I. Overall Assessment

1. This Report on the Observance of Standards and Codes (ROSC)—Data Module is a reassessment of the exercise conducted in July 2002, using the IMF’s Data Quality Assessment Framework (DQAF July 2003). It covers national accounts, consumer (CPI) and producer price indices (PPI), government finance, monetary, and balance of payments statistics. The Georgian agencies that compile and disseminate these datasets are: the National Statistics Office of Georgia (GEOSTAT) for national accounts and prices, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) for government finance statistics (GFS), and the National Bank of Georgia (NBG) for monetary and balance of payments statistics.

2. Following the 2002 ROSC mission, Georgia has continued to make impressive improvements in statistical compilation and dissemination in all areas of statistics covered by the Data ROSC. It participated in the General Data Dissemination System (GDDS) in 2006. The commendable progress achieved allowed Georgia to subscribe to the Special Data Dissemination Standard (SDDS) on May 17, 2010. Since its SDDS subscription, Georgia has been in observance of the SDDS, meeting the specifications for coverage, periodicity, timeliness, and the dissemination of advance release calendars. It uses flexibility options on periodicity and timeliness for the production index and employment and unemployment statistics. Appendix I provides an overview of Georgia’s dissemination practices compared to the SDDS.

3. The ROSC—Data Module contains the following main observations. Georgia’s macroeconomic statistics are generally of high quality and adequately meet users’ needs. Since 2002, Georgia has made tangible improvements on the legal, institutional, methodological, and dissemination aspects of data quality. Nevertheless, areas for further improvements include increase staff resources of GEOSTAT, compilation system for GDP by expenditure approach in real terms, extension of the coverage to include the expenditure pattern of the whole population in the CPI weights, classification of board money, and enhancement of accuracy of c.i.f./f.o.b. prices on imports on a sound method. Since the 2002 ROSC, major improvements are the enactment of the Law of Georgia on Official Statistics in December 2009, followed by the establishment of an independent statistical office—the GEOSTAT—in 2010; the adoption in 2008 of the classifications of the Government Finance Statistics Manual 2001 (GFSM 2001) as the budget classification; a new compilation system for balance of payments statistics; the significant increase in the scope of macroeconomic statistics produced and disseminated by the three agencies to the public; and the explicit declared commitment by senior management to work toward international standards of data quality.

4. In applying the IMF’s DQAF July 2003, the remainder of this section presents the mission’s main conclusions. The presentation follows the DQAF’s quality dimensions, by agency for the first two dimensions and across datasets for the remaining four.

5. Regarding prerequisites of quality, the responsibilities of the GEOSTAT, MOF, and NBG to compile and disseminate the corresponding statistics are clearly specified in the relevant laws governing them. However, the Law of Georgia on Official Statistics does not include mandatory reporting and sanctions (penalties) for nonreporting or misreporting, hence, some data producing agencies face significant challenges to improve source data, with the strongest impact on national accounts and price statistics. While management of each of the three agencies clearly demonstrates the commitment to improve data quality through collaboration, there is no arrangement for regular meetings of technical staff responsible for macroeconomic statistics. Such meetings provide a comprehensive arena for exchanging information on current and forthcoming projects for statistical development, promoting cross-sectoral data consistency crucial for macro-economic policy making, and coordinating work programs to avoid duplication of effort, ensure coherent application of methodology at all stages of data collection, and enhance effectiveness. Nevertheless, these agencies have several bilateral meetings and arrangements for collaboration on data issues e.g. MOF and NBG on GDP estimates, GEOSTAT and NBG on data sources for balance of payments statistics. However, there is no regular venue for the price users to discuss the issues related to the price statistics and their developments. All three data producing agencies seek to maintain a high level of transparency in the compilation and dissemination of their statistics. Especially, the management of the newly established GEOSTAT conducts intensive outreach activities with users to build trust and increase the credibility of statistics

6. Staff, computing, and financial resources are adequate to compile GFS, monetary and balance of payments statistics. However, staff resources of the GEOSTAT are not adequate for performing current programs. The remuneration of the GEOSTAT staff is not competitive compared to similar job positions in other data producing agencies in Georgia. This creates difficulties in attracting and retaining experienced staff. Hardware and software facilities of the GEOSTAT are not up to date for implementation of the medium-term program. All agencies, except the MOF, have systematic arrangements in place to obtain feedback from external users.

7. Regarding assurances of integrity, staff of the GEOSTAT, MOF, and NBG uphold high standards of professionalism, transparency, and ethical conduct in producing macroeconomic statistics. The basic principles governing the statistical compilation and dissemination practices include professional independence, objectivity, confidentiality of statistical data, and efficiency. Recruitment and promotion of staff are based on relevant skills and performances in accordance with the Law of Georgia on the Public Service (No. 1022 of October 31, 1997). Professionalism is promoted through well-established procedures including participation in training and seminars. Advance notice of major changes in methodology, source data, and statistical techniques is provided, except for monetary and balance of payments statistics. Arrangements with the NBG and GEOSTAT for internal government access to GFS prior to their data releases are not publicly identified by the MOF.

8. Regarding methodological soundness, the macroeconomic statistics are generally based on sound methods. All datasets broadly follow international statistical standards, namely the System of National Accounts, 1993 (1993 SNA), international manuals for the CPI and PPI, GFSM 2001, Monetary and Financial Statistics Manual (MFSM), and Balance of Payments Manual, fifth edition (BPM5). Methodological deviations exist in most datasets. Volume measures of GDP by the expenditure approach are not compiled. The scope of the consumer price index is limited to only urban areas while the treatment of owner-occupied housing is conceptually imprecise. The structure of PPI relies on turnover rather than output concept while product based PPIs are not compiled. For GFS, impressive progress has been achieved in the implementation of the GFSM 2001, as part of the ongoing reform of public sector accounting. The reform includes the implementation of accrual accounting by 2020. However, there are deficiencies in sectorization of Legal Entities of Public Law (LEPLs) and securities are not recorded at market value in central government debt. For monetary statistics, classification and sectorization mainly follow international guidelines, except for: i) the definition of broad money; ii) classification of other financial corporations (OFCs) and nonprofit institutions (NPI) in other depository corporations (ODCs) survey; iii) classification of accrued interest together with the outstanding amounts of assets and liabilities for some financial instruments; and iv) recording financial derivatives in the balance sheet of the NBG and commercial banks.

9. The accuracy and reliability of the macroeconomic statistics for most datasets could benefit from further improvements. National accounts face serious source data deficiencies owing to: absence of an economic census; under-reporting in the business survey and household budget survey (HBS); shortcomings in the business register; and incomplete coverage of some activities (trade, other community, social and personal activities). Also, a better method could be used to benchmark quarterly national accounts data to annual estimates. The export and import price indices are not compiled. The accuracy of the CPI and PPI weights, with respect to actual household consumption and market turnover, suffers from the same HBS and business register shortcomings as the national accounts. The imputation methods for both CPI and PPI, while recently improved, need to be enhanced to ensure coherent long-term treatment of seasonal goods. Monetary and balance of payments statistics rely on adequate and timely source data. However, the source data for monetary statistics do not give a clear definition of residency for legal entities consistent with the recommendations of the MFSM. Some data sources for balance of payments need strengthening, notably the International Transactions Reporting System (ITRS) and the private nonfinancial external debt compilation program. For the balance of payments, statistical techniques are adequate, except for the calculation of the c.i.f./f.o.b. adjustment to imports. For national accounts and balance of payments, limited revision studies and analyses are carried out but not documented.

10. Serviceability of macroeconomic statistics is adequate, with all macroeconomic datasets exceeding timeliness requirements of the SDDS. All datasets meet the periodicity requirements of the SDDS. The CPI, PPI, and GFS receive excellent assessments in all elements of serviceability. All macroeconomic statistics fulfill adequately the consistency parameters within each dataset and over time. Although the serviceability of balance of payments statistics is generally sound, users are neither informed when data are revised nor provided with detailed explanations of the revisions. In addition, the revision cycle of the national accounts follows a regular schedule, determined on the basis of the availability of source data and the timing of revisions to related datasets; however, the public is not informed about the revision policy.

