Report of the 

OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION 

ANNUAL POLICY REPORT 

FISCAL YEAR 2009 

Submitted Pursuant to 

Section 240A of the 

Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 

As Amended

June 2010
OPIC Annual Policy Report FY 2009 i 

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... ii

I. OPIC in 2009 .............................................................................................................. 1

Fiscal Year Overview ................................................................................................. 1

OPIC Initiatives in Fiscal Year 2009 ........................................................................... 3

II. U.S. ECONOMIC & HOST COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS ......................... 6

U.S. Economic Effects ............................................................................................... 6

Host Country Development Effects ............................................................................ 9

III: ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, SAFETY & SOCIAL IMPACTS .............................. 13

Fiscal Year 2009 New Initiatives Summary .............................................................. 13

Project Screening and Assessment ......................................................................... 13

Climate Change Mitigation ....................................................................................... 18

Fiscal Year 2009 Reporting ..................................................................................... 23

IV. LABOR AND HUMAN RIGHTS .............................................................................. 24

Labor Rights ............................................................................................................ 24

Human Rights .......................................................................................................... 25

V. MONITORING OF ACTIVE PROJECTS ................................................................. 26

Fiscal Year 2009 Monitoring Activity ........................................................................ 26

Compliance with OPIC Conditions and Covenants .................................................. 27

Self Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 28

Site Monitoring ......................................................................................................... 31

VI. EXHIBITS ............................................................................................................... 36

1. US EMPLOYMENT & ASSOC. EFFECTS, FY2009 ............................................ 37

2. BREAKOUT OF FINAL THIRD COUNTRY DESTINATION OF THE

 OUTPUT OF OPIC-SUPPORTED PROJECTS ................................................... 38

3. U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS AND HOST-COUNTRY LOCATION OF OPIC-

 SUPPORTED PROJECTS, FY 2009 ................................................................... 40

4. METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS ........ 444

5. OPIC’s DEVELOPMENT MATRIX EXPLAINED ................................................. 45

6. OPIC’s FINANCIAL SERVICES DEVELOPMENT MATRIX EXPLAINED .......... 46

7. OPIC SITE MONITORING METHODOLOGY ..................................................... 47

8. PACE REPORT .................................................................................................. 48
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 ii

 

OPIC ANNUAL POLICY REPORT – FY 2009 

Executive Summary 

 In Fiscal Year 2009 (FY 2009), OPIC assisted 117 new projects (including 24 investment funds 

subprojects and nine framework subprojects) in 54 countries or regions, involving a wide range of 

industries. These projects are expected to generate more than $480 million in U.S. exports and 

support over 770 U.S. jobs. 

 OPIC continues to support U.S. small businesses. Of all the projects that OPIC supported in FY 

2009, 76 percent, or 89 new projects involved small businesses. In addition, the projects OPIC 

assisted in FY 2009 are expected to procure $93 million from U.S. small businesses located in 23 

states, plus the District of Columbia. This procurement is expected to support 154 jobs in U.S. small 

businesses during the first five years of project operations. 

In FY 2009, OPIC announced a new commitment to transparency and significantly expanded the 

volume and breadth of information it discloses to the public about the projects the agency supports, 

as well as provided enhanced opportunities for public comment on environmentally or socially 

sensitive projects. 

In FY 2009, OPIC also expanded its efforts to support the development of clean and renewable 

energy projects and strengthened its policies related to climate change mitigation. 

 Sixty-nine percent of FY 2009 projects target the services sector, which includes financial services, 

social services, communications, tourism and other services. The high proportion of projects in this 

sector reflects the increasing importance of services to the global economy and the desire of U.S. 

services companies to expand their operations internationally. 

 The projects that OPIC supported in FY 2009 are expected to generate close to 11,400 jobs in 

developing countries. Total initial host-country expenditures are projected to be $4.3 billion, which 

will support these jobs and spur additional economic activity and indirect employment in the host 

countries. Eighty percent of the 117 OPIC-supported projects in FY 2009 were located in low- and 

middle-income developing countries. 

 In FY 2009, OPIC site monitored 57 insurance, finance and investment fund projects in various 

sectors in almost all world regions. FY 2009 was the second complete fiscal year of integrated site 

monitoring where, in most cases, OPIC monitored each project during the site visit for all three 

disciplines – Labor and Human Rights, Environment Impacts, and Economic and Developmental 

Effects. 

 In FY 2009, OPIC continued to work in close consultation with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau 

of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) when reviewing each project on human rights 

grounds. 

 OPIC pursued its strategic initiatives by working in close collaboration with other U.S. agencies in 

promoting economic development within key regions in the world, including the Middle East and North 

Africa, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Central America. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 1 

I. OPIC in 2009 

Fiscal Year Overview 

In Fiscal Year 2009, OPIC assisted 117 projects in 54 countries and regions. 

OPIC assisted 117 new projects1 located in 54 countries and regions around the world in FY 

2009. This is a significant increase from the 71 projects OPIC supported in FY 2008. In 2008, 

there was a delay in Congressional passage of OPIC’s authorizing legislation that prevented the 

agency from making any new project commitments for nearly six months. For this reason, the 

2009 total project count reflects a significant increase over 2008. 

In Fiscal Year 2009, the 117 new projects included: 

20 structured finance projects 

 9 framework subprojects 

52 small and medium enterprise finance projects 

24 investment fund subprojects 

19 insurance projects2.

The total investment amount for the 117 new projects was $6 billion, of which approximately 59 

percent ($3.5 billion) represents investment from U.S. sources (including OPIC), 19 percent from 

host countries ($1.2 billion), 14 percent from third countries ($847 million), and eight percent 

($468 million) from multinational development institutions (see Figure 1). Thus, OPIC's 

assistance to U.S. investors leveraged over $2.5 billion worth of investment from non-U.S. 

sources. 

 

1The project count includes new finance and insurance projects that have not been previously reported to Congress, as 

well as downstream investments made by OPIC-supported investment funds and framework agreements. Prior to FY 

2007, OPIC estimated the economic and developmental impact of its framework agreements and investment funds using 

a model based on actual monitored results from similar types of facilities. Projects were evaluated at the framework and 

fund level and the impacts at the subproject level were not included in the cumulative reporting data. However, in FY 

2007, OPIC changed its methodology to include the estimated economic impact of the individual downstream subprojects 

in its cumulative reporting data instead of the modeled data for the framework agreements and investment funds. This 

change is intended to increase the transparency and accuracy in its cumulative reporting data. Thus, the project count 

does not include eight new investment funds that OPIC supported in Fiscal Year 2009.

2 This count includes seven projects that OPIC supported through both OPIC’s Insurance Department and Finance 

Department.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 2 

Figure 1 

OPIC-supported projects target emerging markets around the globe. 

In FY 2009, OPIC supported projects throughout the developing world, with a significant portion 

of projects located in the agency’s targeted regions: Sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and 

North Africa, and Central Asia. The regional distribution of OPIC’s FY 2009 projects is shown in 

Figure 2 below: 

Figure 2 

United States

59% Third Country

14%

Multilateral 

Instutions

8%

Host Country

19%

Sources of Project Investment 

Fiscal Year 2009 

All OPIC 

Countries

5%

Latin America

32%

Oceania

South 1%

& E. Europe

13%

Central & W. Asia

15%

South Asia

7%

East & 

Southeast Asia

3%

Middle East & 

N. Africa

9%

Sub-Saharan 

Africa

15%

Projects By Region

Fiscal Year 2009 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 3 

In Fiscal Year 2009, OPIC supported projects across a broad range of industries. 

Figure 3 illustrates the projects OPIC supported in 2009, broken down by sector. Projects in the 

financial services sector accounted for 50 percent of all new OPIC-supported projects in 2009, 

followed by manufacturing and other services (13 percent each), minerals/energy and housing 

construction (eight percent each), communications (four percent), and agribusiness and tourism 

(two percent each). The entire services sector, composed of financial services, communications, 

and other services, accounted for 69 percent of all new OPIC-supported projects in 2009. 

Figure 3 

OPIC Initiatives in Fiscal Year 2009 

In 2009, OPIC continued to target key regions and sectors to fulfill its mission of promoting 

positive economic development in emerging markets. 

 OPIC focused on investments in the renewable energy and clean technology sector to 

promote “green” investment in the developing world. 

 To encourage investment in particularly vulnerable countries that are critical to U.S. 

foreign policy, OPIC continued to support U.S. entrepreneurs with viable business 

opportunities in post-conflict and transition markets, particularly in the Middle East and 

Central Asia. 

 In response to the global financial crisis and liquidity crunch, OPIC focused on improving 

access to credit in numerous developing countries, targeting borrowers such as microentrepreneurs, small- and medium-sized business, and low- and middle-income 

homebuyers. 

Agriculture 

2%

Communications 

4%

Financial 

Services 

50% Manufacturing 

13%

Minerals & 

Energy 

8%

Other Services 

13%

Housing 

Construction

8%

Tourism

2%

Projects By Sector

Fiscal Year 2009 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 4 

OPIC supports renewable energy and clean technology projects across the developing 

world. 

India

During Fiscal Year 2009, OPIC supported several innovative clean technology and renewable 

energy projects. For example, Olympus Capital Holdings Asia, through its OPIC-supported Asia 

Development Partners Fund II, invested in Oriental Green Power Pte. Ltd. (“OGP”), a leading 

aggregator and developer of renewable energy assets in India. 

Established in 2007, OGP makes long-term investments in and/or acquisitions of companies that 

utilize non-conventional power sources such as biomass, small scale hydropower, biogas, and 

wind throughout India. As of December 31, 2009, OGP had 175 MW of operational renewable 

energy capacity with more than 500 MW under its construction/implementation pipeline. 

By providing capital to companies in the country’s renewable energy sector, OGP will have a 

positive developmental impact and furthers the Government of India’s goal of promoting 

renewable energy projects. Renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, hydropower, and 

biomass not only augment energy generation, but also improve the environment, create markets 

for crop residues, and increase employment in rural areas. 

OPIC supports U.S. businesses in post-conflict and transition markets that are critical to 

U.S. foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East and Central Asia. 

