Strategic Priorities and Policy Support: DG ECHO funding priorities and submission dates

HIPs describe humanitarian funding priorities and allocations. Technical annexes contain partner conditions and allocation rounds. Submission dates can be indicative, historical, restricted to pre-selected partners or not applicable. Read each round’s conditions before preparing a proposal.

Document status: current. Last source check: 4 Nov 2026, 12:17 UTC. Extracts below retain the donor’s source wording.

Countries and scope

No country list has been extracted. Read the geographic or thematic scope in the HIP and technical annex.

Funding priorities

In order to improve the coherence and the predictability of baseline information needed to conduct quality programming, in particular impartial multisectoral needs assessments, DG ECHO will support action(s) that would be able to gather and analyse the necessary data in a coherent and systemic way, allowing for comparability of identified needs and of their severity between and within crises. The proposed action(s) should be coherent with INFORM and with the Joint and Intersectoral Analysis Framework (JIAF) methodology and their indicators. Given the complexity of the task, the proposal(s) can pursue a twin-track approach: 1) cover
Response strategy ↗
urgent gaps in the provision of data for needs assessment and 2) develop a more robust collaborative model between the actors involved in the data collection, coordination and analysis needs assessment so far, ultimately guaranteeing needs assessments and data remain public goods, while ensuring the respect of personal data protection rules.
Response strategy ↗
Building on initiatives previously funded under geographical HIPs, the main objective of the proposed programme(s) should thus be the collection of data (primary/secondary, including meta-data), the analysis of the collected data, and the dissemination of the data (public availability). The proposals should furthermore factor in the following elements: a data governance framework for the collected data; data interoperability, data security and use of the relevant standards, and as much as possible use shared data platforms and tools that enhance coordination among actors and helps prevent duplication of efforts. It should moreover ensure involvement of local actors.
Response strategy ↗
The proposed programme(s) should contribute to a strengthened and more efficient data and needs assessments ecosystem supported by a more coherent and coordinated governance. The proposed programme would therefore be an important contribution to a principled and efficient humanitarian response.
Response strategy ↗
In order to respond to this challenge. DG ECHO is looking for a consortium, ideally under one single contract. In the consortium logic, the proposal should build on respective partners’ strengths, complementing each other's engagement. The programme should finally aim at providing the necessary granularity of data (people in need number; multisectoral; age; gender; disability; etc.), allowing to best understand the severity of needs, and provide crisis analysis. It should furthermore adequately include consultation and involvement of affected communities in the various strands of the proposed projects.
Response strategy ↗
DG ECHO will support a new humanitarian initiative named SHIELD (Sexual and Reproductive Health In Emergencies and Life in Dignity). The SHIELD Initiative will take the form of a two-year global programme with UNFPA and would be two-fold:
Response strategy ↗
3.1.4 Security risk management of humanitarian operations
Response strategy ↗
(1) funding the global supply chain pipelines of inter-agency reproductive health kits and supplies until the last mile, including pre-positioning, while supporting efficiency gains across the humanitarian system;
Response strategy ↗
(2) funding and supporting a pool of GBV/SRH experts to be quickly deployed to the relevant countries according to evolving needs.
Response strategy ↗
In order to maximise the use of multipurpose cash assistance in humanitarian response in line with the Common Donor Approach, proposal(s) should aim at fostering a conducive environment for cash at both global and country level. In practice, the proposal(s) should aim at strengthening awareness on the benefits of cash, supporting the implementation of efficient cash coordination including local actors, and providing capacity building and technical expertise. DG ECHO will favour a consortium approach supporting the operationalisation of the Common Donor Approach at both global and country level. The selection of contexts for
Response strategy ↗
the country component – if required - should be based on a gap-filling analysis addressing barriers to cash and issues related to cash capacity and coordination. The proposed programme(s) should moreover highlight how they complement actions funded through other DG ECHO Humanitarian Implementation Plans and ensure there are no overlaps.
Response strategy ↗
DG ECHO will fund actions crucial to strengthen safety and security of humanitarian personnel. Proposals under this priority should therefore aim at enhancing security risk management of humanitarian operations, to enable safe and secure aid delivery. This includes improving the analysis of and reporting on attacks on humanitarian personnel, as well as measures that strengthen their operational, policy and legal protection. Support should include measures to improve cross-cutting security risk management, to facilitate operational security coordination, and to enhance information sharing among humanitarian actors. Furthermore,
Response strategy ↗
