URBAN

C R I S E S

Urban context analysis toolkit

Guidance Note for Humanitarian Practitioners
Stronger Cities Consortium
Preface IIED’s Human Settlements Group
The Stronger Cities Initiative is a consortium of the International The Human Settlements Group at the International Institute for
Rescue Committee (IRC), the Norwegian Refugee Council Environment and Development (IIED) works to reduce poverty
(NRC), and World Vision International (WVI) with technical and improve health and housing conditions in the urban centres
advice from David Sanderson, University of New South Wales, of Africa, Asia and Latin America. It seeks to combine this with
Sydney. The purpose of the initiative is to produce practical promoting good governance and more ecologically sustainable
field-tested guidance for humanitarian organisations working in patterns of urban development and rural-urban linkages.
urban conflict, displacement, and natural hazard settings.
This paper is part of a series of research pieces produced
The urban context analysis toolkit and guidance were under the ‘Urban Crises Learning Fund’ managed by IIED.
developed by the IRC. The IRC responds to the world’s worst Funded by the Department for International Development
humanitarian crises, helping to restore health, safety, education, (DFID), the fund aims to build an in-depth understanding of
economic well-being, and power to people devastated by how the humanitarian sector can most effectively operate in
conflict and disaster. Founded in 1933 at the call of Albert urban contexts.
Einstein, the IRC is at work in over 40 countries and 26 US
cities helping people to survive, reclaim control of their future,
and strengthen their communities. Published by IIED, June 2017
This guidance note was written by Brian Sage (Oxu Citation: International Rescue Committee (2017) Urban context
Solutions), Andrew Meaux (IRC) and Wale Osofisan (IRC) with analysis toolkit. Guidance note for humanitarian practitioners.
contributions from Mary Traynor (Oxu Solutions) and Tatiana IIED, London.
Reye Jove (Oxu Solutions). The authors would like to thank
http://pubs.iied.org/10819IIED
the policymakers and practitioners that generously shared
their time to input and review draft versions of the toolkit and ISBN 978-1-78431-480-4
guidance note: Barri Shorey, Bryce Perry, Bobi Morris, Geoffroy
Cover photo credit: Jacob Russell/IRC
Groleau, Ilaria Michelis, Kristin Kim Bart, Laro Gonzalez, Leah
Campbell, Tyler Radford, Yasin Abbas, and Zeina Shuhaibar. In
particular, the authors would like to David Sanderson, Pamela
Sitko, Laura Phelps, Samer Saliba and Tobias Metzner for
their support and critical guidance throughout the toolkit’s
development. Most importantly, the authors are indebted to
the amazing IRC staff and local interpreters in Jordan, Nigeria,
South Sudan, Tanzania, and Thailand that made piloting the
toolkit possible.
This publication was funded with
the generous contributions of UK
aid from the UK government and
EU Humanitarian Aid. This is an
independent report and does not
necessarily reflect the views of IIED,
DFID or ECHO. Any errors are on part
of the authors. This document covers
humanitarian aid activities implemented
with the financial assistance of the
European Union. The views expressed
herein should not be taken in any way
to reflect the official opinion of the
European Union; and the European
Commission is not responsible for European Union
Civil Protecon and
any use that may be made of the
Humanitarian Aid
information it contains.

International Institute for Environment and Development

80-86 Gray’s Inn Road, London WC1X 8NH, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 3463 7399
Fax: +44 (0)20 3514 9055
www.iied.org
@iied
www.facebook.com/theIIED
Download more publications at http://pubs.iied.org/
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Today, over half of all internally displaced persons (IDPs)

and refugees are living in cities. This means that forced
displacement is both a humanitarian and development
challenge, given that displacement is often long term, with
more than 80 per cent of refugee crises lasting ten or more
years. Current models and tools developed mostly for rural,
camp-based settings are not equipped to help responders
understand and navigate the complex nature of urban
contexts. Context analysis approaches can help humanitarian
actors have a better understanding of the dynamics in a given
setting by unpacking the political, economic, social, service
delivery and spatial factors that could potentially enable or
hinder effective crisis responses of affected populations.
The urban context analysis toolkit was created to provide an
analysis toolkit that is user friendly, relatively quick to use, and
adaptable. The toolkit contains a set of practical tools (work
plan, questionnaires, analysis tables, report templates) tailored
to conducting analysis that informs context specific responses
– targeting both the displaced and host communities – in a
given urban crises setting. The guidance note provides step-
by-step guidance on how to apply the context analysis toolkit
in practice. This toolkit will enable users to identify relevant
stakeholders, existing power relations, resource distribution,
governance and legal frameworks, sources of livelihoods,
social networks, and access to services that will help
responders to determine suitable entry points and improve the
effectiveness and responsiveness of their programmes.

www.iied.org 3
Urban context analysis toolkit

Contents
Abbreviations and acronyms 6

Introduction7
Why urban context analysis matters 7
What is context analysis 8
Why an urban context analysis toolkit 8
Who is the toolkit for, when to use it and limitations 9
How to use the toolkit and narrative guide 10

Phase 1 – Preparation 12
Step 1: Launch context analysis 12
Step 2: Frame the context analysis  14
Step 3: Select initial key context analysis questions 16

Phase 2 – Data collection 20

Step 4: Collate secondary data 20
Step 5: Prepare to collect primary data 24
Step 6: Carry out primary data collection  27

Phase 3 – Data analysis and documenting 29

Step 7: Analyse primary and secondary data  29
Step 8: Validation workshop  31
Step 9: Write final report  32
Step 10: Communicate findings 33

Conclusion34

References35

Additional bibliography 37

Annexes: Urban context analysis toolkit 38

4 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

List of figures and tables

Figure 1: Complete urban context analysis toolkit 10
Figure 2: Overview of context analysis steps 11
Figure 3: Typology of urban systems 17
Figure 4: Stakeholder analysis from Sierra Leone  22
Figure 5: Summary of urban context analysis process and tools 34

Table 1: Team member roles 13

Table 2: Considerations and questions to frame the scope and scale 15
Table 3: Thematic framework 18

www.iied.org 5
Urban context analysis toolkit

Abbreviations and acronyms

ACAPS Assessment Capacities Project
ALNAP Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action
CaLP Cash Learning Partnership
CCCM Camp Coordination and Camp Management
DFID Department for International Development, UK
ECHO European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid
FBO Faith-based organisation
FGD Focus group discussion
GBV Gender-based violence
IDP Internally displaced person
IIED International Institute for Environment and Development
INGO International non-governmental organisation
IRC International Rescue Committee
KII Key informant interview
LGBT Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender
LNGO Local non-governmental organisation
NGO Non-governmental organisation
NRC Norwegian Refugee Council
NSA Non-state actor
UN United Nations
UN DESA United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
WVI World Vision International

6 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Introduction
Why urban context analysis matters
The global phenomenon of urbanisation brings forth new and pressing challenges to the humanitarian sector,
especially to actors responding to forced displacement. It is predicted that by 2030, four billion people – nearly
50 percent of the world’s population – will live in the towns and cities of low- and middle-income countries (UN
DESA, 2014). This increased urbanisation is expected to magnify urban displacement crises resulting from conflict
or natural disasters, straining already stretched infrastructure and services even more acutely in low-income
country cities.
Today, over half of all internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees are living in cities (Meral, 2015). This means
that forced displacement is both a humanitarian and development challenge given that displacement is often
long-term with more than 80 percent of refugee crises lasting ten or more years (Crawford et al., 2015). Those
affected by forced displacement often face the key risks and impoverishment processes of: (a) landlessness; (b)
joblessness; (c) homelessness; (d) marginalisation; (e) food insecurity; (f) loss of access to common property
resources; (g) increased morbidity; and (h) loss of social capital (Jennings et al., 2014).
Current models and tools developed mostly for
rural, camp-based settings are not equipped to help Key terms
responders understand and navigate the dynamic
and complex nature of urban contexts. Urban Urban contexts “are characterised by high numbers
spaces are different from rural settings in numerous of very different people living and working in close
ways. One key distinction is that, in urban settings, proximity to one another (Global CCCM Cluster,
humanitarian actors have limited leverage or influence 2014; CaLP, 2011). In contrast to rural areas,
over contextual factors such as how the urban system urban inhabitants are more mobile (Brown et al.,
functions in informal areas, the quality of service 2015; Shelter Centre and NRC, 2010) and largely
provision, employment opportunities, infrastructure, dependent on technical or economic systems in order
or legal rights (Haysom, 2013). These factors are to meet their basic needs (SKAT and IFRC, 2012;
further exacerbated when host communities are UNHCR, 2009; Sanderson et al., 2012). The social,
densely populated, mostly low-income and face political and institutional environment is also more
similar problems as the displaced populations. complex” (SKAT and IFRC, 2012; USAID, 2008;
This distinction necessitates a transition in the way CaLP, 2011).
humanitarian actors respond to forced displacement Source: Parker and Maynard 2015
and underscores the necessity of collaboration
with and support for the governments of cities and
countries accommodating displaced persons and their host communities (Meaux and Osofisan, 2016). Successful
interventions must not only understand what the risk factors are but also the underlying factors that may exacerbate
or reduce the associated risks and impoverishment processes.

Photo credit: Samer Saliba of Amman, Jordan

www.iied.org 7
 Urban context analysis toolkit

What is context analysis

Context analysis approaches aid humanitarian actors to understand the complex dynamics of a given situation by
unpacking the political, economic, social and spatial factors that could potentially enable or hinder effective crisis
responses to affected populations.1 They do so by enabling users to:
• Generate contextual information that goes beyond telling us what the current situation is (the visible effects of
the problem) to instead explain why things are the way they are and how they are connected (the less apparent
systemic issues and the non-traditional actors that influence them).
• Understand what influences the types of decisions made by local authorities, bureaucrats, and frontline service
providers (state and non-state) and how displaced populations may affect their perspective and decision making.
• Identify practical and realistic entry points when designing interventions that contribute to an effective response
while remaining true to humanitarian principles and values.
A context analysis is not focused on needs and, therefore, must be understood as quite distinct from a needs
assessment. Consequently, while the outputs of context analysis may point to potential opportunities (geographical
areas, sectors/services of focus, etc.) for the organisation, they will not include significant information on needs
or gaps in services required to design or implement programming. Examples of common types of humanitarian
context analyses include stakeholder analysis, political economy analysis,2 conflict analysis, and market analysis.

