Executive Board Funding Dialogue — UNDP, UNFPA and UNOPS (24 August 2026)

Executive Summary

The Executive Board took three items in one afternoon. They were the UNDP funding dialogue with the UNCDF financial review, the UNFPA funding dialogue, and an update on how the Board itself does governance and oversight. A draft decision is being prepared on each one.

Nobody in the room argued about the numbers. UNDP reports that official development assistance fell 23.1% in 2025 and that its own core funding is down to 9% of total contributions — the first time below 10% in sixty years. UNFPA reports core at 24% of its funding against a compact target of 30%. UNCDF reports about $4 million of core against a $15 million requirement.

The defining divide is who has to move to close that gap. In practice it breaks down like this:

Donors must restore core funding — Chad for the African members, Nepal for the LDC Group and nationally, Ethiopia, Côte d'Ivoire and Finland. Chad names the target: regular resources should be "30% of total contribution", and member states should "reverse the current trend by significantly increasing their contribution".
Close the gap from inside — the United States, alone. It asks the Board to "revisit the current resource allocation formula", presses UNDP on private-sector revenue, and asks whether cutting business class travel would free up $7 million. It commits no money, in either of its two statements.
Fund it, and ask what the reform buys — the Netherlands and Switzerland for two groups of states, joined by Rwanda on the governance item. The Netherlands signed a new four-year core contribution of €40 million and then asked two questions: how has UNDP adapted, and what is it prioritising.
Capital rather than core — Tanzania, which wants deployable capital instruments from UNCDF rather than a larger core budget, and brings the only worked example in the room.

The finding worth taking away The United States and the African members ask for the same thing in almost the same words, and mean opposite things by it. The US says the situation "compels the executive board to revisit the current resource allocation formula to make sure that the limited resources go where they are most needed". Chad calls for "greater coherence between UNDP strategic objectives and the resources allocated to them". Both want the money redirected. Only one of them is arguing for more money to redirect.

Colour key — a delegation's colour follows its name through the whole page and matches its dot in the plot: Donors must restore core Fund it, ask what reform buys Capital rather than core Close the gap from inside Presenter (not scored)

What the Organisations Reported

Eight officials presented. Two of their answers do more work than the reports themselves, because both correct a picture the room was working from.

The state of the money

Suzanne Brown (UNDP) set out the landscape: aid "fell by a record 23.1%" in 2025 with a further fall expected, and core funding to the UN system fell 27%. UNDP still mobilised $19.6 billion over the last strategic plan, 91% of its resource plan. Her ask is about quality, not volume — and she repeats it: "If you can't give more, give core" (full quote below).
Linda McGuire (UNDP) gave the figure the debate turned on. Core contributions fell to $442 million, "just 9% of total contributions. This marks the first time in UNDP's six decades of existence that core's share has fallen below 10%." UNDP has cut 354 posts at headquarters, 11.5% of that workforce. Her conclusion sets the limit on the reform argument: "efficiency gains and cost recovery cannot replace predictable core funding".
Pradeep Kurukulasuriya (UNCDF) reported two clean performance audits and balanced books, then named the constraint. Co-funding is "below five million against an annual requirement of 15 million", from six member states — "Switzerland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, China, and Thailand". He is the only presenter to name the governance consequence rather than the operational one: "the board risks having less room to shape the institution it governs".
Andrew Saberton (UNFPA) reported core down from $379 million to $340 million, a core-to-non-core ratio of "24% to 76%", and humanitarian resources down 31% in 2025 — which "led to the closure of over 1,000 health facilities and 250 safe spaces in fragile settings". Humanitarian funding is down a further 46% year on year in 2026.
Samuel Choritz (UNFPA) reported where the new money is coming from: thematic funds up 16% to $280 million, "13 new agreements worth $46 million, including $37 million in Bangladesh" with international financial institutions, a first $10 million philanthropic investment, and individual giving of almost $10 million, up 36%. He attaches the same condition the delegations do: "that doesn't replace the value of core and ODA".

