82 . MOPAN 2017-18 ASSESSMENTS . UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND WORKS AGENCY FOR PALESTINE REFUGEES IN THE NEAR EAST MI 5.3: Capacity analysis informs intervention design and implementation, and strategies to address any weakness found are employed Score Overall MI Rating Overall MI score Element 1: Intervention designs contain a clear statement of capacities of key national implementing partners Element 2: Capacity analysis considers resources, strategy, culture, staff, systems and processes, structure and performance Element 3: Capacity analysis statement has been developed jointly where feasible Element 4: Capacity analysis statement includes clear strategies for addressing any weaknesses, with a view to sustainability Element 5: Evidence of regular and resourced reflection points with partner(s) that take note of any significant changes in the wider institutional setting that affect capacity MI 5.3 Analysis N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Source document Micro-indicator deemed not applicable for assessment purposes given UNRWA mandate MI 5.3 Evidence confidence MI 5.4: Detailed risk (strategic, political, reputational, operational) management strategies ensure the identification, mitigation, monitoring and reporting of risks Score Overall MI Rating Highly satisfactory Overall MI score 3.5 Element 1: Intervention designs include detailed analysis of and mitigation strategies for operational risk 3 Element 2: Intervention designs include detailed analysis of and mitigation strategies for strategic risk 3 Element 3: Intervention designs include detailed analysis of and mitigation strategies for political risk 4 Element 4: Intervention designs include detailed analysis of and mitigation strategies for reputational risk 4 Element 5: Risks are routinely monitored and reflected upon by the partnership N/A Element 6: Risk mitigation actions taken by the partnership are documented and communicated N/A MI 5.4 Analysis Source document UNRWA identifies four kinds of risk facing the agency: institutional (including reputational), programmatic, occupational and contextual (including political) and there is clarity on how each of these are managed and who is responsible. Risk assessments are undertaken as part of UNRWA’s annual planning cycle and updated every quarter. Risk management and mitigation and where necessary, contingency planning informs Operational 1, 8, 10, 16, 18, 19, 23, Plans but there are not specific mitigation strategies for operational risk. UNRWA’s MTS has a matrix 24, 28, 31, 35, 36, 37, of risk associated with each of its strategic outcomes. Corporate documentation outlines how risks 52, 61, 142 are reported on and relevant risks are also outlined in Field Office Strategic Plans. Financial risk has received a greater emphasis in the organisations planning and assessments recently in light of the organisation’s funding constraints, with a high-level of scrutiny from HQ on Field Office expenditure and cash flow.