CERF

Handbook
As of January 2024
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | USING THE CERF HANDBOOK

What you will find in the CERF

Handbook

1. Using the CERF Handbook

2. About CERF
3. Overview of CERF Funding Elements
4. Guidance for Humanitarian/Resident Coordinators
5. Strategic Use of CERF
6. CERF’s Life-Saving Criteria
7. Rapid Response
8. Underfunded Emergencies
9. Navigating the Application Process
10. Guidance for drought requests
11. Common Services (Safety and Security, UNHAS, ETC)
12. Implementation
13. Reporting, Monitoring and Accountability
14. Telling the story of CERF: Communication and Branding
15. Annex
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | USING THE CERF HANDBOOK

Using the CERF

Handbook
The Handbook is a reference tool to find quick answers on the Central Emergency
Response Fund (CERF) as well as a guide to applying for and maximizing the
impact of CERF funds.

Version The CERF Handbook was first published in 2018 and is being updated regularly.
history Parts were updated throughout 2022 and 2023. In August 2023, a chapter on
drought guidance was added and in October 2023, guidance for RC/HCs was
integrated into the Handbook.

The CERF Handbook describes CERF as a humanitarian financing tool and the
activities involved in all parts of the CERF process, from coordinated prioritization
to applying for CERF funds and reporting. You will also find explanations of what is
meant by using CERF strategically, and the context-specific relevance of the CERF
Life-Saving Criteria in different situations.

Who should The Handbook is particularly relevant for those involved in any part of the CERF
cycle at the country level and at headquarters:
use the
Handbook • Resident Coordinators/Humanitarian Coordinators (RC/HC), prioritizing needs
and activities for consolidated CERF applications, endorsing and submitting
proposals within the applications, and submitting timely consolidated CERF
reports 1

1 The Handbook refers throughout to RC/HC and clusters as a matter of simplicity; the
information applies to countries with other coordination setups as well.
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | USING THE CERF HANDBOOK

• The Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) or UN Country Team (UNCT) and Inter-
Cluster Coordination Group (ICCG) who inform on and analyse humanitarian
needs and funding gaps, and make recommendations for CERF support the
RC/HC

• UN agencies as primary CERF recipients and their partners

• Cluster coordinators and sector leads

• OCHA Country Office staff and OCHA Regional Office staff providing guidance
and support to in-country leadership and coordination mechanisms in the
prioritization of needs and the related projects; facilitating inter-cluster needs
analysis; guiding the CERF application process or coordinating and
consolidating the reporting components

• UN agency CERF Focal Points at headquarters and other interested UN staff

• OCHA headquarters staff supporting country-level processes

Though these are the expected primary users of the Handbook, other parties can
also access the Handbook to seek answers to queries regarding CERF.

Intention of The Handbook is a reference designed to provide a broad overview and

understanding of what CERF is and how it works, and to point users in the right
the Handbook
direction to navigate the CERF process. You are likely to find consulting the CERF
Handbook useful when:

• You are part of an HCT or UNCT preparing to recommend that the RC/HC
makes an application for CERF Rapid Response funds

• You are already involved in a CERF application process or supporting its

development (Rapid Response or Underfunded Emergencies funding window),
as OCHA staff, UN agency staff, NGO staff, or staff in the office of the RC/HC

• You have a role in monitoring and reporting on the use of CERF funds

• You are new to the CERF process and want to understand how it works and
the actions that are required

• You may start anywhere in the Handbook using the Table of Contents as a
guide to the topics or questions you most need to review or through digital
search of key words.

• UN and CERF policy and guidance documents are referenced as sources for
the information and for further details you may need. Additional policies,
guidelines, procedures, templates and forms are available on the CERF
website.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | ABOUT CERF

About CERF
CERF is one of the most effective ways to enable the timely provision of life-saving
assistance, including supplies, and protection to millions of people in need.

CERF’s The Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) is a stand-by fund established by
establishment the United Nations General Assembly to enable timelier and more reliable
humanitarian assistance to people affected by natural disasters and armed
conflict. Originally created in 1991 as a revolving fund of US$ 50 million providing
loans to UN agencies, the United Nations General Assembly upgraded the CERF by
adding a $450 million grant element on 15 December 2005 through the resolution
A/RES/60/124 to achieve the following objectives:

• Promote early action and response to reduce loss of life

• Enhance response to time-critical requirements

• Strengthen core elements of humanitarian response in under-funded crises

CERF’s functioning is further described in relevant Secretary-General’s Bulletins,

currently ST/SGB/2020/5.

Since its operational launch in 2006, CERF has proven to be one of the fastest and
most effective ways to support rapid humanitarian response. It is also a lifeline for
those caught up in the world’s most neglected, underfunded and protracted crises.

CERF’s CERF pools voluntary unearmarked contributions from donors around the world
into a single fund. Between 2006 and 2022, CERF has enabled UN agencies, funds
achievements
and programmes as well as implementing partners to provide more than $8 billion
worth of life-saving assistance. This has been made possible thanks to the
voluntary contributions from more than 130 UN Member States and observers as
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | ABOUT CERF

well as regional local authorities, corporate donors, foundations and individuals.

Each year, CERF grants help humanitarian partners deliver critical assistance and
protection to millions of affected people, as described in CERF’s annual reports.

CERF’s The ever-increasing scale and intensity of emergencies points to the need for a
larger CERF to address the growing needs. During the first ten years of CERF global
increased
humanitarian needs have quadrupled while the share of CERF current funding
funding target target against the global requirements has declined. In December 2016, the UN
General Assembly endorsed the Secretary-General’s call to expand CERF’s annual
funding target from $450 million to $1 billion. GA resolution A/RES/71/127 was
adopted in recognition of the significant achievements of the CERF in facilitating
life-saving assistance to crisis-affected people. In addition, it calls upon all
Member States to consider increasing their voluntary contributions to the fund and
invites the private sector and all concerned individuals and institutions to do so.

CERF’s Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC)

management In December 1991, the General Assembly adopted resolution A/RES/46/182 to
structure strengthen the United Nations response to complex emergencies and natural
disasters. The resolution created the position of Under-Secretary-General for
Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator (USG/ERC), to combine
the functions carried out by the Secretary-General's representatives for major and
complex emergencies and natural disasters. The USG/ERC oversees CERF’s
operations on the Secretary-General’s behalf.

CERF secretariat

The CERF secretariat, which is part of the United Nations Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), supports the ERC in managing both
the grant and loan elements. It is responsible for ensuring that the funds are
allocated properly, disbursed in a timely manner, and that use of the funds in
individual countries is reported transparently.

CERF Advisory Group

Established per UN General Assembly in 2005, the CERF Advisory Group provides
the Secretary-General with policy guidance and expert advice on the use and
impact of CERF, through the USG/ERC. Advisory Group members serve in their
individual capacity, and not as representatives of their countries or Governments.
They include Government officials from contributing and recipient countries,
representatives of humanitarian non-governmental organizations and academic
experts. Candidates are nominated by Member States and selected by the
Secretary-General for two-year periods, reflecting a geographical and gender
balance.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | OVERVIEW OF CERF FUNDING ELEMENTS

Overview of CERF
Funding Elements
CERF receives contributions from donors and the money is available in several
components for immediate use at the onset of emergencies.

CERF is comprised of a grant and a loan element. Furthermore, the grant element
is divided into a Rapid Response (RR) and an Underfunded Emergencies (UFE)
funding windows. Approximately two thirds of CERF’s annual budget is allocated
through the RR window, and one third through the UFE window. CERF manages
allocation volumes according to available funds. Each year, CERF funding reaches
affected people in some 50 different countries.

Rapid CERF’s Grant Element

Response Rapid Response (►► Chapter 6) grants are requested by Resident
Coordinators/Humanitarian Coordinators (RC/HC) to provide seed money for life-
saving, humanitarian activities in the initial days and weeks when a sudden-onset
crisis has occurred, or after a significant deterioration in an existing emergency.
CERF RR funds may be used to respond to time-critical requirements and provide
early action to minimize loss of life and damage to social and economic assets.
CERF RR grants are intended to jump-start or expand the immediate humanitarian
response, while additional resources are mobilised. The process is field-driven, in
that typically RC/HCs apply based on an on-the-ground joint analysis of priority
needs. In urgent cases, the ERC can also initiate an allocation.
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | OVERVIEW OF CERF FUNDING ELEMENTS

Anticipatory Anticipatory Action: CERF funding for anticipatory action falls under the Rapid
Response window. It is currently restricted to OCHA-led frameworks, meaning that
Action
requests for formal Anticipatory Action funding outside of these initiatives are not
possible.

Underfunded Underfunded Emergencies (►► Chapter 7) grants target the world’s most
underfunded and neglected crises. Countries with significant unmet humanitarian
Emergencies
needs are eligible for UFE support. Typically twice yearly, the Emergency Relief
grants Coordinator selects countries based on quantitative data analysis of funding levels
and humanitarian needs, risk and vulnerability, and qualitative, contextual
information from consultations with UN agency and OCHA headquarters, NGOs
and other public source documents.

A country can receive RR, UFE and AA allocations in the same year, should the
humanitarian need be present and should the country team demonstrate the
complementarity between the allocations. Similarly, if multiple emergencies occur
in the same country during a short time span, RC/HCs can request multiple rapid
response allocations.

CERF’s loan CERF Loan Element

element As decided by the General Assembly in its resolution A/RES/66/119, CERF
maintains a loan facility of $30 million which acts as a cash-flow mechanism to
ensure a rapid and coordinated response to humanitarian emergencies. The
utilization of the loan element is also be guided by General Assembly resolutions
A/RES/48/57 and A/RES/56/107. The ERC is responsible for determining the
amount to be advanced in each situation.

The organization making the request sends documentation, as follows:

1. A formal letter to the ERC, specifying why the loan is needed, and how exactly
it will be used by way of humanitarian response. The letter must specify that
the loan will be repaid as first charge on contributions received by the agency
for the programme or project.

2. A completed Letter of Understanding (LOU) using the template.

3. A budget for the loan amount using the CERF loan budget template.

4. Copies of pledge/commitment letters received by the agency which provide

evidence that the operational organization will be able to repay the loan (this
requirement can be waived by the ERC).

5. Any other documents required according to the Letter of Understanding (LOU).

6. Loans must be typically repaid within one year from the date of disbursement.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR HUMANITARIAN/ RESIDENT COORDINATORS

Guidance for
Humanitarian/
Resident
Coordinators
Key Points of Engagement in CERF Processes

This note provides a brief overview of key responsibilities of Resident and

Humanitarian Coordinators (RC/HCs) in managing CERF allocations 2. It highlights
key decisions and initiatives to be led by the RC/HC and is applicable to both Rapid
Response (RR) and Underfunded Emergencies (UFE) allocations 3. The OCHA
Country Office will support the RC/HC in managing all aspects of the CERF
process, and where no OCHA office exists the relevant OCHA Regional Office will

2 Additional detailed CERF guidance relating to different aspects of the CERF process can be

found in the guidance section of the CERF website, including the CERF Handbook, the CERF
Life-saving Criteria and the CERF Monitoring Guidance.
3 The main difference is that RR requests are country-driven and linked to new needs, and
typically time-critical in nature, whereas UFE country allocations are decided by the
Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC) once or twice a year based on a global comparative
analysis of humanitarian need and funding levels. It should be noted that this document does
not cover “special allocations” from CERF. Also, CERF Anticipatory Action allocations under
the Rapid Response window are not covered by this note as these are governed by specific
processes and guidance (https://cerf.un.org/anticipatory-action).
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR HUMANITARIAN/ RESIDENT COORDINATORS

support along with the RC Office. OCHA therefore plays a key role in facilitating
CERF processes under the leadership of the RC/HC. Notwithstanding and as
highlighted in the below flowchart, this document outlines some specific areas

where the RC/HC’s direct involvement is expected.

Decide The first key task for an RC/HC is to determine whether to request CERF funding,
whether to based on the humanitarian situation 4. An RR grant may be requested following a
new emergency, a significant deterioration of an existing one, or a change in the
submit a rapid
operational environment. To determine whether a situation falls within the scope
response of CERF’s RR Window, the RC/HC should consider several key questions 5,
CERF funding including what the trigger for the CERF request is, what time-critical interventions
request could be put in place, and the potential comparative advantage of supporting the
allocation response through CERF funding.

Should RC/HCs consider pursuing a CERF RR allocation, they are encouraged to

discuss the possible request with the OCHA country/regional office and
informally reach out to the CERF secretariat (directly or through the OCHA Office)
as early as possible to establish contact before efforts to assemble an application
commence. This will allow the RC/HC to get feedback on the feasibility and

4 Application to the RR Window can be made at any time. Eligibility for the Underfunded
Emergencies Window is determined through a central process that takes place once or twice
per year. In some specific situations the ERC may proactively decide a rapid response
allocation from the global level and inform the RC/HC of this.
5 Further information is available in the CERF Handbook.
(https://cerf.un.org/sites/default/files/resources/cerf_handbook_2018_en.pdf), Chapter 6 –
Rapid Response.
| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR HUMANITARIAN/ RESIDENT COORDINATORS

potential size of a possible allocation. This initial outreach should happen within
days following the event that triggered the request.

Define the A key role for the RC/HCs is to articulate their “strategic statement” on the
intended use of a CERF allocation, explaining its focus, and how it will make an
strategic
impact in the operational context, beyond simply providing additional funding to
vision for the the response. While the RC/HC consults the Humanitarian Country Team
CERF (HCT)/United Nations Country Team (UNCT) 6 in developing this “strategic
allocation statement”, it will ultimately remain under the authority of the RC/HC 7 to set out
the strategy for the allocation, with OCHA country office support.

