Detailed Information on the
United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Assessment

Finalizing implementation of financial management and supply chain system.

Department will emphasize support for UNHCR's Results Based Management agenda in the 2009 U.S. - UNHCR Framework for Cooperation

Department will continue to support UNHCR's protection activities.

Measure: UNHCR Inventory Control: Ratio of value non-expendable items procured/total value of recorded non-expendable property procured. (Measures the value of the goods bought versus value of goods actually recorded in inventory. Purpose is to determine how much of the goods bought are lost in transit, and reduce that amount. Ideal ratio is 1:1)

Explanation:Until 2006, only inventory procured at HQ is tracked and measured. For 2006 and 2007, inventory procured worldwide.

Measure: Number of UNHCR protection posts worldwide.

Explanation:Creation of a separate UNHCR budget mechanism to provide funding for creation of additional posts with UNHCR in the "protection" area, and annual progress toward creation, funding, and mainstreaming of these positions.

Measure: Number of UNHCR Protection Posts worldwide. Targets are threefold: a) Sustain support each year for posts previously created (earmarked by PRM); b) number of posts mainstreamed in UNHCR's budget (cumulative, no PRM earmark); c) number of posts newly supported/created each year (earmarked by PRM).

Explanation:The presence of staff with specific protection responsibilities is critical to providing both legal and practical protection for vulnerable individuals and groups. By co-locating with refugees, protection officers are better positioned to prevent abuses and increase accountability for perpetrators.

Measure: Number of countries with significant refugee populations for which UNHCR provides a comprehensive refugee needs assessment to donors.

Explanation:Carry out needs assessments for increasingly smaller UNHCR country programs. Targets below denote countries in relationship to the size of their refugee population.

Measure: Carry out needs assessments for increasingly smaller UNHCR country programs.

Explanation:Number of countries with significant refugee populations for which UNHCR provides a comprehensive refugee needs assessment to donors. In 2004, the target was that a needs assessment be carried out for 5 pilot countries. In 2005 and 2006, the target is to have a needs assessment done for all countries with smaller populations. In the targets below, 'C' denotes countries in relationship to the size of their refugee populations.

Measure: The critical recommendations in an audit report for one year that are addressed by the time of the next year's audit report.

Explanation:Show improved budget management over the previous year by reducing the number of negative audit findings, increasing the percentage of negative findings that have been addressed in the subsequent year, and increasing the percentage of negtive findings that are being addressed.

Measure: The percentage of critical recommendations in an audit report for one year that are addressed by the time of the next year's audit report.

Explanation:Show improved budget management over the previous year by reducing the number of negative audit findings, and increasing the percentage of negative findings that have been addressed in the subsequent year, and increasing the percentage of negative findings that are being addressed.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The purpose of the program is to help ensure a comprehensive and effective response to the protection and assistance needs of refugees and to help provide refugees with lasting solutions. The Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, as amended, authorizes the U.S. Government to provide contributions to UNHCR "for assistance to refugees under his mandate or persons on behalf of whom he is exercising his good offices." UNHCR's mandate is "to lead and coordinate international action for the worldwide protection of refugees and the resolution of refugee problems," making it the Department's primary partner in refugee protection and assistance.

Evidence: a) Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, as amended; b) Statute of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; c) 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.; Partner Accountability

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest or need?

Explanation: UNHCR was established in 1951 as a temporary office with the responsibility of resettling 1.2 million European refugees left homeless by WWII. New refugee crises emerged, and today UNHCR is one of the world's principal humanitarian agencies, with responsibility to protect and assist nearly 21 million persons including over 11 million refugees. The USG program supports the activities of UNHCR.

