Core Support for the Establishment of

Eurasia Partnership Foundation in Georgia

A proposal to the Swedish International Development Agency

Submitted August 21, 2007, Revised October 24, 2007

Contact:
George Zarubin
President
g.zarubin@eurasia.org.ge
Caitlin Ryan
Regional Development
Officer
caitlin@eurasia.org.ge
3 Kavsadze Street
0179 Tbilisi, Georgia
Phone: (995 32) 22.32.64,
25.39.42/43

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................... 4
I.

EURASIA PARTNERSHIP FOUNDATION ............................................. 5

WHY A LOCAL FOUNDATION? ...........................................................................6
WHY A REGIONAL FOUNDATION? ......................................................................7
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE ..............................................................................9

II.

TODAYS CHALLENGE IN GEORGIA .................................................11

THE ROLE OF NGOS IN CIVIL SOCIETY ............................................................. 12
ADDRESSING ROOT PROBLEMS ....................................................................... 13

III.

REGIONAL PROGRAM OBJECTIVES .................................................15

IV.

HOW WE WORK ...........................................................................17

GRANTS MANAGEMENT: BUILDING LOCAL CAPACITY .............................................. 17
OPEN DOOR GRANTS: FLEXIBLE AND DEMAND DRIVEN ........................................... 18
TARGETED GRANTS: ADDRESSING PRIORITY NEEDS .............................................. 18
TRILATERAL GRANTS: REDUCING THE POTENTIAL FOR CONFLICT ................................ 18
THE GRANTS REVIEW PROCESS ...................................................................... 19
OPERATING PROGRAMS ............................................................................... 21
SETTING PROGRAM PRIORITIES ...................................................................... 22
STAFFING PATTERNS................................................................................... 22
THE ROLE OF THE REGIONAL AND DC OFFICES .................................................... 23

V.

EFS CAPACITY: WHAT HAVE WE ACHIEVED IN 13 YEARS? ................24

VI.

RELEVANCE.................................................................................31
CONFORMITY WITH SIDAS REGIONAL STRATEGY .................................................. 31
CONFORMITY WITH NATIONAL STRATEGY DOCUMENTS ............................................ 31
IMPACT ON THE POOR, GENDER EQUALITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT ............................. 32

VII.

SUSTAINABILITY AND RISK ANALYSIS ............................................34

RISK AND UNCERTAINTY .............................................................................. 34
FUNDRAISING CAPACITY .............................................................................. 36
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT ....................................................................... 39
PROGRAM SUSTAINABILITY ........................................................................... 41

VIII.

MONITORING AND EVALUATION ....................................................42

IX.

A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP: SIDA AND EPF....................................45

VIII.

APPENDICES ...............................................................................47
SYNERGIES BETWEEN SIDA STRATEGY AND EPF ACTIVITIES ..................................... 47
SYNERGIES WITH GEORGIAN NATIONAL STRATEGY DOCUMENTS ................................ 54
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS ..................................................................... 55
GEORGIA PROGRAMS: 2008 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING PLANS ...................... 58
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.

Participatory Civic Monitoring ........................................................ 58

Corporate Social Investment ......................................................... 61
Community Empowerment through Youth Initiatives ......................... 64
Economic Development Through Tourism ........................................ 74
Conflict Resolution and Tolerance Building ....................................... 78
European Integration.................................................................... 80
2008 Presidential and Parliamentary Elections.................................. 81
Open Door Grants Program ........................................................... 82
Cross Border Programs: ENP Civic Dialogue, Stage II ........................ 83

BUDGET PROJECTIONS: 2008-2010 ............................................................... 86

ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.............................................................. 87
ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS ............................................................................ 92
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION PLAN ............................................................... 96
BOARD MEMBER BIOGRAPHIES ....................................................................... 99
MORE TOP IMPACTS FROM GEORGIA .............................................................. 102
EVALUATIONS ........................................................................................ 104
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

NGO Watchdog Initiative (Georgia 2004) .................................... 104

Business Associations in Georgia (2004)........................................ 107
South Caucasus Cross Border Media Initiatives (2004) .................... 109
Public Policy Research Institutions (2004)...................................... 111
Cross Border Cooperation Portfolio (Foundation wide, 2005) ............ 113
Corporate Social Investment Initiative (Russia, 2005) ..................... 115
Institutional Development Grants Cluster (EF-wide, 2006) ............... 118
Business Education Programs (EF-wide, 2002) ............................... 123

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
After 15 years of political independence and support for democratic development
from international donors, civil society has still not achieved sustainability in Georgia.
Why not? At least in part, it is because donor investments have not targeted the root
challenges to achieving a vibrant civil society in a holistic and systematic way. These
challenges include a lack of diversified opinions and dialogue on public policy topics,
a lack of reliable information and nuanced analysis of social processes, apathy
towards civic engagement, limited local sources of support to sustain civic initiatives
and a prevailing tone of conflict and mistrust across political boundaries.
With 13 years of experience in grants and program management in the South
Caucasus, Eurasia Foundation (EF) is uniquely positioned to take a long-term,
systematic approach to addressing these challenges. Today, EFs Board of Trustees is
taking the first step toward realizing this vision in the South Caucasus by adopting a
localization strategy for its offices in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, establishing
the Eurasia Partnership Foundation (EPF). As a network of locally registered
institutions linked together through shared programmatic and leadership
mechanisms, EPF will be more sustainable in the long term as it is able to diversify
funding streams, and more responsive to local needs as it is governed by a single
Board of Trustees with deep expertise and knowledge of the South Caucasus region.
Understanding that Sidas new development strategy for the South Caucasus focuses
solely on Georgia, EF seeks a founding commitment from Sida in the establishment
of Eurasia Partnership Foundations operations in Georgia. It is a unique opportunity
for Sida to be in on the ground floor at the creation of a new and lasting institution
that will serve the long-term needs of civil society development in this country. EF
respectfully asks for a commitment of USD 3 million or USD 1 million per year
over three years. Thirty-five percent of this contribution will be managed as a Sida
flagship Open Door Grants Program a pool of resources for initiatives that are
highly innovative or that respond to quickly emerging and critical needs in the
country. The remaining balance will be managed as core support for all of EPFs
activities in Georgia, including support for operational programs, program and grants
administration and overhead costs.
EPFs mission is to equip people with the tools and vision that enable them to shape
their own future, empowering them to effect change for social justice and economic
prosperity. By inheriting the strong systems, procedures and expertise of EF offices
in the South Caucasus, EPF will be fully operational as of January 1, 2008.
In the proposal that follows, we describe the structure and rationale of EPF in greater
detail; outline the challenges facing civil society in Georgia today and offer four
program objectives to meet these challenges; describe the relevance of EPFs work
to international and local development priorities; describe EPFs tools and capacity
for achieve its goals; provide a sustainability and risk analysis and a monitoring and
evaluation plan. The extensive appendices provide further detail in support of these
main topics.

I. EURASIA PARTNERSHIP FOUNDATION

Eurasia Partnership Foundation (EPF) will be made up of three locally registered
institutions in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia united by a regional office in Tbilisi.
Each office will pursue a common mission and an integrated program strategy and
will share both governance and management structures to promote coordinated work
across borders. These three local institutions will be the legacy of Eurasia Foundation
(EF) in the South Caucasus, inheriting EFs financial and management systems,
programmatic expertise, institutional knowledge and mission: We equip people with
the tools and vision that enable them to shape their own future, empowering them to
effect change for social justice and economic prosperity.
In a phased transition process, EPF will take the place of and take over all
programs of Eurasia Foundation branch offices as of January 1, 2008. During the
first three years following the registration of EPF, EFs Washington, DC office will
manage an annual grant to EPF (funds received through EFs Core III Grant
Agreement with USAID) and continue to build the capacity of EPF, ensuring that core
funding is expended in an appropriate and transparent fashion. Into the future, EF
will continue to serve as a channeling mechanism for donors who can work only with
a U.S. not-for-profit grant recipient. Other donor support will be channeled directly to
EPF.
This regional network will have a functional reach well beyond the Caucasus, as it
will belong to a network of localized legacy foundations throughout the Eurasia
region. EF legacy institutions have already been launched in Russia and Central Asia;
EPF will be the third localized institution established by EF and its partners. One
more foundation, serving Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova, is also currently in the
process of local registration and launch. This EF Affiliate Network will improve the
quality of programs, increase exchanges among local and international institutions
throughout the region and multiply the social return on financial investment made by
participating donors.
EF is a recognized leader in the field of grants and program administration. The
Foundation was created in 1992 with bipartisan support from the U.S. government to
provide funding for development at the grassroots level in the countries of the
former Soviet Union. Since 1992, EF has administered more than 8,400 grants,
disbursed more than 450 loans, and dedicated over $360 million to programs in the
12 successor states of the Soviet Union and beyond. Since its inception, EF has
managed more than $60 million on behalf of corporations, private foundations,
European governments and individual philanthropists, complementing a substantial
base of core funding it receives from the U.S. government.
EF operates with the belief that societies function best when people take
responsibility for their own civic and economic prosperity. EFs programs equip
citizens to define and achieve outcomes of enduring benefit to themselves and their
communities. We employ a demand-driven approach, which allows civil society
actors to determine the issues that are of importance to their communities and to
develop interventions that will be effective in addressing identified needs - a critical
factor in a vibrant democracy.

WHY A LOCAL FOUNDATION?

Civic and economic prosperity in the Caucasus region is not yet self-sustaining,
despite many promising changes in recent years. After 13 years supporting
grassroots civic organizations and investing in human capital, EF is seeking to
consolidate its past achievements and to make a long term commitment to achieving
its goals by establishing this legacy institution in the South Caucasus.
Through localization, EPF will refocus on its mission to be more locally-driven and to
target resources where civil society needs them most. EF is already known
throughout the region as an organization built on citizen initiative and locally-set
agendas. In a recent CRRC1 household survey, EF had higher name recognition than
any other international assistance agency in the region, with the exception of the
United Nations. The official localization of EFs legacy institutions is, to some degree,
a legal rather than substantive question.
Several key factors influence the decision to localize: cost and program efficiency,
revenue diversification, and institutional profile.

Cost and program efficiency

A localized foundation will have a simpler and ultimately less costly
administrative and governance structure when it is independent of US-based
headquarters, resulting in cost savings for donors and greater efficiency of
resource management. For example, EPF will become a grantee of the Eurasia
Foundations U.S. headquarters and will be able to solicit and manage funds
without levying the mandatory negotiated indirect cost rate it is currently
subject to. Staffing structures will be more flexible as they shift to projectbased contracts and a larger proportion of locally-sourced hiring regardless of
employee nationality. Governance structure will include mostly locallyresident trustees, reducing direct costs of international communications and
transportation.

Revenue diversification
Localization will enable EPF to seek sponsorship and collaborate directly with
donors and partners who currently are not able to work with Eurasia
Foundation. In particular, EU and other multilateral donors who seek to invest
development resources through local partners will be accessible to EPF
following full localization. Local corporations and individual philanthropists will
also find attractive the idea of partnership with a locally-registered
foundation.

Institutional profile
Unquestionably, there will be a continuing need for an independent, nonpolitical grant making and operating foundation serving civil society needs in
the South Caucasus for the foreseeable future. EF is uniquely positioned to
transform its organizational know-how and experience into lasting
institutions serving these nations and their future needs. EF has been
perceived as a local foundation and has been operating for over a decade as a
de facto local institution in each country where it works. Full registration
under local legislation will bring the legal status of the institution in line with

CRRC is the Caucasus Research Resource Centers. For more information, see the Appendix
E.

existing perceptions. EFs American parentage will decrease in significance,

leaving behind a locally led and managed mandate, supported by a truly
international coalition of donor agencies and advisors. The formation of EPF
will build on the brand recognition and positive image that EF has built over
the past decade and a half.
WHY A REGIONAL FOUNDATION?
The Georgia office of Eurasia Partnership Foundation will be one member in a
network of three local foundations in the South Caucasus that are guided by a single
set of regional programming priorities, a single Board of Trustees, and one
Presidents office (based in Tbilisi) that serves all three local offices. The regional
approach maintains programmatic standards and harmony and contributes needed
resources and attention o regional stability. The Georgia office will share
responsibility with its counterparts in Armenia and Azerbaijan for designing and
implementing cross border programs, which are central to EF/EPFs belief that
building linkages across political borders reduces the chances for violent conflict.
Maintaining effective partnerships and building strong democratic institutions in this
fragile region is not easy: conflict rather than cooperation is the prevailing tenor of
relations in the greater Caucasus. Yet the geographic proximity of Armenia,
Azerbaijan and Georgia requires cooperation, communication and trust if enduring
economic growth is to take off.
Owing to their shared political legacy, these three countries face a number of similar
challenges to democratic reform. Better governance and accountability, civic
engagement, entrepreneurship and fiscal transparency are just a few of these shared
needs. These nations can benefit from cooperative work on solving common
problems, as EFs cross border programming has demonstrated.
The development and prosperity of people in the South Caucasus (and among
neighboring countries) are strongly and directly affected by the unresolved conflicts.
Change will never proceed with vigor until greater dialogue, tolerance and
understanding are achieved. At the core of EPFs approach will be the belief that
cross border linkages, both across individuals and institutions, are essential to the
peaceful, long-term resolution of conflicts in the region. Regional programming
promotes dialogue, increased understanding of varied points of view, and builds
confidence around shared interests an important synergy for finding common
ground in a post-conflict context.
Given the high tensions in the region both across borders of Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Georgia, Turkey and Russia, and within Georgias own borders it may seem
counter-intuitive to focus so heavily on regional and cross border programming.
There will be political hurdles and economic challenges for years, if not decades, to
come. So the question remains, is this focus on regionality ultimately foolhardy or
visionary?
In the absence of high-level political solutions to the conflicts in this region,
continued dialogue and constructive citizen-level interchange is critical. Just as it was
important during the Cold War for dialogue at the citizen level to proceed between
the US and the Soviet Union, so it is critical for the common people of these three
neighboring Caucasus nations to continue rebuilding personal and professional
linkages. Without ongoing citizen level dialogue, political isolation can lead to nearly

insurmountable cultural hostility among populations, making implementation of a

political compromise much more difficult.
Maintaining an emphasis on the upside potential of continued dialogue focusing on
strengthening citizen-level ties and enabling shared solutions to shared challenges
is part of EFs program portfolio and integral to the future of the local foundation
network. Trilateral work is also the only way to bring together Armenian and
Azerbaijani counterparts without a third neutral player, governments and
frequently misinformed citizens simply refuse to participate at the bilateral level.
The time is also ripe for achieving lasting results through cross border work.
Diverging political trajectories over the past two decades have tended to push these
three nations apart, but as each country looks toward Europe for greater political,
social and economic integration, regional cooperation will be a necessity. Each
country has adopted a European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) action plan, which
establishes a framework and political incentives for cooperation in a way that has not
previously existed. With commitments made publicly by each government to
implement the ENP Action Plans, cross border work can leverage these commitments
to build institutional linkages across the three countries.
EF has taken the ENP Action Plans as guiding frameworks for the development of
regional programming. For example, specific legislative changes are needed in each
country to promote the readiness for closer structural integration and compliance to
EU standards; the particulars of how to approach these changes differ from nation to
nation. Targeted grants and programs in each country can provide the necessary
technical assistance to promote policy reforms, and lessons learned from the process
of promoting change can easily be shared across borders, to the benefit of all
participants. EFs networked grant making and operating programs link like-minded
reformers from different communities, build regional trust among colleagues,
promote regional recognition of shared goals, and increase the efficiency of reform
efforts in the region as a whole.
One important result of EFs trilateral work is its success in stimulating regional
cooperation through positive incentives. We observe a clear chase the leader
phenomenon when civic activists in one country have achieved progress prior to
their colleagues in a neighboring country, there is keen interest in learning how it
was done and in catching up to the achievements of their peers. This dynamic
demonstrates the effectiveness of working at the citizen level to achieve substantive
progress in the absence of political cooperation.
EFs pioneering work in trilateral grant making over the years has revealed a number
of fields in which the approach demonstrates sustainable success. For example, EF
was the first organization to initiate cross border media assistance, breaking the ice
in a field where neither local nor international organizations considered possible
before.
The field of trade and small business is demonstrating itself as another area with
high potential for success at the regional level. EFs support to a Regional Export
Catalog is enabling local export-oriented businesses in all three countries to enhance
their business profile among prospective foreign partners inside and outside the
region. This can help individual local firms take advantage of potential business
opportunities through a collective action model, as well as to establish bi- and trilateral partnerships in the region that can enable the partners to break into foreign

markets collectively. The Azerbaijani and Georgian partners are drawing on the
experience of their Armenian colleagues, who have been successful in generating
substantial subscription and advertising revenues. The partners are confident that
they will eventually be able to make the regional catalogue self-sustainable.
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE
Registered locally in Georgia, Azerbaijan and Armenia, EPF will be governed by a
shared Board of Trustees identical for all three countries, and managed from the
Presidents Office located in Tbilisi. The initial board of trustees will be comprised of
international figures with deep knowledge of and commitment to the region. Please
see the Appendix for biographies of confirmed board members. Local citizens will be
added to the board as soon as politically practical,2 maintaining the principle of an
identical board overseeing all three countries. Board members will be private
citizens, appointed in consultation with key stakeholders and donors. EPF invites Sida
to nominate a Swedish national to sit on the Board of Trustees and looks forward to
receiving the recommendation.
The boards role will be to ensure overall fiscal accountability for each of the three
localized institutions. It will meet twice per year to approve and oversee annual
budgets, expenses and general program strategies. In addition, Board members will
be invited to serve on the following three sub-committees:
1. Executive Committee The Chair of the Executive Committee will be the
same as the Chair of the Board. The committee will be made up mostly of
board members, residing in the region, and will meet at least once between
each full board session to review issues that come up on an ongoing basis.
2. Audit and Finance Committee The Audit and Finance Committee will also
meet between full board meetings to review internal and external audits,
budgets and expenses, and all other finance, insurance and risk management
issues.
3. Selection Committee The Selection Committee will convene when a current
member leaves the board. They will reevaluate the needs of the board at that
time and conduct a search for new candidates. Each board member will be
invited to serve for a maximum three year term, renewable based on the
recommendation of the selection committee. The selection committee will
determine criteria for identifying new members and strive to create a balance
of members based on the functions of the board, gender, etc.
EPF also anticipates that board members will help to raise additional funds by
establishing initial contacts and representing EPF in wider circles.
In addition, a Local Advisory Committee comprised of local citizen leaders will be
established to advise on programming issues, to provide recommendations on grants
and various program areas.
Given that local NGO tradition does not usually entrust Boards with fiscal
accountability, the separation of these two bodies functions will be expedient for the
2

Due to tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan, it is not currently possible for the local
entities to register boards containing local nationals from all three Caucasus countries as
governors. When political conditions allow, local citizens will take places on the governing
board, and will likely be drawn from the national advisory committees.

first few years of operations. We have found that local advisors still fear taking on
personal responsibility for the transparent allocation of finances, while international
professionals do not. In addition, it is useful in the current political context to have
international scrutiny on the finances of a public good foundation, because it adds
to the credibility that resources are not simply being allocated according to insider
connections. Once EPF has been operating successfully for several years, we
anticipate that the reticence of local professionals to take on an accountability role
will significantly diminish.
In combination with a strong coordinating function of the Office of the President
(which will serve the donor relations, fundraising, outreach and coordination needs of
the partnership), this dual trustee/advisory structure should meet the governance
needs of the new organizations.

10

II. TODAYS CHALLENGE IN GEORGIA

A vibrant civic sector and high rate of public involvement in decision making
processes are hallmarks of participatory democracy. A mature civic sector serves a
variety of roles in this atmosphere:

It is a check and balance against the concentration of power in an

(inevitably) limited number of hands
When the state does not or is incapable of providing public services, civil
society groups perform this role, especially in service provision to
vulnerable groups in society
Civil society serves as a middleman, representing individual interests at the
state level and galvanizing citizens to action around shared interests.

Civil society organizations employ a number of tools in this work: advocacy to make
citizen voices heard; independent data collection, research and analysis; citizen
education and awareness raising; and service provision.
In the South Caucasus, the civic sector does not yet serve these roles in full. Few
material resources, a lack of reliable information and elite-driven political processes
deprive people of the opportunity to decide basic issues in their lives. Adding low
levels of government accountability to the mix, a negative feedback cycle emerges
citizens dont take action for their own interests and as a consequence governments
are not held accountable; when governments do not answer to citizens demands,
community members lose the incentive to seek change and defend their rights. This
basic set of challenges exists in most emerging democratic countries, but in the
three countries of the South Caucasus, they are manifest in different ways.
In Georgia, a strong civil society sector was instrumental in the 2003 revolution and
the implementation of reforms that quickly followed. Civic organizations relied on
independent data and monitoring of issues (such as corruption and government
abuse of power) to galvanize the public. They knew the issues that mattered to
citizens because they were closely connected to their constituencies. Today, a core
group of experienced civil sector organizations (mainly based in Tbilisi) are achieving
laudable results for the groups they represent, but relatively few organizations
represent the interests of Georgians living in the regions outside of Tbilisi
especially vulnerable groups such as ethnic minorities. To maintain the pace of
progress that has been achieved over recent years, Georgias civil society
organizations require a deeper connection to their community and constituencies,
and especially to groups outside the capital city.
A different set of challenges hinders citizen initiative in Armenia and Azerbaijan. In
Armenia, civil society lacks the capacity to demand government transparency and to
fight corruption. These problems stem from institutional problems inability to
generate income through fee-for-services programming or to effectively engage their
constituencies and leverage non-monetary resources. In Azerbaijan, media
persecution, unaccountable government and high levels of corruption prevent people
from participating in the decisions that directly affect them, while civil society
organizations are institutionally weak and unable to represent the needs of
vulnerable groups in society. Locally-led programming in all three countries
targeted at empowering people to make change in their own lives can achieve
lasting results.

11

THE ROLE OF NGOS IN CIVIL SOCIETY

Despite substantial development of the civil sector in the past 15 years, there are
still systemic deficiencies. NGOs in particular, while playing a primary role in other
civil sectors globally, still experience significant trust problems in the nations of the
South Caucasus. NGOs are not especially trusted by local governments, local
businesses, and often not even by the common citizen. Why?

Government views NGOs as anti-government rather than as a useful partner

in social reform processes. Government is distrustful of NGOs role in
providing critique of public reform agenda, often because NGO feedback is
exclusively negative and pays little attention to what successes public
servants and public sector reforms may have achieved. In Georgia, the
government also views many NGOs as donor-driven. This is especially true of
NGOs working to advance gender equality, which is largely seen as an issue
that has been imported from the west. A commonly held belief among many
policy makers is that the system of communism eradicated inequalities
between women and men and that such issues do not warrant further
attention or resources.3

Citizens often view NGOs as elitist, given that their advocacy agendas are
pushing toward widespread reforms and promoting conformance to global
standards. Unfortunately, this attitude is supported by a very weak existing
link to actual citizen constituencies very few NGOs today in the South
Caucasus are based on membership or community-defined priorities for
change. There is a strong resentment toward NGO staff, who are perceived
to receive generous salaries and do little useful work for the common citizen.

Businesses are frequently cynical about the value added of civil society
organizations and support NGOs only when they are useful in bringing about
regulatory change affecting the enabling environment for small or medium
enterprise. In addition, businesses see little other value for social change
agendas, particularly when such agendas raise the cost of doing business in
local economies.

One explanation for these attitudes relates to the process of development and
maturation of the civic sector in general, which has been primarily donor-led and
tends not to display the key functions of civil society (advocacy, independent
analysis, citizen education and awareness raising, service provision). The civil sector
in Georgia (and many post-soviet states) often focuses primarily on the first function
(advocacy) without the benefit of strong daily connections to grassroots
constituencies and with a bias toward sensational scandals rather than taking a
systematic approach. Having been funded by outside agencies (through bilateral
grants by and large), the NGO sector in the South Caucasus has foregone a more
natural bottom-up growth process, driven instead by pressing development aims
rather than by grassroots agendas and community priorities. Successful NGOs are
given positive feedback for their ability to lobby change in legislative and policy
decisions. Hence, advocacy efforts in the South Caucasus NGO sector are often
placed at a higher priority than are other functions such as active community
liaison, education, independent analysis and benchmarking functions, cultural
engagement and social service provision. The ultimate grassroots sector is literally
3

From conversations with Tamar Sabedashvili, gender studies specialist.

12

being driven by external priorities more strongly than it is being informed by local
citizen priorities.
Ultimately, the civil sector, including major NGOs, not only can but MUST play a key
role in keeping government accountable. Only through the efficient work of a mature
and robust civil sector one that applies convincing, well-documented moral suasion
on behalf of citizen priorities can government be kept responsive and held
accountable to the needs of its citizenry.
EPFs program priorities support a re-connection to core constituencies, and an
essential re-alignment of NGO activities to address root problems and social
challenges. Our goal is to improve the quality of civil society input and the tenor of
citizen participation in the public dialogue. An important part of this re-connection is
an increased capacity of NGOs to engage with governments in a positive and
constructive fashion. More on how to address these challenges is outlined below.
ADDRESSING ROOT PROBLEMS
EPF aims to address the core issues that will help to establish a mature civic sector in
the region. They include:

Diversity of Voices
Too often, public policy formation in the Caucasus is dominated by public officials
and, at best, a limited set of voices from the private and civil sectors. What public
discussion does exist is dominated by men and ethnic Georgians, leaving women
and ethnic minorities largely out of the conversation. For example, civil society
groups were marginalized from participation in the formation of the Georgian
European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) National Action Plan, and women policy
makers involved in the process were also grossly under represented. This is a
trend in most policy formation in Georgia: civil society organizations, and
especially womens groups, are excluded from participation. To address the issue
of ENP action plan formation, EF supported a group of NGO expert working
groups to develop an alternative action plan and to raise awareness about the
need for greater diversity of voices in public policy formation.

Information Access
Information is empowering. Unfortunately, reliable information frequently does
not exist on certain topics, and when it does, it is not generally available to the
public. Both decision makers and members of the general public need better
access to accurate information information that is based on more than casual
observation or speculation. Social science researchers also need better skills in
rigorous methodology to draw useful conclusions and policy lessons from this
information.

Local Initiative
Citizens in the Caucasus often dont take action on their own behalf. Why?
Because from past experience, they feel that individual action yields no results.
They have ample reason for skepticism on this point, since prevailing public
officials often blatantly ignore public opinion. When shared and unbiased
information is available, however, it can stimulate collective action and bring
more effective pressure to bear on policy makers. Bringing people together
cannot, however, be accomplished by donors themselves. EF seeks to raise

13

awareness about the mutual benefits of working together and to support

grassroots groups who have already made a commitment to collective action.

Sustainable Domestic Financing

Following a decade of community mobilization programs, there remains a need to
make community-led and community-driven programming truly sustainable.
Latent resources within local communities still widely go unrecognized and
untapped, and community programs typically succeed only as long as outside
donor funding is available. At the same time, corporate philanthropy is in its
infancy in this region. Few incentives exist yet for businesses to invest in their
communities or in the human capital of their countries. But in Azerbaijan, for
example, budding philanthropists who benefited from the oil boom are looking for
guidance on how to invest their profits to build their companys recognition
among the population at large. In Georgia and Armenia, steps can also be taken
to engage local business leaders in constructive and more transparent social
investment activity.

Frozen Conflicts
Regional tensions over frozen conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia and
Abkhazia are an additional challenge to democratic vibrancy in the Caucasus.
Government rhetoric, perpetuated stereotypes and inflammatory language in the
media all prevent the peoples of the South Caucasus from combining resources
for mutual benefit. These unresolved conflicts also destabilize the region and
prevent integration into European structures and practices.

Through sustained strategic support to civil society, Eurasia Partnership Foundation

aspires to address the root causes of these problems.

14

III.

REGIONAL PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

At a time when the pace of reforms and development in Armenia, Azerbaijan and
Georgia is reaching a crescendo, the voice of civil society is needed more than ever.
It serves as a check on the policies of national governments, and also as a
grassroots link between citizens who face common concerns about economic
security, human rights, public service delivery, etc.
The following objectives will guide all of EPFs programming. They have been defined
based on the needs of civil society outlined in the section above. As the guiding
areas for a regional strategy, they will also maintain cohesion among the three
Partnership institutions.
1. To equip citizen groups and civil society organizations (CSOs) with skills
and knowledge to monitor the planning and implementation of key
government reforms and the provision of public and social services; and
to enhance the impact of civic monitoring on policy formation
EPF will encourage NGOs to pursue work on setting and maintaining public
accountability to international project and audit standards through civil sector
involvement in infrastructure and legislative monitoring, as well as project
evaluation. Direct citizen engagement will constitute a key component of all
activities funded. Citizen monitoring and evaluation will provide more accurate
and unbiased information, on which citizens can measure their countrys progress
and on which public officials can make good policy choices. The civil monitoring
program, ENP Action Plan programming, and CRRC Data Initiative, for example,
bring accurate, methodologically rigorous information to bear in public dialogue.
These programs make the same data accessible to policy makers, legislators,
professional analysts and ordinary citizens alike.
2. To encourage the growth of corporate philanthropy; and to encourage
community volunteerism and activism among the youth
EPF intends to take a lead in promoting both corporate social investment and
community-based philanthropy efforts in the South Caucasus region. The focus
on increasing awareness of targeted Social Investment practices among local
businesses aims to move the current understanding of philanthropy away from
pure charity. In its place, EF promotes investment into building social capital, a
form of strategic philanthropy that improves sustainability of third sector
programs while addressing businesses goals. Among civic actors, these programs
will promote civic initiative and local ownership of development steps; and build
understanding of methods for sustainable financing. Supporting the initiatives of
youth, especially those in rural areas, is also a focus of EPFs programming in
each country. The Youth Bank program develops the skills and experience of
young people to become active members of their communities by giving them the
tools and training needed to manage a small pool of funds to support the good
ideas of their peers. Through the program, youth gain an appreciation for local
philanthropy and citizen initiative.
3. To increase local capacity to conduct high quality social science research
that informs the actions of policy makers
EPFs programs will also support independent research, especially social and
economic policy analysis. Cooperation with DFID on the South Caucasus
European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) program and with the Carnegie Corporation
of New York in creating the CRRC Centers are two examples of regional efforts in

15

this field. The ENP program has undertaken a number of policy research projects
that combine high-caliber policy research practices with NGO expertise in such
areas as labor law, trade promotion, business climate reform, integration of
energy systems, higher education, consumer rights and water resource
management. The Caucasus Research Resource Centers are building the caliber
of policy research produced by local social science scholars through trainings and
fellowships. In coming years, EPFs programs and grant making will increasingly
focus on promoting concrete policy impacts as part of our sponsored activity.
4. To promote cross border cooperation ifor peach and economic growth in
the greater Caucasus and Black Sea regions
EF is one of the leading program implementers in cross border activities within
the South Caucasus. The foundation has been working quietly, but successfully,
throughout some of the toughest years of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict to link
NGOs across the Armenia-Azerbaijan border in pursuing shared areas of interest
along with Georgian counterparts. Some areas of past programming include:
environmental
information
centers,
water
resource
management,
communications and e-commerce, agriculture, trade, seismic preparedness,
green tourism, and legislative reform that promotes industry compliance with EU
standards.
In a time when government will is not strong enough to peacefully resolve frozen
conflicts, regional programming is key. It contributes to security and stability by
building links among individuals and civil society groups. As an essential
component of Track Two Diplomacy efforts, cross border work that focuses on the
third sector and businesses (rather than government) establishes the essential
social cohesion that helps to build confidence and promote peaceful resolution to
conflicts. EPF will also pursue cross border work between Turkey and Armenia.
Our programs promote dialogue and cooperation on areas of mutual benefit,
building confidence across political boundaries. For example, the harmonization
of legal and regulatory structures in the region and integration of the South
Caucasus countries into European standards is one area where cooperation is
beneficial to all parties. EPF will take the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP)
Action Plans, which assist the countries of the South Caucasus to align their
institutions and laws with the EU, as a guiding framework for its programming.
The Caucasus Research Resource Centers also promote regional cooperation by
offering scholars and practitioners opportunities and resources for integrated
research and collaboration.
All EPF funded initiatives (particularly those in citizen monitoring and youth
integration) will include a significant investment of citizen effort. Through citizen data
gathering, for example, or involvement of rural citizen groups in larger NGOmanaged projects, the connection between collective local action and public sector
responsiveness will be emphasized. See the Appendix for a full Logical Framework
Analysis (LFA), including Objectives, Outcomes and Indicators.

