Study on best practices in irregular migration awareness campaigns : final report.
Date: 2021-08-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs
Subjects: EU strategy, communication skills, cost-effectiveness analysis, disinformation, innovation, mass media, migration policy, public awareness campaign, report, research, social media, trafficking in human beings

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs 
Directorate C — Migration, Asylum and Visa 
Unit C.1 — Irregular Migration & Returns 

Contact: Silvia MOSNEAGA 

E-mail: HOME-ANTISMUGGLING-C1@ec.europa.eu  

European Commission 
B-1049 Brussels 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Study on best practices in irregular 
migration awareness-raising 
campaigns  
Final Report 

Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs 
Study on best practices in irregular migration awareness campaigns  
Final Report 
2021 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Manuscript completed in July 2021 

First edition 

LEGAL NOTICE 

This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the 
European Commission is not liable for any consequence stemming from the reuse of this publication. More information on the 
European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). 

PDF    ISBN 978-92-76-37656-9   doi:10.2837/678132   DR-08-21-123-EN-N 

Photos: 

Cover guenterguni/iStock.com | Page 8 Shanti Hesse/Shutterstock.com | Page 11 zurijeta/Shutterstock.com | Page 17 
Pascal Rateau/Shutterstock.com | Page 20 Awais Khan/Shutterstock.com | Page 21 Lucian Coman/Shutterstock.com | 
Page 23 Hit1912/Shutterstock.com | Page 26 Rudra Narayan Mitra/Shutterstock.com | Page 27 Davide 
Bonaldo/Shutterstock.com | Page 35 Michal Knitl/Shutterstock.com | Page 46 pabloavanzini/Shutterstock.com | Page 54 
Richard Juilliart/Shutterstock.com | Page 58 M Selcuk Oner/Shutterstock.com | Page 64 Nick Fox/Shutterstock.com | Page 
67 timsimages.uk/Shutterstock.com | Page 69 Daniel Prudek/Shutterstock.com | Page 80 Dennis Diatel/Shutterstock.com | 
Page 108 Vixit/Shutterstock.com 

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2021 

© European Union, 2021  

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.  

The  reuse  policy  of  European  Commission  documents  is  implemented  by  the  Commission  Decision  2011/833/EU  of  12 

December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Except otherwise noted, the reuse of 

this  document 

is  authorised  under  a  Creative  Commons  Attribution  4.0 

International 

(CC-BY  4.0) 

licence 

(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed provided appropriate credit is given and any 

changes are indicated. 

For any use or reproduction of elements that are not owned by the European Union, permission may need to be sought 

directly from the respective rightsholders.  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table of Contents 

Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 9 

Key findings .......................................................................................................... 10 

Research and design ...................................................................................................... 10 
Delivery and Working Methods ....................................................................................... 10 
Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) ................................................................................... 12 

Recommendations ................................................................................................ 12 

Glossary of terms .................................................................................................... 18 

Acronyms ................................................................................................................. 20 

1. Background ......................................................................................................... 22 

1.1. Why irregular migration awareness-raising campaigns? ................................. 22 

1.2. Study approach .............................................................................................. 24 

1.2.1. Assessing campaign “effectiveness” .................................................................... 25 

2. Design and Research .......................................................................................... 27 

2.1. Setting campaign objectives ........................................................................... 27 

2.2. Acknowledging trade-offs between migration management and protection 
objectives .............................................................................................................. 29 

2.3. Including approaches for campaign sustainability .......................................... 31 

2.4. Conducting pre-campaign research ............................................................... 32 

3. Delivery and working methods .......................................................................... 36 

3.1. Selecting and understanding campaign audiences ........................................ 36 

3.1.1. Primary audiences ................................................................................................ 36 
3.1.2. Secondary audiences ........................................................................................... 37 

3.2. Selecting campaign channels ........................................................................ 38 

3.2.1. Word-of-mouth communication ............................................................................ 39 
3.2.2. Events................................................................................................................... 41 
3.2.3. Social media ......................................................................................................... 42 
3.2.4. Mass media .......................................................................................................... 44 

3.3. Designing messages ...................................................................................... 45 

3.4. Choosing a messenger .................................................................................. 47 

3.4.1. Branding ............................................................................................................... 47 
3.4.2. Community influencers and local community ....................................................... 48 
3.4.3. Returnees and diaspora ....................................................................................... 49 

3.5. Supporting beyond information ...................................................................... 52 

6 

 
 
 
 
4. Designing an effective monitoring and evaluation plan .................................. 55 

4.1. Recognising the value of M&E ........................................................................ 55 

4.2. Developing a Theory of Change .................................................................... 57 

4.3. Developing a results framework ..................................................................... 58 

4.3.1. Inputs, Outputs and Outcomes ............................................................................. 58 
4.3.2. Social media indicators ......................................................................................... 60 

4.4. Creating a data collection plan ....................................................................... 61 

4.4.1. Monitoring approach ............................................................................................. 62 
4.4.2. Choose cost-effective evaluation methods ........................................................... 63 

4.5. Message testing ............................................................................................. 65 

5. Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 68 

6. Toolkit for developing and designing irregular migration awareness-raising 

campaigns............................................................................................................ 70 

Guidance for Designing & Evaluating Campaigns ................................................ 70 

6.1. Workbook Templates ...................................................................................... 81 

1.  TEMPLATE: SETTING CAMPAIGN OBJECTIVES .............................................. 81 
2.  TEMPLATE: PRE-CAMPAIGN RESEARCH ......................................................... 82 
3.  TEMPLATE: TARGET AUDIENCE SELECTION .................................................. 89 
4.  TEMPLATE: CHANNEL, ACTIVITY AND MESSAGE SELECTION ..................... 92 
5.  TEMPLATE: ACES CHECK .................................................................................. 95 
6.  TEMPLATE: THEORY OF CHANGE ..................................................................... 98 
7.  TEMPLATE: RESULTS FRAMEWORK .............................................................. 100 
8.  TEMPLATE: DATA COLLECTION METHODS ................................................... 105 
9.  TEMPLATE: LEARNING AGENDA ..................................................................... 106 

7. Annexes ............................................................................................................. 109 

Annex A: Full list of research questions .............................................................. 109 

Research Areas and Questions .................................................................................... 109 

Annex B: Research methodology ........................................................................ 111 

Data collection .............................................................................................................. 113 
Limitations .................................................................................................................... 115 

7 

 
 
 
 
8 

 
 
 
Executive Summary 

Rapid changes in migratory flows towards Europe in the past decade have solidified irregular 
migration  as  a  priority  on  the  political  agenda  in  the  European  Union  (EU)  and  most  of  its 
Member States.1 Awareness-raising campaigns on the risks of irregular migration have been 
among the many responses aimed at reducing irregular migration to Europe. 

Given  the  significant  investment  in  such  campaigns,  Member  States  and  the  European 
Commission  (EC)  aim  to  collate  and  disseminate  collective  lessons  learned  on  campaign 
design  and  implementation.  Despite  considerable  investment  in  such  initiatives,  empirical 
evidence on the effectiveness of campaigns remains insufficient. 

The Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs (DG HOME) commissioned Seefar, 
togther with it’s consortium partner Ecorys, to conduct this two-phase study to address these 
existing evidence gaps. The study presents best practices from 20 existing campaigns, and 
seeks to highlight ways to improve the quality and effectiveness of future campaigns. This final 
report presents the cumulative results of the two phases of this study.  

First, the report presents key findings on research and design, delivery and working methods, 
and  monitoring  and  evaluation  methods.  Second,  the  key  findings  are  followed  by 
recommendations.  Finally,  the  recommendations  are  complemented  with  a  ‘toolkit’  to  help 
implementers and donors resolve the most common issues uncovered. 

Key  findings  and  recommendations  in  this  report  draw  from  robust  primary  data  Seefar 
collected between February 2020 and December 2020 (see Table 1). 

Table 1: Overview of data collected 

1 EU Action Plan against migrant smuggling (2015 - 2020), COM(2015) 285 final 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Key findings 

The study made a range of findings that have been categorised and summarised below. 

Research and design 

The study highlighted that around half of the campaigns did not set effective objectives. Donors 
and  implementers  had  generally  not  reached  an  explicit  consensus  on  whether  their 
campaign’s purpose was migration management or protection (Section 2.1). This meant that 
some campaigns were designed and implemented without a common understanding of what 
they needed to achieve, which contributed to success being elusive and/or unverifiable. 

Many key informants wrongly believed that migration management and protection objectives 
were not mutually exclusive. This thinking was evident in the limited reflections on the trade-
offs between the two. Therefore, they missed opportunities to resolve the trade-offs between 
the two objectives while maximising progress towards their priority objective (Section 2.2). 

A majority of implementers emphasised how their campaigns would have an impact beyond 
the timeframe they were implementing. However, few campaigns demonstrated evidence of 
sustainability. There was no evidence that campaigns had actually ensured that their impact 
would  be  felt  beyond  the  conclusion  of  campaign  activities.  The  primary  method  of 
sustainability proposed was to ensure messages continued to be disseminated post-campaign, 
however the study found no evidence of this being effective, likely or successful. 

Key informant interviews also suggested that irregular migration awareness-raising campaigns 
are  a  migration  management  tool  that  could  not  realistically  yield  results  without  ongoing 
funding. Instead, they suggested that such campaigns should be understood as an ongoing 
cost of migration management (Section 2.3) similar to other migration management controls 
such as law enforcement and passport controls, rather than as traditional aid and development 
projects. 

The  focus  of  pre-campaign  research  was  similar  among  the  studied  campaigns,  including 
exploring  characteristics  of  the  primary  audience  (such  as  gender  and  age),  most  trusted 
channels,  and  self-reported  information  needs.  For  many  campaigns,  and  especially  where 
implementers  had  prior  experience,  comprehensive  and  often  expensive  pre-campaign 
research did not add value as the data gathered could have been discovered in a thorough 
desk review more easily. Thus, campaigns missed opportunities to focus their field research 
on  key  unknowns,  or  to  spend  money  on  re-testing  the  effectiveness  of  their  approach 
throughout (Section 2.4). 

Delivery and Working Methods 

In  the  campaigns  studied  for  this  report,  there  was  a  variety  of  primary  and  secondary 
audiences,  often  addressed  within  one  campaign.  On  the  one  hand,  campaigns  effectively 
narrowed down their audiences based on standard demographics looking at, for example, the 
profiles of the highest numbers of arrivals in Europe or profiles of potential migrants. On the 
other  hand,  most  of  the  campaigns  had  a  very  generic  audience  description  and  missed  a 
chance  to  narrow  down  their  audiences  further.  Targeting  broader  audiences  meant  that 
campaigns risked designing messages that were irrelevant to subsets of the audience and not 
in  line  with  the  objectives  or  desired  impact  of  the  campaign.  Consequently,  they missed  a 
chance to focus on an audience that could be most effective in terms of achieving the campaign 
objectives (Section 3.1). 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
Campaigns also used several communication channels at once. Most campaigns effectively 
chose  their  channels  based  on  evidence  of  frequency  of  use,  accessibility  and  trust  in  the 
channel among their audiences. They were well aware that multiple channels were a useful 
method  to  reinforce  campaign  messages.  However,  project  documents  suggested  that 
campaigns  did  not  analyse  current  or  past  effectiveness  of  channels  to  achieve  specific 
outcomes – which showed an absence of learning and adaptation (Section 3.2). 

An  examination  of  all  20  projects  reaffirmed  that  word-of-mouth  messaging  was  the  most 
effective communication channel for attitudinal and behavioural change in irregular migration 
awareness-raising  campaigns.  Among  suggested  reasons  for  its  effectiveness  are  that  it 
combined  the  most  trusted  channels  of  beneficiaries,  it  was  relationship-based,  it  could  be 
tailored to the individual and that message retention is high (Section 3.2.1). Community events 
appeared useful for advertising word-of-mouth services to the primary audiences and to build 
trust in communities. However, they remained a supporting method rather than a tool to change 
behaviour (Section 3.2.2). 

Social  media  and  mass  media  were  rarely  effective.  Social  media  was  a  useful  tool  if  a 
campaign  aimed  to  reach  a  large  audience  quickly  at  a  low  cost  and  where  evidence  for 
changing  behaviour  or  attitudes  was  not  required  (Section  3.2.3).  The  study  was  unable  to 
identify evidence that mass media was effective at behaviour or attitudinal change on irregular 
migration.  However,  one  advantage  identified  was  that  mass  media  could  reach  remote  or 
isolated areas where campaign activity was limited (Section 3.2.4). 

The most effective messages were those that were specifically tailored to the individual. Most 
implementers realised that it was most effective to deliver a credible and tailored message. For 
campaigns  that  did  not  use  word-of-mouth  communication  and  therefore  provided  fewer 
opportunities  for  tailoring,  key  criteria  for  effectiveness  included  accuracy,  credibility, 
relevance, balance and providing hope (Section 3.3). 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
All key informants emphasised that migrants’ trust in a campaign decreased if the campaign 
was branded in connection with a European government. However, there were some limited 
situations in which campaign communications could be aligned with official, public messaging 
by destination country governments. An example would be where visa or asylum policies were 
provided by destination country governments on official channels (Section 3.4.1). 

When choosing the most effective messengers, there was a general agreement that personnel 
drawn  from  local  communities  were  most  effective.  This  is  because  they  shared  the  same 
culture and were the most authentic, trusted and relatable for campaign audiences (Section 
3.4.2).  Interlocutors  with  migration  experience  (i.e.  diaspora  and  returnees)  in  some  cases 
were very effective messengers, based on the audience’s sense of familiarity. However, their 
deployment  could  also  backfire  due to  the  stigma  that  returnees  experience  and  distrust  of 
diaspora  members  who  were  discouraging  migration  (Section  3.4.3).  The  most  successful 
messengers appeared to be those with the right motivation, credibility in the community and 
effective communication skills – migration experience appeared much less relevant. 

Data from the survey confirmed that information may often not be enough to generate long- 
term change for campaign audiences. Key informants acknowledged that as long as original 
reasons  for  migration  persisted,  information  alone  may  only  be  one  influencing  factor  on 
migration plans (Section 3.5). 

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) 

Overall,  the  quality  of  M&E  varied  widely  between  campaigns  and  both  donors  and 
implementers  struggled  to  harness  the  value  of  M&E  (Section  4.1).  Only  five  out  of  20 
campaigns had a Theory of Change (ToC) guiding both campaign design and evaluation. Both 
donors and implementers showed limited understanding of its importance (Section 4.2). Most 
campaigns had a results framework showing outputs and outcomes. However, while output 
indicators were often SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time- bound), 
outcome indicators varied considerably in their quality and many outcome indicators did not 
measure desired outcomes. As one example, a prevalent weakness of social media metrics 
was the inherent lack of effectiveness data (Section 4.3). 

Campaigns  were  very  good  at  tracking  project  progress  (e.g.  completed  outputs/activities), 
however  the  monitoring  data  was  limited  to  the  extent  that  it  could  not  offer  insights  into 
progress  towards  reaching  the  ultimate  campaign  objectives.  Similarly,  data  collection  that 
would allow systematic learning and adaptation were limited (Section 4.4). 

Finally, few campaigns tested their messages systematically – neither before the campaign 
started  nor  during  implementation.  A  failure  to  re-test  or  adapt  the  messages  meant  that 
campaigns  lost  an  opportunity  of  maximising  messaging  effects  in  relation  to  campaign 
objectives and could not identify less effective messages (Section 4.5). 

Recommendations 

Approaches to designing, implementing and evaluating campaigns will vary from one context 
to  another.  However,  this  study  identified  good  practices  that  can  make  future  irregular 
migration campaigns more effective. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
13 

 
 
 
14 

 
 
 
15 

 
 
 
16 

 
 
 
17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Glossary of terms 

Term 

Definition 

Awareness-
raising 

Awareness-
raising 
campaigns 

Attitudinal 
change 

Awareness-raising is a process that seeks to inform and educate people  about a topic  or 
issue  with  the  intention  of  influencing  their  attitudes,  behaviours  and  beliefs  towards  the 
achievement of a defined purpose or goal 2 (see Section 2.1). 

Purposive attempts to inform or influence behaviours in large audiences within a specified 
time  period  using  an  organised  set  of  communication  activities  and  featuring  an  array  of 
mediated messages in multiple channels (see Section 2.1). 

Attitudes refer to a person’s predisposition or tendency to evaluate an object or its symbolic 
representation in a certain way. 3 Attitudinal change is, therefore, change in the evaluation of 
an object or thought 4 (see Section 2.1). 

Audience 
segmentation 

Audience segmentation is the process of dividing a large audience into  smaller groups of 
people  –  or  segments  –  who  have  similar  needs,  values  or  characteristics.  Segmentation 
recognises  that  different  groups  will  respond  differently  to  social  and  behavioural  change 
communication (SBCC) messages and interventions 5 (see Section 3.1). 

Baseline survey 

A baseline survey is a descriptive cross-sectional survey that mostly provides quantitative 
information on the current status of a particular situation – on whatever study topic – in a 
given  population.  It  aims  at  quantifying  the  distribution  of  certain  variables  in  a  study 
population at one point in time 6 (see Section 4.4). 

Behavioural 
change 

Behavioural  change  is  the  process  of  modifying  a  behaviour,  often  to  produce  a  desired 
outcome.  Behavioural  change  involves  the  substitution  of  one  pattern  of  behaviour  for 
another 7 (see Section 2.1). 

Campaign 
objectives 

Campaigns usually have two levels of objectives (see Section 2.1). Campaign objectives at 
the  societal  level  are  commonly  referred  to  as  the  desired  impact  of  the  campaign.  They 
describe the long-term results to be achieved by the campaign. 
Campaign objectives at the audience level describe the desired change within the audience. 
They  describe  shorter-term  results  that  are  achieved  within  the  audience  during  the 
campaign implementation. 8 

Endline survey 

An endline survey is run after a programme’s benefits are expected to have materialised. 
Comparing outcomes at baseline and endline allows stakeholders to identify changes that 
occurred during the intervention 9 (see Section 4.4). 

Evaluation 

Indicator 

Evaluation  is  a  rigorous  and  independent  assessment  of  either  completed  or  ongoing 
activities  to  determine  the  extent  to  which  they  are  achieving  stated  objectives  and 
contributing to decision-making 10 (see Section 4.1). 

An indicator is a specific, observable and measurable characteristic that can be used to show 
changes or progress a programme is making toward achieving a specific output or outcome 11 
(see Section 4.3). 

2 TAP Network, Raising Awareness through Public Outreach Campaigns 
3 Seel N.M. (2012) Attitudes – Formation and Change 
4 Bohner G. and Dickel N. (2011) Attitudes and Attitude Change 
5 Compass, How to Do Audience Segmentation 
6 FAO (2013), Baseline study in PRCA 
7 Burns R.J. and Rothman A.J. (2013) Behavior Change 
8 Phineo (2020), Social Impact Navigator 
9 ILO (2018) A step by step guide to impact evaluation 
10 UNDP (2009) Handbook on planning, monitoring and evaluating for development results 
11 UN Women Programming Essentials, Monitoring & Evaluation 

18 

 
 
 
Inputs 

Inputs are essentially the things that must be put in or invested in order for activities to take 
place.  Inputs  include  the  time  of  staff,  stakeholders  and  volunteers;  money;  equipment; 
technology; and materials 12 (see Section 4.3). 

Message 

A  message  is  a  statement  containing  key  points  of  information  that  a  campaign  wants  to 
communicate to an audience to encourage a desired change 13 (see Section 3.3). 

M&E plan 

A monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan describes how the M&E system for the campaign 
works. This includes the indicators, who is responsible for collecting them, what forms and 
tools will be used, and how the data will flow through the organisation 14 (see Section 4.1). 

Monitoring 

Monitoring  is  the  ongoing  process  by  which  stakeholders  obtain  regular  feedback  on 
progress made towards achieving their goals and objectives 15 (see Section 4.4.1). 

Outcomes 

Outputs 

Primary 
audience 

RCT 

Results 
framework 

Secondary 
audience 

Theory of 
Change 

Outcomes  refer  to  he  intermediate  changes  that  a  campaign  produces  for  campaign 
audiences or populations, such as change in knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, skills, behaviours, 
access to services, policies and environmental conditions 16 (see Section 4.3). 

Outputs are the immediate results of programme activities, meaning the direct products or 
deliverables of programme activities, such as the number of counselling sessions completed, 
the number of people reached and the number of materials distributed 17 (see Section 4.3). 

A  primary  audience  refers  to  the  individuals  targeted  in  an  unmediated  way  with  the 
campaign  activities,  and  among  whom  the  campaign  wants  to  achieve  an  effect 18  (see 
Section 3.1). 

A Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) is a research or evaluation design with two or more 
randomly selected groups (an experimental group and control group) in which the researcher 
controls or introduces an intervention (such as a campaign) and measures its impact on the 
dependent variable at least two times (pre- and post-test measurements) 19 (see Section 4.4). 

A results framework is an explicit articulation (graphic display, matrix, or summary) of the 
different  levels,  or  chains,  of  results  expected  from  a  particular  intervention.  The  results 
specified typically comprise the longer-term objectives (often referred to as “outcomes” or 
“impact”)  and  the  intermediate  outcomes  and  outputs  that  precede,  and  lead  to,  those 
desired longer-term objectives 20 (see Section 4.3). 

A  secondary  audience  refers  to  Individuals  in  the  general  environment  of  the  primary 
audience.  They  often  contribute  to  the  campaign’s  success  within  the  primary  audience 
because they play an important intermediary role 21 (see Section 3.1). 

A Theory of Change (ToC) is a purposeful model of how an initiative – such as a policy, a 
strategy, a programme, or a project – contributes through a chain of early and intermediate 
outcomes to the intended result 22 (see Section 4.2). 