Evidence: d) PRM's Organizational Policy and Program Implementation Paper for UNHCR for 2003; e) Opening Statement by High Commissioner at the 53rd Session of UNHCR's EXCOM meeting; f) List of Persons of Concern to UNHCR (UNHCR 2003 Global Appeal). BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: UNHCR has the UN mandate to provide for the protection and long-term solution of the plight of refugees, and has special expertise in performing these duties. The U.S. government sees UNHCR's role as unique in this regard, and relies on UNHCR to ensure these duties are carried out. U.S. government support for UNHCR has been authorized by Congressional legislation and is provided solely through this State Department program, thereby avoiding any redundancy. Because of UNHCR's multilateral approach and worldwide presence, it plays a critical role in providing and coordinating refugee assistance (food, water, sanitation, shelter, etc.), although the U.S. government relies on other organizations to carry out refugee assistance as well.

Evidence: a) Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962, as amended; c) 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees; g) UNHCR Mission Statement (from 2003 Global Appeal). BPP Evidence: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: This program provides for the protection and care of refugees on a multilateral basis, which allows the U.S. to advance its objectives, while providing only a portion of the costs of the programs. As a member of UNHCR's Executive Committee (EXCOM), the largest single donor, and a key partner of UNHCR, the U.S. has been able to achieve significant progress in promoting its objectives through UNHCR. Support of programs carried out by a multilateral organization like UNHCR, however, means that the U.S. (or any other donor) does not have sole control over the direction of the organization, nor can it guarantee that the organization will receive adequate resources to carry out its mandate.

Evidence: b) Statute of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; g) UNHCR Mission Statement (from 2003 Global Appeal); h) UNHCR document explaining impact of funding shortfalls.

Is the program effectively targeted, so that resources will reach intended beneficiaries and/or otherwise address the program's purpose directly?

Explanation: This program supports UNHCR activities to meet the immediate and long-term needs of refugees. Donor support comes in response to UNHCR's funding appeals that are issued by country and activity. At the end of the year, UNHCR reports on how the funding have been used. To assist UNHCR, the U.S. provides the majority of its funding at the regional and subregional level, so that as funding requirements change throughout the year, UNHCR has flexibility in the use of its resources. However, in situations where the USG feels adequate steps are not being taken to advance U.S. priorities, earmarked funding at the country level or for cross-sectoral programs is provided to further promote U.S. goals. Examples include contributions to particular countries in Africa, additional contributions to support 'up to standards' initiatives in Africa, and specific funding for USG priorities such as refugee protection, registration, and refugee women and refugee children.

Evidence: i) Report at UNHCR's 26th Standing Committee: "Overall Program and Funding in 2003 and Projections for 2004;" j) Charts of USG contributions to UNHCR, 2002-03; k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR (includes earmarked contribution in support of U.S. priorities; l) Example UNHCR report on use of USG earmarked funding); m) USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation, 2002-04. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The long-term performance measures included in this review are based on key program priorities and include increasing refugee protection, better assessing refugee needs worldwide, and strengthening UNHCR's budget management. Additional long-term goals are included in the Framework for Cooperation, and the Bureau Performance Plan and policy papers.

Evidence: m) USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation, 2002-04; n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; o) Objectives section of PRM's Organizational Policy and Program Implementation Paper for UNHCR for 2003. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: This program has set the following targets to be achieved by or before the end of 2009: establishing 50 additional UNHCR international protection posts and getting 40 mainstreamed into UNHCR programs or supported by other donors; obtaining a real assessment of refugee needs in all countries with greater than 10,000 refugees; and improved UNHCR budget management by reducing the number of annual negative audit findings by 50%, and increasing the percentage of negative findings for which adequate progress has been made, in the subsequent year, to 90%.

Evidence: n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; o) Objectives section of PRM's Organizational Policy and Program Implementation Paper for UNHCR for 2003. BPP Evidence: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: Each long-term performance measure has at least one accompanying annual performance measure that is aggressive and demonstrates the accomplishment of the long-term goal.

