A/HRC/26/20 arrangements, which will require careful consideration and further dialogue involving all stakeholders. 68. Most stakeholders who participated in the consultation process favour a mandate that would support a broad range of capacity-building activities at local, national and international levels across all stakeholder groups. 69. With respect to the types of activities such a fund could support, nearly all submissions noted the value of awareness-raising and training activities on the Guiding Principles for different stakeholder. However, there was less agreement on other issues, including: whether the mandate of the fund should be broadly focused on all three pillars of the Guiding Principles or whether it should be focused on one particular pillar or issue; whether it should primarily support projects, including ongoing projects of the Working Group, or whether it should also support dissemination of documents in multiple languages and the participation of a broader range of stakeholders in United Nations meetings related to business and human rights; and whether it should support one-off activities or focus exclusively on projects that are replicable and could be scaled up in the future. 70. With respect to the aim of mainstreaming the Guiding Principles throughout the United Nations system, most submissions noted that, while OHCHR and other United Nations actors would be critical partners in ensuring the effective implementation of a fund in the area, priority should not be given to building the capacity of the United Nations, as that could draw resources away from other actors with limited ability to access funding through other means. It was noted, however, that a fund should facilitate the engagement of United Nations country teams and all other components of the United Nations system in capacity-building efforts relating to business and human rights, especially in developing countries. 71. Stakeholder views concerning the most effective and appropriate governance mechanism for a proposed new fund varied considerably. A majority of submissions indicated that OHCHR should be a key actor in administering a fund in this area. Some stakeholders also stated that the Working Group should play a central role in shaping a fund’s strategic approach. Several submissions also stressed the importance of ensuring an efficient governance structure and limiting administrative costs. 72. There is less agreement among stakeholders concerning the extent to which a fund in this area should follow established United Nations voluntary trust fund models. Some submissions indicated that multi-stakeholder governance, with special emphasis on the participation of business in decision-making, was of importance in engaging a significant number of businesses as financial contributors to a fund and ensuring its long-term impact. It was suggested, for example, that a multi-stakeholder advisory board could be established to provide overall strategic guidance, but it should not have authority for decision-making on individual projects to be supported or in matters relating to who can contribute or benefit from funding. Others proposed a “board of trustees” model based on established OHCHRadministered voluntary trust funds. 73. With respect to monitoring and evaluation, in some submissions, it was suggested that grants could potentially be effectively administered and evaluated through existing United Nations agencies, including at national level, in order to minimize overhead costs. It was also suggested that an external evaluation of a fund after five years of operations should be planned from the outset. 74. On the subject of funding sources, stakeholders in their submissions were largely in agreement that a new fund in the area should be able to accept financial contributions from any actor, including States, businesses, philanthropic organizations and individuals. The importance of ensuring full transparency of donors and allocation of resources to individual 15