Consolidated Appeals Process

Consolidated Appeals Process
Name	Consolidated Appeals Process
Abbreviation	CAP
Formed	1990s
Type	Humanitarian coordination mechanism
Headquarters	Geneva

Consolidated Appeals Process

The Consolidated Appeals Process is a humanitarian coordination mechanism that aggregates United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs appeals and those of United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, World Food Programme, United Nations Children's Fund, and other United Nations Development Programme partners into a single planning and fundraising instrument for crises such as the Darfur conflict, the Syrian civil war, the Haiti earthquake (2010), and the Horn of Africa droughts. It serves as a bridge between field-based planning by International Committee of the Red Cross, Médecins Sans Frontières, Oxfam International, Save the Children, and donor coordination fora involving United States Agency for International Development, the European Commission Humanitarian Aid Office, and national ministries in capitals such as London, Paris, Washington, D.C., and Ottawa.

Overview

The Consolidated Appeals Process brings together agencies including World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization, International Organization for Migration, United Nations Population Fund, and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies alongside local partners like Kenya Red Cross Society and Bangladesh Red Crescent Society in integrated plans for crises such as the 2014 Gaza conflict or the 2015 Nepal earthquake. It compiles humanitarian needs, strategic objectives, sectoral projects, and budgetary requirements to present unified calls to donors such as the United Kingdom Department for International Development, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Government of Japan, and philanthropic actors like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

History and Development

Developed in the wake of lessons from multi-agency responses to events like the Rwandan genocide and the Balkans conflict (1990s), the Process evolved alongside policy instruments such as the Good Humanitarian Donorship initiative and agreements reached at forums including the World Humanitarian Summit and meetings of the Inter-Agency Standing Committee. Early pilots drew on coordination models used in the Somalia famine (1992), and later iterations assimilated guidance from the Sphere Project and the Transformative Agenda. Institutional actors shaping the Process included senior officials from UNICEF, UNHCR, WFP, and donor representatives from Germany, Norway, and Netherlands.

Objectives and Scope

Primary objectives include harmonizing appeals across sectors represented by Education Cannot Wait, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and humanitarian clusters for Health Cluster and Protection Cluster to reduce duplication and to prioritize assistance for crises such as South Sudanese Civil War and Yemen crisis. The Process targets populations affected by armed conflicts like the Iraq War, natural disasters like the Indian Ocean tsunami (2004), and protracted displacement exemplified by the Palestinian refugee situation. It aims to align agency plans with donor priorities articulated by bodies such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and commitments under instruments like the International Health Regulations where relevant.

Structure and Components

The Consolidated Appeals Process comprises planning tools (capabilities assessments, Multi‑Sectoral Needs Assessments) developed by teams involving Cluster approach (humanitarian) leads such as WHO for health, UNICEF for nutrition and education, UNHCR for protection and shelter, and OCHA for overall coordination. Components include Humanitarian Needs Overviews, Strategic Response Plans, Flash Appeals for sudden onset crises like the Nepal earthquake (2015), and Consolidated Appeals for protracted situations such as the Afghanistan conflict (2001–2021). Field-level structures invoke Humanitarian Country Teams, Resident Coordinator offices, and donor liaison groups that mirror the modalities used in responses to the Hurricane Katrina aftermath and the 2005 Kashmir earthquake.

Implementation and Coordination

Implementation relies on coordination mechanisms where agencies like UNDP, WFP, UNFPA, WHO, and international NGOs co-design projects, set indicator frameworks in line with United Nations Sustainable Development Goals reporting, and coordinate logistics alongside actors such as World Bank and national disaster management authorities like Federal Emergency Management Agency. Operational coordination often references precedents from the Cholera outbreak in Haiti (2010) response and integrates cash-transfer pilots championed by International Rescue Committee and Mercy Corps. Political and diplomatic engagement with host states—ranging from Sudan to Philippines—is essential to access, protection, and legal frameworks.

Funding and Resource Allocation

Funding appeals consolidated under the Process have been targeted to bilateral donors (e.g., United States Congress, Government of Canada), multilateral instruments like the Central Emergency Response Fund, and pooled funding mechanisms such as the Sudan Humanitarian Fund and the Yemen Humanitarian Fund. Allocation decisions balance needs assessments with donor earmarking practices observed in contributions from Qatar and United Arab Emirates and multiyear commitments influenced by analyses from Development Assistance Committee (DAC). Financial tracking aligns with standards promoted by International Aid Transparency Initiative and audit functions involving offices like UN Office of Internal Oversight Services.

Criticisms and Reforms

Critics—drawing on evaluations by Humanitarian Outcomes, Overseas Development Institute, and academic studies from Harvard University and London School of Economics—argue the Process can produce overambitious budgets, inadequate localization for organizations such as Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication, and donor-driven priorities resembling patterns seen in Afghanistan and Iraq. Reforms proposed include stronger engagement with local civil society groups like Afghan NGO Safety Office, improved needs analysis modeled after Integrated Food Security Phase Classification, and enhanced accountability measures influenced by recommendations from the Global Public Policy Institute and panels convened after the Haiti earthquake (2010). Recent iterations emphasize risk analytics, anticipatory action linked to mechanisms such as Forecast-based Financing, and greater use of pooled funds exemplified by the Emergency Relief Coordinator's initiatives.

Category:Humanitarian assistance