discussion note on financial reporting to steering ... · discussion note on financial reporting to...

1

Discussion Note on Financial Reporting to Steering Committee (version 20 Nov 2015) (Input for PAGE technical meeting, 1-2 December 2015) The following note is an input for discussion during the PAGE Technical Team meeting. The background note lays down options to address the requests by some Steering Committee members for additional financial information about PAGE summarizing potential decisions in the table at the end. The objectives of the discussion to be held during the upcoming Technical Team meeting are: => To reach agreement on financial reporting to PAGE steering committee => To initiate the process for compiling financial information for the DSC meeting in January 2016 1) Background 1.1 Requests from DSC members on financial reporting In previous DSC meetings, members of the DSC have requested more detailed information on the expenditures going beyond an aggregated presentation of income and expenditures by funding source. We have recorded the following requests in the PAGE Secretariat on financial reporting:

- show expenditures against the global work plan - by countries and global activities - written comments by NORAD after November 2014 DSC meeting and NORAD comments on 29 April 2015 DSC meeting

- show more details on country budgets and global activities, beyond lump sums in global 2014 -2015 work plan – Finland, April 2015 DSC meeting

- provide more details on expenditures and transaction costs—DSC, Summary of Meeting, PAGE Donor Steering Committee Meeting, April 2015

- report in-kind contributions by agencies – Finland, since the time it signed contribution agreement to PAGE, and noted in November 2014 DSC meeting

- report on co-financing by governments and other partners for PAGE activities - noted in 11 November 2015 DSC meeting.

Related to these requests, donors have mentioned that they do not expect a certified financial report providing these details - meaning certified by agencies’ finance departments - but a financial overview or analysis provided by PAGE Secretariat. 1.2. Financial reporting documents that donors have received so far

a) We are obliged to provide donors who have signed contribution agreements to PAGE with 10% programme support cost (PSC) a yearly consolidated trust fund statement of the PAGE trust fund. See Annex 1 (PAGE trust fund annual statement) This trust fund statement is issued by the UNEP finance department in Nairobi and provides very aggregated information on income, expenses, assets and liabilities. Expenses in this statement are only disbursements. This means all transfers from UNEP to other agencies under interagency agreements only show as expenses once the agreements are fully finalized and all expenditures reported back to UNEP. Otherwise they show as advance

2

transfers, even if part of the funds have already been reported back by the agencies. Usually the statement is issued after closing of accounts towards the end of the 1st quarter of the following year. For 2015 it was delayed and we just received it in October. It has not yet been shared with any of the donors. The insight that donors get through this statement on the programme’s expenditures, transaction cost or delivery rate is obviously very limited. But purely following the legal requirements, this is the only statement that donors that signed with 10% PSC rate; this is currently the case for Finland and Korea.

b) Donors that have signed their contribution agreement at 13% PSC can request specific

financial reporting on their contribution following UNEP standard financial reporting templates. These reports can be requested at different points in the year (not necessarily only at year end) and are needed for donors with multi-year contributions in order to trigger the payment of a new installment. The UNEP standard reporting template breaks down expenditures by broad budget categories: staff, consultants, travel, contractual services, meetings and trainings, equipment and premises, miscellaneous component and shows expenditures as disbursements as well as commitments.

See Annex 2 as sample (report that Norway requested in November 2014 for its annual

bilateral review meeting with UNEP) Financial reports of this kind have so far been prepared for Norway and Sweden, which pay 13% PSC. They were also prepared for Finland, despite the fact that it only pays 10% PSC. It turned out that Finland could only pay a new installment under its multi-year contribution with proof in hand that the previous installments had been used (and this information is not shown in the consolidated annual trust fund statement – Annex 1). These specific financial reports have so far not been linked to requests for specific narrative reports by donors. All donors have accepted the consolidated annual narrative report as the main progress report for PAGE.

The information that donors receive through the specific financial reports on the delivery rate and transaction costs is still limited. But the specific financial reports are still useful for the donor’s financial administration, as it allows them to monitor, how much of their contribution was used and whether a new installment would be justified. While PAGE works with the idea of a trust fund and pooled funding, some donors’ financial administration is focused on monitoring their specific contribution. Given this situation, each donor contribution is kept in a separate account under one umbrella project document for PAGE.