The strategic statement will be presented to the Emergency Relief Coordinator

(ERC) as a basis for deciding on the allocation. It should therefore be concise and
describe in strategic terms the focus and added value of the allocation to the
overall response and reflect how CERF resources will be leveraged to maximize
saving of lives.

The strategic statement of the RC/HC will serve as the basis for articulating a
focused funding proposal – and is the starting point for prioritising how CERF
funds should be allocated to achieve greater impact. The strategic statement will
also serve as the foundation for reporting on the impact of the CERF allocation at
the end of the implementation period and therefore it should be tangible and
realistic.

In countries with a Country-Based Pooled Fund (CBPF), the strategic statement

should also clarify how the CERF allocation will ensure complementarity with
CBPF funding, based on the comparative advantage of each mechanism and as
part of one “joined-up” strategic approach 8. The strategic statement may also
highlight complementarity with other funding sources. 9

The strategic statement should be submitted to the CERF secretariat as part of

the initial funding request for funding and should precede the development of a
full application. For the RR window, the initial request, with the strategic statement,
should be submitted as quickly as possible following the triggering event to allow
for timely funding decisions. For sudden onset shocks, the statement should be
submitted no later than a week after the event.

6 The strategy will be based on an assessment of humanitarian need and priorities and of
CERF funding’s comparative advantage, and informed by relevant analysis by OCHA,
cluster/sectors groups and other key actors.
7 While developed in collaboration with the HCT the statement should ultimately present the
RC/HC’s strategic vision for the allocation and it is not meant to be a consensus exercise.
8 Please refer to CERF’s website for further information on CERF/CBPF complementarity
9 Including other funding instruments such as for example the Peace Building Fund
| 4 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR HUMANITARIAN/ RESIDENT COORDINATORS

Lead the Once RC/HCs have set a strategy for the use of resources, they should lead an
inclusive process to determine the best possible prioritisation of CERF funding.
process for
The RC/HC’s leadership on this is critical to shift the focus from the implementing
determining organizations’ individual funding goals towards the achievement of collective
the use of results.
resources
The RC/HCs should set out the parameters for the allocation of funds and lead
discussions with partners on the optimal funding “breakdown” across clusters
and agencies to achieve strategic goals. While this should be based on a
consultative process, the RC/HC should not “devolve” this decision-making
responsibility to the working level, such as to the inter-cluster/inter-sector
coordination group. It is also important that the RC/HC ensures that the allocation
is focused on a limited number of projects that will have a significant impact
towards the achievement of the strategic statement, thereby helping ensure a
focus on results and impact and avoiding that the CERF funding is committed
across too many fragmented projects, sectors or geographies.

The RC/HC shall ensure that the needs of the most vulnerable are considered
throughout the CERF process. In this respect, the RC/HC, with support from OCHA,
should see that technical experts 10 and leads on cross-cutting programmatic
priorities, including on cash and voucher assistance especially multi-purpose cash,
gender, GBV, PSEA and disability are engaged in CERF decision-making 11 and
programme design, and that accountability to affected people (AAP) underpins the
CERF allocation design and implementation.

The RC/HC is responsible for ensuring that in-country processes relating to CERF
applications are fast, in particular for time-critical RR allocations. A key objective
of the CERF’s RR window is to ensure that critical, acute and life-threatening
humanitarian needs are met through a timely response. Therefore, it is important
that RC/HCs avoid lengthy consultations at this stage of the process, as delays
may limit the intended impact of CERF funding. 12 For RR requests, the submission
of the full application with project proposals to the CERF secretariat is expected
within a week of the ERC’s initial funding endorsement.

10 Including ideally local experts or organisations.

11 Including as part of UNCT/HCT CERF discussions.
12 To help ensure a timely RR process the CERF secretariat sets out timing benchmarks for
submissions.
| 5 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR HUMANITARIAN/ RESIDENT COORDINATORS

Use the CERF Beyond providing rapid and strategic funding, CERF is also meant to highlight the
urgency for humanitarian action by signalling critical financing requirements. All
allocation for
CERF allocations are intended to be catalytic in leveraging additional funding from
advocacy and other sources. While this should be done collectively by the HCT, with support from
resource OCHA, the leadership of the RC/HC is required for ensuring that CERF’s
mobilisation contribution is actively used to strengthen further resource mobilization efforts.

Even before receiving an allocation from CERF, it is therefore important that the
RC/HC considers opportunities to use CERF funding to leverage additional donor
resources. Given the importance of this aspect, RC/HCs are expected to outline in
their CERF applications how the allocation will be used to support resource
mobilisation and to report on related achievements as part of the final narrative
report and stock-taking exercises throughout the implementation period.

With support from OCHA and recipient agencies, the RC/HC is also expected to
actively communicate and convey the impact of CERF funding to the broader
humanitarian community and to the public.

Oversee The RC/HC is responsible for overseeing the overall implementation of CERF
funding and ensuring that implementation is on track towards the achievement
implement-
of the pre-defined strategic objectives. In this respect, the RC/HC should institute
ation through periodic “check-ins” with the HCT, and particularly cluster leads to discuss
check-ins & progress of the CERF-funded interventions 13. This will help ensure collective
stock-taking ownership of the allocation and allow the RC/HC to monitor that the overall
exercises implementation is on track, and if not, agree on corrective measures with the HCT
as required. These “check-ins” are not intended to be detailed technical reviews
but high-level assessments of progress in meeting strategic objectives of CERF
allocations. In this regard, they can be handled through an “agenda item” in a
standard HCT meeting. It is up to the RC/HC to decide the number of required
“check-ins” based on the nature of the grant and its duration, however it is
suggested that at least one to two are conducted, in addition to the mandatory
interim stocktaking exercise (see below).

In addition to periodic check-ins with the HCT/UNCT, the RC/HC is also required
to lead a more substantive “interim stocktaking exercise” halfway through the
implementation period. The exercise is intended to review progress against the
objectives set out for the allocation and discuss challenges that have/could affect
implementation. The objective of the exercise is to give the RC/HC - and by
extension the ERC – an update on the implementation of the allocation, and more
importantly, to enable corrective actions 14 to be taken if required. The interim

13 HCT/UNCT check-ins may be informed by the outcomes of working-level CERF

discussions and stock-staking at the inter-cluster/inter-sector level
14 These may include the decision to pursue a no-cost extension and/or reprogramming of
the budget of an ongoing CERF project if considered necessary and justified by the RC/HC.
| 6 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR HUMANITARIAN/ RESIDENT COORDINATORS

stocktaking exercise is expected to involve a broader group of participants than

the periodic check-ins, to allow for a more in-depth discussion on implementation
against the strategic objectives of the allocation. The outcome of the interim
stocktaking exercise should be a consolidated interim update report 15 that should
be discussed in the HCT/UNCT before being finalised and submitted to the CERF
secretariat by the RC/HC.

Lead an After- The RC/HC is expected to lead an After-Action Review (AAR), which is essentially
a structured discussion at the end of the implementation period that allows the
Action Review
HCT and cluster leads to collectively reflect on what was achieved through the
and reporting CERF allocation and what lessons were learned. A main objective of the AAR will
be to assess whether the strategic objectives set out for the allocation in the
strategic statement were met. The AAR will also support a discussion of what was
achieved with the grant, what was learned, what follow-up actions should be taken
and what corrective measures can be taken in the future. The AAR meeting should
take place shortly after the conclusion of CERF grant implementation, with relevant
stakeholders, in particular CERF recipient agencies and the HCT/UNCT, as well as
cluster leads and other partners as relevant. With the support of the OCHA Office,
it is the RC/HC’s responsibility to ensure that the AAR is conducted, and that it
addresses the strategic and operational added value of the CERF allocation in a
manner that enables a strong articulation of impact and achievements. The AAR
meeting can be chaired by the RC/HC with support from OCHA, or ideally by an
external facilitator if feasible. The AAR is key in informing the final narrative
reporting on the CERF allocation.

Three months after grant expiration, the RC/HC is required to submit a final
narrative report on the use of CERF funds to the ERC (through the CERF
secretariat), that contains strategic reporting at the level of the overall allocation,
as well as agency reporting at the project level. The reporting shall be based on
the outcome of the AAR. The RC/HC shall personally approve the strategic level
reporting16 that will explain whether and how the strategic statement set out for
the allocation was achieved whether operational targets were met and articulate
how the allocation has been utilized to meet life-saving humanitarian needs. The
final narrative reports are important tools for communicating to the ERC and
CERF’s donors the strategic results of CERF allocations, their strategic added value
and relevant learning obtained through implementation.

15 The CERF secretariat will advise RC/HCs the on the timeline of the interim report and
provide a pre-populated standard template
16 The reporting guidance and template will explain what parts of the report require direct

RC/HC leadership and sign-off.

| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | STRATEGIC USE OF CERF

Strategic Use of
CERF
A strategic use of CERF funds to facilitate a jointly prioritized and life-saving
component of the response, and to support important strategic goals that will have
a longer-term impact, is the optimal way to maximize CERF allocations.

Clear strategic CERF is designed to address the highest priority life-saving needs in a crisis as
focus determined by humanitarian actors on the ground. Due to its speed of response
and inclusive allocation processes, CERF adds strategic value to humanitarian
action beyond the mere amount of money allocated. Particularly when strongly
owned by the RC/HC, UNCT/HCT and OCHA offices, CERF projects have
demonstrated their capacity to realize strategic changes, impacts and results.

While CERF is not intended to address root causes, finance preparedness activities
or serve as core funding for regular planned programmes, it focuses on providing
flexible funding at critical moments, when and where it is needed the most. This
makes CERF an indispensable tool of global humanitarian architecture. As such,
CERF is often one of the first sources of funding to emergencies.

The main consideration the CERF secretariat looks at during the application
process is the compatibility with the Life-Saving Criteria (►► Chapter 5) within
these contextual factors:

• The objectives of an RR application and individual projects are directly related

to the trigger causing an acute humanitarian crisis; the projects are not routine
programmes.
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | STRATEGIC USE OF CERF

• The prioritisation is based on the severity and urgency of the need rather than
solely on funding gaps in a response plan, for maximum life-saving impact.

• The Emergency Relief Coordinator encourages a strategic allocation of CERF

funds, focusing on a limited number of agencies and projects rather than
spreading the limited funding too thinly. Typically, CERF projects should not be
smaller than $100,000 and on average have much higher budgets.

• The implementation period for a RR project is 6 months while UFE projects

typically last 9 to 12 months. The ERC may decide to grant a longer
implementation period for specific allocations or projects. All of the funds
must be expended and all activities completed, including those of
implementing partners, within the implementation period. Projects or activities
that require long lead times to set up and cannot expect to have a life-saving
impact within the timeframe are not appropriate for CERF funds.

• CERF allocations are approved by the ERC to support a joint strategy

developed by humanitarian partners on the ground. The strategy should use
CERF only for highest priority, immediate life-saving activities, while other
funds and contributions are used for longer-term needs, such as
reconstruction and recovery. The aim is to maximize the impact of resources
available through all financing streams by targeting each source, so that
together national resources, bilateral contributions, and pooled funding
mechanisms, including Country-Based Pooled Funds (CBPFs) and CERF
facilitate a coherent response.

Coordination Consequently, during the CERF application process, the Resident

Coordinators/Humanitarian Coordinators (RC/HC) provide a brief overview about
& prioritization
how CERF and other resources will complement each other. This allows for a better
assessment of the requested CERF allocation’s contribution to response efforts in
the country.

Apart from providing timely and flexible funding, CERF processes are also
designed to strengthen humanitarian leadership, improve coordination among
humanitarian actors and increase coherence of the response. Unlike most bilateral
funding that focuses on agencies’ individual outputs, CERF funding is designed to
enable the humanitarian community’s joint response toward collective outcomes.

This strategic added value is achieved through inclusive CERF application

processes lead by RC/HCs and carried out by Humanitarian Country Teams and
clusters with the participation of country- level humanitarian actors. The RC/HCs
should fully own the CERF allocation, and consult relevant stakeholders –
agencies, sectors/clusters, NGOs, local partners, affected people, etc. – to
determine the best use of the funds, including how strategic goals can best be
| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | STRATEGIC USE OF CERF

achieved. RC/HCs and HCTs/UNCTs describe this strategic use of CERF funds in
a ‘strategic statement’ for each request. Guidance for RC/HCs is available here.

Necessary Once the strategic priorities are defined and activities are prioritized, they are
compiled into a consolidated application to the ERC for CERF funding on behalf of
elements for
the country level humanitarian community. This is characterized by the development
prioritizing of a strategic prioritization and operational prioritization, followed by the development of a
activities full application, including projects. This process ensures that CERF funds are
implemented by humanitarian actors in a coordinated manner according to a
coherent strategy. Furthermore, the implementation of CERF funding is later
reviewed and reported on jointly by implementing organizations. CERF gives
incentives to humanitarian actors to participate in these forums that prioritize
CERF funding requests and strengthens the lead roles of RC/HCs and cluster
leads.

The following questions should be addressed when preparing a CERF application:

• Has the RC/HC or their office considered whether a CERF loan or a CERF grant
is suitable before proceeding with the application?

• Has the RC/HC, with the UNCT/HCT, built a coherent and focused approach to
address humanitarian needs taking contextual factors into account?

• Has CERF’s niche for maximum impact been identified, and are CERF funds to
be used to complement other available or expected resources?

