1.4.1 Key considerations for reintegration assistance

The information below covers the key considerations for developing and implementing a comprehensive reintegration programme in line with the integrated approach to reintegration. These considerations underpin all the guidance and interventions described in this Handbook.

Migrant-centred

Reintegration programming should always promote the returnee’s ownership of and active participation in the reintegration process. Reintegration assistance should be designed and delivered in collaboration with returnees, whose autonomy and agency should be promoted. The rights and needs of the returnee should be at the forefront. Assistance should be gender- and age-sensitive. It should be provided without discrimination or prejudice on the basis of age, race, skin colour, sex, gender, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, or birth or other status.

Sustainable

Reintegration assistance programmes should always consider how to support sustainable reintegration processes even after assistance is no longer necessary or available. This requires promoting local and national ownership and strengthening capacity and systems at the community and structural levels.

Organizations providing reintegration assistance should also consider the environmental sustainability of their programmes and interventions in line with international standards. Where possible, programmes should directly contribute to preserving or restoring the environment.

Multidimensional

As described in the integrated approach to reintegration, reintegration assistance should include economic, social and psychosocial dimensions.

Reintegration interventions can address several dimensions simultaneously. For example, a community-based income-generating activity that involves both returnees and community members might impact the economic dimension through the creation of livelihoods, whilst the psychosocial dimension might be impacted by the fostering of social cohesion between returnees and community members.

Strategic and tailored

Reintegration assistance should be designed based on an analysis of the unique circumstances of the return environment. Such an analysis should focus on: the overall context and services available (see section 1.4.2), individual capacities and needs (see section 2.2), wider challenges and opportunities in high-return or key communities (see section 3.1) and structural conditions, stakeholders and coordination mechanisms (see Module 4). Analyses should be continually updated because conditions can change over time. Programmes should be adaptable to a changing environment.

Using this contextual knowledge, reintegration assistance initiatives should develop a programme theory, or theory of change, that clearly articulates the desired results an intervention aims to achieve and how it aims to achieve them, in the specific context in question. This theory of change provides an overall strategy to guide the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the programme. See section 5.2.1 for more information on developing a theory of change.

Adequately resourced

Programmes require adequate human and financial resources. Reintegration teams that have expertise in a wide range of areas (for example psychosocial experts, livelihood experts, medical staff) should be mobilized or recruited, and when possible, both in host countries and countries of origin (see section 1.4.3 for more detail on relevant staff profiles).

Budgeting processes should take into account the need to remain flexible and adaptable by allocating for unforeseen changes or adjustments. While funding availability may limit comprehensive reintegration assistance, reintegration programme managers should promote community-based approaches and structural interventions that complement individual level assistance. Where funding is not adequate enough to provide comprehensive assistance to everyone, programmes should prioritize returnees in vulnerable situations.

Delivered through coordination and partnership

The integrated approach to reintegration requires developing coordination, complementarity and coherence with all stakeholders. These can include governmental and non-governmental, public and private, local and international actors in host countries and countries of origin. Partnerships and good coordination enhance the range and quality of reintegration assistance and can make assistance more efficient by reducing duplication of effort. Coordination should occur:

1. Between local and regional actors who work directly with returnees and their communities in host countries and countries of origin. These actors could include authorities, NGOs, religious and community leaders, employment centres at the local or regional level and between this local/regional level and the national level.
2. Across various sectors and among relevant ministries and State agencies holding different mandates (such as interior, foreign affairs, labour, social affairs, humanitarian assistance and development), as well as non-State stakeholders. It is important to mainstream sustainable reintegration into existing coordination mechanisms for migration policies or cross-sectoral mechanisms rather than create new systems that risk being disconnected from other processes.
3. Between host countries and countries of origin, at both national and local levels through decentralized cooperation dynamics. For example, host countries and countries of origin should work together to agree on a shared analysis of the local context for return.

Institutional dialogue between partners can promote a common understanding of the challenges related to return and reintegration and can inform and influence policy development. Interdisciplinary forums for exchange and discussion can unearth cooperation opportunities.

Practitioners and stakeholders can also exchange information and best practices to identify opportunities for synergies and scaling up (for example, through implementation of joint initiatives at the transnational level).

