Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes in Georgia

(SEPP)
Project Description and Purposes 2014 2019
Introduction
The purpose of this document is to inform a broad range of interested partiesincluding
government officials, donors, political parties and local and international organizationsabout
USAID programming related to elections and political processes over the next four years. It is
USAIDs intention that interested parties use this document to begin thinking about innovative
ways to achieve the anticipated results and ensure proper coordination.
USAIDs assistance to Georgia is guided by the 2013-2017 Country Development Cooperation
Strategy (CDCS).1 The CDCS includes three main development objectives, the first of which is
Development Objective One (DO1) Democratic Checks and Balances and Accountable
Governance Enhanced. This project is one of three projects USAID intends to design and
implement in support of DO1. This project targets electoral and political processes, while two
additional projects address good governance and the rule of law, respectively.
The watershed parliamentary elections in October 2012 brought Georgias first peaceful transfer
of power through democratic elections since the country declared independence in 1991.
Discussions are ongoing about reforms to enhance political competition and electoral
administration. Despite the progress signaled by the 2012 Parliamentary and 2013 Presidential
elections, Georgias political processes remain fragile and subject to external and internal shocks.
The principles of shared political power, fair competition, and the responsibility of those elected
to govern justly as well as citizens to engage in governance are not yet ingrained in Georgias
political culture.
Effective and sustainable electoral and political processes2 in a democracy require the
1

http://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1863/GeorgiaCDCS.pdf
Political processes involve a collaboration of public and political leadership to formulate, implement and oversee policies intended to benefit a

engagement of various institutional actors. Foreign assistance can be useful in building these
institutions and strengthening their inter-relationships to achieve healthy political competition.
To take advantage of new opportunities and address remaining challenges in Georgia, this
project will engage political parties and government institutions with electoral responsibilities, as
well as support increased and more effective citizen engagement in and oversight of politics and
elections.
This project is predicated on the development hypothesis that sustainable political competition
can be enhanced at the national and local levels by continuing to build the capacity of institutions
and organizations related to elections and political processes and by ensuring broad citizen
engagement in those processes. This will be done through achievement of the following results
or sub-purposes:
1) Strengthened political parties at the national and regional levels.
2) Improved government capacity to administer and oversee free and fair electoral processes.
3) Enhanced civic engagement and national consensus around electoral and political processes.

Project Description
The Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes in Georgia Projects (SEPP) starts during an
auspicious time following the countrys successful transfers of power through democratic
political process in the 2012 Parliamentary, 2013 Presidential and 2014 local elections. The
political ups and downs of the last decade culminated in October 2012 when a dominant group
that had been in power for nine years was defeated in Parliamentary elections.3 Georgian leaders
and citizens alike appear ready to continue to improve their electoral and political processes.
While political processes that impact the countrys development efforts have become sturdier
due in part to past investments by USAID and other donors4, more needs to be done to bolster
these political processes and the organizations that are their engine.5
SEPP tackles some of the most difficult and sensitive problems confronting any transitioning
political system. The outstanding issues in Georgia include the nascent nature of its transition
from communism and the weakness of its political institutions and democratic political culture.
Also, Georgias recent turbulent political competition and excesses of previous governments
society and its members. The U.S Governments foreign assistance framework (Program Element 2.3.2) defines elections and political processes
support as: promoting legitimate contestation for ideas and political power through democratic processes that reflect the will of the people, and
establishing or developing competitive multiparty systems through improved legal and regulatory frameworks under which political parties and
political entities operate. As for political parties, the framework (Program Element 2.3.3) states that programming is to establish and/or develop
viable political parties and political entities that are effective and accountable, that represent and respond to citizens interests, and that govern
responsibly and effectively.
3

See for example, Can Georgia Become A Multiparty Democracy? by Cory Welt
http://mercury.ethz.ch/serviceengine/Files/ISN/154390/ipublicationdocument_singledocument/501f9794-efcd-45b7-ad87a3396f10ebcf/en/CaucasusAnalyticalDigest43a.pdf
4
See Mid-Term Performance Evaluations of PPSG and PSP by Social Impact (Andrew Green).
5

See OSCE/ODIHR Final Report, 12/21/2012. http://www.osce.org/odihr/98399

have left some wounds that need healing. Those challenges aside, the opportunity for and actual
instances of positive change are unparalleled in the region. This period is an ideal time for
USAID investment in this complicated but important sub-sector of democracy programming.
The scale of the problem is large and pervasive, thus USAIDs interventions and expected
accomplishments must be considered as contributing to broader social and political trends rather
than driving them. By the projects end, Georgia will have passed through this important period
of transition and is likely to have evolved considerably. USAID aims to see the impact of SEPP
over the life of the project, and in particular during the 2016 Parliamentary, 2017 local and 2018
Presidential electoral cycles.
Project Purpose: To deepen and institutionalize Georgia's democratic electoral and
political processes.
SEPP solidifies past gains by continuing to build the capacity of institutions and organizations
related to elections and political processes and by ensuring broad citizen engagement in those
processes. The success of electoral and political processes and reforms depend on the ability of
stakeholders to foster a solid base of societal understanding and a resultant political will to make
difficult changes that will pay longer term dividends.
Due to the political turbulence and still unpredictable nature of politics in Georgia, it is important
to maintain some flexibility in election and political process programming. The Georgia
experience highlights the importance of distinguishing between genuinely transitioning,
democratizing states and one that has settled into stable competitive authoritarianism. With the
growth of the hybrid regime worldwide, the future of democracy development will depend on
identifying this distinction and having policies ready to address them.6 This project carefully
examines future political developments in Georgia and tailors activities accordingly.
This project is predicated on the development hypothesis that sustainable political competition
can be enhanced at the national and local levels by continuing to build the capacity of institutions
and organizations related to elections and political processes and by ensuring broad citizen
engagement in those processes. The following sets forth the projects sub-purposes and the
strategies and approaches that will be pursued to achieve these sub-purposes.
Sub-purpose 1. Political parties strengthened at the national and regional levels.
While parties today are better organized and better structured and some have platforms and
programs, additional assistance is still needed to bring them up to the level of fully professional,
democratic parties. Whereas the needs of Georgian political parties vary greatly, activities under
this sub-purpose will contribute to improving the organizational capacities and intra-party
6

Georgias 2012 Elections and Lessons for Democracy Promotion January 23, 2013 Michael Cecire

democracy of democratic political parties.

Parliamentary systems, especially those with proportional representation, tend to have three or
more active political parties.7 Therefore smaller parties are important, because they may balance
the tendency toward one or two parties dominating the political scene and thus limiting
competition. For these reasons, in addition to USAID support for the principal political parties,
the smaller parties in Georgia also benefit from intensive technical assistance to improve their
basic organizational, campaigning, and fundraising capacities. Support for larger parties focuses
on much-needed higher level structural changes such as sustainability strategies and improving
internal processes.
During this project cycle, USAID continues to support a range of political parties. The selection
of parties to receive the various types of assistance will be done jointly by the implementing
partners and USAID based on USAIDs policy of non-partisan support to viable and democratic
political parties.
The following results and illustrative activities are designed to target the areas of greatest need
predicted during the life of this project.
-- Improved organizational capacity and intra-party democracy within democratic
political parties.
Each partys needs will evolve greatly based on developments internal to the party and its
leadership, as well as on the external political environment and election calendar. Technical
assistance (TA) and training for political parties on organizational issues, membership
development, and local campaign management will be tailored to suit each party at the
appropriate point in its development. The two year gap between 2014 local and 2016
parliamentary elections is a unique opportunity to work to develop several, viable, democratic
political parties ready and able to compete effectively in 2016 parliamentary, 2017 local, and

The number of effective political parties varies depending on a countrys electoral system.
According to a classic theory from 1955 by French political scientist Maurice Duverger, who
studied the evolution of political systems and the institutions that operate in diverse countries,
the plurality rule favors a two-party system while proportional systems lead to multipartyism. In
recent years, Lijphart (1994) reexamined the evidence for this thesis. His study compared 27
advanced industrialized democracies from 1945-90 based on the Laakso and Taagepera measure
of the 'effective number of parliamentary parties' (ENPP), which takes account not only of the
number of parties but also the relative size of each. Lijphart found that the ENPP was 2.0 in
plurality systems, 2.8 in majority and 3.6 in proportional systems.

