[
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on the active participation of affected populations, including vulnerable or
marginalized groups, in the planning and implementation of recovery, peacebuilding, and resilience programs. The
evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made efforts to address the needs of migrants, returnees, and community
members through various interventions, including economic, social, and psychosocial support. Community
participation surveys indicate that a significant majority of respondents believed that the community projects
addressed their needs and those of returnees. However, there were also instances where needs assessments were not
conducted directly with community members, and some returnees felt that the economic support was insufficient or
not tailored to their skills. Furthermore, gaps were identified in the post-return psychosocial support. While the
program achieved some success in engaging affected populations, there is room for improvement in ensuring their
active participation in the planning and implementation phases and addressing the identified gaps.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='The confidence level is high because there is substantial evidence from desk research,
interviews, focus group discussions, and surveys that directly addresses the theme. The evidence highlights both
the successes and shortcomings of the JI-HoA program in engaging affected populations in recovery and reintegration
efforts. The community participation survey provides quantitative data on the perceived relevance of the projects,
while qualitative data from interviews and FGDs offer insights into the challenges and areas for improvement.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- Community participation survey results indicating that 95% of
community members agreed that the projects addressed community needs, and 92% agreed that the projects addressed
the needs of returnees.\n- Focus group discussions highlighting the importance of economic assistance for returnees
but also pointing out the insufficiency of the support in some cases.\n- Identification of gaps in post-return
psychosocial support.\n- Instances where needs assessments were not conducted directly with community members.',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- Insufficient active participation of affected populations in the
planning and implementation phases of the programs.\n- Inadequate tailoring of economic support to the skills and
local context of returnees.\n- Gaps in post-return psychosocial support and integration of MHPSS into program
documents.\n- Needs assessments not always conducted directly with community members.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2b11'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program has made contributions towards governments'
capacity to address inequalities and socio-economic drivers of migration, particularly through capacity building
activities, data collection and research, and community-based reintegration projects. However, the evidence also
highlights challenges such as political priorities, staff turnover, and the broader socio-economic context
hindering the full realization of this capacity. The program has supported the development of tools and strategies,
but sustainability remains a concern.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='I am moderately confident in this assessment. The evidence clearly indicates efforts to
build governmental capacity, but also acknowledges significant limitations and the need for continued support. The
program has laid a foundation, but the extent to which governments can independently address these issues remains
uncertain.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- JI-HoA addressed the gap of limited frameworks or mechanisms for
migration through capacity building activities and tools.\n- Efforts regarding migration data were of particular
relevance and importance to the stakeholders.\n- Community-based reintegration projects were helpful in creating
business and employment opportunities.\n- The Regional Data Hub enhanced knowledge on migration, harmonizing
methodologies and indicators, and building capacities for data collection and management.\n- The evaluation found
that the community-level approach to reintegration has been crucial for the achievements of the JI-HoA.',
gaps_identified='Gaps include a lack of concrete examples demonstrating sustained governmental action
independent of external support, and a more detailed analysis of the specific types of inequalities addressed and
their impact on migration drivers. Further information on the long-term impact of capacity-building initiatives and
the integration of return and reintegration into policy documents and development plans would strengthen the
assessment.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3c11'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The theme focuses on improving the knowledge, skills, and resources of government and civil society
stakeholders to protect vulnerable migrants and apply a survivor-centered, gender-sensitive, human-rights based
approach. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program addressed gaps in government capacity through capacity
building activities and tools. It also highlights the importance of the program's efforts regarding migration data.
The program also addressed the needs of national stakeholders through local capacity building activities. The
program also provided direct support to migrants in distress and built the capacities of key stakeholders involved
in the process. The evaluation also found that the community-level approach to reintegration has been crucial for
the achievements of the JI-HoA. The work of the Regional Data Hub was highly appreciated by stakeholders and the
activities of the hub were effective in enhancing knowledge on migration, harmonizing methodologies and indicators,
and building capacities for data collection and management. However, the evaluation also found that governments and
stakeholders do not have the capacity to continue this work independently. Therefore, the theme is partially
covered.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='The confidence level is high because there is direct evidence from multiple sections of
the report that supports the conclusion that the JI-HoA program improved the knowledge, skills, and resources of
government and civil society stakeholders to protect vulnerable migrants. The evidence includes specific examples
of capacity building activities, data collection efforts, and support for reintegration. However, the
sustainability of these improvements is questionable, as the evaluation also found that governments and
stakeholders do not have the capacity to continue this work independently.',
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA program addressed gaps in government capacity through
capacity building activities and tools.\n- The program's efforts regarding migration data were of particular
relevance and importance to the stakeholders.\n- The program addressed the needs of national stakeholders through
local capacity building activities.\n- The program provided direct support to migrants in distress and built the
capacities of key stakeholders involved in the process.\n- The community-level approach to reintegration has been
crucial for the achievements of the JI-HoA.\n- The work of the Regional Data Hub was highly appreciated by
stakeholders and the activities of the hub were effective in enhancing knowledge on migration, harmonizing
methodologies and indicators, and building capacities for data collection and management.",
gaps_identified='The main gap identified is the lack of capacity of governments and stakeholders to continue
the work independently. This suggests that the improvements made by the JI-HoA program may not be sustainable in
the long term. There is also a need for continued investment in AVR and impact studies to closely monitor the
impact of the integrated approach.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3d31'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made significant strides in providing
governments with data and analysis on the socio-economic needs of people at risk of unsafe migration, particularly
those from marginalized groups. The program focused on addressing the needs of migrants, returnees, and
communities, and also aimed to build the capacity of governments to use data for policymaking. The Regional Data
Hub played a crucial role in producing and disseminating migration data. However, challenges remain, including
staff turnover, financial constraints, and the need for continued support to ensure the effective use of data in
policymaking. While the program contributed to increased data availability and capacity building, the evidence also
indicates that governments are not always ready to fully utilize this data. Therefore, the theme is partially
covered.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Confidence: 8/10\nThe evidence clearly demonstrates the program's efforts to provide
data and analysis to governments. The evaluation highlights the increased availability of migration data and the
capacity building activities undertaken. However, the evidence also points to limitations in the governments'
ability to fully utilize this data due to various challenges. Therefore, I am confident that the theme is partially
covered, but not fully realized.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA exceeded targets for the number of field studies and
research conducted.\n- Stakeholders appreciated the work of the Regional Data Hub in data production and capacity
building.\n- A survey of stakeholders indicated that data produced has supported evidence-based policies,
procedures, and program design.\n- The number of stakeholders involved in return and reintegration assistance
increased significantly.\n- Stakeholders in Djibouti noted that additional steps still need to be taken to improve
data gathering capacities.\n- Some stakeholders from Sudan and Somalia noted that shortage of finance and staff
prevent the government from actively using increased capacities for policymaking.',
gaps_identified="Gaps include:\n- The extent to which governments are consistently using the provided data and
analysis to inform evidence-based solutions is not fully clear.\n- The long-term sustainability of the data
collection and analysis efforts is uncertain.\n- The impact of staff turnover and financial constraints on the
governments' ability to utilize the data needs further investigation.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3c13'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program has made significant strides in addressing the
immediate needs of returnees upon arrival in their countries of origin. This includes economic, social, and
psychosocial support. Satisfaction surveys indicate a reasonable level of satisfaction with reintegration
assistance. However, there are also indications that the economic assistance provided may not always be sufficient,
and that psychosocial support has gaps in its execution and integration within the program. Recommendations also
point to the need for longer-term integration support. Overall, while immediate needs are being addressed to some
extent, there are areas for improvement and a need for more comprehensive support for sustainable reintegration.