Evidence-based

Systematic monitoring and long-term evaluation to assess effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, impact and sustainability should be part of reintegration assistance programming at all three levels of intervention (see Module 5 for details on setting up a monitoring and evaluation system in reintegration programmes). Data collected during the monitoring of direct assistance to returnees, including their feedback, is an important source of information on the effectiveness, impact and sustainability of reintegration measures. Long-term monitoring and evaluation also helps assess the impact of different types of reintegration support on the individual returnee and the community as a whole.

Systematic and continuous data collection, while preserving the right to privacy and protection of personal data, and monitoring and evaluation help stakeholders, especially programme managers, understand the impact of reintegration interventions, verify the theory of change and inform ongoing and future programme design. Feedback mechanisms allow returnees, communities and other beneficiaries to express their views on the assistance received in an open and confidential manner.

Anchored on confidentiality and “do no harm”

Programmes must take measures to protect the personal data of returnees in the reintegration process. This is essential in order to preserve the privacy, integrity and human dignity of the returnees. All personal data must be collected, used, transferred and stored securely in accordance with international data protection standards.¹³

The “do no harm” approach should be adhered to in reintegration programming at all levels. Support for returnees should cause no harm to the returnees themselves and no harm to their communities. Analysing sources of tension, power dynamics and conflict issues at the onset of programming and then monitoring them continuously, will identify key dividers and connectors within communities and help show how the programme can avoid exacerbating conflict or harm to individuals or groups.

Situated within a migration governance strategy

It is important to remember that reintegration is not an isolated process but part of a larger migration governance strategy. Strengthening reintegration support at the national level can enhance good migration governance and contribute to other development and governance goals.

The drivers that resulted in a migrant’s initial decision to migrate and the factors influencing their ability to re-integrate into the country of origin are two sides of the same coin. If these factors are not addressed, the result will continue to be outward migration as a coping mechanism for actual or perceived inadequate standards of living, a lack of opportunities and insecurity. Reintegration programming should therefore be fully integrated, nationally and locally, into existing development plans and migration strategies.

1.4.2 Assessing the return context

When establishing a reintegration programme, it is important to undertake initial assessments and analyses around the return environment. Understanding the political, institutional, economic, security and social conditions at the local, national and international levels that inform return patterns can help stakeholders develop appropriate supports for sustainable reintegration.

This section guides programme development and management staff through the suggested assessments that should take place in countries of origin. These include mapping policies, laws, labour markets and social conditions, stakeholders and services available to support the sustainable reintegration of returnees. At the end of this initial mapping process, reintegration providers are encouraged to synthesize this information into a project-specific feasibility grid for use during reintegration planning at the individual, community and structural levels, as detailed in section 1.4.3.

Assessments described in this section are highly recommended, especially at the onset of reintegration assistance programmes. Nevertheless, it is also very important to consult them throughout the programme and the project cycle, because they may change.

After the assessment phase, potential reintegration initiatives should be prioritized according to available budget. Whenever possible, responsibilities and costs should be shared by various stakeholders. Note that some reintegration initiatives are not necessarily cost-intensive but require coordination and adaptation to existing mechanisms.

Situation analysis for return and reintegration in the country of origin

A situation analysis in the country of origin details the return and reintegration context and trends as well as the wider policy framework.

Specifically, it should include the:

• Return and reintegration context

  • Key return migration trends, including an assessment by geographic patterns (which localities migrants mostly return to and originate from, concentration of migrants);

  • Assessment of past reintegration support projects to identify relevant reintegration strategies and sectors that effectively supported the development of local communities and the sustainable reintegration of returnees (including from an environmental perspective);

  • General historical, social, cultural and economic characteristics of the country and how these affect migration;

  • Socioeconomic situation of returnees across different time intervals after initial return, by geographic area, age, sex, gender, skill level, support received, in comparison to local population.

• Policy framework

  • Mechanisms, processes, policies and legislation (at local, national, regional and international levels) that are relevant to return and reintegration;

  • Government structure, decision-making processes, levels of decentralization and responsibilities;

  • Existing migration and development framework and how it affects reintegration outcomes.

• Political and security situation

  • Political climate including any upcoming elections or deadlines and main actors;

  • Security situation including any access restrictions and major security risks in the country and in different areas within the country.

