1

DepartmentforInternationalDevelopment2013MultilateralAidReviewUpdate

UNESCO

ApproachfollowedinthisupdateInthisnote,UNESCOaimsatprovidingtheDepartmentforInternationalDevelopment(DFID)withspecific informationontheDFID ‘reformprioritycomponents’ identifiedforUNESCO,i.e.

results‐basedmanagement; continuedprogressinreducingadministrativeoverheads; increasedtransparency; focusonvalueformoneyandcostconsciousness.

UNESCOprovidesageneralstatusupdateforeacharea,demonstratingprogressmadesince the 2011 Multilateral Aid Review (MAR) assessment, along with specificexamples illustrating country‐level evidence. The information is mostly organizedaroundtherelevantcriteriaand leadquestionsspecified inthe“enrichedassessmentframeworkformultilateralaidreviewassessments”,whereapplicable,i.e.questionsinregardsto:

MARcomponent4:Contributiontoresults MARcomponent6:Financialresourcemanagement MARcomponent7:Costandvalueconsciousness MARcomponent9:Transparencyandaccountability.

Thispresentationcontains informationrelated toMARcomponent5,notablyon theevolutionofthebudget,overheadcosts,andHRissues.MARcomponent4:Contributiontoresultsandresults‐basedmanagementGeneraleffortsinimplementingRBM:UNESCO’s results‐based management (RBM) approach aims at shifting the focusfromactivities linked inbroad terms toUNESCO’smandate to theachievementofclear expected results against the resources invested. As a comprehensivemanagement strategy, the RBM approach encompasses programme, financial andhuman resources aspects, and facilitates evaluation. The shift to a results‐basedmanagement culture requires continuing efforts to build effective institutionalcapacitiesforRBM,whichUNESCOisundertaking.Aspartofvariousstagesofalargerin‐housereformprocess,effortshavebeenmadethroughout the last decade to ensure the Organization’s transition towards theintroduction and consistent application of results‐based programming,management, monitoring and reporting for the Regular Programme as well as

2

equally for extrabudgetary projects. Building on these efforts,which included thelaunchofanewversionofSISTER1,theIT‐basedmanagementtoolthatsupportsnotonlyRBMbutalsotheevolvingResults‐BasedBudgeting(RBB)approach.Toensureacommonin‐houseunderstandingandconsistentapproachtoRBM,awiderangeofdedicated training courses and capacity‐building workshops has been organized(see also JIU/REP/2011/8).These training initiatives target the full rangeof boththeUNESCOSecretariatatHeadquartersandinthefieldaswellasMemberStates(Permanent Delegations and National Commissions), guided by the strategicorientations, policies and priorities established in theMedium‐Term Strategy (34C/4 running until 2013) and the biennial Programme andBudget documents (34C/5,35C/5and36C/5,thelatestfor2012‐13).Dedicated evaluation exercises have proved to strengthen RBM and itsimplementation.Giventheimportantroleextrabudgetaryresourcescurrentlyplayfor the Organization, enabling UNESCO to deliver on its expected results andintensifying its outreach and eventual impact, evidence on results generatedthroughextrabudgetaryactivitiesisimportantbothforUNESCO’sgoverningbodiesandforindividualdonorsandpartners.IOSandBSP/CFSarecurrentlyundertakinga joint project aiming to strengthen UNESCO’s evaluation policy and qualityassurance framework of interventions funded by external donors. The first phase(inventory and descriptive analysis, revision of UNESCO’s extrabudgetaryevaluation policy) is close to completion. In a second phase, IOS intends toundertake a comprehensive meta‐evaluation (assessment of quality) of allextrabudgetaryevaluationswith theobjectiveof improvingguidelinesandqualityassuranceregardingevaluationsconductedbyUNESCO’sProgrammeSectors,FieldOfficesandCategoryIInstitutes.4.1Does theMultilateralOrganisation (MO) articulate the theoryof changethat translates normative and standard‐setting work into impact on theground?Can itdemonstrate, through itsmonitoringandevaluation systemsthatthisimpactistakingplaceandthatmilestone/progressmarkersdeemednecessarytoachievethisimpactarebeingachieved?Generalinformation:In the Organization’s strategies and programme documents, UNESCO aims atillustrating a convincing theory of change through a results chain from its ratherbroad mandate and long‐term programmatic objectives to concrete outputs anddeliverablesindailyoperations.In all organizational planning, programme managers are required to provide inworkplansaclearinterventionlogic,including:

‐ an implementation strategy with an identification of needs, envisagedmodalitiesofactionandexpectedtargetgroups;

1SISTER:TheSystemofInformationonStrategies,TasksandEvaluationofResults istheOrganization’son‐lineprogrammingandmonitoringtool. 

3

‐ expected results, with mandatory definition of monitoring information(performance indicators, baseline data, programmed benchmarks andinformationonmeansofverification,whereappropriate).

Anewoutputandresultstablehasbeendesignedtofacilitatestructuredplanningand monitoring. This new tool has been incorporated into the revised Extra‐budgetaryProjectDocumentandwillbeimplementedinSISTERforthe37C/5.Throughout the two‐yearbudgetandprogrammecycle (thecyclewill change toafour‐year one for the Programme part from 2014 onwards), monitoring ofprogramme implementation takes places on an ongoing basis, and is reported toUNESCO’sExecutiveBoardeverysixmonthsaspartoftheOrganization’sstatutoryreportingrequirements(EX/4documents).The above measures and instruments aim at illustrating a demonstrable andtransparent change process, linking impact on the ground to the Organization’shigher‐levelwork(includingnormativeandstandard‐settingwork).However, UNESCO recognizes the need to make better use of theory‐of‐changeapproachesinevaluations,especiallyintermsofacleareridentificationofcountry‐levelimpactofUNESCO’saction,anditistakingactivemeasurestoaddressit.OnesuchinitiativeistheupcomingevaluationofUNESCO’sstandard‐settingworkintheCulture Sector (CLT). This evaluation will focus on the impact of the standard‐settingworkofCLTon legislation,policiesandstrategiesof StatesParties to fourCLTConventions.Theevaluationisalsoexpectedtoassistinfutureforresponsestoquestionsand criteria contained in theenrichedDFIDMAR framework, especiallywithregardtonormativeaspects.

In preparation for this evaluation, UNESCO’s Internal Oversight Service hasconductedadeskreviewofpastevaluationsintheCLTinordertoa)distillfindingson the relevance and effectiveness of standard‐setting work from all evaluationreports; and b) reflect about approaches used with regard to the evaluation ofstandard‐setting work. This includes, in particular, evaluation findings on theeffects of UNESCO’s work on policy development and policyimplementation.Duringthedeskreview,atheoryofchangewasdevelopedandwillserveasabasisforelaboratingtheevaluationapproachandmethodologyIt is worth noting that the conceptual difficulties related to the assessment ofresults/impactofnormativeworkedareachallenge fortheUNsystemasawholeandbeyond,andarenot limitedtoUNESCOonly.Inrecognitionofthis,UNESCOisworkingincollaborationwiththeUnitedNationsEvaluationGroup(UNEG)onthedevelopment of a Handbook for the Evaluation of Normative Work to focus onmethodologicalissues.ThistoolwillenableallUNagencieswithastrongnormativeorientationtobetterevaluateandreportontheeffectsoftheirwork.

4

Specificexample: In2001/2002,UNESCOengagedintheDemocraticRepublicoftheCongoina

long‐term effort for the reconstruction of its education sector. UNESCOplayed a crucial role in the education reforms and planning process of thecountry. UNESCO’s global education policies and strategies simulationmodels(EPSSim)informedtheGovernment’sdecisionswithregardtoschoolfees abolition and the adoption of 8‐years primary/basic education. ThesettingupoftheEducationManagementInformationSystem(EMIS)fortheproductionofeducationdataandstatisticswithaviewtodevelopingasoundeducation policy and planning was an important standard‐setting step ineducation. The technical assistance of UNESCO allowed the country toproduce and publish education statistical yearbooks regularly since 2006.This is a significant gain for the country’s educationpolicy andplanning inwhich the data for a majority of education‐related indicators were notinternationally reported prior to 2006 because they did not exist. Theimprovements in education policy and planning have also had positiveimpact on direct beneficiary groups. It is worth noting that the GrossEnrollment Rate in primary education in the country has dramaticallyimprovedsince1999from48%to94%in2010(increasefrom4,022,000to10,572,000). Teaching staff for primary education has increased from155,000in1999to286,000in2010.Teachingstaffforsecondaryeducationhasincreasedfrom89,000(1999)to218,000(2010).

4.2Arenormativeandstandard‐settingproductsrelevant,havethebackingofkeystakeholdersandambitiousenoughtodemandsignificantimprovementsinpractice?Generalinformation:UNESCO has developed a set of normative and standard‐setting instruments(conventions, recommendations, and declarations, as well as guidelines, toolkits,etc.)acrossitsareasofcompetencewhichhaveyieldedsignificantimpactintermsofmobilization,sensitizationandchangeofpoliciesontheground.Specificexamplesinclude:

Righttoeducation:UNESCOhasagloballeadroleinpromotingeducationasa human right in the context of a comprehensive human‐rights basedapproach.Strong legalandconstitutional frameworksareneededtoensuretheenjoymentof thisbasichuman right.Currentlya totalof140countrieshave inscribedtheright toeducation intotheirconstitutionsandsome150countries guarantee it and/or its main components in their legislation.UNESCOprovidestechnicalsupporttocountriestoreviewandupdatetheirlegal frameworks to reflect the right to quality education for all. The 1960UNESCOConventionagainstDiscrimination inEducation (97 ratifications todate) is the first legally binding international normative instrumentwhich

5

spells out core elements of the right to education. It is recognized as afoundation for the Education for All goals. Since 2006, ten new countries2have ratified the Convention (including two in 2010 and one in 2012),reflectingUNESCO’s long‐term support and advocacy on the importance ofthisframework.Moreover,UNESCOiscurrentlyprovidingtechnicalsupportandaccompanyingsometenadditionalcountriesintheirprocesstoratifyingtheConventionandputtinginplacetherelevantlegalframeworks.

Safetyof journalists:UNESCOhas assumeda leadership rolegloballyand inthe UN system for the promotion of safety of journalists and combatingimpunity of the perpetrators of crimes committed against journalists.UNESCO’sDirector‐General isannuallyreleasing theReporton theSafetyofJournalistsand theDangerof Impunity to the Intergovernmental Council oftheInternationalProgrammefortheDevelopmentofCommunication(IPDC).This is part of the Organization’s role to monitor the follow‐up of killingscondemned by the Director‐General in order to deter impunity and toencourage Member States to take preventive measures. Furthermore,UNESCO, through the IPDC, convened the firstUN Inter‐AgencyMeetingontheSafetyof JournalistsandtheIssueof Impunity inSeptember2011.Thisproduced theUNPlanofActionon theSafetyof Journalistsand the IssueofImpunity, which was subsequently endorsed by the UN Chief Executives’Board (CEB) in April 2012. This Plan has become a rallying point for UNagencies, media professionals, NGOs, intergovernmental organizations andnational authorities to address the worsening situation of the safety ofjournalists and to fight impunity. The Plan focuses on harmonization,eliminating duplication and enhancing knowledge‐generation and sharing.By November 2012, the Plan was being operationalized and has alreadyenabled UNESCONepal to secure US$ 500,000 for promotion of the issue.TwoNGOs(OpenSocietyFoundationandInternationalMediaSupport)havemobilizedalmostthesamesumtosupportthePlaninfiveothercountries.AthirdNGO(InternationalFederationofJournalists)isplanningtoincreaseitswork training journalists in safety, in partnership with UNESCO, toimplement thePlan– furtherevidence for the impactof theActionPlan tomobiliseabroadrangeofkeystakeholdersaroundthisissue.

