SC UK’s experiences with Central Emergency Response Funds (CERF)
Summary of evaluation report1
In May 2007, Save the Children UK (SC UK) surveyed all of its field programmes operating in countries where Central Emergency Response Funds (CERF) had been granted over the year. This was a follow up to a published position paper on CERF in January 2007, which argued that unless non-governmental organisations (NGOs) achieve direct access to CERF funding, the CERF would never achieve its full potential. The January paper highlighted several concerns, including the speed of forward disbursements, lack of transparency, problems in United Nations (UN) /NGO relations in the field and poor communication.
Of the 37 countries that had received CERF funding in 2007 at the time of the survey, SC UK was operational in seventeen. Of those 17, SC UK had successfully applied for grants in two countries - Mozambique and Liberia. The Somalia response team also benefited from CERF, through CERF funded UN cargo flights that assisted SC UK relief programming in Hiran region.
Currently, each UN agency requires using its own sub-agreement form with NGOs. Also, overhead costs still need to be negotiated on a case-by-case basis that takes time. Experience in Mozambique revealed that CERF did not provide the critical jump-start funding for either UN agencies or NGOs in the wake of the flooding in February 2007. According to the Inter-Agency real-time evaluation of the response to the February 2007 floods and cyclone in Mozambique, there would have been considerable delays in assistance had UN agencies and NGOs not had their own seed money to begin operating right away. The report also states that "the most difficult area of the CERF was the application for funds for NGOs via the CERF".
According to the SC UK survey it is problematic that UN agencies do not adequately keep track of when and how much CERF funding is passed through to NGOs. Without these data, it is impossible to gauge the impact of CERF funding on beneficiaries. To its credit, the CERF Secretariat has introduced new reporting requirements which should improve the transparency. The UN and the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) are now required to submit an annual report, including lessons learned on accessing funds from the CERF and analysing its impact. The Humanitarian/Resident Coordinator (HC/RC) annual reports are meant to document forward disbursements to NGOs.
Another finding from the survey is that the relationship between the UN agencies and NGOs in the field varies greatly. Mutual suspicion and a lack of communication can prevail in certain contexts, and a lack of transparency feeds this problem. SC UK found that there was confusion (and scepticism) amongst Country Directors about the UN agencies' motivations for applying for CERF funding. There was a perception that they use the CERF to 'top up' their own budget shortfalls, which is not the intended use of CERF. In two countries, SC UK Country Directors made clear how frustrated they were at being excluded from the decision-making processes. In both cases, they were assured they would be consulted next time.
Several of the SC UK programmes were simply unaware that CERF funding had been granted to the countries in which they work. This points to not only a lack of communication but also to the state of UNNGO relations.
SC UK, Oxfam and representatives from UN agencies attended a CERF Training of Trainers in April 2007, which helped finance staff understand better the mechanisms, limitations and opportunities with the CERF. Trainings from the Humanitarian Liaison Support Unit in the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) have also helped the wider NGO community - particularly field based staff - know more about the CERF.
SC UK makes a number of recommendations regarding the CERF:
- The CERF Secretariat should establish pre-approval procedures or standardised Letters of Understanding (LoU) between the CERF Secretariat and NGOs with proven competency. Alternatively, a standardised global LoU would also be useful between any UN agencies and NGOs with proven capability.
- The CERF Secretariat and UN agencies must continue to improve the transparency of CERF funding, including regular public reporting of the speed and impact of CERF funding for humanitarian programmes on the ground. There should be clear guidelines for timing, minimum percentage of funds to NGOs and percentage of overheads.
- The CERF Secretariat should pursue a project tracking system, to track funds all the way from CERF to beneficiaries.
- The CERF Advisory Group and UN member states must hold UN agencies accountable to higher levels of transparency and speed for disbursal of funding from the CERF, in order to improve this important mechanism and better demonstrate impact for beneficiaries on the ground. A real-time evaluation of CERF's speed and transparency should be piloted.
- The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) Working Group and CERF Secretariat should navigate a way to allow NGOs with established capabilities direct access to CERF funding, in order to improve the timeliness and effectiveness of humanitarian response.
1SC UK (2007). Save the Children's Experience with CERF in 2007. May 2007. Available from http://www.scuk.org
More like this
FEX: Review of NGO engagement with the humanitarian reform process
Summary of report1 Women wait for a WFP general food distribution in Kabul A recent report analyses the current state of global humanitarian reform efforts from a...
