final compendium 2012
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
1/28
Compendium of Contributionsby Main Donors
2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
2/28
Front Cover: UNICEF/NYHQ2012-1850/Tanya Bindra
A smiling girl attends class at her school in the village of Bladier, in the rural municipality ofOulessbougou, in the western Koulikoro Region. By late November 2012 in Mali, the occupation of much
of the countrys north by rebel forces had displaced an estimated 198,558 people and forced more than
200,000 to seek refuge in neighbouring countries. Additionally, Mali remains one of eight countries in theSahel region also including Burkina Faso, Chad, Mauritania, Niger and the northern parts of Cameroon,
Nigeria and Senegal facing a severe food and nutrition crisis. The emergency is the result of repeateddrought-related food shortages, from which people have had insufficient time to recover before being again
affected. Conditions have improved since the height of the crisis in early 2012. Still, an estimated 10.3
million people throughout the Sahel are expected to face food insecurity in 2013, with 5 million pregnantwomen and children under age 5 expected to suffer from malnutrition. This includes some 660,000 under-
five Malian children who are expected to be acutely malnourished. In northern Mali, the pairing of foodshortages with increased conflict has already exposed some 510,000 people to food insecurity. Vulnerability
is highest among displaced populations, children under age 5 and women and is increasing within hostcommunities. Limited access to basic services, including water, sanitation and hygiene, is another key
concern, as is the conflicts effects on childrens rights, including to be educated. Some 25,000 internally
displaced students in the countrys south are in need of access to education. To respond to these and otherneeds throughout 2013, UNICEF together with 54 humanitarian partners, including other United Nations
organizations and NGOs, have called for over US$370 million in the 2013 Consolidated Appeal for Mali.
UNICEFs portion of the appeal is approximately US$84.7 million.
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
3/28
A Note of Thanks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..3
Top 20 Public and Private Sector Donors to UNICEF, 2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..4
Top 20 Government Donors to UNICEF, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..5
Top 20 National Committee Donors to UNICEF, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..6
Total Revenue by Type of Donor, 2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..7
Regular Resources (RR) Revenue by Type of Donor, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..8Other Resources (OR) Revenue by Type of Donor, 2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..9
Other Resources Regular (ORR) Revenue by Type of Donor, 2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10
Other Resources Emergency (ORE) Revenue by Type of Donor, 2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
Regular Resources and Other Resources, 2003-12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12
Regular Resources the vital funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
Trends in Total Contributions by Category, 2003-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
Contributions received through Inter-organizational Arrangements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
Breakdown of Thematic Revenue, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
Thematic funds highest quality earmarked funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Top Ten Donors to Thematic Funding, 2012. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18
Total UNICEF Contributions, 2011-12 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Member Governments,
Regular Resources Revenue to UNDP, UNICEF and UNFPA, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Member Governments,Total Revenue to UNICEF Compared to ODA, ODA Per Capita and GNIPer Capita, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
Abbreviations and Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24
2012Compendium of Contributionsby Main DonorsContents
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
4/28
A Note of Thanks
Dear Partner,
Thank you for your continued commitment to our shared goal: achieving results in the lives of the worlds
most vulnerable children. UNICEFs ability to reach the children, families, and communities in greatestneed is dependent on our donor partners. In a continued austere economic situation worldwide the mostdisadvantaged members of our society need our solidarity even more. UNICEF truly values the efforts by our
donor partners to sustain the support to our joint commitments.
There is much progress to celebrate. Through our continuous partnership it has been possible for morechildren in more countries worldwide to receive clean water, basic sanitation, education, safe places to learn
and thrive, as well as crucial vaccines. Also, together we supported children in need during emergencies likelast years nutrition crisis in the Sahel or the continued turmoil in Syria.
In support of our joint efforts, UNICEF draws on several comparative advantages: our mandate, our technical
capacity and experience, our global presence and sincere local knowledge in more than 150 countries, ourability to convene key actors locally, regionally and globally as well as partnerships on various levels and
building on the strengths of UN coherence. These advantages also allow UNICEF to appreciate the challengesthat remain, reaching particularly those children who are most disadvantaged and excluded as we approach the
2015 target for the Millennium Development Goals.
We can only achieve results in the most fragile settings and for the most disadvantaged children by walkingthe extra mile through efficiency, innovation and strong partnerships. The UNICEF Virtual Integrated System
of Information (VISION) and the move to the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) inJanuary 2012 are examples of our efforts to endorse and practice efficiency. VISION provides a platform forresults-based management and offers financial and programme information in one system. IPSAS improves
the quality of organizational-level financial reporting by ensuring improved accountability and transparency.In 2012 UNICEF joined the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). In the spirit of accountability and
transparency, UNICEF also makes itself readily available for assessments by its donors, such as the MultilateralOrganization Performance Assessment Network (MOPAN).
Yet, the foundation for the organizations efficiency lies in its funding structure. The important Regular
Resources or funds without restrictions to their use allow UNICEF to streamline business practices and
programming, reduce transaction costs, and maintain maximum flexibility in order to reach those children mostin need. In this context, the growing imbalance between Regular and earmarked resources is of great concern.Global thematic funds complement Regular Resources and are the ideal option for soft earmarking that allowdonor partners to direct the use of funds according to their priorities, but that also directly support UNICEFs
strategic objectives.
We look forward to innovating and strengthening our partnership in support of governments in their efforts toachieve the Millennium Development Goals, and as we work with all to shape the Post-2015 agenda and better
future for children.
Sincerely,
Elhadj As Sy
Director
Public-Sector Alliances andResource Mobilization Office (PARMO)
New York, May 2013
2
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
5/28
The Compendium of Contributions 2012 comprisesinformation on contributions from public and privatesector donor partners to UNICEF1. Information
presented in the Compendium demonstratesthe results of extensive policy and programme
partnerships between UNICEF and its donor partners.The Compendium is not an official UNICEF financial
document, but it draws largely on financial data and ispredominantly intended as a practical and illustrativereport for donor partners.
In 2012, the total revenue to UNICEF was $3,958
million. Regular Resources (RR) revenue amountedto $1,260 million, and Other Resources (OR) revenue
amounted to $2,698 million. Of the total revenue,$2,621 million or 66 per cent was contributed by thepublic sector including 51 per cent from government
donors, 6 per cent from inter-governmental
organizations, and 9 per cent from inter-organizationalarrangements. Private sector revenue was $1,261 or 32per cent of the total UNICEF revenue including 24 per
cent from National Committees, 6 per cent from GlobalProgramme Partners and Partnerships, and 2 per centfrom UNICEF country office fundraising.
The proportion of Regular Resources has been steadily
decreasing from approximately 50 per cent in 2000to 32 per cent in 2012. This has resulted in increased
challenges for UNICEF to pursue longer term objectivesand deliver on its mandate and priorities due to themore restricted nature of non-core funding. In addition,
the institutional structure and resources allocatedfor the core mandate become overstretched when
required to support the activities financed by non-corefunding, especially when cost recovery is insufficient.
As recognized in the resolution 67/2262of the GeneralAssembly, the need to address the imbalance between
core and non-core resources and encourages MemberStates to make core contributions which are key toachieving the internationally agreed development goals,
and reducing transaction costs.
As reinforced by the General Assembly resolution,optimizing the proportionality and complementarity
between RR and OR is important to achieve predictableresults for the most vulnerable and marginalizedpopulations, particularly children and women. UNICEFs
thematic funding provides an opportunity to provide
high quality earmarked funding allowing long-termplanning, sustainability and savings in transaction costs
for both UNICEF and donors. However, thematic fundingconstituted only 11 per cent of total Other Resources
income in 2012. This is a worrying trend and UNICEFlooks to work with its donor partners to reverse this
trend in seeking also to enhance efficiency in its funding,programme implementation and quality results reporting.
