[rev_slider alias="blog-post-header-long-title"]


Jun 21, 2010 | Publications, Uncategorized

Developed by the Swedish National Contact Group on Security Sector Reform, the Security Sector Reform Assessment Framework is a new tool to assist in the crafting security sector reform (SSR) project assessments. The main objective of the framework is to ensure that SSR assessments are “carried out in a comprehensive manner in order to avoid sector fragmentation and to address Security Sector Reform from a wide societal perspective” (4). The framework accomplishes this by providing practical guidance for assessments including how to sequence the document and what content to include.

The framework is based on the Swedish SSR conditions but is also intended for use by other governments, institutions, and actors. Constantly evolving, the document hopes to remain a dynamic resource for planners, technical experts and advisors, and desk officers. As a result, the Swedish National Contact Group on Security Sector Reform encourages feedback on the framework in order to develop and improve it for future editions.

While the OECD DAC Handbook outlines the various types of SSR assessments that can be conducted (Table 3.1, p. 46), the framework provides flexible resources and guidelines for completing such assessments. Used to facilitate information gathering and analysis to support decision-making, monitoring and evaluation, and programming of SSR efforts, the framework is intended to be adapted to the specific needs and objectives of the assessment process including the planning stage, background analysis, in-country assessment, and report and recommendations.

The framework is an important addition to the reporting process for SSR. The objective of the framework is “to provide a basis analysis from which further SSR engagement can be built” (12). It is a comprehensive tool that enables analysts to complete full assessments without missing any aspects of the SSR process. The questions laid out in the assessment framework contain both breadth and depth of analysis, allowing the reporting process of SSR to become even more full and relevant to issues on the ground.