h@li#

Consultative

Group on International

Agricultural

Research

- CGIAR

Mid-Term

Meeting 1995

Nairobi, Kenya May 22-26,1995

1 Renewal of the CGIAR: From Decisions to Actions 1

Report of the 5th Meeting of the Finance Committee
(October 21 and 27,1994)

At ICW94, the Chair of the Finance Committee, Mr. Michel Petit, reported the outcome of the 5th Meeting of the Finance Committee, which covered 1994 funding, 1995 funding and financing plan, and 1996 planning as well as the continued review of the new financing arrangements. A written report of the Meeting, supplemented by the detailed circulars sent to the Centers on the decisions taken by the Finance Committee, is attached for information.

CGIAR Secretariat l Mailing Address: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. l Dffice Location: 701 18th Street, N.W. Tel: (l-202) 473-8951 l Cable Address: INTBAFRAD . Fax: (l-202) 4738110 l E-mail: CGIAR@cgnet.com or CGIAR@wcddbank.cxg

Fifth Meeting of the CGIAR Finance Committee
The CGIAR Finance Committee held its fifth meeting in Washington, DC. at the CGIAR Secretariat on October 21 and 27, 1994. Michel Petit of the World Bank chaired the meeting with the participation of Australia (Eric Craswelll, Canada (lain MacGillivra y), Denmark (Ebbe Schioler), Germany (Jiirgen Friedrichsenl, Japan (Kunio Alakamura), Philippines (Manuel Lantinl and the United Kingdom (Andrew Bennett). Regrets were received from Brazil (Mario Alves Seixas).

Key Points
1. NEW FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS

from Discussion
across all programs, incentives for reducing
l

thereby overhead

providing costs.

The Finance Committee continued the review of the new financing arrangements proposed for the CGIAR (“New Financing Arrangements: Re-engineering the CGIAR Planning, Budgeting and Funding System”, ICW/94/09 dated October 6, 1994). In this context it also reviewed a preliminary analysis prepared by the Secretariat on the overhead costs of Center operations. Points raised in the discussion in addition to those raised in the fourth meeting of September 1994, are outlined below.

The costs and efficiencies of restructuring the livestock and banana/plantain efforts should be considered as case studies, from which the CGIAR may learn valuable lessons. These two instances should be monitored by the CGIAR to learn from this experience in restructuring and changing program directions.

Multi- Year Financial
l

Commitments

Structure
l

and Operation

of the Matrix matrix should not cage, it should be broad program micro-management Center and system

The cells of the new become an inflexible defined in sufficiently terms so as to avoid and restriction of the programs.

l

The analysis presented by the Secretariat indicates that the average cost of “fixed overhead” is USSI .6m year. per However, this should not be considered the minimum cost of CGIAR participation, and opportunities to increase efficiency need to be found to reduce governance costs for smaller Centers. Therefore, rather than a separate column (the ‘F’ column in the present draft matrix), fixed overheads should be incorporated into the and should be programs Centers encouraged to move to full cost recovery

A replenishment option may evolve in the future, if strong political commitment to the CGIAR emerges from the high-level For this meeting in February 1995. the reason, together with possible improvement of funding stability, the option of the CGIAR evolving ‘towards a legal entity in the long term, should be kept on the table for the present. A legal personality for the CGIAR does not necessarily mean CGIAR’s transformation into an international organization, and some imaginative ideas could be explored if there is demonstrable high level political support for the CGIAR at the Lucerne meeting.

2.

1994

FUNDING

The Finance Committee reviewed the status of 1994 funding in context of allocating the 1994 Bank funds remaining after allocations made at the September meeting.

The amount of: -

available

for allocations

consisted

equally between the Centers and the system. This principal would be applied also in other similar cases in the future. . In 1994 funding terms, this implies that both ICRISAT and WARDA should receive about $0.75 million less than their allocated shares of Bank funds in 1994.

-

$0.5 million not allocated at the September meeting, an additional $0.5 million available as a matching contribution due to the $1 million additional IDB contribution in response to the Chairman’s appeal. $0.9 million due to the reduced cost of operations for WARDA and ICRISAT resulting from a devaluation of their host countries in West Africa (discussed below).

(decisions reflected in memo to Center Directors with subject Re: Allocation of the Find Tranche of the 1994 Worki Bank Contdwtion, dated November 16,1994)

Allocation
l

of Remaining

Bank Funds

3.

19%

FUNDING AND FINANCING PLAN

The Committee decided that this total of $1.9 million should be distributed to those Centers whose funding was below their allocation in the $270 million vector after the September allocation. The allocation would be in proportion to their funding gap.

The Finance Committee reviewed the limited amount of funding indications provided by the donors to the Secretariat and examined several options for developing firm financing figures for each Center. The goal was to have a 1995 financing plan by the end of ICW94, that could guide the however tentative, Centers for planning their 1995 operations.
l

Devaluation .

