SPONSORSHIP & INCLUSION

A guide to identifying who is socially excluded and how to include them

in our program services and spaces.
September 2020
0
Table of Contents
Table of Contents.......................................................................................................................... 1
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 2
Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3
Who is this guide for? .................................................................................................................................................. 3
A Social Inclusion Analysis: Why and what ............................................................................................................. 3
Key concepts and definitions...................................................................................................................................... 4
Overview: When and how to do a social inclusion analysis? ............................................................................. 6
Step 1: Design your Social Inclusion Analysis ............................................................................. 9
An ethical approach ...................................................................................................................................................... 9
Develop terms of reference, a plan and budget .................................................................................................. 11
Step 2: Review Secondary Sources ............................................................................................ 12
Some priority excluded groups ............................................................................................................................... 12
Internal sources and key informants ...................................................................................................................... 15
External sources and key informants ..................................................................................................................... 15
Analysis of secondary source findings .................................................................................................................... 16
Step 3: Collect Primary Data ..................................................................................................... 17
Identify key questions................................................................................................................................................. 17
Identify sources and methods .................................................................................................................................. 18
Orient, train primary data collectors ..................................................................................................................... 21
Conduct inclusive data collection ........................................................................................................................... 22
Step 4: Analyze Results............................................................................................................... 24
Identify and describe under-represented excluded groups .............................................................................. 24
Social exclusion analysis............................................................................................................................................. 24
Entry points for transformational change.............................................................................................................. 25
Examples of entry points ........................................................................................................................................... 26
Validate key findings and conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 33
Step 5: Share and Use Results.................................................................................................... 35
Country Office presentation .................................................................................................................................... 35
Report dissemination plan......................................................................................................................................... 35
Annexes ........................................................................................................................................ 36
Toolkit ........................................................................................................................................................................... 36
Resources...................................................................................................................................................................... 37

1
Acknowledgements
Author:
Patrick Crump, Freelance Consultant
Technical Lead:
Seema Baral, Advisor, Global Sponsorship Program Quality
Contributors:
Brad Kerner, Senior Director - Global Sponsorship Program
Laurel McLaren, Associate Vice President, Program Quality & Impact
Reviewers:
Helen Moestue, MEAL Advisor, Global Sponsorship Programs
Gail Snetro, Senior Advisor, Community and Social Change, Global Sponsorship Programs
Margarita Franco, Advisor, Global Sponsorship Program Quality
From Sponsorship Country Programs:
Apry Selwin Leokuna, MNCHN Coordinator, Indonesia
Oumer Mohammed, Sponsorship Program Specialist, Ethiopia

2
Introduction

Who is this guide for?

This Guide is for Sponsorship teams, including sponsorship managers, Program, MEAL and Community
Mobilization Leads, Core Program managers and impact area partners, to help them to determine who
are the most excluded children in their context, what are the causes of their exclusion, and how
Sponsorship can effectively engage them, through existing or new programs. For some Sponsorship
teams, this process may simply amount to a confirmation that they are indeed reaching the most
excluded; for others it may be an awareness-raising exercise, introducing them to groups they may not
have been fully aware of; and for some it may help to prioritize amongst the many excluded groups they
are trying to reach.

A Social Inclusion Analysis: Why and what

Why do a social inclusion analysis? Despite the historic success of the Millennium Development Goals
in reducing poverty by 2015, the global community recognized that the world’s poorest had still not
been reached by mainstream development, and that new approaches would be needed to lift them out
of poverty. In his foreword to the UN’s MDG Report (2015), Ban Ki-Moon stated that “The global
mobilization behind the Millennium Development Goals has produced the most successful anti-poverty
movement in history… But further progress will require an unswerving political will, and collective,
long-term effort” (emphasis added).

It is this need for political will that distinguishes the global 2030 Agenda from the MDGs. Per the World
Bank’s seminal report, Inclusion Matters (2013), “social policy needs to move beyond conventional social
service approaches toward development’s goals of equitable opportunity and social justice”. Following
the emphasis on equity in the Sustainable Development Goals, Save the Children’s 2030 Strategy
commits to doing whatever it takes to reach the most deprived and excluded children. Save the
Children’s Country Offices, including those with Sponsorship programming, have identified most
deprived groups in their specific contexts, and designed their country strategies around these groups.

Sponsorship teams are equally committed to reaching the most deprived. A survey of Sponsorship
country staff, conducted in April 2020 as input for this Guide, found that each of the 21 CO Sponsorship
teams could identify specific deprived groups it was prioritizing, and actions it was taking to reach them.
And yet the survey revealed that each Sponsorship CO was targeting, on average, eight different
deprived groups. Facing such diverse needs, a number of respondents highlighted a dilemma between
using their scarce resources to reach the many needy children in their impact areas, versus
concentrating those resources on the extra effort to reach the neediest. There is indeed a trade-off;
the excluded face distinct, and often multiple and mutually reinforcing structural or social/cultural
barriers, which is precisely why they remain unreached by most services, including our own.

Inclusion is not a one way - vertical approach; many times we fail to reach the most vulnerable
populations and fail to strengthen the ecosystems that could help them develop and thrive because from
the very beginning of our programs we are failing to give these populations a voice and find with them
and not just for them the critical problems and the most effective solutions.

Prioritizing will mean making choices. We will never have the resources to reach all those in need.
While working to reach all children in a sponsorship impact area, we know this is impossible and will
amount to leaving some behind. Who are those that we, despite our best intentions, have left behind?

3
This Guide adopts the term “social inclusion analysis” to describe a qualitative research exercise to
understand who the excluded are in a specific social and geographic context, the factors and root causes
for their exclusion, and to consider what the sponsorship program can do to address the barriers that
limit their participation, access to services and spaces created by sponsorship. Given the diversity of
excluded groups within an impact area, the exercise will likely involve choices about which groups to
prioritize, based on their number, their distinct characteristics and circumstances, and on SC’s capacities
to make a difference in their lives. The outcome of a social inclusion analysis is a plan to reach and
engage excluded groups, whether through new targeting efforts, revised eligibility criteria, adapted or
new program or advocacy activities, or a combination of these. Sponsorship provides a great
opportunity to embrace short, intermediate and long term efforts in advocacy and in strengthening the
capacity of local actors.

Key concepts and definitions

“In every country, certain groups—whether illegal immigrants, indigenous people, or other minorities—
confront barriers that prevent them
from fully participating in their Key Definitions
nation’s political, economic and
social life.” The disadvantages they Social exclusion: the concept takes us beyond the mere description
face not only limit their of deprivation, and focuses attention on social relations and the
processes and institutions that underlie and are part and parcel of
opportunities; they also “rob them
deprivation (de Haan, cited in Inclusion Matters, 2013)
of dignity” (Inclusion Matters, 2013).
Recognizing who these excluded Deprived: those who individually suffer shortfalls in or violations to
groups are entails more than a the realization of their rights in specific areas (Save the Children)
simple needs assessment; it requires Marginalized: children vary from one social, economic, cultural and
understanding the social processes political context to another. In contrast to being deprived, being
and relations that have led to their marginalized is a relative condition. Some children, and their families
exclusion. and social groups, are marginalized in relation to others (Save the
Children)
This Guide will use the term Identity: the qualities, beliefs, personality, looks and/or expressions
“excluded” to refer to those whose that make a person or group. One can regard the categorizing of
rights have been denied or identity as positive or as destructive (Wikipedia)
neglected. We use this term to Identity group: comprises members who share a social category and
encompass both the “deprived” and are attracted to the group as a whole as well as its overarching
the “marginalized”, key concepts in identity. More specifically, members of common-identity groups are
Save the Children’s Vision 2030, and attracted to the group's norms, goals, activities, and other defining
both resulting from processes of features (Prentice, Miller and Lightdale, 1994, cited in Sage.org)
exclusion. Intersectionality: people are simultaneously situated in multiple
social structures and realms. When they intersect, they can produce
The social processes that lead to a multiplication of advantage or disadvantage (Inclusion Matters,
inclusion or exclusion can be p32)
brought into focus through the lens Social inclusion: the process of improving the terms for individuals
of identity and power. Each of us is and groups to take part in society; the process of improving the
a unique combination of different ability, opportunity and dignity of people, disadvantaged on the
identities, such as our age, basis of their identity, to take part in society (Inclusion Matters)
nationality, sex, race, ethnicity,
religious identity, bodily ability, sexual orientation, and so on. Each of us as a human being has
inalienable rights, such as respect for our dignity and agency. This includes the right to self-identification,
as noted in the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD).

4
And yet, social processes and relations often discriminate on the basis of identity, preferring and
conferring power on certain identities over others. Some people express these preferences overtly as
racism, sexism or ableism, but more often we participate in and perpetuate them in unconscious or
seemingly impersonal ways, for example by accepting wage gaps, gender norms, or building codes.
Intersectionality means that for some, certain aspects of identity bias may offset others, while for others
they may be compounding; an elderly indigenous widow with disabilities is likely to be amongst the most
excluded in her community.

Inclusive development means understanding these processes, and working with others to make society
more inclusive. This starts with our own self-awareness about how each of us participates in the
processes that shape society; social justice becomes possible when we recognize these exclusionary
processes not as inevitable but unacceptable. With this new awareness, every program becomes an
opportunity to transform them.

This Guide draws inspiration, and uses frameworks and tools, from a range of sources related to social
inclusion, to specific excluded groups, and to qualitative research. The full list of resources referenced
can be found in the Annexes, but chief among these are:
 Social inclusion resources: these include Inclusion Matters, the World Bank’s seminal 2013
report that helped to frame the post-MDG debate around equity, providing a rationale for the
examination of social exclusion and inclusion processes. Every Last Child: The children the
world chooses to forget, a Save the Children 2016 advocacy report, makes the case that
discrimination is a key factor accounting for those children excluded from the globe’s progress
during the MDGs. Save the Children’s forthcoming guide, Gender Equality and Social Inclusion
Analysis Guide and Toolkit, presents a methodology for understanding the impact of gender
inequality and social exclusion in communities where we work, and is highly relevant to this
guide’s focus on social inclusion. The Guide draws inspiration and several exercises from The
TAAP Toolkit (Transforming Agency, Access and Power) for inclusive development produced by
World Learning and partners, particularly the Toolkit’s focus on practitioners’ need for self-
awareness on how power, bias and identity interact to cause exclusion. In keeping with Save
the Children’s child rights framework, the Guide seeks to build on analyses already completed
by country offices for their strategic planning, and explicitly references its CRSA Guidelines.
 Resources on specific excluded groups: the Guide illustrates some concepts and steps in social
inclusion analysis through frameworks related to specific groups (see Step 2, Review Secondary
Sources, and Step 4, Analyze Data). A useful framework for understanding disability is the
barriers framework, presented in World Vision’s Travelling Together, which recognizes that
people with disabilities do not have deficiencies but rather face barriers—attitudinal,
environmental and institutional—to participation. Useful programming resources for working
with persons with disabilities include the Disability Inclusive Development Toolkit and Inclusion
Made Easy, both from Christian Blind Mission. UNHCR’s durable solutions framework is useful
for thinking about the issues facing displaced peoples. Useful resources for understanding and
working with minorities include the World Bank’s Pathways for Peace and UNDP’s Marginalized
Minorities in Development Programming.
 Resources on qualitative research: one set of resources relates to Participatory Rural Appraisal,
popularized by Robert Chambers in the 1980s and 90s. This qualitative research methodology
draws particularly on simple visual methods to empower local people and excluded groups to
engage with researchers in sharing their knowledge and analyzing their own situation. This
Guide echoes the participatory, empowering methodology of PRA, and refers to several tools
drawn from a number of sources, including CRS, IIED and Feed the Future, and Sustainable
Sanitation, Water Management and Agriculture. Another set of resources relates to ethical

5
 research; Everyday Ethics in community-based participatory research describes the particular
ethical research issues arising from this relationship-based approach to research such as the
dynamics of power relationships, community rights and participation, ownership of knowledge,
and the blurring of boundaries between researchers and researched. The Guide draws on other
Sponsorship data collection guidance, including the Situation Analysis Guide and Managing
Performance Evaluations, and seeks to abide by Save the Children’s Ethical Research Policy. And
finally, the Guide draws on some generic qualitative research resources, including Better
Evaluation and INTRAC’s M&E Universe, for methodological guidance on concepts such as
sampling and triangulation.

Overview: When and how to do a social inclusion analysis?

As a contribution to the development of
Agenda 2030, Save the Children’s Every
Last Child report showed how continuing
to focus on poverty alleviation would not
be enough; to reach those left behind by
the MDGs we must grapple with
discrimination, the root cause of their
exclusion. Focusing on the excluded will
remain a Save the Children priority for at emergencies or international migration, children without birth
least the next ten years, and should
therefore become a part of Sponsorship’s
business-as-usual approach. An inclusion
analysis such as described in this guide
might be a one-off exercise, generating a
reference point or baseline, with MEAL
indicators to monitor progress at key
stages. Where needed, inclusion reviews
might be built into Sponsorship’s annual
cycle of planning and monitoring of
ongoing programs. The inclusion review
will likely also become a standard part of
Situation Analyses when teams begin to phase into new impact areas.
Case Study: Mapping Excluded Children in Indonesia
In preparation for its 2019-21 strategic planning, Save the
Children and an Indonesian partner organization, Yayasan
Sayangi Tunas Cilik (YSTC), conducted a mapping exercise to
identify excluded children in Indonesia, with a focus on those
out of school. The review identified a number of excluded
groups, including children separated from their families due to
certificates or stateless children, and children from indigenous
or minority groups. Amongst the drivers of exclusion from
education, the study identified families’ lack of economic
resources, traditional gender norms and cultural practices, and
an education system ill-adapted to the needs of indigenous
and disabled children.
The Indonesia Sponsorship team is planning to build on the
study by conducting a social inclusion review in the impact
area of West and Central Sumba, to determine whether these
groups are excluded from its programs, and if so, how to
attract them as beneficiaries.

This Guide is organized around five steps to conducting a Social Inclusion Analysis. The guidance for
each step includes objectives and narrative description, key questions to answer, tools to choose from,
and links to further resources.

