Full_Report_863

AFFECTED BY CRISIS
AN ENABLING RIGHT:
EDUCATION
FOR YOUTH
ROUNDTABLE
INEE POLICY
2010
Outcome Report
January 2011
INEE Policy Roundtable 2010
15–16 November 2010
Geneva, Switzerland
INEE Policy Roundtable
An Enabling Right: Education
for Youth Affected by Crisis
Eteyamohu, 16, reads at the library of the
Lagambo Youth Centre in Ethiopia.
Photo Credit: Guy Calaf, Save the Children

The Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) is an open global network of representa-
tives from non-governmental organizations, UN agencies, donors agencies, governments, research and
academic institutions, affected populations and interested unaffiliated individuals working together within
a humanitarian and development framework to ensure all persons the right to quality and safe education
in emergencies and post-crisis recovery.
Published by:
INEE
c/o IRC
122 E. 42nd
St.
14th
floor
New York, NY 10168
USA
INEE © 2011
All rights reserved. This material is copyright but may be reproduced by any method for educational pur-
poses. For copying in other circumstances or for reuse in other publications, or for translation or adapta-
tion, prior written permission must be obtained from the copyright owner: network@ineesite.org
The report was designed by Eric Doyle, Rubicon Design Associates: www.rubicon-online.com

2010 Policy Roundtable | An Enabling Right: Education for Youth Affected by Crisis Outcome Report | January 2011
1
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements 2
Executive Summary 3
Introduction 5
Framing Paper Presentations 6
Identified Gaps and Needs & Visions of Success 9
Collated Action Points & Key Actors 10
Conclusion 14
Annex A: Policy Roundtable Agenda 15
Annex B: Policy Roundtable Participant List 16
Annex C: Youth Partner Remarks 17
Annex D: Detailed Working Group Recommendations 19
Annex E: List of Prioritized Research Questions 22

2
Acknowledgements
The Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) is deeply appreciative for the active
involvement of all INEE 2010 Policy Roundtable participants (please see Annex B for the full Participant
List). Their participation and commitment to youth affected by crisis made the event and this Outcome
Report possible, and are key to the success of future initiatives.
INEE also warmly thanks the following individuals for their contributions to the Policy Roundtable:
Policy Roundtable Coordinator: Jamie Vinson (INEE Consultant)
Policy Roundtable Advisory Group: Naseem Awl (UNICEF), Lori Heninger (INEE Secretariat), Marian
Hodgkin (INEE Secretariat), Caroline Keenan (IASC Education Cluster, UNICEF), Ian Macpherson (Open
Society Institute), Nicolas Servas (Refugee Education Trust)
Policy Roundtable Reference Group: Julito Aligaen, Emma Asomba, Zainab Bah, Katy Barnett, Brittney
Bailey, Denise Bentrovato, Guy Bessette, Charlotte Beyer, Bhuwan, Brooke Breazeale, L Randolph
Carter, Malvern Chikany, Philip Davis, Niamh Del and the Karen Refugee Committee Education Entity,
Somaratne Ekanayake, Else Engel, Grace Ezzell, Alice Farmer, Godson Daniel Gayflor, Mark Hamilton,
Valerie Haugen, Ingrid Iversen, Florence Kabahamba Ameri, Kashif Khan, Jane Kalista, Callixte Kavuro,
Pawel Krzysiek, Jean Claude Manaliyo, Theodore Mauro, Julius Namisano, Audrey Nirrengarten, Martin
Ogango, Abimbola Onigbanjo-Williams, Emmanuel Olabode, Arme Opheim, Jenny Perlman Robinson,
Saji Prelis, Radha Rajkotia, Michael Sasi, Anna Seeger, Kujtim Sermaxhaj, Sweta Shah, Lili-Marguerite
Stern, Erin Tanner, Dale Tokpah, Carl Triplehorn, Maria Lucia Uribe Torres, Romeo Serge Uzele, and Ju-
lien Yombouno
Framing Paper Authors: Josh Chaffin (Women’s Refugee Commission), Janice Dolan and Laura Brannelly
(CfBT Education Trust), and Barbara Zeus (Refugee Education Trust)
Youth Framing Paper Partners: Stephen Gichohi, Hibist Kassa, and Kashif Khan
Presenters, Facilitators, and Note Takers: Naseem Awl (UNICEF), Laura Brannelly (CfBT), Sandra Uwan-
tege Hart (IASC Education Cluster, Save the Children), Lori Heninger (INEE Secretariat), Marian Hodgkin
(INEE Secretariat), Ian Macpherson (Open Society Institute), Susan Nicolai (IASC Education Cluster, Save
the Children), Nicolas Servas (Refugee Education Trust).
Additionally, INEE is extremely grateful to UNHCR for providing the facilities and refreshments for the
event, and particularly to Audrey Nirrengarten and Eva Ahlen for facilitating these logistics. Many thanks
also go to the IASC Education Cluster, UNICEF, the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and an anony-
mous donor for their generous financial contributions to the Roundtable.

