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
Recognition that preparedness& DRR saves lives and is cost-effective
GHD commitment to:
‘Strengthen capacity of affected countries and local communities to prevent, prepare for, mitigate and respond to humanitarian crises
Pillar 5 of Hyogo Framework for Action – Strengthening disaster preparedness for effective response

4. The case for more funding (cont’d)
Norwegian commissioned study on the feasibility of a thematic CAP
current aid architecture is ill-suited for funding preparedness/DRR
preparedness activities represent a very small percentage of overall humanitarian expenditure
small group of humanitarian donors fund the bulk of preparedness
financing allocations happen after the “fact”
lack of clarity on overall leadership and ad hoc coordination

5. Pilot Survey on Funding Humanitarian Preparedness
SWG Preparedness Survey – 2010
Framework Project, revealed
Funding Gaps

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 48
Ethiopia 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/tree day 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” (cont’d)
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
Informal IASC GHD Consultation October 2010
IASC Working Group meeting November 2010
3. engage with the GHD with a view to stimulating discussion/supporting work on preparedness funding
2. systematically review country-based pooled funds – CHFs and ERFs
1. year-long tracking of funding for preparedness through the FTS
4. collaborate with the SWG on Preparedness

12. Resourcing IASC Preparedness - The Way Forward
Leadership: IASC Principals ‘New Business Model’
Humanitarian Financing and Preparedness
Advocacy: ECOSOC 2011
Innovative Funding Mechanisms