16

IV.

HOW WE WORK

The operations of Eurasia Partnership Foundation programming methods, systems,

policies and procedures, etc. will be based on those of its predecessor, Eurasia
Foundation. Eurasia Foundations grant making philosophy from its very beginnings
has been oriented at supporting grassroots initiatives and giving a voice to the civil
sector organizations that represent the ordinary citizen. EF was established in 1992
by the US State Department as a delivery mechanism to support grassroots, locally
defined projects, and was consciously created as an alternative to more traditional
(large-scale and externally driven) technical assistance projects. While EFs portfolio
has evolved over the years, all of its work retains this essential character of working
at the nexus of local priority and international interest. EF works in a mode which
maximizes our ability to be responsive to emerging community priorities, rather
than being more directive as other project operators and grants programs are.
When EF was established in 1992, its method of delivering development assistance
at the grassroots level was pioneering: directing financial resources to inexperienced
NGOs based locally, coupled with technical assistance to ensure that funds were
handled responsibly. Since that time, EFs approach has evolved to adapt to the
needs of civil society as the sector grew and changed in each country. In Georgia, for
example, after a core group of EFs partners demonstrated their independence and
sustainability during and after the 2003 revolution, EF began broadening and
deepening its programs to reach a wider geographic scope and increase the
connection to local constituencies. In Armenia and Azerbaijan, the approach focuses
on supporting democratic processes and is tailored to the local political landscapes,
where corruption and government accountability are still the biggest challenges to
improving lives. EF has earned a reputation throughout the region for administering
efficient, results-oriented grants. Its approach is grassroots and demand driven, and
always emphasizes strengthening local capacity, fostering local initiative, and
promoting transparency of local decision-making.
GRANTS MANAGEMENT: BUILDING LOCAL CAPACITY
EFs grants are more than just a mechanism for disbursing funds they build the
institutional capacity and internal controls of partner organizations. Before grant
implementation, EF staff work jointly with grant applicants on project design,
implementation schedules, and evaluation processes, including establishing baselines
and indicators. EF program officers guide organizations through the grants process,
helping them to build and mobilize a constituency, run a public outreach campaign,
and strengthen the administrative systems of an organization. The application
process even builds capacity among those who are not ultimately funded. CRRC, for
example, is pioneering an online application system through which potential fellows
progress through a series of steps designed to improve the quality of their
applications All applicants, whether funded or not, receive feedback on their ideas
and proposals.
During the grant period, EF also employs a unique grants management system,
which allows for strict fiscal oversight of grant recipients. Detailed procedures have
been developed with respect to inquiry and proposal review, grant awarding,
monitoring and closing. Each grantee is required to submit periodic analytical and
financial reports that document grant activity and expenditure. In addition, EF
Foundation conducts periodic site visits to each grantee in order to verify that grants
are progressing as expected and to confirm grantee compliance with internal

17

controls, accounting procedures, and management practices. The intensive grant

review and implementation process pioneered by EF builds internal capacity, policies
and procedures that strengthen the future work of its partners and inherently works
toward institutional sustainability.
EFs key tools for building capacity and addressing the regional priority areas are
grants and projects: open door grants, targeted grants, trilateral grants and targeted
operating programs. Grants generally range from $5,000 to $35,000, with occasional
grants up to $50,000. They last in duration from six to eighteen months, but most
often are about one year in duration from contract signing to delivery of final
products.
OPEN DOOR GRANTS: FLEXIBLE AND DEMAND DRIVEN
Approximately a quarter of EFs grants are awarded through an Open Door Program,
in which EFs staff receives and reviews a wide variety of unsolicited proposals on a
continual basis. The Open Door Program has proven to be an effective means to
support new and innovative pilot projects, or projects whose need is time-sensitive.
In many cases these grants have been so successful that they were replicated on a
larger scale. For example, EFs Armenia office piloted a project with an NGO located
in Charentsavan to develop a municipal software program that could be used by
government officials to track their work, and also accessed by citizens who are
interested in the activities of their local governments. The program was so successful
that the original grantee has now received funding from other donors, including the
World Bank and UNDP, to install the municipal software and train specialists in ten
communities across Armenia. The Open Door Program is also a way to ensure that
initiatives are driven by community needs rather than solely on donor-defined
priorities.
EFs program staff engages in extensive research and outreach to cultivate interest
in the Foundations programs among potential grant applicants. These activities
result in greater innovation in grant making, opening up new fields of interest,
different approaches to project activities, new collaborative efforts, and imaginative
co-funding ideas.
TARGETED GRANTS: ADDRESSING PRIORITY NEEDS
To complement its Open Door grant program, EF sponsors targeted initiatives, or
grant competitions, in which multiple projects sharing a common programmatic
theme are solicited and funded together. This allows each country office to identify
and target areas identified as high priority with funding and technical assistance. This
scheme complements the Open Door grant program by supporting areas that need
additional focused support or receive little support from other donors.
TRILATERAL GRANTS: REDUCING THE POTENTIAL FOR CONFLICT
The political will of national governments is low in the South Caucasus when it comes
to peacefully resolving frozen conflicts. Often citizens are kept in the dark or
presented a less-than-balanced picture of the national interest, particularly in a postconflict environment. Without citizen action and fuller information, the effects of
political stalemate can spill over into renewed hostility. Building links between
individuals and non-government organizations establishes the kind of social capital
that reduces the chances for violent conflict. EFs trilateral grant-making mechanism

18

builds confidence and repairs broken relationships across lines of division between
Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia at both the citizen and professional levels. Projects
focus on areas where cooperation regionally has add-on effects that cant be
achieved by three stand alone projects, in areas such as environment and trade,
media projects focusing on tolerance, harmonization with ENP goals and European
standards in various fields.
The trilateral grants process keeps all partners involved in parallel, and has proven
to be a significant force for effective promotion of cross border civic dialogue. The
process involves three steps, including two unique types of grants:

Cluster meetings: To facilitate partnerships, EF initiates cluster meetings to

bring together up to 40 professionals from Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia
to introduce a topic and to share experiences. Participants return to their
home countries with an established network of practitioners in their field.

Contact Grants: Groups of three organizations, one from Armenia, Azerbaijan

and Georgia, apply for a Contact Grant, which provides seed funding (up to
$1,000 per partner) for the group to meet with one another, conduct research
on feasibility and needs, and ultimately to develop a proposal for a Linkage
Grant. Partnerships may be initiated by the organizations themselves or may
be facilitated by EF staff through cluster meetings.

Linkage Grants: Successful partnerships usually result in a joint formulation of

a shared project, and application for a full-scale trilateral project.
Applications for Linkage Grants (generally up to $35,000 per partner) are
reviewed by an independent Advisory Committee and awarded to support the
implementation of coordinated, trilateral projects.

A typical trilateral granting cycle involves up to 40 representatives of 40 different

organizations during a cluster meeting, 8-10 resulting sets of Contact Grants and 3-4
final sets of Linkage Grants.
The trilateral grants mechanism is a model that can be effectively adapted to other
contexts, and has strong potential for encouraging bilateral work with partnered
organizations operating in Abkhazia and South Ossetia to promote collaboration with
Georgian counterparts.
THE GRANTS REVIEW PROCESS
The review process includes several stages:
1. Letter of Inquiry: Interested applicants submit a letter of inquiry with a basic
project description, which is reviewed by a program officer for relevance and
general compliance with current priorities. If the project described in the letter
shows promise of a match, the applicant is invited to submit a full proposal. If
the project is determined to be out of mandate, the inquiry is answered with a
statement of why it is out of our current mandate. EF staff makes every effort to
provide appropriate referrals to other donors or partners when it is possible to do
so.

19

2. Submission of Full Proposal:

Full proposals are reviewed by program officers
and grants managers for suitability and cost effectiveness. If there is potential in
the proposal draft but certain adjustments are advisable in cost structure,
deliverables, or other key project elements, the program officer can correspond
with the applicant to clarify what adjustments would be desirable.
3. Due Diligence: When strong projects pass preliminary program officer review,
they go to our Grants Management staff for an organizational capacity and due
diligence review. Budgets are trimmed or adjusted according to experiences of
cost effective management and other project adjustments are made to assure
proper documentation of project impact and lessons learned.
4. Advisory Committee Meeting: Once every two or three months, EF convenes a
review committee (consisting of prominent local NGO leaders, International
organization staffers, and local experts and practitioners) to consider those
proposals highly recommended by the program officers and select final projects
for funding.
5. Pre-award Site Visit:
After the Advisory Committee has given a stamp of
approval for the project, each potential grantee must undergo a pre-award site
visit. Program officers and grants managers interview key staff in the applicant
organization, with the aim of documenting organizational capacity and
determining possible risk factors in awarding fiscal responsibility to a particular
organization.
6. Grants and Program Management Seminars: Each grantee is required to attend
a seminar on financial and program management techniques, which they are
expected to use in administering their Eurasia Foundation grant. Financial
controls are stringent, and complying with them can significantly build capacity in
younger organizations. Many more mature NGOs in countries where we work
have actually based their internal accounting, control and procurement systems
on EFs standard operating requirements. Funds are disbursed in three or four
tranches, depending on the projects activity cycle and cash flow needs. During
the Program Management Seminar, grantees receive an overview of reporting
regulations and program implementation requirements.
7. Ongoing Grants Monitoring and Reporting: Throughout the project life cycle,
financial reports are submitted and reviewed by grants management staff prior to
release of subsequent tranches of funding. Program update reports are reviewed
by both program and grants staff to assure adequate progress in implementation
and output development. On occasion and as needed, project site visits will be
scheduled to track and support grantees during unanticipated challenges in
implementation. In rare cases, funding is cancelled if compliance with EF
standards is lacking.
Grantees are also coached in understanding how to measure and document impact of
their projects.
Particular emphasis is placed on documenting policy-related
recommendations arising as a result of grant-related experience, and such
information is a required part of EFs regular project reporting format.

20

OPERATING PROGRAMS
In addition to grants, in the last few years EF has run an increasing number of
operating programs in each country. Operating programs maintain EFs focus on
revitalization of the civil sector and strengthening linkages between civic groups and
communities, but they target these areas from a different angle than grants alone.
They do so in three ways: 1) When there is a need for a convener or an intermediary
among stakeholders on an issue, EF can bring various groups together to improve
collective action; 2) operating programs allow for larger-scale, sustained
interventions when a challenge cannot be addressed by a grants competition alone;
and 3) through operating programs, EF can leverage the small achievements of
individual activities and programs by many actors for long term, sustainable impact
in a targeted field. Current operating programs include Youth Fund, Islam in a
Democratic Azerbaijan and the Caucasus Research Resource Centers. For more
information on EFs current operating programs in the South Caucasus, please refer
to the Appendices A-D.
Operating programs within EF can be on a very large or a very small scale. For
example, the CRRC program enjoys a $1 million annual budget from a single donor,
and operates across all three South Caucasus countries.
Youth Fund entails
approximately $250,000 in funding annually (from three donors), operating in
Azerbaijan for the third year and just getting started with a smaller pool of core
funds in Armenia and Azerbaijan. EF Armenia convened an Anti-Corruption
conference in cooperation with the Parliament of Armenia, which took the form of an
operating program and had a budget of under $15,000. EF Georgia operated a
monitoring capacity building program (the Pipeline Monitoring and Dialogue Initiative
or PMDI) for a coalition of donors in Georgia, with a budget spanning over 20 months
and totaling $450,000. The Tourism support program, by contrast, involved a total
of $35,000 in contracted and directly provided technical assistance to the
Department of Tourism in Tbilisi.
Technically, the primary difference between operating and grant programs is the
locus of responsibility for program outputs, and the mechanisms controlling financial
expenditure. Grants allocate funding to outside partner organizations through a grant
agreement, and the responsibility for delivery of project outputs rests entirely with
the grantee. In running operating programs, EF directly manages project activities or
concludes contracts with supplier partners (NGOs, individuals or commercial
entities); usually the aim of the contract is to support direct provision of technical
expertise to project participants. More importantly, EF takes upon itself ultimate
responsibility for delivery of outputs and project results.
In order to augment EFs technical capacity, country offices convene advisory boards
and expert panels of locally-based and international experts to provide advice on
needs, existing resources and potential program direction. Advisory boards
participate in the review of grant proposals and make recommendations, but do not
have final decision-making authority. These boards add significantly to the review
process by bringing new perspectives and networks of contacts to the decisionmaking process. The Country Director approves grants and programs up to a certain
threshold; for large programs the approval of the Regional Vice President or EF
Executive Committee is required. Thresholds are set annually. This decentralization
of authority is designed to maximize the input of local staff so that programs are
responsive to local conditions.

21

SETTING PROGRAM PRIORITIES

EFs basic approach to planning is collaborative and participatory. First, program
staff who are most closely in touch with NGOs and potential grantees make
preliminary recommendations for areas where resources are most needed, in balance
with emerging priorities and existing programming focuses. They work with country
managers and local advisory bodies to refine and articulate a strategy for the
upcoming year. This is then shared with outside stakeholders donors, sectoral
opinion leaders, technical experts, ministry staff to confirm its relevance and
timeliness. EF likes to try to stay ahead of the curve and bring a research and
development element into its work. In other words, EF tries to anticipate emerging
needs where small pilot interventions with local organizations can make a catalytic
difference. If a pilot program succeeds, EF offers it to larger agencies with larger
funds as a possible model for replication on a bigger scale.
One such example in Georgia of late is the civil registry reform project. Launched
conceptually through a planning grant to the Georgian Young Lawyers Association
(who cooperated directly with the Ministry of Justice), a strategic plan was created
for converting the civil registry to a computer-based system which can effectively
allocate social benefits, voting records, etc. On the basis of this strategic plan, the
Ministry launched an effective campaign with larger donors and now is pursuing a
$20 million modernization program on the civil registry. This model of larger
replication civil sector assisting the public sector to address citizen need is the
perfect example of an effective dynamic between EFs support and larger impact of
citizen efforts in public reform processes.
STAFFING PATTERNS
The Georgia office of EPF contains 17 employees; one country director (local
national), an Associate Director (usually an expatriate), plus 5 program officers, 3
grants managers, 2 finance staff, an officer manager and several administrative
support staff. The CRRC program has one country director, two program staff,
alibrarian and an IT manager in each country. EPFs regional office includes four
staff: the President, Executive Assistant, Chief Financial Officer, Regional
Development Officer and a Regional Communications Officer (shared with the
Georgia office), who serve all three countries. With the launch of the local
foundation, these staffing patterns are not expected to significantly change.
Staffing for operating programs, when dedicated personnel are required, entails
contracts for fixed-term appointments which are directly linked to the project life
cycle. Thus, the staffing patterns for operating programs are more flexible than are
those for core grant making activities.
EPF conducts a transparent and fair hiring process,
Salaries are reviewed annually, compared with market rates and adjusted when
necessary. The salaries of women and men in positions of equal responsibility and
qualification are equal and EF makes every effort to maintain gender equality in the
recruitment of staff. Organizational staffing charts are available in the Appendix.

22

THE ROLE OF THE REGIONAL AND DC OFFICES

The Tbilisi-based Presidents Office will play several important roles in the
management of EPF. First, it is a coordinating mechanism for strategic program
development, fundraising, donor relations, and governance. The President convenes
regional staff and strategic planning meetings, assists country offices with external
relations issues, identifies regional or multi-country program and funding
opportunities and helps pursue them. A key function of this office (which is part of
the decentralization strategy of EF worldwide) is to provide for coordinated
management and implementation of the localization process. Second, it is a
centralized go-to point for donors, partners, and outside agencies for information
about the Foundations regional activities. The key reporting responsibility for all
regional branch offices lies with (and is carried out through) the regional office.
Finally, the office plays a role in fiscal control, reviews and approves annual budgets,
monitors expenditure progress, and oversees compliance with internal procedures.
The Presidents office will serve as the governance liaison point, convening meetings
of the Board of Trustees and supporting implementation of their directives across all
three EPF institutions. The regional office also supports cross border cooperation
between the three local institutions and the CRRC program, which is central to the
vision of this new regional network of foundations. Management of internal
communications systems is another responsibility that lies with the Presidents office,
ensuring that knowledge and best practices are shared across the region and with
the wider EF Network.
EPF will be a member of the EF Network, consisting of four localized legacy
institutions in Central Asia, Russia, Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus. The EF
DC office provides basic services to all members of the EF Network, as laid out in the
networks charter. EF DC also manages core grants to network members (EPF will be
a grantee of EF DC) and reports on the Networks activities to US government
institutions. The EF DC office also aids in the institutional development of Network
members by participating in the Board of Trustees (for example, EFs President,
Horton Beebe-Center, will serve on the Board of EPF) and maintains common
information systems, programmatic standards, and fundraising strategies. The two
main purposes of the EF Network are to assist legacy institutions in financial
sustainability and to ensure high programmatic standards.

23

V. EFS CAPACITY: WHAT HAVE WE ACHIEVED IN 13 YEARS?

With over $20 million invested over 13 years in civil society development in Georgia,
EFs impact has been extensive. Although it is nearly impossible to document the
cumulative impact of this investment, we can show the results of specific programs
and broader initiatives. By demonstrating achievements at small and medium scales,
we hope the reader will gain an appreciation for the overall achievements of EF.4
1995-2000
EF was established to deliver seed capital to emerging civil society organizations
working for democratic reform after the collapse of the Soviet Union. During the first
years of EFs operations, rigorous grant management procedures built the capacity of
start-up civic organizations in financial and project management. (For more
information on EFs grants management and organizational capacity building
activities, please see Section VI, How We Work.) Todays strongest and most active
civil society organizations in Georgia received seed grants from EF in the early- and
mid-1990s, when most donors were not yet active in the country. This cadre of
sustainable and effective organizations includes the Georgian Young Lawyers
Association, the Association for Legal and Public Education, Radio Green Wave, the
Civil Society Institute, Caucasus Environmental NGO Network (CENN), Liberty
Institute, Caucasus School of Business, European School of Management, Association
of Young Economists, Caucasus Institute for Peace, Democracy and Development,
Georgian Federation of Certified Public Accountants and Auditors, Association for the
Protection of Landowners Rights and many, many more. Although EF cannot claim
responsibility for the individual success of each of these organizations, the collective
group whose roots are tied to EF seed capital strongly suggests that EFs early grant
making had high impact.
Today it is nearly impossible to find a successful local NGO in Georgia that did not
receive a grant from EF in the early stages of their institutional start-up and
development. In many cases, the small projects that these local organizations
implemented with EF funding were so successful that larger donors took on similar
projects with bigger pools of funding. For example, the Association for the Protection
of Landowners Rights (APLR), received their first grant from EF in 1997 to prepare
draft legislation on land privatization, which helped to consolidate land parcels and
pave the way for economic growth in the agriculture sector (the law was adopted in
2005). After this project, APLR was contracted by USAID on a large land parcel
registration project and is now the leading source of expertise in land-related issues.
APLR is also a successful social enterprise, supplementing its social work with
income-generating consulting projects for the government and businesses.
Many other organizations are winning direct bids from major donors and pursuing
nuanced campaigns for social justice and democratic development. One former
grantee of EF, the United Nations Association of Georgia, is even sub-contracting
activities of a large USAID-funded program on integration of minority ethnic groups
back to EF.
4

Additional program results from Georgia and a set of summaries of relevant evaluations can
be found in the Appendix. Because the achievements of EFs affiliate offices in Central Asia
(EFCA), Russia (FNE), Eastern Europe and elsewhere in the South Caucasus are also the
strengths of EPF in Georgia, we have included several examples from EPFs affiliate partners
that have direct relevance to programming in Georgia.

24

EF also established itself during this time as a foundation willing to take risks by
piloting new ideas and programmatic approaches, especially in the field of cross
border work:

An external evaluation of EFs support to cross border media programs

between 1999 and 2004 noted that In late 1999, when the first regional
media projects were funded, the Eurasia Foundation was one of very few
international organizations that pioneered work in the field of cross border
media assistance The wide range of [EF-supported trilateral] regional
media initiatives broke the ice in many areas which neither local nor
international organizations considered possible before. This conclusion is
further supported by a recent decision of the European Commission to fund
the Caucasus Journalists Network through their Independent Media for Civil
Integration program. This program is an example of a partnership group that
EFs cross border program brought together and that continues to cooperate
for mutual benefit.

Another evaluation of EFs support to public policy NGOs in the South

Caucasus documents the payoff to taking risks in the region. An external
evaluation of EFs Cross Border program noted: EF most broadly
experimented with its programmatic approaches in its South Caucasus cluster
of grants. The idea of [EFs trilateral] program of collaborative policy studies
carried significant implementation risks due to the additional difficulties of
forming a partnership team, filing joint grant proposals, communication in the
course of work on a project and collective reporting. The deep and unresolved
conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan complicated the matter further.
However, these risks were justified by the invaluable opportunity to promote
trust, goodwill, and mutual understanding between the intellectual and policy
elites of the South Caucasus countries, and to draw on multiple synergies
created by cross border cooperation of policy experts. Such synergies
included: dissemination of policy blueprints and outcomes; creating regional
competition in policy reform; pooling bigger expert teams (economies of
scale) and de facto introducing the practice of peer reviews; addressing cross
border spillovers of national policies; and seeking policy harmonization.

2001-2006
As civil society began to flourish in Georgia, EF focused the second phase of its
work on deepening and strengthening existing partnerships, consolidating the
capacity of partners and grantees, and achieving concrete program impacts in fields
identified by the Foundation as critical to civic and democratic development. Between
2004 and 2007, EF awarded more than 85 grants to Georgian NGOs and civil society
groups mostly through the Open Door Program. Through grant clusters in specific
program areas, EF targeted resources where needs were highest, while the Open
Door Program allowed EF to retain its flexibility to respond to emerging needs.
Notable achievements during this time include:

Elections Monitoring - In 2003, the local branch of the International Society

for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) came to EF with a proposal to
conduct exit polling during the 2004 Presidential elections. Recognizing
the potential impact of this program, EF quickly made a grant through the

25

Open Door Program. The results of ISFEDs exit polls provided reliable and
independent confirmation that the elections had been rigged. The results of
the exit polls were broadcast on independent TV channels across the country,
galvanizing public opinion and ultimately precipitating in the Rose Revolution.
In 2006, EF responded to the need for further voter education in the run-up
to the hastily announced municipal elections held in October. With a grant
from EF, New Generation New Initiative monitored the new central voters list.
The grantee, using teams of volunteers in the regions, checked over 100,000
names on the list, finding a significant number of errors which were reported
to the Central Election Commission. A grant to ISFED promoted the active
involvement of youth in the election process by training first-time voters in
the election code and election procedures. A smaller group received additional
training to serve as volunteer observers during the election.
In 2003-2004, in cooperation with IREX and OSGF, EF awarded grants to
several independent regional newspapers, radio stations and televisions to
provide unbiased and professional coverage of the November 2, 2003
parliamentary and January 4, 2004 presidential elections. The grantee media
organizations organized live talk-shows involving all major political players,
civic organizations, experts and private citizens, allowing the Georgian
citizens to stay fully informed about their election rights, electoral procedures,
standards for fair elections and the programs of different political parties. The
media grants culminated in civic and political activism of informed citizens to
defend their constitutional rights and to resist election fraud by the
incumbent government. The grants also helped the recipient media outlets to
enhance their management, quality of programs and reporting.

NGO Watchdogs - In 2001, a grant awarded through EFs Open Door

Program to an NGO in Akhaltsikhe launched a public campaign that succeeded
in pressuring the government to maintain higher accountability over the local
budget. Building from the success of the pilot project, EF launched the
Anticorruption NGO Watchdog Initiative (ACWI) in 2002, awarding grants to
six NGOs in Georgias regions and to one Tbilisi-based organization. The
partners increased public awareness regarding the rights and responsibilities
of different government bodies, identified numerous cases of corruption and
organized responses through court appeals, law suits and media campaigns.
Achievements from Phase I include significant changes to the staff, budgets
and expenditures of government bodies, including the dismissal of several
corrupt officials. EF launched a second round of the program in 2004 and over
the next two years ten NGO Watchdogs received grants to conduct
anticorruption activities in the regions outside of Tbilisi. One grantee, the
Georgian Young Lawyers Association, monitored the use of presidential envoy
funds in six regions of Georgia and found many examples of misuse and
corruption. They developed a package of recommendations on effective
management of these funds, which were presented to regional governors.
Many of these recommendations were adopted by regional administrations.
Other partners monitored local government budgets and the procurement
process; identified numerous instances of corruption; publicized findings
through public information sessions, quarterly bulletins and media campaigns;
and advocated for citizen interests. More than 70 percent of the
recommendations made by the NGO watchdogs were integrated by local
governments into their activities, and the grantees won several court cases

26

under the law on freedom of information to make government expenditures

and budget planning processes open and available to the public.

The Data Initiative Recognizing that the quality of research in the social
sciences in the South Caucasus was low and was not meeting the information
needs of policy makers, independent analysts or the donor community, EF
launched the Caucasus Research Resource Centers (CRRC) in 2001 with
support from the Carnegie Corporation. The goal of CRRC is to strengthen the
quality of social science research in, for and about the South Caucasus. At the
time, reliable and freely available data about the South Caucasus was difficult
if not impossible to find. In response, CRRC launched the Data Initiative, a
yearly household survey containing over 120 questions that is conducted
simultaneously in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia. First coordinated in 2004,
the survey aims to provide publicly accessible, consistent raw data on a wide
range of issues related to demography, education, migration, economic
behavior, health, political activities, social institutions and crime. During the
first year of the survey in 2004, 4,500 households were surveyed (1,500 in
each capital city). Each year, the survey has expanded in geographic scope
and size. By 2006 the survey included over 6,800 households and covered all
regions of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan (excluding conflict zones). In
2007 the survey will include more questions to fill additional information gaps,
and it will cover 12,000 households in all enough to make significantly
statistical comparisons across regions within each country. In addition to
providing data for researchers to use for academic and policy research, the
dataset is now being used in trainings and presentations to teach policy
makers and analysts how to better manipulate data and to educate the
development community about datas importance. The data is immediately
relevant to the problems that both the development community is facing and
problems academics are interested in and many individuals apply the handson activities used in the trainings to their classrooms or workplaces.

The growth of Georgias private sector over the last few years has created a
high demand for local managers with management skills that meet
international standards. EF played a key role in the development of
university level business education to meet this demand. Back in 1998,
EF supported the launch of an MBA program, the Caucasus School of Business
(CSB), which since then has become a leading business school in Georgia. In
2003, EF gave institutional development grants to both CSB and European
School of Management (ESM), the other leader in business education, to
address institutional weaknesses such as scarce library resources, a small
capacity for faculty development, and a lack of international recognition.
Through these grants, the schools expanded their libraries by purchasing
textbooks and subscribing to electronic business libraries. The grants
promoted the professional development of core faculty by supporting faculty
members research activities, and strengthened the schools international
partnerships. As a part of the accreditation process, CSB and ESM completed
a self-assessment and underwent evaluation by the Central and East
European Management Development Association (CEEMAN) experts. As a
result of this process, both schools were awarded accreditation by CEEMAN
for meeting high standards in business education.

27

2007 and Beyond

EFs mission of strengthening civil society in Georgia requires a long-term
commitment. Although civil society is much stronger now than it was 13 years ago,
for various reasons, we do not yet see the mature civil society sector that is
necessary for democratic development. Today, EF is targeting resources in areas
identified as critical to strengthening the role of civil society in Georgia.
While many successful NGOs are working in Tbilisi, only a handful of civic
organizations are active in the regions. EF is broadening the geographic scope of its
investments in Georgia to target civil society organizations in the regions outside of
the capital. It is doing so by encouraging partnerships between strong organizations
working mostly in Tbilisi with newer organizations working in the regions, and by
reincarnating EFs original seed grants to the regions. The majority of the projects
in Georgia have a regional aspect to them:

For example, the Youth Bank program was launched in Georgia in the
summer of 2007 and focuses exclusively on young people in regions where
opportunities for youth employment and engagement in civic processes are
exceptionally low. The regions include two ethnic minority populated regions
of Georgia Kvemo Kartli and Samtskhe-Javakheti plus Adjara, Kakheti and
Samegrelo Zemo-Svaneti. One of the goals of the Youth Bank Program is to
achieve a balance between female and male participants. In Azerbaijan, this
program has just entered its third year and we have seen some impressive
results that are expected to be repeated in Georgia. Through the Azerbaijani
program, youth established collaborative relationships with various
community members such as businesses, local government representatives
and other youth groups, gaining a valuable set of professional skills and
practical experiences. As a result, 17 youth have received new or improved
employment opportunities after beginning the program. The youth
committees funded, monitored and accounted for 28 youth-led projects in five
rural regions of Azerbaijan, over half of which were implemented by young
women. Maintaining equal participation of women and men is a notable
achievement of the program. One youth group used their pool of grants to
fund the establishment of a caf for women only, since men dominate the
cafes and young women have few opportunities to gather outside of the
home. EF also found innovative ways to allow young women in the program
to access the internet, which was critical for their participation but difficult at
a practical level since women are frequently forbidden by their families from
going to male-dominated internet cafes. Most recently, EF has been engaged
in negotiations with the Azerbaijan Ministry of Youth and Sports to finalize a
partnership in which the Ministry will contribute $10,000 towards the
programs implementation.

EFs work in Georgia is also guided by the ENP Action Plan that was adopted by the
government in 2006. With momentum and commitment from the government
towards deeper European integration, programs that coincide with the parameters of
the Action Plan are a recipe for achieving long-lasting results. Already we are seeing
some positive results in this field:

In partnership with the Open Society Georgia Foundation and the Heinrich
Boell Foundation, EF initiated a program to involve civil society in the
development of an alternative ENP National Action Plan. The purpose

28

of developing an alternative plan was to set a high standard for the

governments own version. EF chaired two expert working groups on
economic development and anticorruption that were composed of civil
society leaders, private sector specialists and former members of
parliament. Unofficially, it appears from comparing the governments draft
and final plans that many of the sections developed by the NGO working
groups were directly incorporated into the governments final plan. EF and
its partner organizations have also organized a series of roundtable
discussions about the most important reform topics under ENP, including
healthcare and social security, judicial reform and the rule of law, taxation
and conflict resolution. The partners are now organizing a lobbying trip to
Brussels in November 2007 to meet with representatives of the European
Parliament and to present a set of recommendations set out as a work plan
with specific targets for implementing the national action plan. It is hoped
that this campaign will help to put additional pressure on the government
to make concrete steps towards achieving the commitments they have
made, some of which are quite vague.
Looking ahead, EF is planning to launch the Corporate Social Investment program to
increase the long term sustainability of civil society organizations in Georgia one of
the major challenges facing the sector:

In addition to broadening the reach of civil society across the country, EF is

also cultivating local sources of funding for long-term sustainability of civic
initiatives. The Corporate Social Investment (CSI) program is encouraging
local philanthropy, one important source of capital for civil society in the long
term when donors exit the region, by working with businesses to design social
investment strategies. Although this program will be launched in Georgia in
the near future, EF has seen significant results of similar initiatives in
Azerbaijan and Russia. As a result of EFs program activities in CSI in
Azerbaijan, Garadagh Cement, a local business, has funded the expansion of
the Youth Bank program to the neighborhood where their cement plant is
located; and a major telecommunications company has restructured its entire
Corporate Social Responsibility department and appointed two full-time staff
members to oversee its social investment program. This company also assists
EF in financing the trainings and high level speakers for the 25 other local
businesses active in EFs CSI events. After the first kick-off event for the
program in Armenia, EF was approached by HSBC Bank to implement an ecofriendly tourism project. The summary of the impact evaluation for EFs
Corporate Social Investment program in Russia (in the Appendix) also
demonstrates many notable achievements that we hope to see replicated in
Georgia.

