Financial Summary

Back to the 2015 Annual Report

Financial summary of the CGIAR System, Centers and Research Programs


Overview

With an annual research portfolio of close to $1 billion and approximately 11,000 staff in over 70 countries, the 15 CGIAR Centers are supported by Funders, countries, private foundations and regional and international organizations which contribute financially, technically and operationally, enabling CGIAR to pursue its strategic direction, follow agreed plans and deliver on promised outcomes and impact.

CGIAR funding is delivered via a multi-donor trust fund and bilaterally. Harmonized funding is channeled through Windows 1 and 2 of the CGIAR Fund, with Funders designating their contributions to specific CRPs via the latter. Funders also allocate funding to particular CGIAR Centers through Window 3 of the Fund or bilaterally (outside the Fund).

In 2015, overall CGIAR revenue was $971 million. Reflecting broader budgetary headwinds experienced by key Funders, this represented a decrease of 10% ($109 million), from $1,080 million in 2014. CGIAR expenditure was $985 million, a decrease of $82 million from $1,067 million in 2014. The impact was most pronounced on core funding, with Windows 1&2 experiencing a 32% ($122 million) reduction, from $382 million in 2014 to $260 million in 2015. Bilateral funding decreased by 11% ($48 million), from $437 million in 2014 to $389 million in 2015. In marked contrast, Window 3 funding increased by 24% ($56 million), from $238 million in 2014 to $294 million in 2015. Spending from Center-own income increased by 22% ($5 million), from $23 million in 2014 to $28 million in 2015. Expenditure on research not specifically associated with a CRP remained at approximately $169 million (or 17% of total expenditure) in 2015. After a number of consecutive years of surpluses, 2015 saw the CGIAR system record a shortfall of $14 million.

There remains a lag between the rate at which Funder contributions are received and disbursed from the Fund, and the rate at which Centers expend those funds. The difference (or the ‘cumulative gap’ in Figure 1), stands at $440 million, little changed from the previous year ($438 million). These amounts appear on the balance sheet of Centers, and represent a liability to donors to deliver research. Most of the $440 million ‘gap’, relates to bilateral and Window 3; only 17% was from Windows 1&2.

System Financial Performance Indicators remained in line with expectations. Unrestricted net assets decreased slightly from $281 million in 2014 to $269 million in 2015. In contrast, days of operating reserves increased from 103 days to 111 days, as a result of lower daily operating expenditures. The indirect cost ratio increased slightly, from 14% in 2014 to 15% in 2015.

TABLE 1: TOTAL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES, 2015 COMPARED TO 2014 ($ MILLION)

 
2015
2014
Revenue
Total
CRPs
Non-CRPs
Total
CRPs
Non-CRPs
CGIAR Fund Window 1&2
 260  
 242  
 17  
 382  
 362  
 20  
CGIAR Fund Window 3
 294  
 246  
 48  
 238  
 182  
 56  
 
 554  
 488  
 66  
 620  
 544  
 76  
Bilateral
 389  
 296  
 93  
 437  
 338  
 99  
Sub-Total Funding
 943  
 784  
 159  
 1,057  
 882  
 175  
Center Own income
 28  
 18  
 10  
 23  
 5  
 18  
Total Revenue
 971  
 802  
 169  
 1,080  
 887  
 193  
             
Expenditure            
CRPs
 802
 887
   
Other Programs
 163
 160
   
Systems entities and special initiatives
 20
 20
   
Total expenditure
 985
 1,067
   
Net result
 (14)
 13
   

FIGURE 1: EVOLUTION OF DONOR CONTRIBUTION (W1, 2 AND 3) AND ABSORPTION BY THE SYSTEM ($ MILLION)

Source of Funding

Between 2011 and 2014 total investment in CGIAR research increased steadily from slightly over $700 million in 2011 to almost $1.1 billion in 2014 but contracted to just below $1 billion in 2015. Bilateral funding also declined from $510 million in 2011 to $389 million in 2015 while W3 through the Fund increased from $11 million in 2011 (when Fund contribution agreements started to be developed) to $294 million in 2015. In 2015, W1&2 funds as a proportion of total funding returned to 2011 levels of around 26%, from a high of 35% in 2014. Contributions to the Fund (which excludes bilateral and Center-own income) increased steadily from $200 million in 2011 to $620 million in 2014 but declined to $554 in 2015 (Figure 2).