12 UNDP (2009) Handbook on planning, monitoring and evaluating for development results 
13 Compass, How to Design SBCC Messages 
14 Tools4dev, M&E plan template 
15 UNDP (2009) Handbook on planning, monitoring and evaluating for development results 
16 UNAIDS, An Introduction to Indicators 
17 UNAIDS, An Introduction to Indicators 
18 Phineo (2020), Social Impact Navigator 
19 UNICEF (2014), Randomized Controlled Trials 
20 IEG (2012) designing a results framework for achieving results: a how-to guide 
21 Phineo (2020), Social Impact Navigator 
22 Serrat O. (2017) Theories of Change. In: Knowledge Solutions 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Acronyms 

CSO  

Civil Society Organisation 

DG HOME   Directorate-General 

for  Migration  and  Home  Affairs, 

EC  

EU  

FGD  

IDI  

IOM  

KII  

M&E  

NGO  

RCT  

European Commission 

European Commission 

European Union 

Focus Group Discussion 

In-Depth Interview 

International Organization for Migration 

Key Informant Interview 

Monitoring and Evaluation 

Non-Governmental Organisation 

Randomised Controlled Trial 

SMART  

Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-bound 

ToC  

Theory of Change 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
21 

 
 
 
1. Background 

The implementing partners of the study consortium are Seefar and Ecorys. Ecorys is one of 
the oldest and largest independent economic research and consulting companies in Europe 
and brings an extensive network of geographical coverage and research surge support to the 
project. Seefar is a recognised leader in understanding migration behaviour change and has 
extensive  experience  developing  and  deploying  innovative  monitoring  and  evaluation 
approaches for irregular migration communication campaigns.  

This  report,  the  last  of  a  two-phased  study,  seeks  to  provide  practical  guidance  for  future 
campaigns. The recommendations are based on findings from in-depth research on the quality 
and effectiveness of 20 irregular migration awareness-raising campaigns, including from the 
perspective of migrants. 

To make this guidance as practical as possible while still exploring the evidence generated 
through this study in more detail, the report sets out: 

1.  What  campaigns  should  do  to  be  more  effective  going  forward  and  why  campaigns 

should follow this guidance; 

2.  Findings  from  primary  data  on  best practices  in campaigns and  how  the  campaigns 

reviewed for this study dealt with design, implementation and M&E; and 

3.  Recommendations of which concrete steps should be taken. 

We follow this structure throughout the report and apply it to all three overarching research 
questions: 

1.  Which design and research methods work best for different types of campaigns? 

2.  Which working and delivery methods are the most effective? 

3.  Which monitoring and evaluation methods produce the most insightful data? 

To answer these questions, the report provides analysis and recommendations on improving 
future  campaigns  along  with  a  ‘toolkit’  to  help  implementers  and  donors  resolve  the  most 
common issues uncovered. 

1.1. Why irregular migration awareness-raising campaigns? 

Irregular  migration  awareness-raising  campaigns  are  a  subset  of  broader  public 
communications  campaigns,  or  information  awareness-raising  campaigns.  Information 
awareness-raising  campaigns  are  broadly  defined  as  “purposive  attempts  to  inform  or 
influence behaviours in large audiences within a specified time period using an organised set 
of communication activities and featuring an array of mediated messages in multiple channels.” 
This  is  done  with  the  intention  of  producing  non-  commercial  benefits  to  individuals  and 
society.23 Generally, they are applied across very different fields of intervention, such as health, 
hygiene, humanitarian emergency responses, internal displacement, and human trafficking. 

Irregular  migration  awareness-raising  campaigns  have  grown  in  importance  as  research 
continues to show that many migrants still underestimate the risks of migrating irregularly and 
overestimate their chances of successfully reaching and settling in the EU. 24 

International  organizations,  civil  society  organizations  and  governments  have  started  using 
information and awareness-raising campaigns in order to raise awareness about the risks of 
irregular migration and about potential alternatives. Through this they usually hope to counter 

23 C.K. Atkin, R.E. Rice (2013), Theory and principles of public communication campaigns 
24 3E Ethical, Engaged & Effective. Running communications on irregular migration from Kos to Kandahar 

22 

 
 
 
 
misinformation  and  ultimately  help  potential  migrants  to  make  more  informed  migration 
decisions. 25 

Since  the  early  1990s,  campaigns  aimed  at  potential  (irregular) 
migrants  in  origin  and  transit  countries  have  drawn  significant 
interest  and  investment  from  European  states.26  The  European 
Union and Member States funded more than 100 information and 
awareness-raising campaigns targeted at migrants since 2014. 27 

Campaigns can take many different forms. They may use basic 
tools such as posters, leaflets, advertisements in newspapers and 
television  commercials.  They  may  also  use  hotline  services, 
community events, workshops, educational events in schools or 
specially  commissioned  movies  and  comic  books.  Increasingly, 
campaigns  also  include  online  and  social  media  components, 
such as Facebook groups, Facebook advertising and websites. 28 

irregular  migration  awareness-raising 
The  objectives  of 
campaigns  are  varied  but  ultimately  they  are  all  aimed  at 
awareness-raising  or  changing  attitudes  and  behaviours  among 
potential or transit migrants. Specific examples include: 

“Informing potential migrants about the risks and complex realities 
of irregular migration; to protect vulnerable people from harm and 
exploitation;  to  address  misinformation  about  irregular  migration 
and the situation in destination countries; promoting safe and legal 
alternatives to migration; reducing the flows of irregular migration 
to  destination  countries;  and  (although  not  always  explicitly) 
prevent human trafficking.” 29 

The  report  shows  that  campaigns  have  the  potential  to  change 
beneficiaries’ knowledge, attitudes and behaviours. However, few 
campaigns were well-designed to achieve and prove it. In 2019, 
the International Organisation for Migration noted that “the uptake 
in the use of irregular migration campaigns has far outpaced any 
rigorous  assessment  of  the  effects  they  may  have  on  their 
respective target group” 30 – where evaluation was attempted, the 
data  collected  has  often  been  inadequate  to  draw  conclusions 
about  campaign  effectiveness.  This  study  indicates  that  the 
problem still exists, but also finds that it is possible to measure the 
impact of campaigns in principle and in practice.  

The biggest need in order demonstrate impact is to define more 
carefully what a campaign intends to achieve. For example, most 
campaigns do not state measurable outcomes or assign values to 
them.  They  are  also  unfocused:  intentionally  or  unintentionally, 
most campaigns address populations so big and diverse that they cannot hope to influence 
and demonstrate the changes they have had on the most important parts of that population. 
To maximise and demonstrate value, campaigns need to narrow down to the most important 
sub-populations,  define  campaign  outcome  measurements  and  assign  priorities  to  them. 

25 Schans and Optekamp (2016), Raising Awareness, Changing Behaviour 
26 Schans and Optekamp (2016) Raising Awareness, Changing Behaviour; Nieuwenhuys and Pécoud (2007), Human Trafficking, 
Information Campaigns, and Strategies of Migration Control. American Behavioral Scientist 
27 European Migration Network, Annual Conference in Vienna on 3 December 2019 
28 López (2019), Online migration campaigns: promises, pitfalls and the need for better evaluations 
29 IOM (2020), Public Communication Campaign Toolkit 
30 Tjaden, Jasper, Sandra Morgenstern, and Frank Laczko (2019). ‘Evaluating the Impact of Information campaigns in the Field 
of Migration: A Systematic Review of the Evidence, and Practical Guidance.’ 

23 

 
 
 
Finally,  campaigns  need  to  ensure  that  monitoring  and  evaluation  focuses  on  the  most 
important information to address those priorities. 

The study design and the campaigns in this study generated less evidence for the long-term 
results or sustainability of campaigns. Indeed, the results of this study highlight the importance 
of differentiating between three different perspectives on the potential long-term results: 

1.  A humanitarian perspective, which focuses most on providing  short-term services to 
people in need, with less concern for longer-term changes. Most campaigns implicitly 
used this perspective. 

2.  A  development  perspective,  which  prioritises  structural,  long-term  change.  Many 

campaign designs mentioned a wish for this, but did not implement it. 

3.  A migration management perspective, which sees campaigns as an ongoing cost of 
reducing irregular migration for a country that many people want to reach irregularly. 
Few campaigns adopted this perspective, but it appeared to align best with their design. 

Choosing  between  or  comparing  these  perspectives  on  sustainability  could  greatly  improve 
campaign design by helping designers to focus on the most important outcomes and activities. 
Compared  to  other  kinds  of  migration  management,  capacity-building  or  material  support, 
communication campaigns can be cheaper, faster and more flexible. On the other hand, there 
are limits to what a campaign can achieve – communication is unlikely to change structural or 
material  factors  affecting  irregular  migration.  Most  campaigns  would  therefore  benefit  from 
focusing on and adapting to particular people, with particular needs, in 0-3 year timeframes. 

1.2. Study approach 

As noted above, this study combines the findings from Phase 1 and Phase 2, and seeks to 
answer three overarching research questions: 

1.  Which design and research methods work best for different types of campaigns? 

2.  Which working and delivery methods are more effective than others? 

3.  Which M&E methods produce the most insightful data? 

To answer these guiding questions, four key research areas were identified at the beginning 
of the research phase in 2019 (see Graphic 1). These served as the analytical framework for 
the research design. For a full list of research questions and objectives, please refer to Annex 
A. 

Graphic 1: Key research areas 

The different phases of the study and resulting stand-alone reports relied on both primary and 
secondary  data.  While  Phase  1  focused  on  data  collection  from  10  campaigns  already 
concluded at the time of the study, Phase 2 focused on 10 campaigns that were ongoing or 
very  recently  completed.  This  allowed  for  a  real-time  meta-assessment  of  campaigns 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
underway. Based on the present data, it is anticipated that these findings are generalisable to 
other contexts. 

The research relied on a range of qualitative and quantitative data collection tools used in a 
concurrent approach (see Annex B for more details on how the two phases of the study related 
to each other and more details on the research methodology). 31 

1.2.1. Assessing campaign “effectiveness” 

This study did not include new evaluations of the impact of individual campaigns. Where it was 
available, the study drew upon existing campaign evaluations or other evidence of impact, then 
examined the design and management of these campaigns. Only 5 out of 20 campaigns had 
completed evaluations by the time of the study, partly because 10 campaigns were on-going 
at  the  time  of  the  study  and  evaluation  methodologies  for  earlier  campaigns  were  of  much 
lower quality. This also meant that out of the 5 campaigns that had completed evaluations, 3 
did not include methodology that allowed conclusions with regards to their overall objectives. 

Where strong evaluation data was not available for a campaign, the study examined campaign 
design and management. The purpose was to identify, for example, whether the campaign’s 
activities  were  logically aligned  with  its  objectives,  or  whether  it  had  the  monitoring  tools  to 
demonstrate its results. In other words, ‘effectiveness’ in this study refers more to design and 
management rather than campaign impact. As the results show, there are many opportunities 
and  needs  to  adopt  best  practices  so  that  campaigns  have  a  chance  of  achieving  and 
demonstrating impact.  

31 See Annex B for Methods and Limitations. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
26 

 
 
 
2. Design and Research 

2.1. Setting campaign objectives 

The first step in designing any irregular migration awareness-raising campaign is to set clear 
campaign objectives. Campaign objectives form the foundation of any successful campaign 
because they help to: 

•  Orient project design decisions: The project team can design activities that are focused 

on directly achieving the campaign objectives. 

•  Measure  success:  Based  on  the  campaign  objectives,  the  project  team  can  set 
measures  of  success.  This  helps  them  directly  demonstrate  whether  the  campaign 
activities were successful at reaching its objectives. 

 Findings 

Among all campaigns sampled, campaign objectives at the societal level were almost always 
a migration management and/or migrant protection objectives. Interviewees framed migration 
management objectives as “political objectives”; by contrast, protecting migrants was seen as 
a “humanitarian objective”. Campaign objectives at the societal level often referred  to long-
term  behavioural  changes.  “Decreasing  or  preventing  irregular  migration”  often  implicitly 
referred to a change of social norms. 

Campaign  objectives  at  the  audience  level  usually  included  awareness-raising;  attitudinal 
change; behavioural change; or a combination of the three (see Graphic 2 for examples).  

All  campaigns  focused  on  change  at  the  individual  level,  with  some  campaign  designs 
assuming  that  the  cumulative  change  of  enough  individual  attitudes  and  beliefs  would 
eventually produce societal change. Campaigns have shifted entirely towards the individual 
paradigm as it has been shown to be effective in a short time span and with limited resources. 

Where  there  was  an  assumption  of  societal  change  originating  from  individually-focused 
communications built into the campaign design, there was no evidence the societal change 
actually  occurred.  There  was  also  no  evidence  that  it  had  been  tested  and  there  were  no 
resources indicating that societal change was in fact possible from communications focused 
on the individual. 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
Graphic 2: Examples of effective objectives among the campaign sample 

Based  on  an  analysis  of  project  documents,  50%  of  all  campaigns  set  effective  campaign 
objectives.  These  campaigns  were  effective  with  regard  to  their  objectives  because  the 
objectives  were  SMART  (specific,  measurable,  achievable,  realistic,  and  time-bound).  For 
example,  effective  objectives  clearly  identified  the  intended  effects  of  the  campaign  on  a 
specific primary audience; they were realistic to achieve in the intended timeframe; and they 
referred to a measurable future state. 

However, many other campaigns set loosely defined objectives. For example, one campaign 
described  its  objective  as  “producing  communication  content,  through  highly  trusted  media 
platforms, based on key findings from field research to inform and educate target audiences 
about  migration.”  This  objective  was  less  effective  because  it  was  not  SMART  and,  for 
example, only referred to activities rather than the results to be achieved. It was likely assumed 
that content on highly trusted media platforms would result in an increase in and retention of 
knowledge among the primary audience without testing this assumption. 

In some interviews, donors and implementers articulated different priority objectives. Donors 
were much more explicit about their goal of ultimately changing irregular migration behaviour. 
Implementers, on the other hand, overwhelmingly emphasised the aim of providing information 
and raising awareness in general. One implementer said they were aware of donor objectives 
but  noted  that  they  never  spoke  about  reducing  irregular  migration  internally.  Some 
implementers said that the ultimate goal was to change behaviours but often only spoke about 
it as something that was hoped for. Such misalignment had the potential to confuse design 
and implementation decisions. 

To reiterate, for most implementers, delivering any type of information to migrants was a good 
result  in  itself.  Whether  the  information  would  ultimately  influence  migrants’  behaviour  (e.g. 
deter them from undertaking the trip) was insignificant. Many implementers emphasised the 
principle  that  no  one  should  be  told  not  to  migrate.  Most  donors  who  funded  awareness 
campaigns on the other hand expected that awareness-raising would lead to attitudinal and 
behavioural change among migrants. However, this study and other research show that this is 
not necessarily true.32 

32 Schans and Optekamp (2016), Raising Awareness, Changing Behaviour 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
2.2. Acknowledging 

trade-offs 

between 

migration 

management and protection objectives 

When setting campaign objectives, there is a need to acknowledge and address the trade-offs 
between migration management vs protection objectives. That’s because even though many 
practitioners  argue  that  campaigns  are  not  about  discouraging  migration,  their  funding  by 
destination governments is often based on an expectation of achieving migration control. 33 The 
two  distinct  objectives  interact  with  each  other  in  complex  ways;  while  some  argue  that 
stopping people from migrating is an efficient way to save lives, this has also been criticised 
by many. 34 The lack of clarity on this contributes to a lack of clear objectives in many cases, 
which in turn can limit campaign effectiveness (see Section 2.1) 

33 Informing Migrants to Manage Migration? An Analysis of IOM’s Information Campaigns 
34 See for example Van Dessel, J and Pécoud, A (2020). A NGO’s dilemma: rescuing migrants at sea or keeping them in their 
place? 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Findings 

Data  from  campaigns  and  KIIs  showed  that  there 
were trade-offs between migration management and 
protection objectives: 

1.  For campaigns where migration management 
objectives  were  more  prominent, 
the 
emphasis  on  deterrent  messaging  was 
stronger  than  in  those  with  more  prominent 
protection objectives. 

2.  Key 

informants 

from  campaigns  with  a 

“Okay,  we  don’t  say  don’t  go 
abroad,  because  migration  is 
actually  a  right.  Migration  is  a 
right,  so  we  are  looking  for  a 
way  for  people  to  do  it  right. 
That’s our target.” 

— Returnee Interview 2 

stronger migration management emphasis focused on achieving a behaviour change 
away  from  all  migration  regardless  of  migration  motives.  In  contrast,  key  informants 
from  campaigns  with  a  stronger  protection  focus  emphasised  deterring  only  those 
potential  migrants  who  have  no  chance  of  being  granted  asylum  in  Europe.  They 
rejected the notion of discouraging migration in general. 

Among the  campaigns sampled, many donors and implementers failed to acknowledge the 
trade-offs between migration management and protection objectives. In other words, hoping 
to  achieve  protection  outcomes  as  a  by-product  of  migration  management  could  be  an 
inefficient  way  of  achieving  protection  for  the  migrant,  and  vice  versa.  In  both  phases,  the 
majority of interviewees tended to view discouraging migration as protecting potential migrants 
from exposure to harm.  

As one key informant said: “The prevention of irregular migration is itself a form of protection, 
and  an  awareness  campaign  must  first  and  foremost  consider  the  protection  of  any 
stakeholders  (especially  migrants)  it  aims  to  engage  with.” 35  Only  when  explicitly  asked  in 
Phase 2, some implementers pointed out the trade-offs. A failure to recognise potential trade-
offs  likely  meant  that  there  were  missed  opportunities  to  address  trade-offs  effectively,  to 
prioritise monitoring and resource decisions, and to maximise effectiveness towards priority 
objectives. 

35 KII 4, Phase 2 

30 

 
 
 
 
 
2.3. Including approaches for campaign sustainability 

Campaign design must address how the campaign is going to address campaign sustainability. 
This  is  to  ensure  that  a)  the  impact  achieved  will  be  sustained  by  the  individual  audience 
members; and b) the wider objectives of the campaign will be achieved, even after campaign 
activities are concluded.36 

  Findings 

When asked about sustainability, key informants almost exclusively said that involving local 
stakeholders  was  key.  Accordingly,  most  campaigns  partnered  with  local  stakeholders  in 
different  ways  to  address  sustainability.  Key  informants  said  that  working  with  local 
stakeholders,  on  the  one  hand,  allowed  them  to  design  more  effective  campaigns  that  had 
potential for lasting change. On the other hand, campaigns operated under the assumption 
that these local stakeholders would take up the cause, own the messages and continue the 
work after the campaign was over. A donor for example said that, “For this project, we have 
connected  them  to  West  African  Democracy  Radio  and  made  sure  that  the  radio  can 
disseminate their materials. It’s a kind of sustainability to make the materials last longer.” 37 To 
what extent the radio in fact disseminated materials, however, was unclear. 

Even  though  almost  all  key  informants  recognised  the  importance  of  sustainability,  an 
understanding  of  what  worked  and  didn’t  work  in  achieving  sustainability  lacked  as  most 
campaigns did not monitor the effectiveness of their sustainability approaches. Only 25% of 
campaigns  (two  in  Phase  1  and  two  in  Phase  2)  included  sustainability  as  an  objective  or 
indicator of success in project documents. One campaign, for example, included a target of 
“increased % of knowledge of public and private actors” in order to ensure ownership of the 
fight against irregular migration by public and private actors.” 38 All the other campaigns had no 
targets or activities in their project documents that even rhetorically addressed sustainability. 
No campaign had a method to test whether their theory about sustainability worked in practice. 
This meant that the chances for impactful sustainability were almost zero. 

a 

as 

defining 

informants 

Considering that most irregular migration awareness-
focused  on  migration 
raising  campaigns  are 
management, 
of 
interpreation 
different 
sustainability also came out of the interviews. Rather 
continued 
sustainability 
than 
discussed 
key 
dissemination, 
sustainability  as  potentially  functioning  as  a  more 
sustainable approach to solve the problem (continued 
irregular  migration)  that  it  is  trying  to  address. 
Specifically,  several  interviewees  pointed  out  that 
irregular migration awareness-raising campaigns are 
likely to be a long-term need. One key informant said: 
“Sustainability is the main problem with these sorts of 
the 
campaigns 
campaign finishes it is shut down and you can’t say 

in  Afghanistan  because  when 

“Even 
the  best  awareness 
campaigns,  if  nothing  changes 
at  local  level  (economic  and 
social  factors)  at  the  base  of 
migration  motivation,  would  be 
not useful.” 

— Key Informant Interview 10, 
Phase 2 

36  Seefar  (2018),  “3E  Impact:  Ethical,  Engaged  and  Effective:  Running  Communications  on  Irregular  Migration  from  Kos  to 
Kandahar” 
37 KII 25, Phase 2 
38 Campaign 8, Project document, Phase 2 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
that  the  messages  continue  to  somehow  spread,” 39  arguing  that  “changing  behaviour  is  a 
process that cannot be fully achieved through a single campaign.”  

Similarly, one key informant said that as long as push factors exist that drive people to migrate, 
including violence, conflict, and lack of local employment opportunities, information may likely 
not  impact  sustainable  change.  Therefore,  it  was  suggested  that  in  order  to  work  towards 
ensuring  lasting  change  an  approach  of  long-term  communications  campaign  should  be 
understood as an ongoing cost of migration management. 

2.4. Conducting pre-campaign research 

Before  designing  any  campaign,  implementers  need  to  answer  key  questions  through  pre-
campaign research. Pre-campaign research is best-practice 40 because it helps to answer the 
questions that are key to any campaign design. 41 This pre-campaign research will look different 
for every campaign depending on what is already known. 