2. Possible ways forward to meet the requests from donors on financial reporting For the last Technical Team meeting in June 2015, the PAGE Secretariat prepared an overview that reported 2014 and 2015 expenditures (up to June 2015) against allocations provided in the global PAGE 2014-2015 work plan. All agencies provided inputs to the overview and were able to report and disaggregate their expenditures, including staff and consultant costs, against the country budgets and budgets for global activities. This exercise showed that – provided that all agencies provide inputs in a similar manner – the PAGE Secretariat will be able to compile expenditure reporting against the global work plan with aggregated figures by country and global activity.

See Annex 3 (overview table shared in June 2015 technical meeting) In the overview prepared for the technical meeting in June, we were for example

3

able to show the following information:

Allocated to Peru in 2014-2015 work plan: USD 1,160,000

Spent by Dec 2015 for all agencies together: USD 775,787

Remaining in June 2015 USD 384,213

Allocated to GE Academy in 2014-2015 work plan: USD 350,000

Spent by June 2015 for all agencies together: USD 304,633


Allocated to practitioners guide on green industrial policies in 2014-2015 work plan USD 200,000

Spent by June 2015 for all agencies together: USD 107,028


This gives the PAGE team and potentially the donors an overall idea on the use of the funding and can help to identify areas where too much or too little budget has been allocated to activities and make decisions on necessary reallocations and future budgets. The overview can be the basis to sum up expenditures by outcomes and it also allows us to derive some conclusions on our current balance of funds used in global activities vis-a-vis funds used for country level work. The new tables introduced for ‘uncertified’ financial reporting in the annexes of the interagency agreements (for the amendments and new agreements) should help to facilitate compiling this information. However, some additional efforts may still be needed by each agency to disaggregate the data further for specific sub-outputs or activities.

See Annex 4 (Annex for financial reporting in IAs) 3. Possible ways to further elaborate the financial reporting against the global work plan The current overview on expenditures reporting against the global 2014-2015 work plan only shows total figures for countries and global activities. There could be several ways to further detail the figures, for example:

a) By what each agency spent in a country or on a global activity.

=> This information is easily available, as each agency provides its figures, which are then added up into a total For example (Peru):


Spent for Peru by Dec 2015 for all agencies together: USD 775,787 UNIDO: xx USD UNDP: xx USD UNITAR: xx USD UNEP: xx USD ILO: xx USD


4

b) By input cost, meaning e.g. by staff, consultants, grants, travel, meetings, etc.

=> To do this, each agency would need to further detail its expenditures along an agreed set of budget categories and then agency figures would be aggregated into one figure showing, e.g. the staff, consultants, grants, etc. for one country or global activity. This is something that members of the DSC are interested in to understand how much of the funds were given to institutions in the country, or how much of the funds for one country was used for staff or consultants. For example (Peru):


Spent by Dec 2015 for all agencies together: USD 775,787 Staff (national): xx USD Staff (international): xx USD Consultants (national); xx USD Consultants (international): xx USD Sub-contracts (nat. institutions): xx USD Sub-contracts (int. institutions): xx USD Travel: xxx USD National meetings: xx USD Other: xx USD


c) By outputs and work streams for the country budgets or by bigger sets of activities for global activities (e.g. cost for work streams on green buildings, GE modelling, or sustainable procurement in Mongolia or cost for development of GE Academy and on-line trainings and cost of their implementation). This is how currently the country budgets are prepared by allocating budgets against

specific work streams and related outputs (which then are led by an agency). Reporting could be done for country level activities along these lines.

For example (Mongolia):

Allocated to Mongolia in 2014-2015 work plan: USD 960,000

Spent by Dec 2015 for Mongolia for all agencies together: USD 750,708 Outcome 1: Green jobs survey: xx USD Green economy indicators: xx USD Etc. Outcome 2 Waste inventory/recycling: xx USD Green financing : xx USD Etc. Outcome 3 National PAGE coordinator: xx USD Etc. Overall coordination: xx USD


See Annex 5 (for a sample of a current country budget, Mongolia)

5

ILO provided a sample for the reporting that another NORAD funded ILO project prepares. This sample provides financial reporting (i) by country, detailing the expenditures for each country in to different staff and consultant classes, subcontracts, operating expenses, seminars etc., and (ii) for global activities, which are all other expenses, also detailed by input cost. This is an example for how the reporting could be done if we follow above mentioned option b). However, we need to take into consideration that currently we do not have the funds for PAGE programmed by country in the financial system. Country budgets could not be generated by the UNEP financial system and would need to be compiled manually with inputs from each agency.