Therefore, the theme is partially covered.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='Confidence is moderate. The evidence provides a mixed picture. Satisfaction surveys and
FGDs suggest positive impacts on addressing immediate needs, particularly economic support. However, the evidence
also highlights gaps in the adequacy of economic assistance, the relevance of microbusiness support, and the
integration and effectiveness of psychosocial support. The recommendations further emphasize the need for
longer-term integration strategies.',
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- 56% of surveyed returnees were satisfied with reintegration
assistance.\n- Economic assistance helps returnees develop income sources and restore dignity.\n- Some returnees
felt the economic assistance was insufficient.\n- Gaps were found in the correspondence of specific activities to
returnees' psychosocial needs.\n- Recommendations emphasize the need for longer-term integration support, including
education and entrepreneurial skills development.",
gaps_identified="Gaps include:\n- Adequacy of economic assistance for long-term sustainability.\n- Relevance of
microbusiness support to the local context and returnees' skills.\n- Integration and effectiveness of psychosocial
support services.\n- Lack of longer-term integration strategies, such as education and skills development.\n-
Monitoring of MHPSS interventions.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3a43'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on the capacity of governments to implement solutions for persons on the move due
to disasters, climate change, and environmental degradation, aligning with human rights standards. The evidence
suggests that the JI-HoA program has contributed to building government capacity through capacity building
activities, tools, and improved cooperation mechanisms. However, the sustainability of these efforts is
questionable due to a lack of operational and financial capacity and resources from the government. The program
also enhanced awareness and availability of support to stranded migrants, which should enhance access of migrants
to safe, humane, and dignified AVR processes. Some evidence has been found of the involvement of governments in
AVR, in terms of direct assistance to MRCs, cancelling exit fees and penalties in host countries, and direct
contributions to return flights. The JI also supported the reintegration process through individual and
community-based reintegration projects. Overall, the evidence indicates that the JI-HoA program has made some
progress in enhancing the capacity of governments to implement solutions for persons on the move, but there are
still significant challenges to overcome.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='The confidence score is moderate (7/10). The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program
has contributed to building government capacity, but the sustainability of these efforts is questionable. The
program also enhanced awareness and availability of support to stranded migrants, which should enhance access of
migrants to safe, humane, and dignified AVR processes. However, it is unclear whether return processes have
actually become safer, more humane and more dignified in general (without the support of IOM).',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA program addressed the gap in limited frameworks or
mechanism for migration, governments had no tools, and no national capacity building strategies through capacity
building activities and tools such as the SOPs and various guidelines.\n- Government officials and other
stakeholders have reported an increase in their capacity, and sometimes even resources, to work on return and
reintegration.\n- A lack of operational and financial capacity and resources from the government remains some of
the main barriers to creating sustainable capacity of governments to work on migrant protection and
reintegration.\n- The JI effectively reached out to migrants who would otherwise not be in a position to return
home (87%, exceeding the target of 70%).\n- Some evidence has been found of the involvement of governments in AVR,
in terms of direct assistance to MRCs, cancelling exit fees and penalties in host countries, and direct
contributions to return flights.',
gaps_identified="Gaps include:\n- The sustainability of the JI's results is to a large extent dependent on the
ability of key stakeholders mostly governments- to maintain the tools and mechanisms set in place by the JI and
continue building on the results.\n- Whether return processes have actually become safer, more humane and more
dignified in general (without the support of IOM) is unclear.\n- The current evaluation did not find guidelines for
awareness raising and outreach that would ensure a harmonized approach across countries.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2c12'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on inclusive systems and structures linking populations and government to
strengthen social cohesion and resolve conflicts without violence. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program
has addressed community needs and those of returnees, contributing to social cohesion by creating economic
opportunities and fostering a sense of community. The program also supported the establishment and strengthening of
data collection and monitoring tools, which can contribute to evidence-based policies and better governance.
However, the evidence also points to challenges in ensuring that all communities receive equal support and that
projects are aligned with community skills and needs. External factors such as conflict and political instability
have also hindered the full implementation of the integrated approach. Overall, while the program has made
contributions to the theme, there are gaps and challenges that need to be addressed.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="The confidence score is moderate. The evidence clearly shows that the JI-HoA program
has addressed community needs and contributed to social cohesion through economic opportunities and community
projects. The program's efforts to strengthen data collection and monitoring tools also support the theme. However,
the evidence also highlights challenges in ensuring equitable support and aligning projects with community needs,
as well as the impact of external factors. These challenges suggest that the program's contribution to the theme is
not complete or fully realized.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- 95% of community members agreed that the projects addressed
community needs, while 92% agreed that the projects addressed the needs of returnees.\n- The creation of economic
opportunities within the community reduces the risk of social conflict.\n- The program supported the establishment
and strengthening of data collection and monitoring tools.\n- The integrated approach is of great importance to
sustainable reintegration.',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- Unequal support across targeted communities.\n- Projects not
always aligned with community skills and needs.\n- External factors such as conflict and political instability
hindering the full implementation of the integrated approach.\n- The methodology to assess the sustainability of
reintegration is rather new and still subject to testing and improvement.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2b12'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The provided evidence strongly supports the theme that crisis-affected populations in need receive
movement assistance. The JI-HoA program demonstrably provided assistance to migrants and returnees, addressing
their basic needs such as food, water, shelter, and clothing. The program also facilitated safe, humane, and
dignified voluntary returns, exceeding targets for the number of migrants supported and their satisfaction with
travel arrangements. While some gaps were identified, such as the sufficiency of economic support and the
integration of psychosocial support, the overall evidence indicates that the program effectively provided movement
assistance to crisis-affected populations. The conclusions and recommendations sections further reinforce this,
highlighting the program's crucial importance in addressing the needs of migrants and returnees facing dire
situations.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="High confidence (90%). The evidence is consistent and comes from multiple sources,
including desk research, interviews with stakeholders and returnees, focus group discussions, and project
monitoring data. The program's achievements in terms of the number of migrants assisted, their satisfaction levels,
and the establishment of MRCs are well-documented. While some areas for improvement were identified, the overall
evidence strongly supports the conclusion that the program effectively provided movement assistance to
crisis-affected populations.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA provided food, water, clothing, and shelter to migrants
in need.\n- The program supported 9025 migrants to return voluntarily to their countries of origin, exceeding the
target of 8450.\n- 95% of assisted migrants were satisfied with travel arrangements made for them.\n- The JI built,
enhanced, rehabilitated, or rented a total of 15 MRCs, exceeding its target of 12.\n- Returnees involved in Focus
Groups noted specifically that "their return would not have been possible without IOM".',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- Some returnees felt that the economic support was insufficient.\n-
Post-return psychosocial support was not well-integrated into the program.\n- There was a lack of harmonized
approach to awareness raising across countries.\n- Long waiting times for AVR were a concern in some areas.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1a16'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence strongly suggests that the JI-HoA program has made significant strides in
providing pre-departure, post-arrival, and return assistance and counselling to migrants, with a focus on gender
sensitivity. The program addressed pressing needs such as food, water, shelter, and psychosocial support. It also
facilitated safe, humane, and dignified voluntary returns. While there were some gaps in the consistency and
sufficiency of support, particularly regarding economic and psychosocial needs, the overall impact appears
positive. The program also contributed to data collection and research on migration trends, which can inform future
interventions. The recommendations highlight the need for continued support and capacity building to ensure the
sustainability of these efforts.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='High Confidence: The evidence directly addresses the theme, providing specific examples
of pre-departure, post-arrival, and return assistance and counselling. The evidence includes both positive outcomes
and identified gaps, providing a balanced assessment. Multiple sources, including desk research, interviews, and
focus group discussions, support the conclusion.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA provided essential resources like food, water, clothing,
and shelter to migrants in distress.\n- The program facilitated safe, humane, and dignified voluntary returns for
migrants.\n- Returnees received economic, social, and psychosocial support to aid reintegration.\n- Awareness
raising activities were conducted, including on SGBV.\n- The program built and enhanced MRCs to provide assistance
to migrants.\n- Data collection and research efforts improved understanding of migration trends.',
gaps_identified="Gaps identified include:\n- Some returnees felt that the economic support was insufficient.\n-
There were gaps in the post-return psychosocial support.\n- Awareness raising efforts lacked harmonized guidelines
and specific objectives.\n- Waiting times for AVR could be lengthy.\n- Satisfaction with reintegration support
varied across countries.\n- The sustainability of the program's impact is uncertain without continued support.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3a52'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The theme focuses on the management and availability of appropriate assistance in Resettlement
Transit Centers and Resettlement Support Centers. The evidence provided discusses the Joint Initiative for the Horn
of Africa (JI-HoA)'s efforts in providing assistance to returnees, including economic, social, and psychosocial
support. It also covers the enhancement of safe, humane, and dignified voluntary return processes, including the
establishment and enhancement of Migrant Resource Centers (MRCs). The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA has made
significant progress in providing assistance and improving return processes. However, there are also gaps
identified, such as the sufficiency of economic support and the integration of post-return psychosocial support.