UNICEF moves to IPSAS
United Nations system organizations, including UNICEF,have prepared their financial reporting in accordance
with United Nations Systems Accounting Standards(UNSAS) since 1993. Through a General Assemblyresolution, member states requested UN organizations
to adopt International Public Sector FinancialReporting Standards (IPSAS) to enhance the quality
of organizational-level financial reporting by ensuringimproved transparency, accountability and governance.
UNICEF adopted IPSAS effective January 1, 2012.
A meaningful analysis of trends in revenue from one
period to the next requires comparable data. The changein accounting standards in 2012 from UNSAS to IPSAS
may not allow meaningful comparisons between 2012figures and previous years. Under IPSAS, revenue is
recorded at the earlier of either cash received or signatureof a formal agreement with the donor. In addition:
Where the donor indicates the year of use of the
contribution, revenue is not recorded until the yearof use is reached;
Where the agreement has legislative, termination
or reduction clauses, revenue is no longer recordeduntil UNICEF is notified of the legislative approval,or when cash is received;
Where the agreement has a performance clause,revenue is no longer recorded until UNICEF
has performed its obligation. In most cases, aperformance clause represents a requirement forUNICEF to provide the donor with a financial or
narrative report or an official request for paymentbefore additional funds are released to UNICEF.
Executive Summary
1 All figures in this reports analysis have been rounded.
2 The General Assembly resolution (67/226) on the Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review (QCPR) of UN operational activities fordevelopment adopted on 21 December 2012.
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
6/28
The top 20 donors contributed $2,760 million or 70 per centof the total revenue to UNICEF. These donors provided 72per cent of total Regular Resources (RR) revenue and 68per cent of total Other Resources (OR) revenue. Revenuereceived through inter-organizational arrangements isexcluded from this ranking as it originates primarily from thesame group of major UNICEF government donors.Of the top 20 donors, 72 per cent belonged to public sector
(governments and inter-governmental organizations) whilethe remaining 28 per cent were private sector donors (Global
Programme Partnerships and NatComs). All governmentdonors in this list belong to the OECD DevelopmentAssistance Committee (DAC).In 2012, the top five donors were all public sector donors.These comprised four government donors including UnitedKingdom, United States of America, Norway, and Japan,and one inter-governmental organization, the EuropeanCommission. These five donors contributed almost half of
the total contributions of all top 20 donors.
Top 20 Public and Private Sector Donors to UNICEF, 2012
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000
United Kingdom
United Statesof America
Norway
EuropeanCommission
Japan
Canada
Sweden
Japan NC
Netherlands
France NC
Germany NC
Australia
Bill & MelindaGates Foundation
United Statesof America NC
Netherlands NC
Sweden NC
Republic ofKorea NC
Germany
UnitedKingdom NC
Denmark
US$ thousands
Regular Resources
Other Resources (Regular)
Other Resources (Emergency)
Rank DonorsRegular
Resources (US$)Other Resources(regular) (US$)
Other Resources(emergency) (US$)
Total (US$)
1 United Kingdom 63,492,400 213,791,582 57,218,787 334,502,769
2 United States of America 131,755,000 115,989,899 86,352,545 334,097,444
3 Norway 80,545,500 141,049,325 12,688,570 234,283,395
4 European Commission - 137,868,990 89,977,613 227,846,604
5 Japan 17,300,374 59,116,958 120,994,614 197,411,946
6 Canada 18,000,000 113,957,010 47,559,465 179,516,475
7 Sweden 69,974,400 59,040,371 32,317,050 161,331,821
8 Japan NC 129,923,654 14,722,201 6,334,752 150,980,606
9 Netherlands 42,288,520 73,603,394 8,571,427 124,463,34110 France NC 69,393,474 16,127,223 9,942,647 95,463,344
11 Germany NC 47,422,248 31,690,150 9,779,862 88,892,260
12 Australia 35,594,944 33,714,951 18,707,638 88,017,533
13 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation - 84,627,476 - 84,627,476
14 United States of America NC 19,899,939 51,051,190 9,071,498 80,022,628
15 Netherlands NC 53,481,916 16,095,125 7,339,232 76,916,273
16 Sweden NC 34,805,625 28,977,541 1,105,394 64,888,560
17 Republic of Korea NC 43,066,582 19,967,335 1,234,480 64,268,398
18 Germany 8,076,870 12,528,910 39,997,163 60,602,943
19 United Kingdom NC 17,829,794 30,891,938 9,186,899 57,908,631
20 Denmark 29,054,750 10,409,093 14,448,672 53,912,515
4
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
7/28
Top 20 Government Donors to UNICEF, 2012*
The top 20 government donors contributed $1,979 million or50 per cent of the total revenue to UNICEF. These donorsprovided 47 per cent of total Regular Resources revenue and52 per cent of total Other Resources revenue. Of these top20 donors, all except one (Saudi Arabia) belong to the OECDDevelopment Assistance Committee. Contributions receivedthrough inter-organizational arrangements are excluded from
this ranking as they originate primarily from the same groupof major UNICEF government donors.In 2012, the top five donors in this category included UnitedKingdom, United States of America, Norway, Japan andCanada. These five donors contributed 65 per cent of thetotal contributions of all top 20 government donors.
Rank DonorsRegular
Resources (US$)Rank
Other Resources(regular) (US$)
RankOther Resources
(emergency) (US$)Rank Total (US$)
1 United Kingdom 63,492,400 4 213,791,582 1 57,218,787 3 334,502,769
2 United States of America 131,755,000 1 115,989,899 3 86,352,545 2 334,097,444
3 Norway 80,545,500 2 141,049,325 2 12,688,570 9 234,283,395
4 Japan 17,300,374 12 59,116,958 6 120,994,614 1 197,411,946
5 Canada 18,000,000 11 113,957,010 4 47,559,465 4 179,516,475
6 Sweden 69,974,400 3 59,040,371 7 32,317,050 6 161,331,821
7 Netherlands 42,288,520 5 73,603,394 5 8,571,427 11 124,463,341
8 Australia 35,594,944 6 33,714,951 8 18,707,638 7 88,017,533
9 Germany 8,076,870 14 12,528,910 11 39,997,163 5 60,602,943
10 Denmark 29,054,750 7 10,409,093 13 14,448,672 8 53,912,515
11 Finland 21,144,260 10 10,999,659 12 9,313,613 10 41,457,532
12 Belgium 24,747,565 8 6,151,529 16 8,128,631 12 39,027,725
13 Switzerland 21,598,200 9 8,957,840 14 1,959,072 17 32,515,112
14 Ireland 10,991,936 13 13,960,397 10 1,329,215 19 26,281,548
15 France 1,328,020 20 16,500,656 9 1,368,856 18 19,197,532
16 Saudi Arabia 1,000,000 23 7,600,013 15 5,360,962 15 13,960,976
17 Spain 3,808,218 16 219,193 33 8,008,608 13 12,036,019
18 Italy - - 5,906,453 17 5,953,594 14 11,860,047
19 Luxembourg 3,519,253 17 3,971,193 19 638,969 22 8,129,415
20 New Zealand 4,535,160 15 1,511,431 23 408,495 24 6,455,086
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000
United Kingdom
United Statesof America
Norway
Japan
Canada
Sweden
Netherlands
Australia
Germany
Denmark
Finland
Belgium
Switzerland
Ireland
France
Saudi Arabia
Spain
Italy
Luxembourg
New Zealand
US$ thousands
Regular Resources
Other Resources (Regular)
Other Resources (Emergency)
* Excludes Inter-governmental Organizations.