3
Executive Summary
In 2008, members of the Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE) – an open global
network of over 5,000 members working together within a humanitarian and development framework to
ensure all persons the right to safe, relevant, quality education in emergencies and post-crisis recovery1
– convened the Adolescents and Youth Task Team (AYTT). The AYTT undertakes technical tasks to
ensure a coordinated, evidence-based response to the educational rights, needs, and aspirations of
adolescents and youth affected by crisis.
In large part due to the Millennium Development Goals, much attention has been paid of late to ensuring
that basic primary education is provided to younger children during emergencies. However, there re-
mains a significant gap in programmatic interventions, knowledge creation, and advocacy for all forms of
education for youth. Given these gaps, it was decided that the 2010 INEE Policy Roundtable should lift
up the right to education for youth in crisis situations. The AYTT was instrumental in shaping the Round-
table, with additional leadership provided by inter-agency Advisory and Reference Groups.
On 15-16 November, INEE held the 2010 Policy Roundtable on An Enabling Right: Education for Youth
Affected by Crisis. Hosted by UNHCR in Geneva, Switzerland, this one-and-a-half day event brought
together a diverse group of policymakers, practitioners, donors, and youth to strategize around how to
close critical gaps in advocacy, financing, and service delivery for youth affected by crisis.
The Roundtable offered the 46 participants a unique opportunity to work together across sectors on the
issue of meeting the rights and needs of youth in crisis contexts. Action-oriented discussions were fo-
cused around three thematic Framing Papers on post-primary opportunities and income growth, financ-
ing for post-primary education, and holistic approaches to working cross-sectorally with youth. Through-
out the course of the meetings, Working Groups on each Framing Paper moved through a process of
identifying gaps and needs in each area to formulating recommendations and future action steps. Areas
of gaps identified by participants included a need for improved data and data usage, better coordination,
increased funding, and a greater focus on educational content and youth participation.
From the Working Group and plenary discussions, four foundational principles, which should undergird
all work with, and on behalf of, youth emerged. These include: the centrality of youth participation in all
areas of work; the need to take a balanced, sector-wide focus (including viewing education through an
economic lens); the importance of utilizing a cross-sectoral approach to ensure youth are seen holisti-
cally in terms of their physical, mental, social, developmental, and political needs; and the necessity for
evidence-based policy and programming to ensure access to quality opportunities for youth affected by
crisis.
Finally, Roundtable participants developed strategies and ways forward to address the needs and gaps
in youth programming. These strategies can be clustered into four categories for action: advocacy and
building the evidence base to make the case for education for youth; knowledge management and
technical capacity to equip all actors; resources for all to increase funding for post-primary education;
and inter-agency and inter-sectoral coordination to work together to holistically meet the needs of youth
affected by crisis.
The full list of collated recommendations is included in the body of this Report; selected points that have
been flagged as priorities by Roundtable participants include:
• Draw on existing emergency-focused research, as well as relevant research from development con-
texts, to develop Advocacy Briefs that make the case for post-primary education. These briefs should
convincingly answer the question “Why prioritize youth in emergencies?” from economic, social, politi-
cal, and development perspectives, as well as in terms of peace and stability and human rights.
1. Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies (INEE), www.ineesite.org, 2010.

4
• Work with the Fast Track Initiative (FTI) to explore guidance given to governments relating to post-
primary education within sector plans – information which can also be used to guide the preparation of
the Advocacy Briefs mentioned above.
• Collate tools and, if needed, develop emergency-specific guidance on quality and relevant youth
education programming (including needs assessment, market assessment, funding proposal develop-
ment, monitoring and evaluation, etc).
• Collate, promote and disseminate resources already available related to youth participation in all
stages of policy and programming for humanitarian preparedness, response and recovery.
• Pursue the formation of an inter-sectoral group, working beyond INEE’s education-specific mandate
and structures, to explore further coordination mechanisms and opportunities for cross-sectoral part-
nership on the issue of youth in emergencies.
Over the next year and into the future, the INEE Secretariat, AYTT, and INEE members and part-
ners will be working to see that many of these recommendations are realized, and that youth in cri-
sis come to receive the attention they deserve. To become involved in these efforts, please e-mail
network@ineesite.org for more information.

5
Introduction
Today one person in every five is between the ages of 15 and 24, with around 85 percent of the 1.2
billion youth worldwide living in developing countries. Furthermore, of the world’s 14 million refugees,
about 35percent are young people, aged 12 – 24, and far more unaccounted for youth are seriously
affected by disasters and displacement.2
Although youth comprise a significant portion of crisis-affected populations, this age group tends to be
overlooked by governmental, humanitarian, and development actors alike. Caught in a tran-
sitional no-person’s-land between being seen as vulnerable children or as fully capable
adults, the unique developmental needs of youth – as well as their capacity for positive
contributions to society – become lost amidst other competing priorities.
In reality, youth are both vulnerable and extremely capable. The particular vulnerabili-
ties of youth – recruitment into armed forces, becoming targets of physical and sexual
violence, lack of access to health care, or involvement in illicit means of livelihood – can
be exacerbated by crisis, especially when youth do not have opportunities for personal
development or the ability to contribute in a positive way to their families and communities.
Youth are, and should be viewed as, an important resource for development and reconstruction;
they have the ability to contribute positively to societal change. Youth participation, being allowed
a “seat at the table,” is often cited as a critical component of successful youth-focused initiatives.
Youth are a heterogeneous population group, and this diversity in sub-groups within the broad youth
category is an important dimension to consider in discussions around how to meet the needs of youth in
crisis. Another dimension includes the spectrum of physical, social, cognitive, emotional, economic and
political needs of youth. It has been recognized that the experiences of youth on a daily basis fall within
the purview of the work of many sectors, including education, health, livelihoods, and protection. How-
ever, with no IASC Cluster or other body specifically focusing on youth, there is a great danger of these
cross-sectoral needs being overlooked.
Education can be one entry-point for action, addressing the wide range of issues affecting youth in crisis
situations. Since the Education for All goals were agreed upon a decade ago, great efforts have been
made towards reaching universal primary education. Providing education opportunities beyond the pri-
mary level, however, comes with its own set of challenges – and ones that are often compounded in cri-
sis and post-crisis contexts. Youth in crisis are often prevented from attending school because of school
closures, lack of safety and security in or en route to school, family poverty, bureaucratic obstacles, or
lack of access to the next level of education. Additionally, many out-of-school young people, aged 12
and older, are unable to return to school once conflict has ended.3
Given INEE’s educational mandate, the 2010 Policy Roundtable on An Enabling Right: Education for
Youth Affected by Crisis utilized education as an entry-point for integrated, cross-sectoral discussion on
meeting the rights and needs of youth in crisis. The Roundtable grew out of the work of the INEE Ado-
lescents and Youth Task Team (AYTT) which, over the past few years, has undertaken technical tasks
to ensure a coordinated, evidence-based response to the educational rights, needs, and aspirations of
adolescents and youth affected by crisis.
The AYTT recognized that, while there has been an increase of attention on providing education in
emergencies at the primary level, a significant gap remains in programmatic interventions, knowledge
creation, and advocacy for education, in all forms, for youth. Given these gaps, the AYTT advocated for
the INEE 2010 Policy Roundtable to lift up the right to education for youth in crisis situations. The AYTT
was instrumental in shaping the Roundtable, with leadership also provided by inter-agency Advisory and
Reference Groups.
2. UNFPA, State of World Population 2003 - Making 1 Billion Count: Investing in Adolescents’ Health and Rights, 2003.
3. UNICEF, Machel Study 10-Year Strategic Review: Children and Conflict in a Changing World, 2009.
“We must ensure that
youth have a place
at the table and a voice
in the microphone.”
Lori Heninger

