Why we do this

The humanitarian community lacks evidence-based solutions that can meet the increasing scale and complexity of humanitarian need. Sectors that invest in research and innovation are proven to be more effective and adaptive than those that don’t, and the humanitarian sector should be no different. But current estimates suggest that less than 0.4% of humanitarian financing is allocated to research and innovation.

• We conducted two gap analyses in humanitarian WASH and GBV, working in close partnership with the Global WASH Cluster and the GBV Call to Action. We’ve gone on to address the identified gaps and priorities through coordinated innovation challenges.
• We have undertaken and published a systematic review of the humanitarian public health evidence base. Our Humanitarian Health Evidence Review (HEER) identified 133 quality papers between 1990-2013. We’re already contributing to this limited body of evidence through an additional 78 papers published in reputable journals such as the Lancet, BMJ Global Health, and JAMA. We’re also advocating for, and working with, our funding partners to fund new research to address the clear evidence gaps.