Evaluation evidence for Strategic Directions 2027–2031
Global policy, strategy or thematic evaluation
Evaluation evidence for Strategic Directions 2027–2031
October 2026
The UNHCR Evaluation synthesis series brings together a decade of independent evaluation evidence to inform UNHCR Strategic Directions 2027–2031. The twelve papers draw on 2,421 conclusions, lessons learned and good practices extracted from 122 independent evaluations commissioned by UNHCR between 2016 and 2026, spanning country operations, emergency responses, and global thematic and strategic evaluations.
The series is organized in three strands:
- Four papers examine the population groups with and for whom UNHCR works.
- Five examine the roles UNHCR plays, from advocacy and coordination to operational delivery.
- Three examine cross-cutting themes: emergency response, self-reliance and inclusion, and durable solutions.
To produce the series, findings were extracted verbatim from published evaluation reports into a structured database. The Evaluation Office then developed each paper through iterative dialogue with a large language model (Claude, Anthropic), verifying every citation against the source report. The Evaluation Office is responsible for all analytical judgements and final text.
Each paper sets out what the evidence shows, where it is consistent, and where it remains thin. Together, the papers offer a common evidence base as UNHCR pursues its goal of halving, by 2035, the number of people in protracted displacement who rely on humanitarian assistance.
122
independent evaluations
Light
Text color
Dark
2,421
findings analysed
Light
Text color
Dark
10
years of evidence (2016–2026)
Light
Text color
Dark
12
synthesis papers
Light
Text color
Dark
Population groups
Papers 1-4
What the evidence shows for each population with and for whom UNHCR works.
Paper 1 of 12 · 30 evaluations
Refugee protection is the legal obligation of host states, and the rights they extend determine whether self-reliance and durable solutions are within reach. UNHCR delivers protection, registration and life-sustaining assistance effectively at the onset of displacement, but the emergency model does not reliably give way to national ownership. Where self-reliance has been achieved, states opened legal and economic space and development actors provided financing and employment.
Paper 2 of 12 · 6 evaluations
Work to end statelessness draws on UNHCR strengths in law, advocacy and convening, and the past decade has seen laws reformed, registration improved and hundreds of thousands of stateless people acquire a nationality. Results depend first on government willingness, since nationality is the state's alone to grant, and then on whether operations commit leadership, staff and funding to work that is the first to recede when emergencies arise.
Paper 3 of 12 · 18 evaluations
The distinctive value of UNHCR in internal displacement lies in protection leadership exercised through inter-agency coordination. That value is put at risk when UNHCR also delivers protection and assistance: the two roles compete for staff and resources, and operational interests weaken the neutrality a cluster lead requires. Without an agreed boundary or a planned handover, involvement deepens with no exit strategy in place.
Paper 4 of 12 · 9 evaluations
Most returnees go home outside any formal repatriation exercise, and voluntariness is assessed as a binary choice when returnees face a range of imperfect options. Civil documentation is the gateway to land, schooling, work and freedom of movement. Returns prove more durable where UNHCR takes an area-based approach and engages development actors from the outset, yet conditions in areas of return are rarely assessed or monitored.
Roles of UNHCR
Papers 5-9
How UNHCR performs in each of the roles it plays across displacement contexts.
Paper 5 of 12 · 28 evaluations
Advocacy produces measurable change in law, policy and practice when four conditions align: a willing government counterpart, sustained multi-year investment, a robust evidence base, and delivery through coalitions. The most durable contribution is catalytic: building national advocacy capacity and positioning development financing behind inclusion. Annual planning cycles, project-based funding and staff rotation work against precisely that function.
Paper 6 of 12 · 22 evaluations
Convening authority is strongest in the first phase of a refugee emergency, where the UNHCR mandate is uncontested. Performance declines once that phase ends or a second coordination framework enters the same space, because UNHCR is at once coordinator, operational actor and funder. The evaluations identify the conditions for effective coordination: dedicated capacity, separation from operational interests, early government engagement and early transition planning.
Paper 7 of 12 · 19 evaluations
UNHCR collects substantial data on populations, needs, activities and feedback, but collection and use are disconnected. Data is decentralised, siloed across divisions and systems, and variable in quality, so the organisation does not consistently assess what difference its efforts make. The paper traces this disconnect from registration through needs assessment, results frameworks and feedback mechanisms to the use of data as influence.
Paper 8 of 12 · 22 evaluations
Capacity development rarely produces durable national ownership, because the UNHCR operational model is not designed for institutional change. Training builds individual competencies without changing how institutions function, are financed or are held accountable. Genuine handover requires sustained engagement, national budget commitment, co-designed transition plans and investment in civil society; annual funding cycles, staff rotation and short planning horizons work against each.
Paper 9 of 12 · 20 evaluations
UNHCR delivers assistance well in the emergency phase, with fast mobilisation, funding at volume and coordination across large partner networks. It then carries that direct-delivery model into protracted situations, where it runs in parallel to national systems rather than connecting people to them. Partner management shows recurring shortcomings, and handover is planned late or not at all. Where transition was designed from the outset, it worked.
Cross-cutting themes
Papers 10-12
Evidence across the displacement cycle, from emergency onset to durable solutions.
Paper 10 of 12 · 20 evaluations
Most people fleeing conflict and persecution access territory, registration, protection services and life-sustaining assistance at the onset of an emergency, and where specialist capacity is present, survivors of gender-based violence and children receive protection. Emergency delivery routinely continues beyond the nine-month limit UNHCR sets itself, because transition toward national system inclusion was absent from the initial design. Planning transition from the first day is possible.
Paper 11 of 12 · 13 evaluations
Refugees who secure a single entitlement, such as the right to work or civil documentation, do not see self-reliance improve; those who secure several together do. Inclusion in national systems is the pathway through which host states deliver many of these entitlements, yet no evaluation has yet measured its effect on self-reliance. The paper identifies five distinct barriers to inclusion, each requiring a different institutional response.
Paper 12 of 12 · 15 evaluations
Each durable solution depends on conditions largely beyond UNHCR control. Resettlement is bounded by the quotas states set; local integration succeeds where host state will and refugee preference align; repatriation could end the need for international protection for more people than the other two combined, yet most returns go untracked. Resettlement and naturalisation together reach only a fraction of the 50by35 target, leaving repatriation and self-reliance to carry the larger share.
Related publications
Global policy, strategy or thematic evaluation
Global policy, strategy or thematic evaluation
Global policy, strategy or thematic evaluation