The second main issue to be covered by such an CIRM would be the dissemination of ‘best practices’ and ‘products’ developed. Chief Secretary NEP and Provincial Planning Secretariat see the need for related functions to be included in the proposed CIRM because at the moment, each and every donor supported programme and project as well as development initiatives by government institutions tend to develop own procedures and methods for project planning, implementation and monitoring and evaluation with much time and money spent for ‘inventing the wheel’ again.

The proposed CIRM preferably to be established within the provincial administration, should have two main objectives:

• Supporting decision making and coordination of development efforts of the provincial government through an efficient management information system (MIS) and by applying information technology respectively
• Supporting the efficient use and replication of ‘best practices’ and ‘products’ developed by different stakeholders (e.g. ‘best practices’ and ‘products’ developed by the IFSP).

Two main units are proposed for the CIRM: ‘IT Unit’ and ‘Product Coordination Unit’.

In principle, there are three options for the institutional set-up of such an CIRM:

• Fully integrated into the Provincial Council (Chief Secretary in charge).
• Partly integrated into the Provincial Council (e.g. attached as a Department to the Provincial Council and related to Provincial Planning Department and MDTD) with a high degree of independence (semi-autonomous, independent budgeting, accounting and fund raising, employment of staff etc.).
• Fully commercial and independent from government.

Forming a semi-autonomous body under the Provincial Council but with a high degree of independence is perhaps the best compromise. Such organisational set-up would have the advantage to be integrated into the government structure and that decision makers could firmly insert their influence. On the other hand, the semi-autonomous status would allow the flexibility such an institute would need to react to requests from government and donor supported projects and would be finally in a position to raise and administer funds and to employ qualified personnel.

Options for funding could be as follows: i) Funding from government sources; ii) Establishing a new project under bilateral or development cooperation; iii) Funding through the proposed IFSP for the Wanni and Batticaloa to include capacity building at provincial level; iv) Funding from ongoing development programs.

The sustainability of the proposed CIRM depends on three factors: i) The preparedness of a donor to support the CIRM proposal or, if that is not possible, the preparedness of programmes in the North Each Province to support the CIRM in its initial stage. This depends on the capacity of the provincial administration to sensitise and convince decision makers of development programmes and heads of government departments on the need of such a CIRM. The second factor would be the ability of CIRM itself to meet its objectives and to mobilise the necessary minimum funding for operation from government sources. Finally, sustainability would depend on the ability of the proposed CIRM to generate own funds from commissions received from third parties.