibilities either to align the protection of this with a specific concept terminology that is used by the areas of responsibility specifically or to align together with language that can really help us out in linking with other systems related to that specific dimension of risks so the work of consultation and drafting in terms of the results are revised list with revised terminology that is much more coherent across the sector but also the specific definition with the structure that I've been showing you so far so when it comes to definition this is the part I wanted to present so we did a process consultation you are going to have the list but you have also the definition and then for the second quarter we're going to work more on the human rights engagement side now we've analyzed the first part so I will make a pause and I would like to hear a bit from you if you have any question doubts or even challenges that you found in applying some of these or in general on protection risks so let me pause there and don't be shy please raise your hand or ask the question directly or in the chat thank you is anything clear so far in case just give me a thumbs up thank you very much Francesco, is this a definitive and closed list or is it a list that is subject to an opening thanks Jorge I'm not answering to Jorge Spanish and I'm going to translate it and Jorge asks if this list is closed or if it's open and it can be modified Jorge's idea is that at the moment it's closed and we're going to use it for 2023 and at the end of the year with your experience check and identify if you need to change things so for this year for the use of this year it will be checked at the end of the year I don't know if you have a good answer or if you need any other details the answer thank you Jorge for the question the list is closed now but one of the idea we had is let's start using it for 2023 and we're going to run a revision by the end of the year so the idea is that we learn from this experience so we could spend months in defining a list that is not coming from practice so let's start using it and we're going to collect lessons learning over the year in order to decide at the end of the year to revise it and so on and so forth thank you Jorge is there any other question or doubt on this part I'm just posing a bit more because the second part we're going to enter in a much more detailed presentation is it okay to continue can I ask some thumbs up again just to be sure because I don't see cameras thank you so in this second part we're going to look a bit of the theory and the process in the second part the idea is to look a bit on okay how do we do the protection analysis update and how we can actually go in practice so I will show you the format and how to play with the format and work with the format but also some examples on how to identify how to use data and information and how to prioritize protection risks so when you come to the protection analysis update this is for the colleagues that were there also in last weekend there is a section and there is a mistake it's not three pages it's six pages the maximum which is the section where to draft the narrative analysis protection risks the idea is to focus on the five most prominent protection risk in the period so try to use the list provided definitions now we're going to look at how to adapt them to the context and what we have seen from practice that work very well is to have the buy-in so to really do a collective process instead of defining ourselves but in doing a proactive process sometimes it is also a bit easier than what it seems specifically when there are categories or standards and so on so the goal is that the protection analysis update should use as a reference the 50th standard but the way you draft the protection analysis update you have full flexibility to adapt them to the context and for that we provided in the guidance some suggestions some hints in order to ensure that the language of risk is current even if you adapt them in the context the first element is when you draft the headaches of the risk try to avoid general formulation like all forms of violence that doesn't really help in clarifying what we're talking about so it's something more for the context so make sure that you are a bit more precise or even when we speak about house land and properties that doesn't help in understanding what are the particular risks the particular situation in terms of house land and property that we are trying to highlight so try to just avoid those general formulation and when you redraft or when you adapt consider that risk it's always related to a form of a violence coercion deprivation done by actors so try to qualify so use like language like force, denial impediment something that actually qualifies what is the role of I would say the possible perpetrator of the authorities of the responsible parties of that the third element is that there might be crisis where you are in there where the major crisis or the major issues in the monitoring crisis is something pertaining to another set food security is what comes to mind for instance that actually is dominating the old humanitarian narrative so it's a priority forever a sector is a specific priority for the old humanitarian action in those cases what we the guidance what you will see is suggest to actually highlight very well the risk or the risks that interrelate with that situation so if it's food security for instance introduce those risks that are provided by the driver although there is that it's a driver of food security or it's creating the cycle of food insecurity or what are the risks that actually are exacerbated or are increased in terms of impact due to food insecurity for instance if we speak about food security insecurity we did a similar exercise now with Somalia for instance where we have been looking into the risk of denial of social opportunity specifically for a marginalized group of food security and we actually focus the analysis on that the last point it relates with the first but it's even more provide even more general context so occupation ongoing violence and conflict and some of the colleagues here they know that in the context sometimes we use this language but try really to focus on what is the protection that is resulting from the general situation everything yes so far please stop me because now we one of the efforts that we try to do also in the guidance is to link and to try to give you some sense so now to use the protection analytical framework and the protection analysis update so the the the message is very simple the protection analytical framework should give you the logic so in presenting the risk let's follow the logic threats the effects of the threat and the capacity so even in the