2018 presidential elections.

-- Improved capacity and engagement of regional branches of democratic political
parties.
Georgia is facing a major governance shift as the Government implements decentralization
reforms. One of the key elements of that reform is to increase both the number of local
governments and the number of elected positions within each municipal government. In other
words, beyond the 2014 local elections there will be significant additional power up for grabs at
the local level. Many political parties positioned themselves to compete for that power; indeed,
some of the 2013 Presidential candidates used that opportunity to raise awareness of their
campaigns to catalyze into local electoral wins. The shift is welcome, but difficult for local
actors who have just come through a period of dramatic political change and churning at the
local level, such as the widespread switching of local politicians from UNM to GD following the
2012 Parliamentary election and the civil service attestation process that started towards the end
of 2014.
A crucial part of this project helps parties to weather and leverage these changes by deepening
their linkages with regional branches, including by improving membership recruitment and
relations with constituents based on policy priorities. Illustrative activities include: facilitating
visits by local party leaders to Tbilisi for sessions with leadership and supporting party
leadership to reach out to local branches more regularly; hosting town halls and other fora at the
most local level feasible; facilitating connections by parties to NGO and think tank resources in
Tbilisi and the regions for research, analysis, organizing and advocacy; training local party
leadership; and supporting the development of party strategies for local outreach.
-- Party caucuses in legislative bodies at the national and local levels will more
effectively contribute to legislative development and provide oversight for executive branch
implementation of policy.
The project helps legislative factions at the national and local levels to build consensus within
their own parties, as well as among a variety of political stakeholders on major reforms. This
assistance aims to reverse the trend of party leaders wielding power in isolation of broader party
cadres and its elected members.
With the recent constitutional shift of power from the presidency to the Prime Minister and
Parliament, parties in Parliament have an increased role in policy development and government
oversight. The project helps party caucuses in Parliament to provide a meaningful forum for
elected officials to negotiate political solutions and pass legislation. In order to achieve this,
factions need training in strategic planning and capacity building, as well as to improve their
research and policy analysis capacity. Inter-faction groups established by Parliament will also be
5

assisted to move forward key reform agendas and legislative initiatives and to overcome their
current deficiencies of talent, expertise, and resources. Party caucuses in Parliament will also be
encouraged to support citizen outreach and engagement by their Members of Parliament (MPs).
USAID supports political party caucuses in local councils to improve the ability of political
parties to engage effectively in policy debate and government oversight at the local level.
Subsequent to the political opportunities that resulted from decentralization reforms and
competitive local elections in of 2014, it will be important to strengthen caucuses in cities and
regions to support the development of local party structures and the emergence of new leaders.
In close coordination with the Missions Transparent and Accountable Governance project
(TAG), which will support improved public administration and civic engagement at the local
level, this project will work with party factions within local councils to improve their ability to
legislate, better represent their constituents, and provide effective oversight of mayors and
gamgebelis. Support to political factions at the local level will help to mitigate political conflict
as effective strategies for party development, political participation and political oversight of
local governance are encouraged.
Party factions within parliament and local government need to communicate their strategies and
reasons for supporting or opposing laws and policies to the public in order to justify their
decisions and be able to gain additional support for next elections. Trainings on communication
skills and methods for effective communication, including through the media, will be supported
through this project.
-- More women, youth and minority candidates in elections held during the life of project.
This project will counteract the tendency toward marginalization of key demographic groups in
politics by supporting activities to enhance the substantive engagement by women, youth and
ethnic minorities in political parties. Women, youth, and minority party activists and candidates
could benefit from additional support, especially to cultivate the next generation of leadership.
Technical assistance (TA) and training will be provided for women, youth and minority political
party candidates. TA and training and study tours will be crafted for party members and leaders
to better understand the value of cultivating women, youth and minority candidates. The project
will work closely with party leaders to convince them to attract more women and youth into
parties and to provide continuing education programs and other special support for these groups.
The existing curriculum for a womens campaign training program may be further developed and
offered to political parties to be able to provide intensive training to women and increase their
skills. This project addresses these issues by advocating for appropriate legal changes,
supporting NGOs working to promote gender equality, promoting of role models and working
closely with party leaders to address gender equality within party structures and supporting
relevant agencies in implementation political participation aspect of the National Action Plan
6

(NAP) on Gender Equality for 2014-2016 adopted by Parliament of Georgia in January 2014.8
Sub-purpose 2. Government capacity to administer and oversee free and fair electoral
processes improved.
Electoral processes in Georgia have evolved significantly since independence. With sufficient
political will, which appears to exist and if it continues into the future, Georgian institutions
should be able to handle future elections with limited technical support as trust towards these
processes continues to increase. Yet important challenges to free and fair elections nowadays
arise primarily during pre-election periods. Some problems with the voter lists still exist, such as
de-registered voters, voters without addresses, or voters abroad. In addition, face-to-face
biometric registration was not implemented for the 2014 elections as it was originally planned.
Political finance remains a core issue of any election campaign, and the institution responsible
for political finance monitoring has yet to hit the right stride.
Significant investment of development assistance and diplomacy by many western countries,
including the US, has been essential to fostering Georgias electoral democracy. The payoff has
been dramatic and clear. Georgia has run a few successful elections with limited major flaws.
The prospects for continued reform of Georgias electoral system are good, and several key areas
require continued and concerted effort and oversight. Development assistance and diplomatic
attention should help cement past changes and put in place additional changes in outstanding
problem areas. Through this project, USAID will provide technical assistance in areas such as
election code reform, campaign and political party finance, dispute resolution and to improve
voter lists and other more sophisticated aspects of electoral administration processes.
Yet major changes to the election administration body could lead to increased vulnerability of
the electoral process. The capacity of the existing institution is relatively solid, but its functions
are so narrow that this capacity is actually rather thin. Further, the capacity of the Electoral
Commission may be seriously challenged if there are structural reforms in the future, including
related to decentralization and the Electoral Commissions composition. Should additional
responsibilities be bestowed on the Electoral Commission (such as overseeing campaign finance
and/or managing voter lists), the entire institution could struggle. In addition, there are some
discussions about introducing electronic voting and/or electronic counting, which would require
advanced skills and efforts from District Election Commission (DEC) and Precinct Election
Commission (PEC) members.
The following results and illustrative activities are designed to target the areas of greatest need
predicted during the life of this project.
-- Improved effectiveness of election dispute resolution mechanisms.
8

https://matsne.gov.ge/index.php?option=com_ldmssearch&view=docView&id=2235622&lang=ge

Election dispute resolution is a delicate but critical matter that the project will push as far
forward as possible. Georgias current system diffuses responsibilities across a variety of
institutions, including the DECs, courts, Inter Agency Task Force/Inter Agency Commission,
Ministry of Justice, State Audit Office of Georgia and others. Overlapping jurisdictions among
these institutions have the potential to create confusion, which could prevent the timely
resolution of election disputes. Further, some of these institutional mechanisms are not being
fully utilized. According to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Office for
Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE/ODHIR) International Election Observation
Mission Presidential Election preliminary findings from 27 October 2013, The CEC and the
courts have received only a few complaints. The majority of complaints have been filed with the
Inter-Agency Commission for Fair and Free Elections (IAC), even though it lacks a mandate to
impose sanctions. The IAC is issuing non-binding recommendations to various stakeholders in
response to complaints it received. While the IATF/IAC in its current format does provide
space for raising political disputes during the campaign period, further attention should be paid
to ensure that the system is rational and functions properly in all its aspects. The project will
help Georgian stakeholders to develop and understand dispute resolution mechanisms to ensure
adequate safeguards against the politicization of election administration.
Activities include training and technical assistance for institutions with formal roles in election
disputes, such as election management bodies (EMBs)in other words, the Central Election
Commission (CEC), District Election Commissions (DECs) and Precinct Election Commissions
(PECs) in Georgia-- and political parties. Activities will also include support for oversight of
election disputes by local observers. Legislative changes may also be needed, and the project
will share related international expertise.
-- Legal frameworks and oversight for campaign and party financing improved
The project will facilitate agreement among NGOs, political parties and the public on reasonable
levels of party funding and campaign spending limits that would allow for fairer competition,
better representation of citizen interests, and less of a drain on the economy. This will include
facilitating access by advocates of campaign finance reform to lawmakers and party leaders to
advocate for reforms. Additional activities will include the provision of international technical
assistance to the EMBs or other Government bodies as needed, including the government
institutions in charge of political finance to increase their capacity to be able to professionally
monitor campaign expenses. The project will also support non-partisan oversight of campaign
finance via NGO watchdogs and the media.
-- Improved capacity of the election administration commissions, especially in national
minority areas and in the event of structural reforms to those commissions.
The project will provide assistance to the election administration commissions, especially if their
8

