The machinery of administrative co-ordination

(1) The body in which the inter-organization consultations required by the agreements are held is the Administrative Committee on Co-ordination (ACC). The members of this Committee are the executive heads of the organizations; the Secretary-General of the UN is the Chairman of ACC. Most reports to ACC are first examined by an "Organizational Committee" this consists of representatives of the executive heads - frequently the senior officials responsible for co-ordination generally. Prior to the restructuring of the subsidiary machinery of ACC in l978 (see section l.4) most reports were seen first by a "Preparatory Committee".

(2) To deal with the wide range of subjects covered by the agreements, ACC has a number of subsidiary committees. One of them is the Consultative Committee on Administrative Questions (CCAQ), which deals with the items covered by the articles of agreement which are referred to in sections l.l (4) and l.l (5). The members of CCAQ are the chiefs of the administrative departments of the organizations, or their representatives.

(3) CCAQ recommendations normally require approval of ACC if they concern matters of policy or principle; on matters of application which would normally fall within the authority of the chief of an administrative department ACC approval is not required. "In accordance with the decisions concerning the restructuring of the ACC machinery, decisions of CCAQ are considered to be final, unless they are objected to by an executive head within 30 days of the promulgation of the decision." (ACC/1979/R.11, para. 54).

(4) On some matters, ACC approval may need to be followed by the approval of the responsible legislative or governing bodies of the separate organizations. Apart from any machinery which may exist within Member States to ensure that their representatives take the same attitude in the different legislative bodies, there is no machinery for ensuring that these bodies take the same attitude towards matters agreed in ACC. At its l3th session, however (September l952: CO-ORDINATION/R.l32), CCAQ recommended that in such matters every effort should be made by the executive heads to induce their legislative bodies to take seriously into account the common administrative view.

(5) At the l9th session (March l958: CO-ORDINATION/R.164, paras. 79-80) the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) informed CCAQ that its Council was considering whether to recommend to UN that, in future, common system matters having financial implications should be examined by a committee containing government representatives. The other organizations observed that the common system of which every aspect has financial implications, had its origin in legislative action and had been subjected to legislative approval in all organizations, including ICAO.

(6) In a statement to the seventeenth session of the General Assembly (l962; A/C.5/934), ACC indicated that it proposed to consult the International Civil Service Advisory Board (ICSAB) on a possible revision of the terms of reference of the Board, with a view to enabling it to serve as an independent inter-organization body to make judgements when problems arose in the administration of the common system. This was noted with approval by the UN General Assembly in its resolution l869(XVII) (l962). At its 24th session (March l963: CO-ORDINATION/R.430, paras. 9-10 and Appendix C) CCAQ agreed on the text of a paper for consideration by the Board. This text was approved by ACC in April l963 and subsequently issued as ICSAB document ICSAB/XI/1. ACC reported its action to ECOSOC in E/3765, para. l97.

(7) Also at its 24th session (March l963: CO-ORDINATION/R.430, paras. 80-81) CCAQ was asked by the Organizational Committee of ACC to consider the report of an adhoc inter-agency meeting on publications (CO-ORDINATION/R.512). The Committee noted that this report dealt with several questions which would not normally concern CCAQ, but that it had also raised the question of measures to meet difficulties in recruitment of language staff. On this, the report had suggested the setting up of an ad hoc inter-agency working group, composed of officers responsible for language matters. It appeared to CCAQ that such a measure would lead to confusion of responsibilities, since problems of recruitment of staff fell within the competence of CCAQ. CCAQ suggested to ACC that the proper procedure would be that in so far as an organization has difficulties in recruitment of language or other staff it should, if it believes that the problem is a common one, take it up through CCAQ machinery.

(8) At its 52nd session (l970: CCAQ/SEC/l43) ACC laid down rules regarding the functioning of ACC subsidiary bodies and procedures for convening inter-agency meetings.

(9) At its 53rd session (April l97l, CO-ORDINATION/R.877 - CCAQ/SEC/l83(GEN)) ACC decided that it could not accede to a request by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) that it should be allowed to take part in the work of CCAQ on a regular basis. Since WIPO became a specialized agency in December l974 it has participated fully in CCAQ as from l January 1975.

(l0) The International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) began to participate in the activities of ICSC and CCAQ in the summer of l978; it became a specialized agency on 15 December 1977. The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) became a specialized agency with effect from 1 January 1986 and informed the Commission that it had accepted the ICSC statute.

(11) By resolution 32/197 of 20 December 1977, the General Assembly endorsed the conclusions and recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Restructuring of the Economic and Social Sectors of the United Nations System (see annex to the resolution), inter alia on inter-agency co-ordination. On the same subject, see resolution 32/214 on restructuring of ACC subsidiary machinery (see also section l.4, para. (12)). At its 50th session on financial and budgetary questions (March l979) CCAQ(FB) was informed that the Organizational Committee had assigned two new subject areas to it: the financial impact on the organizations of decisions taken by central intergovernmental bodies, and language arrangements, documentation and related matters (ACC/l979/R.ll, para. 55).

(12) At the 52nd session on financial and budgetary questions (March 1980), CCAQ considered a suggestion by UNDP on the convening of periodic meetings of chief accountants to discuss specific problems relating to activities financed by UNDP. It was agreed that the principle of such meetings was acceptable but that they should concern system-wide issues. UNDP would be free to propose specific items for discussion at such meetings or to arrange for direct contacts between its accounting staff and that of its executing agencies (ACC/1980/16, paras. 39-40).

(13) At the same session on financial and budgetary questions, recalling that responsibility for co-ordination in the area of language arrangements, documentation and publications had been assigned to it by the Organizational Committee following the restructuring of the subsidiary machinery of ACC, CCAQ found that the nature of subjects in this area appeared in the main to be outside the normal scope of its work and outside the competence of its participants. It concluded that the Organizational Committee might wish to reconsider this assignment of responsibility, except to the extent that the subjects in question might have budgetary or financial implications (ACC/1980/16, para.46).

(14) Also at the 52nd session on financial and budgetary questions, CCAQ authorized its secretariat to provide the secretariat of the Organizational Committee with detailed indications of the subjects that might be foreseen for the CCAQ work programme, on the understanding that the programme would need to be kept open-ended to allow for work undertaken in response to requests by central intergovernmental bodies and for initiatives of member organizations. It was also agreed that the secretariat of CCAQ, or its Chairman when necessary, should attend meetings of the Organizational Committee as appropriate (ACC/1980/16, para. 52).

