ti georgia strategy and theory of change

7/25/2019 TI Georgia Strategy and Theory of Change

1/24

1

Transparency International Georgia

Strategy 2016-2020

Towards a Mature Democracy and Society

Transparency International Georgia (TI Georgia) is a national chapter of the global anti-corruption

movement, Transparency International. Our vision is to make Georgia a country which is free of

corruption in all parts of society. A country where people are involved in the policymaking process. We

aim to make Georgia a place where transparency and openness in government and the private sector

are the rule rather than an exception. This includes supporting an engaged citizenry and a vibrant andfair democratic environment.

To achieve this, we have undertaken a missionto support building and empowering state institutions,

develop good governance and the rule of law and ensure the transparency and direct accountability of

the state institutions.


2/24

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Transparency International Georgia

Strategy 2016-2020INTRODUCTION

ABOUT THE STRATEGY

CONTEXT

Structure

Our profile

Lessons learnt

DELIVERING CHANGE

Guiding principles

Stakeholders

Interventions

EXTERNAL PRIORITIES

INTERNAL PRIORITIES

Resources and capacity

Financial sustainability

MONITORING IMPACT


3/24

3

ABOUT THE STRATEGY

This strategy has been written to provide a framework for TI Georgias actions in 2016-2020. It is TI

Georgias second strategy document. The first was the 2011-2015 Strategic Plan. This strategy reflects

the changes that have taken place in Georgia, as well as the impact our team has made in Georgia so far.

The strategy clearly articulates TI Georgias guiding principles and the link between our mission and

areas of activity. It is thus a reference for future decision making, project planning and implementation.

Improving governance is a very complex process. The goals articulated here will not be achieved during

this strategy period. Moreover, should they be achieved it will not be based solely on the work of TI

Georgia. As such, the strategy and the supporting monitoring framework does not make claims of

attribution for any goals, objectives or outcomes. Development is slow, there will be many hurdles along

the way. However, the work that we will undertake within this period will lay important groundwork

necessary for building a mature, robust and democratic Georgia.

The strategy builds on the vast experience that TI Georgia has in mitigating risks and dealing with

pressure. It provides an overview of major lessons that we have learnt during earlier periods of work.

Thus, strategic planning ensures continuity of our work: it both helps us learn from the past and ensures

sustainability of our priorities in the future.

Our areas of focus have broadened over the past few years. We have gained a very high reputation forit. This has resulted in both external and internal pressure to respond to a vast array of developments in

the country. Some of these developments may be outside our mandate. Strategic planning and guidelines

help us remain focused on our core mandate. It sets boundaries within which we will engage, and

clarifies where we will not engage. The strategy brings coherence to our priorities and projects,

ensuring they align under our core principles.

As we engage with multiple stakeholders, the strategy also serves as a primary document for our

partners and the general society to understand our mandate, and priorities.

The strategy was developed as a result of internal and external consultation. TI Georgia program staff

participated in a series of workshops to develop the Theory of Change which guides this document. The

TI Georgia Board also provided vital guidance, for which we would like to thank them.

CONTEXT

The past several years have seen significant changes in Georgia. After the Rose Revolution, President

Saakashvilis United National Movement (UNM) government introduced important reforms to achieve


4/24

4

economic growth, developed infrastructure and virtually eradicated low-level corruption (e.g. bribery in

public services). However, the UNM government failed to deliver on promises to create strong

democratic institutions and strengthen the rule of law. While a number of reforms were successful,

concentration of power within a narrow group of officials comprising the President and his closest

associates occurred, making it possible for this group to exercise near-total control over all key public

institutions (including Parliament and the judiciary) and some important non-state actors (such as thecountrys most influential media outlets). This resulted in a low level of transparency and a virtual lackof

accountability at the highest tiers of government and created extensive possibilities for abuse of power.

Alleged elite corruption, the 2008 war with Russia, personality politics and patronage networks

undermined much of the progress by, and popular support for, the UNM.

A peaceful and democratic handover of power in 2012 following parliamentary elections demonstrated

the growing maturity of the electoral system. The Georgian Dream (GD) Coalition, led by billionaire

Bidzina Ivanishvili, won the election on a promise of democratic reform. Following the parliamentary

elections, the presidential and local government elections were also fair and democratic, resulting into

election of an overwhelming majority of GD candidates at the central and local government level.

Ivanishvili resigned from his position as Prime Minister in 2013, but remains a figure of influence even as

a private citizen. Informal rule by a private citizen is one of many concerns about the state of democracy

and democratic institutions in Georgia.

During the two years that the Georgian Dream government has been in power, however, Georgians

have seen many setbacks. We have been concerned with the weakness of institutions that make up a

democratic society.

In 2013 a new constitution came fully into effect, moving the center of power from the president to the

prime minister. The public argument for the change was to share power more within government, to

improve the checks and balances on any individual office and, thus, improve accountability andgovernance. The prime minister has more formal responsibility and power but the president is not

simply a rubber stamp or figurehead position the Constitution provides the president with powers in

foreign policy, makes her/him the commander-in-chief and gives the office the power to schedule

elections. The division of power between the offices of the prime minister and the president is still not

settled, and jostling for both symbolic and actual power is on-going, posing a potential threat to the

quality of democratic governance in Georgia. In the 2015 State of the Nation address, President

Margvelashvili noted the problems that arise from this lack of clarity as it weakens the institutions of

state and undermines accountability.

