This is the Report of the Fourth External Review Panel appointed to evaluate the programme and management of the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI). The membership of the Panel and their backgrounds are given in Appendix I. The Terms of Reference of this Fourth External Review of IPGRI are shown in Appendix II.
The Panel's approach to the Review has been participatory and forward-looking. In conducting the Review, the Panel has interpreted the Terms of Reference and the general guidelines for the CGIAR review process in the light of the new approach to EPMRs; and has made full use of the various CCERs available to it. This has enabled the panel to concentrate on the most strategic issues facing the Centre, after examining thoroughly information pertaining to all the principal areas of the review.
The Panel wishes to place on record its appreciation of the work done by other external reviewers who provided the in-depth assessments contained in the CCERs. The recommendations of these CCERs, and the Board and management response to them, gave the Panel a valuable head start in the review process. In addition, the staff and management of IPGRI provided very useful descriptive information on the Institute and its activities, which has been highlighted in Boxes to enable the reader to obtain a good bird's eye view of what IPGRI does and how it goes about its work.
IPGRI is one of the few CGIAR Centres that conducts its work mainly by facilitating research and other activities with partners in national programmes and with specialized research organizations. The Institute also serves a role unique from other CGIAR Centres in its role of leading and coordinating the activities of an inter-Centre activity: the System-wide Genetic Resources Programme (SGRP) and by its management of a crop improvement network: the International Network for the Improvement of Banana and Plantain (INIBAP). The Panel therefore attempted to evaluate IPGRI through its clientele as well as from the extensive documentation received on specific programme areas from CCERs. The Review was a dynamic process of interaction with Institute staff, although not all sites could be visited by Panel members and not all staff were consulted.
The information on which the Panel based its decisions regarding the key concerns and issues, and its assessments and conclusions were gathered in a number of ways. These included visiting the Institute and interacting with the Board, management and staff; meeting and discussing with national programme representatives and IPGRI's partners at various locations in Africa, Asia and Latin America; undertaking in-depth examination of specific aspects such as INIBAP, Board and policy/legal aspects through Panel consultants; interviewing Board members; and obtaining information through a survey letter sent to all CGIAR and non-CGIAR institutions collaborating with IPGRI, and to all CGIAR Members and Regional representatives. The chronology of the Panel is given in Appendix III.
Finally, the Panel had access to a large array of documents and data made available by IPGRI. Additional documents were provided by the TAC and the CGIAR Secretariats. A complete list of documents given to the Panel is shown in Appendix IV. One of the documents provided by IPGRI was the response of the Institute, including INIBAP, to the recommendations of the last reviews, which is reproduced together with the Panel's comments, in Appendix V.