(15) At the 53rd session on financial and budgetary questions (September 1980), the Committee considered suggestions put forward by the Secretary at the request of CCAQ(PER) on co-ordination between CCAQ as a whole and other parts of the machinery for inter-organization co-ordination, and between CCAQ(PER) and CCAQ(FB). The suggestions on the first of these subjects gave rise to no comments. As regards the resumption of joint meetings of the two components of CCAQ, the participants accepted the principles of convening them when important specific questions necessitated the collective presence of both personnel and financial officers, although the scheduling of such meetings was likely to prove difficult (ACC/1980/32, paras. 52-53).

(16) At the 55th session on financial and budgetary questions (September 1981) it was agreed that meetings of CCAQ as a whole should be resumed only if they were needed to deal with a very specific and limited agenda agreed in advance; in practice decisions in both CCAQ(PER) and CCAQ(FB) on matters of common concern were taken after consultations between those concerned within the organizations (ACC/1981/30, para. 70).

(17) At the 57th session on financial and budgetary questions (September 1982) it was agreed that the arrangements for the participation of executing agencies in the discussions of the Budgetary and Finance Committee of the UNDP Governing Council should be improved. To explain their administrations' views, agencies concerned with matters to be discussed in the Budgetary and Finance Committee would nominate a single representative (ACC/1982/25, paras. 63-64).
(18) At its 62nd session (March 1985), CCAQ agreed on the text of an information note for ACC on the common system (ACC/1985/6, para. 20 and annex IV)). On behalf of ACC, the Organizational Committee took note of the information paper in April 1985 (ACC/1985/9, para. 40).

(19) At its 65th session (July 1986: ACC/1986/10, para. 134), CCAQ took note of a communication from the Chairman of the Organizational Committee to the Secretary, concerning a number of aspects of the functioning of ACC subsidiary bodies.

(20) The Organizational Committee's agreements on working arrangements for subsidiary bodies of ACC were also considered at the 65th session of CCAQ(FB) (September 1986). The participants found that the arrangements in question were relevant principally in the case of ACC sub-committees established to deal with specific subject areas. The members of CCAQ, as senior administrators of the system, were well equipped to appreciate matters of effectiveness, efficiency and economy, and from this point of view were satisfied with the existing working arrangements of the Committee (ACC/1986/12, paras. 69-70). The Secretary of the Committee subsequently informed the Chairman of the Organizational Committee of the conclusions of CCAQ(PER) and CCAQ(FB).

(21) Also at the 65th session of CCAQ(FB), with reference to divergencies that had arisen between the two components of the Committee at their previous (64th) session on the principle of joint financing of the General Secretary of FICSA in 1986, the members were informed of correspondence exchanged and discussions held between the Chairmen of CCAQ(PER) and (FB) with a view to preventing the recurrence of such a situation. It was agreed that the areas where divergencies between the two components of the Committee might arise were few in number. Following the Chairmen's consultations, there was now good hope that this problem could be avoided in future (ACC/1986/12, para. 71).

(22) ACC reviewed the functioning of its subsidiary machinery in October 1986. By decision 1986/21, it decided to endorse a report on that subject (ACC/1986/OC/CRP.14/Rev.1).

(23) Nevertheless, the Committee's review of its subsidiary machinery continued well beyond 1986, particularly in the light of the establishment by ECOSOC of a Special Commission to study the UN intergovernmental structure and functions in the economic and social areas (resolution 1987/112). The Organizational Committee, in February 1988, concluded that practical steps were needed to make ACC and its subsidiary machinery more responsive to the needs of intergovernmental bodies. It also reached a series of other conclusions focusing on preparation and documentation for ACC sessions, secretariat support, better interaction between ACC and its subsidiary bodies and among those bodies, the agenda of CCSQ(OPS), better harmonization of programme planning within the ACC framework, and a possible reduction in the number of meetings (ACC/1988/2, paras. 17-20).

(24) In October 1988 the Organizational Committee agreed on a number of issues arising from the adoption by ECOSOC of resolution 1988/77, on the revitalization of the Council. These concerned the participation by the organizations in the Council's discussions, reporting requirements, and the relative roles of the Council and ACC in operational activities for development (ACC/1988/2/Add.3, paras. 21-28). In February 1989 the Organizational Committee adopted a draft statement on the revitalization of ECOSOC, incorporating the points referred to above, and submitted to ACC a progress report containing a series of recommendations on the functioning and structure of the ACC machinery. Both the statement and the report were endorsed by ACC itself in April 1989 (decisions 1989/10 and 1989/17; for the progress report see ACC/1989/3, Add.1, annex II).

(25) At its 71st session (July-August 1989: ACC/1989/14, paras. 149, 150) CCAQ(PER) took note of information from JIU on its work programme for 1990-1991. Following concerns voiced about the relevance of some aspects of the studies proposed, the Committee concluded that these should be discussed further by the CCAQ Secretary with the Executive Secretary of JIU and the Inspectors concerned.

(26) In February 1990 the Organizational Committee had further discussions on the role and functioning of ACC, including the need to modify its annual overview report, to have ACC focus more on emerging issues and make action-oriented proposals, and to devise subsidiary machinery responsive to current needs (ACC/1990/2, paras.11, 12). It later submitted a further progress report to ACC (ACC/1990/2/Add.1).

(27) Commenting at its 72nd session on the 1990 review in the Organizational Committee of co-ordination in the United Nations system, CCAQ(PER) expressed the hope that its secretariat's role and function would not be redirected into areas other than the administrative ones for which it had been established (ACC/1990/4, para. 176).

(28) In October 1990 the Organizational Committee approved a standard format for reports of ACC subsidiary bodies. In the same month its Chairman wrote to the chairmen of those bodies requesting more detailed information on the overall plans and approach of each one to the tasks assigned to it, and the specific activities and outputs planned for 1991 to implement them (ACC/1990/2/Add.2, para. 27).

(29) At its 75th session (July-August 1991: ACC/1991/17, paras. 150-154) CCAQ(PER) was seized by a request from IAEA for views from the organizations on how greater flexibility might be introduced into the common system. The latter, in the Agency's view, had developed into a rigidly-controlled monolith which allowed organizations insufficient flexibility. After discussion of the fundamental tendencies within the common system the Committee concluded that CCAQ should be more dynamic and flexible to keep up with changing times, that it should foster and not inhibit change, that organizations should be more prepared to take initiatives in areas outside "core" common system areas, and that it might be useful to encourage the presence of two or three executive heads at meetings of the Fifth Committee of the General Assembly. The question should be retained on CCAQ's agenda (for full text of these initial conclusions, see ibid., para. 154).

