Presentation by Hamish Goldie-Scot, CoST-Infrastructure Transparency Initiative, UK, on the CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative, at the third regional conference on public procurement for ENP East countries, Tbilisi, 6-7 November 2019.

1. © OECD
3rd regional conference on public
procurement for ENP East countries
The CoST Infrastructure Transparency Initiative
Hamish Goldie-Scot, CoST Technical Adviser, UK
Tbilisi, 6-7 November 2019

2. Overview
1. Problem definition
2. VIDEO - The CoST global programme
3. Overview of CoST features
4. Theory behind CoST
5. Impact of CoST
6. CASE STUDY: CoST disclosure in Ukraine
1

3. 1. Problem definition
2
$15 trillion
public
infrastructure
investment gap
up to 2040
Public
infrastructure
particularly
prone to
corruption
Growing demand
for transparency
and citizen
engagement
.. but no easy
solutions
Many underlying causes, including a lack of:
• Transparency; and
• Trust

4. 2. VIDEO: The CoST global programme
3

5. 3. Overview of CoST features
4
Multi-Stakeholder
• Government, industry
and civil society work
together.
• Builds trust
Disclosure
• Disclosure in Infrastructure Data
Standard or OC4IDS format.
• 40 data points disclosed over
project cycle.
Social Accountability
• Stakeholders empowered to
hold government to account.
• Leads to improvements in
policy and practice.
Assurance
• Disclosed data turned into
compelling information
• Concerns highlighted
• Public launch of report
Multi-
stakeholder
Working
Disclosure
Social
Accountability Assurance
Value for money
Better services
Enhanced trust
WORKING TOGETHER … to LET THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES..to STRENGTHEN EXISTING ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS… to IMPROVE PERFORMANCE

6. 4. Theory behind CoST
- Finance staff & equipment
- Clear operating procedures
- Skills & experience
- Quality management
- Transparency
- Performance management
- Shared values & vision
- Mutual respect
- Confidence in fair contracts
fairly applied
- Institutional clarity
- Rule of law fairly applied
- Good performance rewarded
What drives performance?

7. 6
Procuring
Entity
Project data
and
association
information
Proactive
Disclosure
Multi-Stakeholder Group
Assurance
process
Assurance
Report
Reactive
Disclosure
Requests for
information
Stakeholders
Site visits
5. Impact of CoST: Accountability

8. 7
BUSINESS
Wants better markets
SOCIETY
Wants better services
GOVERNMENT
Wants better value for
money
GOVERNMENT
Wants to be trusted
Wants to trust the system
BUSINESS
Wants to be trusted
Wants to trust the system
SOCIETY
Wants to be trusted
Wants to trust the system
5. Impact of CoST: Trust

9. 8
Quick wins
Some CoST
recommendations simply
provide a stimulus for
policy initiatives that all
parties already know are
necessary
Better data management
Procuring Entities invest in
strengthened
management information
systems
Underlying causes of cost
overruns
Geographical distribution of
funding
5. Impact of CoST: Better performance
Accountability
Clients subject
themselves to increased
public scrutiny. Examples
include:
 Constructive citizen
engagement
 Inflated quantities
identified
 Unnecessary project
cancelled
Belize bridge, Guatemala

10. 9
Member
Affiliate
Latin America:
Buenos Aries, El
Salvador, Costa Rica,
Guatemala, Honduras
and Panama.
Africa: Ethiopia,
Malawi,
Tanzania,
Uganda and
Sekondi-
Takoradi
Eurasia:
Afghanista
n, Thailand
and
Ukraine.
6. Impact of CoST: Global application

11. 10
Infrastructure Data disclosure Platform
All contract stages
1 2 3 4Planning Work
execution
Supervisi
on
Project
design
CoST IDS
WHAT to disclose
OCDS
HOW to disclose
Data set in
OC4IDS
INFRASTRUCTURE MONITORING
7. CASE STUDY: CoST disclosure in Ukraine

12. Ukraine: CoST disclosure Platform
Data set in OC4IDS
International standard
OC4IDSINTERACTIVE
ANALYTICS
 Market

Contractors
 Procurement
Entities
 Tenders
State and local
roads
11

13. 12
Ukraine: Real time analysis of road markets
 INTERACTIVE FILTERS
2016
CURRENT REPAIR
CAPITAL REPAIR
RECONSTRUCTION
NEW CONSTRUCTION


2017 2018 2019 0.1%
0.9%
1.2%
0.01%0.1%
19% 0.8%
0.4%
23%
0.7%
1.2%
26%
1.4%
2%
0.1%
14%
9%
3 Bln UAH
(120 M
USD)
692 M UAH
(27,7 M USD)
0.4%
14%
57%
15%
1.7%
11%
0.3%
0.7%

14. Ukraine: Top 5 contractors
Contractors analysis
 TOP 5 contractors
 Information about Contractor
 Geography of contractor’s work
 Procurement process analysis
47%
53%
TOP
5
other
7%
7%
15%
16%
32%
9%
6%
8%
TOP - LLC “Avtomahistral
Pivden”
268 mln $ in 9 regions
(21% of total value)
13

15. Ukraine: Detailed analysis of market
14

16. 15
7.0
4.4
3.8
2.6
1.8
1.0
31.6 thou - 7.9 mln
19.8 - 31.6 mln
7.9 - 19.8 mln
19.8 - 31.6 thou
> 31.6 mln
<31.6 thou
1
2
3
4
5
6
Contract value $ № participants
Ukraine: Interactive real time analytics (competition)

17. 1А 1B 2 3 4
739,0
541,0
474,0
364,0
186,0
AVERAGE COST OF
1KM
ROAD CATEGORY
THOUSAND$PER1KM
Ukraine: Interactive real time analytics (unit costs)
16

18. 17
CAPITAL REPAIR OF ALMA - ATYNSʹKA
STREET
Kyiv
Terms of
completion
Initial – 487 days Final – 1217 days
Total value
Initial – $ 9.8 mln Final – $ 13.5 mln
Ukraine: Overview of cost increases

19. 18
Hamish Goldie-Scot MA(Cantab) MSc CEng FICE
Tel: +44 7803259721
Email: h.goldie-scot@infrasructuretransparency.org
Website: www.infrastructuretransparency.org
https://twitter.com/costransparency
Sample portals: www.sisocs.org
www.portal.costukraine.org