World Heritage conservation: The UNESCOWorld Heritage Centre togetherwith its advisory bodies is ensuring permanent monitoring of the 962propertiesontheWorldHeritageList.Thankstothismonitoringandrelatedreports, theWorldHeritageCommittee tookconcretedecisionsona totalof141 sites, providing guidance and recommendations to the State Parties fortheir conservation. These decisions have produced tangible conservationbenefits, such as in the case of Serengeti National Park, where theGovernment decided to abandon plans for a highway through SerengetiNational Park, a project which would have destroyed one of the mostspectacular wildlife spectacles on the planet, the annual wildebeestmigration.TheworkofUNESCOintheWorldHeritageConvention,whichis

2 Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Jamaica, Latvia, Mali, Monaco, Montenegro, Seychelles, Togo, Zimbabwe.  

6

done by a lean secretariat in collaborationwith the advisory bodies of theConventionandotherpartnerscanthereforebeconsideredashigh“valueformoney”,creatingimportantleveragefortheconservationoftheglobalpublicgoodsprotectedthroughtheConvention.

MediaDevelopmentIndicators(MDI):UNESCO’sInternationalProgrammefortheDevelopmentofCommunication(IPDC)launchedaninitiativetodevelopa set of indicators for evaluating national media landscapes. Following aglobal two‐year consultation process involving a variety of experts andorganizations, thesetof indicatorswasunanimouslyendorsedby the IPDCIntergovernmental Council at its 26th session in 2008 as an “importantdiagnostic tool” for assessing media landscapes. The tool has gainedmomentum over the past three years. MDI‐based assessments have nowbeencompletedinBhutan,Croatia,EastTimor,Ecuador,Gabon, Jordan,theMaldives, Mozambique and Tunisia, while others are still on‐going in 11countries, including Egypt. These assessments have made it possible toidentify media development gaps at the national level, provide evidence‐based recommendations on how to address these gaps and guide theformulation ofmedia‐related policies. In Tunisia, the government has nowcommittedtoimplementingtwomedialawsfollowingthepublicationoftheMDIexerciseanditsrelatedrecommendations.ThecostofthesestudiesandrelatedactivitieshasbeenintheregionofUS$350,000‐400,000,whichhaslargely been covered by partners and voluntary resources drawn to theinitiativeby its success.Belgium, for instance, contributedUS$176,000 fortheTunisreportandotheractivities.Likewise,theNGOInternationalMediaSupport in Nepal and the government of Bhutan have also contributed tocostsinrespectivecases,demonstratingthattheMDIshavebecomeatriggerforadditionalinvestment.In2012,partnershipswerebeingdevelopedwiththe International Federation of Journalists and the Doha Centre for MediaFreedom – evidencing the growing credibility and utility of the tool forpractitionersinmediadevelopment.

4.3Arecountryandregionallevelimplementationactivitiesrelatedtonormsandstandardsworkdesignedandmanagedwithafocusonachievingresults?Generalinformation:Yes.UNESCO’sactivities implementedattheregionalandatthecountry levelsareapplications of norms and standards at work, adapted to regional and nationaldevelopmentpriorities.AllUNESCOaction,atregional/countrylevels,beitstand‐alone asUNESCOagency‐specific activityor in the context ofUN systemcommoncountry programming exercises is driven by, and monitored against, theachievementofclearlydefinedexpectedresults.Specificexamples:

The Millennium Development Goals Achievement Fund (MDG‐F) is aninternational fund established in December 2006 to accelerate progress in

7

achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) at country level.“CultureandDevelopment”hasbeenselectedasonetheeightthematicareasof the MDG‐F with an envelope of US$ 96 million granted to 18 jointprogrammes.UNESCO,astheonlyUNagencywithamandateinthefieldofculture,hasaleadingroleintheimplementationofthesejointprogrammes(acting as lead agency in 13 out of 18 joint programmes).The fund,whichsupports projects at country level, is an example of how normative andstandard‐settingworkofUNESCOistakenforwardatcountryandatregionallevels, including byUN system partners. With an overall objective to fostersustainable socio‐economic development by building on cultural assets, the“CultureandDevelopment”JointProgrammes’(JP)areasofworkrangefromstrengthening cultural and creative industries, developing sustainablecultural tourism, safeguarding tangible and intangible heritage, andpromoting cultural diversity andpluralism, to supporting inclusivepoliciesand ethnicminoritydevelopment.Theprogrammes therefore cover awidevariety of cultural domains, including cultural and natural heritage,intangible cultural heritage, performance and celebration, visual arts andcrafts, books and press, audio‐visual and interactive media, design andcreative services, and tourism. While the MDG‐F JPs on Culture andDevelopment are not, by definition, a direct operationalization of UNESCO’sCultural Conventions, the latter form the legal backbone of programmeactivitieswhichareenshrinedintheConventions’principles.AchievementsofMDG‐Fprojectsinclude: In Ethiopia, 4 site protection laws for theWorld Heritage Sites (WHS)

were elaborated and submitted to the Council of Ministers forendorsement, along with a by‐law for “Research and Conservation ofCulturalHeritageProclamationNo.209/2000”(whichestablishesanewGovernment body: Authority forResearch and Conservation of CulturalHeritage).UNESCOwastheleadagencyforthisproject;

In Cambodia, a Royal Decree for the establishment of a Living HumanTreasures System was elaborated under UNESCO’s leadership inFebruary2010followingahighlyinclusivenationalconsultation;

In Turkey, a Sustainable TourismDevelopment Strategywas developedfor the province of Kars and approved by the Ministry of Culture andTourismwhich includes aDiagnostic Report evaluating the potential ofculturaltourismdevelopmentinKars

The first‐ever Culture Sector Strategy was developed to update theNationalPlan forPalestinianCulture (NPPC2011‐2013),asanoutcomeofjointUNsystemactionunderUNESCO’sleadership.

Closelyrelatedtothe2005ConventionontheProtectionandPromotionofthe

DiversityofCulturalExpressionstheprogramme‘StrengtheningtheSystemofGovernance for Culture inDeveloping Countries’ has been developed as thefirst technical assistanceprogramme to implement the2005Conventionatcountrylevel.ThisprojectisfundedbytheEUandrunsfrom2010to2012.

8

The goal is to support countries in their efforts to establish legal/institutionalframeworksforthedevelopmentofnationalculturesectorsandtointroducepoliciesthataddresstheroleofcultureinsocialandeconomicdevelopment, particularly through cultural industries. Technical assistancemissionshavetakenplacefor13countries(Barbados,BurkinaFaso,BuenosAires, Cambodia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Haiti, Honduras,Kenya,Malawi,Mauritius,Niger,SeychellesandVietNam).Thefirstresultsareencouragingand includeadraftnationalculturalpolicy forthecreativeindustries and a strategy for the development of the music industry inSeychelles;astrategytoincreaseartsandcultureeducationinBurkinaFaso;a creative industry strategy and related funding strategy in Viet Nam; acultural policy declaration in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and acapacity‐buildingprogrammeforculturalindustriesinHonduras.

4.4 Isthereevidenceofglobalknowledgeproducts,policyadviceor thoughtleadershipleadingtotangiblechangeinpolicyorpractice?Yes.Examplesof ‘UNESCO’sglobalknowledgeproducts,policyadviceandthoughtleadershipleadingtotangiblechangesinpolicyandpractice’include(inadditiontovariousexampleslistedunder4.3above):

Within the framework of a joint agreement with UNICEF, UNESCO’sInternational Institute forEducationalPlanning (IIEP) supported theSouthSudanMinistryofGeneralEducationandInstruction(MoGEI)toembarkonan extensive sector planning process, beginning in December 2010. Sincethen, UNESCO has been working closely with the MoGEI by providingtechnicalexpertisefortheformulationofacomprehensivefive‐yearstrategicplan for the education sector. The goal of the General Education StrategicPlan(GESP)istolaythefoundationsforadynamiceducationsector,onethatrespondstotheneedsofthenewnationandcontributestosustainablepeaceand development. The 5 year GESP has now been endorsed forimplementation.

UNESCOKabul conducted aNeeds andRights Assessment of Inclusive and

Child‐FriendlyEducation inAfghanistananddevelopeda roadmaptowardsinclusionforAfghanistan,byintroducingtheconceptof inclusiveandchild‐friendly education toMinistry of Education (MoE) officials via a high‐levelroundtablediscussion.TheroundtablewasfollowedbyanationalconferenceinOctober2010duringwhichaDeclarationonInclusiveandChild‐FriendlyEducationwas endorsed by theMinistry of Education. UNESCO developedandadapted severalpublications inEnglish,Dari andPashto in theareaofinclusive and child‐friendly education in close collaboration with theInclusive and Child‐Friendly Working Group. The group is chaired by theMOE and co‐chaired by UNESCO. Part of the policy work included theestablishment of a new taskhil (civil servant system) under the General

9

DirectorateofGeneralEducation for inclusive and child‐friendly education,aswellasintegratinginclusiveeducationinthecurriculumoftheFacultyofSpecial Education of Kabul Education University and providing support intrainingofbachelors’ degree studentsonhow to teach inclusiveand child‐friendlyeducation.

AstheleadUNagencyfortheinter‐agencyprojectUNTrustFundforHumanSecurity project “Comprehensive Community Services to Improve HumanSecurityfortheRuralDisadvantagedPopulationsinMongolia”(2009‐2012)“,UNESCOworked closely with the Government of Mongolia at both centraland decentralized levels and coordinated three other participating UNpartners(UNICEF,WHOandUNDP).UNESCO’sinterventionscontributedtothe establishment of the second TV channel of the Mongolian publicbroadcaster(MNB2)devotedtoethnicminorities.This is likely tohavefar‐reaching implications on the integration of minorities into the nationalmainstream. It helped establish 10 community radios in remote areas,building the momentum for the further development of the communitymedia sector in the country. It also increased awareness for media lawreform to guarantee a community‐friendly legal environment. Under theproject,UNESCOwasinstrumentalinestablishingtwentymodelCommunityLearning Centres to respond to the learning needs of young people andadults in rural Mongolia, offering them essential learning opportunities.TheseCentresarenowservingascommunityhubsforsocialization,sharingexperiencesandideas,withspillovereffectsinotherpartsofthecountry.

