Our work with governments, multilateral organisations, research institutes and NGOs spans the last couple of decades. That means we've got quite a lot of material we can share. Below are some selected pieces of work from the last few years:

• Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
• Health Systems Development
• Human Development Report
• Irish Aid
• OCHA
• OECD-DCD
• Royal Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs
• Save the Children (UK)
• Tearfund and WaterAid
• Tufts University

You can also access some of our back catalogue – such as Reality of Aid – by visiting the thematically organised sections from the left-hand menu.

Worked for the technical co-operation department/investment centre on resource mobilisation options for transitional investments in food security in the Horn of Africa.

For more information on our work with FAO, please contact Tasneem Mowjee.

Back to top

1. Development assistance for water and sanitation, 2006 – a background paper for the HDR report, Beyond scarcity: power, poverty and the global water crisis.

2. New thinking on aid and social security, 2005 – a background paper for the HDR report, International cooperation at a crossroads: aid, trade and security in an unequal world.

3. Gender aspects for development cooperation – a background paper for the Human Development Report Office (HDRO) report, 1995.

For more information on our work on the Human Development Report, please contact Tony German.

Back to top

We worked with the HSD programme to help communicate policy-relevant findings on the factors that constrain health systems from meeting the needs of the poor.

Our job was to clarify the key messages arising from the research, identify people, institutions and events where those messages could be relevant, produce outputs suitable to those audiences and create opportunities for HSD to engage with policy makers on the issues.

1. We produced a brochure, People, patterns and policy: making health systems work for the poor. Download brochure.

2. We helped to organise a joint meeting with Oxfam and the All Party Group for Debt Aid and Trade (APG DATA). Panel discussions centred on: key points from DFID's new thinking on health; health systems in fragile states, and the role of heath access in breaking the poverty cycle.

For more information on our work with HSD, please contact Lisa Walmsley.

Back to top

Most humanitarian assistance analysis focuses on the efforts of official DAC donors and the relevant multilateral agencies – for whom data is readily available. The significant contributions made by non-DAC donors, host communities and through direct remittances are not captured – and neither are the voluntary contributions to NGOs, UN agencies and other international humanitarian organisations such as the ICRC and IFRC.

Focusing mainly on the activities of the 19 largest non-governmental humanitarian actors (such as Oxfam International, CARE, MSF, Save the Children), we were able to report a more detailed analysis than has been attempted before of this additional contribution to the global humanitarian response.

The total humanitarian expenditure of the 19 NGOs examined – a sample of 114 member organisations raising funds in 23 countries and together accounting for something like 60-80% of all humanitarian spending by NGOs – was an estimated EUR2.4 billion from all funding sources in 2006.

We identified volumes and characteristics of private givings to NGOs as well as the implications of the scale of private funding. We reviewed and validated key findings with EU NGOs and coalitions.

For more information on our work with Irish Aid, please contact Judith Randel.

Back to top

1. ERF review

ERFs are project funds, managed by OCHA in-country, for short-term NGO projects.

Development Initiatives was engaged by OCHA to advise on:

• whether all emergency situations should have an ERF
• what the best system would be for managing ERFs
• whether ERFs should be part of the consolidated appeal process (CAP).

Since NGOs are the main recipient organisations – both at international and national level – we worked with NGOs in the five case study countries (Angola, DRC, Indonesia, Liberia and Somalia) to answer some key questions.

• How do field-based funding mechanisms add value to humanitarian response?
• What experience do NGOs have of the timeliness and flexibility of these funds?
• Are reporting requirements appropriate?
• What field-based flexible funding mechanisms would make the optimum contribution to the humanitarian response capacity?

Read the review>

2. Common humanitarian fund (CHF) evaluation

We carried out an external evaluation of CHFs in Sudan and Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The study aimed to build on the 2006 ‘baseline’ evaluation and consolidated and augmented existing evidence around the CHF pilots. The key objective of the study was to inform key decision makers on the functioning of the main components of the pooled funds in both pilot countries.

For more information on our work with OCHA, please contact Tasneem Mowjee.

Back to top

We ran a training programme for the DCD Peer Review Team on the assessment of humanitarian assistance and supported the DCD on peer reviews for Spain and Finland in 2007.

For more information on our work on DAC peer reviews, please contact Tasneem Mowjee.

Back to top

We investigated and explained the impact of unearmarked funding on multilateral disbursements. We identified patterns, exploring the need for visibility and researched examples of best practice.

For more information on our work on earmarking and visibility in humanitarian assistance, please contact Tasneem Mowjee.

Back to top

1. We produced an evaluation and summary of Save the Children (UK)'s advocacy on nutrition. The evaluation itself combined desk-based research, telephone and face-to-face interviews in Bangladesh, Washington and the UK.

2. We reviewed the extent to which DFID, the EU and USAID address children's needs and rights as part of their humanitarian responses.

For more information on our work with Save the Children (UK), please contact Tony German.

Back to top

1. We reviewed the European Union Water Initiative (EUWI) on behalf of WaterAid and Tearfund. Our report, Glass half empty provided in-depth analysis of Europe's response to the urgent nees of the poorest for clean water.

Read the report >

For more information on our work with Save the Children (UK), please contact Tony German.

Back to top

We carried out the case studies on DRC and Sudan for 'Humanitarian Agenda 2015: Principles, Power and Perception', a study by Feinstein International Center on the post 9/11 challenges facing humanitarian aid organisations.

The Sudan country study was selected as a featured document on Scribd.com – a site that enables users on slower connections to read and leave comments.

View the Sudan case study on the Sribd site >