Evidence: m) USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation, 2002-04; n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; o) Objectives section of PRM's Organizational Policy and Program Implementation Paper for UNHCR for 2003; p) USG Agreement with UNHCR on increasing UNHCR Resettlement referrals; q) Initial progress report on UNHCR Resettlement referrals. BPP Evidence: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: Each of the annual goals has baseline figures and outyear goals that represent a significant increase in performance of the program. For example, in 2003 UNHCR had 240 officers working in the "protection" area. In 2004, the goal is to establish a budget mechanism for creating additional posts in the "protection" area, with the long-term goal of increasing the number of permanent professional staff who focus on refugee protection, and to create and receive funding for at least 25 additional protection-related posts.

Evidence: m) USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation, 2002-04; n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; o) Objectives section of PRM's Organizational Policy and Program Implementation Paper for UNHCR for 2003. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: The program partner has been informed of the specific short and long-term performance measures included in this document, and efforts in the past year suggest that it is taking USG priorities seriously and striving to address them. Additionally, the U.S. and UNHCR have an annual Framework for Cooperation, which represents a "policy commitment" (not legally binding), and is signed by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the Assistant Secretary of State for PRM. Progress on Framework objectives is tracked and reported on by both parties, including through semi-annual discussions between the two parties. The State Department has also recently established an understanding with UNHCR regarding increased resettlement referrals. The various priorities in the Framework for Cooperation are incorporated into the FY 2005-06 Bureau Performance Plans.

Evidence: m) USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation, 2002-2004; p) USG Agreement with UNHCR on increasing UNHCR Resettlement referrals; q) Initial progress report on UNHCR Resettlement referrals; r) UNHCR Quarterly Report on Progress made towards the 2004 USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation; s) Conclusions at the 53rd Session of UNHCR's Executive Committee; t) UNHCR's Agenda for Protection. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement:

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The last bureau-wide evaluation was undertaken by the Department's Inspector General's (IG) office in 1995. Evaluations of particular aspects of the bureau's work related to this program have been conducted more recently. In 2002, the Department's IG office reviewed the bureau's programs on behalf of refugee women, and in 2003 the GAO completed a review of protection efforts on behalf of refugee women and girls. UNHCR submits to its own series of internal and external evaluations. Recent independent evaluations of UNHCR programs of special importance to the U.S. include the review of UNHCR's policy on Refugee Women, the Protection of Refugee Children, and UNHCR's Community Services Function, several of which were supported by bureau funding.

Evidence: u) State Dept IG review of PRM, 1995; v) GAO report on protection of refugee women and girls, 2003; w) State Dept IG review of Refugee Women's Programs, 2002; x) PRM response to recommendations of IG review of Refugee Women's Programs, March 2002; y) Independent evaluation of UNHCR's Kosovo Women's initiatives, 2002; z) Independent evaluation of impact of UNHCR activities to Protect Refugee Children, 2002; aa) Independent assessment of UNHCR's Policy on Refugee Women and Protection, 2002; bb) Independent evaluation of Community Services function in UNHCR, 2003; cc) UNHCR response to 3 Evaluations of Refugee Women, Children and the Community Services Function; dd) Updated PRM response to recommendations of IG review of Refugee Women's Programs, December 2002; ee) IG Memorandum of October 27, 2003 indicating 2002 IG report recommendation #1 is "closed;" ff) UNHCR Action Plan for Implementation of Recommendations from 3 evaluations (women, children & community services).

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: Only one of the goals on the measures tab requires direct resources to achieve: "Creation of a separate UNHCR budget mechanism to provide funding for creation of additional posts with UNHCR in the "protection" area, and annual progress toward creation, funding, and mainstreaming of these positions." The Department submits information as to the cost to achieve this target during budget hearings with OMB, but this information is not clearly linked to the performance goal in the Bureau's performance plan or in the Department's Congressional Budget Justification. However, since the Bureau can clarify the impact of policy and funding changes on this goal, they receive credit for this question.

