independent progress report of the peace dividend marketplace timor-leste, aidworks inh184, january...

8/7/2019 Independent Progress Report of the Peace Dividend Marketplace Timor-Leste, Aidworks INH184, January 2010

1/49

Peace Dividend Martketplace Timor Leste

(PDM-TL)

AidWorks INH194

INDEPENDENT PROGRESS REPORT

Roger Collier, Independent Consultant


2/49

Aid Activity Summary

Aid Activity Name

AidWorks initiativenumber

INH194

Commencement date 4 May 2007 Completion date 30 September 2012

Total Australian $ $2,630,000.00

Total other $

Deliveryorganisation(s)

Peace Dividend Trust

ImplementingPartner(s)

Peace Dividend Trust

Country/Region East Timor

Primary Sector Private Sector Development

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily representthe views of the Australian Government.


3/49

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 3

EVALUATION FINDINGS ....................................................................................................... 10

EVALUATION CRITERIA RATINGS ...................................................................................... 17

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................... 18


4/49

Executive Summary

The project was based on international research and experience of post-conflict situationswhich identified a peace dividend which could be secured through facilitating links betweeninternational donors and local suppliers. As a specialist niche player, the Peace DividendTrust (PDT) proposed a Phase 1 to promote donor-supplier links through a procurementdirectory and matchmaking supported by training and outreach activities for local suppliers.AusAID fully funded the first year activities in 2007. PDT then proposed a broadened Phase 2of five activities: procurement directory, matchmaking and micro-matchmaking, businesstraining, marketing/research and tender distribution.

This wider business training and market research extended beyond PDTs niche towards

private sector development. Micro-matchmaking moved further into general private sectordevelopment promoting trader-supplier links as well as donor-supplier links - an areaaddressed by other donors, including EU, USAID and ILO.

Proposals lacked scheduling and M&E frameworks to guide management and informfinanciers. In this context inefficiencies arose, such as micro-matchmaking transactions assmall as US$0.1 against transaction costs of US$18. These suggest a lack of necessarydiscipline in both planning and implementation which has prevented clear definition ofplanned outcomes and impacts and will have limited the actual effectiveness and efficiency aswell as the ability to demonstrate successful performance.

AusAIDs Phase 2 funding was a small part of the proposed US$6,4million and PDT have notsecured substantial contributions from other sources. Without full funding, Phase 2implementation has been limited and unsustained. Of the five activities proposed in Phase 2,two have not been implemented: business training; and marketing/research. The businessdirectory and tender distribution services (both operational) and matchmaking activity beingdeveloped to serve large projects support the original peace dividend activity promoting donor- supplier links as well as international private sector links to local suppliers. Micro-matchmaking can be seen as two distinct activities: (i) the original peace dividend activity

promoting donor supplier links which has been inefficient with significant leakages to


5/49

with: a program of actions, M&E framework, detailed costs, and a fully funded financing planshowing contributions from different stakeholders and projected income generation.

The business plan could be agreed early in 2010 and implementation completed in 2011. Theestimated total cost of this transfer package is about AUD460,000. A number of uncertaintiesmust be resolved in the business plan: (i) PDM-TL must agree to the recommended option;(ii) PDM-TL must have the willingness and capacity to establish a revenue generating activity;(iii) long-term ownership and management responsibility must be established: (iv) a servicemust be provided at a quality and price acceptable in the market. If this is not possible, thenAusAID may consider consolidation of the assets individually:

Procurement Database - MTCI is willing to manage the database but needs support and to

coordinate development with its existing registration database. Existing pans could be used tocomplete this transfer in 2010. The estimated total cost is some AUD 270,000.

Tender Distribution Service - ILOs Business Development Centres could be a distributionnetwork but may not be able/willing to manage the service. An option is for ownership by thenew Chamber of Commerce. The estimated total cost is about AUD80,000.

Matchmaking/procurement service - the reoriented service is not yet viable, mostly servesthe private sector and risks overlap with EU, USAID, and ILO programmes. It is unattractiveas a stand-alone activity which is not sharply focused on peace dividend objectives.

Evaluation Criteria Ratings

EvaluationCriteria

Rating(1-6)

Explanation

Relevance 5 The Afghanistan peace dividend model is relevant but the initialfocus on replication lacked country specific focus. Responsiveimplementation re-adjusted activities to increase country focus butdrifted to private sector development with less peace dividend focus.


6/49

Introduction

Activity Background

Origin of the Proposed Activity

Formed in 2004, Peace Dividend Trust (PDT) is a non-profit organization whose mission is tomake peace and humanitarian operations more effective, efficient and equitable so that theydeliver cheaper, faster, smarter missions - resulting in a stronger peace and a larger peace

dividend. The operations are intended to: learn from past failures by building on successesand lessons learned; reinforce peace building by jumpstarting economic recovery; buildlegitimacy by dispersing benefits as widely as possible; and implement practical andinnovative approaches that create self-perpetuating results.

PDT was established in the context of the 2004 UN Secretary Generals Commission onPrivate Sector and Development report Unleashing Entrepreneurship on creating aframework to exploit the potential of the private sector to be utilized in developing and post-conflict countries, which concluded The private sector can alleviate poverty by contributing toeconomic growth, job creation and poor peoples incomes, and Small and mediumenterprises can be engines of job creation seedbeds for innovation and entrepreneurship. (p.i) Thus, reinforcement of peace building and jump starting economic recovery is to beachieved through promotion of the private sector, especially small and medium enterprises.

An early PDT assignment was the 2005 Economic Impact of Peacekeeping (EIP) project, acomprehensive evaluation of the economic footprint of UN peacekeeping operations, fundedby the Australian Government, the British Government, the World Bank and the UnitedNations. The project undertook fieldwork in ten countries where peacekeeping operations hadbeen experienced, including East Timor, to propose policies and reforms to minimize negative

i ff t hil i i i di t h l j t t i th


7/49

Building of Timorese Businesses. The sub-title illustrates the continuing theme ofUnleashing Entrepreneurship in a proposal of three main components:

1. Procurement Directory based on the Afghanistan Procurement Database pilotto allow UN and other international buyers to easily find Timorese goods andservice providers.

2. Matchmaking to directly link international agencies and staff to Timorese SMEsand micro-enterprises capable of replacing existing external vendors.

3. Training and Outreach program to build the capacity of local entrepreneurs andyouth co-operatives to access, understand, and bid on international contracts.

These activities are clearly focused on international agencies and staff as the source ofdemand, not on a more general re-establishment of marketing systems to re-establish anddevelop pre-conflict private sector activity. This replicates the Afghanistan model

2, which is

Kabul-centred and in which the large military presence and level of expenditure is a majorcharacteristic.

The proposal presented a wide range of outputs, outcomes and impacts expected from theproposed activities in the tables, lists and logical framework matrix, reproduced in Annex 2,which differ between each other and suggest a lack of clear focus. The logical frameworkindicates many indicators and means of verification, but project planning neither identified

objectively measurable indicators as baselines nor time-bound targets against which tomeasure performance.

The proposed activity was indicated to last for 1 to 3 years focusing on maximizing theeconomic impact of UN and donor spending expected to peak in 2007 and with a transition tonational management by 2009. The budget for the first year was given as US$833,040,including in kind contributions of US$41,500 and requested funds of US$791,540.

On 29th

May 2007, AusAID approved funding of AUD 1,500,000 from 2007, considering thatthe PDM-TL activity is consistent with the objectives of the draft Australia-East Timor

D l t A i t St t 2007 2011 Th t t tli th th t ti


8/49

Business Verification and Profiling, a continuation of the Procurement Directoryactivity

Training for Business Development, with a broadened scope of business trainingthan proposed under phase 1.

Research, a new activity not detailed in the proposal

Matchmaking and Micro-matchmakingServices, a continuation of the phase 1activity, distinguishing between Dili-based Matchmaking and district-based Micro-match making.

Tender Distribution Point (TDP), a development of the tender distribution activity

developed under the phase 1 Training and Outreach activity.The proposal contains no Logical Framework nor any other planning statement objectivelyidentifying present, baseline conditions and relevant performance indicators, beyondproposing that a monitoring and evaluation system be developed under phase 2. Textindicates expected results broadly as to: (i) create jobs; (ii) generate taxable revenues; (iii)increasing local spending by international actors; and (iv) implementation of an exit strategy toestablish sustainable activities.

The Dili-based matchmaking activity declined after the procurement database became fully

operational in late 2008 and effectively ceased by June 2009 in the sense that the activity didnot generate any significant level of transactions. In discussions with senior PDM-TL staff4 itwas stated that enquiries relating to smaller transactions, previously dealt with by thematchmaking activity, are now referred to the procurement database whilst the matchmakingactivity is focused on larger procurement contracts. The matchmaking activity is beingreoriented to a longer term slower moving process of getting into the procurement pipeline onbig projects and has yet to pay off

5. This major shift can be considered, effectively, as a new

procurement service and staff indicated that the larger investment projects are predominantlyprivate sector financed rather than donor or Government funded. This is a significantdevelopment which could generate sustainable revenues but also involves the risks of a new

i hi h h ff


9/49

Source Amount Period Uses

ENI spa US$ 165,000 2009 Funds district offices the south coast withno contribution to Dili or other offices.Funds meet obligations for local content incontract with National Petroleum Authority.

AusAID AUD 630,000 2009-10 Core funding

Skoll

Foundation

US$ 1,000,000 2010-2012 Core Funding of PDT

In June 2009 it was again noted that impact data was absent and further short term funding ofAUD 630,000 was approved

7and the requirement for surveys was repeated.

With reduced AusAID funding, PDM-TL sought funding from other sources for 2009 andsecured a total of US$368,000 from Norway and ENI spa for 2009 but with no commitmentbeyond the end of the year. PDM-TL has secured support from the Skoll Foundation

8in the

form of a grant of US$1million of core funding over a three-year period, which includes a

possibility of continued funding subject to satisfactory performance. As core funding of PDTthey have freedom in use of the funds and need not use the funds to support PDM-TL.

