EVALUATION OF THE REGIONAL CENTRE FOR THE SAFEGUARDING OF THE INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE IN SOUTH-EASTERN EUROPE UNDER THE AUSPICES OF UNESCO, SOFIA, REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA

Final

24 July 2017

Review by: Sang Mee Bak Commissioned by: UNESCO Culture Sector Paris 1 | Page

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive summary

1. Introduction: background, objectives and scope of the evaluation

2. Methodology

2.1 Evaluation criteria

3 Findings

3.1 Overview

3.2 Structure and efficiency of the Centre

3.3 Effectiveness of the Centre’s missions

3.4 Relationship with UNESCO

4 Recommendations

4.1 General recommendation on whether the renewal of the Centre’s status as a category 2 institute is warranted and would conform to the Integrated Comprehensive Strategy

4.2 Recommendations to the Centre for improving the effectiveness of its operations

(1) Relationship with Member States

(2) Governance issues within the Centre

(3) A mid-term programme

(4) ICH safeguarding and capacity building

4.3 Recommendations to UNESCO for improving the effectiveness of coordination and interaction with the Centre

4.4 Specific recommendations for possible amendments to the Agreement

2 | Page

Annex 1 – List of Interviewees Annex 2 – Questionnaires Annex 3 – Mission Agenda Annex 4 – Organization Chart Annex 5 – List of Documents Provided Annex 6 – General Assembly of Sofia Centre and Submission of Working Documents Annex 7 – Meetings and Projects Annex 8 – Terms of Reference

3 | Page

Executive summary

The main objectives of this evaluation are to assess the performance of the Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe under the Auspices of UNESCO (hereafter, the ‘Centre’) with respect to its objectives and functions, as specified in the agreement between UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria. It will also provide an assessment of its contribution to UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes. The findings of the evaluation will serve as the basis for the Sector Review Committee’s recommendation to the Director-General as to whether or not to renew the Agreement.

According to the 2010 Agreement between UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria regarding the establishment of the Centre (the ‘Agreement’, Article 6), the objectives of the Centre are to: (a) promote UNESCO’s 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (‘ICH’) and contribute to its implementation in the South-Eastern European sub- region; (b) increase the participation of communities, groups and individuals in safeguarding ICH in South-Eastern European countries; (c) enhance the capacity of the South-Eastern European Member States of UNESCO to safeguard ICH; (d) coordinate, exchange and disseminate information regarding the safeguarding of ICH in the sub-region; (e) foster regional and international cooperation for the safeguarding of ICH.

This evaluation has considered the following three aspects: the Centre’s conformity to the UNESCO Strategy, the structure and efficiency of the Centre, and the effectiveness of its mission. The methodology used to evaluate the Centre included: a desk study of relevant documents, both those provided by the Centre and the UNESCO Secretariat and those gathered from other sources, including the webpages of UNESCO and the Centre; a visit to the Centre, including interviews with the Centre’s management and staff; and interviews (telephone, online and/or via e-mail) with the Centre’s stakeholders, collaborators, and beneficiaries as well as the UNESCO staff concerned.

The Centre was established in collaboration with three national entities: the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Bulgaria, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Bulgaria, and the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Representatives of these three entities are members of the General Assembly (the Agreement, Article 7.1). Most of the stakeholders interviewed express no particular opinion on the appropriateness of this structure or its efficiency in carrying out the Centre’s mission.

4 | Page

However, some of the stakeholders interviewed in Bulgaria intimated that there is a connection between this structure and the frequent change of directorship.

The interviewees agreed that, since its establishment, the Centre had made significant progress in carrying out its mission. Most interviewees mentioned the frequent change of directorship as one of the major weaknesses of the Centre. They said that this had led to a lack of long-term planning. They also considered the lack of ICH experts among the staff of the Centre as a weakness. For future programmes and activities that need to be more content-based, the Centre needs to hire ICH specialists as full-time staff. If this is not feasible in the near future, a systematic staff training programme could be helpful. As the staff of the Centre seemed highly professional, interested in ICH safeguarding and dedicated to their work, staff training in the field of ICH would improve the Centre’s capacity and expertise in carrying out its mission in their Region. One of the three entities participating in the Centre (the Academy of Science) could provide human and other kinds of resources to this end.

It is well recognized that the Centre is the only one of such nature in the region. Its existence and activities are appreciated not only by the Member States but also by UNESCO (the Headquarters and the UNESCO Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Europe). All of the stakeholders interviewed as part of this evaluation greatly valued the location of the Centre, which stands at the crossroads of diverse cultures. The staff of the Centre are highly motivated and seem satisfied with their jobs. They are proud of their institution with its UNESCO affiliation, which garners great prestige in Bulgaria.

This evaluation has found that the Centre has been successfully carrying out its mission in accordance with the Agreement with UNESCO, in line with the above-mentioned UNESCO Strategy and Objectives. The stakeholders interviewed as part of the evaluation all recognized these achievements positively. The Centre is also well prepared to take the next step in safeguarding ICH and collaborating with Member States and other ICH-related organizations through ICH-related programmes and activities. For these reasons, this evaluation recommends that the Agreement between UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria be renewed.

While the evaluation has reached the positive conclusion that the Agreement should be renewed, there are several recommendations to be made for the Centre to be more successful in carrying out its mission, reflecting the particular needs of the Member States in the Region. In particular, these are directed at:

5 | Page

- ensuring the stability of the directorship, which is expected to enable the Centre to develop and execute long-term plans;

- streamlining the Centre’s objectives in the region by identifying priorities among many potential agendas in safeguarding ICH and promoting and implementing the 2003 Convention.

Accordingly, a revision of the Agreement could be considered in order to align with the thematic and geographical focus based on consultations with all the relevant stakeholders.

6 | Page

1. INTRODUCTION: BACKGROUND, OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION

Background

Category 2 institutes and centres under the auspices of UNESCO form an important part of UNESCO’s network and, as a general rule, represent an effective partnership model for UNESCO’s programme delivery, significantly contributing to priority areas in UNESCO’s fields of competence. Category 2 institutes and centres are intended to contribute to the achievement of UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes and to the attainment of programme results at the level of the Main Lines of Action (‘MLA’) of UNESCO’s programme and budget (C/5). This can be achieved either through individual action, joint action with other category 2 institutes and centres or joint implementation with the Secretariat. Category 2 institutes and centres can also play a considerable role in helping the Organization achieve programme objectives for which sectoral expertise or resources are not sufficient.

In order to enhance the operation and effectiveness of individual UNESCO category 2 institutes and centres, as well as the effectiveness of their network, a revised Integrated Comprehensive Strategy for institutes and centres under the Auspices of UNESCO, as contained in document 37 C/18, Part I, and its annex, was approved by the 37th Session of the General Conference (37 C/Resolution 93). This strategy, among other elements, provides guidelines for the renewal assessment procedures of category 2 institutes and centres.

These guidelines provide that an agreement for the establishment of an institute or centre as a category 2 institute or centre is typically concluded for a definite time period, not exceeding six years. The agreement may be renewed by the Director-General, with the approval of the Executive Board, in the light of an evaluation of the activities of the institute/centre and of its contribution to the strategic programme objectives of the Organization and the aforementioned Integrated Comprehensive Strategy for category 2 institutes and centres.

