Annexes - European Commission - Europa

EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN 

COMMISSION’S SUPPORT TO THE 

REPUBLIC OF GUYANA 

Final Report 

Volume II – Annexes 

September 2008 

Evaluation for the European Commission

Hildastrasse, 66 

D-79102 Freiburg 

Germany 

This evaluation was commissioned by: 

the Evaluation Unit common to: 

Aide à la Décision 

Economique 

Belgium 

EuropeAid Co-operation Office, 

Directorate General for Development and 

External Relations Directorate-General 

France 

Germany 

This evaluation was carried out by EGEVAL 

The evaluation was managed by the evaluation unit who also chaired the reference group composed by members of the 

services EuropeAid, Relex, DG Budget and the European Commission Delegation in Ghana 

The opinions expressed in this document represent the authors’ points of view which are not 

necessarily shared by the European Commission or by the authorities of Guyana.

EVALUATION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION’S 

SUPPORT TO THE REPUBLIC OF GUYANA 

EGEVAL 

Table of contents 

ANNEX 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE 

ANNEX 2 – INFORMANTS MET BEFORE THE FIELD MISSION 

ANNEX 3 – FIELD MISSION PLANNING & INFORMANTS MET 

ANNEX 4 – BASIC ECONOMIC INDICATORS 

ANNEX 5 – INTERNATIONAL DONOR COOPERATION 

ANNEX 6 – PRESENTATION OF THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS 

ANNEX 7 – INFORMATION MATRIX 

ANNEX 8 – LIST OF INTERVENTIONS 

ANNEX 9 – BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Final Report – Volume II - Annexes – September 2008 

Table of contents



EGEVAL 

Annex 1 - Terms of Reference 

Final Report – Volume II - Annexes – September 2008 Annex 1

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

EuropeAid Co-operation Office 

Evaluation 

I:\1. Evaluations - ON-GOING\Guyana\1.ToR\draft ToR 15nov06a.doc 

Evaluation of the European Commission’s support to 

the Republic of Guyana 

DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE 

November 2006 

o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o

Table of contents 

1. MANDATE...............................................................................................................................3 

2. BACKGROUND ......................................................................................................................3 

3. SCOPE ......................................................................................................................................5 

4. THE EVALUATION’S BASIC METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH............................6 

4.1. PREPARATION PHASE .............................................................................................................7 

4.2. DESK PHASE ...........................................................................................................................7 

4.3. FIELD PHASE ..........................................................................................................................9 

4.4. FINAL REPORT-WRITING PHASE ..............................................................................................9 

4.5. DISSEMINATION AND FOLLOW-UP ........................................................................................10 

5. IDENTIFICATION OF THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS............................................10 

6. RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND THE MONITORING OF THE 

EVALUATION.....................................................................................................................................11 

7. THE EVALUATION TEAM ................................................................................................11 

8. TIMING ..................................................................................................................................12 

9. COST OF THE EVALUATION...........................................................................................12 

10. PAYMENT MODALITIES...................................................................................................12 

ANNEX 1: KEY DOCUMENTS FOR THE EVALUATION ..........................................................13 

ANNEX 2: OUTLINE STRUCTURE OF THE FINAL REPORT..................................................15 

ANNEX 3 - QUALITY ASSESSMENT GRID ..................................................................................16 

ANNEX 4 - COUNTRY OVERVIEW................................................................................................17 

2

1. MANDATE 

Systematic and timely evaluation of its expenditure programmes is a priority of the 

European Commission (EC), as a means of accounting for the management of the 

allocated funds and of promoting a lesson-learning culture throughout the 

organisation. Of great importance also, particularly in the context of the programmes 

of the so-called Relex Family of Directorates-General 1 , is the increased focus on 

impact against a background of greater concentration of external co-operation and 

increasing emphasis on result-oriented approaches. 

The evaluation of the Commission’s co-operation with the Republic of Guyana in its 

2006 is part of the 2006 evaluation programme as approved by External Relations and 

Development Commissioners. 

The main objectives of the evaluation are: 

− to provide the relevant external co-operation services of the EC and the wider 

public with an overall independent assessment of the Commission’s past and 

current cooperation relations with the Republic of Guyana 

− to identify key lessons in order to help improve the current and future 

strategies and programmes of the Commission. 

2. BACKGROUND 

1) The European Union's co-operation policy is based on Article 177 of the Treaty 

establishing the European Community (EC). It determines that the sphere of 

development co-operation shall have three objectives namely: fostering 

sustainable development of developing countries 2 ; assisting the smooth and 

gradual integration of the developing countries into the world economy and 

campaigning against poverty in the developing countries. 

2) In November 2000, the Council and the Commission endorsed a Development 

Policy Declaration 3 that identifies six priority themes/areas. These are: Trade and 

Development; Regional Integration and Co-operation; Support to Macroeconomic 

Policies linked to Social Sector Programmes; Transport; Sustainable 

Rural Development and Food Security; and Institutional Capacity Building, Good 

Governance and the Rule of Law. Environment and Gender are considered as 

crosscutting issues, which needs to be integrated into all these six themes in order 

to make development sustainable. 

3) The EC has made Poverty Reduction Strategies (PRSPs) the point of departure 

for its Country Strategy Papers (CSPs) in all countries that have/produce a PRSP. 

The PRSP approach, with its six principles: (1) national ownership, (2) results 

focus, (3) comprehensive, (4) prioritised, (5) long-term, and (6) partnershiporiented, 

forms the core for donor support, and the common framework within 

1 

2 

3 

Directorates General of External Relations (RELEX), Development (DEV), Enlargement (ELARG), 

Trade (TRADE) and the EuropeAid Co-operation Office (AIDCO). 

Sustainable Development is defined as the improvement of the standard of living and welfare of the 

relevant populations within the limits of the capacity of the ecosystems by maintaining natural 

assets and their biological diversity for the benefit of present and future generations. 

Council document 13458/00. 

3

which all stakeholders supporting poverty reduction in a country expect to work 4 . 

Furthermore CSPs are the culmination of a joint programming process, which 

started with the launching of the Cotonou Agreement in January 2001 and 

involved many actors (the European Commission, EU Member States, the 

Government, civil society and the private sector). 

4) Guyana's CSP 5 2002-2007 is the current framework for EC/Guyana cooperation 

which combines all relevant resources and instruments. This CSP takes Guyana’s 

development agenda as its starting point together with EC’s co-operation 

objectives. Accordingly the overall aim of the CSP is to reduce poverty through 

accelerating the process of sustainable economic and social development. Support 

is focused on infrastructure (flood protection of major population area with main 

economic activities), as well on macro-economic support for the social sector, 

especially low-income housing and the health sector. 

5) The 9th European Development Fund (EDF), makes available up to €48 million 

(€34M for envelope A and €14M for envelop B to cover emergencies and 

unforeseen needs, international debt relief initiatives, instability of export 

earnings). (see also Country overview in Annex 1) . 

6) In November 2000, the IMF and the World Bank approved the Interim Poverty 

reduction strategy paper (PRSP) and agreed to support a comprehensive debt 

reduction package for Guyana under the enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor 

Countries Initiative (HIPC). This deal will save Guyana about USD 590 Million 

in debt service over the coming years. Among the requirements for the release of 

the funds are the completion of a PRSP and the implementation of a set of social 

and public sector reforms and the maintenance of financial stability. 

7) In October 2002, the IMF agreed to a credit of USD 73 million under the PRSP. 

8) In December 2003, IMF and World Bank agreed that Guyana had reached the 

completion point under the enhanced HIPC. Debt relief on this account amounts 

to USD 334.5. This comes in addition to the USD 256.4 that Guyana received 

when it reached the completion point under the original HIPC framework in May 

1999. 

9) Guyana's position on the UN's Human Development Index went further down 

from 104 in 2004 to 107 in 2005. 

10) Regional context 

Guyana is among others, a member of the UN, ACP (Guyana is full Member), 

ACS, CARICOM and CARIFORUM. 

The Headquarters of the Caribbean Community, Caricom, is in Georgetown; 

new HQ offices at Liliendaal were opened in February 2005. Also the Caribbean 

4 

PRSP review: key issues 

http://www.cc.cec/home/dgserv/dev/body/theme/docs/B2/PRSP_review_key_issues.pdf#zoom=100 

5 

Country Strategy Paper for Guyana 

http://europa.eu.int/comm/development/body/csp_rsp/csp_en.cfm 

4

Forum of ACP States, Cariforum is headquartered in Georgetown. Relations 

with Brazil are quite good and occasionally common regional projects are put 

forward. Relations with Venezuela maintaining a significant territorial claim on 

Guyana are improving. 

A Guyana-Suriname border dispute re-ignited in 2000, following exploratory 

drilling for oil off the coast of the disputed area. Guyana in February 2004 

referred this long-standing maritime boundary dispute the United Nations for a 

legally binding resolution under article 287 of the UN Convention on the Law of 

the Sea. The legal representatives of the two governments met at the end of May 

2004 to continue their discussions about the arbitration panel to adjudicate the 

maritime boundary dispute. A final ruling is expected in 2006. 

11) Relations with EU Member States 

The UK is the only EU Member State with a permanent representation in the 

country: EC Delegation and British High Commission have regularly contacts. 

12) Guyana is a high cost producer of both sugar and rice. Both these commodities 

have enjoyed preferential access to the lucrative EC market through special 

Lome/Cotonou protocols. However, these preferences will change by 2009, and 

already from 2006 the "Everything but Arms initiative" will allow free access to 

EC for sugar and rice originating from least developed countries, thus creating 

competition for Guyanese exports. To facilitate the transition, funds have been 

allocated from the EDF for the rice sector under the CARICOM Rice Project. 

(EUR 24 million for Guyana, Suriname and regional). 

13) Guyana is highly dependent on trade because of its small economic base. The 

major exports are sugar, rice, gold and bauxite. The pattern of Guyana's trade has 

changed very little in recent years. The country's main trading partner remains the 

United States (22% of exports and 25% of imports), the EU - mainly the United 

Kingdom - (30% of exports and 19 % of imports) and Canada (24% of exports 

and negligible imports). 

Please also refer to Country overview in Annex 4. 

3. SCOPE 

The scope of the evaluation is the Commission’s co-operation strategies with the 

Republic of Guyana and their implementation for the period 1995-2006. 

The Consultant should assess: 

- the relevance, coherence and complementarity of the Commission’s co-operation 

strategies for the period 1995-2006; 

- ,the consistency between programming and implementation for the same period; 

- the implementation of the Commission’s co-operation, focusing on effectiveness 

and efficiency for the period 1995-2002 and on intended effects for the period 

under the current programming cycle 2002-2006; 

5

– the following co-operation areas in particular: 

(a) macro-economic framework and economic reforms, 

(b) social reforms and human resources development, 

(c) infrastructures. 

- the cooperation framework with the country, including the main agreements and 

other official commitments between EU and the Republic of Guyana. 

NB: Previous relevant evaluations, at country level and at regional level as well as 

global thematic evaluations relating to the country and evaluations of instruments are 

important reference material to be taken into account. The Consultant should not deal 

with the points already covered by these evaluations but use them and carry out 

further analyses. Result Oriented Monitoring of Projects (ROM) related to Republic 

of Guyana should also be taken into consideration (see CRIS database) on the 

assessment of the country programme. 

4. THE EVALUATION’S BASIC METHODOLOGY AND APPROACH 

The evaluation basic approach will consist of five phases in the course of which 

several methodological stages will be developed. The Consultant’s contribution is 

essentially the area marked grey in the table below, to which the launch note should 

be added. 

Phases of the evaluation: Methodological Stages 6 : 

1. Preparation Phase • Reference group constitution 

• ToR’s drafting 

• Launch Note (Consultant) 

2. Desk Phase 7 

3. Field Phase 

4. Synthesis phase (seminar in the 

country) 

• Structuring of the evaluation 

• Data Collection 8 , verification of 

hypotheses 

• Analysis 

• Judgements on findings 

5. Feedback and Dissemination • Quality Grid 

• Summary for the Commissioners 

concerned 

• Evinfo (summary for OECD and 

Commission databases) 

• Fiche contradictoire (a statement 

of key recommendations followed 

by the Commission’s response) 

6 

7 

8 

These components are not entirely sequential. 

It includes interviews in Brussels and could include a short mission to the country 

The study will draw on the contents of (i) all relevant documentation supplied by the Commission 

Services, and (ii) documentation from other sources (to be detailed). 

6

4.1. Preparation Phase 

The evaluation manager identifies the Commission services to be invited to be part of 

the reference group, taking care that the objectives are met: an input of expertise and 

information, the expression of a range of pertinent opinions from the Commission and 

the legitimacy of the evaluation process. 

The reference group acts as the main professional interface between the Consultant 

and the Commission services. The group's principal functions will be: 

• to provide an opinion on the draft Terms of Reference ; 

• to provide the Consultant with all available information and 

documentation about the subjects of the evaluation; 

• to examine the inception note and subsequent reports produced by the 

Consultant; 

• to provide a judgement on the quality of the work of the Consultant; 

• to assist in assuring feedback and the update of the findings and 

recommendations from the evaluation into future programme design and 

delivery. 

The evaluation manager prepares the draft ToR for the evaluation and sends these to 

the Consultant. 

The Consultant will present a Launch note 9 which should contain: (i) his 

understanding of the ToR; (ii) the provisional composition of the evaluation team with 

CVs; (iii) a budget proposal. The launch note will be referred to the reference group 

for comments. 

4.2. Desk phase 

4.2.1. Inception report 

Upon approval of the launch note by the Evaluation Unit, the Consultant proceeds to 

the structuring stage, which leads to the production of an inception report. 

The main part of the work consists in the analysis of all key documents which are to 

the Commission’s co-operation (past and present) with the Republic of Guyana (in 

particular the strategy and programming documents).The Consultant will also take 

account of the documentation produced by other donors and international agencies. 

On the basis of the information collected and analysed, the Consultant will: 

9 In the case of a tender procedure, the launch note will be replaced by the financial and technical 

proposal of the tender 

7

a) reconstruct the intervention logic of the EC in the framework of its co-operation 

with the Republic of Guyana.The reconstructed logic of the intervention will be 

shaped into one or more logical diagrams of effects which must be based 

strictly on official texts. Prior to the elaboration of the effects diagram(s), the 

Consultant will have (i) identified and prioritized the co-operation objectives as 

observed in official texts;(ii) translated these specific objectives into intended 

effects. These intended effects will form the “boxes” of the diagram(s). Possible 

“gaps” in the intervention logic should be indicated and filled on the basis of 

assumptions to be validated by the reference group. The logical diagram(s) of 

effects will help to identify the main evaluation questions; 

b) propose evaluation questions and prepare explanatory comments for each. The 

choice of the questions determines the subsequent phases of information and 

data collection, elaboration of the methods of analysis, and elaboration of final 

judgements; 

A first meeting will be held with the Reference group to explain and approve the 

logical diagram(s) and the evaluation questions. 

c) identify appropriate judgement criteria and preliminary indicators for each 

evaluation questions selected. For each question, at least one judgement 

criterion should be identified, and for each such criterion appropriate a limited 

number of quantitative and qualitative indicators should be identified; 

d) include a description of the development/co-operation context of the 

Commission with [country]; 

e) propose suitable working methods to collect data and information in the 

Commission’s headquarters and in the country and present appropriate methods 

to analyse the collected data and information, indicating any limitations. 

The report will also confirm if necessary, (i) the final composition of the evaluation 

team and (ii) the final calendar. These two latter points will be agreed and confirmed 

through a formal exchange of letters between the Consultant and the Commission. 

This phase may include a short preparatory and exploratory visit in the field by the 

Consultant and/or a representative of the Evaluation Unit. 

4.2.2. Desk phase report 

Upon approval of the inception report, the Consultant proceeds to the final stage of 

the desk phase during which he will: 

• present the finalised quantitative and qualitative indicators; 

• present the first elements of responses to the evaluation questions and the 

first hypotheses to be tested in the field; 

• present suitable methods of data and information collection in the country 

indicating any limitations and describing how the data should be crosschecked 

; 

• propose appropriate methods of analysis of the information and data 

collected, again indicating any limitations of those methods in [country]; 

8

• propose a list of activities, projects and programmes for in-depth analysis in 

the field. 

At the conclusion of this work, the Consultant will present a draft desk phase report 

setting out the results of this first phase of the evaluation including all the above listed 

tasks (the major part of the Inception report will be put as an annex of the desk phase 

report).The field mission may not start until the proposed methodology will be 

approved by the evaluation manager. 

4.3. Field phase 

Following acceptance of the desk phase report, the Consultant undertakes the field 

mission. The fieldwork shall be undertaken on the basis set out in the desk phase 

report and approved by the Reference group in accordance with the Delegation. If 

during the course of the fieldwork any significant deviations from the agreed 

methodology and/or schedule are perceived necessary, the Consultant must have 

received the approval of the Evaluation Unit before they can be applied. At the 

conclusion of the field study, the Consultant presents the preliminary findings of 

evaluation: 

(1) during a de-briefing meeting with the Delegation; 

(2) to the Reference group, shortly after his return from the field. 

4.4. Final report-writing phase 

The Consultant will submit the draft final report in conformity with the structure set 

out in annex 2 with account being taken of comments received during de-briefing 

meetings with the Delegation and the Reference group (cf.4.3). 

If the evaluation manager considers the report of sufficient quality (cf. annex 3), he 

will circulate it for comments to the reference group, which will convene to discuss it 

in the presence of the evaluation team. 

On the basis of comments expressed by the Reference group and the Evaluation Unit, 

the Consultant will make the appropriate amendments. The revised draft final report 

will be presented at a seminar in the Republic of Guyana. The purpose of the 

seminar is to present the results the conclusions and the preliminary recommendations 

of the evaluation to the National Authorities, to the Delegation as well as to all the 

main stakeholders concerned by the co-operation (representatives of civil society 

organisations, other donors, etc.). 

The Consultant should prepare a presentation (power point) for the seminar. This 

presentation shall be considered as a product of the evaluation in the same way as the 

reports. 

On the basis of the comments expressed at the seminar and on the basis of further 

comments from the Reference group, the Delegation and/or the evaluation manager, 

the Consultant will prepare the final report. The Consultant may either accept or reject 

the comments but in case of rejection he must motivate (in writing) his reasons (the 

comments and the Consultant’s responses are annexed to the report). 

The presentation (power point) will be revised in accordance to the final report. 

9

4.5. Dissemination and follow-up 

After approval of the final report, the Evaluation Unit proceeds with the dissemination 

of the results (conclusions and recommendations) of the evaluation. The Evaluation 

Unit (i) makes a formal judgement on the quality of the evaluation (cf. annex 3); 

(ii) prepares an evaluation summary following the standard DAC format (EvInfo); 

(iii) prepares and circulates a “Fiche contradictoire”. The final report, the quality 

assessment grid, the EvInfo and the “Fiche contradictoire” will be published on the 

Website of the Evaluation Unit. 

5. IDENTIFICATION OF THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS 

The evaluation will be based on the five criteria endorsed by the OECD-DAC: 

relevance, impact, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability. The criteria will be 

given different weight according to the precise evaluation questions. 

In general, questions will refer to the following main areas: 

• Relevance of the strategy/programme: this includes both relevance to the general 

objectives of the EC and relevance to the needs and priorities of the Republic of 

Guyana (including the choice of target groups). 

• Design of the intervention strategy/programme: this mainly concerns the extent 

to which the resources foreseen are adequate in relation to the objectives set out in 

the programming documents. The Consultant will also verify the extent to which 

the intervention modalities (instruments, aid delivery channels, etc.) are 

appropriate to the objectives. 

• Consistency of the implementation in relation to the strategy: the Consultant 

shall verify the extent to which the calendar and implementation of the 

intervention programming (type of interventions, geographical and sectoral 

distribution, instruments, aid delivery channels, etc.) are consistent with the 

strategy. He shall demonstrate who are the real beneficiaries, direct or indirect, of 

the intervention and compare them to the target population(s) in the programming 

documents. 

• Achievement of main objectives: the Consultant shall identify all recorded results 

and impacts, including any unintended ones, and compare these to the intended. 

The Consultant will also identify the changes with occurred in the areas on which 

EC programmes were supposed to produce an impact. 

• Efficiency of the implementation: for the activities which were effective, it will be 

necessary to question to what extent funding, human, resources, regulatory, and/or 

administrative resources contributed to, or hindered, the achievement of the 

objectives and results. 

• Sustainability of the effects: an analysis of the extent to which the results and 

impact are being, or are likely to be, maintained over time. 

10

• Key cross-cutting issues: for example gender, environment human rights, 

HIV/AIDS, institutional capacity building, etc. Verification should be undertaken, 

on the one hand, of the extent that account has been taken of these priorities in the 

programming documents and, on the other hand, to what extent these issues have 

been reflected in the implementation modalities and in the effects of the 

intervention. 

• The 3Cs (co-ordination, complementarity and coherence): 

co-ordination and complementarity with EU Members States, and other donors; 

coherence with EU policies (including the Member State own policies). 

6. RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND THE MONITORING OF THE 

EVALUATION 

The Evaluation Unit (AIDCO 03) is responsible for the management and monitoring 

of the evaluation with the assistance of the Reference group (cf.4.1). 

7. THE EVALUATION TEAM 

The evaluation team should possess a sound level of knowledge and experience in: 

− evaluation methods and techniques in general and, if possible of evaluation in the 

field of development and cooperation; 

− the country and/or the region; 

− the following fields: 

1) trade and economic cooperation; 

2) social sector and human resources development 

3) infrastructures (water sector, in particular); 

4) good governance and human rights. 

Additional expertise could be requested after the drafting of the specific 

evaluation questions. 

− 

the following language(s): English 

The Evaluation Unit strongly recommends that the evaluation team should include 

local consultants (notably, but not only, during the field phase) with in-depth 

knowledge of key areas of the evaluation 

The team composition will initially be agreed between the contractor 

and the Evaluation Unit but may be adjusted subsequently, if 

necessary, on the basis of the findings of the desk phase. 

Regarding conflict of interest, experts who have been involved in the 

design or implementation of programmes or projects that are covered 

by this evaluation, are excluded from this assignment. 

A declaration of absence of conflict of interest shall be signed by each 

consultant proposed for the study team, and annexed to the launch 

note. 

11

8. TIMING 

The dates mentioned in the following section are indicative 

Evaluation Phases 

and Stages 

Notes and Reports Dates Meetings 

RG Composition Notes November 2006 

ToR Draft November 

Starting Stage Launch Note December 

Desk Phase 

Structuring Stage Short presentation (logical 

diagram and EQ) 

January 2007 

RG Meeting 

(kick off meeting) 

Draft Inception Note 

February 

Final Inception Note 

March 

Desk Study Draft Desk Report March RG Meeting 

Final Desk Report 

April 

Field Phase 

Final Phase 

(report-writing) 

Presentation May RG Meeting 

Draft Final Report 

1rs draft Final June RG Meeting 

2 nd draft Final July 

Seminar 

September 

Final Report 

October 

9. COST OF THE EVALUATION 

The overall cost of the evaluation is expected to be around € 180.000 

This amount includes a provision (reimbursable costs) of € 7.000 for the organisation 

of the seminar in the country. 

10. PAYMENT MODALITIES 

The payments modalities shall be as follows: 

30% on acceptance of the inception note; 

50% on acceptance of draft final report; 

20% on acceptance of final report. 

Seminar related costs are to be invoiced, and paid, separately. 

12

ANNEX 1: KEY DOCUMENTS FOR THE EVALUATION 

NB: the following list is indicative and by no means exhaustive. The consultants are 

requested to take into account any other documents relevant to the present evaluation. 

− Country Strategy Paper 2002-2006 & National Indicative Programme 2002-2004 

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/development/body/csp_rsp/print/gy_csp_en.pdf#zoom=100 

− Addendum to the CSP and National Indicative Programme: 

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/development/body/csp_rsp/addentum/Add_CSP_GY.pdf#zoo 

m=100 

− Regional Lomé 4 (1997-2002)) 

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/development/body/region/docs/rb_en.pdf#zoom=100 

− Regional Sheet 

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/development/body/publications/rep98/pdf/en/rb.pdf#zoom=100 

− Regional for 2003-2007: 

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/development/body/csp_rsp/print/r9_rsp_en.pdf#zoom=100 

− Annual reports and mid-term reviews 

− Evaluation regional cooperation Caribbean (2005) 

http://ec.europa.eu/comm/europeaid/evaluation/document_index/2005/951663_docs.htm 

− Previous Project/programme Evaluations Guyana: 

Caribbean Regional Tourism 

Sector programme (99810) 

7 ACP RPR 

443/444 

final 

(draft) 

dec-02 

Guyana Training Agency 

Project 

8 ACP GUA 

008 

mid-term 

Feb-03 

Strengthening the Institutional 

Response to HIV/AIDS/STI in 

the Caribbean (SIRHASC) 

8 ACP TPS 

018 

mid-term Feb 2004 

Linden 

Advancement 

(LEAP) 

Economic 

Programme 

8 ACP GUA 

009 

final Aug 2004 

Strengthening of Medical 

Laboratory Services in the 

Caribbean 

8 ACP RCA 

020 

final Dec 2004 

13

Urban development projects, 

phase2, Guyana. Final report 

Small business credit initiative - 

Guyana final report 

(GUA/7001) 

Small business credit initiative 

(Guyana) final report 

Rehabilitation of the bauxite 

industry of Guyana - final 

report - Global evaluation of the 

cooperation between ACP and 

EU in the mining sector and 

Sysmin 

950968 01/01/1995 

951054 01/01/1995 

951319 13/07/1997 

951339 01/06/1998 

Coopération nord-sud en 

matiere de lutte contre 

l'expansion de l'epidemie du 

vih/sida et aide aux politiques 

et programmes démographiques 

dans les pays en developpement 

951552 

01/11/2000 

- Monitoring Reports on EC (co-financed) actions in Guyana (ROM Database) 

- Relevant documentation from other donors 

14

ANNEX 2: OUTLINE STRUCTURE OF THE FINAL REPORT 

The overall layout of the report is as follows: 

- Summary 

- Context of the evaluation 

- Replies to the evaluation questions 

- Conclusions (1) 

- Recommendations (2) 

Length: the final report must be kept short (75 pages maximum excluding annexes). 

Additional information on the context, the programme or the comprehensive aspects 

of the methodology and of the analysis will be put in the annexes. 

(1) 

The conclusions have to be assembled by homogeneous "clusters" (groups). The 

setting out of the conclusions according to the 5 DAC criteria is not required. 

The chapter on "Conclusions" has to contain a paragraph or a sub-chapter with the 3 

to 4 principal presented in order of importance. 

The chapter on "Conclusions" must also make it possible to identify subjects for 

which there are good practices and the subjects for which it is necessary to think 

about modifications or re-orientations. 

(2) 

– Recommendations have to be linked to the conclusions without being a direct 

copy. 

– Recommendations have to be treated on a hierarchical basis and prioritised 

within the various clusters (groups) of presentation selected. 

– Recommendations have to be realistic, operational and feasible. As far as is 

practicable, the possible conditions of implementation have to be specified. 

– The chapter on "Recommendations" has to contain a sub-chapter or a specific 

paragraph corresponding to the paragraph with the 3 to 4 principal conclusions. 

Therefore, for each conclusion, options for action and the conditions linked to 

each action as well as the likely consequences should set out. 

15

ANNEX 3 - QUALITY ASSESSMENT GRID 

Concerning these criteria, the evaluation 

report is: 

1. Meeting needs: Does the evaluation 

adequately address the information needs of the 

commissioning body and fit the terms of 

reference? 

2. Relevant scope: Is the rationale of the 

policy examined and its set of outputs, results 

and outcomes/impacts examined fully, 

including both intended and unexpected policy 

interactions and consequences? 

3. Defensible design: Is the evaluation design 

appropriate and adequate to ensure that the full 

set of findings, along with methodological 

limitations, is made accessible for answering 

the main evaluation questions? 

4. Reliable data: To what extent are the 

primary and secondary data selected adequate. 

Are they sufficiently reliable for their intended 

use? 

5. Sound analysis: Is quantitative information 

appropriately and systematically analysed 

according to the state of the art so that 

evaluation questions are answered in a valid 

way? 

6. Credible findings: Do findings follow 

logically from, and are they justified by, the 

data analysis and interpretations based on 

carefully described assumptions and rationale? 

7. Validity of the conclusions: Does the 

report provide clear conclusions? Are 

conclusions based on credible results? 

8. Usefulness of the recommendations: Are 

recommendations fair, unbiased by personnel 

or shareholders’ views, and sufficiently 

detailed to be operationally applicable? 

9. Clearly reported: Does the report clearly 

describe the policy being evaluated, including 

its context and purpose, together with the 

procedures and findings of the evaluation, so 

that information provided can easily be 

understood? 

Taking into account the contextual 

constraints on the evaluation, the overall 

quality rating of the report is considered. 

Unacc 

eptabl 

e 

Poor Good Very 

Good 

Excelle 

nt 

16

ANNEX 4 

COUNTRY OVERVIEW 

General Background 

Guyana, located at the point where the Caribbean meets South America on its North Atlantic 

seaboard, is historically and culturally a part of the Caribbean region. Georgetown hosts the 

Secretariat of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). 

Guyana is a country with a small population 751,000 ( (2002 census) living in a large area of 

214 969 km 2 . With a per capita income of+/- 850 USD, Guyana is also one of the poorest 

countries in the Caribbean and the Western Hemisphere. Ethnic 9 %, others and mixed 17%. 

Guyana has three distinct geographical areas: the coastal zone, the tropical forest zone, and 

the savannahs, in the south. Close to 90 % of the population lives and works in the coastal 

plain, an area around 10 000 km 2 , roughly 5% of the country's total land mass. Over 80% of 

GDP, including the entire agricultural production and the vast majority of all non-mining 

industrial activities are concentrated in this area, which is located below sea level, and needs 

constant protection from the sea. 

Guyana's economy is based on exporting bauxite, sugar, rice, and more recently gold and 

forestry products. In spite of some acute ethnic polarisation problems, the overall political 

situation of the country had been improving at a satisfactory rate until recently. GDP 

fluctuated from - 0.7% in 2003 to + 1.6 % in 2004 and to - 2.5% in 2005, the latter figure 

relating to the floods in January 2005 (source EIU). 

In November 2000, the IMF and the World Bank approved the Interim Poverty reduction 

strategy paper (PRSP) and agreed to support a comprehensive debt reduction package for 

Guyana under the enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC). This deal will 

save Guyana about USD 590 Million in debt service over the coming years. Among the 

requirements for the release of the funds are the completion of a PRSP and the 

implementation of a set of social and public sector reforms and the maintenance of financial 

stability. 

In October 2002, the IMF agreed to a credit of USD 73 million under the PRSP. 

In December 2003, IMF and World Bank agreed that Guyana has reached the completion 

point under the enhanced HIPC. Debt relief under the enhanced HIPC amounts to USD 334.5. 

This comes in addition to the USD 256.4 that Guyana received when it reached the 

completion point under the original HIPC framework in May 1999. The HDI continued to 

drop from 104 in 2004 to 107 in 2005. 

Political situation 

Guyana's political scene is dominated by two main parties, the People's Progressive Party 

(PPP) and the Peoples National Congress (PNC). Each represents one of the two main 

ethnicities of the country, the PPP electorate being mostly indo-Guyanese and the PNC's 

mainly afro-Guyanese. 

After 28 years of undemocratic rule, the first internationally recognised fair and free elections 

took place in 1992 and Dr Cheddi Jagan (PPP) was elected President. The following general 

elections were held in December 1997 and were once again won by the PPP. 

The elections of March 2001 which returned the government of President Jagdeo and the 

PPP/C to power were considered by most observers to have been fair and open. But as it was 

the case after the 1997 elections which were also won by the PPP, civil disturbances erupted 

17

again after the election. 

Progress in the political reconciliation process has been slow and the process as a whole is 

still rather unstable. Currently government and opposition are not on real speaking terms. The 

country is gearing up for the next elections on 28 August 2006. 

Concerning the human rights situation freedom of press and opinion are respected. However, 

the police force has been criticised locally and internationally (Amnesty International) for 

alleged extra-judicial killings. 

Regional framework 

Guyana is among others, a member of the UN, ACP, ACS, CARICOM and CARIFORUM. 

The Headquarters of the Caribbean Community, Caricom, is in Georgetown and a new 

Caricom headquarters at Liliendaal was opened in February 2005. The Caribbean Forum of 

ACP States, Cariforum is headquartered in Georgetown. Relations with Brazil are quite good 

and occasionally common regional projects are put forward. Relations with Venezuela 

maintaining a significant territorial claim on Guyana are improving. A Guyana-Suriname 

border dispute re-ignited in 2000, following exploratory drilling for oil off the coast of the 

disputed area. Guyana in February 2004 referred their long-standing maritime boundary 

dispute with Suriname to the United Nations for a legally binding resolution under article 287 

of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. The legal representatives of the two 

governments met at the end of May 2004 to continue their discussions about the arbitration 

panel to adjudicate the maritime boundary dispute. A final ruling is expected in 2006. 

Relations with the EU 

The UK is the only EU Member State with a permanent representation in Guyana and the EU 

Delegation and the British High Commission have contacts on a regular basis. 

Guyana is highly dependent on trade because of its small economic base. The major exports 

are sugar, rice, gold and bauxite. The pattern of Guyana's trade has changed very little in 

recent years. The country's main trading partner remains the United States (22% of exports 

and 25% of imports), the EU - mainly the United Kingdom - (30% of exports and 19 % of 

imports) and Canada (24% of exports and negligible imports). 

Guyana is a high cost producer of both sugar and rice. Both these commodities have enjoyed 

preferential access to the lucrative EC market through special Lome/Cotonou protocols. 

However, these preferences will change by 2009, and already from 2006 the Everything but 

Arms initiative will allow free access to EC for sugar and rice originating from least 

developed countries, thus creating competition for Guyanese exports. To facilitate the 

transition funds have been allocated from the EDF for the rice sector under the CARICOM 

Rice Project. (EUR 24 million for Guyana, Suriname and regional). 

Country Strategy 

Top of page 

The objectives of the EC assistance program to Guyana are the reduction of poverty and the 

promotion of sustainable development. 

The two areas of concentration proposed for the 9 th EDF are: 

• Infrastructure: Sea Defences and coastal management and 

18

• Macro-economic support to social sectors (health and housing) 

Both of these programs would receive project and/or budgetary sector support. 

Outside these areas of concentration assistance is proposed for: 

• Transport sector planning 

• Support to Economic Actors : Strengthening the NAO office / Micro-project 

programme 

Priorities for co-operation 

Top of page 

The EC Country Support Strategy for Guyana will be financed through different instruments 

under the 9 th EDF, which amounts to a total of EURO 48 million. 

9 th EDF A-allocation (EUR 34 million). From the B-allocation EUR 4,9 million concerning 

Sysmin resources will be used to support the focal and non-focal sectors, bringing the total 

resources allocated to EUR 38,9 million for the following purposes. 

Focal sector 1. Infrastructure: sea defences and coastal management. Total amount EUR 19 

million or 49% of the programmable resources. 

Focal sector 2. Macro economic support. Total amount EUR 14,9 million or 38% of the 

programmable resources. 

Other programmes outside the focal sectors Total amount EUR 5 million or 13% of the 

programmable resources. 

Balances from previous EDFs at the date of entry into force of the Financial Protocol as well 

as decommitments made at a later stage, have been added to the above mentioned indicative 

allocation. These funds will be used for projects and programmes already identified under 

Indicative Programmes of preceding EDFs, for which no financing decision was taken before 

the entry into force of the 9 th EDF. 

In May 2004, the Guyanese Government and the EC signed a five-year agreement to fund the 

establishment of a micro projects programme for vulnerable groups and NGOs. This initiative 

is part of a larger commitment to eradicate poverty. 

The Macro-economic support programme was approved in July 2004. 

9 th EDF B-allocation (EUR 14 million) This envelope includes EUR 4,9 million from 8 th 

EDF Sysmin resources allocated to the focal and non-focal sectors above. These funds are 

used under the programmed activities as listed above. From the remainder of the B-envelope 

under the flex procedures, 8,4 million has been allocated in January 2002 to be programmed 

as part of the budget support, bringing it to 23,3 million. The last EUR 0.7 million has been 

allocated by ECHO for relief after floods which hit Guyana in January 2005. 

Apart from the above-mentioned financial instruments, of which the A-envelope is the main 

programmable basis for the Indicative Programme, the 9 th EDF also includes the "Investment 

Facility" as a financing instrument managed by the European Investment bank. The 

Investment Facility does not form part of the Indicative Programme. 

Specific actions could be financed via budget lines, inter alia, in the areas of decentralised co- 

19

operation, NGO financing, human rights and democracy, disaster prevention and 

humanitarian and emergency assistance. These are subject to specific rules and regulations 

and depend on availability of funds. Guyana can also benefit from the Regional Indicative 

Programme or from trade specific operations, according to needs and availability of funds. 

Specific activities may be supported through the Centre for the Development of Enterprise 

(CDE). 

9th EDF Financial Data 

Top of page 

Focal areas 

Infrastructure: Sea defences and costal management 19 M EUR 49 % 

Macro economic support 14.9M EUR 38 % 

Non- focal areas 

Transport Sector Study & Support to Economic Actors 5 M EUR 13% 

Total 38.9 M EUR* 100 % 

The amount shown above accounts solely for EDF allocations - programmable aid 

* From the B-allocation EUR 4,9 million concerning Sysmin resources will be used to 

support the focal and non-focal sectors, bringing the total resources allocated to EUR 38,9 

million for the indicated purposes. 

Previous EDF financial data 

Top of page 

(All EDF in MEUR (million EUR)s 

(8th EDF) 

National Indicative Progr. 12.8 14.6 22.1 32.8 32 

EIB loans: Risk capital 3.2 4 4 1 12.5 

EIB loans - - - 7.8 - 

Structural adjustment support - - - 8.5 11 

Sysmin - 34.5 - 5 - 

debt relief - - - 6.4 - 

Food aid 0.7 3.8 4.3 - - 

Other (emergency aid, AIDS, damage compensation) - 0.5 0.30.1 - 

Environment and NGO budget lines - - - - 4.1 

From regional funds - - 1.2 12.3 0.8 

Total 16.7 57.4 31.9 73.9 60.4 

20

Main Development Projects 

Top of page 

Major project activities presently undertaken are: 

• 8 th EDF Sea Defences Programme (EUR 20 million) 

• 8th EDF Economic Diversification Project in Linden . (12, 5 million ) 

• 8 th EDF Low-income housing 9, 1 million 

• 9 th EDF budget support programme (EUR 23.3 million) 

21



EGEVAL 

Annex 2 – Informants met before the 

field mission 

ABDUL Yusuf Guyana Sugar Corporation inc. 

General Manager, Technical 

services 

ALLI Ronald Guyana Sugar Corporation inc. Chief Executive Manager 

BALGOBIN Tarachand Ministry of Finance Head of NAO office 

BARROWS Lunch Guyana Micro-projects programme 

Head of association of timber 

producers 

BOGUSZ 

Grazyna 

DG EcFin Unit 4 Horizontal 

issues and co-ordination of 

financial assistance. Development 

policy. Links with multilateral 

banks. 