11. Regarding accessibility, most datasets meet the standard in terms of presentational format and dissemination media, provision of advance release calendars, and simultaneous release of data. While national accounts have comprehensive references to international guidelines on the GEOSTAT website, the information on data sources and methods for compilation of national accounts and price statistics, applied in Georgia, is limited. Brief metadata for CPI are disseminated, but for the PPI the GEOSTAT does not currently disseminate either analysis of recent index movements or any metadata apart from the SDDS metadata on the IMF website. Consistent long-term index series for the CPI and PPI are not disseminated monthly, although they are available in the quarterly publications. Most datasets provide contact information and compilers are responsive to queries as confirmed by the independent users’ survey. However, the MOF do not provide contact details or material suitable to help raise awareness of the use of GFS for the general public. Data and metadata for monetary and balance of payments statistics, and the international investment position are available to the public on the NBG website.

12. Section II provides a summary assessment by agency and dataset based on a four-part scale. This is followed by users’ survey in Section III and staff recommendations in Section IV. The authorities’ response to this report and a volume of detailed assessments are presented in separate documents.

II. Assessment by Agency and Dataset

13. Assessments of the quality of six macroeconomic datasets—national accounts, CPI, PPI, government finance, monetary, and balance of payments statistics—were conducted using the DQAF July 2003. In this section, the results are presented at the level of the DQAF elements and using a four-point rating scale (Table 1). Assessments of the prerequisites of data quality and the assurances of integrity (Dimensions “0” and “1” of the DQAF) are presented in Tables 2a–c. For each dataset, the assessment of methodological soundness, accuracy and reliability, serviceability, and accessibility (Dimensions “2” to “5” of the DQAF) are shown in Tables 3a–f.

Table 1.

Data Quality Assessment Framework July 2003—Summary Results

Practice observed: Current practices generally meet or achieve the objectives of DQAF internationally accepted statistical practices without any significant deficiencies. Practice largely observed: Some departures, but these are not seen as sufficient to raise doubts about the authorities’ ability to observe the DQAF practices. Practice largely not observed: Significant departures and the authorities will need to take significant action to achieve observance. Practice not observed: Most DQAF practices are not met. Not applicable: Used only exceptionally when statistical practices do not apply to a country’s circumstances.

Table 1.

Data Quality Assessment Framework July 2003—Summary Results

Key to symbols: O = Practice Observed; LO = Practice Largely Observed; LNO = Practice Largely Not Observed; NO = Practice Not Observed; NA = Not Applicable
Datasets
Dimensions/Elements	National Accounts	Consumer Price Index	Producer Price Index	Government Finance Statistics	Monetary Statistics	Balance of Payments Statistics
0. Prerequisites of quality
0.1 Legal and institutional environment	LO	LO	LO	LO	LO	LO
0.2 Resources	LNO	LNO	LNO	O	O	O
0.3 Relevance	O	LO	LO	LO	O	O
0.4 Other quality management	O	O	O	O	O	O
1. Assurances of integrity
1.1 Professionalism	O	O	O	O	O	O
1.2 Transparency	O	O	O	LO	LO	LO
1.3 Ethical standards	O	O	O	O	O	O
2. Methodological soundness
2.1 Concepts and definitions	O	O	LO	O	O	O
2.2 Scope	LO	LO	LO	O	O	O
2.3 Classification/sectorization	LO	O	O	LO	LO	O
2.4 Basis for recording	LO	O	O	LO	O	O
3. Accuracy and reliability
3.1 Source data	LNO	LO	LO	O	LO	LO
3.2 Assessment of source data	O	O	O	O	O	O
3.3 Statistical techniques	LO	LO	LO	O	O	LO
3.4 Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs	O	O	O	O	O	O
3.5 Revision studies	LO	O	O	O	O	LO
4. Serviceability
4.1 Periodicity and timeliness	O	O	O	O	O	O
4.2 Consistency	O	O	O	O	O	O
4.3 Revision policy and practice	LO	O	O	O	O	LO
5. Accessibility
5.1 Data accessibility	O	O	LO	O	O	O
5.2 Metadata accessibility	LO	LO	LNO	LO	O	O
5.3 Assistance to users	O	O	O	LO	O	O

Practice observed: Current practices generally meet or achieve the objectives of DQAF internationally accepted statistical practices without any significant deficiencies. Practice largely observed: Some departures, but these are not seen as sufficient to raise doubts about the authorities’ ability to observe the DQAF practices. Practice largely not observed: Significant departures and the authorities will need to take significant action to achieve observance. Practice not observed: Most DQAF practices are not met. Not applicable: Used only exceptionally when statistical practices do not apply to a country’s circumstances.

View Table

Table 1.

Data Quality Assessment Framework July 2003—Summary Results

Key to symbols: O = Practice Observed; LO = Practice Largely Observed; LNO = Practice Largely Not Observed; NO = Practice Not Observed; NA = Not Applicable
Datasets
Dimensions/Elements	National Accounts	Consumer Price Index	Producer Price Index	Government Finance Statistics	Monetary Statistics	Balance of Payments Statistics
0. Prerequisites of quality
0.1 Legal and institutional environment	LO	LO	LO	LO	LO	LO
0.2 Resources	LNO	LNO	LNO	O	O	O
0.3 Relevance	O	LO	LO	LO	O	O
0.4 Other quality management	O	O	O	O	O	O
1. Assurances of integrity
1.1 Professionalism	O	O	O	O	O	O
1.2 Transparency	O	O	O	LO	LO	LO
1.3 Ethical standards	O	O	O	O	O	O
2. Methodological soundness
2.1 Concepts and definitions	O	O	LO	O	O	O
2.2 Scope	LO	LO	LO	O	O	O
2.3 Classification/sectorization	LO	O	O	LO	LO	O
2.4 Basis for recording	LO	O	O	LO	O	O
3. Accuracy and reliability
3.1 Source data	LNO	LO	LO	O	LO	LO
3.2 Assessment of source data	O	O	O	O	O	O
3.3 Statistical techniques	LO	LO	LO	O	O	LO
3.4 Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs	O	O	O	O	O	O
3.5 Revision studies	LO	O	O	O	O	LO
4. Serviceability
4.1 Periodicity and timeliness	O	O	O	O	O	O
4.2 Consistency	O	O	O	O	O	O
4.3 Revision policy and practice	LO	O	O	O	O	LO
5. Accessibility
5.1 Data accessibility	O	O	LO	O	O	O
5.2 Metadata accessibility	LO	LO	LNO	LO	O	O
5.3 Assistance to users	O	O	O	LO	O	O

Practice observed: Current practices generally meet or achieve the objectives of DQAF internationally accepted statistical practices without any significant deficiencies. Practice largely observed: Some departures, but these are not seen as sufficient to raise doubts about the authorities’ ability to observe the DQAF practices. Practice largely not observed: Significant departures and the authorities will need to take significant action to achieve observance. Practice not observed: Most DQAF practices are not met. Not applicable: Used only exceptionally when statistical practices do not apply to a country’s circumstances.