(30) At the same session CCAQ(PER) commented on a request by the General Assembly (resolution 45/238) that the Secretary-General use the Committee's co-ordinating potential more extensively in the area of system-wide co-ordination of conferences. The Committee did not support such an approach (see ACC/1991/17, paras. 140-142).

(31) At its first regular session of 1992, ACC invited a consultant to suggest how ACC could be strengthened. At its 78th session (March 1993: ACC/1993/6, paras. 6-8) CCAQ was informed that the report of the consultant proposed an additional layer to be introduced into the system above CCAQ (PER) and CCAQ (FB) to deal with broad policy issues. The two bodies would become sub-committees of the new body. In connexion with a forthcoming discussion in ACC of the relationship agreements between the United Nations and the other members of the common system, pursuant to a request of ECOSOC (resolution 45/191 B), the Committee concluded that it could not identify any problems at the working level with these agreements (ibid. paras. 7-9).

(32) At its first regular session of 1993 (ACC/1993/14, para. 13) ACC reviewed the consultant's final report on the functioning of ACC and drew up new terms of reference for the Consultative Committee on Administrative Questions with higher level representation and assisted by two components representing CCAQ(PER) and CCAQ(FB). CCAQ with senior representation would meet when ACC decided that important policy issues needed to be addressed. Otherwise, its two components would continue to meet separately, with members drawn from the respective technical services of the organizations. At its 79th session (July 1993: ACC/1993/22, paras.7-11) the Committee reviewed the conclusions of ACC and felt that every effort should be made to increase cooperation between the two components of CCAQ and that a greater concordance of the work of PER and FB could be achieved through the convening of PER and FB meetings at the same time and place. CCAQ agreed to recommend that a joint session be held as soon as possible to provide the opportunity for greater interaction between the members of the two committees.

(33) At its 85th session (July 1996: ACC/1996/14, paras. 78-89) CCAQ prepared a detailed response to a request by the Secretary of ACC seeking the views of CCAQ(PER) on the ongoing review of the functioning of ACC and its subsidiary bodies. The response underlined the unique role of CCAQ(PER) vis-à-vis ICSC and as a forum for the views of staff to be made known. The scope for the Committee drastically to reduce the number of its sessions was inherently linked to its consultative relationship with ICSC. The participation of CCAQ and the organizations in meetings organized under the aegis of ICSC had been rationalized and reduced in recent years. There was potential for further reductions if ICSC limited its sessions to one a year but this depended on the management of ICSC's agenda which was not within the purview of CCAQ.

(34) CCAQ agreed that, depending on its own agenda, future sessions might be organized into sub-groups of specialists working in parallel to review the technical aspects of selected issues and report back to the full Committee which need then only meet for one or two days in plenary. Apart from its regular sessions where the need for organizations to be physically present was confirmed, there were many other opportunities when inter-agency consultations could usefully take place; these should be achieved without the need for inter-city travel and formal meetings. CCAQ recommended that ACC propose to the General Assembly that, as part of the reforms being undertaken throughout the common system, ICSC sessions be limited to one per year and that the work programme of ICSC be revised accordingly. ICSC decided that taking substantive decisions at its first session only and adopting its report at its second session had proved positive and felt that more could be accomplished in two short sessions than in one long one (ICSC/44/R.12, para. 51).

(35) At its third high level meeting (February 1998: ACC/1998/CCAQ-HL/9, paras. 12-14) CCAQ-HL, in amplification of its terms of reference, inter alia, confirmed that it should focus on strategic issues with a view to reaching decisions or providing advice to ACC, be the forum for a continuing dialogue on the reform processes under way in the common system, review administrative issues on behalf of ACC, receiving the reports of CCAQ(FB), CCA (PER) and ICSC, and take action on behalf of ACC on issues referred to ACC by these bodies. It also established its working arrangements, including the possibility of occasionally organizing sessions with staff representatives.

(36) At its 89th session (February 1999: ACC/1999/6, para. 55) CCAQ(FB considered a draft of a JIU report entitled "ACC and its machinery" on which its comments had been requested by the Secretary of ACC. With respect to the JIU recommendation that the funding of the Sub-Committee on Nutrition (SCN) be arranged on a cost-sharing formula basis as was done for other jointly-financed bodies, participants noted that the existing flexible arrangements reflected organizations' wishes to be free to control the amounts of their voluntary contributions. Accordingly, the SCN core budget had to reflect demands for SCN services and the extent to which organizations were prepared to contribute. While appreciating the desire for a more secure funding formula for SCN, participants were unable to agree to it. With regard to the proposal to rename CCAQ-HL as the Inter-Agency Committee on Management, participants pointed out that the acronym IACM was already in use by some organizations and that if the name were to be changed, it should be changed to something different.

(37) At its 4th high-level meeting (July 2000: ACC/2000/21, para. 15) CCAQ-HL was informed that executive heads were examining proposals on the reform of ACC and the ACC sub-machinery put forward by a review team and that, on the basis of their input, the Secretary-General would in due course be writing to organizations with details of the implementation of the proposals. The Committee, noting that the composition and scope of functions of the proposed High Level Management Committee corresponded broadly to those of the High Level CCAQ, considered it could assist ACC in acting on relevant aspects of the review team's proposals by mandating a Task Force of its members to review priority tasks and concerns for inter-agency coordination in the management area and consider the most effective arrangements for pursuing them in the context of a High Level Committee and subsidiary bodies. In that light the task force should make recommendations concerning (a) methods of work and subsidiary structures, including the provision of guidance to, and relevant aspects of the functioning of, ICSC and (b) the manner in which the concerns of staff representatives and the Chairman of ICSC might best be prepared for ACC's fall sessions each year, as well as the manner in which meaningful and productive dialogue with staff representatives also might best be maintained at meetings of the High Committee itself. The Committee invited the Task Force to develop a discussion paper in preparation for a special session of the High Level Committee which would meet in early October in Geneva to provide input on the matter to ACC's fall session requested the Task Force to include in its discussion paper, proposals for policy coordination in areas such as procurement, conference services, printing services and travel which were not clearly attributed within the current ACC sub-machinery, to focus in particular on how these as well as all the other issues dealt with by the subsidiary machinery and other groups tasked with fulfilling a coordination role might be developed in task-based Task Forces and to address the issue of inter-action and coordination arrangements between management and programme areas.

