This database is a comprehensive tracking tool that monitors external financial and in-kind support provided to UN Special Procedures mandate holders from 2016 to 2025. It centralizes data traditionally scattered across annual “Facts and Figures” reports into a single, standardized spreadsheet. It serves as a vital resource for analyzing donor influence, mandate independence, and the resource distribution of international human rights mechanisms.
Click on any name below to reveal detailed records and sources.
This database was constructed through a systematic extraction and normalization of data from the annual “Facts and Figures” reports of the UN Special Procedures (2016–2025). The following methodological rules were applied to ensure consistency, transparency, and conservative estimates of support:
1. Data Normalization & Entity Rolling
To provide a clear view of donor influence, specific diplomatic missions, country offices, and regional branches were rolled up into their primary parent entities. For example, “US Embassy in Tanzania” was standardized as United States, and regional branches of foundations (e.g., OSISA) were categorized under the parent organization (e.g., Open Society Foundations).
2. Financial Consolidation & Joint Funding
Earmarked Funding Through the OHCHR: Funding earmarked for a mandate through the OHCHR is accounted into the total funding from that donor to the mandate.
Joint Support Splits: In cases where two donors jointly funded a single position or project without a specified breakdown, the total amount was split 50/50 to create separate entries for each contributor.
Intermediaries: For specific grants (notably Ford Foundation grants for the albinism mandate), the intermediary fiscal agents (e.g., Amnesty International, SALC) were retained as the primary donors to reflect the reported flow of funds.
3. Currency Conversion
All non-USD financial data (e.g., EUR, GBP, CHF, AUD, CAD, NOK) was converted to USD based on the approximate average market exchange rate for the specific reporting year.
4. Quantitative Assumptions for In-Kind Support
A conservative approach was taken regarding the quantification of human resources:
Singular Support: If the report listed a “research assistant” (singular), a value of 1 was assumed.
Plural Support: If “research assistants” (plural) were listed without a specific number, a value of 2 (the minimum plural amount) was assumed. As a result, the figures in this database represent the minimum possible count of personnel; the actual number of individuals supporting the mandates is likely significantly higher.
5. Data Limitations
The database is based on voluntary self-reporting by mandate holders. Consequently, the information provided is subject to the transparency and reporting consistency of individual experts and does not constitute an exhaustive audit of all support received by the Special Procedures.