FEX: Evaluation of cluster approach in Mozambique
Summary of evaluation1 Women displaced by floods wait to receive food rations at Chupanga camp, near Caia in Sofala Province. A real time evaluation (RTE) of the response to...
FEX: Shared experiences of Southern Africa crisis
Malawi 2002, Medical Missionaries of Mary distribute Concern funded maize to most needy in Lilongwe Summary of meeting By Marie McGrath (ENN) On November 5th, 2002 a meeting...
FEX: The state of the humanitarian system
Summary of report1 A recent report by ALNAP presents a system-level mapping and analysis of the performance of international humanitarian assistance between 2009 and 2011...
FEX: Grand Bargain: Reform or business as usual?
Views Summary of comments* and review** Location: Global What we know: Inadequate resources are a severe and increasing constraint on humanitarian action in the face of...
FEX: Giving voice to silent emergencies
Summary of editorial1 A recent issue of Humanitarian Exchange focuses on 'Silent Emergencies'. According to the editorial, many emergencies do not attract significant amounts...
FEX: Evolution of a Crisis: a Save the Children UK perspective
By Mark Wright Mark Wright was the Save the Children Programme Officer for Southern Africa from November 2000 to November 2002. This article details Save the Children UK's...
FEX: National and local actor’s share of global humanitarian funding
Summary of report1 Location: Global What we know: Emergency aid funding has risen tenfold in the last 14 years. What this article adds: A recent review of national and...
Blog post: Reflections from ENN - maximizing on the value and potential of the GNC and SUN Movement
ENN has returned from the Global Nutrition Cluster (GNC) annual meeting in Amman, Jordan, where it seemed that everyone was talking about the humanitarian development nexus as...
FEX: ACF review of humanitarian reform
Summary of review1 Action contre la Faim (ACF) has published a review of recent humanitarian reforms that include the Cluster Approach, new humanitarian financing mechanisms...
FEX: Humanitarian financing for older people and people with disabilities
Summary of study1 A recent study quantifies the funding provided by donors to meet the humanitarian needs of two of the most vulnerable groups: older people and people with...
NEX: The Grand Bargain
A new deal for humanitarian aid The 'Grand Bargain' is the name given to a package of reforms to make humanitarian aid financing more efficient and effective. It was launched...
FEX: Global Nutrition Report
This Global Nutrition Report (GNR) is the first in an annual series. It tracks worldwide progress in improving nutrition status, identifies bottlenecks to change, highlights...
FEX: ALNAP review of humanitarian system
Summary of published report1 A recently published report, commissioned under ALNAPs2 Humanitarian Performance Project, set out to chart the performance and progress of the...
FEX: One UN for nutrition in Afghanistan - Translating global policy into action to tackle wasting
This is a summary of a Field Exchange field article that was included in issue 63 - a special edition on child wasting in South Asia. The original article was authored by...
FEX: Meeting on approaches to address moderate malnutrition in emergencies
The Emergency Nutrition Network (ENN) and Save the Children UK (SC UK) recently held a meeting on approaches to address moderate malnutrition in emergencies (29th-30th May...
FEX: Swaziland Cash and Food Transfer Programme
By Rosie Jackson Rosie Jackson currently works for Save the Children UK as an Emergency Food Security & Livelihoods Advisor. Based in London, she provides technical support to...
FEX: Save the Children
Name: Save the Children Federation Incorporated (SC - USA) Head office: 54 Wilton Road Westport, CT 06880 Sub head office: 2000 M Street NW, Suite 500, Washington DC...
FEX: Retrospective qualitative analysis of an infant and young child feeding intervention among refugees in Europe
Summary of MSc thesis By Alexandra Svoboda Alexandra Svoboda is a student on the MSc Nutrition for Global Health course at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine...
FEX: Global Nutrition Cluster Rapid Response Team
By Ayadil Saparbekov View this article as a pdf Lisez cet article en français ici Ayadil Saparbekov has been in a position of the Deputy Global Nutrition Cluster...
Reference this page
SC UK’s experiences with Central Emergency Response Funds (CERF). Field Exchange 33, June 2008. p28. www.ennonline.net/fex/33/scuk
(ENN_3813)