The duration and timing of the HPC process will depend on 1) the nature of the crisis (e.g. sudden onset or protracted) and 2) the optimal planning period for the response (e.g. annual or multi-year).

Sudden Onset Crises – Typical Timeline and Key Actions  

In sudden onset crises, HCTs (as well as FSC Teams) often need to take decisions based on limited or incomplete information, and to provide rapid overall direction to the response to enable the mobilisation of action and resources (see also the FSC SOPs in Annex I). 

To ensure well-coordinated action in the fast-moving environment of a sudden onset crisis (or sharp escalation of an existing crisis), the following steps are recommended:

Protracted Crises – Typical Timeline and Key Actions 

For protracted crises, detailed step by step guidance on the HPC is produced yearly (shared by OCHA), providing Coordination Teams with a clear overview of the timeline and key actions involved in the development of the HNO and HRP – make sure to check online or with the GST for current updates. See Annex II for a summary of the typical HPC steps and timeline and see detailed actions related to the HNO (9.4.1) and the HRP (9.5.2).    

Annual Planning in Protracted Crises: RC/HCs and HCTs in protracted crises generally engage in an annual needs analysis and response planning process from July to November of each year. However, the planning time frame is flexible and can start at any point in the year and run for any length of time, based on operational requirements (for example, in Yemen, the HRP was finalized in late April 2022 due to the IPC being conducted in March).

Multi-year Planning in Protracted Crises: The RC/HC and HCT may consider a multi-year HRP  in contexts where needs and planned responses change little from year to year, or where multi-year programming (such as resilience-building actions) is under way.  A multi-year HRP should cover a 2-3 year span to enable an outcome-oriented approach which ensures a response that effectively strengthens resilience (the HCT will often look at the potential availability of multi-year funding and other sources of funding to bridge the humanitarian–development divide). Examples (in 2022) includes Whole of Syria, Haiti and Venezuela.  At country-level, the HPC elements/tools will be adapted to the context (making the process lighter) and to allow for broad consultation at both national and subnational level. See details on the impact for the Coordinator in 9.5.2.

In case of a Change in Context? If there is a (significant and unforeseen) spike in needs or a change in the context, the RC/HC and HCT may decide to revise the HRP  or develop a Flash Appeal to outline the new needs and associated funding requirements. In this case, the Flash Appeal serves as a precursor to the revision of an HRP . In some HRP countries where the situation has either changed, or, where lack of funding has resulted in planned activities not taking place during first six months, a Mid-Year Review (MYR) will allow all clusters to update their targets for the year to ensure they remain realistic. The FSC Coordinator will thereby provide the narrative inputs as well as updated targets for the FSC (for example, for agricultural activities which can be seasonal and time specific due to the cropping calendar or for food assistance, MYRs offer the chance to update the targets accordingly).