structures change or if they adopt new responsibilities for political finance, election adjudication,
or maintaining voter lists and providing voter identification. It is anticipated that discussions
about the composition of the election administration will resume after local elections; these
discussion may lead to changes in the composition, status or authority of electoral commission.
In this case, this project will need to provide more significant assistance to support a transition.
The project will continue to provide technical assistance in these sub-areas that require a more
sophisticated level of reform and implementation regardless of their institutional home. The
project will facilitate and incentivize the CEC to conduct outreach to disadvantaged and
politically marginalized and manipulated communities, such as ethnic minority communities. In
addition, the project will place emphasis on ensuring that CEC institutions and work are open
and transparent.
Sub-purpose 3: Enhanced civic engagement and national consensus around electoral and
political processes.
Activities under this sub-purpose undergird the entire project and USAIDs overall approach in
Georgia. Without adequate citizen understanding of and involvement in electoral and political
processes, Georgias turbulent politics will continue to distract policy makers and investors from
their important work to grow the countrys economy and resolve social problems. The dramatic
events surrounding the Parliamentary election in 2012 showed that during critical moments, civic
engagement is very high. However, Georgias citizens need to also understand the importance of
civic engagement in elections and political processes not only during critical moments, but also
regularly between elections to ensure that they do not face crises in the future. Since the transfer
of power in 2012, civil society and citizens have become more vocal in expressing their opinions
and ideas, and the government seems more accessible and responsive. All efforts should be
made to maintain this positive trajectory and make sure that society will be more actively
engaged in decisions affecting their future. Only when this attitude is ingrained among the
public will the threat of authoritarian or semi-authoritarian rule in Georgia be mitigated.
The following results and illustrative activities are designed to target the areas of greatest need
predicted during the life of this project.
-- Increased citizen engagement in and understanding of key aspects of priority reforms
related to electoral and political processes.
The project continues to provide technical assistance (in close cooperation with diplomatic
efforts) to ensure follow-through on the well-known electoral reform needs, such as increased
independence of the electoral commission, a more equitable electoral system, and improved
integrity of the voters list. Activities under this result will provide the fora and the means for
core debates in an attempt to build broad and sufficient national consensus on the countrys way
forward in these areas. The project will: provide international technical assistance and general
academic research as requested by legitimate domestic actors; support venues whereby key
9

stakeholders can come together to debate electoral and political reforms; training and other
programs for university students or first time voters on the importance of democratic institutions
and values; support domestic advocacy and investigative reporting on key electoral and political
reforms that will help to spur the political will needed to carry through with reforms; fund civic
awareness campaigns by local partners toward targeted populations on key reform areas; and
support broad, informed citizen consultations on key policy issues. It is crucial to reach
consensus on major reform legislation and for the political stakeholders and the citizenry at large
to understand (or at least have the opportunity to try and understand) the electoral system and
rules that will be adopted. If a broad consensus is reached, the major players and the public are
far more likely to adhere to these principles and protect them in the future.
-- Greater participation of marginalized groups in electoral processes, including women,
ethnic and religious minorities, youth, and people with disabilities (PWDs)
The project will support general civic and voter education, including in the context of significant
procedural or legal changes to electoral and political processes. Decentralization reforms will
pose new challenges and opportunities for disadvantaged groups to become more civic-minded
and politically involved, as well as to have a real voice in their society and government. The
project will provide training, information and technical assistance to marginalized populations
regarding electoral and political processes. The project will provide training and support to the
EMBs to increase the integration of marginalized populations into electoral processes. The
project may provide incentive funds or additional technical assistance and training opportunities
to partners that substantially increase the participation of marginalized groups.
Voter education programs will target national minority areas in local languages to help ensure
that every citizen of Georgia has the opportunity to be engaged in electoral processes. The
Census conducted in the fall of 2014 will provide information on the distribution of people with
disabilities around Georgia; the project will help the CEC and other government agencies to
analyze this data and provide improved access to polling stations in areas where such people live.
The project will support analyses of legislation and provide recommendation on what aspects of
laws should be changed to ensure integration of marginalized groups into elections and related
political processes.
-- Independent observer groups mount credible monitoring missions
Domestic election monitoring by qualified Georgian civil society organizations will continue to
be critical during the duration of this project and beyond to ensure the positive trajectory of
elections management and validate future election results. According to OSCE/ODIHR 2013
report, The involvement of a large number of citizen observers and groups throughout the
electoral process enhanced the transparency overall.9 Importance of domestic observer groups is
9

OSCE/ODIHR Election Observation Mission Final Report, Georgia, Presidential Election, 27 October 2013

10

underlined in several reports and articles, [Local civil society organizations] were instrumental
in uncovering instances of malfeasance and even electoral fraud.10 The project will provide
ongoing support for domestic observation, possibly, through direct grants to local organizations
or a consortium of local organizations. The project may also support international observation or
international technical assistance to supplement domestic observation on an as-needed and
funds-available basis. International organizations may also be requested to provide independent
election observation.

10

Georgias 2012 Elections and Lessons for Democracy Promotion January 23, 2013 Michael Cecire

11

ANNUAL PROGRAM STATEMENT APS-114-15-000003 FOR STRENGTHENING

THE ELECTION AND POLITICAL PROCESSES IN GEORGIA THROUGH
DIRECT AWARDS TO GEORGIAS CIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONS

Table of Contents
SECTION I- PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ................................................................................ 2
A.

PURPOSE ....................................................................................................................... 3

B.

PROBLEM STATEMENT ........................................................................................... 3

C.

STRATEGIC FOCUS .................................................................................................... 5

D.

OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS ............................................................. 7

SECTION II ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION .................................................................... 10

A.

ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS ......................................................................................... 10

B.

ELIGIBILITY DOCUMENTS ................................................................................... 10

SECTION III APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION ............................ 12

A.

APPLICATION PROCESS ........................................................................................ 12

B.

CONCEPT PAPER INSTRUCTIONS....................................................................... 13

C.

FULL APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS ................................................................. 14

SECTION IV APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION ............................................... 18

A.

EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR CONCEPT PAPERS ......................................... 18

B.

EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR FULL APPLICATIONS ................................... 18

C.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................ 19

TIMELINE
Tbilisi Information Session:

May 20, 2015

Concept Paper Deadline:

June 08, 2015

USAID Response:

August, 2015

SECTION I- PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

2

A. PURPOSE
The United States Government, represented by the United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) Mission in Georgia, requests applications from Georgian nongovernmental organizations for projects to strengthen election and political processes in
Georgia.
USAID uses an Annual Program Statement (APS) to generate competition for awards when
the Agency intends to support a variety of creative approaches and activities that contribute to
the attainment of its strategic objectives. This APS is designed to seek relationships beyond
traditional USAID norms by inviting submissions from local organizations, including those
who have never received direct funding from USAID.
The overall goal of USAIDs Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes in Georgia
through Direct Awards to Georgias Civil Society Organizations APS is to support
Georgian groups to mount credible electoral and political process monitoring activities and to
inform the public of their recommendations in order to help engage citizens in electoral and
political processes in Georgia. To achieve this goal, USAID intends to issue multiple awards
under this APS to applicants who address the following objective: Increase the confidence
of Georgian citizens in local and national elections by contributing to increased
transparency and accountability of electoral and political processes.
Subject to the availability of funds, USAID intends to provide funding for multiple
cooperative agreements worth from $200,000 to $1,500,000 for up to 36 months to support
activities related to election and political process monitoring for the upcoming election cycle
in Georgia, which includes 2016 Parliamentary, 2017 local, and 2018 Presidential elections.
Awards should be structured to cover the 2016 and 2017 election periods, with a possible
extension period for 2018 presidential elections; interventions around the 2018 presidential
elections should be proposed now, but would not be decided and finalized until a later date.
USAID intends to make all awards to local organizations for the upcoming election cycle
prior to the 2016 Parliamentary elections; local organizations should not expect that
additional election and political process monitoring awards will be made between 2016 and
2018.
For details on eligibility, see section III- Eligibility Information. For details on the application
process, please see Section IV-Application and Submission Information. The first deadline
for concept papers under this APS is June 8, 2015.

