Paper details
| Paper authors | Erma Fetić Mujić, Jonathan Xenakis, Jean-Baptiste Metz |
| In panel on | Using Evaluation Evidence to Guide a Structured "Humanitarian Reset" |
| Paper presenter(s) will be presenting |
In-Person / |
Abstract
As the humanitarian sector faces mounting global needs alongside diminishing donor support, the call for a “reset” invites not only system-wide reform but also grounded, actionable shifts from within. This paper presents the case study of A Drop in the Ocean (DiH), a small humanitarian organization working with displaced populations in Greece and Norway, which initiated a comprehensive programmatic transformation grounded in academic research, field reflection, and participatory engagement.
Without the resources, capacities and leverage often present in large INGOs, DiH drew from cross-sector academic literature, evaluations, global standards, and frontline knowledge to redesign its program architecture and monitoring and evaluation systems. Longstanding projects were restructured into standardized, measurable programmatic strategies underpinned by a new MEAL framework. This case study illustrates how small, frontline organizations can act as laboratories for disruptive humanitarian approaches: embedding evidence and best practices, challenging top-down accountability, and recentering affected communities as knowledge holders. DiH’s transformation offers a model for equitable, grounded humanitarian programming that prioritizes scaling depth over breadth.
By bridging critical theory with operational design, DiH’s work demonstrates that meaningful reform is possible even at the margins of the system -- challenging the dominant flow of learning and data exchange that typically occurs among large INGOs. For localisation to gain real traction, a wider table is needed, one where smaller, local organisations can both contribute to and learn from broader sectoral knowledge. This paper contributes to ongoing conversations about how embedded learning and localized evidence, when rooted in a conscientious understanding of one’s position within the humanitarian ecosystem, can serve not only as tools for program improvement, but as guiding principles for a more inclusive humanitarian architecture that centers the knowledge, agency, and priorities of affected communities.