In its 35 C/Resolution 58, the 35th session of the General Conference approved the establishment, in the Republic of Bulgaria, of the Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe (hereafter, ‘the Centre’). According to the 2010 Agreement between UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria regarding the establishment of

7 | Page

the Centre (the ‘Agreement’, Article 6), its objectives are to: (a) promote UNESCO’s 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (‘ICH’) and contribute to its implementation in the South-Eastern European sub-region; (b) increase the participation of communities, groups and individuals in safeguarding ICH in South-Eastern European countries; (c) enhance the capacity of the South-Eastern European Member States of UNESCO in safeguarding ICH; (d) coordinate, exchange and disseminate information regarding the safeguarding of ICH in the sub-region; (e) foster regional and international cooperation for the safeguarding of ICH.

In order to achieve the above objectives, the specific functions of the Centre are to: a) instigate and coordinate research into practices of safeguarding ICH elements present in South- Eastern European countries, as referred to in Articles 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the 2003 Convention; b) organize training courses on the following subjects:

• the 2003 Convention and its Operational Directives;

• different examples of policies including legal, administrative, technical and financial measures that foster the safeguarding of ICH;

• an introduction to UNESCO publications on the identification and documentation of ICH and their application in fieldwork;

• safeguarding ICH through formal and non-formal education; c) enhance international, regional and sub-regional cooperation through networking with institutions active in the domain of ICH, notably those established under the auspices of UNESCO (category 2), in order to coordinate activities, exchange information and knowledge concerning the safeguarding of ICH and promote good practices.

Subsequent to the approval of the General Conference, an Agreement concerning the establishment of the Centre (hereafter, ‘the Agreement’) was signed between the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria and UNESCO on 25 October 2010. The Agreement is fixed for a period of six years as from its entry into force on 13 May 2011.

Objectives of the evaluation

The main objectives of this evaluation are to assess the Centre’s performance with respect to its

8 | Page

objectives and functions, as specified in the Agreement between UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria, and its contribution to UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes. The findings of the evaluation will serve as the basis for the Sector Review Committee’s recommendation to the Director-General as to whether or not the Agreement should be renewed.

Scope of the evaluation

According to document 37 C/18, Part I, and its annex, established by the 37th Session of the General Conference, category 2 centres such as the Centre can be renewed according to specific guidelines. After a maximum of six years, the Director-General, with the approval of the Executive Board, can renew the centre based on the results of an evaluation of its activities and of its contribution to the strategic programme objectives of the Organization and the Integrated Comprehensive Strategy for category 2 institutes and centres. This evaluation of the Centre, with reference to the above-mentioned documents, has taken into account the following three aspects:

(1) Conformity to the UNESCO Strategy

This comprises: the relevance of the Centre’s programmes and activities to achieving UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes, as defined in the Organization’s Medium-Term Strategy (C/4), and to attaining programme results at the level of the Main Lines of Action (‘MLA’), as defined in the Organization’s Approved Programme and Budget (C/5); the quality of coordination and interaction with UNESCO, both at Headquarters and in the field, with regard to the planning and implementation of programmes; the conformity with the integrated comprehensive strategy for category 2 institutes and centres, as approved in 37 C/Resolution 93, as well as the relationships with other thematically-related category 2 institutes or centres, with regard to the planning and implementation of programmes.

(2) Structure and efficiency of the Centre

This comprises: the nature and quality of organizational arrangements, including management, governance and accountability mechanisms; the human and financial resource base and the quality of mechanisms and capacities, as well as context-specific opportunities and risks for ensuring sustainable institutional capacity and viability; the process of mobilizing extrabudgetary resources 9 | Page

and to what extent such extrabudgetary funding is aligned with the strategic programme objectives of UNESCO.

(3) Effectiveness of the Centre’s Missions

This comprises: the effectiveness of the Centre’s programmes and activities for achieving its objectives, as defined in the Agreement; whether the activities effectively pursued by the Centre are in conformity with its functions, as specified in the Agreement signed by UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria; the quality of relations with various stakeholders.

2. METHODOLOGY

The methodology used in the evaluation of the Centre includes:

(1) A desk study of relevant documents, both those provided by the Centre and the UNESCO Secretariat and those gathered from other sources, including the webpages of UNESCO and the Centre;

A desk study was carried out of all the background documents provided by UNESCO and the Centre as well as those gathered from other sources, including the webpages of UNESCO and the Centre (the list of such documents is provided as Annex 5).

(2) A visit to the Centre, including interviews with the Centre’s management and staff;

A mission to Bulgaria was undertaken in order to conduct interviews with the relevant authorities and central Government of the Republic of Bulgaria, and with the staff and managers of the Centre (the travel plan and agenda/schedule of the mission are provided as Annex 3). Participant observations were also conducted in various locations and contexts in Bulgaria.

(3) Interviews (telephone, online and/or via e-mail) with the Centre’s stakeholders, collaborators and beneficiaries as well as the UNESCO staff concerned;

Interviews (face-to-face, by telephone, email, and Skype) were conducted with the Centre’s stakeholders and beneficiaries as well as with the UNESCO staff concerned (the list of interviewees is provided as Annex 1). The interviews were semi-structured, with necessary modifications for stakeholders in different capacities (the list of interview questions is provided as Annex 2).

2.1 Evaluation criteria

In order to meet the purpose of this evaluation, the following parameters were considered:

10 | Page

a) Whether the activities effectively pursued by the Centre are in conformity with its functions, as specified in the Agreement; b) The relevance of the Centre’s programmes and activities to achieving UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes, as defined in the Organization’s Medium-Term Strategy (C/4), and to attaining programme results at the MLA level, as defined in the Organization’s Approved Programme and Budget (C/5); c) The effectiveness of the Centre’s programmes and activities to achieving its stated objectives, as defined in the Agreement; d) The quality of coordination and interaction with UNESCO, both at Headquarters and in the field, with regard to the planning and implementation of programmes, as well as with other thematically- related category 2 institutes or centres; e) The quality of relations with the Centre’s Member States, including its focal points, government agencies and UNESCO National Commissions, and with public or private partners and donors; f) The nature and quality of organizational arrangements, including management, governance and accountability mechanisms; g) The human and financial resource base and the quality of mechanisms and capacities, as well as context-specific opportunities and risks for ensuring sustainable institutional capacity and viability; h) The process of mobilizing extrabudgetary resources and to what extent such extrabudgetary funding is aligned with the strategic programme objectives of UNESCO.

11 | Page

3. FINDINGS

3.1 Overview

The interviewees agreed that, since its establishment, the Centre has made significant progress in carrying out its missions.

Most interviewees mentioned the frequent change of directorship as one of the major weaknesses of the Centre, suggesting that this had led to a lack of long-term planning.

Concerning the lack of ICH experts among the personnel of the Centre: for future programmes and activities that need to be more content-based, the Centre needs to hire ICH specialists as full-time staff. If this is not feasible in the near future, a systematic staff training programme could be helpful. As the staff of the Centre seemed highly professional, interested in ICH safeguarding and dedicated to their work, staff training in the field of ICH would improve the Centre’s capacity and expertise in carrying out its mission in their region. One of the three entities participating in the Centre (the Academy) could provide human and other kinds of resources to this end.

According to the Agreement, the Centre requires a minimum of six administrative staff members: one Executive Director, one accountant and a minimum of four office staff members (Article 11. 2.c). The Centre currently has the total of six full-time staff (Annex 4 of this report).

Also according to the Agreement, the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria undertakes to provide at least the equivalent of 200,000 euros annually. So far, this sum of money has been properly provided. However, the Centre has been unable to spend the total budget, resulting in an excess of funds from previous calendar years, which is now almost equivalent to the annual allocation from the state budget. This is partly due to the fact that the Centre only has six staff members and its operations have been focused only on networking and organizing events, while it could spend more on short- and long-term training programmes, for instance.