• What are the priority life-saving needs and gaps to be addressed with a CERF-
funded response? Can the needs and gaps be addressed within the timeframe
of a CERF project?

• Who, where, and how many people are to be reached with activities?

• What is the impact or change that CERF funds can make?

Implementing CERF stronly encourages localization. Partnerships with implementing partners

(national and international NGOs, Red Cross/Red Crescent Societies and/or
partners
government counterparts) should ideally be in place, and there should be adequate
access and capacity among the partners to implement the activities within the
timeframe. When designing the CERF project’s implementation calendar,
consideration should be given to the time it will take to sign agreements and
transfer the funds to the implementing partners, as this has proven to sometimes be
time- consuming leaving less time for actual implementation.

Advocacy When the ERC communicates to the international community that CERF is
allocating funds to an emergency, messages about the need for additional
resources should be ready to leverage the attention generated by the CERF
| 4 CERF HANDBOOK | STRATEGIC USE OF CERF

funding. Similarly, the RC/HC should use a CERF allocation for advocacy purposes,
to draw attention to an emergency and encourage further donor funding.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | CERF’S LIFE-SAVING CRITERIA

CERF’s Life-Saving
Criteria
To achieve its mandate to enable timelier and more reliable humanitarian
assistance to people affected by disasters and emergencies, CERF follows the
“CERF criteria for eligible life-saving humanitarian action,” or in short, the Life-
Saving Criteria (LSC), which is a document that codifies activities that are eligible
under CERF funding.

The concept CERF funding aims to prioritize life-saving assistance to people in need. To ensure
of the Life- adherence to its mandate, CERF focuses on those most in need. CERF-funded
humanitarian programming must be provided in accordance with International
Saving Criteria
Humanitarian Law, International Refugee Law and International Human Rights
Law, and the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and
independence.

CERF’s Life-Saving Criteria clarify definitions and determine criteria for the CERF
grant elements. The current version of the Life-Saving Criteria was developed
through a collaborative process with humanitarian partners and the Global Cluster
Leads, and was endorsed by the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC) in 2020. The
current version of the LSC codifies important systemic updates on anticipatory
action, gender, people with disabilities, accountability to affected people (AAP)
and other important areas.

Application of The inclusion of an activity in the LSC does not guarantee its inclusion in a
particular CERF application, nor approval for funding. Resident
the Life-
Coordinators/Humanitarian Coordinators (RC/HCs) have the overall authority to
Saving Criteria determine funding priorities in country following an inclusive and transparent
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | CERF’S LIFE-SAVING CRITERIA

consultation process, and the ERC makes the final decision on whether to fund
specific activities.

The LSC guidelines cover general as well as sectoral criteria for both the Rapid
Response (RR) and Underfunded Emergencies (UFE) windows of the CERF, and
thereby also apply to anticipatory action and special allocations.

Contextual The LSC were developed with a range of crises in mind and should be interpreted
in relation to the specific emergency context. The LSC are not an exhaustive list of
issues to be
activities that may qualify for CERF funding; humanitarian activities not reflected
considered in the LSC may be considered for CERF funding based on the specific context. The
context on the ground will guide the determination and an appropriate degree of
flexibility will be exercised regarding funding decisions. Typically, CERF funds will
not be used to address issues that require long-term interventions, or are not
situated in a humanitarian emergency context. However, the ERC has the authority
to make allocations that go beyond the scope of the LSC.

Grey areas The CERF secretariat may sometimes follow up with RC/HCs on “grey areas” – activities
that need more explanation in terms of how the requested activities are “life-saving” in
the particular context. Providing a rationale grounded in the field perspective of the
context can strengthen a request that initially might appear to be outside the remit of
the LSC.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | RAPID RESPONSE

Rapid Response
With CERF Rapid Response (RR) grants, the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC)
allocates funds for sudden onset emergencies or to address a rapid deterioration
within existing crises, in various contexts.

Determining Through the RR funding window, CERF can make funds for life-saving assistance
CERF Rapid available within a short time. RR grants may be requested following a new
emergency or a significant deterioration in an existing situation, allowing UN
Response
agencies and implementing partners to start work right away. As CERF allocations
eligibility aim to meet urgent, immediate needs, they in turn kickstart operations that would
otherwise remain on hold until other resources are mobilized, while the critical
window of opportunity to save lives following a disaster quickly closes. In
summary, three main conditions can be considered for RR eligibility:

• Rapid or sudden-onset emergency

• Sudden or significant deterioration in an on-going crisis

• Time-critical situation

Developing a The process of applying for a RR grant is usually a country-driven process that
gives the Resident Coordinator/Humanitarian Coordinator (RC/HC) overall
joint
authority to determine priority activities and submit a consolidated funding request
application to the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC). Consultations in country with United
Nations Country Team/Humanitarian Country Team (UNCT/HCT) and inter-cluster
coordination mechanism, if present, are key to identifying needs and priorities for
CERF funding.

Typically, the RR process has two parts: First, the RC/HC and country team write a
short request and send it to the CERF secretariat. In urgent cases, this can be a
light request without the project breakdown. If the ERC decides to make an
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | RAPID RESPONSE

allocation, the RC/HC and country team then develop a full-fledged application,
with a strategy and agency projects. In particular urgent cases, the ERC may decide
to allocate funds without a prior request.

Every CERF application is unique and based on country-level needs. Early

consultation is recommended between the RC/HC and the CERF secretariat on the
possibility of rapid response funding, before sending a funding request.

Procedures & CERF aims to alleviate needs that have been triggered by an emergency, and not:
root causes, chronic or underlying issues or activities that can be done through
criteria for
routine programming. To determine whether the potential request falls within the
application mandate of CERF’s Rapid Response window the following key question might help
to take a decision:

Rapid or sudden-onset

• What: Response to new rapid onset humanitarian situations where fast action
is critical.

• Trigger: What is causing an acute humanitarian situation?

Examples of triggers include:

 Conflict: new conflict, new displacement

 Health-related: new disease outbreaks, such as cholera or Ebola

 Natural disaster: earthquake, storm, tsunami, floods, volcano eruption

 Human-made disaster: explosion or fire

• Rationale: What information can be provided to demonstrate the humanitarian

nature of the new crisis (how many people are affected, where, when, how
severely)?

Significant deterioration in an-ongoing crisis

• What: Response to a significant deterioration of ongoing humanitarian crisis.

• Trigger: What event happened, when (must be recent), that caused the
significant deterioration?

Examples of a deterioration include:

 Escalation of violence resulting in new and significant displacement

including projected displacement

 Refugee arrivals, including projected refugee arrivals, above planning

figures
| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | RAPID RESPONSE

 New disease outbreak within a complex emergency

• Rationale: Present information that demonstrates the deterioration of the

humanitarian situation and timing of the event.

Time-critical intervention

• What: Response actions that need to take place during a specific window of
opportunity to address out of the ordinary humanitarian needs (i.e. not core
programming or regular seasonal planning).

• Trigger: What is the trigger or event for time-critical needs?

Examples of time critical needs include:

 New access that allows humanitarian partners to identify new needs

within a community or in a location that was previously inaccessible

 Drought or food insecurity: the situation must be, or projected to be,

significantly worse than usual, demonstrated by comparing current data
or projections (for example, rainfall, crop production/crop loss,
malnutrition prevalence) with a five-year trend and a lifesaving niche for
CERF needs to be clearly identified.

• Rationale: What is the assessment or information that shows an immediate

response is required to out of the ordinary needs?

Navigating the A RR allocation is requested and managed by a country’s RC/HC and may be done
at any time a crisis meets the criteria of the RR window and the RC/HC considers
application
it necessary to access CERF funds.
process
1. Contact the CERF secretariat: The first step is for the RC/HC to inform the ERC
of a rapid response emergency or early warning indicators of an imminent
emergency—done at the working level by the RC/HC or OCHA office contacting
the CERF secretariat. This should be done as soon as possible.

2. Provide the rationale: Develop an initial CERF request outlining the rationale
for and objectives of a request for CERF funding, including the RC/HC’s vision
for the use of a CERF allocation in the form of a strategic statement. The CERF
request will be presented to the ERC for initial decision-making.

3. Initiate the prioritization process: When the ERC decides to make an allocation
the RC/HC leads the process to prioritize activities and projects that will be
included in the CERF application package.

As RR grants are for new, deteriorated or time-critical emergencies, timeliness and

speed are crucial. RC/HCs should send a request as soon as possible after the
onset of an emergency or, if possible, even before. Under its Rapid Response
| 4 CERF HANDBOOK | RAPID RESPONSE

window, CERF supports the full spectrum of emergency humanitarian assistance,

from anticipatory action (thorough AA frameworks) via early action to rapid
response. Broadly speaking, there are four scenarios:

• Before a shock: This applies to situations where there are high-quality, high-
confidence forecasts that an event will happen imminently with a very high
probability, or projections from renowned institutions and based on a rigorous
methodology that a trend will worsen critically. This could include, for example,
tropical cyclones forecast to make landfalls, the IPC’s food insecurity
projections showing a severe deterioration, or projections for further
displacement. In these cases, the ERC may consider a request for CERF
funding before the shock occurs.

• After a shock, before the impact: A shock has occurred, but the peak
humanitarian impact has not. For instance, the rainy season has failed but
food insecurity is only expected to significantly deteriorate in several weeks or
months. If there are high-quality forecasts or projections for significant
humanitarian consequences due to the shock, the ERC may consider a request
for CERF funding before those consequences fully materialize.

• After the shock and impact: Some shocks are difficult or impossible to
foresee, such as conflict, earthquakes or volcano eruptions. In situations
where a shock has occurred and has caused humanitarian consequences,
RC/HCs should send a CERF request as quickly as possible. Time is of the
essence so that affected people can receive assistance as quickly as possible.
The RC/HC does not have to wait until full needs assessments have been
conducted or a flash appeal published. Instead, CERF can make rapid
response allocations even based on preliminary, incomplete information, as
long as there is a good-enough picture of the scope, scale and severity of the
humanitarian situation.

These first three scenarios can be combined. For instance, people have already
fled their homes but more are expected to flee in the coming weeks. Or food
insecurity has already worsened but is expected to further deteriorate in the
coming months. There is a fourth scenario:

Contingency requests: In some cases, a future shock may occur, but the
probability of this happening is either not clear or not very high. In this case, the
country team can work with the CERF secretariat to prepare for a potential CERF
request should the shock occur. There should be a solid basis for such a
contingency request, ideally a contingency plan developed by the country team
with clear scenarios including the number of people who could be affected and the
amount of funding that would be required for the overall humanitarian response to
each scenario.
| 5 CERF HANDBOOK | RAPID RESPONSE

Once the ERC has decided to allocate funds, the full application including project
proposals should be submitted within a week. CERF encourages agencies to make
use of the opportunity of choosing an early start date for their CERF projects, up
to 6 weeks before the disbursement date but not before the onset of the
emergency. This will allow agencies to start implementing CERF funds as soon as
they are certain funding will come, and prior to actual disbursement. Once the
consolidated CERF RR application is submitted by the RC/HC, the CERF secretariat
reviews the request, and makes recommendations to the ERC on the overall RR
allocation amount, and on individual projects. During this phase, the CERF
secretariat continues to liaise with relevant country-level actors as necessary –
directly or through the OCHA Country Office – to clarify or revise aspects of the
submission.

Allocation CERF RR grants are meant to ‘jump start’ responses or support the rapid scale-up
of current responses rather than fully fund a response or target all the needs of the
amount
affected population. Similarly, CERF RR funds are not meant to fill funding gaps or
pipeline breaks in ongoing programs. Sectors, projects and activities should
therefore be identified and prioritized by the country team.

CERF cannot fund 100% or a large share of project requirements. Normally, CERF
contributes to a limited amount of the total requirement to meet the most time
critical and life-saving requirements, but this may vary depending on the context
and situation. The requested amount should reflect the urgent life-saving
humanitarian requirements for the new crisis that triggered the application to
CERF.

When evaluating the amount for a RR allocation, the CERF secretariat considers
several factors including, but not limited to:

• Scale and severity of the needs

To estimate the scale and severity of needs, CERF consults a wide range of
stakeholders, both in OCHA and outside, and sources, including sitreps, press
releases, media reports and specialized organizations that provide
information on the scale and severity of current or forecasted humanitarian
needs.

• Overall funding requirements and the proportion requested from CERF

As noted above, CERF can only fund a portion of the overall funding
requirements for the response to a specific humanitarian emergency.

• Comparison with other emergencies or allocations

In 2021, CERF improved its ability to compare new funding requests with past
allocations by developing a real-time dashboard and a group of statistical
models. The dashboard that allows the CERF secretariat to quickly filter and
find the best comparison list (e.g., allocations to past droughts in southern
| 6 CERF HANDBOOK | RAPID RESPONSE

Africa) and that provides relevant summary statistics (e.g., allocated amount
per person targeted). The multi-variate regression models allow the CERF
secretariat to calculate a historical reference average range for a new
allocation based on four factors: the emergency type, overall funding
requirements for the response to the specific humanitarian emergency, the
number of people targeted, and a country’s overall humanitarian situation
measured by the CIRV score (see chapter on Underfunded Emergencies).
These comparisons provide one of many inputs for the decision-making, they
never determine new allocation amounts as each emergency is unique.

• Operational capacity
This includes, as proxy indicators, implementation delays and no-cost
extensions associated with previous CERF allocations.

