The process for accessing funding from the Anticipatory Pillar of the DREF involves several key elements. Hence, in this chapter you will get to know why it is important to engage with your IFRC delegation early on, learn about the differences between the available funding mechanisms, understand the EAP approval process but also respective management processes until resubmission after an activation. In the toolbox you also find links to all relevant templates and brochures.
Every National Society is covered by an IFRC Country Delegation, Country Cluster Delegation or Regional Office. Engaging with the IFRC should start from the beginning of the EAP development phase. The IFRC can provide technical support, including coordination with other in-country capacity strengthening initiatives, advice from IFRC sectoral experts, explanations of IFRC standards and guidelines, and providing lessons learned from response operations and anticipatory action.
Support on the IFRC plan and budgeting structure can be provided by the IFRC focal point at country or regional level. The EAP budget should be developed using the IFRC budget template (see toolbox) and advice on the budget can be provided by IFRC finance staff. Ultimately the finalised EAP will be submitted to the IFRC delegation for technical review and funding from the IFRC Disaster Response Emergency Fund (DREF). Not involving the IFRC early in the EAP development process will likely result in delays in the technical review and approval of the EAP. The IFRC DREF does not provide funding for development of plans for anticipation or for response. National Societies should look for different sources of funding for these costs.
Since 2018, the Anticipatory Pillar of the DREF has provided funding for developed EAPs. In 2022, the IFRC launched a new funding mechanism for a simplified Early Action Protocol (sEAP).
The sEAP is an additional ex-ante funding mechanism for National Societies and seeks to complement the existing funding mechanisms including the ‘longer term’ EAPs (i.e., five years) and ‘shorter term’ DREF for imminent events (i.e., 1 to 4 months). It articulates a National Society’s plan to trigger early actions in advance of a weather or non-weather-related hazard, but does not replace the full EAP; instead, it is a ‘medium term’ (i.e., two years) funding alternative. It is simpler document than a full EAP with a lower budget and a shorter lifespan. The sEAP fulfils a dual purpose: it serves as a plan for the early action (when action will take place, what actions will be undertaken and how much funding will be needed) and it allows a National Society to access pre-agreed funding from the DREF.
The EAP and the sEAP have separate templates and eligibility criteria which can be found at the end of this chapter or on FedNet (see in toolbox). Technical review and approval of the EAP and a sEAP is based on the respective quality criteria. It is important to consider each of the quality criteria when developing the FbF system and the EAP.
Each EAP should focus on one hazard, but a National Society may develop multiple EAPs for different hazards. At this time, a National Society can have an unlimited number of full EAPs in place; however, IFRC only allows approval of up to three sEAPs at one time, each of which should also focus on one hazard. The simplified EAP was launched in 2022 with a three year pilot phase, after which IFRC DREF will review the funding mechanism.
The EAP and sEAP budget is made up of three types of activities: prepositioning activities, readiness activities and early action activities.
Key conditions of the simplified and full EAP
| Simplified EAP | Full EAP |
|---|---|
| Early action should target at least 2000 people for a budget allocation of CHF 200,000 | Early action should target at least 10,000 people for a budget allocation of CHF 500,000 |
| Duration: 2 years | Duration: 5 years |
| Separate quality criteria | Separate quality criteria |
| Show that an event of the magnitude/strength being proposed as a trigger has caused demonstrable humanitarian impact in the country in the past. - Demonstrate that the proposed early action activities are possible within the lead time available - Allocate a maximum 65 percent of the budget for readiness activities and prepositioned stock combined. If readiness costs exceed 30% this needs to be justified. In case this Manual is out of date, you can cross check the latest information on FedNet (see toolbox). |
What is the difference between the funding mechanisms under the Anticipatory Pillar of the DREF? Specifically, what is the difference between an EAP, a simplified EAP and a DREF allocation for imminent crisis?