4.5Does theMO demonstrate results in addressing identified regional andglobalissues? Yes. UNESCO uses several mechanisms to identify global and regional needs,including technical research and studies in its areas of competence, stakeholdersurveys,UNsystem‐wideassessmentexercisesaswellasconsultationmechanisms,such as the Regional Consultations with Member States in all regions on thepreparation of theMedium‐term Strategy and the Programme and Budget of theOrganization. UNESCO’s governing bodies have approved dedicated action withclear expected results for Africa, which is a global priority for the Organisation.Moreover,theworkplansforregionalofficesineducationandscience,establishedinallregions,addressspecificregionalissuesandneeds.MemberStatesfurthermorearticulateregionalandglobalprioritiesatthesessionsofUNESCO’sExecutiveBoardandGeneralConference,andtakethemforwardinrelateddecisionsandresolutions.Basedonthedefinedpriorities,UNESCO formulatesstrategies,withrelatedactionplans and monitoring frameworks. Statutory reports (every six months and insummary form every two years) report against the attainment of the resultsapproved by the General Conference. UNESCO also undertakes specific technicalreviews and evaluations for some of its action, in which results formulation andattainmentareregularlyreviewedandassessed.Specificexampleofactionbasedonassessedneeds:

10

According to theEFAGlobalMonitoringReport (EFA/GMR)2008,progress

achieved in primary school enrolment worldwide requires significantprogressinaccesstoqualityTVETforanincreasingnumberofyoungpeoplethatcompleteprimaryeducation.Thishasrecentlybeen furtherreinforcedby the EFA/GMR 2012. ‐ UNESCO has initiated consultations at the globallevel with a broad range of partners, including specialized United Nationsagencies,anddevelopedastrategyfocusingonthreecoreareas:(i)provisionofupstreampolicyadviceandrelatedcapacitydevelopment;(ii)conceptualclarificationofskillsdevelopmentandimprovementofmonitoringofTVET;and (iii) acting as a clearinghouse and informing the global TVET debate.Since then, UNESCO has been providing support at country and regionallevels. In addition and within the context of the second core area of itsstrategy, UNESCO has facilitated consultations and cooperation with otherinternational organizations which led to the development of a conceptualframework and a set of indicators linking TVET to employment.Complementary to this work, UNESCO contributed to the preparation of aconceptual framework for establishing an internationally comparable data‐set of skills indicators. Both frameworks will be tested in selected pilotcountries in 2013. UNESCO is also working on enhancing Member States’capacities inestablishingsystemsforrelevantandreliabledataonTVETatnationalandregionallevels.InAfrica,UNESCOhasconductedastudyonthestatus of the Statistical Information Systems (SIS) onTVET in Sub‐SaharanAfricaandproposedstrategiestoimprovetheavailabilityandqualityofdata.InLatinAmericaandtheCaribbean,UNESCOcarriedoutaregionalinventoryof existing information systems andprovided a set of recommendations toMember States in the region. (Report:http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002175/217544e.pdf)

UNESCOhastakentheleadershiporwastheco‐leaderintheUNsystemforseveral issues at regional and global levels in relation to natural sciences.Results include theadoptionof aUNSecretary‐GeneralGlobalCompact fortheOcean,whichisthemainocean‐relatedprogrammaticelementoftheUNSecretary‐General’s Five‐Year Action Agenda (2012‐2016) and the firstintegratedstrategywithintheframeworkoftheUNfortheprotectionoftheOceans.TheUNSecretary‐General’sGlobalCompact for theOceanwasalsoinfluenced by the ‘Blueprint for Ocean and Costal Sustainability”, aninteragency initiative (UNESCO‐IOC,FAO,UNDP, IMO)prepared for theUNConference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) which set out tenproposals for the Ocean and costal sustainability. The Global Compactaddresses global overfishing and ocean pollution issues by improving thegovernanceofoceansandcoastalhabitatsandbydevelopinganinstitutionalandlegalframeworkfortheprotectionoftheoceanbiodiversity.

After forty years of experience coordinating the Pacific Tsunami WarningSystem,UNESCO’sIntergovernmentalOceanographicCommission(UNESCO‐IOC) is leading a global effort to establish ocean‐based tsunami warning

11

systems as part of an overall multi‐hazard disaster reduction strategy.UNESCO‐IOC ensures appropriate design and development of tsunamiwarning systems and provides adequate protection at local, regional, andgloballevels.Followingtheunderseaearthquakeon26December2004andthe subsequent strongest tsunami in living memory, UNESCO‐IOCcoordinatedactivitiesandimmediateactiontoestablishaTsunamiWarningSystem(TWS)intheIndianOcean.TheresponseincludedtheestablishmentofaninterimTsunamiWarningSystem,whiletheinterimTsunamiAdvisoryInformation is provided through the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center inHawaiiandtheJapanMeteorologicalAgency(JMA).Morerecently,aftertheRegionalTsunamiServiceProvider (RTSP)operations for the IndianOceanTsunami Warning System commenced on 12 October 2011, the RTSPs ofAustralia, India and Indonesia issued their first ocean‐widebulletinson11April 2012. In theMediterranean, France and Turkey have started interimprovisionoftsunamiservicesasof1July2012.

TheUNWorldWaterDevelopmentReporthostedbyUNESCO isaone‐stopresourceforup‐to‐dateinformationontheuse,managementandstateoftheworld’s freshwater resources. It is the only major UN system‐wide reportrepresenting the collective input of 30 UN agencies. The UNESCO‐WWAPstudyWater2050published in2012 is exploringalternative futuresof theworld’s water and its use to 2050 to inform future planning by MemberStates.

4.6To theextent that theorganisationhas in‐countryactivities thatarenotrelated to its normative work, is there clear evidence that these arecontributingtoresultsatcountrylevel?Yes.Member States turn toUNESCO for assistance covering awide area of needsandissues,inlinewiththeOrganization’sfunctionsandareasofcompetence.

Flood early warning systems and management: Following the 2010devastatingfloodsinPakistan,UNESCOhelpedtorebuildnationalfloodearlywarning systems and management capacity, in close cooperation with anumber of Pakistani government agencies. On the basis of strategic waterinvestmentanalysisforthewholecountry,technicalinfrastructurehasbeenput inplaceenablingtheuseofsatellite‐based forecastingsystems throughcontinued provision of expertise and technical service. Over 300 expertshave received UNESCO training in integrated floodmanagement, includingadvanced master programmes and middle‐management level customizedshortcourses.

Since2000,UNESCOhasbeenimplementingthe“OpenSchoolsProgramme”asakeycontributiontopreventviolenceaffectingyouthbothasvictimsandas perpetrators. This programme, entirely financed from self‐benefittingfunds, aims at opening up public schools on weekends to offer artistic,cultural,leisureandsportsactivities,aswellasinitialworktraining,toyoungpeopleandtheircommunities.InBrazil,theOpenSchoolsProgrammemade

12

accessible more than 4,000 schools every weekend in all regions of thecountry, to the benefit of around 4 million people. This practice ‐ initiallyimplementedbyUNESCOincooperationwitheducationauthoritiesatthestateand municipal levels ‐ has since become a national public policy at themunicipal,stateandfederallevelsinBrazil. EvaluationsoftheOpenSchoolsProgrammecarriedoutoverthelastsixyearsbytheUNESCOBrasiliaOfficeand its partners have demonstrated its success also in terms of a directreduction in the levels of violence registered in schools and theirsurroundings. To date, the project has been replicated in Honduras, ElSalvador,Guatemala,Nicaraguaand theDominicanRepublic.Theproject isalsocurrentlybeingdevelopedinGuinea‐BissauinAfrica.

All in‐countryactivities,whetherrelatedtonormativeworkornot,areplannedinalignmentwith national development priorities and objectives. In themajority ofMember States, UNESCO’s cooperation programme is integrated in the country’sUNDAF,andthereforecontributingto itsoutcomes,whichareagreedbetweentheGovernment and the entire UN system. Evidence of results‐based countryprogrammes is captured in theUNESCOCountryProgrammingDocument (UCPD)thatispreparedbytheFieldOffice(cf.forexample:UNESCOCountryProgrammingDocument(2011–2015)fortheUnitedRepublicofTanzania).WhiletheUCPDisnotyet available for all countries, itwill bemade available by the end of 2013 in allcountries UNESCO is active in, as part of the Director‐General’s Roadmap. In anycase, all field offices are required to apply strictly the principles of results‐basedprogrammingandmonitoringintheirprogramming,whichmustbeenteredintothecentralSISTERtool,andinrelevantprogrammingdocuments.Alignmenttocountryneeds and contribution to results are among the basic requirements for thevalidation of proposed workplans in SISTER and the allocation of resources byseniormanagement.MARcomponent6:Financialresourcemanagement6.1Doesituseaclearandtransparentsystemtoallocateaid?Yes. The allocation of resources to the different programmes within UNESCO’sProgrammeandBudget(C/5document)isdiscussedandapprovedinaninclusiveand transparentmanner by UNESCO’s governing bodies (General Conference andtheExecutiveBoard).Budgetenvelopesareallocatedat the ‘MainLineofAction’‐level with associated expected results and decentralization of staff and activityresources to regions are clearly identified. It must be understood however, thatwhilecertainactivitieswouldqualifyas“aid”,UNESCOisnotperseanaid‐providingorganization given its global, regional and country level remit and its broadfunctions, including as a standard‐setter, benchmarking organization (e.g. ineducationandsciences)andalaboratoryofideas.

13

UNESCO’s activities areplannedwithin anorganization‐wideonlineprogrammingtool calledSystemof InformationonStrategies,Tasksand theEvaluationofResults(SISTER),which is accessible toMember States andNational Commissions. WithinSISTER each work plan outlined must reflect programmatic actions in concretetermsapplyingUNESCO’sresults‐basedmanagement(RBM)approach.ActivitiesareallplannedinawaysoastocontributetotheachievementoftheExpectedResultsapprovedbytheGeneralConferenceintheprogrammeandbudget(C/5).

SISTERisusedtorecord,monitorandreporttheattainmentofexpectedresultsandtrack actual expenditures by activity and extrabudgetary projects and against theworkplansoftheRegularProgramme.Six‐monthlyconsolidatedexpendituresfromthe approved C/5 and the related Complementary Additional Programme ofextrabudgetary resources are monitored against budgets and reported to theExecutiveBoardalongsidetheachievementofeachresult. Inadditiontoreportingto its governing bodies (Executive Board), the six‐monthly monitoring allowsmanagementtofollowcloselyexpenditureandperformanceattheactivitylevelandmakedecisiononnecessaryadjustmentswhenneeded.MemberStateshaveat therecent190thsessionof theExecutiveBoardexpressedappreciation for the increasedtransparencyresultingfromtheiraccesstoSISTERanditsreports(190EX/Decision4).

UNESCOusesanintegratedEnterpriseResourcePlanning(ERP)runonSAP‐alsoknown as the Financial and Budgetary System (FABS) ‐ to record and monitorfinancial transactions.FABSwas implemented in2001andenhancedover the lastdecade. ERPprovidestransparentsystemstoplanandmanagetheOrganization’sfinancial resources. The application of FABS enablesmanagement tomonitor andreportoncorefinancialandactivityimplementation,bothgloballyandinreal‐time.