See Annex 6 (sample that ILO provided for financial reporting to NORAD) 4. Other possible ways to present the financial reporting Another possibility could be to provide additional financial details but not report against the global PAGE work plan and related allocations for countries and global outputs. UNDP provided an example for financial reporting from a UNEP-UNDP joint programme which is managed through the Multi-partner Trust Fund (MPTF) and can be accessed through the MPTF Office Gateway. Information provided incudes:

- Aggregated information on contributions and use of funds - Details on contributions received by donors - Interest earned - Transfer of funds to partner agencies - Expenditures separated by agencies and a delivery rate calculated by comparing

expenditures reported by participating agencies against ‘net funded amount’ (the amount transferred to the agency less refunds)

- Aggregated expenditures by all participating agencies by UNDG budget categories (such as staff materials, contractual services, travel, transfers and grants, etc.=

See Annex 7 (sample provided by UNDP for MPTF financial reporting)

This report does not provide insight into the amounts used for countries or activities but does detail the amount that each agency received and spent and the related delivery rates. It also provides an aggregated overview on the income and input cost of the project. The information can be easily generated from the information that agencies currently report to the PAGE Secretariat, but it would not respond to the requests by donors to provide information on the amounts spent by countries. 5. Other financial details requested by donors

a) In-kind contributions by agencies In DSC meetings funding partners have also repeatedly requested that PAGE provide information on in-kind contributions by PAGE agencies. So far we have provided information in an aggregated manner on the total in-kind contribution by PAGE partners, estimated at USD 1,200,000 in 2014. This figure can easily be broken down into in-kind contributions by agencies. With the new financial reporting templates in Annex 4 of the interagency agreements agencies are requested to report back on their in-kind contributions (uncertified) and it will be possible to present

6

and sum-up these figures in the next financial report. The reporting is based on estimates mainly of how much staff time of core funded staff was used for PAGE delivery. But it could also be for activities that were funded out of core budget that contributed to PAGE outcomes.

b) Co-financing by government and other technical cooperation partners Funding partners have also requested that PAGE provide information on co-funding received from Governments or from other technical cooperation partners. So far there is no mechanism in PAGE to systematically record these contributions, while they do exist in some countries. An example for a co-financing by a technical cooperation partner is the contribution that the AFD provides to the waste feasibility study in Mauritius.

c) Funding that is provided alongside PAGE country work plans

Other funds that could be monitored for PAGE countries are funds applied by other programmes in the countries alongside PAGE work plans. This could include for example funds that are used in the country by GIZ aligned with the PAGE country work plan, the funds aligned with PAGE by other PAGE partners programmes or by other joint initiatives, such as UN-REDD, PEI etc. Questions for Discussion and Decisions on Financial Reporting to Steering Committee

Decision Options Example and additional questions

Decision 1: Do we provide aggregated expenditure information against the global workplan?

Yes or no Expenditure summary presented in June 2015 technical team meeting (Annex 3)

Decision 2: If yes to 1, decision 2: Do we provide further details beyond total figures by country and global output?

Yes or no

Decision 3: If yes to 2, decision 3: What additional details do we provide to report against workplan?

a) By amount agency spent in a country or global activity

b) By input cost (staff, consultants, meetings, etc.)

c) By outputs and work streams for countries or broader sets of global activities

ILO report to NORAD-funded project (Annex 6)

7

Decision 4: If no to 1, decision 4: Do we provide additional financial detail but not report against work plan?

Include info such as: - details on contributions

received, - interest earned, - transfer of funds to partner

agencies, expenditure by agency and delivery rate, aggregated expenditures by budget categories (staff, travel, etc.)

MPTF financial report (shared by UNDP) (Annex 7)

Decision 5: Do we provide requested in-kind and co-financing information?

a) In-kind contributions by agencies

b) Co-financing by gov. and tech cooperation partner

c) PAGE-aligned funds applied by other programmes

Questions: On option a) Do we further details in-kind contributions, e.g. by staff positions, percentages of staff time, core-funding support to meetings, etc.)? On option b) 1) Do we start recording co-

financing from governments and technical cooperation agencies?

2) How to present info (part of country budgets, part of the agency reporting, other)?

On option c) 3) Do we start monitoring and

compiling information on funds that are aligned with PAGE activities in PAGE countries?

