1. State of World’s Cash Report:
Cash transfer programming in humanitarian aid

2. 1
Global spend on cash & vouchers increased by 40% to $2.8bn in 2016 2
Capacity for CTP is a limiting factor across organizations
CTP is being considered more often, but not systematically 3
CTP as a % of Total Global Hum. Aid of $27.3bn in 2016
40%
Organizations have enough capacity to implement CTP
Total Cash and Voucher Aid Growth from 2015 to 2016
Sector experience with CTP
Only
Low
High
87%
Food
WASH
Education
Protection
Shelter
Nutrition
Health
Respondents agree that CTP is more routinely considered than a year ago
2016
2.8bn
10.3%
7/10
Organizations have difficulty finding skilled staff for CTP roles
48%
Barriers to accessing CTP trainings
40%
Increment
0.8 bn
Organizations do not agree that market and response analysis are embedded in response
Cost of Face to face trainings
2015
2.0bn
Lack of time to attend 4
The quality of CTP is improving, enhanced by collaboration 5
The coordination of CTP is unreliable, limiting the benefits realized 6
Innovations and evidence are proliferating, but gaps remain
8/10
Practitioners believe their organization
% Practitioners who believe evidence is available to
% Practitioners who believe there has been an improvement in
Has made progress towards increasing the quality of CTP
Has considered evidence of best practices while designing and implementing CTP
Is taking steps to embed common standards and guidelines for CTP
48%
Quality of CTP coordination
41%
Predictability of CTP coordination
80%
100% Agree
0% Agree
Make the case for CTP
Use CTP appropriately across sectors
Inform selection of operational model for CTP
53%
44%
28%
Practitioners believe that national/ local actors are appropriately involved in the coordination for CTP
Barriers to effective coordination for CTP
Confusion about where CTP coordination sits / no leadership in the international system
Limited commitment to use shared operational mechanisms
Source: Practitioner Survey, Organization Survey, CaLP and Accenture Research

3. Key Messages (1)
Cash transfer programming is improving humanitarian aid around the world. The recent major commitments made to increase the use of cash & vouchers are translating into action on the ground. Momentum for cash transfer programming is strong
In 2016, the use of cash and vouchers grew to $2.8bn, up 40% from 2015 and up 100% from This accounted for 10.3% of global humanitarian assistance in 2016, up from 7.8% in Growth is expected to continue.
To date, growth has been uneven. Cash is being considered more often as a tool for humanitarian response, but not yet systematically. Over two thirds of all humanitarian aid delivered as cash and vouchers worldwide in 2016 was disbursed by WFP & UNHCR
Capacity for cash transfer programming is a critical limiting factor. This includes capacity in host governments, national organisations and international agencies. The organisations that have made most progress have invested consistently in building their capacities over years, in areas such as staff skills, response analysis and organisational procedures & support
Building the capacities of local actors for cash transfer programming requires more investment from international actors
Cash transfer programming is being integrated into key humanitarian standards, such as Sphere, with increasing engagement across clusters. Greater use of common tools, based on best practice, is required to manage quality consistently

4. Key Messages (2)
The coordination of CTP remains ad hoc and unreliable across humanitarian responses. This limits the realisation of benefits. It reflects wider issues about coordination, organisational interests and limited resources. Consensus is emerging that cash should be coordinated at the inter-sector level, with the support of technical Cash Working Groups.
Many exciting innovations are being trialled to use cash and vouchers to enhance aid. They range from technology, to partnerships with new actors, testing new operational models, and bridging the humanitarian - development divide
The evidence base for how cash and vouchers can be best used in different contexts and sectors is strengthening. Addressing the remaining critical gaps requires different types of programming to be implemented and systematically evaluated
Significant debates continue about the best use of cash. Different actors have differing views about issues such as the use of unrestricted cash, reforms to operational models and links with wider reform efforts
Looking ahead, actors will need to continue investing in integrating CTP into existing humanitarian mechanisms, and innovating to improve aid. This requires the support of three enabling factors: sustaining high level policy commitments, working collaboratively, and supporting a limited amount of cash-specific infrastructure.
CTP is making a major contribution to improving the efficiency and effectiveness of humanitarian aid. There is immense opportunity to take this further, as cash enables new ways of working. But it is not a silver bullet and needs to be implemented with care in each context. Progress will depend on the extent to which organisations consider the use of cash collectively rather than independently.

