Business Model

1. Business Model Executive Board retreat 21 March 2013

2. Outline for discussion • Introduction • Challenges identified from review of each dimension of the business model • Toward an integrated solution • Next steps

3. 1. Introduction

4. Introduction • The bull's eye • Low, lower-middle, and upper-middle income countries • Mid-Term Review brought focus to key aspect of UNFPA’s work: what substantive areas the organization concentrates on • Did not address other aspects of business model: where, how, who • Current business model has evolved largely through piecemeal efforts (e.g., regionalization) • Three tiered structure: HQ, Regional Offices, Country Offices • Implementing partners, other partnerships • Not well articulated in policies, but in practice: advocacy/ policy, capacity development, service delivery

5. Why consider changing the business model? • External factors: • MDG 5 is furthest from attainment • Shift in demand from programme countries: from service delivery to bringing high level technical expertise and adding value through knowledge management • Major shift in global distribution of poverty: 75% of world’s poor live in middle-income countries (MICs) • Internal factors: • No clear policy guidance on the different modes of engagement in different settings • Resources spread thinly across the globe • QCPR, Delivering as One, and the broader UN reform process call for more efficient and effective UN

6. Process • Review undertaken by external consultancy firm: • Analysis on a range of evidence (external evaluations, internal reviews, key performance data, MTR lessons learned) • Visits to country and regional offices and consultations with external stakeholders • Multi-stakeholder thematic consultations on middle-income countries and on humanitarian programming and fragile contexts • Consultation with External Advisory Group • Extensive internal consultation with Senior Management, Consultative Inter-Divisional Group, and through online surveys

7. 2. Challenges identified from review of each dimension of the business model

8. What • Improved the focus and brought coherence • Only introduced in 2012 and so organization still aligning to it • Consensus to retain for the period of 2014-2017 • Language of the “bull’s eye” improved slightly, but no fundamental changes to it are proposed Population dynamics Young people including adolescents The goal… Achieve universal access to sexual and reproductive health, promote reproductive rights, reduce maternal mortality, and accelerateprogress on the ICPD agenda and MDG 5 (A & B) to improve the lives of … Human rights Gender equality Women enabled by …

9. Where • Key issues emerging from review of evidence • Role in middle-income countries: organization will remain heavily involved in middle-income countries but role will shift as countries develop and so can assume more responsibility for financing and implementing interventions • Shifting areas of emphasis in MICs: programming should respond to the unequal gains in the socioeconomic strata by focusing on inequality • Fragile contexts: impossible to achieve MDGs or advance the ICPD agenda globally without working in fragile contexts, so this must be a focus for 2014-2017

10. How • Two key topics analyzed on how UNFPA achieves impact: • Demand for UNFPA’s services: interest in more “upstream” work on advocacy and policy/dialogue and advice, and less for service delivery • Internal capacities: strongest comparative advantage in advocacy, followed by policy dialogue and service delivery; capacity development and knowledge management areas less strong • Additional issues emerged from review of evidence: • Lack of policy guidance: no policies in place on how to operate in different settings, leading to reliance on ad hoc solutions and individual capacities and skill • Shifting from doing to brokering, particularly in MICs: demand for UNFPA to broker top caliber expertise including through South-South Cooperation • Humanitarian programming: adoption of Second Generation Strategy has strengthened UNFPA’s work, but more attention needed to address youth, to ensure mainstreaming, and to establish clearer division of labor between headquarters, regional offices, and country offices

11. Who • Internal • Regionalization: complex process begun in 2008 and still a work in progress, with key challenges typical of these processes: • Division of roles between regional offices and headquarters, and resources to implement on them • Need for more strategic approach to supporting country offices • External • Ownership of the ICPD agenda: tendency to hold onto the ICPD agenda rather than letting go of it in a way that enables other stakeholders to own it • Leveraging the UN system more effectively: UNFPA not making optimal use of the RC system and UNDAF to advance the ICPD agenda • Private sector: too often private sector is treated solely as a funding source rather than tapped for their innovative solutions to problems • Regional entities: Regional actors increasingly important but UNFPA’s engagement with them has been uneven

12. 3. Toward an integrated solution

13. Clarity • Greater clarity in defining programme strategies: • Advocacy and policy dialogue/advice • Knowledge management • Capacity development • Service delivery • Greater clarity in classifying countries: • Two dimensions: • The need that a country has for UNFPA’s support • The ability that a country has to finance its own response to the ICPD agenda • Combination = groups of countries that have similar levels of needs and abilities to finance their responses • Modes of engagement should be roughly similar in countries in the same group (e.g., broader range of strategies in countries with high need/low ability to finance than in low need/high ability to finance)

14. Modes of engagement by setting • No hierarchy in modes, as they all have same objective: improving the lives of beneficiaries • Modes of engagement must be sensitive to fragility: in fragile contexts, UNFPA must operate across entire spectrum • To be applied in flexible manner, not as a straightjacket • Also useful for global and regional levels: A/P and KM • Consistent approach across all country offices * physical presence only in select countries A/P = Advocacy, policy dialogue/advice KM = Knowledge management CD = Capacity development SD = Service delivery

15. Uses and benefits • Uses: • Guide to programming: provide a starting point for modes of engagement in different settings • Resourcing: foundationfor human resource deployment, as the number, level, and competencies of staff in a country office should be based on the modes of engagement • Benefits • Increased focus in UNFPA’s work, building on the MTR • Improved ability to articulate clear theories of change • More efficient use of resources, improving UNFPA’s ability to deliver on its commitments • Greater ability to channel resources to people in need, and so more consistent with a human rights-based approach • More consistent communications with key stakeholders about UNFPA’s role and comparative advantage

16. Partnerships • Partnerships at the heart of how UNFPA operates • Key conceptual shift: away from owning ICPD agenda to helping others internalize it • Key audiences: • UN system: leveraging the Resident Coordination function and the broader UN Development Assistance Framework process • Private sector: build on innovative recent partnerships to shift from treating the private sector solely as a source of funds to a source of new ideas and approaches • Regional entities: more structured approach

17. 4. Next steps

18. Next steps • Key strategic elements to be included in Strategic Plan, based on guidance from the Executive Board • Informal in late April/early May • Closely coordinated with the work on funding arrangements and on results • Shifts in management practices to be addressed outside Strategic Plan • For example, guidance on engagement with private sector

19. Thank you!