Over its 13 year history of grant making and programming in Georgia, EF has helped
to launch some of the strongest civil society institutions in the country (GYLA, CENN,
APLR, CSM, ESM, etc.); invested in small but risky ideas with large payoffs later
(exit-polling during 2004 elections); focused resources where needs and potential
impact were greatest (NGO Watchdogs); and filled the information gap (CRRCs Data
Initiative). In the years ahead, EPF will seek to replicate these successes by building
a stronger civil society sector in Georgias regions and by strategically investing in
new ideas while building off successful existing ones.

29

We remain committed to building a civil society sector that conducts high quality and
independent policy analysis, citizen education, advocacy and service provision,
enabling all citizens to achieve social and economic prosperity.

30

VI.

RELEVANCE

CONFORMITY WITH SIDAS REGIONAL STRATEGY

Eurasia Partnership Foundations focus on empowering individuals and strengthening
institutions of civil society is relevant to a number of the objectives that are set out
in Sidas Regional Strategy paper for the South Caucasus. For example, a vital civil
society plays a critical role in enhanced democracy and effective governance. It
also serves as a springboard for advocacy in compliance with human rights and
enables independent institutions to monitor compliance with human rights. The civic
sector also supports economic development through community organizations in
areas such as agriculture where cooperation can yield higher returns. A table
demonstrating synergies between EPFs activities and Sidas priorities is available in
the Appendix.
CONFORMITY WITH NATIONAL STRATEGY DOCUMENTS
Eurasia Partnership Foundations mission and goals are designed to complement the
broader picture of development assistance to the South Caucasus. Through strategic
planning sessions that occur both during yearly planning sessions and on an ongoing,
as-needed basis, each countrys own development priorities are regularly reviewed
and programs are continually reassessed to ensure that they are relevant to national
development strategies, including the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) and
ENP Action Plan documents.
At the regional level, the ENP Action Plans are important guiding documents to EFs
work. Cooperation at the regional level is a significant priority in the ENP Action Plans
of all three countries. However, promoting trilateral intergovernmental cooperation
will be extremely challenging given the lingering political impasse between Armenia
and Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It is here that NGOs can play a
key role in facilitating cooperation across the region through the exchange of ideas
on issues that impact all three countries. EF is implementing an 18-month ENP Civic
Dialogue Project (described in the Appendix) that seeks to promote regional
cooperation on NGO input to ENP action plan implementation; to foster dialogue and
collaboration between government and civil society on public policy issues common
to all three ENP Action Plans; and to raise awareness of the concrete benefits of
European integration and the ENP process among journalists and the general
public. EF has already conducted three policy forums examining waste management,
food standards and safety, and vocational education. The policy forums have
successfully brought together NGO and government officials from all three countries
to establish the research agenda for forthcoming policy reports on these topics. In
addition to promoting a cross border exchange on policy issues, the ENP Civic
Dialogue Project will also serve as a catalyst for government-NGO dialogue on the
selected public policy issues in each country through the establishment of in-country
working groups consisting of NGOs, government agencies, and other stakeholders in
the development of the policy reports.
For more detail on conformity of EF objectives with various relevant national
development strategies, please see the Appendix.

31

IMPACT ON THE POOR, GENDER EQUALITY AND THE ENVIRONMENT

Poverty
Poverty is a multi-dimensional problem. It involves not only physical and material
deprivation, but a lack of information, education, power and political influence.
Poverty also affects different segments of society in different ways. In many
impoverished families, women have taken on the role of breadwinners by taking lowpaid jobs. This has given them a certain degree of empowerment through increased
economic independence, though it has also subjugated them to gender-based
violence both in the domestic as well as public domains. The majority of women who
remain employed in the formal sector work in the low-paying fields of agriculture,
education, healthcare and light industry.5 The vertical and horizontal gender
segregation of the labour market is obvious from the high concentration of women in
lower positions in the less profitable sectors of the economy. As a result, according
to the State Department of Statistics, in 2005 the average nominal monthly salary of
women in all fields of the economy and all sectors was 49% that of men.6
Our programs help to increase the material and non-material assets of the poor and
vulnerable groups, including women, as well as representatives of different
minorities, by creating better opportunities for poor people to improve their
standards of living through access to information and resources that enable them to
make better decisions; through a focus on collective action for greater impact; and
by making governments more aware of and accountable to the needs and interests
of vulnerable populations. Past EF grants have supported capacity trainings for
small-scale lenders to Georgian entrepreneurs and youth, support to womens rural
handicraft associations for skills building and income generation in Azerbaijan and
Georgia, support to business associations in all three Caucasus nations, and direct
provision of small scale loans to emerging businesses in Armenia. While EPF will not
focus directly on the elimination of poverty, our programs give citizens the tools to
help themselves and to seek out constructive solutions. In this way, our programs
address issues of powerlessness and isolation issues that are tied directly to
poverty.
Gender Equality
All of EFs programming is gender conscious; In the Youth Fund program, for
example, the equal participation of young women and men is a priority. The
participation of women on equal footing with men is tracked in all our grants and
programs throughout the grants management and reporting cycles by the Grants
Management System, a proprietary electronic database used by EF to manage and
record all aspects of the grant making cycle. In addition, the CRRC programs Data
Initiative, a yearly regional household survey of social attitudes and behaviors in the
South Caucasus, collects data disaggregated by sex to allow for gender analysis of
different social phenomena.

5
According to 1989 data 50.2% of employed in agriculture, 77.4% in healthcare and 70.4% in light
industry were women. See Gender Development Association, Status of Women in Georgia, Tbilisi, 1999, 7.
6
Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia, Department of Statistics, Woman and Man in Georgia,
Statistical Abstract, Tbilisi, 2006, 54. According to the State Department of Statistics the average monthly
nominal salary of women made 60% of that of men. Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia,
Department of Statistics, Woman and Man in Georgia, Statistical Publication, Tbilisi, 2005, 58. Thus, one
can clearly observe a decreasing trend between these two data.

32

As a local foundation in Georgia, EPF will establish and implement a gender

mainstreaming strategy into its grant making and operating program activities. This
strategy will be based, in part, on the State Concept on Gender Equality adopted by
the Georgian government in July 2006, and on international best practices in gender
equality. This includes:

Program design: The program design phase will be built on identification of

needs of a programs potential beneficiaries, including common and particular
needs of women and men. Respectively, EPF staff will pay particular attention
to the impact of issues and the interventions offered on women and men.
Monitoring and evaluation: Through needs assessments and collection of
baseline data disaggregated by sex (where possible), EPF will be in a better
position to undertake gender impact analysis of the effects of programs and
interventions.
Awareness Raising - EPF will seek to raise awareness among our grantees
and partners on practical tools for achieving greater gender equality in
programs. One existing tool, a manual for grantees in monitoring and
evaluation, will be updated to contain a section specific to monitoring and
evaluating gender equality.
Staff recruitment EPF is an equal opportunity employer and does not
discriminate. Both women and men are welcome to apply for every position.
EPF will conduct an analysis of the types of positions occupied by women and
men including decision-making posts. The analysis should allow for critical
review of our HR policies/regulations to avoid any type of discrimination on
the basis of sex.

EPF is also seeking a local gender specialist as a member of the Program Advisory
Committee in Georgia. Although her candidacy has not yet been confirmed, EPF
hopes that Tamar Sabedashvili, a specialist in gender studies working now for the
Office of the United Nations Coordinator in Georgia, has been invited to join the
board. If confirmed, Ms. Sabedashvilis expertise will be critical to mainstreaming a
gender persepective into all of EPFs work in Georgia.
Environment
A number of EF grants and programs support a cleaner, healthier environment. A
cross border program to engage citizens in the monitoring of water resource
management along the Kura-Aras river basin resulted in the inclusion of
environmental impact as a key criterion for the privatization of a copper mine
polluting the river. In Georgia, the Pipeline Monitoring and Dialogue Initiative
brought together citizen groups to monitor BPs compliance with international
environmental standards and commitments in areas such as waste management, oil
spill response, and reinstatement of the landscape. Waste management is one of
three thematic focuses of the cross border ENP project.

33

VII.

SUSTAINABILITY AND RISK ANALYSIS

EFs core mission is to build local, sustainable civil society institutions through grants
and technical assistance support. In 2004, EFs Board of Trustees set in motion a
process to permanently root each of its field offices into the institutional fabric of
local civil society. This localization strategy will assure the sustainability of operations
throughout the Eurasia region, cementing 15 years of experience. In 2005, EF began
transferring ownership of strategy, finances and programs to local staff of its Russia
office, and in 2006 the offices in Central Asia underwent the same process. EFs
vision is that these newly independent institutions EPF among then will continue
to receive core financial and institutional support from EF while expanding their
funding from other international and local sources. They will design their own
programs under the leadership of local managers and international boards of
directors. EPF will inherit from EF and maintain high standards in programming,
financial oversight and administrative and management systems. These standards
and procedures contribute to the sustainability of both the institution and its
programs.
EF believes that a sustainable organization:
Has the ability to secure financial support (fundraising capacity)
Has sound financial systems and internal controls, and an engaged Board of
Trustees (organizational sustainability)
Delivers programs and outputs with value to stakeholders (sustainability of
programs)
Ultimately, the goal of institutional sustainability is not the long term life of the
institution itself, but the realization of long term development goals. EPFs goal is,
To build a civil society sector that conducts high quality and independent policy
analysis, citizen education, advocacy and service provision, enabling all citizens to
achieve social and economic prosperity. EPF has developed plans for fundraising,
institutional development and program strategies that collectively aim to achieve
sustainable outcomes. More information about these plans follows below.
RISK AND UNCERTAINTY
EPFs need to raise additional funds in order to be sustainable brings with it inherent
risk. As described at length below, EPF has taken a number of steps to mitigate
these risks and believes that over the next five years, the financial future of the
Foundation is secure. Other efforts (such as securing a line item in the U.S.
Congressional budget see below) take a longer-term approach to EFs and EPFs
financial sustainability. The benefit of EFs experience and lessons learned from
localizing offices in Russia and Central Asia minimize other risks associated with
creating a new local institution. Recognizing that the Foundation must be comfortable
with a certain level of uncertainty and risk in its operations, EF/EPF has anticipated a
multitude of scenarios and built strong systems and procedures in programs and
grants implementation, administration, human resources, financial management,
procurement, governance and reporting that are part of daily activities. These
procedures are reviewed annually and adjusted as necessary to meet new challenges
as they arise.
Registering as a local foundation also entails certain risks, including financial, political
and programmatic risk. By recognizing these risks in advance, EPF will be better
positioned to manage them, prevent them or react early to them:

34

Financial Risk
A few finance-related issues arise with localization, but all are manageable
with planning and management attention. There will be an increased tax
burden, for one, when the VAT exemption our operations currently enjoy is
removed. EF is in process of requesting a continued VAT exemption for all
qualifying funds which it manages. There will be an increased reporting
burden to local tax authorities, which will increase staff time required to
maintain in compliance with local legislation. EPF will maintain EFs
relationship with an outsourced specialist in local taxation to mitigate this
reporting burden. Finally, there is a possibility of increased fraud risk under a
fully localized scenario. EPF will continue to use the strong internal financial
risk mitigation systems that it currently has, including a strict hierarchy in
financial transaction authorities, a system of checks and balances built into
grant making systems and a strong internal audit function. EF will continue to
provide advice and support on the financial systems level until full autonomy
of internal systems is achieved by EPF.

Political Risk
Under local registration, the individual country foundations conceivably may
be at greater risk of receiving direct or indirect political pressure from local
authorities to award specific grants or avoid certain program areas. We
believe several structural factors will serve to mitigate this type of risk:
maintaining an international governing board with full fiscal accountability to
whom all expenditure concerns can be referred for transparency purposes;
and a wide profile of local advisory committee members past whom all
programmatic questions will be run. We believe these risks will continue to be
mitigated by the international board structure, our close ties with US,
Swedish and other donor communities, and clear and transparent internal
processes that identify and prevent any irregularities.

Programmatic Risk
With a shifting program portfolio, especially one that focuses on funding
innovation, there is always increased risk of programmatic failure. EPF plans
to renew EFs core expertise in grants programs but refocus grant making and
project management activities to rural regions where a less skilled and
experienced set of NGO partners will carry a greater risk of project failure.
Experimental or innovative grants funding is by nature a higher-risk
endeavor than institutional grant making or project management. It is similar
to the volatility of the investment atmosphere that venture capital firms face
in backing small businesses or investing in emerging markets. There is a
higher chance of great returns and a higher risk of great failure.
Fortunately, with a small-scale investment approach, EPF will be managing
this increased risk both structurally and procedurally. Structurally, EPF will be
able to internally manage any high risk startup or capacity building activities
necessary for specific initiatives. Risk mitigation strategies include key
trainings for social investment programming, serving as a convener or
intermediary for outside organizations who desire coordination services,
trainings for citizen monitoring and targeted technical assistance provision
directly to local partners. Examples of past successes on this front are:
management of the Pipeline Monitoring and Dialogue Initiative, founding of
the Caucasus Research Resource Centers, support to the department of
Tourism in Tbilisi for development of national tourism branding materials.

35

Procedurally, we will adjust our review procedures, reporting requirements,

site visit schedules and other requirements to provide adequate control and
support to newer grantees and contractors as necessary. Our track record in
this arena has always been strong, and we are confident it will remain so
after formal localization is complete.
FUNDRAISING CAPACITY
As a locally-registered institution, EPF will be eligible for funding from a variety of
sources, including European governments and the European Union. EPF will receive
core financial support annually delivered by EF from U.S. Government core funds7.
EF submitted a request in August 2007 to renew its USAID Core III Grant Agreement
for $18 million over three years ($2 million annually for Georgia). Given the trends in
core funding for Georgia, EPF expects to secure USAID funds at similar levels in
2008-2010.
In addition to the USAID Core III Grant Agreement, the EF Headquarters office in
Washington is also leading an effort to secure Congressional authorization for the
Eurasia Foundation which would provide EF with more widespread and stable support
and would greatly enhance the fundraising prospects of the Foundation and the
legacy foundations. In early summer 2007 an Act establishing EF as an independent
institution was introduced in the U.S. Congress and has official, bipartisan
sponsorship from more than 25 members of Congress. On October 23, 2007, the
Eurasia Foundation Act was approved unanimously by the House Foreign Affairs
Committee and will now proceed to the Full House of Representatives. With passage
by the House and Senate, the EF Network of legacy institutions would be authorized
by the US Congress. These funds would be managed by EF DC as grants to the local
legacy foundations.
Fundraising Trends
Trends in EFs fundraising for Georgia (see chart below) show that EF-Georgia has
seen a steady and reliable inflow of core funds, which has hovered around $2 million
each year, coupled with some big successes in non-core fundraising over the last few
years.
Trends in Azerbaijan, where core funds have been steadily decreasing over the last
six years, present a different picture. As USAID funding decreased for Azerbaijan, EF
took a more proactive approach to fundraising there. By reaching out to new donors
and diversifying funding sources, EF in Azerbaijan was able to maintain steady
overall funding levels even as USAID funds fell off sharply (See chart below). EPF in
Georgia will apply a similar proactive fundraising strategy as it seeks to leverage
core support with funding from new donors; EFs success in fundraising for
Azerbaijan programs is a good proxy indicator of EPFs ability to secure additional
resources for Georgia.

For the purpose of this proposal, we use the term core funds to describe funding provided for the foundations
operations in pursuit of its overall mission (vs. funds granted for a specific project). This includes annual U.S.
Government funding granted to EPF through EF and any funding from other donors that is not program-specific.

36

Georgia: Core, Raised and Leveraged Funds 2001-2007

3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
-

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007*

Leveraged

$0

$83,300

$135,066

$7,910

$0

$0

$0

Raised

$0

$0

$206,300

$299,270

$174,922

$309,903

$75,162

2,000,000

2,000,000

1,988,300

1,900,000

2,025,000

2,220,000

2,000,000

Core

Azerbaijan: Core, Raised and Leveraged Funds 2001-2007

3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
-

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007*

Leveraged

$0

$100,560

$64,696

$121,559

$211,813

$7,880

$0

Raised

$0

$20,000

$82,757

$42,964

$110,000

$410,941

$781,062

2,000,000

2,453,702

1,987,000

1,850,000

1,730,000

1,500,000

1,200,000

Core

37

Lastly, the fundraising success of EF offices worldwide in FY2007 demonstrate the

ability of EF legacy institutions to fundraise a trend we strongly believe will be
replicated in the South Caucasus in the coming years. These worldwide successes
include:

$6.9 million in non-core funds were raised for FY07 (the goal for the year was
$6.2 million). The sharp increase is due especially to success in the South
Caucasus
EFs traditional donors such as the British Government, Corporations; Mott
Foundation, Netherlands, OSCE, and others continued to support EF
programs;
Over half of donors in FY07 are new donors
The first EU money was given directly to a legacy organization: 85,000 Euros
to EF in Central Asia for Public Participation Centers
For the first time, a corporate donor (Philip Morris in Kazakhstan) handed an
entire social investment portfolio to an EF Network member
First donation from the UN Democracy Fund (in Armenia)
First sizeable award received from the Russian government: $400,000 from
Voronezh region for education programs

Sources of funds
EPFs fundraising efforts in 2008-2010 will focus on raising non-core funds from the
following types of sources:
1. Bilateral donors and the EU
Bilateral funding from European governments is the most promising source of
funds for EPF, especially the UK, Swedish, Norwegian, Dutch and Austrian
governments. EPF may also bid on EU tenders as appropriate and eligible, and
seeks to become a partner with European organizations on EU-funded
projects. Already, EF is working with the Austrian NGO Interkulturrelles
Zentrum to implement a youth media program about the South Caucasus.
The Canadian International Development Agency has also indicated strong
interest in working with EPF on a regional Participatory Citizen Monitoring
program. EFs development team is currently working to design a proposal for
this program, worth up to $3 million over three years for the region ($1
million for Georgia) if successful.
2. U.S. government funding
US Government funding from sources outside EFs USAID Core III grant
agreement are another potential source of resources for EPF. The State
Department Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) is one
important source of such funds: EF has already won three awards from DRL,
including one in Azerbaijan. EF may choose to submit a bid for contracts or
cooperative agreements from local USAID missions or approach U.S. partner
organizations to sub-contract to EPF for a portion of a USAID project.
3. International Corporations and Foundations
European and U.S. corporations and private foundations are another source of
funds for EPF. As a local organization, EPF will be eligible to receive funding
from European corporations and foundations working in Georgia. As needed,

38

EF will channel donations to EPF from U.S. corporations and foundations

which require their donations go to a U.S.-registered 501(c)3 organization.
4. Corporations and businesses in Georgia
International investment in Georgia is growing quickly as new players enter
the market. The banking sector in Georgia holds promise; newly-arrived
HSBC has already indicated an interest in funding EF for an environmental
program. International businesses operating locally, such as Philip Morris
International and BP have contributed to EF programs in the South Caucasus.
EPF may also be able to attract small contributions from local (noninternational) businesses in Georgia.
5. Multilateral agencies
EPF will continue to build its relationship with various multilateral aid
agencies, including the UN and the OSCE. Both EF in Georgia and the CRRC
program have recently collaborated with these and other multilateral
agencies, and EPF will look to strengthen these relationships in the future.
International Donors Forum
A donors forum to bring together key US and European donors held around the time
of the launch of EPF could secure additional core funding for the local foundations by
putting pressure on governments who have not yet come in with a funding
commitment to EPF. EPF would seek to bring together a number of high-level
government representatives for a half-day conference on the state of development in
the South Caucasus. Major founding partners in EPF, including Sida, Carnegie
Corporation and USAID, would be asked to spearhead the initiative by making their
financial commitments to EPF public at the forum. The aim is to raise awareness of
the issues facing the South Caucasus and their impact on European and U.S.
interests, and to galvanize financial support for EPFs mission from other leading
governments in a donor pledge drive.
Internal Systems for Fundraising
EPFs internal capacity for fundraising has already begun to grow, building on EFs
existing systems and procedures. EPF established the Regional Development Officer
position in spring 2007 and the management team has placed increasing emphasis
on incorporating fundraising activities into EPFs program sustainability plans. The
EPF President and Regional Development Officer will manage fundraising and
program development efforts across the region. All EPF staff are responsible for
identifying new opportunities and for sharing this information with colleagues.
Emphasis will be placed on stronger coordination of fundraising efforts across offices.
EFs Donor Database (DDB), an electronic database that tracks EFs fundraising
history, is one existing management tool that will be inherited by EPF.
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
EFs experience launching two local legacy foundations in Russia and Central Asia has
shown that internal structures, procedures, and administration of an organization
determine its capacity to mobilize resources and advance its mission. In an effort to
measure the institutional growth of our legacy institutions, EF developed the
Capacity Mapping Initiative (CMI) with support from an external consulting company,
the Local Initiatives Support Corporation LISC). To ensure that the legacy

39

foundations have clear institutional development goals and are moving forward to
meet them, EF uses the CMI to assess where the legacy foundations stand in their
institutional development and then to jointly identify steps they need to take to
move to a higher level. Once an organization understands where it is and where it
wants to be, the CMI tool guides the institution to get there.
The CMI is a diagnostic tool consisting of four modules: Board Governance, Executive
Leadership, Financial Management and Program Management. Each module is broken
down into different steps, called stages of critical competency, which identify a
continuum of capacity and the critical gates that most organizations pass through as
they become increasingly sophisticated, more efficient and more productive. For
example, Stage 1 of Board Governance is the most basic: Board demonstrates
knowledge of the organizations mission and strategy. Stage 10 is the most
sophisticated: Board mobilizes the organization to accomplish increasing levels of
achievement that produce measurable and visible changes in the community. Within
each stage, there is a verification test (such as interviews with Board members,
review of files, etc.) and associated indicators so that EF and the legacy foundation
staff can determine if the organization meets that level of competency. Also in each
stage is a list of capacity builders steps that the organization should take to get
to the next stage of competency. In this way, using the CMI, EF and EPF will map
how EPF is doing as an institution on a regular basis, and identify specific, short-term
objectives that will help EPF become a stronger institution. EPF will participate in the
CMI within the first six months of its operations.
The CMI tool will help EPF reach an understanding of current capacity and chart a
path for organizational growth. Using the tool will engage all staff in the change
process and identify common training and technical assistance needs and prioritize
them. Using the tool over time will provide a measure of organizational growth and
can confirm that capacity-building efforts are yielding results.
In advance of the CMI, EPF has developed an interim Institutional Development Plan
(available in the Appendix), as well as operating plans for the coming fiscal years.8
The Institutional Development Plan outlines EFs objectives for developing and
strengthening EPF and its governing bodies. These objectives are:

To assist in the development and the effectiveness of the new EPF board of
directors and its committees
To set targets for EPFs financial sustainability and to create the systems
required to achieve those targets
To transfer EF programs to EPF and to develop EPFs program management
To develop strong human resource management, administration and
communication during transition to EPF as a foundation for EPFs operations
To create sound financial management systems for EPF
To establish strong external and internal communications about EPFs goals
and accomplishments through more effective and efficient use of internet
technologies

In developing and employing the CMI tool, as well as in putting together institutional
development, operating and business plans, EF has applied its experience and
8

Because the FY2008 Business Plan for EPF covers all three South Caucasus Countries, we have incorporated all the
sections that are Georgia-specific into this proposal and its appendices. We hope this is preferable to providing Sida
with another lengthy document, but the FY2008 Business Plan is certainly available should Sida be interested to see it.

40

lessons learned launching local foundations in Russia and Central Asia. These plans
suggest a path for growth toward sustainability, and EF has systems in place to
monitor EPFs progress along that path.
PROGRAM SUSTAINABILITY
Sustainability is hard wired into EFs unique approach to grant making, an approach
EPF will inherit. A viable plan for sustainability will be among EPFs criteria for
awarding grants to local partners, a practice EF has been implementing since it
began making grants in Georgia. EPF will continue to award grants only to
organizations which have a clear strategy for achieving sustainable, enduring
outcomes. Through a process of grants management that mentors and coaches
grantees along a demanding path of program development, financial and systems
auditing, due diligence, monitoring and reporting (as previously detailed in section
titled The Grants Review Process), EF builds the institutional capacity of partners to
manage stronger, better programs in the future. Grants are typically accompanied by
training and technical assistance to build skills and to provide new tools to our
partners.
The sustainability of EPFs programs will be ensured by EPFs governance structure:
through the leadership of an international Board of Trustees who will provide broad
strategic oversight and transparency functions; through the sector- and countryspecific expertise of National Advisory Committee members; and through the
devolution of greater authority from EF DC to local institutions. A marriage of
country-specific programming and shared regional program objectives will allow the
new network both to address local needs in order to build strategic programming and
to share lessons and resources across each office of EPF in the South Caucasus.
EPFs mission and goals are designed to complement the broader picture of
development assistance to the South Caucasus. Through strategic planning sessions
that occur both during yearly planning sessions and on an ongoing, as-needed basis,
each countrys own development priorities are regularly reviewed and programs are
continually reassessed to ensure that they are relevant to national development
strategies, including the PRSP and ENP Action Plan documents. At the regional level,
the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) Action Plans will be important guiding
documents to EPFs work. Program niches vary by country, but in program design
and planning processes, our general aim is to design programming in line with wider
local and international framework agreements or government priorities.
Georgia programs focus on several national government priorities including
education reform, civic integration of youth and minority populations, and economic
development through tourism. Staff in Georgia are in regular contact with regional
NGOs and local municipalities, and have held a series of sessions to introduce these
programs and receive feedback in Batumi, Zugdidi, Rustavi, Kustaisi, Akhaltsikhe
and other towns in Georgia. Cross Border programs focus on civil sector input to the
ENP action plan implementation and policy adjustment processes, and also focus on
citizen action in public monitoring.

41

VIII. MONITORING AND EVALUATION

EPF will develop a detailed monitoring plan and employ a comprehensive, resultsoriented evaluation strategy to produce timely information about program and grant
activities and assess the impact made by the program. This strategy will allow EPF to
demonstrate program impact and results and to identify issues or concerns that arise
during program implementation so that they can be addressed. EPF will inherit EFs
strong institutional capacities in monitoring and evaluation. These include:

Program staff with extensive experience in programmatic and financial

monitoring.
A proprietary electronic database, the Grants Management System (GMS),
which the EF Network uses to track all activities related to grants. GMS
records all financial and programmatic events and tracks impact according to
a variety of standard indicators (i.e. number of female and male beneficiaries,
number of jobs created, funds leveraged, coalitions built, publications
produced, etc). GMS also contains a vast history of every grant made and
application submitted over the last 13 years.
The Program Management Information System (PMIS), another proprietary
database used to plan, monitor and report on operational projects.
Strict grant and monitoring policies and procedures designed to ensure that
grantmaking is transparent, fair and efficient, while working to improve both
the effectiveness and measurability of EF/EPFs initiatives.
A regional evaluation officer who supports EPF with extensive practical
experience in evaluation and monitoring systems in the U.S., Russia, Central
Asia and the South Caucasus

Grants Monitoring
Before disbursing grant funds, EPF will apply strict due diligence procedures,
analyzing potential grantees experience and the capacity of grantee personnel to
comply with EPF procedures. Grantees will be required to maintain all grant-related
source documentation and have it available for review by EPF staff at any time. EPF
will also follow EFs proven procurement procedures.
When monitoring grants, EPF will rely on standard procedures tested and improved
by EF over the last 13 years. Shortly after grant award decisions are made, EPF staff
will offer mandatory training to grantees in financial and program management and
reporting requirements. EF has also developed a self evaluation manual for grantees
that builds their own evaluation capacity and helps EF to monitor the quality of their
work. All grantees will be required to submit periodic narrative and financial reports
documenting progress of their projects and expenditures under the grant. EPF
program and grants management personnel will be responsible for reviewing both
analytical and financial reports. These reports will be reviewed together to ensure
that the financial information corresponds with the programmatic activity for the
specified period. The frequency and content of the reports will be tailored to the
specific nature of each grant and will be stipulated in agreements between EPF and
its grantees. Grant payments are contingent upon receipt and approval by
Foundation staff of intermediate financial and narrative reports.

42

As part of its grants monitoring process, EPF Program Officers will work with
grantees and implementers prior to every project, to identify an overarching goal,
key objectives, the outputs that will lead to these objectives, and the activities that
will produce those outputs. This logical mapping is a requisite component in the
approval process for all EPF projects, regardless of their size. Program Officers
identify both impact indicators and collection methods before the start of all projects.
These indicators include project-specific impact indicators, as well as universal
indicators applicable to all projects.
EPFs program and grants management staff are responsible for monitoring grant
implementation. Through a combination of analytical reports, financial reports,
source documentation, audit reports and site visits, EPF will have the best
possible feedback on the financial and programmatic progress and success of grants.
EPF will share grantmaking best practices by collecting, interpreting and
disseminating outcome-oriented performance data critical to program understanding
and refinement.
Program Monitoring
EF conducts rigorous impact planning prior to all projects, regardless of size.
Considerations include the impact on both program beneficiaries and external
stakeholders such as ethnic minority groups, women and men, the elderly, youth and
disabled persons as well as impact on the environment. Program Officers are
required to identify output, outcome and impact indicators, frequency of data
collection and data collection methodology, which is a requisite component of EFs
codified program approval process.
For each program, EPF will identify specific outcome indicators that reflect overall
program results. These include a mix of quantitative and qualitative indicators and
are compiled to create a composite picture of program impact across each outcome.
For each identified outcome EF will also track a wider range of output indicators,
typically quantitative measurements that capture immediate results, help to monitor
program activities, and provide near real-time feedback on the programs
effectiveness. EPF will report against outcome and output indicators in its narrative
reports. In some cases, EPF will cooperate with the Caucasus Research Resource
Centers (CRRC) program to collect and analyze data.
Evaluation
Since its inception in 1993, EF has invested in building an evaluation culture that
drives all of our programming, from small open-door grants to multi-year, multicountry initiatives. Building on that legacy, EPF seeks to become a leader in applying
evaluation to its own programs, a well-regarded voice for excellence in donor
evaluation policies, and a champion for the effective use of evaluation in the region.
Prior to all major program initiatives, EPF collects baseline data and undertakes
needs assessments in order to determine the demands and gaps in infrastructure
and services that can be met through programmatic activity. Whether to explore new
geographic or programmatic areas, needs assessments allows EPF to design
targeted, effective, and appropriate programs that respond to local needs.
Project specific indicators do not always lead to data that can be aggregated, but
oftentimes these smaller projects create models that the foundation scales up or
replicates. Cluster indicators help us understand how we are doing in a particular
field of interest, such as the delivery of micro-finance in rural regions. A set of
universal indicators are also tracked to illustrate the scale of EPFs work, but these

43

indicators inadequately demonstrate the tremendous impact our programs have in

improving lives. The limitation of universal indicators is why EPF will continue to rely
on evaluation at every level.

Evaluations will be conducted by external evaluators or by EPF program staff.