The two answers that changed the picture

Business class travel is a smaller prize than it looks. The United States put the saving at $7 million. McGuire answered with numbers instead of an assurance: economy is "more than 95% of all of our travel", business class is "less than 2.5% of travel requests", business tickets are down more than 50% and the spend down 62% — "a reduction already of 7.4 million US". Total business class travel in 2025 was $4.5 million, and cutting it "would be limited in the sense that the travel would likely still take place, albeit in a different class". Most of the saving is already banked, and the rest is smaller than the figure quoted (full quote below).
Only a quarter of core money is actually UNDP's to steer. George Kuriakou, UNDP's Chief Financial Officer, answered the prioritisation question by opening the budget. The 2026 core programme budget is $321 million, of which $130 million has been collected — "just above the two-month threshold" against a Board agreement to hold three to five months. Within that, $170 million is fixed by Board resolution under a "predetermined formula". Management discretion covers $85.4 million, plus $24.1 million for crises. His conclusion reframes the whole item: "when we have a level in 2025, 9% of our funding is core, that doesn't mean 9% is subject to management discretion".

What each organisation has already cut

UNDP — down 8.5% since January 2025, "almost 2000 positions", 11.5% at headquarters and 8.76% in country offices. McGuire reads the country-office share as "the beginning of an erosion of our capacity to really be everywhere".
UNCDF — "eliminating seven D1 positions, which were in New York, going down to two", footprint down "nearly 30, 35% over the last couple of years", travel under 5% of budget, and 95–96% of staff moved closer to the field.
UNFPA — planned for the fall rather than reacting to it. Contributions for 2026–2029 are budgeted "in the region of about 20% less than they were achieved in the previous planning period. We've allowed for that." A business model review is running alongside.

The governance item

Annette Kaiser (Germany) and Zebib Gebrekidan (Eritrea), co-chairs of the joint working group, presented a revised report on the 2023 Joint Inspection Unit review — 10 formal and 21 informal recommendations, clustered into five work packages. Kaiser stated the governing principle twice: "the working group advises and the executive board decides", and existing mechanisms get strengthened before new ones are built. Five proposals follow:

A delegates handbook, drafted jointly by all five secretariats.
A review of Board working methods.
A possible standing advisory committee on audit, risk, budget and finance.
Harmonised terms of reference for Board secretariats.
A dual reporting line, so oversight committees report to the Board as well as to the executive head.

The final implementation plan is due at the 2027 annual session.

Areas of Consensus

These hold across the camps, including between delegations that disagree about the remedy.

The diagnosis is agreed and nobody contests a figure. The presenters' numbers are quoted back by delegations and used as premises, never challenged. Chad and Nepal both cite the same 24% fall in regular resources; the United States works from the same picture to a different conclusion.
Earmarking is a quality problem, not only a volume problem. Named by five presenters and by Nepal, Ethiopia and Chad. Tight conditions on money raise costs, cut flexibility and fragment delivery.
New money sources add to aid, they do not replace it. Every delegation that welcomes private-sector, philanthropic, IFI or domestic financing attaches the same condition, and the presenters agree. Nepal: such innovation "should complement, not substitute concessional and core development financing".
Efficiency has a ceiling. McGuire states it and no delegation argues otherwise — including the United States, whose case is that savings are worth taking anyway, not that they close the gap.
Country presence is what the money buys. Nepal, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Côte d'Ivoire and the Netherlands all frame core funding as what keeps offices, staff and delivery in place.
UNCDF's capital mandate is distinct and worth keeping. Said by Nepal, Switzerland's seven-state group, Tanzania and Ethiopia. Switzerland's group also recognises the turnaround: 40 joint initiatives and $46.8 million from UN pooled funds, up from $21 million in 2024.
On governance, strengthen what exists before building anything new. Rwanda, Switzerland's 21-state group and the United States all endorse the working group's principle and all three want the group kept running to track implementation.