6
5 Steps to the Sponsorship Social Inclusion Analysis

7
 Five Steps of the Sponsorship Social Inclusion Analysis
Step Description Activities and Tools
This step establishes the broad parameters of the  Determine the Scope of
inclusion analysis. Beginning with making the case the Social Inclusion Analysis
to get the necessary buy-in, it then secures the (TAAP Toolkit)
Step 1: Design expertise and resources needed, and puts together  Project Charter (ADI
your Social a high-level plan and budget to conduct the Toolkit), including the team
Inclusion exercise. A key question to be resolved at this
Analysis stage is whether or not you plan to engage
excluded groups in primary data collection and
analysis, including children, and how you plan to
use and share that information.
This step assembles existing data on the most  Stakeholder Analysis
excluded groups in your country context, starting Framework (adapted from
with SC sources such as the CO’s CRSA and GESI TAAP)
analysis, to identify 1) the main data sources and  Key Informant Interview
Step 2: Review
stakeholders for each priority group; 2) Checklist
Secondary
characteristics of the priority groups, including the  Secondary Source Analysis
Sources
barriers they face; 3) their prevalence in your Worksheet
country and particularly in your impact area; and 4)
any standardized tools or approaches for inquiry
related to these groups.
This step comprises the research design process,  Key Questions Template
training and orienting the data collection team, and  Research Design Protocol
following inclusive data collection practices and  Data Collector Orientation
Step 3: Collect
behaviors. Agenda
Primary Data
 Impact Area Mapping
 Excluded Groups FGD
Checklist
The analytical process progresses through three  Excluded Group
stages, from the primarily descriptive creation of “Snapshot”
excluded group “snapshots”, to the analytical stage  Barrier/Booster Analysis
of examining the barriers each group faces to full Template (TAAP tool)
Step 4: Analyze
participation in society, towards a decisional and  Inclusive Design Exercise
Results
design stage of identifying opportunities for (builds on CASP RFs)
bringing about change for each of the groups.  Data Validation Process
 Report and Presentation
Formats
This final step examines the implications of the  Management Response
social inclusion review for different stakeholders, Template
both internal and external, and generates action  Report Dissemination Plan
Step 5: Share
plans for using results. Potential responses range Template
and Use
from program revisions, to local or country-wide
Results
advocacy and mobilization, to awareness and
learning within the broader SC network and the
international development community.

8
Step 1: Design your Social Inclusion Analysis

This step establishes the broad parameters of the inclusion analysis. Beginning with making the case to
get the necessary support and commitment, it then secures the expertise and resources needed, and
puts together a high-level plan and budget to conduct the exercise. A key question to be resolved at
this stage is whether or not you plan to collect primary data from excluded groups, including children,
and how you plan to use and share that information. Save the Children is committed to ethical research
standards, and has a review process to protect vulnerable research subjects. If your review will involve
primary data collection, you will likely need to develop a detailed research protocol at this stage for
review. If, on the other hand, your review will be based on secondary sources and key informants, your
design can take shape gradually over Steps 2 and 3, informed by and involving your key informants. At a
minimum, outputs of Step 1 include a Project Charter, a team, and a high-level plan and budget.

An ethical approach
This Guide proposes that a social inclusion analysis include three general objectives to address the
following questions: 1) Which groups are excluded? 2) Why and how are they excluded? and 3) How
can we enable their inclusion? The objectives of the review should serve both the specific needs of the
Sponsorship programs and the broader country and global strategy of Save the Children. You might
have a specific motivation for an inclusion analysis, or an interest in a specific deprived group; the review
should help you understand why some groups are under-represented in our programs, and how our
programs might become more inclusive.

To address these objectives, the Guide recommends a participatory, value-based, action-oriented

approach. Participatory action research “is based on a set of values that includes the promotion of
equal partnerships and co-learning and an explicit commitment to ensuring that research leads to, and is
informed by, action” (Banks and Armstrong et al, 2013). Such an approach is particularly relevant for a
social inclusion analysis for three reasons. First, it is an effective approach to access excluded groups,
mobilizing the distinct knowledge, experiences and perceptions of communities of identity. Professional
researchers have been using participatory research methods for several decades with “hard to reach”
groups such as minority ethnic and faith groups, indigenous communities and people with disabilities.
Second, through such an approach engagement in social inclusion analysis begins the actual process of
social inclusion. By valuing excluded groups’ own knowledge and experience, and by encouraging
greater ownership of the analysis by the communities themselves, the analysis process can be a
validating, empowering exercise. Third, driven by a concern for equity, the approach entails a
commitment to acting on findings, and to local solutions to local problems (Everyday Ethics in
Community-based Participatory Research, Banks and Armstrong et al, 2013).

9
The potential risks and pitfalls of such an approach must be stressed, given Save the Children’s
commitment to ethical research. Banks and Armstrong et al (ibid) cite several ethical issues raised by
such participatory research approaches that are not easily addressed by traditional ethical research
standards. Several that are particularly pertinent to our social inclusion analysis include:
 partnership, collaboration and power: by sharing decision making with community
representatives in the design, conduct and analysis of the social inclusion exercise, Save the
Children is likely creating the expectation that it will seriously consider the community’s
recommendations for program interventions which, if ignored, would damage trust;
 community rights, conflict and democratic representation: this again relates to power dynamics,
and the possible pressures put upon community members, perhaps by their own
representatives, to share sensitive knowledge or discuss sensitive topics such as stigma and
discrimination, potentially putting them at risk;
 ownership and dissemination of data, findings and publications: an ethical dilemma arising from
the co-creation of knowledge is ownership of that knowledge, with the risk of its appropriation
by external organizations for their own agendas, possibly putting community members at risk;
 do no harm: the ethical challenges of labelling people according to their minority group status or
disability can cause harm in itself and can be a barrier to data collection.

The authors recommend “everyday ethics”, where ethics are embodied in the researchers themselves,
through such traits as trustworthiness and integrity, and embedded in their everyday practices and
relationships (Banks and Armstrong et al, ibid). Such ethical issues should be carefully considered in the
research design protocol and openly discussed during the data collector orientation.

Some of these dilemmas can be mitigated through

an ethical research protocol, which will be Ethics Review
required if the social inclusion analysis will involve The SCUS Ethics Policy mandates that all activities
any primary data collection. Ethical research (studies) that involve interaction with beneficiaries
standards are first and foremost about protecting to collect personal identifiable data and information
vulnerable research subjects, which includes about their lives must undergo an ethical review by
children. In general, in keeping with SCUS’s value SCUS’ Ethics Review Committee (ERC). Ensure your
of Accountability, any research or evaluation study research protocol carefully considers the “three C’s”
that involves children, their parents, or others – consent, confidentiality and child safeguarding – to
should be reviewed to ensure that it meets US and ensure that we do not inadvertently:
international standards of “doing no harm or
presenting minimal risks” to participants in those  pressure or force people to participate in the
studies. Save the Children’s reputation is at risk if study against their will
we are not aware of or able to demonstrate due  harm the population we are studying by
diligence in ensuring that our research and misrepresenting or misusing data, or sharing
evaluation activities meet nationally (US and local identifying information
country) and internationally recognized standards.  broach sensitive topics without adequate
support
The ethical review process can follow two paths.
For more, see SCUS’s Ethical Research Policy, as well
An internal ethics review should be conducted for
any SCUS project activity that involves a) research as Managing Performance Evaluations.
(data collection though an intervention or
interaction) with b) human subjects, and c) involves minimal harm or risk. If SCUS’s Ethics Review
Committee deems that the research involves greater than minimal harm or risk, it will likely refer it for
an external review by an institutional review board (IRB). You can find more information on Save the
Children’s ethical research policy and review process here. To find out whether your host country
requires a national ethics review or other approval process, check with your CO’s MEAL staff.

10
Develop terms of reference, a plan and budget
The parameters of the analysis should be clear, to ensure that it is manageable. Will it cover all
programs serving children in the impact area and/or in a specific sector, including those of other service
providers? Will we be collecting primary data from vulnerable groups, and engaging them in analysis and
recommendations? Can we mobilize the resources, and do we have the time to complete the exercise
within these parameters? How do we plan to use the results? The tool Determine the Scope of the
Social Inclusion Analysis (Annex 1.1), can be helpful in working through these questions.

The answers to these questions should be documented in a Terms of Reference, using the Project
Charter template from the Accelerated Delivery and Impact (ADI) methodology, which has been
introduced to CO Sponsorship Teams around the world (see Annex 1.2, Project Charter). The
template identifies team members and roles, including a project sponsor; and provides an overview of
the project (or review), including its business impact, scope, objectives and deliverables, milestones, and
risks and assumptions. The template requires some effort and consultation to complete, but its
thoroughness ensures that you will have the people you need and the clarity of purpose and approach
for a relevant and effective social inclusion review.

An inclusion analysis might range from a short, desk-based study, to a set of consultations with partners,
local leaders and stakeholders, to a full-blown research exercise with primary data collection taking
place with marginalize groups over several months or quarters. When planning, consider seasonal
factors that may determine accessibility or participants’ availability. Consider any local approvals you
might need for data collection activities, as well as any courtesy notifications to local authorities,
community leaders, and partners. Plan for the translation of documents either to the local language so
the report is easy to disseminate and use locally by the SC team and partners.

In most cases your study will require an ethics review. The process of completing and submitting a
research protocol and responding to the Committee’s questions can take time. If the ERC refers the
protocol to an Institutional Review Board, this needs to be built into both the timeline and budget.
Thus, there are two scenarios your social inclusion analysis can follow. If the analysis will be based on
secondary sources and key informants, you can follow an iterative, participatory design process guided
by findings from the secondary source review, and involving the data collection team in the design during
Step 3. This Guide is structured according to this scenario. If, however, the study will engage children
or their parents from vulnerable, excluded groups, you will need to build the ethics review into your
process. This means you will need to come up with a detailed research design during Step 1, using
SCUS’s Research Design Protocol (Annex 3.2).

Step One: Checklist

 Determine the objectives of the analysis—regarding who are the most excluded, how are
they excluded, and how Sponsorship can enable their inclusion—and how you will use the
results
 Decide on overall approach of the analysis
 Prepare and submit research protocol for internal ethics review as well as any needed
national ethics review if you will be collecting primary data
 Secure the necessary resources: budget, team and expertise, and relationships

11
Step 2: Review Secondary Sources

In most countries around the world, much is already known about the most excluded. Save the
Children’s 2030 Strategy embraces the equity focus of the SDGs, and most Country Strategic Plans
identify several most deprived groups they intend to prioritize. The second step in the social inclusion
analysis, therefore, is to assemble existing data on the most deprived and marginalized in your country
context. This can largely be accomplished by consulting internal Save the Children sources, including
documents such as the CO’s CRSA and CO GESI analysis as well as CO staff with particular expertise
on exclusion or on specific excluded groups. If you find gaps in information you may want to consult
external sources as well, both published research and key informants. Review of secondary sources
should focus on identifying four sets of issues: 1) the main sources and references on each priority
group; 2) characteristics of priority groups, including the barriers they face; 3) their prevalence in the
context of your country and, where accessible data exists, your impact area; and 4) any standardized
tools or approaches for inquiry related to these groups.

Some priority excluded groups

The processes of exclusion are particular to each society, Most Common Deprived Groups in
and yet there are some groups that seem to be excluded Sponsorship COs
from many societies across the globe. Some of the most
prevalent deprived groups identified in the Country  Rural/pastoral poor (11 CSPs)
Strategic Plans are listed in the adjacent textbox. With its  Children with disabilities (10 CSPs)
focus on poverty over many decades, particularly the rural  The Poorest (10)
poor, Save the Children has built up extensive experience  Refugees, migrants, displaced (8)
with some of these groups, including some original  Girls, including married (7)
 Those affected by disaster, or living in
analytical tools such as household economy analysis. Some
disaster-prone areas (7)
excluded groups, such as girls, have received quite a bit of
 Ethnic or religious minorities (6)
deserved attention from Save the Children, whose 2016
report Every Last Girl, for example, noted deep-seated Source: HDI and MPI in Sponsorship
barriers to equality such as child marriage, gender-based Countries (2019)
violence and harmful practices, lack of voice and
recognition, and other barriers. Our interaction with some of the other groups listed, however, has
been more haphazard, subsumed in our target group of the poorest, without our having reflected on
their distinct nature and challenges as identity groups.

It is useful, therefore, to briefly consider some of the unique characteristics and trends for several of
these groups, in hopes that each country office targeting specific identity groups will take the time to
learn a bit more about them through secondary sources. Here we illustrate the distinct nature of

12
different identity groups by briefly touching on three of them: children with disabilities; refugees,
migrants and displaced; and ethnic minorities. We should use the term identity group with caution,
however, as many individuals would not necessarily self-identify with these three labels.

\Groups
Persons with disabilities Displaced Peoples Ethnic minorities
Data\
Sources and  World Report on  Migration data portal  Minority and Indigenous
References Disability  UNICEF data on child Trends, 2019
 International Disability migration and  Minority Rights Directory
Alliance displacement
Character-  90% of children with  Child and young  Indigenous peoples
istics disabilities in developing migrants (13.9 and constitute around one-
countries do not attend 10.8% respectively in third of the world’s 900
school 2017) are at risk of million extremely poor
 80-90% of adults with abuse, trafficking and  Estimates suggest 50-70%
disabilities in developing exploitation, especially of the world’s 101 million
countries are if they travel alone and children out of school are
unemployed through irregular from minority and
 Children with migration pathways indigenous populations
disabilities are 3–4  1 in 4 refugee children  400 million children from
times more likely to of secondary age are ethnic and religious groups
experience physical and estimated to be in are discriminated against
sexual violence and school compared with  Two-thirds of families who
neglect than their peers 3 in 4 children lack good health, nutrition
worldwide and education are from a
 17 years is the average minority ethnic group
length of time refugees
spend uprooted from
their homes
 Children accounted for
51% of refugees in
2014, up from 46% in
2011, and over half of
IDPs are children (ELC,
p11).
Prevalence  About 15% of the  International migrants  Indigenous peoples make
world’s population lives reached 272 million in up around 370 million, or
with some form of 2019, or 3.5% of the 5% of the world’s
disability, or an world’s population population
estimated 1 billion  70.8 million people are  5% of the global
people forcibly displaced as a population are from
 150 million children are result of persecution, indigenous groups but they
estimated to be living conflict, generalized make up 15% of those
with a disability violence or human people in poverty
rights violations
 42,500 people a day
fled their homes in

13
 2014, a fourfold
increase from 2010
Tools for  Washington Group of  UNHCR Needs  Marginalized Minorities in
Inquiry Short Questions on Assessment Handbook Development
Disability  IOM Handbook on Programming, UNDP (see
 WHO Model Disability Protection and Part 3, Tools to Integrate
Survey Assistance for Migrants Minorities into Develop-
Vulnerable to Violence, ment Programming
Exploitation and Abuse  Social Impact Assessment
to assess potential impact
of projects, particularly on
indigenous groups.
Includes Inclusive
Development Analysis
(Annex IV), tool to
understand indigenous
peoples; and references
Akwé: Kon Guidelines
(Annex III), developed by
Indigenous Peoples, for
consultations with
indigenous groups
Sources on characteristics and prevalence: TAAP Inclusion Hub (Persons with disabilities and Ethnic
minorities); UN Dept of Economic and Social Affairs, Migration Data Portal and Every Last Child
Report, Save the Children (Refugees, migrants and displaced);

Children with disabilities is an excluded group that Save the Children now prioritizes in its current
strategy. The term “disability”, however, covers a wide range of conditions, from mild to severe
physical, mental or intellectual impairments, some of which may be temporary, others life-long, and still
others associated with certain stages of life such as old age. Persons with disabilities, therefore, should
be understood not as a precise group but rather a continuum. The Washington Group Disability
Question Sets is an internationally recognized tool useful for understanding how much individuals feel
that the impairments they face are “disabling”. Disability itself is increasingly understood not as
impairments but rather the social, environmental and institutional barriers faced by people with
impairments.