On-Going Context of the Activity

PDM-TL originates as a niche activity specialising in promoting leakage to the domesticeconomy from post conflict donor activities, by facilitating linkages between internationaldonors and local suppliers. Although the focus is specialised, the individual activitiesundertaken - such as business directory development or promotion of links between

i t t i t th di id d t t A th f ti iti


10/49

development of producer/trader links parallels the projects micro-matchmaking activity as itdevelops from the peace dividend model of donor-supplier links to larger scale and more

sustainable producer/trader links.Member States of the EU undertake significant complementary programmes, including EastTimors largest individual donor, Portugal. Germany provides assistance with the ruraldevelopment; Portugal in education, governance and justice; Ireland and Sweden ingovernance and commodity assistance; and UK in commodity assistance. None of theseactivities impact upon or duplicate project activities.

Japan11

is East Timors third largest donor and focuses on four priority areas: (i) agricultureand rural development; (ii) maintenance and improvement of infrastructure; (iii) human

resource development and institution building; and (iv) consolidation of peace - law andjustice sector. Agriculture and rural development activities include irrigation infrastructure,watershed management and policy advice as well as the Project for the Promotion ofAgribusiness and NGO partnerships promoting coffee and fisheries development. These arecomplementary rural activities which do not overlap or duplicate any PDM-TL activities.

United States12

Accelerated Economic Growth Program promotes economic developmentand the revitalization of the private sector, areas in common with the PDM-TL project. ThePrivate Sector Development Program, funded to mid-2010, promotes market efficiencies bystrengthening the supply chain linking rural producers with national and international markets,

similar to the PDM-TL micro-matchmaking activity. The Economic Rehabilitation Program,funded to end March 2010, seeks to improve income levels and living conditions for farmfamilies through export oriented agriculture, SME, and improved business capacity - inaddition to coffee and agroforestry the project has established cattle breeding in six districtsand holding facilities in Covalima on the Indonesia border, investing in the cattle exportactivity which is becoming a major part of PDM-TLs micro-matchmaking activity. The BuildingAgribusiness Capacity program provides technical and business training and the PreparingOurselves for Work program provides work preparation training of men and women aged 16-30, including financial and entrepreneurial training and vocational training. Elements of these

i il t PDM TL ti iti i t h ki i t h ki


11/49

and working capital, including strengthened microfinance institutions. These activitiescomplement those of PDM-TL with little prospect of any overlap.

United Nations Development Programmes Country Programme for Timor-Leste (2009-2013) targets; (i) poverty reduction, environment and sustainable development; (ii) democraticgovernance; and (iii) crisis prevention and recovery. The approach to crisis prevention andrecovery is holistic and closely integrated with poverty reduction and democratic governance.Poverty reduction outputs relevant to the PDM-TL project include: (i) capacity building forfinancial service providers to expand their financial outreach; (ii) enhanced capacity self-helpgroups to undertake rural livelihoods and community driven, productivity enhancing smallrural works; and (iii) increased numbers private SMEs with access to capital, technical andbusiness skills, knowledge services and new value chains for poverty reduction. These

activities seem generally complementary to the PDM-TL activities though widening businessadvisory services and value chain development may require coordination.

International Labour Organisation16

prioritises: (i) enhancing youth employment; (ii)integrating employment into rural economic development; and (iii) creating labour marketgovernance. The youth training activities may have overlapped PDM-TL training activies,which were not implemented, and activities supporting rural economic development includeincreased and improved services to micro and small enterprises in rural areas which mayparallel the developing micro-matching making activity and associated business advisoryservices. ILO is establishing Business Development Centres as part of the improved servicesin, so far, 5 districts and through them provides training packages - including on tenderpreparation - for which charges are made in cash and kind, but not aimed at full costrecovery. Other Centre services include business information, market information, counsellingand follow-up; the range of services will be expanded support existing businesses as well asstart ups. ILO is also supporting an employment database, employment centres, careerguidance and links to microfinance. There are clear parallels between these activities,especially the district Business Development Centres, with micro-matchmaking, the emergingbusiness advisory role and the proposed but unfunded training and research activities.


12/49

(d) Assess the appropriateness of PDM-TL data collection and monitoring andevaluation systems, in terms of credibility and disaggregation and recommend

improvements where needed;(e) Comment on the impact of PDM-TL to date (in terms of creating employment

and business growth), including a comparison of the impact across various sub-groups of the population including the poor, non-poor, rural, urban, youth, menand women, geographic distribution (districts) and other relevant groupings asappropriate;

(f) Comment on how PDM-TL complements the existing and future activities ofother donors (such as the International Finance Corporation), and efforts toimprove the business enabling environment more generally;

(g) Recommend options for future Australian support to PDM-TL, in terms of thescope of activities, and the duration and quantum of support; and

(h) Identify the extent to which do no harm approaches have been adopted tomitigate the risks of unintended negative impacts of the program.

Evaluation Scope and Methods

With limited information available in reports and the absence of a M&E Framework emphasishas been placed on collecting whatever data is available and analysing it to provide insightson performance. Sources have included AusAIDs own staff and records, discussions withdevelopment partners (IFC, World Bank, ILO, UNDP), discussions with enterprises served byPDM-TL and, principally, discussions with PDM-TL staff and access to PDM-TLs databaseand activity reporting.

Data has generally been concerned with inputs and outputs and has been analysed to betterunderstand the nature of the project activities - e.g. the size of micro matches to identifypossible outcomes and impacts in terms of beneficiary groups and the like.


13/49

Evaluation Findings

Relevance

The Minute approving funding for PDM-TL Phase 1 funding in 2007 noted that the proposedactivity was consistent with and relevant to the draft Australia-East Timor DevelopmentAssistance Strategy 2007-2011 to support private sector development. That proposal

17was

based on the model to increase the local impact of international spending, which was mostrelevant in the early post-conflict period after the 2006 events.

The 2008 proposal for Phase 2 includes the peace dividend model but increases the scope

of activities to wider private sector promotion through re-establishing private sector marketingchannels not linked to international spending. This change in emphasis is most clearly evidentin the micro-matchmaking activities in rural areas.

Table 2: Number and Value of Micro-Matchmaking Transactions by Type of Requester2008-2009 (US$)

18

PDM-TL includes both non-government and foreign government with CBO in the internationaldata in Table 2. Most of the individuals are staff of international organizations. Together, theindividual and international categories are the original peace dividend targets, but even in the

fi t t f l t h ki t i th l t d t f

No. % Cum% Total US$ % Cum% Avg US$Government 67 1.4% 1.4% $46,811 1.3% 1.3% $699

Individuals 1,441 31.1% 32.5% $751,512 20.5% 21.7% $522International 2,145 46.2% 78.7% $1,024,764 27.9% 49.6% $478Enterprises 987 21.3% 100.0% $1,850,557 50.4% 100.0% $1,875

Total 4,640 100.0% $3,673,644 100.0% $792

Transactions Transaction ValueRequester


14/49

The original proposal was to replicate21

activities in Afghanistan. Although this was building ona new approach differences were identified, as explained by senior staff in PDM-TL

22, in that

Timor was much more developmental - with better security in rural areas - and less militarydominated As a consequence, PDM-TL became less a replication of the Afghanistan modeland, for example, led PDM-A in extending activities to rural areas.

The ToR requires Review the logic of the PDM-TL model, including whether the programmodel is proving to be plausible, feasible and measurable. Considerations of measurabilityare discussed under Effectiveness, Impact, and Monitoring and Evaluation. However, theplausibility and feasibility of the peace dividend model, concentrating on increasing the impactof international organizations, is questioned when activities must be redesigned anddeveloped after one year - as indicated in the difference between the Phase 1 and Phase 2

proposals.

Although the proposals cover a wide range of activities - procurement directory, training,research, matchmaking, tender distribution points - they are not comprehensive of all theneeds of private sector development. Informally, based on stakeholder discussions, theproject has extended to include business advisory services, relevant to objectives of businessdevelopment and employment creation. Stakeholders, however, also identify otherconstraints, particularly access to equity and credit funds, which the project does not address.

The flexibility and responsiveness shown by PDM-TL has maintained relevance of the

activities instead of replicating a standard model.

Effectiveness

The proposals for Phase 1 and Phase 2 present intended outcomes in general terms with alack of sharp focus, quantified baseline or target indicators, or time frame. Monitoring hasfocused on recording inputs and outputs rather than outcomes. As concluded underMonitoring and Evaluation below, effectiveness cannot be objectively and quantifiablydemonstrated but relies on anecdotes for illustration.


15/49

Outside Dili effectiveness is illustrated in establishing market linkages between private sectorrural producers (mostly farmers) and private sector traders and exporters which are likely to

have self-sustaining economic and employment impacts in the rural areas supportingproduction and market access for locally produced livestock, coffee, mung bean and similarproducts. PDM-TL records measure outputs rather than outcomes but discussions withstakeholders suggest effectiveness of both micro-matchmaking and business advisoryservices in achieving outcomes.

The micro-matchmaking has facilitated local spending by international agencies and theirstaff. However, international staff purchases are often the indirect import of foreign goods,such as Sprite and Coca-Cola soft drinks, Marlboro cigarettes, Pepsodent toothpaste and Luxsoap, leaving only retail and distribution margins to benefit the local economy whilst PDM-TL

reporting do not distinguish between local value added and the cost of imports.

Over 50% of transaction value has been in meeting demands from enterprises. Overallgrowth in micro-matchmaking transactions between 2008 and 2009 exceeded 100%, led bylarger transactions over US$1,000, which now account for over 80% of all micro-matchmaking by value.

On balance, output records and anecdotal evidence suggest that PDM-TL has had asignificant degree of effectiveness, but it cannot be objectively quantified on the basis ofpresent data.

