6.8 Project Funding Mechanisms and Donor Coordination

UNCTs have to consider the most effective mechanisms through which technical assistance projects will be funded. The options are:

6.8.1 Entirely UN-funded

The UN can develop programme initiatives entirely using funds either from UN operating budgets or donor contributions to the standing general funding initiatives. It might be forced to do so especially in circumstances when the NHRI has no track record yet, and where the country situation is such that donors may be nervous about the prospect of participating in an unknown or risky venture.

6.8.2 Support coordinated through the UN

Coordination among donors is always preferable: uncoordinated initiatives can easily skew the operations of the institution and divert the NHRI from dealing with strategically important issues in favour of those for which it can receive financial support in the near term. Uncoordinated approaches also impose heavy reporting obligations, a burden to both the institution itself and to the partners that are supporting it.

It is theoretically possible for donors to coordinate support to a new institution, for example, by defining and carving up funding responsibilities, designating one country as the ‘lead’ and authorising that country to receive financial and other reports on the total of the monies provided the institution. A more typical approach, however, is to have the UN, and the UNDP in particular, as the coordinating agent if requested. When this happens, typically, all the parties ensure coordination and cooperation through a country agreement or MOU. The UN, in these circumstances, develops an umbrella project covering technical assistance needs of the institution, and invites and encourages other donors to join. This may be done by channelling funds into and through the UN system, or more simply by agreeing to assume administrative responsibility for delivering a defined portion of the technical assistance. Both scenarios have occurred in the past, including for example, with the OHCHR and the APF as part of an umbrella approach. While using the UN as the funds administrator is easier, the second option often applies.

The advantages of the umbrella approach for the NHRI are obvious:

• NHRIs will have an easier time participating directly in project design;
• Assistance will therefore be geared to their needs and priority concerns;
• Since they will deal with the UN for reporting purposes, NHRIs will be freed from the tyranny of maintaining multiple accounting ledgers and producing multiple reports on each individual project;
• There will be no need to ‘shop around’ to find support for individual projects; and
• There is less likelihood that NHRIs will be tempted to skew their strategic planning to access need donor funding.