Overall, the evidence indicates that the theme is partially covered, as the management and availability of
assistance are discussed, but there are areas where improvements are needed.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='The confidence level is moderate. The evidence directly addresses the provision of
assistance to returnees and the improvement of return processes, which are relevant to the theme. However, the
evidence also highlights gaps and areas for improvement, suggesting that the theme is not fully covered. The
satisfaction rates with reintegration support vary across countries, indicating that the effectiveness of
assistance is not consistent. The lack of specific guidelines for awareness raising and the unclear monitoring of
MHPSS interventions also contribute to the moderate confidence level.',
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA's provision of economic, social, and psychosocial
support to returnees.\n- The establishment and enhancement of MRCs.\n- High satisfaction rates with travel
arrangements for voluntary returns.\n- The identification of gaps in the sufficiency of economic support and the
integration of post-return psychosocial support.\n- Variable satisfaction rates with reintegration support across
different countries.",
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- The sufficiency of economic support for returnees.\n- The
integration of post-return psychosocial support.\n- The lack of specific guidelines for awareness raising.\n- The
unclear monitoring of MHPSS interventions.\n- The sustainability of return processes without IOM support.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2c11'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on communities impacted by crisis or vulnerability having the necessary resources
and capacities to restore sustainable livelihoods. The evidence addresses the needs of migrants, returnees, and
community members, and the extent to which the JI-HoA program met those needs. It covers material resources (food,
water, shelter, economic assistance), technical capacities (skills training, business support), and access to
markets (through microbusiness support). The evidence also discusses the sustainability of these interventions and
the capacity building of local stakeholders. While there are gaps and areas for improvement, the evidence suggests
that the program did address the theme to a significant extent.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='Confidence is high (8/10). The evidence directly addresses the components of the theme:
material resources, technical capacities, and access to markets. It provides specific examples of how the JI-HoA
program supported these aspects for migrants, returnees, and communities. The evidence includes data from surveys,
focus group discussions, and interviews with stakeholders, providing a comprehensive picture. The identified gaps,
such as the need for more substantial economic assistance and better integration of psychosocial support, do not
negate the overall coverage of the theme but highlight areas for improvement.',
evidence_summary='The JI-HoA program provided material resources (food, water, shelter) to migrants in crisis.
It offered economic, social, and psychosocial support to returnees, including microbusiness assistance to restore
livelihoods. Community-based projects aimed to create economic opportunities and address the needs of both
communities and returnees. Data collection and analysis tools were strengthened to monitor the impact of
reintegration assistance.',
gaps_identified="Gaps include the need for quicker service provision and AVRR for migrants, more substantial
economic assistance for returnees, better alignment of microbusiness assistance with recipients' knowledge and
local context, and improved integration of post-return psychosocial support. The sustainability of the program's
results is also a concern, as it depends on the continued capacity and resources of governments.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2b61'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on migrants having adequate knowledge and tailored information to make informed
and voluntary decisions to return to their countries of origin. The evidence suggests that IOM conducted numerous
awareness-raising activities, and a significant percentage of surveyed migrants reported receiving sufficient and
useful information to make informed decisions about returning. However, the evaluation also notes a lack of
harmonized guidelines for awareness raising and a lack of specific objectives and impact studies for these
activities. There are also some concerns about the length of AVR procedures and the sufficiency of economic support
for reintegration. Overall, the evidence indicates that the JI-HoA made efforts to provide migrants with
information, but there are areas for improvement in terms of tailoring information, harmonizing approaches, and
ensuring the information leads to truly informed and voluntary decisions.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='High Confidence: The evidence directly addresses the theme, with data on
awareness-raising activities and migrant satisfaction with information provided. While there are identified gaps,
the overall evidence supports the conclusion that the theme was addressed to a significant extent. The satisfaction
rate of 95% of surveyed migrants reporting sufficient and useful information is a strong indicator.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n* IOM conducted five times more awareness-raising activities than
expected.\n* A stakeholder in Djibouti noted the effectiveness of providing migration-related information.\n*
95% of surveyed migrants reported receiving sufficient and useful information to make an informed decision to
return.',
gaps_identified='Gaps include:\n* Lack of harmonized guidelines for awareness raising.\n* Lack of specific
objectives and impact studies for awareness-raising activities.\n* Concerns about the length of AVR
procedures.\n* Concerns about the sufficiency of economic support for reintegration.\n* Unclear whether return
processes have become safer, more humane, and more dignified in general (without IOM support).',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3a42'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The theme focuses on governments and stakeholders having access to migration research and data
analysis for evidence-informed dialogue and learning exchange. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program
addressed the gap in migration data and capacity building, which was appreciated by stakeholders. The program also
contributed to the availability of data and research on migration trends in the region, which stakeholders found
valuable for decision-making. The Regional Data Hub's work was appreciated for enhancing knowledge on migration,
harmonizing methodologies and indicators, and building capacities for data collection and management. The
evaluation also found that the research done by the JI-HoA itself provided important evidence for programming.
Therefore, the evidence supports the theme.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Confidence is high because the evidence directly addresses the theme's components:
access to migration research, reliable data analysis, evidence-informed dialogue, and learning exchange. Multiple
sections of the provided text highlight the program's efforts and the stakeholders' appreciation for the data and
capacity building initiatives.",
evidence_summary="The JI-HoA program addressed the lack of migration data and capacity building in
participating countries. Stakeholders appreciated the program's efforts in providing data and research on migration
trends, which they found valuable for decision-making. The Regional Data Hub's work was also highly appreciated for
enhancing knowledge on migration, harmonizing methodologies and indicators, and building capacities for data
collection and management.",
gaps_identified="While the evidence suggests that the program contributed to the availability of data and
research, it does not provide specific examples of how this data was used to engage in evidence-informed dialogue
and learning exchange on policies and processes. Further evidence could strengthen the analysis by providing
concrete examples of policy changes or learning exchanges that resulted from the program's data and research
efforts.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3c41'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The theme focuses on the capacity of local stakeholders to contribute to the immediate and
longer-term response. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program did address the needs of national stakeholders
and governments by providing capacity building activities and tools. However, the sustainability of these efforts
is questionable, as many stakeholders believe they cannot continue providing support without IOM funding. There's
also a mention of some IPs feeling they already had sufficient capacity. The recommendation to increase attention
on building partnerships with service providers who can function without significant funding from IOM further
supports the theme. Overall, the evidence indicates a mixed picture: initial capacity building efforts were
successful, but long-term sustainability and the ability of local stakeholders to function independently remain a
concern.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='High Confidence: The evidence directly addresses the capacity building efforts of the
JI-HoA program and the perceived needs of local stakeholders. The sustainability section provides a clear
assessment of the long-term prospects, and the recommendation section highlights the importance of independent
service providers. The evidence is consistent and comes from multiple sources (interviews, reports, FGDs).',
evidence_summary="- 82% of partners believed IOM's local capacity building activities were useful.\n-
Governments reported increased capacity and resources to work on return and reintegration, leading to new policies
and processes.\n- Lack of operational and financial capacity from the government remains a barrier to
sustainability.\n- Vast majority of interview respondents do not believe that stakeholders could continue the
provision of support without the involvement and funding provided by IOM.\n- Recommendation to increase attention
on building partnerships with service providers who can function without significant funding from IOM.",
gaps_identified="- More specific examples of capacity building activities and their impact on local
stakeholders' ability to respond to crises independently.\n- Further details on the types of support stakeholders
believe they cannot continue without IOM funding.\n- A deeper dive into the reasons why some IPs felt they already
had sufficient capacity.\n- Metrics to quantify the increase in capacity reported by government officials.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1a22'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on governments receiving support to develop and implement migration policies and
mainstream migration into related public policy domains. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program has
addressed gaps in government capacity through capacity building activities and tools. The program also contributed
to the introduction or strengthening of new policies and enhanced the capacity of government officials. The
Regional Data Hub enhanced knowledge on migration, harmonized methodologies and indicators, and built capacities
for data collection and management. However, external factors such as conflict, COVID-19, competing government
priorities, and political instability have prevented this component of the integrated approach from functioning to
its full extent. The evidence also suggests that governments and stakeholders do not have the capacity to continue
independently the work of providing direct support to migrants in distress. Overall, the evidence indicates that
the program has made progress towards the theme, but there are still challenges to overcome.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="High confidence. The evidence directly addresses the theme's focus on government
support for migration policy development and implementation. Multiple sections of the report highlight the JI-HoA's
contributions to capacity building, policy strengthening, and data harmonization, all of which are relevant to the
theme. While external factors have hindered progress, the evidence clearly demonstrates that the program has made a
positive impact.",
evidence_summary='- The JI-HoA program addressed gaps in government capacity through capacity building
activities and tools.\n- The program contributed to the introduction or strengthening of new policies and enhanced
the capacity of government officials.\n- The Regional Data Hub enhanced knowledge on migration, harmonized
methodologies and indicators, and built capacities for data collection and management.\n- Stakeholders expressed a
clear interest in continuing to work with the RDH on improving research and data in the region.',
gaps_identified='The report mentions that external factors such as conflict, COVID-19, competing government
priorities, and political instability have prevented the government component of the integrated approach from
functioning to its full extent. The report also notes that governments and stakeholders do not have the capacity to
continue independently the work of providing direct support to migrants in distress. Further information on the
specific types of support governments need and the challenges they face in mainstreaming migration into related
public policy domains would be beneficial.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3c52'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence suggests that the EU-IOM Joint Initiative for Migrant Protection and
Reintegration in the Horn of Africa has made significant contributions to improving migration data collection,
management, sharing, analysis, and use at national and regional levels. The Regional Data Hub (RDH) played a
crucial role in producing and publishing migration data, engaging with National Statistical Offices (NSOs), and
collaborating with regional migration data stakeholders like IGAD. The program exceeded targets for field studies
and surveys conducted. Stakeholders reported increased knowledge on return and reintegration issues. The initiative
also led to an increase in the number of stakeholders involved in return and reintegration assistance.\n\nHowever,
challenges remain. Stakeholders in Djibouti noted the need for further improvements in data gathering capacities.