Economic and financial assistant 

for development policy 

BRANDT Manfred EC AIDCO Administrator 

BURBAN Florence Elections process evaluation / EC Head of mission 

CHAMPANHET Bernard 

Bio-ethanol study / ACP countries 

/ EC 

Energy economist 

CHAND Komal 

Guyana Agri.&General Workers 

Union 

President 

FRASER Neil LEAP PMU 

Manager, Business Development 

Unit 

GAFOOR-CHIN Zorina Ministry of Housing & Water Expert 

GARCIA 

EuropeAid Unit E.7 Responsable thématique dans le 

Manuel 

PUERTA 

Macro-economic support 

secteur des transports 

GIRARD Felix NAO Task Force Team Leader 

HERLANT Patrick 

EuropeAid Unit E.6 Natural Senior officer for operations 

ressources 

quality support and coordination 

HESPEL Evelyne 

Programme Manager - Assistant 

EuropeAid Unit E.1 

Officer - Quality Management 

Macro-economic support 

Officer 

HORN Kevin Guyana Water incorporated Team Leader 

JACKSON Nick Guyana Sugar Corporation inc. Chief Executive 

LOPEZ Patricia World Bank Country representative 

Mc CORMACK Mike Guyana Human Rights association Team Leader 

MINASYAN 

Charlotte 

EuropeAid Unit C2 Geographical 

coordination and supervision for 

ACPs 

Assistant programme manager 

MUCI Giampiero 

Delegation of the European 

Commission 

Economic section 

NORTON Shawn LEAP incubator Tenant 

PERMAUL Dindyal Ministry of Agriculture Permanent Secretary 

PERSAUD Robert Ministry of Agriculture Minister of Agriculture 

SALLMÉN Ritva 

Delegation of the European Programme manager, Head of 


economic section 

SANKAR Beni Kayman Sankar Group Chief Executive Manager 

SHARPE Valérie LEAP PMU Manager, LEAF unit 

SIMMONS Coralie Guyana Micro-projects programme Team Leader 

SINGH Ashni Ministry of Finance Minister of Finance 

Final Report – Volume II - Annexes – September 2008 Annex 2 /page 1



EGEVAL 

SURUJBALLY Nisa Guyana Sugar Corporation inc. Marketing director 

TERNOY Jacques 

Bio-ethanol study / ACP countries 

/ EC 

Head of mission 

VANHELDEN 

Bast 

DG Dev Unit 1 Relations with the 

countries and the region of the 

Caribbean and the OCTs 

International Relations Officer - 

Desk Officer: Jamaica, Belize, 

Bahamas, Guyana, Suriname, 

Trinidad & Tobago 

VARAS OLEA Sergio 

Inter-American Development 

Bank 

WHALEN Kathleen LEAP PMU Team Leader 

ZEPHYR Patrick SMEs association President 

Country representative 




EGEVAL 

Annex 3 – Field mission planning & 

Informants met 


Evaluation of the European Commission's 

Support to the Republic of Guyana 

EGEVAL 

Team with 

Clem Duncan 

Michel Nadon Karolyn Thunissen Virginie Morillon Wim Klaassen 

1 - Relevance / 6 - Efficiency 8 - 3C's / 4 - Budget support 7 - CCI / 3 - Private sector support 2 - Sea defences / 5 - MPP 

Wed. 10 DEC/DNAO Joint Briefing 9:00 DEC/DNAO Joint Briefing 9:00 DEC/DNAO Joint Briefing 9:00 DEC/DNAO Joint Briefing 9:00 

NAO Task Force 11:00 NAO Task Force 11:00 NAO Task Force 11:00 NAO Task Force 11:00 

DEC 14:00 DEC 14:00 DEC 14:00 DEC 14:00 

Thurs. 11 Mr. Bal Persaud, Director, PSC 11:00 Budget Office 10:00 Mr. Bal Persaud, Director, PSC 11:00 

Gail Texira, Acting Presidential Secretariat 14:00 Gail Texira, Acting Presidential Secretariat 14:00 Gail Texira, Acting Presidential Secretariat 14:00 Gail Texira, Acting Presidential Secretariat 14:00 

Fri.12 

Hon. Mr. Henry Jeffrey, Minister of Foreign 

Trade and Int'l Cooperation 

Hon. Mr. Harry Narine Nawbatt, Minister of 

10.30 

Housing & water 

Hon. Mr. Henry Jeffrey, Minister of Foreign Trade 

11:00 

and Int'l Cooperation 

Hon. Mr. Harry Narine Nawbatt, Minister of 

10.30 

Housing & water 

Ms. Denise Bereforrd, Prog. Manager, GTA 

Mr. George Howard, Sea & River Division 14:00 Ms. Tamara Whalen, World Bank 15:30 

Programme 

12:00 Mr. George Howard, Sea & River Division 14:00 

Mr Amsterdam, SRD 15.00 Felix Girard - Adèle Clark / LEAP 15.00 Mr Amsterdam, SRD 15.00 

Bernhard Weihs, TLPMU Housing 16.00 Bernhard Weihs, TLPMU Housing 16.00 

Team meeting 18.00 Team meeting 18.00 Team meeting 18.00 Team meeting 18.00 

11:00 

Saturday 13 Field visit / Sea Defences 7.00-18.00 Hon. Dr. Leslie Ramsammy, Minister of Health 11:00 Field visit / Sea Defences 7.00-18.00 Field visit / Sea Defences 7.00-18.00 

Sunday 14 Team meeting 18.00 Team meeting 18.00 Team meeting 18.00 Team meeting 18.00 

Team with 

Clem Duncan 

Michel Nadon 

1 - Relevance / 6 - Efficiency 

Karolyn Thunissen 

8 - 3C's / 4 - Budget support 

Virginie Morillon 

7 - CCI / 3 - Private sector support 

Wim Klaassen 

2 - Sea defences / 5 - MPP 

Hon. Mr. Robeson Benn, Minister of Public 




8:00 8:00 8:00 

Works 

Works 

Works 

Works 

8:00 

Monday 15 Adèle Clarke, NAO TF 9.00 

Collin Lord, NAO / Rice 10.00 Collin Lord, NAO / Rice 10.00 

Mr. Abubarcy Tal, UNDP 14:00 Mr. Abubarcy Tal, UNDP 14:00 Roel Ubbink, TLPMU Sea Defences 11.00 


Tuesday 16 

Mrs Whalen, programme Manager, LEAP 

Programme 

Mrs Whalen, programme Manager, LEAP 

10.00 DFID 9.00 

Programme 

10.00 Mr. Amsterdam, Sea Defences 8.00 

Irène Bacchus, Linden Arts & Craft 12.30 Pauline Cummings EC Delegation 10.00 Irène Bacchus, Linden Arts & Craft 12.30 Mr. J. Bhojedat, PMU MPP 9:30 

National Drainage Irrigation Authority, Min. of 

R. Glasgow, Regional Devlopment Unit 1.30 R. Glasgow, Regional Devlopment Unit 1.30 

Agriculture 

Farmers Association, Region 10 3.00 Farmers Association, Region 10 3.00 

Sebrai Woods 4.00 Sebrai Woods 4.00 

Hon. Miss Priya Manickchand, Minister of 

Wed. 17 Mayor & Town Council 8.00 

Labour, 

13:30 Mayor & Town Council 8.00 Mr Ravi Marine, Nat. Drain. & Irr. Auth. 9.00 

Hon. Mr. Priya Manickchand, Minister of Labour, 

Linden Chamber of Commerce 9.00 ECD Head of Economic section 15.00 Linden Chamber of Commerce 9.00 

Human Services and Social Security 

13:30 

Tourism Association, Region 10 10.00 

LEAF Executive officer 11.00 LEAF Executive officer 11.00 

Mrs Whalen, programme Manager, LEAF 

Mrs Whalen, programme Manager, LEAF 

12.00 

Programme 

Programme 

12.00 

Toucan Call Centre 14.00 Toucan Call Centre 14.00 

Balgit's Demonstration farm 15.00 Balgit's Demonstration farm 15.00 


Briefing meetings preparation 18.00 Briefing meetings preparation 18.00 Briefing meetings preparation 18.00 Briefing meetings preparation 18.00 

Team with 

Michel Nadon Karolyn Thunissen Virginie Morillon Wim Klaassen 

Clem Duncan 

1 - Relevance / 6 - Efficiency 8 - 3C's / 4 - Budget support 7 - CCI / 3 - Private sector support 2 - Sea defences / 5 - MPP 

Team meeting / Br. meet. Final prep. 8.00 8.00 Team meeting / Br. meet. Final prep. 8.00 Team meeting / Br. meet. Final prep. 8.00 

Thursday 18 Mr. Tarachand Balgobin, work meet. 9:00 Mr. Tarachand Balgobin, work meet. 9:00 Mr. Tarachand Balgobin, work meet. 9:00 Mr. Tarachand Balgobin, work meet. 9:00 

Hon. Mr. Permaul, PS, Minister of Agriculture 14.00 USAID 13.30 MPP Beneficiaries (Salv. Army & ..) 12.00 Hon. Mr. Permaul, PS, Minister of Agriculture 14.00 

Mr. Sergio Varas-Olea, IDB 11.30 

EC Delegation, work meeting 15.30 EC Delegation, work meeting 15.30 EC Delegation, work meeting 15.30 EC Delegation, work meeting 15.30 

Sonya Roopnauth, Budget office 17.30 


Debriefing meeting preparation 19.00 Debriefing meeting preparation 19.00 Debriefing meeting preparation 19.00 Debriefing meeting preparation 19.00 

Team meeting / Br. meet. Final prep. 8.00 Team meeting / Br. meet. Final prep. 8.00 Team meeting / Br. meet. Final prep. 8.00 Team meeting / Br. meet. Final prep. 8.00 

Friday 19 DNAO / ECD De-briefing 9:00 DNAO / ECD De-briefing 9:00 DNAO / ECD De-briefing 9:00 DNAO / ECD De-briefing 9:00 

Bureau of Statistics 11;30 Mr Amsterdam, SRDD 11.00 

Mr Vaugh, SRDD 13.00 

ECD, Head of Delegation 16.00 ECD, Head of Delegation 16.00 ECD, Head of Delegation 16.00 ECD, Head of Delegation 16.00 

Mr Roel Ubbels, Monitoring Sea Def. 18.00 

10.00 

Final Report - September 2008



EGEVAL 

Annex 4 – Basic economic indicators 

Population 

Population 

(thousands) 

Population growth 

(%) 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

747 746 748 752 755 757 759 761 763 765 NA 

-0.3 0.0 0.5 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 

Production and prices 

Nominal GDP 

(G$M) 

99.0 106.7 108.0 120.7 130 130.4 137.7 143.8 154.6 157.4 166.2 

Annual percentage changes 

Real GDP 7.9 6.2 -1.7 3.0 -1.4 2.3 1.1 -0.7 1.6 -2.6 0.7 

Real GDP per capita 6.6 5.5 -1.7 1.9 -1.7 1.9 0.8 -1.2 1.3 -2.9 0.4 

GDP deflator 3.1 2.7 2.6 12.8 4.3 1.5 3.7 5.4 5.8 4.5 4.9 

Consumer prices 7.1 3.6 4.6 7.5 6.1 2.7 5.3 6 4.7 5.0 5.0 

(average) 

Origin of GDP 

As percentage of GDP 

Agriculture and 57.8 52.7 50.6 48.7 NA NA NA NA 31.3 NA NA 

mining 

Manufacturing and 14.9 16.4 14.8 14.8 NA NA NA NA 27.0 NA NA 

construction 

Services 27.3 30.8 34.6 36.5 NA NA NA NA 41.7 NA NA 

National 


accounts 

Investment 30.0 30.3 28.8 23.4 22.6 20.8 21.6 21.5 22.1 33.2 34.8 

Private sector 10.9 12.2 13.4 11.8 8.8 6.8 8.3 6.5 5.7 6.3 6.3 

Public sector 19.1 18.1 15.4 11.6 13.8 14 12.6 14.5 16.4 26.9 28.5 

National saving 22.3 16.2 15.0 12.6 7.3 2.3 6.2 8.9 10.1 6.7 8.0 

Public finances 


Revenue 34.6 31.9 30.6 29.9 34.6 32.6 33.4 34.9 37.6 37.2 37.5 

Expenditure 39.6 42.6 39.1 36.6 48.4 49.1 52.5 48.4 48.6 62.0 62.4 

Overall balance (after 

grants, including 

HIPC) 

1.2 -3.0 -4.8 -1.0 -6.0 -7.1 -8.2 -8.7 -4.4 -15.1 -16.9 

Balance of 

In millions of US dollars 

payments 

Current account -33 -63 -56 -50 -82 -96 -66 -47 -30 NA NA 

balance 

Exports, fob 572 591 545 522 503 485 490 508 584 NA NA 

Imports 550 591 553 519 550 541 514 525 598 NA NA 

Trade balance 23 0 -8 4 -47 -56 -24 -17 -14 NA NA 

Capital account 

balance 

Financial account 

balance 

618 24 13 16 16 32 31 44 46 NA NA 

-563 100 89 43 94 68 50 34 -39 NA NA 

External debt 

1352 1329 1198 1130 1124 1095 1145 1217 1140 NA NA 

Public debt 

outstanding (US$m) 

Debt service / 14.1 17.0 18.8 12.4 9.7 6.6 8.9 7.5 5.8 NA NA 

exports (%) 

Sources: IMF, Guyana Statistical Annex, 2001, PRSP 2002, PRSP Progress report 2005, 2006, World Bank, World 

Development Indicators, 2006. 




EGEVAL 

Annex 5 – International Donor 

Cooperation 

Table - Donors main sectors of Intervention, 1996-2005 

In ms of dollars In per cent 

VI.0 Action Relating To Debt 330,49 256,38 

United Kingdom 276 84 

Germany 26 8 

Denmark 6 2 

I.5 Government & Civil Society 133,19 10,23 

IDB Special Fund 66 50 

United States 17 13 


II.3 Energy 114.33 8.78 



European Commission 18 16 

II.1 Transport & Storage 105,73 7.83 



I.1 Education, Total 101.89 7.83 

Canada 36 35 



IV.3 Other Multisector 68,94 5,29 


IFAD 10 15 


III.1 Agriculture - Forestry - Fishing, Total 64,99 4.99 

IDB Special Fund 60.6 93 

V.2 Developmental Food Aid/Food Security 58,50 4,49 

Assistance 


V.1 General Budget Support 57.09 4,38 


IDA 12 21 

Japan 4 7 

I.6 Other Social Infrastructure & Services 54.06 4,15 



Canada 3 6 

I.4 Water Supply & Sanitation 45,25 3,47 


Canada 3 7 

I.3 Population Programmes 39,46 3,03 





EGEVAL 

IDA 10 26 

GFATM 9 23 

IV.1 General Environment Protection 29.42 2,26 


Germany 3 11 

I.2 Health, Total 28,90 2,22 

Japan 12 42 

Canada 7 23 


III.2 Industry - Mining - Construction, Total 17,53 1,35 

European Commission 11.8 67 

Canada 5.7 33 

Other 56.59 3,73 

Total 1301.36 100,00 

Source: OECD, CRS online database on aid activities. 

Note: The numbers in front of the codes are a reference to OECD codes. 

IDB 

Fund 

United 

Kingdom 

Table - Breakdown of the support of principal donors 

to Guyana by DAC sector, 1996-2005 

Special 

European 


Transport Storage (28%), Energy (20%), Government & Civil 

Society (18%), Other social Infrastructure and Services (11%), 

Other Multi-sector (13%), Education (8%), Health (2%) 

Action relating to debt (73%), Water Supply & Sanitation (11%), 

Energy (6%), Government & Civil Society (5%), Education 

(4%), Other Emergency & Distress Relief (1%) 

General Budget Support (33%), General Environment 

Protection (20%), Energy (15%), Industry Mining – 

Construction (10%), Infrastructure and Services (7%), 

Unallocated/Unspecified (6%), Other social Government & 

Civil Society (6%), Education (1%), Transport & Storage (1%), 

Other Emergency & Distress Relief (1%) 

United States Development al Food Aid/Food Security Assistance (52%), 

Population Programmes (16%), Government & Civil Society 

(15%), Other Multi-sector (6%), Business & Other Services 

(4%), Action relating to debt (3%), Banking & Financial Services 

(2%), Other social Infrastructure and Services (1%) 

Canada 

Education (42%), Government & Civil Society (20%), Industry 

Mining – Construction (7%), Action relating to debt (7%), 

Other social Infrastructure and Services (4%), Water Supply & 

Sanitation (4%), Banking & Financial Services (2%), Multisector 

(2%), Other Multi-sector (2%), Business & Other 

Services (1%), Agriculture – Forestry – Fishing (1%) 

IDA General Budget Support (24%), Population Programmes (20%), 

Other Emergency & Distress Relief (18%), Business & Other 

Services (18%), Action relating to debt (10%), Government & 

Civil Society (10%) 

Germany 

Japan 

Action relating to debt (89%), General Environment Protection 

(11%) 

Health (44%), Unallocated/Unspecified (30%), General Budget 

Support (15%) 

GFATM Population Programmes (76%), Health (24%) 




EGEVAL 

IFAD Other Multi-sector (100%) 

Netherlands 

Agriculture – Forestry – Fishing (43%), Action relating to debt 

(57%) 

Denmark Action relating to debt (100%), 

UNICEF Population Programmes (61%), Unallocated/Unspecified (39%) 

France Education (48%), Action relating to debt (52%) 

Norway Action relating to debt (100%) 

UNDP Other Multi-sector (100%) 

Source: OECD, CRS online database on aid activities. 




EGEVAL 

Annex 6 - Presentation of the Evaluation 

Questions 

Within the set of eight Evaluation Questions, one question relates to the overall relevance 

of the Commission’s interventions (EQ 1), four to their effectiveness, impact and 

sustainability in specific areas (EQs 2-3-4-5), one to the overall efficiency of the 

Commission’s interventions (EQ 6) and the remaining two to wider issues relating to crosscutting 

issues (EQ 7) and to Coordination, Complementarity and Coherence 

(the "3Cs": EQ 8). 

EQ 1 - Relevance of the Strategy – This Question concerns the appropriateness of the 

Commission’s strategy design to the priorities set by the GoG in its development policy. 

The criteria of effectiveness, sustainability and impact of the Commission’s support to 

Guyana’s economic and social sectors will be considered through the four main focal 

sectors of the Commission’s intervention. These questions are closely related to the 

expected effects of the 8 th EDF NIP and the 9 th EDF CSP as identified in the intervention 

logic. 

EQ 2 – Effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the support to economic and 

social infrastructure for the protection of coastal belt population – This EQ assesses 

how the Commission’s activities have contributed to supporting the rehabilitation of sea 

defences as a key sector of the Commission’s strategy and interventions. The other 

infrastructures relating to water and transport are not included since no resources have 

been allocated to their rehabilitation. The rationale or otherwise of this situation is 

addressed through EQ 1. 

Thus sea defences will be regarded as a major sector of Commission support, and special 

attention will be given to the strategy developed for this sector and to institutional aspects 

bearing on investment in, and sustainable management of, sea defence hardware and 

software. Ultimately the extent of attainment of the intended specific impact “Livelihoods 

and dwellings of coastal belt population are protected” will be assessed. 

EQ 3 – Effectiveness, impact and sustainability of the support to the private sector 

for restoration of and increase in production capacity – This EQ assesses how far 

Commission support to SME development has effectively enhanced the competitiveness of 

private sector firms and contributed to sustainable private sector strengthening. Ultimately 

the question analyses the specific impact of these interventions on increasing production 

capacity. 

EQ 4 - Effectiveness, impact and sustainability of interventions for improvement to 

social conditions – This EQ aims at estimating the extent to which (general or sector) 

Budget support contributed to achieving the PRSP objectives, in particular in terms of 

improving social and economic conditions. 

EQ 5 - Effectiveness and sustainability of the support to Civil Society organisations 

Final Report – Volume II - Annexes – September 2008 Annex 6/ page 1



EGEVAL 

for the provision of social benefits to local communities – This EQ assesses the extent 

to which interventions through the micro-projects programme have contributed to 

empowering Civil Society organisations and to improving the socio-economic conditions 

of local communities. 

EQ 6 - Efficiency of the overall Commission Country Strategy – This EQ assesses 

the extent to which the cooperation instruments and the financial, human and technical 

resources and processes have been used to achieve the required objectives in a timely and 

cost-effective manner. The question also addresses the role and commitment of the NAO 

Task Force in this respect. Institutional aspects of Strategy implementation will be 

considered in the context of the organisational structures of the GoG, the Commission and 

the project stakeholders. Issues related to institutional development and strengthening of 

capacity to overcome the brain drain problem will also be considered in this section. 

EQ 7 - Cross-cutting issues – This EQ seeks to address how far cross-cutting issues 

related to good governance and human rights, gender, protection of the environment, 

institutional development, capacity building and HIV/AIDS have been taken into account 

in the design and implementation of the programmes. 

EQ 8 – Coordination, Complementarity and Coherence – This EQ aims at 

appraising the extent to which the design and implementation of the Commission Strategy 

in Guyana has been fostered by appropriate application of the "3Cs" principles. Coherence 

applies both between Commission policies (in particular trade and CAP) and also in 

relation to the programmable (NIP, RIP) vis-à-vis non-programmable instruments (Sysmin, 

SAF, Budget Lines). Coordination between the Commission, the GoG and the donor 

community in designing and implementing its Country Strategy is also considered in the 

context of enhancing complementarity between the various programmes. In particular, 

coordination mechanisms with the IMF, IDB and WB will be considered. 

Given the diversity and financial weight of other instruments in the Commission’s 

interventions in Guyana, after deeper investigation the evaluation team slightly revised the 

intervention logic presented in the Inception Report so as to incorporate instruments 

unrelated to the planned strategy but designed to set the Commission intervention within 

the budget of the indicative programme. These other instruments have been taken into 

consideration in EQ 8 for their coherence with the identified strategy, and in EQ 6 to 

assess their contribution to the overall efficiency of programme implementation. 

Furthermore, interventions funded through these ‘non-programmable’ instruments can 

also be considered under EQs (3 and 5) concerned with the intervention sectors which 

they are specifically supporting, respectively the private sector and the general or sectoral 

budget. 

Where in-depth investigation of the documentation was found to necessitate unavoidable 

revision of the indicators, their replacement or adaptation is mentioned in the following 

section. 




EGEVAL 

Alignment of EQ with Evaluation Criteria 

Relevance 

Effectiveness 

Impact 

Sustainability 

Efficiency 

Cross-cutting 

Issues 

3Cs 

EQ 1 

Relevance 

EQ 2 

Protection of coastal belt population 

EQ 3 

Production capacity 

EQ 4 

Social conditions 

EQ 5 

Social benefits to local communities 

EQ 6 

Efficiency of implementation 

EQ 7 

Cross Cutting Issues 

EQ 8 

Coordination, Complementarity and 

Coherence with other donors 

The Evaluation Questions in brief 

EQ1: 

EQ2: 

EQ3: 

EQ4: 

EQ5: 

EQ6: 

EQ7: 

EQ8: 

To what extent is the Commission Country Strategy in Guyana consistent with the 

priorities set by the GoG in its development policy? 

To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to the rehabilitation of 

Guyana’s sea defences and ultimately to sustainably protecting the livelihoods and 

dwellings of the coastal belt population? 

To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to private sector strengthening 

and ultimately to sustainably restoring and increasing Guyana’s production capacity? 

To what extent has Commission budget support contributed to the improvement of social 

conditions? 

To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to empowering Civil Society 

Organisations and ultimately to improving the socio-economic conditions of local 

communities? 

To what extent have the financial, human and technical resources been used to reach 

objectives in a timely and cost-effective manner and was the regulatory and administrative 

framework appropriate for doing this? To what extent has the support to the NAO Task 

Force contributed to reaching objectives in a timely and cost-effective manner? 

To what extent were cross-cutting issues related to good governance and human rights, 

gender, environment, institutional development, capacity-building and HIV/AIDS taken 

into account in the design and implementation of the programmes? 

To what extent has the Commission support to Guyana been fostered by the consideration 

of the “3Cs” principles? 




EGEVAL 

EQ1 : Relevance 

To what extent is the Commission support to Guyana consistent with the priorities set by 

the GoG in its development policy? 

Justification and coverage of the question: This question firstly aims at understanding if and how the 

overall and specific objectives and the design of the Commission co-operation with Guyana reflect the 

priorities of the partner country and adequately addresses the constraints of the country in order for it to 

achieve its national objectives. It also examines to what extent the evolution from the 8 th EDF NIP to the 9 th 

EDF CSP is consistent with the evolution of the National Strategy from the medium term Policy Framework 

Papers geared towards macroeconomic stabilisation, adjustment and consolidation during the first period 

under observation, to the focus on poverty reduction in the PRSP during the second period. 

Utility: This question on relevance will assess the extent to which the right strategic choices were made at 

Commission level regarding the priorities expressed in the National Strategy. 

Criterion: Relevance. 

Feasibility: The question will be answered mostly on the basis of written material. The Question is 

challenging as it encompasses different elements of Commission support, NIP, RIP, compensation schemes 

(esp. Sysmin) and specific Budget Lines, over a ten-year period (with important recent changes in the design 

and implementation modalities of some of these instruments). 

Judgment criteria 

• JC 1.1 - The 

Commission’s Strategy 

objectives are coherent 

with those of the GoG’s 

medium term policy 

strategies 

• JC 1.2 – The 

Commission’s 

intervention logic, 

programming and choice 

of beneficiaries are 

coherent with the GoG 

priorities in its 

development strategy 

Sources of information: 

• 8 th EDF NIP 

• 9 th EDF CSP 

• Policy Framework Papers (1996-1998; 1998-2002) 

• National Development Strategy (NDS) 

• PRSP (2002-2005) 

• Sectoral policy documents 

• Diagnostic studies 

Indicators 

• I 1.1.1 – Degree of alignment of the Commission objectives 

(NIP/CSP) to Guyana’s development policy objectives as expressed in 

its NDS, the 1996-1998 Policy Framework Paper and the 2002 PRSP 

at general level 

• I 1.1.2 – Degree of alignment of the Commission objectives 

(NIP/CSP) and Guyana’s sector policy objectives as expressed in 

sector policy documents (infrastructure, health, housing, private 

sector). 

• I 1.2.1 – Degree of alignment of the Commission priorities (NIP/CSP 

and non-programmable tools) and Guyana’s development strategy 

priorities as expressed in sector policy documents (infrastructure, 

health, housing, private sector) 

• I.1.2.2 – Explicit reference in the Commission strategic documents 

(NIP/CSP and non-programmable tools) to their adherence to the 

prioritised public expenditure identified in the medium term 

expenditure framework (MTEF) and to the prioritised donor support 

identified as required in the medium term. 

• I.1.2.3 – Explicit reference in the Commission strategic documents 

(NIP/CSP and non-programmable tools) to their adherence to 

prioritised investment programming 

• I 1.2.4 – Explicit reference in the Commission strategic documents 

(NIP/CSP and non-programmable tools) to their adherence to target 

the beneficiaries identified as the target population in Guyana’s 

development strategy. 




EGEVAL 

EQ2 : Protection of coastal belt population 

To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to the rehabilitation of 

Guyana’s sea defences and ultimately to sustainably protecting the livelihoods and 

dwellings of the coastal belt population? 

Justification and coverage of the question: Support to sea defences has been a major feature of the 

Commission’s cooperation programmes with Guyana since the 4 th EDF and most resources have been 

directed towards this in the 8 th and 9 th EDFs. The NIP and CSP justify the large investments in sea defence 

structures by the fact that the coastal area (much of which is situated below sea level) houses the majority of 

Guyana’s population and sustains much economic activity, in particular rice and sugar cane culture. The main 

question pertaining to this highly capital-intensive support relates to the sustainability of the rehabilitated 

infrastructures, with particular regard to institutional and financial aspects. 

Utility: The question focuses on the effectiveness of the support to sea defence infrastructure and the 

sustainability and impact of these infrastructures in the longer term, and also in terms of institutional 

improvements. 

Criteria: effectiveness, impact, sustainability. 

Feasibility: Existing documentation will facilitate adequate coverage of the question relating to sea defences, 

including aspects of impact and measures adopted to ensure sustainability. This information will be 

complemented by interviews. 


• JC 2.1 – Commission 

interventions were in line 

with the CSP/NIP strategy 


intervention has contributed 

to the rehabilitation of 

Guyana’s sea defences 


intervention has contributed 

to the setting up of a 

sustainable sea defence 

management 

and 

maintenance system 


support to infrastructure has 

enabled the protection of 

livelihoods and dwellings of 

the coastal belt population 

Indicators 

• I 2.1.1 – Degree of alignment of the programme’s IL with the IL of 

the NIP/CSP 

• I 2.1.2 – Discrepancies between the programmes and the strategy 

are explicitly justified 

• I 2.1.3 – ‘Impact on livelihoods’ of sea defence programmes has 

been well formulated and placed in the IL 

• I 2.2.1 – Km of sea defences in critical condition rehabilitated by 

the Commission interventions as a share of the total no. of km 

rehabilitated during the period 

• I 2.2.2 – Km of prioritised tranches of sea defences in critical 

condition rehabilitated by the Commission interventions as a share 

of the total no. of km of prioritised tranches rehabilitated during the 

period 

• I 2.2.3 – The sea defence infrastructure has been constructed in 

accordance to the approved design and technical specifications 

• I 2.3.1 – The capacity to monitor water levels in view of flood risks 

and conditions at the seafront by local stakeholders. 

• I 2.3.2 – Number of contingency plans for higher tide levels 

• I 2.3.3 – Sea defence management systems and related staff capacity 

have been established and are effective 

• I 2.3.4 – Sea defence routine maintenance and repair staff capacity 

has been established and is effective 

• I 2.3.5 – National budget provision for maintenance and operation 

of the sea defence systems 

• I 2.3.6 – Evidence of beneficiary - in particular household - 

involvement in management and maintenance of the established 

structures. 

• I 2.4.1 – Evidence that the pursuit of maximum impact on the 

livelihoods and dwellings of the coastal belt population has been a 

selection criteria in identifying the infrastructures rehabilitated 

(studies, public consultations) 

• I 2.4.2 – Acreage under cultivation in coastal areas protected 

• I 2.4.3 – Number of dwellings in coastal areas protected 

• I 2.4.4 - Number of very small enterprises or estimated size of 




EGEVAL 

informal productive activities in coastal areas protected 

• I 2.4.5 - Evidence that the value of property and land in the coastal 

belt has increased due to greater flood control 


• NIP/CSP 

• GoG sectoral strategies 

• Programme documents: FA 

• Feasibility studies, project documents (financing proposals), project monitoring and completion reports, 

project evaluation reports. 

• Transport sector strategy 

• Transport maintenance plan 

• National Sector Policy on sea defences 

• Water supply and sanitation strategy 

• Water tariff studies 

• National budget allocations for infrastructure sector (operating and investment expenditure) 1995-2005 

• National Sector Policy on sea defences 

• Project completion reports and project evaluation reports 

• Living conditions surveys 

• Agricultural surveys 

• Housing surveys 

• Beneficiary surveys 

• Interviews with Commission, NAO Task Force, GoG, national institutions and companies, private 

organisations and entrepreneurs, representatives of the civil society, technical assistance and PMUs 




EGEVAL 

EQ3: Production capacity 

To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to private sector strengthening 

and ultimately to sustainably restoring and increasing Guyana’s production capacity? 

Justification and coverage of the question: Under the 8 th EDF, in line with the GoG’s priority of 

facilitating private-sector-led growth, the Commission proposed support for SME development, in particular 

enhancement of SMEs’ ability to face competition in internal and external markets. Implementation focused 

on establishment of business advisory services and financial services (funded from Sysmin resources in the 

Linden area) and on the setting up and running of a training agency. The evaluation will assess to what extent 

these initiatives contributed to strengthening the private sector, taking account of the best practices identified 

in PSD Evaluation, what impact they might have had on restoring and increasing Guyana’s productive 

capacity, and to what extent the effects achieved (are likely to) last after the intervention 1 . 

Utility: The question will seek to assess the effectiveness of the support provided, its impact in the context of 

the objective pursued and the actual or likely sustainability of the effects achieved. 

Criteria: Effectiveness, impact and sustainability. 

Feasibility: The assessment will to a large extent depend on the availability of indicators that allow 

measurement of improvements in terms of private sector development. 



interventions were in line 

with the CSP/NIP strategy 

• JC 3.2 – Interventions in 

Guyana are in line with the 

best practices identified in 

PSD Evaluation 


support to private sector 

development in Business 

Development Services (BDS) 

has been conducive to 

enhanced SME activity 



development in financial 

services has been conducive 

to increased SME activity 



development in training has 

been conducive to increased 

SME competitiveness 

Indicators 

• I 3.1.1 – Degree of alignment of the programmes IL with the IL of 

the NIP/CSP 

• I 3.1.2 – Discrepancies between the programmes and the strategy 

are explicitly justified 

• I 3.1.3 - Degree of alignment of Commission interventions with the 

NDS and the National Competitiveness Strategy for Guyana 

• I 3.2.1 – Evidence that a methodological procedure has been 

adopted to select the areas of intervention to support PSD in 

Guyana 

• I 3.2.2 – Evidence that the key constraints conditioning success in 

the areas of intervention have been addressed 

• I 3.2.3 – Evidence that coherence & complementarities between 

areas of intervention has been maximized 

• I 3.3.1 – Market for business services increased 

• I 3.3.2 – Number of local market SME beneficiaries 

• I.3.3.3 – Evidence of encouragement of know-how and 

technologies & support to cooperation between industry and 

scientific research 

• I 3.3.4 – Evidence of the impact of BDS on SME competitiveness 

• I 3.4.1 – Number of beneficiary SME 

• I 3.4.2 – Volume of financing 

• I 3.4.3 – Quality of the financing (recovery rate) 

• I 3.4.4 – Economic activities targeted by LEAF 

• I 3.4.5 – Evidence of the impact of financial services on SME 

competitiveness 

• I 3.5.1 – Number of beneficiary enterprises 

• I 3.5.2 – Number of trained people 

• I3.5.3 – Evidence of the impact of training on SME 


1 The Desk and Field Phases and the review of the findings of the PSD evaluation led the team to revise some of the 

JC and I of EQ 3. The new JC and I will allow the team to better assess the enhancement of private sector 

competitiveness through EC interventions as they focus on three areas of interventions evaluated in the PSD 

evaluation: business development services, financial services, and training. 




EGEVAL 

• JC 3.6 – Results achieved by 

Commission support are 

maintained after the end of 

its direct support 



strengthening has 

contributed to restoring and 

increasing Guyana’s 

productive capacity 

• I 3.6.1 – Explicit reference in the FA to measures to ensure 

sustainability 

• I 3.6.2 – Evidence that the benefits continue to be used after the 

end of the intervention 

• I 3.7.1 – Evidence of increased production capacity and private 

sector activity: 

- increased number of new firms, including SMEs 

- higher employment levels 

- higher production levels 

- increased volume and value of non-traditional exports 

• I 3.7.2 - Evidence of increased private sector investments relative to 

public investments 

• I 3.7.3 – Evidence of increased private capital inflows (foreign 

direct investment and remittances) 

• I 3.7.4 – Number of bankruptcy filings and number of new SMEs 

per year. 

• I 3.7.5 - Existence of new SME-friendly regulations and specific 

measures to enhance private sector investments in the productive 

sectors 

• I.3.7.6 – Testimonies of Guyanese officials on the impacts of 

Commission support on Guyana’s productive capacity 


• NIP/CSP 

• GoG sectoral strategies 

• Programme documents: FA 

• Sector strategy 

• National accounts 

• Balance of payments 

• Surveys and studies of private sector activities 

• Chamber of Commerce and Industry 

• Employment data per sector 

• Emigration data 

• Evaluation of Commission support to Private Sector Development in Third Countries, December 2005 

• Interviews with beneficiary enterprises & Guyanese officials 




EGEVAL 

EQ4: Social conditions 

To what extent has Commission Budget Support contributed to the improvement of public 

finance management and to the improvement of social conditions? 

Justification and coverage of the question: The Commission extended Budget Support to Guyana under 

the 8 th and 9 th EDFs, and whilst implementation modalities evolved from targeted Budget Support to general 

Budget Support, all programmes focused on improving public finance management and securing levels of 

budget expenditure facilitating improvements in Guyana’s social conditions, especially in health and housing. 

The question will assess the extent to which the Commission’s Budget Support has succeeded in improving 

Guyana’s budgeting planning, systems and scope and whether this has been translated into increased and 

sustainable public expenditure levels in the social sectors which have in turn led to improved use of social 

services and improved social conditions. The use of Budget Support is also an important tool for 

Commission-partner dialogue and the evolution of the quality of this dialogue will also be assessed. 

Utility: This question addresses the effectiveness, impact and sustainability of Budget Support in attaining 

the PRSP objectives. 

Criteria: Effectiveness, impact and sustainability. 

Feasibility: The effectiveness criteria can be verified at the hand of existing documentation and data; 

however, the assessment of impact criteria will depend upon availability of appropriate data. The issue of the 

quality of policy dialogue might be difficult to verify for the earlier period because of staff turn-over and 

depends very much on the willingness of interlocutors to provide their views on the subject. 


• JC 4.1 – The use of Budget 

Support has enabled the 

Commission to engage in a 

dialogue with the GoG 

regarding PRSP design and 

implementation. 

Indicators 

• I 4.1.1 – Frequency and quality of meetings between GoG and 

DEC on macro-economic, fiscal and poverty reduction strategy 

issues 

• I 4.1.2 – Evidence of changes in GoG strategy following policy 

dialogue with Commission 

• I 4.1.3 – Participation and role of Commission in donor-wide 

discussions on public finance management issues and PRSP 

• JC 4.2 - The use of BS has 

contributed to improving the 

government’s planning and 

budgetary system including 

its public finance 

management capacity. 

• I.4.2.1 - Budget planning has improved and the budget is more 

realistic 

• I.4.2.2 - The budget is prepared with due regard to government 

policy 

• I.4.2.3 - The predictability of the budget has improved 

• JC 4.3 – BS has contributed 

to establishing sustainable 

levels of public expenditure 

in the social sectors 

• JC 4.4 – The GoG is carrying 

out planned expenditures. 

• I 4.3.1 – Trends in budgeted and realised expenditure in social 

sectors 

• I.4.3.2 – Funding mechanisms are in place for maintenance and 

operation of social infrastructure 

• I 4.4.1 – Evolution of external account balance and budget balance 

as share of GDP 

• I 4.4.2 – Public expenditure outcomes: budget execution in the 

social sectors, in particular pro-poor expenditure 




EGEVAL 

• JC 4.5 – Social conditions 

have improved 


• GoG Budget and budget execution 

• National accounts and financial data 

• Central Bank 

• Social sector reviews 

• PRSP joint donor assessments 

• PRSP annual monitoring reports 

• Minutes of meetings 

• Cost recovery mechanisms in health and education sectors 

• Living conditions surveys 

• IDD and Associates, Evaluation of GBS, May 2006 

• Interviews (Commission, GoG-NAO and donors) 

• I 4.5.1 – Performance of PRSP indicators measuring access to 

health, housing and water such as infant immunisation rates 

(measles and DPT), % of population with access to health services, 

% of population with access to adequate sanitation, house lots 

distributed, land/house titles distributed. 

• I 4.5.2 – Quality of available social services 

• I 4.5.3 – Living conditions 




EGEVAL 

EQ5: Social benefits to local communities 

To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to empowering Civil Society 

organisations and ultimately to improving the socio-economic conditions of local 

communities? 

Justification and coverage of the question: 

The 9 th EDF CSP identifies MPP as one of the three activities to be financed outside the areas of 

concentration. During the period under evaluation, one MPP (9 ACP 1) has been financed and is currently 

under implementation. The financing agreement was signed in May 2004 for an amount of €4m for a 

duration of 5 years. 

The question is closely linked with the intervention logic that stipulates that MPP should first contribute to 

empowering Civil Society and subsequently improve the socio-economic conditions of local communities. 

The question will examine to what extent the programme is likely to yield the expected results and the role it 

has played in providing social benefits to communities. 

Utility: MPP is part of the intervention logic of Commission support to Guyana but as the programme 

started only recently the assessment will focus mostly on the design and the programming. Effectiveness, 

impact and sustainability would only be assessed in respect of their potential. 

Criteria: Effectiveness, impact and sustainability 

Feasibility: Because the implementation of the MPP is so recent, it is assumed that documentation and 

institutional memory are easily accessible. Nevertheless the programme having only started in 2005, only its 

potential effectiveness and impact would probably be assessed as it is possible that only small effects will yet be 

visible. 


• JC 5.1 – Commission intervention was in 

line with the CSP/NIP provision and with 

the GoG policy 

• JC 5.2 – Local communities have better 

access to socio-economic infrastructure 

• JC 5.3 – The capacity for self-help of local 

communities has increased 

• JC 5.4 – Civil Society organisations 

participate more in the development 

process 

Indicators 

• I 5.1.1 – Degree of alignment of the programmes IL 

with the IL of the NIP/CSP 

• I 5.1.2 – Discrepancies between the programmes and 

the strategy are explicitly justified 

• I 5.1.3 - Degree of alignment of the programme with 

the GoG policy 

• I 5.4.1 – Clear reference in the programming 

document to the promotion of socio-economic 

development of local communities 

• I 5.4.2 - New socio-economic services are available in 

the communities supported 

• I 5.3.1 – Evidence that MPP is conceived to be 

undertaken at the request of local communities 

• I 5.3.2 – Clear reference to participation of local 

communities in the programming documents 

• I 5.3.3 – Evidence that MPP is based on needs 

assessment undertaken by local communities 

• I 5.3.4 – Evidence that an adequate level of capacity 

building investment has been foreseen in the 

programme 

• I 5.3.5 – Evidence that local communities benefited 

from capacity-building 

• I 5.4.1 – Evidence of local development process 

weaknesses in policy papers 

• I 5.4.2 – Clear reference to this objective in the 

programming documents 

• I 5.4.3 – Measures to ensure the strengthening of civil 

society are in place 

• I 5.4.4 - Extent to which the MP-Office/Board 

implemented and facilitated MP development and 

cooperation with civil society 




EGEVAL 

• JC 5.5 - Results achieved by Commission 

support are maintained after the end of its 

direct support 

• I 5.5.1 – Explicit reference in the FA to measures to 

ensure sustainability 

• I 5.5.2 – Evidence that the benefits continue to be 

used after the end of the intervention 


• NIP & CSP 

• Project documents (FA, MR, Annual Reports, Internal Monitoring, Evaluation…) 

• Interviews with local communities/organisations supported 

• Interviews with beneficiaries (population) 

• Evaluation of European Commission support to Micro-Project Programmes under the European 

Development Fund in ACP countries, August 2006 




EGEVAL 

EQ6: Efficiency of implementation 

To what extent have the financial, human and technical resources been used to reach 

objectives in a timely and cost-effective manner and was the regulatory and administrative 

framework appropriate for doing this? To what extent has the support to the NAO Task 

Force contributed to reaching objectives in a timely and cost-effective manner? 

Justification and coverage of the question: The question aims at assessing to what extent deadlines were 

respected and resources used in an optimal manner when implementing the interventions. It also aims at 

examining whether the regulatory and administrative framework has been conducive to timely and costeffective 

programme implementation. Specific attention will be dedicated to the support to the NAO, as 

specific interventions were planned in this respect and the planned activities also aimed at increasing 

efficiency. 

Utility: The present question is complementary to the questions on effectiveness. Indeed, it is important not 

only to determine to what extent objectives have been reached, but also to examine whether or not objectives 

were reached at a reasonable cost and within reasonable deadlines. The question is also useful for determining 

the role the support for the NAO has played in this respect. 

Criterion: Efficiency 

Feasibility: Measuring cost-effectiveness is challenging in the absence of precise data. There might be some 

difficulties in collecting sufficient reliable data especially for the period 1996-2002. Where quantitative data 

are lacking, assessments will be based on qualitative approaches based on evaluations, monitoring reports or 

interviews. 


• JC 6.1 – The institutional 

set-up foresees a clear 

distribution of roles at each 

level of project 

implementation, 

design to closure 

from 

• JC 6.2 – The financial 

instruments used for 

implementation contribute 

to reaching objectives in a 

timely manner 

• JC 6.3 – The institutional 

support to Commission 

projects is improved 

through the NAO Task 

Force 

• JC 6.4 – Programme and 

projects are implemented in 

a timely manner and at 

planned cost 

Indicators 

• I 6.1.1 – Evidence of organizational structure and management 

culture through well-defined procedures and job roles in particular at 

NAO Task Force level, at DEC level and at project level 

• I 6.1.2 – Degree of appropriateness of the organizational structure (in 

particular at NAO, DEC and project level) to (i) the country’s 

capacity and constraints, (ii) to the Commission’s available resources 

and (iii) the scope and size of the programmes and projects 

• I 6.1.3 – Evidence of emphasis on conformity in the whole 

organization in particular at NAO, DEC and project level 

• I 6.1.4 – Emphasis on timely and cost-effective management in 

particular at NAO and DEC levels. 

• I 6.1.5 – Existence of co-ordination mechanisms among 

implementation actors (consultations, coordination working groups) 

• I 6.2.1 – Number and amount of global commitments and financing 

agreements by sector 

• I 6.2.2 – Types of financing agreements: number and amounts of 

contracts, grants, programme estimates by direct labour operations or 

externalised direct labour operations 

• I 6.2.3 – Types of procedures laid down in the financing agreements 

(i.e. according to financing thresholds) 

• I 6.2.4 – Delays and rates of disbursements by financing agreement 

• I 6.3.1 – List of new management tools in place in the NAO task 

force (retro-planning, support to projects…) 

• I 6.3.2 – Perception of NAO Task Force, Commission task managers 

and programme managers on the effects of the support to the NAO 

and on the overall efficiency of interventions, in terms of time 

management and cost-effectiveness. 