International development is widely acknowledged as one of the three core pillars of U.S. foreign 

policy, and OPIC is a U.S. government agency uniquely qualified to execute on this mission of 

promoting development through the creation of long-term economic opportunities in countries 

critical to U.S. interests overseas. 

West Bank

OPIC has supported the establishment of a newly-incorporated Palestinian non-bank housing 

finance company, the Affordable Mortgage and Loan Company (“AMAL”) that will operate in the 

Palestinian Territories, headquartered in Ramallah. Its mission will be to provide long-term, fixedrate and adjustable-rate housing finance to low- and middle-income households through 

established banks and Islamic finance companies. The investment is targeted at developing new 

neighborhoods adjacent to big cities such as Ramallah, Jenin, Hebron, Nablus, and Qalqilya 

resulting in approximately 17,000 new affordable housing units over the next 5 to10 years. This 

project will have a significant development impact in broadening the mortgage finance market and 

expanding the homeownership base of the West Bank. In addition, OPIC support of this project 

allows for loans of longer tenors than are presently available in the local market. 

The facility will total $485 million. AMAL will use long-term funding provided by OPIC ($241 

million of which $72 million will be guaranteed by the International Finance Corporation) and the 

Palestine Investment Fund ($72 million) (collectively, the “Common Creditors”) and the Bank of 

Palestine and Cairo Amman Bank (collectively, the “Originating Banks”) to provide up to 25-year, 

fixed-rate or 5-year adjustable-rate mortgage financing. Additionally, the Originating Banks will 

provide up to $100 million in mortgage financing and the U.K. Department for International 

Development will provide an estimated $20 million of funding that will be used as first-loss cover. 

AMAL will operate as a service provider on behalf of the Common Creditors and the Originating 

Banks and will not assume credit risk on the underlying mortgage loans. 

OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 6 

India

OPIC provided an investment guarantee through its framework agreements with Citibank to 

support the growth of Spandana, a Hyderabad-based microfinance institution (“MFI”). 

Spandana’s mission is to be the leading microfinance service provider in India and to create 

market driven and equitable solutions for underserved segments of the population. The $20 

million Citibank loan, which included a $16.5 million OPIC guarantee, will assist the MFI in 

providing its lending services to a broader clientele and in underserved regions. 

Spandana, established in 1997 by Padmaja Reddy, provides specialized microfinance services to 

low-income female borrowers in India. Spandana has transformed over the last decade from a 

small non-governmental organization into one of India’s largest microfinance institutions with 

mainstream institutional support. Spandana has continued to successfully manage growth with 

operations now spanning eight states and a client base that constitutes almost 1.5 percent of the 

“below poverty line” population in India. This project will have a positive impact on the Indian 

economy by increasing the availability of credit to low-income women. Increased access to credit 

will enable enterprises to expand and innovate. The project will also encourage private sector 

development and provide significant downstream benefits to consumers and suppliers by 

targeting micro-entrepreneurs. 

Central America

In 2009, OPIC provided investment guarantees to expand financial services to small- and 

medium-sized entrepreneurs and low- and middle-income mortgage borrowers at financial 

institutions across Central America. OPIC is supporting Banco de America Central (“BAC”), 

which is one of the largest financial institutions in the Central American region. To support the 

growth of Banco de America Central’s operations in Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, El 

Salvador, Costa Rica and Panama, OPIC provided $200 million in guarantees to leverage total 

portfolio expansion at this network of financial institutions totaling $300 million. This project will 

have a positive developmental impact on the host countries by providing mortgages to the lowand middle-income segment of the population and SMEs that are currently underserved by 

traditional lending institutions. Furthermore, the project introduces new management processes 

and technology to the market. This investment should result in over 8,000 new loans in these 

countries, with loans ranging from $5,000 to $100,000 and averaging $40,000. 

II. U.S. ECONOMIC & HOST COUNTRY DEVELOPMENT 

IMPACTS 

In FY 2009, OPIC committed to 117 projects, an increase over 2008 when OPIC committed to 71 

projects. As noted earlier, the increase in the total number of new projects supported in 2009 

was primarily the result of a backlog of projects that could not be committed in 2008 due to the 

delay in passage of the agency’s authorizing legislation. 

U.S. Economic Effects 

The projects that OPIC supported in FY 2009 will support over 770 U.S. jobs.

The FY 2009 portfolio of OPIC-supported projects will result in important economic benefits to the 

United States. These include: 

 A substantial portion of the initial procurement for OPIC-supported projects will be 

supplied by U.S. firms, resulting in an estimated $250 million in U.S. exports of capital 

goods and services. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 7 

 The value of American materials and equipment required for ongoing operations is 

estimated at $230 million over the next five years. 

 As a result of this level of initial and operational procurement from the United States, the 

FY 2009 projects will support an estimated 3,865 person-years of direct and indirect 

employment for U.S. workers. This is equivalent to an average of 773 U.S. jobs over a 

five-year period. 

 Taking both the financial and trade flows into account, the combined impact of the FY 

2009 projects on the U.S. balance of payments over the first five years of operations is 

expected to be a positive $710 million. 

Information in the Exhibits section at the end of this report shows the break-out of OPICsupported projects and their impact on the U.S. economy through procurement and support of 

U.S. employment. Exhibit 1 on page 37 breaks out all of the OPIC-supported projects in 2009 by 

sector – including agribusiness, minerals and energy, manufacturing, and services. Using these 

four sectoral classifications, the chart provides data on the markets – host country, U.S., and third 

country - in which revenue will be generated for all OPIC-supported projects in 2009, and what 

the U.S. procurement amount – both initial and operational –is projected to be by sector. The 

U.S. employment impact is generated using procurement data provided by investors. 

Exhibit 2 on page 38 shows in detail the revenues generated by third-country sales from all OPICsupported projects in Fiscal Year 2009, classified by sector. Projects are classified according to 

their impact on U.S. employment – one group includes projects having a positive U.S. 

employment impact, and the second group includes projects with a neutral U.S. impact. 

Table 1 

Estimated U.S. Economic Benefits of

Fiscal Year 2009 Projects Supported by OPIC

Total project investment $5,999 million

U.S. investment in projects $3,528 million

U.S. percent of total 59 percent

Total direct U.S. project exports $480 million

 Initial procurement from U.S. $250 million

 Operational procurement (5 years) $230 million

Estimated U.S. employment supported

(5 years, direct and indirect) 3,865 person-years

(773 U.S. jobs)
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 8 

OPIC-supported projects are carefully screened for their U.S. employment effects. OPIC does 

not support projects that would harm the U.S. economy or result in the loss of U.S. jobs. OPIC 

collects and analyzes, both geographically and sectorally, the projected U.S. employment and 

associated economic effects of the projects that it assists. Even before taking into account their 

positive U.S. employment impacts, none of the Fiscal Year 2009 projects are expected to 

result in the loss of U.S. jobs. For a detailed description of the methodology used to calculate 

the U.S. employment effects of OPIC-supported projects due to initial and operational 

procurement, please refer to Exhibit 4 on page 44. 

OPIC supports U.S. small businesses, directly and indirectly. 

OPIC is dedicated to assisting U.S. small businesses expand into developing markets. Since 

1997, OPIC has provided approximately $3 billion in direct loans to U.S. small businesses. 

According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, U.S. small businesses represent 99.7 

percent of all employer firms and employ about half of all private sector employees. U.S. small 

businesses have generated 60 to 80 percent of annual net new jobs to the economy over the last 

decade and small businesses play an important role in U.S. trade flows, comprising nearly 97 

percent of all identified exporters and producing 28.6 percent of total reported exports. OPIC 

recognizes the importance of small businesses as a key driver of U.S. economic growth and 

actively seeks to partner with these firms in enabling their expansion overseas. 

OPIC’s efforts to reach out to small businesses have yielded positive results in Fiscal Year 2009. 

OPIC supported 89 new projects that involved small businesses, representing 76 percent of all 

new projects supported by OPIC in Fiscal Year 2009. This includes: 

 13 small businesses received OPIC political risk insurance 

 34 small businesses received OPIC investment guarantees3

 45 small businesses received OPIC support in the form of direct loans, which totaled over 

$1.2 billion. 

In addition, of the 117 OPIC insurance and finance projects OPIC supported in FY 2009, ten 

include U.S. investors that are women- or minority-owned businesses.4 

Indirectly, OPIC-supported projects have benefited U.S. small businesses through the projectrelated procurement of supplies and services from U.S. small businesses. During their first five 

years of operations, the projects OPIC supported in FY 2009 are expected to procure $93 million 

from U.S. small businesses located in 23 states plus the District of Columbia, supporting 154 U.S. 

jobs. 

OPIC collects data on the specific U.S. companies that will provide goods and services to OPICsupported projects. Investors are encouraged to provide as much detail as possible regarding 

their procurement of U.S. goods and services so that the positive impacts on the U.S. economy of 

OPIC-supported projects can be recorded fully and accurately. In FY 2009, 42 percent of 

project-related U.S. procurement was identified by specific U.S. supplier and type of product. 

 

3Includes 24 investment fund subprojects. One project received both an OPIC investment guaranty and political risk 

insurance.

4 This data is not collected for OPIC investment fund and framework subprojects, as they do not have U.S. ownership 

stakes.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 9 

Using the data collected for the fiscal years 1994 through 2009, OPIC has identified the specific 

U.S. suppliers for over $15.3 billion in expected procurement for OPIC-supported projects. These 

U.S. companies are located in 49 states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. 

Approximately 57 percent of the identified suppliers are U.S. small businesses. 

Host Country Development Effects 

In FY 2009, OPIC continued to systematically evaluate the developmental impacts of all 

projects. 

OPIC’s core mission is to promote private U.S. investment that will contribute to the economic 

development of the world’s less developed countries. OPIC selects projects that are likely to 

serve as foundations for long-term economic growth, and that provide innovative products or 

services to emerging market countries. To further enhance OPIC’s assessment of the relative 

benefits of the projects that it supports, OPIC uses two developmental assessment models – the 

standard developmental matrix and the financial services developmental matrix. For a detailed 

description of the methodologies employed for both the development matrix and the financial 

services development matrix, refer to Exhibits 5 and 6 on pages 45 and 46. 