FABS and SISTER as part of the Organization’s information systems facilitate thetransparency of financial resource allocation and reinforce the accountability fortheirusebothatHeadquartersandinFieldoffices.Bothtoolsarelinkedinasmuchno activity can receive funding through FABS unless it has not been enteredprogrammaticallyintoSISTER.

Recent initiatives to further enhance the transparency and accountability ofresourceallocationinclude:

• A reviewofUNESCO’s cost recoverypolicy for extrabudgtaryprojectswiththe aim of strengthening implementation, simplifying processes andharmonising with the cost recovery practices across the United Nationssystem;

• UNESCOhascommittedtotheintroductionofResults‐BasedBudgetingwithanimplementationplantobepresentedtotheExecutiveBoardinApril2013.The current C/5 programme and budget already provide elements of thisapproach with the distribution of resources providing a global pictureincludingextrabudgetaryprojectsandanalysedby“MainLineofAction’,by

14

regionandtheclassificationofProgrammeSectorstaffcostsas:Programme;ProgrammeSupport andManagement&Administration.Discussionsat the190thExecutiveBoardinOctober2012coveredtheclassificationofcostsaswellastheimplicationsofimplementationofRBB; 

• The upgrade of an IT application, named ‘Budget for UNESCO’ (B4U’), toassist project officers in building their projects budgets within SISTER.Revisedmechanismswill reduce the administrativeworkload and cost andenhancecontroloverthecompletenessofprojectbudgets.

6.2Doesitpro‐activelymanagepoorlyperformingprojectsandprogrammes,curtailingthemwherenecessaryandrecyclingsavingsintobetterperformingpartsoftheportfolio?While each sector currently extracts periodic updates on the status of project/programme expenditure from UNESCO’s financial systems, a standardized andautomateddashboardhasbeenput inplace inNovember2012 toprovideregularmonthlyexpenditurerates.

BFMprovidesamonthlyreportandanalysistotheSeniorManagementTeam(SMT)onexpenditureratesbysectoracrossallsourcesoffunding.SMTmeetingsreviewtheglobal implicationsanddiscussremedialactions. BFMcoordinatesayear‐endreviewoffundscommittedforprogrammes/activities(butnotyetspent)inorderto identify and cancel those that are unlikely to be delivered within specifiedtimeframes.

TheBureauofFinancialManagement(BFM)providesadetailedquarterly“SectoralAlert System” to provide for early warnings relating to underperforming extra‐budgetary projects. Annual financial statements are prepared for donors andmanagersof suchprojects.Theprogrammaticprogressreviewsofextrabudgetaryprojects are followedupby theBureauofStrategicPlanning in coordinationwiththedonorandimplementingprogrammesector/fieldoffice.Reviewandreallocationoffundsoccurregularlyatthesectorallevelbetween‘budgetcodes’foractivities.

The ProgrammeManagement Committee reviews anticipated budget savings andmakesrecommendationsfortheirredistributiontotheDirectorGeneral.

UNESCOhasadetailedevaluationpolicymanagedbytheInternalOversightService(IOS)comprisingbothinternalandexternalevaluations. . IOSauditandevaluationreports, which frequently identify underperforming projects/programmes andinefficientoperations,aresystematicallyfollowed‐upbyseniormanagement.

Examplesofwherethishasledtocostsavings,closureofprojects,etc.include:

InlinewiththerecommendationsofarecentevaluationreviewofUNESCO’sMoscowOffice,theorganizationismovingforwardinfurtherintegratingtheOfficewitha localCategory IEducation Institute(IITE).Atastrategic level,

15

thiswillleadtoarepositioningofUNESCO’spresenceintheCISRegion.Atamoreoperationallevel,thiswillleadtogreaterefficienciesandcostsavings.

An evaluation of UNESCO’s programmatic work in the area of socialtransformations (MOST) called for a sharper strategic focus and thediscontinuation of less relevant/effective areas. The programme wasreoriented, both thematically and in its modalities of operation, andapprovedbytheIntergovernmentalgoverningbody.

Ajointauditandevaluationofamajorextrabudgetaryprojectmanagedoutof UNESCO’s Cairo Office and implemented in eight countries – theInternationalComputerDrivingLicenseproject–raisedissueswithrespectto its relevance and sustainability. UNESCO seniormanagement agreedonan exit strategy with the various partners that ensured sustainability ofprojectresultsandgraduallyphasedouttheproject.

AnauditoftheUNESCOChairsprogrammeidentifiedtheneedtobetteralignchairs with current UNESCO priorities. Senior managers improved theprogramme alignment of current chairs, terminated over 100 inactive orobsoletechairsandimprovedtheongoingengagementbetweenandamongthe chairs and their UNESCO counterparts to achieve better programmeresults.

AnauditofUNESCOactivitiesinKinshasaconcludedthateffortstoconvertaforestry school into a Category 1 UNESCO institute were premature andrepresented a significant financial burden to the organization. Seniormanagementhasundertakenconsultationswithvariouspartnersinordertoidentifyalternativesolutionsfortheschool’ssustainability.  

Finally, it should be noted that funding received can only be spent according toestablishedrulesandregulations;projectaccountsareclosedandauditedannuallybytheExternalAuditorandreportedtogoverningbodiesonayearlybasis.

***

Programme monitoring against the achievement of expected results is managedthroughSISTERandisconductedprimarilyonasectoralbasis.Periodicprogrammeimplementation reviews are carried out by Sector ADGs/Bureau Directors, withparticular attention paid to low‐performing activities. Reviews may entailreprogramming actions, including the reallocation of fundswhere performance islow and/or the development of exit strategies. In addition, Sector ADGs/BureauDirectors and BSP in the framework of the regular workplan review exercisemonitor low performing programmes and put forward recommendations in thisregardtotheDirector‐General.

AspartoftheOrganization’sstatutoryreporting,asix‐monthlyprogressreportonthe execution of the programme is submitted to the Executive Board (EX/4document). It recognized the considerableprogressmade regarding thequalityofreporting through the EX/4 Document (190 EX/Decisions and 190 EX/INF.24).Startingin2011,achievementsarereportedforeachMLAresultacrossallfunding

16

sources,pavingthewayfortheapplicationofRBB.Forthefirsttime,bothprogressassessments on results attainment and budget execution rates of RegularProgramme core operational costs and extrabudgetary resourceswere associatedwithresults.

A new rating feature is currently being piloted in SISTER enabling responsibleofficers to represent through a symbol the assessment of progress andachievementstowardseachC/5resultaswellasassessmentoftheimplementationstatusofeachprojectandactivity.Thisnewfeatureallowstopresentataglimpseprogrammeimplementationassociatingbothprogressassessments(substance)andexpenditurerates(i.e.budgetexecution).Itisexpectedthatthisfeaturewillservetofacilitate further performance‐based decision‐making by the Secretariat andMember States and it will also serve as an alertmechanismwhich does not relysolelyonexpendituresrates.

6.3Doesithavestrongpoliciesandprocessesforfinancialaccountability(riskmanagement, anti‐corruption, quality of external audits, fiduciary riskassessment)?

FinancialAccountability

Responsibilities for financial policy development and compliance reviews aregrouped under a dedicated section (FPC) within UNESCO’s Bureau of FinancialManagement (BFM). It comprises three units. First, the Policy Unit in charge ofstrengtheningtheimplementationofUNESCO’sInternalControlPolicyFramework,aswellasofdevelopment,interpretationandtrainingonfinancialpolicies,includingprocurement. Second, the Compliance Unit, whose role is to enhance internalcontroleffectivenessandefficiencythroughcompliancemonitoringofkeyfinancialcontrol activities.Third, theAdministrativeManualUnit in chargeof coordinatingthe review and publication of all financial, budgetary and administrative texts.UNESCO financial rules describe the system and controls in place to managefinancial commitments, authorize payments and control expenditures. Thesefinancial rules are put into operation through UNESCO administrative manual.Internalcontrolprinciplesareembeddedwithintheinformationsystem(SAP)usedto manage disbursements, to ensure proper segregation of duties and approvalprocessforallpaymentsmade.

Staff can access the Administrative Manual (AM) via the Intranet includingdownloadable PDF formats. The AM and the Human Resources Manual providesstaffatheadquartersandinthefieldwithacentralisedformatofup‐to‐dateinternalregulationsandprocedureswithacleardescriptionofaccountabilities.Aworkinggroup meets regularly to agree schedules for review of AM items, revisions arecommunicatedelectronicallyandsupportedbyFAQguidesandregular training inkeyareas.

RecentupdatestotheAdministrativeManualinclude:

17

• Fraud and corrupt practices: prevention and detection policies within theprocurement,contractingandfinancialadministrativeprocesses;

• Amendments to Financial Rules, roles, authorities and accountabilities toincorporateIPSASrequirements;

• Introduction of a new contractual modality governing the use of allocationsdetermined by Intergovernmental Bodies and/or Committees established byintergovernmentalbodies;

• Workflows and Electronic Signatures aimed to promote efficient modernworking practices and to reduce costs and administrative burden throughminimizingtheuseofpaperdocumentation;

• UseandconservationofofficesandgreenareasatHeadquarterstooutlinetheimportanceoffollowingrulestoensureproperconservationofHQbuildingsandinstallationsaftertherenovationworks;

• UseofUNESCOMobileTelephoneswithaviewtocontainingthecostsofmobilephonecommunications;

• Travel on Mission policies reviewed to incorporate cost saving and greeningmeasures, clarify policy and processes to end‐users and respond to auditfindingsandrecommendations.

Some other key changes relating to cost‐consciousness concern air travel classdowngrade, DSA reduction for non‐staff travelers, mandatory travel by train fortrips up to 4 hours in Europe, inclusion of purchase of restricted tickets andmandatoryadvancebooking(seealsoMARcomponent7).

ExistingAMprovisionsincludedthe‘Funds‐in‐TrustCooperation’withthepurposeof making the management of extrabudgetary projects with specific deliverableagreed with donors more efficient, and to provide clarifications on evaluation,projectequipmentinventory,planofoperationsandbudgeting.

UNESCOintroducedanannualstatementoninternalcontrol(SIC)fortheyearendof 2010 and 2011, based inter alia on information collected through the internalcontrolself‐assessmentprocessandpersonalattestationsfromtheSeniorManagersofUNESCOatHeadquarters,FieldofficesandInstitutes.TheseattestationsformthebasisfortheDirector‐General’sannualstatementsoninternalcontrolintheauditedfinancialstatements.TheSICalsoprovidesabasis for theassessmentofemergingrisks and the development of policy and capacity. As one of the first UNorganizations implementing thismechanism,UNESCO led theSeptember2012SICworkinggroupoftheUNFinance&BudgetTaskforce.

UNESCOimplementeditsERPpackageSAPtomanageitsbudget,accounts,payrolland treasury operations and to produce quarterly, annual and biennial financialstatementsaswellasdetaileddepartmentalaccounts.