6
The INEE Policy Roundtable was held on 15-16 November at UNHCR in Geneva, and was organized in
collaboration with the IASC Education Cluster. The Roundtable brought together a diverse group of 46
humanitarian and development policymakers, practitioners, donors, and expert youth to strategize around
how to close critical gaps in youth policies, programming, advocacy, research, and funding.
The objectives of the event were to:
• Stimulate cross-sectoral dialogue on approaches for engaging with and addressing the needs of
youth in humanitarian response through to recovery.
• Review innovative youth-focused policies, programmes and funding mechanisms to determine
how the rights and needs of youth in crisis can be met at scale.
• Develop targeted policy recommendations and advocacy strategies to significantly improve and
expand existing and emerging policy, programming, and funding for youth affected by crisis.
Action-oriented Working Group discussions were structured around three thematic Framing Papers,
highlights of which are included in the following section. Over the course of three sessions, each Work-
ing Group collaboratively:
• identified gaps and needs
• brainstormed five-year visions of success
• drafted recommendations, action steps, and identified key actors
Detailed notes on the outcomes of individual Working Groups are available in Annex D. The body of
this Outcome Report presents a synthesis of points made by all three Working Groups on each of the
above-mentioned tasks. Attempts have been made to accurately reflect each group’s contribution, while
collating inputs into a useful list of identified needs, areas of recommendation, and action-
able points to be carried forward by the AYTT, INEE Secretariat, and INEE members
and partners.
Framing Paper Presentations
To shape the Roundtable and to provide a common starting point for all
participants, three Framing Papers were commissioned and authored by
experts in the field, each in collaboration with a youth partner. At the Round-
table, overviews of the content of each paper were presented, pointing to cur-
rent work with and on behalf of youth, as well as to the needs and gaps in knowl-
edge, programing, and policy. The three youth Framing Paper partners also spoke
compellingly as to why they believe action on these issues is so crucial; the transcripts of
their remarks can be found in Annex C.
Framing Paper 1–Education and Opportunity: Post-Primary and Income Growth
Framing Paper 1 considers the connections between post-primary education for crisis- affected youth,
and Income Growth interventions. The complex and poorly-understood ‘gray area’ between emergencies
and development work is of increasing interest in resource-poor contexts with youth-majority popula-
tions. Given that post-primary education (PPE) is seen to have largely failed in reaching adolescent girls
and boys and youth in the developing world,4
and given that current thinking on development issues is
going through a shift toward labor-market-centered approaches,5
this paper reviews the current state of
4. UNESCO, Education for All Global Monitoring Report, 2010
5. ILO Geneva, Conclusions on Skills for Improved Productivity, Employment Growth and Development, International Labour
Conference 2008
“The main hindrance
to getting a living here is the
type of trainings…which end up
offering us the same kind of skills
with limited opportunities
to implement them.”
youth leader in Dadaab camp

7
thought in the field, defines a number of often-confused terms, and seeks to better define the niche in
Income Growth work for the education sector.
Employment and self-employment must become central to the mission of schools and non-formal
education programmes. Tackling the livelihood needs of crisis-affected adolescents and youth will
require governments, donors and implementing agencies to create “seamless pathways”6
through the
worlds of school and work. This means a focus on the school-to-work transition (perhaps better termed
“school-and-work”) throughout the education sector as a whole, perhaps in a dual-track system rather
than in discrete sub-sectors such as primary, secondary, or vocational education. These actions must
follow comprehensive supportive strategies through which donor and government funding are aligned
to strengthen post-basic learning systems. It will require scaling up targeted approaches for adolescent
girls and young women in particular, including non-formal and “modular” approaches, adopting new
policies that address the reality of the burgeoning informal sector and the needs of micro- and small
enterprises.7
The new emphasis on continuity along the educational spectrum will require sector actors
to overcome a “cultural” division between different types of agencies, and for social partners in the INGO
world to engage in areas they have traditionally resisted, not least in engaging the private sector.
Framing Paper 2– Financing for All: Beyond the Primary Need
Framing Paper 2 explores the extent to which post-primary education options are
being financed, what approaches are being taken and the opportunities and chal-
lenges for supporting post-primary education in the future. In situations of conflict
and crisis, youth and adolescents are likely to have a diverse range of educational
needs and to fall into two broad categories: those who are post-primary age but
have not yet acquired a basic education; and those who have received basic edu-
cation and wish to go on to further studies. A number of different education options
are required to meet these diverse needs, including second-chance education pro-
grams, technical and vocational training, work-related training and secondary education.
Financing for education can come from a number of sources – governments, bilateral and
multilateral donors, foundations, non-governmental organizations and community contribu-
tions, amongst others. However, there has been limited investment for education opportunities for youth.
For example, governments in conflict-affected fragile states (CAFS) are, on average, investing less in
secondary education (24percent) as a share of the education budget when compared to other low-
income countries (30percent).
For donors, whilst progress has been made in recent years to increase aid for education in countries af-
fected by conflict and crisis, this support has typically lagged behind that provided to other low-income
countries. Much of the focus of this attention has been on primary education, linked with commitments
to achieve universal primary education. Evidence presented in this paper reveals that donors are invest-
ing less aid in basic skills, secondary education and vocational education in conflict-affected states
($618m) than in other low-income countries ($963m), and funding to post-primary education ($618m) is
at lower levels than aid to primary and tertiary education ($1056m and $766m, respectively). This is de-
spite the numbers of youth who have missed out on education due to conflict and crisis, and the critical
role that education at this level plays in long-term stability.
A similar pattern has been seen in humanitarian aid, with post-primary education receiving little atten-
tion in the humanitarian sector. However, some funding does reach post-primary or youth interventions.
A review of humanitarian appeals in 2008 revealed that at least 34 of over 200 projects were funded with
some youth component.
6. ILO Geneva, Conclusions on Skills for Improved Productivity, Employment Growth and Development, International Labour
Conference 2008.
7. World Bank, Youth Employment in Africa: Discussion Paper, 2010
“Education gives a
person a voice. Young people
want education so that their
voice can be heard.”
Hibist Kassa, Youth Partner