People who self-identify as persons with disabilities, however, have struggled for decades for recognition
and respect, reaching watershed moments with the UN Convention on the Rights of People with
Disabilities adopted in 2006, and the Global Disability Summit of 2018, which endorsed the disability
movement’s mantra, “Nothing about us without us”. The international development community,
particularly disability organizations, have increasingly come to realize that they cannot speak for people
with disabilities, who are increasingly self-organizing through disabled persons’ organizations, many of
whom are represented in the apex International Disability Alliance.

Displaced populations, a label recommended by Collaborative Research Network 11, includes refugees,
migrants, and the internally displaced, is another diverse group of people who nevertheless often face
similar challenges in host societies across the world. They are in fact three distinct groups, though the
causes and motivations for their movement may be similar, and as populations they are often inter-
mingled, particularly in urban settings. Refugees International’s analysis that the displaced are amongst
the most vulnerable to COVID-19, illustrates the vulnerabilities they face: most live in camps or

14
crowded conditions; they have difficulty accessing basic services, particularly healthcare; they have
limited access to information, due to factors such as language barriers or mistrust of authorities; and the
international humanitarian assistance they often depend on has been constrained by overwhelming global
needs and limited resources.

The steady increases in international migration (by 25% since 2000) and displacement (by over 70% since
2009) have pushed states to agree to greater cooperation, expressed in the Global Compact for Safe,
Orderly and Regular Migration and the Global Compact on Refugees, both affirmed by the UN General
Assembly in 2018. Human mobility can have positive and/or negative effects, depending on policy
choices. Informed research and evidence generation, such as an inclusion review, can contribute to
designing constructive policies and services.

Many ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities face discrimination, marginalization and exclusion and, in
some countries, the impacts of violence and conflict. In all regions of the world disadvantaged minority
children suffer disproportionately from unequal access to quality education, with school curricula often
neglecting minority language, culture and history. Politically, minorities are almost always under-
represented in national parliaments, in local government and other areas of public life. Many minorities
have been historically excluded from full and effective participation in economic life, and often face
discrimination when seeking employment or undue legal restrictions on the practice of traditional
livelihoods. As a severe form of exclusion, most of the 15 million stateless people are members of
minority groups (UN Forum on Minority Issues).

The UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic
Minorities (1992) and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) are foundations for
pluralist societies. And yet we are seeing a rise in populism and majoritarian politics in many parts of
the world, both developed and developing. Many politicians find it all too easy to channel what may be
legitimate popular grievances and direct them against vulnerable minority groups, polarizing society. In
such environments, conducting reviews on social exclusion can pose serious risks, not least to the
minority groups we are studying. As we seek to understand the conditions of minority and other
identity groups, we must avoid “profiling”, reducing people to one-dimensional caricatures of identity,
unintentionally exacerbating the barriers they face. The TAAP Toolkit’s five principles offer inclusive
language and framing to help researchers and practitioners navigate these challenges.

Internal sources and key informants

SC’s Country Offices conducted extensive research on the most deprived during the 2019-22 country
strategic planning process. In particular, each CO conducted a Child Rights Situation Analysis that
identified child rights gaps, and which children suffer from them, often referencing statistical sources.
The CSPs usually identified priority groups from amongst the most deprived. Impact Area Situation
Analyses and Baselines are also important sources to consult, and might identify some of the most
marginalized groups. Key informants will likely include thematic advisors from the CO’s PDQ team, but
might also include staff from the impact area.

Internal sources also include global analyses conducted by SC’s Global Themes, by one of the global
campaigns, or by different SC members. These include some analyses on specific deprived groups or
issues, such as on gender equality, girls, people with disabilities, child poverty, children on the move, etc.
Key informants might include STWG or other thematic advisors covering your country.

External sources and key informants

The more thorough the internal sources are, drawing from data sources that are reasonably recent, the
less effort will be required in reviewing external sources. Nevertheless, there may be two reasons to

15
seek out external sources, including both documents and individual experts: 1) to ensure you have
accessed the most up-to-date information, and are aware of any developments, debates or
controversies; and 2) to foster engagement with key influential figures or representatives of the priority
groups, for their awareness and possible future support on any advocacy efforts.

When identifying potential sources, it is useful to consider key informants from a rights perspective,
ensuring that you approach key informants from both ends of the continuum (see Annex 2.1,
Stakeholder Analysis Matrix). Rights holders, such as elected officials or civil society leaders from an
excluded group, or sympathetic advocates or practitioners from organizations working on their behalf,
will tend to articulate the challenges and barriers faced by that group, but also their potential. Duty
bearers, such as government decision makers or service providers, or those seeking to inform them
such as think tank analysts or academic researchers, will tend to focus on what is known about or what
they are doing for an excluded group. The more formal a duty bearer’s responsibility, the more likely it
is s/he will express the “party line”, which in itself may be informative. The Key Informant Interview
Checklist (Annex 2.2) should help you structure your discussion with these key informants.

Rights holders Duty bearers

Elected representatives or Advocates Academics Policy makers
civil society leaders from Practitioners Policy advisors Government service
excluded groups Private providers providers

Analysis of secondary source findings

The information gleaned from these secondary sources should be summarized and analyzed, noting any
data gaps, to inform any primary data collection (see Secondary Source Analysis Worksheet, Annex 2.3).
Analysis should focus on the four areas: sources, identity, prevalence, and standards. Findings should be
categorized by type of source, rights holder or duty bearer, to highlight different perspectives and
possible contradictions to explore during primary data collection.

Step Two: Checklist

 Identify the main sources and references for each priority group in your country
 Consult internal Save the Children sources, both documents and informed individuals, to
access what is already known about these groups
 Fill gaps by consulting external sources, from both rights holder and duty bearer perspectives
 Assemble and analyze data on the characteristics of and barriers faced by your priority
excluded groups

16
Step 3: Collect Primary Data

This step describes the process of a gradually evolving research design, training and orienting the data
collection team, and ensuring inclusive data collection practices and behaviours.

Identify key questions

Use the data you have collected from your secondary source review to identify gaps in your knowledge
or areas requiring further information. The framework below offers guidance on domains to consider
under the three review objectives presented in Step 1, while the tables in the next sub-section offer
examples of questions for each of these domains (see Annex 3.1, Key Questions Template).

Objectives Domains Description

Who are the Identity and  Key factors shaping identities, such as language or location, and
excluded? Context the impact of key intersectionality, such as age or gender
 roles, responsibilities, participation and time use
 access to and control over assets and resources, such as land and
housing, income, public services and social benefits, employment,
technology and information
 beliefs, perceptions and cultural norms of identity groups
Prevalence  number and location of the various excluded groups in the
impact area
 their participation in Sponsorship programs

Deprivations  gaps in accessing rights, disaggregated by excluded groups,

particularly rights to survival, education, protection and
participation
How and Social Attitudes  broader social knowledge, beliefs and perceptions, and norms
why are they about different identity groups’ acceptable behavior, how they
excluded? are valued by society, and their capabilities
 human dignity, safety and wellness, including the ability to live life
free from stigma, discrimination, and danger, and have incidences
of violence addressed and prevented
 transitions transforming society, such as migration patterns,
conflicts or globalization and digitization, and their impact on
social attitudes

17
  Individual and household power and decision making, such as
purchasing decisions, decisions about one’s body or about
children, or entering into legal contracts
Environmental  Natural and climatic factors, such as topography, erosion, rainfall,
Factors or changing weather patterns
 Infrastructure, roads and transport, communications and the
built environment
Laws and  Treatment of different identity groups by both customary and
Institutions formal legal codes, safeguarding laws, and judicial systems
 access to legal documentation such as ID cards, voter
registration, property titles, rights to inheritance, employment,
redress of wrongs, and representation
 differential interpretation and application of laws and policies
 quality and availability of public services, including provider
behaviors and attitudes
How can we Empowerment  potential strategies to strengthen the assets, capacities and
enable their networks of individuals
inclusion?  strategies to strengthen the voice of excluded groups, including
their representative groups
 strategies to restore the dignity of excluded groups, such as their
recognition through documentation and official statistics
Acceptance  potential strategies to increase excluded groups’ access to
resources, for land, housing, labor and financial services
 strategies to increase access to or demand for services, including
health, education, social protection, transport, water and
sanitation, energy and information
 strategies to make spaces more inclusive, including social,
political and cultural spaces
Inclusive  empowerment and acceptance actions that can be applied in
Programming Sponsorship programs
 inclusive interventions to enhance the four sub-outcomes:
access, quality, capacity, and enabling environment.

Identify sources and methods

The next step is to identify, for each key question, the source of the data needed to answer the
question, and the method to be used to collect it. The research design can be developed in a
participatory exercise involving the data collection team during their orientation.

The first objective, understanding who the most excluded are in your impact area, will involve gathering
primarily descriptive information, about the identity of these groups, their prevalence within the impact
area, and the deprivations they face (see table below). The main sources for such data should be
members of the excluded groups themselves, including children and their caregivers but also
representatives of these excluded groups, whether civil society or community leaders, or elected
representatives such as school board or local council members. Another set of sources is those who
interact frequently with these groups, whether service providers such as schoolteachers, health clinic
staff or local council employees, or your own staff and partners.

18
Using a variety of data collection tools can enhance the richness of the data you are able to collect. In
addition to the standard key informant interviews or focus group discussions (see Annexes 2.2 and 3.5),
the table below lists examples of tools to help explore different dimensions of identity group members’
lives. The Daily Routine tool, for example, has often been used in gender analyses to compare the
different ways boys and girls spend their time (see example in SC’s Gender Equality Toolkit, p97), while
Mobility Mapping can expose the different constraints each faces in their access to public space (for an
example, see Feed the Future’s Mobility Map) The WASH Alliance’s Leave No One Behind tools (see
Organization Inclusion Assessment Tool, for example) or the Population Council’s Coverage Exercise
(see, for example, p30) can be useful tools to help staff and partners examine how their program design
shapes participation. And participatory analytical tools, such as Problem Ranking or the Problem Tree
(for an example, see Sustainable Sanitation, Water Management and Agriculture’s Toolbox), can be
helpful to tease out the deprivations faced by these groups.

At this point it is useful to consider the question of sampling, to try to ensure that the set of sources
you choose from an identity group is somewhat representative of that group in your impact area. If the
identity group is fairly well known and visible, then you may want to set some criteria for purposive
sampling, such as sex, age, wealth, family type (e.g. female-headed household), and geographic location, in
order to ensure you understand the diversity within the various excluded groups. If a group is not so
visible, such as children with disabilities in some societies, you may need to consider more innovative
sampling techniques such as “snowball” sampling, where one representative, perhaps a program
beneficiary, connects you with others from the same identity group. Another creative sampling
technique is to conduct a census of all children or families in a random sample of the communities in
your impact area, to get a sense of their prevalence. For more guidance on sampling, see Sponsorship’s
Managing Performance Evaluations. Other useful sources on sampling techniques include Better
Evaluation or INTRAC’s M&E Universe.

Objective 1: Who are the excluded in our impact area?

Domain Identity and Context Prevalence Deprivations
 Who are the most excluded  How many from these  What rights (to survival,
groups in our impact area? groups are in our impact education, protection,
 What traits or experiences area? participation) are members
Key are common to their  How many from these of these groups typically
Questions identity groups? groups participate in our denied or challenged in
(examples) programs? accessing?
 What factors exacerbate
access to rights, and for
whom?
 Members of excluded  Representatives, leaders of  Representatives, leaders of
groups excluded groups excluded groups
Sources  Representatives, traditional  Spon staff and partners  Members of excluded
and non-traditional leaders  Service providers groups
of excluded groups
 Focus group discussion  Key informant interview  Focus group discussion
 Mobility maps  Impact area mapping  Problem ranking
 Asset profiles  Community mapping  Problem tree analysis
 Seasonal calendar  Exclusion patterns in SC
Tools  Daily routine programs (social excl pdf)
 Identity wheel  Coverage exercise
 Washington Group  Service provider records,
questions (for children with Spon program records
disabilities)

19
The second objective involves analytical information to understand how and why specific groups are
excluded (see table below). There are a range of frameworks available for social exclusion analysis (see,
for example, TAAP’s six domains based on a model developed by the Harvard Institute for International
Development, slides 106-8). This guide advocates a simple, three-domain model adapted from disability
barrier analysis (see Travelling Together, World Vision, p41-43) that examines 1) prevailing social
attitudes towards the different excluded groups, particularly prejudice, discrimination and stigma; 2)
environmental factors that affect these groups, including both natural factors and infrastructural factors
such as buildings or transport and communication systems; and 3) laws, policies and institutions that
regulate people’s lives and the services they can access. These three domains are inter-related; the legal
age of marriage, for example, usually correlates with social attitudes about the acceptable age for
marriage. Access to land or water resources is shaped by their physical availability but also by the legal
system and by social norms about who can inherit land. This objective examines how these different
domains interact to create barriers but also boosters to an excluded group’s participation in society.

In the spirit of participation, the social inclusion analysis is not the exclusive preserve of the team but
should involve the primary sources who actually experience these processes of exclusion. These include
rights holders from the excluded groups and their representatives, but also social and political leaders
who shape public opinion. Opinion leaders might be religious figures, clan or tribal leaders, or figures
with large social media followings.

There are a range of interesting tools to choose from to elucidate how these social processes work.
Time Trends (see, for example, Natural Resource Trend Analysis, Participatory Rural Appraisal
presentation, slides 38-39) examine people’s perceptions of transitions occurring over time, such as
migration trends, climate change or decentralization. Social Norms Analysis (see Oxfam’s GEM+
Toolkit), developed to help program teams understand the social norms that shape, constrain or
promote women’s economic empowerment, can be adapted to a variety of thematic areas. Venn
Diagramming (see Feed the Future example) has often been used to explore community members’
opinions about the different actors and institutions that shape a specific sector, such as education.

