REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Annual report of the European Union's humanitarian aid and civil protection policies and their implementation in 2015
Date: 2016-12-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, EU financing, aid to disaster victims, aid to refugees, civil defence, international voluntary worker, man-made disaster, natural disaster, third country, war

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 1.12.2016  
COM(2016) 751 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL 

Annual report of the European Union's humanitarian aid and civil protection policies 
and their implementation in 2015 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
Contents 

Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 3 

Humanitarian aid ................................................................................................................. 7 

Refugee crisis ........................................................................................................................ 7 

Humanitarian crises in Africa .......................................................................................... 9 

Other humanitarian crises.............................................................................................. 11 

Education in emergencies .............................................................................................. 12 

Humanitarian aid policy .................................................................................................. 13 

Civil Protection.................................................................................................................... 15 

Syria refugee crisis ........................................................................................................... 15 

Response to Ebola ............................................................................................................. 15 

The European Medical Corps......................................................................................... 16 

Response to natural disasters ...................................................................................... 16 

Prevention and preparedness ....................................................................................... 17 

Civil Protection policy....................................................................................................... 17 

Disaster preparedness and resilience........................................................................ 18 

European Union Aid Volunteers ................................................................................... 19 

Coordination with other EU instruments .................................................................. 20 

Financial and human resources ................................................................................... 22 

EU humanitarian budget at a historic high.............................................................. 22 

Human resources............................................................................................................... 23 

Additional information and sources............................................................................ 24 

Annexes................................................................................................................................. 25 

2 

 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 

This report presents the Union's main activities and policy outcomes in 2015 in the field 
of  humanitarian  aid  and  civil  protection,  as  carried  out  through  the  Directorate-General 
for  European  Civil  Protection  and  Humanitarian  Aid  Operations  (DG  ECHO)1  of  the 
European  Commission.  As  Commissioner  for  Humanitarian  Aid  and  Crisis  Management, 
Christos  Stylianides  has  a  dual  mandate:  to  deliver  assistance  to  alleviate 
humanitarian  crises  around  the  world  and  to  foster  cooperation  among  civil 
protection  authorities  across  Europe  in  responding  to  natural  or  man-made 
disasters in Europe and beyond.2  

The  mission  —  to  help  save  and  preserve  life,  prevent  and  alleviate  human 
suffering  and  safeguard  the  integrity  and  dignity  of  populations  affected  by 
crises — is fulfilled through humanitarian assistance3 and civil protection operations4. EU 
humanitarian  aid  is  a  lifeline  for  communities  and  victims  of  new,  recurrent  and 
future  emergencies. 
protracted  crises.  It  allows  them  to  prepare  better 
Complementary civil protection operations offer immediate support in the form of expert 
teams, rescue equipment and real-time monitoring of developing disasters, in the EU and 
elsewhere.  When  disaster  strikes,  timely  and  effective  intervention  by  the  international 
community can make the difference between life and death. 

for 

Together  with  the  Member  States’  contributions,  the  EU  is  a  world-leading  donor.  This 
assistance  —  based  on  Articles  196  and  214  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the 
European Union (TFEU) — is a fundamental expression of European solidarity. 

1  

2  

3  

4  

Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid, Article 19, requires 
the  Commission  to  submit,  at  the  close  of  each  financial  year,  an  annual  report  to  the  European 
Parliament and to the Council with a summary of the operations financed in the course of that year 
With regards to the external dimension of his actions, the Commissioner contributes to the work of the 
High  Representative  of  the  Union  for  Foreign  Affairs  and  Security  Policy/Vice-President,  who  is 
responsible  for  steering  and  coordinating  the  work  of  all  Commissioners  in  the  realm  of  external 
relations. This approach fully takes into account the special modus operandi of humanitarian aid, which 
must  be  provided  in  accordance  with  humanitarian  principles  and  international  humanitarian  law, 
solely  on  the  basis  of  the  needs  of  affected  populations,  in  line  with  the  European  Consensus  on 
Humanitarian Aid. 
Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1257/96  of  20  June  1996  concerning  humanitarian  aid  (OJ  L  163, 
2.7.1996, p. 1). 
Decision No 1313/2013/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on a 
Union Civil Protection Mechanism (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 924). 

3 

 
                                                            
Executive Summary 

The year 2015 saw a continuing surge in humanitarian crises. Around the world, armed 
conflicts  and  attacks  on  civilians  increased  at  an  alarming  rate.  Natural  disasters, 
exacerbated by climate change and population growth, are also occurring with increasing 
frequency  and  intensity.  With  over  60  million5  forcibly  displaced  people  in  the  world, 
protracted  displacement  has  become  a  major  humanitarian,  development,  political  and 
economic  challenge.  Needs  are  increasingly  outweighing  resources  and  the  delivery  of 
humanitarian  aid  and  civil  protection  is  becoming  more  complex.  Given  these 
unprecedented  circumstances,  the  EU  has  responded  by  targeting  humanitarian  aid  to 
the  people  most  in  need  and  most  vulnerable,  and  by  upgrading  its  policy  response. 
Through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, the EU has also ensured a well-coordinated 
response at European level to victims of natural and man-made disasters in Europe and 
elsewhere.  

•  In  2015  the  EU  provided  humanitarian  and  civil  protection  assistance  of 
to  help  more  than  134  million 
over  EUR 1.5 billion.  This  served 
beneficiaries caught up in natural disasters or conflict in over 80 countries. The 
2015 humanitarian budget — the largest ever executed by the Commission — was 
a response to the ever increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters and 
other humanitarian crises. 

•  Syria  is  the  largest  ‘source  country’  of refugees  currently  arriving  in  the  EU.  The 
Syrian conflict has continued unabated into its fifth year and remains the biggest 
humanitarian  and  security  crisis 
in  the  world.  In  2015,  more  than 
EUR 370 million  was  allocated  to  life-saving  operations  in  Syria  and 
neighbouring  countries.  In  addition  to  helping  displaced  populations  in  their 
countries  of  origin,  emergency  humanitarian  interventions  were  funded  in  transit 
countries,  notably  the  Western  Balkans  (EUR  22  million),  in  favour  of  vulnerable 
refugees,  asylum  seekers  and  migrants.  Hungary,  Serbia,  Slovenia,  Croatia  and 
Greece  activated  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  when  they  required 
immediate material support to cope with the refugee influx.    

•  In 2015, humanitarian aid to Iraq was significantly increased, with up to 
nearly  EUR  79  million  of  the  EU  budget  allocated  to  one  of  the  most  rapidly 
unfolding  humanitarian  crises  worldwide.  The  protection  of  civilians  is  one  of  the 
main challenges. Iraq is also hosting almost 250 000 Syrian refugees. 

•  Funding  for  the  Sahel  amounted  to  EUR 229 million  with  a  focus  on  the 
food  and  nutrition  crisis.  Recurrent  food  crises  in  the  Sahel  have  severely 
eroded  the  resilience  of  the  poorest  families  and  have  forced  hundreds  of 
thousands to leave their homes. Conflicts in Mali, the Central African Republic and 
northern  Nigeria  —  spilling  over  to  Chad,  Niger  and  Cameroon  —  have  further 
exacerbated the food security situation. 

•  Continuous  armed  conflict  in  South  Sudan,  a  Level  3  emergency,  has  uprooted 
millions  and  generated  huge  humanitarian  needs.  EU  funding,  reaching  EUR 
127  million  in  2015,  has  supported  life-saving  activities  in  South  Sudan 
and helped the South Sudanese refugees in neighbouring countries. 

5  

http://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/record-number-forcibly-displaced-people-has-reached-60-
million-worldwide-data-show 

4 

 
                                                            
•  The EU announced in December 2015 a contribution of EUR 125 million to 
finance  emergency  actions  in  countries  affected  by  the  extreme  weather 
phenomenon  ‘El  Niño’  in  Africa,  Caribbean,  Central  and  South  America. 
Targeted  disaster  risk  reduction  and  local  capacity  building  actions  are 
supported in areas presenting high local vulnerabilities. 

• 

In  July  2015,  the  UN  classified  the  Yemen  crisis  as  a  Level  3  emergency.  EU 
humanitarian  funding,  which  reached  EUR  50  million  in  2015,  targets 
both  Yemen’s  internally  displaced  people  and  its  refugees.  Conflict 
combined  with  poverty,  forced  displacement  and  rising  food  prices  have 
aggravated an already serious humanitarian crisis. Yemen is also directly affected 
by the humanitarian crisis in the Horn of Africa. 

•  Millions  of  people  in  Ukraine  are  in  need  of  humanitarian  aid  because  of  the 
conflict in the eastern part of the country. EUR 30 million from the EU budget 
was  allocated  in  humanitarian  and  early  recovery  aid  to  the  people  of 
Ukraine.  In  addition,  in-kind  assistance  was  provided  through  the  EU  Civil 
Protection Mechanism. 

•  EUR 15 million in immediate humanitarian relief was provided to the victims 
of  the  Nepal  earthquake,  in  addition  to  the  deployment  of  civil  protection 
experts,  search  and  rescue  and  first-aid  teams,  and  relief  items,  sent 
under the EU Civil Protection Mechanism. 

•  Education  in  emergencies  became  a  major  policy  priority  in  2015. 
Education is a life-saving humanitarian intervention in a context of such significant 
forced  population  movements  last  year.  In  2015,  more  than  1.5 million  children 
benefited from education in emergencies' support.  

•  In  2015,  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  was  activated  for  25 
emergencies  (pre-alert,  monitoring  and  request  for  assistance)  and  received 
19  requests  for  direct  assistance  within  the  EU  and  in  other  disaster-stricken 
countries. 

•  2015  also  saw  the  most  successful  edition  of  the  European  Civil 
Protection  Forum,  the  large  biennial  conference  bringing  together  all  European 
and some international civil protection stakeholders. The 2015 Forum provided the 
platform  for  the  official  launch  of  work  with  neighbourhood  countries,  as  well  as 
the  new  important  work  strand  on  remotely  piloted  aircraft  systems  in  civil 
protection. 

•  The EU has made exceptional efforts to tackle the Ebola epidemic in West 
Africa since the beginning of the outbreak in March 2014. Humanitarian aid 
addressed the most urgent needs in addition to which there was a deployment of 
emergency supplies and experts through the EU Civil Protection Mechanism. Such 
measures ultimately led to the defeat of the disease in January 2015. The lessons 
learned  from  the  Ebola  crisis  led  to  the  establishment  in  2015  of  the  European 
Medical  Corps  in  the  framework  of  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  voluntary 
pool.  