8
The paper concludes by highlighting a number of challenges and opportunities relating to the financ-
ing of post-primary education. The need for investment across all levels of the education sector is clear,
and it is necessary to take a more holistic approach, recognizing the important role that youth play in
post-crisis recovery and in national policy, plans and investments. Based on this, the forms of educa-
tional opportunities financed need to be designed to meet the needs of the specific context, and to align
with labour market opportunities. Investment must represent value for money and provide meaningful
learning experiences for young people, which enable them to progress to further levels of education or
employment.
Framing Paper 3–Whole People, Holistic Approaches: Cross-Sectoral Action and Learning
Worldwide, adolescence and young adulthood is regarded as a transitional phase and is often associ-
ated with increased vulnerabilities and challenges. These can be exacerbated by crisis, especially when
youth do not have opportunities to contribute in a positive way to their families and communities. In
addition, although the international community has prioritized education of children in crisis contexts,
youth generally face greater challenges in accessing education and other services. This is particularly a
concern as education can be an effective entry point from which to address the many physical, social,
emotional, and psychological needs of youth.
In transitioning from childhood to adulthood and from education to employment, relevant youth issues
fall into a variety of sectors including education, early recovery, livelihoods, protection, WASH and health.
Effectively responding to their rights, meeting their needs, and allowing them to develop
to their potential – even when affected by crisis – is a key concern for international
humanitarian action. Holistic programming that capitalizes on cross-sectoral part-
nerships is required to adequately address the complex challenges facing youth.
This paper also advocates that youth fill a role far greater than that of passive
beneficiaries. With appropriate support structures and room for creative outlet,
youth can self-initiate and play a central role in program effectiveness and in
the recovery of communities and societies affected by crisis.
Through six case studies from across a range of sectors, this paper explores
innovative programmatic approaches, with a particular emphasis on the role of
youth participation. From the case studies, it draws out key impacts and findings,
summarizes lessons learned for the education sector, and suggests recommendations for
holistic inter-sectoral action.
Initial recommendations for areas of action within this topic include creating channels for increased co-
ordination on youth issues between IASC Clusters and other relevant actors at both global and national
levels. The paper calls for the systematic participation of youth in emergency preparedness, response
and recovery in the education sector in order to improve the quality, effectiveness and relevance of
programming. Finally, the dearth of data regarding the impact of emergencies on youth populations is
highlighted.
While acknowledging the constraints facing youth-focused and youth-led initiatives, all three Framing
Paper presentations highlighted the importance of renewing efforts to uphold the rights of this popula-
tion group. There was consensus that youth need to be meaningfully involved and empowered in all
programming and policy work. All presentations focused on the important role of a relevant, quality
education for youth in emergencies, as well as on the need to work across sectors and at all levels of
government to address the varied needs of youth.
“Youth have the potential
to be peace makers and peace
builders if the right conditions
are made available to them.”
Kashif Khan, Youth Partner

9
Identified Gaps and Needs & Visions of Success
After the Framing Paper presentations, participants migrated to one of three Working Groups designed
to focus on the specific thematic area of the paper. During these sessions, group participants brain-
stormed and prioritized the current gaps and needs of their respective issues, then shared the gaps and
needs in the plenary session that followed. Several commonalities emerged across the three groups,
including the need for improved data and data usage, better coordination, increased funding, and a
greater focus on educational content and youth participation.
The chart below summarizes specific points mentioned by multiple Working Groups:
Key Gaps and Needs
Data and Data Usage
• Dearth of empirical data on what works and what doesn’t work in youth education
programming
• Lack of disaggregated data by gender and population
Coordination
• Need for a more explicit youth-focus within the cluster coordination mechanism
• Lack of coordinated plans between relevant government ministries
• Inadequate national policies regarding youth and education in emergencies
Funding
• Need to bridge humanitarian and development funding pools
• Lack of government prioritization for post-primary education
Educational Content
• Need to:
• undertake market analysis to identify appropriate and relevant skills
• ensure skills are income-oriented
• prioritize peace education programming
• focus on adult and youth literacy
• consider ‘green collar’ jobs
• Lack of Teacher Training and ‘Training of Trainers’ programs
Youth Participation
• Need to:
• link participation to community development
• provide an enabling structure and safe spaces
• focus on all aspects of youth development, including political and social arenas
• Lack of systematic means of youth participation
During the first Working Group session, groups also spent time focusing on their long-term goals for
each topic, using the following prompt: In five years, if inter-agency work on this issue is widely viewed as
successful, it will mean…
While responses varied somewhat across groups, some of the most commonly mentioned marks of suc-
cess included:
• educational offerings are monitored and evaluated in terms of labor market outcomes for participants
• an increase in adolescent-specific projects and funding has occurred
• an identified model or mechanism to improve coordination amongst actors working with youth has
been created and is in use

10
• an evidence-based advocacy strategy, underlining the value of post-primary opportuni-
ties has been developed and is used successfully
• the increased inclusion of youth in decision-making and all aspects of
policy and programming work has occurred and been measured
• vocational training and market policies, developed with youth
participation and which take into account youth at national
and regional levels, are in existence
• education for youth is an accepted component of humani-
tarian response
• an efficient two-way flow of information and ideas between
the education sector and other sectors is the norm
• smoother connections exist between primary and post-primary
education levels
• a larger number of market assessments have been, and are being, con-
ducted at all levels, from community to national
• effective participative national policies – which include a costed strategy, a
monitoring component with youth involvement, a national inter-agency coordination
body, and the regular sharing of knowledge – have been developed and implemented
With these visions of success in mind, Working Groups next moved into discussions around the steps
needed to begin realizing some of the these goals.
Collated Action Points & Key Actors
Throughout the course of two break-out sessions, Working Groups developed specific recommendations
and key actions on each Framing Paper theme (a detailed outline of the individual group recommenda-
tions can be found in Annex D). The emerging themes and priority actions, collated from the individual
group presentations, are outlined in this section. Attempts have been made to both accurately represent
each group’s work, and to consolidate the ideas into concrete next steps.
Four underlying principles seemed to permeate the work of all the Working Groups, coming up again and
again in discussions and final presentations. Rather than specific recommendations in and of them-
selves, they seem to underpin all recommendations and should be considered foundational in all actions
moving forward. These underlying principles include:
• Youth participation: Youth have the potential to be agents of change rather than simply passive
beneficiaries. Effective youth policies and programs prioritize the meaningful inclusion of youth in all
stages of assessment, design, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation.
• Sector-wide focus: A balanced sector-wide approach is required to ensure that youth have access
to a variety of relevant, quality post-primary education opportunities. The sector-wide focus should
consider options for market-driven livelihoods initiatives in addition to formal secondary school, as well
as the balance of funding across all levels of education.
• Cross-sectoral approach: Youth are developing physically, emotionally, socially, cognitively and politi-
cally; the issues they face do not neatly fit into any one sector. Working with, and for, youth holistically
calls for cross-sectoral partnerships and action.
• Evidence-based policy and programming: A sound evidence base should be the basis of policy and
programmatic decision-making. Best practices in youth policy and programming need to be shared
and built upon by all stakeholders in order to ensure access to quality opportunities for youth affected
by crisis.
Global consensus on
investing in
youth programming
A model for
coordination amongst
actors
Empowered youth

