Cases within the Syrian Hope Forum initiative are managed through five interconnected procedural and quantitative stages. The process begins with receiving proposals and prioritizing cases, culminating in tracking stakeholder responsiveness, measuring impact, and documenting outcomes. This mechanism aims to organize civic participation, document issues, and pursue follow-ups in a verifiable and transparent manner.
-
Propose an Issue (Proposal & Classification Stage)
Case proposals are accepted throughout the month via the submission form on the Propose an Issue page, and similar proposals are merged under a single case file.
At the end of each month, the total number of accepted proposals is calculated. A minimum threshold of 50 accepted proposals is required for a case to be adopted within the general track. Exceptional consideration may be granted to cases below this threshold if verified indicators point to severe harm, with explicit documentation of the exception rationale. Urgent threats to life or safety bypass the monthly schedule and are activated immediately via the Fast-Track procedure.
The baseline priority coefficient starts at 1.00, to which applicable criteria weights are added according to the following schedule:
- Threat to life or physical safety: +0.40
- Need for urgent, time-sensitive action: +0.30
- Infringement on fundamental rights (education, health, basic freedoms, housing): +0.25
- Threat to basic needs or livelihoods: +0.25
- Significant extended long-term impact: +0.20
- Affected highly vulnerable groups (children, elderly, persons with disabilities, IDPs): +0.20
Final Weight Formula: (Priority Coefficient + Applicable Criteria Weights) * Accepted Proposals = Final Weight
The case achieving the highest final weight is selected to open the next Hearing Session cycle. In the event of a tie, the case with the higher priority coefficient takes precedence. If a tie persists, the selection rationale is formally documented.
-
Hearing Sessions (Listening Stage)
A digital hearing session is opened for the selected case for a period of 7 days via the Hearing Sessions section to collect direct clarifications, field insights, and specific digital mandates from affected stakeholders using secure forms adhering to the Data Minimization principle.
The minimum participation threshold for a hearing session is established based on the Final Priority Coefficient:
- Standard Priority (Coefficient <1.30): 35% of accepted proposals.
- Moderate Priority (Coefficient between 1.30 and <2.00): 25% of accepted proposals.
- High Priority (Coefficient ≥ 2.00): 20% of accepted proposals.
Fractional figures are rounded up to the next whole integer. Submissions are valid if complete and relevant to the case file, excluding obvious duplicate entries.
If the minimum participation threshold is not met within the 7 days, a 3-day extension may be granted provided that submissions have reached at least 80% of the required threshold. If the threshold remains unmet after the extension, the active hearing cycle is closed and its records archived without being construed as a lack of case significance.
Once the minimum threshold is met and the hearing session period expires, the case advances immediately to the session report drafting phase.
-
Session Reports (Documentation & Endorsement Stage)
Upon completion of the hearing session, the Forum compiles a documented session report synthesizing the case, verified clarifications, and civic demands, maintaining a strict distinction between verified facts and estimates.
Concurrently, a "Public Endorsement" form is opened for 7 days to measure community support for the demands. Each individual is limited to one endorsement per case following data processing and identity anonymization.
The minimum final endorsement threshold is established according to the following schedule, subject to the defined minimum and maximum caps per priority level:
- Standard Priority (Coefficient < 1.30): Accepted proposals × 1.5 (minimum 200 endorsements / maximum 1,000 endorsements).
- Moderate Priority (Coefficient between 1.30 and < 2.00): Accepted proposals × 1.0 (minimum 150 endorsements / maximum 750 endorsements).
- High Priority (Coefficient ≥ 2.00): Accepted proposals × 0.75 (minimum 100 endorsements / maximum 500 endorsements).
If endorsements reach at least 80% of the required threshold within the 7 days, a 3 day extension is applied.
Upon reaching the required threshold, the Forum dispatches official communications to relevant stakeholders, attaching the session report and verified demands with a standard response deadline of 14 days. Endorsement collection remains open for an equivalent period (14 additional days) alongside follow-up efforts.
If total endorsements reach 3 times the required threshold without receiving a response, the Forum activates escalation protocols: submitting formal escalation briefs to oversight entities, sharing the case file with relevant media outlets and civic/humanitarian organizations, or launching a digital campaign to intensify advocacy.
-
Public Briefing (Follow-up)
The Forum publishes periodic updates via the Public Briefing section to inform the public of case progress, official communications, and received responses.
-
Impact Results (Closure & Archiving Stage)
The Forum compiles a final evaluation report published via the Impact Results section detailing the case trajectory, actions taken, and verified results, classifying the file publicly under one of the following statuses:
- Full Resolution of Demands
- Partial Resolution
- Documented Non-Response Report (as of tracking date)
- Ongoing Tracking Without Definitive Outcome
- Unable to Proceed (with explicit disclosure of reasons)
All case records, including proposals, collected clarifications, reports, and communications, are permanently preserved within the Forum’s Civic Archive to safeguard collective documentation integrity. Case files may be reopened upon the emergence of new verified data warranting further follow-up.
Operational Notes
- Procedures, decisions, and outcomes are documented across all stages. The numerical counts of proposals, participation, and endorsements serve strictly as organizational benchmarks for prioritization and engagement measurement; they do not in themselves constitute sole proof of a case's validity, severity, or exclusive representation of Syrians. Data accuracy, identity anonymization, and participant safety remain absolute ethical and technical imperatives throughout all operational phases.
- The absence of a response does not in itself constitute agreement or rejection of the demands by the entity concerned, but is formally documented as "Non-Response" up to the tracking date.
- Amendments may be introduced to this Operational Workflow, and such updates shall take effect immediately upon publication.
Last Updated:
October 2026