Objective 2: How and why are they excluded?

Domain Social Attitudes Environmental Factors Laws and Institutions
 What social attitudes and  What physical, natural and  What laws, policies and
behaviors toward these climatic factors reinforce institutional practices
groups cause exclusion? their exclusion? contribute to their exclusion?
Key
 How are transitions (eg  How do social and legal  How do these legal and
Questions
demographic, rural-urban, forces shape the impact these institutional forces affect
(examples)
climate change) affecting environmental factors have access to markets, services
social attitudes toward on exclusion? and spaces?
identity groups?
 Opinion leaders  Service providers  Government leaders
 Members of excluded groups  Key informants on natural  Service providers
Sources  Representatives, leaders of resources, climate,  Representatives, leaders of
excluded groups infrastructure excluded groups
 Representatives, leaders of
excluded groups
 Time trends  Key informant interview  Venn diagramming
 Social norms analysis (Oxfam  Impact area mapping  Network analysis
GEM)  Community mapping  Time trends
Tools
 Social network and influence  Seasonal calendar  Problem tree
mapping (Georgetown RH)
 The 5 whys

20
The third objective, identifying ways to enable greater social inclusion of excluded groups, is exploratory
and propositional, considering ways that the social processes of exclusion can be reversed or mitigated.
It explores how excluded groups might be supported or empowered to participate more effectively,
how the wider society and its institutions might become more open and welcoming of these groups, and
finally how Sponsorship programming might become more inclusive, including incorporating
empowerment or acceptance interventions.

The table below lists several examples of tools that can help stakeholders as well as Sponsorship staff
and partners to brainstorm and prioritize inclusion interventions. Preference Ranking (see IIED
example), is simply a form of voting amongst different options, while Direct Matrix Ranking (see IIED
example) involves comparing a set of options against a set of criteria. Resources for Measuring Social
Norms (Institute of Reproductive Health, Georgetown University) contains a set of useful tools for
influencing social norms, such as Specifying Reference Groups who have the potential to change them.
Sponsorship’s Logical Framework, with its four generic sub-outcomes (access, quality, capacity, enabling
environment), can be a useful framework for considering how to integrate inclusion interventions into
existing programs.

Objective 3: How can we enable their inclusion?

Domain Empowerment Acceptance Inclusive Programming
 What aspirations or  What policy or  How can our programs
assets can these groups institutional changes be more inclusive of
build on to strengthen would enhance access these groups?
their own to resources, services  Who can we partner
empowerment? or spaces? with to become more
Key Questions
 What entities can  What attitude changes responsive to these
voice(examples)
contribute to their or cultural excluded groups?
empowerment? competencies would  Is there a need for an
make society more advocacy strategy to be
welcoming of these included in our
groups? program?
 Representatives, leaders  Opinion leaders  Spon staff and partners
Sources of excluded groups  Government leaders
 Service providers
 Preference or direct  Specifying reference  Theory of change
matrix ranking groups (IRH) development
Tools
 Asset mapping  Participant-defined  CASP Results
 Venn diagramming quality tools (SC) framework

Orient, train primary data collectors

A pivotal element of a social inclusion review is the selection and orientation of the primary data
collection team. Data collectors need awareness and understanding of the dynamics of deprivation and
exclusion, including their own biases. This section of the guide draws training/awareness exercises from
the TAAP Toolkit, particularly Inclusive Inquiry and Reflection.

Qualitative research literature emphasizes the importance of including both “insiders” and “outsiders” in
the research team. Insiders are those with local knowledge and relationships, such as staff, partners or
volunteers from the impact area but could also include representatives from the different identity
groups. Outsiders contribute subject matter expertise, whether in conducting qualitative or identity

21
group research, or in a thematic area of interest such as health, education or natural resource
management. Research teams should generally be gender-balanced and possibly age-balanced, including
children, for easier access to and understanding of the groups being studied. Diverse teams can help
offset each other’s biases, though building team cohesion may require more effort.

The toolkit includes a sample workshop agenda, with the objective of preparing data collectors to
conduct inclusive, methodologically and ethically sound data collection to meet the Review objectives
(see Annex 3.3). All data collectors should have taken SC’s child safeguarding training. The workshop
setting should also build a team bond and common sense of purpose, and should cover the following
topics:
1) sensitization to identity and exclusion/inclusion dynamics: the TAAP Toolkit’s Inclusive Inquiry
and Reflection offers some useful reflective exercises on participants’ own multi-faceted
identities, and on the identity of their organization, which in turn shape how they interpret their
role and purpose;
2) findings and conclusions from the review of secondary sources: the secondary source analysis
worksheet (Annex 2.3) presents a useful summary of findings and conclusions, and a starting
point for the data collection team to identify points to confirm or further explore, as well as
unanswered questions;
3) research and data collection tool design: involving the data collectors in some level of the
research design is a useful way to orient them to the research. While the Project Charter
(Annex 1.2) will have set the broad research parameters, the workshop agenda assumes further
work will be needed on formulating the key research questions, identifying sources and
methods, developing research tools such as interview checklists or ranking criteria, and working
out the research schedule, research pairs, and daily logistics; and
4) training/orientation to inclusive data collection: this final topic is extremely important, to ensure
the team has understood and agreed to ethical and inclusive data collection practices (see next
section). Role playing in front of the group is a helpful exercise for reinforcing inclusive team
norms.

Conduct inclusive data collection

Inclusive data collection is not simply a set of research techniques or an empathetic style of interaction
with the research subjects; it is an ethical stance that social exclusion is unjust but not inevitable; we
study exclusion in order to transform it into greater social inclusion. This Guide endorses the TAAP
approach’s five principles for inclusive development, while also committing to the ethical research
standards outlined in Save the Children’s ethical research policy.

The TAAP Toolkit articulates five principles guiding its overall approach toward social inclusion (see
TAAP Toolkit, slides 38-43):
 participatory approaches: applying this principle means that all stakeholders who are affected by
your work are not just listened to but have an active role in decision making throughout the
project’s implementation
 conflict sensitivity: this principle ensures that you identify the local power dynamics (and
marginalization dynamics) so that your project can remove barriers to inclusion, mitigate
unintended consequences, and provide pathways to inclusion
 emphasis on dignity and agency: this principle echoes the slogan “nothing about us without us”
popularized by the disability activist James Charlton in 2000. By practicing this principle,
organizations working for social change can avoid contributing to oppressive structures or
reinforcing norms that constrain individuals’ capacity to determine and pursue their own
priorities and to serve as agents of change in their society

22
  address power imbalances: this principle seeks to understand the many layers of identity-based
power distribution and to find inclusive ways to address power imbalances— in part by fostering
direct connections between historically marginalized and excluded populations and those in
power—connections that would be unlikely to happen otherwise
 think big, think the impossible: it was the work of those who believed in a more inclusive society
and their determined efforts that brought previously marginalized and excluded people to places
of greater agency, access, and power. This principle means continually looking beyond our daily
routine work, and creating space where we can dream big and orient our work toward that
vision.

In addition to these ethical and action-oriented principles, inclusive data collection should also be guided
by ethical research standards, as outlined in Save the Children’s ethics in research guidance regarding
research on human subjects. These standards are especially important where those subjects are
children, and members of excluded groups who tend to suffer high levels of stigma and trauma; the
humanitarian ‘do no harm’ principle is paramount. Save the Children’s research design protocol (see
Annex 3.2) requires that specific, practical measures be proposed to address the key ethical concerns,
including being sensitive to the cost/benefit balance of stakeholders' participation in the research,
including recognizing and offsetting any potential risks from their participation; ensuring participants are
aware that their participation is voluntary; respecting their confidentiality and anonymity if requested;
seeking, and documenting when necessary, participants’ informed consent, or that of caregivers in the
case of children; and having plans in place for the long-term safeguarding of any personally identifiable
data. As much as possible, the research should use Sponsorship’s already approved practices and
mechanisms for data collection and storage, as described in Managing Performance Evaluations (see, for
example, the section on Ensuring consent, confidentiality and children safeguarding), as well as using the
ASIST database.

Step Three: Checklist

 Formulate key questions that fill in gaps in knowledge from secondary sources and address
the three objectives of the analysis
 Identify sources and methods for each question
 Orient and train primary data collectors, ensuring they are sensitive to inclusive development
principles and ethical research issues
 Collect primary data while adhering to ethical research and inclusive development principles

23
Step 4: Analyze Results

The Social Inclusion Analysis’s analytical process will progress through four stages, from the primarily
descriptive stage of creating “snapshots” of the different excluded groups, to the analytical stage of
examining the barriers each group faces to full participation in society, towards a decisional stage of
identifying opportunities for bringing about change for each of the groups. This is followed by a data
validation exercise, to validate or refine key findings and conclusions. Intersectionality should remain a
cross-cutting theme throughout the analysis process, noting both how characteristics and barriers can
be compounding, but also how entry points may benefit numerous groups.

Identify and describe under-represented excluded groups

The first stage in the analysis process is to assemble and consolidate your findings for each excluded
group, using the Excluded Group Profile Form (Annex 4.1), to construct a description of the
characteristics and identities of each group that will serve as a reference point for the next stages of the
analysis.

As much as possible, the Profile should answer our key questions for the first objective of the Review,
Who are the excluded in our impact area? It should summarize what we have learned about their
identity and characteristics, their prevalence in our impact area, and the key deprivations they face. It is
important that the profiling exercises not be siloed but consider ‘Intersectionality’, or overlapping
characteristics that often exacerbate deprivation for individuals within groups, such as a female member
of an indigenous group who also has a disability.

The master form for a particular excluded group is first filled based on the information recorded in the
secondary source analysis worksheet (Annex 2.3). Each data collection pair that has conducted key
informant interviews and focus group discussions with representatives of that group should enter their
key findings in the form. The data collection team then compares findings, noting whether they confirm,
clarify or contradict the original findings from the secondary source analysis. Where there are
discrepancies in the findings, use triangulation to verify or refute key points. If a discrepancy remains,
note this as a point to clarify during the validation exercise or during further primary data collection.

Social exclusion analysis

The second stage of the analysis involves discerning the main barriers and boosters faced by each
excluded group, completing the Barrier/Booster Analysis Template (Annex 4.2). Barriers are those

24
factors that contribute to an identity group’s exclusion while boosters are those that facilitate—or could
facilitate—their participation in society.

Again, this analysis should help you answer the key questions for the second objective of the Review,
How and why are these groups excluded? Barriers and boosters should be categorized among the three
domains of social attitudes, environmental factors, and laws and institutions. The boosters point to
opportunities for inclusive actions in the third stage of the analysis.

This stage of the analysis can be conducted as a participatory group exercise, using sticky cards or post-
its posted into a matrix on a large whiteboard. Focusing on one excluded group at a time, write up the
boosters and barriers noted by the secondary sources, and then have each research pair record the
barriers and boosters they encountered during their primary data collection. For each cell in the matrix
(booster or barrier per domain), group the similar cards, and determine whether the extraneous cards
indeed represent factors faced by the identity group or rather reflect special cases. Review the set of
boosters and barriers for consistency and complementarity, resolving contradictions or eliminating
repetitions, before proceeding to the next excluded group.

Entry points for transformational change

The third stage of the analysis identifies opportunities to transform or mitigate against processes of
exclusion, using the Inclusive Design Exercise (Annex 4.3). This exercise should help you address the
questions for the third objective of the Review, How can we enable these excluded groups’ greater
inclusion in society? While some of the opportunities we identify may be incorporated as interventions
in the Sponsorship program, we should not restrict our thinking only to our own manageable interest,
but rather think about the broader vision of a more inclusive society, as expressed in the fifth TAAP
principle, “Think big, think the impossible”.

The process for this stage, therefore, begins with brainstorming opportunities that address the barriers
or build on the boosters identified in the previous stage. This potentially long list of opportunities can
then be refined by ranking them according to their impact on the root causes of exclusion, their
responsiveness to the expressed priorities of our sources from the excluded group, and the feasibility of
implementing them. The ranking will allow you to focus on the most promising of the opportunities in
the last step in the process, which is to identify where they might fit into one of the existing Sponsorship
core programs, according to the CASP logical framework and its sub-outcomes.

25
 Sponsorship CO Recent Efforts to Target the Most Deprived
Source: Sponsorship Coverage Exercise Survey Results, April 2020
# of
Type of Effort Examples
COs
Special targeting or 11  Outreach through radio to those outside schools (Malawi)
outreach efforts  Conduct count of all children in impact area (Niger)
New activities or services 7  Age-specific community-based health groups, with targeting
tailored to the needs of guidelines (Bangladesh)
specific deprived groups  Transition-to-school activity for children not accessing
ECCD (Egypt)
Reach most deprived 7  Reach children with disabilities through disabled people’s
through partners orgs (Nepal)
 Collaborate with government to identify children with
disabilities (Zambia)
Make services more 6  Locate services close to disadvantaged, with special hours
accessible to most (Bolivia)
deprived groups  Gender assessment of programs (Uganda)
 Deliver aid to most geographically isolated during COVID
(US)
Strengthen partner, staff 4  Build teacher capacities to work with children with visual,
capacities to work with hearing impairments (Afghanistan)
most deprived groups  Gender, inclusive education training for teachers
(Myanmar)

Examples of entry points

To illustrate entry points for transformative change, we return to the three excluded groups we
examined in Step 2, Review Secondary Sources, and present examples of strategies and interventions
relevant to the needs of these three groups. These are drawn from overarching approaches to social
inclusion for these groups, including Disability Inclusive Development for persons with disabilities,
Durable Solutions for displaced peoples, and Pathways for Peace for minorities. The strategies are
aligned with the four sub-outcomes in Sponsorship’s logical framework, and could be incorporated into
Sponsorship core programs using the Inclusive Design Exercise (Annex 4.3).

Children
CASP Sub- Displaced Ethnic
Approaches and Strategies with
outcomes Populations Minorities
Disabilities
Accessibility and universal design X
Access
Local integration as a durable solution X
Inclusive education X X X
Quality
Specialized services X X X
Participatory, inclusive program management X X X
Capacity
Partnering with excluded group organizations X X X
Enabling Self-advocacy X
Environment Conflict transformation and peace building X

26
Access: excluded groups face acute barriers to participation, resources and services, some distinct to
specific groups and some common across excluded groups. Access refers to removing these barriers.