•  The  third  UN  World  Conference  on  Disaster  Risk  Reduction,  which  took  place  in 
Sendai,  Japan,  in  March  2015,  adopted  a  new  framework  for  disaster  risk 
reduction.  The  Union  took  a  leading  role  in  building  an  enhanced  disaster 

5 

 
risk  reduction  framework,  defining  further  steps  to  reduce  risks  and  foster 
disaster  resilience,  in  the  context  of  sustainable  development  and  building  on 
synergies with climate change. 

• 

The first calls for proposals for the deployment of volunteers under the European 
Union  Aid  Volunteers  initiative  were  published  in  2015.  This  will  create 
opportunities  for  up  to  18,000  people  to  volunteer  in  operations  worldwide  by 
2020. 

6 

 
HUMANITARIAN AID 

The  Union has  remained  a  reference  humanitarian  donor.  The Commission  ensures  that 
all interventions are coherent with humanitarian principles, are relevant in targeting the 
most  vulnerable  beneficiaries,  and  are  duly  informed  with  needs  assessments. 
Interventions  ensure  cost-effectiveness  and  efficiency  in  funding  critical  sectors, 
mobilising  partners  and  supporting  the  overall  capacity  of  the  global  humanitarian 
system.  The  importance  of  these  principles  for  maintaining  the  humanitarian  space  is 
well recognised in external and independent evaluations of the Commission's operations 
(A summary of the evaluations conducted in 2015 of humanitarian projects can be found 
in Annex 1. Evaluation of Civil Protection is based on the requirements of its legal base. 
An overall evaluation of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism will be launched in the 2nd 
semester  of  2016.  Thus,  no  evaluation  on  Civil  Protection  actions  was  carried  out  in 
2015) 

Refugee crisis 

Syria 

The  European  Union  and  its  Member  States  are  leading  the  international 
response  to  the  Syrian  crisis.  The  estimated  number  of  Syrian  refugees  in 
neighbouring  countries  and  the  wider  region  has  reached  over  4.5  million,  and  the 
number of internally displaced people in Syria is estimated at 6.5 million. In 2015, more 
than EUR 160 million was allocated from the EU budget to life-saving operations 
inside  Syria.  The  key  strategic  priorities  focused  on  supporting  multi-sector,  rapid, 
flexible  and  reactive  responses  to  emergencies  in  parallel  with  maintaining  regular 
humanitarian  assistance  to  already  displaced and  vulnerable  populations.  Most  refugees 
find  refuge  in  countries  and  among  people  who  already  struggle  with  poverty  and 
hardship, and therefore host communities in the region are often also beneficiaries of the 
humanitarian aid provided. 

The  ‘Whole  of  Syria’  approach  is  based  on  a  four-pillar  strategy  that  included 
negotiated  access,  emergency  response,  protection,  and  accountability  and 
support  to  partnerships.  As  one  of  the  main  donors  of  the  2015  Strategic  Response 
Plan,  the  Union  helped  support  12  million  beneficiaries  with  health  assistance,  5  million 
with protection services, 8 million with water, sanitation and hygiene services and over 6 
million vulnerable internally displaced people with shelter and non-food items. The Union 
also  became  increasingly  involved in  international  diplomatic  initiatives  (e.g.  the  Vienna 
talks) and advocacy efforts aimed to promote the respect of basic humanitarian principles 
and international humanitarian law. 

Neighbouring countries 

In  Lebanon,  in  2015,  EUR 97 million  was  allocated  from  the  EU  budget  to 
support  some  665  000  people,  with  a  special  focus  on  women  and  children. 
Assistance focused on the most vulnerable refugees to address their basic needs through 
a  multi-purpose  cash  approach,  secondary  healthcare  for  life-saving,  shelter,  and  water 
and sanitation. In addition, specific protection activities were funded, such as counselling 
and legal assistance to victims of violence. 

7 

 
In Jordan, priority was given to the most cost-efficient and effective solutions focusing 
on the basic needs' approach, through cash assistance totalling EUR 58 million. For 
instance,  the  Union  supported  UNICEF  to  assist  56  000  girls  and  boys  from  the  most 
vulnerable Syrian refugee families with a cash grant of 20 Jordanian dinars per child per 
month.  The  immediate  objective  of  this  programme  was  to  prevent  vulnerable  families 
from  relying  on  negative  coping  mechanisms  such  as  child  labor  or  eating  less  to  save 
money, by helping to cover needs and expenses specific to each child. As a result, more 
than 50% of families reported avoiding the use of at least one negative coping strategy 
and  91%  of  the  sampled  group  reported  that  this  improved  their  overall  family  well-
being. 

After decades of conflict, vulnerable Iraqis struggle to survive a complex emergency that 
has  entered  into  its  third  year.  Fighting  and  sectarian  violence  have  resulted  in  the 
displacement of millions of people. Iraq is facing not only the consequences of its internal 
conflict,  but  also  those  created  by  the  conflict  in  neighbouring  Syria.  It  is  hosting 
hundreds  of  thousands  of  registered  Syrian  refugees.  Responding  to  growing 
humanitarian  needs,  the  Union  significantly  increased  its  humanitarian  aid  to 
Iraq,  allocating  nearly  EUR 79 million  in  2015.  The  aim  was  to  provide  protection 
and  relief  to  Iraq’s  displaced  people,  to  Syrian  refugees  and  to  other  vulnerable 
populations affected by the conflicts. 

In 2015, Turkey was declared the largest refugee-hosting nation in the world. Over 2.5 
million  Syrian  refugees  were  registered  there  at  the  end  of  the  year.  Nearly 
EUR 36 million  was  allocated  from  the  EU  budget  for  humanitarian  assistance  to 
meet the urgent needs of the most vulnerable. One of the main priorities was the health 
sector,  especially  physical  rehabilitation/post-operative  care  for  war  wounded,  and 
primary  healthcare  services  in  acutely  underserved  areas  for  about  130  000  people. 
Another  key  priority  are  programmes,  reaching  about  230  000  people,  providing  the 
most vulnerable refugee families with vouchers that enable them to buy basic household 
items. 

Furthermore,  the European  Council  on  15  October  2015  welcomed  the  Joint  Action  Plan 
with  Turkey  as  part  of  a  comprehensive  cooperation  agenda  based  on  shared 
responsibility,  mutual  commitments  and  delivery.  The  Facility  for  refugees  in  Turkey6 
provides  substantial  new  financial  resources  and  a  coordination  mechanism  designed  to 
ensure  that  the  needs  of  refugees  and  host  communities  are  addressed  in  a 
comprehensive  and  coordinated  manner.  The  Facility  will  coordinate  a  total  amount  of 
EUR 3 billion for 2016-2017. 

In 2015, more than one million people made their journey into the EU, using largely what 
has  become  to  be  known  as  the  'Western  Balkans  route',  crossing  Turkey  and  then 
Greece in an effort to reach central and northern Europe. The EU budget also funded 
emergency  humanitarian  interventions  in  the  Western  Balkans  amounting  to 
EUR  22  million  to  support  vulnerable  refugees,  asylum  seekers  and  migrants  in  need. 
This support contributed to the provision of emergency assistance (food, water, hygiene, 
non-food  items,  health,  basic  protection,  and  winterisation)  in  places  where  a  high 
number of refugees was concentrated, including borders and registration points.  

6  

COM/2015/9500 final 

8 

 
 
                                                            
Humanitarian crises in Africa 

The Sahel 

The  Sahel,  one  of  the  world’s  poorest  regions,  is  reeling  from  the  aftershocks  of  four 
consecutive  food  and  nutrition  crises  since  2005,  aggravated  by  the  impact  of  climate 
change. These recurrent crises have severely eroded the resilience of the poorest families 
who struggle to cover their basic food needs year after year, most especially during the 
long  period  between  harvests.  In  2015,  funding  to  the  Sahel  (Burkina  Faso, 
Cameroon,  Chad,  Mali,  Mauritania,  Niger,  Nigeria  and  Senegal)  amounted  to 
EUR 229 million with a focus on the food and nutrition crisis. 

As  one  of  the  world’s  least  developed  countries,  Chad  continues  to  face  a  complex 
emergency as a result of chronic food insecurity, malnutrition, natural hazards, epidemics 
and  massive  displacement  of  populations.  EU  humanitarian  aid  for  Chad  totalled 
EUR 58  million  in  2015,  enabling  75  000  households  to  acquire  basic  food  items 
through cash grants and vouchers. Decades of political instability and natural disasters in 
the  neighbouring  Central  African  Republic  has  triggered  an  influx  of  refugees  putting 
additional strain on already overstretched resources. 

In  addition  to  protracted  food  insecurity,  the  widespread  violence  in  the  north-east  of 
Nigeria  due  to  Boko  Haram  has  prompted  a  massive  exodus.  In  the  course  of  2015, 
EUR 21.5 million was allocated from the EU budget for humanitarian assistance 
in  Nigeria,  providing  emergency  food  assistance,  health  and  protection  services  to 
displaced  people  and  victims  of  conflict.  Over  2  million  Nigerians  have  been  forcibly 
displaced  within  the  country  and  over  190  000  have  fled  to  neighbouring  Niger, 
Cameroon  and  Chad.  The  humanitarian  community  expects  a  new  massive  wave  of 
displacement,  due  to  ongoing  evacuations  of  resident  populations  from  the  Lake  Chad 
islands, as a result of military operations in the area.  

South Sudan 

South  Sudan  has  been  plagued  by  continuous  crises  that  have  generated  huge 
humanitarian  needs.  The  EU  provides  more  than  40%  of  all  humanitarian  aid 
funding to South Sudan to support life-saving programmes for an estimated 2 million 
people.  In  2015  alone,  it  provided  EUR 127 million  in  aid  for  the  country.  The 
armed conflict since December 2013 has left thousands dead and over 2 million uprooted 
from  their  homes.  A  peace  agreement  was  signed  in  August  2015,  but  there  is  still  no 
sign of peace in the country.  

