The main objective of the CRP/PTF Annual Reporting documents is to provide:

• a standard format for CRP/PTF reporting and planning to the System Management Board and System Council, and

• for the SMO to be able to efficiently collect data for an overall annual system-level report on progress and planning.

These will give us a chance to:

• highlight any successes in 2017

• provide evidence of gradual contributions towards system level outcomes, at various points along the impact pathways from discovery to scaling

• illustrate evidences of supports and services of Platform to Programs to carry out effective activity towards system level outcomes.

• demonstrate that the theories of change/impact pathways are relevant, and are being regularly reviewed and the assumptions tested

• demonstrate high-quality adaptive management, including choosing an appropriate level of risk and return across the research portfolio, making tough choices about what lines to drop and what to expand, and managing risks well

• illustrate strategic use of monitoring, evaluation, learning and impact assessment for management decision-making

• demonstrate that W1/W2 funds are used strategically and efficiently to support system goals including cross cutting issues

• illustrate the added value of system structures - of CRPs linking Flagships together towards higher objectives, and the division into different types of CRPs and PTFs

• highlight any efficiency gains made in the past year

• demonstrate strategic use of partnerships

We are trying to increase the efficiency of this process for you, and are working with the MIS developers in MARLO, MEL and others to ensure that all or most data required can be input directly into those systems. Some Funders will read the System-level report, whilst others will dig down into detail and will seek narrative descriptions of program achievements and state of health. This is the purpose of the executive summary. It will serve as a narrative ‘front end’ that tells a clear story, as well as the tables of data that many funders require.

In filling the template, please:

• keep answers as brief as you can to get across your message. Not all sections need to be the same length, and feel free to use “N/A” for questions that are not applicable. Use bullets wherever possible, especially with examples – as we may want to pull your examples straight into a system level report. If there are areas you feel are very important and need significantly more space (for example to illustrate changes in the theory of change), please feel free to attach an additional Table(s). Overall an indicative length would be around 10 pages of narrative, plus the tables.

• provide documents in Word/Excel (for convenient extraction of key data) as well as pdf.

• evidence your statements, either by citing academic references or other links (as shown).

What is taken away and added in this version in comparison to Phase 1 version?

• A list of common reporting indicators was designed (Table D) and approved by the System Council (SC05_Nov. 2017). You can find more detailed guidance for each of the common results indicators while trying to integrate reporting of the indicators as much into the MIS systems. Most indicators are similar to those used in past years (Phase 1) and we would expect at least some reporting against them in 2017, while others are new and we would expect most reporting to start in 2018, although we would be grateful if you could report any available data.

• Evidence on Progress towards SLOs (Table A): Outcome case studies are already reported by most CRPs. However, we recognize that there has been less investment across the CGIAR in large scale adoption and impact studies, so there are many gaps in the evidence linking intermediate (research) outcomes to development outcomes and impacts, that is vital in making the case for CGIAR research. Highlighting these evidence gaps is the first stage in getting more funding for this area of work.

• For Platforms, narrative section: Platform Specific Quality Control Activities, and table: Reporting against Platform Specific Indicator, enable to illustrate the Platform specific activities and targets.

• The information on ‘Main Areas of W1/2 expenditure’ (Table E) is of great interest to many funders, and it would be a great help if we could obtain better evidence on this. We recognize that many financial systems do not record these categories - so please pick a few categories that work for you from the list, and do your best. Please note that the table is optional for the annual reporting in 2017, but will be requested to POWB and Annual Report for 2018.

• We have included questions on efficiency, and simplified questions for open data and intellectual assets (Table E) for the first time in this template. The efficiency question provides an optional space to highlight key efficiency gains you have made, and also to reflect on opportunities to improve efficiency in future.

• We have simplified CRP financial repot (Table J) without L-series reports.