EPF will conduct a number of assessments and evaluations throughout the
lifecycle of its programs to evaluate progress and impact:
Before launching a new program, a needs assessment will be conducted to
provide data on the gaps, achievements, challenges and prospects for future
work. Baseline evaluations will be publicly available through EPFs website and
distributed in print format to other donors and civil society organizations
engaged in similar activities. Baseline data will be collected in order to
compare the initial situation with the situation after the intervention.
Several mid-program evaluations will assess progress toward stated goals
and objectives and allow for adjustment in activities if necessary. Program
and financial staff will report quarterly on the main developments, restrictions
and changes in the policy context.
At the final stage of the program EPF will contract a team of independent
evaluators to assess the impact made by the program.

EPF proposes to conduct a final impact evaluation of the SIDA flagship Open
Door Grants Program at the end of year three.
Depending on resources available, evaluations will either be conducted by external
evaluators or by EPF program staff. While evaluating program activities, EPF will pay
special attention to crosscutting issues such as gender, youth, rural communities,
ethnic minorities and the environment, as appropriate. This approach will be
reflected both in the monitoring of day-to-day operations and in detailed mid-term
and final evaluations. EPF will also pay special attention to the sustainability of
programs and grantees, evaluating each program/grantee not only on progress
toward expected outcomes, but also on the sustainability of the institutions
developed.

44

IX.

A STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP: SIDA AND EPF

Becoming a founding sponsor of Eurasia Partnership Foundation in Georgia offers

Sida a unique opportunity a chance to be in on the ground floor at the
creation of a new and lasting local institution. A strategic partnership will
leverage EFs 13-year investment in the region, which has been built on high levels
of citizen trust and public visibility as an agent promoting a locally-led social change
agenda. This established reputation will position Sweden as a leader in support to
civil society development in Georgia.
EPF will undeniably be a central player in civic development in Georgia in the coming
decade. This new institution will be ground-breaking on several counts: with its aim
of strengthening the civic sector over the long run, it will both promote and model
the very practices of developing grassroots, citizen-driven checks and balances that
many donors seek to support through their development efforts across the region.
Both its grant making and its program operations will embody the importance of
fiscal transparency, citizen action, participatory governance and locally-driven reform
agendas.
As a mechanism for channeling its support to civic sector development, EPF offers
several very concrete benefits to Sida:

Physical presence on the ground in Georgia

Close association with a reform effort driven by locally-defined needs
Cost-effective technical support in grant making, informed by an ear close to
the ground
Access to the full spectrum and network of outstanding civic actors who have
been supported by EF in the region since the mid 1990s
Access to in-depth data on citizen attitudes to change in their societies via
CRRCs annual household survey (the only one of its kind)
A proven mechanism for targeted delivery of Swedish technical expertise via
civil sector projects
Effective fiscal control of funds invested, thorough project/grant monitoring
systems and financial monitoring systems
Synergies with other Sida-funded efforts (such as ISET and Kvinna till Kvinna)
through project coordination with EPF
Access to a network of institutions with a unique experience in successful
cross border programming

Sida participation in EPF will bring outstanding benefits to the partnership effort
itself, including among others: strengthened ties to European partner organizations;
access to Swedish know-how and technical networks; and working links with a
strong, developed EU economy and European standards of social systems
development as models for regional development.
As a strategic partner to this effort, EF requests both significant financial and
programmatic participation of Sida. The financial commitment requested is a
contribution of $3 million ($1 million per annum over three years). Thirty five
percent of these funds will be used for a flagship Sida Open Door Grants
Program. The rest of Sidas contribution will support core programmatic and
program support activities.

45

Coordination and Reporting

EPF proposes to provide a quarterly interim program report to Sidas designated
liaison, along with semiannual interim financial updates. The interim reports are
intended to be used as instruments for designing the following years activities, to
introduce new intervention instruments as needed, and to make any mid-course
program strategy corrections necessary. These reports will be a tool for EF and Sida
to jointly make adjustments to address any discrepancies between program design
and realization. On a bi-monthly or quarterly basis, the EPF country director and/or
program staff will meet with Sida representatives to confer on major updates or
anticipated strategic developments in EPFs core portfolio. For the Sida flagship Open
Door Grants Program, special briefings and a consultation schedule, at minimum on
a bimonthly basis, will be set up according to Sidas preferences.
Lastly, EF proposes that Sida nominate a candidate to sit on the Board of Trustees of
the new Foundation. In addition, we welcome suggestions for local Advisory
Committee members and members of issue-based, ad hoc advisory committees. EPF
will look to Sida to provide active linkages to other Swedish initiatives, Swedish
development expertise and advisors, and working linkages to close European
partners as well.
Eurasia Foundation looks forward with great enthusiasm to a fruitful and rewarding
partnership between Sida and Eurasia Partnership Foundation in Georgia.

46

VIII. APPENDICES

SYNERGIES BETWEEN SIDA STRATEGY AND EURASIA PARTNERSHIP FOUNDATION ACTIVITIES

Introduction: The left side of this chart is a listing of Sidas priorities for Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan and the South Caucasus region, as stated in
Sidas Strategy for development cooperation with Southern Caucasus, 2006-2009. The right hand column lists concrete examples of Eurasia
Foundations work that demonstrate impact in each of Sidas objective areas. The purpose is not to be comprehensive, but to demonstrate the
compatibility of EFs work with the Sida strategy.

GEORGIA
Sida Aim: Enhanced Democracy and Greater Respect for Human Rights, and promoting sustainable economic development
Sida Objective 1: Enhanced capacity in public institutions promoting democratic and effective governance, by means of efforts to:
Sida Strategy
Give citizens greater access and
influence in political processes

Examples of EF Activities
A grant to New Generation, New Initiative supported the organization to conduct random checks of the central
voters list and to conduct a public awareness campaign urging the public to check their registration records in
order to be eligible to vote in the October 2006 local government elections. Using a large group of citizen
volunteers, the organization was able to check over 100,000 records for accuracy and submitted over 8,000 errors
to the Central Election Commission.
In 2006 the President of Georgia and Ministry for Refugees and Settlement started a new legislative project entitled
"Georgia is My Home"; the aim of the project was to allow IDPs and refugees to register property they had lost. The
draft of the project and the accompanying legislative documents were discussed at a policy roundtable (March 24,
2006), with participation of representatives of Ministry, State Chancellery, media and researchers. EFs Caucasus
Research Resource Centers (CRRC) assisted in the design of the program, participant selection and a former CRRC
Program Manager moderated the discussion. The roundtable resulted in the creation of a working group to design
measurement indicators to ascertain whether IDPs knew and were involved in the registration process, as well as
an outreach program to better inform IDPs about the registration process.
To ensure fair coverage of the 2003 parliamentary elections in Georgia and to increase public trust in the election
process, EF funded an independent, nation wide public opinion survey and exit poll. The results of the polls were
broadcast on Rustavi 2, an independent TV station. The public outreach activities on the results of the two polls
were instrumental in generating interest in the election fraud, which eventually precipitated into the Rose
Revolution. The project involved the cooperation of several Georgian and international organizations. An expert
from the Global Strategy Group, an international polling firm, provided training on international standards and
methods for conducting exit polls. The participation of this respected international partner in the project helped to

47

increase public trust in the exit poll results and facilitated public discussion on the election process itself.
Additionally, the project contributed to the development of local capacity to conduct impartial and quality research
on election processes. The project was cofunded by the Open Society Georgia Foundation and British Council.

Ensure that the differing needs of

men, women and minorities are taken
into account in political processes

Strengthen the capacity and improve

the organizational efficiency of
ministries and government agencies
at different levels

A grant to the International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) allowed the NGO to conduct a
nation-wide education campaign for first-time voters, including ethnic minority youth, prior to the municipal
elections in the fall of 2006.
A major cluster of EF grants supported tolerance building and integration of non-Georgian ethnic groups into
Georgias economic, social and political life. For example, a grant to the Center for Civil Integration and InterEthnic Relations enabled the organization to provide intensive training in the instruction of the Georgian language
to 32 lead teachers in the Azeri-populated Kvemo Kartli region. The grantee developed a series of language
learning materials aimed at non-native speakers of Georgian, such as a grammar, teachers guide and an AzeriGeorgian dictionary of terms. Other grants to Rustavi-2 TV Company and the Union of Young
Cinematographers New Studio supported the development of documentary films on the history and culture of
various ethnic groups living in Georgia.
Working through the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies (GFSIS), EF supported a
project to overhaul the internal structure of the Department of Tourism and Resorts and develop its capacity to
function as a Western style tourism promotion agency. The Department developed a mission, strategic plan, job
descriptions for employees and provided training for newly recruited staff.
Following the success of the Tourism Departments reorganization, EF worked directly with them on a project called
Branding Georgia that developed promotional materials on Georgia (brochure, map, CD and interactive website)
that have been presented at numerous international tourism fairs.
The Tourism Department continues to view EF as a major partner in their institutional development. EF is now
collaborating with them and the Department of Education to develop the curricula, admissions policies and
administrative functions of two tourism vocational schools. It is expected that the work accomplished for these two
schools will serve as a framework for the nine other vocational schools that will also be established in other fields.
The Caucasus Research Resource Centers (an EF program) expanded its repertoire of capacity building exercises
beyond in-house trainings for social science researchers to provide targeted training in statistics, data analysis and
SPSS programming to employees of the State Department of Statistics of Georgia.

Support the government's reform

initiatives and anticorruption
measures

A major EF initiative, the Anticorruption NGO Watchdog Program, was a grant competition that involved 10
NGOs in monitoring and exposing corruption and fraud in municipal budgets, local education spending and so-called
special governors funds in the regions of Georgia.
Several other EF grants have supported the reform agenda of the government of Georgia, particularly in the areas
of education and deinstitutionalization of children. For example, a grant to the NGO EveryChild developed a pilot
community-based care model for deinstitutionalized children. EveryChild built an after-school care center in Tianeti
for vulnerable children and a small group home in Rustavi. The program also developed standards and training

48

modules for foster care families.

A research grant from CRRC allowed Simon Gabrichidze, a social science researcher, to evaluate the
implementation of a newly launched program by the Ministry of Labor, Health and Social Affairs aimed at providing
better health services for people living under the poverty line in the Samegrelo and Ajara regions. Primarily, the
fellow is going to test the relationship between the introduction of a database of people living under the poverty line
and improvements in accessibility to maternal health facilities in the Zugdidi and Batumi districts. Poor and
vulnerable women and their families in the Samegrelo and Ajara regions will benefit from this research, as the
recommendations developed and presented to government officials hopefully will contribute to improvements of the
State Obstetric Care Program.
Another CRRC research Grant to Nikoloz Jashi will test the hypothesis that children living under legal guardianship
have more stable placement compared to children residing under informal care in Georgia. Using various statistical
methods, Nikoloz Jashi will analyze the MICS (Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey UNICEF Georgia, 2006) database.
In addition, the researcher will conduct individual and group interviews with kin caretakers, children under informal
kinship care, and policymakers. The recommendations will be useful for the Georgian parliament, which is currently
reviewing the new draft law on foster care.

Support moves on the part of public

institutions to mainstream a gender
equality perspective into political
processes

Bring civil society more fully into

political processes

To increase the marketability of handicrafts produced by female artisans in the isolated mountainous regions of
Georgia, a grant to the Georgian Textile Group supported seminars, trainings, and consultations with professional
designers. The designers will assist artisans in Tusheti and Samtskhe-Javakheti in improving the quality of products
and selecting their most marketable handicrafts for branding and production. The handicrafts will be shown at local
and international exhibitions; sold at craft stores in Tbilisi and abroad; and promoted through flyers, posters, and a
documentary to be shown internationally. The project team will assist artisans in establishing an association to
continue joint product marketing after completion of the project. By improving artisans' skills and helping them in
the production and sales of textile handicrafts, the project will help generate much-needed income in Tusheti and
Samtskhe-Javakheti. (This project is ongoing)
EF is participating in a joint project with Open Society Georgia Foundation and the Heinrich Boell Foundation to
encourage NGO monitoring of the European Neighborhood Policy Action Plan implementation process in
Georgia. During the first phase of the project, the NGO coalition developed a set of recommendations to the
Government of Georgia on various reforms that should be included in the Action Plan, many of which were included
in the plan ratified by the Government. The project is now monitoring implementation of the Action Plan, and
project activities include roundtable meetings on various aspects of the plan (health care, taxation etc) along with a
monthly newsletter
CRRC held a joint roundtable with the Ministry of Refugees to discuss the Declaration of the President of Georgia on
Property Rights Regulations in Conflict Zones. 24 participants from NGOs, Academia and ministiries took part in the
roundtable.

Support the emergence of free media

Support to independent media was a priority field for Eurasia Foundation Georgia for the past three years. EF
awarded grants to Mega-TV, Radio Hereti, the newspaper Seven Days, Studio Reporter, and the
Regional Media Association to support a variety of activities aimed at strengthening media independence,
especially in the regions. Examples include talk shows on social and political issues, investigative journalism, and

49

media monitoring of government performance and budget spending. A grant to the International Center for
Journalists-Caucasus provided intensive training in investigative journalism techniques to over 20 young
journalists, who then produced a series of in-depth stories in the areas of energy, health care and judicial reform.
The results were posted on the organizations website for free use by any Georgian media outlet.

Support the development of local

democracy

The Batumi-based NGO Young Scientists Union Intellekt in coalition with the Democracy Institute and Liberal
Development and Human Rights Protection Association worked to increase transparency of the local government
and enhance public oversight of the municipal budget. The coalition succeeded in committing the local city council
committee to include the alternative package of recommendations developed by the project team in the 2006
budget for Adjara region. The project collation still actively provides recommendations and consultations to decision
makers at the local city administration of Batumi and has identified various cases of wrongdoing and inappropriate
spending by the local government and city council. The project team has won several court cases against the local
city administration and its agencies and as a result received public information from these bodies. As a result of the
YSUI project the local administration of Batumi, Adjara has become more transparent and accountable towards
local communities and the civil society sector.

Sida Objective 2: Greater respect for human rights by means of efforts to:
Sida Strategy
Heighten public awareness of human
rights and the need for gender equality
between women and men, girls and boys

Enhance the capacity of public institutions

to ensure compliance with human rights

Support institutions that monitor

compliance with human rights, such as
the ombudsman system

Examples of EF Activities
A grant to the Union Saphari supported the organization to operate a small shelter for victims of domestic
violence in Tbilisi, and to develop a support network for victims in two other regions of Georgia. The grantee also
conducted a public awareness campaign on the issue of family violence, which is seldom discussed in Georgia, as
well as intensive trainings for police and other community leaders on how to work with victims. The grantee also
provides medical treatment and psychological counseling for victims and their children.
A grant to the NGO Tanadgoma supported the Ministry of Educations inclusive education initiative, which
stipulates that disabled children should be mainstreamed into the Georgian public school system. The grantee
provided training to over 200 teachers and school administrators in Tbilisi, Rustavi and Batumi on how to work with
disabled children, and launched a public awareness campaign on the right of disabled children to receive an
education in the public schools, rather than home-schooling, which has been the common practice. As a result of
this project, over 100 disabled students have been enrolled in pilot public schools for the first time.
A grant to the Institute of Development and its partners in Armenia and Azerbaijan supported the reform of penal
legislation in the South Caucasus in accordance with international standards by creating a framework for an
alternative punishment system. Through sociological surveys the partners researched and diagnosed the level of
readiness of South Caucasus' societies and governments to accept the introduction of alternative punishment
system. The partners researched and analyzed various international alternative punishment systems and standards
and developed recommendations for introducing appropriate systems in the South Caucasus. Additionally, the
partners conducted an information campaign to increase awareness of alternative punishment issues among the
public and government bodies. The partners published a handbook, conducted a number of TV and radio

50

broadcasts and created a web site.

SCCP awarded grant to Union 21st Century and its partners in Armenia and Azerbaijan to protect the rights of
consumers in the South Caucasus countries by further strengthening a region-wide monitoring network, increasing
public awareness and improving regulatory frameworks. The project partners will conduct regular monitoring of
imported and locally produced food products available in the markets of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.
Monitoring reports will be regularly exchanged between the partners to prevent expired or dangerous products
from being re-sold in the neighboring countries. The partners will also conduct an extensive public awareness
campaign to inform consumers through print, radio and television outlets. Lastly, the project partners will prepare
policy papers and draft regulations to improve the consumer protection legislation in each country. The project will
fill the information vacuum regarding food product safety and quality and activate a cross border consumer
movement in the region. (ongoing project)
Create free media

See Section 1

Sida Objective 3: Sustainable economic development in agriculture, thereby creating greater opportunities for poor men and women to
support themselves, by means of initiatives that:
Sida Strategy
Improve education and training in
agricultural sector

Examples of EF Activities
EFs awarded a trilateral grant to the Association of Professional Beekeepers of Georgia and its partners in Armenia
and Azerbaijan to facilitate the development of the apicultural industry by sharing best practices in the region and
promoting international standards. The partners will conduct a series of trainings led by local and international
experts to improve beekeepers' knowledge of contemporary apicultural methods and practices. The international
experts' participation in the project will be supported by the Farmer to Farmer program of ACDI/VOCA and their
trainings will focus on marketing honey products as well as demonstrating modern apicultural techniques. In addition,
the partners will also build on their earlier achievements to elaborate common standards and certification criteria for
apicultural products, which will bring the countries of the South Caucasus further in line with international standards.
Lastly, by collecting data on individuals and organizations working in the apicultural industry and producing an
industry newsletter, the project will also enhance networking opportunities for professional apiarists of the region. As
a whole, the project will create mechanisms to facilitate the development of apiary practice and raise the quality and
volume of apiary products produced and exported from the South Caucasus. (this is an ongoing project)
Another trilateral grant was awarded to the NGO Shalom Club to improve agribusiness and boost agricultural
productivity, particularly in the area of potato cultivation and seed production, in the countries of the South
Caucasus. Improving agricultural production is vital to the economic growth in all three countries of the South
Caucasus. Potato and potato seed cultivation is a major crop in the regions agricultural production. Shalom Club,
together with its partner organizations in Armenia and Azerbaijan, trained farmers on agricultural business
development and more efficient potato production methods, drawing from the expertise of the Mashav Center for
International Cooperation in Israel. Training activities focused on developing business plans, farmers unions, seed
cultivation, and drip irrigation techniques. Six participants were later selected to attend a series of advanced

51

trainings for agribusiness trainers in Israel. The participating farmers increased their potato yields by six fold by the
end of the project.
A trilateral grant to the Elkana Biological Farming Association and its partners in Armenia and Azerbaijan supported
the development of organic agribusiness. Organic foodstuffs are among the most competitive products for potential
export from the South Caucasus. However, the lack of awareness and information about organic farming among
small farmers in the region hinders the development of organic agribusiness. The partners conducted organic
marketing seminars for farmers, facilitated the formation of organic farming networks and created a database for
organic foodstuffs from the region to enable better production planning and to identify common export markets. The
organic farmers' network continues to function and follow-up projects were funded by other donors as a result of EF's
pilot grant making.

Help bring agricultural institutions,

standards and rules into line with
the EU

Food standards and safety is on of three thematic focus areas for EFs European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) Civic
Dialogue Project, which is fostering dialogue and collaboration between government and civil society on public policy
issues through policy forums and the development of joint policy reports. (Waste management and vocational
education are the other two themes.)

52

REGIONAL STRATEGY
Sida Aim:
To promote dialogue and peaceful
coexistence among the countries of
the region. Initiatives that directly
aim to promote conflict resolution
and prevent potential conflicts from
breaking out are encouraged.

Examples of EF Activities
EFs trilateral grants program promotes collaboration among individuals and professionals in fields where regional
cooperation yields results that are not possible by operating alone. More information on this program is available in
the section on trilateral grants in the body of this proposal.
CRRC encourages researchers to collaborate regionally, hosts regional conferences and methodological workshops,
and conducts a regional survey of household attitudes (the Data Iniative). More information on this program is
available in the Appendix.
In 1998, the Eurasia foundation established the South Caucasus Cooperation Program (SCCP) to facilitate contact,
build confidence, and encourage collaboration among leading organizations in Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia. The
Program is operated via dedicated staff at the EFs offices in Baku, Tbilisi, and Yerevan. Since 1998, SCCP has
invested over 6 million USD in grants and technical assistance to promote and strengthen cross border partnerships
among civic activists, entrepreneurs, journalists, professional associations, educators and other engaged citizen
groups of the South Caucasus. SCCP-sponsored partnerships have addressed shared regional challenges by
developing common approaches as well as by exchanging experiences and innovative ideas in areas such as:
independent media strengthening, economic development, environmental protection, anti-corruption, public policy
development, harmonization with EU standards, and others.
EF has launched the Armenia-Turkey Cross Border Dialogue and Cooperation Program in 2006 to promote improved
dialogue and cooperation between representatives of the non-government, government and private sectors in
Armenia and their Turkish counterparts. Over the years of 2007-2008, the Program will support the implementation
of cross border grant projects by Armenian organizations in areas such as education, culture, youth development,
business development, and local governance.

53

SYNERGIES WITH GEORGIAN NATIONAL STRATEGY DOCUMENTS

In Georgia, several key national strategic plans guide EFs development goals, including Georgias
national strategy for combating poverty, the Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Paper
(EDPRP), the National Concept on Gender and the European Neighborhood Policy Action Plan.
EFs targeted support to the improvement of Civil Monitoring Capacity, Youth Integration,
Tourism Development, Vocational Education and Corporate Social Responsibility directly
contribute to the achievement of a number of specific objectives in the Economic Development
and Poverty Reduction Paper, including:

Better governance (through support to building capacity for and best practices in social
accountability through the Civic Monitoring Program);
Institutional and structural reforms for promoting entrepreneurship (through support to
civic monitoring of the reform of judiciary and tax system, organizing the roundtables on
tax reform and creation of favorable business conditions within the ENP Action Plan);
Better social safety nets (through support to participatory monitoring and evaluation of
the on-going health and social assistance policies and programs, as well as organizing
roundtable discussion on the conformity of the sectoral reform with the ENP Action Plan)
Development of human resources through education (through support to development
of tourism vocational schools with the aim to prepare qualified work-force for tourism
industry as well as set a model for development for other newly established vocational
education institutions in the country)
Tourism development, identified as one of the priority sectors for the economy in the
EDPRP (through support to already mentioned tourism vocational school as well as
training of representative of small tourism enterprises throughout all regions of Georgia,
and support to creating inventory and data of the countrys tourism resources and
capacities)

The Government of Georgias 2006 Basic Data and Directions (BDD) document, developed by
the State Minister for Reforms, sets tourism development as one priority over the next 5 years.
EF has been working closely with the tourism department on a number of different projects,
including an effort to brand Georgia and market the country to western tourists; and an ongoing
effort to develop curricula and standards for two newly-created vocational education schools in
the field of tourism and service. Georgia also adopted a National Anticorruption Strategy in
2005. Through building the capacity of civil society to conduct monitoring of policy reforms, to
reveal instances of corruption and to advocate for change, the NGO Watchdog Initiative has
contributed to the fulfillment of this strategy from the civic perspective.
In July 2006, the Parliament of Georgia adopted the State Concept on Gender Equality, a
political statement of will that introduces Georgian definitions on gender, gender equality, direct
and indirect discrimination, gender mainstreaming and other important terms based on CEDAW
and Council of Europe definitions. The document identifies priorities for the states intervention in
political, economic, and social fields to achieve greater gender equality and sets the framework
for further policy making and action in the field of gender equality for the executive branch of the
government. In 2008, EPF will begin to raise awareness among its grantees on the concept of
gender equality and mainstreaming in their programs based on this document and other best
practices in achieving gender equality.
The Georgian governments reform strategy also places a strong emphasis on stronger ties with
the European Union. In Fall 2006, Georgia concluded an ambitious European Neighborhood
Policy (ENP) Action Plan, which sets out key priorities for the countrys economic and
democratic integration into EU systems and structures. Together with the Open Society Georgia
Foundation (OSGF) and the Heinrich Boell Foundation (HBF), EF has been instrumental in
involving civil society, various experts and interest groups in providing sustained input to the
design and implementation of the ENP Action Plan. EF is continuing to support civic participation
in the ENP process through roundtable discussions on the top priority areas of the Action Plan
improvement of business and investment climate, and health and social assistance reform. The
ENP Action Plan serves also as a guiding framework for EFs strategy in Georgia when program
areas overlap. For instance, EF has provided grant support for a number of initiatives aimed at
inclusion of the Georgian education system into the Bologna process, which is one key guiding
framework for educational reform in Europe.
54

EPF REGIONAL OBJECTIVES

LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ANALYSIS
WORKING DRAFT: AUGUST 2007

GOAL
To build a civil society sector that conducts high quality and independent policy analysis, citizen education, advocacy and
service provision, enabling all citizens to achieve social and economic prosperity.
OBJECTIVES
1. CIVIC MONITORING
1-A: To equip citizen
groups and civil society
organizations (CSOs) with
skills and knowledge to
monitor the planning and
implementation of key
government reforms and
the provision of
public/social services
1-B: To enhance the
impact of civic monitoring
on policy formation

PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS
Number of CSOs conducting
and leading citizen
monitoring efforts of
government reforms or
service provision

Number of partnerships
between CSOs and
government working
together on policy formation
and service provision

OUTCOMES

PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

1-A.1

Improved professional capacity of CSOs to conduct

civic monitoring

The number of civic monitoring projects

conducted by trained CSOs that result in positive
changes in policies and/or public service delivery

1-A.2

Increased knowledge, awareness and application

of participatory monitoring techniques by citizen
groups at the local level

Local citizen groups or issue groups formed with

skills to continue monitoring at the local level

1-A.3

Increased networking and cooperation between

regional and Tbilisi CSOs

1-B.1

Increased collaboration among stakeholder

groups, including citizens, NGOs, issue interest
groups, local businesses and public officials

The number of joint civic monitoring projects

resulting in recommendations actually utilized by
government
Type and number of recommendations made by
stakeholders that are accepted and implemented
by government

1-B.2

Greater media and CSO collaboration on

promoting public debate and participation in local
decision making processes

Number of joint Media-CSOs activities resulting

in positive changes for communities
Increased coverage of CSOs civic monitoring
activities in media
% of households better informed about CSOs
role in monitoring government actions and
commitments

2. CORPORATE SOCIAL INVESTMENT

55

To increase corporate
philanthropy from local
businesses that supports
local civic needs through
strategic investments

Number of local businesses

engaged in or increasing
their strategic investment
activities

2.1

2.2

Increased awareness of the high net individuals of

social investment practices and CSR international
standards
Increased capacity of private companies to design
and implement social investment programs

# of the high net individuals in the region that

were able to identify and articulate their social
investment goals
# private companies that have clear social
investment priorities and invest in a social
sphere on a regular basis
# of private companies that have personal
assigned to design and oversee social projects

2.3

3. YOUTH VOLUNTEERISM
To increase volunteerism,
community activism and
civic responsibility among
youth

AND CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY

3.1
Number of youth initiatives
taken to solve local
community problems

Increased cooperation between the diverse crosssector stakeholders by engaging them in a

dialogue on corporate giving
Increased confidence and skills among young
people to act as viable agents of community
development

# of private companies that publish their

corporate social report
# of joint projects implemented by private
companies and non-governmental organizations

% of young people affiliated with community

youth groups
# projects initiated by the youth groups to foster
the community development
# of people benefited of the youth groups
activities

3.2

Increased opportunities for youth to take active

roles in the development of their communities.

number of youth group members able to design

and effectively implement a small scale project
% of young people affiliated with community
youth groups
# projects initiated by the youth groups to foster
the community development
# of people benefited of the youth groups
activities

4. SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH

To increase local capacity
to conduct high quality
social science research
that informs the actions of

Number of social science

researchers and practitioners
involved in policy formation
or whose recommendations

4.1

Increased engagement of research institutions,

university scholars, think-tanks and independent
policy analysts in policy agenda setting and policy
formulation

Increased receptiveness of policy makers to

independent policy analysis.
# of local researchers and policy analysts

56

policy makers

are accepted by policy

makers
4.2

4.3

4.4

Increased ability of researchers and independent

analysts to inform public policy debates and
discussions through high quality research that
meets international standards

Increased provision of accurate and credible

information to citizens on the consequences of
public policy choices

Increased access and use of high-quality resources

for social science researchers and policy
practitioners

present/participating in high level government

discussions
Indicator should measure quality of research
Increased sophistication of
methods/methodology and methods used by
researchers and analysts to test the policy
# of times policy papers or articles are cited by
other policy and/or scholarly articles
# of references to a particular public policy
study in Georgian and international media
# and type (credible or not?) of publications
informing citizens on the actual consequences of
public policy choices
# of subscriptions to online journals through EF
resource centers (Caucasus Research Resource
Centers)
# and frequency of users of CRRC libraries and
resources

5. CROSS BORDER COOPERATION

To increase cross border
Perceived change in attitude
cooperation for peace and
towards neighboring
economic growth in the
countries or towards conflict
greater Caucasus and
zones among project
Black Sea regions
participants
Number of cross border
projects implemented

5.1

5.2

Increased mutual understanding and increase the

level of tolerance in the South Caucasus and
neighboring countries

% of project beneficiaries indicating a change in

their attitude toward their neighbors/neighboring
countries

Increased partnerships between organizations and

individuals from different countries

Level of bias and stereotype language in

selected media outlets
# of joint projects implemented after EPF
funding comes to an end
% increase in number of organizations from
different countries that interact with each other
on a regular basis

57

Georgia Programs: 2008 Implementation and Monitoring Plans

1. PARTICIPATORY CIVIC MONITORING
Program Goal
To enhance quality and impact of civic monitoring and evaluation to foster greater
participation of civic sector in policy-making process
Program Objectives
Enhance capacity of Civil Society Organizations (CSO) to conduct efficient civic
monitoring/evaluation of governments policies
Facilitate and promote cooperation between CSOs and government in civic
monitoring
Enhance role of Media as a civic watchdog through development of effective
cooperation between CSOs and Media
Increase civic monitoring capacity of regional CSOs through networking,
exchange of best practices and sharing experience from advanced CSOs
Program Timeframe
February 2007 December 2008
Program Justification
Since the 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia, the government has begun a very rapid
reform process in almost all sectors of society: the economy, education, military etc.
CSOs, which had played a major role in the events leading up to the Revolution, now
find themselves often find themselves on the sidelines of the reform process. Frequently
accused of bias and lack of professionalism, they lack the credibility necessary to make
their voices heard and to influence the reform process. Yet civic monitoring has become
a vital function of the CSOs in Georgia, and the importance of tracking government
progress and adherence to commitments is more critical than ever as the pace of reform
quickens. These factors have impeded CSOs ability to perform a vital watchdog
function over government activity and harms development of vibrant civic life in the
country.
The Eurasia Foundation Georgia (EFG) office has identified participatory civic monitoring
as a priority direction for its civil society development program in 2007-2008. Citizen
participation in monitoring of the rapid pace of reforms in the judiciary system,
healthcare provision, social welfare program delivery, privatization, public budget
spending and municipal services is vital to ensure transparency and efficient service
delivery, as well as broader engagement of Georgian society in the reform process.
Participatory civic monitoring emphasizes the process by which primary stakeholders at
the local level actively (rather than passively) engage in monitoring or evaluating the
governments commitments and public service delivery and become engaged in taking or
identifying corrective actions. Through this process-oriented concept, EF aims to build
the capacity of local people to analyze information jointly, and to catalyze commitment
at the local level to take corrective action.
Past civic monitoring efforts in Georgia have encountered several stumbling blocks. Many
NGOs have encountered open or passive resistance from government authorities at all
levels, particularly with regards to requests for public information. However, NGOs
themselves seem overly reliant on being fed information from official sources, rather
than being innovative in their approaches to verify information by other means,
particularly those involving communities at the grassroots level. NGOs themselves vary
in their levels of professionalism and research skills, and often have very shallow support
from their constituencies.