Why conduct a context analysis?

• Avoid doing unintentional harm or exacerbating social tensions, especially between displaced populations
and host communities
• Identify stakeholders in terms of their capacity, interest in, and influence in forced displacement response
• Understand the relationships between stakeholders and where partnerships, coalitions, coordination and
advocacy could add value
• Recognise the existing legal frameworks, form=al and informal institutions, urban systems and power
structures that will affect a response programme and vice versa
• Design a response based on analysis of the entry points and activities that will be most valuable in
addressing needs with an understanding of the impact in both short and long-term development of an urban
area, and
• Make explicit the programme assumptions, risks and trade-offs involved in planning and implementing
programmes (Heykoop and Kelling, 2014).
Source: Meaux and Osofisan (2016)

Why an urban context analysis toolkit

Humanitarian organisations often struggle to understand and navigate the dynamic and complex nature of a crisis,
especially those occurring in an urban area. Responses to crises require a sound understanding of the underlying
factors of why things are the way they are and the entry points for addressing systemic challenges. There is a
dearth of easy-to-use tools to help humanitarian actors quickly assess an urban area’s pre-existing structures,
systems, and actors.
The urban context analysis toolkit was created in response to this immediate need and designed specifically to
provide an assessment mechanism that is more user friendly, quick and adaptable in comparison to macro level
context analysis tools often used to inform policy reform or development projects. The toolkit is designed to enable
user modification to specific contexts and connect community-level actions with city, state, and national-level

1
Affected populations in the guidance note will be used to cover all people in area that have been affected by the crisis or disaster. This may include displaced
populations, host community, migrant populations, etc.
2
Political economy may be an unfamiliar term for many humanitarian organisations. In short, political economy “focuses on how power and resources are
distributed and contested in different contexts, and the implications for development outcomes. It gets beneath the formal structures to reveal the underlying
interests, incentives and institutions that enable or frustrate change” (DFID, 2009).

8 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

issues. The toolkit was piloted in five cities including Maiduguri (Nigeria), Juba (South Sudan), Amman (Jordan),
Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), and Bangkok (Thailand) in 2016 and 2017. Each of these pilots helped to test the toolkit
in various cultural/geographic areas (Asia, Middle East, East Africa, and West Africa), various types of crises (ie
IDPs in urban areas, refugees in urban areas, camps in urban areas), various lengths of displacement (temporary
and protracted), and, finally, various levels of city fragility (from stable to highly fragile, conflict prone).
A context analysis is the starting point of a process to understand the complexity and fluidity of an urban
environment; this toolkit will enable users to appreciate stakeholders, existing power relations, resource
distribution, governance and legal frameworks, sources of livelihoods, social networks, and access to services.
The main output of the toolkit is a final narrative report containing:
• Stakeholder analysis
• Key contextual findings by theme: political; social and cultural; economic; service delivery and infrastructure;
space and settlements; and crosscutting
• Identifying entry points and risk mitigation strategies for programming, and
• Opportunities to strengthen existing or for future programming.
As noted previously, the context analysis is a complement to an in-depth assessment that may be sector- or
programme-specific. It will not be sufficient alone to design a full programme, but will provide an invaluable
understanding of the local context to ensure that programmes are effective and responsive to local dynamics.

Who is the toolkit for, when to use it and limitations

Who is the toolkit for?
The urban context analysis toolkit and this narrative guide have been designed for use by programme staff
members or consultants with experience of conducting assessments or qualitative studies. The primary users are
presumed to be a technical lead in-country, a technical advisor in headquarters, an emergency response team
member, or a programme generalist with programme design and assessment experience. See Step 1 for further
details on suggested team composition including team lead and data collectors.

When to use the toolkit?

While the toolkit is intended to be comprehensive and adaptable, it is primarily designed for organisations wishing
to conduct an urban context analysis of a man-made crisis or one leading to population displacement to an
urban area. The toolkit itself is generally designed with the assumption of approximately two weeks in country of
data collection as a starting point from which users will adapt according to their needs. It will likely be most relevant
for organisations interested in transitioning from emergency response to recovery and resilience-building activities
rather than immediate response.3 The assumption made while developing the toolkit was that the organisation
using it will already have been operating in the city/country for at least several months prior to the analysis and will
need to conduct a context analysis in order to develop a better understanding of the context they are working in
before or alongside a needs or vulnerability assessment.
The toolkit was nevertheless, designed to be modified easily for use. The guidance under Step 2 in this document
contains some additional considerations that may influence the duration and focus of the analysis. The toolkit and
narrative guide have been designed to constitute a standalone kit. Many organisations may, however, have their
own context analysis tools or analytical frameworks. Users may, therefore, find the toolkit a useful complement to
existing tools and choose to adapt and incorporate some of its components.
A context analysis will be most effective at the very start of the programme life cycle before assessments or
programme design has started. The urban context analysis toolkit is part of a broader suite of urban-specific urban
guidance and tools that may be found at www.iied.org/stronger-cities-initiative.4

3
If interested in a rapid response context analysis, see World Vision’s good enough context analysis for rapid response (GECARR) here: http://wvi.org/
peacebuilding-and-conflict-sensitivity/publication/good-enough-context-analysis-rapid-response. IRC’s conflict sensitivity analysis toolkit also provides
workshop-based modules that can be completed in one to two days (See IRC, 2016b).
4
The suite of urban tools includes an urban multi-sectoral vulnerability assessment tool (UMVAT), an urban response analysis framework (URAF), guidance for
targeting in urban displacement contexts, and urban stakeholder engagement and coordination guidance. These may be found at: www.iied.org/stronger-cities-
initiative

www.iied.org 9
Urban context analysis toolkit

Limitations
As with any guidance document, the challenge is to be specific and concrete enough to be useful while remaining
general enough to be used in varied contexts. This narrative guide assumes that all the tools, which are based
on standard project and qualitative research tools, will be adapted by users for the specifics of the urban context
being examined and according to the rationale behind the launch of the analysis. In addition to adapting the tools
for specific contexts, users should be prepared to update the analysis as the dynamics of urban displacement
evolve on the ground. Urban environments are constantly changing – new governments take office, new policies
are enacted, etc. – and users should revise the analysis as necessary to ensure it remains relevant.
Second, this toolkit is not designed to provide a prescriptive guide to programme design. Rather, the analysis
constructs a backdrop of key cross-cutting issues such as political economy, potential conflict tensions, and
other risks that should be taken into consideration when developing a strategy or programmes/projects. It is also
intended to be linked to other toolkits and design processes.
Third, the toolkit and steps outlined in this document describe a qualitative exercise. If users have time and
resources to carry out quantitative research, eg a household or individual survey, the toolkit could certainly
complement these efforts. Depending on the intended audience for the report, the user may want to consider
quantitative methods. This may include either turning qualitative data into quantitative data or employing counting
methods in FGD discussions to yield data that can be turned into charts and graphs to analyse trends numerically.

How to use the toolkit and narrative guide

The toolkit is composed of ten tools with accompanying step-by-step narrative guide.
Figure 1 contains a listing of the complete urban context analysis toolkit (which can be found in Annexes 1 to 10).
The toolkit includes a set of practical tools (workplan, questionnaires, analysis tables, report templates) in easily-
modifiable Word and Excel formats.

Figure 1: Complete urban context analysis toolkit

Tool 1 Workplan and budget

Tool 2 Desk review summary

Tool 3 Stakeholder analysis

Tool 4 Data collection plan

Tool 5A FGD guide for displaced populations

Tool 5B FGD guide for host communities

Tool 5C KII guide for influential stakeholders

Tool 5D KII guide for service provider stakeholders

Tool 5E KII guide on labour and business climate

Tool 5F KII guide for local government

Tool 5G KII guide for NGO service providers

Tool 6 KII and FGD debrief template

Tool 7 Key findings

Tool 8 Programme implications

Tool 9: Urban analysis workshop

Tool 10: Urban context analysis final report outline

10 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Figure 2 contains an overview on the phases and steps to complete the urban context analysis. The iterative
approach to analysis recommended for the exercise is also presented.
The remaining sections of this narrative guide is organised as follows:
• Phase 1: Preparation (Steps 1-3)
• Phase 2: Data collection (Steps 4-6)
• Phase 3: Data analysis and documenting (Steps 7-10)
Each step throughout the guidance note contains a description of purpose, available tools, and advice for their
preparation and use.

Figure 2: Overview of context analysis steps

Step 1 • Develop workplan and budget

Launch context analysis • Develop role descriptions for team members and partners for
the analysis

Step 2
• Use criteria to determine on what, in which area, and over what Phase 1
Frame the context analysis period of time to focus the context analysis Preparation

Step 3
• Draft key analysis questions using provided framework to
Select initial key context guide and provoke ideas
analysis questions

Step 4 • Carry out desk review, refine framework and document

Collate secondary data findings
• Map existing understanding of important stakeholders

Step 5 • Draft data collection plan to include the identification of KIIs

Phase 2
Prepare to collect primary and FGDs
Data
data • Adapt and contextualise KII questionnaires and FGD guides collection

Step 6 • Debrief regularly and discuss findings to refine hypotheses

• Conduct a meeting midway through data collection to review
Carry out primary data findings and identify outstanding questions for additional
collection FGDs or KIIs

Step 7 • Summarise and analyse information gathered during data

Analyse primary and collection to identify key findings, implications for programming
secondary data and stakeholders analysis

Step 8
Validation workshop • Organise a workshop to validate and refine analysis
Phase 3
Data
analysis and
Step 9
documenting
Write final report • Document key findings and decisions in report or presentation

Step 10
Communicate findings • Share findings with internal and external stakeholders

www.iied.org 11
Urban context analysis toolkit

Phase 1 – Preparation
At this time, the implementing organisation puts in place the structure and resources required for the context
analysis. It also begins to reflect on the issues and questions it wants to explore during the analysis.

Step 1: Launch context analysis

Once an implementing organisation has made the decision
Step 1: Overview that a context analysis is an appropriate initial action in their
response to a crisis, they must carry out a few practical
Tools basic tasks to prepare and structure the analysis.
• Tool 1: Workplan and budget provides a
template for planning the analysis Workplan and budget
Output Individuals who have conducted these types of analyses
and/or used similar tools know that the time to implement
• Completed workplan and budget them can shift significantly, and the time required to
• Establish team roles prepare the meetings in the area can be highly variable.