| EAP and sEAP | DREF allocation for imminent crisis | |
|---|---|---|
| Timing | early actions are planned well in advance of the forecast. The approved EAP and allocated funding give the national society additional time (and funding) to include actions that may require more long-term preparatory work and pre-positioning of stock required for the early action. | Can only be requested when the hazard is on the horizon, that is once a forecast has been issued, which limits the time for planning, approval and implementation of the early actions. |
| Vulnerability assessment | more rigorous analysis of the historical impacts and vulnerability of the population leading to a more targeted and potentially effective intervention | |
| Capacity | The Forecast-based Financing process takes a holistic approach, often starting (but doesn’t have to!) with a Performance for Effective Response (PER) assessment with the aim of develop the best possible EAP for the hazard and the context and takes time to systematically addressing organisational gaps and capacity development needs. While the sEAP is developed using the national society’s own resources and is planned based on the existing capacity, however annual readiness activities means that the national society can maintain a good level of readiness. | DREF for imminent event needs to be planned based on the existing capacity and experience of the national society, due to the limited timeline – however, if a national society doesn’t have a pre-approved protocol, DREF for imminent event enables any national society to act in advance of a hazard. |
| Activation | the national society can initiate the pre-agreed early actions as soon as the pre- defined trigger threshold is reached. There is no need to go through any additional approval processes, thereby gaining valuable time to reduce the impact of a disaster. The financial support is automatically released. | The national society must develop an Emergency Plan of Action and budget for anticipatory action, which needs to be reviewed and approved, with a signed project agreement in place before the funds are released. There is no guarantee the DREF request will comply with all the requirements for approval. |
| To learn more about the linkages between IFRC funding mechanisms, please look at the IFRC brochure Practical Information for National Societies on FbF and funding from the DREF (see toolbox) |
Only National Red Cross Red Crescent Societies are eligible for funding from the DREF. The complete validation process should take around 30 working days, beginning with the submission to the IFRC Country Office or Country Cluster Delegation closest to the National Society. However, in practice the process usually takes longer. The Delegation will check the EAP for consistency with IFRC programming standards by the technical sectors in the delegation and the IFRC Regional Office will review the EAP and the budget. Following the regional technical review, the regional office will send the EAP to the Geneva Secretariat where it will be shared with the Validation Committee.
EAP validation and revision process
The Validation Committee supports the technical review and approval process of EAPs and sEAPs that are submitted for funding against the quality criteria. The Validation Committee is comprised by members of the IFRC, the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre, the Red Cross Livelihoods Centre and National Societies active in FbF.
The Validation Committee and the IFRC extended reviewers (IFRC delegation, IFRC regional offices, Geneva Secretariat) will provide feedback on how an EAP may be strengthened to be fully compliant with the quality criteria. The feedback is consolidated using the review checklist (see toolbox) and returned to the National Society. IFRC will then organize a call between Validation Committee members who have reviewed the EAP and the National Society, the IFRC delegation and partners to go through the feedback and to clarify any questions and comments. Following the call, the national society will revise the EAP in tracked changes, provide a written response to the comments in the review checklist and submit a revised EAP version. If all critical issues have been adequately addressed the EAP is approved. In some cases, multiple rounds of feedback may be necessary.
For more details, please consult chapter 2 of the IFRC interactive guidance (EAP validation process) (see toolbox). This guidance provides a step-by-step overview of the EAP and the simplified EAP approval, maintenance, activation and revalidation process. It is designed for IFRC staff; however, it will also give national societies and partners an overview of the IFRC processes.
Once an EAP has been approved, DREF’s Anticipatory Pillar will allocate the full budget to the IFRC delegation closest to the National Society. IFRC will then produce an EAP summary and publish it, along with the budget, on the . The IFRC and the National Society (potentially also with a partner) will sign a project funding agreement and the closest IFRC delegation will disburse funds for the year one readiness activities, including the one-off pre-positioning costs, as outlined in the EAP.
Please refer to chapter 3 of the IFRC interactive guidance (EAP Approval) for more detailed information.
Throughout the life span of the EAP annual readiness activities need to be managed as well as the prepositioning which is done once in the first year. Hence, the National Society will need to request the budget from IFRC and implement readiness activities. Reach out to your IFRC project manager to ensure you follow the required regulations, including annual financial and narrative reporting.
Please refer to chapter 4 of the interactive guidance (EAP Management) for more detailed information.
When an EAP’s trigger is reached, the national society initiates early actions and notifies the IFRC using the notification template. The IFRC will release the pre-agreed funding for the early actions according to the approved budget. In most cases it will be the delegation that is geographically closest to the national society. As all the administrative processes have been taken care of in the EAP approval phase, the funding for early actions can be released immediately.
Please refer to chapter 5 of the interactive guidance (EAP Activation) for more detailed information.
The EAP includes a basic M&E plan and budget that should include monitoring of activities during the activation, post-intervention assessment, and a lessons learnt workshop or evaluations (please see chapter 9 of the FbF manual). These activities must take place within the operational time frame of the EAP and should feed into a narrative and a financial report no later than 60 days after the end of the activation. Completion of the lessons learnt workshop and report is a (minimum) prerequisite to revalidating the EAP.
Using information from evaluations and the lessons learnt workshop, the National Society should determine what changes need to be made to the Early Action Protocol and budget. IFRC suggests making edits using track changes so that it is easy to identify what adjustments were made. Once the revised version is available, it should be sent to the IFRC delegation to start the revalidation process using the quality criteria.