(38) At the meeting of a high-level Task Force in Vienna (October 2000: ACC/2000/CCAQ-HL/5, paras. 3-4) the Group took note of the support forthcoming from organizations in respect of the establishment of the HLCM, which would, in the Group's view, bring greater coherence, relevance and opportunities for synergies and savings to the administrative management of the United Nations system. The Group foresaw that HLCM, acting on behalf of the Executive Heads on issues of common concern affecting the administrative management of the organizations, would perform a major role in ensuring the candid sharing of knowledge and experiences (both positive and negative) in order to enable organizations to profit from good practices and thereby improve services, achieve productivity improvements and increase efficiency and effectiveness. It identified seven functions that would include inter alia identifying and analysing management issues which required system-wide response; introducing measurable improvements; facilitating a continuing dialogue on the reform processes and the management of change underway in the organizations of the system; developing bench-marks or standards in administrative areas against which organizations could evaluate performance; interacting, as appropriate, with Member States in the UN's Fifth Committee and with the Chairpersons of ACABQ and ICSC on issues which had or might have system-wide implications for the management of resources; and providing a forum wherein meaningful exchanges could be developed with the representatives of the staff associations (FICSA and CCISUA) on issues of mutual concern.

(39) At this session the Group (ibid., paras. 6-8) confirmed that a large part of the work of the HLCM should be carried out by task-based Task Forces and identified a number of areas warranting the Committee's attention. It identified, in particular, the need for a strengthened ICT coordination mechanism to facilitate UN system-wide knowledge sharing of ICT topics, serve as the primary focus for such coordination and assess the feasibility of proposals for the development of system-wide information systems and noted that such a mechanism would provide services and advice to both the HLCM and the HLCP but should report to the HLCM.

(40) With respect to the functioning of the HLCM (ibid., paras. 10-16), the Group considered that key to the effectiveness of the HLCM was the need to maintain in its work the active participation of the highest level administrative manager in each organization and the necessity of identifying performance indicators for activities on which it planned to embark in order to enable it to evaluate progress in each case. The Group underlined the importance of increased use of electronic and other means of real-time communication in the work of the HLCM and of all other committees and task forces working under its aegis. Noting the importance of opening dialogue with relevant NGOs or their coalitions, and with representatives of other civil society organizations and the business sector on an ad hoc basis, the group recommended that, at an early session, HLCM examine how best it might interact with such bodies on matters of mutual interest. Arrangements would have to be made for coordination with HLCP where needed. The Group also considered that the introduction of a dialogue on concerns of a system-wide nature with representatives of the staff bodies (FICSA and CCISUA) should feature on the agenda of its regular sessions and recommended that the HLCM establish contacts with the staff bodies to confirm this intention as soon as possible after its creation. The group also made recommendations on the nature of the secretariat that would be needed and for the Chairperson of CCAQ-HL to continue to exercise this function until the HLCM was fully established.

(41) At its 5th high-level meeting (October 2000: ACC/2000/CCAQ-HL/6, paras. 1-3) CCAQ-HL took note, with appreciation, of the report of the Task Force and decided to report to ACC that the establishment of the High Level Committee on Management (HLCM) was timely and would bring greater coherence, relevance and opportunities for synergies and savings to the administrative management of the United Nations system. HLCM would take decisions on behalf of, and in the name of, ACC on matters affecting the administrative management of ACC member organizations and would refer to ACC only those administrative issues necessary for ACC's strategic policy making. HLCM would identify, promote and coordinate management reforms that would improve services, enhance productivity and increase efficiency and effectiveness through: (a) identifying and analysing management issues that either cut across areas of specialization and were multi-sectoral, (e.g. results based budgeting (RBB) approaches) or that were specific to a given area and required system-wide response; (b) introducing measurable improvements arising out of findings and recommendations made to it in any of these areas; (c) sharing knowledge and experiences (both positive and negative) of administrative management reforms undertaken in member organizations to enable all organisations to profit from best practices; (d) facilitating the continuing dialogue on the reform processes and the management of change underway in the organizations of the system; (e) promoting and facilitating networking among specialists in particular administrative fields; (f) developing benchmarks or standards - in administrative areas - against which organizations could evaluate performance; such benchmarks could reflect the work of entities outside the United Nations system as well as among organizations of the system itself; (g) interacting, as appropriate, with Member States in the UN's Fifth Committee and with the Chairpersons of ACABQ and ICSC on issues which have or may have system-wide implications for the management of resources; and (h) providing a forum wherein meaningful exchanges could be developed with the representatives of the staff associations (FICSA and CCISUA) on issues of mutual concern of a system-wide nature.

(42) With respect to the methods of work and areas warranting the attention of HLCM (ibid, paras. 4-8) the Committee adopted the recommendations of the task-force (see para. (39) above). It noted that in some of these subject areas, notably human resources management, financial and budgetary questions and information systems coordination, sub-committees were currently handling a number of issues on behalf of ACC and that the manner in which system-wide coordination issues arose varied considerably from one subject area to another. In order to determine the most appropriate and economical arrangements for dealing with such issues the Committee invited the sub-committees to define the core issues and functions over which they uniquely had competence, which they anticipated would be continuing and over which there should remain delegated authority and to explain how some or all of their work might be developed within the framework of the task-based approach outlined in the report. The Committee also adopted the recommendation of the task-force for a strengthened ICT coordination mechanism (see para. (39) above) and recommended that priorities should be established for the work programme of such a mechanism at the first session of the HLCM.

