Updated October 2026: this post was first published in February 2020. We have expanded it with a summary drawn from our November 2019 presentation on adaptive management and our paper on value for money.
Durable solutions processes are complex and political, and nobody can say in advance which activities will lead to change at the level of outcomes. Our approach to adaptive management starts from that uncertainty. Rather than fixing outputs at the start and reporting against them, we test, monitor, gather feedback and correct course, in repeated cycles of learning and action. Effective adaptive management needs a programme that can learn, reflect, decide and then act. Two documents set out how we do this: a presentation on our adaptive management approach and a paper on value for money in adaptive programming.
Four learning principles
Our work rests on four learning principles. It is collaborative, grounded in processes that involve our members and external actors. It is adaptive, designed on the assumption that change is inevitable. It is iterative, moving through repeated cycles of reflection and action. And it is locally led, specific to context and organised around problems that local actors agree on. In practice this means treating problems as complex, allowing flexible implementation, delegating decisions to staff closest to the work, paying attention to power, and judging accountability by progress and learning rather than by fixed milestones.
How it works in practice
Real-time learning focuses on three themes: engagement with displacement-affected communities, engagement with government, and area-based approaches. The tools are practical. A results matrix tracks progress. Political economy analyses are shared in durable solutions coordination meetings. Consultative workshops with national authorities, learning events that bring authorities and practitioners together, and joint planning with government feed findings back into programmes. Peer learning across durable solutions consortia creates regular moments for reflection, and progress in applying core programming principles is documented. Adaptations have included programme adjustments based on real-time learning and the results matrix, changes made after learning events, evidence fed into policy dialogue, and technical support to donors as they developed their own strategies.
What we have learned
Better information does not automatically lead to better decisions, a point the presentation makes with reference to ACAPS. Evidence-informed adaptation involves trade-offs between keeping a documented, auditable evidence trail, being pragmatic about time and resources, and sometimes acting without rigorous evidence. It works best where staff are skilled in reflection and learning, finance and planning systems are flexible, and communication with members and partners is open. Reflection and learning need sustained funding, and the knowledge they produce has to be kept over time rather than lost with staff turnover.
Value for money in adaptive programming
Value for money has to be thought about, measured and managed differently when a programme is designed to change course. Our paper uses the four Es. On economy, we share costs and co-fund learning and capacity development with several donors, as a low-cost secretariat hosted by a member rather than a paid consultancy. On efficiency, the paper puts it plainly: “Achieving value for money requires experimenting and adapting.” On effectiveness, we act as a catalyst and information hub without implementing programmes ourselves. On equity, we aim to make sure the most vulnerable and marginalised displaced people, especially women, girls and young people, take part in and benefit from our learning and community engagement.
Because much of the value of our work lies in the learning it generates, we reassess value for money as the approach is tested. Measures include indicators on the uptake of learning from events and workshops, investment in dissemination focused on how evidence is used rather than on producing more publications, work to standardise and share displacement data, an open e-library and dashboard, a shared durable solutions framework that measures contribution rather than attribution, and qualitative indicators on local government leadership and community empowerment.
Read the summary presentation on our adaptive management approach and our value for money approach. For further reading, see ODI’s working paper on monitoring and evaluation tools for adaptive management and the outcome mapping learning brief from the Global Learning for Adaptive Management initiative.
References
ReDSS (2019). ReDSS adaptive management approach. Summary presentation, November 2019. Regional Durable Solutions Secretariat. https://www.regionaldss.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/ReDSS-Adaptive-management-approach.pdf
ReDSS (n.d.). ReDSS value for money approach based on the realities of adaptive programming in complex settings in East Africa. Regional Durable Solutions Secretariat. https://www.regionaldss.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/ReDSS-Value-for-Money.pdf
