A/HRC/16/66 53. The Board highlighted the current success of the active participation of States in the UPR process, including the highly significant input by civil society reporting. However it was noted that there is room to improve on the quality and type of recommendations emanating from the process. 54. The Board enquired as to whether the Human Rights Council had a strategy on engagement of NGOs to ensure their wide participation in preparation of alternative reports on sensitive human rights and in the Human Rights Council sessions. It noted with thanks the ongoing work of the Human Rights Council and looked forward to the upcoming review. B. Special procedures 55. The Board was informed of the work in thematic mandates covering civil and political as well as economic and social and cultural rights, Groups in Focus (migrants, indigenous peoples and women and children) and was briefed on the overall structure of the Special Procedures Branch. The Office provided an update on the work of the special procedures, the working groups and the new mandates, including the review of mandates and the implementation of the Code of Conduct. The Board acknowledged the important contribution to the development of international law made by mandate holders. 56. The Board thanked the Special Procedures Branch for its update, noted the importance of maintaining both the thematic and country mandates and called for the strengthening of the consultative group on the nomination of the mandate holders on the public list. C. Universal Periodic Review (UPR), follow-up and related funds 57. The Board was informed that an OHCHR UPR Strategy was developed in May 2010, adopting a holistic approach for implementation of recommendations by treaty bodies, special procedures, UPR, and High Commissioners’ recommendations. It was informed that the framework for the strategic approach for implementation of recommendations and follow-up to UPR outcomes was through: dissemination and knowledge management, direct support for implementation, and tracking the status of the implementation of recommendations. 58. The Board was informed of the UPR activities in Belarus, and a proposal being drawn up by the Regional Office for the Pacific that would help Pacific Island countries to prioritize the recommendations of UPR and other international mechanisms in a holistic fashion with a view to bringing about tangible impacts at the country level. It was noted that there was a need to strengthen the capacity in the Pacific region to work on UPR recommendations and those of other international human rights mechanisms. The Board was also informed of the UPR pre-session workshop in South Africa and the formal requests for assistance received from States: Burkina Faso, Ecuador, Cape Verde, Democratic Republic of Congo and Ecuador. 59. The Board was informed of the two UPR Trust Funds and their distinct purposes for the Universal Periodic Review to facilitate States’ participation in the UPR process and to assist States to implement follow-up recommendations. It was encouraged to note the participation and partnership of the UNCT in the preparation of documents for the UPR pre-session process. 60. On a concluding note, the Board was interested in the second cycle of the UPR and specifically pointed out its interest in a second round of visits and missions to both large 13