39 KII 10, Phase 1 
40 See for example: The Freedom Fund (2019), “Literature Review: Behaviour Change Communications Campaigns Targeting 
the Demand-Side of Exploitation” 
41  Seefar  (2018),  “3E  Impact:  Ethical,  Engaged  and  Effective:  Running  Communications  on  Irregular  Migration  from  Kos  to 
Kandahar” 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Findings 

Key informants and the literature agreed that “knowledge of the local context (including history, 
attitudes,  and  perceptions)  helps  set  out  an  informed  communication  strategy  and  predict 
potential hurdles, and how to overcome them.” 42 

18 out of 20 campaigns conducted pre-campaign research using a mix of qualitative and/or 
quantitative data collection to inform the design of the campaign (see Graphic 3). Campaigns 
did especially well in exploring characteristics of the primary audience, such as gender and 
age, on gathering information on channels they used, or on self-reported information needs. 
The  pre-campaign  research  phase  was  also  useful  for  starting  collaboration  with  the  local 
community and building trust, which was considered an important starting-point to support the 
implementation. 43 Campaigns also did well in using pre-campaign research for the initial design 
of the messages in terms of making sure they were culturally appropriate. 44 

Graphic 3: Pre-campaign research conducted among the campaigns 

However, not all pre-campaign research was effective. That is because campaign research 
tended  to  focus  on  research  questions  that  often  could  have  been  answered  by  solid  desk 
research or using only a few qualitative interviews with experts as opposed to doing long and 
expensive pre-campaign research. Where implementers had prior experience and where there 
was a lot of information already available through desk review, pre-campaign research did not 
add much value to campaigns. In other words, the research phase often added little except 
time  and  expense.  Where  this  occurred,  campaigns  missed  opportunities  to  target  field 
research at key unknowns, or spend money on re-testing the effectiveness of their approach 
throughout a campaign. 

42 International Centre for Migration Policy Development (2019), “Communication on Migration: An Issue of local governance”. 
43 KII 11, Phase 1 
44 KII 1, KII 2, KII 4, Phase 2 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
35 

 
 
 
3. Delivery and working methods 

3.1. Selecting and understanding campaign audiences 

Identifying and narrowing down the primary and secondary audiences the campaign will focus 
on is critical. This means going from a broad audience such as “potential migrants in Nigeria” 
to a much more specific demographic. That’s important because a 35-year-old male farmer 
with four children living in a rural area is unlikely to respond to the same messaging as a 21-
year-old single female university student living in a city centre. The more narrowly identified 
the audience, the more effective the tailored message can be. 

3.1.1. Primary audiences 

 Findings 

For their primary audiences, most campaigns effectively identified the profiles of the highest 
number of arrivals in Europe from a given country by looking at, for example, the profiles of 
those  migrants  with  the  highest  number  of  asylum  applications.  Others  cited  studies  in 
countries  of  origin  on  the  profiles  of  potential  migrants  and  narrowed  down  their  audiences 
based on that. In that way they provided evidence-based reflection on the basic characteristics 
of the primary audience in terms of age, gender, ethnicity and region. 

Regardless of their objectives, most of the campaigns had a very generic audience description 
and  missed  a  chance  to  narrow  down  their  audiences  further.  This  likely  limited  their 
opportunities to tailor their messages and choose audiences for which the campaign would be 
most effective. The survey showed, for example, that: 

•  Potential  migrants  with  economic  migration  reasons  were  looking  for  information  on 
working visas abroad, whereas those fleeing violence or persecution were looking for 
information on asylum. 

•  More educated respondents were more likely to seek information on studying abroad. 
•  Female respondents had different migration motivations when compared to males and 

also showed differing patterns of accessing migration information than men. 45 

Therefore,  campaigns  that  did  not  further  segment  audiences  were  vulnerable  to  designing 
messages  that  were  irrelevant  to  subsets  of  the  campaign  audience.  This  also  meant  they 
missed a chance to focus on the audience most relevant to their objectives. 

45 In the quantitative survey, women were more likely than men to access family and friends at home for migration information 
(52%, 196 of 377, vs 46%, 762 of 1,641), and less likely to cite family and friends abroad (57%, 215 of 377, vs 67%, 1,094 of 
1,641). Female respondents also had less trust in smugglers, averaging 2.3 on a 5-point trust scale, compared to 2.6 for male 
respondents. 

36 

 
 
 
 
 
3.1.2. Secondary audiences 

 Findings 

By including secondary audiences, campaigns did well in acknowledging that the decision to 
migrate  is  often  not  a  decision  made  alone.  Families  and  communities  are  important 
influencers when a migrant decides to migrate, often providing (financial) resources that carry 
with  them  heavy  obligations  to  achieve  success  abroad.  The  secondary  audiences  that 
campaigns  included  were  often  female  potential  migrants  and  wider  community  audiences. 
Campaigns  mentioned  in  their  project  documents  that  these  audiences  were  included  to 
increase reach and/or influence the primary migrant audiences. 

However,  project  documents  did  not  contain  evidence  to  show  that  including  multiple 
audiences increased impact or decreased it. In contrast, some interviewees implied a problem 
with having multiple audiences: resources are often severely limited relative to the challenge 
of  communicating  on  irregular  migration.  Spreading  resources  across  lots  of  different 
audiences risked decreasing impact because, as argued above, each audience likely requires 
separate  channels,  messages,  monitoring  and  evaluation.  Campaigns  did  not  provide  an 
operationally helpful cost–benefit analysis of including secondary and broader audiences; nor 
did  they  show  efforts  in  testing  how  a  campaign  incorporating  multiple  audiences  performs 
relative to a more focused approach. 

37 

 
 
 
 
3.2. Selecting campaign channels 

Campaigns  must  purposefully  choose  appropriate  communication  channels.  This  involves 
understanding  the  most  effective  channels;  how  people  receive  and  share  information,  and 
identifying  sources  they  trust.  Other  considerations  can  then  be  assessed  against 
effectiveness  when  making  the  final  choice  of  campaign  channel  –  perhaps  preferring  a 
channel that allows for more comprehensive M&E, or gives implementers the freedom to adapt 
messaging mid-campaign in response to changing circumstances. A deliberative approach to 
channel selection allows campaigns to understand how to most effectively deliver information 
and ultimately reach the campaign objective. 

Campaigns often used several channels at once (see Graphic 4). 

Graphic 4: Campaign channels 

Campaigns did well in providing evidence for why they chose a particular channel. They cited 
evidence  on  frequency  of  use,  access  to  the  channel  and  trust  in  the  channel  among  their 
audiences. Findings from the survey confirmed the importance of assessing these variables. 

Channels differed in their ability to reach audiences, how frequently they were used and how 
much they were trusted. These variables also differed by audience and country. For example, 
television  and  radio  penetration  in  Afghanistan  were  high,  while  in  Gambia,  more  migrants 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
used social media. Transit migrants were likely to access social media rather than mass media, 
due  to  its  accessibility.  Importantly,  frequency  of  using  a  channel  did  not  always  mean 
respondents also trusted the information. 46 

Most campaigns also reflected an understanding that using multiple channels could contribute 
to  campaign  effectiveness.  18  out  of  20  campaigns  used  several  channels  at  once. 
Interviewees suggested that this was particularly helpful to reinforce messages and address 
the needs of different audiences. One campaign in Côte d’Ivoire, for example, used billboards, 
television  spots,  flyers,  radio  spots  and  different  types  of  in-person  events.  Migrants 
themselves confirmed that trust was often increased by being able to cross-check information, 
especially for campaigns that used social and traditional media. 

However,  campaigns  provided  less  evidence  of  choosing  a  channel  based  on  past 
effectiveness  and  using  effective  analysis  of  cost–benefits  for  such  decisions.  Channel 
selection was based largely on reports of how often an audience used a certain channel. This 
meant that the dominant approach was to first identify a list of popular channels, then split a 
budget across those channels and report on outputs by channel. There did not appear to be 
much rigour in deciding the costs and benefits of different outputs. For example, it was common 
to find journalist training or media engagement alongside community events, but the method 
to calculate how much money to devote to each was not clear. This meant that channels were 
not always chosen based on what works best in relation to the campaign objective. 

3.2.1. Word-of-mouth communication 

 Findings 

Literature 47  and  data  collected  for  this  study  indicate  that  word-of-mouth  channels  were  the 
most  effective  channels  for  changing  attitudes  and  behaviour.  For  example,  survey 
respondents mentioned that “getting information by having a one-on-one conversation” as the 
second method most likely to change how they thought about migration, just after “providing 

46 For example, 34% of transit migrants in the survey reported social media as the most frequented source of information, but just 
19% said they also trust it the most. Similarly, 26% of transit migrants surveyed said they most frequently used family and friends 
abroad as a source of information, while 34% said they trust that information the most. 
47 See for example ARK (2018), “Grey Noise: Migration and Strategic Communications.” 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
access to employment in the home country”. Word-
of-mouth 
chosen  by 
respondents as the most trusted channel. 

information  was  also 

Key  informant  interviews  as  well  as  interviews  and 
focus group discussions with migrants also provided 
insight  into  why  one-on-one  and  word-of-mouth 
channels were most effective: 

•  There 

is  an 
messenger and receiver. 

interaction  between 

the 

•  The  interaction  is  personal  and  based  on  a 
and 
relationship 
receiver.  In-person  engagement  over  time 
allows 
the 
messenger and the migrant. 48 

trust-building  between 

between  messenger 

for 

• 

• 

It provides an opportunity to take into account 
the  personal  needs  of  the  migrants. 49  Not 
tailoring information to each unique individual 
could mean that information was not relevant 
to individual cases50 or not internalised. 51 

In one-on-one conversations or small groups, 
migrants are much more likely to talk openly 
and  there  is  an  opportunity  to  “control”  how 
the migrant interprets the information. 52 

•  One-on-one  engagement 

the 
campaign  audience’s  engagement  and 
retention of campaign messages. 

increases 

•  Word-of-mouth  channels  provide  an  easy 
opportunity  to  follow  up  with  the  same 
migrant. These follow-ups have the effect of 
reinforcing  a  message  over  a  longer  period, 
thus increasing its stickiness. 53 

“The  other  issue  is  instead  of 
having only one discussion with 
a  person  it’s  always  good  to 
have  a  chain  of  discussions 
with  that  person  until  you  are 
assured the individual is on the 
right  track.  An  issue  which  is 
discussed  only  once  has  a 
chance to be forgotten easily.” 

— IDI 8, Phase 1 

“I  had  a  lady  who  wanted  to 
migrate.  She  was  bent  on 
going. But I told her this: ‘Your 
friend  is  in  Lebanon,  sending 
you pictures, but that’s not the 
actual situation there.’ I told her 
I’ll come two days later to do a 
follow  up.  She  agreed.  Two 
days later I came and we had a 
chat. I did a third follow up. On 
the third follow up, she told me: 
‘When  you  first  spoke  to  me,  I 
was planning on going but you 
kept coming. The third time you 
came,  that’s  when  I  actually 
changed my mind.’ Follow ups 
help  build  the  trust  with  the 
migrant.  One-time  interactions 
are not enough.” 

that 

informants  also  emphasised 

remote 
Key 
conversations were effective. The majority of survey 
respondents  confirmed  that  talking  to  someone  on 
the phone can be effective as well. One hotline-based 
campaign  emphasised  the  advantages  of  remote 
word-of-mouth  services  because  interactions  could  also  happen  via  texting  or  messaging 
through WhatsApp or Facebook Messenger, which in turn helped to reach migrants who were 
less comfortable talking on the phone. 

— Returnee interview 5 

Word-of-mouth  channels  were  also  most  effective  at  providing  evidence  of  change.  That  is 
because  they  most  effectively  allowed  campaigns  to  collect  contact  information  from  each 
person who had used a service and ask them directly for the effects of that conversation; or to 
recontact them again later. These kinds of data collection are limited for other channels such 

48 Returnee IDI 5, 18 
49 KII 9, Phase 2 
50 Campaign 10, evaluation report, Phase 2 
51 Campaign 7, monthly report, Phase 2 
52 KII 33, Phase 2 
53 One campaign from Phase 1, for example, noted that repeated exposure to campaign activities would lead to attitudinal and 
behavioural change. Respondents in FGDs and IDIs from Phase 1 in all study locations echoed this. 

40 

 
 
 
as social media or mass media where it is virtually impossible to get contact information from 
all respondents who used a channel. 

Campaigns  also  reported  challenges  when  delivering  word-of-mouth  activities.  Where 
respondents had a word-of-mouth interaction with a campaign, expectations of the kind of help 
provided were a lot higher. Even though information provided through in-person conversations 
was highly trusted, respondents often felt they weren’t helped because the service offered did 
not  go  beyond  information.  This  particularly  applied  to  transit  settings,  where  respondents 
expected to receive information on how to apply for asylum in Europe, how to implement the 
next steps on their journey, or they asked for direct support in accessing shelter or jobs in their 
current locations. 

3.2.2. Events 

 Findings 

Events were most effective at spreading messages, gaining the trust of the community and 
addressing secondary audiences like friends and family. They were beneficial for spreading 
campaign messaging to a wider audience and building brand awareness, trust and credibility 
within the community. Events were less effective for changing attitudes and behaviour. 

That  is  because  events,  even  though  they  allow  for  two-way  communication,  don’t  enable 
campaigns to provide individually tailored information and the in-depth engagement that leads 
to behavioural change. Thus, events were most effective as a supporting method rather than 
a core campaign component. 

The most effective events were those that were smaller, interactive and entertaining according 
to key informants and migrants. Among the campaigns sampled, events included community 
film  screenings,  town  hall  discussions  and  debates.  In  using  the  events,  campaigns  were 
effective  in  using  different  ‘hooks’  to  entice  attendance.  Sporting  and  entertainment  events 
allowed  the  campaign  audience  to  be  involved  in  non-migration-  related  activities  for 
entertainment while also exploring or discussing migration topics. 

41 

 
 
 
 
These  types  of  events  were  seen  to  increase  attendance,  engagement  and  retention  of 
campaign  messages.  For  events  that  were  not  interactive  by  nature,  for  example,  theatre 
performances, key informants recommended follow-on Q&A sessions after. In contrast, some 
respondents in FGDs and IDIs noted that larger events can sometimes discourage potential 
migrants from openly discussing their plans or asking questions. 54 

Some campaigns found that strategic partnerships with organisations and individuals that are 
trusted by the primary audience (celebrities, returnees, local leaders) were an important tool 
for  driving  event  attendance  and  building  trust.  However,  key  informants  also  noted  that  to 
benefit from the trust-building potential of partnerships and community members participating 
in  events,  campaign  implementers  needed  to  tailor  event  activities  specifically  to  the  local 
context. 

3.2.3. Social media 

 Findings 

Social media was an effective tool for campaigns if they wanted to reach large audiences fast 
with certain messages and did not aim for behavioural change. Among campaigns analysed, 
project documents as well as key informants mentioned the large reach of their social media 
channels. One key informant from an implementing agency noted that social media is cost-
effective since it is “a cheap method to reach a lot of people”. 55 This was confirmed by survey 
data:  more  than  half  of  the  respondents  said  that  they  used  social  media  as  a  source  of 
migration information. 

Respondents underlined that if social media is used as a channel, it should be as interactive 
and as engaging as possible. They recommended using animations or videos, particularly for 
less educated audiences. 

However,  social  media  was  not  an  effective  channel  to  achieve  attitudinal  or  behavioural 
change: 

54 IDI, 3, Phase 1 
55 KII 15, Phase 1 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
•  There  were  limited  opportunities  for  two-way  interaction  beyond  interactions  in 
Facebook comments and few campaigns found it effective to engage in conversations 
with migrants in those comments. 

•  The  data  showed  that  while  most  respondents  used  social  media,  a  considerably 
smaller percentage said that they trusted social media. Given that social media is highly 
accessible,  as  a  channel  it  was  also  sometimes  regarded  suspiciously  by  migrants, 
who expressed that sometimes they can’t tell if a particular page is real or a fake news 
outlet. Considering the importance of trust, this indicated that social media on its own 
was unlikely to change attitudes or behaviour. 

• 

Implementers  could  not  provide  evidence  for  effectiveness  of  social  media  beyond 
generic  reach,  Facebook  engagements  or  the  type  of  comments  received.  The 
possibilities  for  M&E  in  social  media  did  not  provide  opportunities  for  measuring 
change. 

Therefore and as emphasised by key informants, social media was most useful as a supporting 
channel  to  reinforce  campaign  messages  across  all  campaigns.  In  Phase  1  and  Phase  2, 
respondents in in-depth interviews said that the credibility of any campaign information was 
highly  dependent  on  being  able  to  verify  the  same  information  via  other  channels.  Many 
respondents who trusted social media said they only did so because they could also find the 
information on the news or Facebook pages for locally trusted individuals. One campaign used 
paid promotion on social media to drive demand for word-of-mouth consultations and found 
that this was highly efficient – an example of a good adaptive campaign approach to the tools 
available. 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.2.4. Mass media 

 Findings 

Most key informants said that mass media was not 
an  effective  channel  to  achieve  attitudinal  or 
behavioural change: 

•  Mass media was not considered particularly 
trustworthy by migrants. 56 Potential migrants 
surveyed in Ethiopia, Sudan and Nigeria all 
mentioned 
information  about 
irregular  migration  via  these  channels,  but 
noted  that  it  had  to  be  crosschecked  with 
other  sources  such  as  social  media  and 
word-of-mouth information. 

receiving 

•  Mass media was only suitable for one-way 
interaction  as  it  provided  extremely  limited 
opportunity for feedback. 

“On  TV,  I  have  seen  a  few 
advertisements,  but  who  cares 
those  awareness 
about  all 
messages. You trust only the one 
sitting next to you and creating an 
ideal  image  of  working  abroad 
and earning a lot of money. You 
don’t  take  those  advertisements 
seriously.  You  see,  there  are 
many advertisements and PSAs, 
but who follows those?” 

— FGD 1, Phase 1 

•  Some 

interviewees  said 

it  was  highly 
effective,  but  could  not  provide  proof.  For 
example, the effectiveness of one campaign that only used traditional media channels 
was judged as highly effective by the donor solely based on an assessment of outreach 
numbers. 

Although mass media was therefore unlikely to be an effective channel and no evidence for 
effectiveness was provided, the advantage of using mass media mentioned by key informants 
was that audiences in remote locations without internet could be reached. Therefore, some 
claimed  mass  media  was  effective  for  spreading  awareness  and  information,  but  not  for 
creating  attitudinal  or  behavioural  change.  Thus,  mass  media  suited  awareness-raising 
objectives due to its massive reach potential. 

56 Trust in mass media channels was generally low but depended on the country. In Afghanistan, 9% (45 of 516) of respondents 
mentioned television as their most trusted source of migration information, compared to an average of 3% (42 of 1504) 
in Niger, Turkey and The Gambia. Additionally, in Phase 1, according to FGD and IDI respondents, traditional media is not a 
generally trusted source of information. Respondents noted that it had to be crosschecked with other sources. 

44 

 
 
 
 
3.3. Designing messages 

Effective  message  design  involves  crafting  messaging  based  on  a  campaign’s  defined 
audiences, with a sustained focus on achieving the defined campaign objectives. Defining and 
identifying the most effective messages allows campaigns to ensure that they are delivering 
information and ultimately reach the campaign objective – a brilliantly conceived and executed 
campaign based on a poorly crafted message is at best ineffective. 

 Findings 

Campaigns’  specific  content  varied  but  usually 
included two different types of messages: 

informing 
the  risks  of 

•  Risks  messages,  which  were 
of 

a 
potential 
combination 
migrants  about 
irregular 
migration – including procedural aspects of 
the  destination 
immigration/asylum 
country 
and 
removals 
deportations)  and  the  risks  of  the  journey 
(including the risks of being trafficked). 

(including 

in 

•  Alternatives  messages, 

referring 

to 
alternatives  to  irregular  migration  as  well 
as  opportunities  in  the  home  country  and 
the  example  of  role  models  who  have 
achieved success in their home country or 
region. 

“If  you  come  and  let  them  know 
about the dangers and the risks of 
it  basically  means 
migration, 
you’re  trying  to  discourage  them 
from leaving the country. If you’re 
not giving them actual alternatives, 
it  would  sound  weird.  You  know, 
people  would  start  to  question 
your own motivation.” 

— Diaspora interview 14 

The  data  showed 
the  most  effective 
that 
messages regardless of the objective were those 
that were tailored to the individual. That is because 
what  was  most  ‘convincing’  depended  on  the 
individual. For example, while some respondents 
said that they thought it was effective to hear about 
risks and that they had changed their plans after 
hearing such stories, other respondents knew a lot 
about  risks  and  said  that  nothing  could  change 
their  determination  to  migrate.  Similarly,  most 
respondents  emphasised  that  the  only  thing  that 
would  make  them  change  their  plans  would  be 
finding alternatives at home; but for many potential 
migrants,  legal  alternatives  were  not  always  accessible.  When  legal  migration  and  local 
opportunities  were 
these  messages  was 
counterproductive and could lead to mistrust. 57 

“We  must  give  them  confidence. 
When  you  are  hungry,  when  you 
are  having  difficulties,  you  say  to 
yourself  ‘I  want  to  go,  I  want  to 
save  myself’.  But  we  have  to  tell 
them  ‘we  can  save  you  in  your 
land’.” 

the  audience,  conveying 

— Returnee interview 8 

inaccessible 

to 

Campaigns that did not provide one-on-one conversations had less opportunity to tailor their 
messages  to  the  individuals  as  described.  Data  for  this  report  showed  other  themes  that 

57 Seefar (2020), “Study on best practices in irregular migration information campaigns Phase 1 Interim Report”. 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
characterised  the  most  effective  messages  and  also  apply  to  messages  posted  on  social 
media, for example: 

•  Accuracy: Key informants often said that being able to provide information that can be 

source-checked elsewhere was crucial for building trust among audiences. 

•  Credibility: Some key informants emphasised the need to ensure that the information 
was  trustworthy  which  could  partly  be  achieved  by  using  participatory  design 
approaches and using trusted voices. 