Some stakeholders in Sudan and Somalia cited shortages of finance and qualified staff as obstacles to using
increased capacities for policymaking. Staff turnover and external factors like COVID-19 also hindered progress.
Despite these challenges, the evaluation concludes that the JI-HoA has made important contributions to the
availability of data and research on migration trends in the region. The dissemination and use of data in
decision-making can have a long-term positive impact on return and reintegration.\n\nOverall, the evidence
indicates that the program has contributed to the theme, but there are areas where further progress is needed.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="High Confidence: The evidence directly addresses the theme, providing specific examples
of improvements in data collection, management, sharing, analysis, and use. The evaluation report explicitly
mentions the contributions of the Regional Data Hub and the increased involvement of stakeholders. While challenges
are acknowledged, the overall assessment is positive regarding the program's impact on this theme.",
evidence_summary='* The JI exceeded targets for field studies and surveys conducted.\n* The Regional Data
Hub (RDH) played a crucial role in producing and publishing migration data.\n* Stakeholders reported increased
knowledge on return and reintegration issues.\n* The number of stakeholders involved in return and reintegration
assistance increased.\n* The evaluation concludes that the JI-HoA has made important contributions to the
availability of data and research on migration trends in the region.',
gaps_identified='* The evaluation acknowledges that additional steps still need to be taken to improve data
gathering capacities in some countries.\n* Shortages of finance and qualified staff hinder the use of increased
capacities for policymaking in some areas.\n* Staff turnover and external factors like COVID-19 also hindered
progress.\n* The evaluation notes that ownership and sustainability of the program cannot be expected after five
years of implementation, suggesting a need for continued support.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3c22'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on the protection of vulnerable and at-risk persons through their sustained and
meaningful participation within humanitarian protection. The evidence provided discusses activities related to
awareness raising, assistance to stranded migrants, and reintegration support. Specifically, it highlights efforts
to ensure safe, humane, and dignified voluntary return processes, as well as support for reintegration into host
communities. The evidence suggests that the program has made efforts to reach out to migrants, provide them with
information, and assist them in returning to their countries of origin. It also indicates that reintegration
support has been provided, although satisfaction levels vary across countries. The evidence also mentions the
establishment of data collection and monitoring tools to track the needs of returnees.\n\nBased on the evidence,
the theme is partially covered. The program activities contribute to the protection of vulnerable migrants by
providing them with assistance and support during their return and reintegration. However, the evidence does not
explicitly address the "sustained and meaningful participation" aspect of the theme. While the program provides
assistance, it is unclear whether migrants are actively involved in the design and implementation of protection
measures.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='Confidence: 7/10\nExplanation: The evidence clearly demonstrates activities related to
the protection of vulnerable migrants through assistance and support. However, there is a lack of explicit evidence
regarding the "sustained and meaningful participation" of migrants in the design and implementation of protection
measures. This limits the confidence in fully covering the theme. The evidence focuses more on the provision of
services rather than the empowerment and active involvement of migrants in their own protection.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- Awareness raising activities addressing migrants in target
countries.\n- Support provided to migrants for voluntary return to their countries of origin.\n- Reintegration
assistance provided to returnees, including economic, social, and psychosocial support.\n- Establishment of data
collection and monitoring tools to track the needs of returnees.\n- Stakeholder feedback indicating the
effectiveness of the program in reaching out to migrants and providing them with useful information.',
gaps_identified='The main gap is the lack of evidence regarding the "sustained and meaningful participation" of
vulnerable and at-risk persons within humanitarian protection. The evidence focuses primarily on the provision of
assistance and support, but it does not explicitly address how migrants are actively involved in the design,
implementation, and monitoring of protection measures. Further information is needed to determine the extent to
which migrants are empowered to participate in their own protection.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1b33'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on vulnerable groups and persons at risk receiving quality healthcare services in
a humanitarian context. The evidence provided discusses the needs of migrants, returnees, and community members,
and how the JI-HoA program addressed these needs. It covers the provision of basic needs like food, water, shelter,
and clothing, as well as economic, social, and psychosocial support. The evidence also highlights gaps in service
provision, such as the insufficiency of economic support and the lack of integration of post-return psychosocial
support. While the evidence doesn\'t explicitly focus on "healthcare services," it does discuss medical and
psychosocial support, which can be considered components of healthcare. Given the focus on vulnerable populations
and the provision of relevant support, the theme is partially covered.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='Confidence is moderate. The evidence directly addresses the needs of vulnerable groups
(migrants and returnees) and the support provided by the JI-HoA. However, the evidence doesn\'t explicitly detail
the "quality" of healthcare services or comprehensively cover all aspects of healthcare. The focus is more on basic
needs, economic support, and psychosocial well-being, with some mention of medical support.',
evidence_summary='The JI-HoA program addressed the needs of migrants and returnees by providing food, water,
shelter, and clothing. It also offered economic, social, and psychosocial support to aid in reintegration.
Satisfaction levels varied, with some returnees expressing dissatisfaction with the amount of economic support.
Gaps were identified in post-return psychosocial support. Community members generally perceived the projects as
beneficial.',
gaps_identified="The evidence lacks specific details on the quality of healthcare services provided. It also
doesn't comprehensively cover all aspects of healthcare, focusing more on basic needs and psychosocial support.
Further information on the specific healthcare interventions and their effectiveness would strengthen the
analysis.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1b31'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made efforts to involve crisis-affected
populations in decision-making, particularly in the design and implementation of reintegration programs. The
program addressed the needs of migrants, returnees, and communities, and sought to create economic opportunities
and reduce stigma. The community participation survey indicates that a large majority of respondents believed that
the community projects addressed the needs of the community and of returnees. However, there were also gaps in the
process, such as needs assessments not always directly involving community members, and some returnees not being
consulted about the type of support they received. The program also aimed to strengthen data collection and
analysis to inform decision-making. While the evidence indicates some level of participation, it is not clear if
this participation was systematic or comprehensive across all aspects of the program.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='I am reasonably confident in this assessment. The evidence shows that the program
addressed the needs of various stakeholders, including crisis-affected populations, and sought their input through
surveys and focus group discussions. However, there are also indications that the participation was not always
ideal, and there were gaps in the process. Therefore, while the theme is covered to some extent, there is room for
improvement.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n* The JI-HoA program responded to the most pressing needs of
migrants, as confirmed by desk research and interviews.\n* A community participation survey showed that the
majority of respondents believed that the community projects addressed the needs of the community and of
returnees.\n* The program implemented activities to harmonize the approach to monitoring and measuring the impact
of return and reintegration assistance, and associated tools for data collection.\n* The JI-HoA has made
important contributions to the availability of data and research on migration trends in the region.',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n* Needs assessments were not always conducted directly with
community members.\n* Some returnees were not consulted about the type of support they received.\n* The
post-return psychosocial support was not well-integrated into the main documents of the JI-HoA program.\n* The
methodology to assess the sustainability of reintegration is rather new and still subject to testing and
improvement.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1b12'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program has made significant contributions to
enhancing the capacities, tools, and systems of governments and civil society in the Horn of Africa to identify and
address the drivers of conflict and displacement. The program has focused on capacity building activities,
providing tools such as SOPs and guidelines, and improving data collection and analysis on migration trends. The
program also supported the establishment or strengthening of data collection, monitoring, and learning tools across
the participating countries. The IMPACT study, which measured the sustainability of reintegration, further
contributed to the understanding of the effectiveness of the integrated approach. The recommendations from the
evaluation team also highlight the need for continued support in terms of capacity-building and socio-economic
development.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Based on the evidence, I am highly confident (90%) that the theme is covered. The
evidence clearly demonstrates the program's efforts to enhance the capacities of governments and civil society in
the region to address the drivers of conflict and displacement. The program has provided tools, built capacity, and
improved data collection and analysis, all of which contribute to the achievement of the theme's objective.",
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA program addressed the gap in limited frameworks or
mechanisms for migration by providing capacity building activities and tools such as SOPs and various
guidelines.\n- The program's efforts regarding migration data were of particular relevance and importance to the
stakeholders, as there was a clear lack of data on migration and existing tools and methods to collect such data
were not harmonized across the region.\n- A total of 36 planning, monitoring, learning, data collection and
analysis tools were set up, implemented and/or strengthened across the four countries.\n- The EU-IOM Joint
Initiative also strengthened data collection, analysis, and dissemination on reintegration through development of
database applications, provision of equipment and training to the relevant government institutions.\n- The JI-HoA
has made important contributions to the availability of data and research on migration trends in the region.",