FIGURE 2: ANALYSIS OF CENTER REVENUE BY SOURCE OF FUNDING ($ MILLION)

Funder Contribution Compared to System Revenue

Figure 3 shows Funder contributions to the CGIAR Fund by funding Windows 1&2 and 3 and how Centers are absorbing these funds over time. The figure further shows how Funders changed contributions to the CGIAR Fund which, in turn, requires adaptation of the mode of operation by Centers and CRPs.

FIGURE 3: ANALYSIS OF DONOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO CGIAR FUND COMPARED TO SYSTEM REVENUE ($ MILLION)

Expenditures

Of the total $985 million CGIAR expenditures in 2015 the majority was directed to the Sub-Saharan Africa region and Asia.

For 2015, the two regions that benefited most from the CGIAR research investment, according to Centers’ estimations, are Africa and Asia with almost 80% (Figure 4). Expenditures by Cost Category experienced very minor changes compared to 2014. Despite the staff reduction of 400 staff or slightly over 3% implemented late in the year, to adjust for late in the year announced fund reductions, salary cost slightly increased. The reason is most likely related to early contract terminations. Travel costs reduced from 7% in 2014 to 6% in 2015 (Figure 5).

FIGURE 4: BENEFITING REGION, 2015

FIGURE 5: EXPENDITURES BY COST CATEGORY, 2015

Center Financial Summary

In 2015, 3 out of 15 Centers achieved a surplus, however the overall shortfall was almost $14 million (Table 2). The financial situation of the CGIAR System remains stable, however, impacts of tightening budgets are not felt equally across CGIAR. ICARDA and IITA had the lowest days of operating reserves with 50 and 40 days respectively, below the recommended 70-95 days.

Centers also report funding sources or revenues classified by CRP and non-CRP. As in 2014 CIMMYT and ILRI report the largest portions of revenues not aligned with CRP activity (Figure 6).

TABLE 2: CENTER REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND SURPLUS/DEFICIT, 2015 ($ MILLION)

 
Revenue
Expenditure
 
CENTER  CRP   Non-CRP   Other   Total   CRP   Non-CRP   Total  Defecit
 AfricaRice 
 16.5    5.9    0.5    22.9    16.5    8.8    25.3    (2.5)
 Bioversity 
 25.8    8.3    2.0    36.0    31.6    5.1    36.7    (0.6)
 CIAT 
 74.7    2.4    1.4    78.5    75.7    2.4    78.0    0.4
 CIFOR 
 29.8    5.8    0.5    36.1    34.8    6.0    40.7    (4.6)
 CIMMYT  
 79.0    43.2    0.7    122.8    79.0    40.9    119.9    2.9
 CIP 
 40.3    3.7    2.1    46.1    40.7    7.7    48.4    (2.3)
 ICARDA 
 36.1    12.6    0.8    49.5    36.1    13.8    50.0    (0.4)
 ICRISAT 
 52.3    2.7    2.9    58.0    55.3    4.7    60.1    (2.1)
 IFPRI 
 116.9    3.4    1.0    121.3    116.9    4.4    121.3    0.0
 IITA 
 87.3    5.3    0.8    93.4    87.3    5.1    92.5    0.9
 ILRI 
 44.2    16.2    9.7    70.1    44.8    23.2    68.0    2.1
 IRRI  
 65.4    13.5    1.1    80.0    65.4    15.8    81.2    (1.2)
 IWMI 
 27.0    1.8    0.9    29.7    27.0    7.2    34.1    (4.5)
 World Agroforestry 
 55.4    6.6    2.4    64.4    57.8    8.1    65.9    (1.5)
 WorldFish 
 31.1    0.5    1.5    33.1    31.1    2.6    33.7    (0.5)
 Subtotal 
 781.8    132.0    28.2    942.0    800.0    155.7    955.7    (13.8)
 Other program partners 
 1.5    6.9    –      8.4    1.5    6.9    8.4    –  
 Total   
 783.3    138.9    28.2    950.4    801.5    162.6    964.2    (13.8)
 Systems entities and special initiatives 
 0.5    19.8    –      20.5    0.5    19.8    20.5    –  
 Total    
 783.8    158.8    28.2    970.9    802.0    182.5    984.7    (13.8)