Adjustment

the Finance At its April meeting, Committee held back the disbursement of the second tranche to WARDA and ICRISAT pending full cost analysis of the impact of CFA devaluation on their 1994 operations. The Centers were requested to compute the full cost impact on their operations of the devaluation of the CFA (African French Franc) that took place in January 1994 and provide such analyses to the Finance Committee by endSeptember. The analysis provided by the two Centers indicated that the net 1994 cost reduction in dollar terms (the combined impact of devaluation and resulting inflation) was roughly equal at about $1.5 million. The issue debated by the Finance Committee was the criteria and method for cost adjustment sharing such “windfall” between the Centers and the system. The Finance Committee concluded that the most equitable and reasonable method would be for the windfall to be shared

l

The Committee accepted the projected allocation to Centers of 1995 contributions prepared by the Secretariat as an initial starting point. One key issue debated by the Committee was the allocation of Bank funds to complete the financing picture for each Center. The discussion included the need for a substantial disbursement as early as possible as well as the need to ensure a balanced funding of the overall The latter point would research agenda. require that the CGIAR retain some flexibility in the Bank funds to take into account allocations by donors to various Centers. Another issue was also to in and stability maintain continuity allocations between 1994 and 1995 due to the transitional nature of the period.
l

l

The Committee recommends to the CGIAR that the Bank funds be allocated in at least tranche The first tranches. two representing 50%, or $25 million, of the total Bank funds expected to be available of $50 million. The subsequent tranches will take into account the balancing needs as well as additional donor information.

2

.

The implementation of this plan is dependent on receiving the remaining 1995 funding information from donors as early as possible and the Committee encourages all donors to be as prompt as possible in providing the information to the Secretariat and disbursing the 1995 funds.

respond to the needs of the matrix. The TF will aim to complete its work by midNovember. 1996 gm -- Guidelines for Center 1996-98 proposals (a short update in context of the parameters used by TAC) will be sent out by end November. 1996 recommendations -- TAC will interact in March and come forward at MTM94 with its recommendations for 1996 in context of 1996-98 as proposed in the new scheme of things.

(decisions reflected in memo to Center Directors with subject Planningfor 1995 Strpport to Agreed Research Agenda, dated November 19,1994)

4.

PLANNING FOR 1996 1996 Financial Assumptions be based on 1996 plans would financial expectations for 1995. They could include a modest amount of increases over The Finance the 1995 levels. Committee also briefly discussed its own 1995 work program related to the 1996 program plans. Based on procedures agreed before, the Finance Committee will examine the financial implications of the 1996 TAC recommendations at its meeting during and prior to the Mid-Term Meeting.

Drs. McCalla and Winkelmann, the incoming present and TAC Chairs respectively, presented to the Committee the process for preparing the 1996 program and funding proposals to the CGIAR. The interaction with the Finance Committee was part of the consultative process with Centers and the CGIAR Committees leading to a discussion in the Group during ICW under agenda item ICW/94/08.

Planning
l

Frame will the can (i.e. the

l

The present five year plans 1994-98 serve as a planning framework for remaining period i.e. 1996-98. The reexamination of CGIAR priorities proceed on a track currently planned, aiming at completion in time to launch 1999-2004 medium term plans.

(decisions reflected in memo to Center Directors with subject Planningfor 2996, dated November 18,1994) (decisions reflected in memo to Center Directors with subject Re: Centers’ 1996Program Plans and Funding Requirements, dated December 15,1994)

Con tent of 1996 Process
l

5.

The 1996 review will reexamine whether changes in circumstances (new scientific breakthroughs, shift in aid priorities, etc.) in the 1996-98 require changes allocations. Program structure -- A task force will be together by the TAC Chair with participation by primary stakeholders (Centers, donors, TAC and Secretariat, CG Secretariat) to examine the activity structure and propose refinements to

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF SYSTEMWIDE INITIATIVES PROPOSED IN 1995 One of the rationalizations for program funding is the need to develop new partnerships, involving IARCs, NARS, laboratories and advanced NGOs, specialized institutions, and move the CGIAR Centers from being CG-centric. New financial mechanisms should provide incentives for partnerships within and These beyond the CGIAR system. partnerships will be critical for leverage

.

.

3

influence of the CGlAR funds in the broader matrix of activities beyond the The management of this CGIAR. interface is very important. . Partnerships have high transaction costs and these need to be recognized. As various financial modalities evolve for the Finance partnerships, building Committee could usefully examine the of various cost-effectiveness success in and their arrangements, leveraging funding from other sources.

6.
l

DONOR PERFORMANCE The Committee considered it valuable to monitor trends in donor contributions to the CGIAR, relative to their overall development assistance contributions. The Secretariat will prepare a detailed report for outline of a monitoring discussion by the Finance Committee.

7.

NEXT MEETING The Finance Committee will meet in on February 11, 1994 immediately the Ministerial Meeting.