A monthly financial management dashboard for the Senior Management Teamprovides an analysis of financial performance and risks and the outcome ofcompliancereviews.AquarterlyupdateontheseissuesismadeavailabletoallstaffandmemberstatesontheIntranettopromotetransparency.Financialandresource

18

management risks are further reported to and reviewed regularly by the internalRiskManagementCommittee(RMC),withintersectoralparticipationandchairedbyADG/BSP,andtheindependentexternalOversightAdvisoryCommittee(OAC).TheRMCreportstotheDirectorGeneralandtheOACtotheExecutiveBoard.

TheOrganization’s InternalOversightService (IOS) implementsacycleof internalaudits(IA)andevaluations,outcomesofwhicharereportedtotheDirectorGeneraland governing bodies. The status of IA recommendation implementations arereviewedregularly.

UNESCOproducesfinancialstatementspreparedinaccordancewithinternationallyrecognized standards. The External Auditor appointed by UNESCO’s GeneralConferencecertifiedthefinancialstatementsfortheperiodended31/12/2011andissued a clean audit opinion. As from 1/1/2010 UNESCO prepares its financialstatements in accordance with International Public Sector Accounting Standards(IPSAS).

Audits are conducted in accordance with the Common Auditing Standards of thePanelofExternalAuditorsof theUnitedNations, the specializedagencies and theInternational Atomic Energy Agency and conform to International Standards onAuditing (ISA). The mandate of the external auditor covers both the audit offinancial statements and of the management mechanisms of the organization.Outcomes of audits and the status of implementation of recommendations arereportedregularlytoseniormanagementandthegoverningbodiesofUNESCO.

Anti‐corruption

UNESCO has established a framework of policies, rules and procedures for thetreatment of reports or indications of fraud, corruption, abuse and othermisconduct.TheOrganization’sEthicsOfficeprovidesadvicetostaffmembersandmanagement and refers cases to the Internal Oversight Service investigation unitwhennecessary.TheEthicsOfficedeliversmandatorygeneraltrainingonethicstoallstaffmembersoftheOrganizationandspecifictrainingonethicsofprocurementtostaffmembersresponsibleforprocurement.

Related party information is disclosed annually in its Financial Statements, inaccordancewiththeInternationalPublicSectorAccountingStandards(IPSAS).TheEthicsOfficeisdevelopingaFinancialDisclosureProgrammetobeimplementedbytheendof2012.

The framework of policies, rules and procedures for the treatment of reports orindicationsoffraud,corruption,abuseandothermisconductincludesinteraliathefollowingprovisions:

• Staffregulations,staffrules,andstandardsofconduct;

• Specific provisions of the Human Resources Manual (misconductinvestigationanddisciplinaryprocedures);

19

• A whistleblower policy, which describes possible ways of reportingmisconduct to the Organization and sets out rules for the protection ofwhistleblowersandinformants;

• AFraudandCorruptionpreventativepolicy.

The Organization’s Internal Oversight Service (IOS) includes a separateInvestigation Unit (INV) dedicated to investigating concerns of fraud, corruption,abuseandotherwrongdoings.

INVoperatesinlinewiththeOrganization’sinternalpolicies,rulesandprocedures,aswellas theUniformGuidelines for Investigationsadoptedby theConferenceofInternational Investigators, and the professional standards of the Association ofCertifiedFraudExaminers,ofwhichtheIOSinvestigatorisamember.

UNESCOhasaspecificpartnershippolicyforsub‐recipientsofprojectfundswhichinclude a vetting process to assess their capacity prior to contracting. The policyalso includeson‐going reviewand appraisal aspects. VendorManagement inBFMreviews suppliers registered for payment against UN databases of blacklistedvendors.UNESCOisintheprocessofformalizingaVendorManagementpolicyandprocess.

6.4Totheextentthatitdisbursesaid,doesitdeliverpredictablefinancingby,forexample,makinglong‐termcommitmentsanddisbursingaidaccordingtoagreedschedules?

Here again, the caution regarding the use of the term “aid” in connexion withUNESCO’s activities, made earlier, should be recalled. UNESCO is implementingmanyof itsprogrammeactivities throughpartnersonacontractualbasis.TheAMsets out guidelines for the selection of Implementation Partners, the expectedcontent of agreements and provides for multi‐year agreements on the basis ofregular financial reporting by the partner and evaluation of performance byUNESCO.TheAMalso lays out similar guidelines for financing activities contractsconcludedwithnot‐for‐profitinstitutions.Thecriteriaforsuchcontractsarelimitedand, as they are exclusively funded by the Regular Programme, cannot extendbeyondthe2yearbudgetcycle.

In addition UNESCO disbursed funds to National Commissions through theParticipation Programme and to individuals through the Fellowships programmeandStudyGrants.Theguidelinesandcriteria for theParticipationProgrammeareagreed by the governing bodies and commitments do not exceed the two yearbudgetcycle.AMprovidesdetailedguidelinesfortheFellowshipsandStudygrantsrequiringthedurationofandobligationsundersuchagreementstobespecifiedattheircommencement.

The delivery of predictable financing through long‐term commitments anddisbursementsaccordingtoagreedschedulesareavailableinSAPandalsooutlined

20

through theuser‐friendly “SharePoint” applicationdeveloped for themanagementof contracts fromdrafting tovalidationworkflowsandacceptanceofdeliverables.The tool incorporates the typesof contracts and the installments foreseen. It alsoincludes the advances which are kept at a minimum, the ability to review allcontractsandpaymentsaremadeonlyonreceiptofdeliverables.

MARcomponent7:Costandvalueconsciousness7.1DoesMOencouragepartnerstothinkabouteconomy,efficiencyandcosteffectiveness inall that itdoes, including innormativeandpolicyworkandglobalpublicgoods?UNESCO is strongly committed to enhance its institutional efficiency and hasinitiated a number of reforms and changes in policies and tools. An independentexternal evaluation (IEE) was conducted at the request of UNESCO’s GeneralConferenceandanactionplanwasendorsed thatprovides the framework for theongoing reform. The implementation status was reported to the 36th GeneralConference in 2011 and is reported also regularly to the Executive Board. Thisincludesimplementationmeasures,suchasbudgeting,managinghumanresources,reforming the field network and increasing administrative efficiency. The actionplan for the implementation of IEE is complemented by the Director‐General’sroadmap,with18targets,approvedbytheExecutiveBoardinFebruary2012.UNESCOhascontinuedthepathtofundamentalreformbyaimingatmorefocusinprogramme delivery and achieving efficiencies. The provisional work plans arereviewed and monitored quarterly to be adjusted periodically depending on theavailability of resources and to reflect the priorities endorsed by the governingbodiesinamoreeffectiveway.Monitoringbymanagementaimstoensureeffectiveprogramme delivery and slow implementation is examined prior to furtherallotment.Organizationalreviewsareunderwayandhavebeenmadeforsectorsaswellas forcentral serviceswithaview toharmonizing someservices, simplifyingreporting lines and flattening structures. These changes should reduce thecomplexitiesofprocedures,streamlineoperationsandmovetheOrganizationfromacultureofcontroltoacultureofaccountability.TheRoadmapmentionedaboveprovidesaframeworkwith18targetsforenhancingprogramme focus and cost effectiveness. The Organization has conducted severalinitiatives to identify administrative reforms such as the Taskforces 2010, theUNESCO Efficiency Group in 2011 and the Transforming Administrative andStrengthening Client Orientation (TASCO) Project earlier this year. The newKnowledgeManagementand ICTstrategy requires thatprojects for strengtheningthe tools used by UNESCO to implement its operations are preceded by re‐engineeringofprocesseswithafocusonsimplificationandefficiency.

21

UNESCOhasbeenoperatingwithzeronominalgrowth(ZNG)budgetsforsixyearsandtheDirector‐GeneralhasagainproposedaZNGbudget for thenext twoyears2014‐2015. ZNG budget envelopes require the organization to absorb anyinflationary costs and statutory increases, which requires reductions and cost‐efficiencymeasures invariousareas.Theestimatedcosts tobeabsorbed in2014‐2015areestimatedatUS$55.8Mwhichrepresents8.5%of thetotalbudget. Thiswill pose considerable challenges to realize economies, efficiencies and costeffectiveness across the board, including normative and policy work and globalpublicgoods.UNESCO’s financial rulesandregulationsembedtheprinciplesofvalue formoneyandcompetitiveselectioninprocurementofgoodsandservices.Evidenceofvalueformoneyandcost‐consciousnessinthepurchaseofprogrammeinputsinclude

• 80%reduction instaff travelcostsand56%inparticipants travelcosts;anestimated$300,000 reduction in travel agency fees ‐ as a result of tightertravel planning, introduction of audio & video conferencing and web‐training tools; abolition of business class travel except for short durationmissions (figures are for Regular Programme 6 months to June 2012comparedtoJune2010);

• Reduction of 80% in consultants costs and 52% in temporary assistancecosts.

***Intermsofmodalitiesofactioninprogrammedelivery,UNESCOaimsatmaximizingvalueformoney,bothfortheOrganizationandforitspartners/beneficiarygroups.Manytimes,UNESCOassistance(technicalorfinancial)toacountryhasacatalyticfunction in that it helps to create the conditions for the country to attract morelarge‐scalefunding.Specificexamples:

UNESCO provides policy advice and capacity development on variousaspectsofeducationandassuchhashelpedmanycountriestoattract large‐scale funding to their national education systems. For example, thegovernment of Chad submitted a $47.2 million project to the GlobalPartnership forEducation(GPE) initiative,ofwhichUSD$7millionwillbededicated to literacy and non‐formal education and for national capacitydevelopment ineducationtobe implementedbyUNESCO.Thisprojectwaselaborated based on the “intermediary strategy for the development ofeducation and literacy”3 towhich UNESCO provided technical support andcapacitydevelopmentwithfinancingof$1million.UNESCO’srelativelysmall

3 Stratégie Intérimaire Pour le Développement de l’Education et l’Alphabétisation (SIPEA) 

22

scale funding provided the technical basis for the Government of Chad toattractlargerscalefinancingforthecountry’snationaleducationsystem.Itisalso significant that the dialogue and advocacy efforts undertaken byUNESCO have allowed the government of Chad and partners (civil society,technicalandfinancialpartners)torecognizetheimportanceofliteracyandnon‐formaleducationresultinginitsinclusioninthepriorityfinancingplanoftheeducationsector.

Innovative programmes in various areas developed with UNESCO’s seedfundinghaveattractedfurtherfinancingandpartnerships, inparticular fromprivate sector partners. Examples include UNESCO’s programme usinginformationandcommunicationtechnologies(ICTs) foreducation,whichhasfostered broad partnership engagement with the private sector. TheOrganizationisalsousingthe internettocrowdsourceinnovative ideasandelicit suggestions on how mobile communication could help achieve EFAgoals, in particular literacy, from the public at large and experts. Theseprogrammes,initiallystartedinpartnershipwithNokia,havenowattractedother private companies, such as Telefónica and Alcatel as well asinternational organizations (GSMA and ITU) which will allow for futurescalingup.

