ATTACHMENT 3

GUIDELINES FOR THE RENEWAL ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES FOR

CATEGORY 2 INSTITUTES AND CENTRES UNDER THE AUSPICES OF UNESCO

Background

1. UNESCO has established a number of category 2 institutes/centres. These institutes/centres serve in their fields of specialization as international or regional centres and poles of expertise/excellence to provide services and technical assistance to Member States, cooperation partners and also internally to the network of UNESCO field offices. In this context, the category 2 institutes/centres are expected to contribute directly to achieving the Strategic Programme Objectives of the Organization and to implementing the Integrated Comprehensive Strategy for the Category 2 Institutes and Centres as contained in the present document. According to this strategy, it is necessary to carry out a formal review before a decision is taken to renew an existing agreement. The relevant provisions of the strategy are copied below for ease of reference.

2. A.3 Periodic review and evaluation

A.3.1 The agreement for the establishment of an institute or centre as a category 2 institute shall be concluded for a definite time period, not exceeding six years. The agreement may be renewed by the Director-General in the light of the review in A.3.2 and A.3.3 and the evaluation referred to in A.3.4 and once the executive Board has taken its decision.

A.3.2 At least six months prior to the expiration of the agreement, the Director-General will carry out a review of the activities of the institutes and centres and of their contribution to the strategic programme objectives of the Organization and the strategy for category 2 institutes and centres approved by the General Conference.

A.3.3 The Director-General will include the results of this review in his report to the Executive Board on the execution of the Programme with his/her recommendations whether the designation as category 2 institute or centre under the auspices of UNESCO shall be maintained, terminated or not renewed. For each institute and centre under review, the termination or nor-renewal of an agreement is incumbent upon the Executive Board.

A.3.4 To facilitate the review, the Internal Oversight Service will consider in its planned evaluations of strategic programme objectives, the contribution of the relevant category 2 institutes and centres to the strategic programme objectives under review.

Purpose

3. The result of each review will serve as the basis for the Programme Sector’s recommendation to the Director-General as to whether an agreement with a category 2 institute or centre should be renewed.

4. The result of each review will be shared with the institute/centre under review and Member State(s) concerned, and be included in the once-per-biennium report to the Executive Board on the execution of the Programme (EX/4 and C/3 reports), as stipulated in B.4.2 of the Integrated Comprehensive Strategy. The report of each review will also be made available on the relevant sector’s website.

Scope

5. In order to meet the purpose of the review described above, the following parameters shall be considered by the expert(s) responsible for conducting the review and writing a report that is consistent with UNESCO’s reporting mechanisms.

(a) Whether the activities effectively pursued by the institute/centre are in conformity with those set out in the Agreement signed with UNESCO;

(b) The relevance of the institute/centre’s programmes and activities to achieving UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes, as defined in the Agreement;

(c) The effectiveness of the institute/centre’s programmes and activities to achieving its stated objectives;

(d) The quality of coordination and interaction with UNESCO, both at Headquarters and in the field (including UNESCO field offices and UNESCO National Commissions), and other thematically-related category 1 and 2 institutes/centres with regard to planning and implementation of programmes;

(e) The quality of partnerships with government agencies, public/private partners and donors;

(f) The nature and quality of organizational arrangements, including management, governance and accountability mechanisms;

(g) The human and financial resource base and the quality of mechanisms and capacities, as well as context-specific opportunities and risks for ensuring sustainable institutional capacity and viability;

(h) The process of mobilizing extrabudgetary resources and to what extent such extrabudgetary funding is aligned to the strategic programme objectives of UNESCO.

Roles and responsibilities

6. Category 2 sector focal points are responsible for managing and coordinating the review process. As such, in consultation with IOS, they should draft the TOR’s for a review, with IOS backstopping, select independent experts who will conduct the review and prepare the report. The selected expert(s) shall be responsible for conducting the review and preparing the report, based on the TOR provided. The report will be finalized in consultation with the sector focal point, BSP and IOS. The results of the review will then be considered by a sector Review Committee who will recommend to the Director-General whether an existing agreement should be renewed or denounced. The Director-General will then provide the results of these reviews, including the endorsement or rejection to renew a specific agreement, in his/her report to the Executive Board on the execution of the programme (EX/4 and C/3 documents) (as well as reports to any subsidiary bodies as may be envisaged in sector strategies). The approval of the Executive Board will be required before the Director-General can proceed with the renewal of an agreement. Should the Executive Board decide the termination or non-renewal of the agreement, the host Member State(s) shall then be duly informed of such decision.

7. BSP will coordinate with the relevant category 2 sector focal point to include the result of a review undertaken in the Director-General’s once-per-biennium report to the Executive Board on the execution of the programme (EX/4 and C/3 documents). The sector responsible for managing and coordinating the review process will be in charge of sharing the report with the concerned Centre/Institute and making the report available on its website.

Review team

8. The review team will consist of independent expert(s) whom the sector focal point will select in consultation with IOS. The CV(s) of the expert(s) will need to demonstrate a good record in the institute/centre’s area of expertise and in evaluation practice. Detailed knowledge of the role of UNESCO and its programmes is also highly desirable.

Background documents

9. The institute/centre will make the following documents available to the review team:

– A copy of the existing agreement between the Member State and UNESCO establishing the institute/centre;

– Annual progress reports and biennial self-assessment reports on the contribution to UNESCO’s programme objectives;

– Periodic independent audit reports of the financial statements; ;

– List of staff;

– List of key publications;

– List of donors and project partners;

– Minutes of the Governing Board meetings;

– Support provided to Member States;

– Available audit and evaluation reports;

– Account of networking achievements linked with other thematically related category 2 institutes/centres and UNESCO’s programmes.

Deliverables

10. Draft review report: The process for preparing the draft review report shall allow adequate time for a discussion of the findings and the recommendations that have been proposed with the relevant UNESCO programme sector and pertinent stakeholders, including the government(s) that proposed the designation of the institute/centre and the institute/centre itself.

11. The final report should be structured as follows:

• Executive summary (maximum four pages);

• Purpose of the review;

• Scope of the review;

• Methodology;

• Findings;

• Recommendation;

• Annexes (including interview list, data collection instruments, key documents consulted, Terms of Reference).

12. The language of the report will be English and/or French.

Logistics

13. The local travel, materials, secretarial support and office space will need to be provided by the institute/centre to be reviewed. The experts will be responsible for telecommunications and printing of documentation. The relevant UNESCO programme sector will facilitate the review process, to the extent possible, by providing any relevant information.

Budget

14. The category 2 institute/centre under review or a sponsoring Member State(s) shall be invited to consider covering all costs related to the preparation of the review, including the mission costs of the expert(s), or to explore the possibility of extrabudgetary resources to cover the cost of a review.

Time schedule

15. The review shall be carried out not later than six months prior to the expiration of the agreement. The duration of the mission of the expert(s) carrying out the review will be determined by the category 2 sectoral focal point, and, if necessary in consultation with the specific responsible focal point in the field, as will the time allotted for the finalization of the report.