• Decision on partners to engage in the analysis Tool 1: Workplan and budget provides an illustrative
workplan and budget based on a 14-day on-site analysis
period for the urban context analysis to understand and
estimate the costs and time required. Of course, each organisation will adapt the tools and planning according to
their available budgets, existing experience in the country and complementary assessments already completed/
planned. The toolkit itself is generally designed with the assumption of approximately two weeks in country of data
collection as a starting point from which users will adapt according to their needs.
The workplan should be refined just after or with the budget as changes may need to be made to the workplan
if budget constraints limit the scope of the analysis. This tool should be used and updated by the team lead
throughout the analysis period. The activities in Column C of the workplan should be modified to reflect the
planned analysis and then planned across the days/weeks. If some team members are consultants or are staff
from HQ or another office that will need coverage from another budget, the user should estimate the anticipated
time allocation of each team member for each line item (see Columns D-F). Similarly, for the budget, the ‘services’
estimates are only necessary if some team members are consultants or are staff from HQ or another office that will

Photo credit: Meredith Hutchison/IRC

12 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

need coverage from another budget. The user should update the anticipated unit rate and number of units for each
line item to estimate the total required budget.

Decision to launch Urban Context Analysis in Maiduguri, Nigeria, 2016

The IRC had been working in Borno State in Nigeria for over one year in response to the displacement of
populations due to the threat of violence from Boko Haram. Programming in Maiduguri began after violence
in the remote areas caused displacement to Maiduguri. The organisation initially primarily responded in the
camps but recognised that many displaced were in host communities living on the property of host families.
This raised different issues of how to ensure access to adequate services for the affected populations. It was
decided to undertake an urban context analysis as a way of preparing to ensure that future programmes could
better address the needs of displaced and community members impacted by the displacement caused by the
insecurity in Borno State.

Team composition
The context analysis team will be led by a team lead who should have significant experience conducting qualitative
studies and familiarity with the type of analysis. If possible, it is helpful to have one to two additional experienced
individuals to provide support. For the FGDs and KIIs, at least four staff with knowledge of the area(s) investigated
would be beneficial. The latter would ideally be national staff who come from and know the local languages of both
the affected communities (if IDPs/migrants/refugees), as well as host communities (remembering that even in
many host communities several local languages may be spoken with one prevailing language serving as a common
– but not necessarily native – language). Those who do not speak local languages will need to be paired with
national staff with appropriate language capabilities or translators. Typical translators will not be ideal for this work,
however, as direct translation is time-consuming: it would be preferable to have a counterpart trained to understand
the nuances of the questions and follow-up questions. It is essential to recruit interviewers/facilitators who are from
the country/city/same groups as the participants in the context analysis, eg refugees, ethnic minorities, male and
female. Below, Table 1 describes the team members’ roles.

Table 1: Team member roles

Role Description Prior experience

Team lead • Determine team roles and responsibilities Leading qualitative studies,
(optional • Develop and maintain workplan and budget eg evaluations, assessments,
additional co- context analysis, etc.
• Determine initial geographic scope for analysis
leads)
• Coordinate writing of desk review
• Adapt tools for context
• Design data collection methodology
• Facilitate team debriefings, analysis sessions, etc.
• Analyse data and formulate findings
• Coordinate writing of final context analysis report
Support and • Coordinate identification and scheduling of FGDs and Knowledge of local context
logistics team KIIs including language(s).
member(s) • Coordinate vehicle rental, workshop rental, translator Experience in planning in fast-
hiring, as needed shifting environments.
Data collection • Support main team to interview KIIs and facilitate FGDs Local language competencies;
team members • Report findings knowledge of context,
notetaking capacities.
• Contribute to preliminary analysis by participating in
regular debriefing meetings with full team
• Translators may also be needed for some team members

www.iied.org 13
Urban context analysis toolkit

Joint analysis and partnerships

If the implementing organisation is already established in the city and partnering or coordinating with other (local or
international) organisations working in the same area, then it may want to consider collaborating formally with them
on the analysis. This would bring the usual benefits and challenges of partnership: diverse perspectives; possible
complementary areas of expertise; and local knowledge versus the need to plan for additional coordination and
contractual activities. As described below in Steps 5 and 7, there will be scope to involve (formal or informal)
partners in the planning for data collection and analysis of findings. Organisations should be careful about taking
on new partners to execute a context analysis in an urban crisis if there is a significant conflict or protection
dynamic at play. Some factors to consider in deciding whether to include local partners or in which phases/
steps are:
• Do the partners know the areas of the city much better than the implementing organisation, such that they can
narrow the focus of the data collection or assist in the formulation of questions?
• Are there protection concerns for the staff of the local partner participating in the data collection? Are there any
risks of bias of the potential partner participating in data collection that cannot be mitigated through the overall
team composition?
• Will sharing findings publicly create risks for any groups that may have participated in data collection or in the
analysis?
In general, there will be many more advantages to having more stakeholders involved in the context analysis as
it will minimise differing perspectives on the context, and increase the likelihood that donors and government
stakeholders appropriate the findings, which will yield better coordinated responses. Also, often due to sensitivities
of the analysis it may be hard to share the final report. Joint analysis can help to facilitate knowledge transfer on the
findings.

Step 2: Frame the context analysis

Urban areas are by their size, density, social and economic
Step 2: Overview diversity inherently complex and unique. Consequently, seeking
to understand and assess the many political, administrative,
Output economic, social and cultural factors that might affect an
international organisation’s programmes in the relatively short
• Decision on the scope and scale of the
period of time available for a typical analysis exercise requires
analysis
defining the specific problem(s) you seek to address. This will
• Decision on the particular sub-areas of enable the team to focus the analysis to ensure that specific
the city to conduct the analysis questions are identified and can be addressed as part of the
data collection steps of the context analysis (described below in
Steps 4-6).

Review considerations and questions to frame the context analysis

Table 2 below contains criteria for the implementing organisation to review when considering what and in which
areas they want to focus the context analysis before drafting key analysis questions in Step 3. These guiding
questions can help to define boundaries of the analysis ensuring that the analysis helps to answer, along with
highlighting key considerations to be taken into account during logistic and data collection planning.

14 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Table 2: Considerations and questions to frame the scope and scale

Considerations Questions
Organisational • What is the current organisational coverage and background in the urban area(s)? Is
capacity and interest there any existing or planned programming?
• What other organisations are operational/have influence in the area(s)?
• Is the intention from the outset to analyse only specific populations or sub-areas or
can these be explored and refined based on the analysis findings?
Type of crisis • To what type of crisis is the organisation intending to respond?
Types of crises:
i) Conflict that causes internal displacement TO a city
ii) Conflict that causes refugee displacement TO a city
iii) Violent conflict WITHIN a city
iv) Naturally triggered hazards WITHIN a city or displacement TO a city
Populations of interest • Which are the affected population(s)?
• Where are they living/accessing services (eg in or out of camps)?
• Are populations of interest clustered in specific areas of the city or living across
multiple area(s)?
Depending on the nature of the event (natural-triggered hazards with rapid or slow
onsets or conflict etc.) and scale of the event you may explore issues related to certain
demographics such as host communities, migrants, IDPs, refugees, etc.
Type of city • What size is the city? How might this impact the number of areas of the city to
conduct primary data collection in?
• What is the size of the specific area(s) of interest within the city? How will that
impact the amount of time for data collection in each particular area of the city?
• Is the city a capital of a country or of a province/state/district, which may have
additional layers of authority and influence?
Knowing all of the above can also be relevant in terms of access to key informants and
inform the scope of the analysis.

Prioritise and map sub-areas

As will be explained further in Phase 2, the urban context analysis aims to collect data at both city-wide level and
in sub-areas. An area (also known as a neighbourhood or settlement) is a community within a defined geography.
They may be formally defined administrative boundaries (eg municipality or ward) or physical boundaries based
on features of the urban landscape (eg roads, rivers) combined with social analysis considerations (Parker and
Maynard, 2015). Typically, it takes approximately one to two days to complete data collection in a sub-area of a city.
As such, each organisation will have to select the number of sub-areas that may be covered given resources, time,
and interest for the analysis.
Below are examples of criteria that may be used to prioritise areas of the city for a context analysis:
• Vulnerability of the sub-area in comparison to other areas of the city
• Implementing organisation’s existing programming or strategic preferences
• Known gaps in contextual understanding
• Security/access to sub-area, and
• Request for support/documentation of needs by local government/UN, etc.
When selecting areas of the city, it can be very helpful to review maps of the areas and how the sub-areas selected
relate to other parts of the city. Some cities may have helpful data on vulnerability that can support this analysis.

www.iied.org 15
 Urban context analysis toolkit

Selecting sub-areas for an urban context analysis, Dar es Salaam, 2016

Dar es Salaam is a large, sprawling capital city. Consequently, it would be time-consuming to try to include
the entire city in a context analysis exercise. Given that the implementing organisation intended to target
refugees and displaced persons for programming, particularly Burundians and Congolese, it was able to focus
the analysis on three areas of the city that were known to have higher concentrations of these groups. This
facilitated a more in-depth inquiry into those areas and the development of a more comprehensive picture of the
issues they faced. Without that basic understanding of the population groups prior to the analysis, choosing the
relevant areas of the city would have been challenging and might have led to analysis of areas that would only
reveal an incomplete picture of the city and how its communities and services function for the target groups.

Step 3: Select initial key context analysis questions

Figure 3 depicts the themes for the urban context analysis.
Step 3: Overview This framework applies a system-thinking approach that
aims to understand both individual thematic areas and the
Output interconnections and relations between each of the areas.
The framework is based on research conducted by the IRC
• Adapted thematic framework and
(Meaux and Osofisan, 2016) and ALNAP (Campbell, 2016) on
guiding questions for the analysis
humanitarian response in urban areas. It is organised according to
analysis themes (described below) and sub-themes identified as
particularly relevant to an urban context analysis. It also contains
a series of key questions to be used as a starting point to explore the themes, sub-themes and issues of interest to
the implementing organisation. These questions will be used by the team to guide the adaptation of the FGD and
KII questionnaires (Tools 5A to 5G) that will be used for data collection in Phase 2.