Georgia signed an Association Agreement and a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement(DCFTA) with the EU in 2014. This brings the need for more reforms to harmonize with EU standards

across a wide range of sectorsall branches of government and all levels. Thus far, changes have been

poorly handled and implemented due to a lack of consultation, opacity in the processes and low

capacity.

Over the last three years, Georgia has seen some gains in international rankings and surveys about

democratic freedoms and corruption. Freedom Houses Nations in Transit index for 2014 gives Georgia


5/24

5

an overall democracy score of 4.68, based on improvements in electoral processes and independent

media (with 1 being the most democratic, and 7 the least) . This is part of a fairly consistent, although

slow improvement since 2009. Georgias improvements in fighting corruption have been noted, with the

Corruption Perception Index 2014 ranking Georgia 50th globally in terms of corruption, with a score of

52a slight improvement from the 2013 score of 49 . While the National Integrity Systems (NIS) for

2014 found overall improvements in legislation around integrity, and some improvements in practice.

Despite these impressive moves to improve the rule of law, citizens access to government,

transparency and accountability, there are still many obstacles undermining good governance in Georgia.

The controversial investigations and prosecution of former government officials (including

unconstitutionally extended pre-trial detentions) are evidence of a lack of respect for the central thesis

of the rule of law. Moreover, major concerns still exist over concentration of power and wealth in the

hands of the elite; lack of public trust in government and state institutions; the failure to establish an

independent and professional civil service; low levels of citizen engagement and public dialogue; low-

levels of capacity in the media; and poor representation of women, linguistic and ethnic minorities.

It is our strong belief that effective governance and inclusive policy-making will help eliminate all forms of

corruption, ensure that the principles of representative democracy are followed and improve Georgians

lives. In order to achieve sustained change, however, the public needs to be engaged. This is why the

focus of this Strategy is advocacy and engagementwith the public and with government.

Structure

TI Georgia is an independent non-governmental organization based in Tbilisi, Georgia. We are a

member of the Transparency International (TI) movement, which is made up of over 100 independent

National Chapters, approximately 30 Individual Members and an International Secretariat in Berlin. We

are the TIs national chapter in Georgia.

Staff and organizational capacity

TI Georgia recruits staff for permanent and project based positions. We are an equal opportunity

employer, striving to achieve a diversity among personnel. These staff are engaged in four offices in

Tbilisi, Batumi, Kutaisi and Zugdidi. Tbilisi office staff focus both on Tbilisi local-issues and national issues

of concern. Kutaisi office staff focus on Kutaisi-local issues and parliamentary programs. The offices in

Zugdidi and Batumi focus on regional concerns only.

Staff are supported by dedicated volunteers and interns. The internship program is used to build

activism and skills among young Georgians, to extend the impact of TI Georgias work, and as a meansto engage with prospective future staff members. As of September 2015, TI Georgia has a full-time staff

of more than 45 people.

TI Georgia has well-established human resources practices and policies which include rules for conduct,

evaluation and promotion, recruitment, benefits and training.


6/24

6

Board

The Board is the highest governing body of TI Georgia. It sets the main directions of TI Georgias

activities. In addition, the Board oversees the work of the Executive Director. As of December 2015, TI

Georgia has five members on its Board:

1. Akhalkatsi, George (Georgia), Chair2. Bancroft, Justin (United States)

3. Forestier, Paul-Henri (France)

4. Kochladze, Manana (Georgia)

5. Mullen, Mark (United States)

Any updates to the composition of the Board are reflected in the official registration records published

by the National Agency of Public Registry and the TI Georgia Charter which is published on the

organizations website.

Our profileFounded in 2000, TI Georgia is one of the leading and most reputable non-governmental organizations in

the country. TI Georgia worked hard to place and maintain anti-corruption reforms, transparency and

accountability high on the governments agenda. We have gained very high visibility due to our quality

research and advocacy. We emerged as a civil society leader. We have pioneered the use of civic tech

and citizen engagement platforms in Georgia. These were the goals of our Strategic Plan 2011-2015 and

we were successful in attaining most of them.

TI Georgia is committed to eradicating all forms of corruption in Georgia. To do this we have

monitored the government, advocated on a range of issues at a high level, mobilized the public and

worked to empower citizens. In all of our activities we undertake to represent interests of those

who have been or could be mistreated due to poor governance. This includes vulnerable social

and minority groups, business companies, civil servants, journalists -- anyone who is affected by

government policies and practices that have been poorly developed or unfairly implemented.

The past five years have been eventful for Georgia and TI Georgia has successfully adapted and

positioned itself to maximize its impact. Our ability to perform as a watchdog, think-tank, civil society

leader and expert has helped us seize an opportunity as it appeared and push for change. These four

roles will be relevant and help TI Georgia achieve its goals during the period of the next strategy.

1. Watchdog

TI Georgia had been operating as a watchdog for years and we strengthened our capacity in this area asmore and more concerns emerged in policy and decision-making. We played a critical role in the final

years of the outgoing United National Movement (UNM) government, when we closely monitored its

activities. We served as a credible information source for the public, media and independent observers.

Our watchdog work on political finance and monitoring of the electoral environment contributed to a

free and fair election.
http://www.transparency.org/global_priorities/corruption_politicshttp://www.transparency.org/global_priorities/corruption_politicshttp://www.transparency.org/global_priorities/corruption_politics


7/24

7

In discussions with civil society and the wider community in Georgia, this role of watchdog has been

highlighted as being of particular value and importance.