11
In carefully considering all Working Group presentations, the following action points emerged, potentially
to be taken forward by the INEE AYTT, INEE Secretariat, and INEE membership. These actions have
been thematically grouped together under umbrella recommendations of: strengthening evidence-based
advocacy, improving knowledge management and technical capacity, and increasing the resources
available for post-primary education in crisis contexts.
1. Advocacy and the Evidence Base: Making the case
Action Key Actors
Draw on existing emergency-focused research, as well as relevant research from de-
velopment contexts, to develop Advocacy Briefs that make the case for post-primary
education:
• economically, socially, politically, and developmentally
• in terms of peace and stability, and human rights
Advocacy targets: national governments, donors, the private sector, priority sectors
such as early recovery, protection and health.
AYTT, INEE Secretariat, INEE
Working Group on Education and
Fragility, GTZ, ActionAid
Work to ensure that national and global education information management systems
collect disaggregated data related to youth.
Education Cluster Knowledge
Management Task Team, UNFPA,
AYTT
Support research relating to education provision for youth affected by crisis by facili-
tating partnerships between practitioners, researchers and donors.*
* A list of prioritized research questions was generated at the Research Symposium Event following the
Roundtable, and can be found in Annex E.
AYTT, INEE Strategic Research
Agenda Initiative
Provide inputs into the Global Monitoring Report (GMR) 2012 on youth and ‘life-skills’ INEE Secretariat and the AYTT

12
2. Knowledge Management and Technical Capacity: Equipping all actors
Action Key Actors
Collate tools and, if needed, develop emergency-specific guidance on quality
and relevant youth education programming (including needs assessment,
market assessment, funding proposal development, monitoring and evalua-
tion, etc).
Collation: AYTT
Tool development: AYTT, Education Clus-
ter, INEE Teaching and Learning Initiative
Collate, promote and disseminate resources already available related to
youth participation in all stages of policy and programming for humanitarian
preparedness, response, and recovery.
AYTT, UNFPA, UN Inter-Agency Network
on Youth Development (IANYD)
Collate national youth plans or education strategies and good practices on
youth policies (for example, emergency plans and policies which include
youth, and youth plans and policies which include emergencies).
AYTT, UN Inter-Agency Network on Youth
Development (IANYD), OSF
Explore opportunities to partner with OSF in an upcoming study on the affects
of public policies on youth in 11 countries.
OSF and AYTT
Request Education Cluster Knowledge Management Task Team (KMTT) to
undertake the development of a case study, or a series of case studies, on
how national Education Clusters are addressing post-primary education and
working with other sectors to meet youth needs.
Education Cluster Knowledge Manage-
ment Task Team and INEE Secretariat
Join the AYTT and contribute to information-sharing and knowledge manage-
ment activities
AYTT members and potential members
3. Resources for All: Increasing funding for post-primary education
Action Key Actors
Work with the Fast Track Initiative (FTI) to explore types of guidance given to
governments relating to post-primary education within sector plans.
AYTT, INEE Secretariat, FTI Secretariat
Conduct a donor analysis to determine which donors are funding post-primary
education, and compile examples of innovative funding practices.*
*See document “Mapping of Donors Active in the International Youth Sector”
(OSF) as a starting point for analyzing global donors’ engagement with youth.
AYTT, OSF, Donors

13
4. Inter-agency and Inter-sectoral Coordination: Working together
All three Working Groups discussed actions which would need to be taken forward by an inter-sectoral
group, beyond INEE’s education-specific mandate and structures. The possibility of grounding this work
under the auspices of the cross-cutting issue Age within the IASC Cluster system was proposed; as of
the date of this report, the cross-cutting issue of Age primarily pertains to older persons. Immediate ac-
tion steps would include:
• contacting the IASC Secretariat to explore options;
• contacting HelpAge International to learn from the work they have done relating to older people;
• undertaking the background work needed to make an effective pitch to donors (making key decisions
about the appropriate vehicle, organizational leaders, action plan, budget, etc.);
• creating a one-page brief articulating the need for an inter-sectoral group;
• mapping key actors to be engaged.
It was envisaged that the establishment of a focus and group within the cross-cutting issue of Age could
help ensure the coordination and mainstreaming of youth issues into the work of all Clusters and other
cross-cutting issues. Where necessary, and potentially in conjunction with INEE’s AYTT, this group could
also develop tools or other products as well as acting as a space for the sharing of information and the
development of collective advocacy strategies across sectors.
Forming an initial group would be required to carry out the exploratory actions. This group might include
representatives from: INEE Secretariat, AYTT – UNICEF, WRC, RET, Education Cluster, Child Protection
Cluster, UNFPA, and YMCA, Global Changemakers or other global youth networks.
If this group formed, a number of suggested priority actions were identified:
Action Key Actors
Develop guidance to complement inter-cluster Needs Assessment
and Information Management tools and systems to ensure youth
needs and capacities are included (for example, youth participation
in needs assessments, inter-cluster standards for disaggregation of
data).
IASC Clusters – especially Education, Protection,
Health, Early Recovery
IASC Cross-cutting issues – especially Gender,
MHPSS, HIV/AIDS
NGOs – Save, IRC, NRC, WRC, Population Council,
ChildFund
UN – UNFPA, UNICEF UNHCR, UNESCO, UNHABITAT,
UN Women, ILO, UNFPA
Donors
Youth – initially, work with youth already engaged
and active in the Roundtable event; in the long
term, work on the systematic engagement of youth
within country-level clusters, whose inputs would
then be relayed to the global level by selected
representatives
Building on the work of the Gender Sub-Working Group, develop
guidance for Clusters on the systematic integration of youth needs
into CAPs and Flash Appeals processes to ensure equitable funding
for all age groups affected by crisis.
Building on resources already available across sectors, develop
guidance for Clusters on systematic youth participation in all stages
of coordinated humanitarian preparedness, response and recovery.
Building on the work of other cross-cutting issues, including Gender
and Mental Health and Psychosocial Support, develop Standard
Operating Procedures or guidance for inter-agency coordination on
youth in rapid onset and ongoing emergencies.

