xz Financial <strong>report</strong>Money raised from the general public:a guarantee of independence and efficiencyThe new presentation of the CER (statement of utilisationof funds) (p.23) clearly shows the leveraging effectof funds raised from the general public in obtainingthe funding applied for from institutional donors. It is thebalanced combination of these two types of funding whichenables <strong>Handicap</strong> <strong>International</strong> to fund its programmesthroughout the world, to safeguard its independence and tocontinue its work in the long term.These two sources are in fact interdependent because,usually, institutional donors only give funding to associationswhich can demonstrate their ability to co-financea significant proportion of the projects involved. Financialsoundness is therefore a guarantee of credibility, commitmentand viability. At the end of <strong>2009</strong>, <strong>Handicap</strong> <strong>International</strong>’sAssociation funds stood at US$28.1 million, of whichUS$8.76 million was in funds received but not yet utilised.In addition to the necessary credibility, they provided securityfor coping with fluctuations in funding receipts, as in2008, thereby safeguarding the social missions. They madeit possible to advance the cash to programmes in the fieldneeded to initiate this work, pending receipts of funds frominstitutional providers.For each US dollar of funds raised from the public spenton social missions, US$1.40 is received from institutionaldonors. By raising funds from the public, the Associationscales up its field operational capacity spectacularly: foreach US$1.00 spent on initial fundraising, US$5.60 are finallyutilised in social missions.(in thousands US$) Rate 1.4406Social missionsFundraising expensesOperating expenses26 ı <strong>Annual</strong> <strong>report</strong> <strong>2009</strong>EXPENDITUREUses of funds fromresources raised fromthe public35,631.614,631.63,512.7Uses of fundsfrom otherresources48,601.7421.44,035.7TOTAL<strong>2009</strong>84,233.315,053.07,548.5Total expenditures for the financial year 53,776.0 53,058.9 106,834.8Charges to provisionsFunds allocated and carried forward to the next financial year1,102.1583.41,102.1583.4Total expenditure 53,776.0 54,744.3 108,520.3Proportion of gross fixed assets for the period financed from resourcesraised from the publicReversal of amortisation charges on fixed assets financed fromresources raised from the public since adoption of the new regulations343.0– 561.5Total uses financed from resources raised from the public 53,557.5INCOMETotal income<strong>2009</strong>Monitoring of funds raisedfrom the general publicNon-designated, unused resources raised from the public in previous periods broughtforward at the start of the period 5,784.3Resources raised from the public 56,299.9 56,299.9Other private funds 8,058.7Total resources raised from the public 64,358.6Grants and other public subsidies 44,262.1Other income 1,381.2Total income this financial year 130,098.4Provisions write-backUnutilised prior period designated resources brought forward1,538.3818.1Change in dedicated funds raised from the public 234.7Total income 132,454.8 62,318.8Total uses financed by resources raised from the public – 53,557.5Balance of resources raised from the public not used and not designated at the period end 8,761.3
Social missions and funds allocatedProgrammes implemented abroad are run from<strong>Handicap</strong> <strong>International</strong>’s head office by three operatingdepartments: Emergency Response Department,Development Department and Mines Department; TheAssociation also runs public interest programmes fromits head office such as disability rights awareness andthe <strong>International</strong> Campaign to ban landmines and clustermunitions.Emergency Response DepartmentQuicker response through controlled risktakingThe Emergency Response Department’s budget wasUS$9.17 million in <strong>2009</strong> (against US$8.14 million in 2008),an increase explained by a sequence of dreadful eventsneeding action from <strong>Handicap</strong> <strong>International</strong> in the PalestinianTerritories, Pakistan, the Philippines and Indonesia (readpages 8 and 9).The broad approach to emergency response, specific to theAssociation, demonstrated its worth. It consists of helpingvulnerable people immediately, with particular supportto those with disabilities. In each set of circumstances,from setting up “disability and vulnerability focal points” torebuilding housing, the types of operations deployed wereadapted to the needs of the beneficiary populations (readpages 6 and 7).Work was also done on optimising our intervention capacity,particularly by shortening reaction times. The Associationtherefore decided to run the financial risk of starting upthese operations, using its own private funds withoutwaiting for confirmation of the funding agreements thatit was seeking. This strategy enabled it not only to meetthe needs of victims, refugees or displaced persons morequickly, but also to achieve a funding cover rate of 82.2%from institutional donors, in full costs.Development DepartmentReorganisation to favour the poorestcountriesThe Development Department’s budget came to $66.26million in <strong>2009</strong> (against $63.95 million in 2008). Threegeographical areas particularly benefited from this increasein the volume of operations:– Southern Asia, including Pakistan (up US$0.72 million andIndia (up US$0.57 million), where actions were launched inresponse to the Bihar floods, and in the Kashmir conflictzone;– East Africa, with the Development Department taking overEmergency Response Department’s operations in Sudan;– the Middle East (the Gaza Strip and Iraq).The target of cutting structural costs and the decisionto concentrate on the poorest countries led to almostcomplete closure of the projects carried out in France andthe regional merger of several programmes (Thailand andCambodia, also Kenya and Somaliland) when they could berun as single operations.Moreover, a project for prescribing and manufacturingwheelchairs was set up in Togo, in conjunction with otherWest African countries.The fall in activity in Mozambique is the result of a transitionphase with AIDS programmes coming to an end and mineclearance programmes waiting to be scaled up whenresponses are received from institutional funding providers.In Sierra Leone and Liberia, the falls are the result ofsuccessful transfer of orthopaedic services to the relevantministries (read page 12). In Uzbekistan, it is explained bythe government’s refusal to authorise operations for whichfunding had been secured.Overall, the work on obtaining better institutional fundingcoverage was effective in <strong>2009</strong>, with a funding rate, in termsof full costs, of 58.8%.Mines DepartmentA pivotal yearMines Department’s budget came to US$2.93 millionin <strong>2009</strong> (against US$5.19 million in 2008), a decreaseexplained mainly by the transfer of the Balkans programmeto Development Department and by the end of the project innorth Lebanon (down US$0.72 million in direct expenses).In addition to technical responsibility for the decontaminationand risk prevention activities implemented by DevelopmentDepartment (particularly the continuation of a major mineclearing project in Mozambique), Mines Departmentcontinued its work to help Palestinian refugees near Byblos,in Lebanon, also on the project in Casamance, in Senegal(up US$72 thousand, but still awaiting European Uniontendering results).<strong>2009</strong> saw many tender process responses and preparationsfor 2010, such as the design of the “mines emergencykit”, designed to help make areas intended for civilianpopulations safer (read page 16). Two exploratory missions,in Chad and Uganda, should result in programme openingsthat will have an impact in 2010.The institutional funding coverage rate has stabilised at ahigh level, 74.5% of full costs.<strong>Annual</strong> <strong>report</strong> <strong>2009</strong> ı 27