Lucerne following

4

I

A ttachments

1. Memo to Center Directors with subject Re: Allocation of the Final Tranche of the dated November 16,1994 1994 World Bank Contribution, 2. Memo to Center Directors with subject Planning for 1995 Support to Agreed Research Agenda, dated November 19, 1994 3. Memo to Center Directors with subject Planning for 1996, dated November 18, 1994 4. Memo to Center Directors with subject Re: Centers’ 1996 Program Plans and Funding Requirements, dated December 15, 1994

Consultative Group on International
Mailing Address:

Agricultural

Research

1818 H Street. N.W.. Washington, D.C. 10433. U.S.A. Office Location: 701 18th Strerr. N.W. Telephone (Area Code 202) 473-895 I Cable Address-INTBAFRAD Fax (Area Code 202) 473-8110

November To: From: Center CGIAR Directors Secretariat

16, 1994

Re:

Allocation

of the Final Tranche

of the 1994

World

Bank Contribution

At its meeting of October 27, 1994, the 1. World Bank (WB) allocation for 1994, to partially remained after the third tranche allocation. The in the attached annexes as the fourth tranche, table below. It is the sum of:

Finance Committee (FC) approved the final fill the gaps in the $270 million vector which additional World Bank resources are shown which is over $2 million as described in the

(9

adjustments in the allocation of the WB’s earlier tranches to ICRISAT WARDA, prompted by the devaluation of the CFA earlier this year; additional research matching funds agenda; and, triggered by an increase in new funds for the

and

(ii)

1994

(iii)

the reserve set aside in September WB tranche.

by the FC during

the allocation

of the third

RESOURCES

FOR .THE UORLD BANK’S

4th

TRANCHE

(B million)

Devaluation

Adjustments: ICRISAT UARDA 0.65 0.72

Additional September

Matching Reserve:

Funds:

l-l 5n
o.L6 Total 2.33

cc:

CGIAR Finance TAC Chair TAC Secretariat

Committee

2. In the September 30, 1994 letter from the Secretariat, Center Directors were informed of the allocation by the FC of World Bank matching funds ($9.6 million) and the safety net ($2.1 million) which had been set aside from the WB grant earlier in 1994. In addition to informing Centers of the allocation of these WB funds (tne third tranche), the letter also provided details of additional funding forthe $270 million Research Agenda, ie. from relabe!led and redirected complementary funding, and additional contributions from donors other tkzn

the WB.
3. The principles guiding the September allocations of the FC were that first, Centers should be funded to their approved level at the $229 million vector and, second, approved to ;ha degree possible. Center funding a; the $270 million vector would 5~ sa:isf;t; This principle is maintained for the allocation of the fourth tranche: systemwide initiatives and the fisheries reserve remain at the same level as previously, as not all the activities are ready for implementation in 1994. The FC allocations were based on gaps remaining in Centers’ funding at the $270 million vector, on an estimate of 1994 income from donors excluding the World Bank, as well as on the allocation of the first and second tranche of WB support for 1994. This estimate derived from information provided by Centers, and from donors. Some funding gaps persist partly because additional funding which became available for the agreed agenda at Centers, from activities which were previously classified as complementary, varied in volume from Center to Center. 4. The following summarizes the FC’s allocation decision on the describes the disbursement plan for the third and fourth tranches. Funding 5. The gross funding gap remaining at the Center level after the third tranche allocation is now $10.4 million (ie. this is the total gap for Centers whose funding is still below the The fourth tranche represents about 22% of approved amount in the $270 million vector). Thus, 22% of each center’s funding gap will be funded the remaining Center requirements. by the fourth tranche. The result is shown in annexes 1 and 2. Estimates of other donors’ funding remain at the level assumed in September, except for the recently-announced increase in unrestricted funding from the IDB, which also results in the additional matching funds referred to earlier. Disbursement 6. Column 5 in annex 2 shows the disbursements to Centers that will result from the FC decisions, taking into account various outstanding amounts, as explained in the footnotes to Disbursement of the third and fourth tranches will be effected after all new the table. contributions pledged as a result of the Stabilization Program have been disbursed or are underway, which is estimated by the Secretariat to be by the end of November. fourth tranche, and

Annex 1: Financial

Support

to the Agreed (in Smillion)

Rcscarch

Agenda

I

Sept. 30 Funding ~_____ Status

October

Adjustment

I Approved Funding in I $270 m Vector
27.5 i 7.6 26.5 14.3 17.6

i Center / CIAT CIFOR CIMMYT 1CIP IICARDA /ICLARM
ICRAF

Estimated Contributions Other ! World than WB’ Bank : Total i
1 21.9 i 4.8 i 6.0!
0.6 I

/I I j j/ World ’ ’ Rcviscd -. .jBank 4th / 1 Total /

li
5.4 I, I

‘! Trzzchc

:

I 1
I I

’