(43) With respect to the functioning of HLCM (ibid., paras. 10-14), the Committee considered that key to the effectiveness of HLCM was (a) the need to maintain the active participation in its work of the highest level administrative manager in each organization and (b) the necessity of identifying measurable improvements, which might be facilitated by performance indicators, on each of the issues on which it would embark in order to enable it to evaluate progress in each case. As a general rule HLCM would meet at least once a year, most likely in the third quarter, prior to the meeting of ACC. Additional meetings might exceptionally be convened in response to given demands. The Committee agreed with the task-force on the importance of increased use of electronic and other means of real-time communication in the work of HLCM and of all other committees and task forces working under its aegis and on the need to open a dialogue with relevant NGOs or their coalitions, and with representatives of other civil society organizations and the business sector on an ad hoc basis (see para. (40) above). The Committee acknowledged that a coordinated approach with HLCP was warranted in a number of areas such as knowledge management and data collection and envisaged a number of coordinating arrangements, preferring approaches and arrangements that avoided institutionalizing additional layers of meetings. The Committee also agreed with the task force on the importance of dialogue with the staff representatives which would assist ACC to enter into a more focussed and meaningful dialogue with them on matters of system-wide concern (ibid., para. 14)

(44) At the same meeting (ibid., paras. 15-17 & annex I) the Committee emphasized the importance of a strong secretariat and expressed its intention of examining its needs when ACC took its decision on the creation of the High Level Committees. It also made recommendations for transitional arrangements and proposed terms of reference for HLCM in the annex. ACC at its October 2000 session established the United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB) and the CEB established two High Level Committees on Management (HLCM) and Programmes (HLCP).

(45) At its first regular session in December 2000 (ACC/2000/24, paras. 3-8) the High-Level Committee on Management (HLCM), after carrying out a review of its functioning and noting that the CEB decision called for a zero-based approach in reviewing its subsidiary machinery, i.e., the starting point should be what needs to be done at the inter-agency level in areas of system-wide concern rather than what was being done at the time, concluded that the new arrangements should obviate the need for any standing committees, require adequate ‘cross-over' in membership between HLCM and meetings of specialists and call for strong support from the unified CEB secretariat. The work of meetings of specialists should be closely linked to the work programme of the HLCM in order inter alia to ensure that issues which cut across different substantive areas were dealt with in a strategic and coherent manner and would permit HLCM to take account of any competing priorities that might otherwise impede progress in a given area. It also set out various considerations that would apply in respect of work in the substantive areas under review as indicated in the next three paragraphs and decided that a member of HLCM would be designated to participate in each meeting of HR Directors, Budget and Finance Directors and ICT Managers.

(46) With respect to work in the Human Resources Management (HRM) area (ibid., para. 9), the Committee considered that issues on the current work programme of the HR Directors would be pursued through Task Forces but that common system HR directors would meet immediately before sessions of ICSC –normally for not more than three days – to review, on behalf of HLCM, all matters under consideration by ICSC, determine common positions to put forward before ICSC, select their spokesperson or persons and authorize them to make representations on behalf of HLCM and determine what mechanisms would be set in place to react to developments which might take place during the course of the ICSC session to enable organizations' representatives to be present only for issues of interest to their organizations. On the basis of specific requests from HLCM, the HR directors could also review policy issues of common concern on the occasion of their pre-ICSC meeting.

(47) With respect to work in the Finance and Budget (FB) areas (ibid., para. 10), issues in these areas would be pursued in future through Task Forces but that FB Directors (as appropriate and relevant to the subject matter) could hold short agenda-driven meetings if they so wished to exchange views on financial policy issues and to deal with any other issues which in their opinion required discussion by their meeting together. Different types of budgeting arrangements (regular, voluntary and to some degree commercial) would also be more fully evaluated and compared.

(48) With respect to work in the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) area (ibid., para. 11), HLCM would itself be responsible for moving strategic ICT concerns forward and, to this end, would review these at each of its sessions, at which a Chief Information Officer (CIO) (i.e. an executive information and technology officer from one of the system's organizations) would be invited to exchange information on ICT trends across the system. ICT Task Forces should focus on issues which would have a strategic impact on the UN family as a whole, issues in which inter-agency intervention would make a difference, e.g. best practices in production, dissemination of documentation electronically, on assisting HLCM in determining what future changes in ICT could be anticipated and how these could be planned for within the UN family, frank exchanges of information on successes and failures in technological developments and issues which linked ICT to other management areas (HR, payroll, procurement, management information, etc.).

(49) The Committee also concluded (ibid., paras. 12-14) that its work should focus on five priority areas: (a) zero nominal growth - its impact on organizations of the UN system; (b) capitalizing on technology – the management of crosscutting ICT concerns across the system and the identification of issues which would make a strategic impact and lead to efficiencies and savings; (c) simplification – in procedures, processes and entitlements; (d) sustainable employability – the fact that a life-long career would no longer be the employment model and the consequences thereof for conditions of employment, contractual policy, exit strategies and the like; and (e) staff security.

(50) HLCM also agreed (ibid., paras 15-17) that a dedicated web site for members should be established to ensure continuing consultations among them, with bulletin boards for the priority areas, and that its secretariat, created by merging the Office of Inter-Agency Affairs in New York and the various inter-agency secretariats in Geneva into a single secretariat with offices in New York and Geneva, would be responsible for the technological initiatives. The core staff should be complemented with others on loan from organizations and consultant support could be added to ensure that capabilities in all management areas were maintained. The Committee considered that two clarifications were warranted in respect of paragraph 5 of its terms of reference (see para. (44) above) to the effect that the reference to the chairpersons of two entities was not intended to be restrictive but that contacts with other entities were also foreseen and that the reference to ongoing dialogue with the staff representatives was seen to be a key component of HLCM's future sessions.

(51) At its September 2001 session (ACC/2001/12, para. 17) HLCM concluded that the Chairman of the UNDG Management Group (UNDP) should be invited to explain how the mandate of that Management Group differed from HLCM's Terms of Reference, with a view to ensuring that the work of the two were synergistic and that there was no duplication of work.

(52) At its March 2002 session (CEB/2002/3, paras. 26-28) HLCM defined its relationship with staff representatives. The details are set out in section 14.3, paras. (58) and (59).

(53) At the same session (ibid., paras. 32-35) HLCM, within the framework of its Terms of Reference which stated inter alia that "the Committee's work is carried out in the main through task forces of experts in given administrative areas … whose work is guided by HLCM," reviewed the direction it wished to give to, and the issues it wished to have considered by, the network of Budget and Finance Managers. There was first the need to establish a sharply focused agenda of issues on which the network should work, both by electronic exchanges and through a meeting, if necessary, before the next session of HLCM. Among the substantive issues to be included in this agenda, the Committee had in the course of its session, already identified: (a) the issue of an appropriate mechanism for effective and timely follow-up work on accounting standards, particularly with regard to monitoring and participating urgently in the development of International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS) by the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC), and (b) an analysis of all the dimensions of the problems associated with funding after-service health care. It thus requested the secretariat urgently to consult electronically with HLCM members to identify additional agenda items and subsequently to share these with the FB network in order to develop a dynamic strategic agenda. The Committee emphasized the importance it attached to the working methods it had adopted in December 2000 in order to obviate the need for routine meetings based on agendas that were largely repetitive.