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
8/28
Top 20 National Committee Donors to UNICEF, 2012
There are 36 UNICEF National Committees (NatComs)throughout the industrialized world. They are non-profit, non-governmental entities established according to national laws,and are instrumental in mobilizing private sector resources forUNICEFs work.In 2012, the top 20 NatComs contributed $911 million or23 per cent of the total revenue to UNICEF. These donorsprovided 43 per cent of total Regular Resources revenue and
14 per cent of total Other Resources revenue. Of the top20 donors, all except one (Hong Kong) belong to the OECDDevelopment Assistance Committee.
The top five NatCom donors included the NatComs ofJapan, France, Germany, United States of America and theNetherlands. These five donors contributed 54 per cent of thetotal contributions of all top 20 NatCom donors.
Rank DonorsRegular
Resources (US$)Rank
Other Resources(regular) (US$)
RankOther Resources
(emergency) (US$)Rank Total (US$)
1 Japan 129,923,654 1 14,722,201 9 6,334,752 7 150,980,606
2 France 69,393,474 2 16,127,223 7 9,942,647 1 95,463,344
3 Germany 47,422,248 4 31,690,150 2 9,779,862 2 88,892,260
4 United States of America 19,899,939 9 51,051,190 1 9,071,498 4 80,022,628
5 Netherlands 53,481,916 3 16,095,125 8 7,339,232 5 76,916,273
6 Sweden 34,805,625 6 28,977,541 4 1,105,394 15 64,888,560
7 Republic of Korea 43,066,582 5 19,967,335 5 1,234,480 14 64,268,398
8 United Kingdom 17,829,794 10 30,891,938 3 9,186,899 3 57,908,631
9 Italy 27,452,050 8 19,869,676 6 3,760,492 8 51,082,218
10 Spain 30,601,465 7 11,346,444 11 6,338,331 6 48,286,240
11 Switzerland 5,831,830 18 11,613,207 10 1,301,878 13 18,746,916
12 Finland 13,291,035 11 4,613,257 16 516,477 19 18,420,769
13 Denmark 9,268,513 12 7,064,558 12 1,084,272 16 17,417,342
14 Australia 6,835,048 16 5,482,412 14 3,601,606 9 15,919,066
15 Belgium 8,018,537 13 5,127,511 15 1,956,296 11 15,102,344
16 Hong Kong 7,114,188 15 5,947,790 13 221,014 27 13,282,992
17 Canada 7,166,999 14 2,949,978 18 2,396,493 10 12,513,470
18 Norway 6,007,319 17 3,512,214 17 237,517 24 9,757,050
19 Austria 4,691,475 19 1,081,247 23 609,467 17 6,382,189
20 Portugal 3,204,129 21 1,272,564 21 330,753 20 4,807,445
0 40,000 80,000 120,000 160,000
Japan
France
Germany
United Statesof America
Netherlands
Sweden
Republic of Korea
United Kingdom
Italy
Spain
Switzerland
Finland
Denmark
Australia
Belgium
Hong Kong
Canada
Norway
Austria
Portugal
US$ thousands
Regular Resources
Other Resources (Regular)
Other Resources (Emergency)
6
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
9/28
Total Revenue by Type of Donor, 2012
The total revenue to UNICEF was $3,958 millionin 2012. Regular Resources revenue amountedto $1,260 million, and Other Resources revenueamounted to $2,698 million. Of the total revenue,$2,621 million or 66 per cent was contributed by thepublic sector including 51 per cent from governmentdonors, 6 per cent from inter-governmentalorganizations, and 9 per cent from inter-organizationalarrangements. Private sector revenue was $1,261
million or 32 per cent of the total UNICEF revenueincluding 24 per cent from NatComs, 6 per cent fromGlobal Programme Partners and Partnerships, and 2per cent from UNICEF country office fundraising.The world economy continues to struggle withhigh unemployment, weak aggregate demandcompounded by fiscal austerity, a high burden ofpublic debt, and a weakened financial sector in manyOECD DAC countries1. Depreciation of the Euro vis--vis other major currencies was the defining trend inglobal foreign exchange markets for the first half of2012, driven by the escalation of the debt crisis in theEuro zone.
1 World Economic Situation and Prospects 2013 Global Outlook, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, December 2012.
2 Inter-governmental Organizations include: African Development Bank, African Union Commission, Asian Development Bank, European Commission, Inter-American Development Bank, OPEC Fund, Secretariat of Pacific Community and UNITAID.
3 Revenue from Private Sector includes global funds, foundations, non-governmental organizations, National Committees and country office private sectorfundraising.
4 Other - Interest and miscellaneous income, which includes gains/losses on foreign exchange transactions.
5 Inter-organizational arrangements include: FAO, IOM, PAHO, UNAIDS, UNDG, UNDP, UNDPKO, UNDSS, UNEP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UN HumanSecurity Trust Fund, UNMAS, UN Office - Geneva, UNOCHA, UNOPS, UN Secretariat, UN Women, WFP, WHO, World Bank (including the Global Partnership forEducation), as well as UN Joint Programme where UNICEF is the Administrative Agent.
6 Total revenue includes financial adjustments and refunds.
Governments andInter-governmental
Organizations2
$2,271M
57%
Private Sector3
$1,261M
32%
$76M
2%
$350M
9%
Inter-organizationalarrangements5
Other4
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201
Public Sector
Private Sector
Other
US$million
s
TOTAL:US$3,958 million6
UNICEF Contributions Trend by Donor Category, 2003-12
ChangeinaccountingpolicyfromUNS
AStoIPSASmaynotallow
meaningfulcomparisonsbetween20
12figuresandprioryears.
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
10/28
Regular Resources Revenue (RR) by Type of Donor, 2012*
Regular Resources allow UNICEF to maintain a globalpresence, reach those most in need, respond rapidlyto emergencies and implement programmes withpredictability and continuity. The total RR revenue toUNICEF was $1,260 million in 2012. Of this, $601 millionor 48 per cent was contributed by government donorswhile private sector revenue was $583 or 46 per cent ofthe total RR revenue.
The top 20 donors to RR contributed $994 million or79 per cent of the total RR revenue to UNICEF.Of these donors, 54 per cent belonged to governmentdonors while the remaining 46 per cent were private sectordonors. All government donors in this ranking belong to theOECD Development Assistance Committee.In 2012, the top five RR donors were comprised of threegovernment donors including United States of America,Norway and Sweden, and two NatCom donors includingJapan Committee for UNICEF and French Committee forUNICEF. These five donors contributed almost half of thetotal RR contributions of all top 20 RR donors.
2012 Top 20 Donors for RRDonor RR (US$)
1 United States of America 131,755,000
2 Japan NC 129,923,654
3 Norway 80,545,500
4 Sweden 69,974,400
5 France NC 69,393,474
6 United Kingdom 63,492,400
7 Netherlands NC 53,481,916
8 Germany NC 47,422,248
9 Republic of Korea NC 43,066,582
10 Netherlands 42,288,520
11 Australia 35,594,944
12 Sweden NC 34,805,625
13 Spain NC 30,601,465
14 Denmark 29,054,750
15 Italy NC 27,452,050
16 Belgium 24,747,565
17 Switzerland 21,598,200
18 Finland 21,144,260
19 United States of America NC 19,899,939
20 Canada 18,000,000
* Change in accounting policy from UNSAS to IPSAS may not allow meaningful comparisons between 2012 figures and prior years.
1 Revenue from Private Sector includes global funds, foundations, non-governmental organizations, National Committees and country office private sectorfundraising.
2 Other - interest and miscellaneous income, which includes gains/losses on foreign exchange transactions.
3 Inter-governmental Organizations include: African Development Bank, African Union Commission, Asian Development Bank, European Commission, Inter-American Development Bank, OPEC Fund, Secretariat of Pacific Community and UNITAID.
