A/HRC/44/19 and offer support in relation to the areas identified. OHCHR has also been producing matrices of clustered recommendations per State reviewed, starting with those recommendations that have been accepted by the State under review. In the matrices, each recommendation is linked to specific Sustainable Development Goals and relevant targets and indicators. In addition, OHCHR has prepared infographic pages, reflecting trends between the second and third cycles in terms of accepted recommendations and the link between recommendations and the Sustainable Development Goals. These infographic pages are a tool for implementation, not only for the States after their reviews, but also for the programming activities of the United Nations country teams and, in general, for the United Nations agencies, funds and programmes. 13. Proposals by field presences for Voluntary Fund resources should be prepared in consultation with, and with the consent of, the country concerned. Not only is this the minimum requirement, this principle also enhances the necessary national ownership. National ownership reflects the spirit of the review (in which the primary responsibility to implement the universal periodic review recommendations rests with the State) and the principles of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, and is an essential factor for the success of any cooperation. Accordingly, Governments should be the initiators or coinitiators of requests for Voluntary Fund resources, with OHCHR being a source of expertise and technical support. 14. In order to increase objectivity in considering suggested projects, OHCHR has based its funding decisions on five criteria, which are also based on the terms of reference of the Voluntary Fund. The same criteria have been included in the internal guidelines on the use of the Voluntary Fund adopted by the Board of Trustees after its March 2019 session. The list is not restrictive, however, and proposals for other types of projects focusing on implementation of universal periodic review recommendations, based on consultations with, and the consent of, the country concerned have also been encouraged. All the projects have been implemented in conjunction with the States concerned, which can count on the technical assistance provided by OHCHR field presences or provided directly by OHCHR Headquarters to the States upon their request. Promotion and implementation of key universal periodic review recommendations 15. The Secretary-General, in his report A/72/351, notes that during the last few years a new momentum has emerged for constructive and cooperative engagement in the field of human rights. The adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the launch of the United Nations reform process and the start of the third universal periodic review cycle have served as a catalyst for national implementation efforts that integrate human rights into the 2030 Agenda and the targets and indicators of the Sustainable Development Goals. This encourages nationally owned processes, which will result in a more constructive engagement with Member States. 16. Recommendations resulting from a universal periodic review have grown in number from a few dozen for the first countries undergoing reviews to some two hundred recommendations per country on average in the third cycle. This increase poses serious challenges for States in terms of implementation, taking into account the accumulation of universal periodic review recommendations over time and in light of other implementation requirements, such as those relating to recommendations from treaty bodies, special procedures and regional human rights mechanisms. 17. Support from the Voluntary Fund for efforts to implement recommendations from the universal periodic review will therefore need to be focused on key recommendations, so that such support can make a significant and lasting contribution to national change. In order to determine whether the Voluntary Fund’s resources should be spent on a proposal for the implementation of specific universal periodic review recommendations, the following questions are particularly relevant: (a) Have the treaty bodies and special procedure mandate holders flagged the thematic issue in question? (b) Do the recommendations correspond to the areas flagged by the High Commissioner in the letter sent following the review? 4