3.2 Structure and efficiency of the Centre

The Centre was established in collaboration with three entities: the Ministry of Culture of the Republic of Bulgaria, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Bulgaria and the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. Representatives of these three entities are members of the General Assembly (the Agreement, Article 7.1) Most of the stakeholders interviewed express no particular opinion on

12 | Page

the appropriateness of such structure or its efficacy for carrying out the Centre’s missions. They simply accepted it as a given fact. Moreover, the stakeholders outside Bulgaria in particular considered it as something that resulted from particular circumstances in Bulgaria. However, some of the stakeholders interviewed in Bulgaria intimated that there is a connection between this structure and the frequent change of directorship. Some interviewees from the Academy of Sciences argued that, given their expertise in the field of ICH, they should have been more involved in the Centre’s activities.

The staff of the Centre are highly motivated and seem satisfied with their jobs. They are proud of their institution with its UNESCO affiliation, which garners great prestige in Bulgaria. The annual wage for the staff is regarded as relatively high, which also significantly contributes to their high level of job satisfaction. The disparity between the workloads of the staff was pointed out as a potentially problematic aspect.

3.3 Effectiveness of the Centre’s missions

Most of the stakeholders interviewed as part of this evaluation expressed their satisfaction over the way the Centre had been communicating with relevant stakeholders, including the UNESCO Headquarters in Paris and the Regional Bureau in Venice and how it had followed the recommendations provided to them. This concerns, in particular, the organization of different training workshops that the Centre has supported since 2015, as its contribution to UNESCO’s global capacity-building strategy for the implementation of the 2003 Convention and annual meetings of ICH experts in South-East Europe. The Centre supported such training workshops in Albania, Croatia, Montenegro, Romania, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. Based on its active collaboration with UNESCO, it also hosted a review meeting of the global capacity-building strategy for safeguarding ICH in Europe and Central Asia in 2014, in Sofia.

It is well recognized that the Centre is the only centre of such nature in the region. Its activities are appreciated not only by the Member States but also by the UNESCO Headquarters and the Regional Bureau. All of the stakeholders interviewed as part of this evaluation greatly valued the location of the Centre, which stands at the crossroads of diverse cultures.

3.4 Relationship with UNESCO

The interviewees from the UNESCO Headquarters and the Regional Bureau were satisfied, at the

13 | Page

operational level, with the way the Centre had been communicating and collaborating with them. They considered that the communications had been regular and useful. The Centre had often relied on the opinions of UNESCO when it came to capacity-building activities implemented by the Centre in different countries of the sub-region. Moreover, the Centre had supported regional cooperation by helping to sustain annual meetings of the Regional Network of Experts on ICH of South-East Europe, coordinated by UNESCO. However, the interviewees noted that the frequent change of Executive Director (currently covered ad interim) hindered the normal functioning of the Centre. They also highlighted a number of aspects that the Centre could further improve on in its work, which are the basis of some of the recommendations below.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 General recommendation on whether the renewal of the Centre’s status as a category 2 institute is warranted and would conform to the Integrated Comprehensive Strategy

The findings of this evaluation provided evidence that the Centre has been carrying out its missions in accordance with the Agreement with UNESCO. This evaluation therefore recommends that the Agreement between UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria be renewed. All the stakeholders interviewed as part of this evaluation took a positive view of the Centre’s achievements. The Centre is also ready to get more involved in long-term training for ICH safeguarding and to further collaborate with its Member States and other ICH-related organizations through related programmes and activities. There are, however, a number of aspects where the Centre’s work could be improved. These are presented below:

4.2 Recommendations to the Centre for improving the effectiveness of its operations

(1) Relationship with Member States

The Centre currently has fifteen Member States. A total of six Member States (represented by ICH- related persons in various capacities, whose names and titles are listed in the Member States section of Annex 1) provided detailed feedback on their experience with the Centre, and their responses were quite positive. They appreciated the important, unique role that the Centre plays in the region, and benefit from the Centre’s activities and programmes. However, some responses revealed that some of the interviewees did not fully understand the role, objectives and functions of the Centre. For instance, 14 | Page

one of the respondents hoped that the Centre would provide funding for ICH-related activities and research exclusively in their own State. Another respondent, an academic in the field of ICH, expressed his hope that his own academic research could be funded by the Centre. Yet another ICH specialist in one of the Member States said that the Centre should reach out to practitioners and experts directly, i.e. not necessarily through each state government. It appears that the Centre needs to make further efforts to render its objectives and functions more visible and better understood among current and potential Member States, while continuing to identify the most ideal and efficient methods of carrying out its mission.

As the number of Member States has been increasing since the establishment of the Centre, it has been observed that States have had different expectations in terms of their participation in the programmes and activities it organizes. This does however seems to be inevitable since States have different circumstances and capacities to implement the 2003 Convention at the national level, ranging from the availability of a specific agency/body in charge of implementing the Convention and different understandings of the Convention to language barriers and financial constraints. The Centre therefore needs to develop more customized approaches to its Member States facing specific challenges.

(2) Governance issues within the Centre

Almost all of the interviewees pointed to the frequent changes of Executive Director since the establishment of the Centre as one of the most problematic issues. In fact, the Executive Director has changed at least five times since the establishment of the Centre, and the current Executive Director was appointed ad interim. Some of the interviewees stated that this is due to the particular structure of the Centre, namely the collaboration among three different entities, as mentioned in Article 7.4 of the Agreement (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Culture and the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences). The delicate relationship among the three entities may have hindered important decisions being made, including those concerning the establishment of simple, clear procedures for appointing the Executive Director and ensuring that his or her responsibilities can be fulfilled in a sustained manner. Moreover, the situation seems to have led to a heavy decision-making process, with the adoption of multiple new rules and procedures above and beyond the guidelines initially adopted, ultimately leading to different interpretations. Even if the structure remains the same in the future, the decision-making process needs to be streamlined for matters of critical importance. This would enable the Centre to advance with mid- and long-term decisions more effectively. It is also recommended that the new Agreement list the duties of the Executive Director, such as directing the work of the 15 | Page

Centre, proposing mid- and long-term programmes, as well as the responsibility to prepare the documents for the General Assembly.

Another issue that came up during the evaluation was the timing of the General Assembly sessions. To present the sessions have been held in March-April of every calendar year, which also meant that the activities implemented at the beginning of the year were officially approved by the General Assembly after they had actually been completed. It is therefore recommended that the Centre plan the sessions of the General Assembly in the third or fourth quarter of the preceding calendar year, while sharing agenda and other working documents according to a precise timeframe that should be included in the agreement, as already occurred with other category 2 centres in the field of ICH.

(3) A mid-term programme

As the Centre has positioned itself as an important sub-regional actor in promoting the implementation of the 2003 Convention in South-East Europe by supporting capacity building, the next stage of its development needs to be more focused on producing substantial and concrete outcomes. If the Centre’s programmes and activities have sought to be as inclusive as possible, the Centre might find it useful to focus its efforts instead on Member States that have expressed a greater interest and have the capacities to cooperate with it. In addition, rather than trying to cover issues and topics related to ICH safeguarding in general on a short-term basis in the framework of annual work plans, it would be useful to identify more specific aspects of ICH safeguarding that require attention in the sub-region and to concentrate efforts on them from a mid- to longer term perspective. The Centre therefore needs a mid-term programme, which would go beyond annual work plans and guide its work over multiple years, preferably aligned with the quadrennial or mid-term strategies of UNESCO.