B. PROBLEM STATEMENT
Strong and effective democracies need well-functioning legal frameworks, institutions,
systems and processes to ensure government accountability, transparency, and checks and
balances. Citizen participation through elections, monitoring of political processes, and
policy advocacy plays a fundamental role in ensuring government accountability and
transparency, as well as furthering government legitimacy and effectiveness.
Georgias recent election cycle (2012-2014) was assessed positively by international
organizations. According to the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the 2012 Parliamentary
3

and 2013 Presidential elections suggest that competitive multi-party elections may be
becoming a routine feature of Georgian politics.1 The report of the Organization for
Security and Co-operation in Europes (OSCE) Office for Democratic Institutions and
Human Rights (ODIHR) on the presidential election of October 2013 stated that the election
was efficiently administered and transparent, and took place in an amicable and constructive
environment. During the election campaign, fundamental freedoms of expression, movement,
and assembly were respected and candidates were able to campaign without restriction. The
media was less polarized than during the 2012 elections and presented a broad range of
viewpoints. On election day, voters were able to express their choice freely.2 For the 2014
municipal elections, Georgia successfully mounted both the election day and run-off election
without instances of disruption that impacted the outcome of the vote.3
While positive, the gains that have been made in the electoral sphere will continue to be
tested. In recent years, confidence towards the Central Election Commission (CEC) has
increased,4 but in a politicized environment, the CEC must continually demonstrate
professionalism, transparency and independence. The media environment has become less
polarized, but it is still subject to political pressure and often bends to the will of political
forces, contributing to a charged environment. To withstand these tests, it is imperative for
Georgians to engage in and have access to impartial and responsive domestic election
monitoring to ensure that elections in Georgia continue to comply with international
standards of fairness and equality.
Compliance with certain standardsrelated to elections and other democratic, political
processes-- is also mandated by Georgias aspirations for Euro-Atlantic integration. Georgia
faces continued international pressure to improve the electoral process and public confidence
in the quality and transparency of elections. The upcoming election cycle, from 2016 through
2018, will be an important test of integration efforts and will be under scrutiny by the
international community. Critical to these processes will be the presence of viable local
organizations mounting credible, non-partisan monitoring efforts. During the October 2013
Presidential election, the OSCE noted that, Civil society and citizen observer organizations
undertook a number of activities to support the electoral process and monitor the elections.
The involvement of a large number of citizen observers and groups throughout the electoral
process enhanced the transparency overall.5
Non-partisan election observation is a core part of the election process and of paramount
importance in transitional democracies such as Georgia, including countering partisan efforts
to monitor elections in Georgia. For every election in the previous electoral cycle, there were
50 to 60 local NGOs registered to observe elections. Many of these organizations were
affiliated with political parties and never published a statement or report on their election
observations or implemented any activities in between elections to support reforms or
1

STATEMENT OF THE NDI ELECTION OBSERVER DELEGATION TO GEORGIAS 2013 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION,
Tbilisi, October 28, 2013
2

OSCE ODIHR Statement: http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/110301?download=true

ISFED Monitoring of 2014 Local Self-Government Elections -Final Report, Page 36, Key Findings,
http://www.isfed.ge/main/777/eng/
4
NDI public opinion polling showed that after the October 2013 Presidential Elections, public opinion of the
CECs performance more than doubled. In June 2013, it was 13%, while soon after the 2013 presidential
elections in November of 2013 it had increased to 37%. After polls in July 2014 positive public perception has
remained the same at 35%.
5
OSCE ODIHR Statement: http://www.osce.org/odihr/elections/110301?download=true
3

improvements. This approach reduces the credibility of domestic monitoring groups and
increases the importance of supporting non-partisan groups that have the confidence of the
general public and the international community. The existence of non-partisan election
monitoring can help level the playing field for smaller political forces and candidates by
reducing the amount of money they need to spend on poll watchers. In addition, larger
parties feel that having one official representative at a polling station is not enough, and they
have established NGOs for the sole purpose of observing elections. If there are no neutral
observers at the Precinct, District, and Central Election Commission levels, only party
commission members, party observers and party-affiliated NGOs will be present in most
places, creating an environment conducive for election fraud.
In addition, neutral, local organizations are well suited to understanding the local context and
constituency concerns which contribute to the credibility and transparency of electoral and
political processes. Non-partisan observation extends to the monitoring of political parties,
finances, media, campaigns, election officials and processes, and helps to balance political
rhetoric and campaign jargon for the public and other specific stakeholders.
C. STRATEGIC FOCUS
The overall goal of this APS is to support credible electoral and political process monitoring
activities that will inform the public and engage citizens in electoral and political processes in
Georgia. This is integral to USAID Mission goals and will complement on-going and future
projects to strengthen electoral and political processes in Georgia.
USAID Strategic Framework
This APS has been designed to advance: USAIDs 2013-2017 Country Development
Cooperation Strategy (CDCS) for Georgia, the strategic goals of USAIDs activities under
the Strengthening Electoral and Political Processes (SEPP) Project, and the Agencys USAID
Forward objectives. In addition, it supports the Government of Georgias (GoG) reform
initiatives intended to increase the transparency, accountability, effectiveness of electoral and
political processes, including those directly related to the performance of the Election
Commissions. For further information, please see the following documents supporting this
APS.

SEPP Project Summary and Logframe

2013-2017 USAID/Caucasus CDCS6
USAID Forward7
Local Systems: A Framework for Supporting Sustained Development8

In 2012, the USAID Mission in Georgia initiated a CDCS with the following overarching
goal: Georgias democratic, free-market, Western-oriented transformation strengthened and
sustained. Of the three Development Objectives (DOs) under the CDCS, this APS will fall
under DO 1: Democratic checks and balances and accountable governance enhanced.

http://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1863/GeorgiaCDCS.pdf
http://www.usaid.gov/usaidforward
8
http://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/LocalSystemsFramework.pdf
7

According to the CDCS, if DO1 is achieved, an increased percentage of Georgians will more
actively participate in the governance of their nation. Government will become responsive to
Georgians aspirations, preferences, and needs through elections and political processes.
Georgias political system will become more democratic with stronger links between state
and society, and mechanisms for accommodation of citizens needs will be further
institutionalized.
This APS will directly contribute to DO 1s Intermediate Results (IR):
IR 1.2 Political and electoral processes are more competitive, deliberative, and transparent
This IR recognizes that citizens who actively participate in their nations public affairs play a
critically important role in a vibrant democracy. An informed and engaged citizenry provides
both a check on government power and valuable feedback the government can use to become
more responsive. Local organizations monitoring elections and political processes are an
important part of the feedback loop.
Current USAID Activities
Awards under this project will complement USAIDs SEPP Project which will work to
deepen and institutionalize Georgia's democratic electoral and political processes.
In 2014, USAID funded four awards under SEPP.
Strengthening Political Process (SPP) is implemented through separate awards by the
National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the International Republican Institute (IRI).
NDI is building the capacity of political factions in the Georgian Parliament and
sakrebulos in six municipalities, while IRI works to build the capacity of political
parties in Tbilisi and the regions.
Strengthening Electoral Processes (SEP) is implemented by the International
Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) and works to improve the capacity of the
CEC, improve electoral legislation, and increase civic education.
The International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) monitored the
2014 local elections and continues to monitor local government reform and hiring
processes.
All current awards under the SEPP project will last through 2019, except ISFED which will
end in August 2015. The APS awardees will complement activities of USAID partners
through local election and political process monitoring. Specifically, activities related to
political party monitoring will be conducted in close cooperation with IRI and NDI, while
monitoring of the CEC or activities of other state agencies will be conducted in close
cooperation with IFES. In addition, if the USG deploys international observer teams for any
of the upcoming elections, close cooperation with those international observers is also
expected.
SEPP builds on previous gains promoted by USAID since the late 1990s. Assistance through
the years has included work to develop political party structures, campaign techniques,
communication efforts, political parties in Parliament, institution building of electoral bodies,
voter education, and building and deploying the capacity of Georgian NGOs to influence and
oversee political and electoral processes. All of these activities featured important elements
of citizen outreach in order to engage ever broader circles of society into the countrys
6

political life. According to a 2012 evaluation of USAIDs previous Political Party