4) How do we define the funds that we call as ‘aligned’ with PAGE in the countries?

8

Annex 1 – PAGE TCTF Statement 2014

9

Annex 2 – Norway Financial Report 31.10.2014

10

Annex 3 – Budget Expenditures 2014-2015 June

2014-2015 Operating Plan Budget and Expenditures 2014-2015

UNDER Discussion

ACTVITIES 2014 alloc.

2015 alloc.

Total for activity, country

2014/2015 Agency

Commitme

nts, Expenditur

es 2014

Commitments,

Expenditures up to

May/June 2015

unspent funds from

2014 allocation

unspent funds from total allocation Agency

Budget 2nd half 2015 (from 2014 rem.+ 2015 add. funds)

Agency leads**

Output 1-3, country level

UNITAR Mongolia 760,000

200,000

960,000

UNEP 78,582

109,500 UNEP

ILO 46,115

21,739 ILO

UNIDO 2,716

37,056 UNIDO

45,000

UNITAR 200,000

180,000 UNITAR

80,000

UNDP* UNDP

11

75,000

Total 327,413

423,295

9,292

209,292 Total

125,000

ILO Peru 810,000

350,000

1,160,000

UNEP 195,908

46,000 UNEP

ILO 219,979

149,382 ILO

UNIDO 70,370

19,148 UNIDO

78,000

UNITAR UNITAR

UNDP 75,000 UNDP

Total 486,257

289,530

34,213

384,213 Total

78,000

UNEP Mauritius 510,000

100,000

610,000

UNEP 81,395

18,923 UNEP

ILO 13,000

33,980 ILO

UNIDO 26,127

22,346 UNIDO

72,000

UNITAR UNITAR

UNDP 75,000 UNDP

Total 120,522

150,249

239,229

339,229 Total

72,000

ILO Senegal 510,000

100,000

610,000

UNEP - UNEP

5,000

ILO 78,282

106,922 ILO

UNIDO 2,716

43,705 UNIDO

15,000

UNITAR UNITAR

12

10,000 5,000

UNDP 75,000 UNDP

Total 90,998

225,627

193,375

293,375 Total

25,000

UNIDO Ghana 510,000

300,000

810,000

UNEP 2,336 UNEP

ILO 10,500 ILO

UNIDO 128,300

88,112 UNIDO

110,000

UNITAR 5,000

30,000 UNITAR

25,000

UNDP 75,000 UNDP

Total 143,800

195,448

170,752

470,752 Total

135,000

UNEP Burkina Faso

400,000

-

400,000

UNEP 8,534

28,780 UNEP

ILO 10,800

41,800 ILO

UNIDO 2,716

17,468 UNIDO

10,000

UNITAR 2,000 UNITAR

8,000

UNDP 50,000 UNDP

Total 22,050

140,048

237,902

237,902 Total

18,000

ILO South Africa -

300,000

300,000

UNEP 3,390 UNEP

ILO ILO

13

10,402

UNIDO 8,822 UNIDO

35,000

UNITAR 10,000 UNITAR

60,000

UNDP UNDP

Total -

32,614

(32,614)

267,386 Total

95,000

UNEP China - 300,000

300,000

UNEP 5,251 UNEP

ILO ILO

UNIDO 2,003 UNIDO

20,000

UNITAR UNITAR

UNDP UNDP

Total -

7,254

(7,254)

292,746 Total

20,000

Subtotal

3,500,000

1,650,000

5,150,000

1,193,756

1,464,066

842,178

2,492,178

Output 3 - global level

UNITAR

On-line training activities

200,000

200,000 UNITAR

71,000

32,000

97,000

97,000

97,000

2014 two GE On-line trainings (English)

Translation of GE online

14

course (French or Spanish)

Advanced GE on line training (fiscal policy)

UNITAR

Development of GE training package

30,000

30,000 UNITAR

5,000

15,000

10,000

10,000

10,000

UNITAR

1 global workshop with CB institutions

160,000

160,000 UNITAR

160,000

160,000

160,000

CB workshop development

CB workshop implementation

ILO

Training package green jobs assessment

100,000

20,000

120,000 ILO

4,485

24,485

Development training package

5,886

21,254

15

Delivery of trainings

15,098

53,277

ILO

2014 Global Green Economy Academy

350,000

-

350,000

UNEP 14,058

ILO 253,283

(138)