• Activities proposed for funding

Activities must be within the scope of the life-saving criteria and directly linked
to the new or deteriorating emergency.

• Complementarity with other resources

Especially OCHA-managed country-based or regional pooled funds, other
funds such as the Peacebuilding Fund or the Education Cannot Wait fund, and
other funding sources.

• Available funds in CERF and forecasted income

CERF prudently manages its cash balance and continuously plans its cash-
flow for the short and medium term based on income and expenditure
projections, and in addition, always aims to keep a reserve for large,
unforeseen emergencies.

Anticipatory CERF provides funding for OCHA-facilitated anticipatory action frameworks that
have been endorsed by the RC/HC and ERC. Today, it is possible to predict with
Action
increasing confidence the occurrence and humanitarian impact of certain shocks.
By combining different analytical approaches, out-of-the-ordinary events can not
only be predicted, but their projected humanitarian impact can proactively be
mitigated based on pre-identified anticipatory actions. This has proven to be
faster, more dignified and more cost-effective than traditional humanitarian
response. Recognizing the merits of targeted anticipatory action, over the past
few years, the CERF has taken on an increasing role in supporting the set-up and
financing of anticipatory action pilot initiatives that are led by OCHA and designed
for and in close collaboration with the broader humanitarian system. More
information is available on the CERF and OCHA websites on AA.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES

Underfunded
Emergencies
With CERF Underfunded Emergencies (UFE) grants, the Emergency Relief
Coordinator (ERC) allocates funds for emergencies that have not attracted or are
unlikely to attract sufficient and timely funding for life-saving activities.

Determining Typically twice each year, through the CERF UFE funding window, the Emergency
CERF Relief Coordinator (ERC) allocates CERF grants for life-saving activities in the least
funded and forgotten humanitarian emergencies. The selection of humanitarian
Underfunded
emergencies for the two UFE allocation rounds is made up of two components: (1)
Emergencies a quantitative analysis of data on humanitarian needs, funding levels, risk and
eligibility vulnerability, and (2) qualitative, contextual information collected from
consultations with UN agency and OCHA headquarters, NGOs and various
documents. The UFE window usually accounts for approximately one third of CERF
grants annually.

Launch of the Underfunded Emergencies round

Each UFE round begins with the circulation of the CERF UFE Guidance Note, typically
in October or November for the first round and in May or June for the second round.
The UFE Guidance Note specifies the amount of funding to be allocated; provides
the selection criteria; and provides a timeline for the round.

As explained in the Underfunded Emergencies Methodology Notes, the CERF

secretariat begins by identifying the most underfunded emergencies with severe
humanitarian needs among the countries with a Humanitarian Response Plan or
equivalent appeal, known as “HRP countries.” Simultaneously, the headquarters
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES

representatives of the UN agencies and OCHA that participate in the Underfunded

Emergencies Work Group (UFEWG) identify and recommend a specific number of
countries without an HRP or common appeal plan, referred to as “non-HRP
countries.”

Quantitative & qualitative data analysis

The selected emergencies are those that have not attracted or are unlikely to
attract sufficient and timely funding for life-saving activities, as judged by:

1. Degree of funding shortfall 17

The funding analysis identifies emergencies with the highest levels of

underfunding, the primary criterion for inclusion in a UFE round. The data for
the funding analysis of HRP countries comes from the Financial Tracking
Services (FTS).

In the analysis, available funding for humanitarian programming is compared

to funding requirements to calculate the funding level. The funding level of
each eligible HRP country is compared to the average funding level.
Emergencies whose funding level is below the average will be considered for
UFE funding.

2. Analysis of risk, vulnerability, and severity of humanitarian needs and type of

programs/activities

For the emergencies defined as underfunded during the funding analysis, the
level of risk, vulnerability and severity of humanitarian needs is assessed. Data
on all aspects of risk, vulnerability and humanitarian needs are combined into
a single index – the CERF Index for Risk and Vulnerability (CIRV).

3. Consultations

The draft funding, risk and vulnerability analysis is shared with the UFEWG,
NGO partners through relevant consortia, and other parts of OCHA. CERF holds
consultations with each group before finalizing the analysis.

Allocation Based on the funding, risk and vulnerability analysis, the headquarters
representatives of the UN agencies and OCHA that participate in the UFEWG
decisions
recommend a long list of countries to the CERF secretariat. Taking the analysis,
consultation and nomination process into account, the CERF secretariat
recommends countries for selection to the ERC. The recommendation to the ERC
may include one or several scenarios depending on the outcome of the analysis
and consultations and will help ERC decision-making. The final country selection

17 Refers to funding received against total annual requirements.

| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | UNDERFUNDED EMERGENCIES

can differ from the scenario(s) proposed by the CERF secretariat as it may be
informed by additional ERC considerations that complement the analysis by the
CERF secretariat. The ERC's final decision includes both which countries will be
included in the UFE round and the funding apportionment.

The ERC decides on and announces CERF UFE country allocations, usually in
December for the first round and July for the second round. The total allocation
amount per round depends on the resources available for the CERF grant
component. The objective is to frontload emergency funding, by disbursing a
larger proportion of the annual amount set aside for the CERF UFE window in the
first round.

Prioritization The ERC asks the RC/HCs of the selected countries to develop a clearly prioritized,
implementable and focused strategy for the CERF allocation in collaboration with
process
their HCT/UNCT. The prioritization strategy is the basis for the UFE country
submission and should provide a brief overview of the needs and gaps while
identifying the critical activities, target groups and geographical locations that will
be addressed with CERF support. It should also explain how the CERF funds will
contribute to strategic goals. The prioritization strategy provides an opportunity
for the RC/HC and the HCT/UNCT to build a coherent and focused approach to
address specific humanitarian problems within a complex context. The CERF
secretariat will provide feedback on the strategy and ensure that it meets CERF’s
criteria. Once the strategy is finalized UN agencies begin drafting proposals in line
with the agreed strategy.

For countries with a Humanitarian Needs Overview (HNO) and with an HRP or
similar humanitarian strategy, the RC/HC may use the HNO's needs assessment
and the HRP's strategic priorities, cluster objectives and projects to inform the
CERF application. However, it’s important that the CERF allocation has a clear
strategic focus within the broader HRP priorities.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | NAVIGATING THE APPLICATION PROCESS

Navigating the
Application Process
Collaboration takes place under the leadership of the Resident
Coordinator/Humanitarian Coordinator (RC/HC) within the existing coordination
structure at field level and with the CERF secretariat.

Who may The RC/HC has the overall authority to determine funding priorities in the country.
submit CERF UN agencies do not submit requests directly. Only grant requests submitted by
RC/HCs are considered for both RR and UFE.
requests?
Who is leading The CERF process is a collective effort by in-country humanitarian partners under
the leadership of RC/HCs. That leadership is critical to shift the focus from the
the CERF
implementing organizations’ individual funding goals toward the achievement of
process collective humanitarian outcomes, through a coordinated and coherent response.

The CERF secretariat reviews the prioritisation for evidence of the leadership,
collaboration, inclusiveness, consultation, participation, and engagement of the
humanitarian actors in the field. The best placed actors to deliver the response
should be selected for CERF funding.

Who is eligible United Nations agencies, funds and programmes are eligible for CERF funds for life-
saving activities in emergencies around the world.
to receive
CERF funding? CERF Grant: UN operational funds, programmes and specialized agencies may be
direct recipients of CERF grants, while OCHA cannot receive CERF funding.
Furthermore, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society and
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | NAVIGATING THE APPLICATION PROCESS

governments may receive funding as implementing partners of agencies that

receive a CERF grant. CERF encourages localization.

CERF Loan: UN operational funds, programmes and specialized agencies,

including OCHA, may apply for a CERF loan.

Who is Essential responsibilities for CERF allocations are managed at the country level.
involved in the The HC or RC/HC leads and manages the CERF submission process, ensuring the
CERF strategic use of CERF funds through rigorous prioritisation. They have the authority
process? to include or exclude activities/projects in the submission package.

The Humanitarian Country Team (HCT), or UN country team when there is no HCT,
participates in the strategic prioritisation process.

Clusters (orsectors where there are no cluters) advise the RC/HC and HCT on
needs, the strategic use of funds and the adherence to CERF's Life-Saving Criteria.

UN Agencies draft their own projects proposals and implement CERF-funded

projects in line with the objectives of the CERF application.

NGOs including local NGOs actively participate in the cluster/sector structures, serve
as members of the HCT, provide inputs to the prioritisation, and implement projects
in partnerships with UN agencies and IOM. Relevant government partners (e.g.,
health personnel under the Ministry of Health) and Red Cross/Red Crescent
societies can also implement UN agencies’ CERF projects. But agencies cannot
transfer CERF funds to another UN agency.

OCHA Country Offices (and Regional Offices) provide guidance and support to the
HC and Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) to advise on rules and procedures of
the CERF, facilitate inter-cluster coordination to organize joint needs assessment,
provide information on funding status of sectors and specific projects during the
prioritization of needs and the related projects.

The OCHA Country and Regional Offices also play a key role in compiling
information and preparing an application for CERF funding, reviewing draft project
proposals, and liaising with the CERF secretariat to ensure revision of applications
as per the comments for time-efficient project approval.

OCHA Operations and Advocacy Division (OAD) desk officers use their knowledge
of the country situation to provide advice and guidance to the OCHA Country
Offices on the CERF process at country level, and can advise the CERF secretariat
about the humanitarian needs in the country context to justify CERF funding for
projects under consideration. Country submissions are reviewed by the CERF
secretariat in liaison with OAD. OAD alerts CERF as soon as a new crisis emerges
or significantly deteriorates.
| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | NAVIGATING THE APPLICATION PROCESS

How to The CERF application template, which is available in English and French, is
comprised of the Strategy and individual agency Project Proposals.
complete the
application The strategic and operational prioritization should be drafted by OCHA or the RC’s
template? Office based on guidance and decisions by the RC/HC and the contributions
provided by the UNCT/HCT, cluster or sector leads, agencies and their
implementing partners.

The project proposals should be completed by the requesting agencies in line with
the agreed strategy. The OCHA or RC’s office consolidates inputs into one joint
document.

Standard In 2021, CERF introduced standard indicators. In their project proposals, agencies
should use these standard indicators wherever possible. Only where these
Indicators
indicators are not relevant should agencies develop custom indicators. The
standard indicators are avaialble on the CERF website.

How to Each CERF project proposal must include a budget which details the costs to be
funded by CERF and which strictly adheres to the CERF budget template and
complete
budget guidelines. The CERF budget template is in line with the United Nations
budget tool? Development Group (UNDG) budget categories. The budget should reflect
activities described in the project narrative, meaning that it should be relevant and
eligible, and include sufficient details to provide a transparent overview of how
CERF funds will be spent.

CERF typically does not fund the cost of existing or established offices or structure
or staff unless costs have increased in relation to the implementation of CERF
projects.

As each UN agency prepares its own budget, UN agencies cannot pass on CERF
grants to other UN agencies as implementing partners. If an agency will implement
activities in several sectors, it should ideally submit one single project proposal
covering all relevant sectoral interventions to be funded by CERF.

CERF has developed an Excel budget tool for preparing CERF proposal budgets,
that is designed to compile the correct calculations of various budget items. The
calculations can then be transferred to the CERF application for submission.
People The CERF secretariat tracks people targeted directly, who are defined as first-hand
targeted recipients of goods or services funded by the CERF. The CERF secretariat tracks
people indirectly targeted separately. These are people whose situation may have
improved due of the implementation of CERF-funded interventions.

The CERF secretariat tracks people targeted and people reached at project, sector,
application and global levels.
| 4 CERF HANDBOOK | NAVIGATING THE APPLICATION PROCESS

• Planned people targeted are estimated by country-level partners in CERF

funding applications

• People reached are reported against planned figures by country-level partners

in RC/HC reports on the use of CERF funds.

Since CERF applications usually include several projects in several sectors, these
projects often provide assistance to the same people. Therefore, CERF undertakes
measures to avoid double counting of people targeted and reached. This is done
in two steps:

• First, in CERF applications and reports, sector leads are asked to remove
duplications at sector level if targeted groups overlap between respective
projects.

• Second, at application and report level, focal points are asked to remove
duplications if targeted groups overlap between sectors.

Figures aggregated following this methodology are entered into CERF’s Grants
Management System, which allows for generating various types of overviews.
Given the complexity of this tracking, this methodology will never be an exact
science and can only lead to best possible estimates.

Submission Proposals for both UFE and RR are sent as an email package to the CERF
secretariat (please copy cerf@un.org).