Themes:
• Politics and governance: exploration of who holds power, influence, and decision-making authority and
whether the reality of these dynamics corresponds to official policies, regulations and laws.
• Social and cultural: consideration of the social structure, identities (eg language, ethnicity or religion), and
individual factors that may support or hinder social relationships and cohesion.
• Economic: examination of issues such as income-generating opportunities, wage rates, commodity prices etc.
that have a close connection to opportunities and vulnerabilities of affected population(s).
• Service delivery and infrastructure: review of access to quality services for affected population(s).
• Space and settlements: analysis of the space in which the crisis is taking place (physical organisation, risks
and access).
The framework also incorporates ‘Do No Harm’ and gender equality as cross-cutting themes. ‘Do No Harm’
analysis helps to ensure that programmes do not increase tension or undermine existing local systems (eg existing
service providers or local government support). Gender equality5 refers to the disparities between women and
men as a result of the responsibilities assigned, activities undertaken, access to and control over resources, and
decision-making opportunities assigned to them. Considerations of these cross-cutting themes are integrated
throughout the toolkit, including the questionnaires and analysis steps, to be gender and conflict sensitive.

5
If the team is only interested in the theme of gender equality, it is recommended that the organisation conducts an in-depth gender analysis instead. For
example see IRC, 2017. Gender Analysis and Program Design Toolkit. Available at: https://rescue.box.com/s/sob2felahuyz5h7yi1wia2gsllfcdaqm

16 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Figure 3: Typology of urban systems

Economy &
livelihoods

Politics & Infrastructure

governance & services
Do No
Harm
Gender
Equality

Social & Space &

cultural settlements

Source: Adapted from Campbell, 2016

Adapting the themes, sub-themes, and guiding questions:

The thematic framework in Table 3 provides guiding questions that can be adapted to a team’s particular context
analysis. A team should always adapt these questions and, as needed, sub-themes. The framework is not meant
to be prescriptive, but rather a tool for framing the context-specific key questions to be developed by the team for
data collection and analysis. While the team will continue to refine the context analysis before data collection,6
early in the preparation, it is useful to begin to define the key questions of interest. During Step 3, users should
review the framework, note questions that appear particularly relevant or irrelevant to their context, and use
the themes and sub-themes to brainstorm other potential questions. This process should help to outline initial
recommendations for data collection methods and the focus of the team during later steps. When adapting the
questions, the team should consider:
• Is this question relevant to my context (keep / remove)? For example, questions on legal protection may be less
relevant for an IDP context vs a refugee context.
• Does this question need adaptation to be relevant for my context? Will knowing the answer to this question help
to inform more effective approaches to programming?
• Are there any key questions missing about anything the team wants to investigate?
It is important not to assume that the team knows the answers to all the guiding questions. Often humanitarian staff
will make assumptions about a particular context that are wrong, or only half of the full picture of the context. If the
team does not have data to back up assumptions, the team should consider investigating the question.
Finally, a context analysis value is only as valuable as the questions that guide the context analysis. Therefore, it is
critical that the team identifies during Step 3 what it seeks to learn through the context analysis to ensure that data
collection and analysis reflect the key desires for the learning of the team. This can mean a team may need to add
new questions or only focus on particular themes to ensure enough data is collected on the particular questions of
value to the programme team.

6
For example, the framework is also included in Step 4 when the context-specific findings of the desk review are used to remove any irrelevant sub-themes and
more precise key questions may be identified by the team. Later, during primary data collection (Step 6), and during the analysis of primary and secondary data
(Step 7), the framework will again serve to organise preliminary and then final findings from the analysis.

www.iied.org 17
Urban context analysis toolkit

Table 3: Thematic framework

Sub-theme Guiding questions

Theme

[to be refined by the team implementing the context analysis]

Stakeholder • Who are the key actors that have an influence on the affected population
analysis (negative or positive)? Why and how to engage these actors?
• What are the incentives and motivation that enable or constrain the actors to
respond to the displacement crisis?
• What is the capacity of each actor to respond to the needs of affected
Politics and governance

populations?
Governance • What is the governance structure (centralised, decentralised, etc.)? At what level
structure are policies on displacement made? At what level are policies on service delivery
made?
• What is the relationship between different government institutions and
departments?
Policy and legal • What are the main policies, initiatives, strategic plans and regulations that may
frameworks have a negative or positive impact on affected populations? (eg city resilience
plan, IDP or refugee policy, municipal bye-laws or plans, national and municipal
disaster preparedness plans).
• What are the main legal frameworks in place that have the greatest influence
on populations affected by displacement and/or the crisis? What traditional
mechanisms or community practices supplement or undermine the legal
frameworks?
Social relationships • What are the key social groups or identities (eg religious, ethnic, language,
Social and cultural

and cohesion gender etc.) in the area? How do different identities affect social relationships
between groups (eg host and IDPs)?
• What does the networks of relationships among people in the area look like, and
how do trust issues between different groups affect these relationships?
• Are there social, ethnic, religious, other differences within the existing population
currently or historically? If there is a displacement, will the nature of the displaced
groups affect fears or concerns with implications for the risk of conflict?
Protection risks • What are the risks of harm to different groups (minority groups, women, youth,
disabled, LGBT, etc.)?
Jobs and • What does the labour market look like in the area? What are the main sources of
characteristics of income? What jobs and skills in demand and in the future?
Economic

labour market • How does the labour market structure affect other urban systems (eg heightened
politics around jobs, limited ability of affected populations to access to services,
or inequality in development of different parts of a city, etc.).
• What opportunities and constraints (financial, social or legal) exist for livelihoods
of affected populations?

18 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Theme Sub-theme Guiding questions

[to be refined by the team implementing the context analysis]

Demand and supply • Which groups have access to social services? What are the barriers to
of services access (eg proximity, infrastructure, and discrimination, financial)? Do affected
populations know who to go to for services?
• Who are providing services? Are critical services delivered publicly or privately (or
Service delivery and

hybrid)?
Infrastructure

• What is the capacity of service providers (eg technical, resources, infrastructure,

policy implementation, and planning)? Are they consistent and coherent with
existing service provision norms?
• What is the nature of accountability between service providers and service users?
Are service-users able to influence service provision?
Coordination of • How is service delivery to affected populations coordinated between various
services service providers (INGOs, LNGO, FBO, UN, host government and the private
sector, etc.)?
• What is the relationship between the different service providers (cooperative/
competitive)?
Urban plans • What are the urban and/or investment plans for the area of interest? What are
Space and settlements

the trends in urbanisation/growth? How would these trends and plans impact a
potential programme?
Environmental • What are the natural or man-made risks that uniquely affect the areas studied?
risks How might access to services increase or mitigate these risks?

Access to housing • Which groups have access to housing, land and shelter? Why/why not? Are
and land property and tenancy rights respected?

Access to public and • How do different groups access public spaces for economic or social purposes?
open spaces Are certain people excluded from these spaces? Why (eg safety, transportation)?

Gender equality • What are the social and cultural norms that affect gender relationships and
expectations? What are the assigned gendered roles and responsibilities define
Cross-cutting

what acceptable types of work for men and women?

• Compared to men, what level of access to, and control over, resources and
services do women have? What role do women play in the decision-making
process?
Do No Harm • How do we ensure that programmes do not increase tensions or undermine
existing systems (eg service delivery systems or processes)? What are the entry
points for promoting positive change?

www.iied.org 19
Urban context analysis toolkit

Phase 2 – Data collection

Data collection will be the most time- and resource-intensive phase. The phase involves firstly reviewing secondary
data (eg existing reports, data, assessments, analyses) to help focus the subsequent primary data collection (ie
KIIs and FGDs). Primary data will be collected in selected sub-areas or neighbourhoods of the city that have been
identified as significant in relation to the crisis of interest.

Key terms
Primary data collection
Data collected directly from the source through fieldwork for the purpose of an assessment. Sources include
key informants, community/focus group discussions, and direct observations (KIRA, n.d.).

Secondary data collection

External research and other information gathered to inform the current assessment. Secondary data is
produced by another institution, person, or entity for a different purpose, and generally has undergone at least
one layer of analysis. Secondary data includes published research, Internet materials, media reports, and data
which has been cleaned and analysed (ACAPS, 2012).

Step 4: Collate secondary data

Conduct desk review
Step 4: Overview Completing a desk review is arguably one of the most important
Tools phases of research. Tool 2: Desk review summary contains
a suggested outline for a desk review. A thorough and proper
• Tool 2: Desk review summary study of secondary data can save time and resources in the long-
provides an outline to organise findings run because it reveals existing knowledge and gaps, identifies
and an optional desk review memo potential entry points, and conceptualises an efficient primary
• Tool 3: Stakeholder analysis data collection and targeted analysis. In short, a desk review
provides a template in which to list helps the team analyse what information already exists and what
influential stakeholders information will need to be collected through KIIs or FGDs.
The desk review should be led (carried out or coordinated
Output by) the team lead approximately two to three weeks before
• Completed desk review data collection. In short, there needs to be enough time after
completion of the desk review to review and adjust the data
• Completed (initial) stakeholder analysis collection plan (Step 5) based on the identified gaps in existing
Decision on partners to engage in the materials. A desk review can take anywhere from two days to up
analysis to a week to complete depending on the time available for the
team to work on it and the amount of existing resources on the
context. Ideally, in-country staff who are familiar with the context
and existing resources will be involved in this process.

20 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

A desk review can help you answer key questions such as:
• What is the timeline of the crisis? Tip: Leveraging
• What is the common understanding of its root cause(s)?
geographic maps
Analysing the space of a city can be key to
• What is well-documented? Where are there gaps?
understanding the underlying dynamics and
• How credible are the existing sources? vulnerabilities such as inequity in service
provision, natural hazards, differences in shelter/
• What issues could be particularly divisive or sensitive
urban planning etc. Open Street Map is a great
during primary data collection?
starting place for exploring the dynamics of an
Tool 2 Desk Review Summary provides a template for urban area.
reviewing existing materials along with guidance on potential
sources of secondary data for each sub-theme of the
thematic framework. As you develop the desk review, the
team should document information that exists to answer the guiding questions along with what questions remain.
The information from the desk review will be used to:
• Populate Tool 3 Stakeholder Analysis
• Revise the guiding questions of the thematic framework based on gaps or new areas of interested identified
• Provide direction and considerations for Step 5’s preparation of Tool 4 data collection plan
Finally, the desk review can help to ensure that all team members have a common understanding of the crisis
and are preparing for data collection with a shared understanding of the existing knowledge and gaps. This is
especially important when the data collection team is international and may not be familiar with the context, but also
may be equally important for country staff that may not have a broad understanding of the context (eg legal and
governance structures are often misunderstood or unknown).