Central African Republic 

Political instability and natural disasters, including vulnerability to climate change, in the 
Central  African  Republic  have  contributed  to  the  destruction  of  the  national  economy, 
lack of development and the weakening of state institutions. Since the beginning of the 
conflict  in  2013,  the  EU  has  played  a  leading  role  in  providing  EUR  73  million  in 
humanitarian  assistance.  The  situation  remains  extremely  volatile.  In  2015,  EU 
humanitarian  aid  for  the  Central  African  Republic  totalled  EUR 25  million 
supporting  projects  covering  protection,  access  to  health  care,  food  and  nutrition 
assistance,  distribution  of  clean  water,  sanitation  services,  logistics  and  humanitarian 
coordination.  A  high  level  international  conference  on  the  Central  African  Republic  was 
held  in  May  2015  which  focused  on  the  country’s  humanitarian  needs,  recovery  and 
resilience building.  

9 

 
Population displacement: Middle East, Central Asia and Africa, 2015 

10 

 
 
Other humanitarian crises 

El Nino Crisis 

The  EU  announced  a  contribution  of  EUR 125 million  to  finance  emergency 
actions in countries affected by El Niño in Africa, the Caribbean, and Central and 
South  America. The phenomenon, which  is one  of  the biggest  events  in  the  last  three 
decades,  exacerbated  by  climate  change,  is  affecting  more  than  41  million  people 
worldwide7.  Ethiopia  in  particular  is  one  of  the  country  worst  hit  by  the  El  Niño 
phenomenon,  reporting  an  increase  in  the  number  of  food-insecure  people  due  to 
drought from 2.9 million in January 2015 to 8.2 million in October 2015.  

Yemen 

Political 
instability,  armed  conflicts,  poor  economic  performance  and  chronic 
underdevelopment  are  at  the  heart  of  the  complex  and  multifaceted  crisis  Yemen  is 
facing.  Over  47%  of  the  population  lives  below  the  poverty  line  on  less  than  2  euros  a 
day  and  the  country  has  the  world’s  third  highest  rate  of  malnutrition.  In  2015, 
EUR 50 million  was  allocated  from  the  EU  budget  to  assist  populations  across 
the  country  affected  by  conflict  and  forced  displacement,  food  insecurity  and 
malnutrition.  The  bulk  of  humanitarian  funding  is  used  to  provide  food, water  and 
sanitation, basic healthcare, and shelter and household items for the internally displaced 
people, the refugees from the Horn of Africa and the communities who are hosting these 
uprooted people. 

Ukraine 

The EU has kept the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine high on its agenda. Millions of people 
in  Ukraine  are  in  need  of  humanitarian  aid  because  of  the  combined  impact  of  conflict, 
displacement  and  extreme  poverty.  Projects  implemented  in  2015  from  the  EU 
Budget  totalled  EUR 30 million,  which  directly  helped over 800 000 Ukrainians. 
While  the  target  populations  were  the  most  vulnerable  children,  the  elderly  and  single-
parent households, aid also went to internally displaced people and to refugees who had 
fled  conflict  areas,  as  well  as  to  returnees.  Assistance  often  took  the  form  of  cash  and 
vouchers,  which  has  been  shown  to  be  a  highly  efficient  and  effective  channel  for 
assistance with the advantage of directly stimulating the local economy as well as helping 
to preserve the dignity of those affected. In addition, material assistance was mobilised 
through  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism.  In  January  2015,  a  joint  EU  operation 
organised the airlift and road transport of relief supplies. 

Nepal 

flattening  entire  villages.  EU  humanitarian 

A devastating earthquake struck central Nepal in April 2015, killing close to 9 000 people 
and 
funding  of  EUR 15 million  was 
immediately  released  to  help  address  the  most  urgent  needs  —  emergency  shelter, 
emergency  healthcare,  water  and  sanitation,  livelihood  support,  and  logistics  —  and  to 
promote  disaster  preparedness  and  risk  reduction  activities.  In  the  days  following  the 
earthquake,  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  (EUCPM)  was  activated  upon  request  of 
the Nepali authorities. The EUCPM facilitated the deployment of three modules — heavy 
urban  search  and  rescue,  advanced  medical  posts  and  water  purification  —  as  well  as 
experts  in  structural  engineering,  and  other  technical  assistance  on  top  of  in-kind 

7  

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-1513_en.htm 

11 

 
                                                            
assistance  and  relief  teams.  The  Commission’s  sustained  advocacy  efforts  led  to  the 
formulation of the National Strategy for Disaster Management in Nepal. 

Forgotten crises 

The  EU  also  looked  beyond  the  media  spotlight  to  engage  in  many  of  the  ‘forgotten’ 
crises8.  In  2015,  these  included  the  Sahrawi  refugees  in  Algeria,  the  Rohingya 
people  in  Myanmar/Burma,  and  the  Colombian  refugees  in  Ecuador  and 
Venezuela9.  The  Forgotten  Crisis  Assessment  identifies  serious  humanitarian  crisis 
situations where the affected populations do not receive enough international aid or even 
none  at  all.  These  crises  are  characterised  by  low  media  coverage,  a  lack  of  donor 
interest  and  a  weak  political  commitment  to  solve  the  crisis,  resulting  in  an  insufficient 
presence  of  humanitarian  actors.  In  2015,  the  EU  allocated  almost  17%  of  its  initial 
humanitarian aid budget to forgotten crises. 

Education in emergencies 

Children account for half of the victims of conflicts across the world and are among the 
most  vulnerable  victim  groups.  In  addition  to  possible  injury  and  forced  displacement, 
family disruption is a very acute risk during times of crisis. The likelihood of and impact 
on children of separation from their families are both very high. When a disaster strikes, 
millions  of  children  have  their  education  disrupted.  The  impact  of  conflicts  on  these 
children  is  often  long-lasting  and  can  lead,  in  protracted  crises,  to  situations  where  the 
lack  of  proper  education  is  conducive  to  perpetuating  violence  —  as  these  children 
replicate  as  adults  the  violent  patterns  that  they  experienced  in  their  childhood.  Out  of 
school, children miss the chance to develop the necessary skills to build more prosperous 
futures for themselves and their countries. 

In  situations  of  emergency,  education  can  help  create  at  least  some  sense  of  normality 
and  safety,  and  it  gives  children  the  psychosocial  support  they  need  to  overcome 
traumas. Education is also often identified as a primary priority by affected communities 
themselves. 

Education  in  emergencies  became  a  major  priority  in  2015.  Education  is  a  life-
saving  humanitarian  intervention  that  has  been  supported  through  the  EU  Children  of 
Peace  and other  initiatives.  From 2012  to  2015,  over EUR 23 million  has  been allocated 
to  educational  projects  (including  contributions  from  the  governments  of  Luxembourg 
and  Austria),  and  more  than  1.5  million  children  have  benefited  from  these 
projects in 26 countries around the world. The Commission has made a commitment 
to  increase  the  proportion  of  humanitarian  aid  funding  allocated  to  education  in 
emergencies from 1% in 2015 (EUR 11 million) to the UN target of 4% in 2016. 

EU-funded  educational  activities  are  tailored  to  take  into  account  the  different  needs  of 
children  based  on  their  age,  gender  and  other  specific  circumstances.  The  actions  vary 

8  

9  

Forgotten  crises  are  defined  as  severe,  protracted  humanitarian  crisis  situations  where  affected 
populations  are  receiving  no  or  insufficient  international  aid  and  where  there  is  no  political 
commitment  to  solve  the  crisis,  due  in  part  to  a  lack  of  media  interest.  This  refers  primarily  to 
protracted  conflict  situations,  but  can  also  refer  to  crises  resulting  from  the  cumulative  effect  of 
recurring natural disasters, or, even a combination of the two. 
The  Forgotten  Crisis Assessment exercise for 2015 identified 10 forgotten crisis situations: Algeria — 
Sahrawi Refugee Crisis; Bangladesh — Rohingya refugee crisis and Chittagong Hill Tracts; Cameroon; 
Chad; India — conflicts in Jammu and Kashmir, central India (Naxalite insurgency) and in the north-
east  of  India;  Myanmar/Burma  —  Kachin  conflict  and  Rakhine  crisis;  Pakistan;  Sudan;  Yemen; 
Colombia  crisis  —  population  affected  by  the  internal  armed  conflict  in  Colombia  and  Colombian 
refugees in Ecuador and Venezuela. 

12 

 
                                                            
from  facilitating  access  to  schools,  including  catch-up  classes,  to  providing  uniforms, 
teaching  material  and  transport  of  children  to  educational  centres.  The  EU  also  gives 
funds  to  rehabilitate  damaged  schools  and  construct  new  learning  spaces  and  centres. 
Thanks  to  EU  support,  access  to  vocational  training  and  psychosocial  assistance  is  also 
possible. 

Humanitarian aid policy 

The  unprecedented  humanitarian  crises  in  2015  affected  Europe  directly  through  the 
massive increase of refugees and migrants. Given this, the Union has pushed for strong 
coordinated  efforts  of  the  international  community  to  respond  to  the  humanitarian 
challenges worldwide, for better disaster risk management and for more involvement of 
development  actors  in  protracted  displacement  situations.  The  first  ever  multi-
stakeholder World Humanitarian Summit, called by the United Nations, took place on 23-
24 May 2016 in Istanbul. The Union was at the forefront of supporting and preparing for 
the summit during 2015. The Union co-organised the preparatory European consultation 
(Budapest,  3-4  February  2015)  and  closely  followed  all  other  regional  consultations  as 
well  as  the  global  consultation  in  October  2015.  It  contributed  to  studies  led  by  the  UN 
Office  for  Coordination  of  Humanitarian  Affairs  (OCHA),  and  supported  the  work  of  the 
Summit's Secretariat. 

The  Commission  Communication  of  2  September  201510  outlined  the  EU’s  priorities  for 
the  summit:  upholding  international  humanitarian  law;  ensuring  effective  aid  delivery; 
closer humanitarian-development cooperation, including in protracted crises; partnership 
with  local,  national  and  regional  actors;  and  efficient  and  sufficient  humanitarian 
financing. 

Humanitarian assistance policy and outreach   

In  terms  of  international  cooperation,  the  EU  continued  its  privileged  dialogues  with 
donors  both  members  and  non-members  of  the  OECD  Development  Assistance 
Committee.  The  EU  organised  its  first  strategic  dialogues  with  Japan  and  Australia  to 
explore  synergies,  discuss  issues  of  global  concern  and  share  priorities.  The  EU  also 
strengthened its cooperation with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation,  the League of 
Arab States and the United Arab Emirates. One example was a workshop in Jeddah with 
the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation. 