(54) At its April 2002 meeting (CEB/2002/HLCM/8, para. 17) the Human Resources (HR) Network, following a briefing by the Secretary of HLCM on the Committee's work over the past year, noted that the new structure, which provided for closer involvement of the most senior administrators at the inter-agency level, had given greater impetus to achieving success in cross-cutting issues as evidenced by the new cost sharing arrangements for security and had helped reinforce the capacity for strategic HRM issues to be dealt with in a timely holistic manner. It expressed appreciation for the introduction of the HLCM newsletter, which was a good vehicle for knowledge sharing in a concise manner across interest groups, and welcomed the inclusion in HLCM's agenda of an item on the changing nature of the balance between regular and voluntary funding in organizations because of the important impact it had on HR planning, contractual arrangements and the independence and impartiality of the international civil service. It requested the CEB secretariat to ensure that the HR Network include on the agenda of its future meetings an item on critical HR issues that required greater integration with other disciplines, in preparation for their development at HLCM.

(55) At its October 2002 session (CEB/2002/5, para. 42) HLCM, in reviewing the relationship between HLCM/HLCP and UNDG, noted that UNDG and its extensive range of working groups appeared to be duplicating the functions assigned to HLCM and HLCP by CEB. It would be necessary to clarify the respective functions of UNDG, established as an Executive Committee by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and the two high-level committees of CEB, so as to remove confusion, avoid duplication and build synergies between the system-wide bodies and UNDG, in order to advance their respective goals and forms of collaboration.

(56) At the same session (ibid., para. 44) HLCM, following a discussion of a proposal for organizations to provide individual comments to JIU reports, confirmed that, it would continue, in accordance with the statute of JIU, to provide joint system-wide comments on relevant JIU reports, which would be coordinated through the CEB Secretariat. It also agreed to work towards greater consistency in the designation of JIU focal points among organizations of the common system.

(57) At its June 2003 session (CEB/2003/3, paras. 27-28) HLCM had the benefit of a briefing from the Inter-Agency Procurement Working Group (IAPWG) and from the Common Services Working Group on Procurement (CSWGP) on developments in respect of common system procurement, the training and certification of procurement and central security personnel and the need to develop closer formal links between HLCM and IAPWG on the one hand and with other groups engaged in management issues including Inter-Agency Network of Facilities Managers (INFM) and the UN Security and Safety Network (the UNSSNET). HLCM agreed: (a) to incorporate the work of IAPWG within its agenda, to receive IAPWG's reports in respect of those matters where high level inter-agency support was required and to provide guidance and oversight as appropriate; (b) to invite members to inform procurement officers in each respective organization of the discussion in HLCM and to follow up meetings of IAPWG; (c) to develop similarly closer links with INFM and UNSSNET; (d) to invite the UN System Staff College to consider its role in the training and certification programmes for procurement and central security staff. Noting the possible conflict between the acronym UNCSD used both by the common services group and the Committee on Sustainable Development the Committee also requested the CEB secretariat to bring this matter to the attention of those responsible with a view to revising one of the acronyms appropriately.

(58) At its July 2003 meeting (CEB/2003/HLCM/20, paras. 31-32) the HR Network took note of the concern expressed by HLCM at its Fifth Session, particularly in terms of possible duplication of effort, at the plethora of groups that had convened to review problems in the HR area, some as part of UNDG. It appreciated the proposal that the Directors of HR of UNDG meet with the objective of reviewing the current situation and making recommendations for cooperation with the HR Network. It requested the UNDG secretariat to share the outcome of that meeting with other organizations through the CEB secretariat with the view to establishing an approach for the future.

(59) At its 6th Session (October 2003: CEB/2003/5, paras. 24-25) HLCM was briefed on a preparatory meeting held in Geneva to reinvigorate the FB Network. The meeting had reiterated the need for the Network and stressed that it should focus not only on accounting but also on budgeting and programming issues. It was also strongly felt that, from time to time, the Network should have face-to-face meetings. Five main issues had been highlighted for the work programme of the Network, namely, United Nations accounting standards, after-service health insurance liabilities, support costs, fraud prevention and electronic inter-agency payments. A treasurer's network should focus on cash management. The group also proposed to develop modalities of work and report to HLCM. The Committee concluded that the FB Network should take the responsibility for cost-sharing formulas and the review of jointly financed budgets.

(60) HLCM (a) welcomed the reactivation of the FB Network and supported the proposals for its agenda; (b) underlined the importance of focusing the Network's attention on developments in results-based budgeting (RBB), as well as United Nations system accounting standards; (c) noted that the Network would also be charged with further refinements of cost-sharing formulas and the budgets of inter-agency funded bodies; and (d) agreed that the Network should be properly structured and have periodic face-to-face meetings.

(61) Also at that session (ibid, para. 25) the Committee recalled its request that the Inter-Agency Procurement Working Group report to HLCM.

(62) At its February 2004 meeting (CEB/2004/HLCM/12/Rev.1, paras. 2-3) the FB Network was addressed by Mr. Michel Camdessus, Former Managing Director of IMF. Mr. Camdessus spoke on the theme of the need for closer links between those "who manage the dreams of the United Nations and those who administer and deliver them". The issue of reform of the UN had become less of a priority for Member States but change was needed to address the increasing number of problems, e.g., climate, pollution, international crime, migration and pandemics, generated by globalisation, which could not be resolved, either at the national level or using traditional communication mechanisms between governments. The UN system had been devised some sixty years ago, at a time when the problems currently facing the UN could not have been envisaged. However much the problems and issues had developed, the systems and mechanisms for dealing with them had not kept pace. Mr. Camdessus cited four main problems currently being faced by UN organizations: (a) an external perception that there existed a major vacuum at the top and that the world lacked leadership; (b) the UN Secretary General's lack of either sufficient authority over organizations or enough capacity to speak on their behalf; (c) the lack of effective instruments to respond to many problems of a global, twenty-first century dimension; and (d) the lack of a voice for developing countries and other actors, e.g. civil society.

