text: Considerations to Achieve Unity of Effort
  environments. These analyses include understanding the sources of funding and resources and the methods
  of application. Each analysis helps ensure the various capabilities and activities focus on achieving stability
  objectives shared by all partners.
  3-82. Funding for activities within any area of operations often comes from several sources with funding
  differing for each country and region. Funding examples include economic support funds (Department of
  State [DOS] or United States Agency for International Development [USAID]); overseas humanitarian,
  disaster, and civic aid (Department of Defense [DOD]); Quick Impact Funding—called the Commander’s
  Emergency Response Program funding in Afghanistan and Iraq (DOD); and International Narcotics
  Control and Law Enforcement funding (DOS).
  3-83. In many cases, such as economic support funds and International Narcotics Control and Law
  Enforcement funds, the military may play an oversight or supporting role as it did in the provincial
  reconstruction teams. In Iraq and Afghanistan, the Commander’s Emergency Response Program provided
  military commanders with funds they could directly program and disburse. Even though the concept of
  quick-impact funds is firmly established, this practice may not continue in future reconstruction and
  stabilization missions.
  3-84. Legal restrictions on the use of certain funds and the existing sanctions on the country in question
  require the separate management of these funds by the organization responsible for their expenditure. The
  separation of funding from different authorities is not always obvious and there is no blanket exception for
  deployment to the fiscal law framework. Commanders should use their resource and legal advisors to
  ensure the laws are not violated. In addition, constraints, including prohibitions on certain uses of the funds,
  must be taken into account in planning. Balancing so many considerations is an essential task for U.S.
  military and civilian leaders that ensures an effective, efficient, and sustainable work plan.
  3-85. Commanders in a rapidly evolving stability environment sometimes react more effectively if they
  can access funds for a given response quickly and efficiently. In addition to civil affairs support to stability
  tasks, commanders and planners engage frequently with members of financial management, contracting,
  and staff judge advocate to ensure timely funding. (See FM 1-06 for more information about financial
  management.)
  3-86. Two major areas of funding that the military commanders manage in operations focused on stability
  are quick impact funds and security cooperation activities.
  Quick Impact Funds
  3-87. A quick impact fund enables Army commanders to respond to urgent humanitarian relief and
  reconstruction requirements in their areas of operations by carrying out programs that immediately assist
  the population. The fund serves small tasks that benefit the local population directly. Commanders can use
  the money to fix problems in infrastructures quickly and increase the quality of life. Ideally, the immediacy
  of these actions prevents crises from developing. Commanders need not wait for the longer approval
  processes for other aid, which can allow the situation to deteriorate. This fund hastens a return to normalcy.
  Projects can bring some order and prevent deterioration of a situation that insurgents or other spoilers could
  exploit.
  3-88. Army commanders have some considerations when using these funds. While these projects can
  reduce local unrest, some have had the opposite effect. They can lead to increased violence if targeted by
  insurgents. For example, insurgents frequently have targeted medical facilities and police stations funded
  by the United States. Their high visibility and connection with the United States makes striking at them
  generate a strong ideological message and frustrate the overall mission. Attacks are less likely if locals staff
  them and local contractors manage them, but the threat remains.
  3-89. Another consideration is that quick impact funds, if not informed as part of a comprehensive
  approach, can adversely affect the building of host-nation capability and capacity and retard host-nation
  ownership. When U.S. partners complete essential tasks that should be under control of the host nation, the
  government has less motivation to take fiscal responsibility.
  3-90. To avoid errors, commanders and staffs must be vigilant and seek advice from USAID and other
  interagency partners. Quick impact funding projects do not always succeed at building local capacity.