•  Relevance: Key informants noted a need to adapt messages to the cultural context of 

their audiences. 

•  Balance:  Implementers  emphasised  that  campaigns  should  balance  messages  on 
risks and alternatives to prevent audiences perceiving a campaign as being aimed at 
deterrence. 

•  Hope:  Key  informants  recommended  including  content  on  optimistic  role  models, 
inspirational themes and a focus on finding hope and concrete avenues for pursuing 
alternatives  to  irregular  migration.  Many  implementers  mentioned  the  importance  of 
raising optimism about prospects in the home country. In the survey, potential migrant 
respondents who were more optimistic about their future were more likely to say that 
they would stay in their home country if there was a change in circumstances. 58 Even 
for respondents who had already started their journey, increased optimism for future 
job opportunities at home was highly correlated with considering returning home. 59 

This study did not assess the message design of individual campaigns. That is because none 
of  the  campaigns,  with  one  exception,  presented  M&E  plans  that  allowed  an  evaluation  of 
messages  against  relevant  criteria.  However,  there  was  an  indicator  that  in  principle  the 
overwhelming majority of campaigns were able to adapt messaging to changed circumstances; 
of the campaigns which were ongoing when the COVID-19 crisis hit, all but one adapted their 
messaging  to  spread  information  about  the  risks  of  COVID-19.  That  is  not  to  say  that  the 
adapted messaging was necessarily as effective as it could have been; adapted messaging 

58 70% (212 of 304) of respondents who were very optimistic about the future said that they would consider staying in their home 
country if there was a change (e.g. economic situation in the country improves), compared to 51% (141 of 277) who were not 
optimistic about the future. 
59 69% (99 of 144) of transit migrant respondents who were very optimistic about their job prospects at home were considering 
going home, compared to 30% (186 of 613) of respondents who were not optimistic at all. 

46 

 
 
 
was focused on COVID-19 prevention strategies, and lacked context-specific elements such 
as information on the impact of COVID-19 on migration routes. 

3.4. Choosing a messenger 

After selecting campaign audiences, channels and messages, the next step is to decide who 
is delivering the message. Even if a message is well-crafted, it is unlikely to have an impact if 
it is not channelled via a credible figure or voice. Thus, the messenger is as important as the 
message. 

3.4.1. Branding 

 Findings 

All key informants emphasised that migrants’ trust in a campaign decreased if it was branded 
in connection with a European government. 60 Most campaigns operated under a brand that 
was  associated  with  an  international  organisation,  with  only  a  few  cases  where  campaigns 
were also publicly associated with a government. 

The  most  effective  strategy  for  developing  a  trusted  brand  was  a continuous  presence  and 
sharing beneficiary testimonials. Two campaigns had been working in the primary audience 
communities for over five years and shared how the campaign staff had gained trust over time, 

60 For example, KII 15, Phase 1 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
above  all  by  incorporating  their  audiences’  stories  into  the  published  content  on  their 
channels.61  Other  trust-building  strategies  included  collaboration  with  local  partners  (see 
below).  The  data  did  not  allow  an  assessment across  all  campaigns  on  the  degree  of  their 
audiences’ trust. 

Factual information on, for example, visa or asylum policies provided by destination country 
governments  on  official  channels  could  be  effective.  Data  from  the  survey  showed  that 
destination country embassies and governments were strongly trusted by almost half of the 
respondents  for  such  factual  migration  information.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  governments 
addressed such information to migrants alongside a recommendation on behaviour (e.g. ‘you 
should stay home because your chances of asylum are low’), even the factual information on 
government policies was not trusted. 

3.4.2. Community influencers and local community 

 Findings 

Many campaigns reported that choosing local partners as messengers was effective. Typical 
partners included CSOs, NGOs, community members and local authorities. Local partnerships 
were effective because: 

•  They enhanced credibility through their familiarity. The importance of sharing the same 
culture,  religion,  or  ethnicity  were  all  deemed  crucial  to  build  familiarity  and  deliver 
messages effectively. That is because the messenger had a frictionless understanding 
of 
that 
communicating strategically means carefully selecting authentic, trusted and relatable 
messengers  who  can  speak  to  the  campaign  audience  in  their  own  words  and 
language. 62 

the  audience’s  experience.  Practitioners  and 

researchers  agreed 

•  They had the necessary knowledge and presence in the communities. Members of the 
local  community  could  leverage  their  community  links  to  help  potential  migrants 
consider their options and make more informed decisions. 63 Key informants, especially 

61 KII 23, Phase 2 
62  Sachrajda,  A.  and  Baumgartner,  L.  (2019),  “More  than  words:  How  communicating  our  shared  values  and  forging  mutual 
connections can bring hope for a new tomorrow” 
63  Schans  and  Optekamp  (2016),  “Raising  awareness,  changing  behavior?  Combating  irregular  migration  through  information 
campaigns”. 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
field  staff,  highlighted  the  use  of  local  languages  and  contextual  knowledge  as 
particularly effective. 

Most of the campaigns understood this as best practice and used local messengers in their 
campaigns. For campaigns with in-person activities, some campaigns identified and trained 
specific  members  of  the  community  who  were  already  known  to  be  influential. 64  Many 
campaigns partnered with local radio stations or other local media outlets to share information. 
Similarly, many events were run in collaboration with local organisations. 

However,  the  data  also  showed  that  trust  in  local  actors  varied  across  contexts.  In  some 
contexts,  religious  leaders  and  communities  were  cited  as  being  particularly  effective  in 
spreading messages and exerting influence. In Nigeria, one respondent said they most trusted 
the community at their mosque for information. 65 Some respondents in FGDs and IDIs did not 
consider community influencers – such as local authorities, religious leaders, and village chiefs 
– as particularly trustworthy. 66 Thus, the most effective campaigns were those that knew well 
the most trusted sources among their participant communities. 

3.4.3. Returnees and diaspora 

 Findings 

Data  collected  for  this  study  showed  that  migration  experience  could  be  powerful  in 
communicating  with  potential  migrants.  Returnees  and  diaspora  respondents  stated  that 
having  migration  experience  helped  in  many  ways  to  make  them  more  effective  when 
interacting with potential and transit migrants. Returnees and diaspora mentioned that they felt 
a  sense  of  familiarity  in  interacting  with  audiences  and  their  experiences,  understanding 
nuances  that  might  be  missed  by  an  outsider. 67  Many  mentioned  in  interviews  that  when 

64 Altrogge and Zanker (2019), “The Political Economy of Migration Governance in the Gambia”. 
65 IDI, 3, Phase 1 
66 FGD 1 with potential migrants, Phase 1 
67 Returnees/Diaspora IDI 4, 10, 16 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
speaking  with  migrants,  they  felt  that  they  were 
better  able  to  relate  to  the  audiences  they  were 
speaking 
feeling  an 
“emotional connection” to audiences. 68 

to.  Many  mentioned 

Survey  respondents  also  stated  that  hearing 
stories  of  successful  returnees  was  effective  in 
changing how they thought about migration. Some 
“are  more 
respondents  said 
experienced  than  any  NGO  worker”  because 
people  working  for  campaigns  have  not  been 
abroad 
experiences 
had  migration 
or 
themselves.69 

returnees 

that 

“In  any  form  of  storytelling,  when 
the individual is telling a personal 
story...you  drive  it  with  all  of  your 
body.  Experience 
the  best 
teacher. I think this is it. Your voice 
changes if you have a memory of 
an event.” 

is 

— Returnee interview 10 

At the same time, interviews also showed there is 
a  danger  that  those  migration  experiences  can 
backfire if returnees and diaspora advise against migrating: 

•  First, returnees are still stigmatised in many communities and interviewed returnees 
mentioned that there was a small subset of migrants who stigmatised them. 70 Those 
who had returned from abroad prematurely or without accumulating expansive wealth 
were perceived as having ‘failed’, with the assumption that if someone were wealthy 
and successful abroad they wouldn’t make the decision to return home. 71 There was 
also the unmet expectation that the gains from migration would be shared among many 
dependents back home. 

•  Second,  some  diaspora  members  that  were  interviewed  spoke  of  difficulties 
communicating with migrants at home. They said potential migrants tended to think that 
diaspora messengers simply wished to keep migrants “beneath” them by encouraging 
them not to migrate. Survey and IDI respondents noted that they were primarily looking 
for information from returnees and diaspora on how to successfully migrate and trusted 
them only for this kind of information. They were distrustful of any messages from these 
groups  that  would  deter  them  from  migrating. 72  In  the  words  of  an  Eritrean  transit 
migrant in Sudan, “I literally used to dismiss my diaspora relatives’ alarmist advice as 
uncredible.  Listening  to  their  narratives  back  then,  I  used  to  say,  ‘If  living  abroad  is 
extremely challenging, why wouldn’t they return back home for good?’” 73 

Furthermore, the data showed that having migration experiences did not characterise the most 
effective messengers, but rather the following characteristics were valued: 

•  Motivation:  Returnees  and  diaspora  involved  in  campaigns  were  very  motivated  by 
their  job  because  they  wanted  to  prevent  others  from  experiencing  what  they  had 
experienced  in  their  own  migration  journeys.  Other  field  staff  spoke  about  similar 
motivations and there was no indication that levels of motivation differed to the extent 
that it would make returnees and diaspora members more effective messengers than 
field staff with no migration history. 

•  Community  influence:  Some  returnees  also  mentioned  they  had  credibility  due  to 
their status within their community, built from previous business or non-profit ventures, 

68 Returnees/Diaspora IDI 3, 4, 15, 17 
69 FGD 3, Phase 1 
70 Returnee/Diaspora IDI 5, 7 
71 Returnee/Diaspora IDI 5, 13 
72 This is in line with other recent research that showed that Afghan Interviewees were likely to dismiss information perceived to 
counter their ambitions; Mixed Migration Centre (2020), Navigating Mixed Messages Can diaspora-led communications reduce 
Afghans’ irregular migration risks? 
73 IDI 7, Phase 1 

50 

 
 
 
 
community involvement, or other means. 74 Beyond their experiences as returnees and 
diaspora,  their  ties  within  the  community  and  their  reputation  mattered  significantly 
regarding how people perceived the message delivered by them. 

•  Relevance of experience/story: Several interviewees mentioned that what was more 
important than being a returnee or a diaspora member was being a returnee or diaspora 
member with experiences that were most similar and relevant for the audience. 

This suggests that a member of the local community who has knowledge of the specific 
context the audience is interested in, has more credibility than a returnee who has a 
very different experience to the individual receiving the message. 

•  Communication  skills:  Returnees  and  diaspora  members  emphasised 

the 
importance  of  being  kind  and  patient.  They  mentioned  that  for  information  to  be 
effective, migrants “have to feel comfortable enough to talk about whatever they want” 
and this required good communication skills. 

The data also showed that if there were no support structures in place, hiring returnees and 
diaspora members could also have negative effects. On the one hand, many returnees spoke 
about  their  experience  with  positive  traits  such  as  the  ability  to  self-organise,  participate  in 
public speaking and even developing a sense of purpose after returning to their home country. 75 
On  the  other  hand,  many  also  mentioned  the  distress  of  having  to  recount  their  traumatic 
experiences. 76  77 78 

The study supports some general findings from the 
15 of the 20 campaigns which involved returnees 
or diaspora members either as direct messengers 
or by incorporating their stories as part of videos 
and online publications: 

Campaigns  did  not  properly  support  any  of  their 
effectiveness  claims  about  the  use  of  returnees 
and diaspora members. Campaigns relied on the 
argument  that  people  back  home  would  listen  to 
people  who  have  already  made  the  journey  and 
therefore diaspora members and returnees can be 
key influencers in migrant decision making. They 
did not provide any evidence that this was true. 

It  was  difficult  for  campaigns  to  recruit  diaspora 
who  reached  Europe  through  irregular  methods, 
though the experiences of these individuals would 
be the most relevant and familiar to the campaign 
audience.  Campaigns  gravitated  toward  hiring 
diaspora who were more educated, successful or 
arrived using legal methods. This frequently meant 
they hired from a different socioeconomic class of 
migrants than the primary audience.79 

Training for diaspora members and returnees was 
generally done well, even though the guidance and 
training  that  returnees  and  diaspora  received  on 

“There is a handful of people who 
don’t  believe  you,  who  say  that 
you are only here because you are 
not 
you  were 
fortunate,  you  would  not  be  here, 
talking 
irregular 
to  me  about 
migration.” 

fortunate. 

If 

— Returnee interview 15 

“My first awareness, it went badly, 
I couldn’t finish. I felt all the things 
I  had  experienced  […]  When  I 
came back I couldn’t even explain 
what I had been through [...] Now I 
am  no 
longer  ashamed  and 
afraid.” 

— Returnee interview 1 

74 Returnees/Diaspora IDI 18 
75 Returnee/diaspora IDI 5, 13, 17 
76 Returnee/diaspora IDI 3, 4, 6 
77 Returnee/diaspora IDI 5, 7, 13, 16. 
78 See also: IOM Senegal MaM evaluation: “Data showed that 29.7 per cent of people who were not exposed to the MaM content 
stated that returning migrants should be “ashamed” of themselves” 
79 Returnee/diaspora IDI 4 

51 

 
 
 
the types of messages to deliver varied. While some interviewees said they did not receive 
much guidance, and that interaction with the implementers was more informal, others were 
provided with comprehensive training on messaging. There was no  information on possible 
psychological support that was offered. 

3.5. Supporting beyond information 

Neither protection objectives nor migration management objectives can be decisively met in 
the long term by information-sharing alone. Other activities beyond information-sharing can be 
appropriate in certain circumstances, where they align with the campaign’s objectives. This 
can potentially address some of the common challenges that irregular migration awareness-
raising  campaigns  experience,  such  as  migrants  experiencing  difficulty  identifying  legal 
alternatives when they exist.80 Without addressing the root causes of irregular migration, it is 
likely that departure can only be delayed until a suitable alternative arises. 

 Findings 

Data from the survey confirmed that information may often not be enough to impact long-term 
change for campaign audiences. In the survey, the majority of respondents across all countries 
said that if they were offered assistance to build livelihoods at home, their community would 
change the way it thinks about migration. 81 An IDI respondent in The Gambia pointed out that 
support in finding a job or creating a business locally can help: “Some of my friends as soon 
as they saw me making money, it helped change their mind to see I am doing something.” 82 

80  Mixed  Migration  Centre  (2020),  Navigating  Mixed  Messages  Can  diaspora-led  communications  reduce  Afghans’  irregular 
migration risks? 
81 Phase 2 report 
82 IDI 4, Phase 2 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
the 

survey 
Furthermore,  almost  half  of 
respondents agreed that new information was not 
enough  to  change  the  way  their  community 
thought  about  migration.  Key 
informants 
acknowledged that as long as original reasons for 
migration persisted, information alone may only be 
one influencing factor on migration plans. 83 

Only one campaign provided concrete support that 
directly  impacted  livelihood  opportunities.  They 
provided  an  opportunity  to  enrol  in  a  tuition-free 
vocational  skills  training  programme  and  some 
cash  for  a  bus  ticket  to  a  neighbouring  country 
where they could find jobs. Most other campaigns 
relied  on  referrals  to  partner  organisations  who 
provided livelihoods, jobs, skills-building and legal 
migration support. Some campaigns that had one-
on-one  interactions  could  provide  more  concrete 
support  –  e.g.  tips  on  creating  a  CV  –  but  most 
campaigns  struggled  to  address  the  need  for 
around 
realistic, 
alternatives  in  campaign  messaging. 84  Similarly, 
only  a  minority  of  survey  respondents  who  had 
been  exposed 
remembered 
receiving information on alternatives, 85 most likely 
due to the lack of it. 

to  campaigns 

information 

actionable 

the 

“Even 
awareness 
best 
campaigns,  if  nothing  changes  at 
local  level  (economic  and  social 
factors)  at  the  base  of  migration 
motivation, would be not useful.” 

— KII 10 

for 

“They  should  provide  practical 
alternatives;  this  will  be  the  one 
and  only  solution 
irregular 
migrations.  They  should  provide 
job  facilities,  educational  support 
and understand the basic needs of 
the  migrants  who  are  migrating. 
they  have  completely 
When 
understood 
the 
the  pain  and 
reason  for  the  pain  then  we  can 
prescribe the medicine for it.” 

— IDI 2, Phase 2 

83 KII 14, Phase 2 
84 Seefar (2020), “Study on best practices in irregular migration information campaigns Phase 1 Interim Report”. 
85 Only 26% (275 of 1,039) of respondents who were exposed to a campaign recalled receiving information about legal migration 
alternatives, and 31% (320 of 1,039) recalled receiving information on home country opportunities. 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
54 

 
 
 
4. Designing an effective monitoring and evaluation plan 

4.1. Recognising the value of M&E 

Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) is important because it: 

•  allows  the  implementer  to  make  statements  about  whether  the  objective  has  been 

achieved 

•  contributes to evidence-based and effective learning and decision-making 
•  ensures accountability to donors and other potential key stakeholders 
•  supports decisions of scaling and funding 

 Findings 

Among the campaign sample, the emphasis on M&E varied even though this had generally 
improved  over  time.  Most  campaigns  analysed  in  Phase  1  did  not  have  any  M&E  plan.  In 
Phase  2,  this  number  had  increased  to  eight  out  of  ten  campaigns,  although  variations  in 
quality were present (see next sections for details on different components of their M&E plan). 
This  is  supported  by  existing  literature  on  irregular  migration  awareness-raising  campaigns 
showing that M&E is mostly lacking or inadequate. This meant that many campaigns could not 
adequately assess the success of the campaign. 

Many campaigns claimed effectiveness without a solid evidence base. Project documents and 
key informants often emphasised the success of the campaign while impact evaluations, where 
they were conducted, showed that objectives were only partially met (or not met at all). In some 
cases, key informants talked about the campaign being “highly effective” in the absence of any 
data  to  support  these  statements.  Key  informants  highlighted  that  campaigns  had  changed 
behaviours although evaluations could not provide evidence accordingly. Some key informants 
referred to the decrease in irregular migration departures and asylum applications as evidence 
of campaign effectiveness. 86 This highlighted a lack of understanding of what constitutes good 
evidence among implementers and donors. 

Similarly, KIIs also revealed a lack of understanding of the importance of investing adequate 
resources into M&E. Donors, for example, questioned the use of expensive M&E and noted 
that impact evaluation was difficult. One donor pointed out that there was a common belief that 
M&E was costly and took too much time. Due to the logistics of funding cycles, donors often 
made  decisions  on  funding  before  final  evaluation  results  were  available.  Implementers 
pointed out that a lack of budget was the most common reason for not doing “better” M&E. 87 
Even though key informants agreed on the need to invest more resources (time, money and 
trained staff) into monitoring and evaluation, interviews also showed that donors in particular 
had  no  frame  of  reference  for  assessing  the  value  of  any  M&E  plan.  In  addition,  few  key 
informants could provide specific recommendations on M&E strategies, suggesting there was 
a general lack of understanding of methodologies and opportunities. 

86 KII 17, 8, 10, Phase 1 
87 KII 10 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
 
There was also some indication that M&E was associated with a lack of trust between donor 
and implementer. One key informant pointed out that “there is an existing invisible pressure 
where implementers think they have to overperform and show what has been achieved.” 88 KIIs 
revealed a sense that donor-commissioned evaluations were used to counter distrust between 
implementer and donor as opposed to being the result of carefully weighed costs and benefits 
of donor-commissioned vs implementer-commissioned evaluation. 

88 KII 28 

56 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.2. Developing a Theory of Change  

In order to develop a sound M&E plan and methods, the very first step is to develop a ToC at 
the inception stage. A ToC helps to articulate the purpose of a project and how it will achieve 
it in a clear and convincing way. It outlines what the campaign will do to achieve its goal. It 
describes the logic or causality of how interventions bring change. In the process, it highlights 
the assumptions that the campaign’s success depends on. If an assumption in the ToC is not 
shared by a stakeholder, the ToC provides a clear mechanism for identifying this and resolving 
the issue. 

  Findings 

Only 5 out of 20 campaigns included a well formulated ToC. Only one campaign had a ToC 
among the Phase 1 campaigns, while 4 had one in Phase 2. The ToCs varied in their format 
and level of detail. Campaigns with a well formulated ToC also tended to have a more elaborate 
description of their M&E methods used. 

In  KIIs,  implementers  and  donors  had  a  limited  understanding  of  the  importance  of  a  good 
ToC.  ToCs  were  never  mentioned  when 
interviewees  were  asked  about  possible 
improvements in or crucial elements of M&E. When explicitly asked for it, even M&E staff rarely 
emphasised  the  ToC’s  importance  or  reflected  on  the  validity  of  an  existing  ToC.  This  also 
meant that where they existed ToCs were likely not being questioned by donors, nor were they 
being used effectively to guide campaign design, implementation and evaluation. Thus, despite 
their  crucial  role  in  any  M&E  plan,  ToCs  were  not  given  enough  emphasis  within  strategic 
communications campaigns. 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.3. Developing a results framework 

After developing a ToC, the next step in designing a M&E plan is to determine how to measure 
progress  toward  campaign  objectives  through  a  results  framework.  The  results  framework 
demonstrates the logic of how inputs will lead to outputs, which in turn lead to the outcomes, 
and  ultimately  the  desired  objective. 89  It  involves  identifying  at  each  step  the  causal 
relationships and assumptions and the indicators defined to track progress. These tools ensure 
that all campaign elements are logically conceptualised towards the overall agreed objective(s) 
and that measurable definitions of effectiveness exist. 

 Findings 

15  out  of  20  campaigns  had  a  results  framework.  Six  campaigns  had  a  results  framework 
among the Phase 1 campaigns, while 9 had one in Phase 2. The results frameworks varied in 
their format and level of detail and varied in their quality based on outputs and outcomes. 