Funding __ -

I

27.9 25.6 17.6’ 16.0 4.8 j 15.2 : 26.9 9.2 7.6 i 23.3 / 13.1 I

11 jj I/ ” 11 jl I! :, // i’ I

27.9 I

1
i

0.51 1
0.2 / I 1 ; 0.41 j I ! I -0.5 ! 3/i 0.1: ! i j ’ I 0.2 / i

5.9 i
25.8 I 17.6 16.3 4.8 / 15.2 j 26.4 ; 9.3 7.6 : 23.3,

19.6 /
’ 15.8 1 11.2 j 4.4 1 14.1 / 20.7 / 8.2 / 6.0 17.5 9.7 6.8 1.8 /

/ t
I

4.8
14.0 1

ICRISAT IFPRI i IIMI 1IITA ’ ILCA ILRAD INIBAP IPGRI i IRRI ISNAR WARDA I Ccntcr total CIP Provision

/

26.9 9.5
7.6 23.3 14.0 11.1 1.8

1
/ j

6.0! 1.8 4.7 0.4 1.0: 6.2 I 1.0: 1.71 5.8 / 3.4; 3.lj i 0.2 3.1: 1.91 0.7; ! 48.2

: : ’ ! , : I I ! I i I

13.3 I

i/A i il---fy-g
27.3 : ‘I 6.5 i I/ 7.6 j 1’ : i’ ,I 254.7 !’ Ok! ! 27.7 / 6.6 j 6.9 1 I 255.7

9.2 29.3 1 / 1
I 6.8 1 5.8 I 257.6 / /

8.2 1
24.2 j 4.7 j 6.9 j 206.5 ;

0.81 1 O.l!
-0.7 / I 2.3

I
1 i

I

0.8’ 10.0 1.0 I l/l
268.6 1 1 8.7 1

I i

0.8 21 I/ 9.2 I i II ‘! I I /

I /i

! I
! ’

I

0.8 ;
8.7

Initiatives / j Systemwide Fishcries Res. j System total /

0.5, I 1 ~

/
215.2 j

I i I ,
49.5 I 4/

264.7 ; ji

2.3 ! 5/j

265.2

I/ The fisheries reserve is unfunded hccnusc the cnvisagcd activity is not ready for implcmcntation in 1994. 21 ‘l’hc CII’cost rccovcry grant was not inciudcd In the $270 m vector. and its I’und~ng was trcatcd ;L.S ;~n exceptional allocation based on a decision taken in 1993 by the Group. 3/ Amount is sho\xn net of devaluation adjustment of -S.65 m and ICRISA’I-s 1111tranchc allocation oiS.1.i m. 41 In Scptembcr a rcservc ofS.46 million from the World Bank had been set aside for future allocation. 51 Amount sho\\n is the gross fourth tranchc (ix.. the devaluation adjustments xc not ncttcd out).

16-Nov-94

Annex

2:

Allocation

and Disbursement

of 1994 World (in S million)

Bank Third

and Fourth

Tranchcs

1 Center $0 I Tranchel ! Tranchei Gap I CIAT 0.98 I CIFOR 0.12 2.24 0.50 I LllvllvI r-7. I. IlIT 1 ?I n 0-l !/ n ?ll L..TcJ I “.L” U.OI I I / I I !CIP / ) ICARDA 1.981 1.63 i 0.37 1ICLARM j ICRAF TCRISAT _-__--__1IFPRI 1IIMI j IITA .WA ...-!.--/ ILRAD 1 ! INIBAP 1 IPGRI I ; IRRI / ISNAR i WARDA Total I 1.53 I 0.34 j 1.62 / 1.m ---1.211 1.1Oi 0.48 0.63 0.65 / 0.30

Adjustment / I I j 1

0.15 1 0.07 j

0.91!

0.20 0.27 ( 0.05 j 0.46 j 0.07:

0.24 / 2.06 0.30

11.14,

10.411

2.33 I

Vovcmbcr 3rd & 4tQ 1 I 0.98 1 0.98 1 I 0.62 ( 0.62’ I 1 CL! n I-MI ~l/ “.\I” I..)“, I I I ) 3 15 I 2.Zi -._._. -... I , I I \ 1 1 I -0.65 ; 21 I 1.03 I, 1.03 ) 0.07 I I 0.07 ( I 0.34 1 I 0.34 j I 1 1.62 I 1.62 j 1.20 1.20; 1.37 / 1.37 I I I I 0.05 j i I 0.05 : 1 I 0.94 I 0.94 ) I / 0.70 I 0.70 / -0.7212/ ) -0.72 / I I -1.37; I 12.10 1 11.32;

Memo Items: 1994 WB;lOutstanding Amounls /I 1st & 2nd ! Total II 5.00 I jl 0.47 I 1.1 :I 4.61 6.2:! : II I’ 1’ 2.61 2.6 I 0.5!3/ 5.1 '! /i 2.76; ! 0.35 : 0.5 31 ;i 0.4 il , I 1.0/j 1.04 i )( 4.70 / 5.7 I ! 1.00 j 1.1;1 I /j 1.32 I 1.7,) I/ 4.16 ! 5.8 ,. ;/ 2.42 : 3.61; I 3.4 !/ ! (i 1.981 I 1, I I: 0.15 ; 0.2 ,, 0.75 0.8 I: I ,! j! 2.58 / 3.5 Ii 1.22 j 1.9,; I iI 0.72 / 0.0) 1.2!3/ ]I I II , I/ 37.87 / 50.0 :i 3.1:

:

i I ; I

! j 1 I

I I

RECONCILIATION ! Sourccc: --_‘-. Original WU Matching funds total Applications: Tranches I & II Safety net Matching funds total

/

2.1 100 i 50.0

1,’ Net of outstanding loan of $1.5 m. U Devaluation adjustment approved by Finance Committcc 3/ Advance/short-term loan.

in October, 1994.

