5.6 The National Organs identified the “role of the APRM in monitoring of the AU agenda 2063 and the post-2015 sustainable development goals (SDGs)” as one of six areas of strategic priority. The Special Summit particularly emphasised the risk of potential pressure coming from “the UN and other development partners for Africa to adopt and use other monitoring tools that would then run parallel to the APRM”, which the leaders wanted to avoid by pushing for the widespread use of the APRM as a unified monitoring tool for all commitments undertaken by participating states. If this effort succeeds, APRM national and continental organs will need to update their tools and models of operation to ensure they are able to discharge these new responsibilities. That is why the APRM Strategic Plan needs to be a dynamic blueprint for action that also accommodates the ever-changing demands placed on the Mechanism over time. APRM national and continental organs carry the ultimate responsibility to ensure the APRM Strategic Plan is implemented in this fashion. 156. The APRM Country Guidelines encourage participating countries to put in place the following structures to facilitate the effective implementation of the APRM: (i) National APRM Focal Point, who should be a minister or senior official with direct access to the Head of State/Government in the country; (ii) National Governing Council/Commission that is autonomous from the government, representative of all segments of society, responsible to provide strategic policy direction on the implementation of the APRM; (iii) APRM Secretariat that is independent of government and provides technical and administrative support to the NGC and also serves as the bridge between national and continental APRM structures; and (iv) Technical Research Institutions that provide independent and scientific input in the preparation of the country self-assessment reports. 157. While this is the recommended structure under the Guidelines, the practice across member states is far from uniform. The national Focal Points and Secretariats in different countries are located in different ministries or departments; the membership of the NGCs differ across countries; etc. 158. This lack of uniformity is, in itself, not necessarily a shortcoming. However, in order for the APRM Strategic Plan to be implemented effectively, member states will need to establish the necessary national structures in as close a form as recommended in our constituent documents, and with the necessary budgetary autonomy and diversity of membership that would enable these institutions to adequately discharge their vital responsibilities and thereby further enhance the legitimacy, ownership and impact of the APRM. 160. The rest of this Chapter presents the implementation framework for the APRM Strategic Plan 2016–2020, including the Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting framework, the communications plan and the enabling conditions necessary for the Strategic Plan to be a success. 5.8 Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting on Implementation20 161. The M&E Framework for the Strategic Plan serves four main goals: (i) To inform the APRM and its stakeholders on a regular basis on progress in attaining the Strategic Plan outcomes and outputs; (ii) To allow APRM and its stakeholders to evaluate progress and assess the need to revise outputs, targets and indicators as needed; (iii) To allow for evidence-based decision making; and (iv) To evaluate the efficiency of implementation by linking outcomes, outputs and activities to resources used. 5.7 Conclusion 159. The APRM national and continental structures will need to be dynamic and resilient enough to remain relevant as standards and expectations on the APRM evolve. To mention a current example, at its Special Summit in January 2016, the APR Forum –42– 20 To ensure uniformity with AU practices, this section uses the M&E section of the AUC Strategic Plan for 2014–2017 as a template for Monitoring and Evaluation of the APRM Strategic Plan.