4 Total RR includes financial adjustments and refunds.
Governments andInter-governmental
Organizations3
$601M
48%
Other2
$76M6%
Private Sector1
$583M
46%
Governments andInter-governmental
Organizations
$646M
60%
$55M
5%
OtherPrivate Sector
$377M
35%
TOTAL RR:US$1,260 million4
TOTAL RR:US$1,078 million
Regular Resources Contributions by Typeof Donor, 2011
Regular Resources Contributions by Typeof Donor, 2012
8
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
11/28
Other Resources (OR) Revenue by Type of Donor, 2012*
Other Resources are received for a specific programme purposeor for strategic priorities. These are further categorized as OtherResources - Regular (ORR) and Other Resources Emergency (ORE).In 2012, the total OR revenue to UNICEF was $2,698 millionconstituting $1,861 million or 69 per cent in ORR and $837 millionor 31 per cent in ORE. Of this, $2,020 million or 75 per centwas contributed by the public sector including 62 per cent fromgovernment and inter-governmental donors, and 13 per cent from
inter-organizational arrangements. Private sector donors contributed$678 or 25 per cent of the total OR revenue including 14 per centfrom NatComs, 8 per cent from Global Programme Partners andPartnerships, and 3 per cent from UNICEF country office fundraising.The top 20 donors to OR contributed $2,073 million or 77 percent of the total OR revenue to UNICEF. Of these top 20 donors,84 per cent belonged to public sector donors while the remaining16 per cent were private sector donors.
The top five OR donors were comprised of four governmentdonors including United Kingdom, United States of America,Japan and Canada, and one inter-governmental organization, theEuropean Commission. These five donors contributed almost half
of the total OR contributions of all top 20 OR donors.
2012 Top 20 Donors and Funding Sources - ORDonor OR (US$)
1 United Kingdom 271,010,369
2 European Commission 227,846,604
3 United States of America 202,342,444
4 Japan 180,111,572
5 Canada 161,516,475
6 Norway 153,737,895
7 UNOCHA 130,597,715
8 UNDP5 115,168,534
9 Sweden 91,357,421
10 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 84,627,476
11 Netherlands 82,174,821
12 United States of America NC 60,122,689
13 Germany 52,526,073
14 Australia 52,422,589
15 Germany NC 41,470,013
16 United Kingdom NC 40,078,837
17 Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria6 38,315,224
18 Rotary International 30,377,908
19 Sweden NC 30,082,935
20 World Bank7 27,312,055
* Change in accounting policy from UNSAS to IPSAS may not allow meaningful comparisons between 2012 figures and prior years.
1 Inter-governmental Organizations include: African Development Bank, African Union Commission, Asian Development Bank, European Commission, Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank, OPEC Fund, Secretariat of Pacific Community and UNITAID.
2 Income from Private Sector includes global funds, foundations, non-governmental organizations, National Committees and country office private sector fundraising.
3 Inter-organizational Arrangements include: FAO, IOM, PAHO, UNAIDS, UNDG, UNDP, UNDPKO, UNDSS, UNEP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UN Human SecurityTrust Fund, UNMAS, UN Office - Geneva, UNOCHA, UNOPS, UN Secretariat, UN Women, WFP, WHO, World Bank, as well as UN Joint Programme where UNICEFis the Administrative Agent.
4 Total OR includes financial adjustments and refunds.
5 Inter-organizational Arrangement (including MDFTs and Delivering as One funding and contribution from the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malariareceived via UNDP).
6 Funds received as the Principal Recipient.
7 Including contributions from the Global Partnership for Education.
Governments andInter-governmental
Organizations1
$1,671M
62%
Private Sector2$678M
25%
$350M
13%
Inter-organizationalArrangements3
Governments andInter-governmental
Organizations
$1,614M
61%
Private Sector
$712M
27%
$307M
12%
Inter-organizationArrangements
TOTAL OR: US$2,698 million4
TOTAL OR: US$2,633 million
Other Resources Contributions by Typeof Donor, 2012
Other Resources Contributions by Typeof Donor, 2011
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
12/28
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
13/28
Other Resources Emergency (ORE) Revenue by Type of Donor, 2012*
In 2012, the total ORE revenue to UNICEF was $837million. Of this, $754 million or 90 per cent was contributedby the public sector including 69 per cent from governmentand inter-governmental donors, and 21 per cent from inter-organizational arrangements. Private sector contributed$83 million or 10 per cent of the total ORE revenueincluding 10 per cent from NatComs, and 0.3 per cent fromUNICEF country office fundraising.
In 2012, UNICEF requested humanitarian funding through20 Consolidated Appeal Processes (CAP), 4 flash appeals,15 non-CAP countries named in Humanitarian Action forChildren 2013, and 3 other crises requiring humanitarianassistance. Overall, UNICEF sought $1.49 billion in 2012 forits humanitarian interventions.The top 20 donors to ORE contributed $767 million or 92per cent of the total ORE revenue to UNICEF. Of these top20 donors, 95 per cent belonged to public sector donorswhile the remaining 5 per cent were private sector donors.
The top five ORE donors were comprised of threegovernment donors including Japan, United States of
America and United Kingdom, one inter-organizationalarrangement - UNOCHA, and one inter-governmentalorganization, the European Commission. These five donorscontributed 63 per cent of the total ORE contributions of alltop 20 ORE donors.
2012 Top 20 Donors and Funding Sources - OREDonor ORE (US$)
1 UNOCHA5 130,587,715
2 Japan 120,994,614
3 European Commission 89,977,613
4 United States of America 86,352,545
5 United Kingdom 57,218,787
6 Canada 47,559,4657 UNDP6 43,925,288
8 Germany 39,997,163
9 Sweden 32,317,050
10 Australia 18,707,638
11 Denmark 14,448,672
12 Norway 12,688,570
13 France NC 9,942,647
14 Germany NC 9,779,862
15 Finland 9,313,613
16 United Kingdom NC 9,186,899
17 United States of America NC 9,071,498
18 Netherlands 8,571,427
19 Belgium 8,128,63120 Spain 8,008,608
* Change in accounting policy from UNSAS to IPSAS may not allow meaningful comparisons between 2012 figures and prior years.
1 Inter-governmental Organizations include: African Development Bank, African Union Commission, Asian Development Bank, European Commission, Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank, OPEC Fund, Secretariat of Pacific Community and UNITAID.
2 Income from Private Sector includes global funds, foundations, non-governmental organizations, National Committees and country office private sector fundraising.
3 Inter-organizational Arrangements include: FAO, IOM, PAHO, UNAIDS, UNDG, UNDP, UNDPKO, UNDSS, UNEP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UN Human Security TrustFund, UNMAS, UN Office - Geneva, UNOCHA, UNOPS, UN Secretariat, UN Women, WFP, WHO, World Bank (including the Global Partnership for Education), as wellas UN Joint Programme where UNICEF is the Administrative Agent.
4 Total ORE includes financial adjustments and refunds.
5 Contributions received through UNOCHA mostly originate from the same group of major UNICEF government and inter-governmental donors and mainly CERF funding.
6 Inter-organizational Arrangements (including MDFTs and Delivering as One funding and contribution from the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malariareceived via UNDP).
