Washington D.C., USA - 27 February 1998
Dr. Donald L. Winkelmann
Chair, Technical Advisory Committee/CGIAR
355 East Palace Avenue
Santa Fe, NM 87501
USA.
Mr. Alexander von der Osten
Executive Secretary
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
The World Bank
1818 H Street, NW
Washington D.C. 20433
USA.
Dear Don and Alexander,
I take pleasure in submitting to you the report of the Panel you commissioned to conduct the Third External Programme and Management Review of IFPRI. My colleagues on the Panel and I enjoyed this assignment, partly because we found in IFPRI a vibrant institute with strong achievements, and in part because this gave us an opportunity to debate several thorny questions that surround evaluation of policy research.
Our overall impression of IFPRI is very positive. IFPRI scores high in terms of all four major criteria we were asked to apply to our assessment: there is good evidence of impact from IFPRI's work; in the most part, the strategic thrusts of the Institute are clear and the work is highly relevant to the objectives of the CGIAR; the quality of the science practised is high and the internal mechanisms for quality control are effective; and the Institute is very well managed.
We have made four sets of recommendations to assist IFPRI's evolution. These concern integrating research and outreach activities, giving greater stress to two programmatic concerns (the context of open economies and research on water), strengthening impact assessment, and furthering infusion of developing country perspectives into IFPRI's work.
I would like to flag one special area for the attention of TAC and the CGIAR. At IFPRI we saw firsthand the effects of increased levels of targeted funding on the work of the individual scientists and the overall functioning of the Institute. To the extent that targeted funding coincides with the priorities of the Institute, this does not present a significant problem. But if it does not, a major shift towards more targeted funding (from the current 50-50 ratio of unrestricted vs. restricted) could limit the overall effectiveness of the Institute.
We had excellent co-operation from IFPRI. The documentation provided was excellent and the Board, management and staff were very open with the Panel on all issues. We also had strong professional support from both the TAC and the CGIAR Secretariats. This facilitated our task and increased the efficiency of our work as a panel.
I would also like to express my thanks to my fellow Panel members for their many insightful contributions and overall professional judgement.
Last, I thank you for providing me this opportunity to learn about a first-rate research institute and contribute to the thinking about its future. The CGIAR needs IFPRI and IFPRI deserves continued support from the CGIAR.
Yours sincerely,
Samuel Paul
Chair, IFPRI EPMR
