CSM Evaluation and Facilitation

CSM Facilitation 2019 – 2020   The findings of the CSM Evaluation of 2018 have been deeply discussed by the Coordination Committee and the CSM Forum 2018. Many of the findings generated new path and lines of works. As part of this follow-up work an internal Working Group on Facilitation was established with two main objectives: a) the drafting of a common understanding on Facilitation and the b) the drafting of a list of tasks for CSM Sub-regional and Constituency Coordination Committee members. Common understanding of Facilitation, as adopted by the Coordination Committee (CC) in January 2020. List of tasks for CSM Sub-regional and Constituency Coordination Committee members as adopted by the CC in January 2020. ———————————————————————————————————- CSM Evaluation 2018 The independent evaluation of the CSM conducted by Priscilla Claeys and Jessica Duncan it’s concluded and the full report is finally available  at this link. Please find below the Terms of Reference and background process that informed the process throughout 2017//2018. The CSM Evaluation findings and recommendations were discussed during the Coordination Committee meeting of October 2018 and during the CSM Forum on 13-14 October 2018. Also find at this link a discussion paper on Facilitation prepared for the CSM by Josh Brem-Wilson from the Centre for Agroecology and Resilience of Coventry University (UK) in September 2018, that complements the work of the CSM Evaluation. Terms of Reference of CSM Evaluation  Background and process: As foreseen in the CSM founding document, a first evaluation of the CSM was conducted in 2013/2014, and its results were discussed by the CC in July 2014. See the full report here. The exercise was found very useful for the development of the Mechanism, and therefore, a second evaluation was scheduled for 2017/18. The CC meeting in May 2017 had a first discussion on the scope and topics of the evaluation, and the CC meeting in October 2017 agreed on a concept note for its further implementation between December 2017 and March 2018. Objective of the Evaluation: The evaluation is carried out with the aim of assessing how the CSM is functioning in line with its founding document, guiding principles and mandate and functions. The Evaluation will assess CSM’s strengths and weaknesses, challenges and potentials with regard to three areas: the internal dimension, the external dimension, and “visionary” dimension, as outlined in detail in the section on the scope. The evaluation will particularly look at the last three

Read more

CSM Welcome Kit

CSM Welcome Kit: Useful Tips on the Civil Society Mechanism (CSM) for Relations with the UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS)   Understanding the role and structure of the CFS is no easy task! It results that understanding what the CSM is and does, proves to be quite complex too.   This welcome kit wants to be an accessible tool to start navigating these complex spaces. It can be useful for those who approach the CSM and CFS for the first time, but they can also be a useful set of tips to get back to for more experienced participants.   Please DOWNLOAD THE KIT HERE and share it widely among your constituencies and sub-regions so that the CSM and the CFS may become less abstract spaces for those who carry out the struggle at the local level.   Do you want to know more? Check out the CSM page for a more detailed explanation and download the the power point presentation of the CSM    

Read more

Latest News on the Process for the CFS Plan of Action for the Evaluation!

CFS Evaluation Background information The Committee on World Food Security (CFS) commissioned an independent evaluation of the effectiveness of the CFS reforms that were initiated in 2009. In October 2013 at its Fortieth Session, the Committee endorsed the recommendation to conduct periodic assessments of CFS effectiveness in improving policy frameworks, especially at country level, and in promoting participation of and coherence among stakeholders on food security and nutrition. At the same session, the Committee decided that an evaluation of the progress of the reforms should be conducted including progress made towards the overall objective of the CFS and its three outcomes. The purpose of the evaluation as set out in the Concept Note endorsed by the Bureau of the CFS is to: Produce evidence regarding whether CFS, as a multi stakeholder forum, is achieving the vision outlined in the Reform Documents and its expected outcomes; Assess the extent to which CFS is performing its roles outlined in the Reform Document, efficiently and effectively, and if so, with what impact; Review the working arrangements, including the multi-year programme of work of CFS in order to assess how the decision-making processes and planning may be impacting effectiveness; Propose forward-looking recommendations to enable CFS to respond effectively to the emerging food security and nutrition challenges, to further strengthen it comparative advantages and to enhance its leadership role in improving global food security and nutrition; and Generate learning regarding multi-stakeholder collaboration, to which the CFS represents a possible model to be replicated.   Process 2017 [content_timeline id=”36″] 26 and 28 July Global discussions on the CFS Evaluation Plan of Action (Recommendations 4,8 and 9) Agenda Draft Plan of Action 20 July  CFS Advisory Group and Bureau meeting Revised draft Consultation Report Preliminary CSM Contributions 11 and 14 of July Global discussions on the CFS Evaluation Plan of Action Draft Agendas 11 and 14 of July Draft consultation report that presents the results of the consultation process conducted in June-September 2017 for the preparation of the evaluation plan of action leading up to CFS 44 with the responses to the evaluation recommendations that are planned for submission at CFS 44 The draft Roadmap for the preparation of the Plan of Action_30 June 2017 that presents the strategy to prepare the responses to the evaluation recommendations that are not planned to be presented at CFS 44 The categorization of the recommendations, according to whether they are:

Read more

to top
#FoodSystems4People
Join the online and offline citizen mobilisations

to challenge the UN Food Systems Summit and re-claim Peoples’ sovereignty over food systems!

JOIN NOW