gaps_identified='While the evidence suggests that the program has made significant contributions to enhancing
the capacities of governments and civil society, there are some gaps in the evidence. For example, the evidence
does not provide specific examples of how the enhanced capacities, tools, and systems have been used to identify
and address the drivers of conflict in practice. Additionally, the evidence notes that external factors such as
conflict, COVID-19, competing government priorities, and political instability have hindered the integrated
approach from functioning to its full extent. Therefore, further research may be needed to assess the long-term
impact of the program and to identify any remaining gaps in the capacities of governments and civil society.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2a22'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made significant strides in providing
dignified shelter and settlement support to crisis-affected populations, particularly migrants and returnees. The
program addressed basic needs like food, water, clothing, and shelter, and offered integrated economic, social, and
psychosocial support relevant to the challenges faced by returnees. The program also focused on creating economic
opportunities within communities to reduce the drive to migrate out of economic necessity.\n\nHowever, there were
also gaps and areas for improvement. Some migrants reported that their needs were not fully met, and quicker
service provision and AVRR were desired. Some returnees felt that the economic assistance was insufficient, and the
microbusiness assistance did not always align with their knowledge or the local context. There were also gaps in
post-return psychosocial support. The sustainability of the program's results is also a concern, as it is heavily
dependent on continued involvement and funding from IOM.\n\nOverall, the evidence indicates that the program made a
substantial contribution to providing dignified shelter and settlement support, but there were also areas where it
fell short. Therefore, I will mark the theme as covered, but with caveats.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="My confidence is moderate (7/10). The evidence clearly shows that the program addressed
the theme, but also highlights several shortcomings and areas for improvement. The evidence is drawn from multiple
sources, including desk research, interviews, and surveys, which strengthens the conclusion. However, the gaps
identified suggest that the program's impact was not uniform across all beneficiaries and contexts.",
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA provided food, water, clothing, and shelter to
migrants.\n- The program offered integrated economic, social, and psychosocial support to returnees.\n-
Community-based projects addressed the needs of both communities and returnees.\n- The program exceeded targets for
providing reintegration assistance.\n- Satisfaction rates with reintegration support varied across countries.\n-
Some returnees felt that the economic assistance was insufficient.\n- There were gaps in post-return psychosocial
support.\n- The sustainability of the program's results is a concern.",
gaps_identified="Gaps identified include:\n- The need for quicker service provision and AVRR.\n- Insufficient
economic assistance for some returnees.\n- Mismatches between microbusiness assistance and returnees' knowledge or
the local context.\n- Gaps in post-return psychosocial support.\n- Concerns about the sustainability of the
program's results without continued IOM involvement.\n- Lack of harmonized approach to awareness raising across
countries.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1a11'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence directly addresses the theme of governments and humanitarian actors having the
knowledge, capacity, and tools to effectively mainstream and implement protection. Section 4.1.2.1 highlights the
initial lack of frameworks and capacity in participating countries before the JI-HoA program, and how the program
addressed this gap through capacity building and tools. Section 4.3.1.2 provides quantitative data on the increased
number of stakeholders strengthened through capacity building and the increased knowledge on return and
reintegration issues. It also acknowledges challenges such as staff turnover and financial constraints that hinder
the optimal use of increased capacity. Section 5.2 provides recommendations to enhance capacity building efforts,
ownership, and sustainability. The evidence demonstrates that the program has made progress in providing knowledge,
capacity, and tools, but also identifies challenges and areas for improvement.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Confidence is high (90%) because the evidence directly addresses the components of the
theme: knowledge, capacity, and tools. The evidence includes quantitative data, stakeholder perspectives, and
recommendations for improvement, providing a comprehensive picture of the program's impact on the theme. The
identified challenges also contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the theme's coverage.",
evidence_summary='The JI-HoA program has increased the knowledge and capacity of governments and humanitarian
actors in the Horn of Africa region regarding migration management, return, and reintegration. This was achieved
through capacity building activities, the provision of tools like SOPs and guidelines, and the establishment of
networks and dialogues. However, challenges such as staff turnover, financial constraints, and the COVID-19
pandemic have hindered the full utilization of these increased capacities.',
gaps_identified='While the evidence indicates increased capacity and knowledge, it also highlights the need for
greater ownership and commitment from governments, as well as sustainable funding mechanisms to ensure the
long-term impact of the program. Further investigation into the specific types of knowledge and tools provided, and
their actual application in policy and practice, would provide a more complete picture. The sustainability of the
capacity building efforts in the face of staff turnover is also a concern.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1b21'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence suggests that the EU-IOM Joint Initiative for Migrant Protection and
Reintegration in the Horn of Africa (JI-HoA) has addressed the theme of providing populations at risk of engaging
with violent extremist groups with social, political, and economic alternatives, although not explicitly stated in
those terms. The program focuses on reintegration of returnees and addressing drivers of migration, which include
lack of economic opportunities and social cohesion. By creating economic opportunities, supporting community-based
projects, and enhancing social cohesion, the JI-HoA provides alternatives to migration driven by desperation, which
can make individuals vulnerable to extremist groups. The evidence highlights the importance of community-based
reintegration projects in creating business and employment opportunities, reducing the need to migrate for economic
reasons, and fostering social cohesion, all of which contribute to providing alternatives to vulnerable
populations. The recommendations also emphasize strengthening community-based reintegration efforts to address
drivers of irregular migration and provide economic opportunities.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='High confidence. The evidence directly supports the conclusion that the JI-HoA
addresses the theme by providing economic and social alternatives to migration, which can reduce vulnerability to
extremist groups. The community participation survey results, the focus on reintegration, and the recommendations
to strengthen community-based projects all point to a concerted effort to provide alternatives to vulnerable
populations.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- Community participation survey showing high agreement that projects
addressed community and returnee needs (95% and 92% respectively).\n- Emphasis on creating economic opportunities
within communities to reduce the drive to migrate.\n- Recognition of the importance of community-based
reintegration projects in creating business and employment opportunities and fostering social cohesion.\n-
Recommendations to strengthen community-based reintegration efforts to address drivers of irregular migration and
provide economic opportunities.',
gaps_identified="While the evidence supports the theme, there is no explicit mention of violent extremist
groups. The connection is inferred through the program's focus on addressing drivers of migration and providing
alternatives to vulnerable populations. Further evidence directly linking the program to reducing engagement with
violent extremist groups would strengthen the analysis.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2a21'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The theme focuses on the provision of quality health, mental health, and psychosocial support
(MHPSS) services to crisis-affected populations in a timely manner. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program
addressed the needs of migrants and returnees, including their psychosocial needs. Research indicated a higher
incidence of Common Mental Disorders (CMD) among JI-HoA beneficiaries, highlighting the relevance of the program's
MHPSS focus. However, gaps were identified in the execution, particularly in post-return psychosocial support,
integration of MHPSS into program documents, and monitoring of MHPSS interventions. While the program provided
MHPSS, the quality and timeliness aspects are less clearly demonstrated, and gaps in post-return support raise
concerns about the overall effectiveness in meeting the theme's objectives. The evidence also highlights the
importance of economic and social support in addressing the needs of returnees, which indirectly contributes to
their mental health and psychosocial well-being.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='Confidence: 8/10. The evidence confirms that the JI-HoA program addressed the MHPSS
needs of crisis-affected populations. The program provided psychosocial support, and research indicated the
relevance of this support due to the high prevalence of CMD among returnees. However, the evidence also reveals
gaps in the execution of MHPSS activities, particularly in post-return support and monitoring. While the program
addressed MHPSS needs, the gaps identified suggest that the quality and timeliness of these services could be
improved. The high satisfaction rates with reintegration support in some countries (e.g., Somalia) and lower rates
in others (e.g., Sudan, Ethiopia) also indicate variability in the effectiveness of the program.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- Desk research and interviews confirming the program responded to
pressing needs of migrants, including those returning from dangerous environments.\n- Research indicating a
significantly higher incidence of Common Mental Disorders (CMD) among JI-HoA beneficiaries.\n- Focus Group
Discussions highlighting the importance of economic assistance in restoring dignity and self-trust.\n-
Identification of gaps in post-return psychosocial support, integration of MHPSS into program documents, and
monitoring of MHPSS interventions.\n- Satisfaction rates with reintegration support varying across countries.',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- Lack of clarity on the quality and timeliness of MHPSS
services.\n- Insufficient post-return psychosocial support.\n- Unclear integration of MHPSS into program documents
and monitoring of MHPSS interventions.\n- Variability in satisfaction rates with reintegration support across
countries.\n- The microbusiness assistance did not always correspond to the knowledge of the recipient or the local
context.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1a15'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program has made strides in providing governments and local
actors with resources, skills, and tools to deliver assistance equitably. Capacity building activities, SOPs, and