Evidence: n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; gg) Fiscal Year 2003 Congressional Presentation Document; hh) State Dept cable (State 53426) showing 2004 contributions to UNHCR in support of program objectives; ii) Budget charts for 2003-05 requests; jj) List of 27 new protection/community services positions; kk) IOM/FOM requesting UNHCR offices carry out needs assessments for 2005 COP; ll) March 25, 2004 email reporting UNHCR intention to share needs assessment info with donors; mm) UNHCR Powerpoint Presentation on MSRP system, October 3, 2003. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: The development of a jointly agreed upon Framework for Cooperation (beginning in FY2001) between the U.S. and UNHCR has provided the program with a new and important strategic planning tool. The framework lays out joint priorities which the U.S. Government then works with UNHCR to advance. U.S. support includes specific funding for priorities such as refugee registration, refugee protection, and resettlement. The current Bureau Performance Plan better quantifies USG priorities and again includes a partner accountability goal. Since the last bureau-wide IG review some years ago, the bureau has adopted a more open and inclusive policy review process whereby each office provides input into the bureau's policy and program decision papers thereby enhancing strategic planning bureau-wide. Finally, the bureau is developing a computer database that is expected to facilitate the tracking of bureau efforts to promote program objectives.

Evidence: k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR (includes earmarked contribution in support of U.S. priorities; m) USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation, 2002 - 04; n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; nn) Information on efforts to establish Bureau database (Abacus). BPP Evidence: Goal Papers: Partner Accountability

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: The USG monitors progress on its priorities through bilateral discussions with UNHCR officials, participation in governing board meetings, inquiries and interventions by bureau staff in Geneva, and direct monitoring of UNHCR program implementation in the field. UNHCR reports on a quarterly basis on its implementation of the priorities in the Framework for Cooperation and the USG and UNHCR meet to review progress semi-annually. Field activities are monitored by refugee coordinators based in key locations throughout the world, and periodically by Washington-based program officers. RMA/Geneva monitors UNHCR headquarters on an ongoing basis. Information gathered allows the U.S. to promote its policies through governing board meetings, consultations with other donor governments, and bilateral discussions with UNHCR including through monthly phone conversations with UNHCR leadership, regular discussions with UNHCR officials, and demarches. Targeted funding is used to promote USG goals.

Evidence: k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR (includes earmarked contribution in support of USG priorities); n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; r) UNHCR Quarterly Report on Progress made toward the 2004 USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation; oo) UNHCR Global Report, 2002; pp) Example PRM Field Monitoring and Evaluation Report (on Angolan refugees in Zambia); qq) RefCoord report on review of UNHCR Ethiopia's 2004 Country Operations Plan; rr) Example of Bilateral Discussions: Points for A/S Dewey-HC Lubbers telcon; ss) Example of Bilateral Discussions: Points for PDAS Greene-DHC Wyrsch telcon; tt) USG statements at the Plenary and on Protection at the 53rd Session of UNHCR's Executive Committee meeting; uu) Example of Bilateral Discussions: Points for PRM-UNHCR/Washington Monthly mtg; vv) Example reporting/demarche cable to UNHCR on Southern Africa issues (Rwandan refugees & Malawi program); ww) Example PRM letters (2) to fellow UNHCR donors. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.; Partner Accountability

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: PRM officers with direct responsibility for the program are evaluated annually on their efforts to advance program priorities, and awards and advancements are based on their efforts to accomplish these objectives. Continuing employment is contingent on performance of program duties. Program partner staff are evaluated on their performance in advancing UNHCR's Global Objectives, many of which coincide with stated U.S. priorities. Employee performance is considered as employees compete for ongoing assignments and advancements. In locations or for programs where partner performance is not acceptable, program funding may be withheld or funds may be earmarked to encourage cost, schedule and performance results.