To reduce costs and enable a holistic approach to return and reintegration in the wider migration and development context, the situation analysis should be linked with other development planning strategies or frameworks (such as Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper poverty diagnostics, ILO Decent Work Country Programmes or UN Development Assistance Framework or Common Country Assessment). Rather than starting from scratch, situation analyses should build on existing information, including information about current and expected future returns and community assessments. This information could include studies of past reintegration beneficiaries to assess the effectiveness of any existing reintegration support frameworks information on the reintegration-development nexus; and local level service provision. Ideally, a situation analysis should be performed by a team of local and international experts using a participatory approach. It should solicit perspectives of a wide range of stakeholders, including return migrants and non-migrants in areas of high return, to elicit comprehensive information and foster ownership and sustainability of the process.

Understanding the frameworks, regulations and policies of service provision

Before mapping existing services and resources and planning for the details of reintegration assistance programming, it is important to be aware of the local, national, regional and local rules and systems for service provision.

Reintegration programming should be developed with a clear understanding of the country’s legislation regulating service provision, its frameworks and policies and any referral systems that are already in place (such as for mental health care or to assist victims of trafficking).

The example below guides staff in understanding the context of mental health-care provision. Similar questions can and should be asked in all service areas relevant for reintegration, such as housing, education and employment.

Stakeholder mapping

The involvement of national and local authorities and other private and non-public stakeholders is instrumental to the success of reintegration programmes. In order to engage with actors who are or should be relevant to the reintegration of returnees, it is essential to conduct a mapping of actors in areas with a high incidence of return migration. Stakeholder mapping provides a comprehensive assessment of the capacity, needs, willingness and potential for partnerships of different stakeholders at the national and local level. A comprehensive stakeholder mapping is required for establishing the scope of a reintegration programme. Guidance on using the stakeholder mapping to develop engagement strategies, capacity-building initiatives and coordination and cooperation mechanisms is included in Module 4.

Relevant stakeholders can include a variety of different public, private and civil society actors, including government ministries and agencies, local governments, municipal stakeholders, private sector entities, CSOs and NGOs, migrant associations and diaspora organizations, and international organizations active at the local level. These could be at work in a range of policy sectors, according to the country context (for instance in the development, migration, environment or humanitarian sectors).

• Never conduct a stakeholder mapping in isolation. Before starting a stakeholder mapping exercise, the lead reintegration organization should engage with partner organizations (such as key government ministries, UN agencies, international NGOs and so on) as well as community leaders and local authorities who are active in the area and have first-hand experience with relevant stakeholders. This can facilitate the mapping exercise and reduce its time and cost. It also enables the transfer of informal knowledge on the roles, expectations, capacity and intentions of stakeholders that may not be accessible through direct engagement with the stakeholders themselves. Local authorities can play a key role in this information- gathering.
• Whenever possible, information about stakeholders’ capacity, interests and motivations should be validated using other sources to take account of different perspectives and eliminate potential bias, intentional or otherwise.
• Finally, stakeholder mappings should be continuous. They should yield a growing network of actual and potential national and local partners that evolves over time as new stakeholders emerge, reintegration programme objectives evolve and return flows change.

Table 1.2 below provides step-by-step guidance for conducting a stakeholder mapping exercise for reintegration programmes.

Labour market analysis

Assessment of local and national labour markets, market systems and value chains is essential for identifying economic reintegration opportunities. It is instrumental to the success of both individual-level and community-based reintegration approaches. Information on available livelihood opportunities and key employment sectors, the skills employers are seeking, as well as the available mechanisms for finding work in a local labour market are crucial for reintegration programme beneficiaries. Absence of this information and poor market knowledge can lead to economic failure of returnees’ livelihood projects.

Labour market assessments (LMAs) include analyses, research papers and reports that assess the composition, nature, growth and accessibility of labour markets and market systems. These assessments look at both national and subnational data. LMAs are generally performed by external contractors, so this section only provides a concise overview of the different approaches to LMAs. Before undertaking an LMA, it is important to research whether an up-to-date assessment already exists (perhaps undertaken by another partner or the government).

In the context of reintegration programming, LMAs generally aim to:

• Determine high-potential growth sectors which may provide employment or self-employment opportunities for returnees, including opportunities for “green jobs” (for more information on green jobs see the Tip below);

• Identify skills’ needs and skills’ mismatches (the gap between an individual’s or population’s competencies and skills and the skills’ needs of the labour market) by sector and occupation;

• Identify relevant regulations and sector-specific legislative provisions such as working hours, legal work age, mandatory benefits, accessibility and equal opportunity provisions;

• Assess business start-up costs and registration procedures, including legal assistance, to adapt business support to local contexts; and

• Identify constraints and opportunities in a market system, including:

  • The supporting services or functions (such as access to market information) that may enable individuals to find steady work;

  • The roles that informal and cultural norms, including gender norms, play in the labour market.

