66. Since its inception, the APRM has made significant progress in terms of the number of countries that have acceded to the Mechanism, the rolling-out of the review exercise, the refining of the review process, as well as the level of participation and engagement of stakeholders. Seventeen of the 35 participating countries have completed their reviews, while three Member States are due for peer review at the August 2016 Summit to be held in Nairobi, Kenya, and the January 2017 meeting in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Most of the reviewed countries have taken actions on the basis of recommendations and their respective national programmes of action, while a few from this group are already preparing for their second reviews. implementation monitoring and follow-up mechanisms need to be enhanced; and the capacity of the continental APRM Secretariat needs to be strengthened. 2.4 The Strategic Plan Development Process and the Way Forward 70. Guided by the six-point revitalisation agenda from the Special Summit, and under the leadership of its newly-appointed CEO, the APRM Secretariat developed the Strategic Plan to guide its activities over the next five years. The document also builds on the three-pronged turnaround programme for restoration, reinvigoration and renewal of the APRM outlined by the new CEO. The Strategic Plan also draws its inspiration from the original vision and mission, values and guiding principles of the APRM, while taking into account the new and emerging realities on the Continent including the AU Shared Values, Agenda 2063 and the 2030 SDGs. The Strategic Plan starts with a baseline survey of where the APRM is today, its strengths and weaknesses, and identifies the operational priorities, related outputs and activities, and indicators of success for the next five years (2016–2020). 67. The benefits derived from the APRM cannot be overemphasised. In some countries, its findings have highlighted good practices that are worthy of broader dissemination across the continent, drawn attention to impending crises that need immediate preventive action, and analysed virtually all issues of governance that fall somewhere in between. In the unfortunate situation where crises already anticipated by APRM reviews were left unaddressed and eventually materialised, APRM recommendations have provided a useful framework for immediate resolution and long-term reform. 71. The appointment of a new CEO of the APRM Secretariat in January 2016 signalled a significant turning point in terms of the political commitment of the participating states to the Mechanism and the orientation of its principal organs. The CEO commenced his duties with a series of engagements with APRM stakeholders, including an Expert Group Meeting on Revitalisation of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) under the theme: “Strategising, Planning, and Developing Improved Review Methodologies”, hosted in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, from 29–30 March 2016. This was followed by an APRM staff retreat from 29 April to 1 May where the Secretariat, supported by staff from the AU Commission, deliberated on the APRM Vision as well as main elements of the Draft Strategic Plan for 2016–2020, a draft statute for APRM integration into the African Union, and draft terms of engagement for the APRM Panel of Eminent Persons. 68. At the same time, although the APRM has achieved much since its inception, it has also encountered a number of challenges. To start with, the APRM has never adopted clear strategic plans for its operations; indeed, the present document will be the first one of its kind to guide APRM operations. 69. Furthermore, despite significant progress, the APRM remains largely unknown to the majority of the people of Africa and the rest of the world. For some critics, the APRM has not yielded the much-needed change in governance and improved service delivery to Africa’s citizens. In terms of country participation, too, while the APRM’s “universal” membership ambitions still remain distant, a significant number of participating countries have yet to undergo the initial base review. Likewise, even among the 17 countries that have undergone the full review, the level of compliance with recommendations contained in the National Programmes of Action (NPoAs) leaves a lot to be desired. Finally, there is also need to enhance popular participation and ownership in APRM reviews; the role of APRM national structures needs to be clarified; –12–