narrative and you will find it in the sample protection analysis update try to just use that narrative so start with the threats look at the effects that you are identifying using all that information available and then going into capacity an element that is fundamental is that the protection our protectionist analysis even when we use it it's stronger if we link up data information that shows driver causes and effects also of other sectors so that's just an invitation and that's just coming from the protection analytical frame so those are the two major elements that could inspire the protection analysis update now when you come to the protection analysis update itself the what we suggest is not to be mixed up in the format but use the format to better present the protection risks so use the context the protection risk section in the response to showcase all the analysis that you can do following the protection ethical framework if it's the case the part of the context it can actually fit in the context but what I mean here is that there is no need of doing a wide context analysis once you re-paradise the risk I think that document and provide a context analysis on your countries on your crisis there are many so we can really really really focus on either the geographic area or on specific situations that are important for us to highlight to show the impact of protection risks or the magnitude so even when we look at past occurrences or trends or if there are specific situation a political or economic level that are changing something in the situation of the population or even when we look at laws or cultural or social norms there is no need of describing all of them but just focus on the one that are important to keep an eye on that to understand the protection risk and that I'm going to present it afterwards in the section of protection risks the core analysis of the logic so trends effects and capacity it's the protection risk section so here is where you can really outline well the logic of it but then in the response section if you have seen from last webinar that it's been a bit of change in the format because you have very good dashboards on 4-5Ws on response on funding we have been realizing that those it's good to use autonomously and use the protection analysis update actually to reinforce what you have there so here there is no need of replicating the dashboard but only focusing on even qualitative aspect that you want to highlight on specific geographic areas on the challenges to our response capacity or situation that are specifically related to our response capacity to the sector response capacity sorry and can be of any kind so specific factors and so on so here again if you use as a reference the guiding question of protection ethical framework this can also guide you in understanding what we could actually highlight in the context session now what we try to do as well is to link in the protection ethical framework and the protection analysis update is to you're going to have a two-pager with the same analysis that you have in the format where we actually tag as you can see here in the example each paragraph to a section of the path what is the logic of this sometimes what you see that some of you are focused on the drafting of the narrative analysis and then we have the colleagues on the IM side a huge work to organize the data for us is not easy to actually have those matching so this document it's done on purpose to on one side see how to structure the analysis but also they can provide an indication to our IM colleagues on how to structure the data information for you I'm not going to read the whole example but I wanted to just do a quick drive through so when you go to the document it's easy for you to understand what is in there so as you can see here the example are coming from the sample of the PAU that you're going to see so in the first paragraph in order to illustrate the threats so the risk here is attacks attacks and violations so here we say according to the national system that is monitoring incidents or people who kill the injured and kidnapped these are the numbers and this is the trends or the variation according to the previous period a simple paragraph that is actually highlighted and then providing a bit the situation for the population in terms of demographic locations that can either focus on highlighted vulnerabilities why specific populations are extremely vulnerable not just that they're victim but why they have specific situations maybe they are displaced populations or they have particular conditions so there are certain groups that are much more vulnerable than others to certain situations and also a bit more of this aggregation if we don't have it for the whole country at least focusing on those areas where it's important to focus so even using the PAU to actually have a zoom in of a specific area and provide a good update when it comes to capacity we've seen that generally we have the tendency to show our 45W what we do but we did the analysis it's good also to start using even if it's qualitative and it's coming from the expertise of our partner our constituency of the AOR a bit of understanding first what is happening at local level what is actually mitigating the situation of risk so here you can see an example and what is good of the example is two elements one is that it focuses on just some areas so as you can see here to mitigate the violence in this four regions Ataipo, Tissura, Piru and Samsalia the governor and the sponsor of the protection response has been trying to do this in this case deploying peaceful coexistence committees but that also it qualifies unsuccessfully so it's to show sometimes you might also have data through this but sometimes it's just an issue okay our response is doing that but at local level there are these added mechanisms and maybe sometimes you can highlight the mechanism that are working well in one area to actually promote that in the recommendation that can be extended to other areas when you come to response so international humanitarian response beside the data and so on it's good sometimes here for instance in the example we introduce a trend that we have with some data so we have data and we show the trend but then here we are linking up with for instance the decision of the security council to renew the mandate of a specific UN in this case it's a fake one and then we qualify it's how this actually is impacting the risk okay so as you can see we might have positive effect on the level of violence so sometimes we might not have the hot data to showcase but I think as a protection sector and protection department we have a good understanding and we can use the PAU to showcase that so using more qualitative side of the data and information