This site or third-party tools used by it make use of cookies necessary for its operation. By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking on a link or continuing navigation in any other way, you consent to the use of cookies

European Commission




A good needs and risks analysis is vital for the success of the Action. DG ECHO is a needs based donor and funding allocations are based on the evaluation of needs. This chapter will help DG ECHO to understand whether the needs assessment has been done in a timely manner, and whether the information and data are reliable. It will give also the possibility to check whether the partner has identified potential risks.

DG ECHO will also check whether the proposed Action is coherent with DG ECHO’s own evaluation of needs and whether the proposed intervention addresses the actual problems of the beneficiaries. Finally, this chapter assesses whether the Action is in line with DG ECHO’s intended response, strategy, priorities for the country/crisis (HIP) and whether the Action is compliant with DG ECHO’s mandate and coherent with its policy priorities.


The partner must provide details on the assessment dates and the methodology used: by whom, how and in which conditions the most recent assessment(s) was/were carried out; whether it was a joint/coordinated assessment, and whether it was shared with other agencies; whether the assessment used direct or indirect sources of information (primary or secondary data); whether the information was confirmed by a field visit and whether beneficiaries were directly involved.

In addition, in order for DG ECHO to assess whether certain specific sources of information /tools are relevant and frequently used, the partner should indicate which tools/sources were used, for instance IPC (Integrated Food Security Phase Classification), MIRA (Multi-Cluster Initial Rapid Assessment), UNDAC (UN Disaster Assessment and Coordination), ACAPS (Assessment Capacities Projects, MSNA (Multi-Sector Needs Assessment) .


The partner must describe the main problems and needs identified by the needs assessment and risk analysis within the geographical area and sectors concerned by the proposed Action, establishing cause/effect relations. The partner will also pay attention to:


  • explain how the problem, needs and risk analysis is in line with DG ECHO analysis and strategy for the country.


  • provide a comprehensive risk analysis that reflects the threats, hazards, vulnerabilities and capacities for different age, sex, and disability groups, as well as contextually relevant social, ethnic, religious and other diversity groups.
  • provide a brief gender and age analysis, including an assessment of the roles of different gender and age groups and their control over resources, issues of inequality or discrimination, including the level of access to humanitarian assistance, the effects of the crisis on different gender and age groups, their specific needs and their capacities for coping with, responding to, recovering from and preparing for crises. If the context does not permit or if the information is not available, the partner will mention it.

For more information on gender and age analysis in needs assessment, please consult the Gender-Age Marker Toolkit (page 22)

  • the analysis should identify the barriers that hinder persons with disabilities from accessing and participating in humanitarian assistance and protection, as well as the enablers facilitating access and participation in society for persons with disabilities on equal basis with others and which can be used to overcome barriers.


  • in addition to natural hazards, (hydro-meteorological and geological), diseases and epidemics, violence and conflict, please take into account how climate change and environmental degradation can aggravate risks in the geographical area. For more information, please refer to DG ECHO Disaster Preparedness Guidance and to the Resilience Marker Guidelines, as this corresponds to Question 1 of the Resilience Marker.


  • explain what are the underlying risk factors linked to the humanitarian crisis; what is the likelihood of large increases in humanitarian needs due to a conflict, natural disaster, epidemics, etc.; what are the foreseen trends; what potential negative effects/risks could different gender and age groups be exposed to. Risks relating to the implementation of the Action will be explained in section 7.5.


  • outline the main issues linked to environmental degradation, which should then be addressed in the response analysis section 4.3. It is important to differentiate between climate induced disasters and issues linked to environmental degradation due to the humanitarian response. The latter should be covered for the purpose of ‘greening’ actions. These issues may include environmental issues linked to greenhouse gas emissions from energy production and transport of goods, plastic pollution and packaging waste, solid, medical and hazardous waste accumulation, deforestation due to gathering of firewood or for the purpose of building shelters, land degradation, water scarcity and contamination, groundwater pollution. Briefly indicate whether an environmental screening (e.g. using the NEAT+ or CEDRIG) was conducted to identify these potential environmental impacts. In the cases where environmental screenings are mandatory (Shelter & Settlements and WASH sector specific interventions and for site/settlement closure/decommissioning) the implementation of these screenings should be reported here, and the detailed results and report attached as a technical annex. Identifying the risks facilitates the request for modification and/or amendment. It is important to keep in mind the potential negative impact beyond the timeframe of the activities.



The partner must explain how the proposed response addresses the specific needs and risks of the affected persons identified in the problem, needs and risk analysis. The inclusion of anticipatory response interventions to address potential needs generated by the risks identified are welcome, if possible and relevant.


In this section, highlight how the proposed response is coherent with the priorities defined in the DG ECHO's funding decision/HIP.


In this section partners should also mention if and how the project responds to the relevant minimum environmental requirements, and provide a short summary of the actions planned in line with the risks outlined in section 4.2. This section will guide DG ECHO staff in understanding whether the requirements were taken into account in the proposal and if environmentally sustainable practices in the delivery of humanitarian assistance were accounted and planned for in the response. The information provided in this section should be short and concise. Detailed description of the activities will need to be provided under section 7.3.


NB: In support to the explanation provided in sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3, the partner can provide in annex a copy of the assessment report. However, information provided in the sections above has to be sufficiently self-explanatory.


This is just a yes/no question, where the default answer is “No”. 


It is for the partner to analyse any data risks in their operation as part of their risk analysis. In particular the following considerations should be taken into account:


  • Does the action entail the management of sensitive data?
  • Is data management taking place in a particularly sensitive response context?
  • Will the data management activity be systematic or large-scale?


If the answers to any of these questions is yes, then a further details on how these risks will be mitigated, including information on any Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) that is planned, may be warranted


Should the partner determine that there may be data protection risks inherent in the project (4.4)  then they should indicate here any mitigation measures that will be put in place against these risks.


The partner may wish to carry out a DPIA as part of this process. There is no single approach to DPIAs, and different organisations may use different methodologies in line with their data protection policies or preferences.


As a starting point the ICRC handbook on Data Protection in Humanitarian Action provides a DPIA template. If a DPIA is determined to be warranted by the partner, then it should include at least an analysis of the data flow, the risks identified and the mitigation actions put in place either by the partner itself, member(s) of the consortium (co-partners), or by any 3rd party (implementing partners).


In this box, the partner may supply details of any DPIA, or planned DPIA, they will undertake.