Photo credit: Ned Colt/IRC

www.iied.org 21
 Urban context analysis toolkit

Map key stakeholders

Stakeholder analysis, also known as actor mapping, involves listing influential stakeholders that the implementing
organisation wishes to better understand as part of the analysis. Data collection will inform the team’s
comprehension of why the actors are influential in the particular context, what their relationships are to other
actors and affected population(s), and how they may affect the implementing organisation’s work (and vice
versa). When mapping stakeholders, it is important to be as specific as possible. For example, rather than stating
local government, map the specific important positions and people that make up local government. Figure 4 is
an example of the range of stakeholders that may be relevant for a project representing government, community
leaders, affected populations, and donors.

Figure 4: Stakeholder analysis from Sierra Leone

National
District Minister of Ebola
Health Response UNICEF DFID
Medical
Officer Centre

District IRC Health

Ebola Coordinator
District
Health Response
Medical Centre
Team
IRC Health
Manager
Nurse
Paramount
Chief Primary
Health
Unit IRC Health
Peer Supervisor
Section Supervisor
Chief Community
Traditional
Health
Healer
Town Chief Wroker

Women
Children
Women’s
Pastor Leader

Secret
Society Men
Head
■ Healthworkers Formal reporting lines Weak
■ Community members Financial support Moderate
■ Authorities Non-financial support Strong
■ NGOs Informal influence over
■ Donors Conflict

Source: IRC (2016)

22 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Common key stakeholders for responses in urban

areas will include:7 Tip: Don’t forget difficult
Affected population groups (displaced, host, social stakeholders!
groups)
When identifying stakeholders, don’t forget
• Community leaders to consider difficult stakeholders. These are
• Civil society, LNGOs, CBOs, NSAs individuals or entities that may seek to block,
divert, or capture assistance for particular
• International NGOs, UN, donors groups (eg local gangs or other armed groups,
• National, sub-national, and local government corrupt officials, etc.).
• Private sector Difficult stakeholders are often critical to the
• Urban planning institutions, and success of a programme, as they can control
• Academia. access to key groups and individuals, or use
influence to erode support for an agency’s
Use the information collected from the desk review to programme. When identified and properly
map key actors. Use Tool 3: Stakeholder analysis engaged, they can provide access to and
to consolidate this information. Fill in the initial
influence among groups and populations that
columns (B-E):
would otherwise not be reached.
• List the name of the stakeholder
Source: Basedow et al. (2017)
• Note what type of stakeholder they are (eg
ministry, donor, UN agency, community group, local
organisation, etc.)
• Note at what level they operate and where they operate, and
• If possible include some basic information on their role(s).
If additional information (eg their level of influence or openness to partnership, etc.) is known, this may also be
added here, but the team should view the tool as one to be updated as and when information becomes available.
Columns F-J of the stakeholder analysis tool will be updated throughout data collection (Step 6) and will structure
the stakeholder analysis (Step 7) to better identify, summarise, and rank actor interests and incentives.
The stakeholder analysis information will be helpful for:
• During data collection: identification of key informants for primary data collection.
• During analysis: identification of stakeholders who are likely to have an impact (positive/negative) on future
programmes or provide opportunities to enhance the impact of a programme through engagement. This
information can then be used by an organisation to inform its coordination strategy and plan throughout a
programme life cycle.

7
See Basedow et al. (2017) for further details on considerations of key stakeholders for urban areas.

www.iied.org 23
Urban context analysis toolkit

Step 5: Prepare to collect primary data

Step 5: Overview
Tools
Tool 4: Data collection plan is a template for planning and implementing data collection. It includes
sampling and staffing needs (interviewers, translators, etc.), and will facilitate logistics and meeting planning for
efficient data collection.
Tools 5A-5G contain a series of sample question guides to structure the KIIs and FGDs:
• Tool 5A: FGD guide for displaced populations
• Tool 5B: FGD guide for host communities
• Tool 5C: KII guide for influential stakeholders
• Tool 5D: KII guide for service provider stakeholders
• Tool 5E: KII guide for labour and business climate
• Tool 5F: KII guide for local government
• Tool 5G: KII guide for NGO service providers

Outputs
Completed data collection plan (Tool 4)
Adapted question guides (Tools 5A-5G)

Plan for focus group discussions and key informant interviews

Tool 4: Data collection plan provides a template for detailed data collection planning of focus group discussions
(FGDs) and key informant interviews (KIIs) for the urban context analysis. It contains the estimated time required
per geographic area and sampling recommendations. This planning work will be ongoing throughout data
collection as details continue to be refined and therefore it is recommended to continue to update the document
throughout the phase. It should be managed by the team lead; local coordinator(s) will likely be necessary to
arrange logistics and mobilise participants for FGDs.
The tool is composed of two tables:
• Tab 1 (4A): Detailed data collection planning for sub-areas –To investigate a particular area, the tool
recommends a sampling approach to apply for a particular community area. This would typically entail FGDs
with affected populations (displaced and host) along with KIIs at an area level (eg community leaders, religious
leaders, local shops).
• Tab 2 (4B): Detailed data collection planning for city-wide sampling – To gain a perspective of the
wider context of the city, it is recommended to conduct KIIs with stakeholders that work at a city level (eg
INGOs, city government, large companies).
Adapting the data collection plan: Because of the specific nature of each urban crisis, sampling will need to
be tailored to the context and the groups and actors that are affected by or able to affect the crisis. This should
ensure that a diversity of people participate in the FGDs and KIIs, representing a plurality of views. Sampling
will also be dependent on the staffing and resources available of the analysis team. There is no magic bullet to
composing an appropriate sample.

24 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Planning for key informants: As noted previously, a

stakeholder analysis will be the starting point to identify
Tip: Ensuring
key informant interviews. representation of full
• Ideally, in Step 4 you will have begun to identify key community
positions, or even names, of individuals to be included
It is important to ensure that women and minority
for key informant interviews at the sub-area or city-
social groups are adequately represented and
wide level. At a minimum, you will have identified some
that the gender distribution of the groups and
key positions to be included for the government and
individuals is balanced. This is essential for
other organisational stakeholders. These should be
collecting information on the barriers women and
added to the data collection plan.
girls, including minority social groups, experience
• Ask country office staff for their suggestions of related to accessing services, business and
individuals from government, civil society, and the employment, education, etc.
private sector, and particularly those individuals
who might be able to speak to the issues of certain
populations or sub-populations of key concern (such
as women, youth, ethnic or religious minorities, other potentially marginalised groups, etc.).
• If resources permit, the team may also consider a facilitator stakeholder mapping or social network analysis in a
workshop format (noted below) as a way to identify key stakeholders.
Planning for FGDs: Plan for separate FGDs for men and women/adolescent boys and girls with same sex
facilitators: adolescents in particular may be less likely to speak in a mixed-gender group.
Geographic/spatial considerations: When planning the data collection, it is useful to understand the
particular geographic and social characteristics of the area before starting data collection. The geographic
considerations (ie location of area in the city, size of the area, location of interviews within the area, camp or out of
camp, etc.) can help to inform how to organise the team and feasibility for number of KIIs or FGDs. Likewise, it is
important to understand the social dynamics of an area to apply a ‘Do No Harm’ approach to the data collection
and tailor questionnaires accordingly, given protection, conflict, or gender sensitivities.
Participatory data collection planning workshop: If conducting the analysis in partnership with another
organisation or if staff have limited knowledge of the local communities, it may be helpful to have a participatory
workshop with local stakeholders knowledgeable of the city (eg local NGOs, local government, academic,
affected populations/community leaders etc.). This could be facilitated in a half-day or one-day workshop to
finalise data collection planning in targeted sub-areas. The toolkit contains an optional tool (Tool optional city
overview workshop) that contains a draft agenda (including facilitation guidance) for teams with the resources
to incorporate a workshop into their data collection planning. If time and expertise permit, the team may consider
conducting a social network analysis mapping to identify key informants that are influential and should be included
in the analysis.8

Adapt and contextualise data collection tools

Based on the adapted framework of thematic, sub-thematic areas and guiding questions along with findings
from the desk review (Steps 3 and 4), the team should now adapt and contextualise the question guides
for primary data collection. Tool 5 Question Guides (A-G) includes questions for KIIs dedicated to: key
influential stakeholders; service providers; labour and business climate; local government; and NGO
service providers. Two guides for FGDs are included: one with displaced populations and one with host
communities.
The question guides should always be reviewed and adapted for every context analysis; just as no
context is the same, no context analysis will be the same. The themes in the framework are connected to
specific modules in the questionnaire. This will make it easier to identify which questions to prioritise during the
interviews/focus groups and also aid the team to identify information sources during analysis. Some questionnaires
also collect information to develop a general understanding of the community profile; for example see Tool 5A:
Module 1. These questions can help to provide general context information that may be important to informing
multiple aspects of the analysis.

8
For guidance on conducting a social network analysis see IRC, 2016a.

www.iied.org 25
Urban context analysis toolkit

The following tasks are essential to adapting and

contextualising the question guides: Tip: Working
1. Eliminate questions that are not relevant, or for which there with displaced
is ample data from the desk review. populations
2. Add questions relevant to issues or problems already Many displaced populations, especially
raised consistently in the data or by peer organisations, refugees living in urban areas, attempt
etc. (eg child exploitation, GBV, etc.). You may need more
to mask their identity to avoid exposure
qualitative information about causes, motivations, or how
something has changed since the event or circumstances to risk or discrimination based on their
which inspired the context analysis. identity. It’s important that data collection
activities employ principles of protection
3. Allow time to validate the tools with country staff and to and do not expose FGD participants to
ensure data collectors fully understand the issues to be
potential harm.
explored; this may require additional protection and gender
training and guidance to the extent possible within the time
and resources available (IRC, 2013).
4. Discuss potential protection risks that might arise around certain questions, particularly gender-based violence
or child exploitation issues with all team members, including translators, as part of training/orientation; all
team participants should have clear guidance on what to do in such instances, eg with regard to referral,
reporting, etc.

