Results – Evaluating the Prospects partnership (2019-2024)

Prospects contributed to increased resilience and, to albeit to a lesser extent, to self-reliance among FDPs and host communities, through its contribution to increased access to education, employment and livelihood opportunities, and protection, as well as through its support for more inclusive policies. Compared with host communities, however, refugees generally experienced lower gains in employment and livelihood opportunities, and self-reliance. Due to the volatile context, these results are fragile and vulnerable to change.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs' initial ambitions were not always sufficiently attuned to local realities in the selected countries, but country-specific contextualisation and collaboration with national governments ensured better alignment during implementation. Overall, the programme responded adequately and in a balanced way to the needs of host communities and FDPs, but it has been less successful in responding to the specific needs of women and girls and people with disabilities, and in meaningfully engaging stakeholders beyond national government actors.

The combined humanitarian and development interventions provided comprehensive support to host communities and FDPs beyond immediate relief, thereby increasing the effectiveness at the beneficiary level. Solutions nevertheless remained temporary or semi-permanent due to factors beyond Prospects’ control. The evaluation does not draw overall conclusions regarding the increased cost-effectiveness of Prospects due to methodological choices and limitations in the financial and monitoring data.

The partnership enabled better alignment and coordination between partners. Although partners indicated that the balance between transaction costs and benefits improved following substantial initial investments in time and resources, it was not possible to quantify this balance. 

Prospects contributed to advancing the nexus approach by further refining nexus implementation, increasing buy-in at the headquarters level within partner organisations and generating programmatic insights relevant to international policy dialogue on forced displacement settings.

• Prioritise testing and gradual scaling up of best practices over the development of new pilots.
• Strengthen the policy dialogue to improve the enabling environment for livelihood and employment opportunities, particularly for forcibly displaced persons. 
• Focus on strengthening knowledge and improving access to formal and informal markets through digitalisation and stronger legal frameworks, including safe working conditions. 
• Strengthen investments in targeted support and address barriers affecting specific groups, particularly women and people with disabilities.
   

• Ensure uniformity in the measurement of indicators in the dashboard.
• Ensure all partners conduct external end evaluations and carry out a synthesis of these evaluations at the end of phase 2.
• Make stronger use of regional functions within partner agencies to facilitate cross-agency and cross-regional learning and exchange.
• Institutionalise the participation of implementing partners, including refugee-led organisations and youth-led organisations, in planning, monitoring, evaluation and learning.
   

• Tailor the communication strategy to better reflect the scale and the global, regional and country dimensions of the partnership.

• Continue the system of long-term funding for refugee response programmes to enhance the focus on durable solutions and the long-term processes required to improve the living conditions of vulnerable populations. 
• In the Department for Migration, Displacement and Asylum's policy theory, clarify whether and how the refugee response programmes relate to the ministry’s objectives regarding regional stability and the prevention of onward migration to third countries.
• Develop an assessment framework that clarifies and operationalises political priorities, assesses risks related to the principle of nonrefoulment, and guides investments in refugee response programmes in relation to durable solutions: resettlement, integration and voluntary return, including reconstruction in countries of origin. Set realistic short- and medium-term objectives. 
• Strengthen coherence and learning with other refugee and migrant programmes of the ministry, exploring how this can enhance a more effective refugee response. 
   

• Reassess partner selection and include criteria on partners’ proven experience, in-country embeddedness and mandate relevance for working in fragile settings in the selected countries, and include flexibility for partner diversity between countries.
• Broaden and strengthen stakeholder engagement in line with the ministry’s localisation agenda.
• Take into account the diversity of needs and barriers affecting host communities and FDPs, as well as the structural barriers faced by women and other marginalised groups.  
• Broaden the programme’s support base to facilitate scaling-up by leveraging other financial resources, including from non-traditional donors and the private sector, in particular from the region itself, and invest in enabling structures for multi-donor programmes.

• Structurally involve embassies and relevant departments in decision-making regarding country and partner selection to ensure contextual alignment.
• Ensure sufficient preparation time for new partnerships and related governance structures by involving relevant departments and embassies.
• Assess and address barriers for collaborative programming resulting from internal processes and institutional structures.
• Maintain sufficient capacity at the embassies and in The Hague for the implementation of large-scale partnership programmes.
• Avoid overly complex monitoring systems that require major investments from partners without resolving monitoring challenges.
• Start with a limited number of countries to allow focused implementation and testing of structures and approaches before scaling up further.