Transcript E/ICEF/2009/AB/L.5 Medium-term strategic plan: planned financial estimates for the period 2009-2012 Income Projections - 2009 to 2012 (in millions of dollars) 3,390 2,924 2008 (actual) 2,954 RR income 3,066 OR income 3,160 Total.

E/ICEF/2009/AB/L.5
Medium-term strategic plan:
planned financial estimates
for the period 2009-2012
Income Projections - 2009 to 2012
(in millions of dollars)
3,390
2,924
2008 (actual)
2009
2,954
2010
RR income
3,066
OR income
2011
3,160
2012
Total income
2
Programme Expenditure
Projections - 2009 to 2012
(in millions of dollars)
2,809
2008 (actual)
2,785
2009
RR programmes
2,847
2010
OR programmes
2,885
2011
2,901
2012
Total programmes
3
Income & Expenditure
Projections - 2009 to 2012
(in millions of dollars)
3,390
3,099
2008 (actual)
RR income
2,954
2,924
2009
RR expenditures
2010
OR income
3,276
3,236
3,186
OR expenditures
3,066
2011
Total income
3,160
3,292
2012
Total expenditures
4
Other Considerations
• Projected cash balances of Regular Resources
- Liquidity requirement will be met over the period
2009-2011
- Regular review and update of financial projections
• ASHI fund reserve
- Balance as of 31 December 2008: $180 million
- Proposed suspension of the annual transfer of $30
million
5
E/ICEF/2009/AB/L.4
Biennial support budget
for 2010-2011
Strategic & Financial Framework
• Medium-Term Strategic Plan (2006-2013)
• Impact of global economic downturn on income projections
• BSB reflects changed financial context
• Greater proportion of resources to programmes
• Consolidation / completion of improvement initiatives
• Efficiencies and savings, including reduction in staff
7
Figure A - Contributions by Funding
Category 2002-2003 to 2010-2011
(in USD millions)
7000
6353
6000
Total Contributions
5843
5765
5000
4715
4369
4000
4009
Other Resources
3632
3000
3126
3136
2000
1701
1425
1984
2133
1834
Regular Resources
1579
1000
0
2002-2003
2004-2005
Regular resources
2006-2007
Other resources
2008-2009
2010-2011
Total
8
Income & Resource Utilization Plan
Table 1. Resource Plan
(In millions of United States dollars)
1. Resources available
Opening balance
Income
Contributions
Other income and reimbursements
Total Income
Trust funds
Total available
2008-2009
Trust
Funds
229.0
Other
resources
1,550.0
1,984.0
300.0
4,369.0
43.0
-
6,353.0
343.0
1,833.8
157.2
4,008.8
20.2
-
5,842.6
177.4
2,284.0
4,412.0
-
6,696.0
1,991.0
4,029.0
-
6,020.0
-
-
3,017.0
5,962.0
1,618.0
3,854.0
Total
resources
2,512.0
%
Regular
resources
613.0
2010-2011
Other
Trust
resources
Funds
1,740.0
303.0
Regular
resources
733.0
1,119.0
1,119.0
-
-
1,348.0
10,327.0
2,604.0
5,769.0
5,472.0
1,630.4
3,875.4
Total
resources
2,656.0
1,743.0
1,743.0
2,046.0
10,419.0
%
2. Use of resources
A.
Programmes
(i) Regular and Other Resources
(ii) Trust funds
Subtotal
-
-
1,249.0
1,249.0
1,249.0
6,721.0
87.5%
1,630.4
3,875.4
912.8
47.6
11.9%
0.6%
728.4
31.2
246.6
-
100.0%
2,390.0
4,122.0
214.0
1,647.0
1,618.0
3,854.0
689.8
47.6
223.0
-
2,355.4
4,077.0
1,249.0
7,681.4
3. Projected Balance of resources
661.6
1,885.0
99.0
2,645.6
3a. Updated Balances of Resources
613.0
1,740.0
303.0
2,656.0
B.
C.
Biennial support budget
United Nations mandated security costs a/
Total use of resources (A+B+C)
-
a/ Includes $21.4 additional security allocation approved by the Executive Board in 2008.