EFG sponsored a workshop on civic monitoring on February 26, 2007 with participation
from media and NGOs. Participants acknowledged that the final reports and deliverables
of many civic monitoring projects, to say nothing about the long-term impacts,
frequently fail to meet expectations. It was particularly stressed that weak coordination
between NGOs and the media significantly hampers the capacity of both actors to
conduct efficient civic monitoring.
In July 2007, EFG announced a request for proposals (RFP) in the field of civic
monitoring and solicited proposals from NGOs and their partner media outlets. The RFP
is designed to enhance the impact of civic monitoring by increasing professionalism and
encouraging dialogue between NGOs and government. Proposal review is underway and
winners will be announced in September. EF seeks an expert to conduct trainings in
participatory civic monitoring for these and other potential grantees of the Program. EF
also hopes to secure funding to launch this program in Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Project Objectives
1. Equip NGOs with skills and knowledge about efficient civic monitoring/evaluation
2. Facilitate dialogue on civic monitoring between government and CSOs
3. Support innovative initiatives strengthening civic monitoring
4. Enhance quality of civic monitoring by developing efficient and lasting cooperation
between media and CSOs
Outcome
Improved professional capacity of
CSOs to conduct civic monitoring

Outcome Indicator
The number of civic monitoring
projects conducted by trained CSOs
that resulted in positive changes in
policies and/or public service delivery

Data source
Project Reports
NGOs feedback
Final Program Evaluation
Report

Increased collaboration among

stakeholder groups, including
citizens, NGOs, issue interest
groups, local business, public
officials

Type and number of recommendations

made by stakeholders that are
accepted and implemented by
government

Increased knowledge, awareness

and plans for application of
participatory monitoring techniques
by citizens at the local level
Greater Media and NGO
collaboration on promoting public
debate and participation in local
decision making processes

Local citizen groups or issue groups

formed with skills to continue
monitoring at the local level

Baseline survey
Project Reports
NGOs feedback
Government Feedback
Official Registers
Final Program Evaluation
Report
Baseline Survey
Evaluation Report
Project Reports
Media Coverage
Baseline Survey
Evaluation Report
Project Reports
Media Coverage

Number of joint Media-CSOs activities

resulting in positive changes for
communities
Increased coverage of CSOs civic
monitoring activities in media
% of households better informed about
CSOs role in monitoring government
actions and commitments

Increased networking and

cooperation between regional and
Tbilisi CSOs

The number of joint civic monitoring

projects resulting in recommendations
actually utilized by government

Baseline Survey
Program Evaluation
Project Reports

The project is a combination of grant-making and operational activities.

59

Operating Activities
1. Baseline assessment of the current state of civic monitoring in Georgia. The
baseline assessment will provide baseline data about gaps, achievements,
challenges and prospects in these fields for comparison with the information
obtained after the final evaluation of the program. The baseline assessments will
serve as a body of knowledge for both EFG and other donors engaged in the
similar activities and help to better plan and structure grant making and
operational programs. RFP on grant competition and evaluate the program on its
completion. The baseline assessments will be distributed as a print copy and be
posted on the EF website
2. A series of roundtable meetings between CSOs, state officials and international
donors to follow-up the workshop on civic monitoring for CSOs organized by EFG
CS program in February 2007. The roundtable will help to the rapprochement of
attitudes of the stakeholders to civic control over the government its destination
and will help to find consensus
3. Training seminars for CSOs on methods of civic monitoring and evaluation will be
conducted by local and international trainer(s). The seminars will have training of
trainers component local trainers will learn from international trainers during
the seminar preparation and actual training stage, and trained local trainers will
train local trainers in the regions.
4. A training seminar for NGOs and Media about building lasting and efficient
cooperation for promoting civic society and civic monitoring
Grant-making Activities
5. The Grant Competitions (2) will support up to twenty CSOs and/or Media outlets
to implement specific civic monitoring projects in the areas of judiciary,
healthcare, social welfare, privatization of state property and state budget
spending. The competition will invite proposals from both Tbilisi and regional
CSOs and Media. The proposals with interregional and/or regional networking
and viable models of CSO-Media cooperation will have an advantage.
6. The EFG will retain Open-Door Grant System in civil society area, though the
funds will be limited and award only outstandingly innovative projects
The reporting will include quarterly reports about the project development, event memos
and final evaluation of the program with comparison to baseline data.
Major Partners
USAID, within democracy and governance programs
funds projects on citizen
participation; OSGF, funds the NGO network working for transparency of public finance
though civic monitoring; WB, funds small grants aimed at increased citizen participation
and information; DFID, funds Civil Society Policy Reform project aimed at effective civil
society engagement in public finance issues; OSCE, funds the projects aimed at
monitoring of elections. TI-Georgia, conducts civic monitoring and evaluation of various
spheres of public policy.

60

2. CORPORATE SOCIAL INVESTMENT

Program Goal
To promote social
development needs

engagement

of

private

companies

in

addressing

Georgias

Program Objectives
1. To promote awareness of social investment, i.e. the type of giving that makes
significant social impact while simultaneously improving private companies longterm competitiveness;
2. To improve private companies capacity to design and implement social investment
projects;
3. To promote specific social investment projects linking private companies and noncommercial organizations.
Program Timeframe
January 2007-December 2008
Program Justification
At the end of 2004 Georgian companies received a stimulus to expand their charitable
programs. The newly adopted Tax Code introduced a special incentive. Eight percent of
profit spent by business on philanthropy was exempted from taxes. Despite this positive
change, Georgian society has not witnessed a significant expansion of either the scale or
variety of corporate giving programs. For the past several years local companies have
continued to focus on discrete charity actions instead of implementing systematic social
investment activities.
EF is planning to implement a program that will promote private sectors interest and
activity in addressing country development needs. EF is focusing on the obstacles,
which according to the recently conducted surveys9 clearly hamper development of social
investment in the country. These are the lack of private companies understanding and
capacity to implement social investment projects, the lack of trust between private
companies and nongovernmental organizations, the lack of awareness of the legislative
incentives for charitable activities etc.
To address these problems EF is planning a project, which will include capacity building
and networking components. In addition to this particular initiative, EF will generally try
to generate the interest of private companies in different programs implemented by EF
and various other nongovernmental organizations. By raising funds from the corporate
sector EF will act as a channel directing private funding to the solution of different
community problems.
Project 2.1
Social Investment Capacity Building Project
Project Objective
1. To raise awareness of social investment among private companies
2. To help local companies to build their capacity to design and implement social
investment projects
9

A survey encompassing 200 companies recently completed by the Center for Strategic
Research and Development of Georgia (CSRDG); a survey carried out by Educational
Cooperation Development Center (ECDC) in 2004 (140 respondents);

61

3. To promote wider application of legislative incentives for charitable giving among

private companies
4. To channel corporate funding through EF
Outcome
Companies operating in Georgia are
aware of social investment as a
concept and its application

Outcome Indicator
Number of companies having
understanding of social investment
practices

Companies operating in Georgia

have built-instems for strategic
philanthropy

Number of companies with written

social investment missions and
strategies/plans;

Data source
Comparison of data from
the baseline surveys and
the final project
evaluation

Number of companies with accountable

and transparent mechanisms for social
investment;
Number of social investment projects
implemented by private companies
Companies are actively using tax
incentives for charitable giving

The number of companies actively

using tax incentives for charitable
giving

Companies and NGOs successfully

partner to implement social projects

The number of joint projects

implemented by private companies and
nongovernmental organizations

Ministry of Finance,
Department of Taxation
records

Operational Activities
Baseline assessment as a part of this assessment EF will analyze results of a
When these surveys are finalized, EF staff will
number of ongoing surveys.10
identify the informational gaps and carry out additional research to have a full
picture of current social investment projects. In this process EF will draw on the
experience of the Central Asian, Azerbaijan and Armenian in implementing social
investment programs.
A roundtable involving senior management of major private companies interested
in social investment to convey EFs vision of the program and the services to be
provided as a part of thereof;
A capacity-building workshop for the mid-management of private companies
involving international and local experts. The workshop will cover such issues as
international practices of corporate giving, pros of engaging in such activities;
ensuring effectiveness and accountability in social investment, tax benefits and
their application;
Raising funds from private corporations to carry out specific development
projects.
The reporting will involve development of quarterly reports and event memos.
EF will
conduct an evaluation to measure the progress against the above indicators. The data
will be compared to the baseline information collected at the beginning of the project.
Key Partners

10

In addition to the surveys mentioned above EF will be using the results of a survey currently
carried out by a Caucasus Research Resource Center fellow. The survey has not been completed
yet. The fellow provided us with the data he collected through the questionnaires distributed
among 80 businesses.

62

Local and international companies operating in Georgia, other international donors and
local organizations working in this area (UNDP, CSRDG, Horizonti Foundation, IFC)

63

3. COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT THROUGH YOUTH INITIATIVES

Program Goal
To encourage young peoples participation and volunteerism in community development
Program Objectives
1. To create opportunities for young people to address social needs, participate as
active citizens in their communities
2. To develop professional governance and management skills among youth
3. To empower young people especially representatives of vulnerable groups in
Georgia to become more active in social and economic life of the country
Program Timeframe
May 2007-December 2008
Program Justification
Hope for sustained, long-term progress lies with the new generation of leaders in
Georgia. Young leaders also hold a special potential for bringing fresh perspectives,
energy and solutions to long-entrenched problems. According to a survey conducted in
2004 by EFG, the vast majority of young people surveyed referred to lack of
opportunities for self-actualization, poor access to information technology, and low
standards of education that leave them without marketable job skills. The lack of quality
education, civic engagement and opportunity for involvement in decision making
processes especially affects young people from rural areas of the country.
Youth Bank is a program designed to encourage young peoples participation in decision
making and mobilization of resources around important issues in their respective
communities. The project targets young people aged 16 to 24, mostly school students of
upper class and university students of first, second and third years. The Youth Bank
concept was developed from a Northern Irish model to address the problems of interreligious conflict by encouraging young peoples participation in social and economic
development their communities. Young people gained the skills to manage small pools of
grant money, which are distributed to support youth-led projects in their communities.
Eurasia Foundation plans to leverage the experience of the participants in Azerbaijan,
where the program started two years ago, in the implementation of the program in
Georgia by creating links between these groups.
Project 3.1: Youth Bank Initiative

64

Youth Bank Logic Model

Objectives
Create opportunities for young people to
address social needs and participate as
active citizens in their communities
Develop
professional
governance
and
management skills among young people
through capacity-building exercises and
practical experience operating a small
grants program
Empower young people, especially women
and non-ethnic Georgians in the regions, to
become more active in social and economic
life of the country through training
programs and confidence building

Outcomes

Outputs

Developed democratic and transparent governance

practices as young leaders apply their skills through
the direct management of small funding for other
young people and peers in their communities.

5 Youth Bank projects carried out in Georgia;

Increased opportunities for volunteerism and civic

activism among young people.

Around 25 youth-led micro-projects supported

through the participation of at least 200 youth
in rural communities;

Young people developed skills in: Research;

Identification of community needs; Outreach and
message development; Selection criteria and
interview techniques; Organizational management;
Fiscal
management,
transparency
and
accountability; Professional governance; Monitoring
and evaluation techniques.
More opportunities for young people to gain
employment thanks to the skills gained through the
program.

35 young leaders trained in managing and

operating Youth Bank programs in Georgia;

4 capacity-building events to develop and

reinforce capacities of new YB committee
members
1 international conference to share YB lessons
with participation of YB members from
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Serbia, Palestine, Russia,
UK and the United States
Media coverage
results

of

program

activities

and

Youth Bank network web site created

Network of Youth Bank committees created in
the framework of the program;
Regional network of Youth Bank committees
created in Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan
South Caucasus countries;

Youth Bank Indicators

Outputs
Five new youth bank
committees created

35 young leaders
engaged in managing
and operating YB (50%
young women)

25 youth-led microprojects supported

through the participation
of at least 300 youth in
rural communities

4 capacity-building
events to develop and
reinforce capacities of

Indicators of Success
# of YB committees operating across Georgia
# of meetings held by YB committees
Number of outreach events and media products produced
Number of grant applications received
Number of interviews held and reported by committee members
with potential grantees
Number of projects awarded
Number of interim and final reports approved by YB committees

Source of Information
Site visits; meeting minutes, program progress
reports, final evaluation report

# of young leaders engaged in managing and operating YB grant

committees, disaggregated by gender
% of YB committee members possessing a thorough understanding
of the project development and/or grant management process
% of YB committee members well aware of their professional duties
Low turnover rate among committee members

35 young people developed democratic and transparent

governance practices as young leaders and apply their skills
through the direct management of small funding for more than 25
small community projects throughout Georgia

# of young people developed skills in: Research; Identification of

community needs; Outreach and message development; Selection
criteria and interview techniques; Organizational management;
Fiscal management, transparency and accountability; Professional
governance; Monitoring and evaluation techniques.
# of applications submitted to obtain funding for micro-projects
# of micro-projects awarded
# of young people engaged in implementation of micro-projects
disaggregated by gender
# of consultations provided by YF committees members to assist
grantees in project execution
% of micro-projects produced anticipated outputs and outcomes
300 young people and peers in their communities are engaged in
different community projects and take part in decision-making
within their communities.
# of regional workshops held over the course of the program
# of local trainings provided over the course of the program
# of workshop participants disaggregated by gender

List of YB committee members; job descriptions

for each position; self-evaluation reports; final
program evaluation report

Site visit reports

Program progress reports

Site visits; meeting minutes, program progress

reports, final evaluation report

Application copies; award letters; site visits;

journal of consultations provided; grantees
narrative and financial reports.
number of project beneficiaries in local
communities throughout the lifetime of the
program meeting participants logs, inquiries
received through the youth committees work
Regional workshop/ local trainings agenda; list of
workshops participants; final program evaluation
report

66

new YB committee
members
1 international
conference to share YB
lessons with participation
of YB members from
Azerbaijan, Serbia,
Palestine, Russia, UK
and the United States
Media coverage of
program activities and
results

% of training participants able to improve their performance as a

result of workshop
Composition of the conference working group
# of conference participants
participant logs, program reports by the youth committee
disaggregated by gender and country origins
# of lessons shared during the conference work
# of presentations made during the conference
# of networking opportunities created during the conference
# of public officials participated in the conference
# of media reports produced to cover the conference work
# of articles published about program activities/results
# of press releases produced by YF committees over the course of
the program
# of press conferences held
# of TV reports aired
Average # of journalists present at press conferences initiated by
YF committee members or grantees

Working group meeting minutes; list of

conference participants; conference agenda;
handouts distributed in the course of the
conference; post-conference survey; copies of
media products

Content-analysis of media publications/ reports;

lists of journalists attending press conferences;
self-evaluation reports
copies of the newspapers, interview transcripts
provided

67

Program Activities
1. Training for Youth Bank Committee Members for Youth Bank committee members to
develop professional skills in democratic leadership and decision-making;
organization and financial management; evaluation, monitoring and reporting; critical
thinking and message development.. The program starts with an orientation training
program for youth committee members. The first series of training programs are
conducted by counterparts from Community Foundation for Northern Ireland. The
training program also addresses the representatives of Peace Corps since they will
work with the youth committees for the entire project. As a result:
35+ Young people from 5 regions are selected for the Youth Committees
through the application and interview process;
Series of trainings are provided for 35+ members of youth committees to
hone their grant-making, monitoring and evaluation skills.
2. Implementation Youth Bank Grant Projects: Youth committee members will conduct
the following activities in their communities as part of the grant implementation
process:
Research to assess community needs
Conduct outreach meetings to promote the idea of YB
Hold seminars on grant-seeking and proposal writing
Issue Requests for Proposals, review submitted projects and make decisions on
grant projects led by groups of young people
Fund small-scale projects implemented by other in their respective regions.
More than 25 youth-led micro-projects are expected to be supported through the
participation of at least 200 youth in rural communities. Together with locally-based
partners, EF Georgia staff will assist YB committees in developing a process and
timeline for monitoring youth-led community projects. YB committees will develop
and complete site visit reports, the quality of which will be assessed by EF staff. The
EF Grants Management Department will assist the YB committees in the process of
developing appropriate financial reporting mechanisms in order to ensure grantee
compliance with the Georgian laws and regulations.
3. YBG Web-site: A special web-site is developed for the Youth Bank Georgia Project to
support networking and knowledge exchange between young people engaged in the
Youth Bank Project. The content of the YBG web site will include information on
small projects funded by the program as well as online forums and discussion,
success stories, etc. Online network will also increase the possibility of joint crosscountry projects and initiatives in the future.
4. Youth Bank Conference: To assess the impact of the program as well as strengthen
communication and feedback among youth committees and programs other
stakeholders the program addresses this need through evaluation conference at the
ending stage of the program. Shared experiences of the Youth Bank committees
across the South Caucasus region will form an outstanding platform for international
cooperation. Eurasia Foundation plans to convene a cross border forum for youth
leaders involved in national Youth Bank programs, focusing on lessons learned and
examining differences and commonalities encountered by Youth Bank participants
from the region as a whole. On the basis of this forum, a regional Youth Bank
program can be designed which would directly address cross border issues as defined
by the youth in the participating communities.
5. Exchange Study Trip: Study trip for up to 5 members of the Youth Committees to
Northern Ireland will take place at the end of the project. The study trips aims at
exchange of experience between the Georgia and Irish Youth Bank members. An

68

additional study trip to Azerbaijan and Armenia will establish links between Youth
Bank members in Azerbaijan and Georgia and an opportunity to exchange best
practices and lessons learned.
The Youth Bank program will be closely linked with other youth initiatives within the
Eurasia Foundation Georgia office as well Youth Bank activities in Azerbaijan and
Armenia.
Program Output
5 Youth Bank Committees are created throughout Georgia;
35 young leaders trained in managing, operating and monitoring small grant scheme
programs;
At least 25 youth-led micro-projects supported through direct engagement of at least
200 young people in local communities in Georgia;
4 capacity-building workshops are conducted for around 50 young people;
Youth Bank network web site created;
Conference to share Youth Fund lessons among network participants in Georgia and
Northern Ireland;
Network of Youth Bank committees created in the framework of the program;
Target Groups
- The key beneficiaries of YB are small groups of young people (7-9 persons) aged 1624 from five regions of Georgia: Kakheti, Adjara, Samstskhe-Javakheti, Kvemo Kartli
and Samegrelo Zemo-Svaneti. These individuals will be selected through an open
and competitive process. The EF will announce an open call for applications in the
project selected geographic areas and conduct interviews with the short-listed
candidates afterwards. (Please see attachment: YB application form, Program one
page description and announcement).
- Additionally, other young people in the selected regions will form project committees
to submit grant applications to the YB committees.
- Local communities in the selected regions will benefit from small projects carried out
through the YB program.
EF has developed preliminary criteria for the selection of YB committees. YB members
will (a) be aged 16-24 and (b) should live in or in vicinity of the community where the YB
will be established. Preference will be given to those youth who demonstrate (a)
commitment to YB approach, (b) ability to work as a team, (c) previous experience in
volunteer work, (d) previous involvement in youth-led projects or activities. Preliminary
selection criteria will be discussed with community members. Additional criteria for the
selection might be suggested by partners.
Key Stakeholders and Partners
EF is inviting donors, government agencies, NGOs and local community to become EF
partners in initiating and implementing the YouthBank Initiatives Project. The Resource
Centers of the Ministry of Education and Science, the American Corners of the USA
Embassy in Georgia, the Peace Corps has already committed to the project. They will
help EF to disseminate information about the project, provide a venue for initial
presentations, participate in the selection of YB committees, and assist YB committees
by providing a working space and/or means of communications. These organizations
may also act as fiscal agents for the youth committees.
The communities where the YB committees are located will be actively involved in
decision making process, also local NGOs and civic leaders will be consulted in the
process of selection of candidates and evaluation of small projects received through the
Youth Bank. Community members will participate in finalizing the criteria for committee
selection and in selecting committee members.

69

The Community Foundation for Northern Ireland is a UK-based organization that

implements the Youth Bank project as part of their youth development strategy in UK
and Northern Ireland. It is in CFNIs interest to expand the YB program across UK,
Ireland and Eastern Europe as well as to Middle East and Asia. CFNI will be the main
partner and mentor in the YB Georgia program. The youth development methodology
and approaches developed and used by CFNI will be shared with EF and applied
throughout the duration of the project.
US Peace Corps volunteers will become active partners in the YB project and act as
mentors and trainers to YB committees. EF may invite PC volunteers to participate in
workshops and trainings organized by CFNI, to work with YB committees in the process
of needs assessment and in monitoring their projects, and assist the YB committees to
maintain active communication with EF and the wider donor community.
Education Resource Centers, established by Georgias Ministry of Education and Science,
will serve as a meeting place and source of information for the Youth Bank committees in
the project target regions.
American Corners The United States Embassy project American Corners offers access to
information/internet, free English lessons and an Englishlanguge library in five regions of
Georgia (Samegrelo, Kakheti, Adjara, Tbilisi, Samtskhe Javakheti). The American
Corners will support EF in disseminiation of information, arranging outreach in the YB
selected regions and providing space for YB committee gatherings.
In order to expand and strengthen YB project capacity, EFG plans to link the program to
Azerbain and Armenia through exchange study trips in each of the YB countries
throughout the South Caucasus, exchange of information, materials and experience.
Assumptions and Risks
Involving vulnerable groups in the project: There might be a risk in failing to
involve most vulnerable youth groups such as IDPs or the non-majority ethnic
youth representatives of Georgia for the reason that they live in closed
communities and do not quite interact with the rest of the country, besides the
large part of ethnic minorities do not speak Georgian. The project plans to address
the risk through using additional information channels for spreading the information
about the project. EF will involve NGOs focused on ethnic minorities and IDP issues
to help disseminate information on the Youth Bank initiative. EF will try to make
sure to have at least 2 representatives of minority groups as well as to have a
gender balance in each Youth Committee.
Participation of adult representatives of community in the project: It is very
important to involve adult citizens in the project. Focusing on youth might create a
sense of being excluded form the developments in their community among adults.
The program will address the risk by engaging elder representatives of community
in assessing community need as well as engage them in the various projects
carried out by Youth Bank.
YB committee members drop out in the middle of the program: The careful
selection of motivated young people committed to the project will help avoid
committee turnover. During the selection of the YB committees, a larger group will
be selected so that if 1-2 committee members leave during the course of the
project, a sufficient number will still remain to continue the committees work.
Award decisions by YB committees may be biased. During the initial project
workshop, issues of conflict-of interest and bias will be discussed. YB committee
members will be taken through scenarios where relatives or friends apply for grants
and policies and procedures will be developed by committee members to deal with
these situations. YB committees may also develop a code of conduct in order to
guide their decision making processes. In addition to this, the YBs will be requested

70

to prepare and present a written report explaining how the selection of grant
projects was made.
YBs do not receive a sufficient number of high quality proposals. The success of the
YB activities is conditioned by the quality of the proposals they receive, review and
fund in their communities. It is possible that in some regions, local youth are not
motivated enough to apply to YB for grants. YB Committee members will be
trained in message development and outreach skills during the first workshop to
properly present their project and attract young people in their communities to
apply. YB Committee members will work with local youth to build their confidence
and credibility in the community. They will be requested to hold meetings with local
youth and local authorities along with announcing the grant project in their regions.
Transparent grant making practices and sufficient publicity will also be used to
mitigate this risk.

Program Evaluation
An independent evaluation of the YB program will be carried out by an outside evaluator
hired by EF Georgia. EF Georgia will develop an evaluation framework that includes the
objectives and questions for the evaluation. The evaluation objectives are not limited to
but may include: the assessment of the level of improved leadership among youth,
committees ability to manage and implement grant program, impact of YB program in
the communities, the effectiveness of YB committee members to build linkages with
other YBs across Armenia and abroad. Information collected will be analyzed and
summarized in a report and used to inform primary stakeholders and partners as well as
future programming for youth integration programs.

71

Project 3.2
South Caucasus: A Part of Europe
The consortium of Interkulturelles Zentrum (IZ/Vienna, Austria) and the Association of
Youth Non-formal Education in Lithuania (AYNEL/Vilnius, Lithuania) in partnership with
Eurasia Foundation will implement a three-year program aimed at strengthening
intercultural exchange and cooperation between the youth groups in the South Caucasus
and Eastern/Central Europe through education and public awareness campaigns.
Through the project, young peoples organizations and initiatives from the South
Caucasus countries will become actively involved in both educational activities and
awareness raising campaigns in Austria and Lithuania. The program is financed by the
European Commission and fully implemented by IZ/AYNEL. EFs role is to only to
facilitate communication with local youth NGOs and experts and to assist with on-theground logistics. Program goals and objectives have been defined by IZ/AYNEL.
Project Objective
1. Mobilize support by increasing awareness among youth in EU Member States on
development issues in South Caucasus, with specific focus on current life conditions
and future perspectives of young people;
2. Encourage co-operation of NGOs in EU Member States with organizations, groups and
initiatives of young Armenians, Azerbaijanis and Georgians;
3. To provide opportunities for volunteerism and civic activism among young people and
equip them with the skills and vision necessary for community development
4. To encourage co-operation between NGOs in the centre and the periphery of Europe
in order strengthen cooperation and replicate mechanisms and methodologies to
address youth projects in future.
Outcome
Increased dialogue and exchange of
experience between youth

Outcome Indicator
# of exchange visits, conferences,
workshops conducted

Data source
Regular coordination
meetings with project
partners

EF broadens expertise in diverse

youth initiatives and network of
contacts with youth NGOs in Europe

Quality and the success of the

outreach and cultural projects
developed in the framework of the
project

Progress reports
Evaluation survey in the
first phase of the
program

The consortium of Interkulturelles Zentrum (IZ) (Vienna, Austria) and the Association of
Youth Non-formal Education in Lithuania (Vilnius, Lithuania) in partnership with the
Eurasia Foundation will implement a three-year program aimed at strengthening
intercultural exchange and cooperation between the youth groups in the South Caucasus
and Eastern/Central Europe through education and public awareness campaigns. In the
framework of the project young peoples organizations and initiatives from the South
Caucasus countries will actively get involved both in educational activities and awareness
raising campaigns in Austria and Lithuania. EF will facilitate communication with local
youth NGOs and experts.
Project Activities
1. Workshops with young peoples NGOs in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia carried
out by Austrian, Lithuanian and local media experts (photographer, journalists
from TV, radio and newspapers);
2. Awareness campaigns supported by media experts and representatives of young
peoples NGOs from South Caucasus.
The project involves an evaluation component which will be conducted to asses the
impact of intercultural projects and their success. The evaluation will be conducted by
the team of experts from European partner organizations.

72

Key Partners
European Commission Delegation in Georgia, Council of Europe, and local youth led
NGOs, Local resource centers of MoE, EF Azerbaijan, and EF Armenia.

73

4. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT THROUGH TOURISM

Program Goal
To assist development of the tourism industry in Georgia
Program Objectives
1. To support development and promotion of tourism professional education system;
2. To increase capacity of growing number of tourism and hospitality SMEs in service
standards and business management practices;
3. To support creation of information materials and databases for the industry;
4. To facilitate partnerships among different stakeholders with the aim to promote
development of the tourism sector.
Program Timeframe
January 2007-December 2008
Program Justification
Both local and international experts recognize tourism as an industry with significant
growth potential in Georgia. While this sector may not generate vast or immediate
revenues, one cannot underestimate the impact from tourism-created employment and
income in rural areas where economic development is lagging. Tourism has become a
priority for the Government of Georgia, which is trying to promote the industry through
large infrastructure rehabilitation projects and creating incentives for private investments
in the tourism sector.
Tourism development constraints are numerous out of which weak human resources and
the absence of functional informational infrastructure are clearly key factors.
The absence of professional educational programs in the field of tourism is unsurprising,
as it reflects the general state of vocational education in Georgia. Not a single
professional education institutions inherited from the Soviet times meets modern
standards, and few have been able to maintain even basic infrastructure. The Ministry of
Education, recognizing the extent of the problem has prepared a legal framework for the
vocational education reform and recently established 11 pilot schools throughout the
country, including two tourism schools. Large investments in the hotel sector in the
capital as well as the Georgian seaside create a solid and growing demand for
professionals in this sector.
EF has decided to support these schools to meet this
demand.
EF also hopes that significant improvement of programs offered by these
schools will affect the overall education reform by creating a model for emulation in
other fields. Vocational education, long viewed as an inferior educational option in
Georgia, will become more attractive if its graduates go to find employment in the
private sector.
Another key constraint to the development of tourism is the absence of a functioning
informational infrastructure, the main components of which are web resources and
physical entities - travel information centers (TICs), which provide information to the
incoming tourists. Two years ago EF supported development of an official tourism website (http://www.tourism.gov.ge, grant # G04-0074). Although informative, this site
needs further development to become the definitive source of information on Georgia on
the internet. As far as TICs are concerned, State Department of Tourism and Resorts,
Ministry of Economic Development is planning to open around twelve TICs throughout
the country. It has secured funds from the private sector for renovations of the centers.
EFG is planning to invest in developing the contents of the web-site as well as the
centers, i.e. in the development of tourist destination inventories, including description
of attractions, accommodation, entertainment etc.

74

Project 4.1
Professional Education and Training
Project Objective
1. To support development and promotion of tourism professional education system
through:
Support to the recently established tourism vocational schools to build their
programs in accordance with the local market demand and international
requirements for vocational education;
Support to the schools in leveraging expertise and resources for preparation of
the well-trained workforce;
Support to promotion of tourism and hospitality professions and standards.
2. To increase capacity of growing number of tourism and hospitality SMEs in service
standards and business management practices through training of SMEs
management and staff throughout Georgia
Outcome
Improved capacity of two state
tourism schools to provide quality
vocational education and retraining
programs

Outcome Indicator
The demand for the programs offered
by the tourism vocational schools
measured by the number of student
applications

Data source
School application and
admission records

Partnerships are established

between Georgian schools and
internationally recognized tourism
training programs; partnerships
established with private sector

Quality of the programs measured by

the ability of the schools to pass
accreditation by the Ministry of
Education

Accreditation received
from the Ministry of
Education

Increased preparedness of school

graduates to enter the tourism
workforce

Degree of partnership with the private

sector measured by the number of
companies offering internship
opportunities to the students of the
schools

Internships integrated in
the school programs

Achievement of international
affiliation with an internationally
recognized tourism school

Affiliation agreements
between local and
international schools

Recognition of the program degrees

measured by the percentage of
employed graduates

School career service

reports, company survey

Operational Activities
EF selected SSTH consultants through a competitive tender based on a set of
criteria such as extensive experience in program development in the area of
tourism professional education, reputation of the school, experience in similar
projects, cost-effectiveness etc to conduct a baseline study of the schools and
provide the first set of recommendations.. EFG will continue to work with SSTH
and local schools to develop a plan for the follow-up exchange activities and
international certification of the programs.
Training the teachers (professionals from tourism and hospitality industry) in
modern teaching methods and curricula development
Training the management in streamlining the student recruitment process;
development of a self-evaluation system
Assistance the management in leveraging expertise and resources from donors
and the industry.
Facilitation of partnerships among different stakeholders, namely Ministry of
Education and Science, Department of Tourism, ProCredit Bank, tourism
vocational schools, major tourism and hospitality companies, tourism SMEs, etc

75

Identifying and hiring a consultant/s to train/advice tourism SMEs management

and staff in service standards and business management practices.