For the timeliest response to emergencies, CERF aims to disburse funds as soon
as possible. Upon receipt of a project approval by the ERC, the grant-requesting
agency must submit the signed project approval letter immediately—CERF aims to
receive the counter-signed project approval letter within no more than two working
days. Submissions of counter-signed letter should be sent to the ERC and copied to
the CERF secretariat (cerf@un.org).
| 5 CERF HANDBOOK | NAVIGATING THE APPLICATION PROCESS

Pre-  The RC/HC has signed off on the application, in particular the strategic
submission statement
checklist  Projects adhere to the overall strategy and agreements; the proposals and the
chapeau match

 Beneficiary figures add up and are consistent throughout the project proposal

 Beneficiary figures between the chapeau and project proposals are consistent

 Geographic locations are consistent with agreed priorities and across projects

 Standard indicators are used in the results framework, wherever possible

 Duration of activities is consistent with agreements

 Cluster/sector and project narratives complement each other; synergies are

apparent

 Monitoring plan is included in proposals

 How the agency plans to implement is clear (implementing partners, timeline)

 Results framework matches budget

 Cost effectiveness of the intervention is clear

 Costs in budget are reasonable according to context

 Costs in budget are eligible as per CERF budget guidance

 Mainstreamed elements are apparent (protection, gender, age, AAP, etc)

 Do No Harm is considered

 Documents are clean with no comments or tracked changes

| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR DROUGHT REQUESTS

Guidance for
drought requests
This section provides basic guidance for country teams that want to request
funding from CERF’s rapid response window for drought, especially in the early
stages of the response or for early action to get ahead of the expected impact of
drought. Understanding that every CERF application is unique and based on
country-level needs, this guideline outlines some standard parameters on eligibility
for CERF rapid response funding, and what may or may not be suitable for CERF
funding. While these basic situational parameters can help field partners
determine whether a situation may potentially qualify for CERF support, meeting
the criteria carries no guarantee of funding as many other factors determine
whether a CERF grant is provided in a given context. Country teams and
Humanitarian or Resident Coordinators – or OCHA country or regional offices on
their behalf – should contact the CERF secretariat as early as possible to discuss
the situation.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR DROUGHT REQUESTS

Definition of Drought is the absence of water. It is a creeping phenomenon that impacts many
sectors of the economy and operates on many different time scales. There are
Drought18
four types of drought:

4. Meteorological drought happens when dry weather patterns dominate an area

5. Hydrological drought occurs when low water supply becomes evident,

especially in streams, reservoirs, and groundwater levels, usually after many
months of meteorological drought

6. Agricultural drought happens when crops become affected

7. The concept of socioeconomic drought relates to the supply and demand of

various commodities to drought

Meteorological drought can begin and end rapidly, while hydrological drought
takes much longer to develop and then for the situation to recover. Its first impact
will usually be on agriculture.

Humanitarian Drought is among the most devastating of natural hazards – crippling food
production, depleting pastures, disrupting markets and, at its most extreme,
consequences
causing widespread human and animal deaths. Drought can also lead to increased
of drought migration from rural to urban areas, placing additional pressures on declining food
production. Herders are often forced to seek alternative sources of food and water
for their animals, which can create conflict between pastoral and farming
communities. 19 Affected households often employ negative coping mechanisms
(such as selling assets, child/forced/early marriage, selling children, begging,
prostitution, etc.) to cope with the impact of drought.

18 NOAA – National Centers for Environmental Information

19 FAO - Drought
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR DROUGHT REQUESTS

Eligibility In contrast to rapid-onset emergencies, droughts develop slowly. Thus, additional

steps need to be taken to show the severity of the humanitarian situation, and
requirements
explain how the situation is exceptional, as opposed to the regular seasonal cycle
in a specific context.

Measuring drought: The country team should compare actual data, forecasts or
projections – for example rainfall measurements, seasonal precipitation
forecasts, crop production crop loss data, food prices – against a comparable time
(such as a 5-year average or, at a minimum, the previous year) to show that the
current or projected situation is significantly worse.

Measuring humanitarian impact: Where a drought is already occurring or

predicted to occur, the country team should present information, including actual
data, forecasts or projections, to show that the humanitarian situation has or is
expected to deteriorate substantially. This is important to demonstrate the
humanitarian impact of the drought and to show that a time-critical response can
help mitigate a humanitarian crisis. This should include a comparison both to the
situation before the drought and to a comparable time (such as a 5-year average
or, at a minimum, the previous year). Aspects of the humanitarian impact that
could be covered include food security, malnutrition prevalence or admission
rates, water availability, diseases outbreaks that can be linked to the drought, or
negative coping mechanisms.

Capacity to respond to the crisis: The request should demonstrate that the
emergency is beyond the capacity of the Government and local actors to respond
and that UN agencies and their partners have the capacity to implement
programmes quickly.

Additional • Response linked to current drought: All sectors, projects and activities must
guidance directly respond to the needs arising from the drought, whether it is unfolding
or has already occurred. The country team should not prioritize sectors or
activities that respond to pre-existing needs or those that address chronic
issues – these activities should be funded through regular programme funds.
The CERF request should be based only on new or additional needs, resulting
from the drought.

• Timing: CERF’s niche is in the earliest part of the response (funding for Rapid
Response is usually given for a 6-month implementation period. Agencies can
use an early start date for their projects, up to 6 weeks before the
disbursement date.
| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | GUIDANCE FOR DROUGHT REQUESTS

• Prioritize and focus: The scope of the application should be restricted to

prioritized outcomes and sectors. The country team and agencies should be
highly selective when prioritizing activities for CERF projects with a focus on
interventions that align with CERF’s niche and comparative advantage, and
they should ensure strategic linkages to longer-term programmes supported
through other funding. For example, in the Food Security sector, consider
including general food or cash distributions rather than asset creation
activities; consider quick-impact activities such as distribution of quick
maturing seeds rather than activities focusing on the longer-term uptake of
drought-tolerant crops. The objective is to maximize the impact of the CERF
grant for drought-affected people where feasible.

• Ensure coherence in the application and the response: Describe how projects
are interrelated and complement one another. Are the same affected people
being targeted by multiple sectors for maximum impact? Do the short-term
CERF-funded interventions align with other planned or ongoing humanitarian
or development programmes with a longer time horizon?
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | COMMON SERVICES SAFETY AND SECURITY

Common Services
Safety and Security
Guidelines Proposals to CERF should convey critical security gaps that have to be addressed
in order to carry out emergency humanitarian activities. CERF funds for common
safety and security will only be considered under two circumstances:

1. A new emergency where there are critical security gaps for common safety
and security services

2. In on-going complex emergencies, on an exceptional basis, when there is a

deterioration of the situation and when humanitarian activities are hampered
by insecurity

CERF funding for common safety and security generally falls under two basic
categories:

1. Security equipment to achieve UN MOSS compliance: Only security equipment,

which are part of the approved country MOSS or a specific Security Risk
Assessment may be funded. Funding for other equipment must be funded by
other donors or by the agency itself.

2. Specific security projects, e.g., Security Information Operations Cell, which can
benefit all UN field agencies and INGOs/NGOs; surge deployment of security
officers (but no new recruitment); management of emergency
communications system; and quick refresher trainings to enhance the safety
and security of UN Personnel as part of a larger project.
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | COMMON SERVICES SAFETY AND SECURITY

Considerations for CERF submissions and specific explanation for narrative and
budget lines

Beneficiary of the service: Provision of safety and security services must benefit
the wider humanitarian community.

Sustainability: The requesting agency should ensure that the project is

sustainable. The overall management and all operational costs of the deployed
infrastructure and personnel should be described in the project. The activities
should be financially sustainable beyond the contribution from CERF, e.g., with all
participating agencies agreeing to cost-sharing in the future.

Staff costs: CERF will typically only support security as a common service. CERF
does not cover personnel at the regional or headquarters levels.

Training: CERF only funds quick refresher training. Training costs should be
limited.

Initial safety and security assessments: As per other sectors, CERF will not fund
initial assessments for provision of safety and security services. Consideration will
only be given to exceptions for inter-agency assessments including initial safety
and security requirements on a case-by-case basis.

Funding UNDSS cannot receive CERF funding directly. Thus, UNDP (in rare instances WFP)
submits CERF project proposals on behalf of UNDSS, countersigns the approval
arrangements
letter and receives funding. As a result, UNDP (or WFP) is responsible for the
implementation of the project, accountability and oversight, and financial
reporting. Where UNDSS does not have a presence, other agencies that provide
common security and safety measures can also apply for CERF funding.

All CERF project proposals need to be cleared by the Designated Official (DO) and
UNDSS headquarters, prior to the RC/HC submitting the proposal to CERF. 20

The DO has the responsibility to ensure that security requirements and initiatives
are an integral component of humanitarian operations. The DO is responsible for
ensuring the efficacy and appropriateness of the overall security sector.

20UNDSS is responsible to ensure that the clearance is obtained as quickly as possible so as

not to impede the RC/HC's submission.
| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | COMMON SERVICES SAFETY AND SECURITY

Humanitarian Air Service

(UNHAS)
Guidelines CERF allocations can provide funding for UNHAS to support the response of the
humanitarian system or core humanitarian activities under specific requirements.

Support Humanitarian Action: The proposed inclusion of UNHAS in a CERF

allocation should be based on an assessment of the benefits of UNHAS to the
humanitarian response, taking into consideration factors such as availability of
safe and reliable commercial air services, security concerns, distances, etc. Per
UNHAS mandate, the provision of air services for passengers and cargo should
benefit the entire humanitarian community, including national and international UN
staff members and NGOs present in the operational areas. 21

Coordination Requirements: Where applicable, UNHAS submissions should be

endorsed by the local UNHAS Users Group Committee, before endorsement by the
RC/HC. The submission should clearly outline the reasons for the service and be
in line with WFP’s Air Transport Manual. It should include, as much as possible,
information on the number of organizations using the service, destinations to be
served, estimated passenger figures and cargo tonnage, expected flight hours, a
resource plan, including user fees and a sustainability or exit strategy.

Resource Mobilization (catalytic effect): The CERF allocation is a complementary

financial mechanism that should be leveraged to advocate for and mobilize
additional resources. In addition to WFP’s resource strategy which may include
cost-recovery schemes, donations or cost-sharing by agencies, country teams and
the local User Group Committee who request UNHAS common air services should
support the mobilization of sustainable funding for UNHAS.

Sustainability: WFP and the country team should ensure that the UNHAS project
is sustainable. The overall management and operational and recurrent costs of
the deployed infrastructure and personnel should be described in the project.

Clearances: WFP must have all necessary clearances for the UNHAS services to
be fully functional.

Requirements Rapid Response grants should address the need to deliver life-saving assistance
in a timely manner. They should assist humanitarian organizations to quickly
for RR funding
access areas and safely deliver life-saving assistances to beneficiaries. Therefore,

21 For further direction on passenger definition see WFP Air Transport Manual.
| 4 CERF HANDBOOK | COMMON SERVICES SAFETY AND SECURITY

CERF Rapid Response funds can normally be made available for UNHAS
operations in the following three situations:

1. The establishment of new air operations for transport of supplies and

humanitarian personnel. This will include parts of the start-up costs and
service for the initial phase of the operation. It should be a timely intervention
and serve as a springboard for other donors to come on board.

2. The expansion of existing services if there is a need for additional locations or

higher frequency of flights due to deterioration in the humanitarian situation.
The need to expand should be documented and justified along the criteria
mentioned above.

3. The need for increased operational capacity due to a change in security phase
in an ongoing humanitarian operation. The need for these flights will have to
be carefully evaluated by the Designated Official in coordination with UNDSS
and the wider humanitarian community.

Requirements If there are UNHAS operations in a country selected for an underfunded

emergencies allocation, the RC/HC can propose those operations in the
for UFE
submission to the ERC. if the operation fits within the CERF Life-saving Criteria.
funding However, the application should explain the reasons for underfunding and
describe the fundraising efforts already undertaken and outline how the CERF
allocation will be leveraged to support resource mobilization efforts.
| 5 CERF HANDBOOK | COMMON SERVICES SAFETY AND SECURITY

Emergency
Telecommunications
Guidelines CERF-funded emergency telecommunications services must directly support the
response of the humanitarian system. Below are the circumstances under which
CERF funds could be made available for emergency telecommunications
equipment and services:

• Establishing new services: The setup of new basic telecommunication

networks for new emergency operations. This can include parts of the start-
up costs and service for the initial phases of the operations. It should be a
timely intervention and should serve as a springboard for other donors to
come on board.

• Expansion of services due to context changes: Upgrade of existing equipment

and services due to a deterioration in the humanitarian situation. The need for
these services will have to be carefully evaluated by the local Emergency
Telecommunications cluster, the UN Designated Officer (DO) in coordination
with United Nations Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS) and the wider
humanitarian community.

Considerations for CERF submissions

Sustainability: The ETC services should be sustainable. The overall management,

operational and recurrent costs of the deployed infrastructure and personnel
should be described in the project. The activities should be financially sustainable
beyond the contribution from CERF, e.g., with all participating agencies agreeing
to cost-sharing in the future.

Cost-sharing among agencies: Proposed projects should include a description of

existing in-country telecommunications capacity and confirm that common
services are required by partners.

Type of equipment: Only basic telecommunications equipment needed for the

common network infrastructure will be funded. Other equipment will need to be
funded by other donors or by the agency itself.

Staff costs: Staff costs can only be considered for the first three months of the
intervention in ongoing emergencies (to give agencies enough time to work out a
suitable cost-sharing mechanism for sustainability), or can be considered in case
| 6 CERF HANDBOOK | COMMON SERVICES SAFETY AND SECURITY

of a new emergency. CERF does not cover personnel at the regional or

headquarters levels.

Training: CERF only funds quick refresher training. Training costs should be
limited.

Initial telecommunications assessments: Like for other sectors, the CERF will not
fund initial assessments for provision of emergency telecommunications.
Exceptions will only be granted for inter-agency assessments, including initial
telecommunication requirements, on a case-by-case basis.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | IMPLEMENTATION

Implementation
The implementation roles and the monitoring actions are agreed upon and
documented in the CERF application.

Implementa- Recipient agencies have full responsibility for the use of and reporting on all funds
disbursed under the fund, and for compliance with the reporting requirements.
tion roles &
responsibili- The RC/HC oversees that CERF-funded activities are implemented as intended.
ties The HCT/UNCT is collectively accountable for a CERF allocation and is expected
to keep the CERF implementation on the HCT/UNCT agenda and jointly follow the
implementation of CERF projects.

