Centre-Commissioned External Reviews (Agenda Item 5)













Table of Contents


CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Seventy-Fourth Meeting, ICRISAT, Patancheru, India - 23-27 March 1998

For Comments

The attached papers were prepared by the Inter-Secretariat Working Group for External Reviews as background material for the discussion on Centre-Commissioned External Reviews.

TAC SECRETARIAT
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
March 1998

CGIAR Secretariat · Mailing Address: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. · Office Location: 701 18th Street, N.W. Tel: (1-202) 473-8951 · Cable Address: INTBAFRAD · Fax: (1-202) 473-8110 · E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]

DATE:

March 6, 1998

TO:

Donald Winkelmann and Alexander von der Osten

FROM:

Selçuk Özgediz

SUBJECT:

External Review Process - Refinements Suggested by the Secretariats

During the last International Centers Week the CGIAR's external review process came under criticism from two quarters:

· From the Directors General during their pre-ICW interaction with Chairman Serageldin. Some of the DGs commented that:

- the CGIAR reviews do not take adequate account of the centers' internally commissioned reviews;

- CGIAR reviews duplicate old reports - there is heavy baggage from the past and not enough dynamism;

- panelists do not understand the CGIAR; and,

- the panels are excessively influenced by TAC/CGIAR Secretariat staff.

· From Chairman Serageldin during his opening statement at the ICW. Mr. Serageldin noted that there is "too much reporting and not enough evaluation." He pointed to variability in center reviews in terms of their incisiveness, asking: "are they helping to sustain scientific excellence'?"

Taking a cue from Mr. Serageldin's call for "candid self assessment," TAC and CGIAR Secretariat staff involved with external reviews discussed these criticisms, first as a group and later with the TAC Chair and the CGIAR Executive Secretary. These led to various clarifications and suggestions for refinement of the review process. This note summarizes these under the following headings:

· appropriateness of the CGIAR's external review model
· reliance on center commissioned external reviews
· consistency of reviews
· influence by TAC-CGIAR Secretariat staff
· cost of CGIAR reviews.

Table of Contents


Appropriateness of the CGIAR's External Review Model

Reliance on Center-Commissioned External Reviews

Consistency of Reviews

Influence by TAC-CGIAR Secretariat Staff

Cost of CGIAR Reviews

Conclusions

Improving the Quality and Consistency of the CGIAR's External Center Reviews

The Issue
Sources of Unevenness in the Quality of the Reviews
Rationale for a Proposed Approach
The Proposal
How This Proposal Would Improve the Quality of the Center Reviews
Operational Implications
Two Caveats
Next Steps