For persons with disabilities, barriers—which include

physical or environmental, communication, policy and
attitudinal barriers—vary by impairment. Children with
motor impairments face physical barriers simply to arrive at
a classroom, while children with visual or hearing
impairments may have difficulty accessing learning materials.
All children with disabilities may face attitudinal barriers.
Barriers faced by displaced people include legal barriers,
barriers to movement and employment, attitudinal barriers
(resentment, competition for resources), and
communication barriers (information flow, language).
Accessibility and Universal Design seeks to create a barrier-
free environment for everyone because a society accessible
for persons with disabilities is one accessible to all (see
Disability Inclusive Development Toolkit, p53). Countries
that have ratified the CRPD are obligated to ensure
accessibility, under the Convention’s Article 9. Universal
Design involves designing products and environments so
that they can be used by the widest range of people possible without need for adaptation or specialized
design.
Universal Design involves designing
products and environments so that they
can be used by the widest range of
people possible without need for
adaptation or specialised design.
Universal Design evolved from Accessible
Design, a design process that addresses
the needs of people with disabilities.
Universal Design goes further by
recognising that there is a wide spectrum
of human abilities. Everyone passes
through childhood, periods of temporary
illness, injury and old age. By designing
for this human diversity, we can create
things that will be easier for all people to
use. (Source: Disability Inclusive
Development Toolkit, CBM 2018)

Examples of interventions aligned with this strategy include:

 Develop accessibility standards for program activities: these should be developed with input
from persons with disabilities. See for example CBM’s Disability-inclusive Consultations and
Events (Inclusion Made Easy, p30-34; p42) or Guidelines for PowerPoint Presentations from the
World Blind Union;
 Disability sensitization training for project staff and service providers: service providers are
often unconsciously guided by a “medical approach”—that the disabled are sick and need to be
fixed in order to join society, or by a “charity approach”—that the disabled are helpless and
outside normal society. These represent attitudinal barriers. Travelling Together advocates a
more respectful and constructive “inclusive approach”, which focuses on society rather than the
disabled as the problem, and aims to make society more inclusive;
 Monitor participation of people with disabilities in project interventions: CBM’s Monitoring on
Inclusion tool (Disability Inclusive Development Toolkit, p120) aims to assess the progress of
disability inclusion in development programs, to help implementers better understand the
situation of people with disability in their community and monitor the changes that their
programs contribute to – in improving the quality of life of persons with disabilities and in
achieving an inclusive society for all. The tool monitors change at three levels; individual,
community and organization, and disaggregates monitoring data by disability type, gender and
age.

27
Local integration, one of the three ‘durable solutions’ promoted by UNHCR and the refugee-serving
community, along with repatriation and resettlement, is a means to ending exile by allowing refugees to
become full members of their host community in their first country of asylum. While host governments
usually have policies regarding treatment of refugees, this solution encompasses de facto as well as de
jure local integration. As a durable solution, local integration represents a transition from relief to
development, integrating special refugee services into the national service delivery system serving the
general population while also supporting the empowerment and resilience of refugees and the displaced.
As noted in one review, “Creating the environment in which individuals can ensure their own access to
services… is more important than the direct provision of those services” (A Remaining Hope for
Durable Solutions: Local integration of refugees and their hosts in the case of Uganda, Sarah Dryden-
Peterson and Lucy Hovil, 2004, Refuge: Canada’s Journal on Refugees).

Examples of interventions supporting local integration include:

 Support school integration strategies: one of three strategic objectives of UNHCR’s Refugee
Education 2030 is to foster safe, enabling environments that support learning for all students,
regardless of legal status, gender or disability. This includes ensuring that learning environments
are safe and inclusive. Sponsorship could support activities such as community-based learning
support, particularly for female students and learners with disabilities, such as tutoring services
to help refugees adjust to unfamiliar national curricula; encouraging refugee participation in
school committees, structures, and activities; employ refugee teachers; or documenting the
absorptive capacity of local schools, and advocating for increased financial support to schools
accommodating refugees and the displaced;
 Outreach to host communities: the UNHCR-NGO Toolkit for Practical Cooperation on
Resettlement proposes a range of outreach activities that NGOs can undertake, including
information campaigns to make host communities aware of refugees’ needs and how to
mainstream assistance to refugees where it dovetails with strategic use of resettlement; to
engage with governments and foster public support for the non‐discrimination of refugees; to
expand asylum space, to improve the rights environment and livelihoods opportunities for
refugees; to make the refugees aware of host community programs and policies that affect them;
to relay back to UNHCR information learned from these entities to inform policy and programs;
and to utilize host community "eyes and ears" to identify at‐risk refugees in need of
interventions, including resettlement;
 Peer support groups: diaspora groups (see Capacity section below, Partnering with
Organizations representing excluded groups strategy) can play an effective role in helping new
arrivals adjust to their host countries. Peer support groups connect new arrivals with
compatriots, group leaders, who are already well established in the host country. Group
leaders seek to provide supports that will: 1) decrease new arrivals’ feelings of isolation; 2) build
community networks and; 3) increase feelings of empowerment within the community (Peer
Support Groups: Evaluating a Culturally Grounded, Strengths-Based Approach for Work With
Refugees, Block et al, 2018).

Quality: in the context of social inclusion, quality refers to meeting the specific needs of excluded
groups, whether by adapting existing services, or developing specialized services. Barriers obviously vary
by excluded group. Children with disabilities may need tailored learning materials and strategies.
Displacement and resettlement can leave refugee children out of school for years at a time, making it
difficult for them to rejoin formal education. Minority and refugee children might face barriers due to

28
language of instruction, while xenophobic attitudes may create learning environments where it is difficult
for them to succeed.

Inclusive Education: inclusion in education is a process of enabling all children to learn and participate
effectively within mainstream school systems, without segregation. It is about shifting the focus from
altering disabled people to fit into society to transforming society, and the world, by changing attitudes,
removing barriers and providing the right support (Implementing Inclusive Education: A Commonwealth
guide to implementing Article 24 of the CRPD, 2012). While inclusive education has become
synonymous with education for children with disabilities, successful inclusive practice will be successful
for all children with many different attributes such as ethnicity, language, gender and socio-economic
status (Implementing Inclusive Education, K4D, 2018).

UNESCO has an extensive library of resources on inclusive education. While inclusive education
advocates a system-wide approach, discrete interventions might include:
 Training and support for teachers and school leaders: this involves training them in inclusive
practices, not just ‘specialized’ ones, and supporting school leadership to enact an inclusive
vision for their schools. UNESCO’s Toolkit for Creating Inclusive, Learning-friendly
Environments is a useful resource for teachers and school leaders;
 Small grants to schools to become more inclusive: the Index for Inclusion can be a useful
starting point to help schools chart a course toward greater inclusion. Sponsorship could offer
small grants to schools to fund initiatives in their school management plan, such as ramps for
accessible classrooms, inclusive learning materials, or a transportation fund for students with
mobility issues;
 Building community support for inclusive education: school management committees can raise
the awareness of parents and encourage engagement of parents of children with disabilities.
Based on the principles of community-based rehabilitation, parents can identify ways the
community can support and complement the efforts of the school and other specialized services
to enable the fuller participation of children with disabilities or from other excluded groups.

Specialized services: children and youth from excluded groups often require services especially tailored
to their needs in order to succeed in an unaccommodating world. In disability-inclusive development
this is the second track in the “twin-track approach” that also includes integrating disability-sensitive
measures into all policies and programs. In most cases it will make more sense for Save the Children to
partner with specialized service providers than to try to acquire the expertise and experience itself.

Specialized services is a broad category of potential interventions to address the diverse and distinct
needs of different excluded groups. Examples include:
 Work-based and service learning for youth with disabilities: vulnerable youth, such as youth with
disabilities, generally need support to become employable. Employment for Youth with
Disabilities (Brandeis University, 2015), a study in the US on employment success for youth with
disabilities, identified two factors associated with employment two years past high school: 1)
hands-on, authentic work experiences, and 2) high parent expectations. The National Service
Inclusion Project webpage links a range of resources to support inclusion of youth with
disabilities in service-learning, while the US-based Center for Parent Information and Resources
has a webpage of resources to support transition to employment for youth with disabilities;
 Accelerated education programs for refugee children: Accelerated Education (AE) is used to
promote access to certified education for children and adolescents who have missed out on

29
 substantial amounts of schooling. In AE older students cover the same educational ground as the
standard-age learners, but at a faster and more intensive pace. AE programs enable students to
study in a way and at a level appropriate to their ability and age. The curriculum is condensed,
so they can complete it in half the number of years normally required for that level, or less.
Certified accelerated education programs are a key way to allow older children and adolescents
to access condensed primary education services in conditions appropriate for their age;
 Mentoring minority youth: ethnic and racial minority youth are often at higher risk than youth
from majority groups due to identity-based discrimination, which can contribute to increased
stress and risky behaviors. In the US, research points to a range of potential benefits of
mentoring for African-American youth, for example, such as reduced health-risk behavior and
improved academic outcomes, social-emotional wellbeing, mental health, interpersonal
relationships, and racial identity (The Chronicle of Evidence-based Mentoring, 2020). One useful
reference on mentoring is the Guide to Mentoring Boys and Young Men of Color.

Capacity: a key aim of development is the empowerment of those affected by it. Capacities refer to the
knowledge, skills, practices and relationships that enable groups to effectively engage in the issues and
decisions that affect them. Excluded groups often lack or are denied these capacities. Barriers include
lack of representation and power; lack of resources to survive and thrive; and lack of opportunities to
participate.

Participatory, inclusive program management is a feasible strategy (i.e. within a program’s manageable
interest) for both strengthening the capacities of representatives of excluded groups while also ensuring
a program’s greater responsiveness to and ownership by those groups. Inclusive program management
can be seen as a continuum, from consultation to ownership by stakeholder groups. It is important to
note that the principle underpinning inclusive program management is stakeholder engagement, meaning
that all stakeholder groups should be represented, not simply excluded groups.

Examples of interventions include:

 Inclusive management practice and responsibilities: this is about modelling inclusion in the
internal management of the program, and involves 1) inclusive recruitment, retention and
professional development of staff with disabilities; and 2) monitoring day-to-day inclusive
practices, such as accessibility of workspace and communications, or equitable access to staff
development opportunities. Inclusive management practices are based on the principle of
reasonable accommodation, defined in CRPD as modifications of processes to ensure to people
with disabilities the equal exercise, on an equal basis with others, of all human rights (Disability
Inclusive Development Toolkit, CBM 2017, p64-69);
 Engage volunteers and community leaders from excluded groups: volunteering can help address
the social exclusion that diminishes participation in society, thereby working as a “critical
catalyst to wider civic engagement”. While benefiting society and host organizations,
volunteering also offers benefits to the volunteer, including learned skills, improved emotional
and physical health, and social networks (Understanding the Role of Volunteerism in Creating
Social Inclusion, Miller et al, 2011). Volunteers and community leaders from excluded groups
can provide valuable benefits to Sponsorship programs through their social connections, their
perspectives and their legitimacy within their communities;
 Inclusive project governance structures: PMD Pro, the methodology behind Save the Children’s
PPM PRIME project management system, recommends establishing a governance structure for
any project. This could be an internal management structure, a steering group with partner

30
 representatives, or an advisory board of stakeholder
What is a DPO?
representatives. Such structures can be
opportunities to increase the responsiveness of the Disabled persons’ organizations or DPOs
project to the needs of its target groups, including are representative organizations or
excluded groups. groups of persons with disabilities, where
persons with disabilities constitute a
Partnering with organizations representing excluded groups majority of the overall staff, board, and
is an extremely effective strategy for engaging excluded volunteers in all levels of the
groups and strengthening their capacity. Most excluded organization. It includes organizations of
relatives of PWDs (only those
groups have some civil society organizations that represent
representing children with disabilities,
them in different countries. The International Disability
people with intellectual disabilities,
Alliance (IDA) brings together eight global and six regional
and/or the Deafblind) where a primary
networks of persons with disabilities, comprising 1,100
aim of these organizations is
member organizations. In contrast to disability
empowerment and the growth of self-
organizations who serve persons with disabilities, DPOs are advocacy of persons with disabilities.
led by and represent persons with disabilities. One of the Source: Disability Rights Fund
Alliance’s priorities is empowerment and capacity
strengthening of organizations of persons with disabilities,
including its members in over 200 countries. Minority Rights Group International campaigns worldwide
with around 150 partners in over 50 countries to ensure that disadvantaged minorities and indigenous
peoples, often the poorest of the poor, can make their voices heard. It is more difficult to find
organizations representing displaced people, often because they are unable to register due to their legal
status in the host country. As an alternative, diaspora organizations, including African diaspora
associations exist in many countries and see their mandate as helping newly arrived members of their
communities adjust to the host country.

Possible interventions within this strategy include:

 Formal partnerships: documented in scopes of work and sub-award agreements or service
contracts, Save the Children can engage excluded group partners in advocacy, community
awareness raising, monitoring/accountability or other contributions to a project. Alternatively,
Save the Children can support a partner’s own project or service that aligns with a Sponsorship
program objective. As an interesting means of selecting partners, Disability Rights Fund
advocates participatory grantmaking, putting decision making in the hands of activists on the
ground who may have insights that funders may not have;
 Consultations and referrals: a less intensive way of engaging excluded group organizations can be
through agreements, documented through an MOU, that draw on their expertise, relationships
and perspectives. This might be for beneficiary selection, community mobilization, event
hosting, or reporting incidents or rights violations;
 Capacity support services: this can be a useful strategy to support a range or network of
community-based structures and self-help groups in an impact area, such as parent groups,
women’s groups, youth groups, savings groups, or others. Capacity strengthening can focus on
leadership and management skills, advocacy, peer education, etc.

Enabling Environment: this refers to both the policy and the social environments, and includes strategies
for policy influence and social mobilization. Barriers to an enabling environment for excluded groups
include lack of representation and voice, lack of awareness in the general population, and lack of political
will amongst leaders.

31
Advocacy agendas for many excluded groups are well defined and articulated in various international
conventions, including the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006), the United
Nations Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951), the Guiding Principles on Internal
Displacement (1998), the UN Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic,
Religious and Linguistic Minorities (1992), and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
(2007). These conventions should guide any advocacy and coalition building efforts.

Self-advocacy: “Nothing about us without us” has become a mantra of the disability community. Indeed,
the first guiding principle of the International Disability Alliance is “To respect the sovereignty of all
member organizations and recognize their expertise on issues affecting their own constituency”.
Enabling persons with disabilities to be self-advocates is a legitimate and respectful strategy to realize
Save the Children’s Theory of Change aspiration to Be the Voice.