Governments andInter-governmental
Organizations1
$577M
69%
Private Sector2
$83M10%
$177M
21%
Inter-organizationalArrangements3
Governments andInter-governmental
Organizations
$610M
63%
Private Sector
$190M20%
$163M
17%
Inter-organizationaArrangements
TOTAL ORE: US$837 million4
TOTAL ORE: US$963 million
Other Resources (Emergency) contributionsby Type of Donor, 2012
Other Resources (Emergency) contributionsby Type of Donor, 2011
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
14/28
Regular Resources and Other Resources, 2003-12
The growth in earmarked funding (Other Resources) hassurpassed the growth of un-earmarked funding (regularresources) by manifolds during the past 10 years. As aresult, the RR proportion of contributions has been steadilydecreasing from approximately 50 per cent in 2000 to32 per cent in 2012. This has resulted in increased challengesfor UNICEF to pursue longer term objectives and deliver onits mandate and priorities due to the more restricted nature
of non-core funding. In addition, the institutional structureand resources allocated for the core mandate becomeoverstretched when required to support the activities financedby non-core funding, especially when cost recovery isinsufficient. Optimizing the proportionality and complementaritybetween RR and OR is important to drive predictable results fothe most vulnerable and marginalized populations, particularlychildren and women.
* Includes contributions from global funds and foundations.
Contributions from all Donors
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201
Regular Resources Other Resources Total
1,688 1,978
2,761 2,7813,013
3,390 3,256
3,682 3,7113,958
9561,187
1,9491,725
1,907
2,305 2,190
2,717 2,633 2,698
732
791 8121,056 1,106 1,085 1,066 965 1,078
1,260US$millions
Share
RR/OR 43%/57% 38%/62% 33%/67% 32%/6
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201
493 555
1,164
800 868
987 916
1,1881,089
1,261
201 263
875
400476
626533
853
712678
292 292 289400 392 361 383 335
377
583
US$millions
RegularResources
Other
Resources
Total
59%/41% 50%/50% 42%/58% 46%/5
Share
RR/OR
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201
1,1591,361
1,543
1,792
1,969
2,295 2,251
2,440 2,568 2,621
755 923
1,074
1,326 1,431
1,679 1,6571,864 1,921
2,020
403 438 469 466 538 616 594 576
646 601
US
$millions
Regular Resources Other Resources Total
35%/65% 26%/74% 26%/74% 23%/7
Share
RR/OR
Contributions from Public Sector: Governements, Inter-governemental Organizationsand Inter-organizational Arrangements
Contributions from National Committees, Non-governmental Organizationsand Other Private Sector Sources*
C
hangeinaccountingpolicyfromUNSASto
IP
SASmaynotallowmeaningfulcomparisons
between2012figuresandprioryears.
Changeinaccou
ntingpolicyfromUNSASto
IPSASmaynotallowmeaningfulcomparisons
between2012figuresandprioryears.
ChangeinaccountingpolicyfromUNSASto
IPSASmaynotallowmeaningfu
lcomparisons
between2012figuresandp
rioryears.
12
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
15/28
Regular Resources (RR) that is, funds without
restrictions on their use provide the important backbonefor UNICEFs extensive operations worldwide.
RR means steady and predictable funding which allows
UNICEF and partners to undertake our work with ameasure of certainty and continuity. RR helps ensureUNICEFs independence, neutrality, and role as a trusted
partner to all parties, including national governments andcivil society actors. RR funds enable the organization to
focus on delivering the best quality services for children.
As RR is un-earmarked, it can be easily moved fromprogramme to programme, or within programmes, coveringessential supplies, services, and technical expertise that
may not be addressed by restricted donations. This hasbeen the case with UNICEFs equity agenda, whereby tens
of millions of dollars have been directed to focus on theneeds and rights of the most marginalized children. As an
example, RR funded the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveysand other essential tools that have facilitated the monitoringof results for equity, which is central to the success of the
equity agenda.
In 2012, RR amounted to $1,260 million, representing32 per cent of the total UNICEF revenue; yet, RR did
decrease by 7 per cent when compared to 2011. UNICEFis especially thankful to all the donor partners that havebeen able to sustain their contributions to RR, despite
the continued austere global economic climate. UNICEFalso welcomes the General Assembly resolution 67/226
(2012 Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review) and the
concern expressed by member states for the decliningshare of RR to the United Nations funds and programmesand the imbalance between core and non-core resources.
With less RR, UNICEF faces increasing difficulties fulfillingour mandate for childrens rights. RR is what allows us to
most efficiently reach the most vulnerable children.
Please visit www.unicef.org/parmoto see the
Regular Resources videoas shown at the 1stRegularSession of the UNICEF Executive Board in 2013.
Regular Resources the vital funds
UNICEF together with partners depend on RR to:
Maintain a global presence
Be strategic and implement the - ExecutiveBoard approved - Mid-Term Strategic
Plan (MTSP) Ensure equity - the needs and rights of themost marginalized children
Quickly respond to changing circumstances
and emerging challenges
Advocate for childrens rights, influencingglobal agendas
Keep transaction costs to a minimum
and deliver greatest value for money
Innovate and advance solutions on behalf
of children and invest in new projects thatcan be brought to scale to reachmore children
In 2012 RR enabled us to:
BENIN: strengthen the Expanded Programme onImmunization, with more than 1,000 communityhealth workers delivering services to remote and
disadvantaged communities.
BURUNDI:the right to education of hundreds ofthousands of Burundi children was fulfilled thanksto the equity-based education strategy, focusing
on the most hard-to-reach communities.
COSTA RICA: provide migrant children and theirfamilies with legal status and, consequently,essential social services.
MADAGASCAR:respond to Cyclone Giovanna a category 4 cyclone which affected nearlya quarter million people.
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
http://www.unicef.org/parmohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohyT5QO-wQ4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohyT5QO-wQ4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohyT5QO-wQ4http://www.unicef.org/parmo -
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
16/28
Trends in Total Contributions by Category, 2003-12
Contributions from All Donors
Overall UNICEF income has been growing over the last tenyears. 2005 is marked by a deviation in the proportion ofORE to the total income due to the unprecedented responseof the donor community to the Indian Ocean Earthquake and
Tsunami. The surge in 2010 ORE was largely due to privatesector funding for the earthquake in Haiti, and that of 2011 isattributed to increased funding for the Horn of Africa crisis.
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Total Contributions 1,688 1,978 2,761 2,781 3,013 3,390 3,256 3,682 3,711 3,958
OR (Regular) 515 796 820 1,126 1,378 1,570 1,527 1,694 1,670 1,861
1,688
1,978
2,761 2,781
3,013
3,3903,256
3,682 3,711
3,958
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
US$millions
Regular Resources
Other Resources (Regular)
Other Resources (Emergency)
443
515
730
391
796
791
1,129
820
812
599
1,126
1,056
529
1,378
1,106
735
1,570
1,085
663
1,527
1,066
1,023
1,694
965
963
1,670
1,078
838
1,861
1,260
RR 730 791 812 1,056 1,106 1,085 1,066 965 1,078 1,260
OR (Emergencies) 443 391 1,129 599 529 735 663 1,023 963 838
100
500
900
1,300
1,700
2,100
2,500
2,900
3,300
3,700
4,100
4,500
Regular Resources
Other Resources (Regular)
Other Resources (Emergency)
Total
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
US$millions
ChangeinaccountingpolicyfromUNSAStoIPSASmaynotallow
meaningfulcomparisons
between2012figuresandprioryears.
Changeinaccountingpolic
yfromUNSAStoIPSASmaynotallow
meaningfulcomparisonsbetween2012figuresandprioryears.
14
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
17/28
Contributions received through Inter-organizational Arrangements*;**
UNICEF continued its participation in the UN coherenceand inter-organizational partnership arrangements through avariety of pooled funds and Multi-Donor Trust Funds (MDTFs).Contributions from inter- organizational arrangements
continues to grow and has doubled from $178 million in 2006to $350 million in 2012. The leading contributors includeUNOCHA, UNDP, World Bank, UN Joint Programme, andUNAIDS. Funding received from CERF totaled $129 million.