Table 2a.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—National Statistics Office of Georgia (GEOSTAT)

Table 2a.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—National Statistics Office of Georgia (GEOSTAT)

0. Prerequisites of quality	1. Assurances of integrity
Legal and institutional environment. The GEOSTAT is a legal entity of public law established by the Law of Georgia on Official Statistics for producing official statistics and disseminating statistical information (Article. 1 of the Charter of the National Statistics Office of Georgia, approved by the Presidential Decree #72 of February 1, 2010). With this legal provision, GEOSTAT is responsible for the compilation of national accounts and price statistics. According to the legislation, the administrative bodies shall be obliged to provide the GEOSTAT with the information, however, no sanctions (penalties) for nonreporting or misreporting are stipulated by the Law. Arrangements to promote consistency of methods and results are set up by the Board of the GEOSTAT. However, meetings among technical staff levels with other data producing agencies to promote coordination and ensure consistency of macroeconomic statistics are not conducted on a regular basis.	Professionalism. The basic principles governing the collection, processing, and dissemination of statistics in Georgia include professional independence, objectivity, reliability, confidentiality of statistical data, and efficiency. GEOSTAT staff is free from political or other influences in choosing the most appropriate sources and methods. The Board of the GEOSTAT nominates the Executive Director who is appointed for a term of 4 years and may be dismissed by the President of Georgia.
	Transparency. The terms and conditions governing the collection of statistics are published in the Law on Statistics and in the Charter of GEOSTAT, which are widely available to the public, including from the GEOSTAT website. Products of the GEOSTAT are clearly identified as such by its name and logo. The national accounts tables disseminated in the NBG’s publications identify the GEOSTAT as the source. There is no prior access by government officials to data before their release.
Resources. Staff resources are not sufficient for performing the current and upcoming tasks, in particular for national accounts, as well as for trade and price statistics. The GEOSTAT faces problems with staff turnover and uncompetitive remuneration. Hardware and software facilities are not quite up to date for implementation of the medium-term program.	Ethical standards. Ethical standards set up in the UN Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics are at core in the GEOSTAT operations. New staff are made aware of the ethical standards when they join the GEOSTAT.
Relevance. The management has an intensive outreach activity with users on building trust and increasing the credibility of the statistics. However, there is no procedure to consult all types of users on a regular basis (e.g. annually) to ensure that current statistics meet needs of CPI and PPI data users. The users’ feedback is encouraged via GEOSTAT website.
Other quality management. The GEOSTAT commitment to quality is stipulated by the Law and well publicized. Quality policy is based on the provisions of national and EU legislation, Strategy of National Statistics Offices, European Statistics Code of Practice, user needs and expectations. It defines overall intentions and directions of institution related to quality. The GEOSTAT regularly reviews and plans improvements to their internal processes.

View Table

Table 2a.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—National Statistics Office of Georgia (GEOSTAT)

0. Prerequisites of quality	1. Assurances of integrity
Legal and institutional environment. The GEOSTAT is a legal entity of public law established by the Law of Georgia on Official Statistics for producing official statistics and disseminating statistical information (Article. 1 of the Charter of the National Statistics Office of Georgia, approved by the Presidential Decree #72 of February 1, 2010). With this legal provision, GEOSTAT is responsible for the compilation of national accounts and price statistics. According to the legislation, the administrative bodies shall be obliged to provide the GEOSTAT with the information, however, no sanctions (penalties) for nonreporting or misreporting are stipulated by the Law. Arrangements to promote consistency of methods and results are set up by the Board of the GEOSTAT. However, meetings among technical staff levels with other data producing agencies to promote coordination and ensure consistency of macroeconomic statistics are not conducted on a regular basis.	Professionalism. The basic principles governing the collection, processing, and dissemination of statistics in Georgia include professional independence, objectivity, reliability, confidentiality of statistical data, and efficiency. GEOSTAT staff is free from political or other influences in choosing the most appropriate sources and methods. The Board of the GEOSTAT nominates the Executive Director who is appointed for a term of 4 years and may be dismissed by the President of Georgia.
	Transparency. The terms and conditions governing the collection of statistics are published in the Law on Statistics and in the Charter of GEOSTAT, which are widely available to the public, including from the GEOSTAT website. Products of the GEOSTAT are clearly identified as such by its name and logo. The national accounts tables disseminated in the NBG’s publications identify the GEOSTAT as the source. There is no prior access by government officials to data before their release.
Resources. Staff resources are not sufficient for performing the current and upcoming tasks, in particular for national accounts, as well as for trade and price statistics. The GEOSTAT faces problems with staff turnover and uncompetitive remuneration. Hardware and software facilities are not quite up to date for implementation of the medium-term program.	Ethical standards. Ethical standards set up in the UN Fundamental Principles of Official Statistics are at core in the GEOSTAT operations. New staff are made aware of the ethical standards when they join the GEOSTAT.
Relevance. The management has an intensive outreach activity with users on building trust and increasing the credibility of the statistics. However, there is no procedure to consult all types of users on a regular basis (e.g. annually) to ensure that current statistics meet needs of CPI and PPI data users. The users’ feedback is encouraged via GEOSTAT website.
Other quality management. The GEOSTAT commitment to quality is stipulated by the Law and well publicized. Quality policy is based on the provisions of national and EU legislation, Strategy of National Statistics Offices, European Statistics Code of Practice, user needs and expectations. It defines overall intentions and directions of institution related to quality. The GEOSTAT regularly reviews and plans improvements to their internal processes.

Table 2b.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—Ministry of Finance

Table 2b.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—Ministry of Finance

0. Prerequisites of quality	1. Assurances of integrity
Legal and institutional environment. The responsibility for compiling and disseminating GFS and budget execution data is clearly specified in laws and decrees. The task of compiling and disseminating GFS is assigned to the Fiscal Forecasting Department of the MOF. Arrangements exist for the exchange of data with other data producing agencies, the NBG and GEOSTAT. However, meetings of the technical staff of the data producing agencies do not follow a regular schedule, such as one per year, which would address data requirements and understanding and ensure the consistency of macroeconomic statistics. The Law of Georgia on Official Secrecy identifies data that are considered confidential. There are legal and administrative provisions for collecting the information necessary for the compilation of budget execution reports.	Professionalism. MOF staff responsible for GFS compilation and dissemination have a strong culture of professionalism, transparency, and ethical conduct. Fiscal data are compiled under budget laws for the purposes of budget monitoring and fiscal policy analysis, and for reporting to international organizations in accordance with international standards. The procedures established under the laws and standards ensure the production of fiscal data on an impartial basis.
	Transparency. The laws and regulations governing the compilation and dissemination of GFS and budget execution data are available to the public. Arrangements with the NBG and GEOSTAT for internal government access to GFS prior to release are not publicly identified.
Resources. The human resources seem to be adequate for current operations. Physical, and computer resources allocated to compiling GFS and budget execution data are adequate. Knowledge of the GFSM 2001 is very good.	Ethical standards. All state employees are governed by a code of conduct according to the Law of Georgia on Public Service, which includes penalties for violations. The Law was disseminated to all employees when promulgated. Employees are referred to the existence of the law when signing their employment contracts. The MOF has its own internal code of conduct (The Home Rule of Central Apparatus of the Ministry of Finance of Georgia) approved under the decree of the Minister of Finance of October 10, 2007.
Relevance. Users indicated that the fiscal data were sufficiently relevant for their use. However, there are no systematic arrangements in place at the MOF to obtain feedback from external users.
Other quality management. The GFS are compiled from accounting data which are subject to budget law, accounting standards, and audit. The MOF monitors the quality of GFS. The ongoing accounting reform includes the full implementation of the GFSM 2001 methodology.