The Commission continued to be in the vanguard in civil-military coordination by actively 
shaping  EU  military  engagements  to  better  respond  to  the  needs  of  the  humanitarian 
community  and  to  ensure  smoother  coordination  in  the  field  e.g.  in  the  planning  and 
conduct of EUNAVFOR MED operation 'Sophia', the European Union naval force operation 
in  the  Mediterranean.  The  Commission  has  also  actively  shaped  the  approach  to  the 
protection  of  civilians  in  EU-led  military  operations  so  as  to  reflect  humanitarian 
protection concerns and respect of international humanitarian law. 

The  unprecedented  number  of  forcibly  displaced  people  in  the  world  —  60  million  — 
called for a stocktaking exercise in the second half of 2015. This was led by the relevant 
Commission  services  and  sought  to  map  out  policy  initiatives,  relevant  instruments, 
actions, lessons learned and gaps at EU level in managing the current refugee crisis. On 
26  April  2016,  the  Commission  adopted  a  Communication  on  Forced  Displacement  and 

10  

COM/2015/0419 final 

13 

 
                                                            
Development  "Lives  in  Dignity:  from  Aid-dependence  to  Self-reliance"11  and  an 
accompanying Staff working document12. The Communication aims at setting out a new 
development-oriented approach to support refugees, IDPs, voluntary returnees and host 
populations in partner countries.  

Integration of thematic policies in humanitarian operations 

Food and nutrition 

During  2015,  the  Commission,  on  behalf  of  the  Union,  chaired  and  steered  the  work  of 
the  Food  Assistance  Convention’s  Committee.  During  the  year,  work  included  a  joint 
statement  by  the  Committee  for  the  World  Humanitarian  Summit.  The  Food  Assistance 
Committee has evolved into a significant forum for policy debate.  

In certain humanitarian disasters, the supply of food to markets and shops is maintained, 
but the affected population loses its purchasing power. In such cases, the 'cash approach' 
ensures  humanitarian  aid  directly  reaches  those  with  the  greatest  need  in  a  timely 
manner.  Cash  transfers  are  quick  to  deliver,  cost-effective  and  provide  people  in  need 
with  greater  choice.  Among 
local  economies, 
empowerment  of  beneficiaries,  dignity,  and  decision-making  power  for  people  who  can 
choose  the items  to  buy.  In March  2015,  the Council  endorsed  a  paper  on  ‘10  common 
principles  for  multi-purpose  cash-based  assistance  to  respond  to  humanitarian  needs’. 
The document appraises opportunities for multi-purpose cash-based assistance from both 
an operational and policy perspective. 

its  advantages  are  benefits 

for 

Shelter and settlements guidelines 

The alarming increase  in displaced populations over the last decade, combined  with the 
continued  economic,  social  and  environmental  challenges  posed  by  climate  change,  has 
greatly increased the need for effective and efficient humanitarian shelter and settlement 
interventions.  As  a  result,  global  technical  shelter  and  settlements  capacity  needs  to  be 
upgraded  and  funds  used  more  effectively  to  provide  greater  impact  for  the  growing 
number  of  those  in  need.  To  capture  best  practice  in  this  sector,  for  which  up  to 
EUR 180 million is allocated annually, guidelines are under preparation, with the external 
consultation phase completed in 2015. 

11  
12  

COM/2016/234 
SWD/2016/142 

14 

 
                                                            
CIVIL PROTECTION 

The  delivery  of  EU  civil  protection  assistance  is  coordinated  by  the  Emergency 
Response  Coordination  Centre  (ERCC).  The  assistance  consists  of  governmental  aid 
from the EU Civil Protection Mechanism’s participating states13 delivered in the immediate 
aftermath  of  a  disaster.  The  ERCC  monitors  crises  around  the  globe  24/7,  ensuring 
complementary action from the EU and its Member States. 

The  mechanism  ensures  a  well-coordinated  response  at  European  level  to  victims  of 
natural  and  man-made  disasters  in  Europe  and  elsewhere,  including  in  cases where  the 
Solidarity  clause  (Article  222  of  the  TFEU)  is  invoked.  In  2015,  the  EU  Civil  Protection 
Mechanism  was  activated  for  25  emergencies  (pre-alert,  monitoring  and  request  for 
assistance)  and  received  19  requests  for  direct  assistance  within  the  EU  and  in  other 
disaster-stricken  countries.  At  the  same  time,  the  Commission  pursues  effective 
prevention and preparedness policies with Member States. 

Syria refugee crisis 

The  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  provides  support  to  Member  States  and 
neighbouring countries facing major peaks in the refugee crisis that overwhelm 
their immediate response capacities. Since the second half of 2015, Hungary, Serbia, 
Slovenia, Croatia and Greece have requested assistance through the Mechanism. Fifteen 
countries  have  made  offers  of  assistance,  and  four  requests  continued  to  be  active  into 
2016.  EUR  490  000  of  the  EU  budget  was  allocated  to  co-financing  the  transport  and 
delivery to the countries affected by the crisis.  

Serbia, for instance, has been confronted with a massive influx of refugees and migrants 
in  transit  from  Greece  to  Hungary  or  Croatia.  To  help  cope  with  the  refugee  influx,  in 
September  2015,  Serbia  received  in-kind  assistance  from  other  European  countries,  in 
the form of vehicles, fuel, hygiene items, beds, mattresses and food.  

In-kind  assistance  has  been  delivered  to  Greece  in  the  form  of  tents,  beds,  sleeping 
bags,  blankets,  hygiene  kits,  power  generators,  water  pumps,  fire-fighting  equipment 
and other specialised equipment. 

Hungary, Slovenia and Croatia have also received material assistance such as winterised 
tents, beds and blankets from the Mechanism participating countries to help them better 
cope with the arrival of refugees and asylum seekers. 

Response to Ebola 

On  14  January  2016,  the  World  Health  Organisation  (WHO)  declared  the  end  of  Ebola 
transmission  in  West  Africa.  From  the  beginning  of  the  worst  Ebola  epidemic  in  history 
(March 2014), the EU and its Member States rapidly mobilised its political, financial and 
scientific  resources  to  help  contain,  treat  and  ultimately  defeat  the  Ebola  virus.  With  a 
total  humanitarian  budget  of  EUR  71  million  since  the  onset  of  the  epidemic,  the  EU 
addressed  the  most  urgent  needs  by  providing  support  activities  including:  epidemic 

13  

33  in  2015  -  the  28  EU  Member  States,  plus  Iceland,  Norway,  the  former  Yugoslav  Republic  of 
Macedonia,  Montenegro  and  Serbia,  and  34  in  2016  when  Turkey  became  a  participating  state  (on 
4/4/2016) 

15 

 
                                                            
surveillance,  diagnostics,  treatment  and  medical  supplies;  deployment  of  doctors  and 
nurses; training of health workers; and awareness raising among the population.   

The  ERCC  played  a  pivotal  role  in  coordinating  the  EU  response,  holding  regular 
coordination  meetings  of  the  EU  Ebola  Task  Force,  which  brought  together  all  relevant 
Commission  departments  (HQ  and  field),  the  European  External  Action  Service,  EU 
Delegations, EU Member States, UN bodies and the EU’s humanitarian partners. Member 
States  coordinated  their  activities  within  the  EU  in  regular  meetings  of  the  Health 
Security Committee established under Decision 1082/13 on serious cross-border threats 
to  health14,  based  on  rapid  risk  assessments  prepared  by  the  European  Centre  for 
Disease  Prevention  and  Control15.  Activation  of  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism 
enabled the swift coordinated deployment of emergency supplies and experts offered by 
Member States (more than 100 flights and 2 cargo ships). A medical evacuation system 
was  established  to  support  the  mobilisation  and  ensure  the  safety  of  international  aid 
workers.  The  deployment  of  mobile  labs  by  the  Commission  played  a  pivotal  role  in 
diagnosing the population in West Africa on Ebola. 

In March 2015, the EU hosted the ‘Ebola: from emergency to recovery’ conference. This 
highlighted  the  need  to  keep  the momentum to  prevent  a  sharp  increase  in  new  cases, 
and  to  plan  the  next  steps  in  the  fight  both  against  the  then  outbreak  and  any 
subsequent outbreak of the Ebola virus. 

The European Medical Corps 

The  concept  of  having  a  'reserve'  of  medical  and  public  health  teams  available 
to  deploy  under  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  –  now  known  as  the 
European Medical Corps – took shape in 2015, following the lessons learned of 
the Ebola crisis16. Quality and interoperability requirements were defined and expanded 
in accordance with the new WHO standards for medical modules. The EU Civil Protection 
Mechanism's  "voluntary  pool"  is  thus  being  expanded  with  medical  teams,  public  health 
teams,  mobile  biosafety  laboratories,  medical  evacuation  capacities,  and  specialised 
assessment and support teams. The official launch — with a number of available medical 
response capacities assigned to the voluntary pool — took place on 15 February 2016. 

Response to natural disasters 

Worldwide, natural disasters are growing in frequency, complexity and severity, and are 
aggravated by challenges such as climate change. 

Every  year,  devastating  forest  fires  take  place  in  Europe  and  around  the  world, 
destroying thousands of hectares of forests. When the scale of a fire exceeds the capacity 
of a country to extinguish it, the EU Civil Protection Mechanism can be activated to bring 
in  coordinated  additional  resources.  The  ERCC  monitors  forest  fire  risk  and  incidence 
across Europe around the clock, using national monitoring services and tools such as the 
European  Forest  Fire  Information  System.  In  July  2015,  Greece  requested  assistance 
under  the  mechanism  in  fighting  dozens  of  forest  fires,  and  in  response,  forest  fire-
fighting aircraft were sent to help. The EU can facilitate the overall transport and logistics 

14

http://ec.europa.eu/health/preparedness_response/docs/decision_serious_crossborder_threats_22102013_en
.pdf 

15 http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/Pages/home.aspx 
16 2015/C 421/04 

16 

 
                                                            
coordination in these scenarios and in this case co-financed the transport of assistance to 
Greece.  In  2015,  total EU  transport  co-financing was  more  than  EUR 14 million,  as  part 
of the EU's financial support for the transport of assistance offered by EU Civil Protection 
Mechanism's participating states. 

The  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  was  also  activated  to  respond  to  other  disasters 
including floods in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania, Myanmar/Burma 
and Bangladesh, forest fires in Paraguay and the earthquake in Nepal.   

