Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Co products and services v8 29-8-2012-final


Published on

Consortium Office products and services, 29 August 2012

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Co products and services v8 29-8-2012-final

  1. 1. CGIAR Consortium Products, Services and OutcomesAugust 29, 2012 – final version for CB consideration following consultation with Consortium membersThis note is intended to help provide clarity on what the CGIAR Consortium and its implementing arm,the Consortium Office, deliver and can be held accountable for. This document was drafted by theConsortium Office staff in June-July and has benefitted from comments received from CGIARConsortium Members 1. The intent is to provide a framework against which the performance of theConsortium, and the value for money it delivers, can be evaluated. This document will be submitted fordiscussion and decision at the October 2012 Consortium Board meeting. The document will be sharedwith the Consortium Board ahead of its virtual meeting on September 27, as it provides the context andbackground for the 2013 CO POWB that the Consortium Board has to discuss at that time.In general terms, the role of the CGIAR Consortium has been described in the various documents relatedto the CGIAR reform. This note has taken key documents such as the Constitution and Joint Agreementas starting points. The note attempts to concretize these roles and responsibilities of the CGIARConsortium into specific products and services, and proposes indicators and targets to measure theperformance of the Consortium against 3-5 year goals. In addition, the draft note proposed key projects,activities and deliverables for the 2013 planning cycle in order to prepare the 2013 CO Program of Workand Budget (POWB) in a consistent manner. This section has informed the 2013 CO POWB, which had tobe prepared more quickly in order to be reviewed by the Peer Review Group and submitted to the FundCouncil for its October meeting. Finally, as there has been some discussion on the Consortium’sapproach to shared services in the CGIAR, a brief position is laid out for the rationale and conditions forthe CGIAR to develop shared standards, systems or services – and the Consortium’s role in these.Who We AreThe primary purpose of the CGIAR Consortium is to lead the development of the CGIAR Strategy andResults Framework (SRF) and ensure its implementation through a portfolio of CGIAR ResearchPrograms (CRPs) that is optimized to achieve the System Level Outcomes most effectively andefficiently.The Consortium Office (CO) is the implementing arm of the Consortium, as delegated by the ConsortiumBoard through approved work plans and budgets. The Consortium Office also provides strategic adviceto the Consortium Board.Much, or even most, of the work of the CO as described below depends critically on, or can only beachieved through, collaboration with / delegation to / joint work with other System components (i.e.Fund Office, Independent Science and Partnership Council, Independent Evaluation Arrangement),1 Comments received with thanks from Martin van Brakel, Bruce Campbell, Victor Kommerell, Frances Seymour,David Theriault, Graham Thiele 1
  2. 2. CGIAR Consortium members, CRPs and other partners through communities of practice (i.e. the CO willnot staff up to implement all the work below but work through partners).What We DoThe key products and services provided by the CO are summarized as – contributions to – the following:1. Policies: Development and cyclical revision of the policies and standards that provide the framework for implementing CRPs – the Common Operational Framework and other policies and standards.2. Core business: Management of the CRP portfolio and annual CRP cycle (portfolio financing plans, CRP budgets and work plans, quarterly cash flow reporting and Window 1 disbursements, operational decisions during the cycle concerning possible gaps/overlaps in the portfolio of CRPs, monitoring and reporting on program results, analysis of progress at portfolio level, reporting on intellectual asset management).3. Shared systems or services: Development and management of shared systems / services. Either with or on behalf of Consortium Members or to improve the functioning of the CRPs.4. Communities of Practice (COPs), Partnership enabling and external relations: Support for Communities-of-Practice and effective Partner relations, including internal and external communication. Several new CoPs may be set up and supported. Organization of Consortium-wide learning on how to partner, with whom, for what; how to manage multiple partnerships; partnership relationship management. Represent, or coordinate/support the representation of, the interests of several or all Consortium Members.5. Internal Consortium back-office support: Management of Consortium internal business such as support for the Consortium Board and Members Group; CO work plans and budgets.In more detail the key continuous services and their associated 3-5 year outcomes, for which theConsortium can be held accountable, are proposed as listed in Table 1 below. More indicators wereconsidered than will be practical to track and monitor. Following consultation and discussion of possibleindicators 1-2 indicators have been selected for each area other than that of the “core business” forwhich 6 indicators are selected, for a total of 10 performance indicators. The indicators proposed to beselected are shown in red and underlined in Table 1. Other indicators considered are shown in black. Ina follow-on step, the costs of these CO services are proposed to be mapped to the outcomes, in order tostart analyzing value for money (and prioritize activities and outcomes).Table 1. Consortium Office Key Services and proposed associated medium term outcomes. 1. Policies / Common Operating Framework: development and cyclical revision SERVICES 3-5 year OUTCOMES (proposed indicators in red, underlined) • Common Operational Framework: • Consortium Level ISO (quality) Financial Guidelines; CRP Monitoring certification by 2015 Principles and Reporting Templates; CGIAR • Risks are managed to the satisfaction of Intellectual Asset Principles; etc. all key System stakeholders, as • Consortium policies, guidelines and measured by annual 360 feedback standards: Consortium Gender strategy; 2