-
-
-
5,505.8
1,956.0
1,956.0
1,956.0
7,461.8
88.1%
975.0
31.2
11.5%
0.4%
1,956.0
8,468.0
100.0%
90.0
1,951.0
-
9
Figure B – Use of Total Resources
(including Trust Funds) for 2010-2011
Biennial Support
Budget
11.5%
Programmmes
88.1%
United Nations
mandated Security
0.4%
10
Support Budget as a Percentage
of Total Resources
25.0%
Percentage
20.0%
23.4%
20.3%
19.8%
15.0%
14.2%
10.0%
11.9%
11.5%
5.0%
0.0%
2000-2001
2002-2003
2004-2005
2006-2007
2008-2009
2010-2011
Biennium
11
Analysis of Support Budget Trends
and Ratios from 1998 - 2011
PLANNED
Biennial Support Budget (BSB)
98-99
527.5
00-01
545.5
02-03
574.2
04-05
701.9
06-07
757.4
08-09
912.8
10-11
975.0
BSB From Regular resources
493.6
477.7
485.9
545.5
567.4
689.8
728.4
94%
BSB From OR and other Recoveries
33.9
88%
67.8
85%
88.3
78%
156.4
75%
190.0
76%
223.0
75%
246.6
6%
12%
15%
22%
25%
24%
25%
Total Regular Resources
% of total RR used for Programmes
% of total RR used for BSB
1122.5
56%
44%
1247.7
62%
38%
1147.9
58%
42%
1424.5
62%
38%
1658.6
66%
34%
2355.4
71%
29%
2390.0
70%
30%
ACTUAL
Actual BSB Expenditures
98-99
507.5
00-01
521.9
02-03
568.9
04-05
682.2
06-07
718.2
Actual BSB From Regular resources
465.0
437.6
466.1
481.3
447.5
92%
BSB From OR and other Recoveries
Total Regular Resources
% of total RR used for Programmes
% of total RR used for BSB
42.5
84%
84.3
82%
102.7
71%
200.9
62%
270.7
8%
16%
18%
29%
38%
1065.1
59%
41%
1182.9
65%
35%
1210.8
59%
41%
1369.5
66%
34%
1747.1
73%
27%
12
Operational Efficiency Gains for
2010-2011 - $34.6M
Reductions in Staff/Non-Staff costs resulting from:
• Establishment of common operational units
• Efficiency in administrative processes
• Enhancement of information technology tools
• Opportunities to share costs of premises
13
Summary of Proposed Increases/
Decreases by Expenditure Category
Biennial Support Budget
Expenditure category
2008-2009
2010-2011
% change
Post
Other staff costs
Consultants
Travel
Operating Expenses
Furniture and equipment
Reimbursements (UN: Common and Shared Services)
670.3
15.5
16.1
30.6
109.9
22.5
23.0
732.7
11.6
13.3
27.0
104.3
21.0
28.1
9.3%
-24.9%
-17.7%
-11.6%
-5.2%
-6.5%
22.4%
TOTAL GROSS BUDGET ESTIMATES ( excluding Investment Projects )
887.9
938.1
5.6%
14
Main Areas of Increases
for 2010-2011
Investment projects:
– Enterprise Resource Planning system
– IPSAS
– Additional office space
$27.5 M
$ 4.8 M
$ 4.6 M
Strengthening of functions:
– Support to organizational improvements,
Audit, evaluation and ethics offices
UN Administration of Justice
$ 8.5 M
$ 3.6 M
15
Post Changes for 2010-2011
Table 4. Biennial Support Budget Posts by Location
Net reduction of 15 posts
16
RBB Elements and Resources by Function
Table 2. Biennial Support Budget by RBB Function
(In millions of United States dollars)
F.A.
Code
Functional Area Description
APPROVED
2008-2009
( Recalculated )*
PROPOSED
2010-2011
2010-11
%
OF
TOTAL
%
CHANGE
(a)
(b)
(c)
d=(b-a)/a
1.
Executive Direction and Leadership
14.3
15.3
1.6%
6.9%
2.
Representation and Advancement of the Core Mandate
86.4
94.3
10.1%
9.2%
3.
Corporate Policy and Strategy Development, Planning & Guidance
27.4
28.6
3.0%
4.6%
4.
Programme Guidance, Management and Oversight
150.8
165.7
17.7%
9.9%
5.
Procurement and Supply Management
33.1
33.7
3.6%
1.7%
6.
Emergency Management
16.9
17.5
1.9%
3.6%
7.
External Relations and Partnerships
17.3
17.9
1.9%
3.2%
8.
Internal and External Communication: Media and Public Relations
75.7
80.1
8.5%
5.7%
9.
Resource Mobilization and Fundraising
20.9
22.5
2.4%
7.6%
10.
Financial Management
111.5
117.1
12.5%
5.0%
11.
Information and Communications Technology Management
111.4
113.3
12.1%
1.7%
12.
General Administrative Management
97.5
97.7
10.4%
0.3%
13.
Human Resources Management
97.3
103.2
11.0%
6.2%
14.
Audit and Investigations
13.7
16.0
1.7%
16.4%
15.
Corporate Evaluation
7.6
8.5
0.9%
11.7%
16.
Staff Security
6.2
6.7
0.7%
7.8%
887.9
938.1
24.9
36.9
48.4%
912.8
975.0
6.8%
SUB TOTAL
Investment Projects
GRAND TOTAL
* Recalculated using harmonized definition of inputs under each functional area as explained in paragraph 26.
100%
5.6%
17
Report of the ACABQ
• The Advisory Committee generally recognized the efforts and
improvements in the organization’s BSB presentation
• Encouraged continued collaboration with UNDP and UNFPA
and further development and harmonization of elements of
results-based framework based on standards and a common
terminology
• Encouraged continued efforts on cost recovery harmonization
• Additional information was requested which UNICEF provided
and is available as part of the ACABQ report
18
Harmonization with UNDP and UNFPA
• Continued refinement of Results Based Budgeting in
collaboration with UNDP and UNFPA
• Harmonized format and approach
• At least one common result for each of the 16 functions, with
agency specific indicators
• Classification of costs under each of the 16 functions largely
harmonized
• Reviewing developments on cost classification with UNDP and
UNFPA, and with other UN organizations on cost recovery
19