• I 6.4.1 - Average MR efficiency rate 

• I 6.4.2 – Project evaluation conclusions on efficiency 

• I.6.4.3 – Identification of implementation difficulties that are not due 

to deficiencies in financial, human and technical resources or to the 

regulatory and administrative set-up 




EGEVAL 


• GoG financial, technical and administrative procedures 

• EDF procedures 

• Monitoring Reports 

• Mid-term, final evaluation reports 

• CRIS database 

• National counterparts 

• Documents from and interviews with the NAO 

• Documents from and interviews with the DCE representatives 

• Interviews with Commission staff (HQ, DEC), NAO Task Force, ministries, projects team leaders 

• Interviews with: 

- NAO task force 

- Commission task managers 

- Commission financial and contract unit of the DEC 

- Programme staff 




EGEVAL 

EQ7: Cross-Cutting Issues 

To what extent were cross-cutting issues (CCIs) relating to good governance and human 

rights, gender, environment, institutional development, capacity building and HIV/AIDS 

taken into account for the design and implementation of the programmes? 

Justification and coverage of the question: The question will cover five issues that the Commission has 

committed to take systematically into account in its different areas of cooperation. Good governance entails, 

according to the Cotonou agreement (art 9.3), “clear decision-making procedures at the level of public authorities, 

transparent and accountable institutions, the primacy of law in the management and distribution of resources and capacity 

building for elaborating and implementing measures aiming in particular at prevention and combating corruption”. Respect for 

human rights is a clear condition of good governance. Gender issues will be considered “as the elimination of 

inequalities and the promotion of equality between men and women” (Treaty establishing the EC (Part 1 – Art. 3.2). 

Environment issues are related to sustainable development. Institutional development and capacity-building 

is clearly recognised as a CCI in the Cotonou Agreement. HIV/AIDS is not a classical CCI but in recent 

years mainstreaming of this issue has been taken into account in countries with high prevalence of 

HIV/AIDS. (Guyana HIV/AIDS prevalence is relatively high-medium (Population 17-49: 2.4%- 2005 

UNDP). 

Utility: This question aims to verify the application of CCI in Commission interventions in Guyana. The 

utility of this question goes further than the Guyanese context given the high potential of the question to 

draw out transferable lessons regarding the manner in which CCI have been taken into account during 

implementation. 

Criteria: Cross-cutting issues 

Feasibility: JC 7.1 depends on the availability of programme documentation. As previously mentioned, the 

1996-2002 documentation might be not available. JC 7.2 will use information from the ROM obtained 

through a specific request to the ROM contractors, as this information appears to be not readily available in 

the Commission. 


• JC 7.1 – CCI have been taken into account in the 

CSP and the NIP and in the design of 

programmes (non-specific interventions) 

Indicators 

• I 7.1.1 – Extent to which the CSP and the NIP 

explicitly promote CCI 

• I 7.1.2 – Number of projects per CCI that 

explicitly identify measures on CCI at the 

project design stage 

• I 7.1.3 – Number and list of specific 

interventions planned by CCI 

• JC 7.2 – Measures identified during design for 

inclusion of CCI in non-specific interventions are 

in place 

• JC 7.3 – Cross-cutting issues have also been 

supported by specific interventions 

• JC 7.4 – Commission interventions have 

contributed to advancement of the CCIs in the 

country 

• I 7.2.1 – Percentage of measures in place as 

planned 

• I 7.2.2 – Perception of direct beneficiaries of 

the CCI 

• I 7.3.1 – Number of specific interventions on 

CCIs out of all the interventions of the period 

• I 7.4.1 – Evolution of respect for human rights 

• I 7.4.2 – Corruption rates 

• I 7.4.3 – Evolution of gender-friendly policies 

and laws 

• I 7.4.4 – Evolution of gender-sensitive 

indicators (education, health, employment) 

• I 7.4.5 – Evolution of environment-friendly 

policies and laws 

• I 7.4.6 – Evolution of percentage of technical 

assistants 

• I 7.4.7 – Evolution of HIV/AIDS prevalence 

rates 

• I 7.4.8 - Testimonies of Guyanese officials on 




EGEVAL 


• Treaty establishing the EC (Title XX, art 177, Part 1 art. 3.2) 

• Lomé IV Convention (art.4) 

• European Consensus on Development (3.3 - 101) 

• Programme documents (FA, MR, Annual Reports, Monitoring reports) 

• Interviews with project managers and staff 

• Interviews with Guyanese officials 

the linkage of the evolution of the CCI in the 

country with Commission interventions 




EGEVAL 

EQ8: Coordination, Complementarity and Coherence with other donors 

To what extent has Commission support to Guyana been fostered by consideration of the 

3Cs? 

Justification and coverage of the question: 

This question seeks to verify how far the “3Cs” – Coordination, Complementarity and Coherence - have 

been taken into account and what have been the effects of their application or non-application. 

On the question of coherence, this question seeks to investigate to what extent the individual elements of 

the policy mix implemented in Guyana have been coherent and mutually reinforcing in terms of attaining the 

stated objectives of the Commission’s support to Guyana and to what extent they have affected this Strategy. 

This question will investigate the trade agreements (sugar, rice, rum), the CAP policies, the programmable 

national and regional financial instruments and the non-programmable financial instruments (Sysmin, SAF 

and Budget Lines). 

As regards coordination and complementarity, this question seeks to determine whether the Commission 

has used coordination mechanisms (government-donor, government-Commission and Commission-other 

donors) in Guyana to develop a coordinated approach to its interventions at country and sector levels and 

whether this has led to complementarity of actions undertaken. 

The question covers both programming and implementation (including alignment of procedures, monitoring 

and evaluation of the Commission interventions). 

Utility: The answer to this question will provide insights into the extent to which coherence between 

Commission policies, and coordination and complementarity with other multi-donor support, have 

contributed to improving the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the Commission’s support. 

Criteria: Coordination, Complementarity, Coherence 

Feasibility: The question is challenging. First it encompasses different elements of the Commission policy 

mix, including foremost the CAP, trade agreements (sugar, rice, rum), compensation schemes (esp. Sysmin) 

and specific Budget Lines, over a ten-year period (with important recent changes in the design and 

implementation modalities of some of these instruments). Therefore it is essential to specify clearly the scope 

of the question as expressed in the JC and I below. Second, obtaining answers to questions related to 

coordination during the design phase relies partly on institutional memory which might be jeopardised by 

unavailability of written documentation and high turnover of staff in the earlier period (1996-2000). 

Implementation questions will be answered on the basis of written materials (meeting notes, DEC files, MR) 

and on interviews. 


• JC 8.1 – The Commission 

has designed its NIP/CSP 

taking full account of other 

Commission policies and 

trade 

potentially 

Guyana 

agreements 

affecting 

• JC 8.2 - The Commission 

has designed its NIP/CSP 

taking full account of the 

resources potentially 

available under nonprogrammable 

support 

(namely Sysmin and 

Budget Lines) and the RIP 

Indicators 

• I 8.1.1 – Extent to which the design takes into account the results of 

specific analyses of resources available to Guyana under the trade 

agreements (sugar, rice, rum) and of their potential uses 

• I 8.1.2 – Integration of these potential resources in the GoG balance 

of payments projections and financing gap projections 

• I 8.2.1 – Extent to which the design takes into account the results of 

specific analyses of resources available to Guyana under Sysmin, 

specific Budget Lines and the RIP, and their potential use. 

• I 8.2.2 – Integration of potential resources available under the 

compensation schemes and under Commission interventions in the 

GoG’s balance of payments projections and financing gap 

projections. 

• I 8.2.3 – Existence of a dialogue within the different Commission 

Services on the expected impact of the various elements of the policy 

mix on implementation of activities and achievement of NIP/CSP 

objectives. 




EGEVAL 

• JC 8.3 – Activities 

programmed under the 

CSP/NIP have been 

redesigned to remain 

coherent with actions 

implemented under other 

Commission policies and 

instruments. 

• JC 8.4 – The Commission 

has built its intervention 

strategy in close 

coordination with the 

GoG and other donors 


activities are implemented 

in full coordination with 

GoG and other donors on 

interventions in the same 

area 

• I 8.3.1 – Existence of a dialogue within the different Commission 

Services on the impact of the various elements of the policy mix on 

implementation of activities and achievement of NIP/CSP objectives 

• I 8.3.2 – Evidence of changes in planned activities and/or scope of 

financial intervention under the NIP/CSP following unforeseen 

changes in resources or implementation modalities linked to other 

Commission policies and instruments 

• I 8.4.1 – Modalities and quality of Commission-GoG dialogue 

through the NAO’s office 

• I 8.4.2 – Evidence of common understanding of Guyana’s needs 

(general and sector) by the Commission and other donors, and 

particularly of participation in common needs assessment studies 

• I 8.4.3 – DEC participation and role in government/multi-donor 

consultation processes (general and sector) and in coordination 

committees or working groups (government/donor and 

donor/donor) at general (macro or PRSP) and sector levels dealing 

with programming of donor interventions 

• I 8.4.4 – NIP/CSP explicitly refers to other donor strategies 

• I 8.5.1 – Evidence of synergies or conflicts between activities 

implemented by the Commission and those implemented by other 

donors and GoG 

• I 8.5.2 – Modalities of coordination mechanisms between the 

Commission, GoG and other donors at implementation level 

(meetings, coordination groups, task forces…) 


• Sector strategies: agriculture, mining 

• Diagnostic studies of the agricultural sector, esp. sugar, rice and rum production 

• Study of projections of resources stemming from trade agreements during the period 1995-2005 

• Diagnostic study of the mining sector and projections of Sysmin resources and their use 

• Balance of payment projections 1995-2005 

• CSP mid-term reviews and addendum to CSP/NIP 

• PRSP and MTEF (or budget proposals), sector strategies 

• Needs assessments and diagnostic studies 

• Programming documents of the Commission (NIP/CSP) and other donors 

• Minutes of meetings of working groups 

• Programme documents (FA, MR, Annual Reports…) 

• Interviews with representatives of: 

- DG DEV 

- Ministries of Finance - Relations with donors 

- NAO task force 

- Sectoral ministries: Finances, Public Works, Housing and Water Supply… 

- Other donors (IDB, WB, UK, Canada, USA) 




EGEVAL 

Annex 7 – Information matrix 

P Nber Source 

- - EQ1 To what extent is the Commission support to Guyana consistent with the priorities set by the 

GoG in its development policy? 

- - JC 1.1 The Commission’s strategy objectives are coherent with those of the GoGs medium term policy 

strategies 

- - I 1.1.1 Degree of alignment of the Commission objectives (NIP/CSP) to Guyana’s development policy 

objectives as expressed in its NDS, the 1996-1998 Policy Framework Paper and the 2002 PRSP at 

general level 

I 1.1.1 

1 - The Guyana Development strategy 

The Guyana Development strategy is designed through five main documents: (i) the National 

Development Strategy (NDS), (ii) the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP), (iii) the National 

Competitiveness Strategy (NCS) and (iv) the Guyana Action Plan (GAP) for the sugar sector and the (v) 

Public sector Investment Programme (PSIP). The common rationale of these documents in defining the 

Guyana Development strategy aiming at the Poverty alleviation in the long-term is to focus on two main 

orientations: economic growth on one hand, enhancement of social services on the other hand. 

The economic development objectives are both targeted the macroeconomic level through incentive 

policies including macroeconomic policy, competition, taxes, and trade policies and the microeconomic 

level in fostering the private sector to reach higher productivity, to expand the traditional economic 

sectors and to diversify activities to non traditional sectors. Macro-economic support and private sector 

development are the two main pillars of the Guyana economic strategy. 

The social development objectives are the second main orientation of the global development of 

Guyana. These objectives encompass the governance of the country in ensuring that all segments of 

society feel that they have an equal stake in the political process. Re-examination of the educational system 

and development of the country’s human resources are emphasized as conditions of the economic 

development. The PRSP highlights the need to sustain economic expansion within the context of 

deepening participatory democracy and access to social services including health, water and housing, 

Final Report – Volume II - Annexes – September 2008 Annex 7/page 1



EGEVAL 

strengthening and where necessary expansion of social safety nets. The use of resources supporting the 

PRSP objectives is ranging from €255m in 2000 to €340m in 2010. The NCS includes policy measures 

with respect to education and training, business development services, finance investment and promotion. 

The GAP for the sugar sector aims at providing infrastructural and human resources development support 

to achieve the regeneration programmes planned in the sugarcane and non-traditional agriculture subsectors 

(projects funded up to €23m). 

2 - The Commission co-operation strategy 

The overall objective of the 8 th EDF (1995-2000) was to improve Guyana's production capacity so as to 

generate income in a sustainable way and to improve its competitiveness on external markets. The purpose 

was to foster Guyana's gradual integration in the regional and world economy. EC funded actions were 

concentrated on two focal sectors: economic and social infrastructure and private sector development. 

These were the same sectors of concentration as those of the 6th and 7th EDFs. 

The overall objective of the 9 th EDF (2002 – 2007) is the reduction of poverty and the promotion of 

sustainable development. The two focal sectors are infrastructure (i.e. sea defences and coastal 

management) and macroeconomic support. Outside these areas of concentration assistance was 

committed to a transport sector study; strengthening the NAO office; a Technical Cooperation Facility 

and a micro-projects programme. In addition the EC supported the holding of General and Regional 

elections in 2006. 

Eventually over the ten year period 1997-2007 of the current evaluation, the Commission’s support to 

Guyana trough bilateral agreement s was focused on five sectors for a total budget €71m. 

1997-2002 2003-2007 

STRATEGY 

Ū (million) 

Ū (million) 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 

1 INFRASTRUCTURES 

SEA DEFENCES 

21 19 

TRANSPORT 8 

1 

HOUSING 

2 PRIVATE SECTOR 

3 

3 BUDGETARY support 

14,9 

4 CIVIL SOCIETY support 

3 

5 PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT 1 




EGEVAL 

1 – Rehabilitation of Social and Economic infrastructure: € 49 million (69%) 

Sea defences is the main programme of the Commission support; the initial budget allocation defined in 

the strategy is €40m, 56% of the total budget. The project objective is, in the long-term, the improvement 

of the security of the coastal belt against the dangers of sea incursion and flooding. Two key points are to 

be considered for the funds mobilisation. (i) The financial support of this program is highly demanding: as 

average one kilometre of sea defences costs approximately €2,8m. Thus 5 km of sea defences 

rehabilitation are planned in the 8 ACP GUA 5 programme under the 8 th EDF, compared to the 160 km 

of the whole infrastructure and the 40 km recognised to be repaired. (ii) The results of this financial 

support are depending on the management capacity of the public institutions involved in the sea defences 

investment and maintenance. 

Regarding also the social and economic infrastructure, water supply and transportation programmes and 

projects were planned in the second instalment of the NIP with a budget of € 9 million. 

2 – Private sector and business development: € 3 million (4%) 

The Commission strategy aimed at two objectives: (i) strengthen competitiveness of private enterprises; (ii) 

increase economic growth through development of SMEs and job creation. 

3 – Budgetary support: € 15 million (21%) 

Poverty Reduction Budgetary support is the second focal sector under the 9 th ED Commission-CSP with 

an original budget of €14,9m. This PRBS support was provided as non-targeted budgetary support which 

in the future could form the basic support mechanism in the social sectors provided Guyana’s continued 

eligibility to this aid instrument. The objective is twofold: on the one hand, it is well embedded in the 

Poverty Reduction Strategy of Guyana; on the other hand, the front loaded fixed tranches have helped the 

Government in covering the budget deficit, decreasing need for external lending and thus facilitating the 

GoG to release budgetary means for overall objectives of the development of the country. 

4 – Support to civil society organisations: € 3 million (4%) 

The CSP objective refers to the social benefits provided to communities with the result to increase 

empowerment of civil society organisation to carry out programmes that reduce poverty. 

5 – Programme management: support to the NAO office: € 1 million (1,4 %) 

The Institutional strengthening of the NAO’s office, initially funded through SASP IV counterpart funds 

from the 8 th EDF, was put in place to set up a comprehensive task force team to help the NAO handle his 




EGEVAL 

increased responsibilities with emphasis on institutional building and local ownership of projects. The 

view is to contribute to transparency and improvement of the Commission programme design and 

implementation. The allocated budget for 5 years is € 1 million. 

Guyana’s development strategy 

Economic development 

Commission’s strategy 


€ million % 

> Macro-economic support > Budgetary support 15 

> Micro-economic support > Private sector support 3 

Social development 

Economic and social 

infrastrucures 

> Sea Defences 40 

> Water & transport 9 


> Civil society org. 3 

> EC programme impl. 1 

71 

25% 

69% 

6% 

3 - Synthesis: alignment of the Commission objectives (NIP/CSP) to Guyana’s development 

policy objectives 

The Commission support to Guyana, as designed in the NIP 8 th EDF and the CSP 9 th EDF meets the 

Guyana’s development policy objectives as expressed in the NDS (2000), PRSP (2002), NCS (2006) and 

GAP (2006) to the following extent: : 


The relevance of the Commission’s strategy with the GoG policy development strategy is established 

through the budgetary support (macro-economic support of the GoG policy) and the Private sector 

support (micro-economic support of the GoG policy) at the extent of 25% of the Commission’s support. 




EGEVAL 

I 1.1.2 

I 1.1.2 


As far as Sea defences and Transport are infrastructures conducive to social development, 69 % of the 

Commission’s strategy budget is concerned. 

Degree of alignment of the Commission objectives (NIP/CSP) and Guyana’s sector policy 

objectives as expressed in sector policy documents (infrastructure, health, housing, private 

sector) 

Coherence between Commission objectives and Guyana’s sector policy objectives: 

The GoG objectives are outlined in the NDS through the listing of 28 intervention sectors. 

Two main objectives of the Guyana’s sector policy are met by the Commission intervention objectives: 

a. The objective n° 2: macro-economic support. First budget of the Commission intervention : 

€42,5m (43 % of the total committed budget); 

b. The objective n° 5: eradication of poverty entailing improvement of productivity and 

enhancement of social services. Three sectors of Commission intervention cover this 

objective and totalise €27,2m (28% of the total Commission budget); 

Common objectives without significant Commission funding concern: Good governance, Environment, Transport 

and Development Programme implementation. 6 other GoG objectives are not funded: 

JC 1.2 

I 1.2.1 

I 1.2.1 

The Commission’s intervention logic, programming and choice of beneficiaries are coherent with 

the GoG priorities in its development strategy 

Degree of alignment of the Commission priorities (NIP/CSP and non-programmable tools) and 

Guyana’s development strategy priorities as expressed in sector policy documents (infrastructure, 

health, housing, private sector) 

Coherence between Commission interventions and Guyana’s sector policy priorities: 

1 The GoG’s development strategy priorities 

The Guyana’s National Development Strategy 2001-2010 defines the following priorities: 

1. Sound macroeconomic policies and economic management, coupled with creation of incentives 

for private sector development; 

2. Improvements in transport infrastructure; 




EGEVAL 

3. Enhancing the role of ICT in the modernization of Guyana:; 

4. Strengthening social services through which poverty can be eradicated and productivity improved, 

to be achieved through education, health and low-income housing programmes; 

5. Reform of public sector institutions. 

6. Conservation of Guyana’s environment. Prescriptions are being made for the environmental 

monitoring and control of all of social and economic endeavours. The importance of utilising 

resources sustainably is also emphasised; 

7. Investments in drainage and irrigation systems and sea defences. 

8. Development assistance to a specially-disadvantaged group, the Amerindians; 

9. Improving inclusiveness, accountability and transparency of central, regional and local 

governments. 

The main goals of Guyana’s poverty reduction strategy 2 focus on: 

• Sustained economic expansion; 

• Access to social services including education, health, water and housing; 

• Expansion of social safety nets. 

To achieve these goals, the strategy rests on seven pillars 3 : 

1. Broad-based economic growth; 

2. Environmental protection; 

3. Stronger institutions and better governance; 

4. Investment in human capital, with emphasis on basic education and primary health; 

5. Investment in physical capital, with emphasis on better and broader provision of safe water and 

sanitation services, farm-to-market roads, drainage and irrigation systems, and housing; 

6. Improved safety nets; 

7. Special intervention programmes to address regional pockets of poverty. 

The National Competitiveness Strategy to Guyana (NCS) 

GoG has defined in 2006 the core policies to improve competitiveness through : 

1. Incentive policies including macroeconomic policy, competition policy, taxation policy, trade 

policy; 




EGEVAL 

2. Supply side policies, mainly including policy measures with respect to education and training, 

business development services, finance, investment and export promotion. 

The Guyana Action Plan for the sugar sector (GAP) 

The Guyana Action Plan for the sugar sector seeks to generate economic growth by bringing sustainable 

improvements in the competitiveness of the sugarcane industry and the non-traditional agricultural subsector. 

Its specific objectives are threefold: 

1. Expansion and diversification of the sugar cane industry (80% of the funding); 

2. Growth and development of specific non-traditional agricultural sub-sectors (6%); 

3. Infrastructural and human resource development support to achieve the regeneration 

programmes planned in the sugarcane and non-traditional agriculture sub-sectors (4%); 

In addition, the GoG’s contribution to the Skeldon project amounts to 10%. 

2 - The Commission’s support priorities trough interventions and non programmable instruments 

The strategy has been subject of evolutions modifying significantly the original design. The use of non 

programmable instruments was conducive to important changes even if the general orientations were 

maintained. 




EGEVAL 

STRATEGY S 1997-2002 2003-2007 

71 146 

INTERVENTIONS I Ū (million) 

Ū (million) 

93 

Non Programmable Instrume NPI 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 53 

1 INFRASTRUCTURES 

SEA DEFENCES S 21 

19 

40 

I 20,53 18,13 39 

TRANSPORT S 8 

1 9 

I 1 1 

NPI 0 7th EDF 0 

HOUSING 

S 

I 9,17 

9 

2 PRIVATE SECTOR S 3 

3 

I 1,54 

2 

NPI Sysmin 

12,6 

13 

3 BUDGETARY support S 14,9 

15 

I 

35,18 

35 

NPI Structural adjustment - Debt relief 19,19 

19 

4 CIVIL SOCIETY support S 3 

3 

& good gov. - environment I 0 6,3 

6 

NPI 2,21 Budget lines 2 

5 PROGRAMME manag. S 1 1 

I 0 1 1 

RICE SECTOR NPI 9¸me RIP 

12,93 

13 

SUGAR SECTOR NPI Budget lin 5,66 

6 

As a whole € 146m were decided under the NIP/CSP 8 th and 9 th EDF, including the RIP (€ 13m) for the 

Rice sector to Guyana and the allocation for the sugar sector at the end of 2006 (€6m). This is twice the 

budget designed €71m. 

By focal sector, the main changes are the following: 

1 – Rehabilitation of Social and Economic infrastructure: € 49m 

Sea defences: with the commitment decided at the end of 2007, the whole budget defined in the NIP / 

CSP is promised to be used with €38,66m committed. 

Otherwise the water supply and transportation programmes planned in the 8 th EDF NIP were not 

implemented afterwards. Only a transport study € 0,95m was committed under the 9 th EDF CSP. 

But despite the NIP did not mention the housing as a sector to be supported, the low-income housing 




EGEVAL 

programme under the 8 th EDF –– was decided in October 2002 for a total budget of €9,17m plus €0,12m 

from the 7 th EDF. This programme clearly fits into the GoG policy in the social sector in improving 

access to affordable housing for low-income groups in Guyana as well as improving quality of settlements 

through community participation. 

2 – Private sector and business development: € 14,14m 

Beyond the 8 th EDF support to the Guyana Training Agency (€1,54m), the private sector received support 

under the SYSMIN instrument for the Linden Economic Advancement Programme (LEAP) in Region 10, 

approved in 2000 with a budget of €12,6m. LEAP’s objectives are to create conditions likely to attract 

new businesses, as an alternative to the bauxite industry in order to increase employment. As a whole, 

€14,1m were allocated to the private sector and business development. 

Additionally, it has to be mentioned that the European Investment Bank also provided support : a €11m 

loan for the financing of the Institute of Private Enterprise Development (IPED) for on-lending to small 

businesses; a €40m loan allocated to the Caribbean Development Bank; and €32m to other economic 

entities (DFL, CLICO, GRENLEC). 

3 – Macro-economic support: € 54,37 million 

Total commitments for financial aid in the form of budget support (BS) over the period under review 

have reached € 39,9 million (including HIPC), of which € 10.2 million originated from the 8 th EDF 

Structural Adjustment Facility , € 6.4 million came from the special HIPC fund and the remainder (€ 23.3 

million) was programmed as BS under the 9 th EDF (initially € 14.9 million were foreseen under the A 

envelope which was increased with € 8.4 million from the B envelope using the FLEX resources for the 

2000 and 2001 shortfalls in export earnings). Since end 2006, another € 12 million have been committed 

under the 9 th EDF (stemming from the 25% top-up of funds allocated to Guyana on grounds of its 

positive mid-term review and positive governance profile), bringing total commitments to budget support 

to Guyana under the 8 th and 9 th EDFs to a total of nearly € 52 million, including HIPC. The latest 

commitment will serve to bridge the budget support gap in 2007, between the end of the PRBS of 2004- 

2006 and the beginning of the new budget support programme to be designed under the 10 th EDF. 

Over the period, three BS programmes were implemented, the SAS IV (1998), SAS V (foreseen for 1999 

and 2000 but implemented in 2000 and 2001) and the PRBS (2004 to 2006). A sixth SAS programme was 

being designed in late 2000/2001 to follow-up from SAS V but it never left the drawing board as 

Guyana’s macro-economic situation deteriorated, its reform programme went off track thus precluding 

new budget support. Currently a new ‘bridging programme’ is being designed for support to the 2007 




EGEVAL 

budget. 

The earlier as well as the latest budget support programmes all supported the Government’s budget by 

either providing funding for specific budget lines (SAS IV and V) or providing non targeted direct budget 

support (PRBS). This change from the earlier Balance of Payments approach (with the use of counterpart 

funds for projects) was made possible by the improvements in public service management and 

accountability such as the introduction of programme budgeting. By funding specific lines of the budget 

and later supporting the budget as a whole, the EC’s budget support programmes thus totally espoused 

Guyana’s development objectives as translated into the budget. In conformity with the policy objectives 

expressed in the 1998-2001 PFP and the HIPC documents, the Commission’s SAS IV and V supported 

Guyana’s entire reform agenda, including policies to enhance service delivery in education and health, civil 

service reform, public enterprise restructuring, financial and insurance sector modernisation, land reform 

and improvements in budget management. In line with overall government policy which emphasized the 

implementation of a second generation of reforms after successful stabilisation of the economy, the 

priority of SAS IV and V (and later of PRBS) was to contribute to enhancing the efficiency and 

effectiveness of public spending by facilitating further reallocation of fiscal resources to priority activities 

in the social sectors. The SAS programmes gave particular emphasis to support to the social sectors 

(health, education and housing) by : 

• targeting the use of counterpart funds to specific budget lines in these ministries’ budgets (mainly 

on the maintenance costs of existing infrastructure and on operational costs enabling improved 

service delivery) and 

• using disbursement conditionalities from the programme agreed with the BWI (PFP) which were 

linked to improved budget management, in particular improved budget allocation to education and 

health and improved execution of HIPC expenditure. 

The PRBS abandoned the targeting of specific budget lines in favour of direct and untargeted budget 

support underpinned by the close monitoring of outcome indicators in the health and social housing 

sectors as well as in the area of public finance management. 

Overall, with the new generation of budget support starting from SAS IV in 1998, the EC thus placed 

total confidence in the soundness of the GoG’s public finance management system and in the spending 

priorities set by the Government in its public expenditure programme: the EC’s strategic objectives using 

the instrument of BS were thus not only coherent with the GoG’s medium term policy objectives but 

totally aligned to them 




EGEVAL 

4 – Support to civil society organisations: € 8,7 million 

The purpose of the main programme, the Micro-Projects Programme (MPP), is to improve the socioeconomic 

conditions of vulnerable groups through the development of sustainable and participatory selfhelp 

schemes; 75 micro-projects at the community level on the area of employment/income generation; 

training/education; communication and good governance, strengthening of non-state actors and 

establishment of regular and structured dialogue between the government. For duration of five years, the 

total amount is € 4.5 million of which € 4,05m from EDF. 

Other interventions concern good governance, democracy enhancement and humanitarian assistance for a 

total € 2,40m plus actions with budget lines €2,21m for good governance (€0,37m) and environment 

(€1,84m) . 

5 - Support to the NAO office: € 1 million (1,4 %) 

This support is implemented as per the allocated budget for 5 years. 

Other actions involving non programmable instruments are the following: 

Regional cooperation: Under the 8 th EDF, the Caribbean Regional Indicative Programme (CRIP) is 

relevant to Guyana through the Caribbean Tourism approved in 2002, the €70m grant to support rum 

producers with the 4-year project started in June 2002, and the Caribbean component of the all-ACP 

HIV/AIDS/STIs Programme with CARICOM as implementing agency. 

Under the 9 th EDF, the CRIP is mainly supporting the competitiveness of the Caribbean Rice sector. A 

diagnostic study and feasibility study of the Caribbean rice industry were carried out in 2002 in view of 

increasing the trade competitiveness of rice production, primarily in Guyana and Surinam, and thereby to 

contribute to the region’s social and economic development and to prevent socio/economic deterioration 

which might occur as a result of the ongoing process of trade liberalisation. The total envelope of the 

programme is €23,6m including a financial facility of €10m. The amount to the direct benefits of Guyana 

is €12,93m. 

Sugar sector: The Government strategy is defined within the ‘National Action Plan on Accompanying 

Measures for Sugar Protocol Countries Affected by the Reform of the EU Sugar Regime’. The DG Dev 

has prepared the EC Response strategy in support of the Guyana Action plan for the period 2007-2013 : 

‘Implementation of accompanying measures for sugar protocol countries’ (27/07/2006). 

It contains four objectives: 

1. Structural support to production; 




EGEVAL 

2. Support to diversification, research and development (bio-ethanol, energy saving and other new 

technology); 

3. Support to infrastructure and human resources and training; 

4. Mitigation of harmful consequences from the sugar industry restructuring on the social sector. 

The State company GUYSUCO employs over 18K persons and influences the welfare of nearly 120K 

persons including employees’ families, Contractors, Suppliers, etc. 

The Commission response strategy in support of the Guyana National Action Plan for the period 2007- 

2013 is to define the onward planning of the accompanying measures and assistance by the Commission 

to the alleviation of the impact of the EU sugar reform. The delivery mechanism will be mainly sector 

budget support to the four areas: Structural adjustment of the sugarcane industry; Diversification to nontraditional 

agriculture; Training and infrastructure; Mitigation of social impact. A first financing for the 

2006 allocation was submitted at € 5.66 m covering the first support to the above four areas. 

The emergency needs caused by the January 2005 floods have been addressed by the remaining 

€0.7m from the B-envelope (after allocation of €8.4m to budgetary support). These funds were drawn 

upon by ECHO and, as such, have not been included in the Commission ‘strategic’ support. 

3 - Synthesis of the Commission interventions regarding the Guyana’s development strategy 

The evolution of the Commission intervention over the two main programming periods is the following: 




EGEVAL 

GoG' strategy 


EC strategy (€ million) 


EC interventions (with Non Pr. Instr.) 

1997-2007 1997-2002 2003-2007 1997-2007 % 

> Macro-economic support > Macro-economic support 15 19,19 35,18 54,37 

> Micro-economic support > Micro-economic support 3 14,14 14,14 

> Rice sector 12,93 12,93 

> Sugar sector 5,66 5,66 

Economic and social 

infrastrucures 

> Sea Defences 40 20,53 18,13 38,66 

> Housing & transport 9 9,29 0,95 10,24 



> Civil society org. 3 2,3 6,4 8,7 

> EC programme impl. 1 0,2 0,9 1,1 

71 65,65 80,15 145,8 

60% 

33% 

7% 

EC interventions have been completed with non programmable instruments have been geared to meet the 

GoG development strategy over the two periods of the Commission’s support implementation. 

Commission interventions for the support of the macro-economy, to the private sector and in favour of 

social services provided to the civil society are in line with the priorities defined in the NDS and the PRSP. 

Other priorities have not been taken into account to the same extent: Good governance, Environment, 

Transport, Development Programme support. Nevertheless the rationale of the Commission’s strategy is 

justified by the size of the financial envelope for EC-Guyana cooperation which entails to focus on 2-3 

focal areas in order to avoid a dispersion of funding. 

Eventually the Commission’s priorities can be compared to the GoG’s priorities defined in the 

NDS, the PRSP and also directly expressed to the evaluation team during the field mission: 




EGEVAL 

Commission's support Ū million Priority GoG development sectors NDS PRSP NCS GAP GoG / Field visit 

Budgetary Support 54 1 Macro-economic support 1 1 1 +++ 

Sea defences 39 2 Infrastructures (eco & social) 7 5 Flooding 

Linden-IPED 13 3 Micro-economic support 1 & 9 1 2 2 +++ 

Regional co-operation progr. 13 4 Rice sector 1 1 ++ 

Housing 9 5 Infrastructures (social) 4 5 +/- 

Accompagnying measures 6 6 Sugar - diversification 1 1 1 ++ 

MPP 4 7 Civil society support/jobs creation 4 4 - 

8&9 NIP projects - Budget lines 3 8 Governance 5 3 ++ 

Budget lines 2 9 Environnement 6 2 + 

Guyana Training Agency 2 10 Education & vocational training 4 4 2 3 Brain drain 

Feasibility studies 1 11 Transport 2 5 + 

Support to the NAO 1 12 Programmme implementation ++ 

0 ICT 3 6 

0 Assistance to Amerindians 8 

Total 146 

At large, the alignment of the Commission priorities (NIP/CSP and non programmable tools) to Guyana’s 

development strategy priorities defined through the NDS and PRSP is effective on three sectors: 

Budgetary support, Private sector support, Rice sector support, cumulating 56% of the total EC 

interventions. Inversely, the rehabilitation of sea defences is not mentioned as a strategic priority in the 

GoG orientations. 

During the field mission the following priorities were highlighted 

Budgetary support : The PRSP is a very controversial subject in Guyana. PRSP II was supposed to be 

produced in 2006 but no outcome in 2007. The same priorities given by the GoG and the Commission to 

the budgetary support do not infer policy dialogue even if there are communication with sector ministries 

(Sugar, Housing and Health). Policy dialogue is not very extensive apart from the health sector where 

technical staff, donors, other ministries participate in the thematic group meeting and they can discuss 

strategic options because there is a long term plan. 

Other element reducing the evidence of the relevance of the Commission’s support is the lack of 

cooperation regarding the choice of indicators, the choice of TA and the lack of PFM sequenced action 

plan. 




EGEVAL 

Infrastructures : There is a great need for filling the physical gap in infrastructure in roads, sea defences, 

harbours, etc. 

Flooding 

Water management includes flooding from upcountry and storm water as well as inundation from the 

ocean. Flooding has been a common feature in Guyana but in areas where population density was low so 

flooding from upcountry featured less than inundation from ocean. But floods in 2005 had dramatic 

economic and social consequences. It appeared that water management and regulation was needed. The 

establishment of the Water management Council was decided and set in motion in the Ministry of Water 

and housing in view of instalment by the end of 2007. This Council emerged from the amalgamation of 

Guyana Water and Sewer Commission and Guyana Water Authority in May 2002. 

Sea Defences : EC main focus on sea defences only does not meet GoG interests and priority. The GoG 

is carrying on a shift from Sea defences programme to Shore development programme. The issue is to 

shift from the management of the Sea Defences line to development of the Costal zone taking into 

account all dimensions of the economic, social and environmental aspects of the sustainable development, 

including biologic and ecologic solutions. For instance, mangrove replacing sea defences walls and 

mangrove as substitute of human activity in the coastal belt. Furthermore the coastal zone development 

entails the sustainability of actions in the long run. But this approach appears to be a new orientation 

which is not yet finalized. 

Brain drain problem : the Guyanese population is decreasing because of brain drain. Human resources 

in Guyana are a serious challenge due to massive migration and lack of qualified workers (lack of 

vocational and technical training). There is a strong need in Guyana for vocational and technical training. 

The GTA project was a well-conceived programme in this respect. But the country is loosing qualified 

locals after training, as salaries are often lower than other international agents can pay in the country. 

Negative effects are that trained people are leaving the country. Positive effects could be considered when 

emigrants support the economy with remittances, investments from abroad and after coming back later. 

The Private Sector Commission is – in 2007 - putting in place a strategic plan to reverse the brain drain 

problem. Without such a strategy, it seems meaningless to finance projects dealing with vocational and 

technical training. Within this strategy, the institutional strengthening is in all sectors and especially for 

socio-economic infrastructures and the agriculture sector. 




EGEVAL 

Rice sector 

The Rice sector has to be regarded from a social point of view in focusing on consequences of the sector 

decline especially for small holders; Four components of the Ec support to Guyana through CRIP : (i) TA 

: €1,8m; (ii) water rehabilitation : €3,2m ; (iii) Financial facility : €6,5m; (iv) training €190,000 ; 

The Water rehabilitation is a public sector issue connected to the overall water management issues in 

Guyana. The primary areas identified for technical assistance involved Research & development and 

Marketing. The principal external markets identified for penetration were in the Caribbean region. 

Poverty Alleviation was a primary social factor identified for resuscitation in the rice sector especially 

through financial injection among the small farmers. But the Government approach to Poverty Alleviation 

was being questioned. The larger Farmers/Millers seem to believe that the bulk of the financing should be 

given to them for fuller utilization of existing acreage and for them to provide satellite farming support to 

the outputs of the small farmers. 

I.1.2.2 

I.1.2.2 

I.1.2.3 

Sugar Sector: the GoG priority is highly political and justified for social considerations. 

The relevance of the GoG strategy relies on institutional feasibility and of Government capacities to have 

the full command of reforms with due consideration of internal constraints/potentialities and external 

threats/opportunities. The Sugar sector contributes to 18% of the GDP and 55% of the agricultural 

GDP,has direct consequences on the social sector and infrastructure. 

Restructuring and privatizing Guysuco is impossible to circumvent to foster the private investment in the 

sugar sector and to increase productivity and profitability. Restructuring is also needed to overcome the 

drastic cut pricing: 5% reduction price has already being supported. The EU ‘compensation’ (€160 ) 

represents 36% of the total estimate of the cut pricing consequences (€440m) 

Explicit reference in the Commission strategic documents (NIP/CSP and non-programmable 

tools) to their adherence to the prioritised set of public expenditure identified in the medium term 

expenditure framework (MTEF) and to the prioritised required donor support identified as 

required in the medium term 

The BS FAs do not explicitly refer to prioritised set of public expenditure but BS is implicitly focusing on 

nothing else but the prioritised set of expenditure, especially as from the PRBS 2004-2007 onwards. BS 

provides supplementary funds for the budget in the medium-term with the aim of facilitating the 

reallocation of fiscal resources to priority activities; even in the earlier BS programmes where particular 

priority budget line items were targeted for support, fungibility of funds allows for improved room of 

manoeuvre for GoG’s reallocation of funds to priority areas 


tools) to their adherence to prioritised investment programming 




EGEVAL 

I.1.2.3 

I 1.2.4 

I.1.2.4 

The NIP refers to the GoG programming in general wording which does not express specific 

adherence to prioritised investment programming. The CSP is clearly designed with due 

consideration of the NDS and of the PRSP and special reference to the HIPC. The sections 

related to ‘Economic situation’, Trade policies and Trade relations’, ‘Social situation’, 

‘Sustainability of current policies’ and ‘Medium term challenges’ provide analysis giving evidence 

of adherence to prioritised investment programming. 


tools) to their adherence to target the beneficiaries identified as the target population in Guyana’s 

development strategy 

In all the Structural Adjustment Support programmes (SAS) as well as in the later Poverty 

Reduction Budget Support Programme, the beneficiaries are very clearly targeted as the poor, 

most vulnerable population. Whereas the first SAS target improved access to and delivery of 

basic social services in education, health and social housing, the more recent PRBS focuses 

attention on health and social housing. 




EGEVAL 

8ACP 

GUA 005, 

9 ACP 

GUA 11 

FA, 

Evaluation 

report, NIP 

EQ2 

JC 2.1 

I 2.1.1 

I 2.1.1 

To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to the rehabilitation of Guyana’s 

sea defences and ultimately to sustainably protecting the livelihoods and dwellings of the 

coastal belt population? 

Commission interventions were in line with the CSP/NIP strategy 

Degree of alignment of the programmes’ IL with the IL of the NIP/CSP 

The Commission carried out one main programme in the sea defences field under the 8 th EDF NIP: the 

8 ACP GUA 5. The Commission programme IL is congruent with the IL of the CSP/NIP strategy. 

The overall objective of the 8 ACP GUA 5 programme is i) the improvement of living conditions of 

coastal zone population, ii) the stimulation of economic growth and iii) the reduction of poverty. It 

contributes to the overall impact of the 8 th EDF NIP: the enhancement of a sustainable economic and 

social development. 

The purpose of the programme is the improvement of long term security prospects of the coastal zone 

against sea water incursion and is and is in line with the outputs of the 8 th EDF NIP (sea defences 

rehabilitated). 

The results of the programme consist in the re-establishment of structural integrity of sea defences 

(reconstruction of 5km of sea defences), the improved capacity of the SRDD, the increased involvement 

of the coastal belt population in the sea defences sector and are therefore in line with the activities of the 

8 th EDF NIP (renovation of essential coastal equipment). 

Under the 9 th EDF, a new sea defences programme decided in 2007 will pursue the 8 th EDF NIP 

orientations. The results of the programme focus on : Reduction of the length of the sea wall which is 

classified as ‘in critical condition’ (estimated 20 km) by approximately 40 % thus providing protection to 

housing and agricultural land and the setting-up of a sustainable (Sea defence) management system 

(Institutional Capacity Building), and on the development of contingency plans for higher tide levels due 

to global warming. 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

CSP/NIP, 

FAs, reports 

I 2.1.2 

I 2.1.2 

Discrepancies between the programmes and the strategy are explicitly justified 

There are no discrepancies between the programmes and the Commission strategy. 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

I 2.1.3 ‘Impact on livelihoods’ of Sea defence programmes has been well formulated and placed in the 

IL 

FAs I 2.1.3 ‘Impact on livelihood’ is identified in the IL at the level of OO, not at the level of Purpose or Result. As 

a consequence ‘Impact on livelihood’ is not specified and only used as a general condition without 

reference to beneficiary and resource base. 