Grant-making Activities
A grant to the Tbilisi-based tourism vocational school. This grant has been
already awarded through the open-door procedure in February 2007 (the grant
amount is USD 38,990). EF will be providing supervision of this project and
together with the grantee will make necessary adjustments based on the
recommendations of the consultants from Swiss School of Tourism and Hospitality
(SSTH);
A grant competition to identify organizations that will provide a week long
seminars to SMEs management and staff in B&B and guesthouse management
standards, financial management and accounting, introduction to computer
literacy to streamline accounting procedures, taxes and relations with Tax
agency, marketing and sales.
EFG will fund a the training seminars to
complement the government-sponsored Employment Initiative 2007 that
promotes SME development in tourism and hospitality business.
A grant competition to support internal branding of tourism and hospitality
trades and standards. Proposals will suggest a methodology to identify the best
performing professionals in the industry, e.g. a cook, a receptionist, a host, a
waiter, etc, and a plan for promoting the standards & values the best in the
professional employ.
The EFG will issue open-door Grants to fund the most innovative unsolicited
proposal for tourism sector development.
Standard grants management and contract monitoring procedures will be applied to
oversee the implementation of the program. Internal reporting will involve development
of quarterly reports and event memos.
EF will conduct mid-term and final evaluations
to find out to what extent the program has advanced the two schools. The data will be
compared to the baseline information collected as a result of the international
consultancy.
Key Partners
Swiss School of Tourism and Hospitality (SSTH), local tourism schools, private
companies such as hotels, restaurants, tour operators, Ministry of Education and
Science, Ministry of Economic Development Department of Tourism and Resorts.

76

Project 4.2
Creating Informational Base for the Tourism Sector
Project Objective
To support creation of information materials and databases for the tourism industry
Outcome

Outcome Indicator

Data source

Information materials on tourism

destinations in Georgia are widely
accessible
The official tourism web-site and
travel information centers are
reliable sources of information on
the local tourism sector

All major tourism sites in Georgia have

basic information available for tourists
at the site
Tourism information centers are fully
stocked with up to date information
about local attractions, tour operators,
accommodations and restaurants

Site visits to major sites

The official Department of Tourism

website is an important source of
information for people seeking
information

Number of hits to website, tourist surveys

Site visits to tourism

information centers

Activities
Needs Assessment aims to identify the categories of information needed for
marketing the tourism sector. The work will be carried out in cooperation with
the Department of Tourism and Resorts and representatives of the private
companies. The needs assessment also includes collection of already existing
information gathered by different donors. EF has made the first steps in this
direction by developing a comprehensive matrix of international donor activities in
the field of tourism. The next steps will include checking the quality and relevance
of data and identifying the gaps.
Organization of targeted tenders or grants competitions to fill in the informational
gaps. The tenders will be aimed at collecting the information on regions of
Georgia, tourist destinations and products, incorporating this information in the
electronic maps, creating textual materials, collecting photos etc.
Work with the Tourism Department and other stakeholders to incorporate the
collected information (contents) in the official web-site and promotional
materials to be circulated through the Travel Information Centers and other
distribution channels (hotels, guest-house, railway and bus stations, etc)
Standard grants management and contract monitoring procedures will be applied to
oversee the implementation of the program. Internal reporting will involve development
of quarterly reports and event memos.
EF will conduct mid-term and final evaluations
to find out to what extent the project has advanced Georgias representation according
to the above-listed outcome indicators. The data will be compared to the baseline
information collected at the beginning of the project.
Key Partners
Tourism industry stakeholders such as hotels, restaurants, tour operators, Ministry of
Economic Development Department of Tourism and Resorts.

77

5. CONFLICT RESOLUTION AND TOLERANCE BUILDING11

Project Objectives
6. To contribute to the peaceful resolution of the Georgian-Abkhaz conflict through
public diplomacy, exchange of often conflicting views over history and future of
the region, and joint discussions on social and economic issues of joint concern;
7. To facilitate the greater tolerance and understanding of the needs of non-majority
ethnic groups in Georgia (with focus on Azeri and Armenian population living in
the compact settlements across the boarders with Azerbaijan and Armenia). and
support practical steps towards their social and economic integration.
Project Timeframe
November 2007 - December 2008
Outcome
Sides of Georgia-Abkhazia conflict
have regular exchange of
information and discuss the ways to
resolve the conflict
A sustainable and continuous
integration process is set for Azeri
and Armenian population living in
the compact settlements across the
boarders with Azerbaijan and
Armenia

Outcome Indicator
Regular discussions between Georgian
and Abkhaz sides

Data source
Meetings, articles, eforums

Joint programs and activities involving

experts and civil society
representatives from both sides
Enhanced participation of non-ethnic
minority groups in decision making
process locally through small
community projects

Reports on joint
programming and
activities
Number of non-majority
ethnic representatives
involved in seminars,
trainings, and decision
making groups locally.
Number of small
projects carried out with
participation of Azeri
and Armenian ethnic
groups

Operating Activities
1. EFG and the New Eurasia Foundation, Russia are discussing a possibility of
hosting a roundtable on the Abkhaz conflict. The preliminary suggestion is to
focus the roundtable on very specific issues that concern all the sides. There are
at least two topics the Abkhaz side especially would be interested to discuss - the
European Neighborhood Policy and Sochi Olympics. We can also frame these two
topics into broader "development and security" and "the role of non state actors"
concepts. As to the process, EFG and FNE will start testing the ground with the
main stakeholder in Georgia, Russia, Abkhazia, EU and US. We will carefully
discuss what type of organizations/individuals should be invited and try to have a
good/relatively equal representation from Russia, Georgia, Abkhazia, EU, the US,
etc. Majority of invitees will be representing NGOs and think-tanks, but the
government agencies dealing with the issue will be also invited. Germany and
Spain expressed their willingness to host the event.
Grant-making Activities
1. A grant component administered by EFG of the National Integration and
Tolerance in Georgia (NITG) Program implemented by the United Nations
Association of Georgia with funding from the U.S Agency for International
Development (USAID). The grant support is given to grants are awarded to NGOs
to support program development in areas of Georgia populated by citizens of
non-Georgian ethnicity. The priority will be given to projects that target Kvemo
Kartlis Azeri and/or Samtskhe Javakhetis Armenian communities.
11

This and two following projects are under development. They might develop into larger
programs (e.g. Tolerance Building and Conflict Resolution Project) or integrate into other Programs
(e.g. Towards EU Integration)

78

2. EFG will encourage NGOs and think-tanks working on the Georgia-Abkhaz conflict
to submit their proposals through open-door to present a new, innovative
approach to the peaseful resolution of the conflict.
Major Partners
USAID; UN Association of Georgia; Office of the State Minister of Conflict Resolution;
OSCE; New Eurasia Foundation, Russia; European Platform of NGOs EPLO; OSCE;
International Alert, UNDP & UNHCR

79

6. EU INTEGRATION
Project Goal
To insure wider participation of Georgian society in the process of committing towards
common European values (democracy and human rights, rule of law, good governance,
market economy principles and sustainable development) and alignment with European
social, political and economic institutions.
Project Objectives
1. To involve Georgian civil society in the process of designing and monitoring of the
ENP AP;
2. To enhance government-civil society dialogue on designing and implementing
policy reforms.
Project Timeframe
October 2007 - December 2008
Outcome

Outcome Indicator

Data source

Increase public participation in the

process of committing towards
common European values and
alignment with European social,
political and economic institutions.

Number of NGOs and civil society

representatives engaged in the ENP
related projects

Volume of ENP related

publications,
conferences and round
table discussions
conducted

Enhance public awareness on the

EU, its institutions, opportunities of
lobbying for their rights with
support of these institutions, and
costs & benefits of the EU
integration

More NGOs and civic groups involved in

discussions, receive publications on
ENP process in Georgia (as well as the
SC)

Exchange trips for NGO

reps to EU related
institutions in Europe to
discuss the ENP action
plan

Increased communication between

NGOs and EU related institutions

Series of discussions
and lobbying for
revisions in the ENP AP

NGOs giving recommendations to the

Government of Georgia on the
revisions and implementation of the
ENP Action Plan through public
consultations and discussions

NGOs recommendations
are integrated into the
ENP Action Plan

Enhanced government-civil society

dialogue on designing and
implementing policy reforms.

EFG in coalition with OSGF and Heinrich Boll Foundation is currently running a project on
Civil Society Engagement in the Design & Implementation of the European Neighborhood
Policy Action Plan. The on-going project has mobilized civil society organizations to
comment on the design and implementation of the ENP AP in Georgia. The project has
already hosted five roundtables on the various priority areas of the AP. The project also
hosts a bilingual electronic newsletter (The European Neighbourhood Policy in Georgia www.enp.ge) highlighting the major developments around the ENP process and posting
recommendations from the roundtables. EFG will continue to host roundtable discussions
around the ENP process. Eventually the program may integrate more into the major EFG
programs. The South Caucasus cross-boarder ENP program will also take on some of
the initiatives under the project.
Major Partners
EC Delegation in Georgia, the Office of the State Minister of European Integration;
USAID, OSGF, Boll Foundation, WWF, various local NGOs, think-tanks and experts.

80

7. PRESIDENTIAL AND PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS

Project Goal
To strengthen the capacity of Georgian society to conduct free and fair elections and
increase citizens participation in the political process.
Project Objective
1. To educate voters on their rights and responsibilities;
2. To increase capacity of civil society to monitor the election process and the voters
lists
Project Timeframe
November 2007 - December 2008
Project Justification
A preliminary date of the 2008 elections has been already determined (sometime
between October and December 2008). According to current legislation, the president
will announce the elections 60 days prior to the Election Day. There was no indication
that the administration would seek to change the legislation to allow more time, and no
indication that they will give more than the minimum 60 days prior notice. (ODIHR
needs 5 months advance warning to prepare their election observation activities.
Participants also noted that some important NATO meetings are scheduled for late fall of
2008, coinciding with the elections.) It is also not clear whether parliamentary and
presdential elections will occur at the same time, or whether they will be split.
Combining the events will ensure stronger voter turnout, though.
The project will have only a grant component that will support initiatives focusing on one
or the set of the following:
Educating first-time voters;
Educating ethnic minorities on elections;
Fostering the capacity of local NGOs and community groups to audit and monitor
the voters lists;
Training election observers.
Major Partners
USAID Democracy and Governance Unit; OSGF; OSCE

81

8. OPEN DOOR GRANTS PROGRAM

Program Objective
To test short-term, innovative projects in new fields. Projects funded by the Open Door
grant scheme must be considered pilot projects that represent a new, innovative
approach to a persistent problem.
Program Justification
One clear distinction of EFs traditional open door grant program is that it provides EF
with the ability to rapidly respond to emerging needs or partnership opportunities. As the
EFG office continues to develop its operational programming, it will be equally important
to maintain a pool of funds that may be flexibly used to leverage other donors
contributions to specific projects and maintain our reputation as a solid partner of
international organizations and businesses in Georgia. In addition, the existence of the
Open Door Program provides a constant source of contact with the local NGO community
and of information on emerging needs in Georgia.
Outcome
As defined by
individual projects

AMs

of

Outcome Indicator
As defined by AMs of individual
projects

Data Source
Site visits
Grantee records
Project reports

82

9. CROSS-BORDER PROGRAMS: ENP CIVIC DIALOGUE, STAGE II

Program Objective
To assist the three countries of the South Caucasus in meeting common ENP Action Plan
commitments in the areas of waste management, food standards and safety, and vocational
education and to stimulate increased dialogue between governments and NGOs on ENP-related
issues.
Program Justification
In October and November 2006, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia concluded national action
plans with the European Union in the context of the laters European Neighborhood Policy. The
Action Plans commit all three countries to deeper integration with the EU through approximation
of EU standards and through increased access to the single European market. There are a host
of common public policy priorities that lend themselves to a regional exchange of ideas and
innovative solutions. Moreover, regional cooperation remains an emphatic priority in all three
Action Plans.
In June 2006, EF-SCCP launched the first stage of its ENP Civic Dialogue Program. In late 2006,
EF-SCCP organized a regional conference and held a series of stakeholder meetings that
identified waste management, food standards and safety, and vocational education as the
themes that would inform the programs activities. Activities have included a series of policy
forums, one on each of the three themes; the development of regional policy reports; and a set
of public awareness activities that includes televised and radio programs. The policy forums were
organized in the first half of 2007 to set the research agenda for subsequent trilateral policy
reports. EF-SCCP anticipates that the three policy reports will be completed in late 2007 and
early 2008.
During Stage II of the ENP Civic Dialogue Program, EFP will identify and implement three pilot
projects on waste management, food standards and safety, and vocational education that are
based on the recommendations from the three forthcoming policy reports and from brainstorming
sessions with the research consortiums. Since the actual findings of the reports will not be
available until late 2007/early 2008, EFP has provided a set of illustrative example projects that
will likely be adjusted to reflect alternative programming ideas generated in the reports findings
and forthcoming brainstorming sessions with research partners.
Project 1.1
Waste Reduction Advocacy Campaign
Project Objective
To promote recycling, reduction, and reuse of solid wastes in the three regional capitals.
Project Activities & Justification
Solid waste management has been identified as major environmental concern, because of
potential health impacts and the detrimental effect solid waste pollution can have on efforts to
promote tourism by all three countries.
The forthcoming ENP policy report on waste
management identified the three Rs (recycling, reuse, and reduction) as critical element in
developing an effective waste management policy for the region. EFP will launch an advocacy
campaign that includes the following operational and grant-making activities:
A survey conducted by CRRC that will measure peoples attitudes toward the reduction of
solid waste at the beginning and end of the project;
A grant or contract to explore the feasibility of building a regional recycling plant that can
be used by all three countries of the South Caucasus;
A public awareness campaign to encourage citizens in all three countries to reuse and
reduce the amount of solid waste they produce (no efforts to promote recycling will be
included due to the lack of infrastructure to handle recycled wasted; however, this may be
the subject of future programming).

83

Outcome
Increased numbers of citizens in the
South Caucasus willing to reduce
and reuse solid waste products

Outcome Indicator
Measured changes in attitudes about
waste reduction

Data source
CRRC survey results
conducted before and
after the advocacy
campaign commences.

Increased awareness by major

stakeholders on the feasibility of the
creation of a regional recycling
center.

Inclusion of major stakeholders in the

national working teams (within the
frames of the project) in all the three
countries.

Finalized feasibility
study on a regional
recycling center
submitted to EPF.

Possible input from one to three

national governments of the region to
the process of feasibility study.

Positive written
response from the
governments (and/or
other stakeholders) in
the region on the
feasibility study
conducted.

Project 1.2
VET Accreditation Standards
Project Objective
To assist the three countries of the region in developing accreditation standards for vocational
education training (VET) that are based on EU VET models and that meet ENP Action Plan
commitments.
Project Activities & Justification
An effectively trained work force is critical to promoting economic growth in the South Caucasus.
In August 2007, EF-SCCP awarded a trilateral grant to DVV International in Armenia, Azerbaijan,
and Georgia to develop a regional policy report on VET reform. One of the areas identified a part
of DVVs policy analysis includes the development of accreditation standards that align with EU
standards. EFP will provide a trilateral linkage grant, most likely to DVV International, to
elaborate VET school accreditation standards in 3-4 key professions, such as construction,
hospitality/service industries, and information technology. Grant partners will likely undertake
the following types of activities:
Research on EU accreditation standards for targeted professions and a gap analysis of
existing accreditation standards;
Creation of working groups to elaborate accreditation standards for targeted professions
(working groups will include relevant government and business stakeholders);
Collaboration with government-sponsored VET schools to implement elaborated standards.

Outcome
One to three countries of the region
apply accreditation standards that are
consistent with EU VET principles.

Outcome Indicator
National governments agree to
adoption of all or part of the
accreditation standards developed
under the project.

EU future reports on the region register

the shift of the national VET systems in
one to three countries of the region to
EU VET standards

Data source
Finalized paper on
accreditation standards
for 3-4 professions
submitted (by grantee)
to EPF.
Positive written response
from the governments
regarding the adoption
of the elaborated
standards.

Project 1.3
Food Standards and Safety Committees
Project Objective
To assist the three South Caucasus countries in developing a more effective coordination system
for enforcing food standards and safety.
Project Activities & Justification
84

In recent years, the influx of non-certified, expired, and contaminated food products into the
South Caucasus countries has increased significantly, making the regions consumer markets
vulnerable to dangerous food products. Moreover, agribusiness forms a sizable portion of the
regions economy; however, lucrative exports markets in Europe and elsewhere are largely closed
because of an inability to meet basic quality standards. In September 2007, EF-SCCP will award a
contract to a trilateral consortium of agribusiness research organizations that will develop a
regional policy paper on food standards and safety in the context of ENP Action Plan
commitments. EFP will sponsor a linkage grant to establish committees in all three countries that
will work to coordinate enforcement of food standards and safety. Grant partners will likely
undertake the following types of activities:
The development of procedures and flow charts for clarifying agency/ministry
competencies and lines of communication;
Monitoring and evaluation of committee activities by grantees.
Outcome
Improved quality of analysis

Outcome Indicator
# citations of publications of course
graduates by other publications

Data source
Bibliometric study

# of methods used by graduates in

drafting of policy reports

Results of blind
evaluation of sample and
dummy group

Quality of reports written by a sample

of graduates as compared to a
dummy group

Marks of the Evaluation

(control group v. dummy)
of five independent
evaluators

85

Budget Projections: 2008-2010

Eurasia Partnership Foundation Georgia

Eurasia
Foundation/US
Government
Grant Costs
Operating Programs
Field Administration

Percent
2008
2009
53%
$ 1,570,000 $ 1,600,000
11%
54%
35%

$ 180,000
$ 845,836
$ 544,165

$ 444,402
$ 737,198
$ 418,400

2010
$ 1,700,000
$ 590,000
$ 738,571
$ 371,429

Other Donors
Grant Costs
Operating Programs
Field Administration

14%
0%
84%
16%

406268

Sida
Grant Costs
Operating Programs
Field Administration

34%
49%
31%
20%

$ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 1,000,000

$ 492,440
$ 492,440
$ 492,440
$ 307,560
$ 307,560
$ 307,560
$ 200,000
$ 200,000
$ 200,000

Total Budget

100%

500000
600000
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
$ 340,377
$ 239,792
$ 339,792
$ 65,891
$ 210,208
$ 210,208

$ 2,976,268 $ 3,100,000

$ 3,300,000

86

ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN

OUTCOMES

PERFORMANCE INDICATOR

TARGET/DATE

DATA SOURCE

Objective 1: To assist in the development and the effectiveness of the new EPF board of directors and its committees
Development of a formal
orientation process for new EPF
Board members to create board
cohesion, knowledge about the
boards role and understanding
about EPFs mission

Checklist for Board members orientation

Complete set of orientation

materials Nov 12

Checklist, forms, handbook

Orientation Workshop (November 2007)

November 2007; Attended

by all members

Facilitators report on workshop

Adoption of Bylaws by governing board

members

All new members Nov

14

Minutes of Board Meeting/Bylaws

# of new Board members participating in

orientation workshop and 3-country launch
Performance evaluation of Board
members conducted

# number of Board members attending board

meetings and/or committee meetings

Board awareness of EFs financial

position

The Board reviews financial reports, including

semi-annual budget-to-actual reports by
program

The Board is engaged in

fundraising efforts

All new members Nov

12-14
All members next
meeting dates set after
each board meeting
2 reviews per year

Copies of signed checklists; copies of

signed conflict of interest
Minutes from board meetings and
committee meetings
Board meeting minutes

Creation of Finance Committee (FC)

2 FC meetings per year

Minutes of FC meetings and

presentations of Chair of the FC to
the Board
Documented conversation between
Board members and staff

The Board approves the fundraising strategy

and implementation plan

Once per year

# of joint meetings between management and

Board members/fundraising events

Minimum 4/yr

Meeting notes in DDB

# of fundraising opportunities/contacts
identified by Board members

Minimum of one contact

from each Board member
annually resulting in
submission of a concept
note or proposal

Documented conversation between

Board members and staff

87

Objective 2: To set targets for EPFs financial sustainability and to create the systems required to achieve those targets
Fundraising strategy developed,
reflecting fundraising targets

Develop a fundraising strategy and obtain

approval by the EPF Board

November 2008

Donor database used and

consistently maintained

EPF staff regularly updating DDB with new

contacts, meeting notes and donor
information

All Directors, ACDs and

development staff using
DDB weekly

Copy of fundraising strategy;

minutes of Board meeting approving
the strategy
Survey of DDB use (conduct them in
September 2007 and September
2008)

Regular search for funding opportunities

organized by EPF senior management

All staff meetings and

contacts entered into DDB
Increase in the # of
proposals submitted

Minutes of EPF Senior management

meetings; DDB

Improve EPF staff skills in

identifying fundraising
opportunities

# of new proposals submitted

Training for program staff in fundraising

New donor/partner relationship

created

# of new partnerships, # joint projects

Diversified funding base

Increased % of funds from non-core funding

sources
Charity and VAT-exempt status obtained

Legal status as a charity and

VAT exemptions to attract
corporate funding
Monitoring of financial
performance of individual
programs and EPF as a whole

Allocation of costs by programs

Assessment of allocation against performance,
outputs and outcomes of the programs

# staff trained by Sept

2008
At least 3 new
partnerships/joint projects

Agenda of training

Match 35% of core funds

with non-core sources
Jan 2008 for VAT and Dec
2008 for charity (in
Georgia)
Semi-annual

Copies of funding agreements; DDB

Semi-annual

Reports from country directors

Copies of funding agreements, or

MOUs

Certificates of legal status

Minutes of Board and Financial
Committee

Objective 3: To transfer EF programs to EPF and to develop EPFs program management

Main program continuity and
demand-driven program areas by
evaluating market niche of EPFs
programs

Annual & ongoing mapping of EPF programs

compared to similar programs by other
implementers

Ongoing and annual review

by Sept. 2008

Program Acceptance Memoranda

(AM) prepared by program staff

Ongoing assessment of need for programs

Ongoing

Needs Assessments & portions of the

acceptance memos

Staff are constantly up to date on ongoing

and new activities of other implementers and
donors in the areas where they work

Ongoing

Meeting notes; Needs assessments

and acceptance memos

88

Improve reporting on impact in

programs/projects

Knowledge, usage and

maintenance of program
management systems (PMIS
and/or new EF network system)
Regular reviews of program
progress by EPF senior
management
Knowledge of EPF policies and
procedures

Outcomes, indicators and verifiable targets

are incorporated in initial program design and
reporting

Quarterly

Reports in DDB, Acceptance memos,

Quarterly Reports

Impact report on 15 years of EFs work in the

Caucasus
# of participants trained and regularly using
PMIS

March 2008

Report; Board minutes

December 2007 training;

ongoing usage

Training Agenda and # participants

Quarterly

Program Reports generated

1 per quarter, including

annual performance review

Quarterly PMIS reports

Actual-to-target information on program is

available on a quarterly basis
# of individual meetings with program staff

Development of new policies and procedures

and adoption by Board

November 2007

# of EPF staff training in policies and

procedures, including program design, etc.

December 2007 - 100% of

program staff

Copies of Annual Employee

Performance Appraisal
Copy of Policies and Procedures;
Board minutes
Copy of agenda and training
materials

Objective 4: To develop strong human resource management, administration and communication during transition to EPF
as a foundation for EPFs operations
Improve internal communications
to better inform employees about
all aspects of EPFs operations
Develop clear and concise
policies and procedures

Senior management team meetings and # of

staff meetings in each country office

Minutes of senior management team

meetings and staff meeting minutes

3-country conference calls, Skype conferences

and video conferences
Development of HR policies and procedures
and adoption by the EPF board

Weekly
Policies and procedures
November 2007

Copies of revised and newly created

policies and procedures

Development of job descriptions revised to

comply with new policies

As needed basis

Copies of job descriptions

October 2007

Employment Contract

100%

Copies of annual employee

performance appraisal reports
Org chart/oard minutes

Hire a regional HR manager

Employees participate in annual review
process
Undertake the efficient and

Weekly

Creation and distribution of org chart and

November 2007

89

transparent transfer of staff to

new EPF organization
Facilitate the effective transfer of
SCCP & CRRC staff to EPF
structure

adoption by the Board

Announcement of new positions and process
for filling those positions
Creation of memos, clear policies and
procedures on new roles and responsibilities
concerning SCCP and CRRC

Sept. 2007 January 2008

Job announcements

Sept 2007 January 2008

Memos

November 2007
Policies and procedures
December 2007 staff
training

Agenda of December training

Objective 5: To create sound financial management systems for EPF

EPF has fully functional financial
management system in place to
provide timely and accurate
management reports

Tenders to identify, install and train finance

staff on the new system

September December
2007

Report on tender process

Budget-to-actual financial reports

# reports, starting from

Jan 2008

Ensure internal controls and

compliance with local/international
audit standards

Develop EPF finance and procurement policies

and procedures

Sept. 2007

Copies of budget-to-actual reports

signed by EPF executive
management
Copy of new Policies and Procedures

Adoption by EPF Board

# of financial budget-to-actual reports by
program submitted to the Board

Nov. 2007
2 per year

# of financial budget-to-actual reports by

program submitted to the EPF Finance
Committee
# of EPF employees who attended training
session conducted by EPF Financial Manager
and Chief Accountant

Quarterly

Documented conversation; copies of

meeting minutes

All EPF program, finance

and administrative
employees

List of attendees; Agenda of training

# of EPF employees attended training session

on EPF internal policies and procedures
Methodology is approved by President

December 2007 - ongoing

List of attendees; Agenda of training

By Jan. 2008

Copy of approved document

Training of future local CFO

Ongoing in 2008

CFO training checklist

Engage the Board and its Finance

Committee to provide necessary
guidance and control

Improved skills and knowledge of

EPF employees on USG regulations
and requirements with respect to
funds management, NICRA
formulation, document retention,
etc.
Developed methodology for
distribution of indirect cost pool,
regularly reviewed and revised
Preparation for A-133 audit
equivalent

Board minutes
Board books; copies of Board
meeting minutes

Objective 6: To establish strong external and internal communications about EPFs goals and accomplishments through

90

more effective and efficient use of internet technologies

Create and maintain better
internal communications through
telephone, Skype, and video
conferencing for senior
management team
Improved communications
between senior management and
EPF staff
Effective external communications
of EPF successes and plans

Weekly senior management team meetings

and distribution of minutes to EPF staff

Ongoing improvements as
technology changes

Minutes of senior management team

meeting

Weekly staff meetings in each country

Ongoing in 2008

Staff meeting notes

Sharing of staff weekly work plans

Press releases

Ongoing

Staff weekly work plan lists

Press releases

Program descriptions (prospective)

Annual report (retrospective)

Country summary inserts (retrospective)

New websites

For all upcoming programs,

by January 2008
2006 report printed by
September 2007; 2007
report by June 2008
December 2007
All information migrated
and loaded by November
2007

Printed program descriptions

Printed Annual Report

Printed inserts
Web site addresses

91

ORGANIZATIONAL CHARTS
Georgia Country Office:

92

Presidents Office:

93

CRRC Offices

94

Regional Finance and Administrative Functions:

Regional Programs:

95

FINANCE/ADMINISTRATIVE PLAN
The Board of Directors will review and approve new policies and procedures plus a
number of additional administrative and financial issues during its first meeting in
November. Please see the appendix for a draft agenda and list of items for Board review.
EPF will adopt the financial and administrative practices of Eurasia Foundation and bring
them into conformity with local laws as required. Key to maintaining good practices is
building capacity among staff. Training will take place in December 2007 in policies and
procedures with special attention to changes in accounting (the new SUN system),
finance, procurement, HR, admin, program, GM, communications and fundraising,
including DDB, GMS and PMIS compliance. The training will happen by functional area
and will be conducted by senior staff. Carmela Weber, a finance and localization
consultant, may come out again to the region to help with the SUN and accounting
training, and we will also invite the EF DC program officer and grant officer to attend the
training as part of their pre-award site visit to confirm that staff are aware of policies,
procedures, systems, etc.
EPF is developing a new set of policies and procedures that conform to local law but
maintain strict financial control and meet the needs of the new organization. The draft
policies and procedures will be submitted to EF in early November. Some sections
requiring local legal review, including the HR and procurement policies, will be sent out
to local legal experts and returned to EPF by the end of October.
Overseeing finance and administration, the regional office will have an expatriate CFO
who will manage the transition from Eurasia representative office to local foundations
and help ensure the process progresses efficiently. With an eye towards sustainability
the CFO will hire a local deputy CFO as part of a succession plan once the new
foundations have demonstrated its capacity in financial and administrative management,
with the goal of fully training the deputy CFO by the conclusion of the first audit in March
2009.
Organizational Structure
EPF proposes an organizational structure that maximizes efficiency, provides a rational
succession plan for key employees, and meets audit and governance requirements of
local and US laws. Brief descriptions of key positions are as follows:
President. The President will manage the Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia
offices. The president will liaise with the Board of Directors and ensure the
effective implementation of EP program strategies and policies. He will represent
the EPF in relations with donors, governments, diplomatic missions and other key
stakeholders. The President will ensure appropriate oversight of financial,
administration, program, grants management, development and communications
functions. The President will have $100,000 approval authority for subgrants and
contracts and must notify and inform the Board of Directors before entering EPF
into donor agreements above $500,000. The Board of Directors will review and
approve an annual program strategy and all larger grants and contracts.
CFO. This position will include financial and audit oversight of the three offices
including oversight of the administrative and grants management functions. Long
term financial planning, pipeline management, and liaising with the board on
financial issues are also the responsibility of the CFO. In addition, the person will
be tasked to groom the deputy CFO for succession.
Country Director(CD). The CD will report to the President and oversee all
operations of the country specific local foundation. The CD will manage the
implementation of all programs, including review and approval of grants and nongrant programs, staffing and local financial issues including payments and
adherence to EPF policies and procedures. The CD will assist the President in
liaising with donors, government officials, diplomatic missions, the board and

96

other stakeholders. The CD will have $35,000 approval authority for grants and
contracts.
Board of Directors. The three entities in Eurasia Partnership Foundation will be
linked in governance by a shared Board of Directors identical for all three
countries. The initial board of directors will be comprised of international figures
with deep knowledge of and commitment to the region, serving as the overall
fiscal accountability body for each of the three localized institutions. Local citizens
will be added as soon as politically practical, maintaining the principle of an
identical board overseeing all three entities. Board members will be private
citizens, appointed in consultation with key stakeholders and donors.
Advisory Committees. An Advisory Committee comprised of local citizen leaders
will operate in each country. This body will guide input on emergent social and
programming priorities. Given that local NGO tradition does not usually entrust
Boards with fiscal accountability, the separation of these two bodies functions
(Board of Directors and Advisory Committees) will be expedient for the first few
years of operations. We have found that local advisors still fear taking on
personal responsibility for transparent allocation of finances, while international
professionals do not. In addition, it is useful in the current political context to
have international scrutiny on the finances of a public good foundation, because
it adds to the credibility that resources are not simply being allocated according
to insider connections. Once Eurasia Partnership Foundation has been operating
successfully for several years, we anticipate that the reticence of local
professionals to take on an accountability role will significantly diminish. In
combination with a strong coordinating function of the Office of the President
(which will serve the donor relations, fundraising, outreach and coordination
needs of the network), this dual trustee/advisory structure should meet the
governance needs of the new organizations.

