IASC Task Team on Funding for Preparedness

1
Resourcing IASC Preparedness Efforts - Tracking
Humanitarian Funding for Preparedness

• IASC Task Team on Funding for Preparedness
  Humanitarian Financing Group

2
IASC Focus on Disaster Preparedness

• The case for more and predictable funding for
  preparedness IASC involvement
• The Pilot Survey of Funding Humanitarian
  Preparedness in the Field
• Resourcing IASC Preparedness Efforts the Way
  Forward

3
The case for more and predictable funding for
preparedness - IASC
4
The case for more funding (contd)
5
Pilot Survey on Funding Humanitarian
Preparedness
6
THE EXERCISE Pilot Survey

• Summer 2010 Sample of six countries (Colombia,
  Ethiopia, Indonesia, Madagascar, Nepal,
  Tajikistan) and one region (West Africa) where
  there is both a significant presence of
  humanitarian actors and a high risk for natural
  disasters.
• A) to understand what kind of preparedness
  support activities humanitarian agencies carry at
  country level and B) to understand in broad terms
  how such activities are funded.
• Out of the six target countries, five provided
  data concerning a total of 236 recent and
  on-going preparedness support activities.
• West Africa CAP and Medical Corps global
  submission.

Country Number of reporting organisations Number of reported projects/activities
Nepal 13 66
Colombia 10 17
Indonesia 10 48
Ethiopia 10 38
Madagascar 16 67
7
LIMITATIONS Pilot Survey

• Limited sample size
• Definition of preparedness
• Under-reporting
• Selective reporting
• Identification of funding source

8
BRUSH STROKES Pilot Survey
Broadly, a confirmation of what was already
known 1) Many humanitarian organisations engage
in a variety of preparedness support activities,
and these target local actors at least as much as
the organisations themselves. 2)
Humanitarians engage in short-term, small-scale
initiatives alongside multi-year, multi-million
Dollar programmes with a seeming lack of
coherence and consistency projectisation.
Target (1) Target (2) Target (3) Target (4) Target (5)
  108     93     130   77   104
Up to 6 months(including one/treeday events) 6-12 months More than 12 months(including permanent or on-going activities)
55 39 80
Less than USD 100,000 USD 100,000 500,000 USD 500,000 1 million More than USD 1 million
99 29 13 27
9
BRUSH STROKES (contd)
Lack of coherence and consistency seemingly
reflected in funding 1) The funding levels
reported may be misleading and do not correspond
to other pieces of evidence (e.g. regional
CAP). 2) A variety of funding sources likely
to reflect an ad hoc, opportunistic
approach. 3) Lack of predictability a major
obstacle to going to scale.
Full funding Partial funding No funding
137 42 19
Humanitarian funding stream Development funding stream Budgetary/Internal resources
  58     23     72  
10
MAIN CONCLUSIONS Pilot Survey

• Fragmented approach amongst implementers and
  donors counters what is required coherence and
  programmatic approach
• Lack of predictability in funding makes it
  difficult to go to scale
• Going to scale will also require substantially
  more volume
• Humanitarian preparedness laying ground for
  transition to recovery/development

11
Resourcing IASC Preparedness
12
Resourcing IASC Preparedness - The Way Forward