As the humanitarian sector grapples with escalating crises, deep funding cuts and growing political pressure, bold reforms such as those proposed by the Humanitarian Reset are urgently needed. Yet, these proposals also demand rigorous scrutiny. One of the most significant among them is the call to channel 33% of global humanitarian funding through Country-Based Pooled Funds (CBPFs), which would see a potential increase in CBPF funding from USD 1 billion to USD 6 billion.

This proposal goes beyond a financial shift. It signals a major reconfiguration of how humanitarian financing is prioritised, governed, delivered, and made accountable. While CBPFs offer recognised strengths—including alignment with Humanitarian Response Plans, support to local actors, and risk sharing—scaling them to manage a third of all humanitarian funding will have far-reaching implications.

This paper presents the collective reflections from ICVA, in consultation with its members, on the practical implications of the CBPF proposal. While recognising the advantages of CBPFs, it calls for further collective reflection and analysis before targets are adopted. It offers constructive recommendations to ensure that any expansion of CBPFs enhances—not replaces—the broader system of pooled funding, direct donor partnerships, and local initiatives.

Recommendations

As the humanitarian sector faces unprecedented levels of need, funding models must evolve to be more inclusive, balanced and responsive. CBPFs offer a valuable tool for aligning funding with strategic priorities at the country level. However, scale alone will not deliver the transformation envisioned by the Humanitarian Reset.

Many NGOs fully support a responsible increase in funding volumes to CBPFs and critically an increase in direct financing to local and national actors best placed to reach people in need.

Our call is for:

1. A rebalanced, inclusive, and diverse pooled funding landscape, one where CBPFs, NGO-led funds, regional mechanisms, thematic pools work together and complement each other to serve communities in crisis. Only by embracing this diversity can we build a more effective, equitable, and resilient humanitarian system for the future
2. If an international target is placed on CBPFs it should remain at the current 15% funding levels and informed by the Guidance note for donors: Promoting inclusive and locally-led action through humanitarian pooled funds (November 2024).
3. Both in their roles as governance members and funders, donors should work with the funds and their grantees, in particular local national NGOs to achieve the objectives set out in the Guidance Note.
4. The priority of CBPFs should remain focused on increasing direct quality financing to the diversity of local and national NGOs, including WLOs/WROs, RLOs, and CBOs. Measurable action plans with clear timelines should be adopted to raise the percentages of funding to 70 or 100% as the operational contexts allow. Increase funding to local and national actors should be prioritised over increasing amounts of CBPF funding.
5. National and international intermediaries that actively promote and have a proven track record of equitable partnerships should be recognised and supported as strategic enablers. Their experience and expertise leveraged and their role in risk-sharing supported.
6. While funding to CBPFs should be increased, this increase must be responsible and go hand in hand with continuous fund improvement. The 11-point plan agreed with OCHA must be implemented and funding increases tied to progress made.
7. Ensure CBPFs set ambitious context specific and measurable targets for funding to WLOs / WROs and for gender specific interventions.
8. The increase in CBPF funding should not be at the cost of the operational capacity of key actors nor should it substitute for direct bilateral funding, when the latter is more efficient.

Download the Briefing Paper