UNIDO 15,599

1,831

UNITAR 20,000

UNDP

Total 302,940

1,693

45,367

45,367

UNITAR

2015 Implementation of GE on-line trainings (1 in English 1 in French)

90,000

90,000 UNITAR

40,000

90,000

50,000

UNITAR

Advanced training material on incl. GE (EC, earmarked)

120,000

120,000 UNITAR

120,000

124,000

ILO

Regional GE learning Forum, Francophone Africa or LAC

100,000

100,000 ILO

100,000

16

UNEP

Development and implementation of training on GE and trade (SECO, earmarked)

100,000

100,000 UNEP

10,000

90,000

UNEP

UNITAR 42,000

Subtotal

840,000

430,000

1,270,000

399,924

173,224

266,852

696,852

Output 4

UNITAR

Guidance note for country support

30,000

30,000 UNITAR

15,000

10,000

5,000

5,000

5,000

2 knowledge products on green industrial policy (280k)

UNIDO

Practitioners guide (UNIDO)

150,000

50,000

200,000 UNIDO

66,181

40,847

42,972

92,972

40,000

UNEP

Flagship report: industrial policy (UNEP)

124,000

124,000 UNEP

11,447

112,553

112,500

112,500

17

Flagship report: industrial policy (contribution by ILO)

6,000

6,000 ILO

3,000

3,233

(233)

(233)

Total: 280,000

(2014) and 330,000

(2015) Total 80,628

44,080

155,292

205,292

UNEP

Review and improvement of modelling/assessment tools (220k)

Manuals on modeling tools and assessment, Improvement of modelling (T21)/assessment tools (UNEP)

189,000

189,000 UNEP

53,455

81,828

53,717

53,717 UNEP

53,000

18

Support to training/video (UNITAR)

31,000

31,000 UNITAR

15,000

10,000

6,000

6,000 UNITAR

6,000

Total:

220,000 Total 68,455

91,828

59,717

59,717

ILO

Guide: Methodologies for GJ assessment

30,000

30,000 ILO

39,600

UNEP

1 Global PAGE Conference

UNEP 121,137

ILO

18,858

UNITAR 10,000

150,000

150,000 Total

149,995

5

UNDP

Development of lessons learned from country experiences (EC, earmarked); 238,000 received from EC funds

270,000

270,000 UNDP

238,000

32,000

45,000

19

UNEP

GE indicators /index work (EC, earmarked)

200,000

200,000 UNEP

5,297

161,501

33,202

58,364

UNITAR

PAGE operational guidance on coordination and joint programme management (EC, earmarked)

36,000

36,000 UNITAR

36,000

UNEP

Development of guidelines and manuals on trade and GE (SECO, earmarked)

150,000

150,000 UNEP

17,000

133,000

37,000

Subtotal

710,000

706,000

1,416,000

319,375

602,009

(211,384)

494,616

UNEP PAGE Communication

150,000

56,000

206,000

UNEP 101,344

74,947

ILO

20

support, material, tools

27,078 562

UNITAR 5,000

5,000

5,000

UNIDO

Total 133,422

80,509

(63,931)

(7,931)

Technical / FOP meetings

50,000

50,000

UNEP 31,922

ILO 22,499

UNIDO 4,839

13,951

30,000

UNDP 5,000

UNITAR 10,000

10,000

15,000

Total 69,260

28,951

(48,211)

(48,211)

Outreach side events

30,000

30,000 UNEP

39,633

(9,633)

(9,633)

Subtotal

230,000

56,000

286,000

242,315

109,460

(121,775.49)

(65,775.49)

Subtotal all activities

5,280,000

2,842,000

8,122,000

2,155,370

2,348,760

775,870

3,617,870

UNEP

PAGE Sectretariat

360,000

200,000

560,000 UNEP

277,017

116,307

(33,324)

166,676

360,000

Total allocated

5,640,000

3,042,000

8,682,000

2,432,387

2,465,067

742,546

3,784,546

*

21

Amounts for UNDP show what was allocated to country offices but not what was spent by country offices

Exp 2014

Prov. exp 2015

Total prov. Exp up to June 2015

ILO Total w/o PSC

724,378

482,015

1,206,393

2015: 33198 not allocated in work

plan

515,213

Total 2015 exp. 515,213

PSC (10%)

72,438

Total

796,816

UNEP Total w/o PSC -

569,813

484,509

1,054,322

22

act.