OPIC projects score well on both development matrices. 

In FY 2009, fifty projects were scored on the financial services developmental matrix. The 

average developmental score was 85. Fifty-eight projects were scored on the standard 

development matrix.5 The average developmental score of these projects was 87. OPIC’s longterm goal is to achieve an average development rating of 100 across all business lines. 

The projects that OPIC supported in 2009 that had the highest development scores were: 

Financial Services

In Fiscal Year 2009, the most developmental financial services-related project was a $62.6 million 

investment in the BRAC Africa Loan Fund to finance the first phase of BRAC’s expansion of its 

microfinance operations in Tanzania and Uganda which were established in 2006. Over the next 

ten years, BRAC intends to build integrated microfinance and development programs in at least 

ten countries in Africa. OPIC will be contributing $28 million to the project in the form of two 

loans, one for $22 million and the second for $6 million to be drawn down over 3.5 years. Private 

U.S. investors, including the Ford Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, CARE, 

Three Guineas Fund, Calvert Foundation, MMA Community Development and Monarch 

Community Fund, will be contributing a total of $12 million in debt financing to the project. 

European and African investors, including Triodos, Triple Jump, Stromme, and Norfund will be 

contributing a total of $18.9 million in debt financing. BRAC Bangladesh has contributed an 

additional $3.7 million. 

This project will have a strong developmental impact in the host countries. BRAC estimates that 

the proceeds of the Fund will allow the operating entities in the three target countries6 to add 141 

new branches to their 82 existing branches, to reach roughly 500,000 new borrowers with an 

average loan size starting at just under $200 and growing to over $500 as borrowers repay loans 

and take out larger ones, and to grow BRAC’s consolidated gross African loan portfolio from 

 

5 Nine projects were not scored on either developmental matrix because they involved the provision of insurance on 

existing assets and did not have additional developmental effects.

6 The Fund will support BRAC’s operations in Uganda, Tanzania and Southern Sudan, although OPIC’s funds are 

restricted to Uganda and Tanzania.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 10

$11.5 million to over $240 million within 10 years. BRAC’s holistic approach to poverty reduction 

includes both economic development (microfinance lending, development of market linkages and 

value chains and livestock and agricultural technical assistance) and social development 

(healthcare, education, and life skills training for adolescent girls). In addition to offering BRAC’s 

core micro-lending product, selected branches will offer larger individual loans to small 

entrepreneurs under the Small Enterprise Program. The average loan size for this product is 

expected to start at $1,500 and grow to $4,235. 

Standard

One of the highest-scoring projects on the standard developmental matrix that OPIC supported in 

FY 2009 involved a $10 million investment by Tivannah USA and two U.S. small businesses, 

Ernest Maier and Quinn Consulting, to expand the operations of Tivannah Global, LDA, an 

Angolan manufacturer of building materials. The factory, which began operations in 2005, 

produces approximately 2,500 concrete blocks per day. Tivannah plans to use this investment to 

install concrete block and paver plants and to procure state-of-the-art quarry-mining equipment. 

This increase in plant capacity, technology, and expertise should allow Tivannah to move into 

production of higher quality and higher profit products. The increased plant capacity is expected 

to allow Tivannah to expand production to include structural blocks, architecturally distinct blocks, 

concrete pavers, decorative masonry units, multiple granulations of gravel and crushed stone, 

and overall higher quality and lower priced goods. Tivannah also plans to purchase a trucking 

fleet to address the shortcomings of the domestic delivery systems. 

The developmental impact of this investment will be significant. The project will create jobs in the 

rural Angolan region of Cacuaco. Furthermore, the project will contribute to infrastructure 

improvements in Angola. The company’s production of construction and building materials will be 

used to create new residential and commercial buildings, as well as public goods like sidewalks 

and roads. There will also be significant knowledge and technology transfer. The two U.S. small 

business investors, Ernest Maier and Quinn Consulting, will provide on-going support through 

training and management consulting to ensure the implementation of best industry practices and 

standards.

In Fiscal Year 2009, OPIC focused its activities in low- and middle-income developing 

countries, providing an important source of employment and tax revenue for these 

economies. 

The projects supported by OPIC in FY 2009 will provide significant economic and social benefits 

for developing host countries. The projects are expected to directly generate 11,455 jobs in 

developing countries directly, of which 6,629 (or 58 percent) are projected to be in skilled 

(management and professional) positions. 

Eighty percent of the projects that OPIC supported in Fiscal Year 2009 are in low- and middleincome countries, demonstrating OPIC’s success in fulfilling its mission to focus on countries 

most in need. Thirty-five projects (30 percent) are located in low-income countries, such as 

Afghanistan and Ghana, while 59 projects (50 percent) are located in middle-income developing 

countries, such as Georgia and South Africa.7 Twenty-three projects (20 percent) are located in 

high-income countries, with 12 of those projects in Russia, Turkey, and Chile – countries that 

“graduated” from medium-income to high-income this year. 

The total initial host-country expenditures for Fiscal Year 2009 projects are projected to be $4.3 

billion. This procurement of local raw materials, services, and semi-finished goods will support 

economic activity and employment in the host countries. The OPIC-supported foreign enterprises 

 

7 As defined in OPIC’s statute, low-income countries are classified as those with per capita GNP of $984 or less in 1986 

dollars. Middle-income countries are those with per capita GNP of $985-$4,268 in 1986 dollars.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 11

are expected to generate $264 million annually in taxes and duties for the host countries.8 Once 

in operation, the projects will generate an estimated $229 million in annual export earnings for the 

host countries. Approximately 90 percent of the output associated with FY 2009 projects will be 

sold in host country markets. Exhibit 2 on page 38 shows a break-out of the final destination of 

output for FY 2009 investments over the first five years of operation for projects that will export to 

third countries. 

 

8 This estimate includes host government revenues generated by large public infrastructure projects OPIC supported this 

year, including a toll road in Mexico.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 12

Table 2 

Estimated Developmental Impacts of

Fiscal Year 2009 Projects

Amount or Number

Host Country (millions of $ or

Effects # workers)

A. Foreign exchange benefits 1

 Exports generated $229 million

 Imports replaced $99 million

 Total A $328 million

B. Foreign exchange costs 1

 Capital outflows $717 million

 Project imports $150 million

 Total B $867 million

Net foreign exchange impact (A less B) 1($539) million

Net annual taxes, revenues and

duties paid to the host country 1$264 million

Initial local expenditures $4,266 million

Local employment generated in fifth year of 

operation

 Technical and management 6,629 workers

 Unskilled labor 4,826 workers

 Total 11,455 workers

1 Average annual amount over a 5-year forecast period.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 13

III: ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH, SAFETY & SOCIAL 

IMPACTS 

The Environmental, Health, Safety, and Social Impacts section of OPIC’s 2009 Policy Report 

represents the 12th year of reporting on environmental, health and safety considerations of OPICsupported projects. This section replaces and continues the reporting of these environmental and 

social considerations in what had been previously reported in a stand-alone OPIC Annual 

Environmental Report. Specifically, this section will report information related to environmental, 

health, safety, and social screening and assessment, annual greenhouse gas reporting, as well 

as introduce and summarize other environment and social-related policy matters undertaken by 

OPIC during the previous fiscal year. 

Fiscal Year 2009 New Initiatives Summary 

Since 1985 OPIC has had a strong mandate to insure that OPIC supports projects that minimize 

adverse environmental, health, safety and social risks. In Fiscal Year 2009, OPIC announced a 

new commitment to transparency and significantly expanded the volume and breadth of 

information it discloses to the public about the projects the agency supports, as well as enhanced 

opportunities for public comment on environmentally or socially sensitive projects. In FY 2009, 

OPIC also expanded its efforts to increase support for the development of clean and renewable 

energy projects and strengthened its policies related to climate change mitigation. In addition, in 

FY 2009, OPIC expanded its definition of a Category A project to include all projects that are 

expected to produce significant emissions of greenhouse gases (> 100,000 tons of carbon 

dioxide equivalents per year). 

Project Screening and Assessment 

OPIC screens all applications to identify the risk of potential adverse environmental and social 

impacts of a project and to identify project impacts that could preclude OPIC support on 

categorical grounds. If a project is determined to be categorically ineligible, OPIC immediately 

informs the applicant so as to avoid any unnecessary effort or expense. If the project is 

categorically eligible, OPIC categorizes the project to determine the requirements for 

documentation, disclosure, consultation, reporting and post-commitment monitoring. Projects 

may be categorized as A, B, C or D, with Category A representing the greatest potential for 

adverse environmental and/or social impacts. 

OPIC uses a rigorous methodology for assessing and calculating potential environmental 

and social impacts. 

Environmental and social assessment is the process used by OPIC to evaluate the environmental 

and social impacts of an applicant’s project and to identify the means to improve the project by 

preventing, minimizing, remediating or compensating for potential adverse impacts as a condition 

of OPIC support. The process includes the following: 

 Identification of potential adverse environmental and social impacts; 

 Disclosure of the project’s environmental and social impact assessment (ESIAs) for 

public review and comment (if the project has been screened as Category A); 

 Comparison of the project’s performance in relation to internationally-accepted standards 

and alternative approaches; 

 Evaluation or design of mitigation measures; 

 Evaluation or design of associated management and monitoring measures. 


OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 16

 a salt extraction and processing project in Djibouti; 

 a chlor-alkali plant in Trinidad and Tobago; 

 an airport renovation project in Costa Rica; and 

 three hydroelectric projects in Mexico. 

OPIC publishes information on all Category A projects for public comment. 

In FY 2009, eight potential Category A projects under consideration for OPIC support were 

disclosed on OPIC’s website for 60 days and announced via the OPIC list server, giving the 

public and non-governmental organizations full opportunity to review the ESIAs or Baseline 

Audits, and to comment on the projects’ environmental and social impacts. All Category A 

transactions that required approval by OPIC’s Board were publicly disclosed for at least 60 days 

prior to the Board vote on the transactions. Full text versions of ESIAs and Baseline Audits were 

available for download directly from the OPIC website. 