15-Nov-94

. Consultative . Mailing Address: Group on International Agricultural N.W., Research Washington, D.C.

The World Sank, 1818 Office

H Street,

Locatron: 701 18th Street, N.W. Teleph~~4~l32~~.?73-895 1 Cable Address: INTBAFRAD Fax: (l-202) 473-8 1 10

November

19, 1994

To: From: Subject:

Center

Directors

The Secretariat Planning for 7995 Support to Agreed Research Agenda

The purpose of this memorandum is to bring you up-to-date on the 1. allocation of resources expected to be available for the Agreed Research Agenda in 1995. 7995 Requiremen is

2. At ICW94 the CGIAR endorsed a 1995 research agenda with financing requirements of $271.2 million, consisting of $262.8 million for Center reviews) and $8.4 million f?budgets (including provisions for external systemwide initiatives. 7995 Funding Projection

3. At ICW, the Secretariat projected that about $265 million would be available to finance the agreed agenda in 1995. Since then we have reviewed the estimate, and confirm that it remains broadly in line with the earlier one. The projection presently stands at approximately $268 million (Annex 1 I. 4. The following assumptions underpin the 1995 projections: contribution

Donors who have yet to confirm and allocate their (9 to centers will retain the 1994 level and allocation; and

cc:

CGIAR Finance TAC Chair TAC Secretariat

Committee

(ii) Exchange rates not deviate significantly Ma tcbing Funding with

at disbursement of non-dollar from those used at ICW.

contributions

will

Requirements

5. At the system level, the present projection indicates that the Agreed Research Agenda is likely to be clo-.. =o to fu’!y funded in 1995. At the center level, however, full funding is projected ior fewer tnan haIT oi tne sixteen centers (column 7 in Annex 2). World Bank s Contribution 6. At its October meeting the Finance Committee approved, for use in 1995, the same formula used in distributing the World Bank’s contribution in 1994. Thus half of the Bank’s $50 million (including about $10 million in matching funds) has been allocated in proportion (of 9.5%) to each center’s The other half will be used to co-finance with other approved requirements. The Finance Committee will review the funding donors the remaining gaps. situation in February/March, and allocation of the second tranche may be subject then to adjustments. 7. The Finance Committee also approved the tranche of the World Bank’s 1995 contribution. disbursed on or about January 1, 1995, and the February/March review of funding. Implications of the Present Estimate for Centers disbursement of the first The first tranche will be second tranche after the

Annex 2 shows the tentative allocation of the overall funding projection 8. However, the projection remains tentative as precise among the centers. information from a number of donors regarding their 1995 conrrioutions as well Refinements will continue as more as their .allocation is still being awaited. information becomes available, and the Secretariat plans to inform each center in January of details of its 1995 funding prospects by donor. 9. Due to the tentative nature of the projections with few exceptions, should plan their operations approved requirements. at this juncture, centers, at 1 - 2% below their

Current I _pporting Su 0.4; LGIUM ICANADA I
l

CoreBedirected O? 0.0 / 0.3 I

tc

[

2.1 ( 11.71

0.6 ( 2.61

0.0: 0.8,

IFAD OPEC FUND ’ UNOP UNEP ’ Sub-total
l

I

3.2 /
0.0

0.0)
0.5

0.51
0.5)

0.2,
0.0 j I !

0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 155.9 40.0 1 I 195.9

0.2 5.3 0.0 7.2 28.6 0.0 I 28.6 1 I

0.0’ 0.9 0.1 2.9 13.4 0.0 1 13.41 I

0.0 1.7 0.0 3.6 10.6 5.3 j I 15.9i I

I

1.7 9.4 4.7 14.1 j I

I

5.21 1.01 0.2 I 7.81 0.1 j 18X/ 217.8 50.0

]

TOTAL WORLD I I BANK TOTAL

GRAND

I

I I

267.8

i I I

I

l

I Non-CGIAR donors Unconfirmed donors

1
I

Annex 2. 1995 TENTATIVE FINANCING (in $million) 1995 Requirements --i Center CIAT CIFOR CIMMYT CIP ICARDA ICLARM ICRAF ICRISAT IFPRI I&II IITA ILRI IPGRI IRRI ISNAR WARDA .erve Fisherid