  3. 3. CGIAR Branding Guidelines; Guidelines for standardized data management, including scientific data quality control; Shared standards for gender research in the CRPs; Shared standards for quality research for development partnerships and for the implementation of impact pathways in the CRPs; etc.• Legal requirements for use of W1 and W2 funds: Joint Agreement and Program Implementation Agreement• Additional as may arise2. Core business: managing annual CRP cycle• Programmatic: Running CRP and CRP • Reduce total reporting and transaction portfolio level Performance Management costs by 20% by 2015 – baseline tbd System; Aligning CRP portfolio with the • Increase overall amount of CGIAR SRF; CRP portfolio analysis funding by 10% year on year• Financial: Annual Financing Plan; Annual • At least 50% of CRP funding through CGIAR financial report; Analysis of Annual Windows 1+2 by 2015 CRP work plans and budgets; Quarterly • Total number of contracts down from cash flow reports; Semi-annual portfolio almost 3000 to 300 by 2015 financial reports; Quarterly disbursements • Partner share of each CRP all-budget at• Resource Mobilization least 30% by 2015, 40% by 2018• Internal controls and best management • CRP receivables / payables less than 20% practices (auditable) at CRP level of annual budget by 2013• Intellectual Assets: Annual Consolidated • Risk management approach to control IA Report and Annual CGIAR IA Report and delivery satisfies auditors and Boards3. Shared systems / services: development and service provision• One Corporate System • Annual system financial report by April• Knowledge Management & 30, in 2015 Communications shared services • Savings from (new) shared services at• HR systems least $3m by 2015• Shared system and standards for scientific • Significant HR policy congruence data management and for programmatic including CGIAR remuneration standards reporting on the CRPs and the portfolio and gender • At least 10 CRPs share key information systems or research platforms by 20154. Communities of Practice (CoPs) / Partner Relations: development and support• Strategic Communication: internal and • CGIAR/CRP brand recognition / quality external perception up 20% from 2012 by 2015• Partnership Development • At least 20% increase in partner• Communities of Practice: Corporate satisfaction with CRPs from by 2015 Service Executives CoP; Science Leaders (over 2012 baseline as surveyed) CoP; Legal / IP CoP; Communicators CoP; • At least 80% of CoP members judge IT managers CoP; Gender and Agriculture their CoP to provide value for money, as 3
  4. 4. Network; Monitoring & Evaluation CoP; measured by annual survey, by 2015 Genetic Resource CoP 5. Internal Consortium business • Board/Members meetings, CO workshops • At least “meets expectations” of CO • Work plans and budgets performance assessment by Board • Monthly finance reports • At least 80% of CO staff find it a great • Compliance with legal requirements place to workNotes on Table 1:1. Total support for the CGIAR, as used above, includes Windows 1, 2 and 3 plus bilateral support.2. Several of the proposed indicators require work to establish baselines to measure progress against as well as to gather the data to assess progress. The key three indicators that are relatively labor intensive are: a. Baseline and tracking total “transaction costs”, including all reporting, proposal development, steering committee meetings etc. (through costing study). b. Baseline and assessment of “partner satisfaction” (through Partner Perception Survey). c. Baseline and assessment of “brand recognition” (through market research).3. Regarding funding the two proposed, linked indicators are: a. Growing the overall resources 10% year on year. b. Increasing the share of core support for the CRP portfolio (W1+W2) to at least 50%.2013 PrioritiesThe overview below is an overview of 2013 priority project / progress objectives and their immediateoutputs or deliverables (contributing to the 3-5 year outcomes from Table 1), This was developed inorder to share expectations for the 2013 cycle early with the CGIAR Consortium members, CRPs, CoPsand other partners. These are the basis for the 2013 CO POWB and are developed further as part of thatdeliverable.Table 2. 2013 Consortium Office Priorities – projects and deliverables / outputs 1. Policies / Common Operating Framework (development and cyclical revision) Key projects / activities 2013 outputs / deliverables • Finalize Common Operational Framework • Revised JA and form of PIA approved (Financial Guidelines (FG): FG1, FG2 phase • All chapters of the COF are completed 2 and FG4 completed, FG5 fully and approved, and a review cycle for all implemented at all CGIAR Consortium guidelines is established members, FG6 reviewed for possible • Strengthened governance policies updating; Performance Management reviewed and implemented System; Dispute Resolution; Conflicts of • Metrics for linking CRPs to SLOs interest; Safeguards) approved • Strengthen governance policies in COF • oversight process for SRF approved • Review Joint Agreement (JA) and form of • research priority setting aligned with 4
