Commissioned by the World Bank, Ipsos UK, in collaboration with Gobin Global and Ipsos offices in Jordan, Lebanon, Colombia and Ecuador, conducted this process and impact evaluation, culminating in a final report. The evaluation, which was completed in 2025–2026, follows Ipsos UK’s successful delivery of the first independent evaluation of the GCFF in 2020–2021.
The first evaluation provided a comprehensive assessment of the GCFF’s initial phase. It examined the Facility’s relevance, coherence, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability, drawing on a theory‑based, mixed‑methods approach. Through portfolio analysis of all funded projects, extensive stakeholder interviews, and in‑depth project-level case studies in Jordan, Lebanon, Colombia and Ecuador, the evaluation found that the GCFF had successfully mobilised significant concessional finance – USD 4.87 billion – and delivered tangible benefits in areas such as economic opportunities, education, and health services for refugees and host communities.
However, the evaluation also highlighted important challenges. These included inconsistencies in how well projects reached refugees, gaps in monitoring outcomes – particularly for women and girls – and the need to strengthen results frameworks, risk management, and collaboration mechanisms. The findings informed key recommendations aimed at consolidating the GCFF’s role as an innovative platform at the humanitarian–development nexus.
Building on this foundation, the second evaluation was commissioned to inform the GCFF’s strategic direction, particularly regarding its potential extension post‑2026, at a time of diminishing Official Development Assistance (ODA) and increasing pressure on humanitarian resources. This more recent evaluation expands the geographic scope to include new Benefiting Countries Armenia, Costa Rica and Moldova, alongside those covered previously, and places greater emphasis on strategic positioning, financial architecture, and portfolio‑level learning.
Utilising a refined, theory‑based, mixed‑methods approach, the study combined extensive document and portfolio review with global and country‑level interviews, five Benefiting Country visits, benchmarking, and a variety of integrated analytical techniques including contribution analysis and financial modelling. This approach enabled both broad coverage of the Facility and deeper insights into country‑level implementation.
The findings reaffirm the GCFF’s unique and valuable role in blending concessional finance into Multilateral Development Bank lending for refugee‑hosting middle‑income countries. Its strategic positioning and governance structures remain broadly robust and efficient. At the same time, the evaluation identifies ongoing challenges that constrain the Facility’s full potential. These include volatility in concessional funding, inconsistencies in achieving medium‑term outcomes, and the need for stronger mechanisms to synthesise and apply lessons across the portfolio.
Importantly, the second evaluation places greater emphasis on the GCFF’s future role – not just as a financing mechanism, but as a knowledge platform within the refugee and development landscape. Recommendations therefore focus on refining financial frameworks to better respond to evolving market conditions, strengthening learning and evidence functions, enhancing risk management, and improving portfolio‑level coherence.
Taken together, the two evaluations provide a robust evidence base on the GCFF’s trajectory. While the first highlighted the Facility’s early achievements and foundational challenges, the second underscores its continued strategic relevance in an increasingly constrained and uncertain funding environment. As global displacement pressures persist, the GCFF remains a critical instrument for supporting refugee‑hosting middle‑income countries. The latest evaluation reinforces the case for its continuation, while setting out clear, practical steps to strengthen its effectiveness, sustainability and impact in the years ahead.