Strengthening in Georgia program (PPSG) and the Parliamentary Strengthening Project
(PSP), the evaluation team concluded that the work of IRI and NDI, ...did strengthen party,
youth wing, and individual capacity in identifiable ways regional party-building activities
did help parties expand their party structure into regions, engage in more public activities,
and train party activists. According to the IFES October 2014 Electoral Integrity Assessment
Report, Georgias election processes, have been characterized by improved election
management, significant progress in the accuracy and credibility of the voter registration
process, increasingly effective civil society participation and peaceful political competition.
D. OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED RESULTS
Participatory democratic governance requires government transparency, citizen engagement,
and mechanisms for accountability that are supported by public access to information.
Electoral and political processes are at the nexus of citizen engagement in the democratic
process. This nexus requires cooperation by various institutional actors with citizen oversight
to provide transparency, accountability and sustain public confidence.
Objective: Increase the confidence of Georgian citizens in local and national elections by
contributing to increased transparency and accountability of electoral and political
processes.
USAID intends to issue multiple awards under this APS to applicants who address the above
objective. Awards under this APS will strengthen election and political processes by
increasing competent oversight by credible local organizations.
Anticipated Results:
Local observer groups mount credible, non-partisan electoral and/or political process
monitoring missions.
Monitoring data is available to the public in a timely manner.
Recommendations to improve electoral and/or political processes are developed and
published and/or presented to relevant stakeholders.

Applicants may apply to cover one or multiple areas listed below, with full or partial
geographic coverage based on justified strategic priorities, and can propose any additional
related areas of focus. USAID will require relevant justification for selecting a specific scope
and impact of the proposed activity.
Illustrative Activities:
I.

Election Observation

In order to maximize USAID resources, applicants applying to observe elections should plan
to cover the entire election cycle, including 2016 Parliamentary, 2017 local, and 2018
Presidential elections. Given the long time period up to the 2018 election cycle and the
uncertainty of the political and electoral environment at that time, interventions around the
2018 presidential elections should be proposed in general terms. USAID intends to make all
awards to local organizations for the upcoming election cycle prior to the 2016 Parliamentary

elections; local organizations should not expect that additional election and political process
monitoring awards will be made between 2016 and 2018 by USAID.
Short-term observation on election day is important to gather detailed information on polling
stations to contribute to analysis and conclusions of the voting and tabulating process.
Monitoring the pre-election period is also important in order to judge whether an equal
playing field was ensured for all stakeholders. Organizations applying to monitor elections
must provide a clear methodology for short-term and/or long-term observation and clearly
indicate how results will be shared with the broader public.

II.

Observe Other Electoral and Political Processes

Selected electoral processes can become the focus of a single monitoring project. While it is
not required to cover each and every district, political party or media outlet, USAID will
require relevant justification for selecting a specific scope and impact on the overall electoral
process.
Examples include but are not limited to:
Monitor media coverage of each candidate and party activities for equal access
and compliance with the law;
Monitor how well members of marginalized and/or minority groups are
informed of political platforms and electoral rights and responsibilities of the
voter and their participation;
Monitor the activities, composition and preparedness of Election Management
Bodies, the Inter Agency Task Force or other relevant state agencies directly
involved in electoral processes;
Monitor the complaints adjudication process and consistency of decisions by
all relevant bodies including courts;
Monitor the use of administrative resources during an election period; and
Monitor the quality of the voters list through conducting an audit, and monitor
policy implementation of relevant state agencies related to voter registration.

Monitor the activities of political parties and their adherence to ethical standards and rules of
conduct during an election period.
Examples include but are not limited to:
Account for campaign expenditures and compliance with reporting
requirements by candidates and parties;
Monitor party campaign events and voter education initiatives with specific
focus on minority areas;
Monitor the rate of fulfillment of candidate and political party promises during
the campaign period and the first year of office, providing analysis of
successes and barriers to fulfillment;
Monitor political parties programs, policies and platforms, including to
compare them and/or analyze their commitment to gender equality, EuroAtlantic integration and/or other policy priorities;

Monitor the ability of all political parties and electoral stakeholders to

organize discussions, meetings, and freely and publicly debates around the
issues;
Monitor adherence to ethical standards by political parties, including hate
speech used by political parties or candidates;
Monitor the consistency of decisions made by members of the Central
Election Commission appointed by political parties; and
Monitor political parties effort to increase the participation of youth, people
with disabilities, minority populations and women during the campaign
period.

SECTION II ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS
The USAID Mission in Georgia invites eligible and qualified organizations to submit concept
papers and, eventually, if requested by USAID, full applications in response to this APS.
Eligible Georgian organizations (such as NGOs, advocacy groups, for-profit businesses, trade
and professional organizations, media outlets, independent national institutions, research and
public policy institutes, think tanks, and universities) must:
o Be organized under the laws of Georgia;
o Be registered in the Georgian NGO registry for at least two years if
registration is applicable to Applicant organization;
o Have their primary place of business in Georgia;
o Be majority owned by individuals who are citizens or lawful permanent
residents of Georgia or be managed by a governing body, the majority of
whom are citizens or lawful permanent residents Georgia;
o Not be controlled by foreign entity or by an individual or individuals who are
not citizens or permanent residents of Georgia;
o Have an annual budget of not less than $50,000 per year in any two years
since 2012; and
o Have at least two years of experience working in a related field.

Evidence that these criteria are met will be required to be submitted along with the full
application for those organizations that are invited to that phase of the competition and will
be part of the evaluation criteria.
The term controlled by means a majority ownership or beneficiary interest as defined
above, or the power, either directly or indirectly, whether exercised or exercisable, to control
the election, appointment, or tenure of the organizations managers or a majority of the
organizations governing body by any means, e.g., ownership, contract, or operation of law.
Foreign entity means an organization that fails to meet any part of the local organization
definition. Government controlled and government owned organizations in which the
recipient government owns a majority interest or in which the majority of a governing body
are government employees, are included in the above definition of government owned
organization.
Partnerships of eligible Georgian organizations are allowed. If applications come from a
coalition of NGOs, the prime organization (recipient of USAID award) must comply with all
above mentioned requirements and all other organizations must comply with first three
requirements.
If applicable, lead applicants are encouraged to include institutional capacity building plans
for partner organizations.
B. ELIGIBILITY DOCUMENTS
Subject to the conditions for eligibility provided in Section II.A of this APS, if the applicant
is selected to submit a full application, the applicant will submit official documentation of its
10

organizations formal legal status, as follows:

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

State registration certificate

By-laws
Composition of Governing Body (indicating the citizenship of members and
other occupation)
Organizations budget demonstrating they meet funding requirement.
List of activities implemented by the organization in recent years related to the
proposed activities.
Other supporting documentation to demonstrate relevant experience in the
field and technical capacity to implement the project

