ISLAMABAD - Much-debated Pakistan Humanitarian Response Plan (PHRP) has drawn mixed responses regarding its implementation and feasibility. There has been a division of opinion within United Nations (UN) as far as the success of the plan is concerned. The UN and humanitarian community in September last year launched PHRP, which aimed at completing rehabilitation of Internally Disabled Persons (IDPs). Ever since the plan has come to the surface, it is marked with ups and downs regarding funding and operational hindrances. Contrary to what UN officials say publicly pertaining to improvement of funding situation and solution of persisting problems, behind the stage assessments show that under-funding in the key areas would continue to last till the very end of IDPs episode. Discussions with some senior UN officials by this correspondent reveal that existing IDPs situation is highly paradoxical; on one hand the senior UN officials like Stephanie Bunker, Eric Laroche, Martin Mogwanja, and Wolfgang Herbinger have been very optimistic regarding the future of PHRP. In their press briefings, the named officials have time and again hoped that funding situation would improve plus they were instrumental in pressing the donors to provide financial assistance for IDPs cause. On the other hand, there are some other insiders as well who assess the overall situation on a sceptic note. They believe that despite generating around $ 378m of $ 542m, there still are the most under-funded segments with early recovery, education and heath being top of the list. A senior UN official from international staff told TheNation that sum of required funds in five key areas including early recovery, education, health, agriculture and security is $422.2 m whereas the funds collected in these areas so far are only $ 27.16. The generated funds for the five keys sectors are only 15 per cent of the required funds in those areas, this is hopeless situation and is not likely to show any remarkable improvement, he added. The collected funds of $27.16m contain the 0.96m for early recovery (280m required), 3.5 m for education (25m required), $ 13.5 m for health (67m required), $ 2.3 for agriculture (20.1 m required) and $ 6.9m for protection ($ 30.1 m required). In the recent past, the aid pledges of more than $ 10 m have been materialised that improved funding situation but there arent much chances of the influx of substantial funds and materialisation of pledges in near future. It bears relevance to mention here that during an interview with TheNation in July this year, Senior Information Officer UN, Stephanie Bunker had said that humanitarian appeals similar to that of IDPs crises involving massive displacements and damages to infrastructure, usually get 2/3rd of the required funds, she had hoped then that funds in desired range would be arranged and under-funding issue, a major challenge to IDPs cause, would be grappled with. Despite that seventy per cent funds have been arranged for PHRP, the chances of further funds generation are blurred. Only three per cent funds are generated for early recovery, the most important area regarding IDPs rehabilitation. Even if we get maximum funds for early recovery that could be between 18 percent to 20 per cent which never serve the purpose, TheNation was told.