2. Think-tank

The election of the Georgian Dream Coalition (GD) to power in 2012 marked a fresh beginning in the

policymaking arena. During the first years of the new government, we have been able to contribute tothe political agenda to a significant extent. We have successfully advocated for reforms in some of the

most vulnerable areas; significantly this includes in the judiciary, and anti-monopoly regulations. New

strategic areas of work emerged as the new government started dismissing public servants and changing

laws that would affect the countrys investment environment. We were able to foresee these as

problematic issues and quickly offered solutions through strategic litigation, researching and writing

new legislative amendments, and monitoring and reporting. We were able to provide quality research,

analysis and recommendations in these areas within our think-tank capacity.

3. Civil society leader

At the same time, the new government was resistant to change in other critical areas, such as

depoliticizing law enforcement and protecting civil liberties. TI Georgia emerged as a civil society leader

and campaigned around these causes. We successfully mobilized other civil society organizations, media

and active citizens, for example in This Affects You campaign. We have also been training media and civil

society organizations in open data and research techniques. In this way we have assisted them to

strengthen their own capacity.

4. Expert

We are often approached for help by various public institutions to provide assistance in drafting action

plans and amendments. The fact that public institutions request our assistance is due to a range of

factors, including insufficient internal expert capacity, lack of resources, and lack of institutional memory.

Moreover, it demonstrates the public services view of TI Georgiaas a fair and professional organization.When requests for assistance align with our mandate and knowledge, we provide expertise and

technical support. We also found that developing staff capacity and cooperation with public institutions

can support other activities we engage in to achieve change.

Lessons learnt

During 2011-2015 TI Georgia has learnt many lessons that will influence how we implement future

activities and how we operate.

1. Working in a personality-driven policy environment

As large areas of the bureaucracy are still strongly personality driven, we have learnt that it is necessary

to work with individuals not just institutions. This translates to a need to identify champions within

ministries and within different branches of government. These relationships with key figures and

individuals are facilitated by TI Georgiasoffices in regions and in the Parliament buildings in Tbilisi and


8/24

8

Kutaisi. By working with these allies we have been able to achieve change that would not have

necessarily been possible otherwise.

Equally, we have learnt to identify when the structures or personalities are particularly resistant to

change. With these organizations we use public pressure, monitoring and reporting to encourage them

to open to us.

2. Responsiveness and flexibility

In a complex and polarized political environment we have learnt that responsiveness is often decisive.

As a civil society organization, we are accountable to the public. We are often expected to act on

concerning developments in the country if they are within in our mandate, even if these are not within

our project plans. The scope for our future work, therefore, needs to be broad, allowing us to act

where and when we see opportunity, and not have overly prescribed areas of interaction. Having a

national and regional presence with our multiple offices allows the organization to react swiftly and

appropriately to events as they occur.

As such, when we design future activities and projects we need to ensure that we have flexibility within

contracts to react to emerging issues and a rapidly changing operating environment.

3. Not overstretching our resources

TI Georgia works on a large range of issues related to transparency and accountability across all

branches and all levels of government. This is important because accountability requires full systems of

integrity that are mutually reinforcing. Even though responsiveness is vital, we need to prioritize and

make sure our work remains relevant to our core mandate. Working broadly is a strength but we need

to be sure that we work comprehensively across the range of activities we implement, and do not only

shallowing touch on issues.

While this may appear to contradict the previous point, it is necessary as an organization for TI Georgia

to be both flexible and targeted. The lesson we have learnt is that untargeted activities may overstretch

our resources without it translating to significant impact within our areas of focus.

4. Local legitimacy

For any civil society organization to be able to influence the public discourse on issues of importance, it

needs to be seen as legitimate. For TI Georgia we have multiple audiences for our work and multiple

groups we aim to influence to achieve good governance outcomes. This means that we must maintain

our legitimacy with a wide range of actors.

Among our international partners, legitimacy is maintained by the high quality of our analysis. The quality

of advice we provide on a range of issues within our mandate is critical. For the government, it is again

about providing sound, realistic and workable recommendations based on solid research and evidence.

With the Georgian public it is about addressing issues of governance that are a concern to them.

In the upcoming years, we must make sure that our high level policy work does not prevent us doing

grassroots community organizing. We cannot succeed as an organization without local support, just as


9/24

9

we cannot succeed without high level reform. This balance in our work and our outlook needs to be

maintained.

5. Incremental change and backsliding

Change is not constant. Development does not progress at a steady rate. Improvements in the situation

in the country is often slow, and often small. But these changes build to a large and significant reformagenda. Equally, there have been areas we have had early successes and then some reverse. We need to

understand that reverses are not necessarily a sign of failure. It often means that different institutions

appetite for change is not equal.

We will work with partners to try to capture early enthusiasm. We will also engage as necessary to

prevent backsliding entirely eclipsing the earlier gains.

DELIVERING CHANGE

Transparency International defines corruption as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. A

corruption-free environment is the guiding ideal for TI Georgia. We have identified poor governance -

- abuse of power, lack of public oversight and weak institutions -- as the primary impediment to

achieving a corruption-free society. Good governance is an essential precondition for sustainable

development as a strong democracy requires transparent and accountable institutions across all

branches of government, along with a capable media and civil society to monitor, report and encourage

citizen engagement.