Fault Lines

Four fault lines run through the afternoon. Each names the poles, who anchors them, and the line that captures each side. Every delegation's full stance is in the reference grid.

1. Who has to move first — the donors, or the organisations? This is the defining divide.

Donors move. Chad, for the African members, sets the ask against the funding compact: regular resources at "30% of total contribution", and a call on all member states "to reverse the current trend by significantly increasing their contribution to NDP's regular resources, a prerequisite for honoring the commitment made under the financing compact". Nepal, Ethiopia and Côte d'Ivoire argue the same way. Kurukulasuriya puts it to the room directly: "please take this proposition back to your capitals, Join the six who have already shown support."
The organisations move. The United States asks the Board to reopen how existing money is split, wants "more detailed tracking" of new revenue streams, and asks about cutting business class travel. It is the only delegation to raise cost-side savings, and it offers no contribution in either of its statements.
Both, on evidence. The Netherlands pays and then asks. It signed "a new multi-year core contribution of 40 million euros for the next four years", and says it "wants to be a strong champion for UNDP. To do so, we need to better understand how UNDP is reforming and where it is choosing to prioritize its resources." Switzerland, for seven states, hopes UNDP's core support to UNCDF "can be maintained" and encourages UNCDF to broaden its partner base.

2. Is finding money outside aid a solution or a distraction?

Push harder and show results. The United States welcomes the focus on new revenue but says "this has been a common theme in these strategic funding dialogue sessions over a few years", and wants programmes "that will generate tangible results".
Push, but ring-fence it. Nepal, Finland, Côte d'Ivoire and Ethiopia welcome the same partnerships and each attaches the condition that they add to aid rather than replace it.
Where it left off. Choritz answered with the numbers above and accepted the condition. Nobody asked what happens if the new sources do not close the gap.

3. Does UNCDF have a core problem or a capital problem? The same organisation, two different asks.

Core is the constraint. Nepal, for the LDC Group, quantifies it: "Only 4.2% of contributions received directly by UNCDF were core", so a 40% revenue rise has not bought flexibility. Kurukulasuriya agrees from the podium — "ultimately $4 million of core is a reality that we face".
Deployable capital is the constraint. Tanzania wants instruments rather than a bigger core budget: "This is the only United Nations entity with a dedicated capital mandate and capital is what we need most." It brings the only worked example anyone offers — a water utility bond UNCDF helped structure where "65% of the capital was raised domestically".
Recognise the recovery first. Switzerland's group commends the joint initiatives and the pooled-fund growth while noting contributions "remained below expectations".

4. On governance: how much new machinery is warranted?

Build the committee. Switzerland, for 21 states, sees "particular merit in considering the creation of a subcommittee on audit and finance" and proposes the Board run "a self-assessment survey after each session".
Keep it lean. The United States backs the phased roadmap and the working group's continuation, and warns that implementation must "avoid creating unnecessary administrative overhead". It also reserves its own position: "at times we may have positions in our national capacity that differ from working group conclusions."
Show the practical effect first. Rwanda, for the African members, asks for "further focus on the practical implications of the recommendations for day-to-day governance" and for clarity on "what will be tracked, what progress will be reported and what remains outstanding".

Outliers to monitor. Tanzania — the only delegation to bring a completed transaction to a debate about instruments, and the only one to argue that the domestic capital is already there to be unlocked. The United States — the only delegation to speak in both the funding item and the governance item, and the only one to raise the cost side. Kurukulasuriya — the only presenter to name his contributors on the record and to frame thin core funding as a governance risk to the Board rather than an operating problem for his office: "If barriers remain, please name them. If doubts remain, test us." Finland — the only delegation whose statement rests on a named bilateral programme, the Women's Health Hub in Turku, and the first country to join the Coalition for Reproductive Justice in Business.