PLAN

I I I

I i
,

I-

Funding in First 1 Second Relation to Support 2/ Project 3/ Tranche 4/l Tranche 5/ Funding 1Requirements I I 27.8 18.4 3.61 2.6 ( 2.9 j 27.5 99% 7.6 4.9 0.1 0.7 1 1.8 1 7.5 98% 26.5 17.2 3.1 2.5 / 3.41 26.2 1 99% 16.5 12.1 3.2 1.6 1 0.0 / 16.9 1 102% 17.6 7.3 I 6.0 1 17.4 I 1.7 I 2.4 i 99% 4.9 2.5 2.2 0.5 0.0 -5.1 105% 14.0 5.1 9.7 1.3 0.0 16.1 115% 16.3 26.9 4.9 1 2.6 2.9 26.6 99% L <I( 1 <I na nfc an acla 9.5 “.J /, ,” I I 7.6 ;;:;I 2.9 ) ;:i ;;:;I ;:; 99% 13.6 I 23.6 4.4 2.3 t 3.0 j 23.3 99% 13.5 I 25.1 3.1 I 2.4 I 4.s I 24.7 1 98% 11.0 Y.0 1 1.11 1.1 j u.u 1 11.11 106% 29.4 f 20.7 1 4.8 / 2.8 / l.01~ 29.3 I 100% 6.8 I 4.3 0.4 0.7 1 1.3 6.7 98% 3.5 2.8 7.0 0.71 0.0 7.0 100% 1.0f t51 0.0 0% I/
I I

Sub-total

! I

262.8 f f l7 I 271.2 :

158.6

I

54.2 5.1 I

25.0

25.0

262.7 5.1 I

100% 60% YYYO J

Ii‘Ui-ti

v

/

Ud.6 I

59.3 I

25.0,

25.0 I

267.8 I

1/ 21 3/ 4/ 5/

Includes external review costs for (CIAT-$0.3m, CIP-$0.3m, IITA-$0.3m and WARM-SO.1 m). Institutional support in the form of unrestricted contributions. Support restricted to programs or specific projects. Allocated in proportion (9.5%) of approved requirements. Estimates may be subject to adjustments as the second tranche will be used to co-finance with other donors the re;naining gaps. 6/ Allocation of the fisheries reserve to ICLARM is pending a positive outcome of the planned mid-term external review - scheduled for early 1995.

Consuitative Group on International

Agricultural

Research

4 d r

Mailing Address: The World Bank, 18I8 H Street, NW., Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. Office Location: 701 18th Street, N.W. Telephone: (I-202) 473-895 I Cable Address: INTBAFRAD Fau: (l-202) 473-8 I 10

November

18, ‘I994

TO:
FROM: SUBJECT:

Center

Directors Secretariat 7996

The CGIAR Planning for

During Centers Week, CGIAR will discuss the 1996 will enable CGIAR donors to prior to ICW95, leading to an The purpose of this for the preparation

it was agreed that the mid-term meeting of the agenda in depth and reach firm decisions. This come forward with firm financing commitments agreed financing plan at ICW95. short note is to alert of the 1996 plans. you about the following

schedule

Mid December: End February: Secretariat. End March: following MTM95: 1996 MTM95:

Secretariat sends Guidelines for preparing the 1996 plans. Centers prepare and submit 1996 plans to TAC and TAC Finance prepares 1996 recommendations on the interaction with Centers. Committee reviews the financial implications agenda of the

agenda. CGIAR decides on 1996 agenda and its financial

implications.

cc:

CGIAR Finance TAC Chair TAC Secretariat

Committee

db
From: Introduction

Consultative

Group

on International

Agricultural

Research

- CGIAR 15, 1994

December CGIAR Secretariat

Re:

Centers’

1996 Proaram Plans and Fundina

Reauirements

.

1. In order to seek funding from donors, Centers are required annually to submit their Program Plans and Funding Requirements document for the following year, to the CGIAR. This note outlines the process which should be followed for preparing, reviewing, and acting on the 1996 Center proposals. Timetable During ICW94, it was agreed that at the 1995 2. would make decisions regarding the 1996 research donors to come forward with firm commitments prior Financing Plan at ICW95. The following is the 1996 Dec. 15, 1994:
Feb. 26, 1995: March April 31, 1995: 17, 1995: Guidelines

CGIAR Mid-Term Meeting, the Group agenda. This will enable the CGIAR to ICW95, leading to an agreed 1996 timetable:

are sent to Centers by the CGIAR Secretariat.

Centers submit TAC prepares

Part 1 of their 1996 plan to TAC and to the CGIAR Secretariat.
recommendations for 1996, following interaction with Centers.

Centers submit their full and finalized 1996 plan document, which incorporates TAC comments, to the Group, TAC, and the CGIAR Secretariat. The Finance Committee reviews financial implications of the 1996 agenda.

MTM95: MTM95:

The Group decides

on the 1996 agenda.

This memorandum, the attachments, and the CG/AR Resource Allocation - Annual 3. Budget Manual (Financial Guidelines Series No.4, revised December 19941, represent the first formal step in the above timetable. In light of the compressed timetable which results from by the need for the Group to consider the 1996 Program at MTM, Centers may submit their Program Plan and Funding Requirements document in two stages.

