Dashboard
Protection referral pathway performance
Finding where a referral pathway loses people, using only the fields a performance analysis actually needs — and treating the restraint about what not to collect as part of the deliverable.
1,850
Cases registered
38.8%
Reached a service
69.7%
Referral made, given consent
the pathway's largest single loss
The pathway, stage by stage
| Stage | Cases | Share of registered | Lost at this stage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Registered | 1,850 | 100.0% | — |
| Consented to refer | 1,638 | 88.5% | 212 |
| Referral made | 1,142 | 61.7% | 496 |
| Referral accepted | 757 | 40.9% | 385 |
| Service reached | 717 | 38.8% | 40 |
Figure
Why this exists
- Audience
- Protection cluster coordinator and the GBV sub-cluster
- The decision it informs
- Which service line and which area receive additional capacity, and whether the disability gap needs a separate response.
How these numbers are produced
Every number on this page is computed from the committed dataset file named below by scripts/export/build-project-dashboards.mjs. Nothing is typed by hand and the page contains no script, no external request and no generation date, so rebuilding it on unchanged data produces an identical file.
Source: protection-referrals-2024.v1.csv
What this page does not show
No four-way disaggregation by case category, sex, age and disability: that produces nineteen cells of one, which would identify people. Counts are registered cases, not incidence.