Prevention and preparedness 

Prevention and preparedness reduce the worst impacts of human and natural  disasters, 
and  can  support  more  effective  adaptation  against  the  impacts  of  climate  change.  An 
example  of  a  successful  civil  protection  exercise  is  the  scenario  of  a  major  accident 
conducted in an industrial area in Oslo in April 2015. The exercise staged a ship collision, 
and  a  fire  at  a  tank  farm  that  resulted  in  an  explosion  and  the  spill  of  hazardous 
substances. The aim of the exercise was to test the emergency and rescue response and 
decision-making  procedures.  Participants  included  the  Norwegian  emergency  services, 
Oslo  municipality,  the  county  governor,  regional  and  national  authorities,  and European 
and international teams and experts from the ERCC. 

Civil Protection policy 

Following  the  adoption  of  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  legislation  and  the 
Implementing  Decision  in  October  2014,  2015  was  marked  by  the  speedy 
implementation of the European Emergency Response Capacity in the form of a 
voluntary  pool  of  Member  States’  response  capacities.  Interested  participants 
under  the  EU  Civil  Protection  Mechanism  can  pre-commit  various  types  of  response 
capacities  to  the  voluntary  pool  for  use  in  coordinated  EU  civil  protection  missions.  The 
voluntary pool enables improved planning of rapid response actions and flexible standby 
arrangements. By the end of 2015, 21 modules and other response capacities had been 
registered in the voluntary pool. The capacity goal of the voluntary pool is 41 modules by 
2020. 

The Commission continues its international outreach to strategic civil protection partners 
around  the  world  (China,  Japan,  USA,  ASEAN,  etc.)  and  its  ongoing  work  with  EU 
candidate and potential candidate countries. In addition to this, in 2015, the Commission 
developed  a  new  form  of  cooperation  with  European  neighbourhood  countries,  in  the 
context  of  the  review  of  the  European  Neighbourhood  Policy17.  A  form  of  associated 
partnership will be offered to a number of neighbourhood countries in order to increase 
their  capacity  to  cooperate  on  disaster  management  under  the  EU  Civil  Protection 
Mechanism. 

2015  also  saw  the  most  successful  edition  of  the  European  Civil  Protection  Forum,  the 
large  biennial  conference  bringing  together  all  European  and  some  international  civil 
protection stakeholders. The 2015 Forum provided the platform for the official launch of 
work  with  neighbourhood  countries,  as  well  as  the  new  important  work  strand  on 
remotely piloted aircraft systems in civil protection. 

17 JOIN/2015/50 final 

17 

 
                                                            
In  addition,  the  Commission  has  been  actively  involved  with  Member  States  in  the 
development  of  national  risk  assessments.  This  arises  from  the  requirement  of  the  EU 
Civil Protection Mechanism for participating countries to submit national risk assessment 
reports to the Commission by December 2015. Risk assessment is also being addressed 
as  part  of  a  global  initiative  to  develop  the  INFORM  index  for  risk  management  in 
cooperation  with  the  Inter-Agency  Standing  Committee  and  many  other  international 
partners.  INFORM  2015,  which  covers  191  countries,  was  launched  early  in  2015  and 
helped the Commission in supporting decision-making processes and funding allocations. 

DISASTER PREPAREDNESS AND RESILIENCE 

The  Disaster  Preparedness  ECHO  programme  (DIPECHO)  aims  to  reinforce  in-
country  preparedness  capacities  so  that  early  action  can  be  taken  to  reduce 
hazard  impacts,  and  asset  and  human  losses,  and  to  respond  to  humanitarian 
needs. The programme is fully integrated in the humanitarian aid financing framework. 
All Humanitarian Implementation Plans18 incorporate an analysis of options and priorities 
for preparedness, early action and disaster risk reduction. On average, every euro spent 
on reduction and preparedness activities saves between four and seven euros that would 
be  spent  to  respond  in  the  aftermath  of  a  disaster.  In  2015,  actions  under  the 
programme  also  strengthened  local  response  capacities  by  investing  in  early  warning 
systems,  providing  training  to  local  authority  officials,  establishing  and  developing  local 
disaster  management  committees,  organising  simulations,  etc.  In  2015,  close  to 
EUR 38 million  was  allocated  to  the  DIPECHO  programme,  increasing  the  number  of 
direct  disaster  risk  reduction  beneficiaries  from  16  million  to  24  million  worldwide. 
Disaster  risk  reduction  activities  were  mainstreamed  in  43%  of  all  humanitarian 
operations  last  year.  These  efforts  are  also  expected  to  contribute  to  adapting  to  the 
impacts of climate change. 

The EU has taken a leading role in building a robust, ambitious and enhanced framework 
for  Disaster  Risk  Reduction  in  2015.  The  EU  played  a  very  significant  role  at  the  third 
United  Nations  Conference  on  Disaster  Risk  Reduction,  which  adopted  the  Sendai 
Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 in May 2015. Disaster risk reduction is 
now  firmly  anchored  as  a  key  element  of  sustainable  development  efforts,  focussing  on 
the  international  community's  ability  to  reduce  risks  and  enhance  disaster  resilience. 
Addressing  the  interlinked  challenges  of  disaster  risk,  sustainable  development  and 
climate change is recognised as an important guiding principle. The adoption of this new 
framework establishes clear targets and priorities for action that will lead to a substantial 
reduction of disaster risk and of losses in lives, livelihoods and health. Implementation of 
the  Sendai  Framework  over  the  next  15  years  will  require  commitment  and  political 
leadership. The Commission is following up on the Sendai Conference with an action plan 
on the implementation of the new international framework19. The Union will be playing an 
active  role  in  the  intergovernmental  expert  working  group  established  to  develop  global 
indicators to measure global progress on the implementation of the Sendai Framework. 

18   The  Commission  adopts  yearly  a  'Worldwide  Decision'  which  covers  all  humanitarian  aid  actions  which  the 
Union  anticipates  to  fund  during  a  given  period.  In  the  context  of  this  Decision,  the  Commission  prepares 
and  publishes  "Humanitarian  Implementation  Plans"  which  provide  more  detailed  information  on  the 
operational priorities identified. 

19  SWD/2016/205 final/2 

18 

 
 
                                                            
The  Commission  will  be  playing  an  active  role  in  the  intergovernmental  expert  working 
group  established  to  develop  global  indicators  to  measure  global  progress  on  the 
implementation of the Sendai Framework. 

EUROPEAN UNION AID VOLUNTEERS 

The  EU  Aid  Volunteers  initiative  aims  to  bring  together,  between  2014  and  2020,  up  to 
18 000 volunteers from EU Member States to support the EU’s efforts to strengthen the 
capacity  and  resilience  of  vulnerable  communities  in  other  countries.  The  initiative 
provides  opportunities  for  capacity  building  and  technical  assistance  for  organisations 
sending and hosting volunteers. The first calls for proposals were launched in 2015. Ten 
projects  have  been  selected  for  co-funding:  four  for  technical  assistance  and  six  for 
capacity  building  in  areas  such  as  disaster  risk  management,  volunteer  management, 
capacity  to  undergo  certification,  tools  and  methods  of  needs  assessment,  building 
partnerships,  and  communication  activities.  Altogether,  88  organisations  are  involved  in 
the implementation of projects. The first concrete results from the preparatory and initial 
implementing actions are expected in 2016  when trained volunteers will be deployed to 
humanitarian projects worldwide.   

Certification 

All organisations wishing to send or host volunteers under the initiative must be certified. 
The  certification  process  verifies  that  the  high  standards  and  procedures  of  volunteer 
management, set to protect and manage volunteers during their deployment, can be fully 
realised  and  met  by  all  participating  organisations.  In  January  2015,  a  call  for 
applications  was  published  to  establish  a  list  of  certified  sending  and  hosting 
organisations. Sixteen certifications were awarded by the end of 2015. The certification is 
an ongoing process and the call is open until 30 September 2020. 

Deployment and training 

The selection, preparation and deployment of volunteers are the main actions under the 
initiative.  A  call  for  proposals  was  published  in  July  2015  for  deployment  of  volunteers. 
By  October  2015,  two  applications  had  been  submitted  involving  27  organisations  and 
the deployment of 44 volunteers after summer 2016. The evaluation of the applications 
and the signature of the grant agreements will be finalised in 2016. 

An open call for tenders for training was published in October 2015.  The objective is to 
provide  training  services  to  candidate  volunteers  and  to  assess  their  competence  and 
abilities.  The  evaluation  of  the  applications  and  the  signature  of  the  framework 
contract(s) are to be finalised in 2016. 

The  Commission's  Education,  Audio-visual  and  Culture  Executive  Agency  (EACEA)  is  in 
charge  of  the  complete  life-cycle  management  of  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers  initiative.  This 
consists  of  the  implementation  of  the  programme  including  the  call  for  proposals, 
analysis  of  the  grant  requests,  certification  process,  on-the-spot  monitoring  of  projects, 
and  the  dissemination  of  the  projects'  and  programme's  results.  The  Commission  holds 
responsibility  for  the  development  of  the  legal  framework  at  the  base  of  the  EU  Aid 
Volunteers  initiative  and  maintains  key  oversight  for  policy,  financial  and  operational 
elements of the initiative. 

19 

 
COORDINATION WITH OTHER EU INSTRUMENTS 

The  EU  attaches  great  importance  to  the  link  between  humanitarian  aid,  as  a  rapid 
response  measure  in  crisis  situations,  and  other  EU  instruments  prioritising  more  long-
term  development  and  reconstruction  efforts.  The  humanitarian-development  nexus  is 
complex  and  requires  increased  coordination  —  leading  to  joint  approaches  between 
Commission  services,  and  collaborative  implementation,  monitoring  and  tracking  of 
progress.  

The  need  to  further  invest  in  this  approach  was  reaffirmed  in  2015  with  the 
publication of the EU Resilience Compendium. The aim of this publication is to foster 
learning  and  a  better  understanding  of  how  resilience  can  lead  to  more  effective 
humanitarian assistance and transformational change for the most vulnerable in the long 
term.  The  compendium  highlights  how  resilience  principles  are  already  incorporated  in 
many  EU  programmes,  such  as  for  climate  adaptation  and  for  social  protection.  The 
Compendium was launched at the third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, 
which took place in Sendai, Japan, in March 2015. 