Efficiency

Whilst proposals, particularly for Phase 1, indicate numerous outputs of activities there is noclear indication of the inputs needed to achieve those outputs nor of efficiency performancetargets relating the level of inputs required to achieve a given level of output.

The matchmaking and micro-matchmaking activities appear to have been inefficient buthave been or can be improved. The Dili based matchmaking activity as previously

i l t d ff ti l d ft th t d t b f ll ti l li


16/49

local spending by international actors; and (iv) implement an exit strategy to establishsustainable activities. The ToR seek a comparison of the impacts across various sub-groups

of the population including the poor, non-poor, rural, urban, youth, men and women,geographic distribution (districts) and other relevant groupings as appropriate and the extentto which do no harm approaches have been adopted to avoid risks of negative impacts.

As with effectiveness, results are likely to have been positive but the lack of relevantmonitoring prevents objective measurement of impacts on jobs, accelerated economicrecovery, etc. which can be realistically claimed by PDM-TL. It is possible to indicate theequity of distribution and avoidance of harm.

Geographic Distribution, Rural and Urban

From an early stage, PDM-TL has operated nationally and functions in every district. Thereare varying levels of resources committed to and benefits received by different districts, asshown in Table 6.4, but these can reasonably be blamed on the limited and uncertain fundingof the rural activity, including tying of ENI and Norwegian funds to specific districts. PDM-TLhas had micro-matching teams working in 9 of the 13 districts plus districts adjacent to Diliserved from the Dili HQ.

In addition to the micro-matchmaking activities, every district is served by the inclusion ofregistered, formal enterprises in the procurement database. Each district accounts for

between 2% and 6% (45 to 140 enterprises) supported by the database activity. In 2009,63.6% of enterprises (1,566) are in Dili, reflecting the dominance of Dili in the formaleconomy. PDM-TLs nationwide operations also avoid harm by appearing to discriminate infavour of one community over another.

Poor and Non-poor

The procurement database, matchmaking and tender distribution activities promote the formalprivate sector and benefit the owners and managers of Dili-based larger enterprises and their

l h lik l t b Thi i id bl lt f ti th


17/49

management remains unchanged. Any decline in foreign ownership is taken up by anincrease in ownership by Timorese men - from 50% to 53% of all owners compared to 22%for Timorese women. About 75% of management in both years is Timorese, split 53% menand 22% women.

There is a strong male bias in employment, ownership and management. PDM-TL activitiesappear to be inclusive but neutral in terms of impact on the gender balance and none of theactivities are designed to address gender issues specifically.

Do No Harm24

PDM-TL has been consistent with AusAIDs approach to fragile states by providing

opportunities to stimulate economic growth.The proposal for phase 1 to replicate PDTs Afghan work in East Timor

25, however, risked

harm, in the context of OECD basic principle of taking the country specific context as thestarting point, by not significantly adapting the model and offering a blue-print approach. Inpractice, this weakness in planning was balanced by the responsiveness of theimplementation team realising the inappropriateness of the blue print - the much smallermilitary/security presence in East Timor and the need for greater emphasis on development -and revising the approach and activities.

A part of this development was to extend services to rural areas, which PDM-A has been slowto do, to give PDM-TL substantially a national coverage and avoiding risks of harm fromappearing to discriminate in favour of some communities.

In its relations with Government, PDM-TL has positively engaged with the Ministry of Tourism,Commerce and Industry (MTCI) in development of its procurement database and hasendeavoured to build capacity through secondment of MTCI staff with a view to transferringthe database activity to MTCI. In terms of tender distribution, PDM-TL has republished andarchived Government tenders but avoided potential conflicts by not being actively involved inGovernment tenders and recognising the lead role of World Bank involvement in this area.


18/49

has yet to be undertaken. For 2009, PDM-TL has secured funding from Norway in two 6month tranches (US$125,000 for January to June and US$78,000 for July 2009 to June 2010)and from the oil company ENI spa as part of the local content requirement of its oil contract(US$165,000 for 2009). At the time of this review, ENI had not made any commitment tofunding beyond the end of 2009.

By MOU of 21 February 2008, a plan was agreed to transfer the online procurement databaseto MTCI in the third quarter of 2009. This deadline passed and MTCI advised

27that

discussions are needed on how to extend the MOU. MTCI are interested in the database - butnot other aspects of PDM-TL activities - but lack office space and no budget provision hasbeen made for 2010 beyond that for seconded staff. MTCIs Department of Domestic Tradecontinues to operate a registration database developed under UNTAET, on which a

consultant is currently working, and MTCI indicated that it would be ideal to combine thedatabases as a single database.

Continuation of the present operation is not sustainable without a substantial increase indonor funding over a longer period of time and Government is interested only in part of theoperations and has no funds currently available.

However, the most of the activities and facilities developed by PDM-TL are potentiallycommercial services which can generate cost recovery. PDT has indicated to SkollFoundation that it plans to develop such income streams over the next year, though PDM-TL

did not indicate any specific plans to this review and has not yet attempted any cost recovery.Whilst matchmaking for small transactions is unlikely to cost-effectively generate income tocontribute to the present US$18 average transaction cost incurred by PDM-TL largertransactions can do so. For example, the rural matchmaking transactions to procure cattleand other agricultural products provide a substantial margin to traders and discussions withthem indicated a willingness to pay subject to agreement of appropriate payment levels andterms. Cattle traders make a margin of US$100 to US$200 per head, depending on liveweight; the major rural matchmaking transactions in Table 6.3 include 9 transactions for atotal of 1,163 cattle in individual transactions for between 41 and 400 cattle. The total

i l US$436 450 i h b bl d k f h d f


19/49

Monitoring and Evaluation

As presented in Annex 2, proposals for Phase 1 and Phase 2 have offered substantial

impacts and outcomes and given possible indicators. However, the plans have never givenbaseline data nor time-bound, verifiable targets. No M&E system has been established.AusAIDs short term funding approvals in 2008 and 2009 indicated concern at the absence ofdata to assess impacts or any baseline survey. Annex 2 also indicates numerous outputs andrelated indicators. Again, no targets were set and most indicators have not been reported - ifmonitored.

Progress reports have focused on indicating the level of activity in terms of number of profilesadded to the database, number of tenders distributed, and number of transactions assisted.

The benefits of these activities are monitored in terms of the US$ value of assistedtransactions. No differentiation is made between the value of a US$ in such transactions as tobuy locally produced coffee or cattle, with benefits fully retained in East Timor, and to buyimported goods, with substantial leakage of benefits overseas. Equally, no distinction is madebetween a transaction with a substantial PDM-TL contribution - as with assisting a trader -Timor Global - find sources of products to trade long term compared to a one off-tender wonby a supplier to whom PDM-TL had sent a text message advising of the tender.

The US$ value of the transaction does not represent a consistent indicator of the impact ofthe transaction/activity.

The procurement database and records of other activities contain much more data whichcould be used to monitor performance and establish time-series against baseline data. Thishas only begun to be analysed and reported in October 2009s report on the BusinessCommunity in Timor Leste.

The M&E system is monitoring levels of activity and progress towards producing outputs butis not measuring effectiveness and progress towards achievement of objectives.


20/49

Evaluation Criteria Ratings

EvaluationCriteria

Rating(1-6) Explanation

Relevance 5 The Afghanistan peace dividend model is relevant but the initialfocus on replication lacked country specific focus. Responsiveimplementation re-adjusted activities to increase country focus butdrifted to private sector development with less peace dividend focus.

Effectiveness 4 Lack of objective monitoring indicators of outcomes limits the abilityto demonstrate the projects contribution to such benefits but strong

support by stakeholders, supported by output data indicatesprobable effectiveness.

Efficiency 3 No efficiency targets or standards relating inputs to outputs were setand implementation ignored efficiency considerations, resourceswere inefficiently applied to minor purchases by expatriates whilsttraining activities were suspended.

Sustainability 3 The present operations are not sustainable but have the potential tobe sustainable through development of income streams appropriate

to private benefits derived from essentially commercial services.

GenderEquality

3 The project is inclusive of both men and women but is neutral incontinuing the status quo rather than promoting gender equality.

Monitoring &Evaluation

2 Numerous impacts, outcomes, and outputs were indicated inproposals but no baselines or time-bound verification indicators wereset in plans and no impact or outcome monitoring has beenundertaken. This is not only a failure of monitoring but of planning,which has lacked focus and detailed design of activities.


21/49

Conclusion and Recommendations

Conclusion

Planning and Implementation

The project design was based on the results of research and experience elsewhere butlacked the detailed, location specific project preparation to provide an implementable planscheduling defined activities focused on measurable targets. Without such detailed planningthe monitoring framework was inevitably too general as the necessary plan inputs of targetsand timelines were missing.

As a specialist player, PDTs proposed Phase 1 focused on the peace dividend, post-conflictniche to increase the amount of international donor funds spent locally: facilitating donor-localsupplier links through a procurement directory and matchmaking activities and increasinglocal supplier capacity through training and outreach activities. AusAID fully funded the firstyear activities in 2007 with PDT as a specialist, niche development partner.

The Phase 2 proposal broadened the scope of activities in terms of wider business training,marketing/research

29and tender distribution. This last contributed to the core niche activity of

facilitating donor-supplier linkages whilst the wider training and market research activities

extended beyond the peace dividend niche towards private sector development in which PDTlacks a unique capacity. Further, development of micro-matchmaking in Phase 2 led to afurther move outside the niche by promoting links between private sector traders and localsuppliers as well as donor-supplier links.