14
Conclusion
The United Nations has proclaimed this to be the Year of Youth. Consensus around the importance of
investing in the world’s youth seems to be growing, and this diverse and significant population group, at
1.2 billion people strong, has our attention like never before.
Many will be quick to point out the length and breadth of the recommended action list. As one partici-
pant stated, “This Roundtable is taking decades of neglect [on the topic of youth] and focusing it into a
day and a half.” There is, indeed, much to be done, and identifying what needs to be done is often easier
than prioritizing the list and agreeing on who should do it.
The INEE Secretariat and the AYTT are strongly committed to moving forward with the actions coming
out of the 2010 Policy Roundtable. As has been true of past INEE events, this Roundtable was not de-
signed to be a one-time meeting with little after-effect; in fact, it is now that the work truly begins.
The INEE Secretariat is in the process of formulating its new Strategic Plan, which will provide guidance
on how to prioritize and begin implementing many of the action items listed above; this will be done in
conjunction with the AYTT, which will explore, assess, build partnerships, prioritize, and implement some
of the recommendations in the formation of their 2011 Workplan. You are very welcome to join the AYTT
and contribute through this platform; more information can be found at www.ineesite.org/youth. In paral-
lel, the Education Cluster Working Group is also in the process of developing its Strategic Plan for the
period 2011-2013. This provides an opportunity to integrate activities related to youth in crisis into the
work of the Cluster at both global and country levels.
There is much that needs to be done in this arena, and your role individually, or as part of an organiza-
tion, is critically important. Please consider how you might fit into some of the tasks listed here – per-
haps it is through sharing good practices with INEE, or by volunteering to serve on the exploratory
cross-sectoral group, or by focusing your research on an issue pertaining to youth in crisis. Everyone has
a part to play in renewing efforts to effectively work with, and for, youth in crisis preparedness, response,
and recovery.
You are encouraged to disseminate this Outcome Report to your colleagues and to be in touch with
INEE at network@ineesite.org about specific, actionable ways that you and your organization might con-
tribute to any of the action steps outlined in this Report.

15
Annex A: Policy Roundtable Agenda
Monday, 15 November
Time: Schedule:
8:30 – 9:00 Registration
9:00 – 9:30 Welcome, opening remarks, Roundtable objectives, and participant introductions
9:30 – 10:30 Framing Paper Presentations
10:30 – 10:45 Gallery Walk of Youth “Real Life Snapshots”
10:45 – 11:00 Tea and Coffee Break
11:00 – 12:30
Working Groups, Session 1 (Breakout groups on each Framing Paper)
Review of lessons learned and sharing of additional insights and experiences
Identification of key gaps and needs
Brainstorming of five year visions of success for each Framing Paper topic
12:30 – 13:30 Lunch
13:30 – 14:30
Plenary Session
Facilitated discussion around links between the identified gaps in each topic
Sharing of visions for success for each Framing Paper topic
14:30 – 16:30
Working Groups, Session 2
Discussion of the draft Framing Paper recommendations
Identification of additional recommendations and priorities
Prioritization of recommendations for preferred action
Initial identification of specific action steps and key actors
16:45 – 17:30
Plenary Session
Facilitated discussion and update on Working Group progress
17:30 – 18:30 Cocktail Reception, hosted by UNHCR

16
Tuesday, 16 November
Time: Schedule:
9:00 – 9:15 Welcome, instructions and schedule
9:15 – 10:15am
Working Groups, Session 3
Finalization of recommendations and specific action steps
10:30 – 11:15
Interactive presentations by Working Groups of specific recommendations, accompanying action
points and next steps
11:15 – 12:00 Closing Plenary discussion of next steps
12:00 – 13:00 Lunch
13:00 – 17:00 Research Symposium (see separate Research Symposium Agenda)
Annex B: Policy Roundtable Participant List
Last Name First Name Organization
Ahlen Eva UNHCR
Albuja Melissa Horn Refugee and Migration Affairs
Al-Hamaydah Bilal UNESCO
Awl Naseem UNICEF
Barnett Katy Protection Cluster (Child ProtectionAoR)
BengoaDelalande Miren Independent
Brannelly Laura CfBT Education Trust
Brochmann Helge NRC
Chaffin Josh Women’s Refugee Commission& FP author
Chikanya Malvern Independent
De Coninck Sophie ILO
Dryden-Peterson Sarah University of Toronto
Farmer Alice NRC
Foran Siobhán GenCap Advisor
Funai Daisuke IRC
Giochi Stephen Youth FP Partner
Hart Sandra Uwantege Save the Children
Heninger Lori INEE
Hodgkin Marian INEE
Hyll-Larsen Peter ActionAid
Kassa Hibist Youth FP Partner

17
Kenny Leo Cluster -- HIV/AIDS cross-cutting issue
Khan Kashif Youth FP Partner
Kode Titise Comic Relief
Krzysiek Pawel UNICEF ADAP Syria
Lattimer Charlotte Save the Children
Lopez Laura Arigatou International
Macpherson Ian OSI
Mc Kinnon Terra UNHCR – Child Protection
Mitchell Kara CIDA analyst
Morrissey Caroline British Council
Muna Maha Protection Cluster (GBV AoR)
Nicolai Susan Save the Children
Nirrengarten Audrey UNHCR
Orazi Monica FAO
Rakotomalala Sabine IASC Psychosocial and Mental Health
Rhoades Amy ILO
Selegzi Noel OSF
Servas Nicolas RET
Sheehy Ita UNHCR
Spellman Kelly Wellspring Foundation
Talbot Chris Independent
Tuttle Widdus Diane Cluster – HIV/AIDS cross-cutting issue
UlHaque Wasim Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Vinson Jamie INEE Consultant
Weiss-Yagoda Jamie IRC
Annex C: Youth Framing Paper Partner Remarks
Presentation by Stephen Gichohi, Framing Paper 1 Youth Partner
A few weeks ago I had conversations with groups of young people at the Dadaab refugee camp in Kenya
and two IDP camps in the Rift Valley Province of Kenya. As many of you may be aware, Dadaab is a safe
haven for refugees from the war torn Somalia. It is indeed clear in line with the framing paper on Educa-
tion and Opportunity: Post-Primary and Livelihoods that something has to be done on the quality and
relevance of education being offered to these young men and women by various stakeholders. The view
held by many is that the education being offered to them is not in tandem with the local skills and market
demand and I quote one youth leader at the Dadaab camp:
“The main hindrance to getting a living here is the type of trainings we are getting which end up
offering us the same kind of skills with limited opportunities to implement them. We end up ven-
turing on the same kind of livelihood activities within this limited market interms of skills and geo-
graphical location. We are getting desperate because the situation back in our country doesn’t
seem to get any better and this means more years for us here”