Accountability, in turn, is essential for good governance. In order for accountability to be achieved,

citizens need to be able to access information about the activities of their government. Thus,

transparency is a necessary precondition for accountability. Transparency, however, on its own isinsufficient to achieve a government free of corruption and truly accountable to the people. For this

reason, to improve governance, TI Georgia works to encourage change in the operating

environment, culture, processes, institutions and mechanisms. Finally, for our work to have long-lasting

impact, we will need to engage the public in delivering this change.

Guiding principles

In the years to come, TI Georgia will be dedicated to help Georgia build on past achievements in public

administration to enable continuous improvements in governance, the democratic environment and

quality of life for all Georgians. Our work will be guided by our key principles, which are articulated inour vision and mission.

Vision

TI Georgia seeks to make Georgia a country which is free of corruption in all areas of public society. A

country where people are a part of the policymaking process. A country where transparency and

openness in government and the commercial sector are routine rather than rarities. TI Georgia seeks to


10/24

10

support an engaged citizenry, and a vibrant and fair democratic environment.

Mission

TI Georgia's main aim is to support state institutions that empower the people, and develop good

governance and the rule of law. To do this, TI Georgia seeks to ensure the transparency and direct

accountability of state institutions, and support fair and democratic elections. The organization aims toprotect universally recognized human rights.

Stakeholders

To make our governance work more effective, we recognize we need to work with people, as

individuals and as part of collective action, and encourage them to engage in anti-corruption efforts.

As we operate in a highly politicized environment, we ensure that we never take sides and remain

objective and neutral. TI Georgia undertakes to be open, honest and accountable in its relationships

with everyone we work with.

1. Government

Implementation of our 2011-2015 Strategic Plan demonstrated to us the importance of engaging and

working collaboratively with the government when and where there are opportunities. This helps us

push for reforms and advocate for improved practices.

As a watchdog, however, TI Georgia will not refrain from criticizing government actions when it

exercises poor judgment in policy areas. We have found various ministries are especially sensitive to our

criticism and react impulsively. In all of our interactions, we aim at maintaining a professional and

constructive relationship with all government agencies, as well as all political parties.

We are often invited by various governmental agencies and commissions and our contribution is usually

welcome because of its high quality. We often deliver training and capacity building to civil servants,

upon request or at our initiative. This once again proves that government recognizes us as an important

partner.

2. General public

In order to achieve real change, TI Georgia recognizes it needs to change behavior of individuals and

institutions involved in governance. This, in turn, requires public support. Without informed citizens

acting to protect their interests, our efforts will be unsustainable. In the past years, TI Georgia has

advocated around issues by first gaining public support. We have started conducting public opinionsurveys which have been helpful for us in measuring public perception of the success of these efforts.

We have found that the young are especially motivated to engage, as are citizens living outside the

capital. TI Georgia, therefore, plans to put even more emphasis on people in the years to come.

We plan to do so through regular community consultations, civic engagement campaigns, promoting

volunteerism and crowdsourcing opportunities.


11/24

11

3. Political parties

As a government watchdog, TI Georgia is an important reference for opposition parties. We realize we

need to be careful that we are not seen to be affiliated with any individual party. For that reason, we

dont provide any training to political parties.

We work with political parties mostly in the context of elections. We monitor if the ruling party and/or

incumbent candidate misuse administrative resources or intimidate other candidates. We also monitor

political party finances and if there are any kickbacks for donations. In all instances where irregularities

are noted, we report on them, advocate for improvements in law and practice as well defend interests

of those whose rights have been violated.

4. Civil society, academia and the private sector

To achieve our mission, TI Georgia will continue working with all interested parties to identify sectors

in Georgia where a lack of transparency is especially problematic. We aim to engage with groups who

are committed to promoting transparency and accountability in Georgia. Such groups may include

national and local civil society organizations, academia, private sector representatives, the diplomatic

community and international organizations.

We will work as part of, and engage our partners, through networks and coalitions, meetings, training,

mentoring and awareness raising.

5. Media

During the last strategy period TI Georgia made very close ties with media organizations operating in

Georgia. Media outlets are important for us in delivering our messages to the government and the

general public. We constantly provide support and training to the media outlets about various research

tools and methods, as well as journalistic standards.

Editorial independence is vital for a functioning democracy. It is, therefore, one of our main priorities to

defend reporters from undue government interference. TI Georgia will continue monitoring and

reporting on the freedom of media and the environment it operates in. We expect this to be one of our

main directions of work ahead of the 2016 elections.

EXTERNAL PRIORITIES

Over the past decade, TI Georgia has been a leading civil society organization engaged in policy analysis

and advocacy in the broad field of democracy and good governance. The organization has further

expanded its activities during the last three years and now covers most of the key areas of public policy

and the majority of main public institutions. As a result, TI Georgia continuously generates up-to-date

and in-depth information and expert knowledge in multiple fields. These include anti-corruption policy,

judicial reform, parliamentary democracy, local government, elections, political and campaign finance,

media, economic policy, and healthcare.


12/24

12

The 2016-2020 period will be critical for Georgias political development, as the country faces

parliamentary, presidential and local government elections; on-going decentralization reforms;

Association Agreement and DCFTA implementation requirements and deadlines; and a growing

influence from pro-Russia groups in society. These are issues that we will have to grapple with both as

they influence our operating environment and as areas of concern to monitor and report on.

TI Georgia has elaborated a Theory of Change (ToC) which identifies areas of focus and priorities.