There are various approaches and methodologies for assessing labour markets and market systems. They differ in their resource intensity, comprehensiveness and level of detail of findings. Before choosing a tool or approach, determine the purpose of the LMA. Is it to collect broad information about a population or market? Or to gain additional information on a specific sector or local labour market? Clarify budget requirements for LMAs at an early stage of project development, as comprehensive LMAs can be very expensive. Once available, LMA findings should be shared with potential beneficiaries early on during the pre-departure process.

An overview of relevant approaches for labour market and market assessments is provided below. These tools are not necessarily alternative approaches to LMA but can also complement each other when implemented within a single reintegration programme. For instance, a Rapid Market Assessment can provide an overview of high-potential markets, which can subsequently be assessed in greater detail through a comprehensive market system analysis. Finally, all three tools not only function as analysis tools, but, due to the way they engage local stakeholders (through interviews, workshops, focus groups and so on), they can also build a foundation for long-term cooperation and partnerships for community-based projects.

• In order to also account for the socioeconomic needs of a community, identify possible local partners and assess the potential effect that return migration will have on communities, LMAs for reintegration programming should systematically be combined with community profiles (see section 3.1). Combining the findings of an LMA with a community profile, positions reintegration programme managers to:

  • Identify key sectors in the economy that should be targeted;

  • Determine promising programme design options and economic interventions that can maximize the opportunities of a market system while avoiding disruptive socioeconomic effects); and

  • Match suitable returnee profiles for each sector or subsector and project.

1.4.3 Developing a reintegration assistance programme

Reintegration staff profiles

While a comprehensive human resources guide for organizations providing reintegration assistance is beyond the scope of this Handbook, this section provides an overview of crucial staffing considerations for various reintegration programming contexts.

When deciding the staffing structure and recruitment approach for a reintegration project, the following considerations are important:

• Programme framework: The programme framework agreement specifies the implementation process and operations that should be carried out for a successful reintegration programme. It generally specifies the roles, mandates and responsibilities of the lead reintegration organization and implementing partners; sets the available financial resources; and directs reporting and coordination processes. Because it defines the organization’s role, responsibilities and external resources (including those of implementing partners), the programme framework has a decisive impact on the staff make-up required for the programme.

• Contextual and structural factors: Contexts vary! Preliminary assessments, detailed in section 1.4.2, can identify contextual and structural challenges, such as conflict or instability, inadequate provision of basic services or the absence of psychosocial care providers. The assessment can help determine what additional expertise is needed to undertake programming in these areas or deal with obstacles during implementation.

• Implementing and operating partners: In countries where many partners can provide effective economic, social and psychosocial reintegration support services, staff roles will shift from direct assistance to focusing more on referrals, supervision and follow-up. By contrast, in implementing contexts where partners are few or lacking adequate capacity, reintegration staff members may need to provide a variety of different functions directly, which requires greater financial and human resources.

• Beneficiary-to-case manager ratio: While good reintegration programming seeks to maintain the beneficiary-case manager ratio at sustainable levels,¹⁵ unforeseen spikes in returns can temporarily increase the number of returnees that reintegration case managers need to take care of. Case managers need awareness around self-care to prevent their burnout, and to keep staff turnover low.

• Profiles of returnees: The psychosocial, social and economic needs of returnees differ. General characteristics of returnees (such as sex, gender, age, ability, ethnicity) need to be considered when planning staffing. The degree and type of support that the average returnee requires affects ideal staffing profiles and training. For example, in scenarios where most beneficiaries have experienced significant psychosocial stress, case managers require adequate training to sustainably provide high-quality care for returnees’ psychosocial needs.

• Capacity and expertise versus number of staff: In some programmes, the budget can fund staff with specific expertise in certain areas of reintegration (such as psychosocial, economic and social counselling and support). In other programmes, staff may need to fulfil a wide range of economic, social and psychosocial counselling and support functions in all three areas. They might need to i) assess needs, ii) develop an individual reintegration plan, iii) implement the intervention and coordinating services and care and iv) monitor the beneficiary’s access to services, their use of services and their progress over time. The different roles and responsibilities associated with each position need to be clearly defined in staff terms of reference prior to the hiring process.