Training the data collection team

As with any data collection event, qualitative or quantitative, it is important to take the time to orient the team
members, data collectors and/or translators, to the purpose of the data collection event and the specific tools.
At a minimum, you should plan to spend a half to full day to review the purpose of the contextual analysis and key
findings and gaps from the desk review as well as the data collection plan. Subsequently, some useful techniques
to orient the participants in the tools are as follows (in addition to, or instead of, direct written translation as
appropriate for the context):
• Review the questions in the tools, identifying key terms where participants should agree on the best equivalent
terms or phrases to use in the local language
• Role play between those who speak the local language as a way of translating the tools and agreeing on key
terms that should be articulated the same way, and
• Pilot the tools in some areas of the city and come back to discuss changes in the tools and/or approaches.
Given that it is less likely that someone is likely to do enough observations and data entry to tabulate and use a
software package to analyse the quantitative responses, it may make sense to pilot the question guides in target
areas of the study, to enable the team to incorporate the information and insights gained during the pilot.

26 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Step 6: Carry out primary data collection

This is when the KIIs and FGDs take place. This step will require
the ongoing involvement of the most experienced members of the Step 6: Overview
team to ensure appropriate participation and adequate notetaking
and cleaning. Tools
• Tool 6: KII and FGD debrief
Continually review and assess participation and template provides a template for
representation debriefs to summarise findings to date
per sub-area during data collection
• As part of each KII and FGD, be sure to get referrals for who
else the team should contact regarding certain topics. Use this Output
snowball/referral sampling method to help identify additional key • Completed KII and FGD debrief
informants or focus group participants. template (one per geographic
• Be mindful that ensuring appropriate participation is a challenge, sub-area)
especially in a time-efficient way, and relying on key powerholders
to organise participation may introduce bias.
• Throughout the data collection process, the team should be on alert for possible gaps in representation of
vulnerable, marginalised, and minority groups, particularly as the team learns more about power dynamics in the
geographic areas.

Note findings daily, debrief, and review at planned intervals

Notetaking
Detailed notes should be taken during each FGD and KII. This will help to maintain a recording of the data
collected and can be cross-referenced later. The team lead should review the notes collected regularly as a way
to monitor whether team members are correctly asking questions and probing to ensure complete and credible
responses from participants.

Daily debriefs
Daily (or every second day) hold a debriefing session with the data collection team. This will provide the team
with the opportunity to review and discuss findings. This enables the team to construct an understanding
of what is happening in a given sub-area and to refine hypotheses to be tested during data collection in
subsequent sub-areas.

Mid-data collection review

1. Use Tool 6: KII and FGD debrief template to note rough summaries of findings to date per sub-area. It
is not necessary to note exhaustively the findings or to polish language. The idea is to prepare to discuss
findings against the framework with the rest of the team during a mid-data collection review. The tool
contains two sheets:
• The framework of thematic, sub-thematic areas and key questions for the analysis against which the
preliminary findings per sub-area may be mapped;
• A table in which to list local service providers.
The framework sheet contains a column (Column G) with the exact information sources (which modules in
which question guide(s) can be used to populate each sub-theme line in the template).
2. Schedule a specific time to revisit the known information and remaining gaps. This review can help the team
to step back and reassess how the data collection is going and whether any adjustments are needed in the
upcoming schedule of FGDs or KIIs to ensure the gaps are filled.
3. Following the review, clean up notes in Tool 6; these should be reviewed by other team members to ensure
clarity and completeness of the information.
These two sheets will be used again in Step 7 below when the team are ready to collate and analyse findings
for the full context analysis.

www.iied.org 27
Urban context analysis toolkit

Protection considerations and data collection

Notes should include general references to the type of interview and location but should be careful not to include
identifiable information. Even without names of individuals, information contained in these notes could pose risks to
study participants. The sample question guides contain an explicit informed consent statement to make sure that
participants understand what will be done with the information.
The notes should be stored in a secure way so that access is limited to only a few persons. For most
circumstances retaining a copy of interview notes is not required and therefore they can be destroyed after the
analysis has been completed and notes from the daily debriefs have been produced. The findings from the process
should serve as adequate documentation. If the organisation wishes to maintain FGD/KII notes, it should build into
the budget the time to carefully transcribe and then anonymise the notes to ensure the protection of participants.
For further information on data security see ICRC, 2013 (Chapter 6) and Responsible Data Forum (n.d.).

Protection considerations, Dar es Salaam, 2016

During the Dar es Salaam context analysis in 2016, it emerged that many Burundian and Congolese displaced/
refugees would not admit their nationality for fear of being deported. This raised a number of protection issues
related to doing context analysis work in seeking to identify and consult with these groups or even in asking
about them. The team was fortunate to have a Congolese person on the data collection team to navigate these
concerns, but it is a useful reminder to organisations undertaking such an exercise to ensure that they are
aware in advance of potential protection risks.

Photo credit: Lucy Carrigan/IRC

28 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Phase 3 – Data analysis and

documenting
As outlined in Steps 4-6 above, information from the desk review, the FGDs, and KIIs, etc. are discussed,
documented, and analysed according to the pre-determined considerations and the framework of thematic, sub-
thematic areas and key questions for the analysis during Steps 3, 4 and 6 using Tool 2: Desk review summary
and Tool 6: KII and FGD debrief template.
Subsequently, during the final phase of the context analysis, it will be necessary to consolidate, review and
document findings and communicate the final analysis.

Step 7: Analyse primary and secondary data

Step 7: Overview
Tools
• Tool 7: Key findings is a template for summarising primary and secondary data collection findings and
analysing it via a series of proposed lenses
• Tool 8: Programme implications is a template to structure key considerations for programming and
potential partners
• Tool 3: Stakeholder analysis – at this step, the tool (previously used in Step 4) is used anew to identify,
summarise, and rank additional stakeholders, and actors’ interests and incentives

Outputs (all of which will be refined during Step 8)

• Draft key findings
• Draft stakeholder analysis
• Draft programme implications

The toolkit contains three tools in which findings from the data collection will be consolidated, compared against
the analysis framework of priority thematic areas and key questions, and (ideally) used to validate findings with
expert stakeholders. Interpreting data in a qualitative analytical approach must involve making judgements about
the salience of particular findings.

Analysing key findings

Use Tool 7A: Key findings to consolidate all context analysis findings from the desk review and the fieldwork.
The findings are organised by sub-areas according to the themes, sub-themes and in response to the questions of
the framework used throughout the analysis. Remember that the theme and sub-themes questions in Tool 7 are
guiding questions.
The information collected through the daily debriefs in Tool 6: KII and FGD debrief template during Step 6 will
be consolidated into the summary findings by sub-area in Tool 7: Key findings (Columns F-H). The information
collected through the daily debriefs should be complemented by information collected during the desk review.

www.iied.org 29
Urban context analysis toolkit

The user(s) should then review the preliminary findings per

sub-area by identifying the key similarities and differences in Tip: Triangulate
findings per sub-theme based on responses to the key question
and most importantly interrogating the reasons for the
information
variations and commonalities, ie the ‘why’ question: During data analysis, ensure that
information is triangulated from a number of
• What are the noteworthy differences or similarities per sub-
different sources. As a data collector you
theme across sub-areas (Column I) and why?
may have one perspective of the context
• What are the noteworthy similarities or differences in findings based on the people you interviewed which
per sub-theme with regard to gender (Column J) and why? may not be representative. It is essential
that other team members/stakeholders
• What are the noteworthy similarities or differences in findings
have an opportunity to challenge the
per sub-theme across populations (eg between host and IDP
findings and analysis and ensure that the
responses) (Column K) and why?
team reflects on the analyses.
• What are the noteworthy similarities or differences in findings
per sub-theme across age groups (Column L) and why?
• What are the risks were identified facing the community or to
the implementing organisations (Column M)?
• What ideas have come up connected to the findings that are relevant for future programming opportunities or
partnerships (Column N)?
Finally, the user(s) should note outstanding questions or information gaps and provide suggestions of how to
address them.
Tab 2 of Tool 7: Dividers and connectors contains an optional tool to help further investigate social relations
and cohesion. This tool is meant to further explore what are the specific factors that divide or cause tension in the
area and connectors that may bring people together or build relations between people. To fill out 7B:
• List the dividers and connectors per area.
• Follow the same steps as above in Tab 1 to further analyse and interrogate reasons for variations and
commonalities, ie the ‘why’ question.

Updating your stakeholder analysis

Tool 3: Stakeholder analysis initially drafted during Step 4 (Desk review) can now be updated and refined
using the information from the data collection. Add any newly identified actors (notably sourced from the service
providers sheet in Tool 6: KII and FGD debrief template) to the list in Columns B-E and complete Columns F-K
to the extent possible with the information supplied by informants and noted during data collection. The stakeholder
analysis tool helps to structure the team’s notes in identifying:
• What the importance of the actor is to future programmes (how critical the actor is to the success of future
programmes implemented by the organisation completing the context analysis, eg permissions or approval
authority, high influence in community, resources to contribute, etc.).
• How the implementing organisation might engage with the actor (at what stage of the project and in what
context, with what capacity, etc.).
• Why the actor might engage with the implementing organisation (what interest or incentive they would
have/need).

30 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

From analysis to action: implications for programming

Tool 8: Programme implications contains five tables of different programming considerations to be reviewed
and populated by the user(s). The purpose of this tool is to put the Key Findings and Stakeholder Analysis into
action by noting the practical implications of the context analysis. In other words, what does the analysis mean for
existing or future programme design, who might be key stakeholders to partner with, and what are the risks that a
project may face and should mitigate for to avoid causing harm.
The content is prompted by a series of questions as follows:
1. What are programming opportunities, potential geographic area, specific sub-population needs and protection
concerns, opportunities to build on/ work with, and constraints to be aware of, eg insecurity?
2. Who are the potential partners (including government agencies, local NGOs and civil society organisations,
and private sector actors) for design and implementation, per sector and geographic area?
3. What are the key advocacy issues and who are potential partners (including government agencies, local NGOs
and civil society organisations, and private sector actors) for these?
4. What approaches or strategies can be adopted to mitigate risks identified through the context analysis?
5. What approaches or strategies can be adopted to harness areas of common interest/connectors identified
through the context analysis?
Note: Information for the above can be sourced from Columns F to O, Tool 7: Key findings and Tool 3:
Stakeholder analysis.
Drafts of these three tools (Tools 3, 7 and 8) are vital inputs into the validation workshop described in Step 8
below. During the workshop they will be used by facilitators to structure discussions and to encourage validation of
findings or the identification of supplementary questions.