Evidence: l) Example UNHCR report on use of USG earmarked funding; xx) List of General Responsibilities of Program Officer - "Job Elements;" yy) Sample Program Officer Performance Appraisal Report Form; zz) Sample UNHCR Performance Appraisal Report Form; ab) UNHCR Global Appeal 2003 - Global Objectives and Indicators of Progress Section. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.; Partner Accountability

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: USG funds are obligated and expended by its program partner in a timely manner. In recent years, the first USG contribution of the year has amounted to approximately 50% of the total annual USG contribution and has been given in late December/early January to ensure UNHCR has funds to start the year. (The USG fiscal year starts earlier than that of other donors). The USG makes subsequent contributions throughout the year to meet needs in the middle and later part of the year. UNHCR requests use of USG funding only as it is needed to cover current expenditures. UNHCR reports on the overall use of donor contributions in its annual Global Report. When required, UNHCR provides the USG with special reports on specific earmarked contributions.

Evidence: i) Report at UNHCR's 26th Standing Committee entitled "Overall Program and Funding in 2002 and Projections for 2003;" j) Charts of USG contributions to UNHCR, 2002-03; k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR (includes earmarked contribution in support of U.S. priorities); oo) UNHCR Global Report, 2002; ac) UNHCR financial drawdown request to bureau Comptroller's office.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The efficiency indicator adopted by the program is improved inventory control of UNHCR's non-expendable items to ensure resources are adequately accounted for. UNHCR rolled out the first phase of its Management Systems Renewal Project (MSRP), which will streamline its asset tracking system and link headquarters and field operations so that procurement data need only be entered into its system once. Roll out of the MSRP system to the field is expected to be completed by the end of 2005. This is the first step to improving its tracking of financial and material resources. Other UNHCR measures that will improve operational efficiency include the role out in 2004 of its new, standardized refugee registration system (Project Profile) to an initial 20 countries. This will provide a more accurate indication of refugee numbers and protection and assistance needs.

Evidence: n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan 2005; mm) UNHCR Powerpoint Presentation on MSRP system, October 3, 2003; ad) Statement of UNHCR's Head of the Department of Operations, Marjon Kamara, at March 2004 Standing Committee on Project Profile, Standards and Indicators, etc.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: Internal efforts are made to coordinate among many partner agencies so that USG funds best support refugees' needs. The UNHCR team includes at least one representative from each PRM office, who reviews each policy/funding proposal to ensure internal coordination. Bureau funding requests are presented to the Bureau's Policy and Program Review Committee, which further enhances internal coordination. When overlapping interests with other agencies occur, PRM coordinates with other agencies to ensure an appropriate USG response. Similarly, the USG promotes coordination among the humanitarian actors, requiring NGO partners to coordinate with UNHCR, and urging coordination among international organizations and other humanitarian actors. The bureau also seeks to improve coordination among donor governments by promoting multi-donor missions and information sharing (including through letters to key donor governments, donor meetings, and providing information on the internet on USG efforts).

Evidence: ww) Example PRM letters (2) to fellow UNHCR donors; ae) NGO instructions on coordination with UNHCR; af) USG statement on coordination at the 25th Standing Committee of UNHCR; ag) UNHCR/WFP MOU; ah) RefCoord instruction cable on participation in UNHCR Country Operations Plan; ai) PRM/DCHA Funding Guidelines. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The UN Board of Auditors conducts annual audits of UNHCR. The USG and other Executive Committee members have urged UNHCR to address problems quickly. Recent findings included lack of an integrated financial management system, incompatibility with other UN systems, and failure to use UN-approved accounting standards. By autumn 2003, of the 20 audit recommendations for 2001, 8 (40%) had been implemented, 11 (55%) were under implementation, and 1 (5%) was not implemented. Completion of UNHCR's Management Systems Renewal Project (MSRP) will implement this final recommendation, which will address the findings noted above. MSRP was launched in Jan. 2004; it will be completed in headquarters by the end of 2004. It will replace disparate, outdated and costly financial and supply chain data management systems with a single, modern, internet-compatible platform. Project roll out in the field will be completed in 2005. PRM requires UNHCR to draw down USG funds no sooner than 30-60 days prior to the funds being expended.