AusAIDs short term funding approvals for Phase 2 in 2008 and 2009 did not fully fund theproposed activities and PDT have not been able to finance the proposed US$6.4 million forPhase 2 - small, short term funding from Norway and ENI has not provided a substantialcontribution in terms of level and duration. Without full funding, the training and outreach


22/49

local supplier links - which has been implemented to include inefficiently small transactionswith significant leakages to imports; and (ii) the wider private sector development activitylinking traders with local suppliers, which already provides over half the micro-matchmakingturnover and, based on stakeholder interviews, are more likely to provide cost recovery to acontinuing service.

Stakeholder interviews relating to both matchmaking (Dili-based, usually larger enterprises)and micro-matchmaking (rural based, usually smaller and often individual enterprises)highlight the role of related and on-going business advisory services informally and freelyprovided by PDM-TL - though not included in the proposal for Phase 2 or in funding approvalsby AusAID. Although this advisory service is clearly valued by stakeholders both it and thesubstantial re-orientation of the matchmaking service are major changes to the project scope

undertaken without formal consultation or coordination with AusAID risking overlaps withother activities of AusAID and development partners, e.g. ILOs Business DevelopmentCentre programme.

Considerations for Future Development

This review is concerned with future development of AusAIDs involvement in the PDM-TLactivity as distinct from development of PDM-TL itself. Proposals by AusAID need not beaccepted by PDM-TL and AusAID may have no future role.

AusAID must place proposed activities in the context of its other programmes, e.g. the on-going design of the MMDF, and harmonization with programmes of other developmentpartners. As discussed on pages 6 to 8, there appear to be overlaps with other developmentactivities as PDM-TL has broadened from its niche peace dividend promotion of donor-localsupplier links towards more general private sector development.

Particularly, the micro-matchmaking linking traders and local suppliers overlap with EU,USAID, UNDP and ILO programmes and PDM-TL does not offer a unique capacity in thisfield compared to other service providers. With the trader-local supplier link overlapping otherprogrammes, promotion of donor-local supplier links operating inefficiently, and the uncertain


23/49

matchmaking service towards procurement service for larger projects needs furtherdevelopment but can increase the use and benefits of the database and tender services andprovide a means of income generation. Income streams can also be developed for theprocurement database, e.g. internet advertising revenue, and the tender distribution service,e.g. subscriptions.

PDT indicated to the Skoll Foundation its intention to develop income streams from itsactivities after a period of loss leadership. Continued AusAID support, for specified activitiesover a limited period, should require a more disciplined planning and implementation regimewith clearly defined outputs and outcomes which can be monitored and assessed by AusAID.Support for the option, based on generating sustaining income streams, requires a clearbusiness plan combining a program of actions to be taken with identification of the role of

stakeholders and their responsibility for the actions. The program should be costed in detailand a financing plan completed and fully funded prior to expenditure of AusAID funds.

The business plan should include a monitoring framework to inform stakeholders and guideimplementation. The key indicators in such a plan are likely to be outputs - e.g. procurementservice established, activity transferred - rather than outcomes and impacts, such as jobscreated, increased GDP. These would be simpler and easier to verify and monitor.

The business plan could be developed and agreed by stakeholders in the first quarter 2010and implementation completed by mid-2011 (end of AusAIDs 2010-11 financial year). The

plan should identify costs and cashflows indicating funding requirements from AusAID andother stakeholders as well as targets for revenue development.

The estimated total costs30

involved in implementing this transfer package are aboutUS$425,000 or AUD460,000.

Whilst this option could provide a sustainable package of activities after a limited period ofAusAID funding it involves a number of uncertainties which must be resolved in the businessplanning process:

PDM-TL, as owner of the assets, must agree to the recommended option;


24/49

o Chamber of Commerce and business associations would need to beconsulted and could own and manage the assets but would also probablyneed capacity development support;

o a specialised, not for profit organisation could be established to own andmanage the three activities long term, perhaps parts of PDM-TL being spun-off to form such an organisation;

o private sector commercial ownership, if interested investors can be found.

a quality of service which can be cost-effectively supplied to the market at a price it iswilling to pay.

If it is not possible to establish a credible business plan agreed by stakeholders, particularlyPDM-TL as owners of the assets, for consolidation of the three-part package then AusAIDmay consider consolidation of the assets individually:

Procurement Database - MTCI has stated Governments interest in managing thedatabase but currently has resource constraints and needs to coordinate thedevelopment of the procurement database with its existing registration database. Atransfer of management to MTCI has been begun by PDM-TL and a programme couldbe designed to complete this transfer during 2010 with AusAID and partialGovernment funding and full Government funding from 2011. The estimated total cost

of this transfer over 12 months is some US$250,000 (AUD 270,000)31

Tender Distribution Service - MTCI indicated that Government is not interested in

funding and managing this service whilst uncertainty over PDM-TLs district officescould deprive the service of a distribution network as well as its connection to theprocurement database. ILOs Business Development Centres could offer a distributionnetwork but it is uncertain that they would be suitable to operate and manage theservice. An option which should be explored is ownership and management by thenew Chamber of Commerce as a service to members, possibly on a subscriptionbasis. This would probably need some technical support for a transitional period,


25/49

Annex 1

Terms of Reference

AusAID Review of Peace Dividend Marketplace Timor Leste(PDM-TL)

1. Purpose of the assignment

1.1 To assess the performance and effectiveness of Peace Dividend Marketplace TimorLeste (PDM-TL) to date with a view to making recommendations for future Australiansupport to PDM-TL.

2. Background

2.1 Timor Leste is one of the poorest countries in the world. It ranks 162nd

out of 182

countries in the United Nations Human Development Index and around half thepopulation lives below the poverty line of USD 0.88 per day. The majority of the poorreside in rural areas and engage in low-productivity agriculture activities. Strongpopulation growth and limited employment opportunities contribute to a rate of youthunemployment of over 40 per cent. Less than half as many women as menparticipate in the paid labour force.

2.2 Timor Leste is a young nation and continues to suffer the after effects of a decades-long independence struggle against Indonesia, which damaged infrastructure and


26/49

(c) Unleash economic potential through complementary initiatives;

2.7 PDM-TL has three main components:

(a) Procurement Directory based on the Afghanistan ProcurementDirectory pilot to allow UN and other international buyers to easilyfind Timorese goods and service providers.

(b) Matchmaking to directly link international agencies and staff toTimorese small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and microenterprises capable of replacing existing external vendors.

(c) Training and Outreach Program to build the capacity of localentrepreneurs to access, understand and bid for internationalcontracts.

2.8 The Australian Government has provided support to PDM-TL since 2007. TheAustralian Government funded PDT to implement PDM-TL Phase I in June 2007 withbudget of $1,500,000. In July 2008, the Australian Government provided another$500,000 for Phase II and provided further support in August 2009 of $630,000 tosustain PDM-TL until June 2010. AusAID is also considering the value of a strategicpartnership with PDT. The aim of the strategic partnership is to enable AusAID tohave access to world leading international cutting edge research and analysis andenable opportunities for closer working relationships between headquarters andAusAID. It is likely that the benefits would include greater access to PDT researchon countries and areas of mutual interest, regular discussions and policy debatebetween PDT and AusAID staff and at least one visit per year by PDT staff toCanberra.


27/49

(d) Assess the appropriateness of PDM-TL data collection andmonitoring and evaluation systems, in terms of credibility anddisaggregation and recommend improvements where needed;

(e) Comment on the impact of PDM-TL to date (in terms of creatingemployment and business growth), including a comparison of theimpact across various sub-groups of the population including thepoor, non-poor, rural, urban, youth, men and women, geographicdistribution (districts) and other relevant groupings as appropriate;

(f) Comment on how PDM-TL complements the existing and futureactivities of other donors (such as the International FinanceCorporation), and efforts to improve the business enablingenvironment more generally;

(g) Recommend options for future Australian support to PDM-TL, interms of the scope of activities, and the duration and quantum ofsupport; and

(h) Identify the extent to which do no harm approaches havebeen adopted to mitigate the risks of unintended negative impacts ofthe program.

5. Duration and Phasing

5.1 The following is an indicative timetable.


28/49

(c) Experience in monitoring and evaluation of aid projects, includingability to assess monitoring and evaluation systems, data collection,data analysis and preparing reports.

6.2 The Consultant will hold primary responsibility for preparing the evaluation plan andthe report, preparing for in-country interviews etc.

6.3 This review will be supported by the East Timor country program including both Postand Desk.

6.4 Post will undertake to support the review by (in consultation with the desk and theCrisis Prevention, Stabilisation and Recovery Group [CPSR]) preparing the draftprogram and organising the in-country mission.

6.5 Desk will be responsible for coordinating Canberra-based consultations andproviding background information for the review.

6.6 The East Timor Country program team will be supported by CPSR group who willaccompany the external consultant to East Timor to conduct the review and providecomments on draft interview questions and substantial feedback on the report.

7. Reporting

7.1 An evaluation plan, detailing the proposed methodology, will be provided in advanceof the in-country mission.

7.2 A written report will be produced with content as detailed in section 4.1.

7.3 The report should be no more than 20 pages in length plus attachments.


29/49

Annex 2

2006 Proposal Project Objectives, Activities, Outputs, and LogicalFramework Matrix

(Extracted from Peace Dividend Marketplace - Timor Leste Porposals November 2006,pages 8 to 13)

Project Objectives

1. Fuel economic recovery by leveraging international operational spending throughlocal procurement: This project aims to inject an additional 2% of the operating budgets ofDPKO and related UN agencies into the local economy. Based on current estimates of the

mission size, this would equal approximately $5 million. It will also aim to increase overallinternational spending by private contractors and other agencies by an additional $10 million.By harnessing the existing operational spending of international agencies and companies,poverty alleviation and other development goals can be achieved by directly linking the largeprocurement and staffing needs to the local economy.

