Download - TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL GEORGIA 20 OCTOBER 2009 ONE YEAR AFTER BRUSSELS DONOR CONFERENCE
PLEDGED AID (1)
TOTAL AMOUNT 4.55 BLD USD – 1,000 USD PER PERSON
38 COUNTRIES AND 15 INSTITUTIONS
95% PLEDGED BY 13 DONORS – 7 COUNTRIES AND 6 INSTITUTIONS
PLEDGED AID (2)
BIGGEST COUNTRY DONOR US – 1 BLN USD
BIGGEST INSTITUTION DONOR – EBRD 927 MLN USD
MORE THAN ½ LOANS - CONCESSIONAL
PLEDGED AID (3)
SPENDING PRIORITIES:
DIRECT BUDGET SUPPORTENERGYROADSMUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTUREIDPSSOCIAL ASSISTANCEAGRICULTUREENVIRONMENTBANKING SECTOR
PLEDGED AID (4)
COMMITTED IN 2008: 795 MLN USD 403 MLN USD DIRECT BUDGET
SUPPORTMORE THAN HALF GRANTS
COMMITTED IN 2009: OVER 1.850 MLN USD
143 MLN USD DIRECT BUDGET SUPPORT
2/3 LOANS
PLEDGED AID (5)
US FUNDING:250 MLN USD DIRECT BUDGET SUPPORT
60 MLN USD MCC (REGIONAL ROAD)13 MLN USD (GAS STORAGE FACILITY)26 MLN USD (REG. INFRASTRUCTURE)100 MLN USD (STABILIZATION/RECONSTR)1 MLN USD MCC (ADMINISTRATIVE)53.3 MLN USD (ECONOMIC SUPPORT)242 MLN USD (ECONOMY, PEACE, GOVERN)176 MLN USD OPIC (BUSINESS SUPPORT)
POSITIVE DEVELOPMENTS (1)
ESSENTIAL SUPPORT: POLITICAL, FISCAL AND ECONOMIC (FDI DROP TO 20%)
53% ALREADY COMMITTED
FUNDING HELPED TO MAINTAIN ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, REDUCE BUDGET DEFICIT, PAY SALARIES/PENSIONS, STRENGTHEN BANKING SECTOR
POSITIVE DEVELOPMENTS (2)
TRANSPARENT AID BREAKDOWN (MINISTRY OF FINANCE DATABASES POSTED ON INTERNET)
COOPERATION WITH THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE (REGULAR MEETINGS WITH GEORGIAN NGOS)
TRANSPARENT MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT FUND PROJECTS BREAKDOWN (ONE OF THE CHIEF IMPLEMENTORS)
POSITIVE DEVELOPMENTS (3)
SOME GOVERNMENT AGENCIES RESPONDING TO CRITICISM
NGOS AND MEDIA MONITORING AID
IDP ASSISTANCE MORE COMPREHENSIVE AND LONG-TERM
CONCERNS TO DATE (1)
DOMINANCE OF POLITICS (OPPOSITION REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN THE ANTI-CRISIS COUNCIL ACTIVITIES)
WEAK DEMOCRACY
LACK OF POLITICAL CONDITIONS
LACK OF PARTICIPATORY PROCESS OF AID DISTRIBUTION DECISION-MAKING
CONCERNS TO DATE (2)
POOR PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE OF AND UNDERSTANDING OF SPENDING PRIORITIES
SPEEDY PROCESS AND INSUFFICIENT PLANNING
WEAK OVERSIGHT INSTITUTIONS
AID NOT ALWAYS TIED TO CAPACITY BUILDING
CONCERNS TO DATE (3)
NOT ENOUGH EMPHASIS ON QUALITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT
INSUFFICIENT SUPPORT OF NGO MONITORING EFFORTS
LACK OF SUFFICIENT DONOR TRANSPARENCY
CONCERNS TO DATE (4)
TWO-WAY COMMUNICATION
PROGRESS ASSESSMENT AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
FORMALIZED PROCESS
RECOMMENDATIONS (1)
POLITICAL CONDITIONS: MEASURABLE AND PUBLIC
TRANSPARENCY OF FUNDING DECISION-MAKING / CLEAR JUSTIFICATION
COMPREHENSIVE ANALYSIS OF IMPLEMENTING AGENCIES AND OVERSIGHT MECHANISMS