Two members of each advisory comittee will make up a separate advisory task force for
trilateral and cross-border program review, creating an effective review process for these
grants and projects.
Threshold limits are currently set at $100k for the president and $35k for the directors,
but a detailed threshold memo will be drafted for the Board meeting and the board will
approve or adjust these limits.
Policies and Procedures
EPF expects to submit its new policies and procedures to the EPF Board of Directors for
review and approval in Fall of 2007. EP is customizing its policies and procedures to
conform to local legislation and banking regulations, but its policies will be based closely
on existing EF policies and procedures. Each local foundation will have a unique set of
policies but will differ only in matters regarding to the adherence to local law. These
policies and procedures will cover the primary functional areas of EPFs organizational
structure, including programs, grants management, finance and administration, human
resources, development and communications.
Systems. The EPF Finance staff will implement a newly conformed accounting system for
the EPF based on SUN Systems. The Finance teams in the countries are fluent in the
SUN and the system has proven itself flexible enough to manage multiple donors,
payables, multi currencies, and a complex chart of accounts. Local reporting will be
calculated either by hand or by a local accounting system depending on complexity of
the reporting requirements. EPF will continue to use EFs Grants Management System
(GMS) for tracking program activity, it Program Management Information System (PMIS)
for operating programs and its Donor Data Base (DDB) for donor management and
outreach activities.
Budgeting. FY08 budgets as well as budget forecasts through FY08 are included as
annexes. Starting in 2008, the EPF will adopt a calendar year budgeting cycle bringing it
into line with regional legislation and reporting requirements, therefore EPF FY08 budget

97

will run from Janaury 1, 2008 to December 31, 2008. The EPF Board of Directors will
review and approve the budget prior to its adoption.
Audit: As a recipient of USAID funds, EPF will be expected to undergo a yearly audit that
meets A-133 standards and local reporting requirements. Additionally, as part of its
grant from EF, EPF will be subject to periodic site visits by EF staff to ensure compliance
with the grant agreement and EF procedures.
Bank Accounts. EPF will maintain three separate bank accounts one in each
country. The finance directors have conducted due diligence in reviewing banks
and will prepare a memo summarizing the research and analysis for the board
meeting. EPF will also maximize its funds by placing non-USG donations into
interest-bearing accounts.
EPF Compensation Principles
EPF will seek to establish competitive compensation to recruit and retain quality staff.
Initially, the compensation will be comparable to that of EF for staff transferred from EF
to EPF. Management will review the salary and benefits package based on funding levels
and in November will conduct staff performance reviews and make appropriate salary
adjustments in the new contracts. In the future, EPF will work towards supplanting the
expatriate staff with skilled local hire, completing the process of establishing a
sustainable local development foundation.

98

BOARD MEMBER BIOGRAPHIES

HORTON BEEBE-CENTER
Eurasia Foundation
As President of Eurasia Foundation, Mr. Beebe-Center is responsible for defining and executing the
strategic goals of the Foundation as approved by the Board of Trustees. Mr. Beebe-Center joined the
Foundation in 1993. He established the Foundations first field offices and ran the Moscow regional
office for two years. In 1995, Mr. Beebe-Center returned to the United States to serve as the Vice
President for Projects and Development before becoming Executive Vice President. Prior to joining
the Foundation Mr. Beebe-Center worked for several years in U.S.-Soviet projects ranging from
intergovernmental technical exchanges to commercial joint ventures. Mr. Beebe-Center holds a BA in
Soviet Studies from Brown University and an MA in Russian Studies from Harvard University.
DIETER BODEN

Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (ret.)

Dr. Boden was the German Ambassador to the OSCE in Vienna from 2002-2005. He entered the
diplomatic service in 1968, completing assignments in the political department of the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs in Bonn, to various diplomatic missions including to Soviet Russia and Italy and as a
political counsellor in the German Bundestag. Dr. Boden was the Deputy Chief Negotiator for
Germany in negotiations on the reduction of conventional forces in Europe (CFE) in Vienna from
1989-1992. In 1995 he became Head of the OSCE Mission in Georgia and, from 1999 to 2002 went
back to the Caucasus as SRSG of the UN Secretary General in Georgia and Head of UNOMIG. Dr.
Boden is now retired from the foreign service but continues to work on contracts with the
OSCE/ODIHR. He is also an Adjunct Professor of International Relations at the University of
Potsdam. He holds a PhD in Slavic Philology from Hamburg University and was appointed Honorary
Doctor by the Tbilisi School for Political Studies in 2006.
SABINE FREIZER
International Crisis Group
Sabine Freizer is the Director of the International Crisis Groups Europe Program, based in the
Brussels Office. Mrs. Freizer entered the Crisis Group as the Caucasus Project Director in July 2004.
She holds a PhD from the London School of Economics and a MA from the College of Europe
(Bruges, Belgium), which she obtained as a Fulbright Scholar. She specializes in civil society and
conflict prevention and her main areas of expertise include the Balkans, Caucasus, Turkey and
Moldova.
Before joining the International Crisis Group, Mrs. Freizer served with the OSCE in several countries
of Eurasia. She worked as a Political Officer for the OSCE Election Observation Missions in
Azerbaijan and Georgia in 2003-2004; the Human Dimensions/Legal Expert in Tashkent from 19992000 and as the Civil Society Coordinator for the OSCE Mission to Bosnia-Herzegovina, Sarajevo
from 1996-1998. Mrs. Freizer has published articles about Kosovo, Serbia and Nagorno-Karabagh in
a number of scholarly journals and news media including the EU Observer, the European Voice,
openDemocracy.net and IslamOnline.net. Her expert analysis has been sought by local and
international media outlets including BBC, Deutsche Welle, RFL and AFP.
DAVID LAWRENCE LEE
MagtiCom, Ltd
Mr. Lee has 15 years experience in the communications business, including as Deputy General
Director at Comstar, a leading fixed line operator in Moscow; Regional Director of South East Asia
for Cable and wireless; CEO of Sakhalin Mobile and Manager of the mobile business Teleyemen.
Today he is the General Director of MagtiCom Ltd, the largest mobile operator in Georgia with 52
percent market share. Mr. Lee has led the company to double in size to over 1.2 million subscribers
99

and over $115 million ebitda since his arrival in 2004. Mr. Lee was a Naval Officer in the Royal Navy
for nine years and is a trained chartered accountant with KPMG. Mr. Lee is also a member of
Amcham board of directors in Georgia. He holds an MBA from Warwick Business School.
MARGARET RICHARDSON
Oakwood Enterprises, LLC
An attorney with an extensive background in tax and financial services, Mrs. Richardson served as
commissioner of the U.S. Internal Revenue Service from 1993 to 1997. Mrs. Richardson began her
career as a clerk at the U.S. Court of Claims (now the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit)
and then joined the Office of Chief Counsel of the Internal Revenue Service. She later became the
first woman promoted to executive rank in the history of the Office of Chief Counsel. In 1977, she
joined the law firm of Sutherland, Asbill and Brennan in Washington, DC. She was appointed to the
Internal Revenue Service Commissioners Advisory Group, serving as a member from 1988 to 1990
and as Chair in 1990. Currently, Mrs. Richardson is involved with Oakwood Enterprises LLC.
Mrs. Richardson serves on the Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets in the United
States and on the DC Bar Committee on Multidisciplinary Practice. She is also a member of the
Financial Women's Association, the Washington Women's Forum and the Council of the Woodrow
Wilson Center for International Scholars. She serves on the George Washington University Law
School Advisory Board and the boards of the National Museum of Women in the Arts, the U.S.Russia Business Council and Eurasia Foundation. She has also served as a member of the Board of
the National Cathedral School, the Development Board of the Hospital for Sick Children and the
Women's Campaign Fund. She has been profiled in a number of major national newspapers including
The New York Times, The Washington Post and USA Today. Mrs. Richardson was named "Woman of
the Year" in 1993 by the Financial Women's Association, and she is the recipient of several
distinguished awards for her service. She holds a BA in political science from Vassar College and a
J.D. with honors from The George Washington University Law School, where she was also editor of
the Law Review.
MARY SHEEHAN
International Organization for Migration
Mrs. Sheehan brings more than 30 years experience in the field of migration, including eight years
with IOM in the Caucasus. From 1998-2002 she was the Chief of Mission in Yerevan, and from 19982002 she was the Regional Coordinator for the Caucasus based in Tbilisi. After a three year break
from the region during which she opened the IOM office in Sri Lanka to provide emergency response,
and livelihood replacement for tsunami victims, Mrs. Sheehan returned to Tbilisi as Chief of Mission
for the Georgia Office where she currently works. She has also served as Deputy Director of
Volunteer Programs to the Governor of California on issues related to the influx of Southeast Asians
after the Vietnam war; Director of the International Catholic Migration Commission training program
in Sudan for Ethiopian and Eritrean refugees involved in a U.S. resettlement program; and nine years
in a law office dealing with immigration. She began her career with the United Farm Workers Union
in California and Arizona, advocating for the rights to unionize and strike, on political campaigns and
with voter registration.
ROY SOUTHWORTH
World Bank
Roy Southworth is the Country Manager for the World Bank Office in Tbilisi, Georgia. Mr.
Southworth has had a long career in the Bank, joining in 1979 as an agricultural economist, and has
worked throughout Africa, Eastern Europe and Central Asia. He completed field assignments in
Tanzania and Croatia before coming to Georgia in January 2004. Mr. Southworth graduated with
High Honors from Washington State University with a BA in Economics. After a stint in Peace Corps
in Ethiopia he attended Stanford University where he earned a PhD from the Food Research Institute.
Mr. Southworth has extensive experience in the development, implementation and evaluation of

100

investment operations in agriculture and rural development. Since 2001 he has been working on
country operations and management of field offices in the Europe and Central Asia Region.
TIMOTHY DAVID STRAIGHT
Honorary Council of Norway and Finland
Since 2001, Timothy Straight has served as the Norwegian Honorary Consul to Armenia and in 2006, he
was also appointed the Finnish Honorary Consul to Armenia. Prior to these appointments, Mr. Straight
served for five years as the Country Director of the Norwegian Refugee Council, leading programs in
human rights and school and shelter construction. Mr. Straight also worked for NRC in Bosnia and
Croatia, leading a refugee repatriation program involving housing rehabilitation, minority return, civil
rights, a school for small business entrepreneurs, micro-credit and job creation projects. Mr. Straight has
also run several small businesses involved in the import/export of local handicrafts from developing
countries, many of which he designs himself. He currently owns one of Yerevans most interesting
interior design shops, marketing handcrafted Armenian and imported products. Mr. Straight holds an
MBA and BA in International Affairs from George Washington University.
MARGO SQUIRE
U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (on leave)
Margo Squire has been a career diplomat since 1984 with the U.S. Information Agency and the State
Department, serving in Munich, Moscow, Melbourne, Baku and Washington. She has experience in
public affairs, media relations, international broadcasting, educational exchanges, and management of
USG assistance activities in the New Independent States of the Former Soviet Union (NIS). From
2001-2003 she directed the Eurasia Foundation office in Azerbaijan and was named Eurasia
Foundation's outstanding country director for 2001. She was also a member of the BP community
development committee planning the BTC pipeline. Currently on leave in Ankara, Turkey
accompanying her husband, the US Ambassador to Turkey, Margo is involved in Turkish and
international NGOs that promote education and support women and children. She holds a BA in
Russian language and studies from Dartmouth College and an MA from Johns Hopkins University,
SAIS.
KENNETH S. YALOWITZ
John Sloan Dicker Center for International Understanding, Dartmouth College
Ambassador Yalowitz was appointed Director of the John Sloan Dickey Center for International
Understanding at Dartmouth College on July 1, 2003. He completed his undergraduate work at the
University of Wisconsin and holds a Russian Institute Certificate, MA and Master of Philosophy
degree from Columbia University. He retired from the U.S. Department of State on September 30,
2001 after 36 years as career diplomat and member of the Senior Foreign Service. He served twice as
a U.S. ambassador: to the Republic of Belarus from 1994-1997; and to Georgia from 1998-2001. He
was chosen for the Ambassador Robert Frasure award for peacemaking and conflict prevention in
2000 for his work to prevent the spillover of the Chechen war into Georgia. His other foreign
assignments included two tours of duty in Moscow, The Hague and the US Mission to NATO in
Brussels. His domestic assignments have included Country Director for Australia-New Zealand
Affairs, Deputy Director for Economics of the Office of Soviet Union Affairs, and Congressional
Foreign Affairs Fellow. Ambassador Yalowitz previously taught political science at the Industrial
College of the Armed Forces. He also served as the Area Studies Chair on the former Soviet Union
(1993-94) and Dean of the Senior Seminar (1997-98) at the Foreign Service Institute, the U.S.
governments training institution for American diplomats and other professionals preparing for
foreign service. He has been adjunct professor of government at Georgetown University, visiting
fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Foundation, a diplomat-in-residence at American University and a
member of the Institutional Review Board of the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center.

101

MORE TOP IMPACTS FROM GEORGIA

The following grant and program impact summaries are compiled from all three South
Caucasus countries. Although the current proposal only covers Georgia, the lessons and
strengths of the achievements in Armenia and Azerbaijan contribute equally to
demonstrating the capacity of EF in Georgia, since Eurasia Partnership Foundation will be
a tightly-linked network of three local organizations.

Between 2005-2006, a two-cycle Pipeline Monitoring and Dialogue

Program, co-funded by UNDP, BP and IFC, focused on building the NGO
sectors capacity in monitoring and auditing construction and operation of the
pipeline. Trainings and practical experience examining the extent to which BTC
Co. and its contractors complied with stated commitments to minimize the
negative impact of pipeline construction on the environment and surrounding
communities. Representatives from various NGOs formed workgroups to
examine aspects such as waste management, reinstatement of the pipeline
corridor, protection of cultural heritage and oil spill response. Final reports with
all findings were presented both to the public and to BP, which made a formal
response to each finding. The NGO participants developed valuable skills in
monitoring and auditing of large infrastructure and resource extraction projects.

The project Branding Georgia as a Tourist Destination, in cooperation with

the Department of Tourism and Resorts, helped to turn the once-moribund
department into a western-style tourism promotion agency. The department
examined all of its internal management systems, and developed a new mission,
staffing structure, job descriptions and strategic plan. In the next stage, EF
assisted the department to develop a brand image for Georgia as a tourism
destination, including the development of promotional brochures, maps, CDs and
an interactive web portal.
The promotional materials were used to boost
Georgias image at several international tourism fairs. EF continues to actively
cooperate with the Department on several current projects, including support to
the newly-established tourism vocational school, trainings for owners of small
guesthouses and tourism-related business, and the development of marketing
materials for major tourist sites in Georgia that will be available at the sites and
through tourism information centers.

The Georgian National Museum with EF support, completed a major project to

improve its internal management systems, especially in the areas of finance and
accounting, human resource management and strategic planning. The museum
underwent an extensive revision of staff and policy under a new strategic plan
that is in line with international museum management practices. The strategic
plan is now being implemented, and the museum is undergoing dramatic
renovations to improve visitor services and modernize exhibition areas. The
museum has also signed a major agreement with the Smithsonian Institute and
attracted support from BP to construct a state-of-the-art auditorium/lecture hall
that can be used for public events.

With a grant from EF, the NGO EveryChild piloted a community based model of
childcare in the Tianeti region. Former orphanage residents were reunited with
their extended families or placed in foster care families, and receive extra care
and support at an after school facility. In Rustavi, the organization set up a small
group home and organized foster care for children who are living in an orphanage
that is scheduled to shut down. The Government of Georgia has adopted a
country-wide deinstitutionalization plan and plans continue involving NGOs in
developing community based models of care.

102

Water is a key shared resource in the Kura-Araks river basin. Water quality or
quantity problems often originate in one country and affect downstream
neighbors. For many years, mines and factories processing ore have dumped
toxic waste into these waterways. As a result, the Kura and its tributaries at their
most polluted points sustain no animal or vegetable life. Many villagers living
along the rivers believe that some of their families' health problems and the
health problems of their livestock are connected to the contaminated water, and
some studies suggest that crop capacity of adjacent land has decreased by 60%
in the most heavily polluted areas.
EF supported a trilateral coalition of
environmental organizations from Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia to protect the
Kura River. Partner organizations established Public Environmental Information
Centers (PEIC) in three small border communities Akhtala in northern Armenia,
Bolnisi in southern Georgia, and Kazakh in western Azerbaijan. The Centers
organized a wide range of activities to teach interested community members to
safeguard the river and the surrounding environment, developed teaching
materials on ecology for local teachers to use in their classrooms and organized
volunteer street and forest clean-up days. They also began hosting town hall
meetings with interested citizens, local government officials and factory
representatives, replacing silence with a more informed community dialogue. The
Centers supported local drives to organize letter-writing campaigns to
government officials, circulate petitions targeting the factories' polluting practices,
and media campaigns to draw attention to the pollution problems affecting the
three communities. After increasing the public pressure, change began to happen.
In Akhtala, after numerous roundtable discussions, ecological articles published in
newspapers, and an exclusive report broadcast on Armenian public television
highlighting the local copper factorys practices, the company, Metal Prince, finally
broke their silence and began to engage Akhtala residents in dialogue about river
pollution. In Bolnisi, the government announced plans to privatize the stateowned Madneuli copper mine. After the Center activists drew attention to
pollution caused by the mines activities, the Georgian government introduced a
clause into the privatization terms requiring the new owner to cooperate with the
PEIC in Bolnisi to create and implement an environmental impact and protection
plan. The new firm has also built a laboratory and bought equipment to be used
for environmental monitoring.

Throughout the Caucasus, CRRC is building awareness of the importance of

data and analysis among international organizations. In Georgia, CRRC
provided updates on trends in Georgia to several groups of high level officials.
These included a presentation at the home of Robert. J. Wilson, the Caucasus
Regional Mission Director of USAID, with ambassadors and embassy officials from
Europe and the United States in attendance, and a presentation to the European
Commission Delegation to Georgia, chaired by Per Eklund, Ambassador and Head
of Delegation. A lively debate about the use of data in the ECs development
projects ensued.

103

EVALUATIONS
1. NGO Watchdog Initiative (Georgia 2004)
Program title:
Evaluation Type:
Country:
Date of submission:

NGO Watchdog Initiative

Impact evaluation
Georgia
2004

THE PROGRAM
The project, entitled Support for NGO Watchdog in Six Regions of Georgia: an Anticorruption Initiative, was carried out from the year 2002 to the year 2004 in the
following Georgian cities: Tbilisi, Kutaisi, Akhaltsikhe, Poti, Zugdidi, Ozurgeti and Gori.
The central objectives of the project were
Raising public awareness regarding cases of corruption and improving
mechanisms of combating them;
Facilitating the transparency of the local government budget and the education
sector;
Carrying out anti-corruption campaigns and facilitating the implementation of
ongoing anti-corruption projects through training
Consultations
and
ensuring
coordination
between
non-governmental
organizations in the target regions.
EVALUATION GOALS
The evaluation was conducted from September 28 to October 22, 2004. The main aim
of the evaluation was to provide general feedback on the necessity and effectiveness of
anti-corruption initiatives. The concrete goals of the research were:
Assess the effectiveness and local impact of the anti-corruption project carried
out in six regions in Georgia;
Review the activities of the grantee organizations within the framework of the
projects and after project completion;
Evaluate role and the activities of non-governmental organizations after the Rose
Revolution;
Outline the current situation in specific regions of Georgia in regards to combating
corruption;
Prepare recommendations regarding the further direction of anti-corruption
initiatives as well as mechanisms for their implementation;
Analyze best practices and experiences obtained in different regions in order to
develop flexible and effective mechanisms for fighting corruption.
FINDINGS
Situation in the Regions
Following the installation of the new government, substantial changes have been
implemented mainly at the level of central government, but have not yet reached
the regions.
At the local government level, staffing changes affected mainly higher levels only
(governors, heads of local administrations gamgebelis), while at the lower
levels, no staffing changes occurred. At the same time, the proposed salary
increases applied only to high level staff, while the salaries of lower level
employees remained the same. This creates a situation where it is lucrative for
public servants to engage in corruption.
A general problem is the lack of professional and non-corrupt human resources.
This problem is worsened by the fact that many employees are transferred to the
central level.

104

Activities of local law enforcement bodies and prosecutors offices are especially
weak and inadequate. In many cases, these bodies are themselves corrupt and
do not challenge local public officials.
Public control over the government has decreased. Donors are mainly focused on
the funding of projects at the central level and do not fund similar activities in the
regions.

Nongovernmental Organizations after the Rose Revolution

Before the new government came to power, the NGO sector was able to remain
very active as a result of donor support and interest;
After the Rose Revolution, international donor interest shifted from NGOs to the
new government; consequently, the NGO sector ceased to be a donor priority. As
a result, there has been a decrease of grant competitions aimed at increasing the
activity of the population. Many NGO projects that are currently funded consider
more general topics such as the environment and gender issues.
Many prominent members of NGO sector moved into government positions,
resulting in a weakening of the sector.
Local media has also decreased its interest in, and support for, local NGOs.
According to the respondents, this weakening of the NGO sector will result in a
situation where the government will remain without public oversight or
opposition.
In addition, the amount of information exchange between the
government and society will also decrease, leaving both sides in an information
vacuum. In some of the regions, such as in Poti, such tendencies are already
visible.
As suggested by the facts above, local government and NGO representatives consider
the support of NGOs through international donor grants to be crucial for regional
development.
Support for NGO Watchdog in Regions of Georgia: an Anti-corruption Initiative
The project Support for NGO Watchdog in Regions of Georgia: an Anti-corruption
Initiative was considered a success. The success of the initiatives was determined by the
scale and the importance of the results:
Public mobilization (response to cases of corruption, attempts to solve the
problems, etc);
Increase of public awareness regarding the rights and responsibilities of different
governmental bodies;
Identification of corruption; direct (appeals, law suits) and indirect (media)
responses;
Significant changes in staff, budgets, expenditures, and so on--dismissal of
corrupt officials, amendments to the local budgets, eradication of concrete
violations, tender results.
There were also some setbacks that occurred during the implementation of the projects.
The main reasons for these setbacks were:

Lack of awareness and professionalism of some of the organizations in regards to

fighting corruption;
Weakness of the mechanisms identified to achieve set results (ineffective
activities, failure to mobilize the public);
Different levels of public mobilization across the regions.

RECOMMENDATIONS
A complex approach should be used when developing an anti-corruption
mechanism: Active media support/coverage (printing and electronic) public
mobilization and active involvement in the projects (ex. emergency anti-

105

corruption car) responses to concrete violations (law suits/delivery of collected

materials to the respective bodies) feedback from society (meetings /
discussions).
An outline of a project should be written and a tender should be announced in
order to reduce the number of mistakes resulting from a lack of experience by the
organizations and the complexities of the issue.
A sphere of focus should be determined before announcing the grant competition
(for example, budget or healthcare) and priority spheres should be identified for
the regions. The spheres should not be directly subordinated to the central
government (police). Activities carried out in one localized sphere enable projects
to achieve more substantial and long-term results and provide the possibility for
future comparisons between the regions. This is a more complex approach to
combating corruption on a national level.
The functions of the linkage project should be maintained.

106

2. Business Associations in Georgia (2004)

Introduction: The creation and development of business and professional associations in
Georgia is still only partially seen as an integral part of the overall reform project. The
EFG has been active in supporting business associations, which the Foundation has
perceived as a major drive for the improvement of business environment in Georgia. By
implementing consensus-based advocacy campaigns and meeting the needs of their
members for specific services, business associations have been trying to reduce
arbitrariness of state agencies and to strengthen private firms. Careful consideration of
possibilities and limitations is essential if the development of associations as vital
intermediaries between economic actors and government is to proceed in pace with the
accelerating transformation of the economy. The challenge that the Eurasia Foundation
undertook in Georgia was to enable business and professional associations to gain a
status that would transcend that of mere name and registration documents. Engineering
such a shift required a clarification of the precise nature and role of each individual
association.
The evaluation: Interest in business associations and in their potential role in
accelerating economic development continues to grow. However, an understanding of
how business associations function in Georgian transitional economy remains relatively
weak. In order to understand better the functions and roles of the business associations
it supported, the EFG has commissioned this evaluation. This report reviews findings on
the role of several local business associations in assisting industrial clusters in the
transitional economy of Georgia. In the following pages, we present selected findings
from the evaluation research on the impact of the EFG-funded projects and discuss the
roles played by the supported associations in development of their respective business
spheres. In our review of the EF-supported business associations, we present examples
of business associations that undertook significant tasks, from lobbying government in
the interests of their members to providing a range of producer, technical and advisory
services to member companies.
The evaluated projects: In 2001, EFG awarded six grants to business associations
through the Business Advocacy Competition. The Competitions goals were:
1. To enable business associations to identify obstacles to development posed by
onerous government regulations
2. To create mechanisms for solving these problems
3. To foster the institutional development of the business associations
4. To support concrete business advocacy initiatives
In addition, three grants were awarded to business associations through the Open Door
Program in 2001 and 2002. Finally, one institutional development project was funded
through the closed competition in 2002.
These projects were the subject of this evaluation study. They include:

Svaneti Tourist Association

Guria Citrus Growers Association
Wine Makers and Grape Growers Union of Kakheti
Association of Book Publishers
Georgian Association of Publishers
Securities Industry Association of Georgia
Freight Forwarders Association
Construction Union of Imereti, and
United Television Network12

107

Selected accomplishments: The findings of this evaluation indicate that in many of the
business sectors there has been an increase in cooperation through local business
associations. Moreover, there is a positive association between improvements in firms
performance and increases in joint action through business associations in a number of
the case studies. Some of the major accomplishments of the projects could be listed as
follows:

Improvement of technical capacities and management abilities of the associations

Ability of the associations to move to the next, more advanced stage of
organizational development
Introduction of and familiarizing the associations and their members with
international standards
Increased knowledge and experience of the associations and their members
Introduction and/or implementation of a concept of systematic planning in some
fields of associations activities
Increased ability of member companies to work together towards developing their
business sector

Selected areas for improvement could include the following:

Better and closer communication between the associations and the government
structures
More and stronger pressure on the government structures to improve the legislation
More focus on educating the public on the importance of specific business sectors
Bigger effort to find additional sources of financing for projects continuation
More active and structured mechanisms of attracting new members and ensuring
their active participation
Wider network of connections and exchange with international partners
More focus on training activities for the associations and their members
Better communication mechanisms between the associations and their members.

108

3. South Caucasus Cross Border Media Initiatives (2004)

Evaluation Type:
Country:
Date of submission:

Impact
South Caucasus
June 2004

THE PROGRAM
During the period of 1999 - 2004, the Eurasia Foundations South Caucasus Cooperation
Program has financed eight projects in the sphere of cross-border independent media in
the South Caucasus, for a total amount of $695,616. By supporting these cross-border
media projects, SCCP aimed to create professional networks that would in turn increase
regional cooperation in the South Caucasus.
EVALUATION GOALS
Through this evaluation, the SCCP sought to identify and analyze results and impact of
seven of the cross-border media projects (19 individual grants), and to explore the
results of these projects in the context of general situation in and between the South
Caucasus countries and other initiatives in media assistance undertaken to date in the
region.
The main goals of the evaluation were to:
Identify additional program areas to improve or expand SCCPs cross-border
independent media initiative.
Identify strengths and weaknesses as well as opportunities and constraints of the
initiatives
Assess the effectiveness of SCCPs independent media projects
Identify the niche or role that SCCP is most suited to fill in the context of other
cross-border media initiatives in the South Caucasus region.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Grantees knowledge and understanding of needs and gaps in media sphere (on
country and regional level) and of appropriate responses to these needs and gaps
increased as proved by the grantees perception of how realistic and feasible their
projects goals were and their opinions about changes that they would like to
make in their projects implementation;
Cross-border information exchange through the means of modern information
technologies increased;
The role of media in facilitating regional dialogue was enhanced. New media
outlets and/or media products began to focus on regional cooperation, while the
attitude of national media towards covering regional themes changed to more
favorable.
The standard of professional and reliable journalism in the South Caucasus rose.
This becomes evident in the fact that participating journalists adhered to the
principles of reliable journalism: accuracy, impartiality and responsibility in the
public interest.
Cross-border cooperation and networking increased as shown, among others, by
the creation and strengthening of regional professional networks.
Constituencies for peace and democracy in the region expanded. This is
demonstrated by the grantees increasing knowledge and understating of their
constituencies, increasing interaction between the grantees and the media
products recipients.
There are many initiatives of similar mission and scope of work in each of the
South Caucasus countries, but they usually do not know about one another, and
they do not know how to establish contacts and cooperate. The awareness about
the idea of solving common problems regionally is insufficient among civil society
groups, media organizations and general public alike.

109

While the staffing of the SCCP program is relatively sufficient to deal with projects
that pose no problems, the program lacks capacities to go beyond regular donorgrantee relationships and to address controversial issues as they arose.
SCCP has not offered adequate support in developing sustainability mechanisms
as part of their implementation structure and has not paid sufficient attention to
the importance of a follow-up for sensitive projects

RECOMMENDATIONS
Coordination and Cooperation in the South Caucasus
o SCCP should display more initiative in creating linkages not only between
the partners in each project but between the projects and other similar
initiatives as well.
o The Foundation should establish a focal point for more strategic
coordination, a South Caucasus Media Agency, serving both as a clearinghouse and the evaluator of all media-related assistance proposals for the
region.
Length and Character of Commitment in Regional Media Assistance
Sphere
o The SCCP should consider either funding the cross-border projects for a
longer time, or supporting the establishment of links with other donors
who could provide for projects continuation.
Impact Assessment Methodologies and Procedures
o SCCP should develop better tools for assessing projects outcomes and
impact (benchmarks, indicators, data collection and recording methods,
grantee reporting requirements in terms frequency and format).
Continuation and Exit Strategies
o Much bigger attention should be given to the issues of sustainability as a
necessary component of the Eurasia Foundations exit strategy in this field
of assistance.
Specific SCCP Roles and Procedures in Media Assistance Projects
o SCCP should play more active role in facilitating communication between
partners, and be more involved in three-sided regular evaluation of the
projects implementation.
o The SCCP-supported projects should work more closely with the formal
education system in the sphere of journalism, and suggest concrete
improvements in recruitment standards and education methodologies and
practices at Journalism Departments.

