Emergency Response FundGuidelines

Emergency Response FundGuidelines

Guidance Note on Closure of Emergency Response Funds (ERFs)

This note is an annex of the Global ERF Guidelines.

  1. Decision to close an ERF

A decision that an ERF is to be closed is taken by the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs (USG)/Emergency Relief Coordinator(ERC). An ERF shall be closed in the following cases:

1) The Country Office (CO) is due to be closed;

2) The ERF is no longer serving the objective for which it was established.

The USG/ERCdetermines, in accordance with a recommendation of the Humanitarian Coordinator (HC), and based on advice obtained from the Funding Coordination Section (FCS), the Coordination and Response Division (CRD), and the Head of Office (HoO), when an ERF shall be closed. Any of the following factors shall be indicative that this is the case:

a) The CO is closing;

b) The ERF has been frequently used for non-critical / non-life-saving projects;

c) The ERF has not been used (no new projects/disbursements) for six months or more;

d) The level of donor contributions and pledges to the ERF has been below USD 1 million for a year or more.

All relevant circumstances and views of stakeholders, including but not limited to the HC, HoO, CRD, FCS, donors, the Government, and fund recipients, shall be taken into account before deciding that an ERF does not serve, or no longer serves, the objective for which it was established, in accordance with the sections below.

A decision that an ERF is to be closed should be taken at least nine months before the scheduled closing date of the CO or the Fund, whichever the case may be. The nine months is a benchmark because it takes at least three months after the end of a project (normally projects are six months) to completely close accounts.

  1. Preparing decision to close ERF that no longer serves objective

A proposal to close an ERF may be initiated by OCHA HQ or by CO. If initiated by the field, the HC and/or OCHA HoO shallinform CRD and FCS of the interest in closing the ERF and seek their preliminary views. Once CRD, FCS, the HC and the HoO are of the same preliminary view that an ERF may not or no longer serve the objective of the fund, the following steps shall be taken.

The HC supported by the OCHA HoO should initiate discussions with the Advisory Board (AB) to delineate the strategy and action plan leading to the closure of the Fund, followed by consultations with other key stakeholders, such as the Humanitarian Country Team (HCT), donors, partners and the Government.

Consultations with donors should include soliciting their views on the closure of the mechanism and discussions on future funding towards any remaining humanitarian needs (beyond the ERF).

While the focus of these consultations should be on the question of whether to close the ERF, the initiation of consultations should also be an opportunity to advise all partners that no-cost extensions will not be granted for more than nine months from that moment in time.

Based on these consultations, the HC, with a copy to CRD and FCS, will prepare a recommendation to the USG/ERC to close an ERF. Once the USG/ERChas endorsed the recommendation to close an ERF, the HC – assisted by the HoO - will be responsible for planning and implementing the closing process, in accordance with the sections below.

  1. Roles of Relevant Actors in the process of closing the ERF

HC:The HC, as the ultimate custodian of the ERF, is responsible for setting the strategy, direction and action plan for the closure.

CO: The HoO supports the HC in country.The HoO and the ERF Managerare also the interface with HQ.The closure of an ERF has to be closely shepherded by the HoO in making sure the detailed planning is executed.The HoO should inform HQ (CRD, FCS, ASB) as soon as the discussions start (before the decision is taken).Depending on the specific closure plan the HoO with the support from FCS should develop a workplan clearly defining the roles and responsibilities, and timeline against the action plan.

AB:The AB plays an important role in advising the HC on setting the strategy and direction of the ERF in the lead up to the closure.For example, the AB should also consider the balance of the Fund in determining the objective, scope and the need for changing management guidelines – including the ceiling of grants, the project duration – in order to ensure the timely disbursement of remaining funds.

Review Board (RB):The RB and OCHA CO should make sure that all projects being recommended are in line with the objectives/scope of the ERF.In addition, the projects should also have a completion date that is aligned with the closure of the Fund.The RB, in consultation with Clusters and from the review of the projects submitted may advise the AB on any remaining gaps in needs.This would inform the AB’s considerations on the scope and further allocations.

Headquarters (FCS/CRD/ASB/RMS):The FCS should guide and support the CO from the beginning of the transition process.A mission should be fielded as early as possible to advice and support the planning.The mission should help the CO in setting a timeframe, steps required and consultations with all stakeholders. FCSshould be part of the CRD led transition planning from the start and when possible field joint missions with relevant sections (i.e. ASB).

Coordination and Response Division (CRD) has the overall responsibility for managing OCHA’s field operations, which includes assessing the appropriateness of recommending the closure of an ERF together with FCS and the HC, with advice from the HoO and other relevant stakeholders.

The Administrative Services Branch (ASB) should be informed by the FCS when the decision has been taken, in order to be part of the planning process.ASB is responsible for all the administrative and financial accountability elements of the closure.

The Resource Mobilization Section (RMS) should be informed as early in the process as possible so that it may advise donors about the possible closure of the Fund and related deadlines. Fund managers should also alert RMS of any possibility thatthe funds may not be fully spent by the time an ERFcloses so that RMS may negotiate a transfer or return of funds with donors as required.

  1. Administrative steps

The CO should consult the ASB in Geneva on the remaining balance in the ERF.For projects awaiting final payment the audit report will determine whether or not the funds were appropriately used.ASB Geneva will disburse the remaining 20 per cent that is granted after the final report from the NGO recipient organization.

The ideal scenario would be to ensure that there are no-cost extensions or audits that exceed the ERF closure date.The timing of the final closure process, including the return of unspent balances to the donors, will be affected by the audits and refunds from implementing partners.However, there may be times where the no-cost extensions and other project implementation/audits reporting dates exceed the closure date of the ERF.For these cases, the Humanitarian Support Unit--HSUshould be responsible for the follow up. If there is no HSU, the CO in consultation with CRD and FCS, should ensure that a sufficient OCHA presence remains after the ERF closure date, to enable adequate follow-up of outstanding projects locally.The HSU should ensure that a staff member is designated as the local ERF focal point until all outstanding projects have been closed. The focal point will be responsible for following-up on all country level administrative issues.This includes contacting implementing partners for outstanding reports, and/or liaising with UNDP in order to finalise pending audits and verify final payments.Project records should be sent to the OCHA Geneva Registry for storage in UNOG’s Archives.

There will be instances where project implementation runs beyond the HSU presence and in those cases, depending on a specific agreement, the Regional Office (RO) would be responsible for the functions mentioned above and the follow up.Alternatively, RMS will work with ASB to determine who contributed the funds and contact the donor(s) to negotiate transfer or return of the balance as outlined in paragraph 3.

  1. Final Actions

For the final steps the following can be used as a check list:

  • all ongoing projects monitored according to the framework designed in country until closure by the ERF Manager/HSU/OCHA focal point or RO;
  • all financial and narrative reports are collected by ERF Manager/HSU/OCHA focal point or RO;
  • all necessaryaudits initiated, received, reviewed and finalized by ERF Manager/HSU/OCHA focal point or ROand ASB;
  • all outstanding payments are made by ASB;
  • once the final remaining balance has been computed, RMS conducts negotiations with donors on disposal of remaining balance.