View Table

Table 2b.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—Ministry of Finance

0. Prerequisites of quality	1. Assurances of integrity
Legal and institutional environment. The responsibility for compiling and disseminating GFS and budget execution data is clearly specified in laws and decrees. The task of compiling and disseminating GFS is assigned to the Fiscal Forecasting Department of the MOF. Arrangements exist for the exchange of data with other data producing agencies, the NBG and GEOSTAT. However, meetings of the technical staff of the data producing agencies do not follow a regular schedule, such as one per year, which would address data requirements and understanding and ensure the consistency of macroeconomic statistics. The Law of Georgia on Official Secrecy identifies data that are considered confidential. There are legal and administrative provisions for collecting the information necessary for the compilation of budget execution reports.	Professionalism. MOF staff responsible for GFS compilation and dissemination have a strong culture of professionalism, transparency, and ethical conduct. Fiscal data are compiled under budget laws for the purposes of budget monitoring and fiscal policy analysis, and for reporting to international organizations in accordance with international standards. The procedures established under the laws and standards ensure the production of fiscal data on an impartial basis.
	Transparency. The laws and regulations governing the compilation and dissemination of GFS and budget execution data are available to the public. Arrangements with the NBG and GEOSTAT for internal government access to GFS prior to release are not publicly identified.
Resources. The human resources seem to be adequate for current operations. Physical, and computer resources allocated to compiling GFS and budget execution data are adequate. Knowledge of the GFSM 2001 is very good.	Ethical standards. All state employees are governed by a code of conduct according to the Law of Georgia on Public Service, which includes penalties for violations. The Law was disseminated to all employees when promulgated. Employees are referred to the existence of the law when signing their employment contracts. The MOF has its own internal code of conduct (The Home Rule of Central Apparatus of the Ministry of Finance of Georgia) approved under the decree of the Minister of Finance of October 10, 2007.
Relevance. Users indicated that the fiscal data were sufficiently relevant for their use. However, there are no systematic arrangements in place at the MOF to obtain feedback from external users.
Other quality management. The GFS are compiled from accounting data which are subject to budget law, accounting standards, and audit. The MOF monitors the quality of GFS. The ongoing accounting reform includes the full implementation of the GFSM 2001 methodology.

Table 2c.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—National Bank of Georgia

Table 2c.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—National Bank of Georgia

0. Prerequisites of quality	1. Assurances of integrity
Legal and institutional environment. The Organic Law on the National Bank of Georgia (NBG) in its Article 3, paragraph 3, mandates the compilation and dissemination of Georgia’s monetary and balance of payments statistics. The legal provisions included in Article 20, paragraph 1 of the Organic Law on the NBG protect the confidentiality of information. Article 45 requires both public and private sectors to provide statistical, financial, and other data, including confidential information that the NBG may request. The NBG is authorized to request statistical and accounting reports from the financial system (Article 33 of the NBG Organic Law). Data sharing and coordination in compiling statistics between NBG departments are adequate. However, meetings among technical staff with other data producing agencies to promote coordination and ensure consistency of macroeconomic statistics are not conducted on a regular basis.	Professionalism. According to the NBG Organic Law, Article 4, paragraph 1, the NBG is independent in its activity. NBG’s independence is strengthened by a similar provision in the Constitution of the Republic of Georgia (Article 95, paragraph 4). These provisions guarantee professional independence of the NBG, ensuring that monetary and balance of payments statistics are compiled following strict technical criteria without outside interference. Recruitment and promotions are based on relevant skills and expertise and are conducted on a competitive basis. Professionalism is further promoted through participation in seminars and workshops, training courses, and visits to other central banks. The NBG tracks media coverage of its data and comments publicly on misuse of its statistics.
	Transparency. The NBG disseminates the terms and conditions for conducting statistical work in the NBG’s website. No government officials outside the NBG have access to the data before their release to the public. Statistics that are included in NBG’s publications but compiled by other agencies carry appropriate attribution. However, there is no advance notice on changes in the methodology, source data, or statistical techniques.
Resources. The number of staff assigned to compile monetary and balance of payments statistics is adequate. Staff responsible for monetary and balance of payments statistics have attended courses organized by other central banks and international organizations. Computing and financial resources are adequate to carry out statistical programs.
Relevance. The NBG conducts annual users surveys of monetary and balance of payment statistics to ensure that MFS and balance of payment statistics meet the needs of users.	Ethical standards. NBG’s Staff Manual identifies rules and standards of ethical conducts for NBG’s staff. The Manual is available to all employees and establishes rights, responsibilities, and disciplinary actions for failure to meet standards prescribed by the Manual.
Other quality management. The NBG recognizes the importance of quality of statistical data. Compilers of monetary and balance of payments statistics review data at the collection, processing, and dissemination stages. The work programs of NBG’s statistical divisions are focused on high quality statistics by extensive use of international standards.

View Table

Table 2c.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 0 and 1—National Bank of Georgia

0. Prerequisites of quality	1. Assurances of integrity
Legal and institutional environment. The Organic Law on the National Bank of Georgia (NBG) in its Article 3, paragraph 3, mandates the compilation and dissemination of Georgia’s monetary and balance of payments statistics. The legal provisions included in Article 20, paragraph 1 of the Organic Law on the NBG protect the confidentiality of information. Article 45 requires both public and private sectors to provide statistical, financial, and other data, including confidential information that the NBG may request. The NBG is authorized to request statistical and accounting reports from the financial system (Article 33 of the NBG Organic Law). Data sharing and coordination in compiling statistics between NBG departments are adequate. However, meetings among technical staff with other data producing agencies to promote coordination and ensure consistency of macroeconomic statistics are not conducted on a regular basis.	Professionalism. According to the NBG Organic Law, Article 4, paragraph 1, the NBG is independent in its activity. NBG’s independence is strengthened by a similar provision in the Constitution of the Republic of Georgia (Article 95, paragraph 4). These provisions guarantee professional independence of the NBG, ensuring that monetary and balance of payments statistics are compiled following strict technical criteria without outside interference. Recruitment and promotions are based on relevant skills and expertise and are conducted on a competitive basis. Professionalism is further promoted through participation in seminars and workshops, training courses, and visits to other central banks. The NBG tracks media coverage of its data and comments publicly on misuse of its statistics.
	Transparency. The NBG disseminates the terms and conditions for conducting statistical work in the NBG’s website. No government officials outside the NBG have access to the data before their release to the public. Statistics that are included in NBG’s publications but compiled by other agencies carry appropriate attribution. However, there is no advance notice on changes in the methodology, source data, or statistical techniques.
Resources. The number of staff assigned to compile monetary and balance of payments statistics is adequate. Staff responsible for monetary and balance of payments statistics have attended courses organized by other central banks and international organizations. Computing and financial resources are adequate to carry out statistical programs.
Relevance. The NBG conducts annual users surveys of monetary and balance of payment statistics to ensure that MFS and balance of payment statistics meet the needs of users.	Ethical standards. NBG’s Staff Manual identifies rules and standards of ethical conducts for NBG’s staff. The Manual is available to all employees and establishes rights, responsibilities, and disciplinary actions for failure to meet standards prescribed by the Manual.
Other quality management. The NBG recognizes the importance of quality of statistical data. Compilers of monetary and balance of payments statistics review data at the collection, processing, and dissemination stages. The work programs of NBG’s statistical divisions are focused on high quality statistics by extensive use of international standards.