FIGURE 6: CRP VERSUS NON-CRP REVENUE BY CENTER, 2015 AND 2014 ($ MILLION)

CRP Financial Summary

Overall spending on CRPs declined by 10%, from $887 million in 2014 to $802 million in 2015. A number of CRPs were able to cover the reduction in planned 2015 revenues (against the initial approved 2015 CRP Financing Plan), by reducing expenditure and using Center-own funds.

Window 1&2 funds, at $242 million, represented 30% of CRP expenditure; a marked 37% decrease compared with 2014. Window 3, at $246 million, represented 32% and showed a growth of 21% over 2014. Bilateral expenditure, at $296 million or 37% was unchanged in percentage from 2014. Center-own funds represented 2% of expenditures. (Table 3)

TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF CRP FUNDING/EXPENDITURE, 2015 ($ MILLION)

From Financial Statements of Individual Centers % of Individual CRP funding
CGIAR Research Program on:  Windows
1 & 2 
 Window 3   Bilateral   Own Funds   Total   Windows
1 & 2 
 Window 3   Bilateral   Own Funds  % of Total
CRP 1.1 Dryland Systems  7  22  14  1  44 16% 49% 32% 3% 6%
CRP 1.2 Humidtropics  10  11  6  0  28 35% 41% 23% 1% 3%
CRP 1.3 Aquatic Agricultural Systems  8  8  10  0  26 30% 32% 37% 1% 3%
CRP 2 Policies, Institutions and Markets  16  27  37  3  83 19% 33% 45% 3% 10%
CRP 3.1 WHEAT  13  6  15  –  34 38% 17% 45%  – 4%
CRP 3.2 MAIZE  10  19  24  –  52 19% 35% 46% 0% 7%
CRP 3.3 Rice (GRiSP)  23  21  34  0  79 29% 27% 44% 0% 10%
CRP 3.4 Root, Tubers and Bananas  20  28  23  1  72 29% 38% 32% 1% 9%
CRP 3.5 Grain Legumes  6  21  15  0  42 14% 51% 35% 0% 5%
CRP 3.6 Drylands Cereals  4  5  6  1  16 28% 29% 37% 6% 2%
CRP 3.7 Livestock and Fish  14  6  8  0  28 50% 20% 29% 1% 4%
CRP 4 Agriculture for Nutrition and Health  19  46  28  0  93 20% 49% 30% 0% 12%
CRP 5 Water, Land and Ecosystems  22  5  22  2  51 44% 10% 42% 4% 6%
CRP 6 Forests, Trees and Agroforestry  19  11  31  8  69 28% 16% 45% 11% 9%
CRP 7 Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security  32  10  15  1  57 56% 17% 25% 2% 7%
Genebanks  19  0  7  0  26 73% 1% 25% 1% 3%
Total  242  246  296  18  802 30% 32% 37% 2% 100%

FINANCIAL SUMMARY OF THE CGIAR FUND

Table 4 shows Fund contributions by Window for five years, beginning with the Fund’s first year of operation in 2011. In 2015, Window 3 grew by 26% over 2014, while Windows 1&2 combined – which accounted for 44% of total CGIAR Fund contributions last year – saw a reduction of 18%, or $54 million.