(4) ICH safeguarding and capacity building

The programmes and activities initiated and/or organized by the Centre have been in line with the 2003 Convention, and have certainly been making a positive contribution to safeguarding ICH and achieving more active communication in the sub-region. Those that took place during the first six years mostly focussed on networking and organizing ICH-related resources in the region. For the future, it will be necessary to develop the Centre’s staff knowledge and capacities in ICH, as well as in terms of results-based management. This could help better integrate the principles of the Convention and ICH safeguarding, and ensure results-based management in the planning and implementation of activities.

16 | Page

The Centre’s role in delivering training has become one of its main achievements; this has increasingly been the case over the last couple of years. While implementing training activities, the Centre called upon UNESCO-accredited facilitators and capacity-building curricula developed by UNESCO. The Centre also contributed to developing, sustaining and enlarging the network of UNESCO-accredited facilitators in the region.

In order to sustain future training interventions, it would be advisable for them to benefit from a more ‘in-depth approach’ by focusing on fewer beneficiary countries and developing full-fledged projects rather than stand-alone activities. While it is understandable that the Centre attempts to support activities in as many countries as possible, its actions could have a greater and more sustainable impact if they were concentrated on full-fledged projects combining a series of training programmes in a logical order (with the use of the needs assessment mechanism, where appropriate). It is also recommended that the Centre benefit from the new and/or revised materials developed by UNESCO for the effective implementation of the 2003 Convention.

As far as the Centre’s role in research is concerned, it does not seem to have produced any visible research output since its establishment. In that sense, it would be advisable for the Centre to either remove research from its functions in the Agreement or to begin to actually enact this aspect of its mandate. It also needs to decide whether to directly engage in ICH research, or just to “instigate and coordinate” (the Agreement, Article 6.2.a). However, even the latter task seems neither well defined nor to have been implemented so far. Depending on this choice, the Centre might need to consider whether to include ICH researchers among its staff.

4.3 Recommendations to UNESCO for improving the effectiveness of coordination and interaction with the Centre

The staff of the Centre and other stakeholders interviewed expressed their overall satisfaction with the way UNESCO (both the Headquarters and the Regional Bureau in Venice) had been working with the Centre. They also mentioned that having UNESCO in its title helped them to carry out their mission more effectively and efficiently. UNESCO seems to have supported the Centre in many ways, by providing advice, cooperation opportunities, recommendations on facilitators, content for training programmes, etc.

4.4 Specific recommendations for possible amendments to the Agreement

As a general recommendation, the evaluation advises that the new Agreement clarify the duties of the

17 | Page

Executive Director, and that it introduce mechanisms to stabilize the governance of the Centre, to avoid the frequent turnover experienced in the past. The evaluation recommends that the new Agreement consider the following, in particular:

• Keeping Article 6.2. (a) as it currently stands, should the Centre wish to continue working in the field of research, subject to a review of the identifiable research outputs and/or outcomes, to be assessed at the next renewal process in six years’ time;

• Introducing an additional line in Article 6.2 (b), which would allow the Centre to provide training on the new and/or revised training materials developed by UNESCO for the effective implementation of the 2003 Convention, to be in line with the agreements of other category 2 centres;

• Introducing a clearer identification of the duties of the Executive Director in Article 9.2, in order to be in line with those of other category 2 centres and to encourage a more sustained and consistent leadership of the Centre.

18 | Page

ANNEXES

Annex 1- List of Interviewees

List of Interviewees

Sofia category 2 centre Name Position Contact

Mr Daniel Kalchev Executive Director ad interim director@unesco-centerbg.org, [email protected]

Ms Chayana Bozhkova Expert in international relations ch.bozhkova@unesco- centerbg.org

Expert on Ms Iliyana Rousseva i.rousseva@unesco- coordination and communication centerbg.org

National counterparts Name Position Contact Secretary General of the Bulgarian Ms Maria Donska [email protected] National Commission for UNESCO Ms Maya Dobreva Bulgarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs [email protected] Mr Vladimir Milanov Bulgarian Ministry of Foreign Affairs [email protected] Head of the Regional Activities Assoc. Prof. Dr. Department, Ministry of Culture of [email protected] Ventsislav Velev Bulgaria Senior advisor in the Federal Ministry of Culture and Sports of Ms Berisa Mehovic [email protected] Bosnia and Herzegovina, member of the Board Senior curator of Museum Kozaram in Prijedor, representative of the Ms Maria Radaković [email protected] Republic of Srbska within Bosnia and Herzegovina Senior Expert, Directorate for the Protection of Cultural Heritage, Ms Vesna Paskutini- Vesna.Pascuttini- Ministry of Culture representative of Juraga [email protected] Croatia on the Centre’s Executive Board Ethnologist in the Institute of Ms Miroslava Lukic Ethnography, Serbia, member of [email protected] Krstanovic the Centre’s Executive Board Former Director of Albania’s Ms Zhulietta Harasani Ministry of Culture and Chairperson [email protected], of Sofia centre General Assembly Ethnomusicologist, Researcher at Mrs Velika Stojkova the Institute for Folklore "Marko [email protected] Serafimovska Cepenkov" – Skopje, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Department of International Ms Catalina Pirvu [email protected] Relations and European Affairs,

19 | Page

Romanian Ministry of Culture Director, Head of Modern Cultural [email protected]; Ms Stavroula Fotopoulou Assets and Intangible Cultural [email protected] Heritage Directorate, Greece [email protected], President of Turkish National Mr Mehmed Öcal Oğuz [email protected], Commission for UNESCO [email protected].

Facilitators of the UNESCO capacity building programme Name Position Contact Facilitator, former staff member of Mr Rieks Smeets UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural [email protected] Heritage Section Facilitator, former staff member of UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage Section and former [email protected] Mr Frank Proschan UNESCO Director-General m representative to the Sofia Centre General Assembly Mr Nikolai Vukov Facilitator [email protected] Mr Sasa Sreckovic Facilitator [email protected] chiara_bortolotto@hotmail. Ms Chiara Bortolotto Facilitator com

UNESCO Name Position Contact Head of Culture Unit at the Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Ms Veronique Dauge Europe (Venice, Italy), UNESCO [email protected] Director-General representative to the Sofia Centre General Assembly Chief of the Intangible Cultural Mr Tim Curtis [email protected] Heritage Section, UNESCO Regional Officer for Eastern Europe, in charge of Sofia category 2 centre, Mr Rasul Samadov Capacity Building and Heritage [email protected] Policy Unit, Intangible Cultural Heritage Section, UNESCO

List of Interviewees that answered to the online survey

Name Role Dr. Antigoni Polyniki Officer, Cyprus National Commission for UNESCO Gor Yedigaryan Armenian National Commission for UNESCO Ms Velika Stojkova Serafimovska Researcher at Institute for Folklore “Marko Cepenkov”, Skopje, Macedonia Vesna Pascuttini-Juraga Senior Expert Advisor-Conservator, Directorate for the Protection of Cultural Heritage, Conservation Department in Varazdin City, Croatia Dr Varvara Buzila President of the National ICH Commission of the Republic of Moldova

20 | Page

Annex 2 – Questionnaires

- In what capacity have you worked with the RC (Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe under the auspices of UNESCO)?

- For how long have you (and/or your institution) been working with the RC?

- Do you consider RC has been fulfilling its mission in accordance with the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage? What are the grounds for your judgement regarding this?

- Do you think the RC has been carrying out its tasks effectively and efficiently? Can you take an example of such cases?

- Do you think the cultural and linguistic diversity in South-Eastern Europe are reflected in the activities of the RC properly? Please provide reasons/bases for your opinion.