UNITAR Total w/o PSC

366,000

344,000

710,000

PSC (10%)

36,600

Total

402,600

UNIDO Total w/o PSC

323,638

295,289

618,927

PSC (10%)

32,363.80

Total

356,001.80

UNDP Total w/o PSC

668,000

668,000

-

-

PAGE Secretrariat

277,017

116,307

23

UNEP PAGE Coms+ tech. meetings

172,899

74,947

-

-

Total: 2,433,745

2,465,067

4,898,812

24

Annex 4 – Uncertified Expenditure Report by outcome and country

(A) UNCERTIFIED Expenditure Report by Outcome and Country

(Includes both disbursements and commitments/obligations)

PAGE Outcome Country X

(pls specify)

Country Y

(pls specify)

Country Z

(pls specify)

Global/ General

costs

Total outcome for all countries

Outcome 1:

Countries are implementing evidence based sectoral and thematic reforms in line with national IGE priorities policies

N/A

Outcome 2:

Countries have reinforced and integrated inclusive green economy (IGE) goals and targets into SDG aligned national economic and development planning through multi-stakeholder collaboration

N/A

Outcome 3:

Individual, institutional and planning capacities for IGE action strengthened at the national and global level

Outcome 4:

Countries have improved their knowledge base for advancing IGE

Total

(B) UNCERTIFIED Partner’s In-Kind Contribution

Type 2015

Staff time

Activity costs

Other cost

Total in-kind contribution

(C) Cash flow statement:

Installment Date Amount USD

1st installment

[when received]

[2nd installment]

[when received]

[3rd installment]

[when received]

etc Balance remaining with UNEP:

25

Annex 5 – Mongolia PAGE Country Budget Template

PAGE Budget for Country Mongolia (2015 allocation and unallocated funds from 2014 allocation)

Balance from 2014 allocation 0 (only stating the really unallocated balance, which can still be newly programmed; only to be include in the new template if activities can be suggested that can still be implemented in 2015)

Addtional allocation to country in 2015 200,000

Total available

200,000

Activity / cost description Global output

reference

UNEP Budget

ILO Budget

UNIDO Budget

UNITAR Budget

UNDP Budget

Total for activity

workstream

Outcome 1: GE goals and targets in national dev planning processes

Green jobs survey in national labor survey, 2nd half 2015 1.1 25,000 25,000

Green economy indicators workshop, Oct 2015 1.2 5,000 5,000

Green policy assessment workshop, November 2015 1.2 5,000 5,000

… 0

Outcome 2: Sectoral policy reform

Additional support for waste inventory/recycling 1.2 5,000 5,000

Green financing 2.2 15,000 15,000

National workshop on green entrepreneurship and TOT workshop on greener business options (GBO) with focus on green construction/buildings

2.2 20,000 20,000

Outcome 3: Institutional and individual capacity building and planning

National PAGE Coordinator Mongolia + Travel 3.1 28,000 28,000

Preparation, Logistics and Travel for PAGE Week, June 2015

3.2 35,000 35,000

Preparation of 2016-2018 National Programme Document 3.2 5,000 5,000

26

Implementation of Green Economy Learning Strategy 3.1 5,000 5,000

Preparation/Participation in PAGE Workshop, January 2016 3.2 5,000 5,000 5,000 10,000 20,000

… 0

Total 20,000 45,000 10,000 88,000 5,000 168,000

Overall coordination lead agency (32k flatrate) 32,000

Total 20,000 45,000 10,000 120,000 5,000 200,000

Balance 0

Notes:

The budget for an activity or work stream is done on full costing basis. This means the budget for an activity shown in this table includes the staff time attributed to the implementation of the activity, related travel, related publication cost (such as editing, printing or translations for reports), consultants supporting and implementing the activity. A general rule applies of not adding more that 25% of staff cost to the direct cost of an activity. Detailed calculations for the activity budgets are done by the agency leading the activity or workstream.

A flat rate for the overall coordination of the country work can be charged by the lead agency. Maximum amount for this is 32,000 equivalent to two generic staff. Other agencies do not charge general coordination cost.

Transfers by UNDP cables to be reflected under the agency that is reponsible for the activity and not under UNDP.

27

Annex 6 – Example Financial Statement ILO

38

Annex 7 – Example GEJP Final Financial Report

discussion note on financial reporting to steering ... · discussion note on financial reporting to...

Documents