FAs, 

CSP/NIP, 

Haskoningevaluation 

Training 

programme, 

JC 2.2 

I 2.2.1 

I 2.2.1 

Commission intervention has contributed to the rehabilitation of Guyana’s sea defences 

Km of sea defences in critical condition rehabilitated by the Commission interventions as a 

share of the total km rehabilitated during the period 

Sea defence and coastal management is a priority area in Infrastructural development. From desk work 

at SRDD during the mission an overview was composed over the past 10 years regarding all works done 

(EDF 8,9-Euro 20 million) 

Nature of 

Work 

Rehabilitation 

of 6.2km sea 

defence 

Structures at 

Region 2 & 3 


of Sea Defence 

Structure 



Structure 

Construction 


Structure 



Structure 



Structure 



Structure 

Remedial 

works to Sea 

Location Year Sea 

Defence 

District 

• Anna 

Regina/Henrietta 

• Land of Plenty 

• Le Destin/Ruby 

• Barnwell/Vergenoegen 

• La Jalousie/Windsor 

Forest 

No. 76/77 Village 

Corentyne, Berbice 

No. 78 Village Corentyne, 

Berbice 

Mon Repos East Coast 

Demerara 

1996 No.1 

No. 1 

No. 4 

No. 4 

No. 4 

Length Cost G$ Contractor Donor 

Agency 

1.4km 

1.3km 

1.1km 

1.3km 

1.1km 

1,655,541,078 Pac - Gelfi EU 

1996 No. 8 400m 137,585,055 Gyu Co IDB 

1997 No. 8 640m 176,758,979 Guy Co IDB 

1997 No. 5 375m 124,216,432 BK Int. IDB 

Aberdeen Essequibo Coast 1998 No. 1 200m 52,596,980 Sammic Civil 

Work 

Taymouth Manor 

Essequibo Coast 

Devonshire Castle – 

Essequibo Coast 

IDB 

1999 No. 1 350m 116,807,117 Falcom IDB 

2000 No. 1 100m 83,459,740 Guy Co IDB 

Henrietta Essequibo Coast 2000 No. 1 200m 51,098,410 Guy Co EU 




EGEVAL 

Defence 

Structures 

Remedial 

works to Sea 

Defence 

Structures 


of 1.7km of 

Sea Defence 

Structure 



Structure 


works 

Sea Defence 

Construction 

Works 


works to Sea 

Defence 

Structure 


works to Sea 

Defence 

Structure 


works to Sea 

Defence 

Structure 

Construction 


Structures 

Institutional 

Capacity 

Building 

Activities 

- Surveys, 

Data, 

Management, 

Modelling, 

Structural 

Analysis, 

Mangrove 

Management, 

Strategy & 

Master Plan 

Aberdeen Essequibo Coast 2000 No. 1 200m 65,358,153 BK Int IDB 

• Good Hope 

• Reliance 

Montrose East Coast 

Demerara 

Cornelia Ida – West Bank 

Demerara 

Mon Repos – East Coast 

Demerara 

Stanleytown – West Bank 

Demerara 

Hague – West Bank 

Demerara 

Veregenoegen – West 

Bank Demerara 

Bel Air Mon Chosi – West 

Coast Berbice 

2000 

2001 

No. 1 

Georgetown 2005 Head 

Office 

600m 

1,100m 

658,003,239 BK Int. IDB 

2001 No. 5 40m 19,483,575 BK Int. IDB 

2001 No. 4 220m 91,818,821 BK Int. Inc. IDB 

2001 No. 5 290m 118,910,812 BK Int. Inc. IDB 

2002 No. 4 290m 175,010,819 BK Int. Inc IDB 



2002 No. 7 2.1km 955,792,061 BK Int. Inc CDB/WB 

To-date 

payment 

393,708,377 

Royal Haskoning 

(Netherlands) 

EU 




EGEVAL 

Quality 

Control for 

Main ICBA 

Contract 

2005 Head 

Office 

To –date 

Payment 

16,901,626 

Rogan Associates 

Ltd - Niras 

EU 

Construction 


Rip Rap 

Profit Foulis Belladrum – 

West Coast Berbice 

2006 No. 7 1.8km To – date 

Payment 

828,488,994 

BK International 

CDB/WB 

Supervision of 

Sea Defence 

Construction 

Works 

Profit Foulis Belladrum – 

West Coast Berbice 

2006 No. 7 1.8km To – date 

Payment 

98,388,000 

CEMCO 

CDB/WB 


of 4km Sea 

Defence rip 

rap structure 

• Capoey/Columbia- 

Region 2 

• Tuschen – Region 3 

• Menten – Meer 

Zorg/De Kindren 

Region 3 

• Hague – Region 3 

Ongoing No. 1 

No. 4 

No. 4 

No. 4 

2,030m 

619m 

950m 

1,005m 

To –date 

Payment 

1,896,413,477 

BK 

International/Gelfi 

Transportation. 

EU 

Supervision of 

Sea Defence 


Works 

• Capoey/Columbia- 

Region 2 

• Tuschen – Region 3 

• Menten – Meer 

Zorg/De Kindren 

Region 3 

• Hague – Region 

Ongoing No. 1 

No. 4 

No. 4 

No. 4 

2,030m 

619m 

950m 

1,005m 

To –date 

Payment 

95,725,514 

E&A 

Consultant/DHV 

Environment 

EU 

Institutional 

Capacity 

Building 

Activity – 

Bridging 

Phase 

Ongoing 

Head 

Office 

To date 

Payment 

41,759,604 

EU 

The above information covering 1996 to 2005, was obtained from SRDD but could not be verified with 

other internal sources in SRDD and/EC Delegation. It may be summarised as follows: 




EGEVAL 

Donor agency Sea defence works Organisational capacity 

development 

EC 11,004 metres 2005: ICD Haskoning 

2005: Quality control Rogan 

Ass. 

2004: ICB ongoing 

CDB 5,700 metres 

IDB 5,445 metres 

The EC funded ICB components, including training of staff has been well implemented. However, the 

newly qualified staff, and or new skills could not be retained in the SRDD organisation as other 

employers were able to offer better working conditions and literally all trained and capacitated left the 

organisation. As a consequence the capacity of SRDD has not been strengthened. 

Although efforts were made to obtain information about the spending by GoG itself on construction of 

sea defence works no figures could be obtained in the end. In the SRDD 4-year budget 2004-’08 no 

figures could be found on new works. On maintenance it was derived that G$ 943.770.608 (or Euro 

3,390,771) was reserved. 

I 2.2.2 

Km of prioritised tranches of sea defences in critical condition rehabilitated by the Commission 

interventions as a share of the total km of prioritised tranches rehabilitated during the period 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

FAs, CSP- 

NIP, MRs, 

JAR’05(draft), 

Agrifor-C, 

I 2.2.2 

Works component is planned to cover the lengths of sea wall which is classified as in critical condition 

will be reduced with 5 kms. The total length of sea defence structure, either natural or constructed is 

quoted as extending to approx. 425 kms (Waine River to Corentyne River). The total length of sea wall 

in critical condition is quoted different in different reports. In the appraisal studies for the 8 th EDF 

(1998) it is mentioned 30 to 40 kms and confirmed by verbal information in SRDD. 

Despite foreign funded reconstruction works over the last decade and a half the critical lengths has 

remained the same. This may be explained by the limited routine repair and maintenance works which 

has found place by SRDD. With reference to section I. 2.2.1, there is evidence that the objective to 

rehabilitate 5 kms of sea defence has been achieved. 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

Final Design 

Report, 

Detailed Design 

and Preparation 

of Tender 

Documents of 

the Works, 

Supervision and 

supply on the 

Guyana’s Sea 

Defence (8 th 

EDF) 

November 

2004, Field 

mission 

I 2.2.3 

I 2.2.3 

The sea defence infrastructure has been constructed in accordance to the approved design and 

technical specifications 

The design work for EDF 8 has been approved by SRDD and DHV. The current design is locally 

known as ‘rip-rap’ whereby the embankment body dimensions are determined after soil stability analysis. 

The embankment sloops are covered with natural rocks (boulders) which reduce the impact of dynamic 

energy of the waves on the banks. Drawings are adequately detailed and available. According to the 

design the crest level of the embankments has been fixed to 18.80 metres. At the time of the field trip it 

was suggested that at the completed sections the current crest level was 18,80 metres. At several places 

visited, e.g. near Den Amstel, at Richmond, it was observed that during high tide considerable 

overtopping occurs which lead to erosion at the land side of the embankment. 

According to the final design report (2004) “with regard to the crest level, due to the partially unfavourable soil 

characteristics and the danger of collapse of the structure, it has been suggested that the effective crest level should be initially 

kept at a lower level, until at a later stage, the conditions allow to be raised to the appropriate level. With this concept in 

mind, the initial design life of the crest level shall be lower than the service life time in the structure. It was suggested to 

adopt an initial 10 year design life for the crest level and wave overtopping and then extend it to the 30-years.” 

In follow up discussions the following information was obtained from DHV, the monitoring firm: 

Current crest levels: 

‐ Region 2: (Essequibo Coast) Crest level at +18.60 mGD; embankment at 18.30 mGD. Slope 

1:3, no berm) 

‐ Region 3: Tuschen: crest level at 18.80 mGD, embankment at 18.55 mGD, slope 1:3, no berm; 

‐ Region 3: DeKinderen: near fishing village): West of sluice: low crest construction in the zone 

in front of the mocha mocha bush and balck sand. Crest level of low crest structure 17.00m- 

17.40mDG, embankment: 17,40 mGD. East of Sluice primary sea defence crest levelat 

18.00mGD. Secondary dea defence structure crest level at 18.00 m 

‐ Hague: crest level at 18.80 mGD, embankment at 18.55 meter, slope 1:3, berm of 4 meters at 




EGEVAL 

4.00 mGD 

‐ Blankenburg at 18.70 mGD, embankment at 18,70mGD slope 1:4, berm of 5 meters at 16,40 

meters; 

‐ According to the information the current crest levels include an expected sea water rise of 20 

centimeters over the next 15-20 years. 

‐ The above indicates that the current crest level is the final crest level at this stage and if needed 

additional workswill have to be done in the years to come to reduce or stop the overtopping of 

the waves and hence erosion. There is however no information about availability of additional 

funds to increase the level of the crest; 

‐ DHV states that the current erosion results from the lack of vegetation of the embankment 

structure and the limited setting of the surface and due prone to erosion; 

‐ All repairs will be done before the contractors completes the works; 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

AGRIFOR: 

Elaboration 

study: final 

propject 

proposal 

0104 

MMcDonald: 

Feasiblity 

study, Final, 

0806 

JC 2.3 

I 2.3.1 

I 2.3.1 

Commission intervention has contributed to the setting up of a sustainable sea defence 

management and maintenance system 

The capacity to monitor water levels in view of flood risks and conditions at the seafront by 

local stakeholders. 

According to GoG/Commission planning there is room for stakeholders to be involved in the planning 

and also implementation of the functions of the sea defence. 

At Sea defences policy level priorities are expressed in the NDS, PRSP, MDG, PSIP. Each document, 

at the basis of flood protection, has in a varying degree a focus on the involvement and on the 

functioning of the local –beneficiary- structure. The NDS (1993-2000) places great emphasis on 

maintenance capacity, management of mangrove forests and establishment of sea defence maintenance 

tax. PRSP does by nature is focussed at the social and economical domain of the beneficiaries and needs 

further development to bring it to the local structures for instance building maintenance and/or 

observer capacity to participate in the programme. 

The Sea defences legislative framework incl. the Sea Defences Act (2), the Environmental Protection 




EGEVAL 

Act and the Drainage and Irrigation Act. The SDA -1998 version- enables the government to create Sea 

defences districts, develop central and decentralised maintenance capacity, regulate offences and 

imposition of penalties, etc. The EPA provides the establishment of semi-autonomous bodies, including 

local level, and coordinates an integrated coastal zone management programme. A number of reports 

mentions the overexploitation of the mangrove vegetation, by the government, local communities and 

external players and the role local communities could play to prevent for overexploitation. 

Key institutions are the Ministry of Public Works and Communication, Sea Defence Board, SRDD, 

Environmental Protection Agency and others. 

In the field few local dwellers were met. It appeared that neither the Neighbourhood Democratic 

Council nor the locally based SRDD office have been involved with the project cycle of the project. In a 

statement of the Minister of Public Works and Communication it was also foreseen that the 

beneficiaries would be involved in monitoring of the sea defence infrastructures in terms of basic 

maintenance and the measuring of water levels. This has not yet been followed up. 

Experience in other developing countries has shown that local communities, provided their leaders have 

access to formal structures and the programmes are of benefit to them, are interested to participate in 

flood control programmes, proper usage of flood prevention systems through local CBOs/structures. It 

should be noted that in documents available, including the latest planning documents (MMDonald), 

linkage of the formal and informal structures has not been worked out in detail. 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

MMcDonald, 

9 th EDF, 

CSP ’02-’07, 

Haskoning 

ICB 

evaluation 

2005 

MRs, 

Haskoning, 

ICB 

I 2.3.2 

I 2.3.2 

I.2.3.3 

I 2.3.3 

Number of contingency plans for higher tide levels 

Floods Contingency planning is mentioned in the CSP ’02-’07 as a ‘major intervention’. It has been 

included in different training programmes. At the level of SRDD there was no information of 

Contingency planning updated or applied from the input provided in the EDF 7,8 capacity development 

programme. 

Sea defence management systems and related staff capacity have been established and are 

effective 

The national policy and legislative framework are adequate. But the institutional framework is not 

supportive and hampers the efforts of the Sea Defence Board and of the SRDD to carry out their 

functions adequately. 




EGEVAL 

GUA 005 

evaluation 

2005, Agrifor, 

0104, 

MMcDonald 

0806, FA 

EDF IX, 

Sea defences management hinges on two major components, which are, firstly, the organisational 

structure and required functions and secondly the availability of human resources to fulfil the tasks. 

Currently the Sea Defence Board has a number of recognised weaknesses (e.g. unclear allocation of 

responsibilities and duplication with the Min.PW & Comm, too large and a diverse membership, no 

direct access to funding and bank accounts, no internal annual planning and reporting, lack of a 

permanent secretariat, etc.) The SRDD, which is supposed to be the operations arm from SDB shows a 

large number of weaknesses (MMcDonald) which prevent it from being to a reasonable extend 

operational. Over and above there is a consensus in the documentation that the department gained little 

from the extensive training programmes under 8 th , 9 th EDF as most documents indicate that trained 

staff left the department for other lucrative employment outside government quite soon after being 

trained. 

In the sequence of 5 MR over the period 2001-’06 the above is confirmed and there is a general trend in 

the area of ICB of limited delivery at Result and OO level. In the MR the project scores well in 

Relevance but increasing low in Efficiency, Effectiveness, Impact and Sustainability. 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

Guyana National Water Board 

Currently, a National Water Board is being established within the Ministry of Water and Housing. It is 

composed of experts in the water sector. This is an advisory group and it was due to be appointed by 

the minister in December 2007. The first mandate of Board will be to to draft a national water policy. 

The key question will be whether this Board will also be equipped with an executive secretariat. 

Following the National Water policy it is most likely that the Board will be tasked with the restructuring 

of the water and sanitation sector in Guyana. 

I 2.3.4 Sea defence routine-maintenance and repair staff capacity has been established and is effective 

CSP/9 th EDF I 2.3.4 Actual procedures and conduct of maintenance work at the sea defence structures is in the 

documentation limited reported or virtually absent. Funding of routine maintenance is from a GoG 

allocation for emergency works included in the annual budget estimates. Most of these funds are used 

for repair stead of –sustainable- maintenance. 

The concept of sustainable maintenance is not –yet- applied although stressed in all documents. As the 

maintenance requirement of most of the new structures is limited GoG has insufficiently provided 

procedures, budget and HR as note above. The lack of Maintenance is facilitated by a –natural?- 

reduction of sea water incursions and inundations over the past period. In the medium and longer term 

it must be expected however that serious periodic inundation will occur if long term maintenance policy, 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

8ACP 

GUA 005 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

9 ACP 

GUA 

005/8ACP 

GUA 005 

MMcDonald, 

CSP/NIP 

8 th EDF 

NIP, 

MMcDonald 

MMcDonald, 

CSP/NIP, 

FA 

I 2.3.5 

I 2.3.5 

I 2.3.6 

I 2.3.6 

JC 2.4 

I 2.4.1 

I 2.4.1 

annual funding and financial reservation form internal and external sources and sustainable technical 

maintenance capacity is developed in the organisation is not put in place. Effective sustainable 

maintenance will reduce also frequent and sizeable repairs. 

National budget provision for maintenance and operation of the sea-defence systems 

Currently budgeting for sustainable maintenance, whereby local structures and beneficiaries play a role is 

extremely limited. With the development of sustainable maintenance capacity on the short/long term 

considerable expenditure resulting from inundations will be prevented. Against these savings for damage 

repair and rehabilitation it may be expected GoG to provide for reservations from internal as well as 

external sources and a medium to long term maintenance plan. 

Evidence of beneficiary - in particular household - involvement in management and 

maintenance of the established structures 

The 8 th EDF NIP explicitly mentions that it will “foster active participation of the coastal belt 

population to the maintenance of the coastal equipments and to the protection of the sea coast. There is 

however no participation of the local decentralised government structures in the operation and 

maintenance of the sea defences works. 

Commission support to infrastructure has enabled the protection of livelihoods and dwellings 

of the coastal belt population 

Evidence that the pursuit of maximum impact on the livelihoods and dwellings of the coastal 

belt population has been a selection criteria in identifying the infrastructures rehabilitated 

(studies, public consultations) 

None of the documents consulted reported that the population targeted by the sea defences 

interventions has been a criterion in identifying the sea defences to be rehabilitated. 

I 2.4.2 Acreage under cultivation in coastal areas protected 

- I 2.4.2 This indicator could not be completed due to a lack of data. In July 2007 a Socio-Economic Survey and 

Public Awareness Programme (SESPAP) has been set in motion. It will develop key socio-economic 

information from the geographical area and the beneficiaries from the sea defence works. The results of 

this study are however not been made public so far. 

I 2.4.3 Number of dwellings in coastal areas protected 

- I 2.4.3 This indicator could not be completed due to a lack of data. In July 2007 a Socio-Economic Survey and 

Public Awareness Programme (SESPAP) has been set in motion. Itwill develop key socio-economic 






EGEVAL 

I 2.4.4 

I 2.4.4 

I 2.4.5 

I 2.4.5 

Number of very small enterprises or estimated size of informal productive activities in coastal 

areas protected 

This indicator could not be completed due to a lack of data. In July 2007 a Socio-Economic Survey and 

Public Awareness Programme (SESPAP) has been set in motion and will develop key socio-economic 



Evidence that the value of property and land in the coastal belt has increased due to greater 

flood control 

This indicator could not be completed due to a lack of data. In July 2007 a Socio-Economic Survey and 

Public Awareness Programme (SESPAP) has been set in motion. It will develop key socio-economic 






EGEVAL 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

FA, Evaluation 

report, 8 th EDF 

NIP 

EQ3 

JC 3.1 

I 3.1.1 

I 3.1.1 

To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to private sector strengthening and 

ultimately to sustainably restoring and increasing Guyana’s production capacity? 

Commission interventions were in line with the CSP/NIP strategy 

Degree of alignment of the programmes IL with the IL of the NIP/CSP 

The initial logical framework of the LEAP programme is in line with the 8 th EDF NIP. 

- The results of the programme consist in business support services, vocational training and financial services 

and are therefore in line with the activities of the 8 th EDF NIP. 

- The purpose of the programme is the development of the local market for business advisory services to attract 

new national and foreign investment and is in line with the outputs of the 8 th EDF NIP. 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

Evaluation 

report 

Mid-term 

evaluation, 8 th 

EDF NIP 

Mid-term 

evaluation, 8 th 

EDF NIP 

I 3.1.1 

I 3.1.1 

I 3.1.1 

The revised logical framework (January 2005) is also in line with the 8 th EDF NIP. 

- The results of the programmes focus on the availability of business services, the creation of new SMEs, 

and on the strengthening of new private enterprises. 

- The purpose of the programme aims at increasing sustainable employment opportunities. 

The LEAP programme is aligned to the national priorities and answers to the problems identified both in the 

NDS and the PRSP. LEAP is one of the PRSP’s special intervention programs. 

The logical framework of the GTA programme is in line with the 8 th EDF NIP. 

- The results of the programme mainly consist in training. 

- The purpose of the programme is the enhancement of the competence of work force and is in line with 

the outputs of the 8 th EDF NIP. 

The GTA is committed to support the objectives of the PRSP and the NDS, focussing on the restoration and 

improvement of the productive capacity through upgrading and training. 

I 3.1.2 Discrepancies between the programmes and the strategy are explicitly justified 

FA I 3.1.2 There are no discrepancies between the programmes and the strategy 

Mid-term 

evaluation 

I 3.1.2 

I 3.1.3 

There are no discrepancies between the programmes and the strategy 

Degree of alignment of Commission interventions with the NDS and the National Competitiveness 

Strategy for Guyana 

NDS, NCS I 3.1.3 The NDS underlines that the role of the private sector in the growth and development of Guyana’s economy is 

of strong importance. During the 1980s and the 1990s, the private sector suffered from a declining economy 




EGEVAL 

and the absence of a national policy on private sector development. The NDS identified several challenges that 

the Private sector development suffers from. Industrial development concentrated on the export of a few 

primary commodities and manufacturing has been neglected. The marketing capacity is poor: the domestic 

market size is too small and Guyana’s exports are mostly earmarked for CARICOM markets. Access to financial 

assistance to invest is also difficult. Moreover enterprises fail to retain skilled labour force who have been 

trained at their expense. 

The GoG drafted a National Competitiveness Strategy to deal with these issues. It identified the core supplyside 

impediments to competitiveness: a workforce with low productivity and narrow skill base, a weak 

vocational and technical training system, an insufficient access to affordable finance for investment and working 

capital, etc. The core elements of the competitiveness policy focus on: an incentive structure, investment, 

human resources, BDS, Infrastructure, Finance, the legal system and the export information and marketing. 

Commission interventions, which focused on BDS, training and financial services, are therefore in line with the 

GoG priorities in private sector development. 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

JC 3.2 Interventions in Guyana are in line with the best practices identified in PSD Evaluation 

I 3.2.1 Evidence that a methodological procedure has been adopted to select the areas of intervention to 

support PSD in Guyana 

Identification I 3.2.1 The LEAP programme has been designed following an identification study for the economic diversification of 

study for the 

Linden realised in October 1999. An analysis and diagnosis of the Linden region has been realised to formulate 

economic 

the project. The study recommends that the project should support the future diversification of the economic 

diversification 

base in the Linden area, helping it to move from reliance on the bauxite industry to alternative sources of 

of Linden 

economic growth. Indeed, the future of the bauxite mining in Linden is uncertain. The study highlights that the 

(1999) 

insufficient employment opportunities in Linden are due to a poorly developed private sector, an unskilled 

labour pool, weak local institutions and a lack of infrastructure that enhances business development. The private 

sector of Linden is poorly developed because of a poor access to capital and credit, enterprise skills are poorly 

developed, a lack of incentives to promote manufacturing, and a small local market. The study recommends that 

the focus of the project is almost entirely on support to micro, small and medium start-up or existing enterprises 

in Linden in the private sector. The support measures proposed mainly focus on 3 areas of intervention: 

business development services, financial services, and vocational training. 

FA, MR I 3.2.1 The GTA programme has been designed following a pre-feasibility study and a “Training Programme Guyana – 

Inception report”. The area of intervention –training- has been chosen after an analysis of Guyana PSD and 

training sectors main features. Indeed, the private sector organisations in Guyana have identified the dearth of 

skilled human resources as one of the main factors hindering improvement of the country’s productive capacity 




EGEVAL 

and still insufficiently addressed by GoG’s or donor activities. The vocational training sector in Guyana is 

characterized by a lack of capacity to produce skilled workers adapted to the needs of modern production units. 

The GoG’s Education Policy encourages the involvement of private sector in vocational training. Therefore, the 

project’s main component is the creation of a Training Agency which will identify and enable training 

companies, facilitate qualification of instructional personnel, design courses based on identified needs and 

improve in-plant training facilities. According to the 2001 MR, the project is very relevant in view of the limited 

possibilities in the country for vocational training and the project design is based on a good situation analysis 

and covers the need industry has for good in-company training. 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

Identification 

study for the 

economic 

diversification 

of Linden 

(1999) 

I 3.2.2 

I 3.2.2 

Evidence that the key constraints conditioning success in the areas of intervention have been 

addressed 

The identification study of the LEAP programme identified the key constraints of the areas of 

intervention selected for the project. 

- Business Development Services: due to the long term dependency on Linmine, little or no 

manufacturing tradition has developed in the area. The business community identified the main 

factors to account for the difficulties Linden has faced in diversifying its economy: the adding of 

value through processing of primary commodities is hardly practised, the step from producing 

for a local market to export markets is large, lack of readily available credit or long term 

financing, no organisation specifically geared towards business promotion within the Linden 

area. 

- Financial services: the formal banking institutions provide no specific facilities for small scale 

credit and no business support facilities in Linden. The Institute of Private Enterprise 

Development IPED is active in Linden providing financial services to small scale productive 

enterprises but its portfolio in Linden has gone down over the years due to a lack of demand. 

- Training: Accompanying the decline in the bauxite industry, there has been considerable outmigration 

of educated and skilled personnel from the town. The Linden Technical Institute has 

only little capacity to provide technical and vocational training in those areas where new 

employment opportunities exist. 

Moreover, the identification study followed a participatory approach to the identification of the 

opportunities and constraints and to the development of an economic diversification programme in 

Linden. Consultations have been held with all the parties involved: DEC, other donors, public sector 

officials, private sector representatives and members of the financial community. A number of 

stakeholder and beneficiary meetings were held in Linden to interact on potential interventions, 

implementation issues including their sustainability. 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

Mid-Term 

evaluation 

I 3.2.2 

Guyana’s dearth of skilled human resources as a major impediment to the improvement of the country’s 

productive capacity has been correctly assessed. The last MR indeed points out that the design of the 

project does not need to be adapted since professional training is desperately needed. But, one key 

constraint has not been addressed in the design of the project: the migration of skilled technical and key 

management personnel. In addition to the problem of insufficient qualification of workers, company 

managers stressed the problem of high emigration rates. The unfavourable changes in the economy have 

increased the migration of skilled workers and professional workers and this is posing a risk for 

employers considering training. 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

FA, 

Evaluation 

report 

I 3.2.3 

I 3.2.3 

The Guyana Training Agency – Inception report followed a participatory approach: briefing meetings 

with the DEC and the Private Sector Commission were held; some of the major stakeholders both in 

the training sector as well as from the donor community were consulted. Several companies expressed 

their willingness to accommodate training on their premises using their facilities and to send trainees to 

other companies for training and pay for it. 

Evidence that the coherence & complementarities between areas of intervention have been 

maximized 

The LEAP programme focuses on 3 main complementary areas of interventions: business development 

services, financial services and training. 

It has seven different components: Business development Unit, Business incubator, LEAF, Inward 

Investment Facility, Training, development of local capacity for economic planning and project design, 

and identification of infrastructure constraints to economic development. 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

LEAP 

Annual 

Report 2006 

I 3.2.3 

JC 3.3 

I.3.3.1 

I.3.3.1 

The Consultative Association of Guyanese Industry (CAGI) is a training centre that already exists. There 

is therefore a risk of overlapping of training activities. 

Commission support to private sector development in Business Development Services (BDS) 

has been conducive to enhanced SME activity 

Market for business services increased 

LEAP aimed at increasing the availability of market for business services and successfully met its targets. 

It is indeed essential to keep in mind that the market for BAS in Linden is very small. 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

LEAP 

Annual 

Report 2006 

I 3.3.2 

I 3.3.2 

Aim of the LEAP by 2009 Until 2006 Cumulative (%) 

2 privately run business advisory services (BAS) 4 200% 

agencies established and utilised 

10 BAS businesses established 1 10% 

Number of local market SME beneficiaries 

Until 2006, 25 small enterprises benefited form the incubator created by LEAP. The targets in terms of 

BAS provided and BAS workshops executed are also met. 

Aim of the LEAP by 2009 Until 2006 Cumulative (%) 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

> 35 BAS workshops executed 43 123% 

200 BAS provided per year 574 114% 

300 active clients per year 2002-06: 1500 693 46% 

30 entrepreneurs benefit from the Incubator 25 83% 

I.3.3.3 Evidence of encouragement of know-how and technologies & support to cooperation between 

industry and scientific research 

I.3.3.3 There is definitely no such evidence. LEAP is mainly providing support to the agricultural sector, and 

apart from the exchanges of experience between farmers of different regions in Guyana or countries in 

the Caribbean, one can not state that LEAP facilitates cooperation between industry and scientific 

research. 

I 3.3.4 Evidence of the impact of BDS on SME competitiveness 

Field Mission I 3.3.4 The NCS stresses that many Guyanese enterprises suffer from a number of deficiencies in BDS which 

affect their ability to effectively compete. The BDS market in Guyana is deficient in both quality and 

quantity in a number of critical areas. There are not many BDS suppliers operating in Guyana and their 

range of services is limited. 

LEAP is providing support to private sector development in BDS through 2 main components: the 

Business Development Unit and the Business Incubator. The BDU provides BAS dealing with 

management and organisation issues whereas the BI provides support for start-up businesses. 

The MTR already stressed the beneficiaries’ satisfaction with LEAP services. Several interviews with the 

beneficiaries conducted during the field mission allowed the evaluation team to appreciate the impacts 

of the BDS provided by LEAP on SME competitiveness in Linden. 

The BAS component helped to build the capacity of the community. It created or supported already 

existing associations in the region (the national craft association, the tourism association, the logging 

association, the farmers association – the last one being created through LEAP). The associations 

provide services to their members and the LEAP provides physical capacities to these associations. 

The incubator (beyond the schedule for 2 years) is nowadays providing support to around 10 small 

enterprises in Linden through provision of subsidized facilities, training and advice and allows the 

enterprises to grow. One beneficiary has criticized the lack of practicality of the approach of the LEAP 

and the lack of skills of the PMU staff in terms of accounting and HRD. The establishment of a second 

incubator for industrial enterprises is planned. 




EGEVAL 

Moreover, a business centre has been created whereas it was not foreseen at the design of the 

programme. This is the only facility of this kind in the country. 

Finally, a call centre has been established in Linden: it employs 50 people and plans to hire until 120 

employees. LEAP helped to recruit the employees and provides advice. 

Focus on the Farmers’ Association 

This association has been created through the assistance of LEAP and is nowadays the most important 

farmers’ association of the Caribbean. LEAP provided several BDS: 

- technological transfers through exchanges of experience with farmers from Trinidad and 

Jamaica 

- training in commercial management 

- training in accounting, farm management, poultry etc 

- financing of their website 

- visits to other farmers’ associations in Guyana 

- Registration of the association 

- Helping the farmers to get access to land 

Since the creation of the association in 2005, the farmers’ production has significantly improved due to 

the transfers of technologies from Trinidad regarding tomatoes’ production for example. This allowed 

them to produce for commercial purposes and to improve their incomes. 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

LEAF 

reports and 

Field mission 

LEAP 

Annual 

report 2006 

and Field 

mission 

JC 3.4 

I 3.4.1 

I 3.4.1 

I 3.4.2 

I 3.4.2 

Commission support to private sector development in financial services has been conducive to 

increased SME activity 

Number of beneficiary SME 

509 loans have been disbursed as at end of September 2007, but it is impossible to know how many 

enterprises benefited from the loans. This data is not provided in the LEAF reports. 

Volume of financing 

1. The aim was that LEAF money was fully disbursed by early 2006 (€m1.9). This goal is achieved at 

66.7% at the end of 2006. This is a very positive result due to the crisis LEAF had to go through in 

between October 2005-August 2007. 




EGEVAL 

Aim of LEAF by 

2006 

LEAF money fully 

disbursed : 1.9€m 

(=518.1$m) 

Until 2006 Achieved 

(Percentage) 

345.1$m 66.7% 

On October 2005, the Office of Commissioner of Insurance (OCI) issued a statement which stated that 

the GUYFLAG (insurance company in charge of the management of LEAF funds) was to cease its 

operations due to alleged irregularities committed by GUYFLAG in conducting its insurance business. 

In 2005 and 2006, the matter was largely unresolved. Consequently, no new funds were made available 

and loans could only be made out of repayments received. In August 2007, the EC delegation judged 

that the 4 criteria required to continue the contract were met and decided that the EU will continue with 

funding. 

2. The initial aim of LEAF was to provide credits to micro-enterprises (12 employees). LEAF has achieved its 

goals as far as micro-enterprises are concerned but has not met its targets regarding small and 

medium enterprises. 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

LEAP 

Annual 

report 2006 

and Field 

mission 

I 3.4.3 

I 3.4.3 


2009 


(Percentage) 

300 micro-credits 347 115% 

disbursed 

200 sm./medium 

credits disbursed 

98 49% 

Quality of the financing (recovery rate) 

It is difficult to assess the performance of the funds because LEAF has only been operating for 2 years. 

At the end of 2006, micro-credits have been recollected at 28% and small and medium credits have been 

recollected at 4%. The recovery rate is therefore not satisfying at this stage. However, Guyflag has still 

some time ahead (until 2009) to recollect the credits. Moreover, this situation is mainly due to the crisis 

encountered by LEAF since October 2005. Some clients still have the perception that they might soon 

not be liable to GUYFLAG for the loans received. This situation is resulting in numerous cases of nonperforming 

clients. 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

LEAF 

reports 

I 3.4.4 

I 3.4.4 


2009 


(Percentage) 

300 micro-credits 85 28% 

recollected 

200 sm./medium 

credits recollected 

8 4% 

Economic activities targeted by LEAF 

1. As a whole, LEAF mainly targeted the primary sector (forestry and agriculture). It also supported the 

development of the tertiary sector (vending and services). LEAF has however not supported the growth 

of the manufacturing sector. 

Main sectors targeted by LEAF 

Share 

Forestry 31% 

Agriculture 16% 

Services 21% 

Vending 16% 

Manufacturing 3% 

Agriculture, Forestry, Manufacturing and Tourism are indeed the 4 growth sectors identified by the 

Regional Development Strategy for Region 10 and one could therefore note the alignment of LEAF 

with the future priorities of the Region but also criticize LEAF for not having supported the 

manufacturing sector. 

2. The tertiary sector mainly benefited from micro-loans whereas the primary sector mainly benefited 

from small and medium loans. 

LEAF Micro-loans per sector (3 main sectors presented) 

Share 

Vending 45% 


Services 18% 




EGEVAL 

LEAF Small loans per sector (3 main sectors presented) 

Share 

Services 31% 

Forestry 27% 


8 ACP 

GUA 9 

LEAF Medium loans per sector 

Share 

Forestry 81% 


Manufacturing 7% 

I 3.4.5 Evidence of the impact of financial services on SME competitiveness 

Field mission I 3.4.4 We do not have sufficient data to complete this indicator. 

The NCS identified the challenges faced by enterprises in Guyana in accessing finance: 

- Limited range of financial institutions limiting the supply of loans: the range of financial 

institutions in Guyana is fairly limited and Banks do not offer financial services. The relative 

importance of investments of the banking system in the enterprise sector has been on a 

decrease. 

- Relatively high interest rates which affect the competitiveness of Guyana’s products. Interest 

rates for lending to enterprises range between 8% and 18%. Annual micro-finance rates 

fluctuate around 15% flat. 

- Limited capacity of the banks to appraise long-term projects 

The interviews conducted in the field also clearly stressed the lack of access to financial resources as an 

impediment to the growth of the economic activity. There is indeed a strong demand for credit in 

Linden but only one commercial bank; the remaining ones being in Georgetown. Moreover, the interest 

rates offered by banks prevent people from borrowing funds. Therefore, the existence of LEAF on the 

one hand and the 15% interest rate proposed on the other hand allow potential investors to borrow 

funds in order to start or expand a business. One should however keep in mind that the PSD evaluation 

stressed that the EC should avoid programmes aimed just at the provision of credit lines. 

LEAF had strong impacts: it stimulated economic activities and fostered the entrepreneurship spirit of 

Region 10. Most of the funds allocated are micro-loans and it has not been possible to supply medium- 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

Final 

Evaluation 

report, 2005 

Final 

Evaluation 

Report, 2005 

JC 3.5 

I 3.5.1 

I 3.5.1 

size enterprises. The impacts have however been constrained by the problems encountered by Guyflag 

and could have been greater. 

Commission support to private sector development in training has been conducive to increased 

SME competitiveness 

Number of beneficiary enterprises 

The project successfully passed performance indicators. Training needs were assessed in 208 companies 

and institutions. 

Original Planning Initial Project 

Overall Achievements 

according to Planning 

Core Activities 

by July 31, 2004 (3 

Feasibility Study (3 until April 30, 2003 4 

years) 

years) 

(2 years) 

Assessment of 

done in 208 companies 

not quantified 30 companies 

training needs 

and institutions 

I 3.5.2 Number of trained people 

I 3.5.2 The GTA programme has successfully met its targets. A total of 50 short-term courses with 498 

participants were delivered. In addition, 66 trainees participated in 7 long-term courses. Finally, a total of 

159 certified assessors and instructors were in the system at end of project. 

Core Activities 

Delivery of Short 

Term Training 

Delivery of Long 

Term Training 

Assessment of 

Training Courses 

and Students 

Certification of 

Students 

Original Planning 

according to 

Feasibility Study (3 

years) 

84 courses 

1,260 participants 

6 long term courses (12 

months) 

120 participants 

not quantified 

Initial Project 

Planning 

until April 30, 2003 5 

(2 years) 

20 training courses 


3 long term courses 

(no # of participants 

stated) 

no indicator 

Overall Achievements 

by July 31, 2004 (3 

years) 

50 training courses 


7 traineeships (6 

months) 


50 courses / 478 

students assessed 

not quantified no indicator 339 participants 

certified 

Upgrading of 62 person months 45 Instructors 159 Instructors and 




EGEVAL 

Instructors and 

Assessors 

(corresponding to a one 

week training of 248 

participants) 

Assessors upgraded 

The crime situation in Guyana has always been an impediment to evening courses. 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

LEAP 

Annual 

Report 2006 

I 3.5.2 

LEAP training activities, in terms of number of people trained, are satisfactorily meeting the goals. 

Aim of LEAP by 2009 

Until 

2006 

Cumulative 

(Percentage) 

300 young people trained in business literacy 125 42% 

150 young people benefit from in-service employment 330 220% 

training 

Specialised training for 100 people/year 368 368% 

LEAP trained 1,079 people over the period 2002-2006. 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

Number of people trained by LEAP per year: 

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total 

132 195 320 195 237 1,079 

I 3.5.3 Evidence of the impact of training on SME competitiveness 

NCS I 3.5.3 The NCS identifies investments in skills as a vital pre-condition for improved national competitiveness. 

The strategy also seeks to ensure that these skills can be retained in the country and not simply exported 

via the brain drain. The main challenges in education relate to vocational and technical training where 

there are large gaps in provision and a resulting shortage of skilled, technical labour force. 

Approximately 3,500 people are trained annually in Guyana. The GTA project is indeed recognized as a 

recent success by the strategy. High levels of migration, especially of skilled people, are also continuing 

to create a huge gap in the supply of labour. The NCS stresses that it will be a long-term process to 

address the brain drain issue and also explores strategies to mitigate the impact of the loss of skills from 

Guyana through migration policies. 

Final 

Evaluation 

I 3.5.3 

At micro level, the involved companies acknowledge the impact of focussed individual-designed 

training. The involved companies have been satisfied with the training and it is expected that results will 




EGEVAL 

report, 2005 

have a positive impact on employee performance and production. 

Customer satisfaction exercises and impact assessments were carried out on a regular basis as part of the 

monitoring exercise. The overall reaction to GTA training was clearly favourable with about 80% of 

responses replying that the service came up to their expectations. 

The overall impact of the project was however limited due to the small size of the organisation, the 

limited number of clients, the general state of the economy and the availability of alternative training. 

8 ACP 

GUA 9 

LEAP 

Annual 

Report 2006 

I 3.5.3 

LEAP, through its training component, clearly has a strategy to improve technical vocational and 

management skills. LEAP conducted training programmes in specific sectors such as agriculture, 

forestry, sewing, fabric and garment design, craft, etc which would allow the participants to generate 

income from the skills imparted. LEAP also designed and conducted training programmes to assist the 

entrepreneurs to improve the management of their businesses, in the areas of book keeping & 

accountancy, and in computer applications for small business. Finally, LEAP conducted training in 

Portuguese, job readiness, capacity building and project management. All these trainings increase the 

skills of the participants and implicitly contribute to the improvement of the competitiveness of their 

business. 

8 ACP 

GUA 8 

Final 

evaluation 

report, 2005 

I 3.5.3 

On a macro lever, the GTA project caused no significant change. Although the GTA provision of 

technical training has disappeared, the need for technical training, which was at the origin of the GTA, 

remains. Nothing has filled the vacuum left by the GTA, and nothing looks likely to do so. There is 

currently no consensus within the private sector on what the training needs are and how they can be 

met. There is little dialogue between the public and private sectors on training issues. The TVET 

Council will come into existence as a result of the TVET Act, but whether it will have the money or the 

will to make the necessary innovations remains to be seen. The private sector is still not able to retain 

skilled workforce from migration. Guyana lacks a national policy on migration of its skilled workforce. 




EGEVAL 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

9 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

8 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

9 

JC 3.6 Results achieved by Commission support are maintained after the end of its direct support 

I 3.6.1 Explicit reference in the FA to measures to ensure sustainability 

FA I 3.6.1 There is no explicit reference in the FA to measures to ensure sustainability. We can however suppose that 2 out of the 7 

activities of the programme might contribute to ensure sustainability: technical and management training, and 

development of local capacity for economic planning, project design and implementation. 

FA I 3.6.1 There is an explicit reference in the FA to measures to ensure sustainability: “The beneficiary companies provide 

resources for the training and contribute to the running cost of the agency itself. In year 3, the cost of the training agency 

can nearly be financed out of the user fees.” 

Evaluation 

report, 

MR, Field 

mission 

I 

3.6.2 

I 3.6.2 

Evidence that the benefits continue to be used after the end of the intervention 

The end date of the LEAP programme is January 2009. At the time of the design of the programme, no exit strategy has 

been foreseen. The LEAP 2 nd Mid-Term review did not provide any exit issue. There are ongoing discussions on the 

sustainability of the programme but key stakeholders think that these discussions should have taken place before. 

On the EC Delegation side, an extension of the programme is not foreseen. The LEAP belongs in the end to the GoG 

and the local authorities must own the project. 

National support for the programme is strong but eventual sustainability of the LEAP relies on the existence of 

strengthened local institutions able to take over the programme. The financial allocations for institutional strengthening 

represent 2.4% of the LEAP budget and do not appear sufficient enough to strengthen properly local institutions. Until 

now, public and private organisations do not have sufficient capacity to undertake LEAP’s activities. 

In terms of institutional strengthening, LEAP focused on key stakeholder institutions having a direct impact on the 

economic development of the Region such as the Regional Democratic Council and the Linden Chamber of Commerce, 

Industry and Development. Support to the LCICD (hiring of an executive coordinator for 17 months, rewriting of the 

Chamber’s constitution, etc) has been disappointing and the capacities of the LCICD are still very weak. 