4.3.1. Inputs, Outputs and Outcomes 

 Findings 

Most campaigns clearly displayed their inputs (resources) and their outputs (their activities) in 
their results frameworks. There was a large variation in the number of outputs – one campaign 
had more than 20 outputs, for example, compared to another that had just four. One social 
media campaign had an output indicator that counted the number of social media posts over 
the project period. All outputs were clearly described and target values were identified. 

89 Better Evaluation (2015), “Logframe” 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
However,  when  looking  at  the  outcome  indicators,  campaigns  varied  a  lot  in  terms  of  their 
quality. On the one hand, some campaigns had high quality measures for their outcomes. They 
usually revolved around measures of awareness, attitude and behavioural change and were 
frequently quantitative in nature (see Examples in Table 2 below). 

Table 2: Common campaign outcomes from studied campaigns 

On  the  other  hand,  some  campaigns  had  low  quality  measures  for  their  outcomes.  For 
example, some campaigns continued to use outputs as proxies for outcomes. These indicators 
did  not  allow 
increase  and 
for  evidence-based  conclusions  about  awareness 
attitudinal/behavioural  change.  For  example,  one  project  used  the  number  of  well-known 
personalities involved in awareness-raising sessions as a proxy for increased awareness. For 
another  campaign,  an  output  was  conceptualised  as:  “Enhanced  knowledge  of  gender 
sensitive migration related concepts,” measured by five indicators that were a mix of people 
who attended a training session and a comparison of average training scores before and after 
the training session. 

Campaigns  also  struggled  to  measure  behavioural  change.  A  typical  desired  behavioural 
change was a “change of migration plans”. The most commonly used measure for behaviours 
were intentions. However, even though there is evidence that suggests that intentions are a 
useful  predictor  of  behaviour,  it  remained  unclear  whether  campaigns  actually  have  an 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
influence  on  who  migrates. 90  In  the  absence  of  opportunities  to  measure  actual  behaviour, 
some campaigns had measured steps taken to plan migration (e.g. contact with a smuggler, 
application for a visa etc.). The weakness here was that the campaigns focused on a behaviour 
that was not the ultimate objective and had an unknown relationship with the ultimate objective. 

important  and  relevant 

As  for  outputs,  few  campaigns  went  beyond  more  traditional  indicators  to  provide  deeper 
insights into the effectiveness of campaigns. For example, while measuring risk awareness 
was 
in  awareness,  measuring  risk 
to  understand  changes 
internalisation  in  addition  to  risk  awareness  may  be  more  appropriate  to  assess  attitudinal 
change. Many potential migrants were aware that irregular migration carries risks but chose to 
ignore  or  dismiss  information  because  they  did  not  believe  the  risks  would  apply  to  them 
personally. 

4.3.2. Social media indicators 

 Findings 

Even  though  most  campaigns  had  social  media  components,  their  indicators  for  the  social 
media component were limited. Facebook shares, likes and engagements did not offer insights 
into how messages were received by the audiences. M&E plans for social media components 
were  focused  on  measuring  reach.  While  Facebook  shares,  likes  and  engagements  were 
useful to see if posts were popular, many key informants criticised their utility, as such metrics 
provided  no  insight  into  reactions  to  posts  and  the  subsequent  impact  on  a  recipient  after 
seeing a post. Furthermore, average reach numbers are frequently skewed by the popularity 
of individual posts due to the high variation between posts.91 

There was only one campaign that reflected adequately on the limits of social media metrics 
available and suggested some advanced and better methods for analysis. These suggested 
methods included looking at daily visits of a Facebook page in conjunction with monthly targets 
so monthly numbers would not be skewed by the popularity of individual posts. 92 They also 
recommended an in-depth analysis of Facebook comments and sentiment analysis. 

90 IOM Global Migration Data Analysis Centre (2020), “Assessing the impact of awareness-raising campaigns on potential migrants 
– what we have learned so far”. 
91 Campaign 6, evaluation report, Phase 2 
92 Campaign 6, evaluation report, Phase 2 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
However, even an analysis of Facebook comments or sentiment analysis was limited because 
not all individuals who read a post engage with it. Those who engage may differ from those 
who do not (e.g. in terms of their gender, education, migration plans). Therefore, an analysis 
cannot  make  conclusions  that  generalise  to  all  individuals  reached,  since  it  will  not  include 
those who do not engage with the post. Further, social media M&E was limited as there are 
not good methods available to provide evidence on the impact of social media on attitudinal or 
behavioural change. 

4.4. Creating a data collection plan 

The  indicators  developed  as  part  of  the  results  framework  dictate  the  kind  of  information 
needed in order to measure effectiveness. Thus, the next step is to ensure that campaigns 
have the tools to get this information. If there are no good data collection methods chosen, the 
best formulated indicators are useless because drawing any conclusions ultimately depends 
on  the  implementers’  ability  to  collect  data  on  those  indicators  in  a  methodologically  sound 
way. The collected data helps to: 

•  manage campaign implementation 
•  monitor progress towards campaign objectives 
•  adapt to changing situations on the ground 
• 

report on expected and actual impacts of a campaign and the factors which led to such 
an outcome 

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Graphic 5: Data collection methods used by studied campaigns 

4.4.1. Monitoring approach 

 Findings 

In both phases, campaign monitoring activities were successful in determining if the campaign 
outputs (i.e. activities) had been delivered as planned. Monitoring activities mostly included 
producing reports of completed campaign activities and the number of people who had been 
reached. 

However, existing monitoring methods meant that statements about effectiveness in reaching 
campaign objectives were limited for ongoing campaigns. Interviewees also almost exclusively 
mentioned  campaign  reach  or  completed  activities  (i.e.  outputs)  when  asked  whether  the 
campaign had been effective. One implementer, for example, pointed to the effectiveness of 
billboards that had been most effective since they had been placed at strategic locations and 

62 

 
 
 
 
had  been  seen  by  many. 93  94  Some  campaigns  collected  audience  feedback  directly  after  a 
specific  campaign  activity  asking  for  comments  to  improve  campaign  activities  and  assess 
knowledge  gaps  and  needs.  Even  though  campaigns  were  very  good  at  tracking  project 
progress in terms of completed outputs/activities, the monitoring strategies were limited to the 
extent that they couldn’t offer insights into progress towards reaching the ultimate campaign 
objectives. A lack of effort to collect information, such as the immediate impact of the campaign 
on knowledge or behaviours, meant that implementers knew little about whether a campaign 
had been effective with regards to their desired outcomes and no mechanisms existed that 
would allow for learning or adaptation while the campaign was ongoing. 

Similarly, data collection that would allow learning and systematic identification of components 
in  need  of  adaptation  was  limited.  Some  implementers  emphasised  the  importance  of 
collecting continuous feedback and adapting along the way. However, “continuous feedback” 
referred  mainly  to  qualitative  insights,  reports  from  partners  in  the  field  or  the  popularity  of 
posts on social media. Furthermore, none of the key informants mentioned that these reports 
had led to big adjustments in the campaign strategy with the exception of having to adapt to 
the  onset  of  COVID-19,  which  forced  many  implementers  to  adapt  their  campaigns  rapidly. 
This meant there was no systematic monitoring to routinely discover possible problem areas 
early during the campaign. 

4.4.2. Choose cost-effective evaluation methods 

 Findings 

Among  campaigns  that  had  already  completed  their  evaluation  (Phase  1),  few  campaigns 
employed  a  rigorous  impact  evaluation  that  could  assess  the  contribution  of  a  particular 
intervention  to  expected  changes.  Only  5  out  of  10  campaigns  had  completed  impact 
evaluations by the time of the study. The other five did not plan to conduct an evaluation. Most 
of the campaign documents did not provide much detail on their data collection methods. Only 
three campaigns provided a clear description of evaluation methods used in the documents 
available (e.g. study designs, sampling strategy). This did not allow for a positive assessment 
of their methodological rigour. 

93 KII 1, Phase 2 
94  Other  implementers  often  mentioned  the  popularity  of  their  posts  on  social  media,  emphasising  the  high  number  of  post 
engagements. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
time 

the  description  of  methodologies 

Comparing Phase 1 and Phase 2 campaigns, it was notable that 
over 
for  evaluation 
improved. As none of the evaluations had started at the time of this 
study’s fieldwork, it was not possible to judge the quality of their 
outcomes  or  whether  planned  evaluation  methods  were 
implemented  according  to  quality  standards.  Judging  from  their 
planned data collection, the following became apparent: 

•  Most  campaigns  described  their  planned  methodologies 
well in their project documents and planned data collection 
tools  were  adequate  to  measure  the  indicators  that  they 
planned to measure. 

•  They also indicated a plan to use a mix of quantitative and 
qualitative methods, which is commonly described as best 
practice in the literature. Mixed methods approaches at the 
endline  combining  quantitative  data  collection  with 
recommended  by  key 
qualitative  evidence  were 
informants. 

•  Only  two  campaigns  had  no  clear  evaluation  methods 
planned,  or  at  least  did  not  refer  to  them  in  their  project 
documents. 

There was some disagreement among key informants about the 
necessity of randomised controlled trials (RCTs). On the one hand, 
some  referred  to  it  as  the  gold  standard.  However,  others 
emphasised the ethical concerns around the application of RCTs 
and mentioned that RCTs were costly and could be too resource-
heavy for most implementers. While there was some evidence that 
RCTs could be applied to migration communications campaigns, 
high  costs,  limited  applicability  to  long-running  interventions  and 
limited generalisability suggest there are limited circumstances in 
which the outcome justifies the investment. 

Implementers encountered the following challenges when conducting surveys for evaluation 
purposes with campaign audiences, and recommended mitigation measures accordingly: 

•  Migrants are a mobile population and in evaluation it is often hard to reach campaign 

audiences at the end of any campaign. 

•  Migratory decisions are based on a multitude of variables, some of which may change 

over time. 

•  Questions on migration plans are a sensitive topic and migrants may not want to reveal 

their true plans in evaluation surveys. 

•  Campaigns  that  conduct  baseline  and  endline  studies  often  struggle  with  sampling 
approaches. In practice, one can often not be sure if the sample is representative of 
the campaign audience.95 

95 KII 14 

64 

 
 
 
 
4.5. Message testing 

Messages  do  not  only  need  to  be  pre-tested  during  pre-campaign  research  but  need 
continuous testing to ensure that they continue to be effective as circumstances on the ground 
are  changing.  The  context  of  most  impactful  messages  will  almost  certainly  change  in  any 
campaign that is longer than a few months. 

 Findings 

Results from the survey showed the importance of testing messages beyond self-reporting. In 
the survey self-reported levels of perceived effectiveness did not always appear to provide an 
accurate  picture  of  the  actual  effectiveness  of  risk  messaging;  the  majority  of  survey 
respondents strongly agreed that risk messages would change the way  they thought about 
migration. 96  However,  higher  self-perceived  knowledge  of  the  risks  correlated  with  survey 
respondents  being  more  likely  to  think  that  irregular  migration  was  more  achievable.  This 
finding  was  also  replicated  in  an  experiment  conducted  in  Gambia,  which  suggested  that 
“migrants overestimate the risk of death caused by irregular migration and that providing more 
accurate information increases their intention to migrate irregularly.” 

Few campaigns tested their messages systematically, either before the campaign started or 
during  implementation.  One  campaign,  for  example,  showed  videos  to  a  sample  of  school 
students and asked them about their reactions before the campaign started. Other message 
testing  involved  focus  group  discussions  (FGDs)  asking  respondents  for  their  reactions  to 
certain messages or anecdotal evidence from the field. Effectiveness of messages on social 
media was usually judged by the popularity of the post. These methods were useful in providing 
evidence  on  initial  audience  reactions  but  were  limited  by  their  reliance  on  subjective  self-
reports as opposed to more objective measures such as observations of genuine attitudinal or 

96 When respondents were asked how effective they thought hearing stories of migrants who almost died on their migration journey 
would be on changing the way they thought about migration, 42% (848 of 2,013) said it would be very effective. 38% (764 of 
2,013) said that it would be somewhat effective. 

65 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
behavioural measures. During implementation, none of the campaigns re-tested or adapted 
their messaging based on the observed effect of their messages. 

The  only  messaging  updates  that  were  reported  by  campaign  implementers  was  updating 
social media messages based on the latest news and post engagements. Most campaigns 
seemed therefore to lack flexibility and potential to adapt rapidly to the local context during 
implementation. Such methods also did not provide any insight into the link between exposure 
to different messages and attitudes and behaviours. 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
67 

 
 
 
5. Conclusion 

Approaches  to  designing,  delivering  and  assessing  irregular  migration  campaigns  have 
diversified  over  the  past  five  years  since  the  EU  and  Member  States  began  funding  these 
initiatives. However, a persistent lack of evidence to guide decisions on planning, implementing 
and evaluating irregular migration awareness-raising campaigns remains. 

The  analysis  of  20  irregular  migration  awareness-raising  campaigns  funded  by  the  EU  and 
Member States, alongside quantitative and qualitative data collection with potential and transit 
migrants  in  origins  and  transit  countries,  has  identified  key  lessons.  This  in  turn  provides 
information  on  best  practices  and  identifies  which  design,  delivery  and  M&E  methods  work 
best for irregular migration awareness-raising campaigns. 

This report shows that there are opportunities to improve at each stage of an irregular migration 
awareness-raising campaign. Some of the most important lessons learnt include: 

The attachments to this study include a ‘toolkit’ to help implementers and donors resolve these 
most  consistent  issues.  This  is  important  because  the  study  also  concluded  that  such 
campaigns can have a great impact if implemented well. 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
69 

 
 
 
6. Toolkit for developing and designing irregular migration 

awareness-raising campaigns 

If you are a donor or an implementing partner (IP) working on irregular migration awareness-
raising campaigns, this toolkit has been produced to help you to design and deliver effective 
campaigns.  

The toolkit provides templates and guidance to resolve the most common and important issues 
identified across a sample of 20 such campaigns implemented by European donors. The first 
component of this toolkit is a set of recommendations and corresponding guidance on how to 
design, implement and evaluate a campaign. The second component of this toolkit is a set of 
spreadsheet  templates  designed  to  support  IPs  and  donors  through  the  most  difficult 
components of that guidance. 

The templates guide the user on the important strategic decisions to make and the criteria and 
constraints  for  making  them.  The  bulk  of  the  toolkit  is  designed  to  support  campaign  IPs 
through strategy development and campaign evaluation, rather than implementation, as there 
are unlimited combinations of tools that might be necessary depending on the strategy taken. 

The toolkit can be used in the following different ways:  

• 

• 

• 

If you are an IP or a donor about to embark on developing a strategy, the toolkit will 
guide you and give you ideas for each key stage; what to do and how to do it. 

If  you  are  an  IP  or  a  donor  midway  through  developing  a  strategy,  the  toolkit  may 
prompt additional lines of enquiry, as well as suggesting what to do next and how to do 
it.  

If you are an IP with an existing  strategy, and a campaign is underway but a donor 
wants  to  judge  how  strong  it  is,  the  toolkit  can  be  used  to  assess  the  project 
development process against the stages described in the toolkit.  

Guidance for Designing & Evaluating Campaigns 

You should read this guide in conjunction with the final report of the study on best practices in 
irregular  migration  awareness-raising  campaigns,  which  contains  the  underlying  analysis. 
Each piece of guidance below has a reference to the appropriate section of the report where 
you  can  read  additional  context.  References  to  templates  have  also  been  provided  where 
relevant. 

1.  State clear campaign objectives based on SMART criteria 

You need to formulate campaign objectives that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, 
and testable (SMART). In particular you should clearly articulate whether: 

•  your campaign aims to raise awareness, change attitudes and/or change behaviours; 
•  you are assuming that when enough individuals change their behaviour or attitudes, 
that it will result in an associated societal-level change in behaviour or attitudes; and 

• 

the campaign is designed to have migration management or protection objectives. 

Relevant section in report: 2.1 

Template: Template 1 

70 

 
 
 
 
 
2.  Ensure donor and IP campaign objectives align 

Make sure that you have clarity on the priority objectives at the societal level. You should check 
that these priority objectives align with the campaign's objectives at the audience level.  

If you expect that that awareness change will ultimately lead to behavioural change, you need 
to include evidence of such a link in the campaign proposal. You can do this by: 

• 

including  a  Theory  of  Change  that  explains  how  awareness-raising  leads  to,  say, 
reduced migration; or 

•  citing evidence from previous studies in the same campaign locations that have found 

that awareness-raising leads to behavioural change. 

Relevant section in report: 2.1 

Template: Template 1 

3.  Clarify  hierarchy  of  objectives  when  pursuing  migration 

management and protection objectives 

You  need  to  decide  whether  the  campaign  seeks  to  prioritise  migration  management  or 
protection objectives. Based on your decisions, you should be clear about how this impacts 
your expectations in campaign design and M&E. 

If you aim to achieve migration management and protection at the same timeyou need to: 

•  analyse the trade-offs and clarify your hierarchy of objectives for the respective design 

choices; and 

•  ensure that proposal evaluation processes include a respective quality check. 

Relevant section in report: 2.2 

Template: Template 1 

4.  Develop mechanisms to test sustainability & include targets 

If sustainability is an important aspect of your campaign, you should elaborate on the approach 
and set specific goals with regards to sustainability in the inception report. This should include: 

•  a definition of sustainability; 
•  how you will address sustainability within the campaign; and  
•  how you will monitor and evaluate sustainability. 

If your campaign prioritises migration management objectives, you should consider a better 
definition of sustainability that includes the long-term availability of funding for campaigns. You 
should also ensure that you test any assumptions about sustainable impact post-campaign.  

Relevant section in report: 2.3 

Template: Templates 5 & 6 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5.  Prioritise  pre-campaign  research  only  when  available  data  on 

audience is limited 

You  should  prioritise  pre-campaign  research  when  gaps  in  the  existing  data  inhibit  your 
confidence in the reliability of your campaign design.  

Your  pre-campaign  research  should  include  a  participatory  approach  and  should  focus  on 
knowledge gaps around the following topics: 

•  Locations and audience characteristics 
•  Motivations and understanding 
•  Most effective channels 
•  Most effective messages  

If  you  can  answer  all  of  your  research  questions  with  a  desk  review,  your  pre-campaign 
research should not go beyond a desk review. You should provide justification in proposals for 
length and scope of pre-campaign research.  

Relevant section in report: 2.4 

Template: Template 2 

6.  Use cost–benefit analysis to identify priority audiences aligned with 

campaign objectives 

You should segment your audiences to identify subgroups of the overall population who are 
most  relevant  to  your  objective  and  likely  to  benefit  most  from  your  campaign  approach. 
Explain  and  provide  evidence  of  the  cost–benefit  for  selecting  a  segment(s)  in  the 
proposal/inception  report.  You  should  also  provide  justification  if  you  decide  to  include 
secondary audiences.  

Depending  on  your  campaign  objective,  directing  resources  to  a  narrower,  higher-priority 
audience can be better value for money:  

• 

• 

If your campaign is aiming to raise awareness of a specific message you could select 
a broader and less homogeneous audience.  

If your campaign is aiming for behavioural change, you could use a narrower definition 
of your audience to tailor your messages to the specific and unique motivations of each 
individual or audience. 

Relevant section in report: 3.1 

Template: Templates 3 & 5 

7.  Allocate resources to communication channels based on audience 

characteristics and research into their past effectiveness 

You need to provide justification for the choice of each campaign channel and the resources 
that you allocate to each channel. This means you should carefully analyse advantages and 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
disadvantages of each channel with a view to your campaign objectives. You should use pre-
campaign research to identify the most effective campaign channels and use this evidence to 
explain the choice of your campaign channels.  

Relevant section in report: 3.2 

Template: Templates 4 & 5 

8.  Use  word-of-mouth,  one-on-one,  relationship-based  engagement 

for achieving attitudinal and behavioural change 

When using word-of-mouth channels, you need to ensure that you: 

• 

take  into  account  the  personal  needs  and  situations  of  the  migrants  and  tailor  your 
messages accordingly; and 

•  manage migrants’ expectations of what they can gain from one-on-one engagement. 
This  could  for  example  mean  that  you  have  to clarify that  you  cannot  provide  direct 
assistance such as livelihood support.  

If  your  objective  is  attitudinal  or  behavioural  change,  you  should  use  word-of-mouth 
communication in a one-on-one setting. If resources allow, you could conduct personalised 
follow-ups to reinforce a message and build trust. 

If you are not able to conduct in-person activities you should offer one-on-one engagement 
over the phone. 

Relevant section in report: 3.2 

Template: Template 4 

9.  Use community outreach events to reach primary and secondary 

audiences but not to achieve attitudinal and behavioural change. 

You should design your campaign events with the interests and habits of your priority audience 
segments in mind. When organising events, you will benefit from partnering with groups and 
institutions  that  are  trusted  by  the  priority  segment.  Your  events  should  involve  community 
participation  through  participatory  components  (sports,  theatre,  music,  art)  that  ensure  the 
community’s ownership and engagement with the event topics. 

If  the  objective  is  attitudinal  or  behavioural change,  you should  use events  as  a  supporting 
method, rather than a core component. 

Relevant section in report: 3.2 

Template: Template 4 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
10.  Use social media to maximise reach and to direct people to other 
campaign components but not to achieve behavioural or attitudinal 
change. Take active steps to ensure social media is credible 

When  using  social  media,  you  need  to  be  aware  that  such  an  approach  does  not  allow  an 
assessment of whether you are reaching the right audiences, nor of the impact the messages 
had.  

You should focus on maximising engagement through establishing credibility and building trust 
by: 

featuring trusted voices, e.g. other migrants; 

•  showing the face(s) behind the brand, e.g. a recurring presenter; 
• 
•  using more spontaneous and authentic formats, e.g. live streaming; 
•  offering ways to initiate direct contact, e.g. through a hotline; and 
•  staying factual, and giving official sources for key information. 

