
On 14 January 2026, the RAPID team, led by Jillur Rahman, Deputy Director, RAPID, held a technical meeting with Mr. Aminul Arifeen, Programme Manager, Social Protection Policy Reform and Planning, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), to discuss the scoring analysis for the final review of the National Social Security Strategy (NSSS).”
The session allowed the team to review the proposed scoring approach in a structured manner, covering the assessment criteria, the basis for justification, and the arrangements for maintaining consistency across themes and data sources. It also helped clarify expectations around interpretation and documentation, so that the scoring outputs remain transparent, comparable, and aligned with the overall assessment framework. This meeting was a part of a wider series of engagement sessions with UNDP that will be convened periodically as the review progresses, ensuring that emerging findings are validated, analytical choices remain well-grounded, and the report is strengthened through iterative technical inputs.
On 11 December 2025, Research and Policy Integration for Development (RAPID) and Cabinet Division, jointly organised a Workshop. Mr Mohammad Khaled Hasan, Additional Secretary (Coordination), Cabinet Division, delivered the welcome and closing remarks. Ms Zaheda Parveen, Secretary (Coordination & Reforms), Cabinet Division, chaired the session, while Dr M Abu Eusuf, Executive Director of RAPID, moderated the workshop. Dr M A Razzaque, Chairman, RAPID, delivered the keynote presentation.
As part of the NSSS review work, six focus group discussions were conducted in November and December across three upazilas, Shahrasti (Chandpur), Bakshiganj (Jamalpur), and Derai (Sunamganj), engaging social protection beneficiaries alongside other locally relevant stakeholders. These discussions were used to document how programmes were experienced in practice, including how people learned about entitlements, whether eligibility and selection processes were understood as fair, and how payment and service delivery arrangements were navigated at the local level. Participant also shared lived realities on adequacy and predictability of support, practical barriers faced by older persons, women, and low-income households, and the extent to which grievance and feedback channels were known, trusted, and used. The combined evidence from the three sites provided a structured basis for triangulating beneficiary experience with administrative and policy review findings, particularly where implementation realities differed across locations and programme types.