In response to the posting of the ESIA’s for these eight projects, public comments were received 

for one project, a gold mining project in Mongolia. OPIC’s Environment Group closely reviewed 

and analyzed the comments and provided written responses to the author of the comments. A 

summary of the concerns posited and OPIC’s written responses were released to the public. 

Transactions rejected on environmental and/or social grounds 

OPIC rejected three applications in FY 2009 on the basis of categorical ineligibility. These 

projects included a forestry project in Guiana, a rubber plantation in Liberia, and a housing estate 

project in Zambia. The projects in Guiana and Liberia were categorically ineligible due to their 

potential impact on critical forest areas. The project in Zambia was categorically ineligible due to 

its location in or near a high hazard area. For reasons of business confidentiality, OPIC does not 

disclose the name of investors, borrowers, foreign enterprises, or projects at issue. 

OPIC announces new commitment to transparency 

In April 2009, OPIC Management announced a significant expansion of the volume and breadth 

of information about projects the agency supports that OPIC would disclose to the public. In 

particular, OPIC expanded the opportunity for public comment on environmentally or socially 

sensitive projects proposed for support. For all Category A projects and projects scheduled to 

come before the OPIC Board of Directors, OPIC posts to its website detailed project summaries 

at least 40 days before OPIC makes a decision to support the projects. Moreover, public 

comment now is invited and considered by OPIC before the agency makes a decision to support 

those projects. Other new steps include posting of summaries on all OPIC-supported projects 

(140 project summaries posted in FY 2009), posting of summaries of findings of third party audits, 

and quarterly listings of sub-projects supported under OPIC’s investment fund program. 

These new measures build on transparency initiatives in recent years under which OPIC has 

enhanced its internal due diligence procedures and has encouraged project sponsors to engage 

in meaningful, inclusive and culturally appropriate consultation with local stakeholders during all 

phases of project development and to require such consultation on projects with the potential for 

significant social impacts. 

OPIC expands support for renewable energy and clean technology projects 

With a focus on long-term development, OPIC works to support projects that tie economic viability 

to environmental sustainability. Oftentimes this means powering growth with alternative forms of 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 17

electricity production and newer, cleaner technologies. OPIC’s outreach program in renewable 

energy and clean technology over the past two years has resulted in the agency’s consideration 

of more than 100 proposals totaling $2 billion in the areas of biomass, solar, wind, hydro and 

geothermal power generation, water purification and distribution, green housing and clean fuels. 

Despite challenging credit and equity markets over the past year, OPIC-supported renewable 

energy investment funds, approved by OPIC’s Board of Directors in September 2008, are poised 

to begin making investments in clean fuels, hydro and solar energy. Examples of OPICsupported renewable energy projects include the following: 

Azure Power

The project involves a $6.23 million OPIC loan to Mr. Inderpreet Wadhwa to invest in Azure 

Power Punjab Limited. The project involves the construction of 2 MW of photovoltaic power in 

the state of Punjab, India. The project was profiled in the international press as the first MWscale independent power project solar facility to sell clean, sustainably generated electricity to 

India’s grid system. This renewable energy project will provide power to thousands of homes in 

communities in rural India for the first time. 

E+Co

The project involves a $10 million OPIC loan to E+Co, used to make loans to small and medium 

enterprises (SMEs) for small-scale energy efficiency and renewable energy projects. E+Co is a 

U.S. non-profit company that provides financial planning, market assessment, technology and/or 

project financing for clean energy SMEs in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The investment will 

enhance E+Co’s engagement in clean energy enterprise development and will broaden its 

investment in companies that employ various technologies including solar, energy efficiency, fuel 

substitution, hydro, biomass, and wind. 

Oriental Green Power Pte. Ltd.

The project involves a $7.5 million investment made by OPIC-supported Asian Development 

Partners Fund II in a leading renewable energy producer in India, Oriental Green Power Pte. Ltd. 

Oriental Green Power is a private entity that invests in renewable energy assets around the 

world. The Oriental Green Power investment will be used to construct the company’s initial 

sixteen projects which include biomass, wind, small hydro, and biogas projects. The projects are 

all located in India and are estimated to produce a total of 216.5 MW of renewable energy. 

On a transactional basis OPIC is also considering reduction and control alternatives for all 

projects, including opportunities for energy and operational efficiencies and to protect and 

enhance sinks for greenhouse gases. OPIC is developing financial products and structures that 

will make it more attractive for project developers to incorporate energy efficient elements in 

project designs. Many OPIC-supported projects already incorporate energy efficiency 

improvements in capital expenditure planning including the following: 

Açai do Amapá Agroindustrial Ltda.

The project involves a $3.712 million direct OPIC loan to construct an açai berry processing 

facility in Santana, Amapá, Brazil and to fund operations to supply açai products for export and 

local markets. The company has taken steps to reduce energy consumption during the past three 

years through the selection of efficient equipment, re-dimensioning motors, changing power 

motors from 220V to 380V, replacement of light bulbs, lengthening production runs, and training 

employees in energy conservation. As a result of these steps, the company has reduced energy 

requirements by 25 percent. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 18

Climate Change Mitigation 

On June 14, 2007, OPIC announced its Greenhouse Gas/Clean Energy Initiative to 

systematically evaluate, monitor, and report on OPIC’s investment decisions and to demonstrate 

to OPIC’s stakeholders OPIC’s progress in reducing climate change impacts in our investment 

decision making. 

OPIC initiated a four-part plan to address the issue of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and 

increase support for clean energy and green technology: (1) reduce the emissions profile of 

OPIC’s portfolio; (2) establish an annual transactional cap to constrain the addition of large 

carbon emitting projects to the portfolio; (3) support energy efficiency, renewable & clean 

technology; and (4) enhance accounting and transparency. 

OPIC is committed to reducing direct GHG emissions. 

As part of its Greenhouse Gas/Clean Energy Initiative, OPIC has committed to: (a) reduce the 

direct GHG emissions associated with projects in OPIC’s active portfolio as of June 30, 2008 (i) 

by 30 percent over a ten-year period; and (ii) by 50 percent over a 15-year period [as required 

under Section 7079(b) of Public Law 111-117 (FY 2010 Omnibus)]; and (b) shift investment 

support focus to renewable and energy efficient projects. 

 

For the purpose of tracking progress in achieving its GHG reduction goals, in 2008 OPIC 

procured the services of an outside auditor, Pace Global Energy Services LLC (Pace), to develop 

a baseline GHG inventory of existing OPIC supported projects. The organizational boundary for 

the inventory was defined as 100 percent of on-site emissions from the calendar year 2007 for all 

projects within OPIC’s active portfolio as of June 30, 2008 (baseline emissions). The 

organizational boundary is consistent with the voluntary Scope 39

 emissions reporting 

methodology that OPIC adopted in 2004. Under that approach, OPIC reported 100 percent of 

direct emissions from its active projects’ portfolio. Accounting for 100 percent of project 

emissions is more conservative than the equity or operation control approach that is commonly 

used in greenhouse gas accounting. OPIC’s accounting is limited to direct emissions because 

these emissions are verifiable and directly attributable to the project activity that is benefiting from 

OPIC’s support. 

OPIC estimates greenhouse gas emissions from all projects that have significant direct 

emissions, which have been defined as emissions exceeding 100,000 tons of carbon dioxide 

equivalents (CO2eq) per year. In order to account for GHG emissions from active projects in 

OPIC’s portfolio that have less than 100,000 tons of CO2eq, OPIC adds an extra 5 percent 

emissions to the aggregate emissions number. The addition of 5 percent to account for such 

sources is consistent with the GHG accounting methodology of the Climate Registry.10 

 

9 Under the World Resource Institute’s Greenhouse Gas Protocol, corporations choose to report emissions based on 

either an equity share or a financial or operational control basis. In other words, a corporation chooses to report either a 

share of a facility’s emissions consistent with its equity ownership or it chooses to report all emissions from a facility 

(regardless of share ownership) based on its having operational or financial control of the facility. The corporation then 

assesses two types of emissions (Scope 1 and Scope 2) and may assess a third type of emissions (Scope 3). Scope 1 

emissions are direct emissions; Scope 2 emissions are indirect emissions associated with purchased electricity; and 

Scope 3 emissions are other indirect emissions, which can involve any indirect emissions associated with the lifecycle of 

products or services associated with the company’s activities (other than those associated with purchased electricity, i.e., 

Scope 2 emissions). Reporting of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions is mandatory while reporting of Scope 3 emissions is 

voluntary. 

10 THE CLIMATE REGISTRY is a nonprofit collaboration among North American states, provinces, territories and Native 

Sovereign Nations that sets consistent and transparent standards to calculate, verify and publicly report greenhouse gas 

emissions into a single registry. The Registry supports both voluntary and mandatory reporting programs and provides 

comprehensive, accurate data to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The 5% value is from The Climate Registry’s 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 19

OPIC believes this additional 5 percent is conservative because a significant percentage of the 

number of projects in OPIC’s portfolio (over half) are in sectors that are not expected to result in 

significant direct emissions (e.g. financial services, telecommunications, home construction). 

Pace confirmed this by estimating GHG emissions from the calendar year 2007 for all projects in 

OPIC’s portfolio as of June 30, 2008 that were expected to emit more than 25,000 short tons but 

less than 100,000 short tons. Emissions from these projects were estimated to be less than 

740,773 tons of CO2eq or 1.5 percent of the aggregate GHG emissions from projects included in 

the baseline. Hence, the provision to add 5 percent to aggregate GHG emissions is conservative. 

Appendix 1 presents Pace’s Report on GHG emissions from projects that are expected to emit 

more than 25,000 short tons but less than 100,000 short tons. The 25,000 short ton threshold 

was selected to match the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s threshold criteria for 

significant GHG emissions.11 

OPIC calculates GHG emissions from projects in its active portfolio using methodologies and 

algorithms that rely on activity data such as fuel consumption or gas/oil throughput. In most 

cases, OPIC uses methodologies approved by the Climate Registry. For emissions from sources 

without Registry-approved methodologies, OPIC uses emission estimates provided by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency. For project-specific information on the methodologies and 

assumptions used in emission estimates, see OPIC’s 2008 Policy Report 

(http://www.opic.gov/sites/default/files/docs/fy08_annual_policy_report_040809.pdf). 