initiatives can also include measures supporting capacity building, awareness on duty of care responsibilities, and trainings in security risk management, in particular among local actors, to ensure that humanitarian personnel are equipped with the knowledge and tools necessary to operate safely and effectively. Initiatives can also explore the development of common minimum security standards across the humanitarian community. Lastly, actions could include risk mitigation measures associated with the rapid proliferation of drone warfare or actions targeting disinformation, misinformation or criminalization of aid delivery. The proposed
Response strategy ↗
programmes should entail a horizontal and global scope and highlight how they complement context specific actions funded through other DG ECHO Humanitarian Implementation Plans to avoid duplication and ensure coherence.
Response strategy ↗
Supporting development finance institutions to remain engaged in fragile countries with humanitarian caseload, and to increase lending is an integral part of efforts to address fragility. In particular, ensuring that this lending reaches the most vulnerable populations and provide long term solutions for humanitarian need is essential.
Response strategy ↗
3.3.1 Humanitarian access to people in need and International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
Response strategy ↗
3.3.2 Quality of humanitarian interventions
Response strategy ↗
a. Accountability (to affected population, donors, taxpayers and ultimately the overall humanitarian system)
Response strategy ↗
To address this challenge, this programme will engage technical support provided by UNDP to unlock EIB loan programmes in contexts facing high levels of fragility while helping connect these loan operations to the long-term alleviation of persistent humanitarian need. This tool will operate in a range of countries over a four-year period. In addition, the programme will support the EIB to provide a support service to help their loan officers integrate the specific needs and challenges of fragile contexts with humanitarian needs into their loan programmes.
Response strategy ↗
Actions to be funded under the Enhanced Response Capacity window of the policy HIP are expected to fall under one of the five main priorities for this year’s allocation.
Response strategy ↗
Humanitarian access constraints continue to lack strategic and systemic measures (e.g. country level humanitarian access strategies; access and protection joint analysis; harmonised monitoring and reporting framework or establishing common risk management and duty-of- care standards) to address them at country level in a harmonised way which often results in compromising humanitarian principles and disproportionately exposing staff - particularly local personnel - to elevated risks. Therefore, actions under this priority should contribute to the effective, secure, and accountable delivery of humanitarian assistance on the ground, while
Response strategy ↗
fostering respect for International Humanitarian Law and humanitarian principles. They should build on existing initiatives and field lessons to provide an evidence-based set of strategic measures addressing the challenges faced by humanitarian personnel at country level. They should align with locally-led, internationally-enabled approaches and operate within an accountable governance framework, complementing (and not duplicating) existing coordination mechanisms and consolidating relevant tools, data, and insights from frontline experience.
Response strategy ↗
Ultimately, the actions should strengthen advocacy and operational coordination at both global and field levels, while generating measurable and sustainable improvements in the operational environment for humanitarian personnel. This includes promoting safer access and reducing risks to personnel, resources, and the affected populations.
Response strategy ↗
By actively engaging communities in monitoring and evaluation, the humanitarian community (and ultimately DG ECHO) demonstrates that aid is both need-driven and transparently managed. In addition, effective accountability systems strengthen internal controls of partners.
Response strategy ↗
To advance this objective, DG ECHO is committed to strengthening sector-wide accountability approaches as a common service to the entire humanitarian system, with strong local ownership. Accountability, in this context, refers to collective mechanisms that ensure
Response strategy ↗
b. Capacity strengthening of WASH personnel in humanitarian contexts
Response strategy ↗
humanitarian partners are answerable for managing key integrity risks and for the transparent implementation of aid interventions. Actions under this priority will focus on active community engagement. The results of these actions should be directly used by a broad range of humanitarian organisations or demonstrate a clear pathway toward adoption across the wider humanitarian sector. The objective is to enhance collective accountability solutions that are sustainably financed beyond the initial support, build on and consolidate existing mechanisms rather than duplicate them, and ensure effective use of frontline insights. These
Response strategy ↗
solutions should foster efficiency through joint governance, shared services, and community- driven actions, and replace stand alone, organisation-specific systems. Examples of potential initiatives include accessible and confidential collective community feedback mechanisms designed to meet affected populations’ needs; joint strategies to mitigate aid diversion, Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment, and fraud; or independent, shared services such as joint investigation capacities and information-sharing arrangements to prevent re-employment of known offenders.
Response strategy ↗
One of the challenges faced in humanitarian WASH responses concern the technical expertise of WASH personnel, as highlighted in the recent WASH evaluation. DG ECHO will thus support initiatives that strengthen technical WASH capacities of professionals to effectively address critical gaps and training needs in the humanitarian WASH sector.
Response strategy ↗