TABLE 4: FUND CONTRIBUTIONS ($ MILLION)

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Window 3 60 197 299 255 311
Window 2 71 132 136 111 125
Window 1 254 185 217 189 120
Total 385 514 652 555 556

Status of the CGIAR Fund

Table 5 shows Fund receipts, disbursements and balances, as of 31 December 2015. Of the $645 million that were made available during the year, $573 million were disbursed, leaving a balance of $72 million in the Fund at the end of 2015, of which $34 million were in Windows 1-2, $35 million in Window 3 and $2 million were provisional (i.e., the Funder has not decided on the final allocation).

TABLE 5: CGIAR FUND STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS, DISBURSEMENTS AND FUND BALANCE AS OF 31 DECEMBER 2015 ($ MILLIONS)

 
Window 1
Window 2
Window 3
Provisional
Total
Balance b/f from 2014
32.3
0.2
21.6
9.7
63.7
Receipts 
Prior years’ contributions received in 2015
0.2
0.1
10.8
11.1
2015 Contributions received in 20151
118.9
125.2
308.1
552.2
Returns & CSP from bilateral 2013 & 2014
8.2
9.7
17.9
Total available in 2015
159.6
135.2
340.5
9.7
644.9
Transfers
Cost Sharing Percentage
9.00
(2.5)
(6.5)
0.0
Transfer from Provisional
1.0
0.1
6.4
(7.5)
0.0
Less: Disbursements
(142.5)
(125.5)
(305.1)
0.0
(573.0)
Fund Balance
27.1
7.3
35.3
2.2
71.9
Contributions in process1
1.3
0.1
2.8
4.2

1 see Table 6

CGIAR Fund inflows and outflows

Figure 7 shows the monthly cash flow and Fund balance throughout 2015. By the end of the year, nearly all (99%) of the Fund contributions were received. In addition, contributions to Windows 1 and 2 were collected in full, enabling the disbursement of the CRP revised budget requirements for 2015 before the end of the year. This was made possible in large part thanks to the multi-year contribution agreements of the following Funders: Australia, Belgium, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark, IFAD, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The multi-annual commitments shortened the processing time required to get contributions into the Fund, thereby facilitating their timelier disbursement to support CGIAR’s critical research agenda.

FIGURE 7: BALANCE IN THE CGIAR FUND IN 2015 ($ MILLION)

TABLE 6: CGIAR FUND 2015 DONOR CONTRIBUTIONS ($ MILLIONS)

 Receipts 
 Window 1 
 Window 21 
 Window 3 
 Total CGIAR Fund 
 Abu Dhabi 
 0.10
 0.40
 0.50
 Australia 
 6.16
 14.37
 11.19
 31.72
 Austria 
 –  
 –  
 1.93
 1.93
 Bangladesh 
 –  
 –  
 0.10
 0.10
 Belgium 
 –  
 6.96
 1.74
 8.70
 Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation 
 1.67
 –  
 103.42
 105.09
 Canada 
 8.23
 –  
 –  
 8.23
 Denmark 
 10.43
 –  
 –  
 10.43
 Finland 
 1.08
 –  
 1.08
 2.17
 IDRC 
 –  
 2.72
 –  
 2.72
 IFAD 
 –  
 –  
 7.53
 7.53
 India 
 0.73
 –  
 5.38
 6.11
 Ireland 
 –  
 2.79
 1.04
 3.82
 Japan 
 0.30
 –  
 1.48
 1.78
 Korea 
 0.26
 –  
 –  
 0.26
 Luxembourg 
 0.24
 –  
 0.30
 0.54
 Netherlands 
 11.40
 30.00
 7.00
 48.40
 New Zealand 
 1.92
 0.77
 –  
 2.69
 Norway 
 10.49
 –  
 –  
 10.49
 Portugal 
 –  
 –  
 0.50
 0.50
 South Africa 
 –  
 0.06
 0.58
 0.64
 Sudan 
 0.10
 0.39
 0.49
 Sweden 
 13.57
 –  
 –  
 13.57
 Switzerland 
 6.20
 9.81
 –  
 16.00
 Thailand 
 –  
 0.03
 0.08
 0.10
 Turkey 
 –  
 –  
 0.50
 0.50
 United Kingdom 
 15.70
 38.35
 18.92
 72.96
 USA 
 0.50
 19.20
 144.52
 164.22
 World Bank 
 30.00
 –  
 –  
 30.00
 sub-total 2015 receipts 
 118.89
 125.24
 308.08
 552.21
Contributions in process2
 China 
 0.14
 2.75
 2.89
 France 
 1.29
 1.29
 sub-total contributions in process 
 1.29
 0.14
 2.75
 4.18
 Total 2015 contributions 
 120.18
 125.38
 310.83
 556.39