Table 3a.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—National Accounts

Table 3a.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—National Accounts

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions. National accounts statistics are compiled based on the 1993 SNA conceptual framework. Scope. GDP estimates by production and expenditure are compiled and disseminated annually and quarterly for the total economy. Volume measures of GDP are available only by the production approach. GDP by expenditure approach at constant prices is not compiled due to the absence of the export/import price indexes and problems in deflation of consumption. In addition, annual input/output tables are compiled, and the sequence of accounts up to the financial account for the total economy. From 2007, the seasonally adjusted time-series were introduced. Classification/sectorization. National Accounts use the Georgian national classification of economic activities (GNC 001-2004) based on Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community (NACE rev 1.1). Classifications of Individual Consumption by Purpose (COICOP) and Classifications of the Functions of Governments (COFOG) are used to classify household consumption and the functions of government, respectively. There are deficiencies in recording transactions of Legal Entities of Public Law (LPEL.) Basis for recording. Market output and output for own final use are valued at basic prices and at equivalent market prices, respectively. Intermediate consumption and final uses are valued at purchasers’ prices, including levied sales/excise taxes and value added taxes, with the deductible part excluded. Total exports and imports are valued at free on board (f.o.b) prices. General government data on a cash basis are not adjusted to an accrual basis. Transactions between establishments within the same enterprise are not recorded on a gross basis.	Source data. Data sources have been noticeably improved over recent years, but continue to be generally inadequate. No economic census has been conducted in observable past; business survey and HBS are affected by underreporting, maintenance of business register needs improvement. Coverage of the some activities is considered incomplete (trade, other community, social and personal activities). Data for the government sector and the balance of payments are obtained from MOF and NBG, respectively. However, consolidated budget data by are not considered detailed enough to properly estimate intermediate consumption. Various ad hoc sample surveys are conducted to support main data collection. Source data are available on a timely basis except the NBG data for insurance companies. Assessment of source data. Appropriate measures are taken to validate source data. Statistical techniques. Surveys conducted by GEOSTAT employ sound statistical techniques. The GEOSTAT makes significant efforts to ensure the exhaustiveness of the GDP estimates. NOE activities are separately identified in the accounts. There are deficiencies in volume measures of trade and taxes; coefficients for measuring work in progress in agriculture need to be updated. Denton technique is not applied for benchmarking quarterly accounts to annual estimates. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. Intermediate data are validated using time-series analysis combined with the cross checking with independent data sources such as employment statistics and tax data from Revenue Service. Revision studies. GEOSTAT analyses direction and magnitude of revisions between preliminary and final data, but there is no documentation of the sources of errors, omissions, and fluctuations in the data.	Periodicity and timeliness. GEOSTAT publishes the quarterly GDP estimates on the 80th day after the end of the quarter. Consistency. Consistent quarterly and annual time series are maintained from 2003. Discrepancies between the independent estimates of GDP by production and expenditure are kept at reasonably low levels. The national accounts statistics are reconcilable with those from balance of payments and GFS. Revision policy and practice. The revision cycle of the national accounts follows a regular schedule, determined on the basis of the availability of source data and the timing of revisions to related datasets, however public is not well informed about the revision policy.	Data accessibility. In recent years there have been a lot of improvements in data dissemination in terms of scope and format of presented data. Data are initially disseminated via a press release and subsequently posted on the website in Excel format. Quarterly GDP data are available since 2003. Main aggregates include GDP, Net Domestic Product, Gross National Income, Net National Income, Gross Disposable Income, and Consumption of fixed Capital, Net Saving, and Net Lending/Net Borrowing. The deflators of GDP are published, including the chain-linked time series. Metadata accessibility. Limited documentation is available on sources and methods for compiling the national accounts statistics. Assistance to users. A catalog of publications is available on the website and updated annually. Contact information is provided in publications.

View Table

Table 3a.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—National Accounts

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions. National accounts statistics are compiled based on the 1993 SNA conceptual framework. Scope. GDP estimates by production and expenditure are compiled and disseminated annually and quarterly for the total economy. Volume measures of GDP are available only by the production approach. GDP by expenditure approach at constant prices is not compiled due to the absence of the export/import price indexes and problems in deflation of consumption. In addition, annual input/output tables are compiled, and the sequence of accounts up to the financial account for the total economy. From 2007, the seasonally adjusted time-series were introduced. Classification/sectorization. National Accounts use the Georgian national classification of economic activities (GNC 001-2004) based on Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community (NACE rev 1.1). Classifications of Individual Consumption by Purpose (COICOP) and Classifications of the Functions of Governments (COFOG) are used to classify household consumption and the functions of government, respectively. There are deficiencies in recording transactions of Legal Entities of Public Law (LPEL.) Basis for recording. Market output and output for own final use are valued at basic prices and at equivalent market prices, respectively. Intermediate consumption and final uses are valued at purchasers’ prices, including levied sales/excise taxes and value added taxes, with the deductible part excluded. Total exports and imports are valued at free on board (f.o.b) prices. General government data on a cash basis are not adjusted to an accrual basis. Transactions between establishments within the same enterprise are not recorded on a gross basis.	Source data. Data sources have been noticeably improved over recent years, but continue to be generally inadequate. No economic census has been conducted in observable past; business survey and HBS are affected by underreporting, maintenance of business register needs improvement. Coverage of the some activities is considered incomplete (trade, other community, social and personal activities). Data for the government sector and the balance of payments are obtained from MOF and NBG, respectively. However, consolidated budget data by are not considered detailed enough to properly estimate intermediate consumption. Various ad hoc sample surveys are conducted to support main data collection. Source data are available on a timely basis except the NBG data for insurance companies. Assessment of source data. Appropriate measures are taken to validate source data. Statistical techniques. Surveys conducted by GEOSTAT employ sound statistical techniques. The GEOSTAT makes significant efforts to ensure the exhaustiveness of the GDP estimates. NOE activities are separately identified in the accounts. There are deficiencies in volume measures of trade and taxes; coefficients for measuring work in progress in agriculture need to be updated. Denton technique is not applied for benchmarking quarterly accounts to annual estimates. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. Intermediate data are validated using time-series analysis combined with the cross checking with independent data sources such as employment statistics and tax data from Revenue Service. Revision studies. GEOSTAT analyses direction and magnitude of revisions between preliminary and final data, but there is no documentation of the sources of errors, omissions, and fluctuations in the data.	Periodicity and timeliness. GEOSTAT publishes the quarterly GDP estimates on the 80th day after the end of the quarter. Consistency. Consistent quarterly and annual time series are maintained from 2003. Discrepancies between the independent estimates of GDP by production and expenditure are kept at reasonably low levels. The national accounts statistics are reconcilable with those from balance of payments and GFS. Revision policy and practice. The revision cycle of the national accounts follows a regular schedule, determined on the basis of the availability of source data and the timing of revisions to related datasets, however public is not well informed about the revision policy.	Data accessibility. In recent years there have been a lot of improvements in data dissemination in terms of scope and format of presented data. Data are initially disseminated via a press release and subsequently posted on the website in Excel format. Quarterly GDP data are available since 2003. Main aggregates include GDP, Net Domestic Product, Gross National Income, Net National Income, Gross Disposable Income, and Consumption of fixed Capital, Net Saving, and Net Lending/Net Borrowing. The deflators of GDP are published, including the chain-linked time series. Metadata accessibility. Limited documentation is available on sources and methods for compiling the national accounts statistics. Assistance to users. A catalog of publications is available on the website and updated annually. Contact information is provided in publications.

Table 3b.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Consumer Price Index

Table 3b.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Consumer Price Index

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions. Generally, the compilation of the CPI applies the concepts and definitions that follow international standards given in the 1993 SNA and the international CPI manual. Scope. The CPI scope covers only urban resident households and their total monetary consumption expenditure. The treatment of owner-occupied housing is currently conceptually imprecise, being included in the price survey but excluded from the weights. Classification/sectorization. The CPI is based on the Classification of Individual Consumption by Purpose (COICOP). The market basket for the index consists of 266 goods and services classified into the twelve major groups of COICOP. Basis for recording. The prices collected correspond to market prices paid by households by direct payment (excluding credit charges and including all taxes levied on the products).	Source data. The HBS and regional price survey provide a sound basis for the CPI but relying solely on these sources may not be the most effective and accurate way of covering certain expenditure classes, for both the weights structure and price changes. The HBS suffers from nonsampling errors that are not accounted for and the inclusion of owner-occupied housing is ambiguous. Assessment of source data. Accuracy of the CPI source data is routinely assessed, both with respect to the HBS and the Price Survey. The prices data are validated by field supervisors independently of the original collection if there is any suspicion that there may be reporting problems in a particular region for a certain product or outlet. Statistical techniques. The CPI compilation techniques have been recently improved by enhancing the previous imputation method for seasonal products. However, few issues still remain in order to implement international best practices regarding the imputation of missing prices and adjusting for quality changes. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. Explanations for large changes at detailed and aggregate level are followed up to identify the underlying reasons for change. Revision studies. The CPI is final when first released.	Periodicity and timeliness. The CPI is published on a monthly basis five days after the reference month, meeting the SDDS requirements. Consistency. Time series at the aggregate and group level are compiled from individual 12-month annual CPI series. The CPI is internally consistent and longer time-series are derived by chain-linking annual index series together. Revision policy and practice. The CPI is final upon its first release. The market basket items are updated annually.	Data accessibility. Data are disseminated monthly on the GEOSTAT website with various formats. Simple long index time series is missing and may be difficult for some users to derive from the existing series. The GEOSTAT website launched recently is relatively informative and user friendly and has improved the data dissemination significantly. Metadata accessibility. The main available metadata is the SDDS metadata on dsbb.imf.org. The GEOSTAT website includes only a brief description of the CPI practice. Assistance to users. The GEOSTAT website includes central telephone number and email address for users to contact.