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
178
234
256
296
356
307
350
128
175165
156 160 163
177
50 59
91 140
196
145
172US$millions
Other Resources (Regular)
Other Resources (Emergency)
Total
TOTAL IN 2012:US$350 million
* Change in accounting policy from UNSAS to IPSAS may not allow meaningful comparisons between 2012 figures and prior years.
** Inter-organizational Arrangements include: FAO, IOM, PAHO, UNAIDS, UNDG, UNDP, UNDPKO, UNDSS, UNEP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UN HumanSecurity Trust Fund, UNMAS, UN Office - Geneva, UNOCHA, UNOPS, UN Secretariat, UN Women, WFP, WHO, World Bank (including the Global Partnership forEducation), as well as UN Joint Programme where UNICEF is the Administrative Agent.
44.2
21.9
17.7
7.8
5.6
5.1
3.4
1.4
0.80.8 0.8 0.6
0.1
0.1
Common Humanitarian Funds
One Funds
MDG Achievement Fund
Joint Programmes via MPTFO
Emergency Response Fund
Peace Building Fund
Iraq Trust Fund
DRC Stabilization andRecovery Fund
Nepal UN Peace Fund
UN Partnership - Rights of Persowith disabilities MDTF
Sierra Leone MDTF
UN Action against Sexual Violen
Darful Peace & Stability Fund
UN IndigenousPeople's Partnership
Cape Verde Transition Fund
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
59
99
98
256
296
356
307
350
93
109
94
137
121
98
101
102
104
110
110
129
Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF)
Multi-Donor Trust Funds (MDTFs)
Other Inter-organizational Arrangements
Inter-organizational Arrangements2008-12 (US$ millions)
Multi-Donor Trust Funds, 2012 (excluding CERF)(US$ millions)
ChangeinaccountingpolicyfromUNSAStoIPSASm
aynotallow
mea
ningfulcomparisonsbetween2012figuresandprioryears.
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
18/28
Breakdown of Thematic Revenue, 2012 (US$ millions)
Thematic funds directly support achievement of the MTSPkey results and humanitarian response by allowing long-term planning, sustainability and savings in transaction costsfor both UNICEF and donors. Overall thematic funding forthe five MTSP focus areas was $198 million, and thematichumanitarian assistance was $89 million. Basic Education andGender Equality received the highest funding, with Norwayproviding 75 per cent of the overall funding for this focus area.
Thematic funding constituted only 11 per cent of total ORincome in 2012. This is a worrying trend and UNICEF looksto work with its donor partners to reverse this trend inseeking also to enhance efficiency in its funding, programmeimplementation, and quality results reporting.
Thematic Revenue, 2012 Thematic Revenue by MTSP Focus Areas, 2012
Young ChildSurvival andDevelopment
Policy Advocacyand Partnerships
HumanitarianResponse
$89M
31%
Basic Educationand Gender
Equality
$122M43%
$6M
2%
HIV/AIDSand Children
$11M
4%
ChildProtection
$18M
6%
$41M
14%
Young ChildSurvival andDevelopment
Policy Advocacyand Partnerships
$6M
3%
HIV/AIDSand Children
$11M
6%
ChildProtection
$18M
9%
$41M20%
Basic Educationand Gender
Equality
$122M
62%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
$1,725M $1,907M $2,305M $2,190M $2,717M $2,633M $2,698M
82% 85% 85% 87% 79% 86% 89%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
8% 4% 6% 3%12%
7%3%
9% 11% 9% 11% 9% 7% 7%
Themaitc ORR
Thematic ORE
Non-thematic
TOTAL:US$287 million TOTAL:US$198 million
OR Contributions 2006-12: Thematic vs Non-thematic
Changeinaccountingpolicy
fromUNSAStoIPSASmaynotallow
meaningfulcomparisonsbe
tween2012figuresandprioryears.
16
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
19/28
Thematic funding is UNICEFs preferred approach whendonor partners want to earmark funds. The thematic
funding windows, aligned with the organizations fiveMid-Term-Strategic-Plan (MTSP) focus areas as wellas humanitarian assistance*, offer an option for soft
earmarking and complementarity, while allowing donorpartners to direct the use of funds according to their
own priorities.
Thematic funding can be provided at the global, regionalor country level. Contributions from all donors to the sameFocus Area are co-mingled in an account with the same
duration, which streamlines financial management andreduces transaction costs. Thematic donors receive one
annual consolidated high-quality narrative report and oneconsolidated financial report that are the same for all donors.
The Multilateral Organization Performance AssessmentNetwork (MOPAN) in 2012 highlighted these reports asUNICEFs best performance reporting as they link thematic
information to the organisation-wide results framework moreeffectively than other reports produced by the organization.
In 2012, overall thematic funding for the five thematic areas
was $198 million, and thematic humanitarian assistancewas $89 million. While UNICEF is grateful for thesignificant contributions it continues receiving from donor
partners, the decline in thematic funding relative to thetotal earmarked contributions and in absolute value in the
past years is of great concern. Thematic funding currentlyaccounts only for approximately 11 per cent of UNICEFs
total Other Resources (OR).
UNICEF welcomes the General Assembly resolution67/226 (2012 Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review)and the aim expressed by member states to continuously
reduce transaction costs. As per the UNICEF ExecutiveBoard decision 2013/5 thematic funding will also continue
to benefit from lower recovery costs compared with otherearmarked funding.
In the coming year UNICEF will work with its donors tofind suitable ways to increase flexible funding for our
programmes including through the thematicfunding modality.
UNICEF together with partners depend
on thematic funds to:
Complement Regular Resources and promoteorganizational long term priorities
Scale up programmes with clear, measurableobjectives
Respond to emergencies swiftly
Strengthen and support the efforts toenhance accountability, transparency,
efficiency, coherence and results-basedmanagement
Reduce transaction costs for UNICEF and
donors, thereby allowing for preferentialcost-recovery rates
In 2012 thematic fundingassisted us to:
BURKINA FASO, ETHIOPIA, GHANA, HAITI,NEPAL and others: coordinate advocacyefforts and implement and monitor evidencebased nutrition interventions in the framework
of the Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) movement.
BANGLADESH:advocate government to
expand policy on universal pre-school, adding ayear of pre-primary to government schools.
ETHIOPIA:support the revision and updateof the national girls education strategy in acontext where 65% of girls are currently not
attending school.
Thematic funds highest quality earmarked funding
*Donors can allocate Thematic funds to the five MTSP focus areas and humanitarian response as follows:
1: Young Child Survival and Development
2: Basic Education and Gender Equality
3: HIV/AIDS and Children
4: Child Protection from Violence, Exploitation and Abuse
5: Policy Advocacy and Partnerships for Childrens Rights
6: Humanitarian Response
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
20/28
Top Ten Donors to Thematic Funding, 2012
The top 10 donors contributed $247 million or 86 per centof the total thematic revenue to UNICEF. These donorsprovided 89 per cent of total thematic funding for the MTSPFocus Areas and 80 per cent of Humanitarian Responsethematic funding.
Of the top 10 donors for both MTSP focus areas as well ashumanitarian response, 64 per cent belonged to governmentdonors while the remaining 36 per cent were NatCom
donors. All government donors (except Brazil) in this listbelong to the OECD Development Assistance Committee.The top three donors comprised two government donorsincluding Norway and Sweden, and one NatCom donor,the Korean Committee for UNICEF. These three donorscontributed 59 per cent of the total contributions of all top 10donors to thematic funding (including humanitarian response).