guidelines have addressed gaps in migration management frameworks. Data collection and harmonization efforts have
also been relevant. Stakeholder surveys indicate increased knowledge on return and reintegration issues. However,
challenges remain, including staff turnover, financial constraints, and the impact of external factors like
COVID-19. While capacity has increased, the sustainability of these gains is questionable, as many stakeholders
believe continued support relies on IOM funding. The evidence points to progress but also highlights limitations in
ensuring long-term equitable assistance delivery.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='Confidence: 8/10. The evidence clearly demonstrates that the program has provided
resources, skills, and tools. The logframe data and stakeholder surveys support this. However, the sustainability
section and stakeholder interviews reveal significant concerns about the long-term impact and equitable delivery
without continued external support. This lowers the confidence slightly, as the "ensure" aspect of the theme is not
fully met.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n* JI-HoA provided capacity building activities and tools (SOPs,
guidelines) to governments.\n* Stakeholder surveys show increased knowledge on return and reintegration
issues.\n* The program exceeded the targeted number of stakeholders strengthened through capacity building.\n*
Increased number of actors involved in return and reintegration assistance.\n* Concerns about sustainability due
to financial constraints and reliance on IOM funding.',
gaps_identified='Gaps include:\n* Limited information on the specific types of resources and tools
provided.\n* Lack of detailed analysis on how the increased capacity translates into actual equitable assistance
delivery.\n* Insufficient data on the long-term impact of the program beyond the project period.\n* Limited
information on the specific mechanisms used to ensure equitable delivery.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1a12'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The theme focuses on strengthened protection referral pathways leading to humanitarian services and
assistance. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program did contribute to this theme, particularly through its
focus on addressing the needs of migrants and returnees, including their economic, social, and psychosocial
well-being. The program facilitated returns from dangerous situations, provided essential services like food,
water, and shelter, and offered reintegration support. The program also worked to build the capacity of governments
and other stakeholders through training and tools. However, there were gaps in the program's implementation, such
as the adequacy of economic assistance, the integration of psychosocial support, and the consistency of support
across communities. The evidence also suggests that the program's impact on government capacity and the
sustainability of return processes without IOM support is unclear. Overall, the evidence indicates a positive
contribution towards the theme, but with limitations and areas for improvement.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="My confidence is moderate (70%) because while there is evidence that the JI-HoA program
strengthened protection referral pathways and facilitated access to humanitarian services, the evidence also
highlights gaps in the program's implementation and the sustainability of its impact. The program's reliance on IOM
staff and funding raises questions about the long-term impact on government capacity and the overall strengthening
of protection referral pathways.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA enabled migrants to return from dangerous environments
and provided essential services.\n- The program addressed the economic, social, and psychosocial needs of returnees
through an integrated approach.\n- The program built the capacity of governments and other stakeholders through
training and tools.\n- A significant percentage of returnees reported sufficient levels of economic
self-sufficiency, social stability, and psychosocial well-being.',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- The adequacy of economic assistance for returnees.\n- The
integration of post-return psychosocial support.\n- The consistency of support across communities.\n- The
sustainability of return processes without IOM support.\n- The impact of the program on government capacity.\n-
Clarity on whether return processes have become safer, more humane, and more dignified in general (without the
support of IOM).',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1b32'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The SRF Output 3d32 focuses on the access of protection and essential service providers to tools and
guidelines for effectively responding to the protection needs and rights of vulnerable migrants and
displacement-affected populations.\n\nThe evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made efforts to address the
needs of migrants, returnees, and communities, including providing essential services and protection. The program
also aimed to build the capacity of stakeholders, including governments and other national actors, by providing
tools and guidelines. However, there were gaps in the implementation and sustainability of these
efforts.\n\nSpecifically, the program provided life-saving assistance to migrants in dire situations, supported
voluntary returns, and offered reintegration assistance. It also contributed to data collection and research on
migration trends. However, the program faced challenges related to the context in which it operated, including
political instability, economic crises, and staff turnover. These challenges undermined the ownership and
sustainability of the program.\n\nWhile the program provided capacity-building activities and tools, such as SOPs
and guidelines, some stakeholders lacked the capacity to work independently on return processes. Additionally,
there were gaps in the design, M&E, and relevance of some community-based reintegration projects.\n\nOverall, the
evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made progress towards achieving SRF Output 3d32, but there were
limitations in its effectiveness and sustainability. The program provided tools and guidelines to stakeholders, but
further efforts are needed to ensure that these stakeholders have the capacity and resources to effectively respond
to the protection needs and rights of vulnerable migrants and displacement-affected populations.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='I am reasonably confident in this assessment. The evidence indicates that the JI-HoA
program did provide tools and guidelines to protection and essential service providers. However, the evidence also
highlights gaps in the implementation and sustainability of these efforts. The program faced challenges related to
the context in which it operated, and some stakeholders lacked the capacity to work independently on return
processes. Therefore, while the program made progress towards achieving SRF Output 3d32, further efforts are needed
to ensure that stakeholders have the capacity and resources to effectively respond to the protection needs and
rights of vulnerable migrants and displacement-affected populations.',
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA program provided life-saving assistance to migrants in
dire situations, supported voluntary returns, and offered reintegration assistance.\n- The program contributed to
data collection and research on migration trends.\n- The program provided capacity-building activities and tools,
such as SOPs and guidelines, to stakeholders.\n- The program faced challenges related to the context in which it
operated, including political instability, economic crises, and staff turnover.\n- Some stakeholders lacked the
capacity to work independently on return processes.\n- There were gaps in the design, M&E, and relevance of some
community-based reintegration projects.',
gaps_identified="Gaps identified include:\n- The sustainability of the program's efforts.\n- The capacity of
stakeholders to work independently on return processes.\n- The design, M&E, and relevance of some community-based
reintegration projects.\n- The lack of harmonized approach across countries for awareness raising and outreach.\n-
The need for longer-term integration support for returnees.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3d32'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made significant strides in equipping
governments with the knowledge, skills, and tools necessary to include migrants, displaced persons, and
crisis-affected populations in policy processes and programs. This is evidenced by capacity building activities,
the development of SOPs and guidelines, and the increased use of data in policymaking. The program exceeded its
target for stakeholders strengthened through capacity building and operational support. However, challenges such as
staff turnover, financial constraints, and external factors like COVID-19 and political instability hindered the
full utilization of these enhanced capacities. While progress was made, sustainability remains a concern,
indicating that continued support is needed.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Confidence: 9/10\nExplanation: The evidence strongly supports the conclusion that the
program contributed to the theme. The report explicitly mentions capacity building activities, the development of
tools, and increased stakeholder knowledge. While challenges to sustainability exist, the initial progress is
well-documented. The main limitation is the external factors that impacted the full realization of the program's
potential.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n* The program exceeded its target for stakeholders strengthened
through capacity building (665 vs. 434).\n* Stakeholders reported increased knowledge on return and reintegration
issues (97% average across four countries).\n* 136 stakeholders reported that data produced supported
evidence-based policies, exceeding the target of 42.\n* The number of stakeholders involved in return and
reintegration assistance increased from 25 to 180.\n* The JI-HoA addressed the gap of limited frameworks or
mechanisms for migration, governments had no tools, and no national capacity building strategies which in turn led
to limited capacity to facilitate return and reintegration.',
gaps_identified='Gaps include:\n* Sustainability concerns due to staff turnover, financial constraints, and
external factors.\n* Not all stakeholders allocated additional budget or resources for migration issues.\n*
Local governments are not always ready to overtake national migration data management.\n* The microbusiness
assistance did not always correspond to the knowledge of the recipient or the local context.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2b42'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program has made significant strides in addressing
the needs of crisis-affected populations in camps and camp-like settings, particularly concerning access to
assistance, protection, and services in displacement sites. The program has demonstrably improved the quality of
life and dignity of migrants and returnees through various interventions, including providing basic needs,
reintegration support, and community-based projects. However, gaps remain in the consistency and adequacy of
support, particularly in psychosocial support and economic assistance. While the program has achieved many of its
targets, satisfaction levels vary across countries, indicating the need for more tailored and context-specific
approaches. The program's contributions to data collection and research have also been valuable in informing future
programming. Overall, the evidence supports the conclusion that the theme is substantially covered, although with
areas for improvement.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="My confidence in this assessment is high (85%). The evidence base is relatively strong,
with multiple sources including desk research, interviews, focus group discussions, and project monitoring data.