Aim of LEAP by 2009 Until 2006 Cumulative (%) 

The Linden Chamber of Industry 

Commerce & development 

comprises 100 members 

33 33% 

Support to the RDC has been much more fruitful: a junior economic planner has been recruited to assist in the writing of 




EGEVAL 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

8 

MR, Midterm 

evaluation, 

Final 

Evaluation, 

LEAP 

Evaluation 

report, 

Field visit 

the Regional Development Strategy and work is currently undergoing with the RDC to increase their capacity for 

investment and promotion. The RDC is also the local institution which has been conceptually attached to LEAP at the 

design stage. This local institution seems the most likely to take over the programme. However, the beneficiaries of the 

programme do not have the same viewpoint. Indeed, the RDC is a local political body and it therefore does not seem 

quite appropriate that a political body take over the programme. 

As far as the LEAF is concerned, the insurance company would like to maintain it. It has until June 2009 to repay the 

funds to the GoG.. The sustainability of the LEAF will depend on the willingness of the company. 

In the end, local authorities will probably have to look for other funding (GoG, donors) to maintain LEAP. 

The national GoG is envisaging a replication of LEAP in Regions 2, 3 and 6, which are heavily dependant on sugar. This 

eventual replication is somehow a kind of sustainability of the LEAP but does not guarantee that the benefits brought in 

Region 10 will continue after the end of the Commission intervention. 

I 3.6.2 The project was not sustainable institutionally. It closed when the European Commission ended funding on 31 July 2004. 

It was not possible to become self-sufficient within the planned timeframe. Insufficient private sector investment 

precluded it from becoming financially self-sufficient. The active participation of stakeholders especially of the PSC was 

insufficient in planning, implementation and financing. This was mentioned in all monitoring reports, but no corrective 

action was taken. 

Being a new institution created for the project, GTA was not sustainable without further donor support. Moreover, 

neither the Private Sector Commission as the implementing agency nor the Government of Guyana were in a position to 

guarantee GTA’s survival. No other donor appeared to want to continue investing. Despite the GTA’s own efforts to 

generate income, significant external support was lacking to achieve sustainability over the time. 

Beneficiaries without exception attest to continuously applying the new competencies in their workplace. Thus, the 

benefits of the project continue to remain in the target group. 

The project has indeed been based on three wrong assumptions: 

1- the country will go on enjoying a positive economical and stable political climate 

2-the beneficiary companies will pay for the training of their employees, make available their premises and contribute to 

the running costs of the Training Agency itself 

3- In year 3, the Training Agency will be self-sufficient 




EGEVAL 

What happened in reality was: 

1- Unfavourable changes in the economy have hampered project effectiveness because employers have been less willing 

to invest in training. 

2-There has not been the private sector investment that the GTA requires to finance itself and there was a problem in 

finding training sites to conduct the training because companies are averse to the risks of liability and company privacy. 

3-GTA was expected to become self-financing from course fees and membership subscriptions, and although it raised 

considerable amounts of revenue, it failed to become self-sufficient. This was the official reason for the closure, but other 

factors contributed as well. There was no ownership of the newly created agency despite the intensive consultation of the 

PSC when analysing the feasibility of the project. The PSC had already been involved with the Consultative Association of 

Guyanese Industry (CAGI) as a training centre and ultimately made the choice to exclude GTA and retain CAGI. 

The failure of the project is more disappointing since it achieved a number of successes in the number of courses, number 

of participants and development of training methodology. 

The field visit confirmed these findings. There is a strong need in Guyana for vocational and technical training. The GTA 

project was a well-conceived programme however based on a wrong assumption: the enterprises will pay for the training 

of their employees. The enterprises were more willing to pay for training at management level and the GTA got in 

conflict with an already exiting training agency (CAGI) which was providing this kind of training. As a result, the GTA 

has been closed. This project was therefore not sustainable. This is unfortunate as the project achieved positive impacts 

and as there are strong needs in Guyana for this kind of training. The ex-programme manager of this project has indeed 

been mandated to realize an assessment of the Guyanese situation in terms of vocational and technical training and to 

redesign it to make it more relevant to the needs. 

The Private Sector Commission is putting in place a strategic plan to reverse the brain drain problem. Without such a 

strategy, it seems meaningless to finance projects dealing with vocational and technical training. 

JC 3.7 

I 3.7.1 

Commission support to private sector strengthening has contributed to restoring and increasing Guyana’s 

productive capacity 

Evidence of increased production capacity and private sector activity: 

- increased number of new firms, including SMEs 

- higher employment levels 

- higher production levels 




EGEVAL 

- increased volume and value of non-traditional exports 

I 3.7.1 

This indicator is only partially completed due to a lack of data. 

- Production levels have increased over the period 1996-2006: GDP at current factor cost increased from G$ 82m to $G 

139m 

Evolution of GDP at current factor cost (1996-2006) 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

GDP at 

current 

factor 

costs 82,258 89,744 90,471 102,098 NA NA NA 123,263 130,701 133,914 139,773 

Source: IMF, Guyana: Statistical Annex, 2001 & IMF, Guyana PRSP Progress Report, 2006 

I 

3.7.2 

I 3.7.2 

Evidence of increased private sector investments relative to public investments 

Over the period 1996-2006, the share of private sector investments relative to public sector investments decreases: from 

57.5% to 22.1%. The ratio increased from 1996 to 1999 -and culminated at 106.7% in 1999- before decreasing to 44.8% 

in 2003 to 22.1% in 2006. 

Evolution of Private & Public sector investments in Guyana, 1996-2006 (in millions of Guyana dollars) 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Private investment 10,843 13,101 14,480 15,242 NA NA NA 9,342 8,872 9,904 10,468 

Public investment 18,867 19,271 16,666 14,285 NA NA NA 20,865 25,300 42,291 47,351 

Private 

57.5% 68.0% 86.9% 106.7% 44.8% 35.1% 23.4% 22.1% 

Investment/Public 

Investment 

Source: IMF, Guyana: Statistical Annex, 2001 & IMF, Guyana PRSP Progress Report, 2006 

I 

3.7.3 

I 3.7.3 

Evidence of increased private capital inflows (foreign direct investment and remittances) 

The tables hereunder indicate first that Guyana receives considerable FDI compared to its GDP. The trend over the 

period 1996-2006 also shows that Guyana is receiving less FDI. Moreover, Guyana’s FDI is representing a very small 

share of the total FDI received by the Caribbean countries: 0.5% in between 2003 and 2005. 




EGEVAL 

Inward Foreign Direct Investment Performance Index ranking for Guyana (1996-2005) a) 

1996-1998 1997-99 1998- 1999- 2002 2003 2004 2005 

2000 2001 

Guyana 8 21 21 17 18 28 41 31 

ranking 

a)The Index covers 141 countries 

Source: United Nations, World Investment Report, 2003 and 2006 

This index ranks countries by the Foreign Direct Investment they receive relative to their economic size; it is calculated as 

the ratio of a country’s share in global FDI inflows to its share in global GDP. 

FDI flows (in millions of dollars), 2003-2005 

2003 2004 2005 

Guyana 26 30 77 

Caribbean countries 5893 41550 38235 

Guyana (in % of 0.4% 0.7% 0.2% 

Caribbean countries) 

Source: United Nations, World Investment Report, 2006 




EGEVAL 

LEAP 2 nd 

Mid-Term 

Evaluation, 

GoInvest 

I 3.7.4 Number of bankruptcy filings and number of new SMEs per year. 

I 3.7.4 This information is not available. 

I.3.7.5 Existence of new SME-friendly regulations and specific measures to enhance private sector investments in the 

productive sectors 

I.3.7.5 The GoG has taken initiatives to provide a more business-friendly environment and improve investment ranking on the 

foreign direct performance index. to improve the regulatory climate, the Government has taken steps recently including 

reducing the number of necessary trade licenses, passing a Value-added Tax bill in 2005, the Investment Act of 2004, the 

Small Business Act of 2004, and a Competition and Fair Trading Bill (due to be passed by May 2006). Furthermore, as part of 

the recent NCS process, the Government is strengthening regulatory and administrative processes as well as improving the 

environment for public-private dialogue through the establishment of a National Competitiveness Council. 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

8 & 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

9 

The Investment Act of 2004 is the principal legislation governing investment in Guyana and is intended to play a reassuring 

role for investors by providing legal protection for investment, increasing the predictability, stability and transparency of the 

legal regime for investment, promoting the development of international best practices regarding investment, and streamlining 

the existing procedures for investment. Moreover, a Small Business Bureau and Small Business Council have been set up 

within MinTIC as a direct result of the Small Business Act 2004. 

I 3.7.6 Testimonies of Guyanese officials on the impacts of Commission support on Guyana’s productive capacity 

Field Visit I 3.7.6 Commission support to PSD in Guyana is weak. Over the past ten years, only two projects dealt with this issue. The LEAP 

mainly enhances the production capacity of the primary sector and only targets Region 10. The impacts of Commission 

interventions in PSD on Guyana’s productive capacity are therefore limited. 




EGEVAL 

P 

Nber 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

4 

& 

9 

AC 

P 

GU 

A 

6&7 

Source 

EC Guidelines 

for designing 

Budget Support 

Programmes 

(2002) 

Nomade 

presentation on 

BS Evaluation 

of 29 th of March 

2007 

FA, MR, PS, 

File notes 

FA 

EQ 4 

To what extent has Commission budget support contributed to the improvement of the social 

conditions? 

The Budget Support (BS) provided by the EU has helped the GoG to pursue its global policy objectives 

expressed in the 1998-2001 PFP, the HIPC documents and the Poverty Reduction Strategy (2002-2005) (see 

EQ1). The entire reform programme (see I.1.1.1) has thus been supported but special attention has been paid 

by the Commission to: (i) the fiduciary context of budget support through the monitoring of the global 

performance and of selected elements of the public finance management system and (ii) to the achievement of 

the GoG’s ultimate objective of poverty reduction via the monitoring of a limited number of service delivery 

indicators in education (SASP programmes only), health and social housing. In order to assess the extent to 

which BS has contributed to the improvement of social conditions, the evaluation uses a two-pronged 

approach: 

• Firstly, the design of the BS programmes (SAS IV, SAS V and PRBS) and in particular the general 

conditions adopted by the PRBS for the release of both fixed and variable tranche show that the provision 

of BS aimed to positively influence the framework for public policy and public expenditures in Guyana 

through: (i) the EC’s participation in policy discussions regarding macro-economic management and 

sector policies (including the overall PRSP) and (ii) the monitoring of the general qualitative performance 

of PFM. These process issues which are essential (if not sufficient) to ensure that policies can be 

satisfactorily implemented so that conditions are favourable for attaining the desired impact, have clearly 

been as important in the Guyana BS as the reaching of the ultimate objective of poverty reduction itself. 

Judging by the choice of disbursement criteria, it is noted that general conditions linked to these two 

process issues condition the totality of the fixed tranches of the PRBS disbursement (50% of BS) and 

specific PFM output indicators condition another 40% of the variable tranches thus linking overall 

process indicators to 70% of BS release. The progress made in these two process areas thus needs to be 

ascertained to measure their potential contribution to the improvement of the overall fiscal and public 

policy framework. The evaluation of the process is undertaken through Judgment Criteria 4.1 to 4.4. 

• Secondly the EC’s BS aimed to contribute to the overall objective of poverty reduction and economic 

growth where access and use of basic social services was of particular importance. The focus of BS on the 

improvement of social conditions was made by linking 60% of the amounts to be released under the 

variable tranches of SAS-V and PRBS to performance indicators in the education (SAS-V), health and 

social housing sectors. The design of the BS programmes thus implicitly makes the link between the use 

of the budget support, the improved delivery of social services and the final outcome of selected social 




EGEVAL 

indicators. The assessment of the extent to which EC’s BS may have contributed to reach the overall 

social impact is carried out under Judgement criteria 4.5. 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

4 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

FA, MR, PS 

FA 

Field mission 

interviews 

JC 4.1 

The use of budget support has enabled the Commission to engage in a dialogue with the GoG 

regarding PRSP design and implementation. 

Due to the fact that budget support provides by definition support to the programme chosen by the 

Government and implemented through the execution of its budget, the EC’s choice of using the BS 

instrument and its decision on the amounts to be allocated to BS rely inter alia on considerations of the general 

policy orientations and of the structural adjustment and reform programmes adopted by the GoG. However, 

it is not until the latest BS programme (PRBS) that EC-GoG policy discussions have been put at the heart of 

the BS programme design in Guyana. 

Indeed the earlier General Import Programmes (GIP I to III respectively covering 1993, 1994 and 1995) were 

provided as balance of payment support. Only the latest GIP used counterpart funds to finance specific lines 

of the GoG budget rather than to finance projects, thus introducing some element of discussion with the 

authorities on priority budget lines (specifically, civil service reform and maintenance costs in education and 

health were targeted). The ‘new generation’ BS with SAS IV (1998) and V (programmed for 1999-2000 but 

effectively implemented in 2000 and 2001) both offered support targeted to specific expenditure items and 

budget lines within selected ministries’ budgets (education, health, housing). Little is known about the 

conditions under which these earlier programmes were drawn up, files being no longer available and staff 

having changed in the meantime, but it is supposed that discussions must have been had with the authorities 

on the choice of budget lines targeted by BS and thus on what both parties considered to be priority spending 

that could be secured through BS. 

The PRBS 2004-2007 formalised the need for broad and sector policy discussions by introducing regular 

policy dialogue as one of three preconditions to the release of BS funds: “The Government shall associate the 

Commission in the dialogue on macro-economic (in particular IMF) and sectoral policies”. The introduction of this issue as 

a conditionality for the release of fixed and variable tranche BS underlines the emphasis given by the 

Commission to the importance of remaining fully informed about macro-economic and fiscal developments in 

the context of a non-targeted, general BS. The issue is evaluated at the hand of three indicators, as follows. 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

Commission file 

notes 

Correspondence 

I 4.1.1 

I 4.1.1 

Frequency and quality of meetings between GoG and DEC on macro-economic, fiscal and poverty 

reduction strategy issues 

From the documentation pertaining to the assessment of the conditions for tranche releases, the dialogue 

between the GoG and the Commission appears not to have responded to expectations: the lack of 

participation of the Commission in the macro and fiscal dialogue was underlined specifically as being of great 




EGEVAL 

between EC 

HQ- Delegation 

and GoG 

Field mission 

interviews 

concern to the Commission HQ (less so at Delegation level) but did nevertheless not represent an issue of 

such importance as to be an impediment to the disbursement of the tranches. The main reason for this 

unsatisfactory dialogue is twofold. 

Firstly, it appears that the EC expected to participate in the yearly IMF reviews; but discussions of progress on 

IMF programmes are a bilateral matter between the government and the IMF where no third party is allowed 

to participate, even as an observer. In Guyana, this would be even more the case than elsewhere since the 

GoG does not even allow the IMF to publish the results of its Article IV consultations (contrary to most 

other countries). Whether to close the information gap by directly attending the meetings or to participate 

more closely in high level policy discussions, it is felt that the EC’s disbursement condition was unrealistic and 

that GoG’s eventual (2005/2006) response to allow the IMF to share its results verbally with the group of 

main donors at the end of the review was appropriate. In the meantime, the condition of a macro-economic 

and fiscal policy dialogue taking place has thus never been fully satisfied, with the earlier period (2004 and 

2005) being particularly poor. On the macro and fiscal policy dialogue, it is thus interesting to note that the 

EC, as only provider of untargeted and direct BS to Guyana6 (and excluding debt relief which cannot stricto 

sensu be considered as a provision of external financing) has been treated just like any other donor in terms of 

the information (not) being released to it. 

Secondly, it is generally recognised that GoG-donor dialogue in Guyana is very much limited to (i) bilateral 

discussions and (ii) to project level discussions (see EQ8). It is only in the second half of the period reviewed 

that GoG-donor working groups have been formed in priority sectors and although donors participated in the 

national discussions of the PRSP when the PRSP was drafted (2001-2002) there does not seem to have been 

any general policy orientations discussions or specific donor contributions to the PRSP’s design and contents. 

The EC has been involved in whatever GoG-dialogue has taken place at general or sector level, but no more 

than any other donor. 

The leverage usually associated with the provision of BS to discuss general policy orientations and progress in 

the implementation of reforms has thus not materialised in Guyana. 




EGEVAL 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 


file notes 

Field mission 

interviews 

I 4.1.1 

On the other hand, specific discussions related to the implementation of ongoing programmes seem to have 

taken place, either in the context of thematic groups (see EQ8) or specifically within the context of reviewing 

conditions for BS tranche release. No documents were found concerning the earlier SAS IV programme but 

for SAS V and PRBS tranche release, sufficient documentation was reviewed to conclude that at least fiscal 

management has been a continuous topic of scrutiny and discussion over the period. For the SASP, missions 

from HQ were deployed to assist the DCE in assessing conditions for tranche release; under the PRBS, 

consultants were recruited to undertake 2 missions a year, one for reviewing the conditions for the release of 

the fixed tranche focusing on the progress of the PFM systems and one for reviewing conditions for the 

release of the variable tranche focusing on the public finance, health and housing indicators. 

These reviews call for several comments. Firstly the choice of indicators retained for variable tranche release 

has not been conducive to developing policy dialogue: in PFM, out of seven indicators, three measured 

performance of TAs funded by the EC (and thus also measured the EC’s performance in providing timely and 

quality TA) and one measured the performance of activities funded by the IDB (and again quite independent 

from the GoG itself). Two other indicators were output and time-bound indicators that could, if taken within 

a broader context, represent reform efforts of the GoG but their narrow interpretation by the EC precluded 

any policy discussion whilst the third indicator was an input indicator. In the social sectors, only 3 indicators 

were retained for health, all three depending on donor funded programmes, whilst only 2 output indicators 

were chosen for social housing: these five social indicators could hardly form the grounds for a dialogue on 

sector policy and strategy. Secondly, partly because of the nature of the indicators, the reviews appear not to 

have given rise to in-depth sector analysis but to have been limited to a rather narrow assessment of the value 

of the indicators. As a consequence, and possibly because the review of the indicators was carried out by 

external consultants, the link between performance indicator assessment and policy discussions was not made. 

Finally the evaluation system did not allow for much flexibility (whether because of external circumstances or 

because targets were set unrealistic) thus sometimes leading to unnecessarily harsh conclusions on targets 

achieved. 

What is interesting to note here is that fiscal management has sometimes 7 been deemed unsatisfactory by the 

EC (HQ mainly) but that this has never impeded full disbursement of the fixed tranches of BS; on the other 

hand, when PFM performance indicators for variable tranche release of PRBS did not reach their targets, they 

have led to the effective reduction of the amount disbursed 8 . 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

Consultants 

reports on 

performance 

indicator for 

I 4.1.2 

I 4.1.2 

Evidence of changes in GoG strategy following policy dialogue with Commission 

Due to the unavailability of institutional memory both at the Delegation and the NAO’s office (the NAO’s 

task force having only been operational from 2005 onwards), no evidence has been found that any policy or 

other discussions between the GoG and the EC might have led to strategy changes by GoG. Taking the 




EGEVAL 

variable tranche 

release 

indicator at the level of sector or tranche release discussions, it is very likely, as will be seen below in JC 4.2, 

that the repeated discussions on PFM issues (twice a year, once on general progress and once on specific 

indicators) have helped to raise awareness of the authorities on the importance of improving the soundness 

and transparency of the PFM systems and have thus contributed (even if indirectly) to current developments 

towards a well defined, prioritised and sequenced PFM reform programme. Similarly, in the health sector, the 

TA support to develop professional codes of practice funded by the EC eventually led the Ministry of Health 

to initiate a number of new bills on nursing practitioners, nursing standards and quality, health protection and 

promotion etc. 

In addition, the linkage of the amounts of the variable tranches to performance indicators might have 

influenced at least one of the government’s activities: the implementation of BS using the timely presentation 

of the budget to Parliament as one of the variable tranche indicators has coincided with the fact that budget 

presentation was brought forward from an average of end of March in the years 1998 to 2004 to end of 

January in 2005 and in 2006. It is to be noted incidentally that this important improvement did not benefit 

GoG in terms of the amount of variable tranche release since the EC considered this indicator as not having 

been reached, falling short of the end of December target. Whether or not it is the incentive of this particular 

indicator which has prompted GoG to improve the timeliness of its budget presentation thus remains 

equivocal. 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

FA 

PFM half yearly 

reports 

I 4.1.3 

I 4.1.3 

Participation and role of Commission in donor wide discussions on public finance management 

issues and PRSP 

Until recently (2007) no forum for discussions specifically dedicated to PFM issues existed even though many 

donors have been or are active in the PFM area: the IDB, the World Bank, the IMF and CIDA. Inter alia, 

these donors have been active in introducing integrated computerised financial and accounting management 

systems (IFMAS under CIDA and IDB funding); strengthening of audit and accounting functions (IMF, 

CIDA); legal environment, regulations and procedures (many donors); external debt management (IDB, 

DFiD, EC); tax reforms (IMF). The Commission has promoted improved public finance management in 

Guyana by using the progress in PFM as a general condition for fixed and variable tranche release and by 

introducing PFM performance criteria to leverage its disbursement of variable tranches (with PFM indicators 

weighing 40% of the total tranche). The Commission also financed TA in PFM areas such as fiscal 

projections, the elaboration of MTEF in the ministries of health, education, housing and public works. In this 

context, under the PRBS, the EC has also conducted six-monthly PFM reviews. 

It appears that each donor has traditionally assisted the GoG on specific issues, neither overlapping nor 

duplicating the efforts of other donors but not coordinating either within an overall mutually agreed and 

prioritised framework 9 . The basis for the interventions was mainly the diagnostic provided in 2002 by the 

CFAA (IMF) and the ROSC (WB). Donor-GoG coordination within a common framework has only recently 




EGEVAL 

started with the joint undertaking in 2007 of a PEFA (including participation of the EU) which is intended to 

provide the basis for development of a global, prioritised and sequenced PFM reform programme and action 

plan. 

Similarly regarding PRSP discussions, as noted above, the EU has had no other role than the participation, 

likewise to other donors, in the national presentations and discussions of the PRSP during the review period. 

Again, this is currently changing: as the second PRSP is being prepared, donors have pulled together and have 

even issued a common statement with regards to funding of the PRSP preparation (see EQ8). 




EGEVAL 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

PRSP 

PRS 2004 

report 

JC 4.2 

The use of BS has contributed to improving the government’s planning and budgetary system 

including its public finance management capacity. 

One of the areas targeted by the Poverty Reduction Strategy concerned the fiscal policies. They aimed at: 

(i) 

increasing public sector savings via revenue generation (based on a broadening of the tax base, a 

reduction of rates and improvement of tax collection and administration) and expenditure control (based 

on improved recurrent/capital allocations, computerization of the public sector payroll and 

rationalization and streamlining of the public sector) 

(ii) reducing domestic indebtedness and 

(iii) improving the public accounting process through the strengthening of the Office of the Accountant 

General and the implementation of program budgeting in Government ministries and agencies by 2004. 

The 2004 and 2005 PRSP Progress Reports report considerable progress on the fronts of tax policy 

(broadening of the tax base, reducing marginal tax rates, tax payers identification registration, harmonising 

custom duties), tax administration and expenditure controls (an organic budget law was enacted, progress 

made towards joined recurrent/capital budgeting, wage bill computerised and integrated into the human 

resource data base). 

Programme budgeting was introduced in all ministries during 2004 but Expenditure Programming 

Management Units (EPMUs) were only functioning in the ministries of health and education due to capacity 

constraints. Some first steps were made to integrate the recurrent and capital budgets (issuance of a single 

budget circular; joint budget meetings) 10 . Progress was made on the implementation of the Fiscal Management 

and Accountability Act (FMAA), the Integrated Financial Management System (IFMAS, January 2004 and in 

strengthening the Project Cycle Management System and the prioritisation of public investment projects. 

PRS 2005 

report 

The EC’s PRBS was aiming to support these fiscal policies through the provision of TA in the areas of (i) 

medium term macro-fiscal projections, (ii) strengthening public debt management and (iii) introduction of 

MTEFs in the ministries of health, housing, public works and education (this latter TA was not initially 

foreseen in the financing agreement). In addition, the BS linked 40% of its variable tranche release to 

performance indicators in the area of PFM. 




EGEVAL 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

GoG/ MoF, 

PRBS 2004- 

2006, Six 

month Progress 

Reports, 

Technical 

reports on PFM 

and TA reports 

on MTEF, 

fiscal 

projections. 

I.4.2.1 

I.4.2.1 

Budget planning has improved and the budget is more realistic 

The PRBS financed TA 11 to help the Government in making fiscal projections and introducing MTEFs in the 

ministries of health and housing with the aim to improve budget planning. After some initial delays TA was 

recruited and the exercises were undertaken and completed in June 2006 (and even extended in the case of the 

MTEF to the ministries of education and public works). 

The Medium Term Fiscal Forecasting model and manual was developed by the EC funded TA but its effective 

use by the Budget Office has been constrained by staffing availability at the Budget Office and the lack of data 

required to run the model. In addition, as identified by the TA, the sustainability of the macroeconomic 

modelling function in the Budget Office required formal mechanisms of coordination, communication and 

reporting to be consolidated between the various institutions involved. 

In the case of MTEFs, the models were developed, manuals for preparing MTEFs were prepared and 

ministerial staff was trained. However, it appears that the success of this component has been jeopardised by 

the lack of appropriation of the model by the respective ministries, problem compounded by the fact that 

trained staff subsequently left the ministries. The MTEFs have not been updated since the TAs completed 

their tasks in 2006. This experience reflects both (i) an insufficient grasp of the constraints to be met for 

introducing MTEF which requires efforts sustained over a number of years (rather than flying visits of 

consultants over the period of a year) as well as a favourable environment which was not yet in place in 

Guyana (such as the need for a medium term strategic sector plan, program costing etc. which were correctly 

identified by the TA as being lacking in the ministries concerned) and (ii) the lack of leadership from the 

Ministry of Finance in conducting the MTEF exercise which is itself related to the lack of a coordinated, timed 

and sequenced PFM reform programme. 

The PRBS also linked seven PFM performance indicators to the release of 40% of its variable tranches in 2005 

and 2006. The impact that these performance indicators could have had on the advancement of the PFM 

system’s quality has however been severely limited by the fact that three of the indicators were directly linked 

to the provision of EC funded TA to the Ministry of Finance (in the fields of medium term fiscal projections, 

MTEFs and debt management) and one of the indicators was directly linked to the activities of an IDB funded 

project (IFMAS), thus linking 4 out of 7 indicators to the efficiency and effectiveness of donor activities rather 

than to GoG activities! In addition, the choice of the seventh indicator relating to the rate of budget execution 

of non salary operational expenditure in health and education relative to the rate for the same expenditure in 

the overall budget was probably not very judicious as the cash-based management of public expenditure in 

Guyana precludes by procedure any large variations between budgeted expenditure and realised expenditure 

(see I.4.2.1). 

In terms of improved budget planning, the contribution of the EC seems thus to have been limited on both 




EGEVAL 

accounts of the macro-fiscal projections and on the expenditure planning aspects, models having been 

produced but remaining (as yet) unused and performance indicators offering no great incentive for GoG to 

advance PFM reforms. 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

PRS 2005 

report 

MN 3 

MN 34 

MN 13 

MN 7 

Budgets 1996- 

2007 

Improvement of budget planning is a real preoccupation of the GoG and measures were announced in the 

2005 PRS report aiming to improve upon the monitoring of public expenditure effectiveness, that being an 

essential input into the improvement of budget planning. Systems based M&E databases were to be set up in 

line ministries to track poverty expenditure by region and the availability of statistics on social sector outputs 

and outcomes was to be reinforced through the Social Statistics Projects. These seem indeed to be essential 

components of a successful MTEF which could have received donor support before focusing on the 

development of the MTEF models themselves. In 2007, no substantial progress has yet been made on these 

two accounts but activities have started on the improvement of the social statistics (with IDB support). It is 

surprising that the EC, as only provider of BS and thus having the greatest stake in obtaining a clear view of 

budget priorities and budget effectiveness in attaining the policy objectives of the PRSP, has offered no 

assistance (other than the medium term modelisation of expenditure in 4 ministries) in setting up the enabling 

environment for better budget planning and monitoring (on statistics, support has been limited to some short 

term TA to the ministry of housing). 

The realism of the budget was checked during the field visit by comparing planned and realised levels of 

revenue and expenditure. In terms of revenue, the forecasts rely on that of the IMF and are relatively reliable. 

In terms of expenditure, since the budget is managed on a cash basis, budget expenditure outturns are almost 

always exactly identical to budget expenditure estimates. The table and graph below illustrate the budget 

expenditure outcomes against the budget estimates over the period 1997-2006 and show that budget 

expenditure plans have been relatively accurate and there has been no noticeable improvement of this accuracy 

since 1999. 

Table - Budget expenditure realised against budget estimates, in %, 1996 to 2006. 

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Recurrent budget 102% 126% 133% 102% 107% 98% 110% 106% 109% 108% 

Capital budget 101% 88% 97% 117% 100% 84% 83% 94% 111% 100% 

Total budget 102% 87% 104% 108% 100% 93% 99% 101% 110% 104% 




EGEVAL 

Budget outcomes: deviations from budget estimates 

0.40 

0.30 

% deviation 

0.20 

0.10 

- 

Recurrent budget 

Capital budget 

Total budget 

-0.10 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

-0.20 

Source: Calculated on the basis of realised budgets versus budget estimates: data provided in the Guyana 

Estimates of the Public Sector Current and Capital Revenue and Expenditure for the year 1996 to 2007 as 

presented to the National Assembly 

Overall, the EC having focussed on supporting specific aspects of the PFM system which have not been 

particularly successful as yet (or at least of which the benefits have not yet been reaped), its role in improving 

budget planning and budget realism cannot be ascertained: the most that can be said at this stage is that the 

EC support may have contributed to raising the awareness for the need of improved planning tools within the 

ministries of finance and the targeted sector ministries. 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

MN3 

Budget Speech 

2007 

Budgets 1996 

to 2007 

I.4.2.2 

I.4.2.2 

The budget is prepared with due regard to government policy 

In order to verify whether the budget is a true reflection of the GoG strategy and policy, some quantitative 

and qualitative analysis of the budget allocations across ministries and within ministries to priority areas and 

activities and of budget trends should be undertaken to check whether policy priorities are reflected in 

spending priorities. In this respect it is interesting to note that qualitative budget analysis and monitoring (see 

also I 4.3.1) is not routinely undertaken in Guyana and that little publicly available information exists outside 

the Public Expenditure Review undertaken by the WB in 1999 (published in 2002). Whether budgetary 

allocations have been made according to policy priorities is the harder to ascertain that recurrent and capital 

budget preparation and hearings have so far (until 2007) been totally separate processes; this, compounded by 

the lack of strategic plan and of programme costing in many sectors, may have seriously constrained budgetary 

analysis as a tool for budget allocation decisions. However, as will be shown in JC 4.3, trends in social 




EGEVAL 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

4 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

4 

FAs, NAO 

Task Force, 

Guyana 

Budgets 

I.4.2.3 

I.4.2.3 

J.C 4.2 

conclusion 

JC 4.3 

I 4.3.1 

I 4.3.1 

spending have shown increased budget allocations to the social ministries thus reflecting the orientations taken 

in the PRSP. 

The predictability of the budget has improved 

This question could not be verified during the field mission. It may however be noted that the predictability of 

the budget may have been enhanced further if the variable tranches were disbursed earlier in the budgetary 

year. Under PRBS, because of the choice of performance indicators, evaluations of variable tranche 

disbursement could only take place during the last quarter of the year (awaiting available statistics) thus 

effectively leading to the release of funds only in early December at the best. 

On the whole, the PFM did generally improve over the ten year period under consideration. Donors having 

undertaken the PEFA in 2007 agree that most PEFA indicators which were also covered in the World Bank 

CFAA of 2002 did improve. However, the contribution of the EC’s BS to this development is difficult to 

assess: the appropriateness, effectiveness and sustainability of work performed by the TA in the two PFM 

areas remains doubtful and performance indicators chosen in the PFM area did not really measure GoG’s 

efforts at undertaking PFM reforms thus providing little incentive for GoG to improve the PFM systems. 

This evaluation also expresses concern over the effectiveness and sustainability of the PFM strengthening 

initiatives taken in the past by the EC as they have been implemented in the void of a general PFM reform 

programme with a prioritised, timed and costed action plan and thus neither piloted by nor actively supported 

by the Ministry of Finance. 

Finally, in absence of information as to the initial reasons for choosing TA to design the MTEFs in the four 

social ministries, it appears with hindsight that TA support could have been better used, for example to 

prepare the grounds for later introduction of MTEFs (such as may be required in the fields of access to 

reliable statistical data, strengthening of M&E functions, strengthening of the programme budgeting, notably 

by assisting in developing programme and activities costs, etc.). 

BS has contributed to establishing sustainable levels of public expenditure in the social sectors 

Trends in budgeted and realised expenditure in social sectors 

Because execution levels of execution of budget estimates are very good (see I 4.2.1) the indicator has 

considered exclusively the executed expenditures in social sectors. The BS provided by the EC under the ten 

year period has represented a total of just over €30 million which have been disbursed as follows: 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

1998 2000 2001 2004 2005 2006 

EC BS in million of Euros 5,3 2,1 3,3 6,0 8,7 5,9 

EC BS as % of social public expenditure 6,5% 1,4% 2,7% 6,7% 8,6% 4,4% 

EC BS as % of total budget expenditure 2,6% 0,7% 1,1% 2,4% 2,7% 1,4% 




EGEVAL 

Source: EC files, NAO information and Budget Estimates and realisations. 

Over the same period, social sector ministries have seen both a rise in their respective shares of total public 

expenditure and in their expenditure as a share of GDP as follows 12 : 

Table - Evolution of social sector budget realisations relative to GDP and to total realised public expenditure. 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 

revised budget 

Social expenditure as % of GDP 

Housing 0.2% 0.8% 1.0% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 1.2% 1.3% 2.0% 1.6% 1.4% 1.3% 

Education 3.9% 6.4% 7.6% 7.4% 16.0% 10.4% 10.1% 9.0% 9.3% 9.5% 9.2% 8.7% 

Health 2.7% 3.8% 4.3% 4.5% 4.0% 3.4% 4.5% 5.3% 5.0% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 

Social Welfare 4.4% 3.1% 2.3% 2.1% 2.1% 3.5% 6.1% 1.7% 2.0% 2.8% 3.6% 3.1% 

Total social sectors as % of GDP 11.1% 14.2% 15.3% 14.8% 23.1% 18.4% 21.9% 17.2% 18.2% 18.8% 19.8% 19.2% 

Total social sectors as % of total expenditure 26.5% 34.7% 39.9% 36.1% 50.1% 38.5% 49.7% 33.9% 36.2% 31.0% 31.2% 35.1% 

Source: Calculated on the basis of data provided in the Guyana Estimates of the Public Sector Current and 

Capital Revenue and Expenditure for the year 1996 to 2007 as presented to the National Assembly 

Social sector expenditure as % of GDP, 1996-2007 

% of GDP 

25,0% 

20,0% 

15,0% 

10,0% 

5,0% 

0,0% 

Housing 

Education 

Health 

Social Welfare 

1996 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 revised 

2007 budget 

Total social sector public 

expenditure as % of GDP 

During the period, the weight of public expenditure in the social sectors has increased from about 11% of 

GDP in 1996 to more than 23% in 2000 and seems settled around 19% of GDP since 2005 thus showing a 




EGEVAL 

definite positive trend in line with PRSP objectives. The change in the trend occurred around 2000 when 

HIPC debt relief kicked in with its associated condition of spending debt relief on social sectors; according to 

the WB public expenditure review (2002) social sector spending in the beginning of the 1990’s represented 

only 6,5% of GDP whilst it continued hovering around 10% of GDP during the 1990s. 

In terms of GoG’s effort to increase the relative shares of expenditures for social sector activities compared to 

overall public expenditure, the trend is less marked: social expenditure increased from 26.5% of total 

expenditure in 1996 to just over 35% of total expenditure budgeted for 2007, with peaks of 50% and 49.7% in 

2000 and 2002 but there is no overall trend over the ten year period as shown in the graph below. 

Total social sector public expenditure as % of total public expenditure 

% of total public expenditure 

60% 

50% 

40% 

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

1996 

1997 

1998 

1999 

2000 

2001 

years 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 revised 

2007 budget 

8 

ACP 

GUA 

4 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

MN 3 

MN 34 

MN 10 

I 4.3.1 

On the whole, and whilst it is recognised that social sector expenditure as a share of GDP has risen strongly 

over the period, this is in a general context of rising public expenditure as a share of GDP, thus dampening 

the extent to which resources have actually been re-allocated within the budget. It would have been interesting 

to check whether pro-poor expenditures within the social expenditure have been favoured over the last 10 

years; unfortunately this type of qualitative analysis is not routinely performed in Guyana. The GoG was to 

undertake an analysis of poverty related expenditure in priority poverty programmes but in fact, since the 

public expenditure review of 1999 (undertaken with World Bank support), nothing has been done (no analysis 

of public spending, no expenditure tracking surveys, etc) apart from the informal budget assessments done 

quarterly by spending agencies to review their work programmes. In 2007, for the first time, the 2006 budget 

outturn was analysed and will be looked at in Parliament. This remains however a far cry from the budget 

analysis which would provide evidence to verify that increased spending has been effective in providing 




EGEVAL 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

MN 3 

MN 13 

I.4.3.2 

I.4.3.2 

MN 13 JC 4.3 

conclusion 

PRS 2004 

report 

JC 4.4 

I 4.4.1 

I 4.4.1 

improved social service delivery in line with poverty reduction objectives as stated in the PRSP. The 

professional expertise required for this type of qualitative analyses is lacking in the Ministry of Finance: there is 

a need to strengthen the Ministry’s capacity for policy analysis. 

Funding mechanisms are in place for maintenance and operation of social infrastructure 

There appear to be no other funding mechanisms for the maintenance and operation of social infrastructure 

than the normal state budget. In the health sector, some partnership/collaboration exists between the private 

and the public sectors in specialised areas such as CTNMRI, operation of the cardiac unit, cancer treatment 

(radiology): in these partnerships, the public sector provides the infrastructure and the equipment whilst the 

private sector provides the expertise. Private sector treatment is subject to user charges which are agreed with 

the public sector for public sector referral patients. The private sector covers 10% to 15% of the health sector 

(including dialysis where patients get direct subsidies from public sector). 

Finally, the extent to which EC BS may have contributed to maintaining the shares of public expenditure to 

the social sectors in total expenditure cannot be established, funds being fungible 13 . The least that can be 

ascertained is that BS has eased the financing gap of the GoG thus enabling it to increase its room for 

manoeuvre in budget allocation decisions. The conditions for disbursement of BS by partly focussing on 

increasing budget allocations to social sectors and in particular on securing adequate levels of (non-salary) 

operating costs may also have helped. Both the SASP and the PRBS used such input indicators. In SAS-V , the 

condition for release of the second tranche pertained to the attainment of expenditure targets in the social 

sectors and for poverty alleviation agreed in the HIPC and in particular of the attainment of expenditure 

allocations towards the education, health and housing and water sectors and within those specifically 

expenditure allocations towards works, supplies and maintenance 14 . In the PRBS, the outturn of non-salary 

operating expenditure in the health and education sectors relative to that of the same expenditure in the 

overall budget was a performance indicator used for variable tranche release in 2005 and 2006. 

In addition, it has been recognised that the good performance on health indicators monitored by the EC has 

led to more secure budget allocations for the programmes which outcomes are monitored for BS tranche 

release (HIV child-mother, immunisation rates and TB DOTS), thus putting a direct link between the BS 

provided and the budget allocation decisions of the GoG. 

What remains lacking is the monitoring and analysis of public expenditure quality which is essential to verify 

the effectiveness of the undertaken expenditure in achieving the objectives of the PRSP. 

The GoG is carrying out planned expenditures 

Evolution of external account balance and budget balance as share of GDP 

Due to the macro-economic instability and the temporary suspension of the IMF programme, donor inflows 

at the end of 2002 and during 2003 were much lower than originally anticipated in the PRSP thus jeopardising 

planned expenditure levels. In 2002, requirements for the PRSP implementation had been estimated at 

US$223 million but only US$139 million materialised (of which official transfers 33 million and programme 




EGEVAL 

9 

ACP 

GUA 

6&7 

PRSP 2004 

annual review 

IBM report 

Nomade 

presentation of 

29 th of March 

2007 

I 4.4.2 

I 4.4.2 

JC 4.5 

loans 7 million). In 2003 however, the financing requirements for the PRSP were of US$ 257 million of which 

only US$ 97 million materialised (official transfers fell to US$30 million and programme loans contributed 

US$12 million). No figures were published in the PRS 2005 report to ascertain whether external financing 

levels materialised as foreseen or not in 2005. In the absence of detailed and coherent balance of payments 

data 15 for 2005 and beyond, it has not been possible to verify whether - and if yes to what extent – expected 

external support levels did materialise and whether or not the expenditure levels initially foreseen to be 

undertaken under the PRSP were indeed implemented. 

Public expenditure outcomes: budget execution in the social sectors, in particular pro-poor 

expenditure 

The PRBS includes one single indicator on the outturn of health and education expenditure (health/education 

non salary recurrent budget execution rate versus overall non salary recurrent expenditure execution) and the 

target of this indicator has been achieved in both 2004 and 2005. However, this indicator is extremely narrow 

as it measures only the execution rate, not the relative budget allocations to the social sectors which are also of 

interest in the context of BS. This information was collected during the field visit and has shown (see above in 

JC 4.3 and I 4.3.1) that although social sector expenditure as a share of GDP has risen steadily over the period, 

the actual share of social expenditure within total expenditure has remained more or less constant over the 

period. As seen in I 4.3.1, the crucial question that remains to be answered is that of the quality of the social 

sector expenditure about which no information is available (the last public expenditure review was that 

undertaken by the World Bank in 1999 published in 2002). 

Social conditions have improved 

Assessing whether BS may have had an impact upon the overarching objective of improving social conditions 

and reducing poverty levels in Guyana raises methodological issues which are the greater that the BS is 

proportionately small compared to the country’s total budget. The assumption is that BS provides (i) greater 

fiscal space (see JC 4.4) and (ii) an incentive for budgetary allocations to be better aligned with PRSP policies 

and priorities (see JC 4.3) which would lead to an improved services delivery and finally a stronger 

achievement of the country’s PRSP objectives. In order to verify whether BS may have contributed to the 

impact of the PRSP implementation on social conditions, the approach is twofold. Firstly the evaluation 

reviews whether the policies and priorities outlined in the PRSP have indeed been implemented; secondly 

whether this has had an impact upon the population’s living conditions, in particular on the most 

disadvantaged groups. 

The main goals of Guyana’s poverty reduction strategy PRSP 2002-2005 (November 2001) focus on: 

PRSP 2002- 

2005 

• Sustained economic expansion; 

• Access to social services including education, health, water and housing; 

• Expansion of social safety nets. 