- Do you think the RC has been communicating with its relevant stakeholders in the Region properly?

- What are the three strengths of the RC?

- What are the three weaknesses of the RC?

- Is there a way to further encourage the Members States of the RC to participate in the activities initiated/supported by the Centre?

- What are the most important tasks that need to be carried out by the Centre?

- Are there any region-specific topics/issues that need to be incorporated in the activities of the RC?

- Could you propose programs/activities that are ideal for the RC to carry out in the future?

- Additional Comments

21 | Page

Annex 3 – Mission Agenda

DATE TIME PLACE NAME

SUNDAY LUFTHANSA 08 JAN 21:55 ARRIVAL Sofia airport, From Munich 2017 Term 2

REGIONAL CENTRE RC STAFF meetings MONDAY 11:30 - 13:00 MEETING THE RC STAFF 09 JAN Regional Centre 2017

======LUNCH BREAK “ 13:00 - 14:30 ======15:30 heading ======Meeting with the members of the from RC toward == Executive Board of the Regional the Bulgarian MEETING Centre Academy of 14:30 - 15:30 - Mr Ventzislav Velev Science - Ms Irena Ilieva Ms Iliyana - Mr Stoyan Denchev Rousseva Ms Diana Tokadjieva Meeting with Prof. Julian Revalski, D.Sc. - President of the Bulgarian MEETING Academy of Science 16:00 - 16:30 Ms Irena Ilieva – representative of the Bulgarian Academy of Science in the Executive board of the Regional Centre – Sofia ======MEETING - Ms Yoanna Spasova – BAS 16:30 - 17:30 former representative in the EB and GA 2013 - 2015.

======HOTEL

======DINNER == 19:00

TUESDAY Visit to the Ministry of Culture 10 JAN 10:00 - 10:30 2017 22 | Page

- The Minister of Culture Mr Vezhdi Rashydov 10:30 - 11:00 MEETING - Head of section, regional activities, Mr Ventzislav Velev 11:00 - 11:30 MEETING - Ms Deyana Danailova – Head of Department of International and Regional 11:30 - 12:00 MEETING Activities at the Ministry of Culture. Former Chairperson of the executive board of the RC. ======

======Interviews with experts in the field of ICH:

======- Mr Nikolai Vukov = = - Ms Iglika Mishkova 12:00 - 12:30 LUNCH ======Interviews with RC staff not present at the office meeting: Ms Chayana Bojkova – Expert – last 4 years – now temporarily on maternity leave

13:00 - 13:45 MEETING Mr Toni Dimov – RC legal advisor

14:00 - 14:45 MEETING Mr Hristo Angelichin - Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs / former Acting Director of the 16:00 - 16:30 MEETING ICH Regional Center, Sofia

======18:30 Leaving the - RC - 16:30 - 17:15 MEETING - - - 17:15 - 18:00 MEETING ======

======19:00 - 21:00 DINNER

23 | Page

WEDNESDAY 10:00 - 11:15 MEETING Meeting in the IEFSEM – 11 JAN Ethnography Museum – one of 2017 our partners. Mr Petko Hristov – director of the museum and experts.

Sofia Municipality - Mr Todor 11:30 - 12:00 MEETING Chobanov – Deputy Mayor of Sofia city. ======Mr Todor Chobanov ======Interviews with some of the long- 12:00 - 13:30 LUNCH time partners of the RC: ======- Mr Ciryl Arnautski – == = president of foundation “Sozopol” - NGO - Mr Emil Pavlov - president of CIOFF, Bulgaria. CIOFF is 14:00 - 14:45 MEETING an accredited NGO - Ms Silvana Tzokova – Head of the section “Cooperation and public affairs” - Diplomatic Institute of the 15:00 - 15:45 MEETING Ministry of Foreign Affairs MFA.

16:00 - 17:00 MEETING - “The Bistrica grannies” - Vocal Ensemble for traditional Bulgarian folklore 18:00 heading – one of the four Bulgarian from the RC to elements on the Bistrica Representative List of the 17:00 - 18:00 Regional Centre - free Intangible Cultural Heritage activities of Humanity. ======18:30 - 19:30 CULTURE

Visiting a rehearsal of the Vocal Ensemble “The Bistrica grannies” in ======Bistrica – 30-min drive from the RC.

======DINNER 20:00

THURSDAY Ministry of Foreign Affairs: 12 JAN 2017

24 | Page

- The Minister of Foreign 11:00 - 11:30 MEETING Affairs, Republic of Bulgaria, Mr Daniel Mitov - - The Secretary General of the National Commission 11:30 - 12:00 MEETING UNESCO for Bulgaria - Ms Maria Donska – chairperson of the Executive Board of the RC

======12:00 - 12:30 MEETING 12:55 ARR ======VESNA Ms Vesna Pascuttini – Juraga – PASCUTINI ======Senior expert advisor – 14:30 – in RC = LUNCH Directorate for the protection of 13:00 - 14:00 ======cultural heritage, Ministry of ======MEETING Culture, Republic of Hrvatska = 14:30 - 15:30 Skype conversations: SKYPE - Mr Sasa Sreckovic - CONVERSATIONS curator of the Ethnographic 16:00 - 17:00 museum of Belgrade – Republic of Serbia 17:00 - 18:00 - Slovenia EthnographicMuseum - Cyprus – Officer of the National commission of UNESCO – Ms Antigony Poliniki

======“Bulgaria hall”

======19:00 - 20:30

======DINNER/Concert ======19:00 - 21:00

FRIDAY 10:30 - 12:00 MEETING SULSIT – State University of 13 JAN Library Studies and Information 2017 Technologies

======LUNCH 14:30 – heading 12:00 - 13:30 ======from RC to New

25 | Page

======Bulgarian = University MEETING NBU – New Bulgarian University – Department of Anthropology 14:30 – heading 15:00 - 16:30 from NBU to the town of Pernik CULTURE CULTURE Visit of “Surva”, Traditional Festival in the town of Pernik – 16:30 - 25 km from Sofia. ======

======DINNER ======

SATURDAY 12:55 DEPARTURE SOF - MUNICH 14 JAN 2017

RC Accountants: Mr Assen Seniov – former RC accountant since the beginning of the RC / 2012 - October 2016. Ms Stanimira Davidova – current RC accountant, since October 2016.

26 | Page

Annex 4 – Organization Chart

General Assembly

Executive Board

Executive Director

Legal Advisor

Financial Expert

Expert on Expert on Expert on Expert on Expert on Programs Popularization of Coordination of International Coordination and and Projects the RC Network Trainings and Relations Communication Activities Seminars

Technical Assistant

Full-time and Part-time staff of the Centre (part-time in shades)

Name Position Daniel Kalchev Executive Director ad interim Iliyana Rousseva Expert on Coordination and Communication Mirena Staneva Expert on Programs and Projects Nadejda Ilieva Expert on Popularization of the RC Network Activities Diana Tokadzhieva Technical Assistant Irena Todorova Expert on Coordination of Trainings and Seminars Tony Dimov Legal Adviser Stanimira Davidova Financial Expert Chayana Bozhkova Expert on International Relations (on maternity leave)

27 | Page

List of General Assembly Members

Representing Country Name Occupation Ms Eranda BEDALLI In 2015 and 2016, Expert on intangible heritage, Ms Zhulietta General Directorate for Strategic 1 ALBANIA Harasani Planning for Cultural Heritage Ministry In 2017, Ms Arta of Culture of Albania Dollani Ms Deputy Head of the Department of the