The evidence provides a comprehensive overview of the program's achievements and shortcomings. The identified gaps
are also well-supported by the evidence. The main limitation is that the evaluation focuses on the JI-HoA program,
and it is unclear whether the improvements are sustainable without continued external support.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA provided essential support to migrants and returnees,
addressing their basic needs and facilitating safe returns.\n- Reintegration assistance, including economic,
social, and psychosocial support, was provided to returnees.\n- Community-based projects addressed the needs of
both returnees and host communities.\n- The program contributed to data collection and research on migration
trends.\n- Satisfaction levels with reintegration support varied across countries.\n- Gaps were identified in
psychosocial support and the adequacy of economic assistance.',
gaps_identified="Gaps identified include:\n- Inconsistencies in the quality and adequacy of psychosocial
support.\n- Insufficient economic assistance in some cases.\n- Variations in satisfaction levels across different
countries, suggesting a need for more tailored approaches.\n- Sustainability of the program's achievements without
continued external support.\n- Lack of harmonized approach across countries for awareness raising and outreach.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1a17'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program has made significant strides in enhancing the
skills, knowledge, resources, and evidence available to governments and stakeholders for mainstreaming migration
into policies and strategies. The program has demonstrably increased capacity through training, provided tools like
SOPs and guidelines, and improved data collection and analysis. However, challenges remain, including staff
turnover, financial constraints, and the need for continued support to ensure sustainability. The program has also
contributed to the development of regional frameworks and policies related to migration. While progress has been
made, the evidence also suggests that external factors such as COVID-19, security issues, and economic crises have
hindered the full realization of the program's objectives. The recommendations section emphasizes the need for
continued capacity building, ownership by local authorities, and financial resources to sustain the progress made.
Overall, the evidence indicates that the theme has been addressed, but with caveats regarding the sustainability
and full impact of the interventions.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="High Confidence: The evidence directly addresses the theme, providing specific examples
of capacity building, data collection improvements, and policy alignment. The evaluation report explicitly mentions
the program's contributions to these areas, although it also acknowledges the challenges and limitations. The
coherence section further strengthens the confidence by highlighting the alignment of the JI-HoA with IOM's
objectives, EU foreign policy, and regional frameworks.",
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- Increased capacity of stakeholders through training and operational
support.\n- Development and strengthening of data collection and analysis tools.\n- Alignment of the JI-HoA with
IOM's objectives, EU foreign policy, and regional frameworks.\n- Increased number of actors involved in return and
reintegration assistance.\n- Stakeholders reporting increased knowledge on return and reintegration issues.",
gaps_identified="Gaps include:\n- Sustainability of the program's impact due to staff turnover and financial
constraints.\n- Full utilization of increased capacity due to external factors such as COVID-19 and security
issues.\n- Need for continued support to ensure ownership and commitment of governments and stakeholders.\n-
Limited financial allocations for migration issues in some cases.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3c51'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made significant strides in providing WASH
programming to crisis-affected populations, particularly migrants and returnees. The program addressed basic needs
like food, water, clothing, and shelter, and also focused on longer-term reintegration through economic, social,
and psychosocial support. While satisfaction levels varied across countries and some gaps were identified in the
sufficiency of economic support and the integration of MHPSS, the program generally contributed to improved living
conditions and access to services for vulnerable populations. The evidence supports the theme's focus on quality,
comprehensive WASH programming, ensuring the human right to water and sanitation, and empowering crisis-affected
populations.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Confidence is high (90%) because the evidence directly addresses the components of the
theme. The evidence details the provision of basic needs (including water), reintegration support, and the overall
impact on the well-being of migrants and returnees. While there are identified gaps, the overall trend indicates a
positive contribution towards the theme's objectives.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA provided food, water, clothing, and shelter to migrants,
addressing their most urgent needs.\n- The program offered integrated economic, social, and psychosocial support to
returnees, relevant to the challenges they faced.\n- The JI supported voluntary return processes, with high
satisfaction rates among assisted migrants regarding travel arrangements and safety.\n- Community-based
reintegration projects supported community and returnee beneficiaries, focusing on capacity building and livelihood
support.\n- Data collection and analysis tools were strengthened to monitor the impact of return and reintegration
assistance.',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- Some returnees felt that the economic support was insufficient.\n-
There were gaps in the post-return psychosocial support, including a lack of integration into program documents and
unclear monitoring of MHPSS interventions.\n- Satisfaction levels with reintegration support varied across
countries, with lower satisfaction in Sudan and Ethiopia compared to Somalia.\n- The methodology for assessing the
sustainability of reintegration is relatively new and still subject to testing and improvement.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1a14'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made substantial progress in providing governments and
other stakeholders with access to relevant data resources, including data standards, best practices, research
methods, and survey instruments. The program exceeded targets for conducting field studies and surveys, and
stakeholders reported increased knowledge on return and reintegration issues. The program also supported the
development of evidence-based policies and increased the number of actors involved in return and reintegration
assistance. However, challenges remain, including staff turnover, financial constraints, and the need for further
capacity building to effectively utilize the available data. While progress has been made, some stakeholders still
lack the capacity to fully utilize the data for policymaking.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='High Confidence: The evidence from multiple sources (IOM logframe, stakeholder surveys,
interviews, and reports) consistently points to increased data availability and capacity building efforts. While
challenges remain, the program demonstrably improved access to data resources for governments and other
stakeholders.',
evidence_summary='- The JI-HoA program exceeded targets for field studies and surveys.\n- Stakeholders reported
increased knowledge on return and reintegration issues (97% average across four countries).\n- 136 stakeholders
reported that data produced has supported evidence-based policies, procedures, and programme design.\n- The number
of stakeholders involved in return and reintegration assistance increased significantly.\n- The Regional Data Hub
(RDH) played a key role in increasing data availability.',
gaps_identified='- Some stakeholders still lack the capacity to fully utilize the available data for
policymaking.\n- Staff turnover and financial constraints hinder the effective use of data.\n- Further capacity
building is needed to strengthen data gathering capacities.\n- COVID-19 impacted the organization of workshops to
design or validate mechanisms.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3c32'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made significant strides in addressing the needs of
migrants, returnees, and communities, particularly in providing immediate, life-saving support and promoting
reintegration. The program addressed economic, social, and psychosocial needs through an integrated approach.
However, challenges remain in ensuring the sustainability of reintegration, particularly in economic
self-sufficiency. The program also faced limitations due to external factors such as economic conditions, political
instability, and COVID-19. While the program contributed to policy development and capacity building, the long-term
impact is uncertain without continued support. The evidence indicates that the program partially covered the theme,
with notable achievements but also areas needing improvement.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Confidence is moderate (7/10). The evidence provides a good overview of the program's
activities and results, including both successes and challenges. Satisfaction surveys, focus group discussions, and
monitoring data offer multiple perspectives. However, the sustainability of the program's impact remains a concern,
and there are gaps in the long-term economic reintegration of returnees. Further, the reliance on external funding
raises questions about the program's long-term viability.",
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA provided essential support to migrants, addressing
immediate needs like hunger, thirst, and shelter (Section 4.1.1.1).\n- The integrated approach to economic, social,
and psychosocial support was relevant to the challenges faced by returnees (Section 4.1.1.2).\n- Community projects
addressed the needs of both communities and returnees, with high levels of perceived relevance (Section
4.1.1.3).\n- The program exceeded targets for setting up and strengthening planning, monitoring, and data
collection tools (Section 4.3.3.2).\n- A significant percentage of returnees reported sufficient levels of economic
self-sufficiency, social stability, and psychosocial wellbeing (Section: Overall achievement of reintegration).\n-
The sustainability of the program's results is dependent on the ability of governments to maintain the tools and
mechanisms put in place (Section 4.5).",
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- The need for quicker service provision and AVRR (Section
4.1.1.1).\n- Insufficient economic assistance for returnees to achieve sustainable livelihoods (Section
4.1.1.2).\n- Gaps in post-return psychosocial support (Section 4.1.1.2).\n- Uneven support across targeted
communities (Section 4.1.1.3).\n- Challenges in ensuring the sustainability of reintegration, particularly economic
self-sufficiency (Section 4.5).\n- Dependence on external funding for continued support (Section 4.5).\n- The need
for further research into the factors influencing the success of businesses initiated by returnees (Section
5.2.2).',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2b62'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The theme focuses on improved living conditions and wellbeing for victims of human rights violations
in the context of reparations and restitution mechanisms. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program addressed
the needs of returnees through economic, social, and psychosocial support, contributing to their reintegration.
Satisfaction levels with reintegration assistance were generally high, although some returnees felt the economic
support was insufficient. Community-based reintegration projects also contributed positively to economic and
employment opportunities. The program also focused on data collection and analysis to track the needs of returnees.