The  EU’s  "Supporting  the  Horn  of  Africa’s  Resilience"  (SHARE)  and  the  "Global 
Alliance  for  Resilience"  (AGIR)  are  flagship  joint  initiatives  of  Commission 
services. They aim to improve the ability of people, communities and countries to face 
persistent  and  acute  emergencies  in  the  eastern  Horn  of  Africa  and  the  Sahel  in  West 
Africa.  To  that  end,  it  is  crucial  for  development  actors,  governments  and  international 
aid  organisations  to  work  together  to  break  the  cycle  of  emergencies.  The  momentum 
created  by  both  initiatives  prompted  nine  countries  in  the  regions  to  adopt  national 
resilience priorities by 2015. 

In  July  2015, Commission  services  co-organised  a  seminar  with the objective  to  update 
humanitarian  and  development  practitioners  working  in/on  fragile  and  crisis-affected 
countries on recent policy developments, as well as on concepts, principles, approaches, 
tools and procedures for better addressing fragility and crisis situations with a resilience 
lens  to  avoid  deterioration  and  ensure  a  smoother  transition  from  humanitarian  to 
development.  

Commission  services  and  EU  Delegations  are  also  working  closely  on  the  joint 
EU  initiative  "Resilience  Building  in  Ethiopia"  (RESET).  This  is  implemented  in 
drought-prone  areas  of  the  country.  The  initiative  addresses  not  only  the  symptoms  of 
extreme poverty but also some of the root causes of food insecurity and malnutrition. In 
so doing, it provides households with greater coping capacity to resist future shocks. In 
December  2015,  the  Commission  adopted  RESET  II20,  an  Action  Plan  for  Ethiopia 
integrating the specific objectives and scope of the EU Trust Fund. 

The  EU  Emergency  Trust  Fund  for  Africa  was  launched  at  the  Valletta  Summit  on 
Migration on 12 November 2015 by European and African partners. The Trust Fund will 
assist countries in the Sahel region, the Lake Chad area, the Horn of Africa and 
North  Africa  that  are  among  the  most  fragile  and  affected  by  migration.  The 
Trust Fund pools together money from different EU financial instruments, supplemented 
with additional funds from EU Member States and other donors.  

20  http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/action-document-eutf-action-document-implementation-horn-africa-window-

ethiopia-reset-ii_en 

20 

 
                                                            
The Trust Fund aims to tackle the root causes of irregular migration and displacement in 
countries of origin, transit and destination, through a range of priority sectors: economic 
programmes, migration management, stability and governance, and resilience. Resilience 
projects  support  basic  services  for  local  populations,  and  in  particular  the  most 
vulnerable,  as  well  as  refugees  and  displaced  persons,  including  through  community 
centres  or  other  means  of  providing  them  with  food  and  nutrition  security,  health, 
education, and social protection, as well as environmental sustainability. 

The  newly  established  Bekou  Trust  Fund  aims  to  promote  the  stabilisation  and 
reconstruction  of  the  Central  African  Republic.  It  focuses  on  linking  relief, 
rehabilitation and development, and on resilience. Contributions come from the European 
Development  Fund,  the  Development  Cooperation  Instrument,  EU  Humanitarian 
Assistance and from EU Member States' programmes. Actions funded by the Bekou Trust 
Fund  also  complement  activities  under  the  EU  Instrument  contributing  to  Stability  and 
Peace.  The  Fund  was  established  in  July  2014  by  the  Union  and  three  Member  States: 
France,  Germany  and  the  Netherlands,  which  were  joined  in  2015  by  Italy  and 
Switzerland. 

In  2015,  the  Bekou  Trust  Fund  focused  on  three  components;  1)  the  resilience  of 
communities  in  terms  of  food  security  through  the  deployment  of  "resilience  boxes" 
based  on  an  integrated  system  of  "farmer-field  schools";  2)  the  accompaniment  of 
pastoral  activities  through  the  reorganisation  of  transhumance  networks  and  the 
development  of  veterinary  services;  and  3)  the  establishment  of  food,  vegetable  and 
small livestock sectors in Bangui in close collaboration with local authorities.  

In  addition,  the  increasing  vulnerability  and  exposure  of  people  and  assets,  and  the 
frequency and severity of hazards, are pressing reasons to search for innovative ways to 
exploit  the  use  of  science  and  technology  to  their  full  potential.  For  example,  the 
Commission  supported  urgent  Ebola  research  on  potential  treatments,  vaccines  and 
diagnostic tests with funds of almost €140 million, leveraging an additional €100 million 
from the pharmaceutical industry. 

The  Global  Research  Collaboration  for  Infectious  Disease  Preparedness  (GloPID-R)  was 
set  up  with  the  support  of  the  EC.  It  brings  together  funding  organisations  on  a  global 
scale  for  an  effective  research  response  to  major  outbreaks  of  infectious  diseases  with 
pandemic  potential.  It  has  proven  its  value  in  the  Ebola  outbreak  as  well  as  the  Zika 
outbreak.  The  European  and  Developing  Countries  Clinical  Trials  Partnership  (EDCTP) 
brings  European  and  African  countries  together  with  the  aim  of  developing  new 
interventions  (diagnostics,  drugs,  vaccines)  against  HIV/AIDS,  Malaria  and  Tuberculosis 
(EU contribution EUR 683 million).  

A  number  of  dedicated  research  and  innovation  actions  on  addressing  the  migration 
phenomenon  have  been  funded  by  Horizon  2020  including  through  the  recent  call  on 
migration, radicalization, integration (EUR 7.5 million). 

In 2015 the European Commission launched the science4refugees initiative for matching 
refugees  and  asylum  seekers  who  have  an  academic  background  with  European 
academic institutions and interested industries. 224 research organisations have flagged 
job vacancies for refugees and 42 refugee researchers have already registered.  

As  regards science  and  technology  cooperation  with  developing  countries,  the  emphasis 
is  on  building  partnerships.  For  example,  during  2015  the  first  important  steps  were 
made towards the development of an EU-Africa Research and Innovation Partnership on 

21 

 
 
food and nutrition security and sustainable agriculture (FNSSA). Around EUR 70 million is 
already being invested in it by the European Commission, European member states and 
African countries.   

In  September  2015,  the Commission  launched  a  new  in-house  centre to  help  EU 
Member States respond to emergencies, prevent and reduce the impact of disasters. 
The Disaster Risk Management Knowledge Centre addresses:  

• 

• 

• 

the need to improve and capitalise on scientific and operational knowledge on 
disasters; 

to need to make better use of existing knowledge at all stages of the disaster 
cycle in policymaking and operations; and  

the  need  to  promote  knowledge  sharing  as  it  is  key  to  enhancing  the 
science/knowledge-policy interface. 

FINANCIAL AND HUMAN RESOURCES 

EU humanitarian budget at a historic high 

The  humanitarian  and  civil  protection  assistance  provided  in  2015  amounted  to  over 
EUR 1.5 billion.  This  served  to  help  more  than  134  million  beneficiaries  caught  up  in 
natural  disasters  or  conflict  in  over  80  countries.  The  year  2015  saw  the  largest 
humanitarian aid budget ever executed by the Commission. This was a clear response to 
the  increasingly  frequent  and  devastating  natural  disasters  and  humanitarian  crises. 
Budget reinforcements in 2015 essentially concerned: 

• 

refugee crises for populations affected by the Syrian conflict, in Syria but also in 
neighbouring countries and along the Western Balkan route; 

•  South  Sudan,  where  ongoing  conflict  continues  to  generate  huge  humanitarian 
needs for people in the country and for South Sudanese refugees elsewhere in the 
region; and 

•  emergency  actions  in  countries  affected by  the  extreme  weather  phenomenon  El 

Niño in Africa, the Caribbean, and Central and South America. 

In  the  course  of  2015,  the  Commission  took  further  advantage  of  the  new  funding 
options under Article 21(2)(b)21 of the 2012 Financial Regulation,22 making greater use of 
external  assigned  revenues,  which  allow  EU  Member  states  and  other  donor 
organisations  to  delegate  the  management  of  some  of  their  funds  to  the  European 
Commission,  for  a  more  streamlined  approach  to  aid  management  in  some  sectors  and 
countries. The largest external revenues came from the United Kingdom and France. 

21 Member States and non-EU countries, including their public agencies, entities or natural persons, may 

provide the Commission with revenue assigned to certain external aid projects or programmes financed by 
the Union. 

22 Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on 

the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (OJ L 298, 26.10.2012, p. 1). 

22 

 
                                                            
As  a  humanitarian  aid  donor,  the  Commission  does  not  implement  humanitarian 
assistance programmes. It fulfils its mission by funding humanitarian actions carried out 
by  partner  organisations.  Partners  are  non-governmental  organisations  that  sign  a 
framework  partnership  agreement,  United  Nations  agencies  covered  by  the  EU-UN 
Financial and Administrative Framework Agreement, or international organisations23 with 
which relations are governed by an ad hoc framework partnership agreement. The 2015 
breakdown of the funding by implementing partner is as follows:  

•  47% to non-governmental organisations; 

•  39% to United Nations agencies;  

•  13% to international organisations; 

•  1% for a direct contract of ECHO flight and a contract with Noha University. 

As  in  previous  years,  actions  in  Africa  received  the  most  substantial  funding  in  2015, 
followed by the Middle East with a special focus on the Syria crisis. Approximately 98% of 
the 2015 humanitarian and civil protection budget was used for operational activities and 
the remaining 2% for administrative and policy activities.   

Human resources 

There  are  344  staff  members  working  in  Brussels  headquarters,  and  over  465 
humanitarian expert staff in 48 field offices located in those countries most severely 
affected  by  crises  in  Africa,  the  Middle  East,  Asia,  Latin  America  and  the  Western 
Balkans.  The  worldwide  network  of  field  offices  enables  up-to-date  analysis  of  existing 
and forecast needs in a given country or region, to ensure the monitoring and support of 
activities and coordination with other donors and implementing partners in the field. 

In 2015, the Commission conducted a revision of its field network with the aim to 

•  Enhance  the  flexibility  and  the  surge  capacity  within  the  network,  by  pre-
identifying 25 technical assistants with an explicit surge role and by creating four 
positions of "surge response experts" deployable at very short notice; 

•  Ensure  a  better  matching  of  resources  to  priorities,  which  resulted  in  a  shift  of 

balance of the field presence to the areas of greater need;  

•  Bring  the  regional  offices  closer  to  the  field,  by  transforming  the  6  Regional 

Support Offices into 12 Regional Offices.   