11

SECTION III APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A. APPLICATION PROCESS
At this time, the application process involves two stages: an information session and the
submission of a concept paper. After these two stages, USAID will invite the selected
Concept Papers to submit a full application.
Stage 1. Information session: The Mission will hold an information session in Tbilisi on May
20, 2015 to respond to questions of clarification from prospective applicants. Applicants
interested in attending the information session should submit: (a) their questions on any APSrelated issues, and (b) the names of their representatives attending (maximum 2 persons).
This information should be sent to Eka Gamezardashvili at egamezardashvili@usaid.gov by
May 15, 2015.
Answers to all questions, posed both in advance and during the information session, will be
posted on: http://www.grants.gov/, www.jobs.ge and the Missions public website. In
addition, print-outs of the APS, supporting documents, questions/answers from the
information sessions and additional information will be posted at USAIDs Centers for Civic
Engagement in Marneuli, Rustavi, Sagarejo, Telavi, Gori, Akhaltsikhe, Kutaisi, Ozurgeti,
Zugdidi, and Batumi.
Stage 2. Submission and review of concept papers: Applicants must submit concept papers
of no more than 8 pages (see detailed instructions below) electronically via e-mail to
Regional Contracting Office, USAID Mission in Georgia at: rcocaucasus@usaid.gov with a
cc to Eka Gamezardashvili, Acquisition Agent at egamezardashvili@usaid.gov no later than
June 8, 2015. Late applications will not be considered for review. The Mission will notify
unsuccessful applicants that their concept papers have not been selected and successful
applicants to submit a full proposal.
IMPORTANT NOTE: Stage 3 and 4 are ONLY relevant if your Concept Paper has
been selected. Please do not submit a full application unless requested by USAID.
Stage 3. Submission of full applications: Notified applicants will prepare and submit full
applications by the date indicated by the Mission. Please note that the invitation to submit a
full application does not constitute an award; USAID may choose not to fund full
applications even after they have been requested.
Stage 4. Review and selection of full applications: USAID will review applications and
notify both unsuccessful applicants and applicants under consideration for award within 60
days of the closing date for full applications. Applicants under consideration will be required
to submit Standard Form (SF) 424 and signed certifications, along with documents that
support the organizations eligibility to apply. Applicants under consideration will be advised
if budget-related discussions are to be initiated, or if additional information (technical or
budget-related) is required. Applicants under consideration for an award that have never
received funding from USAID will be subject to a pre-award review of their financial
systems. Award(s) will be made to responsible applicant(s) whose application(s) best meets
the requirements of this APS and the evaluation criteria contained herein. Issuance of this
APS does not constitute an award commitment on the part of the U.S. Government (USG),
nor does it commit the USG to pay for costs incurred in the preparation and submission of an
12

application. The Mission will notify unsuccessful applicants that their full applications have
not been selected.

B. CONCEPT PAPER INSTRUCTIONS

All concept
restrictions
first step of
application.

papers must contain the items below and must comply with the listed page
for each section and be submitted by the deadline of June 8, 2015. This is the
the application process. Selected concept papers will then be invited for a full
Concept papers must be:

Typed, single space, normal margin, on A4 size paper;

Printed in 12 font size; charts, tables and spreadsheets may be not less than 10 point
font;
Written in English;
If submitted electronically, written in Word (version 2000 or later) or Adobe PDF
format with spreadsheets in MS Excel (version 2000 or later) or in tables that are
compatible with MS Word.
Including the Self-Assessment checklist noted in B.5 below.

1. Cover page (use template provided)

Concise title of project,
Solicitation Number of this APS,
Name and address of the (lead) organization,
Type of organization (such as for-profit, non-profit, university, network, etc.),
Contact point (lead contact name, relevant telephone, and e-mail information),
Names of other organizations that have received (or will receive) the application or
are funding some of the proposed activity,
Confirmation of format and page limitations by checking each box;
Signature of authorized representative of the applicant.

2. Problem statement (1 page)

A brief description of the challenge as it relates to the sphere of electoral and political process
monitoring, its causes, and impacts on society, indicating data that informed the applicants
overall concept and approach (e.g. secondary data, findings from the evaluation of a
development project, or the applicants own analysis/assessment).
3. Technical Approach including project goal, intended results and key activities (2 pages)
An overall goal, anticipated results and key activities to achieve those results;
The applicants hypothesis of desired change, its approach to tackling the identified
problem, and an explanation of why the applicant considers the proposed approach
innovative and/or effective;
An account of the target population, the scope of the project, timeline and the
geographical focus, including a justification for such selection (information about
2018 elections can be presented very generally at the concept note stage);
Information on the methodology to be used during monitoring;
Information how the applicant's proposal takes into account gender concerns as well
as the interests of persons with disability, minorities and marginalized groups;
13

Information on relevant activities of other donors, international organizations, and

stakeholders as applicable.

4. Plan for performance management and outreach (1 page)

A summary plan for rigorous monitoring and evaluation including the main outcome
and impacts of the proposed activities and a results framework;
5. Institutional past experience and capacity (1 page and self-assessment checklist provided)
A brief description of applicants, as well as any prospective partners, past work and
relevant experience in the past three years;
A brief reference to the applicants strengths, distinctive competence, and/or
comparative advantage that will make it well-suited to addressing the challenge;
Completed self-assessment checklist on institutional capacity.
6. Summary Budget (up to 3 pages as budget is separated out by election)
Proposed budget, including annual breakdowns and disaggregated by direct and
indirect program costs. Direct costs may include but are not limited to the costs of
salaries, workshops, travel communications, report preparation, environmental
analysis, passport issuance, visas, medical exam and inoculations, insurance (other
than insurance included in the applicants fringe benefits), equipment, office rent, etc.
Indirect costs may include those that are incurred by an organization but that cannot
be attributed directly to a specific project;
Proposed amount of the applicants financial as well as in-kind participation, clearly
identifying which resources are cash and which are in-kind and providing information
on the nature and valuation of the in-kind contributions;
Cost-share. If applicable, a proposed amount of leverage from prospective partners,
both cash as well as in-kind. Applicants are not required to include cost-sharing
(matching) funds;
The budget for proposed activities must be broken out by each election2016
Parliamentary, 2017 local, and 2018 Presidential--in order to assess the cost of
individual elections and the entire election cycle.

C. FULL APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS

IMPORTANT NOTE: Please, do not submit a full application unless requested to do so
by USAID.
Full applications must be:

Typed, single space on letter size, not legal size, paper;

Printed in 12 font size; charts, tables and spreadsheets may be not less than10 font;
Written in English;
If submitted electronically, written in Word (version 2000 or later) or Adobe PDF
format with spreadsheets in MS Excel (version 2000 or later) or in tables that are
compatible with MS Word.

14

Full application must contain the following information. Excluding the cover page, the table
of contents, past performance, the budget and annexes, full applications must not exceed 17
pages.
1. Cover page (use same cover page as for the concept paper)
2. Table of contents
3. Executive Summary (up to 2 pages)
4. Body of application (up to 15 pages), including:
4.1. Problem statement and analysis: A description of the development challenge; analysis
of its causes and impacts on men, women and other marginalized populations; as well as
opportunities for addressing identified issues effectively. The applicant must explain what
data was used to inform the above analysis and the applicants overall concept (e.g.
secondary data, findings from the evaluation of a development project, or the applicants own
assessment/analysis).
4.2. Hypothesis of change and the applicants overall approach: A description of the
hypothesis of change that determined the programmatic approach to address the identified
problem effectively. Simply put, a program hypothesis outlines the if-then statement
underlying the proposed intervention. In general, a theory of change states what expected
(changed) result will follow from a particular set of actions. A simple example would be, If
I add more fuel to the fire, then it will burn hotter.
In this section, applicants must also offer its assessment of potential risks related to planned
activities and ways to mitigate them. Applicants must also explain how the proposed action
differs from, contributes to, and/or adds value to other stakeholders programs in this field of
activity.
4.3. Goal and objectives, activities and results, geographical focus and duration of the
project: Applications must clearly explain connections between expected results, activities,
and the goal of the project. Applicants must demonstrate an implementation approach based
on logically sequenced activities and that is directly correlated to the hypothesis of change.
Applicants must describe an intended impact on the target population of the project, as well
as its geographical focus. They must indicate how it contributes to advancing the
USAID/Caucasus in Georgias Missions Development Objectives. If applicable, applicants
should indicate how they plan to cooperate with relevant USAID-supported projects.
4.4. Sustainability analysis and an environmental review:
Sustainability analysis: Applicants are required to identify and analyze the sustainability of
the proposed technical approaches. Applicants should explain how they plan to promote
sustainable outcomes going beyond the end of the project timeframe. This involves
analyzing the institutional capacity of the Applicant that will need to be in place or developed
through the project, including systems, policies, and skills.
Environmental Review: Applicants must assess any potential environmental risks emanating
from the proposed activities. Applicants must propose a plan that ensures that negative
15