1 See Table 7
2 Contributions which are supported by signed contribution agreement but the money was not yet received by 31 December 2015

TABLE 7: CGIAR FUND 2015 WINDOW 2 CONTRIBUTIONS BY CRP ($ MILLIONS)

 CRP 1.1 
 CRP 1.2 
 CRP 1.3 
 CRP 2 
 CRP 3.1 
 CRP 3.2 
CRP 3.3
 CRP 3.4 
 CRP 3.5 
 CRP 3.6 
 CRP 3.7 
 CRP 4 
 CRP 5 
 CRP 6 
CRP 7
Donors
 Total 
 Dryland Systems 
 Humid Tropics 
 Aquatic Agricultural Systems 
 Policies, Institutions & Markets 
 WHEAT 
 MAIZE 
GRiSP
 Root, Tubers & Bananas 
 Grain Legumes 
 Drylands Cereals 
 Livestock & Fish 
 Agriculture for Nutrituion and Health 
 Water, Land & Ecosystems 
 Forests, Trees & Agroforestry 
CCAFS
Genebanks
2014 Contributions received in 2015
Sudan
 0.1
 0.10
sub-total
 0.1
 0.10
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 
Contributions transfered from Provisional
South Africa
 0.1
0.06
sub-total
 0.1
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 0.06
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 –  
 
2015 Contributions Received
Abu Dhabi
 0.1
 0.10
Australia
 14.4
 0.96
 0.48
 0.48
 1.44
 1.44
 0.96
 0.96
 0.48
 1.44
 0.48
 0.96
 1.44
 1.44
 0.96
 0.48
Belgium
 7.0
 1.74
 1.74
 1.74
 1.74
IDRC
 2.7
 0.96
 0.95
 0.80
Ireland
 2.8
 0.82
 0.98
 0.98
Netherlands
 30.0
 2.80
 6.40
 4.30
 4.30
 4.30
 2.90
 2.90
 2.10
New Zealand
 0.8
 0.77
South Africa
 0.1
 0.06
Sudan
 0.1
 0.10
Switzerland
 9.8
 0.52
 2.07
 1.03
 0.77
 1.55
 0.52
 1.03
 0.77
 1.55
Thailand
 0.03
 0.03
United Kingdom
 38.4
 1.53
 5.37
 5.37
 5.37
 5.37
 5.37
 1.53
 1.53
 1.53
 5.37
USA
 19.2
 1.50
 4.50
 1.50
 4.50
 2.00
 4.00
 1.20
sub-total
 125.2
 6.21
 5.82
 2.47
 16.30
 11.31
 7.89
 10.83
 14.39
 1.44
 2.48
 10.79
 10.77
 5.37
 7.13
 10.50
 1.55
 
Return of unspent from 2014
 9.7
 0.95
 0.15
 0.26
 8.09
 0.23

TABLE 8: CGIAR FUNDER 2015 CONTRIBUTIONS ($ MILLIONS)

Table 8 was prepared in response to Funders’ request for a report that shows both Fund and bilateral contributions by Funder, but with the understanding that these funding numbers are not comparative nor additive. The report was prepared and a “total” column was added for illustration purposes only and not for financial analysis, as generally accepted accounting principles do not allow combining reports based on two different accounting methods of revenue recognition (i.e., cash and accrual), as is the case here.