Possible interventions to empower advocates with disabilities include:

 Support, promote activists: CBM’s Advocacy Toolkit for Disability Mainstreaming can be a useful
resource to help DPOs think through a mainstreaming strategy. One current advocacy
opportunity is to support local DPOs advocating for inclusive education, drawing on IDA’s 2020
global report, What an Inclusive, Equitable, Quality Education Means to Us and its social media
toolkit. While people with disabilities generally do not want to INGOs to speak for them, they
might welcome Save the Children using its convening power, for example bringing together local
authorities and representatives of persons with disabilities at the impact area level to discuss
issues of concern to them;
 Advocacy alliances: participating in coalitions to produce a signatory country’s shadow report
for the UN CRPD can be a useful way for Save the Children to contribute to an improved
enabling environment for people with disabilities. Global Disability Rights Now! has a useful
webpage with guidance and links for producing shadow reports.

Conflict transformation and peace building: minorities are often at the fault lines of conflict. The World
Bank’s Pathways for Peace examines the relationship of development, peace, and security—a
relationship that takes concrete form in inclusive approaches to preventing conflict. While the report
focuses on the role of national governments, some of the principles undergirding its framework suggest
potential roles for INGOs and local civil society: Prevention must be inclusive and build broad
partnerships across groups to identify and address grievances that fuel violence; and Prevention must
proactively and directly target patterns of exclusion and institutional weaknesses that increase risk (p27).

Possible interventions that could be integrated into Sponsorship programming include:

 Engage actors beyond the state in platforms for dialogue and peacebuilding: Many actors
involved in conflict today are not directly accessible to state institutions or agents. Inclusive
prevention entails a focus on strengthening the capacity of the society, not just the state, for
prevention (Pathways for Peace, p28). Sponsorship programs could foster the bottom-up
process of inclusive prevention by bringing together a broad a spectrum of people and groups,
through activities such as exchange visits between youth groups from different ethnic
communities; ethnic celebrations in schools; or community projects;
 Mainstream people’s engagement in community development programs and local conflict
resolution: under its call for a people-centered approach, Pathways for Peace notes (p318),
regarding public service delivery, the relative importance of how people are engaged as

32
 compared to what resources or services they receive. Through its partner-defined quality
methodology, Save the Children could play a role in reorienting service delivery to make people
partners in the design and delivery of public services and to strengthen trust in local and central
government;
 Monitor the risks of conflict: Pathways for Peace calls for identifying real and perceived
exclusion and inequality, which can fuel conflict. UNDP’s Marginalized Minorities in
Development Programming describes Ethnic Distance surveys (p139), which measure “ethnic
social distance”, or the degree of understanding and intimacy between members of social
groups. These can be integrated into Sponsorship’s performance evaluations to measure social
distance over time, and to monitor for early warning indicators of increasing or declining
tensions and possible conflict. The UNDP guide also provides a framework for development of
indicators for Early Warning on Minorities and Conflict (p142).

Validate key findings and conclusions

In keeping with the principles of inclusive data collection and the standards of ethical research, an
essential stage in the analysis process is the validation of key findings and conclusions with
representatives from the excluded groups. These might be from your key informants during the
secondary source review, and/or local sources from the primary data collection. This stage follows the
Data Validation Process (Annex 4.4).

The validation process usually takes the form of a workshop with select representatives, presenting the
main conclusions and recommendations of the Review and providing ample opportunity for the
representatives to provide feedback. Conclusions can be drawn from the Excluded Group Snapshots
(Annex 4.1) and the Barrier/Booster Analysis (Annex 4.2), while recommendations can be drawn from
the Inclusive Design Exercise (Annex 4.3). In addition to plenary discussion, one way to ensure concise
feedback from the various representatives is to have them participate in ranking exercises of the
conclusions and recommendations.

Two important issues should be considered in the design of a validation workshop: 1) Should there be
one validation exercise covering all excluded groups, or separate exercises for each excluded group? and
2) For any excluded group, should participants include both representatives of the group as well as
stakeholders/ gatekeepers (i.e. those concerned with but not members of the group)? These issues have
ethical and privacy as well as practical ramifications. A single workshop might end up taking significant
time but engaging representatives of any one excluded group only a small portion of that time. Of
greater concern, however, is the mix of participants; if these include both representatives of the
excluded group (i.e. rights holders) and those who regulate or serve them (i.e. duty bearers),
participants may not feel comfortable expressing themselves openly. Furthermore, presenting findings
may be a breach of confidence of some of the sources, and could potentially put them in danger. The
validation workshop clearly needs to be designed by those familiar with the local context.

Your research design should build in flexibility to return to the field for further primary data collection,
in case the validation workshop calls into question your main conclusions or reveals issues you have not
adequately explored. In such an iterative process of data collection and analysis triangulation becomes
an important quality control mechanism, where key conclusions are validated through multiple sources
or methods, to ensure reliability, credibility and validity (for more on triangulation, see INTRAC’s M&E
Universe).

33
When the team is satisfied that it has validated its responses to the key questions of the Review, the
findings, conclusions and recommendations should be written up in a report and/or slide presentation
(see Annex 4.5, Report and Presentation Formats).

Step Four: Checklist

 Identify and describe socially excluded groups who are under-represented in
Sponsorship programs
 Analyse the causes and effects of social exclusion, identifying barriers but also
boosters for each group
 Identify opportunities to transform or mitigate against processes of exclusion,
applying the Inclusive Design Exercise with Sponsorship programs in mind
 Engage rights holders and duty bearers for the excluded groups to validate your
conclusions and inclusive design recommendations

34
Step 5: Share and Use Results

This final step of the Social Inclusion Review examines its implications for different stakeholders, both internal
and external, immediate and remote, and generates action plans for using results. Potential responses range
from program revisions that are within the control of the CO Sponsorship team, to advocacy and
mobilization within the larger country context, to awareness and learning within the broader Save the
Children network and the international development community.

Country Office presentation

The Review report should be presented to interested parties from the Save the Children Country Office.
These will likely involve those identified in the Project Charter, including the sponsor, project owner and
management review group. This Guide recommends that the presenters also facilitate a management
response (see Annex 5.1, Management Response Template).

The Review presentation and report should provoke insights amongst program staff about the processes and
victims of exclusion at work in the country and in the impact area. The recommendations should spark
enthusiasm about Save the Children’s potential to intervene through its programs. The purpose of a
management response is to ensure that each recommendation is given thoughtful consideration. If it is
accepted it requires an action, an owner, adequate resources and a plan for follow up and accountability. A
recommendation that is not accepted requires a justification.

Report dissemination plan

The Social Inclusion Review report will likely have implications beyond the Country Office team, and
provides an opportunity to raise the voices of the excluded groups consulted and to engage duty bearers and
stakeholders in advancing the inclusion agenda for those groups. The Report Dissemination Plan Template
(Annex 5.2) should help the Review team think through who these stakeholders are, and why, how and when
the Country Office should engage them. At least two groups of stakeholders should be considered; 1) local
and national duty bearers, and 2) wider Save the Children stakeholders. Ethical research concerns such as
safety and confidentiality of sources must be kept in mind as you plan dissemination of the report.

An inclusion review can be an important awareness-raising exercise for local and national duty bearers, such
as government and elected officials, local service providers or civil society organizations who engage with the
various excluded groups. Their participation in the exercise itself or in the results presentation can increase
their awareness of the barriers faced by deprived groups, and Save the Children should see it within its
mandate to engage them in exploring how to respond, such as through public awareness, advocacy or policy
change. Sharing results at tactical moments, such as prior to local government planning and budget
allocation discussions, can enhance their value to decision makers. The report could provide useful input

35
into the host government’s CRC country reports or universal periodic reviews. A final aspect of a
dissemination plan is the follow-up mechanism, for accountability and closure.

A second group to consider is internal stakeholders from the wider Save the Children family. These might
include: the Global Themes, interested in thematic learning; special initiatives focused on specific deprived
groups such as children with disabilities or adolescent girls; or global or Save the Children national member
advocacy or communications teams looking for stories to promote, including the Global Sponsorship Team.

Step Five: Checklist

 Present your social inclusion conclusions and recommendations to your country office
stakeholders, and request a management response
 Disseminate your social inclusion analysis report to impact area and national stakeholders,
including relevant duty bearers, as well as to internal stakeholders from the Save the Children
family

Annexes

Toolkit
Step Tools Source
Step 1: 1.1. Determine the Scope of the TAAP Tool
Design your Social Inclusion Analysis
Social 1.2. Project Charter ADI Tool
Inclusion
Review
Step 2: 2.1. Stakeholder Analysis Matrix Adapted from TAAP Toolkit
Review 2.2. Key Informant Interview New tool, with separate checklist for
Secondary Checklist informants for different excluded groups
Sources 2.3. Secondary Source Analysis New tool
Worksheet
Step 3: 3.1. Key Questions Template New tool
Collect 3.2. Research Design Protocol SCUS ERC tool
Primary Data 3.3. Data Collector Orientation Draws from Inclusive Inquiry and Reflection
Workshop Agenda Activities (TAAP)
3.4. Impact Area Mapping New tool
3.5. Excluded Groups FGD New tool
Checklists
Step 4: 4.1. Excluded Group Snapshot New tool
Analyze Form Adapted from TAAP Toolkit
Results 4.2. Barrier Analysis Template New tool
4.3. Inclusive Design Exercise New tool
4.4. Data Validation Process New tool
4.5. Report and Presentation
Formats
Step 5: Share 5.1. Management Response New tool
and Use Template
Results 5.2. Report Dissemination Plan New tool
Template

36
 Social Inclusion Tools
Step Tools and Description Source
1.1. Determine the Scope of the Social Inclusion TAAP Tool
Analysis: an exercise to clarify the objectives, focus and
Step 1:
boundaries of the review
Design
1.2. Project Charter: a reference document defining 1) the ADI Tool
your Social
project team, including sponsor, team and reference
Inclusion
group; and 2) project overview, including business
Review
impact, scope, objectives and deliverables, milestones,
and risks and assumptions
2.1. Stakeholder Analysis Framework: a framework to Adapted from TAAP
help brainstorm and select the most relevant sources and Toolkit
stakeholders to consult
Step 2: 2.2. Key Informant Interview Checklist: a checklist to New tool
Review guide interviews with stakeholders, with prompts related
Secondary to distinct excluded groups
Sources 2.3. Secondary Source Analysis Worksheet: a New tool
worksheet to compile data collected from different
sources, and identify information gaps or need for
further probing
3.1. Key Questions Template: provides a framework to New tool
prompt development of key questions related to the
three standard objectives of the Social Inclusion Review
3.2. Research Design Protocol: provides an outline to SCUS ERC tool
clarify the design, methodology and data collection and
analysis tools, with special emphasis on ethical
considerations
3.3. Data Collector Orientation Agenda: a flexible Draws from Inclusive
Step 3: training/ orientation outline for data collectors, covering Inquiry and Reflect-
Collect self-awareness on inclusion, background information ion Activities (TAAP)
Primary from secondary source review, research design, and
Data inclusive data collection methods
3.4. Impact Area Mapping: assembles important Based on Indonesia
geographic and demographic information for excluded Coverage Exercise
groups, such as service catchment areas, risk areas
3.5. Excluded Groups FGD Checklist: a checklist to New tool
guide focus group discussions with members of excluded
groups, with suggestions for participatory exercises for
specific topics. Includes prompts for specific excluded
groups
4.1. Excluded Group “Snapshot”: assembles key New tool
Step 4: descriptive data for each excluded group
Analyze 4.2. Barrier/Booster Analysis Template: maps key TAAP Tool
Results findings on barriers and boosters for each excluded
group to six domains in a social analysis framework

37
 4.3. Inclusive Design Exercise: identifies inclusion Adapted from CASP
opportunities for specific excluded groups, and matches Logical Framework
them with different Spon core programs
4.4. Data Validation Process: describes a process for New tool
vetting key findings and conclusions with representatives
of excluded groups, and to get their preliminary input on
recommendations for inclusion
4.5. Report and Presentation Formats: outlines to guide New tool
preparation of a narrative report and slide presentation
5.1. Management Response Template: facilitates New tool
program management decisions and action planning in
Step 5:
response to report recommendations
Share and
5.2. Report Dissemination Plan Template: identifies New tool
Use Results
relevant internal and external audiences for the report,
and objectives and messages for each

38
1.1. Determine the Scope of the Social Inclusion Analysis
Objective: To determine the scope of Social Inclusion Review
Output: Completed questionnaire
Data Internal stakeholders’ judgments, decisions regarding scope of the review
sought:
Data CO and Spon senior staff, TA advisors
source:
Method: Internal exercise
Tool TAAP Toolkit (slides 89-92)
source:

Focus Area Questions Answers

Thematic/Sub- Do you intend to focus your Social Inclusion
thematic/Cross- Analysis on a particular theme (.e.g education),
cutting Issue sub-theme (e.g. early childhood education), or a
focus cross-thematic issue (e.g. the impact of identity-
based violence on education outcomes)?
Identity-focused Do you intend to study (a) particular identity
group(s) (e.g. LGBTI persons, migrant
minorities, rural residents, religious or ethnic
minorities, etc.) across several themes?
Identity(ies) Do you intend to study a particular identity or
within a identities, groups within a theme? Or a set of
Theme(s) focus themes (e.g. migrant children in education,
women from rural areas in health)? Or a set of
identities across various themes (in case the
themes of your study have not been determined
yet).
Geography Do you intend to study a particular location
with a focus on particular themes or identities?
Undecided Do you not yet know the focus of your study?
Other

39
1.2. Project Charter
Objective: To document team and scope for the Review
Output: Project Charter document
Data Internal stakeholders’ judgments, decisions
sought:
Data Project Lead, consulting CO and Spon senior staff
source:
Method: Consultations with key internal stakeholders
Tool ADI Toolkit
source:

Project Name Insert Project Name

PROJECT TEAM
The individual who is ultimately answerable for the activity or decision. This includes
Sponsor
“yes” or “no” authority and veto power. Only one Sponsor can be assigned to a
(Accountable)
project
The individual who is responsible for sustaining the solution and improvements
Process Owner achieved through the project. The solution should be part of their everyday
(Responsible) responsibilities. Only one Process Owner can be assigned to a project. The Sponsor
could be the Process Owner
The individual who has project management and continuous improvement skills
Project Lead
responsible for the project completion up until delivery to the Process Owner
CI Team / Black Belt The individual who has project management and continuous improvement skills and
Support is responsible for coaching and guiding the Project Leader through the DMAIC.
Core Team The individual(s) who perform activities that assist the Project Leader in achieving
(Support) outcomes or results
Extended Team The individuals(s) who are content/subject matter experts who will be asked for
(Inform, Consulted) input as needed and appropriate.)
The individual(s) (typically subject matter experts) who are key stakeholders who are
Management Review consulted prior to a final decision or action. This is a predetermined need for two-
Group way communication. Input from the designated position is required. The
(Consulted) Management Review Group should also give guidance to the Project Sponsor,
Process Owner and the Project Leader.)
PROJECT OVERVIEW
What is occurring, what is happening? What “pain” are we or our customers
experiencing? What is wrong or not working?

