US embassy cable - 05ROME2083

UNCLAS  ROME 002083 
 
SIPDIS 
 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR IO DAS MILLER, IO/EDA, IO/S 
USDA FOR FAS/ICD 
 
FROM THE U.S. MISSION TO THE UN AGENCIES IN ROME 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AORC, EAGR, EAID, KUNR, FAO 
SUBJECT:  INDEPENDENT EXTERNAL EVALUATION OF FAO: 
JUNE 2005 UPDATE 
 
REF:  (A) ROME 0239,     (B) ROME 0327 
 
      (C) ROME 1123,     (D) ROME 2082 
 
Sensitive but unclassified - please handle accordingly. 
 
1.  (U)  Summary:  The Intersessional Working Group 
(ISWG) on the Independent External Evaluation (IEE) of 
FAO has reached broad consensus on the scope and 
objectives of the proposed evaluation.  Substantive work 
by two hired consultants on an approach paper outlining 
the IEE is underway.  The ISWG will not complete its 
mandate in time for the 128th FAO Council (20-25 June) as 
the USG and other major donors had hoped initially; it 
will only present a progress report then.  The ISWG 
remains on track, however, to meet the deadline for 
presentation of its final recommendations to the 129th 
Council (16-18 November).  The inclusive, transparent and 
generally harmonious ISWG process has thus far yielded 
good results from the USG perspective, but crucial 
details of the terms of reference (TOR) of the IEE and 
the governance and management of the evaluation remain to 
be worked out.   Barring unforeseen hitches, ISWG 
approval of the approach paper outlining the TOR is 
expected before the end of September.  End summary. 
 
2.  (U)  This is the second of two reports on the IEE. 
Part I (ref D) covers broad policy issues, including UN 
reform, and funding needs.  The present report provides a 
more detailed overview of the work of the ISWG thus far 
and the plan of work through September 2005. 
 
PROGRESS TO DATE 
 
3.  (U)  The IEE is potentially the centerpiece of an 
initiative by the U.S. and numerous partners to promote 
reform of FAO (ref D).  As described in refs A and C, the 
ISWG met several times in January-March 2005 to develop a 
procedure for devising draft terms of reference (TOR) for 
the IEE.  It was agreed during this period that the ISWG 
would hire several independent experts/consultants who 
would meet with ISWG members in a 2-day seminar on the 
IEE, and who would then draw on the ISWG's instructions 
to prepare an approach paper laying out the major 
features of the proposed evaluation.  The ISWG would 
discuss and if needed modify the approach paper, which 
the consultants would then use as the basis for preparing 
the draft TOR. 
 
4.  (U)  During April-May, the ISWG set the above- 
described process in motion.  Selection criteria for the 
experts were agreed upon.  Two experts were hired in mid 
May: Horst Breier (Germany) and Dunstan Spencer (Sierra 
Leone).  A checklist of IEE issues and questions for the 
seminar was devised.  The seminar took place on 17-18 
May, with 68 countries and the EC participating.  It 
featured presentations by various stakeholders (the FAO 
Secretariat, the UN Secretariat, civil society, private 
 
SIPDIS 
sector) and presentations by those involved in prior 
evaluations of FAO, the World Food Program (WFP), and the 
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). 
Permreps speaking for each of the seven regional groups 
outlined their expectations of the aims and scope of the 
IEE.  There was a remarkable convergence of views: the 
IEE should be comprehensive; it should cover impact, 
governance and management; its conclusions should inform 
Council planned midterm discussions of the FAO Strategic 
Framework.  The two consultants came away from the 
discussion with fairly clear and consistent instructions 
from the ISWG on how to proceed with the drafting of the 
approach paper.  They are now at work. 
 
PLANS FOR THE 128th COUNCIL 
 
5.  (U)  The ISWG met on 7 June to finalize its 
preparations for the 128th Council.  Members adopted a 
progress report to the Council that reviews the work 
completed by the ISWG thus far and its continuing 
activities (as outlined in para 2-4 above).  In the 
report, the ISWG recommends two actions by the 128th 
Council to ensure rapid start-up of the IEE once it has 
been approved at the 129th Council: (1) authorizing the 
ISWG to make initial arrangements to facilitate the 
selection of the evaluators and other advisors or experts 
deemed necessary, and (2) instructing the FAO Secretariat 
to establish a multilateral trust fund for the IEE (as a 
successor to the current trust fund, which is designated 
 
 
only for the preparatory work). 
 