Step 8: Validation workshop

A participatory validation workshop is key to challenge and refine
Step 8: Overview the analysis findings. This workshop provides an opportunity to
gain wider input into the analysis and facilitate discussion to probe
Tools certain issues in-depth. The team should plan for one to two lead
facilitators and one overall notetaker.
• Tool 9: Urban analysis workshop
includes a one-day urban analysis Purpose of workshop: The workshop is used to further validate
workshop draft agenda (including the initial analysis with a wider group. If engaging people outside
facilitation guidance) and the organisation such as local experts or peer organisations, it
participants list can be an opportunity to build on relationships with key urban
stakeholders and communicate likely programmatic intentions.
Outputs (all of which are drafted and Involving these actors could be critical to ensuring ownership of the
refined several times during the step, findings though be mindful of the need to maintain confidentiality
notably during the workshop) of data collection sources and any findings that may be sensitive or
compromising to participants.
• Completed key findings (Tool 7)
Workshop participants: It is essential to involve the full analysis
• Completed stakeholder analysis
team and internal (and external if feasible) stakeholders who
(Tool 3)
can challenge findings and ensure that the team reflects on the
• Completed programme implications analysis process, revising and refining findings, and implications
(Tool 8) for future programming. Participants could include analysis team
members, stakeholders consulted during the analysis, other
stakeholders within the implementing organisation, such as country
office management, sector leads, and external – particularly
local – partners. The team may also consider inviting local experts, peer organisations, or even donor agencies to
participate that can inform the analysis from their different perspective.

www.iied.org 31
Urban context analysis toolkit

Gender considerations: Aim to achieve gender diversity of participants by clarifying the individuals who will
be participating and ensuring adequate representation rather than blanket invitations where organisations or
departments simply send ‘representatives’. Moreover, in contexts where women face obstacles to participating
in mixed group discussions, consider designating some working groups as women-only working groups with
documented products from the groups to help ensure that facilitators include those contributions.
Tool 9: Urban analysis workshop contains:
• A one-day urban analysis workshop agenda and template for a list of participants, and
• A facilitators’ agenda outlining potential group activities, structure of the sessions and arrangements for
notetaking for use by the facilitators.
The tool assumes a total of 15-20 diverse participants representing:
• Stakeholders consulted during the analysis
• Other stakeholders within the implementation organisation, and
• External partners – particularly local partners who know the context.

Step 9: Write final report

Depending on the interests of the organisation, a final report may
Step 9: Overview be necessary to communicate the findings. It is worth noting that
a final report is not a requirement and the outputs of the validation
Tool workshop may be enough for completion of the context analysis.
• Tool 10: Urban context analysis Before starting the report, it is critical to identify the target
final report outline is a table of audience (whether internal or external to the organisation), as
contents and summary methodological this will shape how content should be presented. Writing up the
tables for an internal report that findings of the context analysis may be considered as the last step
synthesises the findings of the context during which the team will analyse content. The writing process
analysis should be led/coordinated by the team lead and will likely take
one to two weeks.
Outputs
Tool 10: Urban context analysis final report outline provides
• Urban context analysis final report a structure for the overall internal report at the end of the Urban
Context Analysis; it also includes summary tables to facilitate
the inclusion of methodological information in the report. When
writing up the key findings, it is important to recognise there will likely be overlapping content between two
sections. This is common as the themes are inter-connected.
Note that this outline assumes the production of a report for internal purposes, ie one that is likely to contain
sensitive (contextually and commercially confidential) information that should be reviewed by internal stakeholders
before being considered final. Clarify before writing this report if the implementing organisation requires any other
summary reports or presentation of findings for external dissemination.

Context analysis brief, Maiduguri, 2016

In November and December 2016, the IRC conducted an urban context analysis in Maiduguri to understand the
impact of internally displaced people on the city and the response of actors to this displacement. An external
brief (above) was written to communicate the findings of the report with other stakeholders in Nigeria that had
not partaken in the analysis.
An example of a context analysis report is available at the following link: https://rescue.box.com/s/
racxoota63cp14599qr0p7qcpsh8qzh3

32 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Step 10: Communicate findings

Internal stakeholders
The analysis is ultimately designed to help country programme/sector management become more informed and
consequently develop contextually-relevant programming. If the country programme/sector management team
were not involved in the validation analysis described under Step 8, ensure that they now receive the final analysis
report (Step 9).
The findings are now for these internal stakeholders to put into practice. This may include refining
their programme strategy for the affected area or making adjustments to detailed project design,
proposals, workplans, miscellaneous operational documents, etc. To facilitate this, it will be important to
organise a session with them to debrief the final findings and answer their questions/confirm any remaining gaps
in understanding.

External stakeholders
If feasible, the team should plan to share a summary of findings with external urban stakeholders including
government and peer agencies, particularly those who may have participated in the analysis. In this way, these
other stakeholders may also learn from and apply the findings to adapt their ways of working. The organisation
should exercise caution to ensure that sources are anonymised and that any external presentation or summary
report respect all commitments made during the informed consent element of the data collection process.
Information should always be presented so as not to expose community members to any protection risks should
external stakeholders learn of the analysis findings; relevant organisational protection technical advisors may be
able to advise further.

When to update your context analysis

The information and conclusions from this context analysis will not be appropriate indefinitely. Particularly in ‘crisis’
contexts, the situation is dynamic. It will ultimately be up to the implementing organisation to determine the need to
update or completely redo such an analysis.
Some factors that might suggest it is time to revise or update the study are as follows:
• Significant change in the crisis that (eg policy change, major incidents, or crisis resolved).
• New data collection is planned, which presents the opportunity to ask some questions to assess the continued
applicability of the context analysis and re-confirm its findings.
• New proposal requiring more in-depth information on particular parts of the context analysis.
• Even outside of major events described above, it is probably useful to re-assess the validity before using the
assessment for programming assumptions if it is more than 6-9 months old.
It is certainly possible to revisit only parts of the context analysis if circumstances have changed regarding only
some themes or sub-themes.

www.iied.org 33
Urban context analysis toolkit

Conclusion
The urban context analysis toolkit was created as a user-friendly toolkit to help actors unpack some of the
complexities and dynamics of an urban environment. This is needed to identify entry points and risk mitigation
strategies that will be useful for the subsequent development of programme design or review of existing
programming. Specifically, it should help to understand general tendencies and patterns that yield smarter and
more effect assessment, design, and implementation of programmes. The toolkit is structured around a series of
themes: political; social and cultural; economic; service delivery and infrastructure; space and settlements; and
crosscutting – intended to guide users and organise findings on stakeholders, existing power relations, resource
distribution, governance and legal frameworks, livelihoods, social networks, and access to services. Figure 5 below
summarises the steps and associated tools for the process.

Figure 5: Summary of urban context analysis process and tools

Step 1: Launch context analysis

  Tool 1: Workplan and budget
Phase 1: Step 2: Frame the context analysis
Preparation Step 3: Select initial key context analysis questions
  Thematic framework (Table 4)

Step 4: Collate secondary data

  Tool 2: Desk review summary
  Tool 3: Stakeholder analysis
Step 5: Prepare to collect primary data
  Tool 4: Data collection plan
  Tool 5A: FGD guide for displaced populations
  Tool 5B: FGD guide for host communities
Phase 2:
Data collection   Tool 5C :KII guide for influential stakeholders
  Tool 5D: KII guide for service provider stakeholders
  Tool 5E: KII for labour and business climate
  Tool 5F: KII for local government
  Tool 5G: KII for NGO service providers
Step 6: Carry out primary data collection
  Tool 6: KII and FGD debrief template

Step 7: Analyse primary and secondary data

  Tool 7: Key findings
  Tool 8: Programme implications
  Tool 3: Stakeholder analysis (updated)
Phase 3:
Step 8: Validation workshop
Data analysis and
documenting   Tool 9: Urban analysis workshop
Step 9: Write final report
  Tool 10: Urban context analysis final report outline
Step 10: Communicate findings

34 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

References
ACAPS (2012) Qualitative and Quantitative Research Techniques for Humanitarian Needs Assessment: An
Introductory Brief. Assessment Capacities Project (ACAPS). Available at: www.parkdatabase.org/documents/
download/qualitative_and_quantitative_research_techniques.pdf
Basedow, J, Westrope, C and Meaux, A (2017) Urban stakeholder engagement and coordination. Guidance note
for humanitarian practitioners. IIED, London. Available at: http://pubs.iied.org/10821IIED/
Brown, D, Boano, C, Johnson, C, Vivekananda, J and Walker, J (2015) Urban Crises and Humanitarian Responses:
A Literature Review (April). Available at: www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/dpu/latest/publications/dpureports/urban_crises_
and_humanitarian_response_rev_ LOW_09_04_15.pdf
CaLP (2011) Cash Transfer Programming in Urban Emergencies: A Toolkit for Practitioners. Available at: www.
alnap.org/resource/7056
Campbell , L (2016) Stepping back: understanding cities and their systems. Available at: www.alnap.org/pool/
files/alnap-urban-systems-stakeholders-2016-web.pdf
Crawford, N, Cosgrave, J, Haysom, S and Walicki, N (2015) Protracted displacement: uncertain paths to self-
reliance in exile. Overseas Development Institute, London. Available at: www.odi.org/publications/9906-refugee-
idp-displacement-livelihoods-humanitarian-development
DFID (2009) Political economy analysis: how to note. Available at: www.gsdrc.org/docs/open/po58.pdf
Global CCCM Cluster (2014) Urban displacement and outside of camp desk review. Available at: www.
globalcccmcluster.org/tools-and-guidance/publications/urban-displacement-out-camps-review-0
Haysom, S (2013) Sanctuary in the city? Urban displacement and vulnerability, Final Report, HPG Report 33, June
2013, ODI. Available at: www.odi.org/ sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinionfiles/8444.pdf
Heykoop, L and Kelling, F (2014) Lessons from Baghdad: a shift in approach to urban shelter response. NRC and
DFID. Available at: www.alnap.org/node/19246.aspx
ICRC (2013) Professional standards for protection work carried out by humanitarian and human rights actors in
armed conflict and other situations of violence. Available at: www.icrc.org/eng/assets/ files/other/icrc-002-0999.
pdf
IRC (2017) Gender Analysis and Program Design Toolkit. Available at: https://rescue.app.box.com/s/
pdqfhee2tm1q5pwe0uqkxs5pymkgebv2/file/152239033136
IRC (2016a) Social Network Analysis Handbook: Connecting the dots in humanitarian programs.
International Rescue Committee (IRC). Available at: www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/1263/
socialnetworkanalysise-handbook.pdf
IRC (2016b) Conflict Sensitivity Analysis Toolkit. Available at: https://rescue.box.com/s/
jglegafnquaovngw1j9qdqcwwnm1p9xt
IRC (2013) Protection Mainstreaming Training Facilitator’s Guide. International Rescue Committee (IRC).
Available at: www.globalprotectioncluster.org/_assets/files/aors/protection_mainstreaming/IRC_Protection_
Mainstreaming_Training%20_Facilitators_Guide_March_2013_EN.pdf
Jennings, RS, Colletta, N and Chesnutt, C (2014) Political economy and forced displacement: guidance and
lessons from nine country case studies. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Available at: http://tinyurl.com/
jennings-et-al-2014
KIRA (n.d.) KIRA Training, Primary Data. Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection, Kenya Interagency Rapid
Assessment (KIRA) and RedR UK. Available at: www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/files/
session%202.4%20Primary%20data%20collection.pdf
Meaux, A and Osofisan, W (2016) A Review of Context Analysis Tools for Urban Humanitarian Response.
International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), International Rescue Committee (IRC), Norwegian
Refugee Council (NRC), and World Vision. Available at: http://pubs.iied.org/10797IIED.html