EGEVAL 

PRS report 

2004 

PRS report 

2005 

To achieve these goals, the strategy rests on seven pillars: 

(i) Creating the environment for broad-based, jobs generating economic growth; 

(ii) Environmental protection; 

(iii) Strengthening institutions and improving governance; 

(iv) Accelerating investment in human capital, with emphasis on basic education and primary health; 

(v) Increasing investment in physical capital, with emphasis on better and broader provision of safe water 

and sanitation services, farm-to-market roads, drainage and irrigation systems, and housing; 

(vi) Improving safety nets; 

(vii) Designing special intervention programmes to address regional pockets of poverty. 

PRSP implementation was slower than initially foreseen. Until end 2003, implementation was jeopardised by 

social and political unrest, lower than expected inflows of donor support and foreign direct investment and the 

inability to reach a political consensus required for advancement of the PRS process. Guyana’s macroeconomic 

programme was judged off-track by the IMF in 2002: the main donors interrupted their BS and the 

enhanced HIPC completion point was not reached until December 2003. Slippages on the macro-economic 

front resulted in the need to update the PRSP with economic growth and government revenue collection both 

much lower than anticipated 16 . 

Nevertheless, it is estimated that in 2004 the government accomplished more than 80% of its planned actions 

under the PRSP Progress Report 2004 17 . Progress was made in enacting laws on transparency and 

accountability, in giving local government greater autonomy in raising revenues and in implementing social 

sector policies. In education, the Education Strategic Plan was started (it aims for reduced repetition and dropout 

rates, increased secondary enrolment, reduced overcrowding, absenteeism, teacher training and increased 

non salary recurrent expenditures). In health, the National Health Plan was implemented focusing on 

HIV/AIDs, training of health staff, upgrading of health facilities, delivery of drugs and medical supplies and 

reduction of infant and maternal mortality rates. Improved water and sanitation was facilitated through 

reforms in the water sector which also address tariffs to eventually fully cover maintenance and depreciation 

costs of water & sewerage provision. A master plan for social housing, in particular for squatters, was also 

developed as were specific safety net programmes in the Linden area (see EQ3) and the hinterland areas 

(regions 1, 8 and 9). 

Unfortunately, the improvement of the coverage, timeliness, quantity, quality and use of survey data which was 

recognised as a key item in the PRS and the PRS 2004 report, has still not been implemented in 2007. The 

strengthening of the Bureau of Statistics, without which this exercise would be very difficult, has only just 

started with IDB support. As a result, there have been no new poverty data available since the PRSP was 

launched in 2001 (it used the 1992 HICS data) and currently available social data rely on the collection of data 




EGEVAL 

at sector level of which the reliability is not guaranteed by the Bureau of Statistics which has no oversight on 

these ministerial statistics divisions. 

I 4.5.1 

I 4.5.1 

Performance of PRSP indicators measuring access to health, housing and water such as infant 

immunisation rates (measles and DPT), % of population with access to health services, % of 

population with access to adequate sanitation, house lots distributed, land/house titles distributed. 

Despite the setting up of the PRS M&E Unit in the Policy Coordination and Programme Management Unit 

(PCPMU) of the Office of the President, the M&E functions for the PRS have been slow in becoming 

effective. The household income and expenditure survey (HIES) was supposed to be carried out in 2003, then 

in 2005 but was finally launched in 2006: its results are expected to be published in November 2007 after 

clearing by the Cabinet. There are thus no updated statistical data on poverty or living conditions since the 

publication of the results of the 1992 HICS; a poverty mapping exercise was undertaken in 2007 on the basis 

of the results of the 2002 Census and this is useful for determining regional incidences of poverty. In the 

absence of quantitative poverty data, the PRS reports have relied on sector indicators capturing the access to 

basic services as a way to measure the evolution of living standards. 

On these bases, the PRSP indicators presented in the 2004 PRS report show mixed results. In education, most 

indicators but those for secondary education achieved levels exceeding their targets; in health four out of 

seven indicators were however not achieved, in particular those related to HIV and the infant mortality rate. 

Achievements in the access to potable water, housing and land were also mixed. The tables below are 

reproduced from the 2005 PRS Progress Report and show the main indicators with their targets and 

achievements. 

Table- PRSP indicators, targets ad achievements, 2000 to 2004. 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Population below the national poverty line 35,1 34,9 34 33,1 32,2 

Actual - - - - - 

Total pro-poor spending (%GDP) 11,7 13,8 14,4 14,5 14,7 

Actual 18,4 19,2 18,5 17,1 17,1 

% primary school entrants reaching Grade 6 83,5 84 84,6 85,7 86,9 

Actual 83,4 83,5 88,3 88,3 88,7 

Repetition rate (secondary) 12,9 12,6 12,3 11,2 10,1 

Actual 12,9 12,9 12,6 11,8 10,6 

Student/trained teacher ratio (primary) 54:1 53:1 53:1 52:1 50:1 

Actual 54:1 50:1 50:1 51:1 50:1 

Student/trained teacher ratio (secondary) 37:1 36:1 35:1 34:1 33:1 




EGEVAL 

Actual 37:1 38:1 38:1 39:1 40:1 

Gross nursery school enrolment 87 87 88 90 91 

Actual 87 87 88 91 92 

Gross primary school enrolment 110 107 105 102 100 

Actual 110 107 105 104 102 

Gross secondary school enrolment 62 65 68 70 72 

Actual 62 65 65 65 73 

% trained teachers in secondary schools 55 56 57 60 62 

Actual 57,5 58,5 58,5 57,1 54,2 

% trained teachers in primary schools 49 49 52 55 58 

Actual 50 53 54 56 59,4 

Number of CXC passes 46,7 51,4 52,5 55,5 58 

Actual 73,3 74,5 77,1 75,8 76,3 

Infant mortality rate (per 10,000) 57 56 50 47 45 

Actual 57 56 54 54 53 

Maternal mortality rate (per 10,000) 188 187 170 160 145 

Actual 188 187 126 124 122 

1 year olds immunized against measles 88,9 90,2 93,3 95,5 97,1 

Actual 88,9 90,4 93,5 95,8 97,5 

1 year olds immunized against DPT 85,6 88,2 90,2 90,8 91,3 

Actual 85,6 88,2 91 91 92,8 

% with access to health services 90,4 90,5 92,5 93,7 93,8 

Actual 90,4 90,5 90,7 91,3 92,8 

Number of reported cases of AIDS 248 227 225 220 210 

Actual 248 435 450 475 480 

Reported cases of AIDS among women (15-45 

cohort) 95 112 100 98 95 

Actual 95 123 128 131 133 

% with access to treated water 35,4 36,2 44,7 45,1 48,9 

Actual 35,4 36,2 44,7 45,1 46,9 

Domestic household connected to water system 65 000 68 200 71 500 73 400 75 000 

Actual 65 000 95 180 114 266 120 072 125 763 

Distribution network constructed (km) 230 250 263 275 278 

Actual 230 250 255 265 280 

% with access to adequate sanitation 88 89 90 90 90 




EGEVAL 

PRS report 

2004 

I 4.5.2 

I 4.5.2 

I 4.5.3 

I 4.5.3 

Actual 52 52 53 55 56 

House lots distributed 22 795 3 500 4 750 6 200 6 000 

Actual 22 735 975 4 195 4 739 4 916 

Land/house titles distributed 1 750 2 015 5 200 10 200 12 000 

Actual 1 750 2 416 7 474 6 020 5 003 

Based on a comparison between the 1999 census data, the intermediary data from the Living Conditions 

Survey of 1999 (which gave only very partial seasonal and geographic cover of the population) and the 2002 

census data, the PRS 2005 shows that: 

(i) on housing, the proportion of households owning or renting their homes decreased during the 1990’s 

whilst the incidence of squatting and free rent accommodation increased steeply; 

(ii) access to safe drinking water and improved sanitation facilities increased strongly (respectively from 50% in 

1990 to 74% of households in 2002 and for sanitation from 31% in 1991 to 40% of households in 2002) 

despite regional disparities remaining; 

(iii) education enrolment increased, especially in secondary education (from 52% in 1980 to 54% in 1991 and 

65% in 2002) and educational attainment also increased (whilst in 1990 only 6,217 students went through 

higher education, they were 22,967 in 2002); 

(iv) in health all access indicators improved dramatically (number of doctors, nurses, beds etc per patient) with 

a consequent lowering of infant and maternal mortality rates. 

These results confirm that social statistical data in Guyana should be treated with some caution since different 

sources provide not only differing absolute results but sometimes even contradictory results such as is the case 

for infant mortality rates for example. 

Quality of available social services 

The M&E structures that were meant to monitor the implementation of the PRS (the joint civil society-GoG 

Steering Committee and the PRS regional M&E committees) were established late and did not fully become 

effective. There has thus been only very limited and indirect feedback from the population on the 

improvement of social services delivery (through newspaper articles or letters to the press). At the same this 

information gap has not been filled by the collection of statistical data: one qualitative survey (other than the 

HICS of 2006 of which the results are still awaited) has been undertaken during the period by the Bureau of 

Statistics with IDB and Unicef funding but again the data are not yet available. There are thus no data available 

on the quality of social services delivered under the PRSP. 

Living conditions 

Again, as above, the information will only become available with publication of the results of the HICS 




EGEVAL 

undertaken in 2006, possibly complemented by the results of the IDB/Unicef survey of 2006 which was a 

more qualitative survey. 




EGEVAL 

P Nber Source 

9 ACP GUA 1 MR, midterm 

evaluation of 

the GMPP 

(2007), 9 th 

EDF CSP 


evaluation of 

the GMPP 

(2007), 9 th 

EDF CSP 

EQ 5 To what extent have Commission interventions contributed to empowering civil society 

organisations and ultimately to improving the socio-economic conditions of local 

communities? 

JC 5.1 Commission intervention was in line with the CSP/NIP strategy and with the GoG policy 

I 5.1.1 Degree of alignment of the programme IL with the IL of the NIP/CSP 

I 5.1.1 The GMPP accords with EC strategy for co-operation in Guyana and the 9 th EDF NIP for 2002-2007 

which made specific provision for a micro-projects programme. The NIP specifically mentions microprojects 

as part of the renewed developmental approach. The project purpose of the GMPP seeks to 

improve the socio-economic conditions of vulnerable groups of the Guyanese population through the 

development of sustainable and participatory self-help schemes: i.e 75 micro-projects at the community 

level focusing on the areas of: employment / income generation, training/education, communication 

and good governance, and other socioeconomic sectors. In the 9 th EDF CSP, poverty reduction is the 

main objective and the significance of the support to economic actors and civil society is emphasised. 

I 5.1.2 Discrepancies between the programme and the strategy are explicitly justified 

I 5.1.2 There are no discrepancies 

I 5.1.3 

Degree of alignment of the programme with the GoG policy 

9 ACP GUA 1 Mid-term 

evaluation of 

the GMPP 

(2007) 

I 5.1.3 

JC 5.2 

I 5.2.1 

The GMPP is aligned with the government policy and the PRSP as it seeks to improve the socioeconomic 

conditions o vulnerable groups of the Guyanese population. Moreover, the programme is 

consistent with government policy to increase community participation in poverty programmes. 

Local communities have better access to socio-economic infrastructure 

Clear reference in the programming document to the promotion of socio-economic 

development of local communities 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 5.2.1 The GMPP clearly targets the improvement of the socio-economic conditions of vulnerable groups of 

the Guyanese population. The completion of 75 micro-projects at the community level focusing on the 

areas of employment/income generation, training/education, communication and good governance, 

other socio-economic sectors aims at achieving the project purpose. 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA, MR, 

mid-term 

evaluation of 

the GMPP 

(2007) 

I 5.2.2 

I 5.2.2 

New socio-economic services are available in the communities supported 

The GMPP has only been operational since September 2005 owing to delays in start-up and 

implementation. The first 35 micro-projects have only been completed at the end of 2006 or in the early 

2007. It is therefore too early to assess the overall impact of the GMPP. Even if all projects are 

implemented successfully, due to the small sample of micro-projects, it is difficult to measure their 

overall impact. It should be noted that MPP investments only meet a small part of the country’s needs 

due to the limited number of projects financed. 

When assessing the impact of the projects already completed, it is undeniable that a number of 

communities which received support for a micro-project have better access to socio-economic services. 

Communities also placed a high value on the contribution the GMPP support made to meet their 

specific needs for socio-economic improvement. Examples include: 

- construction of bridges which link separate areas of an Amerindian community 

- improved access to school and health centres as well as to cultivate land and transport the 

produce 

- construction of community buildings where social and skills training will take place 

- women with marginal incomes given equipment and knowledge to set up food processing 

facilities 

- etc. 

According to the MTR, few micro-projects address directly the needs for employment and income 

generating activities in a substantive way that can have direct impact whereas the distribution of funds 

foreseen at the design favored this type of activities. Indeed, only 21% of micro-projects are for income 

generation/employment (compared to 50% planned in the FA). 50% of micro-projects are for other 

socio-economic sectors or social infrastructure (instead of 25% initially planned) and 29% in training / 

education (instead of 25% planned). This imbalance reduces the effectiveness of the GMPP to address 

the real socio-economic problems felt by the community groups. This raises concern as to whether 

projects selected by the GMPB really address the most effective means whereby poverty can be tackled. 

More projects in income generation/employment generation especially in the rural interior would have a 

more direct impact on poverty reduction for vulnerable groups. 

JC 5.3 The capacity for self-help of local communities has increased 

I 5.3.1 Evidence that MPP is conceived to be undertaken at the request of local communities 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 5.3.1 The FA foresees implementation measures that ensure the demand-driven character of the programme. 

The local communities prepare micro-projects proposal and submit them to the GMPO. The GMPO or 




EGEVAL 

contracted intermediate organisations assist the communities in formulating and writing the proposals 

when needed. The GMPO is then screening and scoring the proposals. The GMPO sends to the GMPB 

all the proposals for micro-projects and the latter either accepts or rejects them. 

I 5.3.2 Clear reference to participation of local communities in the programming documents 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 5.3.2 Community participation is stated as a major element in the design of the MPP. Local communities will 

be required to contribute to 25% of project costs in order to ensure ownership of the micro-projects. 

The empowerment of local communities is however not a purpose in itself but a means to reach the 

project purpose: improve the socio-economic conditions of vulnerable groups of the Guyanese 

population through the development of participatory self-help schemes. 




EGEVAL 

I 5.3.3 Evidence that MPP is based on needs assessment undertaken by local communities 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 5.3.3 The realisation of needs assessments are not foreseen in the FA. However, the projects proposals, most 

of the time prepared by the NGOs or CBOs themselves, present clear ideas and needs of the 

community. 

I 5.3.4 Evidence that an adequate level of capacity-building investment has been foreseen in the 

programme 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA, MPP 

evaluation 

I 5.3.4 6.8% of the total GMPP has been allocated to the strengthening of civil society in the FA. The MPP 

evaluation highlighted that on average 7% of total activities during the 7 th , 8 th and 9 th EDF and 8,5% for 

the 9 th EDF were allocated to capacity building and reported that capacity-building investment has been 

low. As a consequence, the share of capacity building investment in the total budget for the GMPP is 

considered as low. The MPP evaluation also stated that capacity-building investments require sufficient 

time and resource allocation to have an effect on the local communities. We can therefore foresee that 

the impact of the GMPP on local communities will be limited. 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA, Midterm 

evaluation of 

the GMPP 

(2007) 

I 5.3.5 

I 5.3.5 

Evidence that local communities benefited from capacity-building 

2 critical assumptions have been made at the design stage of the programme: 

- communities have the capacity to identify and implement viable micro-projects 

- existence and capacity of local non-state actors to assist local communities in meeting the 

requirements for preparing and in executing projects under a call or proposals mechanism 

But these assumptions proved to be wrong: 

- the capacity of the communities has proved to be weak 

- 25 NGOs have been registered with the GMMPO; the actual number with the required capacity 

is much less 

Design did not pay sufficient attention to the need to build the capacity of community organisations. 

The GMPP is indeed primarily focused on the delivery of micro-projects and strengthening of NSAs – 

through training in rapid participatory analysis of poverty problems- to achieve that purpose. The 

GMPP indeed trained CBOs and NGOs in problem and need analysis, EU grant management and 

Project cycle management. 

But more attention could have been paid in the design to allow more time and resources to the need for 

capacity building and systematic training of CBOs and NGOs in project preparation, application as well 

as training in grant management before the start of the implementation. 




EGEVAL 

National 

Development 

Strategy 

JC 5.4 

I 5.4.1 

I 5.4.1 

I 5.4.2 

Moreover, strengthening of civil society would need in itself a substantive programme of activities. 

Other complementary training could include association management, meeting techniques, democratic 

rules and attitudes, training in human rights, legal rights, civil rights, advocacy policy etc. 

If institutional strengthening was the major purpose of the GMPP, then MPs would be a means to 

achieve that objective through the building of local capacity to deliver projects. Rather than designing 

the programme with micro-projects as a means to build community level capacity and civil society 

strengthening, the design has a focus whereby the means of MPs to reduce poverty is the end in itself. 

Civil society organisations participate more in the development process 

Evidence of local development process weaknesses in policy papers 

Given the nature of the country’s history and its current constitution, there is little participation by 

Guyanese non-governmental groups and other sections of civil society, in the formulation of public 

policies and in their implementation. Opposition parties, as always in the country’s political history, are 

not routinely and formally consulted on legislative matters, nor are the trades unions and the private 

sector. It seems to be the rule that such organisations are asked to participate in the decision-making 

processes only in times of crisis, particularly when there is industrial strife and political violence. Often, 

the only objective of the political exercise is to confound the opposing political party. In such 

circumstances, opacity in government is seen as a virtue, and transparency an impediment in the exercise 

of power. 

The current systems of local and regional government also do not lend themselves to meaningful 

participation. Indeed, in many respects, they accentuate the imperfections of the central government, by 

replicating both the winner-take-all syndrome, and the absence of statutory and formal procedures for 

consultation. If anything, because the power to make decisions which impinge upon regional and village 

life rests almost entirely with the Centre, the peripheral systems impede, rather than assist, the 

development of local democracy. For example, budgetary allocations and expenditure are controlled by 

the Centre; the most senior regional public servant is employed by the central government and reports 

directly to the minister responsible for regional and local government; and the laws which the regional 

and local authorities administer are initiated, enacted, and imposed by the Centre. It follows, therefore, 

that no matter what the political allegiance and complexion of the regional and local governments, the 

economic and social decisions which influence and control the lives of their citizens are made by the 

Centre. 

Clear reference to this objective in the programming documents 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 5.4.2 The FA makes a clear reference to this objective. The 4th result of the GMPP is a “Regular and 

structured dialogue between government and civil society”. Activities such as joint statements on sector 

approaches and participation on PRSP sector issues are explicitly mentioned in the FA. 

9 ACP GUA 1 Mid-term 

evaluation of 

the GMPP 

(2007) 

I 5.4.3 

I 5.4.3 

Measures to ensure the strengthening of civil society are in place 

Only one activity out of the four foreseen in the FA was due to be held. The annual workshop planned 

in late 2006 was not held as the new Board, responsible for organising it, has not been constituted. 

The measures in place to assist civil society in participation in the dialogue with the government related 

to poverty reduction strategy are not strong and broad enough to strengthen civil society. A support is 

indeed needed in human development training, advocacy techniques, media training, debates, etc. 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA, Midterm 

evaluation of 

the GMPP 

(2007) 

I 5.4.4 

I 5.4.4 

Extent to which the MP-Office/Board implemented and facilitated MP development and 

cooperation with civil society 

The implementation procedures of the programme are defined in the FA. The FA describes the 

respective roles and functions between the EC Delegation, NAO, GMPB and GMPO in the 

organisational structure for GMPP. The project implementation will be supervised and co-ordinated by 

the GMPB. The NAO is responsible for the implementation of the MPP, with the EC as an observer. 

The GMPO will be responsible for the day-to-day management of the programme. But clarification 

upon these roles has been needed, mainly between NAO and EC. Regular meetings have been held to 

facilitate greater understanding of these roles and responsibilities for management of GMPP. 

More specifically, there are some difficulties of interpretation as to the overall role of the GMPB in 

respect of their functions vis-à-vis the GMPO. The Chairperson has somehow interfered in the 

management of the operations of the GMPO. The MTR stressed that the Chairperson has to 

understand the organizational management structure and roles defined in the FA with regard to the 

delegation of the supervisory role for day-to-day management of GMPP to the GMPO. 

Moreover, there have been some disagreements between the EC Delegation and the government on the 

composition of the MPPB and between the EC delegation and the TA on the implementation 

modalities of the programme. The setting-up of a new Board –foreseen for the end of 2006- has been 

delayed to 2007 due to EC concerns as to the validity of the election process at the workshop held for 

that purpose end of 2006. The MTR raised concern as to the extent of the pool of people in civil society 

from which new Board members can be drawn. 

These difficulties somehow prevented the GMPB and GMPO to facilitate MP development in an 

effective way. 

JC 5.5 Results achieved by Commission support are maintained after the end of its direct support 

I 5.5.1 Explicit reference in the FA to measures to ensure sustainability 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 5.5.1 The FA does presuppose that economic sustainability of the MPP should not be expected as the 

programme will have to provide grants, not credits, to the beneficiaries. Moreover, the design does not 

foresee any exit strategy. 

2 factors are mentioned for the achievement of sustainability at the level of the individual microprojects: 

- the strong emphasis on community participation at all stages of the project 

- the contribution of the communities to the project (25% of project costs) 




EGEVAL 


evaluation of 

the GMPP 

(2007) 

I.5.5.2 

I 5.5.2 

Evidence that the benefits continue to be used after the end of the intervention 

The outputs achieved so far are not substantial enough to allow a full assessment of the GMMP. Even if 

the sustainability of the programme is embedded in the concept of participatory self-help schemes, the 

low capacity of the communities will significantly constrain the overall sustainability of the programme. 

In that regard, the few time and support provided by the MPP in building capacity of NGOs and CBOs 

is an impediment to the sustainability of the programme. Anyhow, the programme will close after 28 

months of implementation instead of the 5 years initially planned . 

In relation to the sustainability of the 35 micro-projects completed under the first call of proposals, field 

visits conducted during the MTR allowed the evaluators a degree of optimism that many will be 

sustained. This is particularly the case when there is a high degree of project ownership by the 

beneficiaries and when the projects build on existing capacities of community bodies. 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 3 

Support to the 

NAO 

8 ACP GUA 5 

Sea Defences 

8 ACP GUA 15 

Low Income 

Housing 


and GoG 

informants 

EQ 6 

JC 6.1 

I 6.1.1 

I 6.1.1 

To what extent have the financial, human and technical resources been used to reach objectives in a 

timely and cost effective manner and was the regulatory and administrative framework appropriate 

for doing this? To what extent has the support to the NAO task force contributed to reaching 

objectives in a timely and cost effective manner? 

The institutional set-up foresees a clear distribution of roles at each level of project implementation, 

from design to closure 

Evidence of organizational structure and management culture through well-defined procedures and 

job roles in particular at NAO task force level, DEC level and project level 

The Financing Agreement (FA) dated May 2004 and related to the Institutional Strengthening of the NAO’s 

office did not define the organizational structure needed for the programme preparation and implementation. 

The document is listing the problems to be resolved as identified by the Consultant in its ‘Elaboration Study 

for support to the NAO’ (August 2003) among which: ‘the need to clarify the roles, responsibilities and 

authority of the NAO Task force”. 

But the initial 5-month Technical Assistance did not contribute to the clarification mainly for the reasons of 

the short duration of its intervention and of the Terms of Reference whose overall objectives, project 

purpose and results only duplicating those mentioned in the FA regarding the NAO. 

8 ACP GUA 9 

LEAP 

8 ACP GUA 4 

SAS V and VI 

I 6.1.1 

BUDGET SUPPORT (BS). The issue is to consider adequacy and efficiency of the Budget support processes 

and management principles by objectives to meet the tranche realease conditions. 

9ACP GUA 

6&7 

Budget 

support 

Concerning organisational structure and procedures 

Administrative arrangements and auditing procedures were outlined in the TAP. The ministries of health and 

education were in charge of submitting copies of justifying documents for eligible expenditure to a private 

sector accountant whom after verification would prepare a monthly summary statement submitted for 

payment from the double NAO and DEC signature CPF account.. Documents could be audited on a regular 




EGEVAL 

basis for accuracy, eligibility, and authenticity; the double signature CPF account was also subject to external 

audit. 

The SAS V was a precursor to the new generation of budget support and included as such agreement for 

starting the gathering of data for performance indicators to facilitate monitoring of performance in the social 

sectors. 

8 ACP GUA 4 

SAS V and VI 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

Budget 

support 

Kea features 

- Under PRBS, performance monitoring of outcome indicators in the social sectors and PFM areas is 

the base for decision-making of variable tranche release. 

- It appears that the process called upon TA both with the view to attain set targets and with the view 

to monitor and evaluate performance indicators. 

- It is also noted that the process of setting up and implementing a monitoring system for PRSP 

implementation appears to have been slow and that the production of monitoring indicators for 

PRSP implementation has posed some initial problems to GoG. 

- The question of the country’s and the DEC’s capacity to undertake the required tasks seems thus to 

be still valid under PRBS. 

Other observations regarding the Budget support procedures : 

- Due to the lack of institutional memory, no information on the actual organisational structure of the 

SAS programmes has been found other than the administrative arrangements and auditing 

procedures outlined in the TAP. The ministries of health and education were in charge of submitting 

copies of justifying documents for eligible expenditure to a private sector accountant whom after 

verification would prepare a monthly summary statement submitted for payment from the double 

NAO and DEC signature CPF account. Documents could be audited on a regular basis for accuracy, 

eligibility, and authenticity; the double signature CPF account was also subject to external audit. The 

existence of actual procedures and job descriptions and roles of the various players (the NAO and 

the DEC, the Ministries of Finance, Education and Health, Bank of Guyana, Auditor General’s, 

Accountant General’s Offices, the private sector appointed accountant and the external auditor.) to 

deal with these issues could not be verified in the field. 

- The SAS V was a precursor to the new generation of budget support and included as such agreement 

for starting the gathering of data for performance indicators to facilitate monitoring of performance 

in the social sectors. This had been a specific recommendation of the evaluation of GIP III realised 

in 1999 which advocated the setup of a 'monitoring and evaluation system specifying clear objectives 

and performance and impact indicators, for the programme as a whole and for each project, 




EGEVAL 

including the preparation of a complete follow-up data sheet for each project' (…) and 'Strict and ongoing 

monitoring and follow-up of projects, based on clear specifications and rules'. This was 

however not realised. 

- With the PRBS, there are no requirements for administrative and financial procedures linked to the 

actual disbursement of the funds other than a NAO request for payment to the Delegation and a 

transmission of this request from the Delegation to the Commission HQ. Importantly, however, the 

level of the disbursement now depends on the fulfilment of a number of targets in the areas of PFM, 

health and social housing. The organisational structure required for the evaluation of the level of 

disbursement (evaluation of conditions for tranche release which involved the evaluation of a set of 

performance indicators in the 3 sectors) is of a different nature and scope since it involves many 

actors: the NAO, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Housing, assistance 

from several TAs and on the Commission side, both the DEC and HQ intervene. 

- From file notes at the Delegation it appears that the organisational structure and the respective roles 

of these different actors had been insufficiently defined at the outset of the programme to allow for a 

smooth process of tranche release evaluation. The start of the PRBS (2005) coincided with the 

setting up of the NAO Task Force and the appointment of 2 new staff in the Economic Section of 

the Delegation who apparently were not familiar with the requirements for Budget Support. As a 

result, the initial 2005 Fixed Tranche release of €6 million which should have been disbursed straight 

after signature of the FA at end of September 2004 was eventually disbursed in December 2004 after 

many exchanges of letters and information between the Delegation and the Commission. The main 

issue of delay was the unsatisfactory information provided by the DEC to the Commission on the 

second general disbursement condition pertaining to a review of the PFM situation. The initial 

information provided was based on reviews provided by the IDB and CIDA which, at the time, were 

supporting the implementation of the PFM reform with the Guyana Economic Management 

Programme (GEMP); after this information was found unsatisfactory by the Commission (lack of 

independent assessment of the PFM situation), it was completed in November 2004 with the results 

of the IMF mission which eventually allowed the disbursement of the fixed tranche in December 

2004 (and to the acceptance by the Commission to postpone a full PFM review to 2005). 

- Correspondence about later tranche disbursements confirms the lack of clarity of respective roles, in 

particular between the DEC and the EC HQ with the HQ micro-managing at a distance the BS 

programme (see I 6.1.2 below). 

- Interviews also stressed the tensions created by the lack of well defined roles between the NAO Task 

Force and the Delegation: because staff of the NAO Task Force are paid by the EC, the Delegation 

appears to consider them as their employees even though they clearly fall under the NAO’s line 




EGEVAL 

management and report to the NAO. 

- Finally as far as the management culture of the beneficiaries is concerned, discussions with the 

ministries of housing and health have shown that the new approach to BS based on management by 

objectives has been well understood by these administrations: it is clear that everything is done to 

ensure that EC social sector targets are reached but it is less certain that this truly reflects a 

management by objectives culture within these ministries. Indeed, it is to be noted that (i) 

performance in both sectors has generally been mixed when considering all PRSP indicators for 

these respective sectors but that EC indicators consistently attained their target levels 18 (see EQ4) 

and (ii) although budget programmes are used within the ministries, there are so in name rather than 

in content, the recurrent and capital budgets are still separated, no detailed programme costing exist, 

no output, outcome and impact indicators are defined, measured and monitored and linked to the 

human and financial means engaged, etc. On the whole, although the principles of BS are well 

understood, the approach is not one that fits well within the Guyanese culture of public monies 

management. 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 6.1.1 An organizational structure has been foreseen in the FA for the MPP: 

- The overall responsibility for the implementation of the project lies with the NAO who is the contracting 

authority of the programme. 

- The supervisor of the programme is the chairman of the MP Board, who is answerable and accountable to 

the NAO and to the EC, with the technical assistance of the International adviser. 

- The MP Office is in charge of the day-to day management of the MPP. The PM will be answerable vis-à-vis 

the MP Board, the NAO, and the EC Delegation. 

I 6.1.2 Degree of appropriateness of the organizational structure (in particular at NAO, DEC and project 

level) to (i) the country’s capacity and constraints, (ii) to the Commission’s available resources and 

(iii) the scope and size of the programmes and projects 

9 ACP GUA 1 MPP Midterm 

evaluation 

I 6.1.2 The organizational structure of the MPP does not seem appropriate. Clarification upon the roles of the 

different stakeholders has been needed, mainly between NAO and EC. Regular meetings have been held to 

facilitate greater understanding of these roles and responsibilities for management of GMPP. 

More specifically, there are some difficulties of interpretation as to the overall role of the GMPB in respect of 

their functions vis-à-vis the GMPO. The Chairperson has somehow interfered in the management of the 

operations of the GMPO. The MTR stressed that the Chairperson has to understand the organizational 

management structure and roles defined in the FA with regard to the delegation of the supervisory role for 

day-to-day management of GMPP to the GMPO. 

Moreover, there have been some disagreements between the EC Delegation and the government on the 




EGEVAL 

composition of the MPPB and between the EC delegation and the TA on the implementation modalities of 

the programme. The setting-up of a new Board –foreseen for the end of 2006- has been delayed to 2007 due 

to EC concerns as to the validity of the election process at the workshop held for that purpose end of 2006. 

The MTR raised concern as to the extent of the pool of people in civil society from which new Board 

members can be drawn. 

9 ACP GUA 1 

MPP 

9 ACP GUA 3 


NAO 

Field visit 

interviews 


and GoG 

informants 

I 6.1.2 

Key point from the GoG point of view: 

- MPP should be a community driven programme. MPP procedures should be flexible (the 75 pages 

application form is irrelevant to most of Guyanese associations). But the boundary impossible to 

breach is the GoG policy in balancing helps and contributions to the various ethnic entities, 

communities, civil or religious associations in the different (urban, rural) areas of the country. In this 

context the only intangible rule is the ‘no objection’ of the Government for the fund allocation 

whatever the board considerations and the EC procedures. 

The Commission resources for the support to the NAO (€ 1 million) amounts to 1.4 % of whole the 

Commission interventions budget (€ 146m over the evaluation period, said € 73 million over the 5-year 

duration of the NAO support Financing Agreement. 

Tables on the following section I.6.2.1 identifies that the NAO Task Force has to deal with : 

- 12 interventions counting € 133m and 91% of the total committed (intervention average € 11m) 

Sector Number Average m€ (*) 

Sea Defences 2 18,5 

Transport 0 

Housing (LIS) 1 9,1 

Private sector (LEAP) 1 12,5 

Budget support 5 10,3 

Civil society (MPP) 1 4 

Rice 1 12,9 

Sugar 1 5,7 

Total 12 132,7 

- 37 interventions counting € 13m and 9% of the total committed (intervention average € 0,35m) 

Sector Number Average m€ (*) 

Sea Defences 5 0,07 




EGEVAL 

Transport 2 0;51 

Housing 1 0,07 

Private sector 7 0,23 

Budget support 5 0,76 

Civil society 5 0,42 

Programme 

10 0,22 

agement 

Environment 2 0,92 

Total 37 13 

So the NAO Task Force with a programme coordinator and two programme officers appears to be 

adequately dimensioned to the scope and size of the programme and projects. 

But the Monitoring report observed in 2004 difficult working environment and limited office space 

(observation confirmed three years after during the evaluation exploratory mission). The mid term evaluation 

provide also indicators confirming that the appropriateness of the organizational structure could be enhanced 

(‘cramped working conditions such as less than optimum communication and transportation facilities’). The 

evaluation team confirmed the rightfulness of these observations during the field mission. No change has 

been observed since the initial settlement to remedy these management constraints. 

8 ACP GUA 8 

Guyana 

Training 

Agency 

8 ACP GUA 4 

SAS V and VI 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

Mid-term 

evaluation 

Synopsis 

sheet SAS V 


file notes 

PRSP 

annual 

reviews 

I 6.1.2 

I 6.1.2 

I 6.1.2 

According to the Mid-Term evaluation, the day-t-day management of the project was good. The team was 

well informed and well-coordinated. However, the day-to-day management was made complicated by the 

organisational arrangements involving the project management team, the NAO and the Commission. The 

style of management was a bit rigid in a situation that demands some flexibility. 

The synopsis sheet for SAS V states that: ‘the Performance Indicators Cell which should have been set up 

with the help of a TA in the Ministry of Finance was not established because ‘the government considered 

that it already had the competence and capacity to carry out the required activities’’. Whether or not the 

absence of this cell was partly in cause, it is further noted that: ‘the lack of clear definition of indicators and 

target measurements and interpretation of data led to differences of view between the Govt, the Delegation 

and Brussels on what amount to disburse.’ 

Under PRBS, performance monitoring of outcome indicators in the social sectors and PFM areas is the base 

for decision-making of variable tranche release. From available documents it appears that the Delegation in 

particular had insufficient resources available to undertake the tasks required from it by the Commission to 

substantiate the requests for tranche releases. The DEC rapidly hired international consultants to prepare the 

information required for fixed and variable tranche disbursement. This has functioned for the 3 years (2005 – 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP GUA 9 

LEAP 

P ACP GUA 3 


NAO 

Delegation 

File Notes 

Evaluation 

report 

I 6.1.3 

I 6.1.3 

I 6.1.3 

2007) with one yearly mission to undertake an independent PFM review (prior to the fixed tranche 

disbursements of 2005, 2006) and one yearly mission to carry out the independent evaluation of performance 

indicators for the variable tranche release. 

GoG’s limited capacity to improve PFM systems (and in particular to achieve the targets retained for the 

performance indicators of the PRBS) also called for TA with the view to assist the GoG in attaining 3 of the 

7 PFM indicators. This particularly refers to TA provided to the Ministry of Finance for the development of 

fiscal projections (indicator 1), the Ministry of Housing and Water for the development of an MTEF 

(indicator 3) and a strengthening of statistics and the Ministry of Health for the development of and MTEF 

(indicator 3) and a TA for strengthening the external debt management capacity (Indicator 4). The TAs 

working on the MTEFs were later extended to encompass the ministries of education, public works and 

finance. Similarly, Indicator 2 was actually dependent upon progress made under an IDB funded project. Out 

of the seven indicators of PFM, GoG had only in-house capacity for fulfilling 3 of them. 

Similarly, in health, the outcome of all three indicators depended heavily on continued external financing 

remaining available for the three programmes monitored. 

It is also noted that the process of setting up and implementing a monitoring system for PRSP 

implementation appears to have been slow and that the production of monitoring indicators for PRSP 

implementation has posed some initial problems to GoG. Unfortunately, during the field mission the PRSP 

M&E unit was unavailable for meetings but it is understood from discussions with DEC staff and other 

donors and from the PRSP annual reviews, that PRSP monitoring has remained weak and receives 

considerable donor attention under the current preparation of the PRSP II. 

Evidence of emphasis on conformity in the whole organization in particular at NAO, DEC and 

project level 

According to the LEAP Monitoring system (2005), the whole organization at project level has been quite 

conform: 

- 7 advisory group per year has been achieved at 71% 

- 5 advisory group task force meeting per year has been achieved at 60% 

- 2 steering Committee Meetings per year has been achieved at 100% 

- 10 Portfolio meetings per year has been achieved at 70% 

- 15 occurrences of the Motivational system for staff members has been achieved at 47% 

Key point 

- No specific rules and organization principles have been presented at the request of the evaluation 

team during the field visit. These management tools should have been elaborated with the view to 

defining the relations between stakeholders so as to determine ‘who is doing what’ at each stage of 

the programming and implementation process (see annexes 6.1-6.2-6.3 and above section 1.6.1.1). 




EGEVAL 

The Monitoring report (MR) dated 07/04/06 mentioned that ‘the NAO TF could be more pro-active in engendering 

better management across the portfolio’. But a monthly Portfolio meeting is headed by the DNAO with the direct 

involvement of the Commission Delegation, Line Ministries and project managements representatives. 

Further emphasis on conformity in the whole organization is depending on the clear understanding of the 

partition of responsibilities between the programme stakeholders. These monthly portfolio meetings 

demonstrate great utility in coordinating project activities and in following up closely intervention 

achievements. 

9 ACP GUA 3 


NAO 

8 ACP GUA 5 

Sea Defences 

8 ACP GUA 15 

Low Income 

Housing 

8 ACP GUA 9 

LEAP 

I 6.1.4 Emphasis on timely and cost-effective management in particular at NAO and DEC levels. 

I 6.1.4 - The DNAO is clearly emphasizing the needed timely and cost effective management through the 

monthly portfolio meetings, entailing clear instructions to the project actors (Line Ministries, 

consultants and to the NAO Task Force in coordinating/supporting/monitoring the actions 

implemented in respect of the projects planning and budgets. 

But the MR quoted that there is still significant room to improvement, which was (in 2006) iterated by the 

DNAO. 

The field mission has been opportunity to fill-up this indicator though comparison of project results before 

and after 2002 (when the NAO Task force was set up). 

Table– Monitoring reports scoring – Delays & rates of disbursements 




EGEVAL 

Legend 

1997-2002 2003-2007 11/07 

Delay Decision>Start 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 % % 

Extension after Contract end date 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 Time Paid 

INFRASTRUCTURES Relevance a b a a b 

Sea Defences Efficiency b c c c d 82% 75% 

8ACPGUA 5 Effectiveness b b b b d 

Impact b b c c c 

Sustainability c c c c c 

Housing 

Relevance 

8ACPGUA 15 Efficiency Ev. 100% 17% 

Effectiveness 

Impact 


PRIVATE SECTOR support Relevance b b b 

GTA Efficiency c b b 100% 100% 

8ACPGUA 8 Effectiveness c b b 

Impact b b b 

Sustainability b b c 

Relevance b b b 

LEAP Efficiency c c b 80% 55% 

8ACPGUA 9 Effectiveness c b b 

Impact c b b 

Sustainability c c c 

Civil society support Relevance c 

MPP Efficiency c 66% 40% 

9ACPGUA 1 Effectiveness c 

Impact 

c 


c 

Programme management Relevance b 

NAO support Efficiency a 60% 74% 

9ACPGUA 3 Effectiveness b 

Impact 

c 


c 

Relevance b b 

Rice sector Efficiency d c 46% 40% 

9ACPRPR 6 Effectiveness c b 

Impact c c 

Sustainability d c 

Key observations 

- Actually, the support to the NAO is recent over the period under observation. So its effective impact 

cannot be observed since its settlement at the end of 2004. 

- The NAO TF was not accountable of the long delays and problems to set up the two interventions 

related to Low Income Housing and to the Rice sector support under the 9 th RIP and also to solve 

the initial serious problems of the LEAP project. 

- As well the serious technical difficulties encountered by the Sea Defences activites with the 8ACP 

GUA 5 intervention were not under the only command of the NAO TF. Other actors identified at 

decision and coordination levels in the organisation and management chart (Annexe XX) were also 




EGEVAL 

directly concerned. 

- Nevertheless surprisingly no ROM mission has been arranged since the the early 2006 despite it was 

necessary for 8 ACP GUA 5 (Sea Defences after the bad scoring of the last MR), 8 ACP GUA 15 

(Housing) which should have benefits of a monitoring mission at the very begiinig ot the project 

start up and before the late evaluation in 2007, 8 ACP GUA 9 (LEAP) due to the exceptional 

difficult context of the LEAF component and also due to the need to enforce the LEAP and LEAF 

sustainability, 9 ACP GUA 3 (MPP) to prevent risk of mismanagement of this highly politically 

sensible intervention, 9 ACP RPR 6 (Rice Sector) to ensure a close follow-up of this important 

intervention for Guyana but through a Regional programme; and eventually 9 ACP GUA 1 (NAO 

support) to get confirmation of the initial positive assessment from the MR in the early 2006. 

- Comparing rate of disbursements and time advancement, the situation remains critical for 8 ACP 

GUA 5 (Sea Defences), highly questionable for 8 ACP GUA 5 (Housing), understandable for 8 ACP 

GUA 9 (LEAP) due to the specific problems faced by the LEAF component, quasi normal for the 

other interventions (MP, NAO support and Rice sector support). 

8 ACP GUA 4 

(SAS V and VI) 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

9 ACP GUA 3 


NAO 

I 6.1.4 

I 6.1.5 

Despite the assistance from an international expert to prepare all background documentation for tranche 

release of the PRBS (see I 6.1.2), the extent to which the DEC should additionally (i) provide an independent 

full PFM review (ie even independent from the work provided by an EU funded consultant) and (ii) have at 

its fingertips all background justifying documents on which the evaluations are based, seems to have been an 

important point of contention/discussion between the DEC and the Commission. 