OCHA, where present, manages CERF-related processes and facilitates flow of

information. The OCHA office supports the RC/HC by managing the agreed CERF
monitoring and reporting processes, collecting the required information, updates
and reports related to CERF project implementation from recipient agencies, and
consolidating and communicating the reports.

Mandatory Agencies shall provide updates according to agreed frequency and timing to the
RC/HC and the HCT/UNCT on the implementation of CERF-funded humanitarian
interim project
action, including the progress toward achievement of project targets, early
status update detection of potential challenges, and actions taken or planned to adjust the
project activities to meet the designated CERF implementation period.

To facilitate this process, the CERF secretariat has developed a light template for
organizing the interim update from recipient agencies on the implementation of
CERF grants. CERF provides a template pre-populated with key information. The
template has been developed based on best practices from country teams.
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | IMPLEMENTATION

The template is used by agencies to provide project updates halfway through the
cycle (or at other agreed milestones). The various agency inputs, including
materials on the impact of CERF-funded humanitarian action, are consolidated by
the OCHA or RC’s office and shared with the RC/HC, the HCT/UNCT, cluster
coordinators and other relevant humanitarian partners.

Implementing partners should be involved in cluster, inter- cluster and HCT

meetings where regular updates on the progress of implementation of CERF
projects are discussed.

No-cost Based on the consolidated information, the status of CERF implementation should
be presented to and discussed by the HCT/UNCT and the completed template shall
extensions
be sent to the CERF secretariat. If significant challenges or delays are emerging
for one or several CERF projects, the need for a no-cost extension or
reprogramming should be discussed. CERF’s policy on NCEs it to only grant them
based on unavoidable factors. Inadequate planning, HR or procurement delays are
not good reasons for NCE requests, and can be rejected.

Project revision requests should highlight circumstances that are preventing

implementation outside of the control of the recipient agency. Compelling reasons
for project extensions might be situations like increased access restrictions,
changes in government policy, or a fundamental change in the socio-political
climate that was underpinning the application for CERF funds. Technical and
procedural details are outlined in CERF’s Guidelines for No Cost Extensions,
Reprogramming and Redeployment of Funds.

Requests should be submitted by the RC/HC to the CERF secretariat explaining

and justifying the changes, keeping within the life-saving mandate of the CERF.
Approval must be given before any changes are made. If a request is not approved,
the agency must return unused funds.

A project extension request should be submitted by the RC/HC to the CERF

secretariat on behalf of the recipient agency as soon as the need for an extension
is detected and at the latest 10 days before the end of the implementation period.

Re- If external circumstances or important changes of scope (targeted people, sector,

activities, or geographic area) are affecting the objective or targets of the approved
programming
project make it unlikely that the original programming can proceed, a
& re- reprogramming request may be made to the CERF secretariat to approve changes
deployment of within existing projects on an exceptional basis.
funds
A formal request is also required when the adjustment pertains to a cumulative
shift of more than 15 percent between budget categories of the direct project
costs or any change to staff costs or programme support costs. Approval of the
entire budget change must be requested prior to implementation of the change.
| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | IMPLEMENTATION

Efficient Based on a 2014 paper by the IASC Task Team on Humanitarian Financing, this
section identifies effective, replicable practices in UN-NGO partnership throughout
partnerships
the grant cycle of CERF funds.

At country- Preparedness
level • Map potential NGO partners: Map potential NGOs and CSOs for emergency
partnerships.

• Conduct annual NGO consultation: Facilitate annual consultations with current

and potential NGO partners to prepare for the year ahead inclusive of likely
scenarios.

• Plan for contingencies: Prepare contingency agreements with current/well-

known NGO partners complete with clear parameters that outline what
programming the NGO should implement under relatively specific
circumstances and the support they will receive from the UN agency.
Contingency agreements are reviewed and renewed annually. Once the
agreement is activated, the NGO provides a detailed budget during an initial
rapid assessment, and the agreement can allow for reimbursement of
expenses relative to a specific date or event. Contingencies can also be built
in to existing agreements with language that specifies when the contingencies
are activated.

Early in NGOs, via clusters, the inter-cluster group and the HCT, should participate in CERF
prioritization processes. UN agencies should engage partners early in
Emergency/
identification and prioritization of projects for a CERF submission. The following
Escalation steps can help speed up project implementation.

• Consult early and often with partners: Ensure projects are planned jointly.
Clarify CERF requirements and project selection process.

• Share agency-NGO agreement template: For international NGOs that require

HQ approval of agreements, share blank agreement template with NGO for
onward distribution with their HQ to help expedite the review process.

• Start projects before CERF approval: Projects can be initiated with non-CERF
funds while waiting for CERF fund approval.

CO negotiates Agency-NGO Partnership Agreement

• Short form Agency-NGO Agreement: During Level 3 or IASC scale-up

emergencies, Country Office Representatives can authorize a shortened form
of the Agency-NGO Agreement.
| 4 CERF HANDBOOK | IMPLEMENTATION

• Initial contracting mechanism: Use a simpler partnership contracting

mechanism for the initial response period to kick-start implementation while
longer-term arrangements are negotiated.

• Amend existing Agency-NGO Agreements with current partners: If activities

are in the same sector, these will not need an additional technical assessment.

• Track disbursement rates: Track speed of disbursement of CERF sub-grants.

Set benchmarks to reduce the number of working days for sub-grant
disbursement.

Project implementation

• Provide detailed budget: For contingency agreements, NGO provides detailed

budget1 to UN agency2 after initial rapid assessment. This allows for the
activation of the Agency-NGO Agreement and the start of project activities
before the detailed budget is available.

• Reimburse emergency expenses: Contingency agreements can allow for

reimbursement of emergency expenses that were incurred prior to activation
of Agency-NGO Agreement.

At Preparedness
Headquarters • Create e-resource toolkit: Create a toolkit to assist field offices with best
practices to respond rapidly to emergencies, including guides and sample
contingency agency-NGO agreements.

• Training: Train all UN Country Office Representatives, cluster coordinators and

program officers on CERF and country-based pooled fund guidance and best
practices.

• Develop a short form grant application process for Level 3 or IASC scale-up
emergencies. Once developed, train field teams on its use.

UN HQ disburses CERF funds to UN CO

• Streamline UN HQ processes: delegate signature authority, set clear steps for

the approval process, and involve fewer people.

• Pre-financing: Allow agency to advance money to the NGO as soon as the

CERF approval letter is received in HQ before the money is actually received
by the agency in-country. Agency can work with donors to use incoming
contributions to offset internal advances. Implementation of CERF projects
can start up to six weeks before disbursemen
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Reporting,
Monitoring and
Accountability
Roles & Reporting from country level is the basis for giving an accounting of the use of
CERF funds to the Secretary-General and donors.
responsibili-
ties The Resident Coordinator/Humanitarian Coordinator (RC/HC) has the overall
responsibility at country level to oversee the activities implemented with CERF
funds, and to report on the use of CERF funds when project activities are
completed.

This section provides an overview of the monitoring and reporting requirements

for recipients of funds from the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) and
clarifies roles and responsibilities in the interim and final reporting process. The
objective of CERF monitoring and reporting is to give the RC/HC and the HCT, as
well as OCHA Senior Management and its donors assurance that CERF-funded
activities are implemented as intended, and to enable corrective actions to be
taken if necessary.

CERF allocations are collectively prioritized under the leadership of the

Resident/Humanitarian Coordinator (RC/HC) who therefore has the main
responsibility to ensure quality and timeliness of monitoring and reporting of
CERF-funded activities. However, the humanitarian country team or UN country
team (HCT/UNCT), sector/cluster leads, other actors in the humanitarian
community, and especially agencies receiving CERF funds are collectively
accountable for a CERF allocation and should jointly oversee project
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

implementation. Regular updates on the progress and potential challenges around

the implementation of CERF projects should be provided in cluster, inter-cluster
and HCT/UNCT meetings, with involvement of implementing partners. In this, the
RC/HC is supported by a designated CERF in-country focal point (hereafter CERF
focal point), usually from the OCHA country office, regional office or the Resident
Coordinator’s Office. 22

Monitoring
The HCT/UNCT should agree on monitoring arrangements at the beginning of the
CERF process, communicated by the RC/HC to relevant stakeholders and
documented in the CERF application to the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC).
The HCT/UNCT is collectively accountable for a CERF allocation, and is expected
to jointly follow the implementation of CERF projects. To enhance accountability
and transparency, updates by recipient agencies on implementation of CERF
projects should be included in the HCT/UNCT agenda. Regular updates on
progress of implementation of CERF projects should be provided in cluster, inter-
cluster and HCT/UNCT meetings, preferably with the involvement of implementing
partners when relevant.

Collective Monitoring

Since funding from CERF and other pooled funds is collectively prioritized by the
humanitarian community at country level under the leadership of the RC/HC, it is
different than funding from other sources. In humanitarian operations where
system-wide monitoring processes are in place at sector/cluster level, CERF’s
contribution to the response should also be reflected through these processes.
Assessing CERF’s contribution through overall response monitoring will help
promote strategic assessment of CERF’s added value, ensure adequate visibility
and enhance collective accountability for CERF allocations. In addition, if feasible
and relevant, the RC/HC in consultation with the HCT may decide to complement
agencies’ own regular monitoring efforts with collective monitoring of CERF
projects. Such collective CERF monitoring could be led by clusters or use
monitoring frameworks from country-based pooled funds (CBPFs) where these
exist. When collective monitoring takes place, agencies shall also allow site visits
to CERF-funded projects when deemed necessary and with prior consultation and
agreement. If collective monitoring of CERF projects is undertaken, the objective

22 In countries without OCHA presence, the OCHA regional office usually provides a focal
point or the RC designates a focal point in the RC Office. Under exceptional circumstances, a
specific lead agency may be asked by the RC/HC to support the reporting process. A focal
point is assigned at the beginning of the CERF application phase and supports the allocation
through the implementation and final reporting phase.
| 3 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

should be to gather additional information that will help foster joint learning,
advance good practices, inform future allocations, and enhance accountability.

The responsibility for monitoring of individual CERF projects lies with the
recipient agencies. CERF recipient agencies shall describe their plans for project-
level monitoring in the relevant section of the CERF submission template. CERF
projects should be monitored as part of agencies’ overall programme monitoring
arrangements in a given country. Monitoring of CERF projects is necessary for
agencies to report on the achievement of project targets and the number of people
reached, and it should enable early detection of potential challenges, allowing
agencies to take timely corrective measures and ensure completion of activities
within the CERF-specific implementation period. During the implementation
period, agencies are required to keep the RC/HC informed about the status of
project implementation, including any challenges or delays in the projects. As part
of reporting on CERF projects, agencies should share any evaluation reports that
include CERF-funded projects or activities with the RC/HC and the CERF
secretariat. CERF regularly commissions independent reviews of the Fund’s added
value at regional or country level. During these reviews, and any other kind of
review, evaluation or audit related to CERF, agencies should provide relevant
information on CERF projects to the evaluators or auditors. This may include
relevant non-public information from agencies’ internal monitoring systems,
including monitoring reports. With prior consultation and agreement, agencies
shall also allow site visits to CERF-funded projects when deemed necessary.

The RC/HC is responsible for overseeing the overall implementation of CERF

funding, and ensuring that implementation is on track towards the achievement
of the pre-defined strategic objectives. In this respect, the RC/HC should institute
periodic check-ins within the HCT to discuss progress of the CERF-funded
interventions. This will help ensure collective ownership of the allocation and allow
the RC/HC to monitor that the overall implementation is on track, and if not, agree
with the HCT on corrective measures if required. These check-ins are not intended
to be detailed technical reviews – but a high-level assessment of progress/ability
to meet the strategic objectives of the CERF allocation. It is up to the RC/HC to
decide the number of required check-ins based on the nature of the grant and its
duration, but it is suggested that at least one to two of these are conducted during
the grant implementation period.

Reporting
In addition to these informal check-ins, reporting on CERF allocations includes four
elements:
| 4 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

1. Country-level Interim Update

2. Country-level Allocation Report, including After-Action Review

3. Agency Headquarters Financial Reports

4. Agency Headquarters Annual Narrative Report

The CERF secretariat provides tailored templates for the interim update and the
final narrative report of each allocation to the RC/HC who, supported by the CERF
focal point, is responsible to distribute these templates to all relevant partners, to
collect quality inputs and to send the interim update and allocation report to the
CERF secretariat. 23 For the final report process, the RC/HC holds an after-action
review (AAR, see guidance below).

The CERF secretariat assumes the following responsibilities when reviewing

interim updates and final reports, and if necessary, returns submitted reports with
requests for clarification or additional information:

• Ensure that all required sections of the report templates are completed with
clear, succinct information

• Ensure that in case of substantial under-achievement against the number of

people targeted or indicators in the results framework, a justification is
provided

• Verify the completeness and coherence of all quantitative information in the

report

• Follow up with the country focal point on challenges highlighted in interim

updates

• Ensure that all relevant information from final reports is recorded in CERF
databases for accountability and reporting purposes

1. Interim Update
The interim update is a light report undertaken at the halfway mark of the grant
implementation, and the main tool for the RC/HC to assess the implementation
status of projects under a CERF allocation, including challenges, and to
communicate this information to the CERF secretariat. The template features

23 For non-standard CERF allocations, reporting requirements, timelines and templates may
be adjusted and communicated by the CERF secretariat accordingly.
| 5 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

project-specific sections for which agencies provide inputs and an overview at

allocation level. This is then consolidated by the RC/HC with support from the
CERF focal point. The objective of the interim update is to give the RC/HC and the
HCT assurance that CERF-funded activities are implemented as intended and to
enable corrective actions to be taken if necessary.