18
This calls for all stakeholders involved to look into ways of diversifying skills and trainings offered in the
post primary setup to provide more opportunities to young people. The IDP youth seem to share similar
sentiments with their refugee counterparts. Notable is their plea for broadening and increasing capabili-
ties of the already existing structures and opportunities for education. One such girl had this to say dur-
ing the discussions:
“In this camp today we are just too many and with only one organization providing training to
a few of us on tailoring and a few young men being enrolled in the local technology (jua kali)
training. I wish these opportunities would cover more of us in the camp. I feel that some of the
already trained youth could be a resource in training the rest not covered by the programme in
this camp. This would only happen if we are better equipped in terms of knowledge and tools”.
In my view therefore there is a need to devise mechanisms of reaching out to more young men and
women in these situations through such means as use of mobile telephony, mobile trainings, ToTs, etc.,
which the youth have commonly come to identify with.
Broadly certain policies would be of great input to the post primary education context if put into prac-
tice with speed. These include such policies as the national youth policies which continue to lie in dust
in many countries especially in Africa whereas the youth these policies are meant to serve continue to
languish in despair due to limited access to opportunities for skills development. All stakeholders includ-
ing governments must ensure that the national youth policies are put into practice if they truly believe in
providing opportunities for youth development. For instance if the policy was in practice in Kenya some
of the problems cited above would perhaps not have existed.
Presentation by Hibist Kassa, Framing Paper 2 Youth Partner
All children have a right to receive primary education. This is not a platform which seeks to launch a po-
litical attack on this concept. Instead, we seek to provide a basis to rethink the implications of the above
for the creation of stable political systems. A highly educated populace has the potential to channel its
collective power to transform the power structures in a state to fit within a framework which responds to
the needs of the citizenry. This implies that they can shape their democracies to achieve the outcomes
they desire.
Increasing existing tensions on a global scale
Not all tension implies that a state is unstable. Politics is about struggle. Education is often a politically
sensitive issue, because, it has the potential to empower groups which have been excluded from power.
Today the UK’s coalition government is facing intense resistance to the plans to reduce public spend-
ing in higher education. Some view this as a repeat of the resistance to neoliberal reforms introduced by
Thatcher in the 1970s. In developing countries like Ghana tuition in public universities are being gradually
increased due to the falling financial support by the state.
I argue that education is a potent weapon in the pursuit of social and political change. Creating a glass
ceiling at the primary level can serve as an instrument to contain such a potentially dynamic social force.
Post primary education provides the basis for supporting these disempowered groups to shape their
societies in a manner which would serve their needs and priorities.
What is the relevance of this to conflict and fragile states?
These states face extreme conditions. Basic infrastructural needs are desperately required. Agriculture
and the informal sector become the shelter for survival. High unemployment levels, against the context
of globalization, feeds into increased pressure for neoliberal principles to permeate into public policies.
This is reflected in the education sector. Against this context, it is possible for donors, multilateral institu-
tions and recipient governments to question the point of public funding for post primary education.
There is a need to create conditions where diverse forms of educational opportunities are available to
individuals which can feed into a process of state building. This process should lead to the growth of

19
institutions which would be constantly examined by an empowered citizenry so that their needs and pri-
orities are not ignored. This requires a long term perspective which is often not the focus of most donors
funded projects or programs. In as much as the current mantra is that recipient governments are to lead
the process, donors and multilateral institutions such as the World Bank must be held accountable. This
is the gap which must be filled.
Presentation by Kashif Khan, Framing Paper 3 Youth Partner
I have just returned from Pakistan’s Swat valley, which is still reeling from years of protracted conflict and
the worst floods in living memory. I went there to see the death and destruction first hand in connection
with my doctoral research which focuses on the conflict-affected areas of North Western Pakistan.
The Pakistan conflict is a classic case of the youth bulge theory, wherein large youth populations be-
came a threat to social and economic security.Youth are the largest target group affected by chronic
conflicts and emergency situations and unfortunately the biggest causality in the Swat tragedy have also
been youth. They have lost all their schools; that were burned down by the extremists. In addition their
needs were neglected over time, which has led them to be easy recruits for extremists who use them at
will as suicide bombers. Unless and until their rights are duly protected and safeguarded; and education
and livelihood opportunities are provided Pakistan’s youth will continue to remain prone to radicalisation
and the conflict will not stabilise.
From the humanitarian relief perspectives in this region, I observed that little or no attention has been
forthcoming to youth as a group. It is thus important that challenges facing youth affected by crisis
requires the need for holistic and inter-agency approaches. A holistic approach to working with youthin
humanitarian situations requires that equal attention is placed at different sectors, such as education, health,
protection, early recovery and livelihoods. As one of my young respondents in Swat emphasized: “The
potential of youth involvement; who bring in lots of exuberance and promise; in the recovery effort following
the conflict in Swat needs to be harnessed fully. This should take into account the strengths, interests and
abilities of young people and lead to provision of opportunities such that youth are directly involved in deci-
sion making that affects them.”
Youth must be given a greater voice and be the primary framers of formulating long-term youth policies.
This paper emphasizes that National youth policies should include an emergency component identifying
the roles and needs of youth during crisis preparedness, response and recovery across sectors, with the
education sector taking the lead role. I believe the process of forging youth partnerships in the conflict
and disaster affected areas needs to be fostered, given state patronage and should be built upon exist-
ing youth networks. Youth have the potential to be peace-makers and peace-builders if the right condi-
tions and environment is made available to them.
Annex D: Detailed Working Group Recommendations
Framing Paper 1 – Education and Opportunity: Post-Primary and Income Growth
Global Level
1. Balance investment across education levels and types of education
• Make an economic case for post-primary education and income growth
• Identify youth needs:
• Provide tools for mainstreaming contextual analysis in the needs assessments and M&E processes
• Promote and disseminate UNICEF and other guidelines on youth participation in policy
• Increase funding for post-primary education and income growth
Key Actors: Academia, INEE (particularly the Working Group on Education and Fragility), IASC – Age,
Education, Protection, Early Recovery (ER), and Health – funding mechanisms such as CAP and FTI,
donors, youth