(63) In proposing solutions to these issues Mr. Camdessus cited the need for organizations: (a) to generate trust in the efficient running of their operations; (b) to concentrate their efforts only on those areas where they held competitive advantage; (c) to reshuffle the system to concentrate upon, and institutionalize, the two most prominent problems, namely, environment and migration; (d) to create a Global Economic Council to provide an arena for a substantive partnership with developing countries and civil society; and (e) to strengthen the authority of the UN Secretary General. Mr. Camdessus also suggested that more work was required on the treatment of Foreign Direct Investment given its huge importance to development issues. Finally, in response to a question on the budgetary strategy of the UN, Mr. Camdessus recalled a suggestion that he had previously made to ECOSOC that the UN would do well to organize itself as the social pillar of the global system and to negotiate funds and budgets for all UN institutions under this single pillar.

(64) At its March 2004 meeting (CEB/2004/HLCM/14, para. 21) the HR Network received updates from UNDP, on behalf of UNDG, on a number of issues on which it was working, namely: Inter-agency mobility, Spouse employment, Harassment, and Harmonization of contract practices. It was also informed that UNDG had decided that it would be inappropriate for the Group to discuss security for national staff as it fell within the purview of HLCM and IASMN and that the UNDG working group covering the rehiring of staff separated from other organizations had been disbanded as it was considered that the issue would be more appropriately taken up by the HR Network. The Network noted UNDG's intention to divide its agenda so that all issues of harmonization and simplification remained within UNDG, whilst all policy issues would be referred to the HR Network.

(65) At its 8th session (October 2004: CEB/2004/6, paras. 19-20) HLCM received a briefing on the outcome of the meeting of HLCP held in September 2004. The Committee reiterated its wish for closer communication between the HLCM and HLCP to ensure the meaningful and practical sharing of information and suggested that two areas where close collaboration would be fruitful were (a) results-based management and (b) harmonization and simplification.

(66) At its 9th session (April 2005: CEB/2005/3, paras. 23-26) HLCM was briefed on the outcome of the February 2005 meeting of HLCP which had reviewed the major developments since it had last met so as to frame the context for its consideration of its report on the implementation of the United Nations Millennium Declaration, “One United Nations — catalyst for progress and change: how the Millennium Declaration is changing the way the system works”. The report was the product of a joint effort by the entire United Nations system of organizations, and focused on how the Millennium Declaration had changed the way the organizations worked. The consultative and inclusive process for the preparation of the report had forged stronger links among the organizations of the system. The value of the report depended upon the capacity to introduce a truly system-wide perspective on the implementation of the Millennium Declaration, i.e., how the contribution of each part of the system fitted into the larger picture and how results in advancing progress in achieving the goals and commitments set forth in the Millennium Declaration could, through enhanced policy and operational coherence, become greater than the sum of their parts. The Committee: (a) reiterated its wish for closer communication between HLCM and HLCP with a view to ensuring the meaningful and practical sharing of information; and (b) suggested that a retreat should be organized in autumn 2005 to bring together representatives of both committees.

(67) At the same meeting (ibid., paras. 75-76) HLCM considered a proposal by FAO (CEB/2005/HLCM/R.12) to accept the United Nations medical directors’ group as a working group of HLCM. The Committee: (a) expressed satisfaction with the work of the medical directors’ group and the leadership that it had shown in harmonizing and implementing medico-administrative and health policies throughout the United Nations system; and (b) agreed to establish the United Nations medical directors’ group as a working group of HLCM.

(68) At the July 2005 meeting (CEB/2005/HLCM/26, paras. 2-3) of the FB Network, WHO expressed a willingness to to facilitate the establishment of an informal network of the Treasurers of the UN system on the subject of common principles and policies for investments. The CEB secretariat was asked to verify the interest of the organizations in the establishment of an informal network of the Treasurers of the UN system.
1. The Basis of Administrative Coordination
1.2 The Machinery of Administration Coordination

(69) At a videoconference held on 26 July 2006 (CEB/2006/HLCM/R.9, paras.4-5), the Chairman of the High Level Panel on System-wide Coherence noted the consensus throughout the Panel on numerous issues: development on a country level needed to be unified, strategic, and effective; the importance of IDPs and the financing of human assistance; a strategic direction on environmental issues; a mainstream approach to gender issues; the need for sustainable development; the wish to concentrate on country-level human rights; and ECOSOC’s role in relation to coherence and effectiveness on inter-governmental and inter-agency levels. In terms of business practices, there was a focus on harmonisation, transparency, accountability and evaluation. Human Resources was identified as an area in need of reform. It was hoped that the CEB/ HLCM would become the driver of the change process. The Committee thanked the Panel for the briefing and agreed to take the item to the joint session with the HLCP at the twelfth session of the HLCM.
(70) At the FB Network sixth session in Vienna in August 2006 (CEB/2006/HLCLM/34, paras.75-78), it was unanimously reaffirmed that the FB Network was the appropriate forum for discussion and decision on financial management matters of actual and potential impact on UN system organisations. Possible areas of overlap between the FB Network and the UNDG Financial Policies Working Group (FPWG) should be monitored and avoided through the sharing of information between the two bodies.

(71) At the same session (CEB/2006/HLCLM/34, paras.79-82), all financial information collected through the CEB Secretariat’s biennial survey on the budgetary and financial situation of organisations in the UN systems would be made available on the Network’s website in the form of Excel tables and in more detailed formats where required. Data collection would continue so as to encompass organisations that have not yet participated in the survey and to engage with issues that had arisen, such as the accounting and reporting for contributions to the UN system by the European Communities.

(72) At its twelfth session, held in Rome from 30 September to 1 october 2006, in response to concerns raised over communication, HLCM agreed that the CEB Secretariat would hold debriefing sessions with FICSA and CCISUA representatives after HLCM meetings.

(73) Regarding the establishment of a UN System-wide Evaluation Mechanism, HLCM recommended, at its 14th session (CEB/2007/6, paras.163-165), that UNEG continue to work on the development of a proposal, for consideration at its next session. An area for further UNEG elaboration could be options regarding phasing in the start up and work programme and in arrangements for funding the core evaluation capacity and the individual evaluations. The HLCM would examine alternatives including proceeding on the basis of a cluster approach. The Committee also agreed that this would be kept a “live agenda item” for future sessions of HLCM and HLCP. The Committee encouraged HCLM members to work to build internal support for this initiative in their respective organizations, and to provide feedback to UNEG in the next months on their views and positions, in order to actively contribute to the design of a proposal that could meet broad favour at the next inter-agency discussion.

