ANNEX 1 . 73 MI 4.1 Analysis Source document UNRWA has a clear statement which provides the basis from which all resourcing decisions follow – ‘The Agency will seek and allocate appropriate human and financial resources to meet its commitment to protect Palestine refugees.’ The rationale of prioritising UNRWA funding to education and health is clearly understood across the organisation and the distribution of funding across programme areas is publicly available. UNRWA’s programme budget is divided across the 5 Field Offices which each have projects, and emergency appeals. There do not appear to be explicit criteria regarding the allocation of funding to each Field Office and it is recognised that there are difficult questions around the allocation of resources across Field Offices .In Jordan, UNRWA is not able to be part of cross-agency emergency appeals or Jordan response plan, whereas in Lebanon it can. UNRWA’s work includes ongoing and new emergencies. UNRWA takes measures to ensure that its emergency responses will not have recurring costs on its programme budget through its emergency appeals. The programme budgeting for 2016-17 included the working assumption that emergencies 1, 2, 3, 8, 10, 11, 40, 42, 54, 55, 65 are expected to continue to characterise the operating context in three out of five UNRWA fields during the biennium. Given this assumption, the destructive impact of conflicts on livelihoods and the centrality of livelihoods in recovery efforts, UNRWA gave particular focus to promoting employment and income generating opportunities for refugees in conflict and post-conflict settings. Organisational Directive 21 (2017) outlines UNRWA’s Annual Operational Planning Cycle. Each Field Office and Headquarters receives instruction from the Department of Planning regarding the development of annual operation plans. These are coordinated with the Department of Finance to ensure consistency with the Programme Budget. Financial expenditure is reviewed regularly with results throughout the year. MI 4.1 Evidence confidence High confidence MI 4.2: Allocated resources disbursed as planned Score Overall MI Rating Satisfactory Overall MI score 3 Element 1: The institution sets clear targets for disbursement N/A Element 2: Financial information indicates that planned disbursements were met within institutionally agreed margins N/A Element 3 Clear explanations are available in relation to any variances 3 Element 4: Variances relate to external factors rather than internal procedural blockages 3