110 likes | 246 Views
2012 CRP Financing Plan. Consortium Office, March 2012. 2012 highlight: full program implementation of the CGIAR reform. All 15 CRP’s will be operational Financing Plan (FP) is based exclusively on programs, not the institutional dimension
E N D
2012 CRP Financing Plan Consortium Office, March 2012
2012 highlight: full program implementation of the CGIAR reform • All 15 CRP’s will be operational • Financing Plan (FP) is based exclusively on programs, not the institutional dimension • FP does not include funds for genebanks or system costs – both to be financed separately • No assumption for 2011-style stability financing BOTTOM LINE 2012 CRP approved financial requirement is $809 million, of which $400 million is from W1-2
Challenges encountered in FP development • Staggered CRP timetable in 2011 meant that until now the CGIAR has been operating two business models in parallel. The “crosswalk” to full implementation requires careful balancing • The approved CRP budget portfolio is in excess of projected 2012 funding • For “early starters” – CRP’s that are underway – approved year 2 budget W1-2 allocations show highly ambitious growth rates, requiring decisions on reducing expectations going forward • Reality check:because CRP development was staggered, some lead centers presented (and had approved) proportionately larger W1-2 budgets than others = uneven “level playing field”
Building an allocation model How we established a window 1-2 distribution plan for 2012
Approach adopted to establish a plan for 2012 • Starting point: calculated availability is $290 million for CRP from windows 1-2 in 2012. • Build an allocation model using “formulaic adjustments” as much as possible, to arrive at a final proposal • Cannot avoid the need for some strategic decisions so criteria must be robust and transparent • The outcome is for 2012 only, and the approach is not expected to be the basis for future allocations • A “CRP harmonization process” will lead to a better basis for allocation in 2013 and beyond
Methodology / Criteria • Search for equity within approved and anticipated approvals for CRP’s – historical reality of budget-building • Employ formulaic adjustments using similar metrics (inclusion of management costs, partner shares, etc.) in CRP’s • Establish a minimum level for all CRP’s based on available resources as currently estimated (72%) • For GRiSP and CCAFS, maintain year 2 allocation at year 1 level, as both were approved at a growth level back in 2010