www.iied.org 35
Urban context analysis toolkit

Meral, AG (2015) Humanitarian action in a new urban world – World Humanitarian Summit: regional consultation,
Europe and others. International Rescue Committee. Available at: www.alnap.org/resource/20283
PADCO (2006) Making Cities Work: Assessment and Implementation Toolkit. Planning and Development
Collaborative International, Inc. USAID. Available at: www.alnap.org/pool/files/municipal-services-assessment.pdf
Parker, E and Maynard, V (2015) Humanitarian response to urban crises: a review of area-based approaches.
International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Available at: http://pubs.iied.org/10742IIED.html
Responsible Data Forum (n.d.) Shooting Our Hard Drive into Space and Other Ways to Promote Responsible
Data Management. Available at: https://responsibledata.io/ways-to-practise-responsible-development-data
Sanderson, D, Knox Clarke, P and Campbell, L (2012) Responding to Urban Disasters: Learning from previous
relief and recovery operations. Available at: www.alnap. org/resource/7772
Shelter Centre and NRC (2010) Urban Shelter Guidelines. Available at: www.alnap.org/resource/21017
SKAT and IFRC (2012) Sustainable reconstruction in urban areas. Available at: www.humanitarianlibrary.org/
resource/sustainable-reconstruction-urban-areas-2
UN DESA (2014) World Urbanization Prospects. Available at: http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/
UNHCR (2009) Designing appropriate interventions in urban settings: Health, education, livelihoods, and
registration for urban refugees and returnees. Available at: www.alnap.org/resource/6468
USAID (2008) Emergencies in Urban Settings: A Technical Review of Food-Based Program Options. Available at:
www.humanitarianlibrary.org/resource/usaid-emergencies-urban-settings-0

36 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Additional bibliography
ActionAid (2003) Participatory Vulnerability Analysis: A step-by-step guide for field staff. ActionAid International.
Available at: www.actionaid.org.uk/sites/default/files/doc_lib/108_1_participatory_vulnerability_analysis_guide.pdf
ADAPT, IRC and Mercy Corps (2016) Adapting Aid: Lessons from Six Case Studies. Analysis Driven
Agile Programming Techniques (ADAPT). Available at: www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/701/
adaptingaidreportwithcasestudies.pdf
Alastair, A, Stark, L and Potts, A (2010) Participative Ranking Methodology: A Brief Guide, Version 1.1. Program
on Forced Migration and Health, Mailman School of Public Health. Available at: www.alnap.org/pool/files/
prmmanual-v1-1.pdf
Darcy, J and Hofmann, CA (2003) According to need? Needs assessment and decision-making in the
humanitarian sector. Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) at the Overseas Development Institute (ODI). Available at:
www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/285.pdf
IRC (n.d.) Labor Market Assessment for Ethiopia. Internal document.
Melim-McLeod, C, Driscoll, B, Fabra-Mata, J, Izzi, V and Reerink, A (2012) UNDP Institutional and Context Analysis
Guidance Note. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Available at: www.undp.org/content/dam/
undp/library/Democratic%20Governance/OGC/UNDP_Institutional%20and%20Context%20Analysis.pdf
Mohiddin, L, Smith, G and Phelps, L (2017) Urban response analysis framework (URAF). IIED, London. Available
at: http://pubs.iied.org/10824IIED/
Mohiddin, L, Smith, G and Phelps, L (2017) Urban multi-sector vulnerability assessment tool for displacement
contexts (UMVAT). Guidance note for humanitarian practitioners. IIED, London. Available at: http://pubs.iied.
org/10823IIED/
Save the Children (2016) Urban Situational Analysis Guide. Save the Children, The Urban Institute. Available at:
www.urban-response.org/directory/20
Smith, G, Mohiddin, L and Phelps, L (2017) Targeting in urban displacement contexts. Guidance note for
humanitarian practitioners. IIED, London. Available at: http://pubs.iied.org/10826IIED/
Truelove, S, Shorey, B, Swift, A, Noronha,T , Pelly, I and Long, C (2016) Labour market analysis (LMA) in
humanitarian contexts: A practitioner’s guide. International Rescue Committee (IRC), Mercy Corps and Save the
Children. Available at: www.alnap.org/resource/21754
WRC (2015) Service Provision Mapping Tool: Urban Refugee Response, Mapping humanitarian and host
community organizations relevant to GBV prevention and GBV risk mitigation. Women’s Refugee Commission.
Available at: www.womensrefugeecommission.org/images/zdocs/Urban-GBV-Tools-Mapping-Services-Pilot.pdf

www.iied.org 37
Urban context analysis toolkit

Annexes: Urban context analysis

toolkit
Individual annexes may be accessed below. To download the full toolkit click here.

Tool 1: Workplan and budget

https://rescue.box.com/s/ev966drlse65cfciatp0os78e3x2mg2i

Tool 2: Desk review summary

https://rescue.box.com/s/0dl7a15x05pgp2pmwikqfddygpggxw54

Tool 3: Stakeholder analysis

https://rescue.box.com/s/y30cqnoxdf5odm7bccjwb0kf1usu1rl4

Tool 4: Data collection plan

https://rescue.box.com/s/b00izpiccu643ffu9l5aso52eede6ge4

Tool 5A: FGD guide for displaced populations

https://rescue.box.com/s/fw7kj9uww9xd10op83lrd2ipi9rhwlvu

Tool 5B: FGD guide for host communities

https://rescue.box.com/s/sof3hsjiej6m6cq0ua9cwsepote8t4su

Tool 5C: KII guide for influential stakeholders

https://rescue.box.com/s/gdugf6wobkapmr6ezqzuuuyzbb9hs3cl

Tool 5D: KII guide for service provider stakeholders

https://rescue.box.com/s/c5sb13bd9f9h0e7510su4oum0ul2594l

Tool 5E: KII guide on labour and business climate

https://rescue.box.com/s/tn50t6a9mqtvmcfsa2b22iszg84r4bil

Tool 5F: KII guide for local government

https://rescue.box.com/s/bt9okv94ibtzu1wkay8bvkk6untlbx9j

Tool 5G: KII guide for NGO service providers

https://rescue.box.com/s/dc6g3ibcjxabt9fgcg5vdtc43e9f2uxg

Tool 6: KII and FGD debrief template

https://rescue.box.com/s/k8b7uq7io7wwyuwov86icgc1g2ce41z3

38 www.iied.org
 Guidance note for Humanitarian Practitioners

Tool 7: Key findings

https://rescue.box.com/s/kxfdvf8qqb6xcicdw5fe9kghgltk18ku

Tool 8: Programme implications

https://rescue.box.com/s/3zoxv2i5bs7gmaokoo7d8oogn03wa22f

Tool 9: Urban analysis workshop

https://rescue.box.com/s/4jpgw4la9dxtdfapj092tt9lhrzoac1v

Tool 10: Urban context analysis final report outline

https://rescue.box.com/s/5o2c5rtdaimv6c01yju49sor1fti1gb1

Optional Tool: City overview workshop

https://rescue.box.com/s/f2jz1vjcc3eupabe3su1c738yu29yd8g

www.iied.org 39
 Toolkit Urban

Keywords:
Knowledge June 2017 urban crises, stronger cities, disaster,
conflict, local government
Products

Today, over half of all internally displaced persons (IDPs) and refugees are living in
cities. This means that forced displacement is both a humanitarian and development
challenge, given that displacement is often long term, with more than 80 per cent of
refugee crises lasting ten or more years. Current models and tools developed mostly
for rural, camp-based settings are not equipped to help responders understand and
navigate the complex nature of urban contexts. Context analysis approaches can
help humanitarian actors have a better understanding of the dynamics in a given
setting by unpacking the political, economic, social, service delivery and spatial
factors that could potentially enable or hinder effective crisis responses of affected
populations.
The urban context analysis toolkit was created to provide an analysis toolkit that
is user friendly, relatively quick to use, and adaptable. The toolkit contains a set of
practical tools (work plan, questionnaires, analysis tables, report templates) tailored
to conducting analysis that informs context specific responses – targeting both the
displaced and host communities – in a given urban crises setting. The guidance
note provides step-by-step guidance on how to apply the context analysis toolkit
in practice. This toolkit will enable users to identify relevant stakeholders, existing
power relations, resource distribution, governance and legal frameworks, sources
of livelihoods, social networks, and access to services that will help responders to
determine suitable entry points and improve the effectiveness and responsiveness of
their programmes.

IIED is a policy and action research organisation. We

promote sustainable development to improve livelihoods
and protect the environments on which these livelihoods
are built. We specialise in linking local priorities to global
challenges. IIED is based in London and works in Africa,
Asia, Latin America, the Middle East and the Pacific,
with some of the world’s most vulnerable people. We
work with them to strengthen their voice in the decision-
making arenas that affect them — from village councils to
international conventions.

International Institute for Environment and Development

80-86 Gray’s Inn Road, London WC1X 8NH, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 3463 7399
Fax: +44 (0)20 3514 9055
www.iied.org