6.  (SBU)  At their last meeting, ISWG participants said 
they did not anticipate major difficulties at the 128th 
Council, given that there is substantial overlap between 
the membership of the ISWG and the membership of the 
Council.  That said, all were mindful that the agenda 
item on the IEE (Item 14) would have to be managed 
carefully.  Some delegates from capitals might not be 
fully in sync with their Rome-based permreps, and a 
plenary discussion could quickly spin out of control if a 
single delegate were to make an incautious remark, 
triggering a potentially messy and unpredictable debate 
on the floor.  ISWG Chairman Flavio Perri (Brazil) will 
discuss options for handling this agenda item with the 
Council's Independent Chairman, Aziz Mekouar (Morocco). 
Among the alternatives would be (1) seeking approval of 
the ISWG report and its recommendations by acclamation 
prior to opening debate, or (2) inviting only one 
representative from each regional group to speak before 
approval of the report. 
 
7.  (U)  U.S. Mission believes that hearing from a cross 
section of Council members on Agenda Item 14 would be 
valuable, provided that such a discussion is managed so 
that adoption of the ISWG report is not jeopardized.  The 
Council discussion also provides an opportunity to 
encourage donor support for the IEE (see below); ISWG 
Chairman Perri said he would make such an appeal during 
his oral presentation of the report. 
 
NEXT STEPS AFTER 128TH COUNCIL 
 
8.  (U)  The ISWG schedule slipped somewhat in early June 
due to the temporary illness of one of the consultants. 
A preliminary draft of the approach paper now is 
scheduled to be circulated o/a 7-8 July.  Shortly 
thereafter, the ISWG Bureau will meet to discuss it. 
ISWG members will be able to submit written comments 
until the middle of July.  The consultants will then work 
through the summer to prepare a revised approach paper 
and a first draft of the TOR, for consideration by the 
ISWG Bureau on 12 September and the full ISWG on 16 
September.  The ISWG also will need to start 
deliberations on the governance and oversight mechanisms 
for the IEE during the summer months. 
 
COMMENT 
 
9.  (SBU)  The IEE project has brought together a diverse 
collection of FAO members in a new sense of shared 
purpose.  This has been a significant achievement in an 
organization where the atmosphere of governing body 
meetings is not infrequently marred by sharp political 
differences, particularly between North and South.  The 
ISWG process has proceeded smoothly and relatively 
harmoniously thus far, but it has required intense 
diplomatic activity by the USG and other supporters of 
the IEE concept (from both developed and developing 
countries) to keep the work on track.  For instance: 
 
-- The selection of the consultants (which we saw as 
largely a technical exercise to be driven by objective 
selection criteria) took on an intensely political 
dimension, with some delegations intent on ensuring that 
their own region would be represented.  We had to expend 
much effort explaining that the provenance of the 
consultants was irrelevant if professional criteria 
prevailed. 
 
-- Some members expressed concern that an IEE funded by 
voluntary contributions risked being influenced unduly by 
the principal donors.  These critics called for a blind 
trust fund (which would in fact violate FAO rules on 
financial transparency), and expressed horror that donors 
might want to wait until the TOR were finalized before 
committing additional funds to the IEE.  It took 
considerable effort to reinforce the point that who pays 
for the IEE is not an issue if the TOR are negotiated 
openly, agreed collectively, and implemented 
professionally. 
 
-- The ISWG Chairman, upon discovering recently that the 
hired consultants had scheduled meetings with various 
permreps and members of the Secretariat of their own 
choosing and without first notifying the ISWG Bureau, 
 
 
attempted briefly to assert control over who the 
consultants could meet, thereby almost triggering their 
resignation.  We and other like-minded delegations had to 
counsel restraint.  We explained that the established 
process for review of the approach paper and the TOR 
would ensure that the ISWG exercised appropriate control 
over the direction and content of the IEE, while 
preserving the independence and professional integrity of 
the consultants. 
 
10.  (SBU)  In each of the above-cited examples, the USG 
and our allies prevailed; but these and other issues of 
this type cropped up regularly, and it took time to solve 
each of them.  Progress on the approach paper and TOR has 
therefore been slower than we initially envisioned.  We 
are convinced, however, that taking the time to keep 
everyone on board during the design phase of the IEE will 
help smooth our path later when we get to the conduct of 
the evaluation and the implementation of its 
recommendations. 
 
HALL 
 
 
NNNN 
 2005ROME02083 - Classification: UNCLASSIFIED