Two questions that will come back. Every delegation's question was answered on the record — the presenters worked through them by name. Two answers are partial by design. On the Policy to Capital Investment Facility, asked about by Nepal, Tanzania and Ethiopia, Kurukulasuriya explained the mechanism and deferred the operating detail: "further details on this will be coming very soon in terms of how the facility will be sort of rolled out, including terms of references, standard operating procedures". On the resource allocation formula, raised by the United States, McGuire committed to a process rather than an outcome: "between now and the midterm review of the strategic plan, this will be a consultative process with the executive board".

Fault-Line Plot — Cluster Map

How to read this plot

Left → rightHow much a delegation put on the record, counted from verbatim quotes. Arguing at length that the fix is internal sits on the right too.

Up / downWhich side it argued for. This is where direction lives.

ColourWhich camp a delegation belongs to.

Click a dotSee both rubrics behind the score; click a second to compare.

The right-hand column is where the money question is contested. Chad and Nepal argue that donors must restore core. The United States argues from the bottom row that the fix is internal. The Netherlands sits in the same column and argues both: it is the only delegation that commits money and also makes its future support conditional on seeing the reform.

Each delegation is scored on two rubrics of seven indicators — one for restoring core funding, one for closing the gap from inside — and the horizontal position is the two added together. Dots are rank-spaced within a cell, never jittered. The eight presenters and co-chairs are unscored and sit in their own band below the dashed line. They present the reports the axis measures reactions to, so they hold no position on it. No delegation spoke below the brevity threshold, so no delegation carries a brief chip. Positions reflect the 24 August 2026 meeting only. Rubrics and caveats.

Y axis — fault-line dimension

Breakdown comparison — click dots to fill the two slots

Every quote is verbatim from the automatic-speech-recognition transcript. The 11 quotes reproduced in Talking Points below were checked against the meeting audio and match (one correction, noted there); the remaining evidence fragments here still reproduce the ASR text. Grey parenthetical rows are analyst summaries of absence, not quotes. Scores are ordinal evidence tallies, not measurements. The ⇄ marker shows which delegation the next dot-click will replace — click the other slot's ⇄ to swap that one instead.

Scores at a Glance

Every delegation, ordered by direction: those putting most on the record for restoring core funding first, those arguing the fix is internal last. Each is scored on two rubrics of seven indicators. For counts what it put on the record pressing donors to give more predictable, unearmarked money. Against counts what it put on the record arguing the gap should be closed from inside. Net is For minus Against, which gives the direction. On record is the two added together — the total argued, either way — and that is what positions a dot horizontally. That is why Chad (88 for) and the United States (78 against) both sit to the right while facing opposite directions. The claim is ordinal — read it as "argued more than", not as a measurement. Full rubrics, per-quote evidence and caveats are on the methodology page.

#	Delegation	On record	For	Against	Net	Profile in one line

Three agenda items ran in one afternoon and the cast changed between them. A low total can therefore mean a delegation argued little, or that the item was never in front of it. Rwanda spoke only on governance and Finland and Côte d'Ivoire only on UNFPA; the profile column says so in each case. Spain was given the floor under the UNFPA item and its statement is not in the record — it is listed unscored rather than silent, because silence would assert it said nothing.

Talking Points

These 11 quotes were checked against the meeting audio on 25 August 2026 and match the recording, using an offset re-derived empirically after UN Web TV shortened the recording post-transcript. One word was corrected against a clear, repeatable audio reading (Tanzania: "bridged bond", not "sub-regional bond").

"In 2025, core contributions fell to 442 million, just 9% of total contributions. This marks the first time in UNDP's six decades of existence that core's share has fallen below 10%."
— Linda McGuire, UNDP
, the figure the whole afternoon works from

"We recognise that difficult fiscal choices are facing many member states and our appeal is therefore not just for more funding, but for better funding… If you can't give more, give core."
— Suzanne Brown, UNDP
, the ask restated twice, once in the presentation and once in the reply

"The remaining resources we do receive largely arrive as earmarked, and as that share grows, priorities increasingly follow those resources. What that means is that the board risks having less room to shape the institution it governs."
— Pradeep Kurukulasuriya, UNCDF
, framing thin core funding as a governance risk to the Board itself