Activities that TI Georgia will engage in for the period of this strategy will align with and support the

outcomes identified in the ToC (please see ANNEX I).

TI Georgia has previously focused much of its attention in these areas. There has been a good deal of

progress across all branches of government, however continued focus is needed to ensure backsliding

does not occur. Activities under each objective area will be identified and prioritized based on rigorous

and on-going needs assessments, horizon scanning and identification of opportunities. The objectives and

outcomes have been further elaborated in the appendix.

Some expected areas to be prioritized include: Strengthening the transparency and accountability of judicial and law enforcement processes;

Monitoring the implementation of DCFTA and Association Agreement reforms;

Social policy and social welfare processes (education, health and urban planning)


13/24

13

Interventions

Types of actions taken to achieve the above objectives include:

1. Conduct objective, insightful and comprehensive analysis

Thorough, objective, insightful analysis is our core institutional strength. It provides the evidence-base

for our other activities. Over the next five years, TI Georgia will work to further improve the impact of

the research and analysis it produces.

TI Georgia is dedicated to provide reliable, fact-based and fair analysis that has a level of depth and detail

necessary to influence and shape policy debates. At the same time, we aim to communicate our work so

that interested non-experts can easily follow and understand our research and recommendations.

2. Effectively employ pro-active and re-active advocacy to ensure increasing transparency

and accountability of state and private sector

TI Georgia effectively employs advocacy to ensure that past success in increasing transparency are

solidified and future goals are achieved. This is done in part by responding to new initiatives and policyproposals coming out of the Parliament or the executive.

As we foster engagement with larger groups of society, we seek to represent more voices and more

people with our advocacy efforts. We, therefore, also work to focus on pro-active advocacy on

important policy issues. We aim to trigger and shape discussions about political accountability and

strengthening democratic institutions in Georgia. During the previous strategy period we found it

effective to submit our own legislative proposals and plan to continue this practice. When possible,

these will be followed by public advocacy campaigns around them to gain support and raise awareness.

We have also found that strategic litigation is an effective tool to influence government. When within its

mandate, TI Georgia will undertake legal action to defend the rights of those who have been abused by a

lack of legislation; the poor quality of laws as they exist; and/or poor enforcement of existing laws.

3. Promote broad public engagement in TI Georgias work so that TI Georgias activities

reflect the needs and interests of parties from all parts of Georgian society

We strive to promote broad public engagement in our work. This ensures that TI Georgias activities

reflect the needs and interests of the public from all parts of Georgia. We have employed new ways of

engaging people and communicating in a way that makes our research and analysis interesting and

relevant for larger audiences. These range from technical solutions, to tours of regional Georgia for

community consultations.

At the same time, we try to ensure that our communication is not a one-way channel - we want citizens

to share their views with us. We aim to engage with the public, to work together towards a positive

impact in communities.

4. Support TI Georgias activities with innovative uses of technology, recognizing that new

technologies offer increasingly powerful ways of improving the scope, reach, and impact of


14/24

14

our work

We seek to support all of our activities with innovative uses of technology. We recognize that new

technologies will allow our work to be more collaborative. New technology, thus, offers increasingly

powerful ways of improving the scope, reach, and impact of our work. TI Georgia extensively uses new

tools and technologies to monitor government and processes, share its work, engage in discussions,

receive information and feedback, and connect groups of individuals who care about similar issues. Atthe same time, new technological tools allow us to initiate new forms of communication between

citizens and authorities. It can create a sphere that allows individuals to make their voices heard and

their concerns be taken seriously.

INTERNAL PRIORITIES

Resources and capacity1. Institutional memory

The relatively high turnover rate observed in recent years has demonstrated the need for strengthening

the organizations institutional memory. Based on exit memos, this turnover is not a sign ofdissatisfaction with the organization as an employer, rather it is frequently due to staff seeking

educational opportunities abroad.

As such, TI Georgia is improving internal systems. Important long-term documents, such as this Strategy

and various program proposals, will ensure that our goals are followed in the future as well. Moreover,

TI Georgia will develop IT solutions that will help us maintain record of all correspondence with its

stakeholders, program files, and financial documents and so on.

2. Staff capacity

As the organization continuously takes on new initiatives and new problematic areas of governance

emerge, there is often the need to renew knowledge. When funding allows, TI Georgia will bring on

new staff members with expertise in relevant fields. Such a need will be determined on a realistic

estimation of staff hours required for each activity.

Equally, TI Georgia will invest in retraining and professional development of its existing staff from its

core funds. This will encourage professional growth among staff, encourage longevity of employment and

assists the organization.

3. Regional reach and influence

TI Georgia will aim to extend its capacity and support in the regions of Georgia. This may include

increasing the number of regional offices, should funding allow for it.

4. Organizational culture

TI Georgia recognizes the importance of team spirit and at least once a year holds a staff retreat, the

goal of which is to evaluate our work, plan for the future and foster the team spirit.

Working at TI Georgia, other than professional research and analysis, also entails civic activism. We will

continue valuing our staff and their individual goals. We will support their activism for various causes as


15/24

15

long as they do not contradict our mission and vision, or undermine universally recognized human

rights.

TI Georgia currently is one of the most desirable employers locally, proven by the vast numbers of

applications for any given vacancy. In the years to come, TI Georgia will commit to further solidifying its

culture of honesty, fairness and transparency, and encourage self-development and the sense ofbelonging and ownership among staff.

