To access CARE's Do No Harm in Practice Toolkit, please use your username and password to log in below.

Don't have an account yet? Register now. Forgot your password? Click here.

Already have an account? Head over to the login page.

Content on this page is managed in the User Profile - DNHP Toolkit template.

By the very end stages of program implementation, it’s no longer possible to undertake baseline or midline surveys to set a reference against which you can directly measure changes in women, girls and other vulnerable groups’ perceptions of safety resulting from your intervention. However, even at this stage, all program teams should still develop an M&E (or just evaluation) plan that investigates whether or not/the degree to which program participants felt safe in accessing/using the program, good or service.

There are two points here that are critical to remember regardless of where you are in your existing programming cycle (i.e., beginning, middle or end):

  1. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good: any steps your program can take to mitigate even one of the risks faced by women, girls or other vulnerable groups is better than ignoring those risks completely.
  2. Every program is a learning opportunity: if you find yourself too late in your current program cycle to implement major changes to your interventions, you’ve still made significant progress simply by understanding the risks and knowing what you should do about them. All of this information should feed into your next program design cycle, and specifically your budgeting decisions.

For more information on how to integrate VAWG risk mitigation/safe programming into proposal drafting and budgeting processes, start at Step 0.

While it’s true that some programmatic interventions to mitigate the risk of VAWG can require funding and/or take time to implement, this is not universally the case.

Course corrections like adding additional WASH facilities to allow for greater privacy or sex segregation, installing lighting, adding locks, sturdier doors or additional privacy measures for shelters would all require funds that - if not budgeted for in the original proposal - might be difficult to find midway through or toward the end of a program.

However, there are plenty of risk mitigation interventions that can be implemented at very little cost, or even no cost at all – and not being able to do everything should not be a reason to not do anything.

Examples

Many accessibility barriers can be addressed without significant additional cost or time, for example:

  • Changing service delivery hours;
  • Segregating distribution lines;
  • Ensuring supportive crowd control at distributions;
  • Increasing the percentage of female staff;
  • Ensuring that information regarding services is shared in the manner most appropriate for women, girls and other vulnerable groups.

Hosting trainings to build capacity of staff to conduct safe and ethical consultations with women, girls and other vulnerable groups and/or to respond safely to disclosures may be able to be built into existing trainings, or training budgets can be repurposed.

Adding one or two indicators to assess accessibility and/or safety perceptions into existing assessments or routine monitoring should not require additional funding or time.

Analysis helps us determine who to target—with which types of programming—based on the risks they face.

WHY we need to analyze assessment data for risks of VAWG

Analyzing the data and information collected during assessments is critical for identifying and understanding risks related to VAWG and/or barriers to access, and which population(s) are most affected.

Analysis forms the cornerstone of proposals and project design. The results of analysis should be used to determine what actions, activities, and/or strategies need to be put in place to address each of the risks identified during assessments and to improve sector-specific outcomes.

HOW to analyze data to understand VAWG risks and barriers

Analysis starts with the same basic questions that should be asked while reviewing the data and information gathered from various forms of assessment.

To help organize the information in your analysis, you can use this basic, fillable GBV risk analysis form:

Basic Risk and Barrier Analysis Form

DOCX 156.27 KB

Understanding the Results of Your Analysis

The common thread of analysis throughout the program cycle can help keep the risks and needs of specific vulnerable populations identified during the assessment phase front and center in proposal writing and program design and implementation.

Why Integrate GBV Risk Mitigation Strategies into Program Design and Implementation

Designing interventions to mitigate risks of VAWG and reduce the barriers to access faced by women, girls and other vulnerable groups is just good programming. Ensuring that our programs are safe and accessible to all, including and especially the most vulnerable or marginalized within a community, is not “additional” work—rather, ensuring that actions to mitigate the risk of VAWG are integrated into every sector’s programs should result not only in safer programming overall, but also in better sector-specific outcomes.

Understanding the risks that different groups within an affected population may be facing allows for the design of programming to better and more safely meet their needs.

There is no one size fits all approach to designing programming that mitigates risks of VAWG. Rather, successful implementation activities need to be determined by the context. Strategies to mitigate risks of VAWG provide a framework to identify where risk mitigation actions should be implemented based on context.

ALL sectors must work to mitigate the risks associated with their programs to ensure that women, girls, and other vulnerable groups can safely access and use them.

How to Integrate GBV Risk Mitigation Strategies into Program Design and Implementation

There are multiple entry points for understanding where and how GBV risk mitigation strategies/actions can be implemented in humanitarian action. 

  • Understanding the risks that different groups within an affected population may be facing allows for the design of programming to better and more safely meet their needs.
  • Successful implementation activities need to be determined by the context. GBV risk mitigation strategies provide a framework to identify where risk mitigation actions should be implemented based on context.

GBV risks can occur across all levels of intervention [societal/institutional, community, and individual/service delivery] and therefore there are opportunities at each of these levels to engage in GBV risk mitigation. Please click on the boxes to see example strategies that can be incorporated.

General Good Practice

The diagram below indicates areas where GBV risks are commonly found and the general types of interventions that can help mitigate those risks. To ensure that interventions are as effective as possible in the context in which they are to be implemented, it is critical to include GBV risk related questions in every sector’s assessments.

Click on a circle to view a corresponding programmatic intervention.