MTSP Focus Areas Humanitarian Response
Norway
Sweden
Republicof
KoreaNC
NetherlandsNC
United
KingdomN
C
ItalyNC
Brazil
SpainNC
Luxembourg
Japan
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10097.5
30.6
18.1
7.05.2 4.7
3.4 3 .3 3.3 3.1
US$millions
Norway
GermanyNC
Finland
SpainNC
United
KingdomN
C
FranceNC
JapanNC
UnitedStatesof
AmericaNC
NetherlandsNC
ItalyNC
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
11.7
9.6
9.3
7.8
6.56.3 6.3
6.0
4.0
3.2
US$millions
18
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
21/28
2011 2012*
1. Government Donors:(Including Inter-governmental Organizations)**
2,260 2,271
a) Regular Resources (Net) 646 601
b) Other Resources 1,614 1,671
i. Regular 1,004 1,093
ii. Emergencies 610 577
2. National Committees, Non-governmental,and Other Private Sector Sources:
1,089 1,261
a) Regular Resources 377 583
b) Other Resources 712 678
i. Regular 522 595
ii. Emergencies 190 83
3. Inter-organizational Arrangements*** 307 350
a) Regular Resources
b) Other Resources 307 350
i. Regular 145 172
ii. Emergencies 163 177
SUB-TOTAL INCOME 3,656 3,882
4. Other Income, net (interest, exchange ratefluctuations, support costs and misc.)
55 76
GRAND TOTAL INCOME 3,711 3,958
* Change in accounting policy from UNSAS to IPSAS may not allow meaningful comparisons between 2012 figures and prior years.
** Inter-governmental Organizations include: African Development Bank, African Union Commission, Asian Development Bank, European Commission, Inter-American Development Bank, OPEC Fund, Secretariat of Pacific Community and UNITAID.
*** Inter-organizational Arrangements include: FAO, IOM, PAHO, UNAIDS, UNDG, UNDP, UNDPKO, UNDSS, UNEP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNHCR, UN HumanSecurity Trust Fund, UNMAS, UN Office - Geneva, UNOCHA, UNOPS, UN Secretariat, UN Women, WFP, WHO, World Bank (including the Global Partnership forEducation), as well as UN Joint Programme where UNICEF is the Administrative Agent.
Total UNICEF Contributions, 2011-12 (US$ millions)
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
22/28
Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Member Governments, RegularResources (RR) Revenue to UNDP, UNICEF and UNFPA, 2012
UNDP* UNICEF UNFPA*
Donor Governments US$millions% oftotal Rank
** US$millions
% oftotal Rank
** US$millions
% oftotal Rank
**
Australia 21.6 2.6 12 35.6 5.9 6 14.9 3.4 12
Austria 2.4 0.3 20 1.5 0.2 19 - N/A N/A
Belgium 27.8 3.3 10 24.7 4.1 8 7.4 1.7 13
Canada - N/A N/A 18.0 3.0 11 17.4 4.0 10
Denmark 57.7 6.8 8 29.1 4.8 7 44.0 10.1 4
Finland 24.9 2.9 11 21.1 3.5 10 36.0 8.2 5
France 18.3 2.2 13 1.3 0.2 20 0.5 0.1 19
Germany 29.0 3.4 9 8.1 1.3 14 20.7 4.7 9
Greece - N/A N/A - N/A N/A - N/A N/A
Ireland 11.9 1.4 14 11.0 1.8 13 4.2 1.0 15
Italy - N/A N/A - N/A N/A - N/A N/A
Japan 80.5 9.5 4 17.3 2.9 12 24.9 5.7 8
Luxembourg 3.9 0.5 18 3.5 0.6 17 3.4 0.8 16
Netherlands 71.4 8.4 6 42.3 7.0 5 49.0 11.2 3
New Zealand 6.5 0.8 16 4.5 0.7 15 5.0 1.1 14
Norway 137.8 16.3 1 80.5 13.4 2 59.4 13.6 2
Portugal 0.6 0.1 26 0.2 0.0 31 - N/A N/A
Republic of Korea 5.0 0.6 17 3.2 0.5 18 0.1 0.0 27
Spain 8.0 0.9 15 3.8 0.6 16 1.9 0.4 17
Sweden 103.4 12.2 2 70.0 11.7 3 66.3 15.2 1
Switzerland 58.1 6.9 7 21.6 3.6 9 15.1 3.5 11
United Kingdom 87.3 10.3 3 63.5 10.6 4 31.8 7.3 6
United States of America 78.4 9.3 5 131.8 21.9 1 30.2 6.9 7
Total DAC 834.5 98.6 592.6 98.6 432.2 98.9
Total Non-DAC 11.6 1.4 8.2 1.4 4.8 1.1
Total Contributions 846.1 600.8 437.0
* Provisional 2012 data provided by respective agencies for revenue.
** Ranking denotes rank among DAC countries by contribution to regular resources only. Within each of the above agencies, non-DAC donor countries mayhave higher ranking than some of the DAC donors shown.
20
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
23/28
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Canada
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy
Japan
Luxembourg
Netherlands
New
Zealand
Norway
Portugal
RepublicofKorea
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
UnitedKingdom
UnitedStates
ofAmerica
Non-DAC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
UNDP
UNICEF
UNFPA
UNICEF
32%
UNFPA
23%
UNDP
45%
UNICEF
33%
UNFPA
20%UNDP
47%
Comparative RR Funding from DACcountries, 2012
Regular Resources Contributions to UN Agencies by Donor DACand Non-DAC countries (US$ millions)
Comparative RR Funding fromNon-DAC countries, 2012
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
24/28
Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Member Governments, Total Revenueto UNICEF Compared to ODA, ODA Per Capita and GNI Per Capita, 2012*
This table is ranked by total contribution to UNICEF per capita.Total UNICEF contributions include government and NatComsources for any given country. In 2012, Norway maintained
the first position with a $48.81 per capita contribution,with Sweden in second position with $23.81 per capitacontribution, following Luxembourg with $21.08 per capita.
102,23755,736
86,400
57,781
46,589
46,122
36,639
87,215
38,839
51,135
45,370
65,987
48,837
36,111
42,067
41,995
22,795
50,765
27,749
47,279
33,279
19,626
21,862
NorwaySweden
Luxembourg
Denmark
Netherlands
Finland
Ireland
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Canada
Belgium
Australia
Japan
New Zealand
Germany
France
United Statesof America
Republic of Korea
Spain
Austria
Italy
Portugal
Greece
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 110,00
48.823.8
21.1
12.7
12.1
11.1
6.7
6.7
6.2
5.5
5.0
4.5
2.8
2.4
1.8
1.8
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.0
0.5
0.4
01020304050
Per Capita Revenue to UNICEF, 2012(US$ millions)
Gross National Income Per Capita, 2012(US$ millions)
* The population figures are from the State of World Population Report 2012.** Weighted average GNI per capita 2012.*** www.oecd.org accessed on April 5, 2013.