Distribution
Center Directors

Center Board Chairs TAC Chair, Members, and TAC Secretariat Finance Committee Chair and Members

CGIAR

Secretariat l Mailing Address: 1818 H Street. N.W., Washington, D.C. 2D433. U.S.A. . Offii Location: 701 19th Street. N.W. Tel: (1-202) 473.8951 . Cabk Address: INTNTBAFRAD . Fax: (l-2021 473-8110 l lntemet: CGlAAR@CGNet.Com

The information which is required by February 28, 1995 (Part 1 of the Program Plans 4. and Funding Requirements) must include the following components, as described in the manual:

a)
b)

Narrative Section: The Introduction (para 9 (a) on page 2 of the manual), and the Prooram Discussion - Fundina Reauest for 1996 (para 9 (d) on page 3). Standard Tables: The funding request, activity structure, and Center projects, Fundina Reauirements bv Cost Center (Tables la and 1 b), specifically: Research and Research-Related Expenditure (Tables 2a and 2b), and Proiect Expenditure Summarv (Table 2d).

Centers are requested to submit five copies of the above information to the CGIAR 5. Secretariat, one copy to the TAC Chair and to each TAC Member, six copies to the TAC Secretariat in Rome, and five copies to be sent to CIP (Lima, Peru) clearly marked “For Retention for the TAC Secretariat”, by February 28. Once TAC’s comments have been sent to Centers and necessary changes integrated into their documents, Centers should provide copies of the proposals to the Group, by April 17, 1995. That document should contain all the information described in the manual. The Finance Committee and the full Group will consider the proposals at MTM95 (May 22-26). The 1996 Funding Guideline 6. would At lCW94, certain principles were reinforced, with respect to how CGIAR programs be executed through the remainder of the Medium-Term (1996-98). These included: . that the CGIAR 1994-98 MTP’ remains valid as a planning framework, and the 1995 funding targets would be maintained in 1996 (attachment 1). The 1996 target is in current dollars (ie. there is no automatic inflation adjustment); notwithstanding the above, that Centers may propose changes funding envelope, if one or more of the following circumstances a) b) new scientific breakthroughs in their 1996 warrant it:

a

impact on the Center activity; assistance and hence

shifting priorities of national systems and the development community introduce changes in the research environment, impact on a Center’s program; Center-specific ecoregional activities are affected developed by convening Centers for systemwide ecoregional programs. - Annual

cl

by the work program initiatives, including

Attachment 2, and the CGIAR Resource Allocation 7. full detail of the required narrative and tabular information.

Budget Manual

contains

’ “Review and Approval September 6, 1993.

of Center Medium-Term

Plans i 994-1998”,

AGRTTAC:IARI93/11,

Attachment

1

CGIAR

RESEARCH

AGENDA

FUNDING

(in current $ million) Estimate
(Nov1994)

Approved
1995 27.5 7.6 26.5 16.2 17.6 5.8 I/ 14.0

Center CIAT CIFOR CIMMYT CIP ICARDA ICLARM ICRAF ICRISAT IFPRI IIMI IITA ILCA ILRAD ILRI INIBAP IPGRI IRRI ISNAR WARDA Subtotal External Reviews CIP Cost Recovery Systemwide Initiatives 2/

1994

27.9 5.9
25.8 17.6 16.3 4.8 15.2 26.4

9.3
7.3 23.3 13.3 10.2

26.9 9.5
7.6 23.3

25.1

1.9 9.0
27.7 6.6

11.0

29.4
6.8 7.0 261 8 A 1.0

6.9
2554 0.3 0.8 8.7

0.0
0.4

Total

CGIAR

265.2

271.2

I/

21

The amouniof 31 million previously in the fsheries reserve has been included in ICLARM’s funding, pending a positive outcome of the planned mid-term external review, scheduled for early 1995. External Reviews: in 1994 for IIMI (SO.3m), andin 1995 for CIAT, CIP, and IITA (each at $0.3,m), and ICLARM ($0.1 m). The 1996 estimate is based on four reviews each at $0.3 m.

. Attachment II

NOTES FOR THE 1996

PROGRAM

PLANS AND FUNDING REQUIREMENTS

The CGIAR Resource Allocation 1. previous version, in order to integrate

(Annual Budget Manual) has been modified changes which are in effect for 1996.

from the

2. Centers’ 1996 Program Plan and Funding Requirements document should not include financial projections for 1997 and 1998. However, if the 1996 request deviates from the 1998 MTP funding target (or, in the case of a few Centers, the actual 1995 approved level), as a result of expected changes in external factors described earlier, then reference should be made on how such changes would alter the program for the three year period starting in 1996.