5. Critical Debates affecting progress in CTP
Measuring CTP
Should cash and vouchers be measured separately or together?
Operational Models
Multi-purpose Grants
How do we ensure that both efficiency and effectiveness are given due weight in the selection of operational models?
How should we use MPGs appropriately, while ensuring necessary sectoral outcomes?
Critical Debates
Financial Inclusion
Capacity Building
What are the most appropriate ways to combine humanitarian CTP with longer term financial inclusion?
What do new ways of implementing CTP mean for capacity building?
Social Protection
How and when can humanitarian CTP align best with social protection systems?

6. Objective 2: Routine Consideration
Priority Actions (1)
Objective 1: Funding
1.1 Sustain high-level policy commitments to CTP. [GFA 1.3, GB 1.3]
1.2 Integrate CTP into organizational and inter-agency reporting systems, using common definitions. [GFA 1.4, GB 4]
1.3 Strengthen support for CTP among the public. [GFA 1.3]
Objective 2: Routine Consideration
2.1 Embed contextual analysis and response analysis into humanitarian programme cycles and funding decisions. [GFA 2.2]
2.2 Identify how CTP can achieve the best results in different technical sectors and across sectors. [GFA 2.3, GB 1.6 & 1.7]
2.3 Donors should work together to ensure appropriate consideration of CTP. [GFA 2.4, GB 1.1]
Objective 3: Capacity
3.1 Integrate CTP into organizations’ strategies, systems, processes and staffing [GFA 3.2]
3.2 Fund and support national organizations to build their capacity for CTP. [GFA 3.5]
3.3 Build individual competencies in CTP. [GFA 3.3]

7. Objective 5: Coordination Objective 6: Evidence & Innovation
Priority Actions (2)
Objective 4: Quality
4.1 Design and implement cash-based assistance to contribute as effectively and efficiently as possible to strategic outcomes [GFA 4.2, 4.3 & 4.4]
4.2 Develop common tools for managing the quality of CTP [GFA 4.1]
4.3 Integrate CTP into existing mechanisms for managing the quality of humanitarian action [GFA 4.2]
Objective 5: Coordination
5.1 Integrate CTP into existing mechanisms for coordinating humanitarian action. [GFA 5.1, 5.2, GB 2.2]
5.2 Support and engage with Cash Working Groups. [GFA 5.4]
5.3 Build links between humanitarian programmes and other government/development initiatives. [GFA 5.1 & 5.3]
Objective 6: Evidence & Innovation
6.1 Strengthen the evidence base. [GFA 6.1, GB 1.6]
6.2 Strengthen common platforms for building, sharing and using knowledge about CTP. [GFA 6.4 & 6.5]
6.3 Invest in innovation to achieve more for beneficiaries. [GFA 6.2]

8. Future progress depends on two key themes and three enabling factors
Integrate CTP into all existing mechanisms of providing humanitarian aid, including: organizations’ policies, strategies, management and reporting systems, funding and programming decisions, capacity building initiatives, coordination mechanisms, standards, guidance, tools and others.
Innovate and strengthen the evidence base. Trial new ways of working that generate the greatest benefits for people in crisis from the opportunities created by CTP. Develop new partnerships and stronger insights into CTP, share experience and learn together.
Three enabling factors
Sustain the high-level policy commitments needed for the effective implementation of CTP.
2. Plan and act collaboratively. Expect to use common approaches and mechanisms for CTP at operational, national and global levels, which are implemented across organizations and existing technical sectors.
3. Support a limited amount of CTP-specific infrastructure, including platforms for collective action on CTP.

9. Q&A SESSION