GPC Funding Analysis and Protection Risks - Understanding the Link and the Cost of Inaction

Humanitarian crises in 2025 have been marked by rising levels of violence, coercion, and deprivation, driving protection risks to unprecedented levels. Across 18 crisis-affected countries, 229 million people face seriousthreats to their safety, dignity, and fundamental rights. Recent subnational assessments conducted in those 18 countries, reveal that in 39% of the 125,200 subnational areas analysed, civilian populations are experiencing severe to extreme levels of protection risks.

The current funding available for protection does not match the scale of existing protection risks. In 2024, the funding gap amounted to 51%, and projections for 2025 suggest a wider gap – with some crises facing a potential shortfall of 86%. This is more than a financial shortfall; it represents a systemic failure to respond to life-threatening risks. While the full impact remains to be seen, early projections already raise serious concerns.

The Global Protection Cluster (GPC) has analysed what could happen if protection funding is reduced by 30% or 50% compared to 2024. The findings are alarming: Between 7.5 million and 12.6 million people could be affected, with 4,400 to 5,000 communities stand to lose the protective presence and connective infrastructure that enable them to act, speak, and organize around their own their safety, such as community-led or social cohesion interventions. Moreover, 2.3 million to 3.5 million people may be left without access to vital information—compromising their ability to make informed decisions and access life-saving assistance.

The consequences of funding shortfalls extend well beyond service reductions—they directly increase exposure to harm. The GPC's projection analysis shows that early warning systems, risk monitoring and data collection and other interventions aimed at not only responding to, but also preventing and mitigating protection risks will be severely reduced. The weakening of case management and support networks will leave affected populations with fewer avenues to access justice, legal protection, and life-saving assistance.

An analysis of 2025 Humanitarian Needs and Response Plans (HNRPs) showed that activities included under life-saving Strategic Objectives (SOs) address 33% of protection risks classified as severe and 11% of those classified as extreme, including gender-based violence, the presence of explosive ordnance/mines, child recruitment, movement restrictions & displacement, psychosocial distress, and theft & forced eviction. However, many key activities to address protection risks are either in the protection-specific SOs or fall outside the scope of HNRPs.

The 2025 humanitarian response stands at a crossroads. If we collectively fail to address the protection risks that populations face, millions will remain trapped in cycles of violence, exploitation, and deprivation and resulting humanitarian needs. Protection cannot be an afterthought. It must be at the core of humanitarian prioritization, ensuring that interventions are driven by the severity of risks and resulting needs. The cost of inaction is not just a gap in resources—it is a failure to protect those most at risk.