Following the completion of the independent audit by Pace, OPIC provided investors the 

opportunity to comment on the Independent Auditor’s estimate, activity data, and methodology. 

Estimates and comments received from investors are provided in Table 3. 

Baseline emissions which were calculated for calendar year 2007 for projects active as of June 

30, 2008 were estimated to be 50,229,853 tons of CO2eq. Based on the independent audit 

findings, the estimated calendar year 2008 inventory of GHG emissions from all significant 

projects that were active as of September 30, 200912 is 31,700,544 tons of CO2eq (Appendix 2). 

The total is based on Pace’s estimate unless the Investor provided data indicative of actual 

operating conditions. Five percent was then added to the total to account for GHG emissions from 

active projects in OPIC’s portfolio that have less than 100,000 tons of CO2eq; thus, the total 

inventory of GHG emissions for calendar year 2008 for projects active as of September 30, 2009 

is 33,285,571 tons of CO2eq. 

 

General Reporting Protocol, Version 1.1, May 2008, p. 58. Available online at 

http://www.theclimateregistry.org/downloads/GRP.pdf.

11 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s threshold criteria for significant GHG emissions is 25,000 metric tons. To 

maintain consistency with units, OPIC uses 25,000 short tons, which is conservative since 25,000 metric tons converted 

to short tons equals approximately 27,500 short tons.

12 Because OPIC operates on the fiscal year, starting with calendar year 2008 emissions, OPIC decided to align GHG 

accounting with the fiscal year by estimating emissions for those projects active as of September 30, 2009.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 20

Table 3: 2008 OPIC GHG Emissions Inventory Estimate by Project (short tons CO2eq/year)

Tier Project Name Location Description Capacity / 

Throughput

Fuel 

Type

Maximum 

Potential to 

Emit

Emissions 

(short tons 

CO2)

Baseline

Emissions 

(short tons 

CO2)

2008 

Investor 

Reported

Emissions 

(short 

tons CO2)

2008 Final 

Emissions 

(short 

tons CO2)

A

Adapazari Elektrik Uretim Turkey Combined Cycle 777 MW Natural 

Gas 2,706,499 2,106,754 2,106,754 2,106,754

A

AES Jordan1Jordan Combined Cycle 10,103,603 

MMBtu/yr

Natural 

Gas 1,288,809 0 590,940 590,940

A

AES Nigeria Barge Nigeria

Engine-Based 

Power 

Generation

270 MW Natural 

Gas 1,603,307 1,166,398 1,341,157 1,341,157

A

Doga Enerji Turkey Combined Cycle 180 MW Natural 

Gas 816,057 740,762 740,762 740,762

A

Gaza Private Generating PLC2 Gaza Combined Cycle 136.4 MW Natural 

Gas 487,658 293,804 303,535 303,535

A Gebze Elektrik Uretim Turkey Combined Cycle 1554 MW Natural 

Gas 5,412,998 4,121,923 4,121,923 4,121,923

A Grenada Electricity Services 

(WRB) Grenada

Engine-Based 

Power 

Generation

18 MW Diesel 

(Fuel Oil) 104,604 114,571 121,156 121,156

A

Habibullah Coastal Power Pakistan Combined Cycle 140 MW Natural 

Gas 487,658 447,880 447,880 447,880

A

Isagen SA3 Colombia Combined Cycle 300 MW Natural 

Gas 696,654 203,010 - -

A

Izmir Elektrik Uretim Turkey Combined Cycle 1554 MW Natural 

Gas 5,412,998 4,694,380 4,694,380 4,694,380

A Jorf Lasfar Energy4 Morocco Steam Boiler 1356 MW Coal 14,268,496 14,268,496 - -

A

NEPC Consortium Power Bangladesh

Engine-Based 

Power 

Generation

363,184 

MMBtu/yr

Natural 

Gas 383,159 245,795 343,581 343,581

A Paiton Energy Indonesia Steam Boiler 1200 MW Coal 7,938,380 9,553,044 9,553,044 9,553,044

A

Pakistan Water & Power Authority Pakistan Combined Cycle 150 MW Natural 

Gas 522,490 522,490 522,490 522,490

A

Termovalle SCA5 Colombia Combined Cycle 199 MW Natural 

Gas 714,070 0 - -
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 21

Tier

Project Name Location Description Capacity / 

Throughput

Fuel 

Type

Maximum 

Potential to 

Emit

Emissions 

(short tons 

CO2)

Baseline 

Emissions 

(short tons 

CO2)

2008 

Investor 

Reported

Emissions 

(short 

tons CO2)

2008 Final 

Emissions 

(short 

tons CO2)

A

Trakya Elektrik Uretim ve Ticaret6Turkey Combined Cycle 478 MW Natural 

Gas 1,818,912 1,747,956 - -

B

Accroven SRL7Venezuela NGL Facility 800 MMscfd Natural 

Gas 998,677 998,677 445,832 445,832

B

Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan Pipeline Azerbaijan Crude Oil 

Pipeline

247 million 

bbl

Natural 

Gas & 

Diesel

699,034 707,672 707,672 707,672

B

E.P. Interoil Papua New 

Guinea

Crude Oil 

Refinery

358,798 

MMBtu/yr Crude Oil 802,469 392,296 103,247 103,247

B

Equate Petrochemical8Kuwait Petrochemical 

Facility

1540 

MMBtu/hr

Natural 

Gas 720,573 720,573 680,311 680,311

B

Foxtrot International Cote 

d'Ivoire

Gas Extraction & 

Pipeline

1736 

MMscf/yr

Natural 

Gas 270,804 104,484 104,484 104,484

B

Natural Gas Liquids II Financing Nigeria NGL Facility 19.5 

MMscfd

Natural 

Gas 390,806 244,048 - 244,048

B

Various Egypt Subsidiaries 

(Apache) Egypt

Oil/Gas 

Extraction & 

Processing

29,934,702 

bbl/yr & 

89,910 

MMscf/yr

Oil & 

Natural 

Gas

1,190,476 1,505,247 1,589,653 1,589,653

B Wilpro Energy Services (El 

Furrial) Venezuela Gas Compression 60 MW Natural Gas 289,106 289,106 - 289,106

B Wilpro Energy Services (Pigap) Venezuela Gas 

Compression 100 MW Natural Gas 507,923 571,090 - 571,090

N/A Latin America Power III9 Latin 

America Fund N/A N/A 2,077,500 2,077,500 2,077,500 2,077,500

Subtotal: 52,610,117 47,837,955 31,700,544

5% for Additional Sources10: 2,630,506 2,391,898 1,585,027

Grand Total11: 55,240,623 50,229,853 33,285,571
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 22

Footnotes:

1

AES Jordan: Operated for less than 8,000 hours in 2008.

2 Gaza Private Generating PLC: Operated less than 8000 hours in 2008.

3

Isagen SA: Emissions for 2008 were 16,746 tons of CO2eq, as reported by the Sponsor. However, since they operated only a few days in 2008 

their emissions were excluded from the 2008 Inventory.

4

Jorf Lasfar Energy: Emissions for 2008 were 14,268,496 tons of CO2eq, as reported by the Sponsor. However, since this project was no longer 

in OPIC’s portfolio as of September 30, 2009 it is not included in the 2008 Inventory. 

5

Termovalle SCA: Emissions for 2008 were 46,213 tons of CO2eq, as reported by the Sponsor. Emissions are less than 100,000 tons of CO2 Eq.

but an increase in operating hours in future years is expected.

6

Trakya Elekrik Uretim Ve Ticaret: Emissions for 2008 were 1,484,377 tons of CO2eq, as reported by the Sponsor. However, since this project 

was no longer in OPIC’s portfolio as of Sep 30, 2009 it is not included in the 2008 Inventory.

7

Accroven: Sponsor provided feedback for 2007 in form of report but did not include GHG information. As a result, the PTE was used for 2007.

8

Equate Petrochemical: Sponsor provided feedback for 2007 after the 2008 OPIC Annual Policy Report was issued. Actual 2007 operating 

emissions were 680,311 tons of CO2eq. Increased emissions due to additional projects that increased capacity.

9

Per agreement between Latin American Power III and OPIC, the Fund agreed not to “make an investment in a Portfolio Company if after such 

investment, the assets and operations of all Portfolio Companies then held by the Fund would emit (in the aggregate and on a calendar year 

basis) in excess of 2,077,500 tons of CO2eq as calculated in accordance with the IPCC”.

10 In order to account for GHG emissions from active projects in OPIC’s portfolio that have less than 100,000 tons of CO2eq, OPIC adds an extra 5 

percent emissions to the aggregate emissions number. The addition of 5 percent to account for such sources is consistent with the GHG 

accounting methodology of the Climate Registry.

11 Projects that were no longer in OPIC’s portfolio as of Sep 30, 2009 were not included in the 2008 analysis.
OPIC Annual Policy Report FY 2009 23

Table 4 compares GHG emissions from projects in OPIC’s portfolio for the baseline and 2008 years. As 

seen in Table 2, GHG emissions from projects in OPIC’s portfolio were reduced by 16,944,282 tons of 

CO2eq. (from 50,229,853 to 33,285,571 tons of CO2eq) indicating that OPIC is on track to achieve its 30 

percent reduction in 10 years and 50 percent in 15 years. As per Section 7079(b) of Public Law 111-117 

(FY 2010 Omnibus), OPIC is required to achieve a 30 percent reduction in GHG emissions from the 

50,229,853 tons of CO2eq that were emitted by projects in the baseline (15,068,956 tons of CO2eq) by 

September 30, 2018. Similarly, OPIC is mandated by Section 7079(b) of Public Law 111-117 (FY 2010 

Omnibus) to reduce GHG emissions by 25,114,927 tons of CO2eq by September 30, 2023, representing a 

50 percent reduction from 50,229,853 tons of CO2eq that were emitted by projects in the baseline. OPIC’s 

policy to constrain the addition of projects that have the potential to emit high levels of GHG emissions to 

the portfolio will help OPIC in meeting its commitments of 30 percent GHG emissions reduction in 10 

years and 50 percent reduction in 15 years. 