Existence of co-ordination mechanisms among implementation actors (consultations, coordination 

working groups) 

Coordination mechanisms exist at Donors programme implementation within the Project Cycle Division of 

the MoF and headed by the DNAO. The Commission programme activities are subject of coordination 

during the monthly Portfolio meeting (see above). The NAO task force is in charge of the projects 

coordination on a day by day basis. A steering committee was installed and headed by the NAO during the 5- 

month TA in 2005. 

8 ACP GUA 4 


9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

I 6.1.5 

In terms of budget support it appears that the whole process of design, implementation, monitoring of the 

programme and evaluation of indicators for tranche release is performed quite independently of any sector 

working groups, PRSP reviews or other platforms of GoG-donor consultations. Obviously all relevant parties 

are consulted but this is done on bilateral basis rather than as a concerted effort, thus losing the opportunity 




EGEVAL 

to use budget support as a lever for improved GoG-donor and EC-donor coordination. 

9 ACP GUA 1 I 6.1.5 No explicit reference to coordination mechanisms in the documents available 

JC 6.2 The financial instruments, management tools and processes used for implementation contribute to 

reaching objectives in a timely and cost effective manner 

I 6.2.1 Number and amount of global commitments and financing agreements by sector. 

Program/Project Title N Sector Committed Cumul %cumul 

8 ACP GUA 5 Guyana sea defencesŹ 1 Sea Defences 20 000 000 20 000 000 14% 

9 ACP GUA 9th EDF Sea Defences Programme 2 Sea Defences 17 018 000 37 018 000 25% 

8 ACP GUA 15 Support To The Low-Income Housing Sector 3 Housing 9 100 000 46 118 000 32% 

8 ACP GUA 9 Linden economic advancement programmeŹ 4 Private sector 12 500 000 58 618 000 40% 

9 ACP GUA 6 Poverty reduction budget support to GuyanaŹ 5 Budget Support 26 666 379 85 284 379 59% 

9 ACP GUA 7 Poverty reduction budget support to GuyanaŹ 6 Budget Support 8 400 000 93 684 379 64% 

7 ACP GUA 26 

Participation communautaire a l'initiative d'allegement de la dette des pays pauvres 

tres endettesŹ 

7 Budget Support 6 440 000 100 124 379 69% 

8 ACP GUA 4 Support programme for economic reforms (sas v : 1999)Ź 8 Budget Support 5 400 000 105 524 379 72% 

8 ACP GUA 1 Support programme for econmic reforms (sas iv : 1998)Ź 9 Budget Support 4 600 000 110 124 379 76% 

9 ACP GUA 1 Micro-projects programmeŹ 10 Civil Society 4 000 000 114 124 379 78% 

9 ACP RPR 006 Support to the Competitiveness of the Rice sector in the Caribbean 11 Rice 12 930 240 127 054 619 87% 

SUCRE/2006/018- 

530 

Accompanying measures 2006 for Sugar Protocol Countries 12 Sugar 5 663 000 132 717 619 91% 

Sub total 12 132 717 619 132 717 619 91% 

Other projects 37 13 029 370 13 029 370 9% 

Total 49 145 746 989 145 746 989 100% 




EGEVAL 

Other porjects (details) N Ū Cumul Average 

9 ACP GUA 2 Design & tender procedure Guyana sea defencesŹ 1 Sea Defences 151 742 151 742 

6 ACP GUA 28 Sea defences - appraisal of progr.& prep. Financial proposalŹ 2 Sea Defences 66 836 218 578 

6 ACP GUA 30 Elaboration study for the sea defence project to be financed under the 9th EDFŹ 3 Sea Defences 59 319 277 897 

6 ACP GUA 24 Provision for investigation of sea defense slip failuresŹ 4 Sea Defences 36 571 314 468 

7 ACP GUA 25 Guyana's sea defences - econ. & financial analyses - 8 EDF 5 Sea Defences 20 779 335 247 67 049 

9 ACP GUA 4 Transport sector studyŹ 1 Transport 900 000 900 000 

7 ACP GUA 13 Feasibility study for Guyana-Brazil roadŹ 2 Transport 124 457 1 024 457 512 229 

6 ACP GUA 29 Low income housing programmeŹ 1 Housing 73 289 73 289 73 289 

8 ACP GUA 8 Guyana training agencyŹ 1 Private sector 1 328 342 1 328 342 

7 ACP GUA 23 Study economic diversification LindenŹ 2 Private sector 101 225 1 429 567 

6 ACP GUA 18 TA for establish. of private sector center (see also 7 GUA 14)Ź 3 Private sector 100 000 1 529 567 

8 ACP GUA 3 Identification study human resource dvlpmt programmeŹ 4 Private sector 73 056 1 602 623 

6 ACP GUA 26 Mid-term evaluation small business credit initiative-phase II 5 Private sector 42 015 1 644 638 

6 ACP GUA 27 Study of HRD needs for the private sectorŹ 6 Private sector 4 610 1 649 248 

8 ACP GUA 6 TA for feasibility study for private sector developmentŹ 7 Private sector 1 160 1 650 408 235 773 

7 ACP GUA 20 Support Structural Adjustment Programme (GIP-III) 1 Budget support 1 264 997 1 264 997 

9 ACP GUA 10 9 EDF sea defences infrastructure design programmeŹ 2 Budget support 900 000 2 164 997 

9 ACP GUA 3 Institutional strenghtening of the NAO's officeŹ 3 Budget support 820 000 2 984 997 

8 ACP GUA 2 Support programme for economics reforms (sas iv : 1998)Ź 4 Budget support 690 000 3 674 997 

8 ACP GUA 17 Feasibility study for a budgetary support programme to Guyana / 9th EDF 5 Budget support 114 988 3 789 985 757 997 

9 ACP GUA 8 Emergency assistance to the victims of floods in Guyana 1 Humanitarian ass. 700 000 700 000 

9 ACP GUA 9 Consolidation of the democratic process (codep) in a polari political situation 2 Good governance 940 000 1 640 000 

DDH/1997/113 Proposal for financing the production of voter identification cards 3 Democracy enh. 362 433 2 002 433 

7 ACP GUA 27 General elections 2001-financial needs assessmentŹ 4 Democracy enh. 49 997 2 052 430 

8 ACP GUA 16 Ta - formulation microprojects programmeŹ 5 Civil society 46 457 2 098 887 419 777 

7 ACP GUA 19 Support Structural Adjustment Programme (GIP-III) 1 Progr. manag. 800 000 800 000 

9 ACP GUA 5 Technical cooperation facility (tcf)Ź 2 Progr. manag. 605 400 1 405 400 

8 ACP GUA 7 Technical study-preparation of the tender dossier-evaluation of the tender bidsŹ 3 Progr. manag. 406 706 1 812 106 

6 ACP GUA 25 Technical assistance to the NAO's officeŹ 4 Progr. manag. 166 132 1 978 238 

8 ACP GUA 10 Identification-preparation of the CSS for the 9th EDF 5 Progr. manag. 79 990 2 058 228 

8 ACP GUA 19 Prep t.o.r. + tender documents - transport sector studyŹ 6 Progr. manag. 47 077 2 105 305 

8 ACP GUA 18 Elaboration study for support to the NAO 7 Progr. manag. 38 846 2 144 151 

7 ACP GUA 24 Technical assistance to the NAO's officeŹ 8 Progr. manag. 31 504 2 175 655 

8 ACP GUA 13 Identification - preparation of the CSS for the 9th EDF phase IIŹ 9 Progr. manag. 19 562 2 195 217 

7 ACP GUA 22 TA for the purpose of examining the government of sysmin reqŹ 10 Progr. manag. 17 342 2 212 559 221 256 

ENV/1998/004-320 Conservation and utilization of biodiversity in the Iwokrama forest 1 Environment 1 350 142 1 350 142 

ENV/1998/003-684 Conservation and sustainable use of botanical diversity in Guyana 2 Environment 494 396 1 844 538 922 269 

TOTAL 37 13 029 370 13 029 370 352 145 

12 commitments amount 91% of the total but 25 other commitments (the 5 of the Budget Support being 

deducted) mobilise a great amount of management energy to deal with the various procedures of 8 different 

financing mechanisms (see just below section I.6.2.2). 

Budget support is implemented though 10 interventions counting €55 




EGEVAL 

I 6.2.2 

I 6.2.2 

Types of financing agreements: number and amounts of contracts, grants, programme estimates by 

direct labour operations or externalised direct labour operations 

Origin 

Number of 

interventio 

ns 

Committed 

(Euros) 

Contracted 

(Euros) 

Paid (Euros) Paid/Contr 

acted 

Paid/Com 

mitted 

8 NIP 

Traditional projects 12 31,256,184 26,407,451 18,340,258 69% 59% 

9 NIP 12 61,101,521 43,326,284 26,351,116 61% 43% 


Budget Support 2 35,066,379 34,866,379 21,350,523 61% 61% 

8 Non Programmable 4 23,190,000 22,955,390 17,396,365 76% 75% 


Budget Support 3 10,690,000 10,690,000 10,690,000 100% 100% 

9 RIP 1 12,930,240 12,930,240 5,238,902 41% 41% 

9 Non Programmable 1 5,663,000 3,563,300 3,437,259 96% 61% 




EGEVAL 

I 6.2.3 Types of procedures laid down in the financing agreements (i.e.: according to financing 

thresholds) 

8 ACP GUA 9 FA I 6.2.3 The PMU is recruited following a restricted procedure. 

Annual Work Programmes (prepared by the PMU and approved by the Project Steering Committee and 

the Commission) constitute the basis on which funds are committed and released. The principle of 

competitive tendering applies to all contracts to be awarded under such work programmes. 

9 ACP GUA 3 

Support to 

the NAO 

And other 

interventions 

I 6.2.4 

I 6.2.4 

Delays and rates of disbursements by financing agreement 

Information is provided with the table in the above section I.6.1.4. Comparing rate of disbursements and 

time advancement, the situation remains critical for 8 ACP GUA 5 (Sea Defences), highly questionable 

for 8 ACP GUA 5 (Housing), understandable for 8 ACP GUA 9 (LEAP) due to the specific problems 

faced by the LEAF component, quasi normal for the other interventions (MP, NAO support and Rice 

sector support). 

8 ACP GUA 9 

LEAP 

Evaluation 

report 

I 6.2.4 

Problematic start up period of about 2 years with a lot of personnel changes. 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

File Notes 

DEC 

Discussions 

NAO TF 

I 6.2.4 

The disbursement procedures for BS are simple and designed to produce fast payments. The dates of 

disbursement for the fixed and variable tranches of the PRBS are as follows: 

Tranche Date due Request Request Date of payment Delays 

NAO DEC 

Fixed tranche 2 nd semester 2004 27/10/2004 04/11/04 Dec. 2004 1,5 month 

2004 

Fixed tranche 1 st semester 2005 24/05/2005 06/06/05 11/07/05 1,5 month 

2005 

Variable tranche 2 nd semester 2005 16/11/2005 30/11/05 07/12/05 but < 1 month 

2005 

received 12/01/06 

Fixed tranche 1 st semester 2006 19/02/2006 21/02/06 23/03/06 1 month 

2006 

Variable tranche 2 nd semester 2006 21/11/06 27/11/06 19/12/06 1 month 




EGEVAL 

2006 28/05/07 10/08/07 9 months 

9 ACP GUA 3 

Support to 

the NAO 

JC 6.3 

I 6.3.1 

I 6.3.1 

Over the period, only the last payments relative to the variable tranche of 2006 has suffered undue 

delays. This was because the DEC, in agreement with the Commission, questioned the validity of data 

underlying one of the indicators. In order not to unduly delay disbursement, only the amount relative to 

that indicator was temporarily suspended, awaiting the results of an audit. In the event as data did not 

corroborate an attainment of the set target, only 50% of the suspended amount was eventually paid. 

In fact, whatever delays have been experienced in BS disbursement these have been due to scrutinising of 

disbursement conditions by the Commission followed by requests for further information or 

clarification. This has been the case for the first fixed tranche which was eventually released without 

having scored full satisfaction on indicator 2 (supply of a full PFM review) and for the variable tranches 

of both 2005 and 2006. Despite these questionings, disbursements have been very fast. From the 

correspondence between the DEC and the Commission, it is clear that in the case of budget support, 

every effort is made by both parties to avoid any delays in disbursement. The importance of speedy 

disbursement of BS can be illustrated by the incident linked to the payment of the 2005 variable tranche: 

payment was made by the Commission on 07/12/05 but an internal error at the Bank of England 

holding the GoG account meant the money was credited to the GoG’s account only on 12/01/2006. 

This meant that the fiscal deficit for 2005 was 0.9% of GDP higher than it should have been, with all the 

consequences for Guyana’s international credit rating and its programme indicators with the BWI. 

However, it is to be noted that due to the choice of indicators, they can only be assessed at year’s end 

when appropriate statistics become available; as a result, variable tranche disbursement takes place at the 

very end of the financial year (in December), thus lowering predictability of budgetary funds and 

contributing to treasury cash flow tensions. 

The institutional support to the Commission projects is improved through the NAO task force 

List of new management tools in place in the NAO task force (retro-planning, support to 

projects…) 

According to the FA, the NAO task force has put in place, apart from the usual logical framework, 

planning and budget, required in the FA : 

Communication tool to the programme actors on the broad range of Commission aid instruments 

(Result 1) 

Information system for programming of Commission assistance to the relevant stakeholders (Result 2) 

Monitoring/management tools designed for the NAO Task force support to the projects actors (Result 

3) 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 3 

Support to 

the NAO 

I 6.3.2 

I 6.3.2 

JC 6.4 

I 6.4.1 

Actually, the support to the NAO is recent over the period under observation. So its impact cannot be 

observed since its settlement at the end of 2004. Thus the NAO TF is not accountable of the long delays 

and problems to set up the Low Income Housing and Rice sector supports and also to solve the initial 

serious problems of the LEAP project. 

Perception of NAO task force, Commission task managers and program managers on the effects 

of the support to the NAO and on the overall efficiency of interventions, in terms of time 

management and cost-effectiveness. 

The MR provides positive conclusions in April 2006 with quite good scoring (‘a’ for efficiency and ‘b’ for 

effectiveness. The informants met at decision level (GoG, Commission Delegation) on the overall 

efficiency during the exploratory and field missions expressed pro-active appraisal on the perception of 

NAO task force. But some projects management’s representatives identified some of the major concerns 

to them which included Time delays between Project formulation and bidding and limited number of 

qualified contractors with capacity to bid. Consequence upon the occurrence of project delays was a 

reduction in the quantitative target (housing). 

From the GoG point of view, the TF felt often paralyzed due to bureaucratic regulations, red tape and issues being 

politicized between the ministries or the GoG and EC. 

Programme and projects are implemented in a timely manner and at planned cost 

Average MR efficiency rate 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 3 

Support to 

the NAO 

8 ACP GUA 5 

Sea Defences 

8 ACP GUA 

15 

Low Income 

Housing 

8 ACP GUA 9 

LEAP 

9 ACP GUA 3 

MPP 

9 ACP GUA 1 

NAO support 

9 ACP RPR 6 

Rice sector 

8 ACP GUA 

15 

Housing 

I 6.4.1 

I 6.4.1 

Monitoring reports 

Scoring 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

1 INFRASTRUCTURES Relevance a b a a b 

Sea Defences Efficiency b c c c d 

Effectiveness b b b b d 

Impact b b c c c 

Sustainability c c c c c 

2 PRIVATE SECTOR support Relevance b b b 

GTA Efficiency c b b 

Effectiveness c b b 

Impact b b b 

Sustainability b b c 

Relevance b b b 

LEAP Efficiency c c b 

Effectiveness c b b 

Impact c b b 

Sustainability c c c 

4 Civil society support Relevance c 

MPP Efficiency c 

Effectiveness 

c 

Impact 

c 


c 

5 Programme management Relevance b 

NAO support Efficiency a 

Effectiveness 

b 

Impact 

c 


c 

Relevance b b 

Rice sector Efficiency d c 

Effectiveness c b 

Impact c c 

Sustainability d c 

Key points 

1. decreasing performances on Sea defences since 2004; 

2. No monitoring of the Low Income Housing project; 

3. positive outcomes with GTA and LEAP (despite the hardship settlement and awkward situation 

of the LEAF component); 

4. insufficient monitoring missions for MPP and NAO support; 

5. follow up to be maintained on Rice interventions with regular monitoring; 

Surprisingly, the settlement of the NAO Task Force did not induce regular monitoring missions as this 

was needed for Sea Defences, LEAP & LEAF, MPP and the NAO support itself. 

The problems faced by the Housing project illustrate concrete difficulties in implementing such a project 

in a timely manner and at planned cost: : 

- The project started two years after the financial agreement, entailing severe consequences about 

the project financing due to price changes. Thus revision should have been planned. The project 

suffered from inflexibility of procedures and of too short time frame. The final short cut is about 

2,5 million € versus 9 millions budgeted. 

- The project implementation faced also the problem of selecting contractor: few applicants by 

unavailability, lack of interest for the low housing sector or possibly fear to face the EC 

2007 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP RPR 6 

Rice sector 

I 6.4.1 

procedures. 

- Other reasons of delays are connected with the changing programme officer in the EC 

Delegation and the changing EC procedures. As example, obligation was imposed to re-tender 

due to the change of templates for the tender process. 

- There is a need of controlling the overhead-cost variance : the difference between the estimated 

overhead cost of the project components and their actual overhead costs due to delays and price 

changes. 

- The selection process is not based on the estimate of the global cost efficiency: the cheapest 

financing proposal is not the cheapest one at the end of implementation in considering criteria 

such as quality, delays, maintenance and overheads costs entailed by various contractor technical 

and management weaknesses, shortages and insufficiency. 

- The current implementation is submitted to and delayed by the complicated Government 

decision process for instance with regards to the attribution of lots. 

Great concern is expressed by the Project TL regarding the overall cost efficiency of this project by 

limited budget and time frame plus moving and inflexible procedures especially for the tender process. 

As second example, implementing this project in a timely manner and at planned cost: entails to address 

the following context : 

- Programme ruled by the Regional Authorizing Officer (RAO), Executive Secretary of 

CARICOM, in Trinidad; 

- The Deputy RAO is the Minister of Agriculture; 

- 11,7 million € are allocated to Guyana (out off 24 million) 

- Programme funded under the 9 th EDF, FA signed in 2003 and running up to 2008; 

- Four components : (i) TA : 1,8 million €; (ii) water rehabilitation : 3,2 million €; (iii) Financial 

facility : 6,5 million ; (iv) training 190 000 €; 

- Two years were needed to launch the project with a fully fledged PMU; 

- TA: difficult set up in terms of institutional arrangements regarding the programme 

management; Two Team Leaders resigned for various reasons including misunderstanding with 

the EC Delegation; the take over of the programme activities by the new TL was insufficient; no 

work plan was set up one year after the programme start. To date the TL is now mainly 

coordinating the project activities. 

- Water rehabilitation : a DAO is on going; 

- Financial facility: this component is aiming at providing financial resources for inputs 

suppliers; this facility is depending on existing local arrangements between farmers and millers in 

financing the farmers’ working capital; the banking sector failing in financing this working 

capital. The study carried out by HTSPE on the financing support to the competitiveness of the 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP GUA 9 

LEAP 

8 ACP GUA 8 

GTA 

Evaluation 

report 

Mid-term 

evaluation 

Rice sector in the Caribbean was not satisfying and the final report dated 20/05/2005 has not 

been approved.. The achievement of the tender process for services contract to manage the 

facility was also difficult through two tenders with only one offer. Other difficult issues 

concerned guaranty by the Government, taxes, exemption of deposit reserves, collaterals from 

farmers, etc. Eventually a credit development expert has been assigned with the view is to 

facilitate emergence and achievements of solutions to these various problems. 

- Training component : significant in terms of outputs regarding the quality management and 

the financial management; 

Key observations 

- Who is taking the leading role in designing the whole programme: the RAO or the DNAO on 

behalf of the GoG ? 

- How rationale is the decision to finance a declining sector? 

- Other comments: 

- The Rice sector has to be regarded from a social point of view in focusing on consequences of 

the sector decline especially for small holders; 

- Restructuring the Rice sector should be under the responsibility of the only private sector 

stakeholders (great farmers, millers, banking sector). 

- The Water rehabilitation is a public sector issue connected to the overall water management 

issues in Guyana. 

- PMU instalment is a recurrent problem : delays between FA signature and project start is two 

years; 

I 6.4.2 Project evaluations conclusions on efficiency 

I 6.4.2 - The programme has experienced many problems in the starting-up phase (frequent changes in 

personnel). Stability of local and international staff involvement is now maintained. 

- Not enough involvement of the local staff members in the overall management 

- The functioning of the Project Steering Committee (Commission Del, NAO, LEAP Pm and 

LEAP BDU Manager) is efficient 

- The role of the Advisory Group is not enough important 

- LEAP & LEAF have raised outstanding expectations with the population in Region 10. 

I 6.4.2 - The project design was efficient. 

- Problems in efficiency relate to delays (in implementation at the inception of project activities 

due to the elections in 2001 and following civil disturbances) and slippages in targets (enabling 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

Budget 

support 

I 6.4.2 

training environment for competency based training, conducting training programmes according 

to needs, improving training facilities). 

- The delay experienced in the first year is now being overcome and progress is satisfactory. 

- The TA supplied by the project has been successful. 

Surprisingly the semi annual report (January-June 2005) did not provide specific conclusion and 

recommendation on efficiency conclusions. 

The Draft Mid-Term Review concluded in November 2004 that, regarding the PRSP, 

there is still work to be done. But the Government remains firmly committed to its objectives. Thus the 

overall assessment is adequate. The human rights record is generally positive although there are concerns 

about some causes of extra-judicial killings and the deteriorated security situation 

9 ACP GUA 1 MPP Midterm 

evaluation 

I 6.4.2 

- The roles in the organisational and management structure for the GMPP between the EC Delegation, 

NAO, GMPB and GMPO are defined in the FA but greater communication and understanding of these 

roles and responsibilities for management of the GMPP has been needed on occasions. The Chairperson 

and some members of the former Board have faced difficulties of interpretation of the role of the GMPB 

vis-à-vis the GMPO, which appears on occasions to have affected efficient management of GMPP. 

- Long-term TA was provided by the TA Contractor but faced problems with the first two persons and 

the third was only in post from September 2005 six months after the contract started. He only stayed 

13 out of the 18 months until October 2006. 

- The third ITA was regarded by the GMPO as having made a positive contribution to the efficient 

management and implementation of the GMPP with training and production of appropriate materials 

and operational manuals to guide implementation and follow EDF grant procedures or calls for 

proposals under decentralised management. 

- The PM and project staff provide efficient management of the GMPO but are constrained by lack of 

capacity to work at with NGOs and CBOs at the regional community level. 

- There is a basic constraint into the GMPP in terms of what can be achieved with the resources and 

capacity that has been foreseen in the FA and subsequent implementation arrangements. 

8 ACP GUA 5 MR I 6.4.2 - Delays due to disagreements about the design of the project 

- Shortage of technical advisory staff at the EC Delegation 

- Staff turnover at SRDD due to precarious conditions of services 

8 ACP GUA 9 

LEAP 

Evaluation 

report, 

Meeting 

I.6.4.3 

I.6.4.3 

Identification of implementation difficulties that are not due to deficiencies of financial, human 

and technical resources or to the regulatory and administrative set-up 

Apart from a problematic start up due to personnel changes, the programme is running well. 

The difficult situation of LEAF the component (micro-credit loans) was due to awkward and intricate 

business and media context. Nevertheless it was established and currently recognised that this context 




EGEVAL 

notes 

was disconnected from the LEAP & LEAF management itself. So the impact of the positive and 

significant outcomes of the LEAP & LEAF complementary components has been limited by the 

negative effects of this situation: EC funding restricted; LEAF management disturbed, etc. 




EGEVAL 

EQ7 

JC 7.1 

I 7.1.1 

NIP & CSP I 7.1.1 

To what extent were cross-cutting issues related to good governance and human rights, gender, 

environment, institutional development, capacity building and HIV/AIDS taken into account for the 

design and implementation of the programmes? 

CCI have been taken into account in the CSP and the NIP and in the design of programmes (nonspecific 

interventions) 

Extent to which the CSP and the NIP explicitly promote CCI 

In the general framework of the 8 th EDF NIP, the Commission highlighted its priority cooperation areas. 

Good governance and human rights, and a sustainable economic and social development –including gender 

and environment- are clearly mentioned as priorities. The NIP also mentions that the Commission could 

provide funds to Guyana through specific budget lines to promote good governance, democracy, 

environment, and HIV/AIDS. 

In the first focal area –Rehabilitation of social and economic infrastructure-, the NIP explicitly mentions that 

environment issues are going to be taken into account in all the programmes and that the active involvement 

of women in the maintenance of coastal equipments will be stimulated. 

In the second focal area –Private sector development-, the NIP mentions that measures will be taken to 

stimulate women involvement in the SME development and that enterprises benefiting from these 

programmes should be sensitive to environmental protection. 

Actions outside focal areas mention actions to promote environmental protection. 

Whereas good governance and human rights is presented as a priority cooperation area, it is not translated into 

specific actions in focal or non focal sectors. 

The 9 th EDF CSP does not make any explicit reference to the CCI apart from the reference to the European 

Community’ Development Policy of 10 November 2000. Focal and non-focal sectors do not include any CCI 

project. The 9th EDF NIP mentions that specific actions could be financed via budget lines in the areas of 

human rights and democracy. 

I 7.1.2 

All Projects Compilation I 7.1.2 

Number of projects per CCI that explicitly identify measures on CCI at the stage of the project 

design 




EGEVAL 

Measures on CCI at the stage of the design of the project 

Number of Projects Name of the Project 

Good governance and Human Rights 0 

Gender 0 

Environment 0 

Institutional development 2 LEAP, BS 

Capacity Building 3 Sea defences, MPP and LEAP 

HIV/AIDS 0 

Reference to CCI at the stage of the design of the project 

Number of Name of the Project 

Projects 

Good governance and Human 1 Sugar 

Rights 

Gender 7 Sea Defences, Low-Income Housing, MPP, NAO 

TF, BS, Sugar 

Environment 5 Sea Defences, NAO TF, BS, Rice, Sugar 

Institutional development 1 LEAP 

Capacity Building 5 Sea Defences, MPP, BS, Rice, LEAP 

HIV/AIDS 0 

8 ACP GUA 9 FA I 7.1.2 The LEAP FA mentions 2 CCI in the design of the project: 

- institutional development is one of the 7 components of the project 

- capacity building = training is one of the 7 components of the project 

Capacity building is also mentioned in component 4 (LEAF). 

8 ACP GUA 8 FA, Mid-term 

evaluation 

I 7.1.2 

The GTA FA does not mention any CCI in the design of the project. 

The Mid-term evaluation stipulates that the project has not been designed with deliberate considerations of 

gender nor environmental issues. GTA’s areas of training fall mostly within those that are non-traditional for 

women (technical skills training) and that less than 30% of women were participating in GTA’s training 

courses. The evaluation also mentions that the project direct impact on the preservation of natural resources is 

rather limited. 

8 ACP GUA 5 FA I 7.1.2 The Sea Defences FA mentions environmental protection, gender and institutional capacity. 

- The project should have an overall positive impact on the environment. 




EGEVAL 

- The project foresees the realization of a study which will enhance the awareness of the local 

population of the project. This study is based on gender disaggregated data. 

- The project aims at strengthening the Sea and River Division of the Ministry of Works through the 

development and implementation of tools to rationalise the monitoring, planning and maintenance 

operations of the division. 

8 ACP GUA 15 FA I 7.1.2 The Low-Income Housing FA makes an explicit reference to gender. Gender issues are addressed in the 

community work and the Community Development Fund proposed guidelines give priority to women and 

children. 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 7.1.2 The MPP FA mentions 2 CCI: 

- Gender: preference will be given to micro-projects that benefit women. 

- Institutional capacity: a series of activities will contribute to the creation of a vibrant civil society 

9 ACP GUA 3 FA I 7.1.2 By strengthening the NAO, the project ensures that sufficient attention is paid to environment and gender. 

9 ACP GUA 6 & 

7 

FA, MoU I 7.1.2 3 CCI mentioned in the FA: 

- Institutional capacity: 2 TA interventions in PFM, one in health and one in the social housing sectors in view 

of building national capacity. 

- Gender: gender objectives are supported in the health sector by the use of indicators concerning mother and 

child health. 

- Environment: the construction of serviced plots in the housing sector is positive for the environment 

because it addresses the water, sanitation and waste disposal aspects of habitation. 

The Memorandum of understanding also mentioned institutional development. Several TAs to foster the 

capacity of the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Housing and Ministry of Health have been planned. 

8 ACP GUA 4 FA I 7.1.2 The SAS V FA does not mention any CCI in the design of the project. 

9 ACP RPR 6 FA I 7.1.2 2 CCI mentioned in the FA: 

- The project will address environmental issues especially in the research of alternative practise to the excessive 

use of chemicals in agriculture and of the destination of industrial waste. 

- Institutional capacity: the programme will be implemented in direct collaboration with the Caribbean Rice 

Association and the 2 Ministries of Agriculture in Guyana and Suriname. 

Sucre/2006/018- 

530 

FA I 7.1.2 CCI mentioned in the FA: 

- Environment: an environmental management plan has been completed for the new factory in Skeldon 

(cf conversion of land to sugar cane production and agreement of GUYSUCO to the long-term 




EGEVAL 

I 7.1.3 

All projects Compilation I 7.1.3 

conservation of 7,500 ha) 

- Gender: women’s role in sugar production is limited 

- Good governance and human rights: the two major unions look after the best interests of their 

workers (sugar industry: role of emancipation from slavery) 

Number and list of specific interventions planned by CCI 

CCI 

Institutional 

development 

Number 

of specific 

interventions 

planned 

List of specific measures planned per project/programme 

7 LEAP: 

- TA and support provided to IMC, RDC, LCICD & LTI 

- Assist LCICD to assume a leading role in private sector development 

Budget Support: 

- TA to assist the Ministries of Housing and Water, of Health, of 

Public Works and of Education to elaborate Medium Term 

Expenditure Frameworks 

- TA to assist the Ministry of Finance in the development of a 

Medium Term Fiscal Forecasting model 

- TA to assist the debt office to develop a debt management model 

- TA to assist the Ministry of Housing and Water in strengthening its 

statistical systems 

- TA to assist the Ministry of Health in developing professional codes 

for three types of medical staff. 

Capacity building 8 LEAP: 

- provide training and hands-on assistance to the financial institution 

managing the fund (LEAF component) 

- provide recruitment and training services for business (Component 

6) 

- organize training in economic development planning and 

management (Component 7) 

Sea defences: 

- TA and training to the SRDD 




EGEVAL 

- Establishment of analytical methods and tools, databases and maps 

for the SRDD 

MPP: 

- MPO to provide assistance and to GROs and CBOs in formulating 

and writing micro-projects proposals 

- MPO to train GROs and CBOs and intermediary organisations in 

rapid participatory analysis of poverty problems. 

- MPO and international TA to provide assistance to the MP Board in 

EC project cycle management, training on the roles and 

responsibilities of a project steering committee 

8 ACP GUA 9 LEAP revised 

Logical 

framework 

January 2005 

I 7.1.3 

3 measures on capacity building and 2 measures on institutional development planned: 

Capacity building: 

- provide training and hands-on assistance to the financial institution managing the fund (LEAF component) 

- provide recruitment and training services for business (Component 6) 

- organize training in economic development planning and management (Component 7) 

Institutional development: 

- TA and support provided to IMC, RDC, LCICD & LTI 

- Assist LCICD to assume a leading role in private sector development 

8 ACP GUA 8 FA I 7.1.3 No specific interventions under the GTA project on CCI 

8 ACP GUA 5 FA I 7.1.3 2 activities are foreseen in the FA to deal with the institutional capacity component: 

- TA and training to the SRDD 

- Establishment of analytical methods and tools, databases and maps for the SRDD 

8 ACP GUA 15 FA I 7.1.3 No specific interventions under the Low-Income Housing project on CCI 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA I 7.1.3 3 Activities focus on institutional capacity: 

- MPO to provide assistance and to GROs and CBOs in formulating and writing micro-projects proposals 

- MPO to train GROs and CBOs and intermediary organisations in rapid participatory analysis of poverty 

problems. 

- MPO and international TA to provide assistance to the MP Board in EC project cycle management, training 

on the roles and responsibilities of a project steering committee 

9 ACP GUA 3 FA I 7.1.3 No specific interventions under the NAO TF project on CCI 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

8 ACP GUA 4 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

FA, MoU I.7.1.3 5 activities focus on institutional development: 

- TA to assist the Ministries of Housing and Water, of Health, of Public Works and of Education to 

elaborate Medium Term Expenditure Frameworks 

- TA to assist the Ministry of Finance in the development of a Medium Term Fiscal Forecasting model 

- TA to assist the debt office to develop a debt management model 

- TA to assist the Ministry of Housing and Water in strengthening its statistical systems 

- TA to assist the Ministry of Health in developing professional codes for three types of medical staff. 

I.7.1.3 Although there were no special interventions on CCI under the budget support programmes, the BS relied on 

the monitoring of a number of indicators of which two are of particular interest in the context of CCIs: 

• Amongst the indicators of progress made in the soundness of the management of public finance, indicator 

5 was a measure of public sector transparency (requiring that a memorandum from the Treasury should be 

submitted within a to month delay to the Parliament following the Public Account Committee Report) 

which was ultimately meant to ensure greater budget transparency and accountability to the public. 

• Amongst the social indicators, the coverage of prevention of mother to child HIV transmission was 

retained as one of the three health indicators. 

9 ACP RPR 6 FA I 7.1.3 No specific interventions under the Regional Rice programme on CCI 

Sucre/2006/018- FA I 7.1.3 No specific interventions under the Sugar programme on CCI 

530 

JC 7.2 Measures identified during the design for inclusion of CCI in non-specific interventions are in place 

I 7.2.1 Percentage of measures in place as planned 

Field mission I 7.2.1 3 projects foresaw measures for inclusion of CCI: LEAP, MPP and sea defences. All the measures foreseen at 

the design stage are in place. 

- 5 measures foreseen in the LEAP put in place (2 institutional development, 3 capacity building) 

- 3 capacity building measures foreseen in the MPP put in place 

- 2 capacity building measures in the Sea defences project put in place. 

All interventions 

I 7.2.5 Perception of direct beneficiaries of the CCI 

Field mission I 7.2.5 According to the beneficiaries’ viewpoint, Commission interventions are taking into account gender, 

environment and capacity building. The institutional development component has not met its target as far as 

the LEAP is concerned. 

JC 7.3 Cross-cutting issues have been also supported by specific interventions 

I 7.3.1 Number of specific interventions on CCI out of all the interventions of the period 

List of projects, I 7.3.1 7 projects focus on CCI out of all the interventions (47): 5 on good governance and 2 on environment. (15% 

Final report for of the interventions) 




EGEVAL 

the second 

external 

evaluation 

“Strengthening 

the institutional 

response to 

HIV/AIDS/STI 

in 

the Caribbean 

(SIRHASC)” 

(2007). 

Projects on good governance (1,1% of the total commitments): 

- Proposal for financing the production of voter identification cards 

- General elections 2001-financial needs assessment 

- Identification-preparation of the CSS for the 9th EDF 

- Identification - preparation of the CSS for the 9th EDF phase II 

- Consolidation of the democratic process (codep) in a polari political situation involving support to 

nat.& reg.elections 

Projects on environment (1,4% of the total commitments): 

- Conservation and sustainable use of botanical diversity in Guyana 

- Conservation and utilization of biodiversity in the Iwokrama forest 

UNDP, Human 

Development 

Report (2006) 

JC 7.4 

I 7.4.1 

I 7.4.1 

As far as HIV/AIDS is concerned, there is no specific national Commission intervention which addresses this 

issue in Guyana but the European Commission provided funding to expand the regional response to 

HIV/AIDS, through the “Strengthening the Institutional Response to HIV/AIDS/STIs in the Caribbean” 

(SIRHASC) Project (budgeted at € 6,9m, and to be implemented by June 2004). The project purpose was to 

strengthen the regional institutional capacity to plan and coordinate an effective response to the 

STI/HIV/AIDS epidemic, particularly in the worst affected countries (Haiti, Guyana, and Dominican 

Republic). Regarding the outcome of the activities, SIRHASC has provided a platform for information sharing 

on HIV/AIDS by stakeholders, which has facilitated policymakers in their fight against HIV/AIDS. It has 

also contributed to an increase in the pool of skilled personnel at national level and has provided relevant 

information for the establishment of appropriate programmes and sensitised countries on the relevance of 

operational research and M&E. SIRHASC also contributed to improve and increase the prevention efforts, 

indirectly by improving the capacity of human Resources. There was still much room for further improvement 

and increase of the prevention efforts. SIRHASC has also provided the regional institutions with the 

opportunity to broaden their scope and intensify their efforts to control HIV/AIDS, thereby increasing the 

regional and national capacity to respond. 

Commission interventions have contributed to the advancement of this CCI in the country 

Evolution of respect for human rights 

Guyana has ratified most of the major international human rights instruments: 

- The International Convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination (1965) 

- The International covenant on civil and political rights (1966) 

- The International covenant on economic, social and cultural rights (1966) 




EGEVAL 

Transparency 

international 

web site 

I 7.4.2 

I 7.4.2 

- The Convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women (1979) 

- The convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 

(1984) 

- The Convention of the rights of the child (1989) 

Guyana has not signed the International convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of 

genocide (1948) 

Corruption rates 

According to the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) established by Transparency International, Guyana is a 

corrupted country. The data relating to the CPI score published by Transparency International do not exist for 

Guyana before 2005 and it is therefore difficult to analyse the evolution of corruption rates over the period 

1996-2006. 

2005 2006 

CPI score(1) 2.5 2.5 

Rank 117 /158 121 / 163 

(1) CPI Score relates to perceptions of the degree of corruption as seen by business people and country 

analysts, and ranges between 10 (highly clean) and 0 (highly corrupt). 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

I 7.4.2 Although this CCI is important for the budget support programmes in terms of public accountability and 

transparency of public finance, it has not been followed under the PFM reviews. 

I 7.4.3 Evolution of gender-friendly policies and laws 

Field mission I 7.4.3 There are no gender-friendly laws in Guyana. According to the interviews conducted in the field, gender 

discrimination does not seem to be an issue in Guyana. 

I 7.4.4 Evolution of gender-sensitive indicators (education, health, employment) 

UNDP, Human I 7.4.4 

Gender indicators have globally improved in Guyana over the period 1997-2004. The Gender-related 

development 

development index has evolved from 0.691 in 1997 to 0.715 in 2004. The adult literacy rate has improved for 

report 1998- 

women over the period (from 97.8% to 98.2%) but is still inferior to that of men. The female economic 

2006 

activity rate has strongly improved over the period (from 28.1% to 43.3%) but is still inferior to that of men. 

1997 1998 HDR 2001 HDR 2004 HDR 2006 

Gender-related development index (GDI) 0.691 0.698 0.693 0.715 … 




EGEVAL 

Rank 83 80 88/162 81 … 

Education: 

1998 1999 2001 2002 2004 

Adult literacy rate (% ages 15 and above) -Female 97.8 97.9 98.2 98.2 … 

Adult literacy rate (% ages 15 and above) - Male 98.8 98.2 99.0 99.0 … 

Environmental 

Protection Act, 

Forests Act, 

Water and 

Sewerage Act 

8 ACP GUA 4 


9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

8 ACP GUA 8 Final Evaluation 

report 

I 7.4.5 

I 7.4.5 

I 7.4.6 

I 7.4.6 

I 7.4.6 

Employment: 

1997 1999 2001 2002 2004 

Female economic activity rate (age 15 and above) 28.1 41.3 41.1 41.5 43.3 

Female economic activity rate (age 15 and above) (as a percentage of 48.9 49 50 50 53 

male rate) 

Evolution of environment-friendly policies and laws 

The environmental law mainly consists in 3 Acts: 

- The Environmental Protection Act (1996) established the Environmental Protection Agency. The main 

functions of this Agency are to the ensure effective management of the natural environment, to promote the 

participation of the public in the process of integrating environmental concerns, to establish and enforce 

environmental regulations, to coordinate an integrated coastal zone management system. The Act foresees the 

realization of environmental impact assessment and the issuance of an environmental permit by the Agency 

for any project which may affect the environment. The Act also guarantees the prevention and control of 

pollution. 

- The Forest Act: consolidates the laws regarding forests, timber sales agreement and permits for forest 

produce, and the protection of forests. 

- The Water and Sewerage Act established the National Water Council to provide advice to the Minister on 

national water policy. The Act provides for the ownership, management, control, protection and conservation 

of water resources, the provision of safe water and water sewerage. 

Evolution of percentage of technical assistants 

Budget support was supposed to contribute to lessen requirements for administrative TA by using national 

procedures. Whilst this has been done with the general BS, at the same time the PRBS appears to have 

brought many TA to the country in order to advance progress in selected PFM issues. The effectiveness and 

sustainability of actions performed by these TA has been uneven and is discussed under EQ4. 

Both local/regional and international technical assistance consultants were attached to the project. 11 short 

term local and regional consultants worked for a total of 12.79 person months and 9 international short term 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

UNDP, Human 

development 

report 1998- 

2006 

PRS reports 

2004 and 2005 

consultants for a total of 11.22 person months making a total of 24.01 months of short term TA. Most shortterm 

inputs lasted an average of between 10 - 20 working days at any one time. A long-term consultant, 

effectively the counterpart to the GTA Director and known as the Coordinator, advised the project 

throughout its lifetime. 

I 7.4.7 Evolution of HIV/AIDS prevalence rates 

I 7.4.7 The prevalence of HIV/AIDS in Guyana has decreased aver the period 1999-2005: from 3.01 to 2.4. 

1999 2001 2003 2005 

HIV Prevalence rate (% 15-49) 3.01 2.7 2.5 2.4 

NB: HIV worldwide prevalence rates range between 0.1 and 27.6 in 2005 

These UN data are in contradiction with the data provided by the Guyanese health services which show 

negative trends of HIV over the years 200 to 2004 as follows: 

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Number of reported cases of AIDS (target of the 

PRSP) 248 227 225 220 210 

Actual 248 435 450 475 480 

Reported cases of AIDS among women (15-45 

cohort) (target of the PRSP) 95 112 100 98 95 

Actual 95 123 128 131 133 

I 7.4.8 Testimonies of Guyana officials on the linkage of the evolution of the CCI in the country with 

Commission interventions 

All projects Field visit I 7.4.8 As far as non specific interventions are concerned, some FAs mention some CCI but there were no specific 

measures dealing with CCI neither included at the design of the project nor implemented. 

