ANNEX 1 . 69 (i) lower operational costs, (ii) flexibility for early response, (iii) predictability of funding. By the end of quarter 2 in 2017, there were 13 active multi-year agreements for the Programme Budget in place. The RMS is reported against on a regular basis against detailed resource mobilisation targets. The RMS has five challenging Agency wide goals to be monitored and reported on during the period 2016-18: The goals cover more effective and efficient resource mobilisation, strengthening of traditional donor partnerships, a stronger and more diversified donor base, an enabling environment from resource mobilisation, and resourcing of working capital and staff safety and security. Each goal has a set of indicators to track progress. The majority of the indicators have been taken from the previous RMS allowing the Agency to measure the success of the new RMS with continuity against the previous RMS. Additionally, UNRWA has sought to diversify its resource mobilisation efforts, notably through the DignityIsPriceless campaign and is actively exploring partnerships with OIC, IDB and World Bank in the pursuit of alternative funding mechanisms. It has also depleted its contingency reserves and institutionalised austerity measures where possible. These measures, combined with programmatic 1, 2, 7, 10,12, 35, 42, 49, 57, 63, 64, 65, 66, 86, 97, 118 reforms, have helped to reduce the growth in Agency costs from 6 per cent (average annual rate of growth in expenditure in the years preceding the current MTS) to 3.3 per cent. UNRWA’s success in diversifying its funding base has been mixed; by the end of of 2017, 86.68per cent of the contributions to the Programme budget were from traditional donors, whereas income from ‘diversified sources’ (regional partners, emerging donors, non-traditional donors and private partnerships) was below target for the majority of these donor groups; 8.87 per cent below the target of 24.8 per cent. UNRWA’s financial challenges are further exacerbated by the recent announcement of the withdrawal of funding from UNRWA’s most prominent traditional donor, amounting to some 30 per cent of the organisation’s funding. MI 3.2 Evidence confidence High confidence MI 3.3: Aid reallocation/programming decisions responsive to need can be made at a decentralised level Score Overall MI Rating Satisfactory Overall MI score 3 Element 1: An organisation-wide policy or guidelines exist which describe the delegation of decisionmaking authorities at different levels within the organisation 3 Element 2: (If the first criterion is met) The policy/guidelines or other documents provide evidence of a sufficient level of decision-making autonomy available at the country level (or other decentralized 3 level as appropriate) regarding aid reallocation/programming Element 3: Evaluations or other reports contain evidence that reallocation/programming decisions have been made to positive effect at country or other local level, as appropriate Element 4: The organisation has made efforts to improve or sustain the delegation of decision-making on aid allocation/programming to the country or other relevant levels 3 3