1 / 17

Moving to a Results Based-Management Environment Progress Report January 2013

Moving to a Results Based-Management Environment Progress Report January 2013. Mandates regarding Mandates Follow-Up. The main requirements regarding the follow-up of mandates are the following:.

navid
Download Presentation

Moving to a Results Based-Management Environment Progress Report January 2013

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Moving to a Results Based-Management Environment Progress ReportJanuary 2013

  2. Mandates regarding Mandates Follow-Up • The main requirements regarding the follow-up of mandates are the following: • GENERAL STANDARDS: Article 88 states that “In order to facilitate the formulation of the budget, the General Secretariat shall: Prepare, as far as possible, a classification of the mandates in each area, according to the level of priority the General Secretariat believes they should have;” • GENERAL ASSEMBLY: As stated in its 2010 Budget Resolution and previous resolutions, instructs the Secretary General: a. To provide member states with a detailed report, on an annual basis, regarding the results achieved and the resources allocated for compliance with the mandates of the Organization. This information should be broken down by pillar, responsible area of the General Secretariat, and object of expenditure; b. To continue, in consultation with the member states and in coordination with the Working Group on the Review of OAS Programs, the implementation of a planning process that identifies strategic objectives, establishes operational results, and aligns programs and projects to the mandates issued by the political bodies. The formulation of strategic objectives to guide the Organization’s planning process will be in keeping with the essential purposes of the Organization as set forth in the Charter of the Organization of American States, and will be adopted in due course by the General Assembly; .

  3. Mandates regarding Mandates Follow-Up • c. To continue, in consultation with the member states and in collaboration with the Working Group on the Review of OAS Programs, the evaluation of the Organization’s programs and projects pursuant to the mandates issued by the political bodies and, subsequently, to define and establish the operational results in accordance with the strategic objectives and the alignment process referred to in the previous paragraph, which will be adopted by the General Assembly, taking into account the comparative advantages of the Organization, and to allocate budgetary resources accordingly; and • d. To ensure that the budget formulation process be guided by strategic objectives, programmed results, and related indicators.

  4. MEMBER STATES: During the 2008-2009 CAAP Sessions, the CAAP, at the request of the Permanent Mission of Mexico, instructed the GS/OAS to develop reporting tools that would inform the CAAP on the implementation of General Assembly mandates for the preceding three years. This was fully supported by all CAAP delegates. During the 2010-2011 CAAP Sessions, the CAAP validated the classification structure for mandates, and on that accomplished an exercise of prioritization. Later, a new exercise to identify obsolete mandates began under the leadership of the Permanent Mission of Mexico. GENERAL SECRETARIAT: The GS, through SAF, identified and classified more than 1700 mandates approved since 1935 to 2008, and linked to them the programmed resources from all the existing funds In 2012, programmed results at the level of Sub-pillars and Groups of Mandates were identified. Background Development of a Mandates Management Tool further responds to requests from stakeholders that we more adequately account for compliance with mandates. In addition, it supports the GS/OAS transition to results-based budgeting. 4

  5. Challenges identified in April 2012 • Record all current mandates. • Develop the capacity to report compliance with these mandates • Help the GS/OAS move towards a results-based budgeting system

  6. Advances from April 2012 Record of mandates totally updated. First version of the Results-Based Budget available. 6

  7. Challenges identified in January 2013 Improve the accuracy of results programmed. Develop the ability to report on the compliance of these mandates. 7

  8. Development Plan Mandates Registration Aggregation and Classification of Mandates Linking Mandates to Planned Results and Programmed Resources Integrationwith OASES and OAS coresystems ProgrammaticReporting and Follow-up

  9. Estructura de Mandatos y Resultados • Aggregation and Classification of Mandates • Aggregation and Classification of Results Pillar Final Outcomes Intermediate Outcomes Sub-pillar Immediate Outcomes Group of Mandates Outputs 9

  10. Progress in the Implementation of theDevelopment Plan during 2012 Mandates Registration and Classification • The new Mandates approved in 2009, 2010 and 211 were registered and classified at the levels of pillars and sub-pillars. The current total of Mandates exceeds 2,300. • The Member States started a process of reviewing the validity of the mandates • Linking Mandates to Planned Results and Programmed Resources: • Planned results at the level of immediate results and their resources were linked to groups of mandates. • Planned results at the level of intermediate results and their resources were linked to sub-pillars.

  11. 2013 Results Based Budget at Pillar Level* *Note: Figures are drawn from the Secretary-General’s budget proposal; version based on the Approved Program-budget is anticipated by the end of the firs quarter of 2013

  12. Human Rights RBB at the level of Sub-Pillar

  13. Human Rights RBB at the level of Group of Mandates

  14. Human Rights RBB at the level of Group of Mandates by department

  15. Mandates Registration and Classification: Ongoing activities • Recording and classification of mandates is now a regular process in the management of the General Secretariat. • Linking Mandates to Planned Results and Programmed Resources: • A new additional format for the program-budget, based on the mandates structure, is being presented to the CAAP as the first draft for a Results Based Budget. • Final results, linked to pillars, will be elaborated and presented to the CAAP during 2013. Linking Mandates to Planned Results and Programmed Resources: • Programmed results and achieved results are being incorporated into the quarterly reports.

  16. Pending activities • Integration with OASES and OAS core systems

  17. Moving to a Results-Based Management Environment

More Related