2. Remove barriers that limit the economic impact of peace and aid operations: Themost significant barriers to increased local procurement are a lack of awareness of theTimorese market on the part of the UN administrators and a lack of understanding of the

international needs on the part of the local entrepreneurs. In many cases procurement officerssimply do not know what is available in-country or where to find it, or they are unable toeffectively venture into the local marketplace. At the same time, local entrepreneurs do notunderstand the procurement process and do not have the capacity to submit tender bids. Inaddition, there is generally only a rudimentary local service industry and local labor pools arevulnerable due to the fact that they are largely unorganized.

3. Unleash economic potential through complimentary initiatives:The ProcurementMarketplace mechanism will address the gap in knowledge of the goods and servicesavailable in the local market. The SME Training component will increase understanding of


30/49

Component Activity Expected Impact

Matchmaking 5. Provide matchmaking services toprocurement officers in UN or otherinternational agencies by matching theircurrent overseas procurement to potentiallocal alternatives.

6. Operating in rural duty-posts, match residentinternationals to local micro-enterprises thatcan provide basic goods and services such

as bread, cleaning services, etc.

Increase the amount beingspent in the Timoreseeconomy by internationalagencies.

Reduce the economicdisparity between ruraland urban Timor.

Support efforts to returnIDPs to home districts.

Outputs

Output:

Create on-line procurement directory accessible to all international and governmentbuyers

Facilitate UN and local government ability to procure and hire locally withmatchmaking service

Train and organize local workers to form micro-enterprises and co-operatives workingon outsourcing contracts

Provide training to SMEs on UN procurement practices, international businessstandards, and private sector development

Outcome:


31/49

Logical Framework Matrix


32/49


33/49


34/49

Annex 3

Data from Procurement Database

Table 3.1: Capacity of Enterprises 2008 and 2009


35/49

Table 3.2: Support Services 2008 and 2009

No. % No. % No. % No. %

Aileu 4 7.1% 0 0.0% 35 62.5% 20 35.7%

Ainaro 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 48 82.8% 47 81.0%

Baucau 19 13.6% 0 0.0% 105 75.0% 95 67.9%Bobonaro 10 11.0% 0 0.0% 72 79.1% 73 80.2%Covalima 4 6.1% 1 1.5% 54 81.8% 45 68.2%Dili 665 42.5% 97 6.2% 1,334 85.2% 1,288 82.2%

Ermera 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 31 57.4% 22 40.7%Lautem 7 8.1% 1 1.2% 53 61.6% 53 61.6%Liquica 6 9.4% 1 1.6% 39 60.9% 28 43.8%Manatuto 2 2.9% 0 0.0% 41 58.6% 42 60.0%Manufahi 1 2.2% 0 0.0% 34 75.6% 30 66.7%Oecusse 7 5.9% 0 0.0% 79 66.9% 74 62.7%Viqueque 4 8.3% 1 2.1% 38 79.2% 36 75.0%Total 729 29.6% 101 4.1% 1,963 79.7% 1,853 75.3%

Aileu 1 2.7% 0 0.0% 20 54.1% 6 16.2%

Ainaro 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 46 82.1% 45 80.4%Baucau 18 19.8% 0 0.0% 71 78.0% 66 72.5%

Banking

Email address Website Bank TransferCapacity to

arrange bankguarantee

Telecommunications

District

2009

2008


36/49

Independent Progress Report 12 February 2010 page 1 of 3

Table 3.3: Employment by District 2008 and 2009

Total Male Female Local Foreign

No. No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. No. No. No. No.

Aileu 371 252 68% 2 1% 254 68% 117 32% 0 0% 117 32% 6.6 4.5 2.1 6.6 0.0Ainaro 267 163 61% 1 0% 164 61% 1 03 39% 0 0% 103 39% 4.6 2.8 1.8 4.6 0.0Baucau 928 641 69% 16 2% 657 71% 270 29% 1 0% 271 29% 6.6 4.7 1.9 6.5 0.1

Bobonaro 617 408 66% 11 2% 419 68% 192 31% 5 1% 197 32% 6.8 4.6 2.2 6.6 0.2Covalima 348 253 73% 7 2% 260 75% 83 24% 2 1% 85 24% 5.3 3.9 1.3 5.1 0.2Dil i 18,335 12,192 66% 1,781 10% 13,973 76% 3,826 21% 557 3% 4,383 24% 11.7 8.9 2.8 10.2 1.5Ermera 292 202 69% 6 2% 208 71% 82 28% 2 1% 84 29% 5.4 3.9 1.6 5.3 0.1Lautem 1,245 598 48% 5 0% 603 48% 708 57% 1 0% 709 57% 14.5 7.0 8.2 15.2 -0.7Liquica 887 608 69% 13 1% 621 70% 263 30% 3 0% 266 30% 13.9 9.7 4.2 13.6 0.3Manatuto 393 270 69% 3 1% 273 69% 120 31% 0 0% 120 31% 5.6 3.9 1.7 5.6 0.0Manufahi 235 156 66% 2 1% 158 67% 76 32% 1 0% 77 33% 5.2 3.5 1.7 5.2 0.1Oecusse 507 315 62% 5 1% 320 63% 168 33% 3 1% 171 34% 4.3 2.7 1.4 4.1 0.2Viqueque 442 313 71% 0 0% 313 71% 128 29% 1 0% 129 29% 9.2 6.5 2.7 9.2 0.0To ta l 24 ,867 16,371 66% 1 ,852 7% 18,223 73% 6 ,136 25% 576 2% 6 ,712 27% 10.1 7 .4 2.7 9 .1 1 .0

Aileu 274 187 68% 2 1% 189 69% 89 32% 0 0% 89 32% 7.4 5.1 2.4 7.5 -0.1Ainaro 254 153 60% 1 0% 154 61% 1 00 39% 0 0% 100 39% 4.5 2.8 1.8 4.5 0.0Baucau 598 405 68% 10 2% 415 69% 183 31% 0 0% 183 31% 6.6 4.6 2.0 6.5 0.1Bobonaro 562 367 65% 8 1% 375 67% 181 32% 5 1% 186 33% 6.5 4.4 2.2 6.4 0.2Covalima 319 226 71% 7 2% 233 73% 81 25% 2 1% 83 26% 5.1 3.7 1.3 4.9 0.2

Dili 12 ,774 8 ,507 67% 1 ,247 10% 9,754 76% 2 ,627 21% 400 3% 3 ,027 24% 13.3 10.1 3.1 11.5 1 .7Ermera 261 181 69% 6 2% 187 72% 72 28% 2 1% 74 28% 5.3 3.8 1.5 5.2 0.2Lautem 399 280 70% 5 1% 285 71% 180 45% 1 0% 181 45% 6.3 4.5 2.9 7.3 -1.0Liquica 280 142 51% 1 0% 143 51% 137 49% 0 0% 137 49% 7.6 3.9 3.7 7.5 0.0Manatuto 107 73 68% 2 2% 75 70% 32 30% 0 0% 32 30% 4.7 3.3 1.4 4.6 0.1Manufahi 203 146 72% 2 1% 148 73% 54 27% 1 0% 55 27% 5.0 3.6 1.3 4.9 0.1Oecusse 375 255 68% 4 1% 259 69% 112 30% 4 1% 116 31% 4.5 3.1 1.4 4.4 0.1Viqueque 231 165 71% 0 0% 165 71% 65 28% 1 0% 66 29% 6.4 4.6 1.8 6.4 0.0To ta l 16 ,637 11,087 67% 1 ,295 8% 12,382 74% 3 ,913 24% 416 3% 4 ,329 26% 10.2 7 .6 2.7 9 .2 1 .0

Aileu 35% 35% 0% 0% -26% 34% -1% 31% -3% D iv/0! Di v/0! 31% -3% -11% -11% -13% -12% -166%

Ainaro 5% 7% 1 % 0% -5% 6% 1 % 3% -2% Div/0! Div/0! 3% -2% 1% 3% -1% 2% -3%

Baucau 55% 58% 2% 60% 3% 58% 2% 48% -5% Div/0! Div/0! 48% -5% 1% 3% -4% 1% 11%

Bobonaro 10% 11% 1% 38% 25% 12% 2% 6% -3% 0% -9% 6% -4% 4% 6% 0% 3% 15%

Covalima 9% 12% 3% 0% -8% 12% 2% 2% -6% 0% -8% 2% -6% 4% 7% -2% 4% -5%

Dili 44% 43% 0% 43% 0% 43% 0% 46% 1% 39% -3% 45% 1% -12% -12% -11% -11% -13%

Ermera 12% 12% 0% 0% -11% 11% -1% 14% 2 % 0% -11% 14% 1 % 2% 1% 3% 2% -9%

Lautem 212% 114% -32% 0% -68% 112% -32% 293% 26% 0% -68% 292% 26% 129% 55% 187% 108% -27%Liquica 217% 328% 35% 1200% 310% 334% 37% 92% -39% Div/0! Div/0! 94% -39% 83% 151% 12% 80% 825%

Manatuto 267% 270% 1% 50% -59% 264% -1% 275% 2% D iv/0! Di v/0! 275% 2% 21% 20% 23% 22% -51%

Manufahi 16% 7% -8% 0% -14% 7% -8% 4 1% 22% 0% -14% 4 0% 21% 5% -3% 28% 6% -9%

Oecusse 35% 24% - 9% 25% -8% 24% -9% 50% 11% -25% -45% 47% 9% -4% -12% 5% -6% 114%

Viqueque 91% 90% - 1% Div/0! Div/0! 90% - 1% 97% 3% 0% -48% 95% 2% 44% 42% 47% 44% -25%Total 49% 48% -1% 43% -4% 47% -2% 57% 5% 38% -7% 55% 4% -1% -3% 3% -1% -5%

District

2009

2008

% Change 2008-2009

Average per Employer

Local Foreign Sub-Total Local Foreign S ub-TotalTotal

Female EmploymentMale Employment


37/49


Table 3.4: Enterprises by Sector and District 2008 and 2009 - Part 1

District

District

Oils

,Fue

lse

tc

Cons

truc

tion

&Renova

tion

Mac

hinery

&Equ

ipmen

t

Ve

hicles,

Boa

tse

tc

Office

Equ

ip,

Sup

pliese

tc

Home

Essen

tials

Foo

d&Beverage

s

Agricu

lture,

Pro

duc

ts,

Serv

ices

Transport,

Log

isticse

tc

ITServ

icesan

dE

qu

ipmen

t

Te

lcom

Serv

icesan

dEqu

ipmen

t

Me

dia&Commun

ica

tions

Tra

ining

&Consu

lting

Serv

ices

Financ

ialan

dLeg

alServ

ices

Rea

lEs

tate&Ins

urance

Trave

l,Accomm.,

Ren

tals

Res

tauran

ts&Ca

tering

Hea

lthan

dMe

dic

ines

Securi

tyServ

ices

&Equ

ipmen

t

Han

dicra

fts

Prin

tingan

dCopy

ing

En

terta

inmen

tan

dLe

isure

Other

Goo

dsand

Serv

ices

Laun

dry,

Was

teC

ollec

tione

tc.

