Download
1 / 1
10 likes | 143 Vues
This document outlines proposed criteria for prioritizing humanitarian projects based on their potential to address immediate physical harm, build resilience, enhance institutional capacity, and feasibility. Each criterion is assigned points to assess urgency and impact. Projects scoring above 6 points are classified as top priority, while those below are medium priority. Key factors include the project’s ability to mitigate threats such as violence and disease, facilitate other initiatives, and confirmed needs through robust evidence.
E N D
Proposed for discussion: prioritisation criteria • Does the project remedy, mitigate or avert direct and imminent physical harm or threats (whether violence, disease, or deprivation) to affected people within a short time span? (If yes, 2 points) • Is the project essential to enabling other projects to remedy, mitigate or avert…? (If yes, 2 points) • Does the project build vulnerable people’s resilience to averting or mitigating harm? (If yes, 1 point) • Does the project build institutional capacity to remedy, mitigate, or avert…? (If yes, 1 point) • Is the project definitely feasible (assuming funding) by the proposing organisation and planned partners, currently and in the most likely scenario? (If yes, 2 points) • Are the needs that the project plans to address confirmed by evidence that is solid by reason of first-hand assessment on the ground, or triangulation (multiple independent sources)? (If yes, 2 points) *** > 6 points: top priority; < 6 points: medium priority ***