When did the problem start? (How long has it been going on?)
Project Background
Where is the problem occurring?

What is the extent or magnitude of the problem

40
 Why should we do this?

What metric will change as a result of this project?

Business Impact
What is the benefit? What is the effort?

Which strategic objective does this project support?

Scope In: What are the boundaries of the project (start and end steps of the
process)?
Scope
Scope Out: What areas will not be addressed?
What are the improvement areas and targets?
Objectives and
Deliverables
How will success be measured?

Major Milestones Include key dates for completion of specific project deliverables as well as
and Timing Management Review dates and the overall completion date
Key Risks,
Identify 1-2 significant risks, assumptions and constraints to the success of the
Assumptions and
project.
Constraints

41
2.1. Stakeholder Analysis Matrix
To select the most knowledgeable and reliable sources per excluded group, in order
Objective:
to consult as part of the secondary source review
Output: Prioritized list of most important secondary sources and key informants to consult
Data List of references and key informants
sought:
Data CO’s CRSA and other research reports, PDQ team
source:
Method: Brainstorming and ranking exercise

Excluded Group:
Category Stakeholders (individuals or Knowledge/ Reliability/ Priority
institutions) familiarity access (H,M,L)
Duty bearers
Services: public or
private services used by
this group
Regulatory: agencies
mandated to protect
this group, or oversee
services they use
Knowledge/research:
individuals or entities
that gather, analyze
information on this
group
Rights holders
Representation:
groups or individuals
who speak for this
group
Leisure/social: clubs
or other venues
frequented by this
group
Knowledge/research:
individuals or entities
that gather, analyze
information on this
group

42
2.2. Key Informant Interview Checklist
Objective: To gain contextual information and further leads on an excluded group
Output: Interview notes
Data Informant’s knowledge and advice regarding an excluded group
sought:
Data Key informant
source:
Method: Key informant interview

Date:
Key
Informant’s
Name:
Position/Re-
lationship to
Excluded
Group
Interviewer:
Explain purpose of the study, and the objective of the interview, including which
excluded group(s) you are interested in. Seek permission to cite informant as a
Introduction: source, but offer anonymity if the informant prefers.

Description of excluded group

What characteristics define this group?
Explore defining traits, experiences, key statistics. Are there
distinct sub-groups? Are there common intersectionalities?
How many are in this group, and where are they located?
Are they concentrated or Tool option: National
dispersed in the broader Map
population?
What are the most important stakeholders and institutions
for this group?
Explore representative groups, Tool option: Venn
dedicated services, gatekeeper/ Diagram
regulatory bodies. What are
these groups doing well, not so
well? Are there any gaps in
coordination?
What are the priority needs, aspirations of this group?
Explore priorities identified in Tool option: Preference
government plans, media/public Ranking
perceptions, and as expressed
by the group’s own elected or
civil society representatives.

43
Challenges faced by excluded group
What attitudes and social norms shape how this group is
seen and treated by society?
Explore family treatment, social perceptions and biases,
depiction in the media.
How do environmental factors shape the experiences of this
group?
Explore physical, geographical and climatic factors and
resources.
What laws, policies and institutional practices and services
shape how group members are able to achieve their rights?
Are there any explicit or implicit identity-based biases in
laws? How effective are legal protections and services?
What factors hinder and facilitate their inclusion?
Explore root causes behind Tool option:
barriers. Barrier/Booster Analysis
Template

Key secondary sources

Who are other key sources of expertise and knowledge
about this group?
Consider both individuals and organizations.
What are the most important studies and references on this
group?
Consider official, academic and civil society sources. Are
there controversies or debates regarding the knowledge
base for this group?
What standards, references or approaches for studying or
working with this group?
Explore both international and national references, eg UN
conventions, advocacy groups. Which national groups have
experience applying international approaches?

44
2.3. Secondary Source Analysis Worksheet
Objective: To collate preliminary findings about key excluded groups, including their relative
preponderance in the country or impact area
Output: Completed worksheet
Data Notes from secondary sources (documents and interviews)
sought:
Data Review team members
source:
Method: Workshop session

Priority Group:
Key Areas to Explore Secondary Source Findings
Rights Holders Duty Bearers
Sources: What/who are considered the best informed
sources on this excluded group? Who are the main
representatives/spokespersons for these groups?

Identity: What characteristics define these groups?

What deprivations do they face? What barriers limit
their equitable participation? What are the main
knowledge gaps regarding these groups?

Prevalence: How large are these groups (numbers,

proportions)? Where are they primarily located in the
country? What is known about their presence in our
impact area?

Standards: What are the internationally recognized

standards, approaches or tools for studying or working
with these groups? Who has used them in our country,
and how successful were they?

45
3.1. Key Questions Template
Objective: Identify key questions to address objectives listed in Project Charter
Output: List of key questions
Data Team members’ views
sought:
Data Review team members
source:
Method: Workshop session

Objectives Domains Key Questions (examples)

Who are Identity What traits or experiences make this an identity group?
the
excluded? Prevalence and How many of this group do we know of in our impact area?
Participation How many participate in our programs?
Deprivations What rights (to survival, education, protection, participation)
are members of this group typically denied?

How and Attitudinal What attitudes and social norms shape how this group is
why are factors seen and treated by society?
they
excluded Environmental How do physical, geographical and climatic factors and
(Barriers)? factors resources shape the experiences of this group?

Legal and What laws, policies and institutional practices and services
institutional shape how group members are able to achieve their rights?
factors

How can we Aspirations What needs or priorities have members of the group
enable their expressed that SC could address?
inclusion
(Boosters)? Relationships What representatives or stakeholder entities could SC work
with to reach this group?

Assets What resources and capacities does this group possess that
we can build on?

46
3.2. Research Design Protocol
Objective: To design and plan the review, meeting ethical research standards
Output: Protocol document completed, submitted to ERC if necessary
Data Design decisions
sought:
Data Review team, consulting MEAL staff as needed
source:
Method: Workshop session (possibly during Data Collector Orientation)
Tool SCUS Ethical Research Toolkit
source:

A. Title of research or survey

B. Name and contact information for primary investigator (PI)

C. Purpose/objectives
i. Primary research questions
ii. Intended use of findings

D. Survey design/sampling plan

iii. Sample size formulas (if applicable)
iv. Process for selecting clusters and participants

E. Data collection tool development

v. In the case of routine program surveys (beneficiary-based baseline/endline, PDMs,
market monitoring, etc.) – Briefly describe the type of data collection tool (survey,
FGD guide, etc.) and the technology to be used (KoBo, paper, etc.)
vi. In the case of external research or internal research intended for publishing - A
description of all tools to be developed, the process for translating the tools into
the local language and pre-testing them, the technologies used for the tools – paper,
KoBo Collect, ODK, etc.

F. Equipment and logistics – Optional, only necessary to include for external research or
internal research intended for publishing
vii. A list and quantities of necessary equipment – GPS units, tablets, printing services
for paper questionnaires, computers for data entry, office space, etc.
viii. Any necessary arrangements needed for transportation and lodging.

G. Data collection – Optional, only necessary to include for external research or internal
research intended for publishing
ix. Recruitment of fieldwork staff (interviewers, supervisors, data entry staff)
x. Development of training guide for interviewers
xi. Training of interviewers and supervisors, conducting pre-test of questionnaire/tools
and pilot of field operations

47
 xii. Conducting and overseeing of data collection

H. Data entry and data cleaning – Optional, only necessary to include for external research
or internal research intended for publishing
xiii. Development of data entry software and data entry protocols (latter only required
for paper-based data collection)
xiv. Development of quality control measures for data entry and data cleaning
xv. Data cleaning to ensure logic and consistency checks

I. Data analysis
xvi. Description of data analysis methods and any analysis software that will be used.

J. Report writing – Optional, only necessary to include for external research or internal
research intended for publishing
xvii. A description of the process for writing the report, and the targeted number of
pages (if applicable). In some cases, you may want to require the consultant to also
provide a draft outline for the report.

K. Schedule/timeline of activities and deliverables, with start and end dates

L. Ethical considerations - State that the research protocol and tools will be submitted
to the SC Ethics Review Committee (ERC) for approval. In order to facilitate
submissions to the ERC, this section should also answer the following ERC questions:

i. Type of study. State whether the study does or does not involve...
1. Collecting specific identifiers from participants, such as names, address,
birthdate, e-mail address, telephone numbers, identification number, medical
record number, vehicle license number, biometric (voice, fingerprint, etc.)
2. Vulnerable populations, such as children, pregnant women, illiterate, mentally or
physically ill or disabled, ethnic or religious minorities, prisoners, refugees,
internally displaced people, or those in immediate distress such as homeless
flood victims
3. Investigating highly sensitive issues, which will depend upon the context, such as
health status for communicable illness or disease (e.g., HIV), sexual behavior or
orientation, and violence against children issues
4. Potential conflict of interest, for example, if there is any reason to believe that
personal, organizational, or financial issues may compromise, or have the
appearance of compromising a researcher’s professional judgment in conducting
or reporting research

ii. Benefit(s) of Study

1. What are the direct benefits to the research participants?
2. What are the indirect benefits to others?

iii. Risk(s) Study Imposes

48
 3. What potential risks do you think your study poses to participants regarding
physical, psychological, economic, legal or social harm?
4. What is the likelihood those risks could lead to harm?

iv. Safeguards: State whether safeguards been put in place to...

5. Minimize potential harm
6. Protect the rights and welfare of vulnerable participants
7. Monitor data collection and maintain confidentiality of data
8. Protect privacy and safety of participants

v. Informed Consent
9. Will informed consent or assent be obtained?
10. Will an informed consent or assent form be signed? (If not, very briefly describe
the process for gaining and documenting oral consent)
11. Will parental or other permission be obtained for research involving minors? (If
minors are not involved, just state “no minors will participate in this
research/survey.”)
12. Will participants receive inducements / compensation /remuneration for their
participation?

vi. Community participation

13. How do you define your ‘community’?
5. Will community members be consulted about the design and/or implementation?
6. Will mechanisms be in place to receive and address complaints or concerns
about the research?
7. Have you applied for approval from a local or national ethics committee in the
host country?

vii. Dissemination of Data

14. Do you intend to publish your research results?
15. Do you intend to present research results at talks, workshops or conferences?
16. Do you intend to communicate results of your study with the local community?
17. Do you have protections in place to protect the confidentiality of individuals and
communities when communicating your findings?

49
3.3. Data Collector Orientation Workshop Agenda
Objective: To prepare data collectors to conduct inclusive, methodologically and ethically sound
data collection to meet the Review objectives
Output: Trained data collectors, equipped with necessary tools and plans
Data Data collectors’ engagement, learning
sought:
Data Research Protocol, Project Charter
source:
Method: Training session/workshop

The Data Collector Orientation workshop can be adapted according to the amount of design work
already completed, and to the data collectors’ need and level of experience. This agenda assumes a
workshop of 2.5 to 3 days for a review with high-level design decisions already taken, and data
collectors already familiar with the impact area and experienced in fieldwork. All data collectors should
have taken SC’s training on child safeguarding.
Time Topic Resources
Half to full day Inclusive Inquiry and Reflection TAAP tools, including:
 Individual Inquiry and Reflection: Participants  Guiding questions for
consider questions for initial reflection, then individual reflection
complete their own Identity Wheel. In plenary,  Identity Wheel for each
discuss questions for building social identity participant
awareness. Conclude with individual statements  Guiding questions for
 Organizational Inquiry and Reflection: Discuss organizational reflection
questions for organizational reflection, then have  Organizational Identity
each participant complete Organizational Identity Wheel for each
Wheel. In plenary, discuss questions for building
organizational social identity awareness.
Conclude with individual statements on how to
enhance organizational inclusivity
1 hour Our Social Inclusion Review  Slides from CSP or
 Discussion: Which excluded groups are targeted CRSA
by our CSP? How well are we currently reaching  Project Charter
these groups in our impact area?
 Present Project Charter: project overview and
team
2 hours Secondary Source Findings  Secondary Source
 Present Secondary Source Analysis worksheet, Analysis worksheet,
by excluded groups completed
 Discussion: What data gaps do we need to fill,  Flipchart to record
and what findings do we need to test or validate? further data needs
1 hour Key Questions  Key Questions Template
 Present Key Questions Template  Cards and pens for small
 Small Groups: Brainstorm possible questions for group exercise
each of the domains
 Plenary discussion: Groups share their questions,
agree on final set of questions for each domain

50
2 hours Research Design  Research Design
 Present Research Design Protocol outline, and Protocol, section D
any design decisions already taken (Survey Design/Sampling
 Discussion: Sources and sampling to address Plan)
Review objectives (Protocol, section D)  Examples of data
 Present data collection tool options (eg FGDs, collection tools, including
ranking exercises, mapping, timelines, etc) from this Guide
 Flipchart to record ideas
for sources and sampling
2 hours Tool Design/Orientation  Research Design
 Small Groups: Each group takes one objective, Protocol, section E (Data
suggests relevant sources and data collection Collection Tool
tools (Protocol, section E) Development)
 Plenary discussion: Groups share their work,
revise based on feedback
1 hour Research Plan and Logistics  Research Design
 Present overall timeframe for data collection, and Protocol, section K
any logistical arrangements made (Schedule/Timeline)
 Discussion: What is the best way to structure
our team (eg by excluded group or by
community)? Agree on sub-teams and their roles
 Small groups: sub-teams meet to detail out their
schedule (Protocol, section K)
2 hours Inclusive Data Collection  SC Ethical Research
 Present SC’s Ethical Research Standards, and any Standards
measures, practices to be followed (child  Research Design
safeguarding, consent forms, etc) Protocol, section L
 Role play: pairs role play interviews, practicing (Ethical Considerations)
inclusive data collection practices
 Plenary debrief: What did you experience playing
the role of excluded group member?
 Discussion: What risks does the Review pose to
participants, to SC? Why are these standards
important? How can we meet them?
 Plenary exercise: review sub-sections of Ethical
Considerations (Protocol, section L), agree on
measures for each section

51
3.4. Impact Area Mapping
Objective: To construct a map that identifies key locations related to excluded groups, service
catchment areas, and risk areas
Output: Impact area map, noting location of excluded groups and services/entities/locations
important to them
Data Geographic and demographic data
sought:
Data Key informants, representatives of excluded groups
source:
Method: Focus group discussion, reviewing physical map

Steps:
1) Obtain or prepare a detailed physical map of the impact area, as well as more detailed street maps
of principal communities if possible.
2) Identify and invite key informants with relevant knowledge to participate.
3) Plot relevant data on the map:
a. Location of any clusters of specific excluded groups
b. Location of relevant services, landmarks important to specific groups
c. Location of any hazards, unsafe areas
4) Reflect on the map with key informants:
a. Note catchment areas of different services, access issues
b. Note potentially unserved clusters
c. Note common vs distinct landmarks for different excluded groups
d. What does the map tell us about access and inclusion challenges and opportunities for
different excluded groups?
5) Share map in future FGDs with excluded groups, for validation, further details.

