| Criteria22Ibid. | Instructions | Indicators and rankings | Sources of information | Evaluator’s summary comments33Lists references of the sources and the information and data collected that provide evidence for the score given. | Total score (maximum possible score 33) |
| (a) The centre demonstrates the capacity to identify, document and implement project activities aimed at assisting parties in the implementation of their obligations under the Basel Convention. | Based on factual evidence,the evaluator should seek examples that demonstrate that the centre has the capacity to:(a)Identify;(b)Document;(c)Implement; projects/activities. | Number of examples for which the centre has identified, documented and implemented project activities:0:No example found in any of the three areas;1:At least one example observed in one of the three areas;2:At least one example in two of the three areas;4:At least one example in all three areas. | – Activity reports for relevant years– Business plans for relevant years– Other relevant information sources (e.g., feedback from parties) | | (Maximum possible score: 4) |
| (b) Achieves concrete and/or measurable results in terms of capacity-building in its technical assistance and technology transfer activities. | Based on factual evidence, the evaluator should look into the number of completed capacity‑building activities or projects relevant to the implementation of the Convention undertaken by the centre and the number of parties that benefited from such activities or projects. | Number of capacity-building activities implemented by the centre:0:No proven example;1:1–5 examples;2:6–10 examples;4:11–15 examples;8:16 or more examples.Number of parties that benefited from these activities:1:Up to 5 parties;2:More than 5 parties. | – Activity reports for relevant years | | (Maximum possible score: 10) |
| (c) Identifies, undertakes and promotes cooperation, collaboration and synergies in efforts to assist parties in meeting Convention obligations. | Based on factual evidence, the evaluator should seek proven examples of coordination and collaboration with other relevant partners (such as other regional centres, the Secretariat, UNEP, FAO and other United Nations entities) to assist parties in meeting Convention obligations. | Number of coordination and collaborative activities undertaken by the centre with other relevant partners:0:No proven example;1:At least one example;2:More than one example. | – Activity reports for relevant years– Other information provided by parties or observers | | (Maximum possible score: 2) |
| (d) Identifies additional financial resources and other donors to fund activities to assist parties in meeting Convention obligations. | Based on factual evidence, the evaluator should look into the number of examples of donors or funds mobilized to implement the centre’s activities or what proportion of the business plan has been implemented. (Funding for the day-to-day operation of the centre shall not be counted). | Number of donors or funding sources mobilized or percentage of the business plan implemented:0:No example of additional donors or funding mobilized to implement any of the activities of the business plan;1:One or two examples of additional donors or funding sources mobilized to implement activities or up to 25 per cent of the business plan implemented;2:Three or four examples of additional donors or funding sources mobilized to implement activities or up to 50 per cent of the business plan implemented;4:Five to seven examples of additional donors or funding sources mobilized to implement activities or up to 75 per cent of the business plan implemented;8:Eight or more examples of additional donors or funding sources mobilized to implement activities or more than 75 per cent of the business plan implemented. | – Activity reports for relevant years– Business plan for relevant years | | (Maximum possible score: 8) |
| (e) Manages and conducts all activities efficiently, effectively and transparently. | Based on factual evidence, the evaluator should seek proven examples that demonstrate that the centre conducts its activities:(a)Efficiently;(b)Effectively;(c)Transparently;and has submitted the required business plans and activity reports within the given deadlines. | Number of examples for which the centre has conducted its activities(a)Efficiently;(b)Effectively;(c)Transparently:0:No example found in any of the three areas;1:At least one example observed in one of the three areas;2:At least one example observed in two of the three areas;4:At least one example observed in each of the three areas.Number of business plans or activity reports submitted within the deadline:0:None of the business plans and activity reports submitted within the given deadlines;1:Up to two out of four documents (business plans and activity reports) submitted within the given deadlines;2:Three out of four documents submitted within the given deadlines;4:All four documents submitted within the given deadlines. | – Activity reports for relevant years– Business plans for relevant years– Other relevant information sources (e.g., feedback from parties or information available on the website of the centre) | | (Maximum possible score: 8) |
| (f) Demonstrates the capacity to meet the various language requirements of the region or subregion and conduct business in English as required. | Based on factual evidence, the evaluator should seek proven examples which demonstrate that the centre does have such capacity. | Number of examples showing that the centre meets the language requirements of the region:0:No example;1:One or more examples showing that such capacity exists. | – Activity reports for relevant years– Other relevant information sources (e.g., feedback from parties) | | (Maximum possible score: 1) |
| Total scores | |