Table 4: OPIC Baseline and Calendar Year 2008 CO2 Emissions (in short tons) 

BASELINE EMISSIONS CALENDAR YEAR 2008 

EMISSIONS

REDUCTION IN GHG 

EMISSIONS

OPIC 50,229,853 33,285,571 16,944,282

*Baseline emissions are those estimated for calendar year 2007 for projects active as of June 30, 2008. 

Fiscal Year 2009 Reporting 

As illustrated in Table 5, OPIC reports no direct (Scope 1) emissions associated with its activities because 

OPIC has no direct CO2 emissions. OPIC reports indirect (Scope 2) emissions totaling 1,329 short tons 

of CO2eq associated with its purchase of electricity. OPIC is reporting as Scope 3 emissions for 2009 the 

direct GHG emissions associated with projects with emissions exceeding 100,000 tons of CO2eq per year 

that were in OPIC’s active portfolio as of September 30, 2009. In the past, OPIC reported as Scope 3 

emissions the direct emissions associated with projects with emissions exceeding 100,000 tons of CO2eq

per year that were in the OPIC’s active portfolio on June 30, 2008 but the reporting date for 2009 was 

shifted to September 30 to match the end of the fiscal year which is the basis for the annual report. 

Table 5: OPIC Fiscal Year 2009 CO2 Emissions (in short tons) 

SCOPE 1 EMISSIONS SCOPE 2 EMISSIONS SCOPE 3 EMISSIONS

OPIC 0 1,329 33,285,571

OPIC provided commitments to two major GHG emitting projects in the FY 2009 that were estimated to 

have total GHG emissions of 787,000 tons of CO2eq. Apache, a gas and oil processing project located in 

Egypt, was estimated to emit 260,000 tons of CO2eq and Contour Global, a power generation project in 

Togo, was estimated to emit 527,000 tons of CO2eq. OPIC reported the Contour Global project in the 

2008 OPIC Policy Report but did not actually disburse funds until FY 2009. 

On a transactional basis, OPIC considers reduction and control alternatives for all projects, including 

opportunities to enhance energy and operational efficiency; protect and enhance sinks and reservoirs of 

greenhouse gases, such as natural forests, and the application of emerging technologies for capture, 

storage, and recovery of greenhouse gases. 

 

The Environmental, Health and Safety Impacts section of OPIC’s 2008 Policy Report represents the 11th

year of reporting on environmental, health and safety considerations of OPIC-supported projects. This 

section replaces and continues the reporting of these environmental considerations in what had been 

previously reported in a stand-alone OPIC Annual Environmental Report. Specifically, this section will 

report information related to environmental, health and safety screening and assessment, annual 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 24

greenhouse gas reporting as well as introduce and summarize any other environment-related policy 

matters undertaken by OPIC during the previous fiscal year. 

IV. LABOR AND HUMAN RIGHTS 

Labor Rights 

OPIC tracks countries’ eligibility as part of its statutory obligations. 

OPIC programs are subject to a country-level statutory criterion, specifically whether a country is taking 

steps to adopt and implement “internationally recognized worker rights,” as defined under the Trade Act 

of 1974. The Generalized System of Preferences (“GSP”) program, a trade benefits program overseen 

by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (“USTR”), has parallel statutory requirements for GSP 

beneficiary countries. For U.S. Government-wide consistency on country-level determinations based on 

this particular “taking steps” standard, OPIC follows the USTR’s actions on country eligibility for the GSP 

program on worker rights grounds. 

OPIC tracks the USTR’s petition-and-review process for country eligibility on worker rights grounds, 

including their Trade Policy Staff Committee’s (“TPSC”) final determinations on these reviews. For 

countries that are ineligible for the GSP program on grounds other than worker rights, OPIC utilizes a 

similar petition-and-review process for country eligibility on worker rights grounds. During Fiscal Year 

2009, no countries regained their GSP benefits on worker rights grounds, and hence their eligibility for 

OPIC programs. Similarly, no countries became ineligible for GSP benefits or OPIC programs on worker 

rights grounds. However, for its 2009 GSP Annual Review, the USTR continues to formally review the 

GSP eligibility of the following countries on worker rights grounds: Bangladesh, Niger, Uzbekistan, and 

the Philippines. Furthermore, the USTR received petitions challenging the GSP eligibility of Iraq and Sri 

Lanka on worker rights grounds. The decision regarding whether to accept these new country practice 

petitions for formal review is expected to be announced in the spring of 2010. OPIC will implement in its 

own programs the TPSC’s final determinations of these countries’ GSP eligibility. 

Historically, as a result of USTR’s GSP and/or OPIC’s own determinations, OPIC programs have been 

suspended in 15 countries13 on account of their failure to meet the statutory "taking steps" standard. In a 

number of those countries, including Liberia and Chile, GSP and OPIC programs have been restored as a 

result of progress in adopting and implementing internationally recognized worker rights standards. At the 

present time, the following countries remain ineligible for OPIC programs on worker rights grounds: 

Belarus, China, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, and the United Arab Emirates. 

OPIC places contractually binding worker rights conditions on every project it supports. 

At the project level, OPIC requires that projects do not "contribute to violations of internationally 

recognized worker rights.” These rights include: the right of association; the right of organization and 

collective bargaining; a prohibition on forced or compulsory labor; minimum age for employment and a 

prohibition on the worst forms of child labor; and acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum 

wages, hours of work, and occupational health and safety. OPIC includes statutorily required standard 

worker rights language in every insurance contract, and every finance and investment funds agreement. 

The language prohibits explicitly the use of forced labor and requires the investor to respect the rights of 

association, organization, and collective bargaining, and to observe applicable laws with respect to 

minimum age and wage requirements, hours of work, and occupational health and safety. 

 

13 Historically, these countries include: Belarus, China, Maldives, Sudan, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Liberia, Central African 

Republic, Chile, Nicaragua, South Korea, and Mauritania. Some countries (e.g., Chile and Liberia) regained GSP and/or OPIC 

eligibility as a result of steps taken to implement internationally recognized worker rights standards. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 25

In certain cases, the applicable laws of the host country or the implementation of such laws may not meet 

internationally recognized worker rights standards. In these instances, and as a condition of OPIC 

support, OPIC requires further that the investor meet the relevant International Labor Organization’s 

(“ILO”) standards for internationally recognized worker rights through additional contractually-binding 

conditions. Such contract conditions typically refer, though are not limited, to non-discrimination on 

account of union activities, minimum age of workers, payment of minimum wages, timely payment of 

wages, limits on hours of work, and rights related to hazardous work situations. 

In addition to reviewing the 117 OPIC-supported projects, the Office of Investment Policy reviewed 

140 additional projects during Fiscal Year 2009. 

A more complete picture of OPIC’s project-by-project labor and human rights reviews can be illustrated by 

the 257 total insurance and, finance projects reviewed by the Office of Investment Policy during FY 2009. 

A number of these projects continue to be reviewed on credit, underwriting, or policy grounds and may 

ultimately receive OPIC support. 

In FY 2009, all of the 117 OPIC-supported projects were subject to a full worker rights review, and OPIC 

support was conditioned upon contractual adherence to internationally recognized worker rights 

standards. Supplemental contract conditions addressing one or more of these rights were included in an 

overwhelming majority of the project contracts and agreements. 

The Labor and Human Rights Group conducts on-site due diligence for particularly sensitive 

projects. 

For projects deemed particularly sensitive upon initial project review, OPIC may conduct additional due 

diligence at the project site prior to issuing approval on worker rights or human rights grounds. A variety 

of factors may determine whether a potential project warrants on-site due diligence, including general 

country- or sector-level labor and human rights sensitivities, location, project size and size of workforce, 

potential for the use of child and/or forced labor, and the nature of the work conducted at the project, 

including the level of hazardous work activity. In FY 2009, the Labor and Human Rights Group conducted 

on-site due diligence in Peru for a project that provides financial support to fair-trade certified coffee 

cooperatives. 

Human Rights 

The promotion of respect for basic human rights is essential to successful OPIC-supported projects, and 

OPIC recognizes the importance of human rights in its programs and project evaluation process. The 

OPIC human rights clearance process is designed to ensure that OPIC-supported projects meet their 

statutory requirements, as required by the Foreign Assistance Act. For all potential projects, OPIC works 

in close consultation with the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and 

Labor (“DRL”), prior to making a final commitment. Since 1990, OPIC programs have been suspended by 

statute in the People’s Republic of China. 

In FY 2009, OPIC continued to collaborate with DRL on the human rights clearance process by utilizing a 

quarterly system of updates to keep apprised of human rights matters that could be impacted by potential 

OPIC projects. Every project considered for OPIC financing, insurance or for investment by an OPICsupported investment fund in FY 2009 was subject to a human rights review. 

OPIC focuses attention on human rights at projects in all sectors and supports multi-stakeholder 

initiatives such as the "Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights." The Principles provide 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 26

guidance on safety, security, and human rights for companies in the extractive and energy sectors. OPIC 

encourages signatories to the Voluntary Principles to implement them to the best of their ability in OPICassisted projects. 

V. MONITORING OF ACTIVE PROJECTS 

This section provides an overview of OPIC’s policy monitoring and evaluation program and outlines fiscal 

year 2009’s monitoring activities. The section is divided in three parts: compliance, self-monitoring, and 

site-monitoring. 

Overview

OPIC considers monitoring active projects an important part of the project oversight process and employs 

two types of project monitoring: self monitoring and site monitoring. 

All OPIC supported projects are required to complete a “Self-Monitoring Questionnaire” (SMQ) annually - 

the SMQ reports on the project’s actual results from the most recent fiscal year. A new, more userfriendly website for this questionnaire was launched in 2008. The new questionnaire is easier for 

investors to use and provides OPIC with higher quality data. 

Site monitoring enhances the value of information gathered through self monitoring. Site monitoring 

involves field visits to OPIC-supported projects to ensure compliance with relevant covenants in OPIC 

agreements. These projects are (1) randomly sampled by the monitoring team or (2) designated as 

sensitive for at least one of OPIC’s statutory disciplines (U.S. economic impact, host country 

developmental impact, labor and human rights, environment and social impact). 