(74) At its eight session (CEB/2008/HLCM/FB/4, paras.38-41), the FB Network thanked UNDGO for presenting its programme of work on financial management matters and took note of it. The FB Network and UNDG would pursue the maximum level of integration and coordination in all financial management policy and guidance issues with relevance at the system-wide level. In particular, any discussions leading to implications for the UN system would be coordinated through the FB Network for comprehensive consideration and buy-in, while UNDG would ensure guidance and support for the needs of the pilot projects and, more in general, for the requirements emerging from the country level.

(75) At the same session (CEB/2008/HLCM/FB/4, paras.55-57), given the importance of a systematic and structured coordination between the FB and the Legal Network, FB Network members were encouraged to review the proposed Consultation procedure on documents having legal implications and transmit any comments to their HLCM representative ahead of the HLCM meeting of 17-18 March.

(76) At its ninth session (CEB/2008/HLCM/FB/18, paras. 35-42), the FB Network took note of the successful experiences of UNHCR, WHO and FAO with out-posting of administrative functions and of the key success factors and challenges, as outlined by the presenters. Recalling that HLCM has recently called for a specific attention by all member organizations to consider any off-shoring options in conjunction with the possibility of establishing “common services” solutions among UN system organizations, whatever the “functions” or “services” concerned are, the Network would explore avenues to leverage on these experiences and to scale-up the service centre solution at the system-wide level.

(77) At its nineteenth session (CEB/2010/3, paras.54-58), HLCM took note of the update by the Associate Director of the UN Development Operations Coordination Office (DOCO) on the work of UNDG and requested the CEB Secretariat and DOCO to continue the collaboration to increase the synergies among the work of the three pillars of CEB and to elaborate a plan, in consultation with organisations, also through the development and launch of a survey/questionnaire, to focus the work of the system on priority areas, eliminating overlaps and streamlining the number of subgroups, and to provide HLCM at its next session with a report covering the areas under its direct purview.

(78) At its thirteenth session (CEB/2010/HLCM/FB/30, paras.40-45), the FB Network acknowledged progress reached by the organisations having developed delocalised service centres; and encouraged UN system organisations to embark on using existing service centres based on individual, natural, incremental growth needs and through bilateral agreements with service providing organisations.

(79) At its twentieth session (CEB/2010/5, paras.17-24), HLCM took note of the proposed prioritization of activities in the areas of finance and budget, human resources, information and communication technology and procurement, as reflected in document CEB/2010/HLCM/25; Urged its Networks to develop and re-adjust their programmes of work accordingly, with a clear focus on the priorities identified and agreed; Underlined the need for the results of the Survey to be seen in conjunction with the Implementation Plan for the recommendations of the HLCM-UNDG joint mission, as approved at the joint HLCM-UNDG session of 27 September and reflected in document CEB/2010/HLCM-UNDG/1/Add.1. In this context, further prioritization of activities may be necessary.

(80) The Committee also re-affirmed the commitment by member organizations to take on the responsibility of leading and supporting activities within each Network, through working groups organized in clusters of interested organizations and requested the CEB Secretariat to develop a prioritized HLCM programme of work, on the basis of the results of the Survey and of the Implementation Plan for the recommendations of the HLCM-UNDG joint mission, for consideration by the Committee at its next session.

(81) At its twenty first session (CEB/2011/HLCM/HR/9, paras.5-7) the HR Network took note of the new modalities for HR Network meetings as follows: a) efforts will be made for closer collaboration with the ICSC; HR Directors will hold a lunch during the Spring session and retreat before the Summer session with the Commissioners; b) election of three Co-chairs to replace the four Spokespersons effective as of the Network’s Summer session 2011; c) focus on ICSC Agenda items during the two annual meetings just prior to the Commission’s session and a one day meeting prior to HLCM to focus on HLCM/HR Network issues.

(82) At the same session (CEB/2011/HLCM/HR/9, paras.10-11) the HR Network endorsed the 2011/2012 Work Plan presented by the CEB Secretariat with minor modifications; Agreed to include Inter-Agency Mobility under Strategy 1. The CEB Secretariat would circulate the presentation on the topic which had been prepared for the HR Director’s Strategic meeting as a starting point for a discussion; And requested that the “lead” agencies be reflected under any working groups.

(83) At its twenty first session (CEB/2011/HLCM/HR/9, paras.41-43), the HR Network also agreed that the review of the HR framework was important, especially in the context of inter-agency mobility; Looked forward to participating actively in the review of the HR framework and to bring experiences from other work undertaken to avoid duplication of effort and gain efficiencies for the system as a whole; Requested that the ICSC and the HR Network clarify distribution of roles and responsibilities and leverage each other’s capacities.

(84) The Commission decided:
(a) To endorse the time lines as shown in Annex II, the proposed framework of actions for the review of the ICSC Framework for Human Resources Management;
(b) To request its secretariat to undertake the actions listed under Phase I of the review, in consultation with organizations and staff federations, and report thereon at its seventy-fourth session;
(c) To consider the use of a working group for Phase II of the review exercise to conduct the study and make recommendations to the Commission.

(85) At its twenty third session in September 2011 (CEB/2011/HLCM/HR/23, paras. 4-6), the HR Network agreed that the ICSC Framework for HR Management was still a valid HR tool but that it may indeed require some updating to incorporate new human resources management issues such as competency frameworks, but not a full review or restructure. The Framework was regarded as the key and overarching document for all HR planning, which would inform any future debate on common system pay and benefits. In addition, the organizations felt strongly that the definition of core and non-core items was the prerogative of the organizations themselves, given their differing needs and mandates.

(86) At its twenty second session (CEB/2011/5, paras.59-70), HLCM endorsed the following common principles on results reporting:
Mutual accountability
• Support national governments to implement their global commitments
• Agree on a shared agenda
• Improve national M&E systems
• Engage in dialogue to facilitate learning
Transparency
• Accessible results reporting
• Balanced reporting on successes and challenges
• Understandable for intended users
Efficient use of resources
• Reporting on efficiency initiatives and relative efficiency gains of individual agencies over time
• Simplify, standardize and streamline financial, internal management and external results reporting
Effectiveness in results
• Individually and collectively reporting on contribution towards national, regional and global results and recommended that member organizations incorporate, simplify, and innovate to ensure the principles are applied across all relevant business practices.