2 Yeranuhi Cultural Heritage and Folk Crafts, ARMENIA MARGARYAN Ministry of Culture of Armenia Senior Advisor in the Federal Ministry of Ms Berisa Culture and Sports of Bosnia & BOSNIA MEHOVIC 3 Herzegovina AND HERZEGOVINA Ms Maria Senior Curator at the Museum of RADAKOVIC Kozara General Secretary of the Bulgarian National Commission for UNESCO; Ms Maria DONSKA Chairperson of the Executive Board of the Regional Centre Mr Ventzislav Representative of the Ministry of VELEV Culture Mr Vladimir Representative of the Ministry of 4 BULGARIA MILANOV Foreign Affairs Representative of the Bulgarian Ms Irena Ilieva Academy of Science Representative of the International Mr Stoyan Association of National Folklore DENCHEV Federations and the Association of Cultural Centres Senior Expert, Advisor-Conservator, Ms Vesna Directorate for the Protection of Cultural

CROATIA PASCUTTINI- Heritage, Conservation Department in 5 JURAGA Varaždin City, Ministry of Culture of Croatia Ms Antigoni Officer, National Commission for 6 CYPRUS POLYNIKI UNESCO, Cyprus Ms Chief specialist of Cultural Heritage Marina Inventory and Documentation Unit TAKTAKISHVILI 7 GEORGIA Mr Chief specialist of Cultural Heritage Konstantine Inventory and Documentation Unit NATSVLISHVILI THE FORMER Ms YUGOSLAV Ethnomusicologist Researcher at 8 Velika STOJKOVA- REPUBLIC OF Institute for Folklore "Marko Cepenkov” SERAFIMOVSKA MACADONIA

28 | Page

Director of Modern Cultural Assets and Ms Stavroula Intangible Cultural Heritage, Hellenic 9 GREECE FOTOPOULOU Ministry of Culture, Education and Religious Affairs . REPUBLIC OF President of the National ICH 10 Ms Varvara BUZILA MOLDOVA Commission of the Republic of Moldova 11 MONTENEGRO Ms Milica Nikolic Ministry of Culture of Montenegro Folklorist, Director of Institute of 12 ROMANIA Ms Sabina ISPAS Ethnography and Folklore "C. Brailoiu" Senior Scientific Associate of the Institute of Ethnography SASA, Ms Miroslava coordinator of joint projects, Institute 13 SERBIA LUKIC- Ethnography SASA and Institute of KRSTANOVIC Ethnology and Folklore with Ethnographic Museum BAS Ms Bojana Director of Slovene Ethnographic 14 SLOVENIA ROGELJ-ŠKAFAR Museum President of the National Commission 15 TURKEY Mr Öcal OĞUZ for UNESCO, Turkey

List of Executive Board

Name Occupation General Secretary of the Bulgarian National Commission for Ms Maria UNESCO; Chairperson of the Executive Board of the Regional DONSKA Centre Mr Ventzislav Representative of the Ministry of Culture VELEV Mr Representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Vladimir MILANOV Ms Irena Ilieva Representative of the Bulgarian Academy of Science Mr Stoyan Representative of the International Association of National Folklore DENCHEV Federations and the Association of Cultural Centres

Representatives from the General Assembly in the Executive Board Name Occupation Ms Vesna Senior Expert Advisor-Curator, Directorate for the Protection of PASCUTTINI- Cultural Heritage, Conservation Department in Varaždin City, JURAGA Ministry of Culture of Croatia Ms Representative of the Ministry of Culture Berisa MEHOVIC Mr Senior Advisor in the Federal Ministry of Culture and Sports of Vladimir MILANOV Bosnia & Herzegovina Ms Senior Curator at the Museum of Kozara, Republika Srpska, Bosnia Maria RADAKOVIC and Herzegovina

List of the members of the Secretariat

29 | Page

Name Position Mr Daniel Kalchev Executive Director, ad interim Expert on Ms Mirena Staneva Programmes and Projects Ms Irena Todorova Expert on Coordination of Trainings and Seminars Expert on Popularization of the Ms Nadezhda Ilieva RC Network Activities Ms Chayana Bozhkova Expert International Relations Ms Iliyana Rousseva Expert on Coordination and Communication Ms Diana Tokadzhieva Technical Assistant

30 | Page

Annex 5 – List of Documents Provided Documents provided by the SOFIA Centre - Minutes, decisions of the meetings of the Executive Board and the General Assembly - Annual Reports (2011–2015) - Financial Reports (2011–2015) - Activity Reports (2011–2016) - Annual Work Plan (2012–2016) - Annual Budget (2012–2016) - Long-Term Programme for the Work of the Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe under the auspices of UNESCO - What about the Statutes, rules of procedures, etc.?

Annex 6 – General Assembly of Sofia Centre and Submission of Working Documents

Date described GA session on UNESCO Session Agenda (Date of the GA) homepage 1. Decision to accept new members of the Centre 2. Adopting the agenda 3. Election of Chairperson of the GA 4. Report by the Executive Board on the Centre’s activities in 2011 5. Decision on amending and supplementing the Centre’s Statute and discussion and adoption of the Centre’s general documents - General Assembly’s rule of procedure - Centre’s long-term programme First session - Centre’s working plan for 2012 20 February (20 February - Centre’s budget for 2012 2012 2012) - Adoption of Centre’s financial, administrative, and staff management-related procedures - Centre’s staff list 6. Changes in the composition of the Centre’s Executive Board 7. Proposals for participation of regional inter- governmental organizations and international organizations in the Centre’s operations 8. Adoption of Centre’s logo 9. Setting a date for the next regular session of the GA 10. Miscellaneous 1. Opening of the session Second session 2. Adoption of new members to the GA (Bosnia and 5 March 2013 (5 March 2013) Herzegovina, Armenia, replacement of the members from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and 31 | Page

Montenegro) 3. Adoption of the Agenda 4. Presenting the updated composition of the Management Board 5. 2012 Activity Report presented by the Chair of the Management Board, including financial statement 6. Debate and adoption of the Centre’s basic documents - 2013 Plan of Activities - 2013 Budget - Changes to the Statutes - Centre’s List of Full-time Positions 7. Election of a new Chair of the GA (or re-election of the current chair) 8. Scheduling the next regular session of the GA 9. Miscellaneous 1. Opening of the GA meeting 2. Election of a new Chair of the GA (confirmation of the current one) 3. Adoption of the agenda 4. Admission of new members to the GA 5. Introduction of the updated line-up of the Executive Board and of the new Executive Director Third session 6. Discussion and adoption of the Centre’s key documents 1 April 2014 (1 April 2014) - Proposals for amendments to the Statutes - Annual activities report for 2013 - Financial statement for 2013 - Work plan for 2014 - Budget for 2014 7. Scheduling the date for the next regular meeting of the GA 8. Any other business Opening of the GA 1. Approval of the agenda 2. Acceptance of new members to the GA 3. Discussion and adoption of the key documents of the Regional Centre Sofia - Amendments to the Statutes - Annual report for 2014 Fourth session - Financial report for 2014 29 June 2015 (10 March 2015) - Work plan for 2015 - Budget for 2015 4. Executive Board: presentation of the current Board and election of new members 5. Election of the Chairperson of the GA 6. Setting the date for the next scheduled meeting of the GA 7. Miscellaneous Opening of the GA 1. Approval of the agenda Fifth session 5 December, 2. Acceptance of new members to the GA (19April 2016) 2016 3. Discussion and adoption of the Centre’s key internal documents - Annual report for 2015

32 | Page

- Financial report for 2015 - Work plan for 2016 - Budget for 2016 4. Proposals for amendments to the Centre’s Statutes 5. Adoption of the Centre’s Internal Regulations, with Annexes 6. Election of the composition of the Centre’s bodies 7. Election of a Chairperson of the GA 8. Setting the date for the next regular meeting of the GA 9. Miscellaneous

33 | Page

Annex 7 – Meetings and Projects The year 2012 - A series of meetings with representatives of Bulgarian educational, scientific and cultural institutions, and the management of universities and non-governmental organizations; - A training seminar on the topic of ‘The Role of the Youth in Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage: Implementing the 2003 UNESCO Convention in the South-East European Countries’; - Financial support for organizing and holding the Eight Conferences of the South- Eastern European Ministers of Culture, devoted to ICH; - The official premiere of the film ‘Dervishes – Mystic of the East’.