However, external factors such as economic decline, political instability, and conflict hindered the full
achievement of the program's objectives. While the program made important contributions, the sustainability of
these efforts is questionable without continued support. The evidence indicates that the program contributed to
improved living conditions and wellbeing for returnees, but the extent to which this improvement is sustainable and
addresses the root causes of their vulnerabilities is limited.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Confidence is moderate. The evidence clearly shows that the JI-HoA program provided
support to returnees, addressing their immediate needs and contributing to their reintegration. Satisfaction
surveys and focus group discussions indicate positive outcomes in terms of economic, social, and psychosocial
wellbeing. However, the evidence also highlights limitations in the scope and sustainability of the program's
impact, as well as external factors that hindered its effectiveness. The evidence supports the conclusion that the
program contributed to improved living conditions and wellbeing, but the extent and sustainability of this
improvement are uncertain.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- 56% of surveyed returnees were satisfied with reintegration
assistance.\n- Economic assistance helped returnees develop income sources and restore their dignity.\n-
Community-based reintegration projects contributed to economic and employment opportunities.\n- The program
strengthened data collection and analysis on reintegration.\n- 89% of returnees reported sufficient levels of
economic self-sufficiency, social stability, and psychosocial wellbeing.',
gaps_identified="Gaps include:\n- Limited information on the long-term sustainability of the program's
impact.\n- Insufficient economic support for some returnees.\n- External factors such as economic decline,
political instability, and conflict hindered the program's effectiveness.\n- Lack of clarity on whether return
processes have become safer, more humane, and more dignified in general, without the support of IOM.",
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='1a19'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The provided evidence directly addresses the theme of reintegration assistance for returning
migrants and displaced persons. The evidence details the types of assistance provided (economic, social,
psychosocial), the satisfaction levels of beneficiaries, and the impact on both returnees and the broader
community. It also highlights gaps in the assistance, such as the insufficiency of economic support and the lack of
integration of post-return psychosocial support. The evidence also covers the needs of the community members and
how the program addressed them. The overall achievement of reintegration is discussed, including the sustainability
of the reintegration efforts.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="Confidence is high (90%) because the evidence directly addresses the core components of
the theme, including the types of assistance provided, the beneficiaries targeted, and the outcomes achieved. The
evidence is drawn from multiple sources, including desk research, interviews, focus group discussions, and surveys,
providing a comprehensive picture of the program's impact. The identified gaps and limitations are also clearly
articulated, contributing to a balanced assessment.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA addressed the pressing needs of migrants, providing
food, water, clothing, and shelter.\n- The integrated approach to economic, social, and psychosocial support was
relevant to the challenges faced by returnees.\n- Economic assistance helped returnees develop income sources and
restore their dignity.\n- Community projects addressed the needs of both the community and returnees.\n- The
program strengthened data collection, analysis, and dissemination on reintegration.\n- The majority of returnees
reported sufficient levels of economic self-sufficiency, social stability, and psychosocial wellbeing.\n-
Community-based reintegration projects contributed positively to economic and employment opportunities.',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- Some returnees felt the economic assistance was insufficient.\n-
Microbusiness assistance did not always correspond to the knowledge of the recipient or the local context.\n- Gaps
existed in post-return psychosocial support.\n- Not all targeted communities received the same support.\n- The
methodology to assess the sustainability of reintegration is relatively new and still subject to testing and
improvement.\n- External factors such as conflict, COVID-19, competing government priorities, and political
instability hindered the integrated approach.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2b63'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on whether internal and international environmental migrants have access to
multidimensional protection interventions. The evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program addressed the needs of
migrants and returnees through various interventions, including providing basic necessities, economic assistance,
and psychosocial support. However, there were gaps in the provision of services, such as the timeliness of AVRR
support, the adequacy of economic assistance, and the integration of post-return psychosocial support. While the
program contributed to the safe, humane, and dignified return of migrants, the sustainability of reintegration
remains a challenge. The evidence indicates that the program provided access to multidimensional protection
interventions, but the effectiveness and comprehensiveness of these interventions could be improved.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="The confidence score is moderate. The evidence clearly shows that the JI-HoA program
provided various protection interventions to migrants and returnees. However, the evidence also highlights gaps and
areas for improvement in the program's implementation and effectiveness. The program addressed the immediate needs
of migrants and returnees, but the long-term sustainability of reintegration remains a challenge.",
evidence_summary='Key evidence includes:\n- The JI-HoA provided migrants with basic necessities, economic
assistance, and psychosocial support.\n- Stakeholders confirmed that the program addressed the most pressing needs
of migrants.\n- Returnees reported that the economic support helped restore their dignity and self-trust.\n-
Research indicated that the incidence of Common Mental Disorders (CMD) is significantly higher among JI-HoA
beneficiaries.\n- Gaps were found in the timeliness of AVRR support, the adequacy of economic assistance, and the
integration of post-return psychosocial support.',
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- Timeliness of AVRR support\n- Adequacy of economic assistance\n-
Integration of post-return psychosocial support\n- Sustainability of reintegration\n- Capacity of governments and
stakeholders to continue the work independently',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3d35'
),
Prediction(
reasoning='The theme focuses on key stakeholders having access to data and evidence to detect and report human
trafficking and smuggling networks. The evidence suggests that the JI made substantial progress in increasing the
availability of migration data through the Regional Data Hub and engagement with National Statistical Offices.
Stakeholders reported increased knowledge on return and reintegration issues. The number of stakeholders involved
in return and reintegration assistance has also increased. However, challenges remain, including staff turnover,
shortage of finance and qualified staff, and the impact of COVID-19. While data availability has increased, the
capacity to use this data could still be strengthened. The evaluation also found examples of the increased use of
data in policymaking, strategies, processes and plans for return and reintegration. The Regional Data Hub was
effective in enhancing knowledge on migration, harmonizing methodologies and indicators, and building capacities
for data collection and management. Overall, the evidence indicates that the JI has contributed to improving access
to data and evidence for key stakeholders, but further efforts are needed to address the remaining challenges and
ensure the sustainable use of this data.',
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation='The confidence score is high because there is direct evidence from the evaluation
report, including stakeholder interviews, IOM logframe data, and project monitoring data, that supports the
conclusion that the JI has improved access to data and evidence for key stakeholders. However, the report also
acknowledges the challenges and limitations that remain, which prevents a perfect confidence score.',
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- The JI exceeded targets for the number of field studies and
research conducted.\n- Stakeholders reported increased knowledge on return and reintegration issues.\n- The number
of stakeholders involved in return and reintegration assistance increased.\n- IOM's survey of stakeholders reported
that data produced has supported evidence-based policies, procedures, and programme design.\n- The Regional Data
Hub was effective in enhancing knowledge on migration, harmonizing methodologies and indicators, and building
capacities for data collection and management.",
gaps_identified='Gaps identified include:\n- Additional steps still need to be taken to improve data gathering
capacities.\n- Capacity to use the available data could still be strengthened further.\n- Turnover of government
staff undoes the positive results of trainings.\n- Shortage of finance and qualified staff prevent the government
from actively using increased capacities for policymaking.\n- COVID-19 prevented the organization of workshops to
design or validate mechanisms.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='3b13'
),
Prediction(
reasoning="The provided evidence suggests that the JI-HoA program made efforts to equip systems and service
providers at national and local levels with the capacities and infrastructure to ensure the inclusion of migrants,
displaced persons, and broader communities in the provision of basic services. This is evidenced by capacity
building activities, development of tools like SOPs and guidelines, and efforts to improve data collection and
harmonization. However, the sustainability of these efforts is questionable due to a lack of operational and
financial capacity from governments and the reliance on IOM funding. The program addressed the needs of migrants,
returnees, and communities through various interventions, including economic, social, and psychosocial support. The
program also focused on building the capacity of national stakeholders and improving cooperation mechanisms.
Despite these efforts, gaps were identified in the correspondence of specific activities to returnees' psychosocial
needs, the value of economic assistance, and the relevance of projects to community members' skills. The evaluation
concludes that continued support is needed in terms of capacity-building and wider socio-economic development.",
theme_covered=True,
confidence_explanation="High Confidence: The evidence directly addresses the theme, showing both successes and
limitations in equipping systems and service providers. Multiple sections of the report discuss the program's
efforts to build capacity, provide infrastructure, and ensure inclusion. The conclusions and recommendations
further reinforce the assessment of the program's impact and sustainability.",
evidence_summary="Key evidence includes:\n- Capacity building activities and tools (SOPs, guidelines) provided
to governments.\n- Efforts to improve migration data collection and harmonization.\n- Provision of economic,
social, and psychosocial support to migrants, returnees, and communities.\n- Community-based reintegration projects
aimed at creating economic opportunities and reducing the drive to migrate.\n- Stakeholder feedback on the
usefulness of IOM's local capacity building activities.\n- Identified gaps in psychosocial support, economic
assistance, and project relevance.\n- Concerns about the sustainability of the program due to reliance on IOM
funding and lack of government capacity.",
gaps_identified='Gaps include:\n- The extent to which the capacity building activities led to sustained
improvements in service provision.\n- The long-term impact of the program on the inclusion of migrants and
displaced persons in basic services.\n- Detailed metrics on the actual increase in infrastructure capacity at
national and local levels.\n- Specific examples of policies and processes introduced as a direct result of the
program.\n- The degree to which the program addressed the root causes of migration and displacement.',
framework_name='SRF',
framework_category='Outputs',
framework_theme_id='2b53'
)
]