Workplace relations are important for supporting organizational culture. As such, TI Georgia

encourages a good work/life balance among its staff. This includes maximum work hours per week, a fair

and good leave policy, and flexibility when needed. We will look to strengthen and clarify human

resources policies as needed.

4. Public relations

TI Georgia has a strong media presence. We do, however, recognize that complicated policy issues are

not always understandable to the general public. The media is not always effective in explaining these

issues, either. We will strengthen our ability to demonstrate and communicate our findings, as well as

the results concerning the impact of our work. Thus our work will be better understood, and more

attractive to the community and relevant stakeholders.

5. Gender mainstreaming

Gender awareness and gender inclusiveness in Georgia in civil society and in government remains

weak. Gender assessments of legislation are not conducted, and the understanding of differential impacts

of policy design and implementation is minimal. TI Georgia itself does not have the skills internally to

conduct gender assessments of programs or program implementation. Therefore this cross-cutting issue

of our ToC will involve developing our internal capacity, and inviting other civil society organizations and

interested members of government to participate in training.

Financial sustainability

The major part of TI Georgias revenue is grants from international donor organizations. The current

financing model contains risks to the sustainability of the organization, which we are aware of. To

improve financial sustainability and expand its funding base TI Georgia has been investigating different

funding sources and methods: service contracts, a wider group of international donors, and private

donors.

TI Georgia will seek to widen and diversify its fundraising. Over the next five years, we will develop

close relationships with companies that strive to practice and promote integrity in their sectors. We willtry to seek a number of enterprises who could become regular financial contributors to TI Georgia. We

believe that foreign-owned and publicly listed companies might be potential supporters of TI Georgia.

Companies that are subject to Western compliance rules and European and American anti-corruption

legislation tend to be less affected by political pressure.


16/24

16

TI Georgia works closely with foreign embassies, and international donors in-country and with

international organizations to identify funding opportunities. We participate in competitive grant

processes, whenever they are relevant to our areas of work. In addition, we submit unsolicited

proposals to those donors we know are open to such submissions and when projects align with donor

strategies.

There are a number of multi-chapter TI projects that we have some stake in. These include programs on

health transparency, improving TI chapter-to-chapter communication, the National Integrity Systems

surveys and others. TI Georgia engages with these initiatives when they are useful and relevant to our

situation and context. These allow for access to a different group of donors, foundations, funds and the

private sector.

MONITORING IMPACT

TI Georgia will carefully and consistently monitor and evaluate the impact of the 2016-2020 Strategy, in

order to be accountable to the public, our Board and learn for the future.

By focusing on our impact, we will increase knowledge about what works and what does not. The

nature of our work makes it challenging to assess its impact. Advocacy takes time and is complex. Not

only does this make data collection challenging but it also makes it difficult to attribute impact. This

means we need a holistic approach, one that captures incremental changes and our contribution to

those changes, as well as the wider impact.

To achieve this, we will:

1. Carry out a baseline assessment of the political situation in Georgia. The NIS survey will be used

to inform this.

2. Collect ongoing information, semi- and annually, on the scope of our work using an impactmonitoring and evaluation framework.

3. With the assistance from the Board, conduct small-scale internal reviews of our work to better

understand occurring challenges to our work and reaffirm relevance of our strategic priorities.

4. Commission a mid-term review of the Strategy to assess whether we are on track to achieve

impact.

5. At the end of the Strategy period, evaluate our main assumptions about improving governance

and assess what works and what does not.

ANNEX I

Theory of ChangePurpose

During 2015 TI Georgia has developed the new strategy for 2016-2020. As part of this process, it was

determined that the organisation as a whole needed to clarify how it understood change to occur, and

how it best identified and prioritised areas of activities. While these were instinctively understood by

staff and management, it was considered a useful idea to outline intervention logic for future

management decisions, donors and to ensure clear communication between the organisation and its

board.


17/24

17

In addition, TI Georgia has been encouraged to look at more complex monitoring and evaluation

frameworksthat allow for reporting beyond simple output level. A theory of change was considered a

useful step in the development of a strategy-wide monitoring and evaluation framework. This was

considered appropriate in light of the wide body of literature that argues for the use of theory-based

evaluations in complex programmes (Pawson, 2004, among others).

To do this, it was determined that a series of workshops to define opportunities and barriers, areas offocus and types of activities were held. These brainstorming sessions helped identify how and where TI

Georgia wished to engage in the future. Following these brainstorming sessions, organised Theory of

Change workshops were facilitated by the then-Project Manager. These workshops were conducted

with management, staff, the board and key informants.

Theory of Change - narrative:

The scope of the strategy and the Theory of Change is ambitious, and beyond any claims of attribution.

It is based on extensive consultation, and should be understood as being targeted across the realms

defined and understood as being part of the integrity system: public sector governance institutions,

implementation and enforcement agencies (law enforcement, audit bodies, etc) and the media. It is

informed by a holistic approach to integrity as understood and defined by the National Integrity Systemssurvey.

Strong democratic systems are made up of a web of interdependent agencies, legislation and policies.

These are mutually reinforcing (both for positive and for negative). As such, any intervention designed to

improve governance must include consideration of the full range of actors in the governance space and

how they interact. Any gains in one area will support improvements in other areas, while equally any

weaknesses in one agency can undermine progress across the sector.