 
CGIAR Fund

Bilateral
Total
 
 Window 1 
 Window 2 
 Window 3 
Based on cash receipts
Based on spending
 Abu Dhabi 
 0.1
 0.4
 0.5
 African Development Bank 
 19.9
 19.9
 Arab Fund 
 4.9
 4.9
 Asian Development Bank 
 1.1
 1.1
Australia
 6.2
 14.4
 11.2
 20.5
 52.3
Austria
 1.9
 0.7
 2.6
Bangladesh
 0.1
 0.1
Belgium
 7.0
 1.7
 1.2
 9.9
BMGF
 1.7
 103.4
 26.4
 131.4
Canada
 8.2
 13.2
 21.5
China
 0.1
 2.8
 2.5
 5.4
Colombia 1
 3.0
 3.0
Cote d’Ivoire 1
 2.5
 2.5
Denmark
 10.4
 0.9
 11.3
Egypt
 0.5
 0.5
European Commission
 13.6
 13.6
FAO
 4.0
 4.0
Finland
 1.1
 1.1
 5.5
 7.6
Ford Foundation
 0.6
 0.6
France 1
 1.3
 1.4
 2.7
Germany
 24.8
 24.8
Gulf Cooperation Council
 0.5
 0.5
IDRC
 2.7
 1.7
 4.5
IFAD
 7.5
 5.5
13.0
India 1
 0.7
 5.4
 8.4
 14.5
Indonesia 1
 0.1
 0.1
Inter-American Development Bank
 
 0.9
 0.9
Iran
 0.1
 0.1
Ireland
 2.8
 1.0
 5.1
 9.0
Italy 1
 2.3
 2.3
Japan
 0.3
 1.5
 3.8
 5.6
Kellog Foundation
 0.1
 0.1
Kenya 1
 0.1
 0.1
Korea
 0.3
 1.5
 1.8
Libya
 1.3
 1.3
Luxembourg
 0.2
 0.3
 0.5
Mexico 1
 19.9
 19.9
Morocco
 0.1
 0.1
Netherlands
 11.4
 30.0
 7.0
 3.7
 52.1
New Zealand
 1.9
 0.8
 2.7
Nigeria 1
 3.4
 3.4
Norway
 10.5
 4.6
 15.1
OPEC Fund
 0.2
 0.2
Peru 1
 0.1
 0.1
Philippines 1
 4.7
 4.7
Portugal
 0.5
 0.3
 0.8
Rockefeller Foundation
 0.2
 0.2
Russia
 –  
South Africa
 0.1
 0.6
 0.1
 0.7
Spain
 0.03
 0.0
Sudan
 0.1
 0.4
 0.5
Sweden
 13.6
 6.9
 20.5
Switzerland
 6.2
 9.8
 7.1
 23.1
Syngenta
 3.2
 3.2
Syria 1
 0.2
 0.2
Thailand
 0.03
 0.08
 0.1
 0.2
Turkey
 0.5
 0.0
 0.5
Uganda
 0.6
 0.6
UK
 15.7
 38.4
 18.9
 7.9
 80.9
UNDP/UN/UNEP
 2.4
 2.4
USA 1
 0.5
 19.2
 144.5
 40.7
 204.9
World Bank
 30.0
 2.1
 32.1
Others
 102.0
 102.0
 Total 
 120
 125
 311
 389
 945

1 Host of a CGIAR Center / Consortium