Table 3.1: Institutional Analysis Strengths Weaknesses n n n n Renewed determination of the leadership all the way from the APRM Forum down Clarity and precision of mandate Strong record of success, especially in the early days, to build on Positive reception of its work among African citizens, civil society and opinion makers around the world n n n Uncertain or variable levels of political support Poor state of finances and unpredictability of APRM contributions Limited staff capacity and adverse impact of financial uncertainty to attract and retain high calibre experts Irregular attendance of meetings by some Focal Points Poor coordination with relevant AU institutions Inadequate follow-up, monitoring and evaluation mechanism High cost of country reviews Cumbersome country self-assessment questionnaire Poorly designed NPoAs that make implementation difficult n n n n n n n n n n n Opportunities n n n n Threats n n n n A sense of renewed political commitment from the APR Forum down Appointment of new and fully-fledged CEO Decision for APRM integration into the AU structures and processes Ever-growing emphasis, within Africa and globally, on the essential role of good governance for sustainable development A sense of good will and intuitive appeal for the APRM mission and the resulting legitimacy and reputational dividend for its work Increasing interest in APRM playing a role as a monitoring mechanism for Agenda 2063 and SDGs Development of new tools and knowledge products to enhance APRM’s standing as the authoritative think tank on African governance Universal membership aspirations Availability of a pool of relevant expertise in the continent that can be deployed at relatively short notice Lack of sustainable financing Potential erosion of autonomy and independence after integration Potentially growing gap between expectations and actual impact of APRM review reports and recommendations on the ground Non-participation of existing members in the review process and potential withdrawal of others –15–