It is understood that the achievement of the overarching goal cannot and will not be the result of solely

TI Georgias work, and this Theory of Change does not define all aspects of activities needed for th eir

achievement.

In each area of focus, the theory of change considers how to achieve not just improved policies on

paper, but actual behaviour change within the organisations. As such, the theory of change includes

consideration of behavioural models, with a focus on an information-deficit model. This model

understands that without sufficient information actors cannot improve or change their behaviour.

However, knowledge alone will not result in systematic organisational and individual behaviour change.

Therefore across all objectives, the strategy aims to build the capacity of key champions of change and

decision-makers to act in a more accountable and transparent manner, while systematically reducing

corruption vulnerabilities. In addition, across all pillars there is the need to incentivise change. This

comes from public scrutiny and the media (a cross-cutting theme) and from breaking down patronage

networks that encourage and embed corrupt practices within government.

At the highest level, the Theory of Change looks at key weaknesses across the executive, legislative and

judicial branches of the national government; and the entirety of local government in one outcome. The

reasoning behind this being that at the national level there is the opportunity to engage with all three

branches separately and independently of projects occurring in other branches. While this work would

be mutually reinforcing, weaknesses at the national level need to be considered both as part of the

whole, and within pillars. In contrast, at the local government level all branches of government are

considered within one outcomethis is because informal ties at the local government level cross

branches more frequently and in more complex webs than at the national level; it would not be feasible


18/24

18

or appropriate to engage with one branch of local government without engaging with the others.

Equally, it would be unhelpful to engage with local legislatures as part of engagement with national

legislature (or with local executive, as part of engagement with national) as the opportunities and risks

are not identical, and specific tailored responses and engage processes are needed.

Cross-cutting issues are identified thus, as they are issues that need to be considered in engagement

with all branches of government and at all levels.

Objective 1: Executive Branch

The logic of the Theory of Change is based in an understanding of the role of the separation of power as

one of the main checks and balances in accountable government. The most significant challenges for

transparency and accountability in Georgia remain in the concentration of power in the executive

branch, which undermines political competition and oversight. Increased independence of the legislative

branch would support its ability to act as a check on the power of the executive branch. It is for this

reason that the bulk of outcomes focus around these areas.

Key weaknesses identified by the 2014 NIS for the executive branch, and by the Nations in Transit

report include poor implementation in practice of sound rules covering integrity and transparency,

informal influence, the highly politicized civil service and low capacity across the civil service. Based on

these findings, and expert knowledge the Theory of Change has focussed on relevant remedies and

pathways of change that might be activated.


19/24

19

Outcome 1.1 covers the rules of behaviour for the executive branch. As noted above, the rules as they

currently exist are well developed, and cover integrity, accountability and anti-corruption in an

appropriate manner. The weakness here is in compliance. Therefore each of the intermediate outcomes

focus on removing barriers to compliance, and providing motivation for compliance. One of the key

identified barriers is the unconstitutional influence currently being exerted by key individuals outside of

government, and patronage networks within political parties and the public service.

Outcome 1.2 builds on outcome 1.1 by focussing on the weaknesses within the organisations

ministries, legal entities under public law (LEPLs) and agencies that sit under the jurisdiction of various

ministries. As noted above, the NIS identified low capacity as one of the major obstacles to transparencyand accountability within the public service. Thus there is a focus on staff capacity and systems to

improve governance within the public service.

During research for the Theory of Change, law enforcement agencies were identified as a specific

priority area for the period of strategy. Government reform processes within the ministry of justice

provides a clear window of opportunity to engage for lasting and significant changes in the transparency,

accountability and governance of the law enforcement agencies.

Outcome 1.3 has a specific focus on ministers and public officials. As the senior decision-makers of the

executive branch their conduct as individuals and as representatives of their organisations sets the tone

for appropriate public disclosure, accountability, transparency and anti-corruption. While leaders act

with impunity, changing the culture within the executive branch towards systematic accountability is

difficult. Currently, experts have noted the weakness of legislation and regulation on conflict of interest,

anti-corruption and governmentbusiness relations. Moreover, where regulation exists the poor levels

of compliance has been emphasised. For this reason, engagement at a policy-level and then at an

enforcement level is needed for the achievement of this outcome and to support the achievement of

other outcomes under the executive branch.


20/24

20

Outcome 1.4 covers the range of government bodies that under the constitution and under good

democratic practice ought to act as oversight and constraint on the power wielded by the executive

branch. This outcome is the stick to encourage behaviour change throughout the executive. However,

weaknesses in practice has resulted in this group of actors being an ineffective control. Therefore, the

strengthening of these actors through improved capacity and knowledgeand the removal of obstacles

will support objective 1.

Objective 2: Legislative Branch

The parliament under the Georgian Constitution is both the law-making body of the country and holds awide array of powers to oversee and investigate government activities, override a presidential veto and

remove government. The parliament is unicameral, with members elected through a mixture of a party

list and single member constituencies.

The legislative processes are complex, and there are many opportunities for them to be managed poorly

and to undermine accountability. In the research and development of the theory of change, it was noted

that in many instances the committee hearings are held in such a way as to undermine public

participation and oversight. For this reason, outcome 2.1 works to improve the processes of the

legislature.