environmental impacts are analyzed, reduced, and monitored from design through
implementation.
4.5. A performance management plan (PMP): A detailed PMP with clear objectives and
sub-objectives, a mixture of outcome and output indicators, data sources, and data gathering
methods, as well as estimated baseline data and indicator targets. Applicants must also
explain how the indicator data and lessons learned in the course of implementation will be
managed to contribute to achieving the intended development impact. Monitoring and
evaluation methods must be specific, measurable, realistic and applicable to the goals and
objectives. Plans must also include gender-sensitive indicators and sex-disaggregated data as
appropriate. The PMP must also include a logical framework (log frame) which clearly
communicates the development hypothesis and an indicator table showing what data will be
collected. USAID will provide a template that can be used for the indicator table or as a
reference to develop one.
4.6. Implementation Schedule: A chart indicating when activities will take place over the
course of the proposed project.
4.7 Institutional Capacity: This section must include a description of the composition and
organizational structure of the proposed project team, indicating key staff and including team
member titles, roles and requisite technical expertise. Applicants should provide sufficient
information on the technical and managerial experience of the project staff and/or Position
Descriptions for key staff. Applicants must provide experienced, qualified personnel in
relevant disciplines and areas for project management and professional staff positions.
Applicants must indicate their strengths, distinctive competence, and/or comparative
advantage that make them well-suited to addressing the identified challenge. This section
must also include roles, responsibilities, and contributions of the prospective partner
organization(s), if applicable.
5. Past Performance (up to 3 pages): Applicants should include a list of past performance
references. Applicants are requested to list all contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements
involving relevant (similar or related) programs conducted by the applicant (or consortium)
over the past three years. Reference information shall include the location, current telephone
numbers, points of contact, overall dollar value of the program, and award numbers if
available. A brief description of work performed by the applicant is also required. Newer
organizations, or Applicants with no related prior grant awards, remain eligible for
consideration and are encouraged to apply. If the applicant has conducted election-related
monitoring in the past, include any public statements made by the organization as an
ANNEX.
6. Budget:
Budget Information (a summary of the budget must be submitted using Standard
Forms 424, 424A and 424B which are available at Grants.gov under Forms tab).
Detailed budget and financial plan with major line items, identification of funding
source (if applicable, partners) for each, and a narrative description of what the
resources will be used for;
The budget for proposed activities must be broken out by each election2016
Parliamentary, 2017 local, and 2018 Presidential--in order to assess the cost of
individual elections and the entire election cycle;
16

Cost-share (if applicable): A proposed amount of leverage from prospective partners,

both cash as well as in-kind. Applicants are not required to submit cost-share in their
budget.

Annexes:
Letter of intent from each partner organization (if applicable);
Curricula vitae of key staff; and
Branding & Marking Plan.
Eligibility Documents per Section II.B: state registration certificate; organizations
By-Laws; composition of governing body (indicating citizenship of members);
organizations budget from relevant years, including funding sources; list of activities
implemented by the organization in recent years related to the proposed activities.
Any public statements made by the organization on election-related monitoring.
All applications must be in English and submitted electronically via email.

17

SECTION IV APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

A. EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR CONCEPT PAPERS
**As noted below, the self-assessment checklist must be included. If it is not, USAID will
not review the concept paper
USAIDs review of concept papers will determine whether the proposed activities meet the
basic criteria below. USAID will evaluate all concept papers and use a rating of acceptable or
not acceptable with regards to the criteria below.
Relevance and soundness of the problem statement: USAID will assess the extent to which
the applicants problem analysis is rigorous, credible, and realistic.
Effectiveness of the applicants technical approach: USAID will assess the extent to which
the application (a) advances the objectives and priorities of this APS (including the expected
results) through the creation of the identified goal and anticipated results; (b) offers a credible
hypothesis of change to address the identified problem effectively; (c) sound methodology for
effectiveness of implementation including the justification for and approaches on gender
issues, inclusion of persons with disabilities and minorities, and the selection of a
geographical focus, where applicable; (d) how efforts will be complimentary with existing
activities.
Performance Management: USAID will assess whether the performance management plan
includes attainable outcomes and impacts of the proposed activity identified in a results
framework.
Commensurate past experience and institutional capacity to implement proposed activities
successfully: USAID will assess the extent to which the applicants past experience and
institutional capacity paves the way for a successful implementation of the stated objectives.
Additionally, the Applicant must complete the self-assessment checklist and include it in the
submission.
Budget: USAID will assess the extent to which the budget reflects reasonable costs, includes
all major line items, and aligns with the proposed technical approach.
USAID will notify unsuccessful applicants and will invite successful applicants to submit a
full application by August 2015 (estimate).

B. EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR FULL APPLICATIONS

The Technical Application will be evaluated in accordance with the following Evaluation
Criteria:
Self Assessment Checklist
Technical Approach
Management Plan
Past Performance

GO/NO GO (pass/fail)
40 points
35 points
25 points
100 points

18

Technical Approach (40 points, see Section III.C.4.1-4.4 above)

The problem analysis is sound, rigorous, evidence-based and applicable to the areas
outlined in the APS.
A clear hypothesis of change that identified the problem and solution. A concise
outline of risks and how to mitigate them. Demonstrated knowledge of other
stakeholders programs in this field of activity and how proposed efforts will not
duplicate other stakeholders efforts.
The technical approach and connections between the goal of the project and expected
results and activities are clearly explained. The intended effect on the target
population and geographical area is clearly defined and contributes to
USAID/Caucasus in Georgias Development Objective 1.
If applicable, a sound assessment of how negative environmental impacts will be
reduced and monitored for the duration of the entire activity.
The design of the application is informed by gender, disabled and minority
considerations.
Management Plan (35 points, see Section III.C.4.5-7 above)
The application has a well-designed plan for performance management, monitoring
and evaluation, and learning.
The implementation schedule is realistic in terms of achieving the expected results of
this APS.
Commensurate institutional capacity to achieve the objectives of the application,
including qualified and experienced key personnel; and a clear description of the
organizational structure of the project team with clearly defined roles and
responsibilities.
Past Performance (25 points, see Section III.C.5 above)
Commensurate past performance to achieve the objectives of the application.
Demonstrate (with supporting documents if needed) technical capacity to implement
the grant project.

C. OTHER REQUIREMENTS
Budget Negotiations
The Applicants budget will not be assigned points but will be evaluated on the extent to
which it reflects reasonable costs, includes all major line items, are allowable expenses,
sufficiently detailed, and aligns with the proposed technical approach. Applications that
maximize direct activity costs including cost sharing and that minimize administrative costs
are encouraged.
While there is no page limit for the cost application, applicants are encouraged to be as
concise as possible.
Applicants will be required to submit SF 424, and signed certifications.