52
3.5. Excluded Groups FGD Checklists
Objective: To understand the experiences, perspectives, and priorities of members of an
excluded group
Output: FGD notes
Data Participants’ views and experiences as members of an excluded group
sought:
Data Members of excluded groups and/or their caregivers
source:
Method: Focus group discussion and associated methods

Date:
Excluded
group:
Participants: (Note number, description, first names)
Interviewer:
Introduction: Explain purpose of the study, and the objective of the focus group discussion. Seek
permission to cite participants as sources, but offer anonymity if they prefer.

Experiences
How do you spend your time on a typical day?
Explore roles, responsibilities in Tool option: Daily
family, community, as well as Routine
hobbies, interests.
Where do you go on a regular basis (daily, weekly, monthly
seasonally)?
Explore institutions, public Tool option: Mobility
venues, safety and mobility Map
issues.
What are your most important relationships and supports?
Explore relationships with Tool option: Venn
family/caregivers, friends, social Diagram
services.
What assets do you possess?
Explore tangible assets, Tool option:
certificates/qualifications,
memberships.

Perspectives
Which groups do you feel a part of?
Explore dimensions of Tool option: Identity
participants’ identities. Wheel
What helps, hinders your being part of these groups?
Explore barriers, boosters to Tool option:
inclusion.

53
What are the biggest challenges you face in feeling safe,
accepted, fulfilled, happy?
Explore social attitudes, Tool option: Preference
environmental factors, or Direct Matrix Ranking
institutional factors.

Priorities
Which organizations/services/clubs do you wish you had
better access to?
Explore what would make these Tool option:
entities more accessible.
Which services/organizations do you wish had services
more appropriate to your needs or interests?
Explore what changes to Tool option: Preference
services would improve their or Direct Matrix Ranking
quality.
What skills or capacities do you wish you could develop
further?
Explore how these capacities Tool option: Preference
would improve their lives. Ranking
If you could send a message to the authorities or community
around you, what would it be?
Explore who they would like to Tool option:
address, what they would say.

54
4.1. Excluded Group “Snapshot” Form
Objective: To collate validated findings and conclusions about key excluded groups
Output: Completed snapshots
Data Notes from data collection
sought:
Data Secondary source analysis, data collectors’ notes, validation workshop output
source:
Method: Analysis workshop

Process:
1) Transfer findings from Secondary Source Worksheet
2) Each research pair enters its own findings from its interviews and focus group discussions
3) The data collection team compares findings from the different sources, to identify overall
conclusions, or to note discrepancies to be resolved through triangulation, the validation
workshop, or through further primary data collection.

Excluded Group:
Item Secondary Source Primary Source Conclusions
Findings Findings
Identity,
Characteristics
Numbers and
Location
Intersectionalities
with other
excluded groups
Participation in
SC Programs
Key Stakeholders
and
Representatives
Key Deprivations
Expressed Needs
and Priorities
Knowledge Gaps
re this Group

55
4.2. Barrier/Booster Analysis Template
Objective: To identify the most important boosters and barriers for each excluded group
Output: Lists of boosters and barriers, categorized by domains, for each excluded group
Data Factors facilitating or hindering an excluded group’s inclusion in society
sought:
Data Excluded group profiles
source:
Method: Team workshop
Tool Adapted from TAAP Toolkit (slide 121, Map Your Data and Findings)
source:

Process:
1) Begin by posting the boosters and barriers identified by secondary sources, drawing from the
secondary source analysis worksheet
2) Research pairs write boosters and barriers for a specific excluded group on post-it cards, one
item per card, noting the domain and adding ‘+’ for boosters or ‘–‘ for barriers
3) Post the cards on a whiteboard marked with columns for the three domains and rows for
boosters and barriers
4) Discuss the cards in each cell, grouping those that are similar and agreeing on a title for that
grouping
5) Note any disparate cards, and ask the team whether they agree these represent common
boosters or barriers for the excluded group, or whether they rather represent special cases
6) Make sure the conclusions are consistent (i.e. boosters are distinct from barriers) and
complementary (i.e. points are not repeated across the domains)
7) Repeat the process for the remaining excluded groups.

Excluded/ Social Attitudes Environmental Laws and

Groups /Domains Factors Institutions
Children Booster
w
disabilities Barrier

Minority Booster
group
children Barrier

Etc. Booster

Barrier

56
Description of domains:

Domain Description of Domain

Social Attitudes  knowledge, beliefs and perceptions, and norms about different identity groups’
acceptable behavior, how they are valued by society, and their capabilities
 human dignity, safety and wellness, including the ability to live life free from
stigma, discrimination, and danger, and have incidences of violence addressed and
prevented
 transitions transforming society, such as migration patterns, conflicts or
globalization and digitization, and their impact on social attitudes
 Individual and household power and decision making, such as purchasing
decisions, decisions about one’s body or about children, or entering into legal
contracts
Environmental  Natural and climatic factors, such as topography, erosion, rainfall, or changing
Factors weather patterns
 Infrastructure, roads and transport, communications and the built environment
Laws and  Treatment of different identity groups by both customary and formal legal codes,
Institutions safeguarding laws, and judicial systems
 access to legal documentation such as ID cards, voter registration, property titles,
rights to inheritance, employment, redress of wrongs, and representation
 differential interpretation and application of laws and policies
 quality and availability of public services, including provider behaviors and
attitudes

57
4.3. Inclusive Design Exercise
Objective: To identify opportunities for including excluded groups into Spon programs
Output: List of inclusion opportunities (interventions, partnerships, etc) for each excluded
group, organized by core program and intermediate result
Data Translation of barriers and boosters into inclusion opportunities
sought:
Data Barrier/booster analysis
source:
Method: Team workshop

Step 1: Brainstorm opportunities that address barriers or build on boosters.

Excluded Group Barriers Boosters Inclusion
Opportunity
Children with  Social stigma  Legislation recognizes  Mobilize CwDs via
disabilities (CwDs)  Services ill-adapted to CwD rights DPOs
CwD circumstances  Represented by  Contract capacity
 Low capacity of disabled people’s strengthening
service providers to organizations (DPOs) services from
address CwD needs  Specialized agencies specialized agencies
offer technical
support

Step 2: Rank opportunities according to impact (addresses root causes of exclusion), responsiveness
(responds to expressed priority of the excluded group), and feasibility (within Spon’s means).
Inclusion Opportunity Impact Responsiveness Feasibility Rank
(High, (H,M,L) (H,M,L) (H,M,L)
Medium,
Low)
• Mobilize CwDs via DPOs H H H H
• Contract capacity
strengthening services from M H M M
specialized agencies

Step 3: Identify relevance of priority opportunities to CASP core programs and to their sub-outcomes.
Inclusion Opportunity Relevant to which Core Relevant to which sub-
Program? outcome?
Mobilize CwD via DPOs All Access (sub-outcome 1);
Capacity (sub-outcome 3)

58
4.4. Data Validation Process
Objective: To validate and/or refine key findings and conclusions
Output: Workshop documentation (flipcharts) with stakeholder feedback
Data Stakeholders’ feedback, examples/illustrations
sought:
Data Stakeholders, key informants representing excluded groups
source:
Method: Presentation, discussion

Before organizing a validation workshop, two important questions should be addressed, with ethical and
privacy considerations:
 Focus: Should there be one validation exercise covering all excluded groups, or separate
exercises for each excluded group?
 Participation: for any excluded group, should participants include both representatives of the
group as well as stakeholders/ gatekeepers (ie those concerned with but not members of the
group)?
Time Topic Resources
30 mins-1 hour Present Review Results  Project Charter
 Objective and methodology  Excluded Group Profile
 Findings (Excluded Group Profile)  Barrier/Booster Analysis
 Conclusions (barriers and boosters)
30 mins-1 hour Feedback on Conclusions  Flipcharts
 Small group discussion: comments and examples
from participants
 Plenary feedback: groups share their feedback;
conclusions are validated or revised
1 hour Present and Rank Recommendations  Inclusive Design
 Plenary discussion: add or revise opportunities
recommendations
 Plenary ranking exercise: individual or group
ranking of opportunities

59
4.5. Report and Presentation Formats
Objective: To document the methodology, conclusions, and recommendations of the Review
Output: Narrative report and PowerPoint presentation of Social Inclusion Review
Data Data collection and analysis
sought:
Data Review data collection outputs, team members
source:
Method: Individual and team effort

NB: If report is to be made public, be mindful of any ethical research concerns such as safety and
confidentiality of sources.

1. Executive Summary

2. Objective and Background

3. Methodology
3.1. Key Questions
3.2. Sources
3.3. Methods
3.4. Limitations

4. Findings and Conclusions

4.1-9. Responses to Key Questions; or
4.1-4. Excluded Groups
4.1.1. Profile of Excluded Group 1
4.1.2. Barriers and Boosters for Excluded group 1

5. Recommendations
5.1. Increasing Inclusiveness of Sponsorship Program
5.2. Implications for CSP
5.3. Implications for Global Strategy

6. Annexes
6.1. Project Charter
6.2. Research Protocol
6.3. List of Sources
6.4. Snapshots of Select Excluded Groups
6.5. Barrier/Booster Analysis for Select Excluded Groups
6.6. Priority Opportunities for Sponsorship Program

60
5.1. Management Response Template
Objective: To facilitate decisions and action plan from Management Review Group (from Project
Charter) in response to Review conclusions and recommendations
Output: Minutes of Management Response
Data Management Review Group judgment, decisions
sought:
Data Management Review Group
source:
Method: Presentation to Management Review Group

Recommendation Management Follow Up Implications (budget,

Response Point Quarter staffing, etc.)
Person Due

61
5.2. Report Dissemination Plan Template
To identify objectives, audiences, and messages in order to maximize impact of the
Objective: Review
Output: Dissemination plan
Data Team’s ideas for maximizing impact of the Review
sought:
Data Project Team
source:
Method: Team meeting

NB: Ensure public version of report meets ethical research concerns, such as safety and
confidentiality of sources.

Stakeholder Objective of Sharing Engagement Monitoring and

the Report Activity Follow Up
Which internal (SC) What does CO hope How and when will How will CO follow up
and external to achieve in sharing CO share the report to see if report has had
stakeholders could the report with each and ensure it is any impact?
potentially use the stakeholder? considered by the
report? stakeholder?

Resources

Social Inclusion Resources

 Save the Children, Child Rights Situation Analysis Guidelines (2013)
 Save the Children, Every Last Child: The children the world chooses to forget (2016)
 World Bank, Inclusion Matters (2013)
 World Learning et al, TAAP Toolkit (2018)

Resources on Excluded Groups

 Coe, Sue and Lorraine Wapling, Travelling Together, World Vision UK (2010)
 Christian Blind Mission, Advocacy Toolkit for Disability Mainstreaming (2015)
 Christian Blind Mission, Disability Inclusive Development Toolkit (2017)
 Christian Blind Mission, Inclusion Made Easy (2012)
 Global Migration Data Analysis Centre, Migration Data Portal, IOM web resource

62
  IOM, IOM Handbook on Protection and Assistance for Migrants Vulnerable to Violence,
Exploitation and Abuse (2019)
 International Disability Alliance, website
 International Disability Alliance, Global Disability Summit of 2018
 International Disability Alliance, What an Inclusive, Equitable, Quality Education Means to Us
(2020)
 Minority Rights Group International, Minority and Indigenous Trends, 2019
 Save the Children, Every Last Girl: Free to live, free to learn, free from harm (2016)
 Save the Children, Gender and Social Inclusion Analysis (forthcoming)
 Save the Children, Gender Equality Toolkit (2014)
 UNICEF, Child Migration and Displacement Database, web resource
 UNDP, Marginalized Minorities in Development Programming (2010)
 UNHCR/USA, Durable Solutions Framework, web resource
 UNHCR, UN Forum on Minority Issues (2011)
 UNHCR, UNHCR Needs Assessment Handbook (2017)
 United Nations, Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (2006)
 United Nations, Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (2018)
 United Nations, Global Compact on Refugees (2018)
 United Nations, Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious
and Linguistic Minorities (1992)
 United Nations, Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007)
 OHCHR, Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (1998)
 Washington Group on Disability Statistics, Washington Group Disability Question Sets (2016)
 WHO, World Report on Disability (2011)
 World Bank, Pathways to Peace (2018)

Research Methodology and Tools

 Banks, Sarah and Andrea Armstrong, Kathleen Carter, Helen Graham, Peter Hayward, Alex
Henry, Tessa Holland, Claire Holmes, Amelia Lee, Ann McNulty, Niamh Moore, Nigel Nayling,
Ann Stokoe & Aileen Strachan (2013) Everyday Ethics in community-based participatory
research, Contemporary Social Science, 8:3, 263-277
 Better Evaluation, web resource
 Dixon, Peter, Child Rights Situation Analysis Guidelines, Save the Children (2013)
 Freudenberger, Karen, Rapid Rural Appraisal and Participatory Rural Appraisal, CRS (2008)
 Georgetown Institute of Reproductive Health, Resources for Measuring Social Norms (2019)

63
 International Institute for Environment and Development, Participatory Learning and Action,
journal
 INTRAC, M&E Universe, web resource
 Modernizing Extension and Advisory Services, Participatory Methods, webpage
 Oxfam, GEM+ Toolkit (2016)
 Population Council, How to Conduct a Coverage Exercise (2006)
 Save the Children, Ethical Research Policy
 Save the Children, Managing Performance Evaluations (forthcoming)
 Save the Children, Situational Analysis Guidance (forthcoming)
 Sustainable Sanitation, Water Management and Agriculture, Humanitarian Crises Perspective,
knowledge platform

64