Outcome 2.2 deals with the lack of enforcement of anti-corruption and integrity mechanisms covering

MPs conflict of interest and attestations. There is a lack of a body with the mandate to investigate andenforce anti-corruption rules and procedures. This results in missing or incomplete pecuniary interest

documentation, or false and misleading documentation. As it stands, members of civil society, including

Transparency International Georgia have been investigating published attestations, and raising awareness

on this issue. But while the Civil Service Bureau has no mandate to investigate the honesty and

completeness of the documents they publish, there is a serious corruption vulnerability and questionable

transparency in this space.


21/24

21

Outcome 2.3 deals with the range of committees in parliament that have specific functions, and

sometimes operate more as a rubber stamp than as a form of review.

Elections are an important method of ensuring the accountability of parliament. While they are managed

by the executive branch, their purpose is to hold the elected officials of the legislature to account.

Therefore outcome 2.4 covers the role of elections as tools of accountability. In Georgia, frequent

changes in electoral legislation, weaknesses in electoral management and lack of transparency inelectoral processes and finances risk undermining this important tool. Improvements have been made in

regulation for managing complaints, although in practice complaints are still poorly handled. There have

also been improvements with financial oversight of electoral funds being moved to the State Audit

Office, however the misuse of state resources for campaigning is remains a concern.1 TI Georgia

supported this move, as during earlier elections we raised concerns over the power of incumbency and

the misuse of public funds for political purposes.

Objective 3: Judicial Branch

The judicial branch here is dealt with in lesser detail than the other branches. This is because there are

fewer entrances and levers for engagement. Outcomes 3.1 and 3.2 deal with the management of the

judiciary and the processes of case progression.

Objective 4: Local Government

Local government is a reflection of the work we undertake at a national level, but with a reduced scope.

This reflects both the comparatively weaker power and institutions of the local governments, and TI

Georgias capacity to engage at the local government level.

The logic of the intervention revolves around ensuring the entire system of integrity is promoted, across

the different branches of government at the local level. This is done through improved public

engagement, transparency and accountability. As above, a range of levers are identified regulation,

1CSOs concerned over screening to children of a violent film in four Samegrelo cities

http://transparency.ge/en/post/general-announcement/csos-concerned-over-screening-children-violent-film-four-samegrelo-cities


22/24

22

capacity and public scrutiny. There will be a focus on improving public engagement particularly in

relation to social policy (including education, health and urban development).

Cross-cutting issues

Citizen engagement, empowerment and oversight provides the demand for good governance, and is an

important aspect of accountability. Evidence from a range of transparency, accountability and open

government evaluations have shown that without bottom up advocacy, strong civil society and engaged

citizens, government will not take necessary steps to improve its performance.2It is for this reason that

citizen engagement and oversight has been noted as a cross-cutting issue for TI Georgia.

Media is also an important agent of accountability. It informs and engages the citizenry in the actions of

government and influential interest groups, including big business and powerful individuals; this in turn

builds social demand for democratic checks and balances, and accountable governance. The poor media

environment, including unwarranted interference from external sources, and insufficient transparency

were highlighted as issues of concern. This undermines citizen oversight of government, and thus

democratic and accountable governance in the country.

Gender awareness and gender inclusiveness in Georgia in civil society and in government remains

weak. Gender assessments of legislation are not conducted, and the understanding of differential impacts

of policy design and implementation is minimal. TI Georgia itself does not have the skills internally to

conduct gender assessments of programs or program implementation. Therefore this cross-cutting issuewill involve developing our internal capacity, and inviting other civil society organizations and interested

members of government to participate in training.

2 Open Government: Top-down needs bottom-up on http://www.makingallvoicescount.org/blog/open-

government-top-needs-bottom/ on 26/01/2015
http://www.makingallvoicescount.org/blog/open-government-top-needs-bottom/http://www.makingallvoicescount.org/blog/open-government-top-needs-bottom/http://www.makingallvoicescount.org/blog/open-government-top-needs-bottom/http://www.makingallvoicescount.org/blog/open-government-top-needs-bottom/


23/24

23

Conclusion and next steps

This theory of change is the initial step in the development of a robust monitoring and evaluation

framework for the 2016-2020 strategy. It outlines the understood logic of TI Georgias interventions. It

can provide guidance on how, where and when to engage with government and civil society actors. And

allows for monitoring along expected pathways of change.

It is necessary for TI Georgia to build in this theory of change in developing a monitoring and evaluation

framework. With the support of a monitoring and evaluation expert, it would be advisable for the

organisation to identify credible and usuable indicators at the intermediate outcome and outcome level.

This process should include both quantitative and qualitative indicators with clear and useful data

sources.

As far as is practicable, TI Georgia should consider using the range of international research on the

country to assist in the monitoring of the impact of the strat egy. These include : Freedom Houses

Nations in Transit; World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness Index; World Bank Government

Effectiveness score; Freedom Houses Freedom in the World score; Transparency Internationals

Corruption Perception Index (conducted by the TI Secretariat, independently of TI Georgia) and

National Integrity Systems survey (conducted by TI Georgia with oversight from a panel of experts). In

addition there are a range of available regular domestic surveys, including National Democratic Institutepolls, International Republican Institute polls and the Caucasus Research Resource Centre (CRRC)

Caucasus Barometer. By using existing monitoring data it would significantly reduce the cost of

monitoring and evaluation for the programme.

It would be advisable for the organisation to conduct an evaluation at the halfway point of the strategy,

to confirm that change is happening as expected. This evaluation could also assist in any reorienting that

might be needed, due to changes in the operating environment.


24/24

24

ti georgia strategy and theory of change

Documents