Evidence: k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR (includes earmarked contribution in support of U.S. priorities); aj) UNHCR financial drawdown request to bureau Comptroller's office; ak) Report of the UN Board of Auditors on the Financial Situation of UNHCR, 2001; al) Information on the Development of a new UNHCR financial management system - "MSRP", from the UNHCR 2002 Global Report.; am) UNHCR Progress Report on Implementation of Recommendations of 2002 UN Board of Auditors Report - Feb. 2004; mm) UNHCR Powerpoint Presentation on MSRP system, October 3, 2003. BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Partner Accountability

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: Through an annual Framework for Cooperation and the associated review procedures, PRM and UNHCR have clear, agreed upon objectives, thereby enhancing the ability of the USG to manage this program. The Framework provides Bureau officers with a set of criteria on which to review UNHCR programs in the field. PRM also has established a standardized, week-long Monitoring & Evaluation training course for all program officers that enhances the Bureau's review of this and other programs. Recent GAO and IG evaluations gave positive reviews of PRM efforts to meet the needs of refugee women and to address refugee protection needs. The Bureau also ensures that UNHCR acts on USG priorities by providing earmarked contributions for these activities. PRM divides financial management functions between its Comptroller's Office and its Office of Policy & Resource Planning, thereby providing a system of checks and balances for funding actions. PRM also funds external reviews of partners' activities.

Evidence: k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR (includes earmarked contribution in support of USG priorities); m) USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation, 2002-04; u) State Dept IG review of the PRM Bureau, 1995; v) GAO report on protection of refugee women and girls, 2003; w) State Dept IG review of Refugee Women's Programs, 2002; x) PRM response to recommendations of IG review of Refugee Women's Programs, March 2002; y) Independent evaluation of UNHCR's Kosovo Women's initiatives, 2002; z) Independent evaluation of UNHCR activities to Protect Refugee Children, 2002; aa) Independent assessment of UNHCR's Policy on Refugee Women and Protection, 2002; bb) Independent evaluation of Community Services function in UNHCR, 2003; cc) UNHCR response to 3 Evaluations of Refugee Women, Children and the Community Services Function; an) PRM Bureau Monitoring and Evaluation training packet; ao) IG Memorandum of October 27, 2003 indicating recommendation #1 from 2002 IG report is "closed." BPP Evidence: Goal Papers: Partner Accountability

Does the program have oversight practices that provide sufficient knowledge of grantee activities?

Explanation: The U.S. is a member of UNHCR's Executive Committee and as such participates in UNHCR governing board meetings and reviews UNHCR's activities, including reports provided by UNHCR. The USG also meets frequently with UNHCR on a bilateral basis. The program partner's field operations are monitored by the Bureau's field-based Refugee Coordinators and Washington-based program officers. UNHCR headquarters activities are tracked daily by the Bureau's RMA office in Geneva, and a Bureau officer in Brussels monitors issues of importance with donor partners in the EC. Internal and external evaluations of UNHCR activities further enhance the Bureau's oversight capabilities. UNHCR provides extensive and valuable information on its programs through its publications and website.

Evidence: i) Report at UNHCR's 26th Standing Committee entitled "Overall Program and Funding in 2002 and Projections for 2003"; pp) Example PRM Field Monitoring and Evaluation Report (on Angolan refugees in Zambia); qq) RefCoord report on review of UNHCR Ethiopia's 2004 Country Operations Plan; rr) Example of Bilateral Discussions: Points for A/S Dewey-HC Lubbers telcon; ss) Example of Bilateral Discussions: Points for PDAS Greene- DHC Wyrsch telcon; tt) USG statements at the Plenary and on Protection at the 53rd Session of UNHCR's Executive Committee meeting; vv) Example reporting/demarche cable to UNHCR on Southern Africa issues (Rwandan refugees & Malawi program).

Does the program collect grantee performance data on an annual basis and make it available to the public in a transparent and meaningful manner?