as well lastly even when it comes to capacity it's good to focus on what protection and ethical framework or deterrence so elements that actually are having an impact in the terrain the perpetrators or to actually put a stop or mitigate the risks so in this case again in the sample we introduce an improvement that we have seen with some data and then we say however this improvement is not expected for the next semester since and there is a situation in this specific sample for instance is the application of a new law so we introduce the law we introduce some numbers and some improvement that the law introduces but that in our analysis for the period we can't qualify we don't see the application of this law on the ground in changing the impact for the violation now or we don't see unless this and this happen so this was just an idea to showcase to you a bit on the narrative of the analysis how to analyze it so it is the only goal is that not to completely copy paste this one so you are full freedom of developing the analysis that makes that is relevant to you but maybe using the rational of the path and of logic and I think these elements can help you out to simplify even the engagement of other actors when you go and draft the protection analysis update now in the next slide I wanted to show you how to generalize section but again as usual let me pose for one second if there is any question or doubts on this part it was a quick thumbs up round again I'm sure that I'm not going too fast or I'm being clear thank you so when it comes to the protection analysis update the old document you can really use flexibly the old document to present your analysis so not just the protection of this section you know so don't be scared about the limitation in pages because you have first the executive summary where we provide the list of the identified protection risk and here the goal is really just to provide the list reason being because by seeing the list then people is invited to go and look at the analysis so not provide and if we introduce some elements here some of them I stopped just on the first page so this is to invite them to read actually the protection of this section then the context and then let me share with you some experiences of some operations is it's a section where not only we can introduce context element but also if for instance instead of prioritizing five risks in your discussion with the constituency the you are you prioritize seven and you don't have and we have to leave it on the five on the protection risk section you can use the context to introduce some risks because some risk is normally interrelated so they wonder much more contextual you can use also the context session to describe part of the list that you've identified I'll make you an example which is related again for instance to the interrelation between sometimes attacks and displacement you might have a need or an interest even for the narrative that you have in the country to maybe present displacement or the elements of displacement as a risk because for you it's a fundamental risk then you could instead of introducing also the risk of attacks you can explain with data information and so on all the situation of attacks in the context section acting as a driver or one of the protectionist that you have been identifying in this case this place it can be even the other way around for you it's extremely important to put the focus on the attacks because it's extremely relevant in your engagement with humanitarian country team and humanitarian community but maybe the displacement situation is a general driver for many of the risks so you could introduce the old data on general displacement and study the context section so it's really flexible and adaptable to the way you want to present the narrative in terms of analysis then when it comes to response we already discussed that a bit try to use that section not to present just data on response but to qualify those elements that are good to understand elements of capacity that are missing so since they are missing the risk are impacting much more the population or maybe some capacity sometimes are positive in this and this region we have this capacity and actually we are able to have a better situation or a better response or a better mitigation because then can reinforce the recommendations because the recommendation might also be what we are already doing in one area so we are able to have a better solution to extending to other areas for instance and when it comes to recommendations section this is the structure it's a bit strict so to present recommendation by risks and that is that has two general goal of saying one is again it makes your narrative stronger because you are presenting analysis and a recommendation to address that and also it shows the only approach that we have as a sector so all the AOR responses all the partners, actors that you have in your constituency we showed all our recommendations to a specific risks so not a specific area of response only and that can even be used more with the humanitarian community for follow up with other sectors as well for follow up on the recommendation again the idea of this part was to share the message with everyone not to be scared about the format but try to use all the elements of the format so you have wide and ample flexibility to really shape the analysis at the best you want so the idea of the categories are just for as a sector to organize a better our general systematic approach but when it comes to the shaping of the protection analysis update you have a format that serves your purposes and not the other way around so don't try just to fix just use the fixed elements but then the narrative you can really shape in different ways to present your protection risk analysis before I tell you to practice from operation any I will pose again for a quick round of reflection again if you have any or maybe the colleagues that already tried some of these if you have any comment reflection challenge maybe I can share with my experience because we already use this format for our bow that was published on January on the end it was I feel like it was a bit challenging just to identify five main protection risks considering the situation in Venezuela and also at the same time double think okay what has been going on what's recent what's new regarding this risks so that was a bit challenging and also considering sorry this is an open and safe place but also what to say I want not to say because that's very delicate when you have relations relations with the government etc so it was smooth the experience of having this 15 protection risk and seeing what applies what doesn't apply but at the same time I felt okay I need more than five you know maybe