Education Sector Proposing an Integrated Budget Framework for the 39C/5 Information meeting Paris, 4 November 2016
Definitions
Definitions Integrated budget framework: To plan and manage the full budget of both Regular Programme and Extrabudgetary Structured financing dialogue: Fund-raising exercise to reach 39 C/5 budget approved Also a continuous dialogue in preparing 39 C/5, to ensure a mutual agreement and commitment on the budget targets of the 39 C/5
Existing budget method and trends
Existing budget method focusing on the Regular Programme (RP) budget MP I Approved Budget Expenditure Plan 36 C/5 (2012 13) $115M $82M 37 C/5 (2014 15) $118M $83M 38 C/5 (2016 17) $124M $83M
Extrabudgetary (EXB) expenditure by year in M$ 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total EXB (HQs and FOs) 85 90 104 105 Total EXB (Institutes) 26 25 25 27 $140M Total EXB 111 115 129 132 $100M 2012 2013 2014 2015 Increasing by 6% in average per year Source Management Chart
Extrabudgetary (EXB) expenditure by biennium EXB EXB Institutes TOTAL MP I 36 C/5 (2012 13) $175M $ 51M $226M 37 C/5 (2014 15) $210M $ 51M $261M Source Management Chart
Full picture of both RP & EXB (1/2) Biennium RP EXB EXB Institutes Total MP I 36 C/5 (2012 13) 37 C/5 (2014 15) $82M* $175M $51M $308M $83M* $210M $51M $344 M * RP figures excluding additional appropriations Source Management Chart
Full picture of both RP & EXB (2/2) EXB incl. Inst. EXB incl. Inst. 73 % 75 % RP RP 27 % 25 % Source Management Chart
EXB: Funds mobilized versus Expenditure
Key facts and figures
Proportion of RP established posts in 37 C/5 RP staff (HQ + FLD + Inst.) 18% - ($64M) RP activities 7% - ($25M) EXB (HQ+FLD+INST.) 75% ($261M) Source Expenditure Management Chart 37 C/5 EXB activities include PA personnel / consultants RP staff costs are at a minimum level
PRIORITY AFRICA Budget proportions to Africa in 38 C/5 RP 38 C/5 expenditure plan by Region Total 2016 Extrabudgetary Allotment by Region Latin America 19% Europe & North America 4% Africa 34% Latin America 19% Africa 27% Asia Pacific 27% Arab States 16% Asia Pacific 30% Arab States 24% 31 Member States in Africa are benefitting directly from ED s extrabudgetary country level portfolio (total 63)
Gender Equality in 38 C/5 38 projects gender specific total 2016 allotment: 11.2 M 15 projects strongly benefitting girls and women: 13.5 M About 18% of total allotment (122M) Gender is also mainstreamed in all other ED projects
Uneven Budget distribution by Expected Result - 2016 EXB and RP Allotments
Preparing an integrated budget framework for 39 C/5
39 C/5 Draft Programme MLA 1: Support Member States in the implementation of SDG 4 MLA 2: Lead and coordinate SDG 4 1. ECCE, primary & secondary education 2. TVET 3. Literacy, Adult learning 4. Higher education 5. Teachers 6. ESD, GCED 7. Gender equ. 8. Inclusion, education in emergencies 9. Global /Regional coordination 10. Review and monitor the implementation of SDG 4
Integrated Budget Part I: Activity funds RP EXB (committed + to be mobilized) Part II: Staff costs RP Part III: Activity (by ER) & Staff costs (at MP level)
Part I: Possible presentation of integrated activity budget ER RP activity EXB committed 2018 19 EXB committed Institutes Resource mobilization target for 2018 2019 TOTAL EDUCATION RP+EXB+RM ER 1 ER 10 TOTAL, MP I Activity target figure
How to build the RP budget? Geographical distribution of funds: respect same percentage distribution as past biennia RP Financial allocation to Institutes: respect earlier distributions RP activity budget: limited 16M priority to global and regional activities, + some seed funding to national level Intersectorality via planning of selected projects and amounts to be pooled from the concerned MP programmes- to be implemented by selected field offices
How to set the EXB targets? Enormous global needs for SDG 4 ($39 billion gap) For UNESCO to assist Member States, budget targets should be ambitious But also realistic based on: past trends in EXB (6% increase) and projections of on-going projects in 2018-19 consultations HQ, Field, Institutes strategic choices for underfunded priorities (e.g. HED and the right to education) while comparative advantage of UNESCO Proposed option : 6% + 6% = 12%
Part II: How to present staff costs? ADG/ED responsibility : manage 254 staff ($65M) oversee implementation of activities $280M To deliver 10 expected results This is the objective of RBM and RBB Present RP staff cost at MP level Provide accurate information on staff costs by organizational structure and no breakdown by ER ADG to manage staff within the ceilings
Example of staff costs presentation based on 38 C/5 figures Number of RP posts by grade Grade HQs Field Institutes Total D1 & above 5 1 8 14 P1 to P5 49 67 25 141 NOA to NOD - 33 2 35 G2 to G7 31 10 23 64 Total 55 111 58 254 Staff costs budget HQs Field Institutes Total in M$ 21,7 29,6 15 66,3 in % 32.8 44.6 22.6 100
Part III: Possible projection of 39 C/5 MP I total budget HQ and FLD Institutes Staff Activities Staff Activities TOTAL ED. RP $51M $17M $15M $83M 1 EXB $210M+ 12% = $235M $51M + 6% =$54M $289M TOTAL ED $51M $252M $15M $54M $372M 2
Benefits of Integrated Budget Transparency: Holistic view of the Education Programme and the resources to fund it Alignment: Informed decisions to channel funds to the Approved Programme and Budget => use limited resources strategically towards SDG 4 Predictability: Member States and Donors can anticipate their contributions and facilitate the planning of MP I for the biennium and beyond Flexibility: a long-term objective not yet feasible with the pattern of our resources
Mutual commitment of Member States and the Secretariat Importance to approve the budget at MP I level to further strenghten our comparative advantage including technical expertise, while encouraging decentralized intersectoral projects Member States and the Secretariat are jointly committed to resource the Programme and Budget approved