Explanation: The Bureau has posted the 2004 USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation on its publicly-accessible website. The Framework lays out key shared objectives for the program, as well as a brief review of issues of the previous year that require continued attention. Additional performance data is made publicly available through an annual Department report to Congress on American staffing levels at the UN (including UNHCR), and through USG statements at UNHCR governing bodies. UNHCR makes available through public documents and its website, reports and findings from its internal evaluations. The bureau includes this link on its website.

Evidence: i) Report at UNHCR's 26th Standing Committee entitled "Overall Program and Funding in 2002 and Projections for 2003"; n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; s) Conclusions at the 53rd Session of UNHCR's Executive Committee; t) UNHCR's Agenda for Protection; y) Independent evaluation of UNHCR's Kosovo Women's initiatives, 2002; z) Independent evaluation of impact of UNHCR activities to Protect Refugee Children, 2002; oo) UNHCR Global Report, 2002; ao) Agenda for discussions with NGOs prior to UNHCR Executive Committee meetings; ap) PRM website information (www.state.gov/g/prm/); aq) Bureau funding information provided for posting to the OCHA Relief Web site (www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf); ar) UNHCR website information (www.unhcr.ch).

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The program has accomplished its annual performance goals, which have resulted in significant progress toward achieving long-term performance goals (see section 4.2 for details on annual goal accomplishments). In addition to efforts made in direct response to the protection performance goal, the Bureau is taking additional steps to strengthen UNHCR's protection work by targeting funding in support of 1) UNHCR's field protection activities, particularly in Africa, 2) the development and roll out of its new registration system, and 3) programs for the prevention of gender-based violence against refugee women and children. We have replaced the original budget management goal with a new goal starting in 2005. The new goal aims to minimize UN Auditors' negative findings of UNHCR programs and improve UNHCR's response to recommendations. This goal is more measurable, tracks an important management issue, and allows greater potential for improvement.

Evidence: j) Charts of USG contributions to UNHCR, 2002-03; k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR (includes $3 million earmark for protection personnel and activities in Africa); n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan 2005; r) UNHCR's Quarterly Report on Progress made towards the 2003 USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation (shows increase in UNHCR staffing in the "protection" area); as) IRC Protection Surge Capacity Report; at) Allocations from UNHCR 2002 Operational Reserve, UNHCR Global Report, 2002; hh) State Department cable (State 53426) showing 2004 contributions to UNHCR in support of program objectives; kk) IOM/FOM requesting UNHCR offices carry out needs assessments for 2005 COP. BPP Evidence: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: The program has reached or exceeded its annual performance goals. PRM has been successful in having UNHCR establish a mechanism whereby donors can provide funding for additional activities not included in its annual budget, and has provided UNHCR with $3 million to create 27 additional protection-related posts (goal was to create 25 new posts). In response to UNHCR headquarters instructions that needs assessments be carried out worldwide, many (well over 5) country offices prepared needs assessments this year in preparation for next year's budget. UNHCR has improved its budget management by adopting a new finanicial tracking system (MSRP), and has advanced the timing of its fall Standing Committee meetings to increase the time Member States have to consider the coming year's budget before its adoption. UNHCR improved its headquarters inventory control last year, increasing the amount of expendable inventory recorded from just over 40% in 2002 ($14.8M/$36.2M) to more than 50% in 2003.

Evidence: j) Charts of USG contributions to UNHCR, 2002-03; k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR (incl. $3 million earmark for protection personnel & activities in Africa); n) PRM Bureau Performance Plan, 2005; r) UNHCR's Qtly Report on Progress made toward the 2003 USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation (shows increase in UNHCR staffing in the "protection" area); as) IRC Protection Surge Capacity Report; at) Allocations from UNHCR 2002 Operational Reserve, UNHCR Global Report, 2002; hh) State Dept cable (State 53426) showing 2004 contributions to UNHCR in support of program objectives; jj) List of 27 new protection/community services positions; kk) IOM/FOM requesting UNHCR offices carry out needs assessments for 2005 COP; au) UNHCR Case Study on "Needs versus Resource-Based Planning in the Kenya Refugee Programme, 2003 (Needed); ll) March 25, 2004 email reporting on UNHCR intention to share needs assessment info with donors. BPP Evidence: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.; Partner Accountability