Aoosc

iation,

Unio

ns,

Coops

Process

ingan

dIn

dus

try

Aileu 56 2 32 5 5 6 9 19 10 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 2 0 2 2 0 19 1 0 3

Ainaro 58 2 30 0 5 3 2 12 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 10 0 0 1 3 0 11 0 0 2

Baucau 140 10 52 12 18 29 37 38 16 3 3 3 0 5 0 0 14 20 8 0 18 6 4 44 3 0 4

Bobonaro 91 2 52 12 11 5 12 15 6 1 1 0 0 3 0 0 5 9 5 0 3 3 3 17 0 0 1

Covalima 66 6 34 10 11 8 9 12 7 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 3 0 0 4 2 0 15 1 0 3

Dili 1,566 42 625 269 202 352 348 166 133 56 84 82 20 84 10 4 83 125 107 31 116 50 41 412 29 2 11

Ermera 54 0 32 3 11 12 11 22 2 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 7 5 0 5 0 0 15 0 0 1Lautem 86 8 37 7 17 13 16 20 5 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 12 14 4 0 15 2 1 34 0 0 2

Liquica 64 2 32 12 5 11 13 22 7 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 7 0 11 2 0 19 2 3 3Manatuto 70 8 42 5 10 7 12 19 3 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 5 1 0 9 0 0 15 1 0 1

Manufahi 45 2 29 5 6 4 11 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 1 0 4 2 1 13 0 0 4

Oecusse 118 4 65 12 22 14 26 39 9 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 7 12 4 0 4 0 2 48 0 0 1

Viqueque 48 13 20 3 15 8 11 12 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 2 5 5 1 1 3 1 5 10 1 1 1

Total 2,462 101 1,082 355 338 472 517 402 204 75 90 85 22 98 14 6 150 222 145 32 195 73 57 672 38 6 37

Aileu 100% 4% 57% 9% 9% 11% 16% 34% 18% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 7% 4% 0% 4% 4% 0% 34% 2% 0% 5%

Ainaro 100% 3% 52% 0% 9% 5% 3% 21% 3% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 12% 17% 0% 0% 2% 5% 0% 19% 0% 0% 3%

Baucau 100% 7% 37% 9% 13% 21% 26% 27% 11% 2% 2% 2% 0% 4% 0% 0% 10% 14% 6% 0% 13% 4% 3% 31% 2% 0% 3%

Bobonaro 100% 2% 57% 13% 12% 5% 13% 16% 7% 1% 1% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 5% 10% 5% 0% 3% 3% 3% 19% 0% 0% 1%Covalima 100% 9% 52% 15% 17% 12% 14% 18% 11% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 8% 5% 0% 0% 6% 3% 0% 23% 2% 0% 5%Dili 100% 3% 40% 17% 13% 22% 22% 11% 8% 4% 5% 5% 1% 5% 1% 0% 5% 8% 7% 2% 7% 3% 3% 26% 2% 0% 1%Ermera 100% 0% 59% 6% 20% 22% 20% 41% 4% 7% 0% 0% 2% 2% 0% 0% 4% 13% 9% 0% 9% 0% 0% 28% 0% 0% 2%Lautem 100% 9% 43% 8% 20% 15% 19% 23% 6% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14% 16% 5% 0% 17% 2% 1% 40% 0% 0% 2%Liquica 100% 3% 50% 19% 8% 17% 20% 34% 11% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 5% 3% 11% 0% 17% 3% 0% 30% 3% 5% 5%

Manatuto 100% 11% 60% 7% 14% 10% 17% 27% 4% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 4% 7% 1% 0% 13% 0% 0% 21% 1% 0% 1%Manufahi 100% 4% 64% 11% 13% 9% 24% 13% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 9% 13% 2% 0% 9% 4% 2% 29% 0% 0% 9%Oecusse 100% 3% 55% 10% 19% 12% 22% 33% 8% 3% 0% 0% 1% 2% 0% 0% 6% 10% 3% 0% 3% 0% 2% 41% 0% 0% 1%Viqueque 100% 27% 42% 6% 31% 17% 23% 25% 4% 2% 0% 0% 0% 4% 0% 4% 10% 10% 2% 2% 6% 2% 10% 21% 2% 2% 2%Total 100% 4% 44% 14% 14% 19% 21% 16% 8% 3% 4% 3% 1% 4% 1% 0% 6% 9% 6% 1% 8% 3% 2% 27% 2% 0% 2%

2009 number

2009 Sector % of Each District


38/49


Table 3.4: Enterprises by Sector and District 2008 and 2009 - Part 2

District

District

Oils

,Fue

lse

tc

Cons

truc

tion

&Renova

tion

Mac

hinery

&Equ

ipmen

t

Ve

hicles,

Boa

tse

tc

Office

Equ

ip,

Sup

pliese

tc

Home

Essen

tials

Foo

d&Beverage

s

Agricu

lture,

Pro

du

cts

,Serv

ices

Transport,

Log

isticse

tc

ITServ

icesan

dE

qu

ipmen

t

Te

lcom

Serv

icesan

dEqu

ipmen

t

Me

dia&Commun

ica

tions

Tra

ining

&Consu

lting

Serv

ices

Financ

ialan

dLeg

alServ

ices

Rea

lEs

tate&Ins

urance

Trave

l,Accomm.,

Ren

tals

Res

tauran

ts&Ca

tering

Hea

lthan

dMe

dic

ines

Securi

tyServ

ices

&Equ

ipmen

t

Han

dicra

fts

Prin

tingan

dCopy

ing

En

terta

inmen

tan

dLe

isure

Other

Goo

dsand

Serv

ices

Laun

dry,

Was

teC

ollec

tione

tc.

Aoosc

iation,

Unio

ns,

Coops

Process

ingan

dIn

dus

try

Aileu 2% 2% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 5% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 0% 1% 3% 0% 3% 3% 0% 8%

Ainaro 2% 2% 3% 0% 1% 1% 0% 3% 1% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 5% 0% 0% 1% 4% 0% 2% 0% 0% 5%Baucau 6% 10% 5% 3% 5% 6% 7% 9% 8% 4% 3% 4% 0% 5% 0% 0% 9% 9% 6% 0% 9% 8% 7% 7% 8% 0% 11%Bobonaro 4% 2% 5% 3% 3% 1% 2% 4% 3% 1% 1% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 3% 4% 3% 0% 2% 4% 5% 3% 0% 0% 3%Covalima 3% 6% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 3% 1% 0% 0% 2% 3% 0% 2% 3% 0% 8%Dili 64% 42% 58% 76% 60% 75% 67% 41% 65% 75% 93% 96% 91% 86% 71% 67% 55% 56% 74% 97% 59% 68% 72% 61% 76% 33% 30%Ermera 2% 0% 3% 1% 3% 3% 2% 5% 1% 5% 0% 0% 5% 1% 0% 0% 1% 3% 3% 0% 3% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 3%Lautem 3% 8% 3% 2% 5% 3% 3% 5% 2% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 8% 6% 3% 0% 8% 3% 2% 5% 0% 0% 5%

Liquica 3% 2% 3% 3% 1% 2% 3% 5% 3% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 2% 1% 5% 0% 6% 3% 0% 3% 5% 50% 8%Manatuto 3% 8% 4% 1% 3% 1% 2% 5% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14% 0% 2% 2% 1% 0% 5% 0% 0% 2% 3% 0% 3%Manufahi 2% 2% 3% 1% 2% 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 3% 1% 0% 2% 3% 2% 2% 0% 0% 11%

Oecusse 5% 4% 6% 3% 7% 3% 5% 10% 4% 4% 0% 0% 5% 2% 0% 0% 5% 5% 3% 0% 2% 0% 4% 7% 0% 0% 3%

Viqueque 2% 13% 2% 1% 4% 2% 2% 3% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 33% 3% 2% 1% 3% 2% 1% 9% 1% 3% 17% 3%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Aileu 51% 100% 88% 25% 25% 20% 50% 36% 11% Div/0! Div/0! Div /0! Div/0! 0% Div/0! Div/0! Div /0! 0% 100% Div/0! 0% 100% Div/0! 36% 0% Div/0! 0%Ainaro 4% 0% 3% Div/0! 0% 0% 0% 9% 100% 0% Div /0! Di v/0! D iv/0! D iv/0! Di v/0! Div /0 ! 0% 0% Div /0 ! D iv/0! 0% 0% Div/0! 0% Div /0! Di v/0! 0%Baucau 54% 67% 73% 9% 38% 53% 54% 73% 60% 0% 0% 0% Div/0! 0% Div/0! Div/0! 17% 82% 100% Div/0! 13% 50% 0% 47% 50% Div/0! 33%Bobonaro 6% 100% 8% 20% 10% 67% 20% 7% 100% 0% 0% Div/0! Di v/0! 50% Div/0! Div /0 ! -17% -10% 25% Div/0! 0% 0% 50% 13% Div /0! Di v/0! 0%Covalima 5% 0% 6% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 17% 0% Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! 0% Div/0! 0% 0% Div/0! Div/0! 0% 0% Div/0! 0% 0% Div/0! 0%Dili 62% 100% 138% 95% 46% 81% 96% 61% 156% 51% 25% 55% 11% 47% 25% 33% 19% 14% 128% 82% 29% 52% 21% 33% 45% 100% 22%Ermera 10% Div /0 ! 7% 50% 0% 9% 10% 5% 100% 0% Div /0! Di v/0! Di v/0! Di v/0! Di v/0! Div /0 ! 0% 0% 0% Div/0! 0% Div /0! Di v/0! 7% Div /0! Di v/0! 0%Lautem 37% 60% 42% 75% 21% 18% 23% 33% 25% 0% 0% Div/0! Di v/0! Di v/0! Di v/0! Div /0 ! 0% 8% 33% Div/0! 114% 0% 0% 55% Div /0! Di v/0! 100%