  5. 5. Program Implementation Agreement (PIA) PMS approved• Finalize a Data and Knowledge • Consortium Data and KM strategy Management Strategy approved2. Core business: managing annual CRP cycle• Update the SRF, following Action Plan • 2013 SRF Update approved• Implement the CRP Performance • PMS in place Management System (PMS) • 2014 Finance plan (partially) based on• Develop an Animal Genetic Resources PMS Strategy at SRF level • Reports are generated as designed from• Implement the CRP biannual financial OCS, and in that format where OCS is reporting requirements not yet operational• Improved Revenue Forecasting: tracking, • CRP financing more predictable in timing updating, and reporting on fund window and volume because donor information income is better collected and disseminated,• Review CRP management & governance and forecast models are more robust structures • Best practices for CRP administration• CRP "mid-term" (program and budget) and governance structures are review established• Develop an annual CGIAR Intellectual • Mid-term review: recommend re-design Asset Report if necessary, both financially or• Develop Capacity Strengthening strategies structurally for CGIAR and CRPs • GIAR IA report acceptable to donors • 2012 CGIAR Annual report published3. Shared standards / systems / services (development and service provision)• OCS adopted in the CO • OCS is functional and serves both• Develop and implement 1-2 new shared routine accounting for the CO and systems or services (depending on 2012 consolidated reporting requirements for report & recommendations) the CRPs (to the degree possible given• Explore interest in common HR policies adoption timetable) and systems with Members • One or two additional services/ systems• Share approaches, experiences with may be implemented designing and implementing research / program / multi-project management support applications, linked to other business processes (e.g. HR, Finance); bring in private sector expertise4. CoPs / Partner Relations (development and support)• Survey Partner Perceptions • Partner Perception baseline and plan of• Initiate novel partnerships with BRICs action for improvement approved• Prepare CGIAR Communications Strategy • Communication Strategy approved (internal and external) • One additional system-wide HR project• CSE will expand focus to embrace human will be undertaken resources CoP & meet twice • At least one of the two CSE meetings will• Legal /IP Network will focus on be a joint one with the HR community 5
  6. 6. implementing the CGIAR IA Principles • Legal/IP Network: CO coordinates the • Science leaders focus on the SRF action development of best practices to plan, the operational plans of the CRPs and implement the CGIAR IA Principles in the the shared scientific data management CRPs; one annual meeting system • Shared data management standard • Gender experts focus on gender research system is on-line quality standards and on capacity building needs in gender research • Genetic Resources experts focus on in situ agro-biodiversity and develop and animal genetic resources strategy – initiate discussion on genetic resources strategy 5. Internal Consortium business • Continued support for Board and • HQ Agreement ratified by French Members Parliament • Ensure privileges and immunities for the • The CO establishes administrative CGIAR Consortium independence (elements of personnel • Legal separation from Bioversity management, all travel, purchasing, etc. • Partial administrative separation from assuming corporate bank account is Bioversity established) • Prep move to new office. • All logistics and plans finalized for • Finalize staffing physical move • Continued compliance with legal requirementsPosition on Shared Standards / Systems / ServicesCRPs and members of the CGIAR Consortium should share common standards (such as FinancialGuidelines), systems (such as the One Corporate System) and services (such as AIARC) when they: • Are required by the terms of the Joint Agreement or other legal documents; and/or • Enable or support more effective management and/or increases probability of impact of CRPs across CGIAR Consortium members and partners; and/or • Are viewed by Members as having priority, benefit potential (benefit/risk); and/or • Enable efficiency gains (cost savings).Dependent on a case-by-case business analysis, it may be sufficient to have shared standards only (and adiversity of systems and service providers). Other cases may justify a shared system or even a sharedservice. A committee of the Corporate Service Executives has been (re-)established in May 2012 to takeforward the recommendations from the 2009 Accenture Shared Services Report. Shared standards maybe part of the Common Operational Framework (such as Financial Guidelines) or outside it (such asshared data standards for CRPs). 6
  7. 7. The CO will support the development of all shared standards, systems and services for which there is aclear business case. The CO will host or lead such work only if it has a clear advantage over one or moreCGIAR Consortium member(s) providing the same. 7