Recommended Changes to the Implementation Plan Template 11

Recommended Changes to the Implementation Plan Template 11 th GEO Programme Board Meeting Agenda Item 2. 1 Kyoto, Japan 29 October 2018 Craig Larlee GEO Secretariat

Some observations on the current template • GWP activities rarely update their Implementation Plans (IPs) or their summary descriptions after the initial submission. • As a result, much of the information in the GWP updates is out of date and/or incorrect. • Analysis and re-use of information in the IPs is hampered by the format (Word documents). • Level of detail, typologies, etc. are inconsistent from one activity to another, making data aggregation very difficult. • Content in some sections not relevant or responding to what was requested – little apparent control applied to content.

Some proposed principles for a new template • Only request information that will be used -- by PB in its review of IPs, by the Secretariat in tracking KPIs, or by either in reviewing status of implementation. • Distinguish between information that should be updated annually and information that will remain static unless changed by the activity itself. • Information that will be aggregated across GWP activities should be collected in tabular format, using defined categories wherever possible. • Build the summary for the GWP document from the content of the IP, not as a separate document.

Some questions for Programme Board members • Which sections of the current IP template were most useful for review teams? Which sections were least useful? • What information did you most want to see in the IPs but was often not provided? • Were there sections of the IP template that were commonly misunderstood by proponents? • Other suggestions to make the IP templates more useful? • Is the Work Programme summary document useful? How could it be improved?