UNESCOhasassistedtheDemocraticRepublicoftheCongo(DRC)topreparefortheGlobalPartnershipforEducation(GPE)aprogrammeproposalinanamountofsome$100million.4WithUNESCOsupport(ofapproximatelyUSD3.3M)5,substantialprogresshasbeenmadeinthesub‐sectoroftheMinistryof Primary, Secondary and Vocational Education (MEPSP), with thefinalization of the “Education Sector Development Strategy‐EPSP and thepreparation of the related “Education Interim Plan (PAP 2012‐2015)”. Tohelp DRC to comply with the recommendations of the GPE externalevaluation, UNESCO contributed to: (i) Revising the 3‐Year EducationInterimPlanandupdatingtherelatedcostsandprojections,usingUNESCO’seducation policies and strategies simulation models (EPSSim) and morerecent educational, macroeconomic and budgetary data; (ii)improving/developing the implementation framework, and (iii) preparingthe monitoring/evaluation framework for the 3‐Year Education InterimPlan.

TheUNESCOGlobalPartnershipforGirlsandWomen'sEducationlaunchedin2011hasprovencatalyticinmobilizingresources(overUSD5million)andpartnershipsand intranslating these intoexpanded learningopportunitiesfor girls and women, with projects in five countries in Africa. Two newpartnerships were established with UN Women and the Barefoot College(India)in2012.ThepartnershipwithProcter&Gambleinitiatedin2011,isabout to be expandedwith a new contract as both parties have evaluatedhighlythefirstyearofcooperation.

4 Decision was to be taken by the GPE Board meeting in Paris on 20 November 2012 5 UNESCO worked with funding amounting to 2 million USD from AFDB for the period 2006‐2009 and with funding from CapEFA and RP from 2010‐to present, amounting to some 1.3 M  

23

7.2 Do its systems (including pressure from the governing bodies andmembers) require seniormanagement to take account of return and costeffectiveness (is there evidence that shareholders actively challenge seniormanagementonsuchissuesorquestionchoice)?UNESCO’ssystemsofbudgetapproval,monitoring,evaluations,auditsandreportingdescribed above promote discussions by governing bodies on return and costeffectiveness.UNESCO workplans align results, budgets and expenditures under Main Lines ofAction(MLAs).MemberStatesfocusonresultsbyMLAsandreviewalsothetrendsincostsbyobjectofexpenditure.Adetailedreviewoftheoverallfinancialsituation–expressedintheso‐calledManagementChart‐isundertakeneverysixmonthsbytheExecutiveBoardanditsFinancialandAdministrative(FA)CommissionaswellasitsAdHocPreparatoryGroup–andeverytwoyearsbytheGeneralConferenceand its relevantCommissions.Debates focusalsoon the levelof fixedcostsof theOrganization and on the proportion and trends in staff cost and administrativecosts. The results of thesediscussions are captured in resolutions (of theGeneralConference)anddecisions(oftheExecutiveBoard).TheOrganization ismoving towardResultsBasedBudgeting(RBB)withagreaterfocuson returns and costsby result. Costswill be analyzedbetweenProgramme,ProgrammeSupport,ManagementandAdministrationandSpecialCoststoprovideabetteroverviewoftheproportionoftheseacrossallresults.Thepresentationin190EX/19totheOctober2012ExecutiveBoardelaboratestheproposalsonfuturebudgetingtechniques.7.3Isitawareofanddoesitstriveforeconomyinthepurchaseofprogrammeinputs(inotherwords,isitsapproachtoprocurementdrivenbycostcontrol,does ithavetargets forprocurementsavings,arepricesachievedmonitoredandreportedon)?The principles of best value for money, transparency, competition, economy andeffectiveness, and the interest of UNESCO are embedded within UNESCOprocurement and contractmanagement policies (AMChapter 7 and Chapter 10 –include hyperlink). UNESCO’s procurement processes are consistent withinternational public procurementpractices and apply to allUNESCOprocurementactivitiesregardlessoffundingsource.ZNG budget envelopes and the current financial difficulties have set targets forreductioninsectoralcosts,particularlyforadministrativecosts.Pricesandsavingsachievedaremonitoredonacontractbycontractbasisatthesectorallevel.UNESCOpublishescontractsawardedoverUS$100,000.

24

TheOrganization continues tomove towards amore comprehensive approach toensure value formoney and reduced administrative cost in contracting, with theconcept of a one‐stop‐shop on contracting as outlined by the Director‐General inJuly2012.Thepurposeoftheunit istoprovidepolicyguidance,capacitybuilding,technical assistance and monitoring for all high value contracts, includingcompliancereviewpriortothesubmissiontotheContractsCommittee.Theunitwilldevelop a global procurement plan which will provide a stronger oversight oftrends. The role of UNESCO Contracts Committee is currently being reoriented,movingtowardsprogrammaticissuesandcost‐effectivenessofUNESCOoperationsand apertinentproposal for anew structurehasbeen submitted to theDirector‐Generalforimplementationinearly2013.

7.4Does itstrive forreductions inadministrativecostsand isnotprofligate(thereisevidenceoftargetsandcostcontrol)?Given UNESCO’s (nominal and real) budget evolution over time, the Organizationhascontinuouslyoverseveralbudgetcyclesbeendoing“morewith less”(seealsoslidesprovidedinAnnex2):

Fig.1:UNESCOBudget(nominalandreal)overtime:10yearsofdoingmorewithlessZNGbudgetenvelopesoverthelastsixyearshaverequiredadministrativeservices(Corporate Services) to achieve reductions over and above the absorption ofinflationary costs. The 36 C/5 Regular Programme provided a US $7.9M / 6%reduction in ZNG Corporate Service budgets compared to the previous biennium.Following the financial pressures resulting in the wake of the suspension of thecontributionbyMemberStates,arevisedbudgetenvelopeofUSD465millionhasbeenestablishedfor implementation.Therelated,revisedworkplansprovideforatotal of US $26M or a 20% reduction for corporate services compared to the

The36C/5isreducedbycloseto$190MInrealterms,the36C/5budgetis21%lessthanthatofthe30C/5(2000‐2001) 

544  544 

610  610 631 

653  653 

465 544 

522 

563 534 

519  513  513 

365 300

400

500

600

700

30 C/5 31 C/5 32 C/5 33 C/5 34 C/5 35 C/5 36 C/5(approved)

36 C/5(budget)

M$

Nominal budget (Approved amount) Budget in real terms (indexed at 30 C/5 level)

25

previous biennium. Ongoing efforts for cost containment, consolidation ofstructures and redeployment of staff should lead further savings as well asimprovedcostrecoveryfromallextrabudgetaryfunds.Roadmap targetswere presented in 189EX/15Part I Addendum to the ExecutiveBoard,acceleratingtheongoingreformasaresultofthereductioninfundsavailablefor the 2012‐2013 budget. Roadmap targets 10 to 18 are aimed at reducingoverhead/administrative costs. The latest comprehensive report on theirimplementationcanbefoundindocument190EX/34.Targetsaimedspecificallyatadministrativecostsincludereducingsuchcostsby15%;andreducingthenumberof posts in Executive Offices (EO), Administrative Offices (AO) and secretarialservicesby10%.TheoverheadandadministrativereformsreportedundertheRoadMaptargetsaretheresultofseveralinitiativessuchastheTaskforces2010,theUNESCOEfficiencygroup in 2011 and the Transforming Administrative and Strengthening ClientOrientation(TASCO)Project.Areviewofadministrativeprocesseshashighlightedtheneedtomodernizeadministrativepolicies,proceduresandprocesses.Reformsproposedaimatachievingimprovementinservicedeliveryatreducedcosts.TASCOadopted a re‐engineering approachwith a project structure cutting acrossone ormore support services rather than focusing entirely on a single service orsector to achieve necessary synergies and maximize efficiency gains. This wasrelatedtoroadmaptargets12and18andindirectly16and17.Resultswereaimedat a reductionof process timeand transaction costs. 46TASCO recommendationswere approved by the Director‐General, impacting administrative processes fortravel,procurement,translation,productionandprintingofinformationmaterials.Implementationtodateincludes:

• Streamliningof procurementwith the introductionof aone‐stop‐shopas asingle entry point within BFM for policy guidance, training and technicalassistanceforallhighvaluecontractstoensurevalueformoney;

• ThefinalstructureoftheconsolidatedAOUnitforCorporateandProgrammeRelatedServiceswasapprovedbytheDirector‐GeneralinOctober2012andwill be implemented by March 2013. The new structure has reduced thenumberofprofessionalAOpostsatHeadquartersbyover60%providinganestimated $2M savings per biennium in Headquarters operations and theopportunity to reinforce the Africa Regional Administrative Platform andotherneedsintheAfricaFieldReform.FurthermoretheProgrammeSectorAOreviewwillbe launchedshortlyandwillbe completedby June2013 tominimizetheadministrativeservices;

• The restriction on the use of business class and the review of travelprocurementmodalitiestoreducetravelcosts.AlsothedevelopmentofnewIT tools such as the travel planning tool to improve decision making andimprovemonitoringoftravelcosts.

26

MARcomponent9:Transparencyandaccountability9.1 Does it have a disclosure policy, and does that policy specify apresumption of disclosure – i.e. that information should bemade publiclyavailable unless there is a clear case for withholding it? Is the list ofexceptions justifiable and based on the MO’s commercial, security, dataprotectionorotherpoliciesandregulations?Whilethereisnofulldisclosurepolicyinplaceyetatthispointintime,anumberofinitiativesdemonstratethetransparencyofinformationprovided:

- Analysisofdeliverablesandexpectedresults includingadetailedreportingatacountrylevelofactivitieswithinreportstotheExecutiveBoard

- Disclosureofcontractsover$100,000publishedontheintranet

- RelatedpartytransactionsreportedinIPSAScompliantfinancialstatements

- Implementationofafinancialdisclosurepolicyin2013

- Summary reports on external audits, internal audits, evaluations andinvestigationspublishedonline.

AsrequestedbygoverningbodiesandasoutlinedbytheDirector‐General,UNESCOcontinues close monitoring and communicating on its financial situation. TheDirector‐Generalhasreportedindetailontheprogressmadetowardsdeliveringonthe18roadmaptargetsindocument190EX/34.