20
2. Systematically address the rights and needs of youth affected by crisis across sectors
• Constitute a cross-sectoral, inter-agency group within the IASC Age area:
• Creation of a ‘Transition Team’ to being this process: develop ToR, identify funding, identify key
agencies to engage, plan first meeting and submit proposal to IASC
• Focus of the group: To ensure mainstreaming of youth issues into the work of all clusters and other
cross-cutting issues; where necessary to develop tools or other products to support this; to act as a
space for sharing of information and the development of collective advocacy strategies.
Key Actors:
• ‘Transition Team,’ perhaps made up of Roundtable participants
• Actors to engage in the IASC Group:
• All clusters – Education, Child Protection, Health, ER
• NGOs – Save, IRC, NRC, WRC, Population Council, CFI
• UN – HCR, UNICEF, UNFPA, UNESCO, UNHABITAT, UN Women
• Youth – initially work with youth already engaged and active; in the long term work on systematic
engagement of youth within country-level clusters to be fed to the global level by selected
representatives
3. Increase political advocacy on education for youth in emergencies, with a particular focus on refugees and IDPs
• Gather and disseminate data on the benefits of youth education
• Intra-agency advocacy for increased focus on youth education
• Approach donors with collected data to illustrate the need for post-primary education
• Share collected data and advocate for youth education with national ministries in CAFS
• Ongoing advocacy of international and regional human rights instruments ensuring the rights
to education
Key Actors: INEE Secretariat, AYTT, and members, UN agencies and NGOs, Education cluster
National Level
1. Make a strong Global Monitoring Report (GMR) 2012 economic case for linking education and income growth
• Review and map what case is currently being made
• Tailor reform for emergency settings
• Engage with the GMR 2012 process
Key Actors: INEE, GTZ, development banks
2. Create an enabling environment for IDPs, refugees, and target populations for income growth
• Understand different interest groups and roles
• Use local knowledge to influence
Key Actors: international organizations (UNHCR, UNWRA), local implementing partners, national
governments
3. Balance immediate needs and long-term priorities as well as investment across the education sector
• Quality M&E
• Making the case for balance (multiple actors)
Key Actors: donors, international organizations, universities and research institutes, youth, key government
ministries (including labor, education, youth, security-related ministries), inter-ministerial committee?
4. Ensure that skills training at the national level is relevant and of high quality
Key Actors: UNHCR, UNWRA, INGOs

21
Framing Paper 2 – Financing for All: Beyond the Primary Need
1. Advocate for youth to donors
• Evidence that funding is needed through a “tip sheet” to support arguments
• Evidence should be in a form that is accessible
• Perhaps INEE and cluster youth groups and task teams should merge to look more broadly at this issue
• Look at what UNICEF has done and their views for the future
• Advocate for immediate prioritization of formal early secondary education to governments and donors
• Conduct an assessment of what exists and compile a short information sheet and longer profile booklet
on the following:
i. Donor positions/strategies on youth policies
ii. INGO, NGO, CBO programs regarding youth
iii. Multi-lateral involvement with youth
iv. National policies and programs regarding youth (in order to identify gaps in program expertise,
raise questions for research, and put forth visions and strategies for the future)
Key Actors: INEE AYTT, IASC clusters, UNHCR, UNICEF, youth groups, NGOs, OSF Youth Initiative
academics
Key Targets: governments, donors, private donors, new resources
2. Balance sector development
• Understand the needs and link to long-term planning, including coordination of multiple ministries
• Explore coordination mechanisms that exist and how they can be leveraged to strengthen or develop
comprehensive national plans to include youth
• Compile three or four case studies to highlight best practices
• Create a “Key Considerations” document for plan development, including checklists regarding:
• Needs assessments
• Funding assessments
• Key stakeholders
• Technical support
• Best practices in donor support
• Explore additional or innovative funding mechanisms for post-primary education in emergencies,
including encouraging private sector investment
Key Actors: governments, donors, civil society, multilaterals, researchers
3. Move beyond the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
• Build momentum now to look beyond 2015 and the EFA goals (we need another ‘Dakar’)
• Make the case regarding the need for post-primary education by broadening the focus through build-
ing the information base:
• Obtain statistics on the numbers of youth who are missing out on education
• Highlight and expand on the success for primary education initiatives
• Identify partner countries with the UN for support
Key Actors: UN partner countries – youth, donors, IASC – civil society, academics

22
Framing Paper 3 – Whole People, Holistic Growth: Cross-Sectoral Action and Learning
Identified Objective: To improve access to a full range of services and mechanisms for participation for
adolescents and youth in humanitarian settings
It was suggested that the areas for action and exploration listed below initially be undertaken in three
different countries. These in-depth case studies would then be used to inform a global approach. The
country level mapping would also be used to inform the process of streamlining youth targeting within
the cross-cutting issue of Age.
• Inter-sectoral coordination
• Map existing tools and mechanisms across sectors
• Define ‘holistic’
• Working with duty bearers
• Identify ways to strengthen national policies regarding youth in emergencies and make these avail-
able to partners at country level
• Strengthen existing capacity-building opportunities
• Consider preparedness as a critical opportunity (for example, building youth networks and peace
education)
• Mainstream adolescents and youth in existing capacity building materials and opportunities across
sectors
• Youth participation
• Remove obstacles to sustainable youth participation
• Systematize mechanisms for youth participation
• Use innovative communication mechanisms such as SMS messaging to exchange information with
youth networks
• Develop Minimum Standards for Youth Participation
• Ensure enabling and safe spaces for youth that enable mobilization and participation
• Use and analysis of existing data
• Undertake a comprehensive analysis of existing data on youth in a given context, including what ac-
tions have been taken
• Improve availability of data
Key Actors: OSF (explore options of integrating the above objectives into an upcoming study of the
affect of public policies on youth in 11 countries), INEE AYTT (in bringing in actors and representatives
from other interested sectors).
Annex E: Prioritized Research Questions
• How can meaningful youth participation in humanitarian action be systematized and scaled up?
• How can we increase financing for post-primary education in emergencies?
• What is the relationship between educational content offered and the type of knowledge and skills
needed to rebuild infrastructure and local economy?
• What mechanisms and tools are needed to overcome challenges of data collection on crisis-affected
youth?
• How can education in crisis contexts be tailored toward market demand, community needs, and youth
people’s opportunities for employment?
• Do current investments in youth programming represent value for money and therefore improve the
incentive for donors and governments to invest in them?

Inter-Agency Network for Education in Emergencies
Réseau Inter-Agences pour l´Éducation en Situations d´Urgence
La Red Interagencial para la Educación en Situaciones de Emergencia
Rede Inter-Institucional para a Educação em Situação de Emergência

Full_Report_863

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (10)

Similar to Full_Report_863

Similar to Full_Report_863 (20)

Full_Report_863