also I needed more guidance on how to mention this sub protection risks let's say not make them eight but choose main five and leave the other three in a different context as to protection risks so I don't know if you can give us guidance on how to allocate this sub protection risks better yeah other than that I feel like it was this format was way more structured and gave me more guidance and actually like knowing okay this is what I need to include this is not that relevant and avoiding like very big context analysis that are extremely wide in the previous one we were mentioning things that already happened the year before so this year was a bit more practical so it was really smooth and a nice experience except the fact of actually choosing the five protection risks thank you keeper no let's go to here and I'm going to present an example on how to go about choosing the prioritization so after the example maybe Kimberly you can come back to see whether the example might be useful for your specific situation no and we know that it's going to be challenging to identify priority protection risks and I've been following several operations some of them has been quite straightforward actually the idea of actually prioritizing has been helpful because it helped my partner to get together and also with the AOS in some other it's been challenging so the two general message and now we're going to look at a couple of example are use the different power formats to to have a narrative all along the years so if for instance the PAU you publish now you focus on five maybe you can publish a brief protection analysis update which is maximum six pages and it's easy to be developed to put a focus on another one or to focus in two months on one risk that you involve in the five so you can play along with the PAU and that was one of the goal of having the two formats so they can the brief one you can use it for zooming in in one specific risk or or so on and so forth and and then as we're going to see the example the other suggestion that we have is that even if we we shape just five don't focus on the only prioritized five okay so now the joint session should not be here only to prioritize five but to have a broader prioritization because as we're going to see in the example maybe under one risk you can present two situations you know so the idea of putting them as just priority is not to hide others but to show more the correlations so if you have again attacks and displacement maybe they can be put together in the narrative so the risk is attacks but then you really focus on the displacement effects and so on and so forth we realize that it's not so much about what we put in the top priority but it's the analysis that is strong so I know that I'm not providing an answer thanks for that but maybe after we see the example maybe we can go back to see to have a bit of your reflection if it's okay and thank you for the intervention is there any other reflection? I know that many of it will come from practice but just let me know if there are some elements that are not fully clear okay let me go to then showcasing the example and then we can pause after each example just to give a bit of your perspective on how do you see them so again is that example so there are no guidance suggesting on how to go about just example of practice from actually some of you and some operations and in one of the actually in a couple of operations the way they went about them is the first is a general comment you already have know you already have all the information data and knowledge so it's not that the protection of this should push you to re-change completely the only fact that changes is that sometimes you have analysis or we have analysis or data and so on that we frame just for example in some context concern issues needs violations or a part of our protection strategy so what is important to reflect we know normally the context but maybe it's not phrases of protection risks so what I've been doing in this specific example is that they took the old list of concern problems that has been identified by protection sector either in the strategy documents they looked into the 15 standard risks and what they've been trying to do is to see how to what I don't know the several points interrelated with the risks I was in one of those exercises and the initial list are green problems it was around 22 problematics and then in the exercise they managed actually to organize them under top risks so the idea is sort of rationalizing something that you already have under you know one let's say that which is the core impact of many problematic or it can be the main trial then what is important after that what has been done is that maybe the language of the risk as it is is not helpful or maybe as Kimberly saying cannot be using the chemistry so of course then you can redraft or adapt the language of the risks according to what you need in the country so it might be several elements about that but let's look concretely with an example so this is coming from an operation that actually tried to do the exercise so what they must clear in the operation is that these elements is what they have been advocating for so safety and security there are ongoing attacks and general violations of human rights constantly based almost on all territory then specifically the area where there are displaced displaced population and the majority of the attacks there is a constant violation of the civilian humanitarian character of sites putting at risk the population then there is a widespread contamination of explosive warrants and then there are almost all violations of protection so almost all six core type of violations as a general problematics they look at the risks and they identify among different risks that they want to be put on upfront in the attacks on civilians and other unlawful killings so decided not to even put it in the context but to put it as a risk because it was fundamental for them to put the accent on that risk as something that actually is impacting the overboard all the population then if we look at the aspects of all they realize that during the joint session in the reflection with partners, with DAO and with colleagues that attacks and these regards of human rights are the major threat so are the core violation that actually is causing or reserving an effect of many other aspects in terms of effects they realize that explosive warrants contamination is a specific effect specifically to something where there has been attacks in the latest period of ongoing attacks so we cannot do the mining action or we cannot do activities so the risk is still higher in those areas and as well related to the non-respective sites and civilians let alone injuries and death and so on and so