How does ITERP work ?

In each country, ITERP establishes collaborations between the research teams that study the prevention of radicalisation, the organisations dedicated to supporting prevention programmes, and the political parties responsible for such programmes.

The consortium’s approach is to construct evaluation tools in partnership with the organisations being evaluated.


The managers of the evaluated programmes are directly involved in the evaluation process. Associations can refuse the publication of the results of these evaluations. ITERP does not disseminate information concerning the identity of the organisations or the people involved. All data collected during the interviews and meetings with the team remains anonymous.

This anonymous data is then modelled mathematically to analyse correlations among the profiles of the people receiving support, the type of organisation, the theories of change at the foundation of the prevention program, age, etc.

    The four main actors of ITERP are :

  • 1.Coordinators of the CVE programmes (Ministers of the Interior, inter-ministerial prevention services, etc.);
  • 2.Clinicians or social workers who work in radicalisation prevention organisations whose primary interest is learning about how to evaluate their actions and their work;
  • 3.Researchers, who learn from their exchanges with one another, are exposed to new scientific methodologies and compare contexts;
  • 4.Security services, which identify new forms of violence and can help identify contextual factors of violence.

The consortium focuses on three areas of research :

Area 1

Evaluation of radicalisation prevention methods in collaboration with organisations.

Area 2

Ethics of evaluation and the impact of evaluations on stakeholders.

Area 3

Comparison of radicalisation contexts and profiles.

The consortium focuses on three areas of research:

  • Organizing international workshops to build evaluation capacity,
  • Comparing different evaluation methods and evaluation processes,
  • Selectively evaluating primary, secondary and tertiary prevention programmes, in consultation with CVE services and practitioners,
  • Developing a network of experts and professionals working on evaluation,
  • Writing reports to help cities, states or security services better identify risks and improve their evaluation skills,
  • Publishing books and scientific literature on mechanisms to prevent violent extremism worldwide,
  • Providing context-specific strategies to the CVE services.

This international research programme will make it possible to answer the following questions:

  • Do the differences in the contexts and profiles of radicalised people necessitate distinct methodological approaches to evaluate ?
  • Which programmes work best for which types of profiles ?
  • Does the training or experience of the workers play a role in a prevention programme’s success ? 
  • What are the different theories of change underlying these programmes and what are their impacts on radicalised people ?