Introduction This survey is mandated by the Executive Board of UN-Habitat, following its second session of the year 2024 that took place from 4 to 6 December 2024. This survey evaluates the effectiveness of the session and to further improve the process and outcome of future sessions. In line with rule 1.1 of the rules of procedure, the Executive Board is supposed to “meet in regular session, two or three times per year, as appropriate, or at such times and duration as it shall determine”. The Functions of the Executive Board are outlined in Rule 5 of the rules of procedure and includes among others; to provide oversight mechanisms by Member States for UN-Habitat to enhance its normative and operational activities and to ensure accountability, transparency, efficiency and effectiveness of the Organization. This survey targets all Member States including Members of the Executive Board. Your responses to the survey are anonymous. All responses will be analyzed and included in the survey report. Thank you in advance for taking the time to complete the survey and for your commitment to improving efficiency and effectiveness of the Executive Board sessions Assessment Scale In this survey, a rating scale of level 5 (strongly agree) to level 1 (strongly disagree) will be used. The scale is as follows: Level 5 = Strongly Agree; Level 4= Agree; Level 3= Somewhat Agree; Level 2= Disagree; Level 1= Strongly Disagree. You should mark what is appropriate. There are also multiple-choice questions and single-choice questions. There are open-ended questions where you are expected to provide your observations, opinions and suggestions. A. Alignment of the functions and competence of the Executive Board with the Provisional Agenda of the sessions of the Board: Question 1: How well aligned is the Agenda for each session of the Executive Board to its functions and competence in terms of strengthening the accountability and transparency of UN-Habitat, and providing an effective oversight to enhance its normative and operational activities? level 5 (strongly agree); level 1 (strongly disagree) Questions Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree The Executive Board’s functions and competence are clearly understood and consistently adhered to. Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree The Agenda for each session is well aligned with the functions and competence of the Executive Board. Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree The provisional Agenda is clearly communicated to the Executive Board members for their inputs before being finalized Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree The Executive Board Bureau is flexible and responsive in the planning process of the provisional Agenda of the Session to ensure effective oversight role of the Executive Board Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree The Executive Board should review its decision 2019/ 4 which pre-determined what agenda items must be covered at each session Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Observations/comments on the alignment of the agenda for each session if any (Optional) Question 2: If the Secretariat were to help Member States and their Delegation understand the functions and competence of the Executive Board, what would be a better way to do so?? (a) Orientations (b) Trainings (c) Refreshment / follow-up sessions (d) Briefing papers (e) Other(Please specify) Enter other… Question 3: Please provide your views/ideas on how the process of drafting of the provisional Agenda for each session of the Executive Board can be improved? B. Quality and Usefulness of pre-session documents: Question 4: How useful are the pre-session documents in their timing submission, accesibility, content and length in helping delegates to prepare adequately for the Executive Board sessions? level 5 (strongly agree); level 1 (strongly disagree) Questions Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Timely submission and distribution of pre-session documents, in accordance with the Rules of the Executive Board of 4 weeks is adequate. Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Pre-session documents of 2024 second session were easily accessible to the Executive Board members in a timely manner Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree The General Assembly guidance on the length limit of 8,500 words per pre-session document is sufficient, with the exception of specific documents like the work programme and budget and the strategic plan Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree The documents presented at the 2024 second session of the Executive Board were informative and focused in content. Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Sharing Executive Director/Secretariat presentations prior to the Executive Board sessions would bring about effective and active participation during discussions of Agenda Items Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Question 5: Please suggest on how the quality and the usefulness (including content and length) of the pre-session documents be improved. C. Pre-session Briefing by the Executive Director: Question 6: Please rate the usefulness of the Executive Director’s pre-session briefing which takes place two weeks prior to each session as provided for under rule 6.10 of the rules of procedure Extremely Helpful Very Helpful Somewhat helpful Not so helpful Not at all helpful Question 7: Please provide your views and ideas on how the Executive Director’s pre-session briefings can be improved for both Member States and the Secretariat D. Number of sessions per year of the Executive Board: Question 8: Rule 1 of the rules of procedure of the Executive Board provides that “The Executive Board of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme shall meet in regular session two or three times per year.” Since the establishment of the Board in May 2019, the Board has met twice in 2020, twice in 2021, twice in 2022, three times in 2023, twice in 2024. As per your experience, do you think holding two sessions per year is adequate to cover the necessary agenda items and relevant matters? Yes No Comment on your answer given above. If ‘Yes’, why; If ‘No’, why. Question 9: With the understanding that the General Assembly and the Executive Board rules on documentation require about 12 weeks of preparations of pre-session documents, and with the understanding that in line with Rule 1.3, the dates of the sessions of the Board when being set, should take into account the dates of meetings of the UN-Habitat Assembly and other United Nations bodies, including the high-level political forum on sustainable development, when, in your view, during the year should the Executive Board sessions take place? (Indicate months) Question 10: The 2024 second session of the Executive Board was held over three days. Was the allocated number of days for that session adequate? Yes No If ‘No’, please specify why not Question 11: In your view, how many days should each Executive Board session be and why? (Indicate number) E. Preparations and implementation of the 2024 second session of the Executive Board: Question 12: How adequate were preparations for the 2024 second session of the Executive Board including meetings of the ad hoc working groups of the Executive Board and Informal consultations on draft decisions? level 5 (strongly agree); level 1 (strongly disagree) Questions Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Number of informal consultations on draft outcomes and decisions were adequate Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Time allocated to informal consultations on draft outcomes during the session itself was adequate Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree The delegates discussed openly, stimulating inclusive debate and dialogue on substantive items that resulted in outcome decisions Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Draft decisions and technical inputs prepared for the Executive Boards’ consideration were manageable, in line with the mandate of the Executive Board Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Comments/feedback on the preparation if any. Question 13: How efficient was the management of time allocated for statements during the second session of the Executive Board for the year 2024, including Group and National Statements? level 5 (strongly agree); level 1 (strongly disagree) Questions Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Time available to the delegates to discuss and debate on important issues was adequate Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Time available to the speakers during the session was adequate Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Question 14: Please suggest on how time management of Executive Board sessions can be improved? Question 15: Based on your views of the 2024 second session of the Board, give suggestions on how the Executive Director and Secretariat could better support Member States to ensure their active and substantive engagement during the sessions of the Executive Board? (a) Enhance the quality of documents and make them more succinct (b) Prioritize the importance of the issues and allocate discussion time accordingly (c) Encourage Member States and Regional Groups to provide feedback prior to sessions (d) Communicate more with Member States and Regional Groups (e) Other(Please specify) F: Other Questions to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Executive Board: Question 16: What measures can the Executive Board consider to improve its effectiveness? Question 17: What other comments would you like to make about the Executive Board? Submit your responses