forth so as you realize what before was presented as different elements in the risk has been used for the narrative so the attacks and with data information and the attacks and then the data on the explosive warrants contamination that's related to actually exacerbating the impact on a certain area of attacks and also the part of the non-respective sites and the humanitarian character of sites when it comes to child protection that has been streamlined in the narrative because some elements of child protection were effects so for instance the association of children with armed groups so that was something that was put as in the narrative with the right effects capacity and so on but in the logic specifically in the area where there is an increase of attacks and increased presence of armed groups there was an increase of association of children with armed forces but then the old data on child separation was presented as actually it was a coping capacity for this certain area because family was sending away children to protect them from the attacks and from the audience in security and safety in just two or three regions so for a specific update has been shown that there is an increase of child separation as a sort of coping capacity but still showing why all the elements interrelate when they did these exercises and they have been looking into how to link up all the elements they realized that the wording on the risk was not fully appropriate so then the language as leaving attacks on civilians but putting the accent so a focus on this regarding the humanitarian character of sides because that is something that was extremely relevant in terms of advocacy in general even for the humanitarian coordinator so it was fundamental to link it up and also to showcase all the factors that are important for that risk let me stop here, Kimberly this is one of the examples I was mentioning you know if maybe you did something similar or this is not applicable in Venezuela or it's not even an answer to the challenge you have but if you have any reflection would be great yes, thank you Francesca it really helped, yeah, I definitely saw it clear thank you and I basically with it is something very similar also ah, okay yeah, yeah, I start to reinvent the world try to really think better all the things interrelate and I mean in the film as you and we normally do this the problem is that when we present the analysis we have different ways of presenting so the idea is to really use the risk more as a reflection and strategic exercise for us so use the definition just for that purpose to simplify a bit the processes any question or doubts before I go to the next example so the next example again is an example so don't take it as a specific guidance but again this is practiced from some operations in this example specifically they have been looking into how to use the protection risk and the path to organize data information so the first thing what they've been trying to do is to use the categories of the protection analytical framework so penis appeal and so on to do a joint analysis a joint session with the partner of the cluster in order to just assessing what information is needed, where the information is and what can be the sources but in correspondence to threats, effects and capacity and the subcategories so that really guide them in rationalizing how to use different type of information then the second sorry I'm losing the presentation the second exercise they've been doing is to revise the dashboard they were using to showcase the data in this case specifically for the protection monitoring so instead of presenting a dashboard with all the data protection monitoring maybe organized by the section of the questionnaire or by other section they are organizing the presentation along the categories of the path so threats, vulnerability capacity and subcategories so that helped in having all the actors that were contributing to analysis actually looking at the data with the same logic so now with the logic of their own area of responsibility but more the logic on the sequence of threats, effects and capacities and that streamline was made a bit simpler the drafting of the protection analysis update the major change being in the first protection analysis update they divide in the section and they are specific area of responsibility and specific partner just to drag those sections after this exercise they've been drafting the protection analysis update much, much more simpler because there was a short agreement on the data to be used and then all that you have in your partner contributed to the different sections to show you to be very simply visually one of the part of the exercise they've been doing these are specific section of the protection monitoring they have in place so on the house of demographic vulnerability, displacement history intentional return condition and safety and they have been basically mapping them out on the question the data presented in the questioner what type of area of the path was contributing to so and we will see another example in the next slide should only look at this so as you can see here in the middle column you have specific question of the protection monitoring so for instance if this place what was the cause of your displacement if the household intends to move why does your household wants to move and then they have a certain set of options for safety and so on and so forth so what they've been doing is to reflect internally which data of the protection monitoring can help in understanding the risk or the different part of the risk as the definition we've seen so which data can help in understanding the intensity and damage which data can be helpful in understanding the relation with perpetrators and authorities and also if the threat is affecting specific groups or the whole area and so on and so forth and then the table you've seen before they use the question the questioner organized by the path just to organize the data information so take this as a with a grain of salt but it was an exercise they tried to do so not to actually have this long long long long long process of consultation and discussion what should go into the analysis but starting already from pulling together some data but organized already the logic that has been used for the protection risk in the PA use let me pause again for a minute is there anything that sounds familiar or you've been doing something similar again to come back to you a bit so let me go to the last example the prioritization again I think it relates a lot with your comments but this is another example so the way they've been doing in another operation is to of course you look at the analysis they already have and first internally so cluster coordinator