Sample Programmatic Interventions for Location of Facilities

  • Ensure facilities are safe and convenient to access (timing, location, etc)

Sample Programmatic Interventions for Dissemination of Information

  • Diverse groups of girls/women have access to information
  • Be aware of and reduce influence of information gatekeepers (ie avoid disseminating information through only male community leaders)

Sample Programmatic Interventions for Human Resources

  • Adequate number of female frontline workers
  • Female representation in management levels
  • Staff trained on Codes of Conduct

Sample Programmatic Interventions for Delivery of Services

  • Materials suit the needs of girls/women based on consultations
  • Distributions are safely sited/ appropriate crowd management
  • Service providers trained on responding to GBV disclosures

Sample Programmatic Interventions for Design and Layout of Facilities

  • Gender-segregated, lockable latrines
  • Culturally appropriate facility and shelter design/layout (i.e. for privacy etc).
  • Appropriate lighting (i.e. for pathways, structures, etc)

For additional guidance on general good practice for VAWG risk mitigation interventions, save this tipsheet.

General Good Practice for VAWG Risk Mitigation Tipsheet

DOCX 27.66 KB

Based on your analysis, you may need to make course corrections to ensure your programming is as safe and accessible as possible. The “How-to Guide” below provides a helpful roadmap for course corrections.

How to Guide: Course correcting existing programming

DOCX 163.25 KB

Sector-Specific Examples

For guidance on common sector specific VAWG risk mitigation interventions, please click on your sector tool below.

CP Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 155.34 KB

ED Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 158.97 KB

FS Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 152.82 KB

Health Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 155.12 KB

Livelihoods Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 152.66 KB

NUT Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 155.63 KB

Protection Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 154.13 KB

Shelter Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 153.73 KB

Site design and layout Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 155.15 KB

WASH Essential VAWG risk mitigation actions

DOCX 152.08 KB

WASH latrine safety checklist

DOCX 164.08 KB

Thematic Area Guides (TAGs)

Additional information can be found in the Thematic Area Guides (TAGs) of the GBV Guidelines, linked from the icons below.

CAMP COORDINATION & CAMP MANAGEMENT
CHILD PROTECTION
EDUCATION
FOOD SECURITY AND AGRICULTURE
HEALTH
HOUSING, LAND AND PROPERTY
HUMANITARIAN OPERATIONS
SUPPORT SECTORS
HUMANITARIAN MINE ACTION
LIVELIHOODS
NUTRITION
PROTECTION
SHELTER, SETTLEMENT AND RECOVERY
WATER, SANITATION AND HYGIENE

When to Conduct a Midline Survey 

You can conduct a midline survey in two situations:  

  1. As a follow up to a baseline survey that was conducted when the project started 
  1. When no baseline was conducted, but you still have enough time left in the project to set at least some benchmarks and measure change against them  (for example, midway through a 3-year project) 

Option 1: Midline Following a Baseline 

If you conducted a baseline survey at the start of your project, the midline survey should include, at minimum, the same questions asked in the original baseline. You can also add new questions if you need to account for changes in the context or other factors.  

Conducting a midline survey in this scenario helps you: 

  1. Determine if project activities are resulting in safer and/or more accessible programming; 
  1. Identify which (if any) activities are not working as intended-- for example: not reducing barriers, increasing access, or improving perceptions of safety-- so you can make necessary programmatic course corrections; and 
  1. Spot any unintended outcomes from your programming.  

Option 2: Midline Without a Baseline 

If you didn’t conduct a baseline survey, a midline survey helps you: 

  1. Set a benchmark for measuring changes in your programming environment; 
  1. Inform any necessary programmatic course corrections (i.e., if specific risks or barriers are uncovered as a result of the survey); and 
  1. Spot any unintended outcomes from your programming. 

How to Conduct Your Midline Survey 

You do not need to conduct a standalone/separate midline survey just for VAWG risk mitigation, unless that makes sense for your specific context/situation. Instead, you can weave safety and access questions into any midline assessment that you’re planning to conduct for your project. This approach mirrors how you could incorporate questions about access barriers and safety perceptions into your regular sector-specific assessments. 

The sample midline survey provided includes various questions you can pick, choose and adapt , as best suits your project and context.  

NOTE: the midline survey included here is exactly the same as the baseline survey from this toolkit. 

AN IMPORTANT SAFETY NOTE 

As in any instance when you’re asking questions about safety, please ensure you (and all enumerators, etc.) have read and understood the tipsheet on asking safety-related questions (linked in the baseline survey document itself). 

Midline Survey: Safety Perceptions and Access Barriers

DOCX 185.06 KB

When you begin your programming, asking questions about safety and barriers to access will help to establish a baseline starting point. You can then measure whether your VAWG risk mitigation strategies are actually working by comparing future results against the baseline.  

There is no need to conduct a standalone baseline survey on VAWG risk mitigation, unless that makes sense for your specific situation. Instead, you can weave safety and access questions into the baseline assessment that you’re already planning to conduct for your project. This approach mirrors how you can incorporate questions about access barriers and safety perceptions into your regular sector-specific assessments.  

The sample baseline provided includes various questions that you can pick, choose and adapt to best fit your project and context.  

AN IMPORTANT SAFETY NOTE 

As in any instance when you’re asking questions about safety, please ensure you (and all enumerators, etc.) have read and understood the tipsheet on asking safety-related questions (linked in the baseline survey document itself). 

Baseline Survey: Safety Perceptions and Access Barriers

DOCX 183.46 KB

This site is always being updated, so please check back often for new additions, tools, and resources!

Copyright © 2026 • GBV Guidelines

crossmenu