If the campaign objective is behavioural or attitudinal change, you should use social media:  

•  as  a  supporting  channel  to  funnel  audiences  to  your  other,  more  personalised 

campaign elements; and 

• 

to  reinforce  messages  from  your  other  channels  to  ensure  that  your  audiences  can 
verify these messages.  

Relevant section in report: 3.2 

Template: Template 4 

11.  Use  mass  media  when  a  campaign  needs  to  reach  remote 
audiences or when the objective is purely to share information 

You  should  use  mass  media  as  your  campaign  channel  when  you  want  to  reach  remote 
audiences or when your objective is purely to disseminate information.  

When considering mass media as a channel, you need to make a careful cost–benefit analysis; 
content like a drama series may generate more engagement, but it will be expensive to make 
and  to  monitor.  Such  an  expensive  approach  would  be  sensible  only  if  supported  by  prior 
piloting that measured the cost–benefit (impact) of such an approach.  

Relevant section in report: 3.2 

Template: Template 4 

12.  Tailor  messages  to  the  individuals;  focus  on  providing  balanced 
information that is accurate, credible, relevant, and provides hope 

You  need  to  tailor  your  campaign  messages  to  individuals  if  possible.  If  your  campaign 
methods allow for individual tailoring (e.g. in one-on-one interactions) you need to take into 
account factors such as:  

•  Migration motivations 

74 

 
 
 
 
 
•  Stage of planning  
•  Pre-existing knowledge of risks and alternatives  
•  Personality 
•  Risk aversity 
•  Ability to access alternatives to migration 

If your campaign methods do not allow for individual tailoring, you should focus on providing 
balanced  information  that  is  accurate,  credible,  relevant,  and  (depending  on  the  context) 
provides hope.  

Relevant section in report: 3.3 

Template: Template 4 

13.  Develop  a  standalone  campaign  brand  for  those  campaigns 

focused on facilitating discussion and behavioural change 

You  should  not  brand  your  campaign  with  the  name  of  the  donors  and/or  international 
organisations if possible. Instead, your campaign will benefit from a standalone brand that is 
trusted in the communities. 

You can consider creating synergies between official donor communications and campaigns. 
You  can,  for  example,  direct  your  audiences  to  factual  information  provided  by  foreign 
governments, especially for information on laws and policies on legal migration options.  

Relevant section in report: 3.4 

Template: Template 4 

14.  Consider  working  with  partners  and  local  influencers  that  are 

already trusted within communities 

When choosing local influencers and partners as messengers you need to be aware of the 
local context of who are the most trusted individuals for migration information. 

Relevant section in report: 3.4 

Template: Template 4 

15.  Choose  messengers  according 

to 

their  ability  as  effective 

messengers rather than based on their migration experience 

When you use returnees and/or diaspora as messengers, you need to ensure that you hire 
returnees or diaspora members who have: 

•  Community influence 
•  Communication skills 

75 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  Motivation 
•  Relevant experience 

You  should  provide  psychological  support  for  returnees  and  diaspora  who  are  actively 
engaged in campaigns. 

Relevant section in report: 3.4 

Template: Template 4 

16.  Tailor information on alternatives as much as possible to audiences 
and  make  it  as  concrete  as  possible.  Consider  inclusion  of  a 
livelihood component 

You need to take into account that the information on alternatives needs to be as concrete as 
possible for your audiences in order for it to be useful. This could, for example, mean that you 
should  consider  providing  specialised  mentoring  on  how  to  access  alternatives  to  irregular 
migration if alternatives messaging is an important component of your campaign. 

If  your  aim  is  sustainable  behavioural  change,  you  should  consider  including  a  campaign 
component to address long-term livelihood needs. This could include providing skills training 
or loans to start small businesses, depending on the audience's needs. 

Relevant section in report: 3.5 

Template: Template 4 

17.  Design an M&E plan in the inception phase and resource the M&E 

plan appropriately 

You need to design the M&E plan in close alignment with your objectives. You should prepare 
your M&E plan during the inception phase and include processes for its review. Your M&E plan 
should include at a minimum: 

•  a Theory of Change;  
•  a results framework; and  
•  planned data collection methods. 

When you design your M&E plan, you need to agree on the minimum M&E standards needed 
for your campaign that are realistic within the budget and time constraints. A useful framework 
for assessing the added value of any M&E activities is the return on information: 

•  The highest value M&E activities are those that provide insights into the links between 

campaign activities and desired outcomes.  

•  A consideration of the investment in the campaign itself compared to the M&E budget 
can be useful. Especially for campaigns with higher budgets, it becomes increasingly 
important to verify that your sum was spent effectively. 

You need to assess whether you have internal capacity to conduct M&E and if applicable you 
need to identify trusted external M&E partners to outsource to.  

76 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Relevant section in report: 4.1 

Template: Templates 6 ,7, 8 

18.  Create a Theory of Change as a necessary first component of any 

campaign 

You need to create a ToC that clearly outlines the underlying change logic and assumptions 
that the campaign is based on. Your ToC should reflect clear campaign objectives. 

The ToC should also help you to identify:  

Indicators that can be used to assess short- and long-term success  

•  Assumptions that should be tested by monitoring and evaluation 
•  Variables to be included in data collection 
• 
•  Questions to ask in any evaluation  
•  Relevant contextual factors that have to be considered in data collection and analysis 
You can represent the ToC in a number of different ways. At a minimum, your ToC should 
include a written representation of the pathway of change.  

Relevant section in report: 4.2 

Template: Template 6 

19.  Develop  a  results  framework  to  define  how  progress  towards  a 

campaign’s desired impacts will be measured 

You  need  to  develop  a  results  framework  that  clearly  defines  your  campaign’s  strategic 
elements  and  indicators.  Your  results  framework  should  clearly  identify  outputs,  short-  and 
medium-term outcomes at a minimum and specify how and when you plan to measure them. 
You should align those with the ToC. 

In  formulating  outcomes,  you  should  start  with  imagining  the  ideal  measure,  consider  its 
feasibility  and  use  the  best  possible  and  SMART  compromise.  Beyond  the  traditional 
indicators,  you  should  consider  including  new  indicators  that  allow  additional  insights  into 
campaign success and quality. 

Relevant section in report: 4.3 

Template: Template 7 

20.  If  social  media  is  the  primary  communication  tool,  effectiveness 
needs to be measured in ways that offer more insight than simple 
engagement metrics 

You  should  consider  developing  improved  methods  for  evaluating  your  social  media 
component. These could for example include: 

77 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  a  benchmarking  study  that  compares  performance  with  other  similar  social  media 

approaches; 

•  using  Facebook’s  Test  and  Learn  platform  that  includes  split-testing  or  AB  testing 

opportunities; and 

•  asking users of the primary audience to follow a Facebook page for a certain amount 

of time and interviewing them afterwards. 

Relevant section in report: 4.3 

Template: Template 7 

21.  Design a monitoring strategy that is learning-focused 

You need to design a learning-focused monitoring strategy including the following elements: 

•  Frequent  testing  of  campaign  elements  to  determine  whether  they  are  effective  in 

achieving campaign objectives  

•  Data  collection  that  allows  some  initial  assessment  of  campaign  impact  on  key 

variables of interest 

•  Adaptation and learning targets 
Relevant section in report: 4.4 

Template: Template 9 

22.  Choose  evaluation  methods  that  will  clearly  indicate  whether  the 

campaign achieved its agreed-upon objectives 

You need to choose evaluation methods that allow conclusions on whether you reached the 
campaign objective. For that you need to consider the cost-to-value ratio of any data collection 
method  to  determine  which  are  most  useful.  Baseline  and  endline  evaluation  approaches 
represent  the  most  useful  data  collection  methods  for  current  campaigns,  even  though  this 
highly depends on the campaign format and objectives. 

Relevant section in report: 4.4 

Template: Template 8 

23.  Message  testing  should  be  done  continuously  throughout  the 

campaign 

You  need  to  prioritise  message  testing  prior  to  and  during  a  campaign  to  understand  its 
effectiveness  in  achieving  the  intended  effect  among  your  priority  audiences.  You  can 
experiment with:  

•  Rigorous  message  testing  approaches  that  do  not  rely  on  self-reporting  but,  for 
example, expose audiences to different messages and compare results of scenario-
based questions at two points in time; and 

78 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  More frequent follow-ups with beneficiaries.  

Relevant section in report: 4.5 

Template: Templates 8 & 9 

79 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
80 

 
 
 
6.1. Workbook Templates 

Overview 

A clearly-articulated strategy is a prerequisite for an effective communication campaign.  

This set of templates aims to guide campaign implementers and donors in developing well-
thought-out strategies. By breaking the process down into steps to be followed when designing 
a migration awareness campaign the toolkit presents a blueprint to be followed for strategy 
development. It will give you ideas for each stage of the work: both on what to do and how to 
do it.  

Please  note  that  these  templates  and  broader  toolkit  are  designed  to  support  campaign 
implementers with their strategy development process rather than implementation process.  

Donors can either provide these templates to implementers completed as set of instructions, 
or implementers can develop them for donors.  

The toolkit contains guidance on each stage of the planning cycle as well as illustrations and 
possibble examples of how it is to be filled out.  

Text coloured Blue represents an example campaign that was generated for demonstrative 
purposes only. The examples presented are not reflective of any specific existing location or 
audience.  

1.  TEMPLATE: SETTING CAMPAIGN OBJECTIVES 

SOCIETAL LEVEL OBJECTIVES 

Migration Management: Reduce the number of people from Country X who commit to 
irregular migration to Europe without prospect of receiving asylum 

AUDIENCE LEVEL OBJECTIVES 

Awareness raising: People from Country X preparing to migrate irregularly have 
improved knowledge and methods to assess whether their plan is a good idea 

Behavioural change: People from Country X preparing to migrate irregularly instead 
invest in alternatives 

SMART CHECK 

The clearer your objectives are, the easier it is for you to make any future design 
choices that are aligned with the objective and decide on how to measure success.  

SMART is a generally good approach to think about whether your objectives at the 
audience level are well articulated before you proceed to the next step. In this step of 
the template, you can check that your selected objectives are specific, measurable, 
achievable, relevant and time-bound. 

81 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
S 
Specific 

M 
Measurable 

A 
Achievable 

R 
Relevant 

T 
Time-bound 

What do 
you want to 
do? 

How will you 
know when you 
have done it? 

Can you 
accomplish it? 

Is it 
worthwhile? 

When exactly 
do you want to 
accomplish it? 

Audience 
level 

The 
audience 
level 
objectives 
outline 
specific 
outcomes to 
be 
achieved, 
including 
improved 
knowledge 
to assess 
whether 
their plan is 
a good idea 
and 
investment 
in 
alternatives. 
The 
audience 
still needs to 
be narrowed 
down in 
"Template 
3. 
Audience". 

Both objectives 
can be 
measured using 
quantitative 
indicators such 
as the number 
of beneficiaries 
who 
demonstrate 
improved 
awareness of 
the risks of 
irregular 
migration and 
the number of 
beneficiaries 
who report 
having invested 
in alternatives. 
Specific 
indicators will 
be defined in 
"Template 7. 
Results 
Framework", 
and 
corresponding 
measurement 
techniques will 
be developed in 
"Template 8. 
Data Collection 
Methods". 

Both objectives 
are achievable 
within the 
project 
timeframe 
based on 
previous 
experience of 
running similar 
campaigns. 
"Template 4. 
Channels, 
Activities and 
Message 
Selection" will 
describe how 
the objectives 
will be 
operationalised.  

The objectives 
are relevant to 
the 
governments’ 
policy to 
contribute to 
the prevention 
of irregular and 
dangerous 
migration by 
providing 
reliable 
information to 
potential 
migrants, to 
help them 
make more 
informed and 
safer 
decisions. As 
per IOM data, 
the number of 
irregular 
migrants from 
Country X 
makes up 20% 
of irregular 
arrivals and 
losses at sea 
per year. 

Within 7 
months of 
implementation. 

2.  TEMPLATE: PRE-CAMPAIGN RESEARCH 

The aim of conducting pre-campaign research is to get information about your audience that 
enables you to design a campaign that will allow you to reach your campaign's objectives. This 
includes, for example, understanding where your audience in your country of choice is located, 
what their demographics are, what kinds of communication channels they use, what their major 
knowledge gaps are and what the most effective messages will be.  

To use this template, first select the lines of inquiry you want answered for each research area. 
Next, select the research methods you would need to use in order to get answers for your lines 
of inquiry. A practical way to select your data collection method would be starting with rapid 
desk research to cross-check whether the information you need isn't already available. If there 
is timely and relevant information available, then the highest value pre-campaign research will 

82 

 
 
 
 
 
not  include  additional  data  collection.  Available  funds  for  pre-campaign  research  should  be 
spent on implementation or evaluation instead. If that is not the case and the information you're 
looking  for  is  not  readily  available  via  desk  research,  then  you  should  consider  conducting 
additional data collection. 

Contextual Analysis 

Research 
area 

Lines of inquiry  
(Note: This is a non-exhaustive 
list of examples. You may add or 
delete lines of inquiry based on 
your campaigning needs.) 

Data 
available 
via desk 
research? 

How important is this 
info for your 
campaign? 

Method 

Most common motivations for 
migration 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Existing knowledge/beliefs about 
the journey, transit and life in 
destination countries 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Motivation 

Existing social, economic and 
political circumstances in countries 
of origin 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Existing norms of irregular 
migration in countries of origin 
including existing peer or family 
pressures to migrate 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

83 

 
 
 
Research 
area 

Lines of inquiry  
(Note: This is a non-exhaustive 
list of examples. You may add or 
delete lines of inquiry based on 
your campaigning needs.) 

Data 
available 
via desk 
research? 

How important is this 
info for your 
campaign? 

Method 

Existing social, economic and 
political circumstances in transit 
countries 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Most common routes from 
countries of origins to destination 
countries 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Routes 

Most common types of transport 
used by migrants 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Existing opportunities (e.g. work, 
access to health care) for migrants 
in transit countries 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Risks 

Possible risks faced through 
activities of smugglers, traffickers, 
criminal gangs, border control, 
police, coastguard 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

84 

 
 
Research 
area 

Lines of inquiry  
(Note: This is a non-exhaustive 
list of examples. You may add or 
delete lines of inquiry based on 
your campaigning needs.) 

Data 
available 
via desk 
research? 

How important is this 
info for your 
campaign? 

Method 

Possible types of exploitation on 
the journey and in the destination 
country (e.g. forced labour) 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Possible financial risks 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Possible long-term consequences 
of all short-term risks on migrants 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Average journey costs 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Most commonly used means of 
financing the journey 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

Costs 

85 

 
 
Research 
area 

Lines of inquiry  
(Note: This is a non-exhaustive 
list of examples. You may add or 
delete lines of inquiry based on 
your campaigning needs.) 

Data 
available 
via desk 
research? 

How important is this 
info for your 
campaign? 

Method 

Preferred destination countries 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Existing social, economic and 
political circumstances in 
destination countries including 
asylum policies 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Destination  
countries 

Attitudes towards irregular migrants 
in destination countries 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Realities of life in Europe (e.g. cost 
of living) 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Realities of forced returns to 
countries of origin 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

86 

 
 
Research 
area 

Lines of inquiry  
(Note: This is a non-exhaustive 
list of examples. You may add or 
delete lines of inquiry based on 
your campaigning needs.) 

Data 
available 
via desk 
research? 

How important is this 
info for your 
campaign? 

Method 

Existing local alternatives to 
irregular migration (e.g. local job 
opportunities) 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Alternatives 

Existing legal migration options 
(e.g. scholarships) 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Forced and 
voluntary 
return 

Opportunities for voluntary return 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

Communications Strategy 

Research 
area 

Lines of inquiry  
(Note: This is a non-exhaustive 
list of examples. You may add or 
delete lines of inquiry based on 
your campaigning needs.) 

Data 
available 
via desk 
research? 

How important is this 
info for your 
campaign? 

Method 

Priority 
segments 

Demographic profiles (e.g. age, 
sex, marital status etc.) 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

87 

 
 
 
 
Research 
area 

Lines of inquiry  
(Note: This is a non-exhaustive 
list of examples. You may add or 
delete lines of inquiry based on 
your campaigning needs.) 

Data 
available 
via desk 
research? 

How important is this 
info for your 
campaign? 

Method 

Potential influencers of the primary 
audience and their demographic 
profiles 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Locations 

Most common cities/provinces in 
countries of origin 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Most in-demand messages 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Messages 

Most common factors that influence 
migration behaviours 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Most common gaps in knowledge 
about irregular migration, 
destination countries and 
alternatives 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

88 

 
 
Research 
area 

Lines of inquiry  
(Note: This is a non-exhaustive 
list of examples. You may add or 
delete lines of inquiry based on 
your campaigning needs.) 

Data 
available 
via desk 
research? 

How important is this 
info for your 
campaign? 

Method 

Messages and content that 
resonate best with audience 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Most trusted sources of information 
on migration 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Trusted 
sources of 
information 

Media consumption habits of target 
audience  

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

Most commonly used information 
channels 

☐Yes 
☐Insufficient 
☐No 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

☐Very important 

☐Somewhat important 

☐Neutral 

☐Desk review 

☐Structured survey 

☐Case studies (i.e. 
in-depth interviews) 

☐Not important 

☐FGDs 

☐Not important at all 

☐Social media 
analysis 

3.  TEMPLATE: TARGET AUDIENCE SELECTION 

You  should  select  the  target  audience  which  is  most  relevant  to  the  campaign  objectives. 
Based  on  the  results  of  the  pre-campaign  research  you  should  aim  to  narrow  down  your 
audience as much as possible. This will allow you to tailor your campaign activities to maximize 
effectiveness and impact. You want to ensure that each of your categories is selected based 
on  evidence  stemming  from  your  pre-campaign  research.  You  should  aim  to  divide  your 
audience  into  smaller  groups,  bound  by  similar  characteristics,  wants  or  needs  which  are 
selected  according  to  your  objectives.  Different  subgroups  of  the  audience  have  different 

89 

 
 
 
 
characteristics that influence the extent to which they pay attention to, understand and act on 
different messages.  

The  primary  target  audience  should  outline  which  groups  you  want  to  target  with  your 
campaign,  and  among  whom  specifically  you  want  to  achieve  an  effect.  The  secondary 
audience allows you to include those groups of people who have an important intermediary 
role as influencers of the primary audience. 

Category* 

Description 

Justification based on pre-campaign research 

PRIMARY TARGET AUDIENCE 1 

Location 

City X, City Y, City 
Z 

Age and Sex 

Male, 18-25 years 
old 

Education level 

Up till secondary 
education levels 

European migration is often preceded by internal rural-to-urban 
migration. Due to the high levels of urbanisation in Morocoo most 
potential irregular migrants travel to City X, City Y, City Z first to save 
money for their irregular migration journey and subsequently organise it. 
As part of this process and in preparation for their travel, they tend to 
stay there between three and six months. The three cities have been 
identified as transit hubs. This means that there is a clear window of 
opportunity to provide information at this stage of the journey. Desk 
research points to these cities having an established migration history, 
meaning that there are many networks and migration pathways which 
enable irregular migration. 

Young men between the ages of 18 and 25 comprise the majority of 
people from Country X who attempt migration to Europe. This segment 
has been found to have more pronounced migration intentions than 
women. Age as well as gender has been shown to be predictive of 
migration intentions for people from Country X. 

People from country X with up to secondary education comprise the 
majority of people from country X whose asylum applications are 
rejected in Europe. People with some level of education are generally 
thought to be more likely than those without any education to have 
intentions to migrate, based in part on a perception that some kind of 
education is needed to judge the possibilities of successfully migrating. 

Ethnicity 

Ethnic group X 

99% of pre-campaign research participants identified as being part of 
ethnic group X. In the case of Country X, ethnic background is not a 
significant factor in migration decisions.  

Marital status 

Single 

Motivations 

Economic 

The majority of irregular arrivals from Country X as well as potential 
migrants from Country X reported being single. Given the fact that most 
migrants are predominantly single when they migrate, marital status is 
expected to influence migration intentions. Similarly, to marital status, 
having children reduces the intention to migrate.  

The majority of diaspora members from Country X who took part in the 
pre-campaign research survey reported having embarked on irregular 
migration journeys to Europe for the purpose of finding better 
opportunities and income-sources allowing them to provide for their 
families. Similarly, economic reasons were among the top 3 reasons 
cited by potential migrants still at home and at the planning stages of 
their journeys. As such, an individual or a household's financial status is 
expected to influence migration intentions. 

Physical risks; 
Realities of life in 
transit and 
destination; Legal 
alternatives 

Migrants from within the Segment outlined above showed a lack of 
knowledge in the following areas:  

• 

• 

The dangers of irregular migration; realities of life in transit and 
destination countries; destination country policies; planning 
migration journeys realistically 
Local alternatives; legal migration routes to Europe; voluntary 
return; practical steps to explore legal migration options 

Knowledge 
gaps 

90 

 
 
 
Attitude 
towards 
irregular 
migration 

Understand it is 
risky, but believe it 
is worth the shot 

Both potential migrants and diaspora members interviewed appear to 
demonstrate some knowledge around risks (specifically on the dangers 
of irregular migration). Risk knowledge did not equal an evaluation of the 
likelihood of that specific risk impacting the migrant (referred to as risk 
internalisation). Even those with the highest knowledge levels on what 
the specific risks are often state confidence that they can manage the 
risks. Those respondents who scored highly on risk-knowledge did not 
have the same corresponding risk-internalisation. Levels of risk 
internalisation varied on the different types of risks (journey, financial, 
destination country realities).  