9.2Doesitroutinelypublishprojectandpolicydocumentation(includingthelatestversionsofallnormative instruments,andreportson implementationof norms) including financial data and performance reports and are thesetimelyandeasytofind?UNESCO publishes project and policy documentation submitted to its governingbodies,theExecutiveBoardandtheGeneralConference,aswellastheresolutionsand decisions resulting from intergovernmental deliberations. All suchdocumentation is available, easily accessible and regularly updated on theOrganization’swebsite.UNESCO’s System of Information on StrategiesTasks and theEvaluation ofResults(SISTER)providesprogrammaticandfinancialdatafortheProgrammeandBudget(document C/5). Member States can access information relating to the regularprogramme and related budgets, extrabudgetary funds as well as details on

27

allocation and expenditure. The information is updated twice a day; actualmonitoringisundertakenonaregularbasisatleastevery6month.UNESCO’s Internal Oversight Service (IOS) provides independent and objectiveassuranceaswellasadvisoryservicesdesignedtoaddvalueandimproveUNESCO'soperations. IOShas theauthority to initiate, carryout and reportonany action itconsiders necessary to fulfill its responsibilities with regard to its oversightfunctions.Itsfunctionalindependenceandoperationaleffectivenessaresupportedby the Oversight Advisory Committee comprised of external experts in audit,evaluationand riskmanagement.EvaluationsofUNESCO’sProgrammeareplacedonline.All documentation relating to the Organization’s normative work is regularlypublished and updated on UNESCO’s website. The documentation that coversaspectsrelatingtoagivennormativeaction–oneofthesixCultureConventions,forexample–ispreparedbythesecretariatandmadeavailabletotheMemberStatesandthepublicat large,anditespecially formsanimportant inputtothestatutorymeetings of the State Parties/Committees, which govern the instruments. Thisrepresentsawealthofdocumentationeasilyaccessible,forexample,ontheCultureSector’swebsite. In the caseof the1972Conventionon theProtectionofCulturaland Natural heritage (1972), for instance, the documentation ranges from theConvention text itself with its Operational Guidelines, General Assembly of StateParties Rules of Procedure, Committee Rules of Procedure, and FinancialRegulations – to documentation presented on‐line and accessible by category, bymeeting,byyearandbytheme.Furthermore,transparencyofallprocesseshasbeengreatlyenhancedthrough livestreamingonthewebofWorldheritageCommitteesessionsanduploadingofalldocumentsforpublicaccess.

***As explained earlier, Member States (i.e. Permanent Delegations and NationalCommissions)haveaccess foreachProgrammeandBudget(C/5) levels tobudgetand financial information regardingbothRegularProgrammeandExtrabudgetaryresources inSISTER templatesor summary financial reports.MemberStateshaveaccess directly through SISTER individual templates or through SISTER pre‐formatted EX/4 Annex Report to performance information. This information isupdatedeverysixmonths.ThroughtheSISTERcountryreportfunction,MemberStateshaveaccesstopartoftheoperationallevelinformationorworkplanswhetherfundedthroughtheRegularProgramme or extrabudgetary resources. The latter allows extracting the list ofRegular Programme activities and extrabudgetary projects by geographical area(global,regional,sub‐regional,national)andwiththefollowinginformation:

Thetitleandexpectedresultsand The estimated amount directly benefiting a country when “National

scope”hasbeenselected.

28

Inaddition,thedetailedlistofworkplansfinancedthroughtheEmergencyfundsisprovided through SISTER on a daily basis. Finally, the general publicmay accessthrough SISTER the 36 C/5 “Complementary Additional Programme ofTargeted/Projectedextrabudgetaryactivities”(CAP)whichcontainsspecificprojectproposals,updatedinresponsetoemergingneedsandopportunities.Itenableson‐line search by programme and thematic areas, as well as regions or countries ofinterest.9.3 Is the multilateral signed up to the International Aid TransparencyInitiative (IATI) and is it actively participating? Has it published a plan toimplementphase1IATI/thenewcommonstandardby2015?UNESCOisworkingwithintheUNsystemonaharmonizedreportingstandard,with2011financialstatistics tobereleased inearly2013.DialoguehasbegunbetweentheFinancialStatisticsprojectandIATI.WhiletheUNprojectprecedestheIATI,thegoalistomeetIATIstandards.ThespeedanddegreeofintegrationwilldependonthenumberofUNagenciessubscribingtoIATI.

UNESCO’s Executive Board adopted the following decision at its 190th session inOctober2012:

Further enhancing the transparency of UNESCO programmes (190 EX/46; 190EX/53):

1.Recognizingthatprogrammetransparencyisfundamentaltoitssuccess,

2.NotingthatUNESCO,throughtheearlyimplementationoftheInternationalPublicSector Accounting Standards (IPSAS), has shown itself capable of being a leadinginstitutionintheadoptionofnewtransparencystandards,

3. Also noting that UNESCO continues to improve its own transparency throughimprovedwebsites,greateruseofSISTERandothermeasures,

4.NotesthatUNESCOisworkingwithintheUnitedNationssystemonaharmonizedreportingstandard.

5.ReiteratesthecommitmentofUNESCOtopublishprogrammeinformationinlinewithaninternationallyagreedUnitedNationstransparencyreportingstandard.

9.4.Arepartnercountrieswellrepresented in thegoverningmechanismsoftheorganization‐andofanyinternationaltreatybodiesithosts‐anddotheyhaveanimpactondecisionmaking?

29

UNESCO has 195 Members and eight Associate Members. It is governed by theGeneral Conference and the Executive Board. The Secretariat, headed by theDirector‐General,implementsthedecisionsofthesetwobodies.

TheGeneralConferenceconsistsoftherepresentativesoftheStatesMembersoftheOrganization. It meets every two years, and is attended by Member States andAssociate Members, together with observers for non‐Member States,intergovernmentalorganizationsandnon‐governmentalorganizations(NGOs).Eachcountryhasonevote,irrespectiveofitssizeortheextentofitscontributiontothebudget.TheGeneralConferencedeterminesthepoliciesandthemainlinesofworkoftheOrganization.ItsdutyistosettheprogrammesandthebudgetofUNESCO.ItalsoelectstheMembersoftheExecutiveBoardandappoints,everyfouryears,theDirector‐General.

The Executive Board, in a sense, assures and oversees the implementation of theProgramme approved by the General Conference and the overall management ofUNESCO.ItpreparestheworkoftheGeneralConferenceandseesthatitsdecisionsareproperlycarriedout.ThefunctionsandresponsibilitiesoftheExecutiveBoardarederivedprimarilyfromtheConstitutionandfromrulesordirectiveslaiddownbytheGeneralConference.

Every twoyears theGeneralConferenceassignsspecific tasks to theBoard.Otherfunctions stem from agreements concluded between UNESCO and the UnitedNations,thespecializedagenciesandotherintergovernmentalorganizations.

The Executive Board meets twice a year. Its fifty-eight members are elected by the General Conference. The choice of these representatives is largely a matter of the diversity of the cultures and their geographical origin. Skilful negotiationsmay beneededbefore abalance is reached among thedifferent regionsof theworld in awaythatwillreflecttheuniversalityoftheOrganization.

Using the example of the 1972 World Heritage Convention, the World HeritageCommitteemeetsonceayear,andconsistsofrepresentativesfrom21oftheStatesParties to theConventionelectedby theirGeneralAssembly.At its first session in1972, the Committee adopted its Rules of Procedure of the World heritageCommittee (the Rules of Procedure were last revised by the World HeritageCommitteeatitsthirty‐fifthsession,UNESCO,2011).TheCommitteeisresponsiblefor the implementation of theWorld Heritage Convention, defines the use of theWorldHeritageFund,andallocates financialassistanceuponrequests fromStatesParties.IthasthefinalsayonwhetherapropertyisinscribedontheWorldHeritageList.TheCommitteecanalsodeferitsdecisionandrequestfurther informationonpropertiesfromtheStatesParties.Itexaminesreportsonthestateofconservationof inscribedpropertiesandasksStatesParties to takeactionwhenpropertiesarenot being properly managed. It also decides on the inscription or deletion ofpropertiesontheListofWorldHeritageinDanger.

30

9.5 Do stakeholders (Government, civil society, other key groups) frompartner countries have amechanism throughwhich they have the right toredressorcomplainabouttheMOspoliciesandprogrammes?TheExecutiveBoardhasadedicatedsubsidiaryorganof23memberstatescalledtheCommitteeonNon‐GovernmentalPartners (NGP).NGOs inofficialpartnershipwithUNESCOparticipate in thework of this Committee and can present all theirviews in the discussion, which may influence recommendations by NGP to theBoard’sPlenary.NGOs in official partnership with UNESCO are holding a biennial InternationalConference whereby they discuss policy and programme issues relevant for theOrganization.Withpresentationsby seniormanagers, suggestions and complaintscan also be aired and are responded to, either on the spot or through follow‐updiscussionsandcontactswiththeSecretariat.Moreover, inpreparationofa futureMedium‐termStrategyandaProgrammeandBudget, NGOs and civil society organisations in official partnership are invited tocontribute their views in response to a questionnaire and aconsultation/informationmeetingatHeadquartersisalsoheldonthissubject.TheresponsesandproposalsoftheNGOsarebroughtinsummaryformtotheattentionoftheExecutiveBoardinaseparatedocumentandthefullresponsesareplacedontheOrganisation’swebsite.ArepresentativeofthePermanentUNESCO/NGOLiaisonCommitteeisalsoinvitedto attend as observer and address each of the Director‐General’s regionalconsultationswithMemberStatesaboutthepreparationofthefutureC/4andC/5documents.AsregardshumanrightsissuespertainingtoUNESCO’sconventions,NGOsinofficialpartnershipwithUNESCOand individuals can submit complaints to theExecutiveBoard’sCommitteeonConventionsandRecommendations(CRE).Everytwoyears,aYouthForumisorganizedpriorto,butasanintegralpartofeachregularsessionoftheGeneralConference.Theconclusionsandrecommendationsofthis Forum are submitted to the General Conference Plenary and discussed byMemberStates.9.6Arenormsandstandardsdevelopedandmonitoredinatransparentandunbiasedway,includingthroughclearlydistinguishingbetweenindependentexpertsandgovernmentrepresentatives?

31

Yes, such arrangements exist. In the case of the 1972 Convention, threeinternational non‐governmental or intergovernmental organizations are named inthe Convention to advise the Committee, composed of Member States, in itsdeliberations:

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) is aninternational, non‐governmental organization that provides the WorldHeritageCommitteewithtechnicalevaluationsofnaturalheritagepropertiesand, through its worldwide network of specialists, reports on the state ofconservationoflistedproperties.Withmorethan1000members,IUCNwasestablishedin1948andislocatedinGland,Switzerland.

The International Council onMonuments and Sites (ICOMOS) provides theWorldHeritageCommitteewithevaluationsofculturalandmixedpropertiesproposed for inscription on theWorld Heritage List. It is an international,non‐governmental organization founded in 1965, with an internationalsecretariatinParis.

TheInternationalCentrefortheStudyofthePreservationandRestorationofCultural Property (ICCROM) is an intergovernmental body which providesexpert advice on how to conserve listed properties, as well as training inrestorationtechniques.ICCROMwassetupin1956andislocatedinRome.