Partner eligibility

Only ECHO partners are eligible to submit a project for funding43;
Eligibility criteria ↗
No award will be made to NGO partner organisations which have not complied with their obligations concerning the submission of audited financial statements (i.e., which would not have submitted those in due time to the Commission without a proper justification) or which would appear not to offer sufficient guarantee as to their financial capacity to implement the proposed actions (in light of their
Eligibility criteria ↗
liquidity and solvency ratios as appearing from their latest available annual statutory accounts certified by an approved external auditor).
Eligibility criteria ↗
All awards made using EU Funds must respect the Conditionality Measures44 issued under any Council Implementing Decision adopted in accordance with Article 6 of EU Regulation 2020/2092 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget45 (“Conditionality Decision”).
Eligibility criteria ↗
The Commission hereby notifies applicants under this HIP/TA of the following Conditionality Decision (valid at the date of publication of this HIP/TA):
Eligibility criteria ↗
44 Conditionality Measures against a Concerned Entity, may, for example, include, amongst others, the requirement to suspend payments or the implementation of the legal commitment to/with the Concerned Entity; and/or terminate the legal commitment with the Concerned Entity; and/or prohibit entering into new legal commitments with the Concerned Entity. Conditionality Decisions and Measures issued under Council Implementing Decisions may impact the implementation of grants, contributions and procurement contracts awarded, as the Commission is required to ensure the application of these Conditionality Decisions
Eligibility criteria ↗
and Measures in the implementation of the EU budget via both direct and indirect management. implementation of grants, contributions and procurement contracts awarded, as the Commission is required to ensure the application of these Conditionality Decisions and Measures in the implementation of the EU budget via both direct and indirect management.
Eligibility criteria ↗
45 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget OJ L 433I , 22.12.2020, p. 1–10
Eligibility criteria ↗
47 Act IX of 2021 on public interest trust foundations with a public service mission (entry into force 01/01/2023).
Eligibility criteria ↗
48 Available (in Hungarian) at:[https://njt.hu/jogszabaly/2021-9-00-00](https://njt.hu/jogszabaly/2021-9-00-00)
Eligibility criteria ↗
Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2022/2506 of 15 December 2022 on measures for the protection of the Union budget against breaches of the principles of the rule of law in Hungary46.
Eligibility criteria ↗
This Conditionality Decision, in particular its Article 2.2, prohibits legal commitments under direct and indirect management with any public interest trust established by Hungarian Act IX of 202147, including those entities listed in Annex I to Hungarian Act IX of 202148 and other affiliated entities maintained by them (“Concerned Entities”). The Commission will further notify when the above- mentioned Conditionality Measures are lifted.
Eligibility criteria ↗

Apply the round-specific restrictions below together with the complete partner and award conditions.

Allocation rounds and submission dates