GovtUS$
NatComUS$
TotalUS$
Total ODAUS$ millions
ODA per capitaUS$
GNI per capitaUS$
ODA as %of GNI
Donor Country 2012 2012 2012 2012*** 2012 2012** 2012***
Norway 46.86 1.95 48.81 4,754 951 102,237 0.93
Sweden 16.98 6.83 23.81 5,242 552 55,736 0.99
Luxembourg 16.26 4.82 21.08 432 864 86,400 1.00
Denmark 9.63 3.11 12.74 2,718 485 57,781 0.84
Netherlands 7.45 4.61 12.06 5,524 331 46,589 0.71
Finland 7.68 3.41 11.09 1,320 244 46,122 0.53
Ireland 5.71 1.03 6.74 809 176 36,639 0.48
Switzerland 4.22 2.43 6.66 3,022 392 87,215 0.45
United Kingdom 5.33 0.92 6.25 13,659 218 38,839 0.56
Canada 5.17 0.36 5.53 5,678 164 51,135 0.32
Belgium 3.61 1.40 5.01 2,303 213 45,370 0.47
Australia 3.84 0.70 4.54 5,440 238 65,987 0.36
Japan 1.56 1.19 2.76 10,494 83 48,837 0.17
New Zealand 1.43 0.97 2.41 455 101 36,111 0.28
Germany 0.74 1.08 1.82 13,108 160 42,067 0.38France 0.30 1.50 1.81 12,000 189 41,995 0.45
Republic of Korea 0.13 1.32 1.45 1,551 32 22,795 0.14
United States 1.06 0.25 1.31 30,460 96 50,765 0.19
Spain 0.26 1.03 1.29 1,948 42 27,749 0.15
Austria 0.46 0.76 1.22 1,112 132 47,279 0.28
Italy 0.19 0.84 1.03 2,639 43 33,279 0.13
Portugal 0.02 0.45 0.47 567 53 19,626 0.27
Greece 0.01 0.39 0.40 324 28 21,862 0.13
Average Total 2.05 0.95 2.99 125,559 130 44,853 0.29
Total revenue to UNICEF per capita
22
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
25/28
Glossary
Consolidated Appeal Process (CAP) - The CAP is aprogramming process through which national, regionaland international relief systems (including UN operational
agencies and, where appropriate to the situation, theInternational Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the
International Federation of Red Cross and Red CrescentSocieties (IFRC), the International Organization for
Migration (IOM), NGOs, bilateral donors as well as
appropriate national and regional structures) are able tomobilize and respond selectively to major or complex
emergencies that require a system-wide response tohumanitarian crises.
Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) - Anemergency fund administered by the UN Office for theCoordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA), fromwhich UN agencies can receive advances for financing
emergency operations.
Inter-organizational Arrangements - Inter-organizational
Arrangements are a growing source of income to UNICEF.Inter-organizational Arrangements include, among others,contributions received through UNAIDS, UNDG, UNDP,UNESCO, UNFPA, UN Human Security Trust Fund, UNOCHA,
WHO, and the World Bank. Funding from these sourcesare mostly directed to humanitarian responses and include,
among other sources, income from various pooled fundingmechanisms, such as grants from the UNOCHA managed
CERF (see above); and multi-donor trust fund contributions.
International Public Sector Financial ReportingStandards (IPSAS)- UNICEF adopted IPSAS effectiveJanuary 1, 2012. IPSAS are credible, high-quality,
independently produced accounting standards,underpinned by a strong due process and supported
by Governments, professional accounting bodies,and international organizations. These standards arespecifically tailored to the public sector and integral to UN
management reform.
Medium Term Strategic Plan (MTSP) The MTSPis UNICEFs strategic plan of action that outlines the
organizational priorities, key results areas and targetsacross the five focus areas for programming. The fivefocus areas are Young Child Survival and Development,
Basic Education and Gender Equality, HIV/AIDS and
Children, Child Protection from Violence, Exploitation andAbuse, and Policy Advocacy and Partnerships.
Multi-Donor Trust Funds (MDTFs) The Multi DonorTrust Fund is a funding mechanism which: a) receives andpools contributions from more than one donor; b) holds
the funds in trust; c) allocates funds through a designatedgovernance structure; and d) disburses funds through an
Administrative Agent/Fund Manager to a numberof recipients.
Other Resources (OR) - Earmarked contribution forprogrammes that is supplementary to the contribution forRegular Resources (RR) and is made for a specific purpose
such as a particular programme or strategic priority or anemergency response (ORE).
Other Resources Emergency (ORE) - ORE are fundsspecifically provided by donors for UNICEFs humanitarianaction and post-crisis recovery activities. In addition toUNICEFs traditional donors, important sources of funding for
ORE are the inter-organizational arrangements including theCERF, and the Multi-Donor Trust Funds (MDTFs) among others
Funding for ORE is raised through the UN Consolidated Appea(CAP) and Flash Appeals in response to the needs outlined in
the UNICEF Humanitarian Action Report and other appeals.
Other Resources Regular (ORR) - ORR are funds forspecific, non-emergency programme purposes andstrategic priorities. ORR allow UNICEF to implement the
activities of approved country programmes, the MTSP
priorities and specific projects at global, regional, andcountry levels. The effective use of increases in ORRdepends on commensurate increases in the Regular
Resource base. ORR that UNICEF needs most are thosethat are flexible both in their purpose and in their duration.
Private Sector Income - Income received from a groupingof donors that includes UNICEFs National Committees,
non-governmental organizations, foundations andcorporate donors and individuals.
Public Sector Income - Income received from agrouping of donors and sources of funding that includes
governments, inter-governmental bodies, and inter-organizational arrangements.
Regular Resources (RR) - RR are unearmarked, coreresources that help sustain UNICEF assisted programmesand enable UNICEF to carry out its mission to improvethe lives of children and women. They include income
from voluntary annual contributions from governments,un-earmarked funds contributed by National Committees
and the public, as well as the net income from UNICEFgreeting card sales.
Thematic Funding - Thematic funds are contributions that
donors earmark geographically for one of the five MTSPfocus areas or humanitarian response.
UNICEF National Committees (NatComs) - There are 36UNICEF National Committees throughout the industrialized
world. They are registered non-profit structures, mostlycategorized as non- governmental entities establishedaccording to national laws. Committees play a key role
in advocating for childrens rights everywhere and areinstrumental in mobilizing resources for UNICEFs work.
UNICEF Compendium of Contributions 2012
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
26/28
ADB Asian Development Bank
AGFUND Arab Gulf Programme for United NationsDevelopment Organizations
CAP Consolidated Appeals Process
CERF Central Emergency Response Fund
DAC Development Assistance Committee
EC European Commission
ECHO European Commission Humanitarian Aidand Civil Protection
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
GAIN Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition
GAVI Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization
GNI Gross National Income
HAC Humanitarian Action for Children
IGOs Inter-Governmental Organizations
ILO International Labour Organization
IOM International Organization for Migration
IPSAS International Public Sector Accounting Standards
MDG Millennium Development Goals
MDTF Multi-Donor Trust Fund
MTSP Medium-Term Strategic Plan
NATCOM National Committee for UNICEF
NC National Committee for UNICEF
NGO Non-governmental organization
ODA Official Development Assistance
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment
OPEC Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries
OR Other Resources
ORE Other Resources-Emergency
ORR Other Resources-Regular
OSCE Organization for Security and Co-Operation in Europe
PAHO Pan American Health Organization
QCPR Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review
RR Regular Resources
UN United Nations
UNAIDS Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS
UNDG United Nations Development Group
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNDPKO United Nations Department of PeacekeepingOperations
UNDSS United Nations Department of Safety and Security
UNEP United Nations Environmental Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalDevelopment
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
UNMAS United Nations Mine Action Service
UNOCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination ofHumanitarian Affairs
UNODC United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
UNOPS United Nations Office for Project Services
UNICEF United Nations Childrens Fund
UNRWA United Nations Relief and Works Agency forPalestine Refugees
UNSAS United Nations System Accounting Standards
US Fund US Fund for UNICEF
VISION Virtual Integrated System of Information
WFP World Food Programme
WHO World Health Organization
Abbreviations and Acronyms
24
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
27/28
-
8/12/2019 FINAL Compendium 2012
28/28
Public-Sector Alliances and ResourceMobilization Office (PARMO)3 United Nations Plaza, H-12A
New York, NY 10017, USA
www.unicef.org/parmo
For the online version, scan this QR code or go to United Nations Childrens Fund
M 2013