Zimbabwe 2012
Trends in coordinated plan requirements
Trends in coordinated plan requirements
01-Dec-2024
Amounts shown for the current year (far right bar) are for the year to date. No data is shown in years where there was no plan/appeal.
Largest sources of coordinated plan funding
Funding for coordinated plan (US$m) | As a share of overall funding to the coordinated plan (%) | |
---|---|---|
United States of America, Government of | 49.1 | 23.7% |
United Kingdom, Government of | 24.9 | 12.0% |
European Commission | 16.4 | 7.9% |
Japan, Government of | 15.0 | 7.3% |
Zimbabwe, Government of | 10.0 | 4.8% |
Germany, Government of | 6.8 | 3.3% |
Australia, Government of | 6.0 | 2.9% |
Switzerland, Government of | 5.1 | 2.5% |
Canada, Government of | 3.0 | 1.5% |
Multiple donors through Central Emergency Response Fund | 2.0 | 1.0% |
Funding progress by cluster
Funding progress by cluster/sector
Cluster/Sector | Required (US$m) | Funded (US$m) | Coverage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
AGRICULTURE | 32.3 | 29.5 | 91.1% |
COORDINATION AND SUPPORT SERVICES | 3.5 | 1.0 | 29.7% |
EDUCATION | 4.7 | 0.2 | 5.3% |
FOOD | 127.7 | 138.6 | 108.6% |
HEALTH | 13.2 | 9.3 | 70.5% |
LIVELIHOODS, INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY BUILDING & INFRASTRUCTURE | 10.3 | 6.2 | 60.4% |
MULTI-SECTOR | 11.0 | 5.0 | 45.7% |
NUTRITION | 2.5 | 0.4 | 13.9% |
PROTECTION | 12.7 | 4.7 | 37.2% |
WATER,SANITATION AND HYGIENE | 20.5 | 10.3 | 50.3% |
Not specified | n/a | 1.6 | n/a |
About coordinated plans
Each UN coordinated inter-agency coordinated plan has a page on FTS, which present all funding linked to the requirements of the coordinated plan; this funding is a subset of overall funding to the affected country. The coordinated plans are a key part of the humanitarian programme cycle (HPC) used by humanitarian country teams to plan and coordinate a response and to communicate the scope of response operations.
Coordinated plan snapshot for 2012
Zimbabwe 2012
https://fts.unocha.org/plans/383/summary
Coordinated plan snapshot for 2012
01-Dec-2024