View Table

Table 3b.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Consumer Price Index

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions. Generally, the compilation of the CPI applies the concepts and definitions that follow international standards given in the 1993 SNA and the international CPI manual. Scope. The CPI scope covers only urban resident households and their total monetary consumption expenditure. The treatment of owner-occupied housing is currently conceptually imprecise, being included in the price survey but excluded from the weights. Classification/sectorization. The CPI is based on the Classification of Individual Consumption by Purpose (COICOP). The market basket for the index consists of 266 goods and services classified into the twelve major groups of COICOP. Basis for recording. The prices collected correspond to market prices paid by households by direct payment (excluding credit charges and including all taxes levied on the products).	Source data. The HBS and regional price survey provide a sound basis for the CPI but relying solely on these sources may not be the most effective and accurate way of covering certain expenditure classes, for both the weights structure and price changes. The HBS suffers from nonsampling errors that are not accounted for and the inclusion of owner-occupied housing is ambiguous. Assessment of source data. Accuracy of the CPI source data is routinely assessed, both with respect to the HBS and the Price Survey. The prices data are validated by field supervisors independently of the original collection if there is any suspicion that there may be reporting problems in a particular region for a certain product or outlet. Statistical techniques. The CPI compilation techniques have been recently improved by enhancing the previous imputation method for seasonal products. However, few issues still remain in order to implement international best practices regarding the imputation of missing prices and adjusting for quality changes. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. Explanations for large changes at detailed and aggregate level are followed up to identify the underlying reasons for change. Revision studies. The CPI is final when first released.	Periodicity and timeliness. The CPI is published on a monthly basis five days after the reference month, meeting the SDDS requirements. Consistency. Time series at the aggregate and group level are compiled from individual 12-month annual CPI series. The CPI is internally consistent and longer time-series are derived by chain-linking annual index series together. Revision policy and practice. The CPI is final upon its first release. The market basket items are updated annually.	Data accessibility. Data are disseminated monthly on the GEOSTAT website with various formats. Simple long index time series is missing and may be difficult for some users to derive from the existing series. The GEOSTAT website launched recently is relatively informative and user friendly and has improved the data dissemination significantly. Metadata accessibility. The main available metadata is the SDDS metadata on dsbb.imf.org. The GEOSTAT website includes only a brief description of the CPI practice. Assistance to users. The GEOSTAT website includes central telephone number and email address for users to contact.

Table 3c.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Producer Price Index

Table 3c.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Producer Price Index

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions. Generally, the compilation of the PPI applies the concepts and definitions that follow international standards given in the 1993 SNA and the PPI manual. However, industry turnover is used instead of production value. Only primary activity products included. Scope. The core PPI activities cover Mining and quarrying; Manufacturing (except production of nuclear fuel and manufacture of aircraft); Electricity, gas and water supply. The PPI has also been extended to Construction and Freight transport industries. However, product PPIs are not produced. Classification/sectorization. The PPI follows the European NACE activity classification and accordingly the CPA product classification, even though product indices are not compiled. Basis for recording. The prices correspond to prices at the factory gate, including excise and similar tolls; VAT and transport expenses are excluded.	Source data. The PPI relies on Business Register and a monthly regional price survey. Generally they provide an adequate basis for the compilation of the PPI, but the completeness of the Business Register behind the sample may not, especially for some industries, provide an up-to-date source. The reliance of a standard paper questionnaire for all industries makes it possibly difficult to capture different and changing pricing policies across industries. Assessment of source data. The source data validation is generally adequate; follow-up checks are undertaken, the prices inspected by Head Office prices staff independently of the original collection. Large price changes are confirmed with the respondents and effort made to maintain the product specifications unchanged. Statistical techniques. Statistical techniques are mostly adequate but certain practices fall behind the international standards. The data collection method relies solely on the simple questionnaire and methods to treat quality changes and missing prices need updating. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. Explanations for large changes at detailed and aggregate level are followed up to identify the underlying reasons for change. Revision studies. The PPI is final when first released.	Periodicity and timeliness. The PPI is published on a monthly basis 15 days after the reference month, meeting the SDDS requirements. Consistency. Time series at the aggregate and 16 sub-group levels are compiled from individual 12-month annual PPI series. The PPI is internally consistent and longer time-series are derived by chain linking annual index series together. Revision policy and practice. The PPI is final upon its first release. The market basket items are updated annually.	Data accessibility. The GEOSTAT website is relatively informative and user friendly but any analysis of the recent PPI movements is missing. Data are disseminated monthly on the GEOSTAT website but consistent long index time series are difficult to locate since they are not disseminated together with the monthly data. Metadata accessibility. There are no PPI metadata available apart from the SDDS metadata on dsbb.imf.org. Assistance to users. The GEOSTAT website includes central telephone number and email address for users to contact.

View Table

Table 3c.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Producer Price Index

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions. Generally, the compilation of the PPI applies the concepts and definitions that follow international standards given in the 1993 SNA and the PPI manual. However, industry turnover is used instead of production value. Only primary activity products included. Scope. The core PPI activities cover Mining and quarrying; Manufacturing (except production of nuclear fuel and manufacture of aircraft); Electricity, gas and water supply. The PPI has also been extended to Construction and Freight transport industries. However, product PPIs are not produced. Classification/sectorization. The PPI follows the European NACE activity classification and accordingly the CPA product classification, even though product indices are not compiled. Basis for recording. The prices correspond to prices at the factory gate, including excise and similar tolls; VAT and transport expenses are excluded.	Source data. The PPI relies on Business Register and a monthly regional price survey. Generally they provide an adequate basis for the compilation of the PPI, but the completeness of the Business Register behind the sample may not, especially for some industries, provide an up-to-date source. The reliance of a standard paper questionnaire for all industries makes it possibly difficult to capture different and changing pricing policies across industries. Assessment of source data. The source data validation is generally adequate; follow-up checks are undertaken, the prices inspected by Head Office prices staff independently of the original collection. Large price changes are confirmed with the respondents and effort made to maintain the product specifications unchanged. Statistical techniques. Statistical techniques are mostly adequate but certain practices fall behind the international standards. The data collection method relies solely on the simple questionnaire and methods to treat quality changes and missing prices need updating. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. Explanations for large changes at detailed and aggregate level are followed up to identify the underlying reasons for change. Revision studies. The PPI is final when first released.	Periodicity and timeliness. The PPI is published on a monthly basis 15 days after the reference month, meeting the SDDS requirements. Consistency. Time series at the aggregate and 16 sub-group levels are compiled from individual 12-month annual PPI series. The PPI is internally consistent and longer time-series are derived by chain linking annual index series together. Revision policy and practice. The PPI is final upon its first release. The market basket items are updated annually.	Data accessibility. The GEOSTAT website is relatively informative and user friendly but any analysis of the recent PPI movements is missing. Data are disseminated monthly on the GEOSTAT website but consistent long index time series are difficult to locate since they are not disseminated together with the monthly data. Metadata accessibility. There are no PPI metadata available apart from the SDDS metadata on dsbb.imf.org. Assistance to users. The GEOSTAT website includes central telephone number and email address for users to contact.