The in-country monitoring process through the interim update is led and
overseen by the RC/HC. The tailored template for the update is usually shared
along with the Emergency Relief Coordinator’s (ERC) ‘allocation summary email’
after the application has been approved and funds for all projects have been
disbursed. The RC/HC, supported by the CERF focal point, coordinates the process
and ensures all relevant partners are well informed of timelines and requirements.
Agencies are responsible for completing and submitting their part of the interim
update with meaningful, high-quality inputs in a timely fashion to the RC/HC. These
should include links to materials demonstrating the immediate impact of the
funding such as photos, video, stories and social media posts. Agencies are
requested to give CERF due visibility when publishing and promoting the content,
by sharing or co-creating it with OCHA; by tagging the relevant social accounts;
and by specifically acknowledging the CERF funding. To consolidate the interim
update, the OCHA or RC’s office adds relevant information (a summary of
implementation status, and potential actions and follow-up) before discussing the
report with the HCT and sharing the finalized update with the CERF secretariat by
the deadline indicated in the ERC allocation summary email.

The deadline for the interim update is calculated for every allocation and set half-
way between the first project start date and last project end date. Four weeks
before the interim update is due, the CERF secretariat sends a reminder to the
RC/HC and the CERF focal point.

2. Final Report
CERF allocation reports (final reports) are the RC/HC’s primary narrative reporting
document on the use of CERF funds. The information in the report may be quoted
or otherwise used in CERF advocacy, communications, reports and publications.
For this reason, the accuracy of the inputs from all relevant partners is very
important, and the leadership of the RC/HC of the reporting process is crucial to
ensure a quality and timely report. Final reports are published on CERF’s website
upon review by the CERF secretariat.

At allocation level, the report highlights whether the original strategic vision and
response objectives have been achieved and targets met, describes CERF’s added
value, and explains how funds have been used for life-saving action to respond to
| 6 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

humanitarian needs. At project level, recipient agencies should report

programmatically to the RC/HC, and by extension to the ERC and CERF secretariat,
on results achieved with CERF funds.

The RC/HC, supported by the CERF focal point, consolidates and submits the
report to the CERF secretariat. However, the preparation of the report should be a
collective effort by all relevant stakeholders at country level. The process should
not only aim to produce a quality report on the use of CERF funds and the results
achieved, but also help foster a collective reflection on the CERF process and
establish lessons learned for improving future allocations.

The RC/HC or CERF focal point on their behalf shares the templates with the
recipient agencies at country-level and coordinates the submission of inputs from
all partners. Recipient agencies are requested to provide quality and timely inputs.
These should include links to materials illustrating the impact of the CERF-funded
project, such as photos, video, stories and social media posts. Agencies are also
requested to give CERF due visibility when publishing and promoting the content,
by sharing or co-creating it with OCHA; by tagging the relevant social accounts;
and by specifically acknowledging the CERF funding. However, the RC/HC remains
overall responsible for adherence to the CERF reporting requirements and should
therefore specifically oversee the consolidation of strategic and operational inputs
at allocation level and should chair the after-action review.

CERF allocation reports are due within three months after expiration 24 of a CERF
allocation. After the interim update is completed, the CERF secretariat shares the
tailored reporting templates for the final allocation report. 25 Four weeks before the
final report due date, the CERF secretariat sends a reminder to the RC/HC and the
CERF focal point.

While the management of the reporting process lies at the country level, there are
key steps that support the preparation of high-quality reports. Based on CERF’s
experience and informed by feedback from country teams, it is recommended to
structure the process as described in the next section.

24 If one or more approved no-cost extensions (NCEs) exceed this original due date, the due
date is rescheduled for one month past the latest NCE. Other extensions may only be granted
in consultation with the CERF secretariat if clearly justified by the RC/HC.
25 Should any project revisions, such as amended figures of targeted people or
added/removed indicators and activities, not be properly represented in the tailored template,
agencies should update the prepopulated information in the template in tracked changes for
review by the CERF secretariat.
| 7 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Proposed Reporting Process

1. Distribution of tailored template and confirmation of project end-dates:

After the interim update process is completed, the CERF secretariat shares a
tailored report template and the final report due date along with a list of all project
end-dates 26 and an overview of the reporting requirements:

In case of already approved no-cost extensions, 27 the CERF secretariat also

clarifies if these will affect the reporting deadline

Following the notification from CERF, the RC/HC informs recipient agencies about
the upcoming project end-date for CERF grants, and asks for confirmation that all
CERF projects will be implemented by the deadline. If implementation is delayed,
the RC/HC informs CERF as soon as possible and, if relevant, no-cost extension
requests are prepared and submitted no later than 10 days prior to grant expiration

2. Process Preparation (around project end-dates):

For a thorough preparation, the RC/HC and CERF focal point prepare a schedule
that:

• includes deadlines for cluster/sector-leads and recipient agencies for their

provision of inputs (narrative and data) to be submitted to the RC/HC

• accommodates the time required by the RC/HCs’ offices for drafting and
consolidation of narrative inputs and data following the submission of these
inputs

3. Preparation of Report Inputs and After-Action Review (within 5 weeks after

project end-dates):

The RC/HC, supported by the CERF focal point, sets up an After-Action Review
(AAR) meeting and shares an agenda (see guidance below). To use the AAR to its
fullest potential, it should be clarified to all stakeholders which inputs are to be
submitted to the CERF focal point already before the meeting. This may include:

26 Project start and end-dates are also available on the CERF website:
https://cerf.un.org/what-we-do/allocation-summaries
27 No-cost-extensions (NCEs) will only be considered in exceptional circumstances and only
if the request is submitted a minimum of 10 days prior to the expiry date of the grant.
| 8 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

• Recipient Agencies: Information on project results and information on sub-

grants to implementing partners (this is part II – project level in the report
template)

• Sector/Cluster Leads: Best estimates on ‘people reached’ at sector level per

project and suggestions for aggregations at allocation level (if there is more
than one project per sector)

• CERF focal point: Drafts basic elements of the report informed by the provided
inputs from partners (part I – allocation level)

4. Zero Draft following the AAR (within 7 weeks after project end dates):

Based on the submitted inputs and the outcome of the AAR the CERF focal point
prepares and circulates a zero draft to the HCT/UNCT (or similar forum), recipient
agencies and sector/cluster leads for review and comments. Sector/cluster leads
circulate the draft within the sector/cluster and consolidate relevant comments.
Feedback should be provided within two weeks.

5. Final Report Reminder

The CERF secretariat sends a final reminder to the RC/HC and CERF focal point on
the upcoming deadline for the report. The RC/HC, in turn, confirms the deadline as
the report should be close to finalization at this time, or informs the CERF
secretariat of any challenge or delay encountered in the process.

6. Draft 1 Circulated (within 11 weeks after grant expiration):

The CERF focal point prepares the final draft based on the comments and the
RC/HC circulates it to the HCT/UNCT (or similar forum), recipient agencies and
sector/cluster leads for a final review.

7. Report Finalization and Submission (within 12 weeks after grant expiration):

The RC/HC finalizes and submits the final report to the CERF secretariat.

8. CERF Review and Publishing

The CERF secretariat reviews the report and, if necessary, seeks additional
information from the RC/HC on issues that need clarification. Once the report is
finalized it is published on CERF’s website. The RC/HC shares the final report with
all relevant stakeholders at country-level.
| 9 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

CERF After-Action Review

The CERF After-Action Review (AAR) is a meeting to reflect on the overall CERF
allocation, including the cooperation of the HCT/UNCT with the broader
humanitarian community during planning and implementation stage as well as
achieved results, challenges and CERF-added value for the overall response. AARs
are a routine part of managing any CERF allocation at country-level and a key
component of the in-country final narrative reporting process.

Value 1. AARs provide an opportunity to collectively analyze the results achieved with
CERF funding and assess CERF’s strategic added value:

The AAR should be a light and informal exercise that allows for open and frank
discussions focused on learning. With the objective of identifying key inputs for
the CERF final report, it should function as a forum where the HCT/UNCT (or
similar) and other CERF stakeholders can jointly reflect on strategic and
operational aspects of the allocation. The core objective of the AAR is to assess
how well the strategic vision for the allocation has been achieved, and to reflect
on collective performance in meeting the agreed response objectives. AARs are
not performance reviews and should not be conducted to allocate blame or credit,
but rather to encourage honest reflection by practitioners.

2. …facilitate joint learning in benefit of future CERF processes:

Discussion during the AAR should focus on identifying strategic achievements and
the added value of the CERF allocation. Best practices and challenges from the
prioritization and implementation stage should be transferred into actionable
recommendations on improving the efficiency and effectiveness on the use of
future CERF allocations. Recommendations should be directed to the CERF
secretariat as well as to the country team.

3. …provide a basis for the CERF final allocation report and a roadmap for the
reporting exercise:

The AAR is the cornerstone of the CERF final reporting process in that it helps to
identify strategic considerations and key results to be highlighted in the final
report, and as such provides the foundation for drafting part I (allocation overview)
of the report. The RC/HC, supported by the designated CERF country focal point,
should use the AAR to collect meaningful contributions and accurate data. A well-
| 10 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

executed AAR provides a sound foundation for the preparation of the final CERF
final allocation report.

Timing The AAR should be conducted soon after the expiration of all grants under a CERF
allocation. This helps ensure involvement of grant implementation stakeholders
while the relevant experiences are fresh in memory. It also places the AAR as the
starting point for the preparation of the CERF final report due about three months
after grant expiration.

Participants The participation in the AAR is at the discretion of the RC/HC. It is, however,
suggested that the meeting is facilitated by the RC/HC or an external facilitator,
and that participants should include all recipient UN agencies, cluster/sector leads
and implementing partners. While considered mandatory, AARs are owned by
country-level teams and should not be considered a compliance exercise for the
benefit of CERF.

Format The length of an AAR meeting can vary, depending on the scope of the allocations
(number of grants) and the number of partners involved. It is important that
participants come prepared. It is recommended that the RC/HC, supported by the
CERF country focal point and a potential external facilitator, develops questions
on strategic and operational achievements and challenges applicable to the
country context and the scope of the overall response and distributes these
questions along with the template and guidelines to all AAR participants prior to
the meeting.

It is suggested that the AAR starts with a recap by the RC/HC of the background
for the CERF allocation where after each recipient agency provides project reports
on the status of CERF grants, the achieved results and any challenges or lessons
learned. To make the meeting more efficient, CERF recipient agencies could be
encouraged to submit project reports in advance of the ARR, or if not possible to
provide full reports, to prepare and share a brief update with key point and issues
related to the implementation of their CERF projects. 28

To ensure maximum synergy with the CERF reporting process, the remainder of
the AAR meeting can be structured around the sections of the final allocation
report. As per the template, key discussion areas should include:

• Achievement of original strategic vision of this CERF allocation

• Various aspects of CERF strategic added value as a collective funding

mechanism, as indicated in the report template

28 Ideally this status update would follow the format of the individual project report templates
under part II of the CERF allocation report template (the project sheets) and thus serve as a
first draft of the project inputs for the CERF report.
| 11 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

• Appropriateness of prioritized activities (in retrospect, was the prioritization

and selection activities appropriate to achieve the strategic vision for the
allocation, and are there any lessons learned in this respect for future CERF
submissions)

• How well CERF funds strategically complimented other funding, including

bilateral donor funds and other pooled funding, in particular Country-based
Pooled Funds, where applicable

• Strategic consideration of achievements through the CERF allocation related

to cross-cutting priorities, including the ‘ERC Underfunded Priority Areas’
(gender, people with disabilities, protection, education)

• Refection on overall results achieved, including people reached (versus

planned), with focus on reasons for potential under- or over-achievements.

It is suggested to nominate a notetaker who summarizes AAR discussion and

captures all learnings and action points. The notetaker, in liaison with a potential
external facilitator, should share the notes with the RC/HC and team members to
ensure that all inputs are accurately reflected. To maximize the synergy with the
CERF narrative reporting exercise, the AAR note could mirror the structure of the
CERF final report.
| 12 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

3. Agency Headquarters
Financial Report
All financial reports are submitted in standard templates provided by the CERF
secretariat, which are also available on the CERF website. The financial reports are
normally prepared by the headquarters of the implementing agencies. In line with
the Secretary-General’s 2020 Bulletin on CERF, the following reports are required.

• Interim financial statements are due by 15 February for all CERF grants
received the prior year, and for all outstanding balances on grants received in
previous years.

• Final financial statements (i.e. an update of the interim statement of 15

February) are due by 30 June for all CERF received the prior year, and for all
outstanding balances on grants received in previous years.

• Interim financial statements are due by 15 August only for CERF rapid
response grants with implementation periods that expire between 1 January
and 30 June for the same year.

Refund of Unspent grant funds should be returned to CERF, taking into consideration
extensions approved by the ERC. Agencies should reflect refunds in their certified
Unspent
financial reports.
Balance
75% of the uncommitted portion of the unspent funds, including any interest
accrued on the funds, should be returned by:

• 15 August for projects with an implementation end date between 1 January to

30 June of the same year, or, alternatively, immediately following the
implementation deadline and

• 15 February of the subsequent year for projects with an implementation end

date between 1 July to 31 December

Any remaining unspent balance, including any accrued interest on unspent funds,
shall be refunded by 30 June of the year following the end of the implementation
period.