Liquica 73% Div/0! 78% 9% 25% 22% 30% 100% 75% Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! 50% 0% 40% Div/0! 38% 100% Div/0! 58% 100% Div/0! 0%

Manatuto 204% Div/0! 223% 150% 233% 600% 500% 280% Div/0! 0% Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! Div/0! 50% 67% 0% Div/0! 200% Div/0! Div/0! 200% 0% Div/0! Div/0!Manufahi 10% 0% 12% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100% Div/0! D iv /0! D iv/0! D iv/0! D iv/0! D iv/0! D iv /0 ! 0% 0% 0% Div/0! 33% 0% 0% 8% Div /0! D iv/0! 0%Oecusse 40% 100% 30% 9% 29% 8% 37% 34% 13% 0% Div /0! Di v/0! 0% 0% Div/0! Div /0 ! 75% 33% 33% Div/0! 33% Div /0! 100% 66% Div /0! Di v/0! 0%Viqueque 33% 333% 5% 200% 36% 60% 83% 33% 0% 0% Div /0! Di v/0! Di v/0! Di v/0! Di v/0! Div /0 ! 0% 67% 0% Div/0! -25% 0% 400% 11% 0% 0% Div /0 !Total 51% 106% 80% 70% 37% 64% 72% 48% 102% 36% 23% 52% 16% 44% 56% 100% 15% 16% 93% 88% 31% 40% 30% 35% 41% 200% 19%

2008-2009 % Change in Number in Each District

2009 District % of Each Sector


39/49

Table 3.5: Enterprise Ownership by District

TotalNo. No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Aileu 55 14 25% 41 75% 55 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%Ainaro 60 25 42% 35 58% 60 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%Baucau 150 37 25% 111 74% 148 99% 0 0% 2 1% 2 1%

Bobonaro 91 37 41% 50 55% 87 96% 0 0% 4 4% 4 4%Covalima 72 15 21% 50 69% 65 90% 1 1% 6 8% 7 10%Dili 1,980 370 19% 911 46% 1,281 65% 151 8% 548 28% 699 35%Ermera 55 9 16% 44 80% 53 96% 0 0% 2 4% 2 4%Lautem 90 26 29% 59 66% 85 94% 0 0% 5 6% 5 6%Liquica 61 21 34% 38 62% 59 97% 0 0% 2 3% 2 3%Manatuto 90 25 28% 65 72% 90 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%Manufahi 45 13 29% 32 71% 45 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Oecusse 125 44 35% 80 64% 124 99% 0 0% 1 1% 1 1%Viqueque 51 18 35% 32 63% 50 98% 1 2% 0 0% 1 2%Total 2,925 654 22% 1,548 53% 2,202 75% 153 5% 570 19% 723 25%

Aileu 33 11 33% 22 67% 33 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%Ainaro 58 25 43% 33 57% 58 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%Baucau 97 22 23% 73 75% 95 98% 0 0% 2 2% 2 2%Bobonaro 85 33 39% 48 56% 81 95% 0 0% 4 5% 4 5%

2009

2008

Sub-TotalMenWomen Women Men Sub-Total

ForeignOwnership

DistrictTimorese


40/49

Table 3.6: Management by District

Total

No. No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %

Aileu 59 14 24% 45 76% 59 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%Ainaro 58 22 38% 36 62% 58 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Baucau 59 23 39% 35 59% 58 98% 1 2% 0 0% 1 2%

Bobonaro 91 35 38% 52 57% 87 96% 2 2% 2 2% 4 4%Covalima 68 19 28% 45 66% 64 94% 0 0% 4 6% 4 6%

Dili 1,596 279 17% 756 47% 1,035 65% 137 9% 424 27% 561 35%

Ermera 54 9 17% 43 80% 52 96% 0 0% 2 4% 2 4%Lautem 86 30 35% 54 63% 84 98% 0 0% 2 2% 2 2%Liquica 65 18 28% 44 68% 62 95% 0 0% 3 5% 3 5%

Manatuto 70 25 36% 43 61% 68 97% 0 0% 2 3% 2 3%

Manufahi 45 14 31% 31 69% 45 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Oecusse 118 38 32% 77 65% 115 97% 0 0% 3 3% 3 3%Viqueque 49 16 33% 32 65% 48 98% 1 2% 0 0% 1 2%

Total 2,418 542 22% 1,293 53% 1,835 76% 141 6% 442 18% 583 24%

Aileu 40 11 28% 29 73% 40 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Ainaro 56 22 39% 34 61% 56 100% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Baucau 92 21 23% 69 75% 90 98% 1 1% 1 1% 2 2%Bobonaro 84 31 37% 49 58% 80 95% 2 2% 2 2% 4 5%

Covalima 65 18 28% 43 66% 61 94% 0 0% 4 6% 4 6%

DistrictTimorese Foreign

Management

Men Sub-Total

2009

2008

Women Men Sub-Total Women


41/49

Annex 4

Data on Tender Distribution

Table 4.1: Number and value of PDM-TL Associated Tenders

Group No. % Value %< $10,000 24 30.0% $112,680 1.8%$10,001-$100,000 41 51.3% $1,324,641 21.1%$100,001-$500,000 11 13.8% $1,598,942 25.5%

$501,000-$1,000,000 4 5.0% $3,244,155 51.7%Total 80 100.0% $6,280,418 100.0%

Table 4.2: Number of Tenders Distributed by Quarter - 2007 4th

Quarter to 2009 4th

Quarter

61

69

60

47

25

2008: 4th Qtr

2008: 3rd Qtr

2008: 2nd Qtr

2008: 1st Qtr

2007: 4th Qtr


42/49

Table 4.3: Number of Tenders by Sector 2007-2009

Table 4.4: Tenders by Organization 2007-2009

1

3

4

6

6

7

7

7

8

11

18

24

32

33

33

38

94

94

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Home Essential

Travel, Accomm., Rentals

Telecom Services & Equipment

Laundry, Waste Collection etc.

Agriculture Products & Services

Health & Medicines

Media & Communications

Oil, Fuels etc.

Security Services & Equipment

Transport, Logistics etc.

Other Goods & Services

Machinery & Equipment

Prining and Copying

Office Equip, Supplies etc.

Vehicles, Boats etc.

IT Services & Equipment

Construction & Renovation

Training & Consulting Services


43/49


Annex 5

Data on Matchmaking

Table 5.1: PDM-TL Matchmaking Service Report

Month (s)Received

request33[1]

Pending

34[

2]

Completed35[3]

36[4]

Cancelled

37[5]Closed

Open38[6]

39[7]

$ Total

WR40[8]

NR41[9]

Formula Open = (Received Request + Pending) (Completed + Cancelled + Closed)

Previous Years (2007-2008) 308 163 44 53 40 8 $1,215,446.00

January09 6 8 30

2 0 9 $3,568.50

February09 19 9 7 1 1 0 19 $215.00

March09 8 19 11 0 1 0 16 $2,160.00

April09 4 16 7 0 4 1 8 $11.880.00

May09 7 8 5 0 2 0 7 $283.00

June09 12 7 8 0 2 0 9 $810.00

July09 19 9 9 1 0 0 18 -

August09 5 18 5 1 0 0 17 -

September09 13 17 10 0 0 0 20 -

October09 2 20 2 0 0 0 20 -

Total 403 N/A 230 47 65 41 N/A$1,234,362.50

33[1]Received Request: Refers to a request from a client for options concerning the procurement of goods/services from one or more suppliers.34[2] Pending: Carry over of final balance of open requests from previous month(s).35[3]Completed: Indicates that the Matchmaking unit has prepared a report of options for a matchmaking request and returned this information to the client. This column indicates the totalnumber of matchmaking reports prepared in the month indicated which have not yet been closed (see below). Note that under the PDT reporting regime, a matchmaking request is no

longer listed as completed once it has been closed, hence the completed figures for a particular month can be expected to decrease over time.36[4] Cancelled Request: Any request that is not completed within 6 months due to the unavailability of goods and services, or due to late responses from vendors to PDT M2.37[5]

Closed: A request is designated as closed when the Matchmaking unit obtains information indicating that the client has either made, or decided against, a purchase. The closedmatches indicated in this column may have originated either in the month indicated or in previous months.38[6] Open: An open request is one being processed by the Matchmaking unit. Complex requests can remain open for some time. The balance of open requests in any one monthrefers to the total number of open requests.39[7]

$ Total: This category refers to the total number of transactions facilitated by PDT M2 which have resulted in a closed with result (see following note) outcome.40[8]Closed WR: This term refers to closed with result, and is based upon feedback from client indicating a completed transaction.41[9] Closed NR: This term refers to closed with no result, and is based upon feedback from client indicating that no transaction has occurred.