In addition, at the end of 2015, the Commission established its presence in Belgrade in 
response to the refugee crisis.   

23 International Committee of the Red Cross, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, 

International Organisation for Migration. 

23 

 
                                                            
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND SOURCES 

•  General information on DG ECHO: 
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/en 

•  Individual country geographical/policy fiches:  

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/media/publications/annual_report/2016/ECHO_
AR2016_Annex1_GEOFiches.pdf#view=fit 

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/media/publications/annual_report/2016/ECHO_
AR2016_Annex2_PolicyFiches.pdf#view=fit 

•  Financial information on Commission humanitarian aid and civil protection 

activities in 2015: 
http://ec.europa.eu/echo/funding-evaluations/funding-decisions-hips-2015_en 

•  Operational information from previous years: 

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/about/annual_reports_en.htm 

24 

 
 
 
 
ANNEXES 

Annex 1: Synthesis of evaluations carried out in 2015 

A) Introduction 

The  following  external,  independent  evaluations  of  the  European  Commission's 
humanitarian interventions were carried out in 2015: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

24  
25  
26  
27  
28  

29  

Coastal  West  Africa,  2008  –  2014  (CWA)24:  The  situation  for  humanitarian 
assistance  in  Coastal  West  Africa  is  complex,  consisting  of  a  mixture  of  natural 
and  man-made  disasters,  and  often  requiring  sudden  and  small-scale  responses. 
The  most  prominent  subjects  of  intervention  are  epidemics  (including  Ebola), 
floods, and conflicts. 

Sahel  Strategy,  2010  –  201425:  The  Sahel  has  some  of  the  highest  acute 
malnutrition  rates  in  children  worldwide.  Levels  of  acute  malnutrition  are  one  of 
the  most  important  indicators  used  to  identify  humanitarian  crises.  They  reflect 
the  overall  status  of  the  most  vulnerable  populations  and  provide  information, 
inter alia, on access to food, the capacity of coping mechanisms and functioning of 
the public health system. 

Syria, 2012 – 201426: Since March 2011, the violent crackdown of the protests in 
Syria  and  the  ensuing  protection  crisis  has  progressively  developed  into  a 
widespread  non-international  armed  conflict,  with  severe  humanitarian 
consequences in Syria and its neighbouring countries. From a widespread guerrilla 
fare, the conflict has evolved towards a full-fledged civil war. Large portions of the 
territory  have  fallen  under  the  temporary  or  permanent  control  of  numerous 
Armed Opposition Groups, particularly in the North and the East of the country. 

Pakistan, 2010 – 201427: Pakistan faces economic difficulties, underdevelopment, 
political  instability,  armed  conflicts  and  insecurity  in  many  geographical  areas. 
Military  operations  result  in  huge  population  movement.  The  Commission  has 
classified  the  protracted  IDP  crisis  in  the  areas  bordering  Afghanistan  in  the 
northwest as a Forgotten Crisis28.  

Transfer Modalities, 2011 – 201429: In the last 10 years the humanitarian system 
has  gradually  shifted  from  a  pure  in-kind  support  to  affected  people  in 
emergencies  and  crises,  to  include  also  transfers  of  cash  and  vouchers.  Cash, 
vouchers  and  in-kind  support  are  different  so-called  ‘transfer  modalities’  used  in 
humanitarian response. In the last few years the EU has pursued and encouraged 
an  increased  use  of  the  cash  modality,  as  this  brings  about  more  dignity,  choice 
and  flexibility  to  the  beneficiaries.  Furthermore,  it  has  a  potential  of  greater 
efficiency, value for money, and ultimately improved effectiveness. 

http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/evaluation-of-the-dg-echo-actions-in-coastal-west-africa-2008-2014-pbKR0415526/ 
http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/evaluation-of-echo-s-interventions-in-the-sahel-2010-2014--pbKR0215833/ 
http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/evaluation-of-the-echo-response-to-the-syrian-crisis-2012-2014-pbKR0415857 
http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/evaluation-of-echo-s-interventions-in-pakistan-2010-2014-pbKR0215834/ 
Severe, protracted humanitarian crisis situations where affected populations are receiving no or insufficient international aid, and 
where there is no political commitment to solve the crisis, due in part to a lack of media interest 
http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/evaluation-of-the-use-of-different-transfer-modalities-in-echo-humanitarian-aid-actions-2011-2014-
pbKR0415822/ 

25 

 
                                                            
B) Methodology 

The Commission’s Humanitarian evaluations follow a standard research methodology that 
ensures  a  sound  evidence  base  for  responding  to  the  evaluation  questions.  Firstly,  a 
literature  review  is  carried  out,  covering  reference  documents,  context  related 
documents,  project  documentation,  existing  project  evaluations  (etc.).  Secondly,  main 
stakeholders  are  consulted,  using  the  most  appropriate  research  tools  (e-surveys, 
interviews,  phone  interviews,  etc.).  Main  stakeholders  are  end-beneficiaries,  the 
Commission’s implementing partners, Commission staff at headquarters and field, other 
main humanitarian donors, government representatives of beneficiary countries, etc. As 
the evaluations carried out in 2015 will all feed into overarching evaluations (notably on 
humanitarian  aid  and  the  Civil  Protection  mechanism),  not  all  the  Better  Regulation 
requirements  applied.  For  example,  no  Open  Public  Consultation  was  carried  out  in  the 
context of these evaluations. 

More  detail  on  the  methodology  applied  for  each  evaluation,  including  on  assessing 
efficiency, and their limitations can be found in the evaluation reports. 

C) Evaluation results 

The synthesised evaluation results are presented according to the five evaluation issues 
required by the European Commission’s Better Regulation Guidelines, as follows: 

1. Relevance 

The relevance of the Commission’s actions during the period was generally confirmed by 
the  evaluations  examined.  The  targeting  of  the  most  vulnerable  groups  was  largely 
appropriate  and  duly  informed  by  systematic  needs  assessments,  including  proper 
involvement of the beneficiaries. Based on the EU mandate, there was a strong focus on 
relief and rehabilitation, duly taking account of gaps in response left by other donors as 
well as specific sector needs.  

2. Coherence 

The  evaluation  results  show  that  the  Commission’s  actions  were  coherent  with  key 
humanitarian  principles  (“humanity”,  “neutrality”,  “impartiality”,  “independence”, 
“protection” and “do no harm”). However, it also came clear that it can be challenging to 
reconcile  the  humanitarian  principle  of  independence  with  ensuring  coherence  with 
national  policies  and  practices,  as  the  latter  are  often  driven  by  political  or  economic 
considerations,  thus  creating  incoherence  with  the  Commission’s  principled  and  needs 
based  approach. Coherence  with DEVCO  actions  expresses  itself  mainly  as  LRRD, which 
has been manifested in an overall positive manner in CWA and the Sahel, resulting to a 
certain  extent  in  aligned  priorities  and  programming.  To  be  mentioned  is  that  the 
evaluation  on  Pakistan  highlights  lacking  coherence  with  DEVCO,  showing  weak  links 
between priorities and programming between the two DGs. 

The  Syria  evaluation  states  that  the  Commission  has  a  robust  system  of  procedures  in 
place that ensure consistency with the broad spirit of the Good Humanitarian Donorship 
(GHD)  initiative.  This  has  resulted  in  need-based  funding  decisions  at  project  level, 
leading  to  the  widespread  appreciation  of  the  Commission  as  a  principled  humanitarian 
donor. However, at strategic level, the Commission’s Humanitarian Implementation Plans 
for  the  Syrian  crisis  over  the  period  2012-2014  do  not  explicitly  refer  to  the  23  GHD 
Principles.  Specific  requirements  are  placed  on  Commission  partners  to  meet  the 

26 

 
principles  of  impartiality  (GHD  Principle  2)  and  to  encourage  consistency  with  LRRD 
norms (GHD Principle 9). 

3. EU Added Value  

The  Commission  takes  the  role  of  a  reference  donor,  basing  its  actions  on  the 
humanitarian  principles,  informed  assessments,  and  promoting  a  non-political  approach 
to  humanitarian  assistance.  The  importance  of  this  for  maintaining  the  humanitarian 
space is well recognised (e.g. as particularly shown in the Pakistan evaluation). 

The principled and needs based approach includes addressing ‘forgotten crises’ as shown 
e.g.  in  CWA,  where  The  Commission  was  present  in  every  humanitarian  situation,  in 
forgotten areas with a variety of adapted funding tools, where other donors were absent. 
In  larger  crises  the  Commission  consistently  advocated  responding  to  situations  where 
other donors were not present and often played the role of coordinator and catalyst. 

The Commission’s financial weight enables it to exercise  policy leadership and impose a 
more  coordinated  and  coherent  approach  on  implementing  partners.  An  example  is 
provided by the evaluation of Transfer Modalities, which shows that, partly as a result of 
the  Commission’s  capacity  building  initiatives  and  evidence  based  funding  strategies, 
cash  transfers  are  an  increasingly  common  element  of  humanitarian  response,  which 
supports the efficiency and effectiveness of humanitarian aid delivery. 

Furthermore,  the  Commission’s  strong  field  presence  allows  for  a  comprehensive 
understanding  of  the  complex  needs  on  the  ground,  and  its  neutrality  provides  greater 
flexibility and power to act on behalf of the most vulnerable. This is particularly shown in 
the  Sahel  and  CWA.  The  Commission  is  valued  by  other  donors  for  its  technical  know-
how and capacity for coordination. 

The  possibility  of  the  use  of  the  European  Development  Fund30  /  ‘Envelope  B’  offers  a 
window of opportunity of a joint EU Added Value, assuming that this funding tool would 
help  to  coordinate  joint  programming  between  the  Commission’s  humanitarian  aid  and 
development  actions.  However,  some  evaluation  results  (particularly  for  Pakistan) 
pointed  at  a  lacking  exploitation  of  this  potential  EU  Added  Value,  as  humanitarian  aid 
project  results  could  sometimes  be  better  promoted  and  picked  up  by  development 
actions if a better alignment of priorities and programming (“LRRD”) would be made. 

In  Pakistan  some  partners  felt  that  the  Commission  could  better  use  its  weight  and 
position  to  put  pressure  on  governments,  and  advocate  for  better  humanitarian  access 
and key issues affecting the humanitarian community. 