The Commission has supported environment and good governance through specific interventions which have 

a positive impact on the advancement of CCI in the country. But the Commission, as one donor among 

others, is only contributing to the evolution of CCI in the country. The donors dealing with environment and 

good governance are UNDP, DFID, CIDA and EU. The UNDP is the main donor as far as good governance 

and environment are concerned and has a major impact on the evolution of CCI in the country. 

Projects dealing with CCI are pushed by the donors but there is no will from the part of the GoG to address 

these issues. 




EGEVAL 

The standards of living in Guyana have deteriorated over the past 10 years and there is first a real need for the 

economy to grow before addressing CCI. 




EGEVAL 

Proj. Nber Source 

EQ8 To what extent has Commission support to Guyana been fostered by the consideration of the 

3C’s principle? 

JC 8.1 The Commission has designed its NIP/CSP taking full account of other Commission policies 

and trade agreements potentially affecting Guyana 

I 8.1.1 Extent to which the design takes into account the results of specific analyses of resources 

available to Guyana under the trade agreements (sugar, rice, rum) and of their potential uses 

8 th and 9 th 

EDFs 

Field mission I.8.1.1 No evidence has been found in country that resources available under the trade agreements were taken 

into account when designing the 8 th and 9 th EDFs. 

CSP 9 th EDF Section 5.2 I 8.1.1 In the 9 th EDF, these sources of funds are not cited as decision making factors in the framework for 

selecting the areas of concentration of the 9 th EDF. It is however mentioned that coherence with other 

Commission policies will be monitored on a permanent basis and that NIP funds could complement 

other funds for specific trade related operations. It is also to be noted that some Sysmin and flex 

resources which were not used under the 8 th EDF are programmed in the 9 th EDF (B envelope). 

I 8.1.2 Integration of these potential resources in the GoG balance of payments projections and 

financing gap projections 

I 8.1.2 The balance of payments and fiscal projections are carried out by the IMF which was unavailable to 

meet the team. 

JC 8.2 The Commission has designed its NIP/CSP taking full account of the resources potentially 

available under non-programmable support (namely Sysmin and budget lines) and the RIP 

I 8.2.1 Extent to which the design takes into account the results of specific analyses of resources 

NIP 8 th EDF 

Para I.6; 

section II.4; 

I 8.2.1 

I 8.2.2 

I 8.2.2 

available to Guyana under Sysmin, specific budget lines and the RIP, and their potential use 

Both the NIP 8 th EDF and CSP 9 th EDF mention that the NIP has taken account of the coherence 

required between programmable NIP resources and potential resources provided by other financing 

instruments 

( FAS, Sysmin, Stabex, special budget lines devoted to democracy, good public management, 

environment, anti-drug campaigns, HIV etc.) and from the RIP. In the NIP 8 th EDF, indications are 

given as to the possible use of funds from these different financing mechanisms and the preferential 

treatment of Guyana’s sugar, rice and rum exports are reiterated. 

Integration of potential resources available under the compensation schemes and under 

Commission interventions in the GoG’s balance of payments projections and financing gap 

projections 

As mentioned above, the balance of payments and fiscal projections are carried out by the IMF which 

was unavailable to meet the team. 




EGEVAL 

CSP 9 th EDF Section 3.3 I 8.2.2 The preferential access for sugar and rice is mentioned in the CSP. Changes expected from the 

extension of this preferential access to other developing countries and from the EPA are also mentioned 

(and in particular the need to improve the productivity of the rice and sugar sectors) but the NIP itself 

does not offer any follow-up of this in terms of proposed interventions. 

I.8.2.3 Existence of a dialogue within the different Commission Services on the expected impact of the 

various elements of the policy mix on implementation of activities and achievement of 

NIP/CSP objectives 

I.8.2.3 This information is not available. 

JC 8.3 Activities programmed under the CSP/NIP have been redesigned to remain coherent with 

actions implemented under other Commission policies and instruments. 

I 8.3.1 Existence of a dialogue within the different Commission Services on the impact of the various 

elements of the policy mix on implementation of activities and achievement of NIP/CSP 

objectives 

9 th EDF Interview 


HQ 

8 ACP GUA 9 

8 ACP GUA 4 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

I 8.3.1 

It appears that there is very little if no exchange of information between the different units in the 

Commission dealing with the country, the commodity trade protocols (sugar, rice, rum) or the 

compensation schemes (Stabex, Sysmin). It seems that at country level there is better general overview 

and information flows between the different sector desks, but there still seem to be contradictory 

statements made by different staff from the EU on the same issue (on sugar for example which is 

currently the most burning issue in Guyana). It also seems that issues are compartmentalised thus 

foregoing possible synergies or complementarities between the use of the different financing and trade 

instruments. 

MN16 I 8.3.1 For example, in the health sector the EC has intervened through the RIP (strengthening of the regional 

laboratory CARIC), through a special budget line (EC/WHO partnership supporting safe child and 

motherhood) and under its budget support programme where it has provided TA to the Ministry of 

Health and used health performance indicators for its variable tranche disbursement. It seems that the 

design and implementation of the regional intervention did not capitalise on the knowledge of the health 

sector that may have been gained at country level and that the three supports have been undertaken in 

total isolation. 

CSP 

documents, 

FAs, 

2007 Budget 

Speech 

I 8.3.1 

Similarly, the LEAP programme is singled out in the 2007 Budget Speech as one of three important 

contributors to poverty reduction and relief for vulnerable groups and communities. Achievements of 

the LEAP such as the infrastructural rehabilitation works, the tourism infrastructure, water supply and 

technical/vocational management training are cited alongside the benefits of other projects such as the 

Poor Rural Community Support Services Project and the Basic Needs Trust Fund as specific 

programmes focussed on improving social conditions and reducing poverty. Although this project was 

thus working specifically towards the same objective as that of the budget support programmes, no 




EGEVAL 

mention was made in the CSP or in either of the financing agreements of possible links or 

complementarity between the two programmes. 

I 8.3.2 Evidence of changes in planned activities and/or scope of financial intervention under the 

NIP/CSP following unforeseen changes in resources or implementation modalities linked to 

other Commission policies and instruments 

8 ACP GUA 9 NIP, FA I 8.3.2 Under the 8 th EDF, the private sector development was a focal sector area and 8 to 10% of the 

programmable resources (€m32) should be allocated to PSD projects. However, the LEAP programme 

has been financed under 8 th EDF SYSMIN resources. 

8 ACP GUA 4 In the Structural Adjustment Support Programme SAS V which was foreseen for € 4.7 million, a rider 

was agreed for using on additional € 0.8 million specifically linked to the social housing sector. The 

9 ACP GUA 

6&7 

JC 8.4 

I.8.4.1 

I 8.4.1 

I 8.4.2 

I 8.4.2 

origins of the supplementary funds allocate to this are not known. 

Under the 9 th EDF the support initially foreseen for budget support was of € 14.9 million under the A 

envelope; this amount was increased with € 8.4 million from the B envelope using the FLEX resources 

for the 2000 and 2001 shortfalls in export earnings. 

On a totally different track, a small amount of the second tranche of the PRBS 2006 (an amount of € 

88 080.49) was retained by the EU in 2007 to cover for project expenditure claims on equipment for 

two water supply projects funded under the 7 th EDF which had no justifying documents and which 

were thus supposed to be reimbursed by the Government to the EC. 

The Commission has built its intervention strategy in close coordination with the GoG and 

other donors 

Modalities and quality of Commission-GoG dialogue through the NAO’s office 

The EC Delegation and the GoG meet once a month for the EC portfolio review. This is a standard 

procedure in Guyana where each donor’s programme and project implementation is routinely reviewed 

in detail once a month with the Ministry of Finance. There are no special and formalised platforms for 

EC-GoG discussions at higher policy level. 

The quality of the dialogue through the NAO’s office is cordial although some tensions seem to arise 

due to the different interpretations of the role of the NAO Task Force (see also EQ6) and due to a 

paternalistic attitude of the Delegation staff. 

Evidence of common understanding of Guyana’s needs (general and sector) by the 

Commission and other donors, and particularly of participation in common needs assessment 

studies 

Guyana is a small country where relatively few donors intervene and even fewer donors are present on 

the ground. It is generally recognised that because of this, there is no lack of information flows about 

“who is doing what where”. Each donor is careful not to duplicate or overlap another donor’s activities 

and the exchange of information might lead to one donor cooperating on a one-off basis with another 




EGEVAL 

PRS 2004 

report 

Field 

interviews 

I 8.4.3 

donor on a specific issue. However, donor coordination is not well developed in Guyana: donors do not 

undertake common sector diagnostic reviews, do not work together in common frameworks of 

understanding of the needs of the sector, do not design common programmes of intervention, etc. 

Although donors may be active in a same area (whether thematic such as public finance or sector work), 

each intervention remains a stand alone effort. Those sectors where the Government itself is actively 

pursuing the implementation of sector reforms (such as in health for example) may show signs of closer 

cooperation between donors. The lack of sector strategic plans is a major hindrance to donor 

cooperation but the constraint can be overcome as three recently undertaken donor cooperation 

initiatives have shown: 

• In governance where several donors (IDB, CIDA and DFiD) have funded and participated in the 

undertaking of the democracy and governance institutional assessment (DGIA). The EU, 

although a member of the governance working group, did not participate because it did its own 

governance profile for the 10th EDF preparation. 

• In public finance management, several donors (IDB, World Bank, EU) jointly assisted the 

Government in undertaking a Public Expenditure and Fiduciary Accountability (PEFA) and a 

national procurement systems assessment. 

• With the view to assist the Government to prepare its second PRSP, the major donors worked 

together to develop a funding plan of this preparatory phase and informed the Government of its 

outcome by a common letter. 

DEC participation and role in government/multi-donor consultation processes (general and 

sector) and in coordination committees or working groups (government/donor and 

donor/donor) at general (macro or PRSP) and sector levels dealing with programming of donor 

interventions 

Within the framework of the PRSP M&E system, GoG invited representatives of line ministries and 

donor agencies to participate in a number of thematic groups with the following functions: 

• reviewing sectoral strategies that target PRSP goals 

• addressing resource gaps in sectoral programmes 

• monitoring performance against sectoral targets, and 

• increasing efficiency of donor interventions through better donor coordination. 

The thematic groups are responsible for contributing to the examination of the work programme to 

support donor coordination and alignment with the PRSP. In 2001/2002, thematic groups were set up 

in health, education, governance, water and infrastructure (including housing). The meetings of the 

sectoral groups are scheduled twice a year but most of them were interrupted during 2004/2005 and 

only those which have actively interested ministers have recently (2007) started again. In preparation of 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP GUA 9 

LEAP 

Evaluation 

report and 

Field mission 

I 8.4.3 

the PRSP II, a group on the national competitiveness strategy was added. Although the government 

subsequently abandoned this group, the donors continued attending and its scope has gradually 

extended beyond the original competitiveness theme to encompass wider macro-economic, 

development and trade issues. This group seems to be the one having gone furthest in trying to 

harmonise donor interventions. 

It seems that these working groups are much appreciated by the donors for information sharing. 

However it also seems that they mainly deal with implementation issues and do not touch upon strategic 

or policy issues. 

Harmonisation of donor efforts takes place through a high level committee consisting of representatives 

of donor agencies, mission heads, and line ministers: the Donor Coordination Unit (DCU) or National 

Donor Coordination Committee. This committee is in charge of: 

- the establishment of thematic groups involving donors and line ministries to review and 

develop project pipelines so as to minimise duplication of donor programmes, 

- to review the participation Action Plan and provide continuous advice for its successful 

implementation, 

- to strengthen the capacity of line ministries to formulate policies and improve their data 

collection capabilities. 

There has been good sectoral donor coordination in the water and education sector and with regard to 

sea defences. Through joint efforts and consultations over the PRSP process, donors are achieving more 

effective co-ordination. 

With respect to harmonisation of donor efforts in Private Sector Development, CIDA plays the 

coordinating role of the PSD Donor Group. In principle, they meet quarterly. 

I.8.4.4 NIP/CSP explicitly refers to other donor strategies 

CSP 9 th EDF I.8.4.4 The 9th CSP specifically mentions other donor interventions as being one of the four factors of its 

decision making process in selecting intervention areas. The strategies of other donors are however not 

defined in the CSP but may be part of the preparatory process to the CSP elaboration. 

When developing sector projects or programmes (as opposed to country strategies) it appears that full 

account is taken of the existing and/or planned interventions of other donors in the same area so as to 

avoid duplication or overlap of activities. However, the interventions are not specifically designed to 

complement or reinforce the activities of other donors. 

For budget support, although the EC is the only provider of direct budget support to Guyana, it did not 

seek to develop synergies with the IDB who is a major provider of balance of payments support and 

equally active in the macro-fiscal and social areas. No mention is made in any of the financing 




EGEVAL 

8 ACP GUA 4 

9ACP GUA 

6&7 

8 ACP GUA 9 Evaluation 

report 

8 ACP GUA 8 GTA Midterm 

evaluation 

report, GTA 

Final 

evaluation 

report 

JC 8.5 

I 8.5.1 

I.8.5.1 

I 8.5.1 

I 8.5.1 

agreements of IDB or BWI strategies with regard to overall support to the PRSP implementation. 

Commission activities are implemented in full coordination with GoG and other donors for 

interventions in the same area 

Evidence of synergies or conflicts between activities implemented by the Commission and 

those implemented by other donors and GoG 

The EC is the only donor providing budget support to Guyana. However, in the fields of particular 

interest to the EC in this context (the quality of the public finance management systems, the health and 

social housing sectors), other donors are active. Cooperation between donors seems good. In PFM, the 

BWI, CIDA, DFiD, USAID, IDB and possibly other donors have all at one point intervened to 

strengthen or support various functions of the Ministry of Finance or of the Auditor General. All 

interventions seem to have been based (loosely or not) on the CFAA diagnostic of 2002 but have not 

formed part of an overall sequenced intervention plan. As a result, opportunities for creating synergies 

and achieving greater results by undertaking complementary and mutually reinforcing interventions have 

not been taken. Close cooperation, when applied, seems to have stemmed mainly from a practical need 

to move things forward: an example is the funding by the IDB of the continuation of the IFMAS 

implementation after CIDA funding ended or the funding by the IDB of the hardware aspects of debt 

management that the EU could not provide for as originally planned under the PRBS. 

For the LEAP programme, there are synergies between activities implemented by the Commission and 

other donors: 

- EMPRETEC is a UNDP, GoG and Private Sector project: it’s a capacity-building programme 

promoting SME development. It has many linkages with LEAP. 

- The Guyana Trade and Investment Support (GITS) is a joint GoG-US government project. It is 

targeting more the larger companies when compared to the target groups of LEAP. 

- CIDA’s programme supports human resource development in agro-processing, forestry & wood 

products. It came to en end in 2005. 

For the GTA programme, there has been favourable cooperation with other donor projects: 

- The GTA assisted the Guyana Volunteer Consultancy (supported by IDB) in defining accreditation 

requirements for training providers 

- Moreover, various projects used the services of GTA: the Caribbean Programme for Economic 

Competitiveness (CPEC) and CIDA. The GTA also worked with the UNDP sponsored entrepreneur 

development project EMPRETEC. 

Regarding the TA component, through cooperation with the CARICOM/GTZ project (Strengthening 

TVET in the Caribbean Region), there have been additional TA inputs in areas such as 

assessment/evaluation of training programmes and Logical Framework analysis. 




EGEVAL 

9 ACP GUA 1 FA, MPP 

Mid-term 

evaluation 

Governance 

Field mission 

interviews 

I 8.5.1 

I.8.5.1 

Some synergies are observed between activities implemented by other donors and GoG and the GMPP. 

- The Building Community Capacity Project (BCCP) is funded by CIdA. This project, launched 

in 1996, aims to build the capacity of Guyanese NGOs and CBOs in order to make them more 

effective in their delivery of development projects. Cooperation has been explored with Guyana 

MPP. 

- Social Impact Amelioration Programme (SIMAP) is an IDB-financed programme with the 

Ministry of Human Services which aims to improve the conditions of lower-income households 

through financing of small-scale community-generated projects. Communication has been 

established with GMPP. 

- GMPP directly supports the school feeding programme mounted under the Education for All 

initiative of the Ministry of Education and funded by the WB. There is co-ordination between 

Guyana Micro Project Office and the Ministry. 

Although there are thus several cases of synergies between particular donors in particular sectors, three 

examples have been cited of multi-donor close cooperation: 

• the elections which has been the only instance in Guyana where donors pulled together to finance a 

common fund (managed by the UN); 

• the governance study (see below), and 

• the PEFA study (see above). 

Apart from these three cases, cooperation is mainly done on a bilateral basis. One could additionally cite 

the case of the sugar sector where the EU, the World Bank and DFiD are closely cooperating within the 

same framework. 

There appears to have been one occurrence of conflict between the EC and other donors’ intervention 

in the area of governance: whereas the EC needed a governance profile to be carried out in the context 

of the preparation of its 10 th EDF, the working group on governance was preparing to carry out a 

Democracy and Governance Institutional Assessment at the same time. For procedural reasons the EC 

proceeded with its exercise; it concluded on a positive governance profile and this, incidentally, allowed 

Guyana to benefit from a 25% top-up on its 9 th EDF funds which €12 million will be used as budget 

support to fill the gap between the PRSB (which finished in 2006) and the new BS programme to be 

designed under the 10th EDF. This incremental financing decision was communicated to the donor 

community just as the DGIA concluded on a less than satisfactory governance profile for Guyana and 

as donors suspended aid in the water sector on suspicions of fraud and corruption within the sector. 

The lack of unified views and of coordination of this kind potentially undermines the efforts of the 

group of donors to make governance issues progress in the country. 




I 8.5.2 

I 8.5.2 

EGEVAL 

Modalities of coordination mechanisms between the Commission, GoG and other donors at 

implementation level (meetings, coordination groups, task forces…) 

Apart from the sector working groups which meet twice a year and which bring together donors and the 

Government, donors individually meet the Ministry of Finance once every month for the review of their 

portfolio implementation. These meetings are essentially geared towards discussing progress in project 

implementation. The EC and the IDB have recently agreed on mutual attendance of these reviews but 

this has not yet materialised. 

Apart from this, donors meet together very regularly: there are weekly meetings of the ambassadors of 

the G8 group, weekly G8 meetings of the heads of aid missions and working groups on specific issues 

depending on what is important at that moment (there have been working groups on statistics, PRSP 

and M&E for example) or where there might be potential collaboration. 

Whilst it does thus seem that collaboration is good between the Government and donors and between 

donors themselves and progress is being made on several fronts towards closer coordination and 

cooperation, much room for improvement remains: 

• The Government-donor dialogue could graduate from discussing project implementation to 

discussing policy and strategy issues. 

• The donor-donor dialogue relies on information sharing rather than on a sharing of 

responsibilities and reliance on each others strengths. It is symptomatic that when working 

groups are formed, all donors attend instead of designating a limited number of key resource 

persons who could work on the behalf of the whole group. 

• The information sharing culture between donors could develop towards a sharing of missions to 

unburden both the donors and the Government. 

• The donor group currently restricted to Western donors (EC, World Bank, IMF, IDB, DFiD, 

CIDA, USAID, Japan) could integrate the ‘new’ donors also active in Guyana (India, Brazil, 

China). 




EGEVAL 

Annex 8 – List of Interventions 

This list of interventions comprises all the Commission interventions in Guyana decided between 1996 and 2006. The data have 

been revised in November 2007 and the list therefore also includes the “9th EDF sea defences programme” (€17M) decided in 

2007. 




EGEVAL 

Instruments Areas Year Origin Program/Project Title Committed Contracted Paid 

Date 

Decided 

Date Start Date end Date closed Source 

Programmable Instruments 1997-2002 

NIP 1. Sea defences 1996 6 NIP 6 ACP GUA 24 

Provision for investigation of sea 

defense slip failures 36,571 36,571 36,571 19-Sep-96 19-Sep-96 19-Oct-96 24-Mar-98 CRIS Consultation 


Sea defences - appraisal of progr.& 

prep. Financial proposal 66,836 66,836 66,836 6-Jan-98 1-Mar-98 30-Jun-98 7-Jun-99 CRIS Consultation 

NIP 1. Sea defences 1999 8 NIP 8 ACP GUA 5 Guyana sea defences 20,000,000 19,528,130 14,719,614 21-Dec-99 1-Apr-00 31-Dec-08 CRIS Consultation 

Guyana's sea defences - econ. & 

NIP 1. Sea defences 1999 7 NIP 7 ACP GUA 25 financial analyses - 8 edf 20,779 20,779 20,779 11-Mar-99 16-Mar-99 15-May-99 24-Jan-01 CRIS Consultation 


Technical study-preparation of the 

tender dossier-evaluation of the 

tender bids 406,706 406,706 406,706 1-Jan-00 1-Jun-00 28-Feb-01 8-Apr-03 CRIS Consultation 

Total Sea Defences 20,530,892 20,059,022 15,250,506 

NIP 1. Housing 2000 6 NIP 6 ACP GUA 29 Low income housing programme 73,289 73,289 73,289 3-Jul-00 10-Jul-00 9-Oct-00 31-Mar-03 CRIS Consultation 

NIP 1. Housing 2002 8 NIP 8 ACP GUA 15 

Support To The Low-Income Housing 

Sector 9,100,000 4,723,137 1,464,460 12-Oct-02 29-Oct-10 CRIS Production 

Total Housing 9,173,289 4,796,426 1,537,749 

NIP 2. Private sector 1996 6 NIP 6 ACP GUA 18 

TA for establish. of private sector 

center (see also 7 GUA 14) 100,000 100,000 100,000 3-May-96 3-May-96 3-May-98 25-Feb-99 CRIS Consultation 


Mid-term evaluation small business 

credit initiative-phase II 42,015 42,015 42,015 20-Jun-97 20-Jun-97 19-Aug-97 19-Feb-99 CRIS Consultation 


Study of HRD needs for the private 

sector 4,610 4,610 4,610 25-Nov-97 7-Dec-97 6-Jan-98 19-Feb-99 CRIS Consultation 


Identification study human resource 

dvlpmt programme 73,056 73,056 73,056 15-Jul-98 15-Jul-98 14-Oct-98 24-Jan-01 CRIS Consultation 


TA for feasibility study for private 

sector development 1,160 1,160 1,160 21-Sep-99 18-Oct-99 17-Jan-00 13-Jan-03 CRIS Consultation 

NIP 2. Private sector 2000 8 NIP 8 ACP GUA 8 Guyana training agency 1,328,342 1,328,342 1,328,342 1-Jan-00 1-Jan-01 31-Jan-05 17-Jan-07 CRIS Consultation 

Total Private sector 1,549,183 1,549,183 1,549,183 

NIP 4. Good governance 2000 7 NIP 7 ACP GUA 27 

General elections 2001-financial 

needs assessment 49,997 49,997 49,997 25-Jan-00 1-Feb-00 30-Apr-00 30-Apr-02 CRIS Consultation 


Identification-preparation of the CSS 

for the 9th edf 79,990 79,990 79,990 30-Nov-00 10-Jan-01 9-Jun-01 9-Jan-03 CRIS Consultation 


Identification - preparation of the CSS 

for the 9th EDF phase II 19,562 19,562 19,562 27-Nov-01 15-Dec-01 14-Feb-02 13-Jan-03 CRIS Consultation 

Total Good Governance 149,549 149,549 149,549 

NIP 5. Support to the NAO 1996 6 NIP 6 ACP GUA 25 

Technical assistance to the nao's 

office 166,132 166,132 166,132 16-Dec-96 1-Jan-97 30-Jun-99 4-Oct-04 CRIS Consultation 


Technical assistance to the nao's 

office 31,504 31,504 31,504 16-Dec-96 1-Jan-97 30-Jun-99 24-Jan-01 CRIS Consultation 

Total Support to the NAO 197,636 197,636 197,636 

TOTAL NIP 1997-2002 31,600,549 26,751,816 18,684,623 

Programmable Instruments 2003-2007 




Design & tender procedure guyana 

sea defences 151,742 151,742 151,742 22-Dec-03 NA 31-Dec-06 31-Jan-06 CRIS Consultation 

Elaboration study for the sea defence 

project to be financed under the 9th 

edf 59,319 59,319 59,319 1-Jan-03 1-Jan-03 31-Dec-03 1-Sep-05 CRIS Consultation 

9 EDF sea defences infrastructure 

design programme 900,000 622,620 0 1-Jan-06 31-Aug-11 CRIS Consultation 

NIP 1. Sea defences 2007 9 NIP 9 ACP GUA 11 9th EDF Sea Defences Programme 17,018,000 0 0 30-May-07 1-Dec-07 28-Feb-14 CRIS Consultation 

Total Sea Defences 18,129,061 833,681 211,061 

NIP 1. Transport 2003 8 NIP 8 ACP GUA 19 

Prep t.o.r. + tender documents - 

transport sector study 47,077 47,077 47,077 17-Mar-03 1-Jun-03 31-Dec-03 9-Dec-05 CRIS Consultation 

NIP 1. Transport 2004 9 NIP 9 ACP GUA 4 Transport sector study 900,000 899,105 854,732 1-Apr-04 NA 31-Dec-08 CRIS Consultation 

Total Transport 947,077 946,182 901,809 




EGEVAL 


Date 

Decided 


NIP 3. Budgetary support 2003 8 NIP 8 ACP GUA 17 

Feasibility study for a budgetary 

support programme to Guyana under 

the 9th EDF 114,988 114,988 114,988 24-Feb-03 1-May-03 1-Sep-03 1-Jun-04 CRIS Consultation 

Poverty reduction budget support to 

NIP 3. Budgetary support 2004 9 NIP 9 ACP GUA 6 Guyana 26,666,379 26,466,379 12,950,523 23-Aug-04 23-Aug-04 31-Dec-10 CRIS Consultation 

Poverty reduction budget support to 

NIP 3. Budgetary support 2004 9 NIP 9 ACP GUA 7 Guyana 8,400,000 8,400,000 8,400,000 23-Aug-04 23-Aug-04 31-Dec-10 27-Mar-06 CRIS Consultation 

Total Budgetary Support 35,181,367 34,981,367 21,465,511 

NIP 4. Micro-projects 2002 8 NIP 8 ACP GUA 16 

Ta - formulation microprojects 

programme 46,457 46,457 46,457 4-Oct-02 15-Dec-02 31-May-03 27-May-04 CRIS Consultation 

NIP 4. Micro-projects 2003 9 NIP 9 ACP GUA 1 Micro-projects programme 4,000,000 3,886,530 1,539,229 17-Feb-04 NA 31-May-11 CRIS Consultation 

Total MPP 4,046,457 3,932,987 1,585,686 


Consolidation of the democratic 

process (codep) in a polari political 

situation involving support to nat.& 

reg.elections 940,000 940,000 740,000 1-Jan-05 1-Jan-05 1-Oct-09 CRIS Consultation 

NIP 4. TCF 2004 9 NIP 9 ACP GUA 5 Technical cooperation facility (tcf) 605,400 582,649 524,976 31-Mar-04 NA 31-Oct-10 CRIS Consultation 

NIP 4. Humanitarian assistance 2005 9 NIP 9 ACP GUA 8 

Emergency assistance to the victims 

of floods in Guyana 700,000 688,135 688,135 1-Feb-05 31-Dec-07 CRIS Consultation 


Institutional strenghtening of the 

NAO's office 820,000 689,124 501,779 2-Apr-2004 NA 30-Jun-11 CRIS Consultation 


Elaboration study for support to the 

NAO 38,846 38,846 38,846 18-Mar-03 15-Jun-03 30-Sep-03 20-Apr-04 CRIS Consultation 

Total Support to NAO 858,846 727,970 540,625 

TOTAL NIP 2003-2007 61,408,208 42,362,187 25,444,692 

TOTAL NIP 93,008,757 69,114,003 44,129,315 

Non Programmable Instruments 1997-2002 

7 Non 

Non Prog Transport 1998 Prog 7 ACP GUA 13 

Feasibility study for Guyana-Brazil 

road 124,457 124,457 124,457 1-Jul-98 1-Oct-98 31-Aug-00 30-Jul-01 CRIS Consultation 

Non Prog Private sector 1998 

7 Non 

Prog 7 ACP GUA 23 Study economic diversification Linden 101,225 101,225 101,225 1-Jan-98 15-Sep-98 14-Feb-99 13-Jan-03 CRIS Consultation 

Non Prog Private sector 2000 

8 Non 

Prog 8 ACP GUA 9 

Linden economic advancement 

programme 12,500,000 12,265,390 6,706,365 27-Oct-00 31-Oct-01 30-Jun-09 CRIS Consultation 

Total Private sector 12,601,225 12,366,615 6,807,590 

NIP Structural adjustment 1995 

7 Non 


Support Structural Adjustment 

Programme (GIP-III) 800,000 800,000 800,000 27-Oct-95 1-Dec-95 23-Oct-96 CRIS Production 

Non Prog Structural adjustment 1995 

7 Non 


Support Structural Adjustment 

Programme (GIP-III) 1,264,997 1,264,997 1,264,997 27-Oct-95 1-Dec-95 17-Apr-00 CRIS Production 


8 Non 


Support programme for econmic 

reforms (sas iv : 1998) 4,600,000 4,600,000 4,600,000 30-Jun-98 1-Aug-98 30-Jun-99 22-Jan-03 CRIS Consultation 


8 Non 


Support programme for economics 

reforms (sas iv : 1998) 690,000 690,000 690,000 30-Jun-98 1-Aug-98 30-Jun-99 22-Jan-03 CRIS Consultation 


8 Non 


Support programme for economic 

reforms (sas v : 1999) 5,400,000 5,400,000 5,400,000 31-Dec-99 31-Dec-00 24-Jan-03 24-Jan-03 CRIS Consultation 

Total Structural Adjustment 12,754,997 12,754,997 12,754,997 

Non prog Debt relief 1999 

7 Non 


Non Prog Good governance 1997 BL DDH/1997/113 

7 Non 

Non Prog Sysmin 1996 Prog 7 ACP GUA 22 

Non Prog Environment 1998 BL ENV/1998/003-684 

Participation communautaire a 

l'initiative d'allegement de la dette des 

pays pauvres tres endettes 6,440,000 6,440,000 6,440,000 16-Dec-99 1-Jul-00 30-Jun-01 10-Jan-03 CRIS Consultation 

Proposal for financing the production 

of voter identification cards (decision 

du 2 mai 1997) 362,433 362,433 345,174 6-Jun-97 24-Jun-97 1-Mar-98 1-Mar-98 CRIS Consultation 

TA for the purpose of examining the 

government of sysmin req 17,342 17,342 17,342 15-May-96 15-May-96 15-Aug-96 25-May-98 CRIS Consultation 

Conservation and sustainable use of 

botanical diversity in Guyana 494,396 494,396 494,396 9-Dec-98 26-Jan-99 25-Jan-03 25-Jan-03 

CRIS 

Production/dates 

CRIS Consultation 




EGEVAL 


Date 

Decided 


Conservation and utilization of 

Non Prog Environment 1998 BL ENV/1998/004-320 biodiversity in the Iwokrama forest 1,350,142 1,350,142 1,350,142 10-Oct-98 20-Jan-99 19-Apr-03 9-Mar-04 CRIS Production 

Total Environment 1,844,538 1,844,538 1,844,538 

TOTAL Non Programmable 1997-2002 34,144,992 33,910,382 28,334,098 

Non Programmable Instruments 2003-2007 

Non Prog Food Crop production 2003 9 RIP 9 ACP RPR 006 

Support to the Competitiveness of the 

Rice sector in the Caribbean 12,930,240 12,930,240 5,238,902 31-Oct-03 30-Sep-13 

Accompanying measures 2006 for 

Non Prog Sugar 2006 BL SUCRE/2006/018-530 Sugar Protocol Countries 5,663,000 3,563,300 3,437,259 25-Dec-06 31-Dec-11 CRIS Production 

TOTAL Non Programmable 2002-2007 18,593,240 16,493,540 8,676,161 

TOTAL Non Programmable Instruments 52,738,232 50,403,922 37,010,259 

TOTAL 145,746,989 119,517,924 81,139,573 




EGEVAL 

Annex 9 – Bibliography 

1. General 

ADE 

ADE 

ADE 

ADE 

Author Title Date 

Council and European Commission 

EC-ACP States 

EC-ACP States 

Economist Intelligence Unit 

EGEVAL 

EGEVAL 

Evaluation of the EC Interventions in 

the Transport Sector in Third Countries - 

Final Report Vol 1 

Evaluation of European Community 

Support to Private Sector Development 

in Third Countries - Final Report 

Evaluation of European Commission 

Support to Micro-Project Programmes 

under the European Development Fund 

in ACP countries 

Revue du Programme d'Appui 

Budgétaire Conjoint pour la Réduction 

de la Pauvreté (2004-2006) de la 

Commission Européenne au Bénin - Vol 

1 

The European Community's 

Development Policy - Statement by the 

Council and the Commission 

Annexe V à l'Accord de Cotonou 

Annexes à l'Accord de Cotonou 

Country Report Guyana (sample) 

Evaluation EC s. / Tanzania - Final 

Report 

Evaluation EC s. / Bolivie Rapport Final 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2006 

2001 

2005 

2006 

2007 

European Commission Annual report 1986 1986 










European Commission 

Cooperation framework between the 

Cooperative Republic of Guyana and the 

European Community - National 

Indicative Programme 8th EDF, Lomé 

Convention IV, 2nd financial protocol) 

1997 




EGEVAL 


Regional Indicative Programme for the 1997 

Caribbean Region - Fourth Lomé 

Convention - Second Financial Protocol 


Country Strategy Paper and National 2002 

Indicative Programme for the period 

2002-2007 

European Commission Joint Annual Review - December 2002 - 2002 

Executive summary 

European Commission Joint Annual Review - July 2002 - 2002 

Executive summary 


Guyana – European Community, 2003 

Country Strategy Paper and National 

Indicative Programme for the period 

2002-2007” (hereafter referred as CSP 

9th EDF) 

European Commission Joint Annual Review - 2002 - 2003 

European Commission Draft Mid-Term Review conclusions - 2004 

Guyana 

European Commission Joint Annual Review - 2003 - 2004 


Proposal for a Council Decision on the 2004 

position to be adopted by the 

Community within the ACP-EC Council 

of Ministers regarding the revision of the 

terms and conditions of financing for 

short term fluctuations in export earnings 

(Annex II of the ACP-EU Partnership 

Agreement signed in Cotonou 


Addendum to the Country Strategy Paper 2005 

and Indicative Program 


Commission staff working paper : Action 2005 

plan on accompanying measures or Sugar 

Protocol countries affected by the reform 

of the EU sugar regime 


Co-operation between the European 2005 

Commission and the co-operative 

Republic of Guyana - Joint Annual 

Review 2004 

European Commission Joint Annual Review - Year 2004 2005 


Report on progress made in Public 

Finance Management in Guyana (July- 2005 

December 2005) 


EC response strategy in support of the 2006 

Guyana National Action Plan for the 

period 2007-2013 - Implementation of 

accompanying measures for sugar 

protocol countries 


Financing Proposal: Implementation of 

the Guyana National Action Plan on 

Accompanying Measures for Sugar 

Protocol Countries affected by the 

Reform of EU Sugar Regime, 2006 

2006 




EGEVAL 

Financing (GNAP 2006) 


Guyana Poverty Reduction Budget 

Support: Report on Public Finance 2006 

Management 

European Commission Joint Annual Review for 2005 2006 


Draft Country Strategy Paper and 2007 

National Indicative Programme for the 

period 2008-2013 


Annex A Standard Format : External 

assistance Management Report 


Directorate General for Development 

website 


Final ETR Conclusions Guyana 


Mid Term Review: Macroeconomic 

support assessment Guyana 


The EU & Cariforum 


Typology o the Sugar Protocol Countries 

European Community 

Treaty of Amsterdam amending the 1997 

Treaty on European Union, the Treaties 

establishing the European Communities 

and related acts (Official Journal C 340) 

Guyana Government National Development Strategy 2001- 2000 

2010 

Guyana Government 

National Action Plan on accompanying 2006 

measures for Sugar Protocol countries 

affected by the reform of the EU sugar 

regime 

Guyana Government 

Enhancing National Competitiveness - A 2007 

national Competitiveness strategy for 

Guyana 

Guyana Government - Ministry of Finance Treasury Memorandum 2005 

Guyana Government - Ministry of Finance 

Treatment of rice levy outturns 

computation 2005 

Guyana Office for Investment 

General website: www.goinvest.gov.gy 

IBM Belgium 

IBM Belgium 

Draft Report of the Third Assessment 

Mission on Poverty Reduction Budget 

Support Grant by the European 

Commission to the Government of 

Guyana (October 17-November 4, 2005) 

Draft Variable Tranches Of Budget 

Support For Guyana Performance 

Indicators Review 

2005 

2005 




EGEVAL 

IBM Belgium 

Last Assessment Mission to Guyana for 

Evaluating Performance Indicators 

Under Poverty Reduction Budgetary 2006 

Support Grant to the Government of 

Guyana (October- November 2006) 

IDD and Associates Evaluation of General Budget Support : 2006 

Synthesis Report - executive summary 

IDD and Associates Evaluation of General Budget Support : 2006 

Synthesis Report 

IMF 

Sixth Review Under the Three-Year 

Arrangement Under the Poverty 

Reduction Growth Facility - 

2006 

Supplementary Information 

Inter-American Development Bank Country Program Evaluation 1989-2001 2002 

Inter-American Development Bank IDB Country Strategy with Guyana 2002 

International development Association Joint Staff Advisory Note on the Poverty 2006 

and International Monetary Fund Reduction Strategy Paper - Second 

annual progress report 

International Monetary Fund Guyana: Statistical appendix 1998 

International Monetary Fund Guyana: Recent economic developments 1999 

International Monetary Fund Guyana: Statistical Annex 2001 

International Monetary Fund 

Guyana Poverty Reduction Strategy 2002 

Paper 2003 



Paper Joint Staff Assessment 



Paper Progress Report 2004 


Guyana: Enhanced Initiative for Heavily 2004 

Indebted Poor Countries – Completion 

Point Document 



Paper Progress Report 2005 

Organisation for Economic Co-operation CRS online database on aid activities 

and Development 

Parliament of Guyana 

PARTICIP 

SOFRECO-ECORYS 




Report of the Public Accounts 

Committee of the National Assembly on 

the public accounts of Guyana for the 

year 1999 

Thematic Evaluation of the Water and 

Sanitation sector 

Medium Term Expenditure Framework 

(MTEF) Manual 


(MTEF) of the Ministry of Education 

and the Education sector 


for Public Works Sector 

Report on Modeling and Forecasting 

Budgetary Fiscal Indicators 

2003 

2006 

2006 

2006 

2006 

2006 

SOFRECO-ECORYS Report on Training in Econometrics 2006 




EGEVAL 


UNDP 

Technical Assistance to the Ministry of 

Health on Medium Term Expenditure 

Framework, Draft Inception Report 

Human Development Reports 1998-2006 

2006 

United Nations 

Common Country Assessment of 2005 

Development Challenges - Part 1 

United Nations World Development Report 2003 

United Nations World Development Report 2006 

United Nations 

Common Country Assessment of 2005 

Development Challenges - Part 2 

United Nations Development Programme Draft Country Programme Document 2005 

for Guyana (2006-2010) 

United States Agency for International Latin America and the Caribbean 2006 

Development 

Selected Economic and Social Data 2006 

World Bank 

Project Appraisal Document on a 2007 

Proposed Grant from the Global 

Environment Facility Special Climate 

Change Fund in the amount of US$3.8 

million to the Republic of Guyana for a 

conservancy adaptation project 

World Bank Guyana Public Expenditure Review 2002 

World Bank 

Memorandum of the President of the 2002 

International Development Association 

to the Executive Directors on a Country 

Assistance Strategy of the World Bank 

Group for the Cooperative Republic of 

Guyana 

World Bank 

The Role and Effectiveness of 

Development Assistance - Lessons from 

World Bank Experience 

World Trade Organisation 

Trade Policy Review Guyana, Minutes of 2003 

the meeting 


Trade Policy Review Guyana: Report by 2003 

the Government 


Trade Policy Review Guyana: Report by 2003 

the secretariat 

Guyana Estimates of the Public Sector 

Current and Capital Revenue and 

1996- 

2006 

Expenditure for the year 2007 as 

presented to the National Assembly 

(Budget Speech and Volume 1). 

Technical Assistance to the Ministry of 

Health to Facilitate the Introduction of a 

Code of Professional Practice in Guyana, 

Final Report (Letter of Contract 

N°2005/ 101522 signed on 28/04/2005, 

Framework Contract AMS/451) 

2005 




EGEVAL 

2. Project Documents 

Audited 

financial Annual 

Mid- 

Term Final Terms of Mission 

Quarterly 

Progress 

Other 

relevant 

Project Number Title FA MR PS RS FR statements report review evaluation Reference Report Report documents 

8 ACP GUA 004 Support x x x x 

Programme For 

Economic 

Reforms 

(SAS V) 

8 ACP GUA 005 Guyana Sea x x x x x 

Defences 

8 ACP GUA 008 Guyana x x x x x x 

Training 

Agency 

8 ACP GUA 009 Linden 

Economic 

x x x x x x x x 

Advancement 

Programme 

(LEAP) 

8 ACP GUA 015 Support to the 

low-income 

Housing Sector 

9 ACP GUA 001 Micro-projects 

Programme 

9 ACP GUA 003 Institutional 

Strengthening 

of the NAO's 

Office in 

Guyana 

x x (Mid 

Term) 

x x x x 

(inception 

and draft 

Ccl) 

x x x x x x (semiannual) 

x x 

x 




EGEVAL 

Project Number Title FA MR PS RS FR 

9 ACP GUA 006 & 

007 

Poverty 

Reduction 

Budget Support 

to Guyana 

9 ACP RPR 6 Support to the 


of the rice 

sector in the 

Caribbean, 

Guyana 

Accompanying 

measures 2006 

SUCRE/2006/018- 

530 

for 

Protocol 

Countries 

Sugar 

Audited 

financial 

statements 

Mid- 

Term 

review 

Annual 

report 

Final 

evaluation 

Terms 

Reference 

of 

x x (for TA to 

PFM; for 

TA to MoH; 

for TA to 

MTFP;for 

TA 

MoH&W; 

x x x 

x 

TA Debt 

Management) 

Mission 

Report 

x (Final 

1st 

mission 

report TA 

MoH&W; 

Final 2nd 

mission 

report TA 

MoH&W; 

Final 3rd 

mission 

report TA 

MoH&W; 

Final 4th 

mission 

report TA 

MoH&W) 

Quarterly 

Progress 

Report 

x (January to 

June 2005; 

July to 

September 

2005; 

October 2005 

to March 

2006) 

Other 

relevant 

documents 

x

Annexes - European Commission - Europa

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?