Table 3d.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Government Finance Statistics

Table 3d.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Government Finance Statistics

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions. GFS are compiled broadly in accordance with the guidelines of the GFSM 2001. Scope. The fiscal statistics cover budgetary central government, local governments, and the consolidated general government. Classification/sectorization. The budget classification follows the GFSM 2001 economic and functional classifications. The classification by institutional sector of the entities set up by government as LEPL needs to be reviewed and updated. Basis for recording. The cash basis is used for recording transactions. Accrual accounting is planned by 2020 as part of the ongoing accounting reform. Central government debt, including securities, is recorded at nominal value.	Source data. Comprehensive and timely source data are provided from administrative systems for central and local governments operations and central government debt. Assessment of source data. The budget classification is the economic classification of the GFSM 2001. It also includes COFOG. Central government debt source data meet the requirements of the GFSM 2001. Statistical techniques. Data are compiled from administrative records. Preliminary data are replaced by final audited data. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. Validation is done against the original source data. Revision studies. Discrepancies between GFS and original source data, which rarely occur, are assessed and investigated. After compilation, GFS data are compared with the previous period to identify unusual trends, for which explanations are then obtained and documented internally.	Periodicity and timeliness. The periodicity and timeliness of fiscal statistics exceed SDDS requirements. Consistency. Data are internally consistent within a dataset. Fiscal statistics are broadly consistent or reconcilable with other macroeconomic datasets. Revision policy and practice. The dissemination of preliminary and final data follows a regular schedule. Final data are identified in a footnote.	Data accessibility. GFS are presented monthly, quarterly, and annually and central government debt quarterly. Data tables and the advance release calendar are available on the MOF’s website. More detailed data are available on request. Metadata accessibility. The methodology is included in the budget laws which are available on the MOF’s website. The GFS metadata are available on the IMF’s Dissemination Standards Bulletin Boards (DSBB) website. Assistance to users. The MOF provides prompt and knowledgeable service and support to users. However, no contact person is publicized and no material is available to raise awareness on the use of GFS.

View Table

Table 3d.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Government Finance Statistics

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions. GFS are compiled broadly in accordance with the guidelines of the GFSM 2001. Scope. The fiscal statistics cover budgetary central government, local governments, and the consolidated general government. Classification/sectorization. The budget classification follows the GFSM 2001 economic and functional classifications. The classification by institutional sector of the entities set up by government as LEPL needs to be reviewed and updated. Basis for recording. The cash basis is used for recording transactions. Accrual accounting is planned by 2020 as part of the ongoing accounting reform. Central government debt, including securities, is recorded at nominal value.	Source data. Comprehensive and timely source data are provided from administrative systems for central and local governments operations and central government debt. Assessment of source data. The budget classification is the economic classification of the GFSM 2001. It also includes COFOG. Central government debt source data meet the requirements of the GFSM 2001. Statistical techniques. Data are compiled from administrative records. Preliminary data are replaced by final audited data. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. Validation is done against the original source data. Revision studies. Discrepancies between GFS and original source data, which rarely occur, are assessed and investigated. After compilation, GFS data are compared with the previous period to identify unusual trends, for which explanations are then obtained and documented internally.	Periodicity and timeliness. The periodicity and timeliness of fiscal statistics exceed SDDS requirements. Consistency. Data are internally consistent within a dataset. Fiscal statistics are broadly consistent or reconcilable with other macroeconomic datasets. Revision policy and practice. The dissemination of preliminary and final data follows a regular schedule. Final data are identified in a footnote.	Data accessibility. GFS are presented monthly, quarterly, and annually and central government debt quarterly. Data tables and the advance release calendar are available on the MOF’s website. More detailed data are available on request. Metadata accessibility. The methodology is included in the budget laws which are available on the MOF’s website. The GFS metadata are available on the IMF’s Dissemination Standards Bulletin Boards (DSBB) website. Assistance to users. The MOF provides prompt and knowledgeable service and support to users. However, no contact person is publicized and no material is available to raise awareness on the use of GFS.

Table 3e.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Monetary Statistics

Table 3e.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Monetary Statistics

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions for compiling monetary statistics are consistent with MFSM. Scope of the depository corporations survey (DCS) comprises commercial banks only. However, data on credit unions which account for a small portion of total depository corporations’ assets are not included in the coverage of the DCS (their share is less than 1% of the total assets of the financial system). Classification/sectorization. Classification is broadly consistent with the MFSM except: i) some deposits (Debit cards, check book, credit guarantee) are not classified as Deposits Included in Broad Money; ii) accrued interest is not classified together with the outstanding amount of assets or liabilities for all financial instruments; iii) OFCs and NPIs are classified together with ONFC in ODCS; and iv) financial derivatives are recorded off- balance sheet. Basis for recording of accounting rules are broadly consistent with the IFRS. Asset and liability items, which are denominated in foreign currency, are converted into Georgian Lari (GEL) at the official exchange rate.	Source data. Data included in the Central Bank Survey are based on balance sheet of the NBG compiled by the Finance and Accounting Department. Balance sheets and supplemental report forms provided by commercial banks form the basis for compilation ODCS. Data are available on a timely basis and with sufficient detail for compiling monetary accounts. However, the definition of residency in the source data for monetary statistics is based on the Tax Code and is not consistent with recommendations of the MFSM. Assessment of source data. Automated and manual assessments, validations of source data and statistical outputs, are performed. Statistical techniques. MFS are based on the balance sheets of the NBG and ODCs. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. The NBG balance sheet data are cross-checked between Monetary Statistics Division and Finance and Accounting Department of the NBG. In addition, automated and manual assessment of intermediate data is performed. Procedures are in place to investigate discrepancies in the intermediate data, classification, and sectorization errors. Data issues are investigated. Revision studies. As a policy monetary statistics are final upon release.	Periodicity and timeliness. Data for the analytical accounts of the central bank and the analytical accounts of banking sector (DCS) are compiled on a monthly basis and meet the SDDS requirements for periodicity and timeliness. Consistency. Monetary data are disseminated in consistent historical series. Data on the NBG and ODCs are internally consistent. The monetary statistics are reconciled with balance of payments statistics and with GFS. Methodological notes explaining differences are posted on the NBG’s website. Revision policy and practice. The NBG has established a revisions policy and practice for monetary statistics. Any revision in the data series and the methodology are explained in footnotes and NBG’s statements.	Data accessibility. All NBG’s publications are posted on the NBG website. Monetary statistics are disseminated through the NBG’s monthly Bulletin of Monetary and Banking Statistics (available from the Research and Publications page on the NBG’s website). Monetary statistics are presented in clearly structured tables. Monetary statistics are released simultaneously to all users in accordance with the advance release calendar. Metadata accessibility. Comprehensive methodological notes are published in the NBG’s Bulletin of Monetary and Banking Statistics. Georgia has posted its metadata on the IMF’s Dissemination Standards Bulletin Boards (DSBB). Assistance to users. A contact person is identified to address users’ queries.

View Table

Table 3e.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Monetary Statistics

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions for compiling monetary statistics are consistent with MFSM. Scope of the depository corporations survey (DCS) comprises commercial banks only. However, data on credit unions which account for a small portion of total depository corporations’ assets are not included in the coverage of the DCS (their share is less than 1% of the total assets of the financial system). Classification/sectorization. Classification is broadly consistent with the MFSM except: i) some deposits (Debit cards, check book, credit guarantee) are not classified as Deposits Included in Broad Money; ii) accrued interest is not classified together with the outstanding amount of assets or liabilities for all financial instruments; iii) OFCs and NPIs are classified together with ONFC in ODCS; and iv) financial derivatives are recorded off- balance sheet. Basis for recording of accounting rules are broadly consistent with the IFRS. Asset and liability items, which are denominated in foreign currency, are converted into Georgian Lari (GEL) at the official exchange rate.	Source data. Data included in the Central Bank Survey are based on balance sheet of the NBG compiled by the Finance and Accounting Department. Balance sheets and supplemental report forms provided by commercial banks form the basis for compilation ODCS. Data are available on a timely basis and with sufficient detail for compiling monetary accounts. However, the definition of residency in the source data for monetary statistics is based on the Tax Code and is not consistent with recommendations of the MFSM. Assessment of source data. Automated and manual assessments, validations of source data and statistical outputs, are performed. Statistical techniques. MFS are based on the balance sheets of the NBG and ODCs. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs. The NBG balance sheet data are cross-checked between Monetary Statistics Division and Finance and Accounting Department of the NBG. In addition, automated and manual assessment of intermediate data is performed. Procedures are in place to investigate discrepancies in the intermediate data, classification, and sectorization errors. Data issues are investigated. Revision studies. As a policy monetary statistics are final upon release.	Periodicity and timeliness. Data for the analytical accounts of the central bank and the analytical accounts of banking sector (DCS) are compiled on a monthly basis and meet the SDDS requirements for periodicity and timeliness. Consistency. Monetary data are disseminated in consistent historical series. Data on the NBG and ODCs are internally consistent. The monetary statistics are reconciled with balance of payments statistics and with GFS. Methodological notes explaining differences are posted on the NBG’s website. Revision policy and practice. The NBG has established a revisions policy and practice for monetary statistics. Any revision in the data series and the methodology are explained in footnotes and NBG’s statements.	Data accessibility. All NBG’s publications are posted on the NBG website. Monetary statistics are disseminated through the NBG’s monthly Bulletin of Monetary and Banking Statistics (available from the Research and Publications page on the NBG’s website). Monetary statistics are presented in clearly structured tables. Monetary statistics are released simultaneously to all users in accordance with the advance release calendar. Metadata accessibility. Comprehensive methodological notes are published in the NBG’s Bulletin of Monetary and Banking Statistics. Georgia has posted its metadata on the IMF’s Dissemination Standards Bulletin Boards (DSBB). Assistance to users. A contact person is identified to address users’ queries.

