The paper, Localisation works: Locally-led humanitarian action in the context of the Reset, draws on an independent evaluation of the Start Fund and compares how humanitarian responses led by local and national NGOs (LNNGOs) perform against those led by international NGOs (INGOs).
Across multiple indicators: timeliness, quality, fairness, participation and accountability, locally-led responses were rated higher by communities themselves.
Local organisations consistently delivered aid more quickly, particularly in remote and hard-to-reach areas. 95 per cent of community respondents in locally-led projects said assistance arrived at the right time, compared with 53 per cent in projects led by international NGOs. Proximity, local knowledge and established relationships allow national actors to mobilise faster when crises strike.
The evaluation also shows that locally-led responses are more closely aligned with community needs.
87 per cent of respondents rated LNNGO-led responses as 'excellent', compared with 49 per cent for INGO-led projects — reflecting the advantage of organisations that operate within the social and cultural realities of affected communities.
Locally-led responses also scored significantly higher on perceptions of fairness and transparency. 97.6 per cent of community members described LNNGO-led assistance as 'very fair', compared with 45.6 per cent in internationally-led responses. Participation and feedback mechanisms were also stronger: 85 per cent of community members were aware of and used feedback channels in locally-led responses, compared with 74 per cent in INGO-led projects.
Based on these findings, the paper calls for accelerated progress on humanitarian localisation. It urges donors to increase direct funding to local organisations, expand flexible multi-year financing and remove structural barriers that limit local actors' access to resources and decision-making spaces.
At the same time, UN agencies and international NGOs are encouraged to translate commitments into practice by shifting leadership, decision-making authority and budget control to local and national organisations, while strengthening equitable partnerships and community-centred accountability.
Together, the findings reinforce a growing consensus across the humanitarian sector: locally-led responses are not only more inclusive: they are more effective.