Each of the above factors feeds into what type of reintegration staff is needed or possible (given budgets). Annex 9 provides an overview of potential staff profiles. While the functions provided are not exhaustive, they feature the major groups of staff who could be represented in reintegration projects.

Both male and female and staff should be employed within any office to provide returnees with a choice between working with female or male staff, as well as provide a balance in gender perspectives. All staff should be trained in and adhere to ethical principles, standards and guidelines for the prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse, and in a gender- and age-sensitive response to returnees.

Selecting relevant individual, collective and community interventions

Given the wide degree of interventions possible in reintegration programmes, once a programme theory of change, logical framework and resources have been put into place it is necessary to set up a mechanism for selecting activities based on individual, community and structural needs. A feasibility grid is a tool that can guide this process by targeting and tailoring interventions for specific likely scenarios. Based on the assessments, the project developer can identify which interventions are appropriate for the context and define a feasibility grid specific to their programme.

The feasibility grid outlines all possible local interventions within the scope of the reintegration programme; criteria for the application of these interventions for specific cases; and conditions for feasibility at the community and structural levels. Once developed, the feasibility grid can help case managers identify which specific intervention to choose for a particular returnee or community. The full feasibility grid is found in Annex 5.

In short, though, the feasibility grid contains the following components:

• Intervention – The grid includes all interventions which can be implemented by the reintegration programme, as well as all services available locally through referrals.
• Scenario For each intervention, the grid should specify a scenario – a situation, status or condition, under which such intervention would be appropriate.
• Criteria – individual, community and structural. The grid specifies the conditions of feasibility for each type of intervention. Conditions could include individual characteristics or attitudes of returnees, characteristics of the community or structural factors necessary for successful implementation of the intervention (such as favourable labour market conditions). The criteria should always be carefully adapted to local conditions to identify reliable, locally appropriate interventions.
  • Individual criteria: Information on the returnee and their family from assessments. The returnee’s general profile, needs, skills, reintegration score (if using the Reintegration Sustainability Survey) and eligibility should inform the identification of individual risk factors and opportunities that affect reintegration (see column “Individual criteria” in the feasibility grid). This helps case managers and beneficiaries tailor a reintegration plan to the beneficiary’s circumstances.
  • Community criteria: Information on the community where the returnee lives, including any ongoing collective and community-based interventions. This information could cover the i) labour market situation; ii) structure and size of markets and value chains; iii) availability, capacity and accessibility of technical vocational education and training (TVET) providers, health services, education facilities, financial management training, life skills’ programmes; iv) intra-community availability and distribution of resources and services, with equity factors an important determinant of potential intra-community tension due to perceived preferential treatment of returnees over other community members. Once these criteria have been considered, the project developer and project manager can narrow down a tailored set of adequate interventions from a community-sensitive standpoint.
  • Structural criteria: The structural environment affecting the returnee’s reintegration, including all available reintegration services provided within the given area of coverage. These are the overall conditions in which the individual and or community-level reintegration pathways are embedded. Structural criteria include i) presence and capacity of institutional, material, economic and financial infrastructure; ii) structure and nature of market systems; iii) nature of regulatory, legal and policy environment; iv) presence of cultural or other sensitivities. Structural factors are overarching and affect the feasibility of interventions in similar ways. However, fundamental criteria such as business regulation and cultural appropriateness need to be cross-checked regularly.

¹³ This includes, among other elements, the principle of lawful and fair collection of data for a specified and legitimate purpose, the principles of consent, confidentiality, access and transparency and data security. For the IOM Data Protection Principles, see: IOM Data Protection Manual (Geneva, 2010).

¹⁴ ILO, 2016; ILO, 2017 and Meyer-Stamer, J., Participatory Appraisal of Competitive Advantage (PACA): Effectively Launching Economic Development Initiatives, Mesopartner (Duisburg, Germany, 2006).

¹⁵ The sustainability of the beneficiary-case manager ratio is itself context-specific, as it depends on the average level of support and counselling that beneficiaries require. In a scenario where returnees have fled a country of origin in a situation of conflict, they may suffer from specific vulnerabilities during the return and reintegration which may place additional burdens on case managers. Programme managers should carefully monitor the psychosocial dimension of the workload of case managers in order to establish a contextually adequate ratio of beneficiaries to case managers.