The year 2013 - ‘BALKAN CUISINE’ Culinary Demonstration; - The Seventh Annual Regional Meeting of ICH Experts in South- Eastern Europe; - The seminar covered the following three topics; 1) The implementation of the UNESCO 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in the countries of the region, 2) New strategies for sustainable development, tourism and partnerships, 3) Training and capacity building: a needs assessment; - Training Seminar for National Experts in South-Western Bulgaria on: ‘The implementation of the 2003 UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible cultural Heritage at the National Level’; - First Global Meeting of category 2 centres; - Support for and participation in the International Ethnological Films Festival; - Participation of the Bistritsa Grannies in an International Concert Organized by UNESCO; - Participation in the Second Meeting of category 2 centres; - The International Festival of Ethnographic Films in Sofia; - Expert Group of the Project ‘JP-EU/COE Support to the Promotion of Cultural Diversity’; - Meeting with students majoring in Cultural Studies regarding a study of the operation of the regional centre, Classes in Intangible Cultural Heritage, Internship Programme; - Promotional, Publishing and Information Dissemination Activities: 1) Publication of the Album of ‘MASTERPIECES OF THE INTANGIBLE CULTURAL HERITAGE IN SOUTH-EAST EUROPE’; 2) Exhibition of ‘COLOURS FROM THE PAST: ANCIENT EMBROIDERIES FROM THE SOFIA REGION’; 3) Photographic Exhibition of ‘A

34 | Page

GUARD OF TRADITIONS’; 4) Exhibition of Children’s Drawings During the General Assembly.

The year 2014 - Organization and convening of a meeting of the General Assembly of the Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe under the Auspices of UNESCO; - Eighth Annual Expert Meeting on Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe; - Participation in the Second Annual Meeting of Category 2 Centres Active in the Field of Intangible Cultural Heritage; - Review Meeting of the Global Capacity-Building Strategy for Safeguarding Intangible Cultural Heritage in Europe and Central Asia; - Workshop on ‘Strengthening Capacities for Implementing the 2003 Convention on the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage’; - Exhibition and competition ‘Fairyland of Legends, Myths and Tales from My Homeland’; - New official website of the Regional Centre with an interactive calendar as an application; the Centre’s profile in social networks; - Workshop on ‘Local Policies for a Local Heritage’; - Participation in an International Forum of Non-Governmental Organizations in Official Partnership with UNESCO on ‘The Role of Youth in the Safeguarding of Tangible and Intangible Cultural Heritage’; - Informal meeting with the Director of the Forum of Slavic Cultures ; - Internship programme, work with graduate and doctoral students.

The year 2015 - Organization and convening of the General Assembly meeting of the Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe under the auspices of UNESCO; - A workshop on ‘Intellectual Property, Intangible Cultural Heritage and Traditional Medicine in the Context of the Policies of the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in the Countries of South-Eastern Europe’; - International Ethnographic Film Festival; - Ninth annual meeting of the South East European Experts Network on Intangible Cultural Heritage on ‘Intangible cultural heritage and the diversity of cultural expressions: synergies and coordination between UNESCO 2003 and 2005 Conventions’;

35 | Page

- Third Annual Coordination Meeting of Category 2 Centres for Intangible Cultural Heritage; - Workshop on ‘Implementation of the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage at the National Level’; - Conference on ‘The Folk Dance as an Element of Traditional Culture’ within the framework of the 18th International Folklore Festival; - XI National Festival of Bulgarian Folklore; - Round Table on ‘70 Years UNESCO: Peace through Education, Science and Culture’; - Round Table on ‘Myths, Popular Beliefs, Oral Narratives and Legends in Balkan Literature’; - Round Table on ‘The National Cultures of the Balkans: Parts of a Whole’; - Youth Competition ‘Meet and Share the Living Heritage of Bulgaria’; - International Forum on ‘The Contribution of the UNESCO Member States of South- Eastern Europe to the Dissemination and Implementation of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage’; - Publication of English translation of The Balkan Man by Yordan Velchev; - A survey on ‘The Intangible Cultural Heritage, Intercultural and Regional Relations. UNESCO’s Faces in South-Eastern Europe’; - Expert meeting in Nicosia, Cyprus; - Jubilee edition on the implementation of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage; - Workshop on ‘Implementation of the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage at the National Level’.

Annex 8 – Terms of Reference

Call for proposal for the evaluation of the Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe, in Sofia, Bulgaria, UNESCO Category 2 Centre.

Background Category 2 institutes and centres under the auspices of UNESCO form an important part of UNESCO’s network. As a general rule, they represent an effective partnership model for UNESCO’s programme delivery, significantly contributing to priority areas

36 | Page

in UNESCO’s fields of competence. Category 2 institutes and centres are intended to contribute both to the achievement of UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes, and to the attainment of programme results at the MLA level of the UNESCO programme and budget (C/5). This can be achieved either through individual action, joint action with other category 2 institutes and centres or joint implementation with the Secretariat. Category 2 institutes and centres can also play a considerable role in helping the Organization achieve programme objectives for which sectoral expertise or resources are not sufficient. In order to enhance the operation and effectiveness of individual UNESCO category 2 institutes and centres, as well as the effectiveness of their network, a revised Integrated Comprehensive Strategy for institutes and centres under the Auspices of UNESCO, as contained in document 37 C/18, Part I, and its annex, was approved by the 37th Session of the General Conference (37 C/Resolution 93). This strategy, among other elements, provides guidelines for the renewal assessment procedures of category 2 institutes and centres. These guidelines provide that an agreement for the establishment of an institute or centre as a category 2 institute or centre is typically concluded for a definite time period, not exceeding six years. The agreement may be renewed by the Director- General, with the approval of the Executive Board, in the light of an evaluation of the activities of the institute/centre and of its contribution to the strategic programme objectives of the Organization and the aforementioned Integrated Comprehensive Strategy for category 2 institutes and centres. In its 35 C/Resolution 58, the 35th session of the General Conference approved the establishment, in the Republic of Bulgaria, of the Regional Centre for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage in South-Eastern Europe (hereafter, ‘the Centre’). The objectives of the Centre are to: (a) promote the UNESCO Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (‘ICH’) and contribute to its implementation in the South-Eastern European sub-region; (b) increase the participation of communities, groups and individuals in safeguarding ICH in South-Eastern European countries; (c) enhance the capacity of the South-Eastern European Member States of UNESCO in safeguarding ICH; (d) coordinate, exchange and disseminate information regarding the safeguarding ICH in the sub-region; (e) foster regional and international cooperation for safeguarding ICH. In order to achieve the above objectives, the specific functions of the Centre are to: a) instigate and coordinate research into practices of safeguarding ICH elements present in the South-Eastern European countries, as referred to in Articles 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the 2003 Convention; b) organize training courses on the following subjects: • the 2003 Convention and its Operational Directives; • different examples of policies including legal, administrative, technical and financial measures fostering the safeguarding of ICH;