co-coordinator and a small group without opening for a wide consultation and they start to draft a broader list more or less with the first like the first example so a broad list on all those risks and all everything they already had and discuss with partners and you also can fit in those lists exactly as the first example then they did a small consultation specifically with those you are or those partners that have been already engaged in the analysis so specific after a small group that has actually been contributing very actively to the analysis just to have a sense checking and revised and the list and so on and after that they've been organizing joint analysis sessions either sub-national or national to actually bring together the initial risk identified and how do they interrelate with what was already discussed in past exercises and do a workshop type of exercise where to prioritize a broad list so the prioritization we don't focus on your file but focus on more than five so six, seven, eight so when they went back to draft the protectionized update they tried to actually draft everything to reflect the seven and the eight risks but included in the file in the section of the protectionist the core file and then using the other risks either to draft a bit better the context or to interrelate to as we have been discussing so far on the different risks again using the logic of the path so this is another way of going about it in order to have a covers on long process of agreeing or disagreeing on what to include in the analysis because even if the professional risk definition might be a bit new you already have ongoing processes and discussion with the partner at least is the experience of what we have seen in following some of the operations that's it on that side so you can see that can be used very flexibly so even in the use of the language and so on and the way you can use it the goal of today's session was to give you a bit more of confidence to you in the way you are going to engage partners say URs and so on so the two core messages is that first of all we work together with the global URs but the other is that there is really an effort everywhere in the old guidance and in the new formats to reflect everything we do so there is no even if we are trying to be more structured but again to be a bit of flexibility on my side let me pause there and it would be good to have a bit of sense checking if there is anything that is not clear you want to me go back to or all is clear so far thank you there is no I understand that why we are going to start and applying them probably the question we will research we are absolutely available all the time and then in the closure I will tell you the next steps a bit on our side but again the goal of the definition and to go about protection risk is let's try to get it to be more focused on protection risks don't be stopped if you have any challenge let's discuss together because we can have a process the idea is not to do everything perfect now but we realize that we need a year to adapt and to understand different situations I hope it was clear so far if there is no other question maybe the Spanish colleagues you want me to clarify something in Spanish if everything was clear since everything was clear thank you Lina thank you we have 15 minutes to the time so let me take advantage to show you one quick thing and then we can close the webinar I just wanted to just do a refresher on what do we do at the global protection cluster level when we work with the protectionist update and we do all these work on protection risks whenever you develop a protectionist update we publish in the week or even in the day in social websites and so on we have many lists of donors and partners that are fighting call I don't want to say numbers but at least more than 600 core targets but then what is important is that I want to just to inform you that we have different processes of global protection with the global protection cluster in terms of advocacy engagement sometimes it's our global protection cluster that has specific engagement with donor members states and we really have to use your protectionist updates so these are concrete examples we have been developing we have been drafting briefing and private letter to donors of course many times it's in combination with you and coordination with you but sometimes when there are urgent situations that you have to provide a briefing we use the the protectionist update we wrote private letters to ambassador or to member state members and also some state when in position for example that sometimes didn't require a engagement and work with you so we really use what you already had we just work on them drafting them and of course we have a sense checking with you before publishing and that's the goal on being much more focused on protectionist because we want to reinforce the overall approach with the goal of actually enforcing your advocacy and that's it on my end and I wanted to invite you to the next webinar it's going to be around the third week of April the goal is to have a session where you are actually telling us challenging lessons learning practice of these next month and a half so it's not going to be a presentation but more a session where we are going to be there to address a bit challenging and also understanding if we have to change course of some of the guidance so please try to dig into the guidance come back to me or to Alza if you have any questions or doubts we are going to share both the recording and the guidance you already received and I'm going to give you my email in the chat lastly if beside the webinar if you need to have specific session on specific elements also we are available so the idea was to do these two webinars to give you a bit more of confidence but then we realize that if you need specific moments we are there to organize them together so on my side it's all if there is any last reflection comments just to clarify I heard well it will be on the third week of April yeah it should be around the third week of April I have to go back to dates I don't remember the dates exactly also wanted to mention that I'm not receiving the emails directly to my email I don't know sorry for the side note on this but I can leave you my email on the chat so I could be added and my coordinator doesn't need to be forward I need this webinar or if you ask no I have your email so no worries I will follow up on that thank you Kimberly anyways I left it on the chat thanks very much it was very helpful pleasure thank you Connie again we just don't hand up here so if you need anything I will this is my email I will put it in the chat and very much thank you for participating and taking time to be in this webinar and have a great rest of the week