1. Governance BoS Advanced Business Operations Training Kabul, Afghanistan November 2014.

2. BoS Structure

3. Annual Workplan Timeframe Planned Budget Planned Activities Q1Q1 Q2Q2 Q3Q3Q4 Responsible Party Source of funds Budget descriptio n Amou nt BoS Outcome: BoS Output 1 Indicators Annual Target Annual Deliverables BoS Output 2 Annual Indicators Linked to BoS Annual Deliverables Responsibility to agency + individual

4. BoS Reporting  Present draft BoS to UNCT for approval;  Present draft AWP to UNCT for approval; Annually  Report annually to UNCT against AWP (Q4);  Annual report includes progress against BoS objectives; Other  Mid Term evaluation and adjustment of BoS;  End Term evaluation of BoS (end of cycle- informs next BoS);

5. Governance Structure BoS

6. 1. Road Map 6 3. Strategic Planning Governance Framework Decision Making-Decision Delegation Assessment-Planning-Management Implementation Technical Input Directions Decisions Approval Plans /ToRs Instructions Proposals Reports Analysis Implementation Reports Technical Results UNCT OMT TWG

7. Exercise- Roles and accountability At your tables, discuss  Roles of UNCT, OMT and Technical Working Groups  What can you do to enhance accountability?  10 min discussion- report in plenary

8. Division of Labor Vision Decision Oversight Escalation Environment Accountable BOS Operationalise vision Oversight TWGs Prepare BOS M&E BOS Develop AWP Manage budget Input BOS & AWP Solution design Implement BOS UNCT OMT Tech. WG

9. Common Budgetary Framework-BOS  Multiyear overview  Includes cost per outcome/output, funds available funding gap  Source: BOS results matrix  Includes resource mobilization plan

10. Financing the BOS  Common Budgetary Framework  Common Services Account  Financing arrangement- Cost Sharing  Resource Mobilization: Mainly cost shared One Fund Business Operations Innovation Fund (draft)

11. Integrated Service Center Brazil pilot

12. Some notes upfront Brazil is a unique BOS pilot No other BOS pilot are using the Integrated Service Center concept No other ISC planned until assessment completed Similar set-ups: Viet Nam, Copenhagen

13. JOF Service lines Eight participants UNAIDS, UNDP, UNDSS, UNEP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNOPS and UN Women.

14. Cost Benefit- Monetary & Labor

15. Brazil-Single Service Window Single Service Window Cap. dedicated Common Operations- free up agency cap. Single rule set for clients- simplification, transparency Reduced cost ( leverage common volumes for services) Less process duplication (contract, client/supplier man Independent- Fair prioritization, accountability Consolidation- No common operations outside the JoF Supplements Agency, Regional and Global service models (different services)

16. Brazil- Integrated Service Center BOS Brazil Copenhagen Viet Nam

17. Regulatory Framework

18. Role JOF

19. Staffing JOF

20. Budget JOF 1/2 JOF Budget Cost Structure: Staff not attached to a JOF service line (Management, Financial/Admin staff...); Rent, Utilities Infrastructure related to above mentioned staff. Timing: Advanced, based on Annual Budget. Cost Distribution:  Option 1: Based on forecasts of the % of total volume of services obtained from the JoF by each participating agency. This is a fair allocation based on the forecast of use of services. Smaller users pay less than the larger users.  Option 2: Based on staff count of each participating agency. Costs are allocated based on relative size of each agency. The smaller agencies pay less than the larger agencies, irrespective of the level of use of the JOF services.

21. Budget JOF 2/2 II. Service Budget Cost Structure:  Staff attached to a JOF service line (Procurement, ICT, HR and Travel);  Rent, Utilities (electricity, telephone, Internet etc) for staff attached to a JOF service line (Procurement, ICT, HR and Travel); and  Infrastructure related to above mentioned staff. Timing:  Post facto based on actual service volume. Cost Distribution:  Based on Local Price List (LPL) or invoice.

22. Procurement – CBA Reduction of parallel processes and transaction costs; Increased value for money through improved planning, Improved coordination, consistency and planning across agencies; Efficiency and effectiveness gains through information sharing; Faster program implementation; Increased professionalization of procurement staff; Better procurement risk management;

23. JOF- Procurement

24. JOF- Procurement functions