The value of site monitoring extends beyond ensuring compliance and understanding why a project 

succeeded or struggled. The process of gathering, analyzing and verifying information about projects 

helps OPIC continually improve its investment strategy, which means better outcomes for U.S. investors 

and host country development. In addition, site monitoring offers OPIC the opportunity to meet with U.S. 

officials in host countries to understand U.S. perspectives on economic development and U.S. investor 

involvement in the host countries. Finally, OPIC is able to ascertain investors’ commitment to any 

community development and social responsibility goals that they set for themselves in their applications 

to OPIC. Seeing conditions at project sites and communities that support them is invaluable in judging 

investors’ commitment to a broad vision of economic and social development. 

In late 2007, OPIC initiated its integrated site monitoring format. Integrated monitoring allows OPIC’s 

Office of Investment Policy (OIP) to use one monitoring visit to comprehensively assess projects’ 

compliance with each of the statutory disciplines. FY 2009 was the second complete fiscal year of 

integrated site monitoring, and it is a successful and sustainable format for efficient and effective use of 

staff and budget resources. 

In FY 2009, approximately 306 OPIC projects were self monitored and 57 OPIC projects were sitemonitored. All OIP site monitored projects quantifiably improved the host country’s economic 

development landscape. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 27

Compliance with OPIC Conditions and Covenants 

Each discipline within the Office of Investment Policy monitors projects to ensure compliance with OPIC 

conditions and covenants. The results of the site monitoring this year are: 

U.S. economic effects and host country development: U.S. economic and host country 

developmental impact site monitoring concluded that no projects were out of compliance with 

OPIC conditions and covenants. 

Environment and social impact: In 2009 environmental and social impact monitoring focused 

on those projects with the potential for greatest environmental and social risk. In 2009, 77 percent 

of the site visits involved Category A and B projects. During site monitoring, approximately 56 

percent of projects were found to be in compliance with all OPIC covenants and conditions 

pertaining to environmental and social considerations. Of those projects found to be deficient in 

some performance measure mostly involved a failure to submit required documentation in a 

timely manner. Other instances in which a deficiency was noted involved a readily rectifiable 

issue. In those cases in which deficiencies were noted OPIC’s environmental and social impact 

group informed the project investor of the deficiency and required the implementation of 

corrective actions. 

Labor and human rights: Labor and human rights monitoring found that the vast majority of the 

projects visited were in compliance with OPIC’s contractual requirements. In FY 2009, 

approximately 94 percent of site-monitored projects were found to be in compliance. These 

projects generally demonstrated a strong commitment to the OPIC worker rights requirements, 

and illustrated many of the projects’ commitments to support workers and their local communities 

in ways that extend above and beyond the OPIC requirements. Of the site-monitored projects that 

were found to be deficient in one or more areas with OPIC’s contractual requirements,OPIC 

worked diligently with the project investors to cure, or implement a plan to cure the deficiencies in 

an appropriate manner and within a reasonable timeframe. 

OIP also determined that three other site-monitored projects required additional follow-up by way 

of a third-party assessment. One of the three projects will be subject to a third-party assessment, 

scheduled to take place in 2010. Ultimately, it was determined that the other two would not be 

subject to a third-party assessment since one project resulted in a change in ownership and lack 

of operations, while the other ended its insurance policy. OIP also determined that a fourth project 

required a third-party assessment as a result of labor issues that were brought to OPIC’s 

attention via the project’s independent environmental and social consultants. At the time of this 

report, the assessment for the fourth project is pending finalization. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 28

The following sections provide additional detail on the results of OPIC’s FY 2009 monitoring. 

Self Monitoring 

The Self Monitoring Questionnaire (SMQ), required by contract/agreement since 1993, is completed by all 

active OPIC investments. This was the second year of OPIC’s integrated SMQ, launched in 2008 in an 

effort to make OPIC’s internal data management processes more efficient and to make procedures as 

streamlined and clear as possible to OPIC investors. The integrated SMQ better reflects the nature of 

OPIC’s supported projects while making the form more user-friendly. The SMQ is divided into Section A 

(for all “bricks and mortar” projects) and Section B (for financial intermediaries). Financial intermediaries 

refer to general lending banks, specialized lending institutions, mortgage facilities, microfinance 

institutions, private equity funds, and other capital market transactions. 

The analysis in this section is based on data obtained from approximately 306 SMQs, 193 of which are 

Section A respondents and 113 of which are Section B respondents. Of these received in FY 2009, 

Table 6 below shows the percentage of OPIC-supported projects reporting on various developmental 

indicators. 

Table 6: FY 2009 Self-Monitoring Results

Capacity 

Measured

Qualitative Monitoring1Percentage of 

Self- Monitored 

Projects Reporting 

Affirmative

Capital Mobilization

Involve Other Federal/Regional/Multilateral Organizations 34.8%

Involve a Public/Private Partnership 19.1%

Human Capital 

Development

Provide Overseas Training for Workers* 51.1%

Have Equal Employment Policy* 73.6%

Have Policies for Women’s Needs* 86.2%

Provide Company Benefits 91.3%

Corporate Social 

Responsibility

Help the Local Community 73.2%

Compliance with Environment, Health, & Safety 

Conditions 96.7%

Technology and 

Knowledge Transfer

Introduce Innovative Management Techniques* 48.9%

Introduce New Marketing Techniques* 33.5%

Introduce New Technology* 31.0%

Introduce New Products* 29.3%

Lower Local Prices* 30.3%

Economic 

Diversification

Have a percentage of Local Ownership* 59.0%

Local Owner is a Small & Medium Enterprise* 24.5%

Help a Poor Region* 73.4%

Strengthen the physical, financial or social infrastructure* 78.2%

1 Indicators noted above with an asterisk only contain information reported by bricks and mortar projects as OPIC does not request 

this information from financial services projects. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 29

Capital Mobilization

One of OPIC’s statutory objectives is to play a key role in leveraging private sector resources for 

development. The most obvious parameters to measure this are the involvement of non-OPIC project 

financing and equity, the involvement of other development institutions, and the promotion of PublicPrivate Partnerships (PPPs) through the involvement of local development banks, civil societies and nongovernmental organizations. 

Of the FY 2009 SMQs received by OPIC, approximately 35 percent reported the use of non-OPIC 

investment sources such as USAID, IFC, ADB, and EBRD, or a host country government entity, civil 

society or a non-governmental organization. In 2009, 19 percent of OPIC supported projects involved a 

PPP. PPPs are characterized by local government support, such as technical assistance from a local 

government agency or construction finance support from a state agency. The idea behind PPPs is to 

bring about local ownership in the project and to increase the number of stakeholders which would 

amplify the projects significance and support. 

Human Capital Development

Employment generation is one of the key indicators OPIC uses to evaluate the developmental impact of 

projects it assists. In FY 2009, OPIC-supported projects created approximately 123,422 host country jobs 

or, on average, 417 host country employees per self-monitored project. The added employment 

contributed to the growth of the local economies by generating around $67,105 of revenue per employee. 

The aim is not just to create jobs, but also to increase the overall skill level of the workforce through 

proper training and development. In FY 2009, SMQ respondents reported approximately 7,569 local 

employees received formal training and around 51 percent reported employees receiving training abroad. 

When these employees are trained in their various job aspects outside of their home country, they are 

able to diffuse the same knowledge that they received abroad to other host country employees, 

increasing the technical knowledge base of the population. 

Company and employee benefits are another indication of a maturing employment market. In FY 2009, 

91 percent of the SMQ respondents offered various company benefits to its employees such as 

transportation or meal subsidies, pension plans, medical coverage, etc. An equal employment policy is a 

way to protect discrimination on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, etc.; approximately 74 percent 

of SMQ respondents had an equal employment policy over and above that required by local law. Finally, 

about 86 percent of OPIC-supported projects had special policies and benefits in place specifically to 

benefit women in their workplaces. 

Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) defines organizations taking responsibility for the impact of their 

activities on customers, employees, shareholders, communities and the environment in all aspects of 

their operations. OPIC evaluates CSR in its projects by identifying socially responsible and 

environmentally conscious benefits that are offered to the greater community. CSR includes community 

outreach programs whereby the foreign enterprise allows public access to company-sponsored clinics 

and schools, funds community centers, sponsors sports teams and cultural events, and provides financial 

support for local foundations and organizations. In 2009, 73 percent of the SMQ respondents were 

involved in these types of community outreach programs. 

Technology and Knowledge Transfer

These transfers include the dissemination of innovative management practices, marketing and distribution 

expertise, and adoption of new production technologies. Often they lead to the development and 

introduction of new products or services into emerging markets. These transfers frequently have a 

substantial effect on the host country by improving worker productivity levels and the quality of other 

factors of production. Moreover, additional impacts may be created through the diffusion and adoption of 

new technologies and ideas by other firms in the host country due to the implementation of these ideas by 

OPIC-supported investors. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 30

OPIC seeks to gauge such transfers of technology and knowledge in its support. For example, in FY 

2009, 49 percent of SMQ respondents introduced innovative management techniques in the host country 

while 34 percent introduced novel marketing methods. Furthermore, almost 31 percent of OPICsupported projects sought to introduce new technologies in the host country, while almost 29 percent of 

projects introduced new products in foreign markets. Such practices assist the foreign enterprises trying 

to seek a competitive edge in the global market, lead to the strengthening of national capacities through 

development of a domestic technology base, and can result in increased operating efficiencies. This 

enhancement of productivity can be reflected in lower local prices and in 2009, 30 percent of OPICsupported projects reported that they offered lower prices in the market than their main competitors. 

Economic Diversification

OPIC encourages private sector ownership of projects in order to promote entrepreneurial growth and 

sustainable development around the world. In FY 2009, approximately 17 percent of OPIC-supported 

projects were located in sub-Saharan Africa, 11 percent in North Africa and the Middle East, 16 percent in 

Asia and the Pacific, 32 percent in Europe and Eurasia, and 24 percent in Latin America and the 

Caribbean. Moreover, OPIC encourages economic diversification of the private sector as it decreases 

the local economy’s dependence on international market swings and domestic business cycles, while 

assisting with overall macroeconomic stability. 

