TOOL 20 - Exit strategy guidance - Plan with communities

Sep 2, 2026

TOOL 20 provides guidance for engaging communities in programme and response exit planning. It focuses on how to ensure communities are informed, can participate in decisions about what happens next, and have opportunities to ask questions and provide feedback. The tool explains why community engagement improves quality and sustainability, strengthens resilience, supports “do no harm,” and protects reputation and trust. It also outlines when to start planning, how to plan an accountable exit, and how to coordinate communication, follow-up, and monitoring after closure.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryGeneral

FormatDOCX

Pages11

Reading Time4 min

AccessFree to download

Purpose of this tool

Why is it important to engage communities in exit strategies?

When to start planning the exit strategy

How to plan an accountable exit strategy

Planning with the community

Communication & feedback

Follow-up and monitoring

Case study – Stopping water trucking in Haiti

Additional resources and reading

TOOL 20: Exit strategy guidance Contents of this document HYPERLINK \l "_Purpose_of_this" \h Purpose of this tool HYPERLINK \l "_Why_is_it" Why is it important to engage communities in exit strategies? HYPERLINK \l "_When_to_start" \h When to start planning the exit strategy HYPERLINK \l "_How_to_plan" How to plan an accountable exit HYPERLINK \l "_Planning_with_the" Planning the exit with the community HYPERLINK \l "_Communication_and_feedback" Communication & feedback HYPERLINK \l "_Follow_up_and" Follow-up and monitoring HYPERLINK \l "_Case_study_–" Case study – Stopping water trucking in Haiti HYPERLINK \l "_Additional_resources_and" Additional resources and reading Purpose of this tool This tool provides guidance on engaging communities in planning programme and response closures, ensuring they are well informed, can participate in decisions about what happens next, and have opportunities to provide feedback or ask questions. This tool focuses specifically on exit planning with communities and does not cover exit planning with local authorities or other organisations, or the administrative aspects of closing a programme or response. Different types of programmes and responses will require different approaches to exit planning with communities. For example, a short-term emergency operation may have limited resources or activities to hand over, versus a long-term resilience programme, which has community capacity strengthening as its core aim. Regardless of the type of programme or response, it is critical communities are engaged, informed, and able to ask questions and provide feedback, when support is coming to an end. This tool provides ideas and suggestions on how to ensure this happens, and can be used in full or in part, depending on the needs and type of programme or response. Why is it important to engage communities in exit strategies? Closing a programme or response can be difficult for the National Society, for staff and volunteers, and the community. Engaging communities in decisions about the closure, and maintaining open two-way communication throughout the process, can help to limit some of the negative effects of a programme or response ending. For example: Quality and sustainability of outcomes: Engaging communities and planning a proper handover increases the chance that improvements implemented through the programme or response will be continued after it closes. For example, if a borehole has been installed in a community it is important to spend time planning how it will be maintained, by who, and what training or resources are needed to do this. Otherwise, there is a risk the borehole will not be maintained or repaired, meaning the initial aim to provide people with clean, safe water will not be met, and the resources and time invested will have been wasted. Strengthening community resilience: The process of planning programme and response closures with community members, strengthening their skills and capacities to take over, and handing control of resources and activities to them, empowers communities and supports long-term resilience. Do no harm: Packing up and leaving with limited warning can put people at risk as they will not have time to prepare how to cope without the support provided through the programme or response. For example, if cash grants are ending, people need to time to plan ahead and find alternative ways to meet their needs. There can also be risks to the wider community. For example, ending cash grants can impact the local economy, or handing over resources without proper consultation can cause tension in the community or increase existing power imbalances. Reputation and trust: Poorly planned and communicated programme and response closures damage the relationship and trust between the community and the National Society. This can limit people’s willingness to engage with the National Society in the future and reduce staff and volunteer acceptan

FAQs

Why should communities be engaged in exit strategies?

Engaging communities helps limit negative effects when a programme or response ends. It improves the quality and sustainability of outcomes, strengthens resilience, reduces “do no harm” risks, and supports reputation and trust.

When should exit strategy planning start?

Ideally, exit strategies are discussed during the planning and design phase so handover steps are built into workplans, timelines, and budgets. If not planned early, discussions should begin as soon as possible in the programme or response cycle.

What does an accountable exit strategy require?

It ensures community members participate in end-of-programme decisions, clearly communicates what is ending and what happens next, provides channels for questions and feedback, keeps staff and volunteers informed, and includes short-term monitoring and contact details after closure.

Sep 2, 2026

Upload by Caleb Sterling