4. Effectiveness 

For  CWA  the  evaluation  confirmed  the  overall  effectiveness  of  Commission  funded 
operations. The Commission funded critical sectors, mobilised partners and supported the 
overall  capacity  of  the  humanitarian  system. However,  DRR  received  little  support  from 
the  Commission  (and  other  donors),  considering  that  DRR  strategies,  programmes  and 
activities are very relevant for the region, and a clear focus on preparedness is needed. 

30  

The  European  Development  Fund  (EDF)  is  the  EU’s  largest  geographic  instrument  for  development 
cooperation,  with  EUR  30.5  billion  allocated  to  the  11th  EDF  for  2014-20.  Envelope  B  is  devoted  to 
cover unforeseen needs 

27 

 
                                                            
As  for  Sahel,  the  evaluation  showed  that  infant  mortality  declined  over  the  evaluated 
period.  Overall,  the  Commission’s  most  significant  contribution  was  to  increase  the 
coverage of health centres offering nutrition treatment and the number of children under 
5 screened and treated. Furthermore, the Sahel Strategy played a very important role in 
linking  relief  to  rehabilitation  and  development  (LRRD),  and  there  are  a  number  of 
examples  of  successful  cooperation  with  the  Commission’s  development  actions  and 
other actors in this respect. As for the hand-over of the Commission’s humanitarian aid 
results  to  governments,  there  have  also  been  notable  changes  in  the  governments’ 
acceptance of malnutrition as a pathology and an issue to be addressed at national level. 
Yet,  LRRD  should  be  further  strengthened  in  the  region  to  promote  impact  and 
sustainability, which is a subject of recommendation by the evaluators. 

The  Commission’s  decision  to  support  remote  management  operations  inside    areas  of 
Syria controlled by armed opposition groups, whilst simultaneously acting to mitigate the 
risks  of  doing  so,  enabled  it  to  provide  effective  life-saving  assistance  to  some  of  the 
most  vulnerable  populations  in  hard-to-reach  areas.  Taken  in  tandem  with  the 
Commission’s  assistance  inside  government-held  areas,  its  engagement  with  remote 
management  operations  allowed  the  Commission  to  provide  impartial  and  needs-based 
assistance under difficult circumstances. 

The  Commission’s  note  on  Remote  Management31  is  still  seen  by  many  partners  as 
leading the policy agenda on this issue. A review of Commission-funded operations inside 
Syria suggests that the note has been widely followed by all partners. 

In  Pakistan  the  Commission  was  –  in  the  vast  majority  of  cases  –  able  to  achieve  its 
purpose  and  fund  partners  to  deliver  outputs  they  would  have  been  unable  to  provide 
without  EU  funding.  The  support  funded  by  the  Commission  on  nutrition  in  the  Sindh 
Province  was  considerable  and  helped  to  highlight  a  long-standing  problem  of  chronic 
malnutrition that was identified at the time of the 2010 flood response. The Commission 
also  helped  to  involve  other  donors  as  well  as  DG  DEVCO,  which  looked  at  the  root 
problems of malnutrition in this area. However, the evaluation also came across certain 
criticism from partners to the Commission in terms of the timeliness of its funding, which 
is  a  precondition  for  an  effective  and  meaningful  response.  Furthermore,  a  limited 
coordination  with  other  Commission  services  and  the  National  Disaster  Management 
Authority  impacted  the  Commission’s  ability  to  effectively  promote  longer-term 
perspectives of humanitarian aid and LRRD in Pakistan. 

5. Efficiency 

Although an approach to assess cost-effectiveness of humanitarian aid is currently being 
developed,  the  Commission  does  not  yet  have  such  an  approach  available,  and 
evaluators have so far been struggling to provide solid statements on this issue.  

For Syria the evaluators concluded that the Commission has generally provided a logical 
rationale  for  the  sub-allocation  of  funds  to  the  countries  within  the  region  –  with  the 
possible exception of Turkey’s low share of the burden, the Commission’s Syria team has 
used  a  relatively  small  budget  to  promote  an  ambitious  set  of  strategic  objectives  and 
exert  larger-than-expected  influence  on  the  overall  response.  In  part  this  has  been 
achieved  through  good  collaboration  with  other  EU  funding  instruments  to  allow  more 
targeted  use  of  the  humanitarian  budget.  However,  the  link  between  the  Commission’s 

31  

http://ec.europa.eu/echo/files/partners/humanitarian_aid/Remote_Management_instructions.pdf 

28 

 
                                                            
funding  decisions  and  beneficiary  needs  in  Syria  is  opaque  and  appears  to  have  been 
sensitive to political influence. 

For Sahel the evaluators could state with a reasonable degree of confidence that money 
was  well  spent,  given  the  contribution  of  the  Sahel  Strategy  to  reducing  mortality. 
However,  it  was  hard  to  say  whether  the  results  could  have  been  achieved  with  less 
funding. Inevitably, lessons were generated (e.g. around the efficiency of specific large-
scale  projects  and  gaps  in  the  current  programme)  and  these  could  be  used  to  further 
improve efficiency. 

In  CWA,  the  evaluation  confirmed  the  efficiency  of  the  ‘multi-country/cross-border 
approach’, which enabled Commission partners to better assist populations moving back 
and  forth  between  two  countries,  given  their  knowledge  of  the  context,  capacities  and 
constraints  on  both  sides  of  the  border.  The  inclusion  of  such  cross-border  dynamics  is 
bound to reinforce the capacity of the communities on both sides of the border to absorb 
shocks  (resilience).  Furthermore,  for  Côte  d’Ivoire  (where  the  larger  part  of  the  budget 
was allocated in CWA during the period), given the situation created by the crisis and the 
number  of  people  affected  (5.9  million  were  registered  in  2012  in  the  most  affected 
western regions; nearly 4 million people are thought to be living in the 2 most affected 
quartiers  in  Abidjan),  it  can  reasonably  be  concluded  that  the  Commission  –  the  main 
humanitarian  donor  –  has  achieved  a  very  high  cost-effectiveness  ratio,  based  on  the 
lack  of  reported  excess  mortality  and  the  effectiveness  of  the  livelihoods  and  social 
cohesions approaches.  

Overall for CWA, even if a cost-effectiveness comparison was not possible due to the lack 
of  comprehensive  and  comparable  data,  the  evaluation  team  judged  the  level  of 
effectiveness to be proportionate to the resources invested and the capacity of partners 
to  respond.  Resources  mobilised  were  adequate  to  the  needs  –  particularly  in  terms  of 
re-establishment  of  health  services  and  supplies,  but  also  for  social  cohesion  or 
protection. 

Concerning Pakistan, both the qualitative and quantitative outputs from EU funding have 
been satisfactory with regard to pre-defined targets. At the same time, EU funding allows 
partners to use a range of approaches, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach: food or 
cash for work, cash vouchers, direct delivery systems involving the beneficiaries and very 
often  district  authorities  were  used.  The  Commission  promoted,  funded  and  used  a 
consortium approach with 2 consortiums, one of which the Commission pushed to be set 
up  with  6  major  international  NGOs  working  together  and  100%  funded  by  the 
Commission during this period. This was to help improve delivery, use economies of scale 
in  terms  of  common  usage  of  assets  and  ensure  standards  using  the  best  of  each  of 
these  organisations’  approaches  and  to  reduce  the  level  of  overheads,  improving 
efficiency. 

However,  the  criticism  of  heavy  bureaucracy  from  some  partners  still  hangs  over  the 
Commission in Pakistan, which is something to consider when assessing the efficiency of 
Commission-funded interventions. 

As for the choice of Transfer Modality – which has a strong bearing on cost-efficiency and 
cost-effectiveness – the Commission promoted the use of cash transfers over the period. 
The evaluation of Transfer Modalities (as well as the one on Syria) confirmed that the EU 
policy  was  relevant,  i.e.  that  having  used  cash  transfers  in  certain  contexts  and 
circumstances raised efficiency of Commission-funded actions. 

29 

 
D) Main recommendations from external evaluators 

•  The  Commission  should  devote  further  funding  to  Disaster  Risk  Reduction  (DRR) 
and/or  Linking  Relief  and  Rehabilitation  to  Development  (LRRD),  to  increase 
impacts and sustainability of its actions. Synergies between humanitarian aid and 
development  actions  should  be  promoted  to  reduce  the  pressure  on  limited 
humanitarian  funding,  without  compromising  the  Humanitarian  Principles.  This 
should  be  combined  with  strengthened  advocacy  efforts  towards  governments, 
development actors and other donors, with the purpose of ensuring a good take-
up and continuation of the Commission’s results. 

•  The  Commission  should  formulate  medium  term  objectives  for  its  interventions, 
based on a theory of change, to strengthen the strategic approach. Furthermore, 
to make the best use of limited resources, the Commission should explore options 
for  achieving  cost  efficiency  savings  through  the  provision  of  more  predictable 
funding to core response agencies; 

•  The  Commission  should,  taking  account  of the  Sendai  Framework,  strengthen  its 
approach to Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Prevention, by developing a clear 
strategy  for  these  actions,  based  on  a  community  approach  and  on  advocacy 
towards governments to take up the results of Commission-funded projects; 

•  The  Commission  should  provide,  and/or  advocate  for,  the  provision  of  adequate 

and predictable resources corresponding to the humanitarian needs; 

•  The  Commission  should  further  promote  the  use  of  cash  transfers  to  meet  basic 

needs at scale. 

The  Commission  will  look  at  these  recommendations  and  identify  follow-up  actions 
where necessary. 

30 

 
 
Annex 2: 2015 Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection budget implementation32 

Region/country 

Amount 
in million € 

Africa 
Sudan & South Sudan 

Central Africa 

Great Lakes 

Horn of Africa 

Southern Africa, Indian Ocean 

West Africa 

North Africa 

Middle East and European neighbouring countries 
Middle East 

European neighbouring countries  

Asia, Pacific 
South West and Central Asia 

South East Asia and Pacific 

Central & South America, Caribbean 
Central & South America 

Caribbean 

Worldwide disasters 

Civil protection 

EU Aid Volunteers 

Complementary operations and support 

660 
159 

92 

62 

171 

20 

141 

16 

560 
529 

32 

130 
103 

26 

63 
29 

34 

39 

57 

7 

72 

% 

41,6% 

35,3% 

8,2% 

3,9% 

2,5% 

3,6% 

0,4% 

4,6% 

TOTAL 

1.587 

100% 

32 For civil protection, the figures in the table are not broken down by country/region. 

31