37 | Page

• introduction to UNESCO publications on the identification and documentation of ICH and their application in fieldwork; • safeguarding ICH through formal and non-formal education; c) enhance international, regional, and sub-regional cooperation through networking with institutions active in the domain of ICH, notably those established under the auspices of UNESCO (category 2), in order to coordinate activities, exchange information and knowledge concerning the safeguarding of ICH, and promote good practices. Subsequent to the approval of the General Conference, an Agreement concerning the establishment of the Centre (hereafter, ‘the Agreement’) was signed between the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria and UNESCO on 25 October 2010. The Agreement is fixed for a period of six years as from its entry into force on 13 May 2011. Purpose The main objectives of this evaluation are to assess the Centre’s performance with respect to its objectives and functions, as specified in the agreement between UNESCO and the host Government, and its contribution to UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes. The findings of the evaluation will serve as the basis for the Sector Review Committee’s recommendation to the Director-General as to whether or not the Agreement should be renewed. The Director-General will then provide the results of these evaluations, including the endorsement or rejection to renew a specific agreement to the Executive Board. The approval of the Executive Board will be required before the Director-General can proceed with the renewal of an agreement between UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria. The results of this evaluation will be shared with the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria and the Centre, and presented to the Executive Board, as specified in the Integrated Comprehensive Strategy. They will also be made available on the website of the Culture Sector. Scope In order to meet the purpose of the evaluation described above, the following parameters shall be considered by the expert(s) responsible for conducting the evaluation and writing a report that is consistent with UNESCO’s reporting mechanisms: a) Whether the activities effectively pursued by the Centre are in conformity with its functions, as also specified in the agreement signed between UNESCO and the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria; b) The relevance of the Centre’s programmes and activities to achieving UNESCO’s strategic programme objectives and sectoral or intersectoral programme priorities and themes, as defined in the Organization’s Medium-Term Strategy (C/4), and to attaining programme results at the Main Lines of Action (‘MLA’) level, as defined in the Organization’s Approved Programme and Budget (C/5);

38 | Page

c) The effectiveness of the Centre’s programmes and activities for achieving its stated objectives, as defined in the Agreement; d) The quality of coordination and interaction with UNESCO, both at Headquarters and in the field, with regard to the planning and implementation of programmes, as well as with other thematically-related category 2 institutes or centres, with regard to the planning and implementation of programmes; e) The quality of relations with the Centre’s Member States, including its focal points, government agencies and UNESCO National Commissions, and with public or private partners and donors; f) The nature and quality of organizational arrangements, including management, governance and accountability mechanisms; g) The human and financial resource base and the quality of mechanisms and capacities, as well as context-specific opportunities and risks for ensuring sustainable institutional capacity and viability; h) The process of mobilizing extrabudgetary resources and to what extent such extrabudgetary funding is aligned with the strategic programme objectives of UNESCO. In addition to the findings on each topic, the expert(s) shall offer four types of recommendations: 1) a general recommendation on whether or not the renewal of the Centre’s status as a category 2 institute is warranted and would conform to the Integrated Comprehensive Strategy; 2) specific recommendations to the Centre for improving the effectiveness of its operations; 3) specific recommendations to UNESCO for improving the effectiveness of its coordination and interaction with the Centre; 4) specific recommendations for possible amendments to the Agreement, in the event that it is to be renewed. Methodology The evaluation of the Centre will include:

o A desk study of relevant documents, provided by the Centre and UNESCO’s Secretariat;

o A visit to the Centre, including interviews with the Centre’s management and staff;

o Interviews (by telephone, online and/or via e-mail) with the Centre’s stakeholders, collaborators, and beneficiaries as well as the UNESCO staff concerned;

o Preparation of the evaluation report. 39 | Page

Roles and responsibilities The evaluation will be conducted by a team comprising one or more independent experts/evaluators. Local travel, materials, secretarial support and office space will be provided by the Centre during the field visit. The evaluator(s) will be responsible for telecommunications and the printing of the documentation. The UNESCO Culture Sector will facilitate and oversee the evaluation process, to the extent possible, by providing any relevant information, and will be responsible for evaluating and approving the final report. Background documents UNESCO shall make the following documents available to the evaluation team in electronic form:

o The Executive Board and General Conference documents concerning the establishment of the Centre;

o The existing Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria and UNESCO concerning the establishment of the Centre;

o The Medium-term Strategy 2008-2013 (34 C/4), Medium-term Strategy 2014- 2021 (37 C/4), Approved programme and budget 2010-2011 (35 C/5), 2012- 2013 (36 C/5), 2014-2015 (37 C/5) and 2016-2017 (38 C/5);

o Relevant correspondence concerning the cooperation between UNESCO and the Centre;

o The Centre shall make the following documents available to the evaluation team in English, in electronic or paper form:

o Annual progress reports; o Financial reports; o List of staff; o List of key publications; o List of donors and project partners; o Minutes, decisions and working documents of the meetings of the General Assembly and Executive Board of the Centre;

o Report of support provided to or received from Member States; o Available audit and evaluation reports; o Account of networking achievements linked with other thematically related category 2 Institutes or centres and UNESCO’s programmes. Draft evaluation report A draft report will present the findings, conclusions and recommendations, with a draft executive summary. The UNESCO Culture Sector, the Government of the Republic of Bulgaria and the Centre itself will have the opportunity to comment and give feedback to the evaluation team. 40 | Page

Final evaluation report The final report (max. 20 pages, excluding annexes) should be structured as follows:

o Executive summary (maximum four pages); o Introduction (background, purpose and scope); o Methodology; o Findings; o Recommendations (as described above); o Annexes (including interview list, data collection instruments, key documents consulted, Terms of Reference). The language of the report shall be English. Evaluation team The evaluation team will consist of one or more independent experts/evaluators. A single proposal/expression of interest must be submitted on behalf of the team, whether it is one or several persons, and a single contract will be executed. Qualifications:

o At least seven years of professional experience in research and/or capacity building in the field of cultural heritage, cultural diversity, intercultural dialogue, cultural policy or culture and development;

o At least seven years of professional experience in policy and programme evaluation in the context of international development;

o Fluency in English (written and spoken); o Knowledge of the role and mandate of UNESCO and its programmes. Schedule The evaluation shall be completed no later than 31 January 2017. The schedule for the evaluation is as follows:

o A desk study of background documents (to be completed prior to the visit to the Centre);

o A mission to visit the Centre; o Writing and submission of the draft evaluation report no later than 15 December 2016;

o Submission of the final evaluation report (before 31 January 2017). The date of the mission to the Centre will be defined by UNESCO in coordination with the Centre and taking into account the Evaluators’ availability. Submission of proposals/expressions of interest. Interested candidates should submit their applications in English, including the 41 | Page

following: 1. The curriculum vitae of expert(s)/evaluator(s) and, if applicable, a company profile; 2. A letter of interest, clearly identifying how the candidate/candidate team meets the required skills and experience; 3. An approach and methodology for the assignment, a work plan and comments on the Terms of Reference, if any (in brief); 4. A total cost (quoted in US dollars), distinguishing the fees for services from the travel expenses, with a breakdown of the cost and number of work hours required for each phase of the schedule. Applications should be submitted no later than 30 October 2016, midnight (Paris time) to the Conventions Common Services unit ([email protected] ). Please note that applications submitted through other channels will not be considered. Selection will be made on the basis of best value for money.

42 | Page