*Note: These categories are a non-exhaustive list of examples. You can change them based on your 
research 

PRIMARY TARGET AUDIENCE 2 

Category* 

Description 

Justification based on pre-campaign research 

Location 

Age and Sex 

Education level 

Ethnicity 

Language 

Marital status 

Motivations 

Knowledge level 

Attitude towards 
irregular 
migration 

*Note: These categories are a non-exhaustive list of examples. You can change them based on your 
research 

SECONDARY TARGET AUDIENCE 

Category* 

Description 

Justification based on pre-campaign research 

Location 

Age and Sex 

Marital status 

Knowledge level 

Attitude towards 
irregular 
migration 

*Note: These categories are a non-exhaustive list of examples. You can change them based on your 
research 

91 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.  TEMPLATE: CHANNEL, ACTIVITY AND MESSAGE SELECTION 

Once  you  the  target  audience  has  been  selected  you  will  need  to  plan  two  importent 
components: what is the most effective way of reaching your intended audience and what is 
the most impactful way of influencing your audience.  

Selecting appropriate channels is as important as the content you share. Selection of the right 
communication channel depends on an understanding of the communication objectives and 
audiences, and the strengths and weaknesses of the different channels that are available. This 
is  where  you  will  heavily  rely  on  your  pre-campaign  research  which should  have  given  you 
results on a) the most trusted, most used and most effective channels, b) the desired and most 
effective messages and c) in some cases also indications of which types of messengers to 
use.  

With this knowledge, you can now design your activities and develop appropriate and impactful 
messaging. The ultimate choice of channels, activities, messages and messengers will vary 
heavilly  based  on  the  campaign  objective,  budget  and  the  unique  characteristics  of  the 
audience. However, as a general rule of thumb, it is recommended to not have more than 5 
different activities for your primary audience and no more than 2 different activities for your 
secondary audience. 

PRIMARY TARGET AUDIENCE 1 

Channel 

Activity (and 
messenger) 

Types of messages  

Justification based on 
pre-campaign research 

Budget check 

Television 

Train and equip 
journalists from most 
popular TV channels 
with the know-how on 
how to report on 
irregular migration 
topics  

Direct face-to-
face 
consultations 

Word-of-Mouth 
counsellors provide 1:1 
consultations to 
potential irregular 
migrants, face-to-face, 
over the phone and via 
messaging 

The dangers of irregular 
migration; realities of life 
in transit and destination 
countries; destination 
country policies; asking 
questions to prompt better 
planning; 

Channels: The primary 
audience segment selected 
these  television as one of 
their most commonly used 
channels for information on 
irregular migration. 

Local alternatives; legal 
migration routes to 
Europe; voluntary return; 
identification of practical 
steps to explore legal 
migration options 

Messages: The types of 
messages identified reflect 
the most common knowledge 
gaps among the primary 
audience segment. 

Budget available but 
it is worth considering 
increasing the overall 
amount for journalist 
training based on 
number and size of 
trainings decided 
upon. 

The dangers of irregular 
migration; realities of life 
in transit and destination 
countries; destination 
country policies; asking 
questions to prompt better 
planning; 

Channels: Pre-campaign and 
industry-level evidence shows 
that 1:1 conversations are the 
most effective way of 
changing knowledge and 
behaviours among potential 
irregular migrants. 

Local alternatives; legal 
migration routes to 
Europe; voluntary return; 
identification of practical 
steps to explore legal 
migration options 

Messages: The types of 
messages identified reflect 
the most common knowledge 
gaps among the primary 
audience segment. 

Yes, available budget 
is sufficient to cover 
costs for delivering 
1:1 Word-of-Mouth 
consultations. It is 
worth considering 
increasing number of 
counsellors to be 
recruited in order to 
meet set target. 

92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Social Media: 

Facebook page 
and website 

Social media officers 
regularly post on social 
media posts basic facts 
about irregular 
migration and 
alternatives including 
returnee testimonials 

The dangers of irregular 
migration; realities of life 
in transit and destination 
countries; destination 
country policies; asking 
questions to prompt better 
planning; 

Local alternatives; legal 
migration routes to 
Europe; voluntary return; 
identification of practical 
steps to explore legal 
migration options 

Community 
volunteers 
(Optional, 
Dependent on 
budget) 

Recruit, train and equip 
community volunteers 
with the know-how on 
how to do basic 
community outreach 
and awareness raising 
on irregular migration 
risks and available 
local alternatives. 

The dangers of irregular 
migration; realities of life 
in transit and destination 
countries; destination 
country policies; asking 
questions to prompt better 
planning; 

Local alternatives; legal 
migration routes to 
Europe; voluntary return; 
identification of practical 
steps to explore legal 
migration options 

Channel: The majority of the 
primary audience segment 
has access to the internet. 
Social media is one of the 
most frequently used 
information sources for 
irregular migration and was 
trusted among more than half 
of the sample interviewed for 
pre-campaign research. 
Facebook can be an effective 
tool for sharing factual 
information. Social media can 
supplement overall 
community influence 
component in that it provides 
branding and legitimacy. It 
can be utilised to reinforce 
campaign messaging. 

Messages: The types of 
messages identified reflect 
the most common knowledge 
gaps among the primary 
audience segment. 

Channels: Component to 
address sustainability of the 
campaign. Previous 
experience shows that if 
community volunteers such 
as religious leaders, 
community leaders or student 
leaders take ownership of 
campaign messages and 
activities are motivated by the 
campaign’s mission, they can 
continue the work after it 
ends. Their increased 
knowledge of campaign 
messages and methods is 
assumed to enable them to 
continue to engage with their 
communities after the 
campaign ends.  

Messages: The types of 
messages identified reflect 
the most common knowledge 
gaps among the primary 
target audience. 

Available budget is 
sufficient to cover 
social media 
component. It is 
worth considering 
reducing social-
media related costs 
in order to increase 
the number journalist 
trainings. 

The budget for the 
capacity building 
workstream available 
may not be sufficient. 
This activity can only 
be conducted if 
budget can be 
generated. 
Recommendation for 
the project manager 
to secure budget for 
several community 
volunteers training 
sessions. 

93 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PRIMARY TARGET AUDIENCE 2 

Channel 

Activity 

Message 

Justification based on 
pre-campaign research 

Budget check 

94 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
SECONDARY TARGET AUDIENCE 

Channel 

Activity 

Message 

Justification based on 
pre-campaign research 

Budget check 

5.  TEMPLATE: ACES CHECK  

There is an array of choices available to the implementer in the previous step. Each choice 
and  decision  made  will  be  highly  dependent  on  individual  campaign  circumstancs.  The 
Alignment-Control-Efficiency-Sustainability  (ACES)  check  allows  you  to  assess  your  own 
choices in relation to campaign audiences, channels, activities and messages. It is best used 
as  applied  to  each  audience  selected  and  allows  you  to  take  a  step  back  and  consider  a 
number of things: 1) do your choices align with the purpose of the campaign? 2) can you control 
the expected changes? 3) how efficient you can be in accessing and impacting your audience? 
Finally the ACES check allows you to diagnose whether your campaign as currently designed 
includes any sustainability measures. If necessary, revise your Audience, Channels, Activities 
and Messages and return to this check after.  

95 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PRIMARY TARGET AUDIENCE 1 

ACES CHECK 

A 
Alignment 

C 
Control 

E 
Efficiency 

S 
Sustainability 

How well does this 
target audience, 
channels, activities 
and messages align 
with your objective? 

How much control do 
you have in the 
change you're trying to 
deliver?  

How efficiently can you 
reach your audience 
and deliver change?  

What kind of sustainability 
is your campaign aiming 
for? How does this 
approach ensure that this 
type of sustainability is 
achieved?  

The selected audience 
represents the main 
demographic of potential 
irregular migrants from 
Country X. Demographic 
variables were examined 
during the pre-campaign 
research phase in order 
to compile the profile 
targeted. Pre-campaign 
research showed that the 
chosen channels and 
messages represent 
effective ways of 
reaching the campaign 
objectives.  

The primary target 
audience 1 can be 
reached through social 
media and television as 
those are accessible to 
them. Evidence of the link 
between providing word-
of-mouth information on a 
1:1 basis is relatively 
strong. Including a 
dedicated activity to 
increase community 
participation adds 
another leyel of 
engagement with the 
targeted community. 
These factors point to a 
medium-to-high level of 
likelihood of awareness 
raising and behaviour 
change.  

Campaign design is 
sufficiently results based 
(see "Template 7. Results 
Framework" and 
"Template 9. Adaptation 
and Learning"). Activities 
set are reasonable in cost 
and complexity in relation 
to project objectives. The 
objectives are concrete 
enough to allow the 
development of indicators. 
The primary target 
audience members often 
live in urban areas and 
have the means to access 
campaign channels 
frequently. As such 
campaign activities are 
being implemented in 
areas with highest 
concentration of potential 
migrants. Activities can 
easily be scaled up if 
necessary. 

The campaign approaches 
sustainability in terms of 
community involvement and 
ownership. Limited funding 
makes migration awareness 
raising campaigns inherently 
insusceptible to high levels of 
sustainability. Campaign 
design aims to increase 
community participation by 
mobilizing and building on 
the capacities of the local 
population so messages and 
practices are retained after 
project end. The change we 
seek is better informed 
communities and 
communities involved in 
figuring out solutions to the 
challenges they face. 

96 

 
 
PRIMARY TARGET AUDIENCE 2 

ACES CHECK 

A 
Alignment 

C 
Control 

E 
Efficiency 

S 
Sustainability 

How well does this 
target audience group 
align with your 
objective? 

How much control do 
you have in the 
change you're trying to 
deliver with this group? 
If not, how can you 
improve that control? 

How efficient is it for 
you to reach this 
group? Can you 
improve efficiency 
through your channels 
and activities? 

How sustainable is this 
approach? If greater 
sustainability is desired, 
consider ways to improve 
sustainability through 
channels and activities. 

97 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
SECONDARY TARGET AUDIENCE 

ACES CHECK 

A 
Alignment 

C 
Control 

E 
Efficiency 

S 
Sustainability 

How well does this 
target audience group 
align with your 
objective? 

How much control do 
you have in the 
change you're trying to 
deliver with this group? 
If not, how can you 
improve that control? 

How efficient is it for 
you to reach this 
group? Can you 
improve efficiency 
through your channels 
and activities? 

How sustainable is this 
approach? If greater 
sustainability is desired, 
consider ways to improve 
sustainability through 
channels and activities. 

6.  TEMPLATE: THEORY OF CHANGE 

In the Theory of Change you should explain how the campaign will have an impact on your 
audience. This is your intervention logic. It should outline what precisely the campaign aims to 
do and how that will contribute to the campaign's objectives. It should describe the logic or 
causality of how the campaign will bring change. Here you should outline the changes that 
need to take place for the overall campaign objectives to be met. It should also highlight all of 
the assumptions you are making and that the success of the campaign depends on.  

When  using  this  template,  you  should  start  from  the  problem  statement  in  order  to  remind 
yourself of the problem the campaign is trying to address. This will help you frame the desired 
results and describe the path to get there. Then you are able to define the long-term goal that 
reflects  the  solution  by  which  you  plan  to  tackle  the  problem.  When  describing  the  change 
pathway  you  want  to  describe  how  you  want  people  to  engage  with  your  activities,  or 
experience them, to make outcomes more likely. 

98 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
*The Theory of Change should be populated and read bottom to top 

Impact 

Reduced prevalence of the number of people from Country X without prospect of 
receiving asylum who migrate irregularly to Europe 

Medium/Long-term 
outcomes 

Potential irregular migrants from Country X have invested in alternatives 
opportunities 
Potential irregular migrants from Country X demonstrate reduced investment in 
irregular migration 

Key Assumptions 

Short-term outcomes 

Key Assumptions 

Outputs/Activities 

Problem Statements 

Counselling potential irregular migrants from Country X is an effective method in 
encouraging investment in alternatives 
Potential irregular migrants who have invested in alternatives have a lower desire of 
migrating irregularly 

Potential migrants have reduced priority placed on irregular migration. 

Potential irregular migrants from Country X demonstrate increased awareness of: 
- the risks of irregular migration; the realities of life in their destination countries; 
legal alternatives to irregular migration 
- methods to assess whether their irregular migration plan is feasible 

Journalists of target television stations: 
- have a better understanding of the risks of irregular migration; 
- have a better understanding of the realities of life in destination countries; 
- have a better understanding of legal alternatives;  
- have increased capacity of more sensile reporting on irregular migration topics; 
and 
- have increased  motivated to air content informing about irregular migration.  

Community volunteers:  
- have a better understanding of irregular migration topics; and 
- continue to disseminate campaign messages. 

- Audiences are willing to engage with campaign channels and are willing to 
participate in 1:1 consultations 
- Campaign activities lead to increased knowledge among the journalists and 
potential irregular migrants 
- Audiences find the information relevant, helpful and trustworthy 

Awareness raising and behaviour change campaign: 
- Engaging potential irregular migrants via word-of-mouth 1:1 consultations 
- Engaging potential irregular migrants via social media engagement 
- Training TV journalists on how to report on irregular migration topics  
- Training community volunteers on how to raise awareness on irregular migration 
within their communities 

European governments are facing challenges in adequately managing the flow of 
migrants. Their desire to support those in genuine need of protection is impeded by 
the surge of economic migrants.  

Many of them face various dangers on the journey that they say they did not know 
about prior to departure or did not believe risks apply to them. 

Many do not make it to their intended destination and find themselves either unable 
to find work or in exploitative labour. 

Each year, thousands of people from Country X attempt to migrate irregularly to 
Europe seeking better income opportunities. 

99 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7.  TEMPLATE: RESULTS FRAMEWORK 

The  results  framework  is  the  tool  you'll  use  to  measure  your  progress  towards  campagn's 
objectives. This template allows you to organize information regarding intended outcomes and 
results. It should state all of the indicators which you will use to track project implementation 
and performance. It also serves as a tool managing data collection methods for each indicator. 
The  results  framework  should  identify  both  which  indicators  will  be  used  but  also  how  and 
when these will be be measured. The emphasis is on concrete outcomes rather than on the 
completion of activities, so it allows you to monitor key outcome variables.  

The indicators in the results framework should directly relate to the campaign objectives (see 
"Template 1. Campaign Objectives") and the Theory of Change (see "Template 6. Theory of 
Change") you have developed in the previous step. This template is meant to help you answer 
the question "How do I know that the intervention has succeeded?" 

* Impact-level results are usually only measured for longer-term campaigns, i.e. more than two years. 

IMPACT 

Impact 
Indicator 1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Midline 

Endline 

Reduced 
prevalence of 
irregular 
migration 
among primary 
audiences 

No. of irregular 
migrant arrivals 
without asylum 
claim in Europe 
from Country X 

NA*  
Beyond the 
timeframe of 
the campaign 

Impact 
Indicator 2 

How will it be 
measured? 

No. of rejected 
asylum claims 
by people from 
Country X in 
Europe 

NA*  
Beyond the 
timeframe of 
the campaign 

Planned 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Achieved 

Baseline 

Midline 

Midline 

Endline 

Planned 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Achieved 

LONG TERM 
OUTCOME 1 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Midline 

Endline 

Potential 
migrants 
demonstrate 
reduced 
investment in 
irregular 
migration 

Percentage of 
campaign 
beneficiaries 
who show 
reduced 
investment in 
irregular 
migration 

Structured 
endline 
surveys with 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Percentage of 
campaign 
beneficiaries 
who have 
explored legal 
alternatives to 
irregular 
migration 

Structured 
endline 
surveys with 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Planned 

0 

- 

- 

- 

10% 

Achieved 

Baseline 

Midline 

Endline 

Planned 

0 

- 

- 

- 

10% 

Achieved 

SHORT TERM 
OUTCOME 1.1 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Potential 
migrants have 
increased 
awareness of 
the risk, 
realities and 
alternatives to 

Percentage of 
campaign 
beneficiaries 
who 
demonstrate 
increased 
awareness of 
the risks of 

Structured 
monitoring 
surveys with 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

100 

Planned 

0 

65% 

65% 

65% 

65% 

Achieved 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
irregular 
migration 

irregular 
migration 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.1.2 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Percentage of 
campaign 
beneficiaries 
who 
demonstrate 
increased 
awareness of 
the realities of 
life in 
destination 
countries 

Planned 

0 

65% 

65% 

65% 

65% 

Structured 
monitoring 
surveys with 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Achieved 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.1.3 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Percentage of 
campaign 
beneficiaries 
who 
demonstrate 
increased 
awareness of 
legal 
alternatives to 
irregular 
migration 

Planned 

0 

65% 

65% 

65% 

65% 

Structured 
monitoring 
surveys with 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Achieved 

SHORT TERM 
OUTCOME 1.2 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.2.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Potential 
migrants have 
increased 
awareness of 
methods to 
assess the 
feasibility of 
their migration 
plan and ways 
of accessing 
alternatives  

Percentage of 
campaign 
beneficiaries 
who 
demonstrate an 
improved 
understanding 
of ways of 
accessing legal 
alternatives 

Planned 

0 

35% 

35% 

35% 

35% 

Structured 
monitoring 
surveys with 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Achieved 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.2.2 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Planned 

0 

35% 

35% 

35% 

35% 

Structured 
monitoring 
surveys with 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Achieved 

Percentage of 
campaign 
beneficiaries 
who 
demonstrate an 
improved 
understanding 
of methods to 
assess whether 
their irregular 
migration plan 
is feasible 

OUTPUT 1.1.1 

Output 
Indicator 
1.1.1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Conduct 
consultations 
with potential 
irregular 
migrants 

No. of first-time 
consultations 
conducted with 
potential 
irregular 
migrants 

Consultation 
reporting 
forms 

OUTPUT 1.1.2 

Output 
Indicator 
1.1.2.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

101 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Planned 

0 

500 

1,000 

1,500 

2,000 

Achieved 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Engage with 
potential 
irregular 
migrants via 
social media 

No. of posts 
shared on 
social media 

Content 
calendar 

Output 
Indicator 
1.1.2.2 

How will it be 
measured? 

No. of social 
media 
engagements 

Social media 
analytics 

Planned 

0 

80  

160  

240  

320  

Achieved 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Planned 

0 

20,000 

50,000 

90,000 

150,000  

Achieved 

SHORT TERM 
OUTCOME 
1.3.2 

Outcome 
Indicator 
1.3.2.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Percentage of 
trained 
journalists who 
demonstrate 
increased 
awareness of 
the risks of 
irregular 
migration 

Outcome 
Indicator 
1.3.2.2 

Percentage of 
trained 
journalists who 
demonstrate 
increased 
awareness on 
the realities of 
life in 
destination 
countries 

Outcome 
Indicator 
1.3.2.3 

Percentage of 
trained 
journalists who 
demonstrate 
increased 
awareness of 
legal 
alternatives to 
irregular 
migration 

Planned 

0 

35% 

35% 

35% 

35% 

Training pre- 
and post- 
tests 

Achieved 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Planned 

0 

35% 

35% 

35% 

35% 

Training pre- 
and post- 
tests 

Achieved 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Planned 

0 

35% 

35% 

35% 

35% 

Pre and post 
training 
surveys 

Achieved 

Journalists 
have increased 
knowledge of 
and capacity to 
report on the 
risks and 
alternatives to 
irregular 
migration  

Outcome 
Indicator 
1.3.2.4 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Percentage of 
journalists who 
have increased 
capacity of 
more sensile 
reporting on 
irregular 
migration topics 

Planned 

0 

35% 

35% 

35% 

35% 

Pre and post 
training 
surveys 

Achieved 

SHORT TERM 
OUTCOME 
1.3.1 

Outcome 
Indicator 
1.3.1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Journalists are 
motivated to 

No. of minutes 
of news and talk 

Media 
reporting form 

102 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Planned 

0 

30 

80 

180 

300 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
report on 
irregular 
migration topics 

show coverage 
of irregular 
migration topics 
by trained 
journalists  

Achieved 

Outcome 
Indicator 
1.3.1.2 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Demonstrable 
motivation 
among 
journalists to air 
irregular 
migration 
related content 

Output 
Indicator 
1.3.1.1 

No. of 
journalists 
trained 

Output 
Indicator 
1.3.1.3 

OUTPUT 1.3.1 

Train and 
sensitise 
journalists on 
issues related 
to irregular 
migration 

Qualitative 
interviews 
with 
journalists  

How will it be 
measured? 

Planned 

NA 

N/A; 
qualitative 
indicator 

N/A; 
qualitative 
indicator 

N/A; 
qualitative 
indicator 

N/A; 
qualitative 
indicator 

Achieved 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Planned 

0 

10 

30 

60 

60 

Training 
reporting form 

Achieved 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

No. of training 
sessions 
conducted 

Training 
reporting form 

LONGTERM 
OUTCOME 2 
(SUSTAINABIL
ITY) 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Planned 

0 

2 

6 

12 

12 

Achieved 

Baseline 

Midline 

Endline 

Planned 

0 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Percentage of 
people in target 
communities 
who show 
reduced 
investment in 
irregular 
migration as 
indirect 
beneficiary of 
the campaign 

NA 
*Beyond the 
timeframe of 
the campaign 

Achieved 

Outcome 
Indicator 1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Midline 

Endline 

Percentage of 
people in target 
communities 
who have 
explored legal 
alternatives as 
an indirect 
beneficiary of 
the campaign 

Planned 

0 

- 

- 

- 

- 

NA 
*Beyond the 
timeframe of 
the campaign 

Achieved 

Outcome 
Indicator 2.1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Percentage of 
people in target 
communities 
who report 
increased 
awareness on 

Structured 
endline 
surveys with 
indirect 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Planned 

0 

- 

- 

- 

5% 

Achieved 

Campaign 
volunteers 
contribute to 
behaviour 
change in their 
communities 

SHORT TERM 
OUTCOME 2.1 
(SUSTAINABIL
ITY) 

Campaign 
volunteers 
share 
information on 
irregular 

103 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
migration with 
their community 

the risks of 
irregular 
migration as an 
indirect 
beneficiary of 
the campaign 

Outcome 
Indicator 2.1.2 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Percentage of 
people in target 
communities 
who report 
increased 
awareness on 
the realities in 
destination 
country as an 
indirect 
beneficiary of 
the campaign 

Planned 

0 

- 

- 

- 

5% 

Structured 
endline 
surveys with 
indirect 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Achieved 

Outcome 
Indicator 2.1.3 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Percentage of 
people in target 
communities 
who report 
increased 
awareness of 
legal migration 
as an indirect 
beneficiary of 
the campaign 

Planned 

0 

- 

- 

- 

5% 

Structured 
endline 
surveys with 
indirect 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Achieved 

OUTPUT 2.1.1 
(SUSTAINABIL
ITY) 

Output 
Indicator 
2.1.1.1 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

No. of 
community 
volunteers 
recruited 

Output 
Indicator 
2.1.1.2 

No. of training 
sessions (and 
follow up 
training 
sessions) 
conducted with 
community 
volunteers 

Recruit and 
train campaign 
volunteers in 
target 
communities 

Community 
volunteers 
database 

How will it be 
measured? 