"We call for regular resource to account for 30% of total contribution… we call on all member states to reverse the current trend by significantly increasing their contribution to NDP's regular resources, a prerequisite for honoring the commitment made under the financing compact."
— Chad
, for the African members of the Board, anchoring the restore-core pole

"The United States additionally wanted to take the opportunity during this dialogue to acknowledge that the current financial situation compels the executive board to revisit the current resource allocation formula to make sure that the limited resources go where they are most needed."
— United States
, anchoring the close-it-from-inside pole

"So business class alone these days accounts for less than 2.5% of travel requests. Business class tickets have decreased by more than 50%, and the associated expenditure has fallen by 62%. So that is actually a reduction already of 7.4 million US… But it would be limited in the sense that the travel would likely still take place, albeit in a different class."
— Linda McGuire, UNDP
, answering the United States on the $7 million saving

"So when you put this in the context of our overall financing, When we have a level in 2025, 9% of our funding is core, that doesn't mean 9% is subject to management discretion."
— George Kuriakou, UNDP Chief Financial Officer
, on how little of the core budget management can actually steer

"We are pleased to have signed a new multi-year core contribution of 40 million euros for the next four years… The Kingdom of the Netherlands wants to be a strong champion for UNDP. To do so, we need to better understand how UNDP is reforming and where it is choosing to prioritize its resources."
— Netherlands
, the only delegation that both commits money and states a condition

"This is the only United Nations entity with a dedicated capital mandate and capital is what we need most… One vivid example is the water utility bond in my country, Tanzania. It's a bridged bond that UNCDF helped structure the financing. 65% of the capital was raised domestically, actually."
— Tanzania
, the only worked instrument example in the room

"A 31% drop in humanitarian resources in 2025 forced difficult trade-offs and led to the closure of over 1,000 health facilities and 250 safe spaces in fragile settings."
— Andrew Saberton, UNFPA
, on what the funding fall has already cost

"It is important to emphasize that the working group advises and the executive board decides."
— Annette Kaiser, Germany
, co-chair, setting the limit on the governance proposals

Reference: Stances by Delegation

Showing 20 of 20

Chad

Restore core · African members

Speaks for eight African members of the Board. Names the funding-compact target — regular resources at "30% of total contribution" — and calls on all member states to increase contributions as "a prerequisite" for the compact. Cites the 24% fall in regular resources to 9% of contributions. Wants quality and predictability improved "while preserving the intergovernmental nature of UNDP, as well as its independence and neutrality", and asks for greater coherence between strategic objectives and the money allocated to them.

Nepal

Restore core · LDC Group + national

Three statements: for the LDC Group on UNCDF, then nationally on UNDP and UNFPA. Regular resources "must remain the bedrock". Points out that "Only 4.2% of contributions received directly by UNCDF were core", so a 40% revenue rise has not bought flexibility. Wants multi-year contributions, thematic windows and pooled funds, with less earmarking. Welcomes IFI and blended finance on the condition that it "should complement, not substitute concessional and core development financing". Asks how UNFPA will protect country delivery under the new strategic plan.

Ethiopia

Restore core · UNCDF item

Reads the 2025 results as reforms "beginning to take hold" that "must now be consolidated". Welcomes the joint UNCDF–UNDP Policy to Capital Investment Facility and wants it operational at scale. Argues that earmarked money delivers specific priorities but only "adequate core and flexible resources" let UNCDF keep country presence, retain expertise and originate new investments. Names its own digital financial inclusion and MSME work with UNCDF, and calls on partners "to match their confidence with the resource".

Côte d'Ivoire

Restore core · African members · UNFPA item

Speaks for eight African members on the UNFPA item. Asks for "predictable, flexible and sustainable funding, in particular through an increase in contributions, core contributions to the UNFPA", because those resources keep the operational presence in countries. Frames sub-Saharan demographic growth as an opportunity conditional on investment in human capital. Welcomes diversification toward IFIs, regional development banks, the private sector and foundations, and wants those partnerships aligned to African priorities. Urges the international community "to double its efforts to close the funding gaps".