Narrative 3. Centers are requested focus substantive discussion
l

to limit detailed written only on the following: activity

presentation

of their programs,

and to

changes in programmed described in the MTP; increases or decreases

compared

to the

program

as originally

l

in funding

requirements

due to external

factors;

and,

.

proposals for systemwide initiatives including ecoregional activities, which were not part of Centers MTP, but which were first proposed in the context of the 1995 funding request and which have evolved since TAC reviewed them in mid-l 994.

Tables 4. Other changes include the simplification or elimination of some previous addition of several new tables. These are highlighted as follows:
l

tables,

and

staffing information is required in only table 5. Funding and expenditure need only contain financial information;

tables

.

system-wide initiatives including ecoregional activities are introduced into several tables as funding requirements additional to Centers’ guideline figures, however, these are not included in tables la and 2a (which continue to focus on the requirements for each Center - not for cross-cutting activity). The convening Center only should include these activities in tables 2d and 6d-f. Any detailed discussion of these activities (which institutions - CGIAR and nonCGIAR - are participating, how resources would be or have been employed, etc.kshould be included in a separate annex;

0

a slightly modified activity structure is introduced in 1996 (details the requirement to specify commodity expenditure is eliminated;

below),

and

.

Tables are added on “projects”. A list of “projects” describing the scientific portfolio of the Center, with appropriate cost information as well as projected funding resources for these projects, is requested. Generally, such “projects” are multi-disciplinary, represent a cohesive set of activities with a common goal, and are discrete objects of decision-making, relative priority-setting, funding, and resource allocation within Centers. As a planning and managerial tool, the set of projects constitutes a pertinent representation of Centers’ portfolios of research and related activities; the inflation table is eliminated;

.
l

the sources and uses table is eliminated; a cash flow table and capital fund movement information are added;

.

Though the main focus of attention remains on the CGIAR agreed research agenda, 5. Centers are requested to include information for “complementary” activities in 1996. In this respect, the 1994 and 1995 periods will reflect the changes in classification and (in some cases) direction of what had been classified as complementary activity, which occurred in the context of the incentive plan adopted at MTM94. Actual complementary activity levels for 1993 will remain as published previously for that year. Because it is now the reality that complementary activities truly lie outside the research agenda of the CGIAR, it is not required that “total program” tables are included in the funding request.

Revised Activity

Structure

6. For several years, Centers have organized their funding requests, and the subsequent reporting of activity, according to the activity structure adopted by the CGIAR based on TAC’s recommendations, in the last priority-setting exercise, and the 1994-98 medium-term plan development. Following ICW94, many Centers offered comments on the existing activity structure, including how it might be altered, in the context of the new matrix budgeting scheme. .The ultimate design of the matrix will result from continued discussion and refinement of a typology to best describe the CGIAR’s programs, including activities carried out by individual Centers as well as systemwide initiatives including ecoregional activities. 7. In the meantime, and for use in 1996, relatively minor changes are proposed in the activity typology, consistent with the contents of the CGIAR Research Agenda paper, for presentation at the Ministerial level meeting in Lucerne in February 7 995. Centers are requested to display their programs according to the revised classification structure. The details of the revised activity list (referred to in the manual as CGIAR activities) 8. are included in the revised budget manual. Five categories are maintained. They are: (1) Increasing Productivity (former activities 2 and 31, (2) Protecting the Environment (former activity 1 .l ), (3) Saving Biodiversity (former activity 1.2), (4) Improving Policies (former activity 41, and, (5) Fortifying National Programs (former activity 5).

9. There is no major recalculation or change in methodology for aggregating the programs into these new activities. The information in the former activity structure merely has to be Therefore, to ensure multi-year shifted somewhat, to fit into the new categories. comparability Centers are asked to perform the reaggregation for the 1993-l 995 programs as well as for the 1996 request. These four years will be the period covered in the resource tables (actual for 1993 and 1994, estimated for 1995, and proposed for 1996).

Special

Features

10. There are two special features which are new for the 1996 documentation. The first, referred to above, is the inclusion of “projects” in the expenditure sections (narrative and tables). This dimension will become increasingly important, as TAC intends to review current CGIAR projects with the objective of possibly using them as the unit of analysis in the next review of priorities and strategies. It is therefore requested that Centers supplement the list of projects with a brief description of their contents. 11. The second new feature relates to the Systemwide Initiative on Genetic Resources (SGRPI; The 1996 funding submission should include a consolidated presentation of the SGRP. This should include the aggregated submissions of all genetic resources activities within the Centers concerned as well as the component (USS 1 .O million in 1996) specifically allocated by TAC to IPGRI for the SGRP. It is proposed that decisions on which activities will be included within the 1996 submission (eg. on forest, aquatic, and livestock genetic resources) should be recommended to TAC by the Inter-Center Working Group on Genetic Resources which meets in January 1995. Further details on the process of submitting 1996 program plans and funding requirements of the SGRP will be communicated after the meeting on the management of Systemwide Initiatives (December 15-l 6, 1994). At least for 1996, it is envisaged that genetic resources activities would be included in both individual Center and in a consolidated SGRP submission. Procedures for 1997 and beyond will be finalized during the course of 1996.