19

Following an application review by the technical committee, applicants will be advised if

budget-related discussions are to be initiated, additional information is required, or if a
decision has been reached not to fund the application.
Type of Award(s) / Substantial Involvement
The number of awards under this APS is subject to the availability of funds. USAID may
make a single award, multiple awards, or no awards at all under this APS, and reserves the
right to close this program at any point up to the closing date. Awards are one-time only and
are generally not renewable. USAID reserves the right, in consultation with applicants, to
reduce, revise or increase budgets in accordance with the needs of the program and
availability of funds. Awards made will be subject to periodic reporting and evaluation
requirements and substantial involvement by the Mission as applicable.
While many types of organizations are eligible (see below for eligibility criteria for partners),
it is USAID policy not to award profit under grants and cooperative agreements.
Consequently, no fee or profit will be paid to the grant or cooperative agreement recipient.
Foregone profits do not count toward partner contributions. However, all reasonable,
allocable, and allowable expenses, both direct and indirect, which are related to the grant
program and are in accordance with applicable cost standards, may be covered by the grant.
This program is authorized in accordance with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as
amended. Awards shall be made in accordance with ADS-303. For Non U.S. Governmental
Organizations, the ADS -303 Standard Provisions for Non-U.S., Non-Governmental
Recipients will apply.
Applicants can find copies of these documents by referring to the USAID Homepage at the
following links:
http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/cfr.html#22; and
http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/omb.html;
Following favorable negotiations with the Mission, USAID may award a grant, cooperative
agreement, or a collaboration agreement to the institution proposing the partnership or to a
third entity that was proposed to implement a jointly funded partnership.
Depending on the evaluations and award determinations from Final Applications, USAID
may decide to be substantially involved in the implementation of the program, and
therefore award a cooperative agreement(s), a specific type of grant. Cooperative agreements
are identical to grants except that USAID may be substantially involved in one or more of the
following areas:
1. USAID approval of the recipients implementation plans (limited to not more frequently
than annually);
2. USAID approval of specified key personnel (limited to 5 positions or 5 percent of the
recipients total team size, whichever is greater);
3. USAID approval of exact scale and scope of observation as applicable
4. USAID approval of any publication issued under this award
4. USAID and recipient collaboration or joint participation, which includes one or more of
the following:
20

a. Collaborative involvement of selection of advisory committee members (USAID may also

choose to become a member), if applicable;
b. USAID concurrence on the selection of sub-award recipients and/or the substantive
technical/programmatic provisions of sub-awards;
c. USAID approval of a program monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan (to the extent that
such information is not included in the application);
d. USAID monitoring to permit direction and redirection because of interrelationships with
other projects; and
e. USAID authority to immediately halt a construction activity, if applicable.
For
more
details
refer
to
http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/300/303.pdf.

USAID

ADS

303.3.11

at

Reporting
Successful applicants will be required to report on program activities on a quarterly basis and
in addition will require reports on a deliverable basis subject to monitoring activities.
Applicants in consortia or in partnerships with other organizations will need to identify roles
for reporting on activities. This may be determined in a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) which will outline responsibilities for quarterly reporting, performance monitoring
plan (collection of data), and other relevant reporting requirements.
Marking and Branding
Effective January 2, 2006, all USAID-sponsored assistance awards are required to adhere to
branding policies and revised marking requirements for grants and cooperative agreements in
accordance with ADS 320. This includes visibly displaying the USAID Standard Graphic
Identity that clearly communicates assistance is, From the American people on all
programs, projects, activities, publications, public communications, and commodities
provided or supported through USAID assistance awards. ADS 320 requires that, after the
evaluation of the applications, the USAID Agreement Officer will request the Apparently
Successful Applicant to submit a Branding Strategy and Marking Plan that describes how the
program, project, or activity is named and positioned, how it is promoted and communicated
to beneficiaries and cooperating country citizens, and identifies all donors and explains how
they will be acknowledged. The Branding Strategy will be negotiated and finalized as part of
assistance award. ADS 320 may be found at the following website:
http://www.usaid.gov/policy/ads/300/320.pdf
Specific communications and promotion measures shall be described in the Branding
Strategy and Branding Implementation Plan and specific marking will be described in the
Marking Plan for this award(s).
Initial Environmental Examination (IEE)
An Initial Environmental Examination (IEE) describing the successful activity's purpose,
location, duration and intensity, and considers alternatives and assesses impacts, including
cumulative impacts, in light of existing and known proposed activities will be pre-pared as a
part of review and approval process in accordance with USAID Environmental Procedures.
The Environmental Compliance requirements will be developed and incorporated into the
award based on the IEE.
21

Prohibition against Discrimination (October 2011)

No U.S. citizen or legal resident shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the
benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, nation-al
origin, age, disability, or sex under any program or activity funded by this award when work
under the grant is performed in the U.S. or when employees are recruited from the U.S.
Additionally, USAID is committed to achieving and maintaining a diverse and representative
workforce and a workplace free of discrimination. Based on law, Executive Order, and
Agency policy, USAID prohibits discrimination, including harassment, in its own workplace
on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), national
origin, disability, age, veterans status, sexual orientation, genetic information, marital status,
parental status, political affiliation, and any other conduct that does not adversely affect the
performance of the employee. Recipients must comply with the requirements of the first
paragraph of this provision and in addition, the Agency strongly encourages its recipients and
their sub-recipients and vendors (at all tiers), performing both in the U.S. and overseas, to
develop and enforce comprehensive nondiscrimination policies for their workplaces that
include protection for all their employees on these expanded bases.

22

USAID Cover Page and Checklist for Applicants of SOL ######

[TITLE of Project]
[Name and address of the organization]
[Type of organization such as for-profit, non-profit, university, network, think tank, etc.]
[Contact point (lead contact name, relevant telephone, and e-mail information)]
[Names of other organizations that are participating in this application or are funding some of the
proposed activity]
This Application follows the formatting requirements (please check each line and sign at the
bottom of this page):
____ Typed in English, single space, size 12 font, on A4 size paper; charts, tables and
spreadsheets may be not less than 10 point font; submitted electronically, written in Word
(version 2000 or later) or Adobe PDF format with spreadsheets in MS Excel (version
2000 or later) or in tables that are compatible with MS Word.
____ Problem Statement (1 page)
____ Technical Approach (2 pages)
____ Plan for performance management and outreach (1 page)
____ Institutional past performance and capacity (1 page and completed self-assessment
checklist)
____ Summary Budget (up to 3 pages for each election)

____________________________________________
Signature of authorized representative of the applicant

Self-Assessment Checklist for Concept Paper Submissions under USAID SOL # APS-11415-000002 **required to be sumitted with concept paper
Annual Program Statement for Strengthening Transparent and
Accountable Governance in Georgia
This checklist is to ensure that Applicants are aware of the full requirements should they be
selected to submit a full application. The items listed below will be verified by USAID before an
award is issued to a selected organization.
Please verify that the organization complies with the following requirements. Please provide a
checkmark below if your organization is:
___
___
___

___
___
___
___

Organized under the laws of Georgia;

Has their primary place of business in Georgia;
Majority owned by individuals who are citizens or lawful permanent residents of Georgia
or managed by a governing body, the majority of whom are citizens or lawful permanent
residents Georgia;
Not be controlled by* a foreign entity** or by an individual or individuals who are not
citizens or permanent residents of Georgia;
Registered for at least two years in the Georgian NGO registry;
Have an annual budget of no less than $50,000 per year in the past two years (2012 and
2013); and
Have at least two years of working experience in a related field.

*The term controlled by means a majority ownership or beneficiary interest as defined above, or the power, either directly or indirectly,
whether exercised or exercisable, to control the election, appointment, or tenure of the organizations managers or a majority of the organizations
governing body by any means, e.g., ownership, contract, or operation of law.
**Foreign entity means an organization that fails to meet any part of the local organization definition. Government controlled and
government owned organizations in which the recipient government owns a majority interest or in which the majority of a governing body are
government employees, are included in the above definition of local organization.

Place a checkmark on each line below if your organization complies with the listed items.
____ The organization is legally registered
____ The organization has written policies and procedures governing organizational processes
____ The organization has procedures and practices to ensure sufficient segregation of duties
____ The organization employs a time and attendance system
____ The accounting transactions are recorded in an accounting system regularly, in
accordance with applicable standards
____ The organization has a system to ensure regular variance analysis (budgeted versus
actual) of financial data

____ The organization produces internal and external financial reports on a regular basis
____ The organization has undergone an external audit during the last three years
____ The organization has an adequate capacity to manage and monitor projects with little
guidance from the donor
____ The organization has experience managing sub-recipients (if applicable)