Planned 

0 

40 

- 

- 

40 

Achieved 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

Planned 

0 

5 

10 

15 

15 

Community 
training 
reporting form 

Achieved 

Output 
Indicator 
2.1.1.3 

How will it be 
measured? 

Baseline 

Time 1 

Time 2 

Time 3 

Target 
(endpoint) 

No. of journalist 
training 
sessions that 
included 
sustainability 
messaging 

Planned 

0 

2 

6 

12 

12 

Training 
reporting form 

Achieved 

104 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8.  TEMPLATE: DATA COLLECTION METHODS 

There is an array of choices available when choosing data collection methods to monitor and 
evaluate the campaign. The choice of data collection methods will be dependent on individual 
campaign circumstances and the campaign objectives. This involves considering 1) what kind 
of methods you need to collect data for all specified indicators in the results framework 2) what 
kind of methods will provide high-quality data 3) how feasible it is to implement that type of 
data collection considering time and resources and 4) if the costs of choosing these methods 
are reasonable.  

The data collection methods mentioned in this template should be taken directly from the data 
collection methods used in the results framework. This template should be used and filled out 
by qualified research or monitoring and evaluation staff members." 

Data collection 
method  

Frequency 

Justification  

Structured endline 
surveys with 
campaign 
beneficiaries 

Once at the end 
of the campaign 

A structured endline survey is the best industry-tool to measure the 
medium-term quantitative indicators from the results framework for a 
representative sample of beneficiaries. It permits a relatively large 
sample size that can be achieved in a comparatively short time and the 
resources available allow its implementation. When matched with data 
from the monitoring surveys, it allows for an assessment of change 
over time while anonymity of the beneficiaries can be ensured. It allows 
statistical analysis to test assumptions on the links between different 
components in the Theory of Change.  

Structured 
monitoring surveys 
with campaign 
beneficiaries 

On-going 
throughout the 
campaign 

A structured monitoring survey is the best tool to measure the short-
term quantitative indicators from the results framework for a 
representative sample of beneficiaries. It permits a relatively large 
sample size that can be conducted flexibly within a short time and the 
resources available allow its implementation. It also allows statistical 
analysis to test assumptions on the links between different components 
in the Theory of Change.  

Social media 
analytics 

On-going 
throughout the 
campaign 

Social media analytics is a low-cost method to assess the effectiveness 
of the social media components from the results framework. It allows 
comprehensive and real-time monitoring of how beneficiaries 
engagement with social media channels. 

Pre and post 
training surveys 

Before and after 
each journalist 
training 

Pre and post training surveys allows the project to establish a 
benchmark against which to measure changes in knowledge after the 
training and provide a high degree of comparability across journalists. 
They also permit additional data collection on the quality of the training.  

Activity reporting 
forms 

On-going after 
every activity 

Activity reporting forms that are filled out by field staff who conduct the 
activities can help to track the output indicators from the results 
framework. They also allow for collecting real-time insights into 
everyday happenings on the ground and feedback from field staff. 

Qualitative 
interviews with 
journalists 

Within 2 months 
after a training 
session 

Qualitative interviews can be used to measure the qualitative indicators 
from the results framework. Qualitative tools are among the best 
methods to explore a concept such as motivation.  

105 

 
 
 
 
 
9.  TEMPLATE: LEARNING AGENDA 

The learning agenda is a tool meant to be used as a framework which will ensure that your 
project team focuses on learning and adaptation throughout campaign implementation. The 
learning  agenda  should  define  learning  questions  for  each  campaign  component  based  on 
different components of the Theory of Change. This is what you should be paying attentioin 
throughout the project cycle. 

The  learning  agenda  should  ensure  that  the  campaign  has  specified  frequent  testing  of 
campaign  elements  and  assumptions  to  determine  whether  they  are  effective  in  achieving 
campaign objectives. During campaign implementaiton the learning agenda can be used to 
record  any  lessons  learnt  throughout  the  project.  The  agenda  should  at  a  minimum  reflect 
learning  goals  with  regards  to  1)  message  effectiveness  2)  progress  towards  campaign 
indicators as reflected in the results framework and 3) testing key assumptions from the Theory 
of  Change.  It  is  crucial  that  each  lesson  is  linked  to  a  recommendation  which  ensures 
immediate adaptation and learning throughout the project. Depending on the project duration 
this can be updated on either monthly or quarterly basis. 

These categories are a non-exhaustive list of examples. You can add to them based on your campaign. 

ID 

Campaign 
Phase 

Campaign 
component 

Learning questions 

Recommendations 

Who is 
responsible? 

Does increased knowledge of the 
risks and alternatives to irregular 
migration lead to behavioural 
changes? 

1 

Inception 
Phase 

Word-of-
Mouth 
consultations 

What role does risk 
internalisation play? 

To what extent do word-of-mouth 
consultations lead to changes in 
knowledge and behaviour? 

Is the information provided 
relevant to the campaign 
beneficiaries?  

Do the campaign beneficiaries 
trust the information delivered by 
the Word-of-mouth counsellors? 
What other sources of 
information do they trust?  

What kind of social media posts 
are received most positively 
among the beneficiaries? 

Do campaign beneficiares 
- respond better to video or static 
content? 
- respond better to positive or 
negative images? 
- respond better to institutional or 
familial messenger? 
- respond better to clean images 
or infographics? 

2 

Inception 
Phase 

Word-of-
Mouth 
consultations 

3 

Inception 
Phase 

Social media 
engagement 

106 

Use the short-term 
data collected 
through monitoring 
surveys to test the 
defined learning 
questions.  

M&E lead 

Use the short-term 
data collected 
through monitoring 
surveys to test the 
defined learning 
questions.  

M&E lead 

Conduct a series of 
A|B tests to 
ascertain results. 
Direct some social 
media marketing or 
research budget to 
this.  

Strategic 
Communications 
lead 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
These categories are a non-exhaustive list of examples. You can add to them based on your campaign. 

ID 

Campaign 
Phase 

Campaign 
component 

Learning questions 

Recommendations 

Who is 
responsible? 

4 

Inception 
Phase 

Journalist 
training  

To what extent are journalists 
actively participating end 
engaging with the training 
content?  

Does increased knowledge 
among journalists lead to more 
sensile and more frequent 
reporting on irregular migration 
topics? 

Trainers should be 
instructed to deliver 
detailed reports on 
observations during 
the training with 
concrete 
suggestions for 
improvement that 
can be 
implemented 
immediately.  

Field staff should 
also regularly 
monitor media 
outputs produced 
by journalists and 
provide monthly 
reports on their 
observations.  

Strategic 
Communications 
lead 

107 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
108 

 
 
 
7. Annexes 

Annex A: Full list of research questions  

This annex provides further information on the research methodology.  

Research Areas and Questions 

Research Area 1 – Content of campaigns 

•  What  objectives  and  assumptions  have  informed  the  design  and  implementation  of 

campaigns? 

•  What  are  the  factors  that  drive  decisions  on  how,  when  and  why  projects  are 

implemented? To what extent do projects differ in design and implementation? 

•  What kind of pre-campaign research and tools have been employed to test products 

before implementation? How do campaigns test their messages? 

•  To what extent do projects differ in design and implementation? 
•  What channels and tools were employed? Do they align with campaign objectives?  
•  How do campaigns ensure adaptability and flexibility of their messages and programme 

design? 

•  How  did  projects  address  the  question  of  sustainability,  namely  the  extent  to  which 
beneficiaries and the wider community take ownership of communications messages 
and continue to disseminate messages beyond the life of the project?  

•  How do campaigns address the changed circumstances as a result of COVID-19? 

Research Area 2 – Effectiveness of campaigns 

•  To  what  extent  have  analysed  projects  been  effective so  far  in  delivering  the  stated 
objectives of a) their implementers; and b) donors? Which factors are likely relevant in 
achieving this? 

•  How do we know campaigns have been effective so far in what they set out to achieve? 
•  What does the M&E plan include and how does this look in practice?  
•  What tools and methods of design, implementation and evaluation have worked best 

so far?  

•  What are recommended indicators that could assess the effectiveness of campaigns 

for a reasonable cost and at a meaningful scale? 

Research Area 3 – Irregular migration insights 

•  What shapes/contributes to the target audience’s attitudes, intentions and behaviour 

towards irregular migration? 

•  How does the target audience perceive and think about local employment and legal 

migration alternatives?  

109 

 
 
 
 
 
•  What  shapes/contributes  to  the  target  audience’s  attitudes  about  home  country 
opportunities  relative  to  perceived  gains  from  migration  (to  European  destination 
countries)? 

•  Which sources of information were more trusted by the target audience? 
•  How does COVID-19 impact the target audience’s migration plans? 

Research Area 4 – Informing future campaigns 

•  What  are  the  recommended  processes  and  critical  elements  for  the  design, 

implementation and evaluation of future campaigns? 

•  What  lessons  does  this  analysis  provide  about  how  approaches  to  the  design, 
implementation and evaluation of campaigns affect their ability to bring about change 
desired by all stakeholders?  

•  How do lessons translate into practical guidance for future campaigns? 

110 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Annex B: Research methodology 

Table 1: Overview of Phase I and Phase II objectives 

Phase I 

Phase II 

Generate  high-level  practical  insights  on  the 
effectiveness  of  campaigns  completed  in 
2019 to inform the commissioning of irregular 
migration  awareness  campaigns  by  Member 
States and the EU in 2020. 

Collect additional evidence from ongoing or recently 
completed campaigns in 2020 to further support the 
overall research objective as in Phase I. 

Focus  on 
fieldwork  and  primary  source  data 
collection, aiming to provide a more detailed real-time 
meta-assessment of projects underway. 

Timeline: January 2020 - May 2020 

Timeline: June 2020 - February 2021 

Objectives: 

Objectives: 

Gather  best  practices  and  guiding  principles 
from 
information  and  awareness-raising 
campaigns  to  improve  the  commissioning, 
design  and 
implementation  of  migration 
awareness-raising campaigns; 

Understand which monitoring and evaluation 
methods have produced insightful data; 

Identify what design, delivery, and evaluation 
methods  work  best  for  different  types  of 
campaigns;  

Investigate campaigns’ effects on knowledge, 
attitudes and behaviours, and trust and reach 
of  communications  channels  among  target 
audiences (small sample, qualitative).  

Build  on  and  test  emerging  recommendations  and 
guiding principles from Phase I; 

Understand  which  monitoring 
methods produce the most insightful data; 

(and  evaluation) 

Identify  what  design,  delivery,  and  monitoring 
methods work best for different types of campaigns; 

Investigate  campaigns’  effects  on  knowledge, 
attitudes  and  behaviours,  and  trust  and  reach  of 
communications  channels  among 
target 
audiences (large sample, quantitative); 

the 

Explore  emerging  research  questions  from  Phase  I 
and  provide  insight  into  why  some  methods  for  the 
design  and  implementation  of  campaigns  are  more 
effective than others; 

Identify  how  campaigns  address 
circumstances resulting from COVID-19. 

the  changed 

Table 2: Campaigns studied in Phase I 

No. 

Campaign 

Donor 

Implementer 

1.  Aware Migrants 

Ministry of Interior, Italy 

IOM, 2016 - 2020 

Encouraging Hope: 
Community Mobilization to 
Mitigate Irregular Migration 

Migration Communication 
Campaign for Migrants from 
West Africa (The Gambia and 
Nigeria) and Iraqi Kurdistan 

Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs, The Netherlands 

IOM, November 2016 to June 
2018 

Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs, The Netherlands 

Seefar, December 2017 to 
August 2019 

Migrants as Messengers and 
Changemakers 

Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs, The Netherlands 

IOM, December 2017 to March 
2019 

2. 

3. 

4. 

111 

 
 
 
No. 

Campaign 

Donor 

Implementer 

5. 

6. 

Belgium Social Media 
Campaign targeting six groups 
of migrants 

Federal Public Service 
of Belgium 

Scooperz Media Agency, 
January 2019 to September 
2019 

Somalia: Part 1. “Dalkeeyga” – 
My Homeland; Part 2. The 
Great Debate 

Ministry of Foreign 
Affairs, Finland 

Wali Media Production, April 
2017 to October 2017 

7. 

Telling the Real Story - Phases 
I & II 

DG HOME 

8.  Safe Migration in Bangladesh 

DG HOME 

9.  We Stay to Build Afghanistan 

DG HOME 

United Nations High 
Commissioner for Refugees 
(UNHCR), January 2015 to 
December 2018 

IOM, February 2017 to 
September 2018 

Equal Access International, 
January 2018 to December 2018 

10. 

Better Migration Management 
(BMM) - Component 5 

EU Trust Fund 

British Council, GiZ, 2018 - 2020 

Table 3: Campaigns studied in Phase II 

No. 

Campaign 

Donor 

Implementer 

1.  A New Hope 

DG HOME 

2.  AMIF Niger 

DG HOME 

 Fondazione AVSI, December 
2018- November 2020 

Seefar, January 2019 - July 
2020 

3.  AVRR Western Balkans 

Austrian Federal 
Ministry of the Interior 

IOM, June 2019 - June 2020 

4.  Diaspora in Action 

DG HOME 

ACRA, October 2019 - March 
2021 

5. 

IDIM-A Afghanistan 

Dutch Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs 

Internews, May 2019 - April 
2021 

6. 

InfoMigrants 

DG HOME 

7. 

InfoMigtrain 

DG HOME 

France Medias Monde, 
Deutsche Welle, ANSA, January 
2019 - December 2020 

NOVAFRICA, January 2019 - 
December 2020 

8.  Migrants as Messengers 2 

Dutch Ministry of 
Foreign Affairs 

IOM, April 2019 – March 2022 

9.  Migrant Media Network 

German Federal Foreign 
Office 

Open Culture Agency, January 
2020 - December 2020 

10.  RMC Network 

German Federal Foreign 
Office 

Seefar, March 2020 - November 
2020 

112 

 
 
 
 
Data collection  

Table 4: Data collection tools used in Phase 1 and 2 

Data collection tool 

Analytical value 

Desk review I 

Focused on providing an understanding of literature on evaluation and 
best practices of irregular migration awareness-raising campaigns. 

Desk review II 

FGDs and IDIs with 
potential migrants, 
community 
members, returnees 
and smugglers 

In-depth interviews 
with potential 
migrants, returnees, 
and transit migrants 

Key informant 
interviews (KIIs) with 
donors 

KIIs with 
implementers and 
external consultants 

Focused on generating a review of data from campaign documents and 
reports collected during campaign implementation. These included 
objectives, associate indicators, outputs and outcomes, Monitoring and 
Evaluation (M&E) activities and lessons learned. 

Focused on providing insights into family, peer and community 
perceptions of campaign effectiveness and dynamics as well as exploring 
migration motivations, decision making processes and other contextual 
perceptions of irregular migration. 

Focused on providing insights into migrants’ perception of campaign 
effectiveness as well as exploring migration motivations, decision-making 
processes and other contextual perceptions of irregular migration. 

Explored the donor’s perspectives on the realities of campaign design, 
implementation and evaluation.  

Explored implementers’ perspectives on the realities of campaign design, 
implementation and evaluation. 

113 

 
 
Table 5: Number of samples collected by data collection tool and country in Phase 1 

114 

 
 
 
 
 
Table 6: Number of samples collected by data collection tool and country in Phase 2 

Limitations  

Conducting a rigorous evaluation of each selected campaigns was beyond the scope of this 
study.  Instead,  the  study  reviewed  campaign  evaluations  where  available  as  well  as  other 
available documents to understand campaign effectiveness and identify best practices.  The 
following table lists methodological and practical limitations of the study including mitigation 
measures.  

Table 7: Key methodological and practical limitations 

No. 

Limitation 

Mitigation 

  Practical Limitations 

1. 

During fieldwork, the number of COVID-19 
cases in Turkey, Gambia, and Afghanistan 
increased rapidly. The risk of contracting 
COVID-19 limited the ability of enumerators 
to find qualified contacts that fit the criteria for 
the quantitative survey, as well as the ability 
to conduct surveys in person. 

2. 

Conducting surveys over the phone 
presented challenges such as survey fatigue 
and higher difficulty in building trust with 
survey respondents. 

Research participants were identified by 
reaching out to local community organisations, 
NGOs, and campaign implementers. Facebook 
was also used as a tool to collect contact 
information of potential migrants. Further, 
enumerators relied on a snowball strategy where 
initial survey respondents were asked for further 
contacts interested in participating in the study. 
In all countries, surveys were mostly conducted 
over the phone. 

Enumerators communicated the estimated time 
to complete the survey to help prevent survey 
fatigue. Enumerators were chosen based on 
their communication skills and experience in 
building trust in phone surveys. 

115 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

Many respondents were unable to recall the 
specific name of the campaign they 
remember seeing, or the organisation that 
implemented the campaign. 

Enumerators asked respondents to describe the 
campaign as well as any organisations that the 
respondent was able to recall. This information 
was later used to approximate campaigns based 
on provided information. 

Even though Iraqi Kurdish transit migrants 
were initially identified as a target group to be 
surveyed in Turkey, the research team was  
not successful in hiring a qualified Iraqi 
Kurdish enumerator who had the prerequisite 
contacts in the migrant community. 

Border closures due to COVID-19 meant that 
the research team was unable to travel to 
conduct training for field coordinators and 
enumerators in-person. 

It was discussed to hire an external contractor to 
fulfill this gap in our fieldwork. However, a cost-
benefit analysis and discussions with the donor 
led to the decision not to study Iraqi Kurdish 
transit migrants. 

Most training was conducted remotely. During 
field research, the research team put additional 
effort into daily data quality assurance.  

Identifying and surveying potential irregular 
migrants in Niger was especially difficult due 
to their low phone connectivity. Enumerators 
found that transit migrants were unlikely to 
own phones with SIM cards that were 
operational in Niger. Furthermore, the risk of 
COVID-19 meant that migrants were rarely 
found in public.  

Small  incentives  were  provided  in  the  form  of 
transportation  and  communication  costs 
to 
encourage  survey  respondents  to  travel  to  a 
location  to  meet  the  enumerator  in-person  to 
conduct the survey.  

Enumerators conducting the interviews in person 
were trained on safety regarding COVID-19, 
including keeping distance and wearing face 
coverings when meeting survey respondents. 

  Methodological Limitations 

7. 

Response rates were lower than expected 
when recontacting respondents to conduct 
the survey after initial screening. This 
limited the amount of randomization 
we were able to conduct when selecting 
candidates for our quantitative survey. 

Enumerators also implemented techniques such 
as, following up at different times of the day over 
several days, contacting through different 
methods, and texting or messaging respondents 
to schedule a time to complete the survey 
beforehand, to improve response rates. 

8. 

Many respondents were unable to recall the 
specific name of the campaign they 
remember seeing, or the organization that 
implemented the campaign.  

Enumerators kept a record of the description of 
the campaign from the respondent as well as any 
organizations that the respondent was able to 
recall. This information was later used to 
approximate campaigns based on provided 
information. Furthermore, during data cleaning, 
campaign names that were similar to an actual 
campaign currently active in the country of the 
respondent were grouped under that campaign. 

116 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The received project documents differed in 
the level of detail and comprehensiveness. 
This meant that the level of information 
available across campaigns differed. This 
limited some conclusions on the 
effectiveness of specific campaign 
methods.  
Further, the timeliness with which project 
documents were provided varied, meaning 
that not all project documents could be 
reviewed before tool design as originally 
planned. 

9. 

Where possible, the study team used KIIs with 
implementers to obtain a) additional documents 
not previously shared, and b) verbal information 
that may not have been included in less 
comprehensive project documents. Where verbal 
information provides the basis for a finding in this 
report, we highlight this as the source of 
evidence. Further, this report highlights the limits 
of information where necessary and does not 
make claims that are not supported by evidence. 

117 

 
 
 
 
 
 
GETTING IN TOUCH WITH THE EU 

In person 

All over the European Union there are hundreds of Europe Direct information centres. You can find the 
address of the centre nearest you at: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en 

On the phone or by email 

Europe Direct is a service that answers your questions about the European Union. You can contact 
this service: 

– by freephone: 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (certain operators may charge for these calls), 

– at the following standard number: +32 22999696, or  

– by email via: https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en 

FINDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE EU 

Online 

Information about the European Union in all the official languages of the EU is available on the Europa 
website at: https://europa.eu/european-union/index_en 

EU publications 

You can download or order free and priced EU publications from: https://op.europa.eu/en/publications. 
Multiple copies of free publications may be obtained by contacting Europe Direct or your local 
information centre (see https://europa.eu/european-union/contact_en). 

EU law and related documents 

For access to legal information from the EU, including all EU law since 1952 in all the official language 
versions, go to EUR-Lex at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu 

Open data from the EU 

The EU Open Data Portal (http://data.europa.eu/euodp/en) provides access to datasets from the EU. 
Data can be downloaded and reused for free, for both commercial and non-commercial purposes.