ANNEX 1 . 59 Element 4: The organisation’s accountability for achieving normative results, including those of Agenda 2030, and any other relevant frameworks, such as the SDGs and their targets and indicators, N/A the QCPR and the Grand Bargain (where applicable), is clearly established Element 5: Progress on implementation on an aggregated level is published at least annually 3 MI 1.3 Analysis Source document UNRWA aligns its work with wider normative frameworks such as Agenda 2030 and has mapped the alignment between the SDGs and its MTS, with the MTS contributing to 10 of the 17 SDGs. UNRWA reports to both the UN-SWAP and the Grand Bargain on an annual basis. UNRWA’s contribution to the 1, 3, 7, 8, 47, 63, 69 SDGs is not aggregated in a specific report or reported on explicitly but can be seen in the agency annual results reporting. In delivering on its mandate, UNRWA supports and exemplifies the framework of Humanitarian Principles and alignment with the international normative legal framework as it relates to humanitarian action and in particular the protection of human rights. UNRWA recently adopted a Neutrality Framework that not only builds on the existing regulatory framework pertaining to UNRWA’s compliance with humanitarian principles, but also reflects existing practices and responds to recommendations 56, 58, 59, 75, 78, 91 issued by applicable United Nations Boards of Inquiry. Data on possible violations of international law, including human rights violations by duty bearers acting in UNRWA fields, is published on an annual basis and through protection publications as well as addressed in regular engagement with the IHRS. Core internal operating policies such as the Child Protection Framework and the Disability guidelines, drafted with reference to international conventions on the rights of children and persons with disabilities ensures internal programming aligns with international human rights standards. Element 4 is not applicable given UNRWA’s mandate. MI 1.3 Evidence confidence High confidence MI 1.4: Financial Framework (e.g. division between core and non-core resources) supports mandate implementation Score Overall MI rating Highly satisfactory Overall MI score 3.2 Element 1: Financial and budgetary planning ensures that all priority areas have adequate funding in the short term or are at least given clear priority in cases where funding is very limited 3 Element 2: A single integrated budgetary framework ensures transparency 3 Element 3: The financial framework is reviewed regularly by the governing bodies 4 Element 4: Funding windows or other incentives in place to encourage donors to provide more flexible/un-earmarked funding at global and country levels Element 5: Policies/measures are in place to ensure that earmarked funds are targeted at priority areas 3 3