110

4. Public Policy Research Institutions (2004)

Evaluation Type:
Country:
Date of submission:

Impact
Russia, Kazakhstan, and the South Caucuses
December 2004

PROGRAM SUMMARY
The Think Tanks and Policy Research Portfolio included three clusters of grant programs
to public policy institutions and experts in Russia, Kazakhstan, and the South Caucuses.
The goal of the project was to support these institutions and experts in forming policy
recommendations to government officials and other stakeholders.
EVALUATION GOALS
In order to assess this cluster of programs, EF contracted independent evaluators. The
evaluators attempted to measure the impact the think tanks had on policy and the
policymaking process, both in terms of direct influence on officials and increasing the
publics understanding of issues.
The evaluators also assessed the programmatic
efficiency of the programs.
The evaluation team assessed the impact of the programs from two angles:
External covering the implications for policymaking, political processes,
economy and society
Internal concerning professional and institutional strengthening of the think
tanks, their sustainability, visibility and credibility among public policy
stakeholders
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
South Caucuses the evaluators concluded that the first round of partnership
grants in the Caucuses on regional integration issues had tangible, but more
modest, outcomes. The second round of grants, however, produced a much
stronger impact on policy. The impact of the grants on the internal capacities of
the grantees was more problematic:
o Some highly valuable outcomes of the SCCP program were the mutual
understanding, spirit of cooperation, and practice and custom of joint work
on policy experts and institutions in the region
o A novel and valuable idea of EF was to complement its think tank grant
programs in the South Caucasus by the recently launched Caucasus
Research Resource Centers initiative (CRRC), to provide public policy
analysts and scholars from across the region with access to professional
resources such as publications, online libraries, and databases
o The think tank sector in the South Caucuses is smaller than in Russia and
still developing and most policy studies are conducted not by think tanks
which specialize in applied research, but by multi-purpose NGOs that are
engaged in a variety of activities, or by university-based teams of analysts
o Policy experts sponsored by SCCP often worked under the aegis of NGO
umbrella organizations, but did not take advantage of the opportunities for
dissemination, advocacy, and networking provided by them
o EF managed to fully sustain the pattern of collaboration amongst policy
NGOs that it pioneered in the region. Most of the think tanks that have
been supported by SCCP grants keep communicating with their partner
institutions after the completion of their SCCP projects, and often
undertake other joint ventures, drawing support from various sources.
Programmatic Efficiency the evaluators found that the principles of EFs
grant making to policy institutions sound, appropriate, and effective
o Streams of relatively small awards made EF a source of support to worthy
policy analysis initiatives as they emerge. This experience also allowed EF
to gradually concentrate its grant portfolios by selecting longer-term
strategic partners among think tanks

111

Grantees interviewed by the evaluators gratefully acknowledged the help

from EF grant program officers in understanding EFs policies and in
meeting the requirements it sets
o EF most broadly experimented with its programmatic approaches in its
South Caucasus cluster of grants, where the idea of collaborative policy
studies carried significant risks. However, these risks were justified by the
invaluable opportunity to promote trust, goodwill, and mutual
understanding between the intellectual and policy elites of the South
Caucasus countries, and to draw on multiple synergies created by crossborder cooperation of policy experts.
o The SCCP and CRRC programs effectively complemented one another
o EF support to think tanks in Kazakhstan promoted the development of
professional, but not organizational capacities. EFs program allowed a
cadre of analysts to attend training programs, gain access to resource
centers, and network with one another. However, such dispersed efforts
will be unlikely to encourage think tanks to spontaneously emerge
Miscellaneous
o Many of the regions think tanks still possess insufficient professional skills
and lack the ability to perform rigorous policy studies, such as cost-benefit
analysis, project evaluation, etc
o There is a widespread lack of understanding and appreciation of the role of
think tanks as independent civil society-based institutions. Think tanks are
often considered by government officials from a purely instrumental point
of view, as technical sources of policy analyses and draft laws. When
think tanks attempt to implement their policy recommendations on their
own initiative and assume an active role in dealing with policy makers, it is
not unusual that such activities are at best ignored and at worst
suppressed.
This problem is confounded by a lack or weakness of
outreach activities by think tanks
o

RECOMMENDATIONS
Outreach there could be various programmatic responses to overcome the
outreach bottleneck, which EF establish as conditions for grant awards
o Think tanks should pay greater attention to outreach activities, perhaps by
developing specialized PR units and forging ties with the media, political
movements, legislative committees and civil society organizations
o When policy analyses are implemented under umbrellas of multi-purpose
NGOs, the latter should more actively and consistently incorporate the
conclusions of the supported studies into their advocacy, networking and
other activities
o Coordinate think tank support programs with other donor activities aimed
at developing democratic institutions and processes and fostering
government accountability
EF should continue facilitating the natural selection process of the institutional
forms that are most suitable for independent policy studies observed in the
countries of its operations, and yet be more willing to support worthy attempts to
create and sustain policy think tanks that specialize in applied policy research
The decentralized model of operations of EFs regional offices has shown
numerous merits, but activities of EFs semi-autonomous units ought to be better
coordinated with each other. EF did not take full advantage of concurrent support
of policy institutions in Russia, Central Asia, South Caucasus and Western NIS
Sustainability of think tanks in NIS countries requires a medium-to-long term
vision of available resources for their operations. Therefore think tanks need to be
properly informed of donors strategies and plans, as this would facilitate their
own strategic planning. Donors, including EF, should in their turn more closely
coordinate such strategies, ensuring an adequate pool of resources for policy
NGOs in the transition region in the medium to long term.

112

5. Cross Border Cooperation Portfolio (Foundation wide, 2005)

Evaluation Type:
Country:
Date of submission:

Cluster Impact
Foundation wide
June 2005

PROGRAM CLUSTER
From 1999 to 2005, the Eurasia Foundation (EF) has supported more than 100 crossborder projects in six target regions through 11 of its 12 representative offices in the
CIS. The majority of the projects were partnerships carried out by several organizations.
Grants were awarded to each of the partners and fell into six program clusters:
South Caucasus Cooperation Program
The Ferghana Valley Initiative
The Kazakhstan-Russia Cross-Border Initiative
Cooperation between Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Afghanistan
Cooperation between Russia and Eastern Europe
Cross-Border Cooperation in the Far East
Four main types of activities were supported in cross-border programs:
informational and consulting support
organization of networks and joint development of solutions to common problems
improvement of professional qualifications and training
development of the mass media
EVALUATION GOAL
In March and April 2005, the Scientific-Research Laboratory of the Non-Profit Sector
(Moscow, Russia) conducted an evaluation of the cross-border projects at the request of
EF. The evaluation focused on an analysis of the content of all the cross-border projects
and the conditions under which they were implemented, as well as the opportunities for
continued financing of these programs from other sources.
The objective of the
evaluation was to:
systemize grant making in cross-border cooperation;
evaluate the effectiveness of the work carried out; and
identify the most successful models and the main lessons learned in designing
and conducting this type of program in general, and these specific projects in
particular.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The evaluation concluded that the cross-border projects were highly relevant.
Such programs should be planned to respond to the urgent problems in the
region, many of which are cross-border in nature, i.e., coordinated efforts by
groups and organizations in neighboring countries are required to solve them.
While the donor community is very interested in supporting cross-border projects,
there is little concerted effort. The work of donors is planned, financed and
carried out for and in specific states, although the donors recognize that it would
be more effective to work at the international level to solve many problems. Only
a few projects funded by other donors were transnational.
Most of the donor organizations are administering state programs for foreign aid
agencies (USAID, TACIS). They have been conducting strategic aid programs in
the recipient countries for many years, and they have extremely limited
opportunities to provide funding for EF grant programs.
Only two of the six cross-border project areasthe South Caucasus and Ferghana
Valleyhave a strategy, albeit a rather vague one. In the other regions, EF did
not expand beyond funding of individual pilot or model projects.
Without
dedicated financing, the future of cross-border activities in these regions is
uncertain.

113

The cross-border programs were developed in response to the needs of the local
communities and in collaboration with them. However, analysis of the local
communities interests and possible participation was insufficient.
Local
organizations are given incentives to work together, but they do not fully
understand that this cooperation is essential to solve regional problems that
cannot be handled individually.
The absence of a clear strategy in each region lowered the effectiveness of the
programs. EF offices introduced cross-border programs by copying some
elements of the work in the South Caucasus without due consideration of local
strategy and specific regional features. As a result, many projects that could have
been funded as national projects were financed within the framework of crossborder programs.
The main factor determining the success of the cross-border projects was political
support. The majority of problems addressed by the grantees could only be
solved through policies adopted and implemented by state bodies.
The team concluded that cross-border projects are extremely difficult to
administer. It did not find that special program offices for cross-border projects
were essential. The issue of program administration by a separate staff was less
important than office location near potential grantees.

RECOMMENDATIONS
There is virtually no chance of receiving major financing for EF activities from the
major donors.
The Foundation should instead position itself as a service
organization that pre-tests models that could then be implemented on a wider
scale.
The Eurasia Foundation may be able to secure co-funding for cross-border
individual projects, but to do this there must be intensive work to identify
common interests and coordinate the grant-making activities of EF with activities
carried out in each country by approximately 10 donor and development
agencies.
The Eurasia Foundation should conduct strategic planning. The evaluation team
recommends that the EF Washington office support the development of crossborder programs by providing separate budgets for them, as has been done for
the South Caucasus and the Ferghana Valley.
Evaluators recommend that the projects designed to influence policy be given
priority in funding. Insufficient consideration of the political factor was a weak
aspect of the strategies.
The EF grant-monitoring system should be improved overall and particularly for
cross-border projects. The monitoring system should serve to improve the
effectiveness of the work of the Foundation and its grantees.
The evaluation team recommends that EF forego partnerships as a prerequisite of
grants. Partnerships should be established when they are essential to solve a
problem and not be a requirement for grants. EF should be more flexible in
internal guidelines and in communication with grantees in order to make it easier
to establish international projects and to carry out inter-related projects in
neighboring countries.

114

6. Corporate Social Investment Initiative (Russia, 2005)

Evaluation Type:
Country:
Date of submission:

Impact
Russia
November 2005

THE PROGRAM
The Russian Social Investment Initiative (hereafter referred to as the Program) was
designed to run for two years (November 2003 November 2005) and was aimed at
helping Russian companies and foundations develop and implement social and
philanthropic programs using the mechanisms that are standard in international practice.
The Programs aim was to promote strategic corporate social and philanthropic programs
in Russia through reinforcing companies ability to set goals, develop strategies and
implement social and philanthropic programs, and also through improving the
environment for philanthropic activity in the Russian Federation.
The Program emphasized the need for companies to shift their giving patterns from
random contributions to charities to more strategic investments that impact local
communities and focus on measurable and sustainable social and economic change. It
also provided information and models on how to design social investment programs that
incorporate the companys mission, business plan, resources and philanthropic interests,
thus benefiting the community and adding value to the business.
Top managers of leading Russian companies and staff of company departments and
divisions involved in social and philanthropic programs were the Programs main target
group. The Program consisted of training and grant-making components.
The Programs training component involved holding seminars and training sessions on
practical aspects of social and philanthropic activity for top management from companies
and private foundations and for managers directly responsible for implementing social
and philanthropic programs. Managers from 54 Russian organizations took part in this
part of the Program, including managers from 36 major commercial companies or
foundations set up by private businesses that are involved in carrying out social and
philanthropic programs.
The Programs grant-making component involved financing six projects aimed at
improving the environment for developing corporate social investment and corporate and
private philanthropy, including through removing administrative hurdles, improving the
legislative framework and putting in place favorable conditions for corporate social
investment in Russia.
EVALUATION GOALS
To assess the results of the Russian Social Investment Initiative, a joint program
organized by the Eurasia Foundation (EF), the New Eurasia Foundation (FNE) and the
William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the New Eurasia Foundation office in Moscow hired
a team of independent evaluators.
The evaluation was carried out during the final stage of the Programs implementation
and aimed at assessing to what extent the Program had reached its goals and what
impact it had on Russian companies and foundations approach to social and
philanthropic work and on the general climate for philanthropic activity in Russia. The
evaluation also sought to assess to what extent the model used in the Program can be
replicated in other regions of Russia and in other countries of the former Soviet Union.
The evaluators used both qualitative and quantitative methods to collect and analyze
data. The fact that evaluation was carried out during the Programs final stage makes it
possible to assess only its success in reaching its short-term planned goals and to
estimate potential success in achieving its long-term goals following completion.

115

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

In the independent evaluators view, the Program has made a considerable contribution
to developing corporate social and philanthropic programs in Russia in the following
ways:
The Program has had a big influence on changing the approach to social
investment among most of the Program participants. In particular, it has done
much to create an awareness of social investment and the larger issue of
corporate social responsibility (CSR) as an integral part of a companys overall
development strategy aimed at making it more competitive and ensuring stable
development.
The companies participating in the Program have realized the need for a strategic
approach to social responsibility.
The Program has made an indisputable contribution to creating a professional
environment among socially responsible companies and helping big business
develop standards for carrying out corporate philanthropic programs.
NGOs that are or could become a part of the infrastructure for philanthropy,
including being recipients of grants, took part in the Programs events, thus
creating additional opportunities for establishing contacts between the different
market players.
The combination of systematic training and the presentation of practical
experience, along with the chance to get exposure to real models of corporate
philanthropy in the United States made the Program unique in Russia. The
Program participants rated highly the opportunity to work directly with foreign
experts during the training events and the study visit to the United States.
However adapting Western models will not happen overnight, as time will be
needed for companies to make the necessary organizational changes and for
adjustments to be made to current law in Russia.
The Program acted to provide the Russian public with information on companies
social and philanthropic programs. However, changing public attitudes to
corporate philanthropy will require more long-term and large-scale efforts
commensurate with the size and population of the country, and it will also require
corporate philanthropic programs to have a more visible impact on peoples lives.
The projects that received support through the Programs grant-making
component drew the attention of the business community, NGOs and state
authorities to corporate social responsibility issues, enabled Russian companies to
learn about European and U.S. experience in the area of CSR, primarily with
respect to corporate philanthropy, identified possible areas for improving Russian
laws on philanthropic activity and helped changed the attitude of the authorities
and business community to corporate philanthropy in one of the Russian regions
(the Republic of Chuvashia). Most successful were the models for developing a
philanthropic vision in Russian companies and for creating favorable conditions for
developing corporate philanthropy in one of the Russian regions. Although close
coordination between the Programs training and grant-making components was
not initially planned, the two components proved strongly linked through the
work on forming a vision of philanthropic activity in companies.
RECCOMENDATIONS
The model for developing corporate social and philanthropic programs used in the
Program has demonstrated its use and effectiveness and can therefore be
recommended as a model for continued use in Russia and in the CIS countries
where conditions are in place for developing strategic corporate philanthropy in
the business community.
Replication of the Program should focus greater attention on coordination
between its separate components.

116

One area for coordination could be the development of detailed methodological

materials as part of the grant-making component and their subsequent use in the
training component.
When holding training events, especially study visits to other countries, it is
recommended that government officials representing both the legislative and
executive branches be included in the list of participants in order to facilitate
interaction between state authorities and business in the area of philanthropy.
It would be useful to continue and expand the participation of foreign specialists
in the Programs various activities.
When replicating the Program, the grant-making component should be
maintained and should take into account the application of various models in the
specific socio-economic conditions in question. For example, media campaigns
aimed not just at informing the public about corporate philanthropy but also at
changing its attitude to these activities should be commensurate in scale with the
size and population of the country where the Program is being implemented.
In cases where the Program is replicated throughout the entire country it would
be good to choose one or several regions for more focused work on developing
corporate philanthropy in addition to work at the national level. This would help to
create successful examples that could be used not only to inform the public but to
change public attitudes.

117

7. Institutional Development Grants Cluster (EF-wide, 2006)

Evaluation Type:
Country:
Date of submission:

Impact assessment
Foundation-wide evaluation
July 2006

THE CLUSTER
In 2000-2006, EF awarded 26 Institutional Development grants (ID grants) to 24 nonprofit organizations and institutions operating in 7 countries of the former Soviet Union:
Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Uzbekistan. Most of
the grants were awarded in 2002-2003. The goal of the ID grants was to provide
resources for institutional strengthening and improving the sustainability of organizations
that met two key criteria; namely, ID grant recipients should have the capability to
influence decision-making in their respective countries and they must work in fields that
are a long-term priority for EF. Through the ID grant mechanism, EF sought to establish
a network of legacy organizations and potential EF partners in these key areas.
Each project supported by an ID grant was tailored to meet the specific needs of the
recipient institution. The grantees work in a broad range of program fields, including
business education, development of private enterprise, public administration and
community administration reforms, independent media support and strengthening civic
organizations.
ID grants were awarded to (a) improve organizational and human resource
management, (b) develop good organizational governance (strategic management,
development of mission and board), (c) enhance strategic planning and evaluation
capacity, (d) improve financial management and diversify funding sources and (e) to
strengthen public relations capacity and ability to collaborate.
EVALUATION GOALS
The evaluation of the ID grant cluster had the following goals:
To assess the impact of ID grants on the institutional development of the grant
recipients;
To test the relevance and legitimacy of EF approach, and
To develop recommendations to improve EF policy and procedures of providing
institutional support.
The evaluation was carried
of the Institute for Social
project sites in Armenia,
Remote data collection was

out by an international team of evaluators under leadership

Development based in Moscow, Russia. The team visited
Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Uzbekistan.
done in Azerbaijan.

Both quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection were used in the course of
the evaluation. The data collection methods included document review, interviews with
EF staff, focus groups with beneficiaries, in-depth interviews with the project leaders,
and structured observations during site visits to the grantees office.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
ID grants made a significant and positive impact on the institutional development of
the grantees in fields that are strategic for EF. However, ID grants were somewhat
less instrumental for establishing grantee / EF partnership relations.

All ID grants achieved their goals and had a strong positive effect on grantee
sustainability regardless of their field of activity. Therefore, EF should maintain its
approach to providing institutional support. ID grants had an impact on such aspects
of institutional development as:
- Existence of strategic and current plans (100% of grantees);

118

Visibility of grantees with different stakeholders, e.g. the public, business

community, other NGOs, media and the government (>90%);
Ability to launch new services (91%),
Focus on new target groups as well as existing ones (57%);
Well-developed fundraising plans (70%).

The goal of institutional development was chosen correctly for nearly all of the
grants, and helped mitigate the grantees weaknesses. The leadership problem
mentioned above was the only aspect of institutional development that changed the
least regardless of the ID grant goal.
Among all assessed donors13, The Eurasia Foundation is the only grantor to declare
an intention to cultivate legacy organizations, as well as well-developed NGOs, in the
priority fields of its activity. The EF institutional support model, as compared to the
models of other donors reviewed during evaluation, is the most systematic and
flexible with respect to grantee selection.
The concept of EF institutional support is based on a reasonable approach; namely,
that an organization cannot develop only through its programmatic activity, without
investing efforts and resources in ID. The idea of institutional support is clearly
described in EFs internal documents and adequately understood by the Foundations
program staff and grantees.
The Foundations approach to the institutional development of non-governmental,
non-profit organizations includes the following elements:
- Selection of grantees;
- Institutional diagnostic and clarification of ID grant goals;
- Logic model for an ID project, designed in cooperation with the grantees;
- Building trust-based partnership relations with the grantees;
- ID grant monitoring and reporting.
The Foundations Program Manual includes a description of each element of the
model. In addition, EFs implementation practices help refine and specify this
description and formalize possible approaches to implementation either at the level of
the Foundation or its field offices.
Foundation-wide procedures are used for the programmatic and financial
management of ID grants. In terms of organizing and documenting these activities,
the EF monitoring procedure is extremely well designed and effective for obtaining
feedback about the status of projects. The system can be improved only in terms of
its application, i.e., completeness of data, cause-and-effect relations, more exact
formulation of expected deliverables and their measurements, and monitoring of
outcomes. It would be reasonable to establish a cluster-wide set of indicators for ID
grants.
EF grantees have a need for institutional support and are highly enthusiastic about
them. The very fact of receiving an ID grant is a fairly rare opportunity, and
grantees highly appreciate the Foundations assistance efforts. However, grantees
still perceive the Foundation as a grantor, and believe that partnership relations with
it should be based on their fundraising strategy.
It would probably benefit EF to focus on changing its image with the leading
organizations that operate in strategically important fields. If EF intends to continue
its program activities, it would be important to demonstrate to other organizations in
what fields its expertise is unique.

RECOMMENDATIONS
A. The Eurasia Foundations Approach
The Eurasia Foundations approach to institutional development of nongovernmental non-profit organizations is understandable both to the EF staff and
13

Charities Aid Foundation, STEFAN BATORY FOUNDATION , Ekopolis Foundation/Centre For

Philanthropy ETP, VIA Foundation, Soros Foundation, Counterpart Consortium, IREX, World
Learning and OXFAM

119

recipients. Nevertheless, it is recommended to describe in more detail what a

mature and sustainable organization is, as the Foundation understands it,
utilizing definitions of institutional, social and financial sustainability. This will
specify the terms used in the EF documents and formulate concepts that the
staff, recipients and external experts would interpret in the same way. Besides,
this will help carry out more focused institutional diagnostics, set feasible and
measurable goals, and improve the effectiveness of ID grants and their impact on
the recipients.
EF would benefit from considering changes in its Acceptance Memos and Closeout
Memos, as well as site visit reports, in order to take into account the specific
features of ID grants. For example, the Foundation ought to consider designing a
system of common indicators for monitoring the impact of ID grants on recipients
sustainability on all logical levels. It might also be worthwhile to revise the
format of ID grant proposals by placing a stronger emphasis on institutional
change. ID project activities should focus almost exclusively on institutional
tasks, such as improving the quality of services, strengthening image and
external contacts, and broadening client or membership bases.
EF should consider simplifying financial reporting for ID grant recipients. Financial
reporting on institutional grants might be done through aggregated budget items
(salaries; purchase of equipment; consultants, etc.). The recipients should be
permitted to buy the necessary goods and services by coordinating these
purchases with the Foundation rather than by asking permission from it.
Implementation of each element of EFs institutional development approach
should be described either at the Foundation level or at the level of each field
office that runs an institutional support program. This description should include
the existing selection criteria, the procedure for taking award decisions,
institutional diagnostic methods, grant impact measurement systems, the format
of site visit reports regarding these indicators, and the format of grant recipients
reports. Selection criteria, formats of the reports produced by EF staff and
recipients, the format of ID grant proposals, and a system of measurements that
would evaluate the impact of ID grants should probably be designed at
Foundation headquarters in Washington, DC, because they are the core elements
of the Foundations policy.

B. Impact of EF Grants on Recipients

All of EFs institutional grants achieved their goals and had a favorable effect on
grantee sustainability regardless of their field of activity. Therefore, EF should
maintain its approach to providing institutional support.
The Eurasia Foundation needs to slightly revise its approach to achieving financial
sustainability of organizations that operate in different areas. Thus, if the
grantees target groups are solvent, it would make sense to focus on the
development and marketing of fee-based services. If the grantees beneficiaries
are not solvent, closer attention should be paid to the promotion of the grantee in
the donor community, strengthening their image in the donor community and
with government authorities, working with new target groups, and adapting the
grantees services to the needs of beneficiaries. Indeed, if an institutional grant is
focused on the achievement of financial sustainability, it should probably include
a marketing component.
External environmental factors often determine the sustainability of outcomes in
institutional development. Despite major successes in capacity-building, the
recipients remain vulnerable to political changes at the national and regional
levels. This risk is unlikely to be fully offset by institutional support and should be
acknowledged. At the same time, strengthening of contacts with government
authorities and community support during an ID project can help minimize this
risk.
The recipients motivation to develop the organization and the ability of its leader
to delegate authority and responsibility to other staff members were the key

120

internal factors that affected the effectiveness of ID grants. The organizations

motivation to develop itself should be an aspect of institutional diagnostic. One
good indicator of the organizations willingness to develop is its desire to raise
additional resources for implementation of an institutional project, and its
willingness to discuss with The Eurasia Foundation its participation in other
program projects during the ID grant. However, the requirement to raise
additional funds cannot be universal. It might be back-breaking for NGOs that
depend primarily on the donor support because donors are usually reluctant to
finance administrative costs, while proactive program work will not leave the
recipient enough time to focus on its development. In this case, the organization
will benefit from the willingness to coordinate its fundraising plans with The
Eurasia Foundation.
Problems of leadership and delegation of authority seem to be the most complex
and require more time and effort than is envisioned by the institutional grant
mechanism. In such cases it would probably be useful to invite an independent
consultant to the organization. This consultant will help the leader understand
what opportunities the organization is missing because all key decisions are made
by one person, and identify the responsibilities that might be delegated to other
employees (either existing or new).

QUOTATIONS
A. Selected passages from the report
Kazakhstan
As a result of the ID grant, Public Fund for Assistance to Farmers and Entrepreneurs
(FAFE) extended its activities to 10 districts of the Shimkent oblast and the number of
clients in agricultural districts increased. Consultations were given to 1,117 farmers and
businessmen from 10 districts on such issues as marketing, management, law, lending
policy, land law and taxation.
Since the award of ID grant, 324 farmers and
businessmen received financial aid to the total amount of KZT 89,2 million. The Board of
Trustees was given a shake-up to include farmers, members of district associations,
NGOs and micro-lending organizations.
FAFE is currently a cost-covering and solvent fund. According to its financial statements,
its loan portfolio increased by 89% against the 2004 level, the number of clients
increased by 35%, net operating income increased by 82%, operating and financial selfsufficiency went up by 25.4% and 33.0%, respectively, to 188% and 153%.
Russian Far East
The grant helped First Far Eastern Consumers Credit Cooperative to market its services
in the financial sector, and has expanded its client base. The Cooperative had 4,000
clients before receiving the grant and 12,000 at present. Internships in Russia and
Ireland helped it revise its role and mission and design several new financial products.
The Cooperative is the only one in the Far East to work with micro businesses. The grant
also helped to start building a network of cooperatives in the Far East. The First Far
Eastern is now operating in 8 regions and intends to open 2 cooperatives in Khabarovsk
and Birobijan.
Central Russia, Saratov
The ID grant made a positive impact on how Saratov State University of Agriculture
(SSUA) clients did their business, their financial standing, farmer awareness and
investment attractiveness of farmer and peasant entities. For example, as a result of
consultations Zarya company in Dukhovnitsy District of Saratov oblast increased the
acreage of cultivated land from 120 to 13,960 hectares, pig stock from 60 to 1,680,
weight gain from 395 to 564 g/day, and crop yield from 13.1 to 23 centners/hectare,
rented 400,000 rubles worth of equipment and contracted 2 million rubles in loans.

121

SSUAs Extension Service supported by the ID grant entered into 18 contracts with
individual farmers and farmer entities since 2003. In 2005, the Service began entering
into direct contracts with associations of peasants and farmer entities, which increased
the number of paid clients. Its income from fee-based services delivered since 2003
reached Rub 1,024,64014 including Rub 710,000 in the first quarter of 2006.
Uzbekistan
Business Womens Association used to provide only consulting services on issues of
business development; the ID grant helped it become a source of seed capital for women
who want to start their own business. Besides, it began funding social projects in the
Navoi oblast from its own funds.
B. From grantees and beneficiaries
Georgia
The School used to focus on theoretical education, and now it offers knowledge that can
be used in practice.
Zurab Liluashvili
European School of Management
Kazakhstan
The Funds services are in a high demand. Even though FAFE has high interest rates on
loans (up to 30% compared to 8% in government lending institutions) we intend to
continue cooperating with FAFE because we have confidence in its transparency, like the
simple procedure of credit disbursement and are sure to have consultative support. No
other organizations offer us a similar comprehensive approach: training followed by the
development of a business plan, loan disbursement, monitoring, consultations,
disbursement of another loan, etc.
Focus group participants
Russia
The grant helped us to establish the Department of Economics, which raised the Schools
status and, most importantly, lay the foundations for the transition from inviting visiting
Western professors to contracting Russian professors with Western degrees. It was very
hard to believe that at least some of those who left for PhD studies in the West would
ever return to teach at NES. Yet, starting 1999, NES has been hiring in the international
job market and succeeded in bringing back two Western PhD every year to build a
faculty of tenure-track assistant professors with PhD degrees from the very top US and
European departments including Harvard, MIT, Wisconsin-Madison, Michigan, Tilburg,
Toulouse, Brussels. With its 13 PhDs in economics NES has brought back more academic
economists than any other institution in the former Soviet Union.
Sergei Guriev
New Economic School, Principal
Uzbekistan
With support of an ID grant Business Womens Association set up and strengthened a
Credit Union, which now disburses loans, earns profit for BWA development and takes
household deposits. Its assets exceeded the planned level of 800,000 soums and
reached 1,309,710 soums by the time of the grant closeout.
Larisa Yurikova
Navoi Oblast Business Women's Association "Tadbirqor Ayol ", Chair

14

Approximately $40,000,

122

8. Business Education Programs (EF-wide, 2002)

Evaluation Type:
Country:
Date of submission:

Impact evaluation
Foundation wide
2002

THE PROGRAM AND EVALUATION GOALS

The Eurasia Foundation (EF) embraced business education in its first year of existence,
launching grants to create degree programs in Moscow and St. Petersburg in 1993. EF
quickly expanded this initiative, funding business programs in other parts of Russia, as
well as Belarus, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Kyrgyzstan. In order to
assess the impact of these grants EF conducted an evaluation of five of its most mature
business education programs. These programs received 15 EF grants, totaling nearly $2
million, from 1993 through 2001:

MBA Program, American Institute of Business and Economics (AIBEc) (Moscow)

School of Management, St. Petersburg State University (SOM)
Program in Economics and Management of Technology, Belarus State University
(PEMT) (Minsk)
MBA Program, Caucasus School of Business (CSB) (Tbilisi)
MBA Program, Khazar University (KU) (Baku)

This evaluation is sought to provide insight into the success of these degree programs
and to gain a greater understanding of the importance these institutions play in their
respective countries.
OUTCOMES:
The schools have all achieved self-sufficiency, producing a total of 383 MBA equivalents
since 1997. In St. Petersburg, Moscow and Tbilisi, the programs continue to thrive and
expand. The Baku program recently moved into a new building in the center of the city,
and enrollment immediately doubled. Though Minsk continues to produce high-quality
MBAs, the program has struggled to grow, primarily because of a hesitation to reduce
English requirements and expand into executive education.
SOM
AIBEc
PEMT
CSB
KU
Average Annual Applications n/a
170.4
39.8
77.7
60.6
1995-2000
Average
Annual
Enrollment n/a
261.0
50.2
63.7
25.4
1995-2000
Average
Annual
Graduates 50
30
15.25
*
*
1997-2001
* CSB started graduating students in 2000, and KU started graduating students in 1999
Impact on Local Business Community.
These programs represent the finest institutional legacies in the region, having improved
the quality of business leaders, business education, and education standards throughout
the region. The evaluation demonstrated that companies care a great deal about local
business education. Foreign companies want to hire local managers because of the
tremendous cost and failure rate of expatriate managers. Local companies want to hire
managers with western business training in order to work with and compete with foreign
businesses. Both foreign and local businesses look to the most progressive business
programs to provide these managers, and they are increasingly willing to provide inkind, if not financial, support. Both graduates and local employers have expressed a
strong interest in providing internships, guest lectures and other support for these
programs. Although there are economic factors that threaten the long-term viability of

123

some of these programs, there is a growing demand for part-time and executive
business education programs throughout the region.
In addition to its MBA, the St. Petersburg School of Management runs other graduate
and undergraduate business education programs. Starting with 30 students in 1993, it
now boasts more than 1200 students. The Moscow program, which a recent World Bank
survey ranked first for quality of instruction, has won the AmCham case study
competition two years in a row. The Georgia Ministry of Education recently ranked the
Caucasus School of Business the top MBA in Georgia. All five programs have had a
powerful impact on both students and businesses:
A St. Petersburg construction supplier with two thousand employees hired 15 SOM
students, and is planning to contract faculty to teach short courses to the marketing
staff.
After winning the AIBEc business plan competition in Moscow, one student turned her
idea into a real businessshe now co-owns and operates her own B2B Internet startup.
The expatriate director of AES Tolasi, a subsidiary of the US power conglomerate, has
hired eight students from the Tbilisi program, using them as agents for change to
run critical AES systems.
Taking part-time courses, one Khazar student impressed her employer so much that
the multi-national corporation recalled its Japanese expatriate and put her in charge
of its Baku office.
After hiring a graduate from the Minsk program in 2000, Philips Electronics
recognized the value of local education programs and donated more than $20,000 to
equip the schools computer lab.
Effectiveness of EF Grants
The programs all seek international accreditation, and they are all pursuing policies
designed to improve their accreditation qualifications. Unfortunately, the programs are
unlikely to achieve international accreditation standards any time soon, primarily
because of the cost of meeting faculty qualifications. Despite this challenge, EF has used
accreditation standards as a benchmark, focusing grants on improving key business
education functions. The grants allowed the programs to undertake critical faculty
training, develop core curricula, and establish partnerships with progressive U.S.
business programs. Although EF applied less funding to student body development,
research, and relations with local businesses, the stronger partnerships addressed these
issues on their own. Students, faculty, and local employers gave these programs higher
overall ratings than they gave the less progressive programs.
Although EF did not
require the programs to track the impact of their graduates on local businesses, they are
starting to develop graduate databases. EF now requires its business education grantees
to track key indicators, which will assist programs in understanding the affect of their
programs on students and businesses, as well as changes in demand for the programs.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Because of the growing need for local managers with international management skills,
both local and foreign businesses are increasingly willing to contribute to the
development of business education programs. Few donors are willing to invest the
resources required to send students and faculty abroad on a regular basis, though. For
this reason, these programs should take advantage of less expensive resources, such as
exchanges with regional institutions and on-line training programs. EF is planning to
disseminate the findings from this evaluation to local institutions in order to stimulate
local philanthropy for business education. These programs are mature enough to
graduate from the EF partnership program. They are ready to pursue local EF grants
and local fundraising opportunities for more targeted activities, including the following:

Non-classroom academic guidance programs

Strengthened career services

124

Financial aid services for students

Program Marketing and brand visibility
The development of local case studies
Corporate representation on advisory boards
Greater use of guest lectures
The development of student research and student consulting projects with local
businesses
Expanded student internship programs.
Improved administrative oversight, policies and procedures.
Updated hardware and software and more workstations for computer labs.

125