44/49

Annex 6

Data on Micro-Matchmaking and District Offices/Teams

Table 6.1: Number and Value of Transactions by Size (US$)

Table 6.2: : Number and Value of Transactions by Type of Requester (US$)

No. % Cum % Total % Cum % Average


45/49

District Transaction Value

OCS#Laborer for Consertia wire, 24 person for 285concertina wire $13,680.0

BBN# Accommodation (Rent House by 6 Peoples) $14,400.0BBN# Pipe 1 (600 stalk) $24/stalk $14,400.0BBN# 23 ton of Choe Beam $0,50/kg $14,500.0

BBN# Local rice $ 0.30/53.343 kg $16,002.9BBN# Stone (1 ret $ 10.00, 12 ret per day, during 140 days) $16,800.0

VQQ#

To Ordering Arts & Carpentry service to makes 53

items of cupboards, $. 17,210.00 $17,210.0BBN# Coffe (15 ton) $1,20/kg $18,000.0

ANR# Coffe (Kafe ho kulit mean) 61ton $0,30/kg $18,300.0ANR# Coffe (Kafe ho kulit mean) 61ton $0,30/kg $18,300.0BBN# Coffe (20 ton) $1,20/kg $24,000.0OCS# Restrains Wall $24,184.0

CVLM# Mun bean (50 ton) $25,000.0

ANR#Rent 2 truck to drop sand $35/truck/one day for 17month (one month 24 days) $28,560.0

OCS# Concertina barbed wire in Nianapu $29,300.0

BBN# Skill (35 poeples, $ 5.00/day during 7 month 168 days) $29,400.0OCS# Concertina barbed wire in bi-topa-au ana $30,184.1CVLM# Buffalo(100 tail) $31,200.0ANR# Coffe (106,725 kg) $0.30/kg $32,017.5

OCS# Tender of wall in Mahata $32,400.6


46/49

Table 6.4: Sectoral Distribution of 50 Largest Transactions by Value

Other6%

Agriculture63%

Construction21%

Labour10%


47/49


Table 6.4: Monthly Activities and Operating Costs by District - 2009

Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Year to DateMANUFAHI

Supported Transactions: No. !" !# !$ #% !$ !" !& #% ' 142

Supported Transactions: $ (!)%#$ (!)%'" (!&)%&* (&)*%! (!&)+$, ('%)'+* (!%)!$' (!")& ("+% $113,184

Personnel Cost $540 $540 $540 $540 $540 $540 $540 $540 $540 $4,860M3 Activities $25 $63 $123 $90 $95 $121 $114 $110 $104 $844Total Cost $565 $603 $663 $630 $635 $661 $654 $650 $644 $5,704Cost per Transaction $30 $50 $39 $32 $37 $35 $50 $33 $129 $40Transaction $/District Cost 1.82 1.76 19.65 5.72 21.23 76.50 15.56 29.73 1.46 19.84

VIQUEQUESupported Transactions: No. #% !$ +* +& $! '" &* #* 350

Supported Transactions: $ (,)#,& (!+)$'+ (##)!"* (!&) %%" (#,)'&% (&!)+&% (+,)$'+ (&,)$+! (#+),,, $230,584

Personnel Cost 960.00 960.00 960.00 960.00 960.00 960.00 960.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 $8,720M3 Activities 56.35 100.05 421.45 447.70 386.95 402.84 440.71 460.40 460.35 $3,177Total Cost $1,016 $1,060 $1,381 $1,408 $1,347 $1,363 $1,401 $1,460 $1,460 $11,897Cost per Transaction $51 $62 $30 $33 $19 $43 $24 $41 $56 $34Transaction $/District Cost 8.15 13.92 16.07 9.24 21.18 23.06 34.81 26.53 17.04 19.38

BAUCAUSupported Transactions: No. !+# #&' #,! &&+ &%! !'' #+% #&" #"# #!' 2,434

Supported Transactions: $(& ') *$ * ( $! )# #$ ( "& )' &% ( !% !) ,' * ( ,,) &% , (* +) *# ! ( $' )# &! ( "") ,! $ ( !%, )+ +& (' *) #$#

$794,980Personnel Cost 1,115.00 1,115.00 475.00 475.00 720.00 720.00 720.00 720.00 785.00 785.00 $7,630M3 Activities 658.80 783.69 57.50 1,190.50 649.59 653.65 657.17 677.85 675.00 674.77 $6,679Total Cost $1,899 $533 $1,666 $1,370 $1,374 $1,377 $1,398 $1,460 $1,460 $12,535Cost per Transaction $8 $2 $5 $5 $9 $6 $6 $5 $7 $5Transaction $/District Cost 37.51 175.64 61.16 64.48 47.04 54.63 71.41 74.28 38.55 63.42

LAUTEMSupported Transactions: No. #+ &! #* !" *# +! &% &% 327

Supported Transactions: $ !)+*,(-------- #*),'!(------ &*)'%&(---- #,)&"%(------ !#)&$!(------ '+)++*(------ #$)'"'(------ #")%%#(------ &%)%$*(------ !')%#"(------ $261,729

Personnel Cost 305.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 640.00 640.00 $5,610M3 Activities 52.00 52.00 119.50 137.60 138.00 143.10 134.10 131.80 115.00 103.00 $1,126Total Cost $627 $695 $713 $713 $718 $709 $707 $755 $743 $6,379Cost per Transaction $20 $22 $27 $38 $12 $22 $17 $25 $25 $20Transaction $/District Cost 42.82 52.56 39.84 17.35 75.82 38.92 41.03 39.84 20.23 41.03


48/49


Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Year to DateMANATUTO

Supported Transactions: No. !! "# $! !% && "' (( ") (( 298

Supported Transactions: $ !"(*+++++++++++ ',%)-*++++++ &%,(--*++++++ "-',!&'*+++ ),#%)*++++++++ "#,&'#*++++++ &!,%("*++++++ %,%)(*++++++++ (,%"$*++++++++ $207,007

Personnel Cost 540.00 540.00 540.00 540.00 540.00 540.00 270.00 565.00 565.00 $4,640M3 Activities 71.15 102.05 97.00 90.00 101.30 99.15 105.00 117.05 118.50 $901Total Cost $611 $642 $637 $630 $641 $639 $375 $682 $684 $5,541

Cost per Transaction $19 $34 $15 $18 $29 $36 $7 $40 $12 $19Transaction $/District Cost 0.51 13.50 41.60 171.95 12.42 30.18 63.07 9.79 8.21 37.36BOBONARO

Supported Transactions: No. "% "& (( )! )! )) """ """ "%% 723

Supported Transactions: $ #,)-%*++++++++ &-$,--#*+++ '),""'*++++ )#,)-$*++++++ ""#,(!%*+++ "$-,#!&*+++ $","'"*++++++ &',$-(*++++++ $",$"#*++++++ !%,!($*++++++ $788,364

Personnel Cost 610.00 610.00 610.00 610.00 610.00 610.00 610.00 610.00 640.00 640.00 $6,160M3 Activities 100.00 85.50 97.00 773.50 422.00 375.00 119.00 102.00 120.00 89.25 $2,283Total Cost $710 $696 $707 $1,384 $1,032 $985 $729 $712 $760 $729 $8,443Cost per Transaction $44 $58 $24 $25 $14 $13 $9 $6 $7 $4 $12Transaction $/District Cost 13.67 293.33 123.22 57.61 115.83 143.08 56.49 39.89 54.50 49.85 93.37

COVALIMASupported Transactions: No. "' (# ")( "($ #- "!% "() !) ) )% 909

Supported Transactions: $ (%,#!#*+++++ "-),%#'*+++ )#,'#)*++++ "%,-()*++++++ "(,)($*++++++ !&,'%&*++++++ $%,!($*++++++ !!,%--*++++++ "%,&)(*++++++ )#,&$'*++++++ $484,683

Personnel Cost 930.00 740.00 875.00 875.00 875.00 875.00 875.00 875.00 875.00 875.00 $8,670

M3 Activities 24.75 69.00 144.50 352.70 375.70 353.70 369.10 351.05 255.00 329.50 $2,625Total Cost $955 $809 $1,020 $1,228 $1,251 $1,229 $1,244 $1,226 $1,130 $1,205 $11,295Cost per Transaction $53 $14 $6 $8 $14 $9 $8 $33 $161 $16 $12Transaction $/District Cost 59.64 133.12 78.37 13.08 12.60 26.75 37.26 27.40 14.40 65.79 42.91

OECUSSESupported Transactions: No. !% !$ (& !) $! $" )& $$ $) !# 445

Supported Transactions: $ $,%-'*++++++++ !(,($!*++++++ #,-%-*++++++ "$,)()*++++++ "",%#"*++++++ #,-("*++++++++ &&,!""*++++++ "&,"#'*++++++ "&,&'"*++++++ "-,$!)*++++++ $141,936

Personnel Cost 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 640.00 640.00 $5,880M3 Activities 17.30 39.75 86.75 107.65 178.85 124.10 137.00 120.80 119.50 140.50 $1,072Total Cost $592 $615 $662 $683 $754 $699 $712 $696 $760 $781 $6,952Cost per Transaction $16 $18 $13 $18 $18 $17 $10 $16 $16 $20 $16Transaction $/District Cost 7.78 57.82 13.69 21.62 15.51 12.95 31.34 17.53 16.17 13.37 20.42


49/49

Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Oct-09 Year to DateAINARO

Supported Transactions: No. !! "# $! %& !" %% !% !' !" 336

Supported Transactions: $ #%(#"!)****** %(#+,)****** !+('$+)****** #(""!)******** %'(,!#)****** "&%("-%)*** #!$(###)*** !(#&%)******** ##(!$!)****** $458,063

Personnel Cost 305.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 575.00 590.00 590.00 $5,510M3 Activities 40.00 86.50 127.00 131.50 120.50 68.00 64.75 $638Tot

independent progress report of the peace dividend marketplace timor-leste, aidworks inh184, january...

Documents