US-UN plan to remake funding for humanitarian crises : Shared by John Gilmartin

Devex is perhaps the premier news line on the world of development work. Development work is actually a large complex business spread all over, not just aid to poor countries, but also the business side of supplying or contracting that assistance. Here’s a current summary of what’s on the mind of the development world.

John

Inside US-UN plan to remake funding for humanitarian crises

Colum Lynch

Devex

January 13, 2026

Click here for the article

Summary

A confidential memorandum of understanding reveals the United States pledged $2 billion through 2026 for UN humanitarian relief in seventeen countries including the Democratic Republic of Congo, Haiti, Syria, and Sudan. 

The agreement marks a significant shift in institutional power, placing management of US funds in the hands of UN emergency relief coordinator Tom Fletcher and empowering UN humanitarian coordinators in the field to determine spending, while major agencies like the World Food Programme, UNICEF, and the UN Refugee Agency must compete for scarcer resources. 

The State Department envisions eventually channeling all US funding of UN humanitarian work through pooled funds managed by Fletcher's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. 

The $2 billion represents only a fraction of the $33 billion the UN estimates it needs this year and just one-fifth of the up to $10 billion in voluntary contributions the US has channeled through UN agencies in recent years. The agreement excludes funding for countries run by US enemies including Afghanistan and Yemen. 

Under the terms, the UN must report any credible allegations of misconduct or fraud to the State Department within 30 days and produce regular reports documenting US contributions. A weekend congressional budget compromise provided considerably more UN funding than the White House sought, including nearly $1.4 billion for the UN regular budget and $1.23 billion for peacekeeping operations.

Quotes

"The US Government welcomes these ambitious reform efforts and aims to support them to ensure that a greater proportion of humanitarian funding is allocated to frontline life-saving work — and less is squandered on overhead, bloat, and non-core activities."

"This $2 billion is, we hope, not the end, but only the beginning of what's a partnership. This is not our full year budget, and it is not the entirety of our humanitarian assistance budget."

"It's a positive development. We're trying something new here, and the U.N. is at its core."

"I warmly thank the United States for this extraordinary commitment to humanitarian action – a powerful act of leadership and generosity that will help save millions of lives. At a moment of immense global strain, the United States is demonstrating that it is a humanitarian superpower, offering hope to people who have lost everything."

"This was a positive first step with this administration, and the hope is that if successful … there will be more to come. It was a big and positive shift to see any U.S. administration say, 'Oh, we're not going to earmark all this at the country level. We're going to give it to a pooled fund.'"

"It's better than zero, and I'm generally a fan of pooled funds. But I think the transition could be challenging – going to zero on other UN and NGO funding and abruptly loading everything onto pooled funds that have never had to take this role before. There's a real risk of further disruption to lifesaving programs as that transition plays out."

"It's a very, very low number relative to what the U.S. would traditionally provide. If this is it, it's a catastrophe. If this is the first down payment of several, then I think it will be intriguing to see how this plays out."