Table 3f.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Balance of Payments Statistics

Table 3f.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Balance of Payments Statistics

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions Data are compiled broadly in accordance with the definitions set out in the fifth edition of the Balance of Payments Manual (BPM5) and elements of BPM6. Scope The balance of payments statistics include the transactions of institutional units resident in Georgia with the rest of the world. Data do not cover territories of Abkhazian Autonomous Republic and Tskhinvali Region, a part of Georgian territory not controlled by the central authorities. Classification/sectorization The classification and sectorization of the balance of payments data closely follows BPM5. Basis for recording FDI and portfolio investment are valued at market prices. Book value is used when market value is not available. Other investment transactions are valued at nominal value. Recording is on accrual basis.	Source data Source data used for compiling the balance of payments are generally adequate and timely. However, some data sources need strengthening, notably the ITRS and the private nonfinancial external debt compilation program. Assessment of source data Source data—including censuses, sample surveys, and administrative records—are routinely assessed, for coverage, sample error, response error, and nonsampling error. Statistical techniques Several measures are established to control quality and conduct appropriate and timely verification of the survey information. Coefficients for adjusting c.i.f. to f.o.b. valuation on imports are not based on a sound method, such as a survey among major importers to estimate transportation and insurance costs. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs Statistical discrepancies in the intermediate data are assessed and investigated. FDI transactions are followed through the financial press. Series are cross-checked with related series/indicators. Revision studies Revision studies and analyses are carried out but not documented.	Periodicity and timeliness The periodicity and timeliness of balance of payments meet SDDS requirements. Consistency The statistics are consistent within the dataset. The NBG continuously revises methodology, procedures, and output in order to ensure the internal consistency of the statistics. The balance of payments statistics are reconcilable with monetary and fiscal statistics and with data on the external debt. Revision policy and practice There is a formal revisions policy. Revisions follow a regular and transparent schedule. Preliminary data are identified in footnotes. However, users are not always informed whenever data are revised.	Data accessibility Quarterly balance of payments statistics are disseminated on the NBG website. The annual balance of payments publication includes charts, graphics, and explanatory notes, related to IIP, balance of payments, and external debt, and contains commentaries on current period developments. The balance of payments advance release calendar is accessible on the NBG website. Metadata accessibility Notes on data sources and compilation methods are available on the website of NBG and the Annual Report on the Balance of Payments of Georgia. Assistance to users Statistics users have available a contact number on the NBG website. New publications are announced via press releases on the NBG website.

View Table

Table 3f.

Assessment of Data Quality—Dimensions 2 to 5—Balance of Payments Statistics

2. Methodological soundness	3. Accuracy and reliability	4. Serviceability	5. Accessibility
Concepts and definitions Data are compiled broadly in accordance with the definitions set out in the fifth edition of the Balance of Payments Manual (BPM5) and elements of BPM6. Scope The balance of payments statistics include the transactions of institutional units resident in Georgia with the rest of the world. Data do not cover territories of Abkhazian Autonomous Republic and Tskhinvali Region, a part of Georgian territory not controlled by the central authorities. Classification/sectorization The classification and sectorization of the balance of payments data closely follows BPM5. Basis for recording FDI and portfolio investment are valued at market prices. Book value is used when market value is not available. Other investment transactions are valued at nominal value. Recording is on accrual basis.	Source data Source data used for compiling the balance of payments are generally adequate and timely. However, some data sources need strengthening, notably the ITRS and the private nonfinancial external debt compilation program. Assessment of source data Source data—including censuses, sample surveys, and administrative records—are routinely assessed, for coverage, sample error, response error, and nonsampling error. Statistical techniques Several measures are established to control quality and conduct appropriate and timely verification of the survey information. Coefficients for adjusting c.i.f. to f.o.b. valuation on imports are not based on a sound method, such as a survey among major importers to estimate transportation and insurance costs. Assessment and validation of intermediate data and statistical outputs Statistical discrepancies in the intermediate data are assessed and investigated. FDI transactions are followed through the financial press. Series are cross-checked with related series/indicators. Revision studies Revision studies and analyses are carried out but not documented.	Periodicity and timeliness The periodicity and timeliness of balance of payments meet SDDS requirements. Consistency The statistics are consistent within the dataset. The NBG continuously revises methodology, procedures, and output in order to ensure the internal consistency of the statistics. The balance of payments statistics are reconcilable with monetary and fiscal statistics and with data on the external debt. Revision policy and practice There is a formal revisions policy. Revisions follow a regular and transparent schedule. Preliminary data are identified in footnotes. However, users are not always informed whenever data are revised.	Data accessibility Quarterly balance of payments statistics are disseminated on the NBG website. The annual balance of payments publication includes charts, graphics, and explanatory notes, related to IIP, balance of payments, and external debt, and contains commentaries on current period developments. The balance of payments advance release calendar is accessible on the NBG website. Metadata accessibility Notes on data sources and compilation methods are available on the website of NBG and the Annual Report on the Balance of Payments of Georgia. Assistance to users Statistics users have available a contact number on the NBG website. New publications are announced via press releases on the NBG website.

III. Users’ Survey

14. To complement the assessment of the macroeconomic datasets conducted using the DQAF framework, the ROSC mission elicited the views of selected users of the statistics. With the assistance of the Georgian authorities, the mission conducted a users’ survey (over 70 survey questionnaires were sent and 23 responses were received) and held discussions with key users. In general, users acknowledged and complimented the significant progress statistical agencies have made over recent years. A majority of the users were satisfied with data coverage, periodicity, timeliness, accessibility, serviceability, and to a great extent dissemination practices (with the exception of revision practice). While recognizing the authorities’ limited resources, users wanted further improvements on coverage of data; user friendliness in terms of metadata especially using presentations easy to understand by nonspecialists; more detailed explanations for revisions to the data; and easier access to longer time series. They indicated satisfaction with the responsiveness of the statistical agencies to users’ queries. Particularly in areas of prices statistics and national accounts, users expressed a need for improvement in level of detail, soundness of methodology, and availability of data. Finally, about 60 percent of the respondents considered Georgia’s official statistics to be of the same or better quality than those from other countries in the region.

IV. Staff’s Recommendations¹

15. Based on the review of Georgia’s statistical practices, discussions with the data producing agencies, and responses from data users (see Appendix III of the Detailed Assessments volume), the mission has developed a set of recommendations. They are designed to increase further Georgia’s adherence to internationally accepted statistical practices and would, in the mission’s view, enhance the analytical usefulness of Georgia’s statistics. Some additional technical suggestions are included in the Detailed Assessments Volume III.