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: The efficiency indicator adopted by the program is improved inventory control of UNHCR's non-expendable items to ensure resources are adequately accounted for. UNHCR has begun rolling out a badly needed, modern finance and supply chain management computer system, the Management Systems Renewal Project (MSRP), which will streamline the asset tracking system and link headquarters and field operations so that procurement data only needs to be entered into the system once. The MSRP system is expected to allow for much improved inventory management and control. Other activities aimed at improving program partner efficiency includes the roll out of Project Profile, and improvements in UNHCR's human resource policies.

Evidence: j) Charts of USG contributions to UNHCR, 2002-03; k) Example funding contribution to UNHCR; r) UNHCR's Qtly Report on Progress made toward 2003 USG/UNHCR Framework for Cooperation; av) Info on Abacus computer system; pp) Example PRM Field Monitoring & Evaluation Report (on Angolan refugees in Zambia); an) PRM Bureau Monitoring & Evaluation training packet; aw) Information on State Dept IG training for UNHCR; as) IRC Protection Surge Capacity Report; at) Allocations from UNHCR 2002 Operational Reserve, UNHCR Global Report, 2002; mm) UNHCR Powerpoint Presentation on MSRP system, October 3, 2003; ax) UNHCR IOM/FOM on new Human Resources policies, of July 7, 2003; ay) UNHCR High Commissioner's Address of June 12, 2003 on human resource policy changes; ad) Statement of UNHCR's Head of Dept of Operations, Marjon Kamara, at March 2004 Standing Committee on Project Profile, Standards & Indicators.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: UNHCR is the only international organization with a mandate to provide for the protection and durable solutions to the plight of refugees. PRM is the only USG entity to fund UNHCR programs.

Evidence: b) Statute of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; c) 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees; g) UNHCR Mission Statement (from 2003 Global Appeal). BPP Evidence: A/S Statement: Goal Papers: Protection and Durable Solutions; Assistance; Refugee Admissions to the U.S.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The Dept.'s IG last conducted a bureau-wide review of PRM in 1995. The IG reviewed refugee women's programs in 2002. The GAO reported on protection of refugee women and girls in 2003. The IG and GAO found that PRM has taken adequate and appropriate measures to address these issues. The IG "found that the Department has advanced its humanitarian response efforts to provide women refugees and conflict victims with equal access to assistance and protection." The GAO report "found that the U.S. government has consistently pushed for a strong international response." UNHCR funded independent evaluations of partner organizations in the areas of refugee women, refugee children, and community services, and has a plan of action. Other achievements include: funding additional UNHCR protection positions; improving UNHCR's human resource policies; roll out of MSRP and Project Profile; new Registration Handbook and Practical Guide to the Use of Standards and Indicators in UNHCR Operations.

Evidence: u-z; aa-dd; aaa) State Dept "Statement of Action" regarding GAO recommendations on protection of refugee women & girls, 2003; hh) State Dept cable (State 53426) showing 2004 contributions to UNHCR in support of program objectives; jj) List of 27 new protection/community services positions; ff) UNHCR Action Plan for Implementation of Recommendations from 3 evaluations (women, children & community services); ax) UNHCR IOM/FOM on new Human Resources policies, of July 7, 2003; ay) UNHCR High Commissioner's Address of June 12, 2003 on human resource policy changes; az) UNHCR document for 29th Standing Committee meeting with update on Project Profile; ad) Statement of UNHCR's Head of Dept of Operations, Marjon Kamara, at March 2004 Standing Committee on Project Profile, Standards & Indicators; mm) UNHCR Powerpoint Presentation on MSRP system, October 3, 2003.