100 likes | 227 Vues
This document provides an in-depth review of the Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR) policy from its inception on May 29, 2007, to December 31, 2008. It highlights the need for full costing of activities, mechanisms to recover incurred indirect costs, and identifies the uneven growth between Regular and Specific Funds. With data indicating that only a fraction of indirect costs is being recovered, the report details financial results, ICR inflows and outflows, and outlines successes and challenges of the new policy, along with recommendations for future steps.
E N D
Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR) Policy: 1st Comprehensive ReviewFrom Inception (May 29, 2007) to December 31, 2008 September 9, 2009
Background A new ICR policy: • Full costing of activities: direct and indirect costs. • Mechanism to recover indirect costs incurred. • Uneven growth between Regular Fund and Specific Funds. • Data on indirect costs was not clear. ICR 1st Comprehensive Review
Basis of ICR Policy • Every $1 administered requires an additional $0.53 to cover indirect costs. • Only 6%, or $3 million, was being recovered from Specific Fund contributions. • $5.5 million were needed: $3 million + $2.5 million (Regular Fund). • New ICR rates: 11% for Member States and 12% for other donors. ICR 1st Comprehensive Review
Report Structure • Preface • Cost of current administrative structure • Overview of financial results since ICR policy implementation • Details on ICR inflows and outflows • Conclusions • Next steps • Schedules ICR 1st Comprehensive Review
Beginning Balance on June 1, 2007 $ 2.2 Add: ICR Collection $ 6.6 Interest Income 2.8 9.4 Available for Execution 11.6 Less: ICR Allocation 7.8 Transfer to the Regular Fund 1.2 9.0 Ending Balance on December 31, 2008 $ 2.6 ICR collection and utilization(for the 19 months from January 2007 to December 2008) (in millions) ICR 1st Comprehensive Review
ICR inflows • “Grandfathered” 38.4 1.2 • Member State <= $20,000 0.3 - • Co-financed by Regular Fund 0.9 - • Unprogrammed Funds 7.7 - • Programmed at 11% or 12% 51.6 5.0 • Programmed at 10% or less 7.2 0.3 • Pending final negotiation with donors 13.7 - • Interest income - 2.9 ICR 1st Comprehensive Review
ICR outflows • In 19 months, GS/OAS allocated $9.1 million of ICR collected. Total $9.1 million ICR 1st Comprehensive Review
Conclusions I. Successes on the new ICR policy: • Simplified and centralized indirect cost recovery. • Uniform organizational recovery rate. • Identified where and how most indirect costs are incurred. • Promoted internal dialogue. • Confirmed that decentralized administrative units impact performance. ICR 1st Comprehensive Review
Conclusions (continued) • Work remains to be done: • Misperceptions: • - Central administration captures ICR for its own benefit. • - ICR collected “belongs” to Secretariat managing the funds. • Misleading or negative communication to donors regarding ICR policy. • Incremental mandates not necessarily accompanied by required financing. • Donors having difficulty dealing with ICR requirements. ICR 1st Comprehensive Review
Next Steps • Earmark ICR for infrastructure costs. • Reestablish a more coordinated management structure within each technical secretariat. • Maintain current ICR rates at the same level. ICR 1st Comprehensive Review