WorldHeritagehasover timeplayed a crucial role in standard setting andpolicydevelopment,bothatnational levelandglobal scale–andas suchwas influencedbothbyrepresentativesofMemberStatesandindependentexperts.Acaseinpointis the “Policy document on the impacts of climate change on World Heritageproperties”, adopted by the 16th General Assembly of States Parties to theWorldHeritageConventionin2007,whichwasdevelopedwiththesupportoftheUnitedKingdom and with the participation of relevant climate change experts andpractitioners of heritage conservationandmanagement, appropriate internationalOrganizations,andcivilsociety.Thedocumentnowassistsnationalauthoritiesandsitemanagerswithregard tosuitable responses toclimatechangeandadaptationstrategies.Ontheoccasionof theConvention’s40thanniversaryan in‐depthreflectiononthe“FutureoftheWorldHeritageConvention”wasundertakentorespondtoemergingchallenges and opportunities. This also included an independent evaluation byUNESCO’s external auditor on the implementation of theGlobal Strategy from itsinception in 1994 to 2011 as well as the Partnerships for Conservation Initiative(PACT). The Vision for the Future and the Strategic Action Plan 2012‐22 wasadoptedbythe18thsessionoftheGeneralAssembly(UNESCO,2011).TheGeneralAssemblyofStatePartiesfurtherdecidedtoestablishanopen‐endedworkinggroupincluding experts from the different geographic regions, in order to produce animplementationplanfortherecommendations.

32

Another example is the 2005Convention on theProtection andPromotion of theDiversity of Cultural Expressions, UNESCO’smost recent culture convention. ThisConventionisofhighrelevanceintoday’sglobalizedworld,reflectedalsobyitshighratification rates in several regions. Recognizing the novel and complex nature ofthe Convention, its implementation is challenging. It requires coordination andcooperationwith stakeholders across sectors and effectivemechanisms to ensurecivilsocietyinvolvementatthelocallevel.The InternationalFund forCulturalDiversity (IFCD)becameoperational inMarch2010 as an operational mechanism to implement the Convention by financinginnovative initiatives to foster the emergence of dynamic cultural sectors indeveloping countries. To date, the IFCD provides support for projects fromdevelopingcountriesthatimpactculturalpoliciesandstrengthenlocalandregionalcultural industries.Theownershipoftheprojectsispromotedthroughreinforcinglocal capacities. All projects take root because they are locally owned and led.Capacity‐building isacoreelementof theIFCDprojectswhoseaimis toempowerlocalactors.AnevaluationoftheFundbyUNESCO’sInternalOversightService(IOS)foundthatthemajorityofcompletedprojectshadattainedtheirexpectedresultsandthattheyaddress the specificneedsof the target groupsand thebeneficiary countries.Theevaluation concluded that overall the IFCD is a highly relevant and uniquemechanismthatcanhelpstakeholdersbetterunderstandtherelationshipbetweenculture and sustainable development, showcase civil society involvement, agenerator of best practices, as well as a mechanism for the promotion of South‐SouthandNorth‐South‐Southcooperation.9.7Does theMOhavesystemsand tools toensureadequateparticipationofdisaster/conflict‐affected groups in needs assessments, monitoring andevaluation?Yes.UNESCOappliestheharmonizedUNsystem‐widetoolsforitspost‐conflictandpost‐disasteraction,notablythePost‐ConflictNeedsAssessment(PCNA)toolkitandguidance,developedbytheUNDevelopmentGroup,theWorldBankandpartners,aswellastheinter‐agencyPostDisasterNeedsAssessment(PDNA)framework.ThePCNA, the PDNA and related tools pursue a participatory approach, involvingdisaster/conflictaffectedgroupsandstakeholdersatplanningandimplementationphases,andfocusingactiononthemostvulnerable. UNESCO is a member of the inter‐agency groups developing these tools andguidance.

33

MARcomponent5:Strategicandperformancemanagement5.5 Do its HR policies encourage good performance? Does it award jobstransparentlyandonthebasisofmeritandexperience?Several HR policies/programmeshave been put in place to encourage and fostergoodperformance:

Performance management policy: the process is interactive/participatory,allowing for dialogue, feedback and coaching. It allows to differentiatebetween levels of performance, including good and very good/outstandingperformance. It integrates a process for identifying areas forimprovement/learning to encourage and allow staff to enhance their skillsand thus making them more competitive when applying to higher‐gradedpositions.

Anewweb‐based tool forperformancemanagement,which includesa90°,180° and 360° feedback has been acquired, with a target date for fullimplementationofend2013.Theresultsfromtheseevaluationscanthenbeusedbythestaff receivingthefeedbacktoplanandmapspecificpathsandadvancement in their career development. These tools, and the feedbackobtainedalsocontributetoenhancestaffoverallperformance.

PromotionPolicy,eitherby: a rigorous and transparent competitive recruitment process,where the

criteria for selection are based first and foremost on competence andmerit as well as proven experience and demonstratedresults/performance.

Postreclassificationwherethecriteriaforpromotionrequireevidenceofperforming the functions, satisfactorily, at a level higher than the staffmember’spresentpostforatleastoneyear.

Pilot Recognition programmes such as Merit‐Based Promotion and TeamAwardsimplementedin2008/2009: Merit‐BasedPromotionsaregrantedonthebasisofobjectivecriteriasucha

demonstrated results, performance, ability to perform at a higherlevel.Awardedtolimitednumberofstaffinrecognitionoftheiroutstandingperformance and/or exceptional contribution to the Organization. (Thisprogrammehasbeentemporarilysuspended.)

TheTeamAward(non‐monetary)establishedtoprovide“public”recognitionofanoutstandingcontributiontoUNESCO’smissionandobjectivesbyateamwhoseperformancehasbeenexceptional.AlimitednumberofTeamAwardsaregrantedbytheDirector‐Generaleverybiennium.

UNESCOasapartoftheUNsystemisboundbythecommonsystemframeworkofpay and benefits which includes the awarding of within‐grade salaryincrements.Theseincrementsaregrantedonanannualbasistostaffonthebasisof

34

satisfactoryperformance[everytwoyearsforthosestaffhavingreachedcertainstepswithincertaingrades].Pleasenotethatallgradeshaveamaximumstep.

Mobilitypolicy/short‐termassignments:providesstaffwiththeopportunitytogainexperienceofworkingindifferentdutystations(inparticularawayfromHQ).Suchexperience is a criterion forMerit‐Based Promotion and is considered a valuableasset when applying for higher‐graded posts in the Organization. These alsocontributetogoodperformance.5.7Doesithaveaneffectiveevaluationfunction?UNESCO’s evaluation function is part of the InternalOversight Service (IOS). Theevaluation unit enables UNESCO to meet its mandate by providing credible andevidence‐basedinformationtofeedintodecision‐makingprocessesonmanagingforresults.IOSperformsevaluationsinaccordancewiththeUnitedNationsEvaluationGroup (UNEG)Norms and Standards for Evaluation in the UN System as a set ofguidingprinciplestoregulatetheconductofevaluation.UNESCOhas an independentOversightAdvisory Committee – referred to alreadyearlier ‐ comprised of four external experts in evaluation, audit and oversightissues.Theirrole,interalia, istoadvisetheDirector‐GeneralontheadequacyandeffectivenessoftheInternalOversightService(IOS)anditsstrategies,prioritiesandworkplans.In its most recent report to the Executive Board in April 2011 (document 186EX/INF.14), the Committee made the following observations with respect to thefunctioningoftheevaluationsection: TheCommitteeobserved thatmuchprogresshasbeenachieved indeveloping

the Section’s operating standards and profile within the Organization; theSectionalsohasbeenenhancedandstrengthenedasaresultofitsinvolvementin the recently completed Independent External Evaluation (IEE) and itscontribution to, amongst other things, the establishment of the Organization’sriskmanagementframework.

EvaluationshavebeencarriedoutonalargescopeofUNESCOactivities,i.e.onallUNESCOStrategicProgrammeObjectivesandonanumberoffieldoffices.Theevaluations reviewed by the Committee used adequate methodologies andprovided useful and achievable recommendations. The Evaluation Section’sactivitiescompliedwithUNEGStandards.

Theworkplan for2011/12of theEvaluationSection issoundandin linewiththeOrganization’srisksandpriorities.

35

5.8Areevaluationsactedupon?Yes. As prescribed in the UNESCO Evaluation Policy, upon completion of anevaluation report, the responsible management unit submits a managementresponse to the recommendations containedwithin indicating whether these areaccepted or not. For all accepted recommendations, the responsible unit alsosubmitsanActionPlan,whichconstitutesabaselineagainstwhichfutureprogressis measured. Action Plans are made available at the IOS websitewww.unesco.org/iosIOS monitors progress on the implementation of evaluationreportsrecommendationsandreportsthereontotheExecutiveBoard.IOS evaluations of the field office network over the past years provide a strongexample of how evaluation findings have informed decision‐making at a strategiclevel. Evaluations have consistently pointed to the need for decentralizedprogrammes toachievegreater focusandoverall coherence, to improvereportinglines and accountabilities, and to strengthen both technical and financialcapacities. The Director‐General’s proposed reform of the field networkwhich iscurrently being implemented as a priority in Africa addresses directly thesechallenges.ExamplesofrecentevaluationsleadingtopolicychangesinUNESCOare:

‐ TheevaluationofUNESCOprizesin2011(ledinteraliatoanewstrategyonprizesandstricterapplicationcriteriaforeligibilityofprizes);

‐ TheevaluationofPriorityAfrica in2012(which led interalia toastrategicreflection on clarifying the roles and responsibilities of different UNESCOentities,andastrengtheningofcapacitiesinthefield);

‐ The evaluation of Category I Institutes in 2012 (ongoing; the collaborativeeffortbetweenIOSandtheEducationsectorimmediatelytriggeredchangesinmodalities of collaboration between the Sector and the Institutes and islikelytoleadtoseveralimportantstrategicchangesbothatHQandInstitutelevel).

ANNEXES

Annex1.Cashreceivedforextrabudgetaryactivitiesandinstitutes,includingevolutionofself‐benefittingfundsinUNESCOAnnex2.(separatedocument)Additionaldataonefficiencies‐evolutionovertimein:

UNESCObudget UNESCOoverheadrates Managementstructures Progressingenderequality

36

Annex1

CashReceivedforExtra‐BudgetaryActivitiesandInstitutes(inUS$),includingevolutionofself‐benefittingfundsinUNESCO

             

  Comparison at June  Yearly comparison   

  Jun‐11  Jun‐12  2009  2010  2011   

Governmental sources 

94,509,351  128,288,032  194,571,141  204,715,732  195,324,650  

Other sources (including EX, dev banks and private sources) 

22,119,386  19,104,527  43,469,890  32,238,385  64,191,747 

 

UN sources  22,039,202  14,642,200  55,497,393  45,906,921  34,660,103   

TOTAL  138,667,939  162,034,759  293,538,424  282,861,038  294,176,500 

                   

of which Emergency Fund 

0  17,972,509  0  0  20,270,126 

 

                   

TOTAL without Emergency Fund 

138,667,939  144,062,250  293,538,424  282,861,038  273,906,374 

 

                   

of which Self‐Benefiting Funds* 

23,104,892  28,215,970  34,068,426  42,655,561  45,556,137 

 

             

             

Contributions assessed (receipts) 

           168,228,628             216,290,655  

           295,939,553  

   271,147,353      247,594,014  

 

             

* The table shows that self‐benefitting funds are growing both in size(34%from2009to2011)andasaproportionoftotalextrabudgetaryfunds(12%to17%).TheJune2012cfJune2011increaseof22%indicatesthatthismaybeacontinuingtrend.