Netherlands

Fund and ask · Largest stated commitment

The only delegation to commit money on the record: "a new multi-year core contribution of 40 million euros for the next four years", on top of targeted support for security, rule of law and governance. Notes 91.4 cents in every dollar reaches development activities. Concerned by the core decline, and frames the item as being "about people". Asks two questions before committing further — where the workforce reductions fell and what UNDP is prioritising — and says it needs to understand the reform to be "a strong champion for UNDP".

Tanzania

Capital rather than core · UNCDF item

Wants instruments, not a bigger core budget: "capital is what we need most", and much of it "already existing domestically". Brings the meeting's only completed transaction — a sub-regional water utility bond UNCDF helped structure, where "65% of the capital was raised domestically". Names five partnership areas: guarantees and access to finance, clean cooking energy, youth entrepreneurship, subnational and climate finance, digital finance. Asks how the Policy to Capital Investment Facility turns identified priorities into investable transactions, and invites partners to supply "flexible and deployable capital".

United States of America

Close it from inside · Both items

Argues the fix runs through the organisations. Says the financial situation "compels the executive board to revisit the current resource allocation formula". Welcomes new revenue streams but notes this "has been a common theme… over a few years" and wants tangible results and detailed tracking. Asks whether cutting business class travel would free up $7 million. On governance, supports the phased roadmap and keeping the working group running, warns against "unnecessary administrative overhead", and reserves positions it may take in national capacity. Commits no funding in either statement.

Switzerland

Fund and ask · Two group statements

Speaks twice for two different groups. For seven states on UNCDF: commends the 40 joint initiatives and $46.8 million from pooled funds, up from $21 million, calls UNDP's core contributions to UNCDF "invaluable" and hopes they can be maintained, and notes contributions "remained below expectations". For 21 states on governance: backs the delegates handbook, direct reporting lines for oversight committees, a review of working methods, and sees "particular merit in considering the creation of a subcommittee on audit and finance", plus a Board self-assessment after each session.

Finland

Restore core · UNFPA item

Concerned about the core decline "both in terms of absolute volume and as share of total funding", and about the humanitarian reductions, arguing that reproductive health services and protection from gender-based violence "are life-saving interventions and should remain integral to humanitarian responses". Commends UNFPA's work on innovative partnerships. Names the Women's Health Hub in Turku and its own status as the first country to join the Coalition for Reproductive Justice in Business. Supports the UN development system reform initiative.

Rwanda

Fund and ask · African members · Governance item

Speaks for the African members on governance only, so it takes no position on the funding question. Welcomes the joint working group's report and its principle of strengthening existing mechanisms before creating new ones — "Reform should not be pursued for its own sake." Wants more focus on the practical implications for day-to-day governance and on how the recommendations will improve the information the Board gets. Asks for clarity on what will be tracked and what remains outstanding, and for consultations that stay open and inclusive.

Spain

Took the floor · statement not in the record

The President gave Spain the floor under the UNFPA item — "I now give the floor to the distinguished Representative of Spain. Spain, you have the floor" — and the transcript continues straight into the UNFPA responses. The recording was shortened after the transcript was made, and Spain's statement is not in what survives. Listed here as a speaker whose position is unknown rather than as a silent delegation, because coding it silent would assert something the record does not support.

Suzanne Brown — UNDP

Presenter · Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy

Opens the UNDP funding dialogue. Aid fell "a record 23.1%" in 2025 and core funding to the UN system fell 27%, while new pools of capital open through development banks and vertical funds. UNDP mobilised $19.6 billion over the last strategic plan, 91% of its resource plan, and programme countries contributed $1.588 billion of their own development financing in 2025. Her ask is about the quality of money rather than the amount: "If you can't give more, give core."

