Page 1 of 1
Field Test Feedback Form
Key Considerations on Cash for Protection in Integrated Protection & Sectoral Interventions using CVA Programming.
This questionnaire is also available in Spanish (
link
) and Ukrainian (
link
)
This short form asks about how the guidance was used in practice, what was useful, and what should be improved before finalisation.
A. Respondent and context
1. Organisation name
*
2. Country / region of operation
*
3. Organisation type
*
A
UN agency
B
International NGO
C
National / local NGO / CSO
D
Red Cross / Red Crescent
E
Government
F
Other
4. Type of crisis context
*
A
Acute / rapid onset
B
Protracted crisis
C
Transitional / recovery
D
Both acute and protracted
5. Your role / position
*
6. Primary area of expertise
*
Protection
Child Protection
GBV / SGBV
MHPSS
CVA
Food Security / Livelihoods
Shelter
MEAL / Programme Quality
Coordination
Other
B. Overall feedback on the guidance
7. Overall, how useful was the guidance for your work?
*
1
2
3
4
5
Not useful
Moderate
Very useful
8. Please rate the guidance on the following aspects:
*
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
Clear and easy to understand
Relevant to your context
Practical enough to apply
Includes the right level of tools, examples and guidance
9. At what stage did you use the guidance?
*
Assessment
Design
Implementation
Monitoring
Proposal
Training
10. What did you use the guidance for?
*
To inform programme decisions
To review or adjust an existing programme
To train or orient staff
To guide discussions with partners
To support proposal development
To adapt or develop tools
To strengthen coordination between Protection and CVA teams
Not yet used in practice
Other
C. Application of the key considerations
11. For each area, please tell us whether it was applied in your context:
*
Fully
Partially
No
N/A
Protection Risk Analysis & Socio-Economic Vulnerability Assessment
CVA Risks, Feasibility & Modality Selection
Safe Identification & Referral of C4P Participants
Collaboration Between Protection and CVA Teams
Transfer Value Calculation
12. Please briefly describe one area where the guidance was particularly useful, difficult to apply, or had to be adapted.
*
D. Field examples and lessons learned
13. Describe one situation where integrated Protection & CVA programming worked well in your context.
*
14. What were the main barriers to applying the guidance?
*
Limited staff capacity
Limited CVA/protection coordination
Data sharing constraints
Funding or donor restrictions
Timing mismatch between CVA and protection processes
Lack of tools or templates
Difficulty calculating transfer value
Difficulty identifying eligible participants safely
Contextual constraints / access / security
Other
15. What would have helped you apply the guidance better?
*
16. Are there any topics or operational issues that the guidance should cover, but does not currently address sufficiently?
*
Exit or transition strategy
Complaints and feedback mechanisms
Market and price monitoring
Data protection and information-sharing arrangements
Disability, age and inclusion considerations
Coordination between clusters / sectors / CWGs
Monitoring of protection outcomes
Transfer value review or adjustment over time
Other
*
E. Recommendations
17. What is the most important thing to improve in the final version of the guidance?
*
*
*
F. Follow-up
18. Would you be willing to participate in a follow-up discussion or share programme documentation?
*
A
Yes
B
Possibly
C
No
Thank you.
Submit