In conjunction with the refund schedule, it is reasonably expected to submit

completed financial report by 15 February of the following year after one year from
the project end date.
| 13 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Communicating the Fraudulent

Use of CERF Funds
Background At its meeting in November 2014, the CERF Advisory Group discussed the
mechanisms and processes in place to deal with cases of potential fraudulent
practice 29 in the use of CERF funds (hereafter simply referred to as fraud), and the
challenges associated with communicating potential cases of fraud to CERF’s
donors. The Group reiterated that fraud poses a serious risk to humanitarian
action, to the reputation of CERF and to the United Nations. They reaffirmed that
fraud related to CERF funds should be treated in accordance with the existing
oversight rules and mechanisms of the recipient agencies and be informed by the
on-going system-wide efforts to ensure coherence of treatment of fraud within the
United Nations. The Advisory Group also requested that the CERF secretariat
develop guidelines for its procedures relating to sharing fraud- related information
with its donors.

In line with this request, this guidance note sets out procedures for communicating
potential cases of fraud under CERF funded projects implemented by recipient
agencies and their implementing partners. The guidance outlines communication
responsibilities of CERF recipient agencies and of the CERF secretariat.

The note was endorsed by the CERF Advisory Group at its meeting in May 2015.

This guidance shall be considered in the context of broader system wide

processes associated to risk and fraud management. This includes the work by
the Risk Management Task Force established by the UN Development Group
(UNDG) to develop a system-wide harmonized risk management and approach to
fraud, and the discussion by the High-Level Committee on Management (HLCM)
of common standards for risk management and treatment of fraud cases across
UN Agencies. The CERF secretariat is following these initiatives closely.

29 “Fraudulent practice” is here defined as any act or omission, including misrepresentation,

that knowingly or recklessly misleads, or attempts to mislead, a party to obtain a financial or
other benefit, or to avoid an obligation. [Definition by the International Financial Institutions
(IFI)
Anti-Corruption Task Force:
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTDOII/Resources/FinalIFITaskForceFramework&Gdline
s.pdf]
| 14 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

Information- Recipient agencies shall inform the CERF secretariat in the event they open an
investigation into possible fraudulent use of CERF funds under a project supported
sharing with
by CERF.
CERF
When: Unless agencies’ investigation units finds that it may harm the investigation
or be in violation with the agency’s due process, CERF shall be informed at three
points during the process: as soon as a formal investigation is opened by the
recipient agency; once an investigation is finalized and once potential follow-up
actions are concluded (including actions regarding the recovery of funds).

What: Upon opening of an investigation: In order to avoid jeopardizing the conduct

of the investigation, the content of the briefing to CERF upon opening of an
investigation should be at the agency’s discretion. Upon finalizing an
investigation: The investigation report and information relevant to the CERF
project(s) implicated. If some recipient agencies’ internal regulations will not allow
them to share investigation reports, the information sharing upon finalization of an
investigation should be a summary including key findings of relevance to CERF.
The information shared with CERF must adhere to the following minimum
standards: country, project, amount at risk (if possible to assess), nature of
allegations and management actions planned or taken after completion of the
investigation. 30 Upon conclusion of follow-up actions: Information deemed to be
directly relevant for CERF and CERF’s donors, including information on recovery or
loss of CERF funds.

How: The investigation service 31 of the respective agency will inform by letter or
email the ERC and the Chief of CERF. The CERF secretariat will log each case and
follow up with the respective agency until conclusion of the case. Fraud cases
involving CERF funds will be a standing agenda item in the annual consultations
between the Chief of CERF and recipient agencies. The consultations will focus on
reported allegations resulting in investigations being launched and in results of
completed investigations reported. The consultations will also address trends in
reported allegations, effectiveness of communication on the matter and outcome
of CERF communication with its donors on cases.

Information- The CERF secretariat shall inform donors in the event that information regarding
potential fraudulent use of CERF funds is formally submitted by a recipient agency
sharing with
to the CERF secretariat. In order to minimize any risk to the confidentiality and
donors integrity of investigations and violations of an agency’s due process, CERF’s

30 Should the policies and procedures of the recipient agency prevent sharing of some of this
minimum information this shall be communicated to CERF.
31 If another entity within an agency will be responsible for this communication the CERF
secretariat should be advised accordingly.
| 15 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

communication on investigations to donors should only be made by CERF with

clearance of the investigative unit of the respective agency.

When: Once information for communication (as per the above) is shared with the
CERF secretariat and cleared for onward communication. 32

What: The cleared information provided by the recipient agency.

How: By letter to interested donors to CERF (see below) and/or by access-

restricted pages of the CERF website.

Who: Donors that are interested in being informed. Donors should sign up for this
service by informing the CERF secretariat. 33 Hereby it is ensured that only
interested donors are contacted and unnecessary administrative work is
eliminated for all parties.

Additionally, the CERF Advisory Group will be notified at its regular meetings of
potential fraud cases that have been communicated to CERF and the status of
these. Relevant information on concluded cases may also be referenced in
summary form 34 in the Secretary-General’s annual report on CERF to the General
Assembly and on CERF’s website.

32 I.e. when agencies inform CERF that an investigation is opened, that an investigation is
finalized and that follow-up actions
33 Only donors to CERF in the year the relevant allocation was made will be eligible to be
informed through this process.
34 Following clearance by the investigative units of the recipient agencies who reported the
potential fraud instances to CERF.
| 16 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

4. Agency Headquarters
Annual Narrative Report
The annual narrative HQ reports are the recipient agencies’ reporting tool for
informing the ERC about the overall strategic impact of CERF funding for each
organization’s global emergency programmes. They describe how CERF programme
results fulfil the mandate of the fund to facilitate the timely implementation of
time-critical, life-saving activities in new crises or strengthen humanitarian
response in underfunded emergencies. The reports feed into the annual Secretary-
General Report on CERF that is shared with the General Assembly and the CERF
annual report.

The reports are due during the first quarter of every year. CERF will send out a
template and information on the deadline during January each year.
Audits Agencies will receive a tailored template for the annual reporting. Details on what
will be asked for in the report are found in the guidelines.

Recipient organizations must comply with internal and external audit procedures
as set out in their financial regulations and rules. If an external audit report
contains observations specific to the contribution of the CERF, the organization
must communicate the recommendations and the organization’s responses to the
ERC through the CERF secretariat.

Reviews & Fraud poses a serious risk to humanitarian action and efforts to support people in
need. Agencies have committed to keep the CERF secretariat informed of any
studies
investigation into potential fraud cases involving CERF grants, and the CERF
secretariat contacts relevant departments within agencies at least twice a year to
ensure that no cases go unreported.

Fraud The CERF secretariat has likewise committed to keep interested CERF donors
informed of investigations by agencies into potential fraud cases involving CERF
reporting
funds and the outcome of such investigations.

The CERF secretariat has developed procedures for communicating potential

cases of fraud under CERF-funded projects which are outlined in a Guidance Note
on Communicating the Fraudulent Use of CERF Funds.

Potential cases of fraud related to CERF grants are handled through the regulations
and rules and oversight mechanisms of the recipient agencies and of the United
Nations. In each case, the investigation service of the respective agency informs
OCHA who logs each case and follows up with the respective agency until
conclusion of the case. Donors are kept updated throughout the life-cycle of a
| 17 CERF HANDBOOK | REPORTING, MONITORING AND ACCOUNTABILITY

case in accordance with the fraud communication guidance and CERF’s Standard
Operating Procedures for such cases.

The accountability mechanisms and reporting processes that ensure CERF funds
PAF are being used and managed appropriately are described in the Performance and
Accountability Framework (PAF). The PAF details the CERF process elements, and
the links between inputs, outputs, outcomes and impact, and the associated
indicators.

The PAF stipulates reviews as an oversight tool that provides the ERC with an
appropriate level of independent assurance about the achievement of key
performance benchmarks and planned results for CERF.

The reviews are conducted by external consultants and managed by the CERF
secretariat. The first such review was piloted in 2009 and since then CERF has
conducted a number of reviews each year.

Reviews can cover a single CERF recipient country or have a regional or thematic
perspective. Reviews include recommendations aimed at improving specific
operational aspects of CERF and may identify policy issues which need to be
addressed at a global level.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | TELLING THE STORY OF CERF: COMMUNICATION AND BRANDING

Telling the story of

CERF:
Communication and
Branding
Photographs, stories, quotes and profiles telling the story of CERF to strengthen
the global visibility of CERF and demonstrate achievements as well as results of
CERF- funded activities.
Visibility of CERF

Telling the story of CERF is vital to strengthening the global visibility of CERF and
demonstrate achievements and impact of CERF-funded activities. The CERF
secretariat requires implementing partners to share content, including
photographs, stories, quotes and profiles, from CERF-funded activities, that can be
featured on CERF’s digital platforms or in one of CERF’s flagship publications.

CERF may use these materials for additional public outreach and visibility efforts,
ahead of key milestones, including the annual high-level pledging event. Due credit
will be given to each individual agency or organization.

CERF informs stakeholders by email of every new allocation as soon as the ERC
makes a funding decision.
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | TELLING THE STORY OF CERF: COMMUNICATION AND BRANDING

Digital CERF's website is the fund’s digital portal; it conveys the global identity of the fund,
and showcases CERF to the public. The website is the resource for crucial
platforms
information and data for partners, donors, recipient agencies and others who want
to know about CERF.

OCHA has set up data hubs for CERF, the country-based pooled funds, and both
types of funds combined.

CERF’s social media platforms such as Twitter (@UNCERF) and Facebook reach a
wide range of partners globally. RC/HCs, country teams and agencies are
encouraged to publicize CERF allocations and in particular whether these have
made a difference for affected people. Agencies should always tag @UNCERF in
their relevant social media posts.

Donor Donor visibility is a key priority for CERF and is central to all advocacy and
communication efforts across all communication platforms. This includes press
visibility
releases, flagship publications, communication assets for digital outreach and
specific initiatives on results for donors.

CERF branding CERF encourages implementing partners to make use of the CERF logo for the
purposes of identification and branding, by placing the logo on relevant digital and
& use of logo
print communication material for the public, donors or other humanitarian
partners. The CERF logo is available here.

Stories from Many examples of CERF’s life-saving impact in the field are posted on the CERF
website. Most stories have been created jointly by CERF and implementing
the field
partners.
| 1 CERF HANDBOOK | ANNEX

Annex
Terms and A CERF Allocation is an allocation to a specific new or underfunded emergency.
An allocation usually consists of multiple project grants for the same emergency
Definitions
approved by the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC).

A CERF Application is a consolidated funding request from a country/emergency,

including a strategy and individual agency project proposals submitted by the
Resident Coordinator/Humanitarian Coordinator (RC/HC).

A CERF Grant is funding for a project to be implemented by a UN agency.

Complex Emergencies are characterized by: extensive violence and loss of life,
massive displacements of people, widespread damage to social and economic
assets, widespread violation of rights, and multi- faceted humanitarian responses,
requiring an international response that goes beyond the mandate or capacity of
any single agency (IASC, December 1994).

Request refers to a summary of the justification for a CERF application and the
intended strategic use to inform the ERC’s initial funding decision. If approved, a
request is turned into a full-fledged application by adding further information.

Disasters are serious disruptions of the functioning of a community or a society

causing widespread human suffering, material, economic or environmental losses
which exceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own
resources. They can be caused by natural hazards or be induced by human
processes. (UNISDR, May 2009)

The Under-Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief

Coordinator (USG/ERC) is responsible for the oversight of all emergencies
| 2 CERF HANDBOOK | ANNEX

requiring United Nations humanitarian assistance and also acts as the central focal
point for governmental, intergovernmental and non-governmental relief activities.
The ERC manages CERF and also leads the Inter-Agency Standing Committee
(IASC), a unique inter-agency forum for coordination, policy development and
decision-making involving the key United Nations and non-United Nations
humanitarian partners.

The Financial Tracking Service (FTS) is a centralized, web-based source real- time
data and information on humanitarian funding flows managed by UN OCHA.

The Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) is an inclusive governance structure at the

field level, led by the RC/HC The HCT should be broad-based and representative,
to include all relevant humanitarian actors from UN agencies the Red Cross/Red
Crescent Movement or NGOs.

The Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) is the primary mechanism for inter-
agency coordination of humanitarian assistance established in June 1992 in
response to Resolution 46/182. It is a unique forum involving the key UN and non-
UN humanitarian partners.

Interim Update is the main tool used by the Resident Coordinator/Humanitarian

Coordinator (RC/HC) to monitor and report on the status of implementation of
projects under a CERF allocation. The update highlights challenges that may affect
implementation, corrective actions (to be) taken and expectations of meeting the
planned targets.

Life-saving and/or core emergency humanitarian interventions are those actions

that within a short time span remedy, mitigate or avert direct loss of life, physical
and psychological harm or threats to a population or major portion thereof and/or
protect their dignity.

The CERF Life-Saving Criteria (LSC) (►► Chapter 5) define interventions eligible
for CERF funding and ensure that CERF only funds those activities that within a
short time span remedy, mitigate or avert direct physical harm or imminent threats
to a population or major portion thereof (CERF Life-saving Criteria, 2020).

Time-critical response refers tonecessary, rapid and time-limited opportunities for

rapid injection of resources to for early action and rapid response to save lives either in
complex emergencies or after natural disasters, to minimize additional loss of lives
and damage to social and economic assets.

Further guidance and templates are available on the CERF website.