Linda McGuire — UNDP

Presenter · Bureau for Management Services

Programme expenses exceeded $4.9 billion in 2025, the highest in over a decade, while core fell to $442 million — "just 9% of total contributions", below 10% for the first time in six decades. UNDP cut 354 headquarters posts, 11.5% of that workforce, and 8.5% overall since January 2025. States the limit on the efficiency argument: "efficiency gains and cost recovery cannot replace predictable core funding." Answers the United States on business class travel with the figures, and the Netherlands on where the cuts fell.

George Kuriakou — UNDP

Presenter · Chief Financial Officer

Opens the core budget to answer the prioritisation question. The 2026 core programme budget is $321 million with $130 million collected, "just above the two-month threshold" against a Board agreement to hold three to five months. Board resolutions fix $170 million under a predetermined formula; management discretion covers $85.4 million plus $24.1 million for crises. His conclusion: "9% of our funding is core, that doesn't mean 9% is subject to management discretion."

Pradeep Kurukulasuriya — UNCDF

Presenter · Executive Secretary

Reports two clean performance audits, balanced books and growing capital deployment to least developed countries, then names the constraint: co-funding "below five million against an annual requirement of 15 million" from six member states, which he thanks by name. Warns that a growing earmarked share means "the board risks having less room to shape the institution it governs". Details UNCDF's own cuts — seven D1 posts eliminated, footprint down 30–35%, travel under 5% of budget. Invites scrutiny: "If barriers remain, please name them. If doubts remain, test us."

Andrew Saberton — UNFPA

Presenter · Deputy Executive Director, Management

Core fell from $379 million to $340 million, leaving a core-to-non-core ratio of "24% to 76%", well below the compact's 30% target and concentrated among a small group of partners. A 31% fall in humanitarian resources closed "over 1,000 health facilities and 250 safe spaces". Humanitarian funding is down a further 46% year on year in 2026. Says UNFPA planned for the fall: 2026–2029 contributions are budgeted around 20% below the last period. Clarifies that core is not the same as discretionary money once the institutional budget is taken out.

Samuel Choritz — UNFPA

Presenter · Division for External Relations

Attributes the 2025 decline primarily to "the termination of contributions from a major partner", with the broader donor base stable. Thematic funds grew 16% to $280 million; interagency funding grew 5% to $177 million. Reports 13 new IFI agreements worth $46 million including $37 million in Bangladesh, a first $10 million philanthropic investment following a GiveWell accreditation, and individual giving of almost $10 million, up 36%. Attaches the same condition the delegations do: "that doesn't replace the value of core and ODA".

Annette Kaiser — Germany

Presenter · Co-Chair, Joint Working Group

Presents the revised report on the 2023 Joint Inspection Unit review — 10 formal and 21 informal recommendations, clustered into five work packages. States the governing principle: "the working group advises and the executive board decides", and existing mechanisms are strengthened before new structures are proposed. Sets out the delegates handbook to be drafted jointly by all five secretariats, a review of Board working methods, and a possible standing advisory committee on audit, risk, budget and finance.

Zebib Gebrekidan — Eritrea

Presenter · Co-Chair, Joint Working Group

Presents the remaining work packages. Harmonised terms of reference for all five Board secretariats, with roles, reporting lines and impartiality made explicit. A dual reporting line so oversight committees report to Board members as well as to the executive head, which she frames as an independence question that leaves the executive head's role unchanged. Performance review of the executive head, common training and onboarding, and risk management sequencing are treated as the complex items needing further discussion, with a final implementation plan due at the 2027 annual session.

President of the Executive Board

Chair · Procedural

Chairs all three agenda items, holds the speakers' list to the clock and asks delegations to keep interventions concise so more can be accommodated. Directs delegations that cannot take the floor to submit e-statements and to route outstanding questions through the Board Secretariat. Announces after each item that a draft decision is under preparation for the Board's consideration later in the session. Closes the meeting and confirms the joint segment resumes the following morning.