OPIC measures the economic diversification impact of its investments through various indicators. This 

can be achieved by developing a new sector of economic activity such as introducing a home mortgage 

financing program in a country without such lending facilities. OPIC’s products also extend credit to 

SMEs in order to encourage private sector investments in entrepreneurial endeavors which leads to 

further economic diversification. As such, approximately 59 percent of OPIC’s projects have some local 

ownership and around 25 percent of these local owners are SMEs. Finally, in order to facilitate 

widespread development in the country, OPIC recognizes the need for rural development in order to 

avoid creating or exacerbating income and developmental disparities between thriving cities and rural 

communities. Approximately 73 percent of OPIC-supported projects reporting in FY 2009 were located in 

poor or rural regions in order to promote overall societal welfare and prosperity. Also, around 78 percent 

of OPIC’s projects worked to strengthen the physical, financial, or social infrastructure, making 

infrastructure more accessible and affordable to all segments of the population.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 31

Site Monitoring 

In FY 2009 OPIC site monitored 57 projects located in various sectors in almost all world regions. The 

figures below provide a breakdown of the locations, sectors, and products involved for projects sitemonitored in FY 2009. 

Figure 6 

Reflecting the shift in the OPIC portfolio over the past few years toward financial services investments 

(about half of OPIC commitments in FY2009 were in the financial services sector), OPIC continued to 

monitor a significant number of projects in this sector. Financial services projects offer two sets of 

analysis: the impact of OPIC support on the financial intermediary and the impact of OPIC support on the 

downstream borrowers. 

The focus on financial services also is reflected in the percentage breakdown of projects monitored by the 

OPIC product line. Most financial services projects are supported through OPIC investment guarantees 

and this is reflected in the projects site monitored by OPIC product in FY 2009. 

Agribusiness

3%

Communications

5%

Construction

7%

Energy

4%

Financial 

Services

33%

Manufacturing

26%

Mining

2%

Services

14%

Tourism

4%

Transportation

2%

Site Monitoring Activities By Sector

Fiscal Year 2009 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 32

Figure 7 

Geographically, the majority of projects monitored in FY 2009 were in Latin America and Middle East & 

North Africa. 

Figure 8 

. 

DI

30%

DI & IG

2%

DI & INS

5%

IG

49%

INS

14%

Site Monitoring Activities By OPIC Product

Fiscal Year 2009 

Central Asia

9%

East & S. Europe

7%

Latin America 

Regional

37%

Middle East & N. 

Africa

21%

South Asia

9%

Sub-Saharan 

Africa

17%

Site Monitoring Activities By Region

Fiscal Year 2009 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 33

FY 2009 Monitoring Observations 

Below is a small sampling of findings from the Office of Investment Policy’s monitoring visits. These 

examples show some of the ways in which OPIC projects have had substantial developmental impact on 

the host countries. 

Latin America

In FY 2009 OPIC site monitored 21 projects in Latin America for statutory compliance. 

Sambazon (Brazil): OPIC’s investment support in the construction of an açai processing facility in Brazil’s 

Amazon has helped the U.S. investor, Sambazon, capitalize on the fruit’s growing popularity. With good 

news about açai’s health benefits and demand for a product that supports sustainable harvesting, U.S. 

and European market demand continues to increase. Though under no contractual obligation to supply 

the plant, there are approximately 3,000 local Amazonian families that harvest the fruit for sale to 

Sambazon. The company works with these families regarding Sambazon’s commitment to the annual 

Fair-Trade price floor, which helps ensure a sufficient supply. During the harvest season, which runs 

from June through December, Sambazon’s modern plant employs more than 70 workers, and the 

company demonstrates a strong commitment to the local community. The company not only puts 

cooperation with it growers as a foremost priority, but also supports local charities, including a school for 

abandoned and impoverished children. 

ISAGEN (Colombia): Another Latin-American project monitored by OPIC in 2009 helped Colombia’s 

hydroelectric power generator, ISAGEN, utilize a U.S. financial institution’s OPIC-backed loan to 

rehabilitate several hydroelectric power generation facilities. By repairing a damaged generator and 

renovating older generators, this project has allowed ISAGEN to maintain its electricity generation 

capacity and thus continue to provide electricity generation services to consumers and businesses. The 

project is helping to meet electricity demand in a country with a lack of adequate supply. Reliable power 

is a prerequisite to economic development, and with this investment, ISAGEN ensured continued stable 

delivery of nearly 25 percent of Colombia’s total annual power. In addition, the investment facilitated 

ISAGEN’s transition to fully-private ownership and the divestiture of the Colombian government in this 

sector. 

South Asia

OPIC monitored four projects in South Asia this year. 

Ceylon Oxygen (Sri Lanka): A visit to Ceylon Oxygen showed the power of an OPIC investment to 

catalyze organizational and technological change. Ceylon Oxygen is Sri Lanka’s leading medical and 

industrial gas manufacturer. OPIC’s investment resulted in Ceylon’s reorganization, which eliminated 

waste and inefficiency that persisted under the old structure. In addition, introduction of technology to 

track and measure organizational and production performance enabled the company to solidify its 

position as Sri Lanka’s premier gas production and delivery organization. Meetings were held with key 

personnel to understand how reorganization and technology transformed the company. In addition, a tour 

of the facilities showed that Ceylon made to improve the company’s safety, and environmental protection 

measures. New fire-suppression control systems allow Ceylon to reduce the risks its facilities pose to 

workers and the surrounding community. 

Lanka Orix Leasing (Sri Lanka): With OPIC’s support, Lanka Orix Leasing, one of Sri Lanka’s largest 

leasing companies, was able to set up a microfinance operation that allows it to expand its reach in to the 

underserved segments of the economy. Because of OPIC’s investment, Orix was able to open six new 

branches in rural areas to serve less developed areas, which resulted in the provision of leases to 

approximately 1,400 new borrowers. Moreover, Orix’s leases for vehicle and equipment borrowers help 

small- and medium-sized enterprises. Orix utilizes cutting-edge technology to manage risk and deal with 

the challenges of operating in an uncertain environment. OPIC monitoring provided OIP staff with an 

understanding of this replicable model, which will help OPIC hone its ability to maximize the 

developmental effects of its investments in micro-finance and leasing around the world.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 34

 

Sub-Saharan Africa

OPIC monitored 10 projects in Sub-Saharan Africa in FY 2009. 

Ghana Home Loans (Ghana): OPIC visited Ghana Home Loans (GHL) and the visit revealed how GHL’s 

introduction of long-term fixed-rate mortgages allowed hundreds of families to purchase homes. GHL has 

introduced long-term, fixed-rate mortgages into the host country market, which were previously not widely 

available. Ghana Home Loans (GHL) was one of the first financial institutions to securitize some of its 

loans and issue mortgage-backed securities into the capital market, deepening the country’s financial 

sector. The increase in mortgage lending has led to multiplier effects throughout the host country 

economy by increasing the availability of housing units, increasing homeownership, and stimulating the 

home supply sector. As of the visit, GHL had closed 464 loans, and had an outstanding loan portfolio of 

$34 million. The company has 172 more loan commitments in its pipeline valued at $11 million. Of the 

OPIC-backed portion of GHL’s loan portfolio, 69 percent of loans have been made for new properties, 22 

percent for business investing and 9 percent for refinancing. GHL currently employs 26 people and is 

adding about four new people every 6 months. GHL offers both in-house and off-site training for its 

employees. 

Milicom (Tanzania): OPIC monitored Tanzania’s Milicom, the country’s third-largest cellular 

telecommunications operator. Milicom, or TIGO, which is the name of its cellular brand, controls about a 

third of the country’s telephony market. This size reflects a significant expansion from 2007, when the 

company received its OPIC-supported investment. TIGO increased its customer base through a rapid 

expansion of the company’s nationwide cell phone coverage. This OPIC-supported expansion has led to 

approximately 60 new management and professional/technical positions, while the increased network 

size involved significant levels of third party employment. TIGO contracts cell tower construction to four 

different Tanzanian companies. With the OPIC-supported expansion resulting in about 25 new towers 

and a minimum of seven people required to build and install a tower, this investment can conservatively 

be credited with supporting approximately 175 Tanzanian workers. TIGO has also been on the forefront 

of mobile banking services, which continue to grow in popularity. Through these efforts the company has 

become the chosen brand for Tanzania’s youth. TIGO also has a strong commitment to the local 

community, with a near doubling of its corporate social responsibility budget between 2008 and 2009. 

Programs supported by the company include donations to local schools, food for the homeless and the 

construction of wells to increase the amount of available of potable water. 

Middle East and North Africa (MENA)

OPIC monitored 12 projects in the Middle East and North Africa in FY 2009. 

HWD (Algeria): OPIC’s investment in an Algerian water treatment facility is noteworthy for several 

reasons. Water security, like power, is a prerequisite to economic development. OPIC’s investment 

helped create the first reverse-osmosis desalinization facility in North Africa. The project’s success in 

supplying the City of Algiers with reliable water is seen as a replicable experiment in responding to this 

region’s water-related challenges. A tour of the plant revealed a modern facility staffed by 60 new 

workers, who were all trained in this cutting-edge technology. Workers receive extensive and ongoing 

training. The company’s strategy for community involvement includes scholarships for students studying 

this technology at the local university. Additionally, the project maintains a good relationship with the 

university to ensure that graduates see the water facility as a desirable place to begin their careers. 

MEC (Jordan): OPIC monitored a Citibank facilitated project, Mid-East Complex for Engineering, 

Electronics and Heavy Industries (“MEC”), in Jordan. The OPIC-guaranteed loan assisted MEC in its 

transition from an assembly-plant to a full-fledged manufacturer of home appliances. It has positive job 

creation impacts as the OPIC-guaranteed funds have enabled the creation of more than 70 permanent 

local jobs. All workers receive training, much of which occurs at the MEC Academy, a training facility that 

provides specialized technical expertise so that workers are compliant with the production standards of 

large Asian firms, under whose labels MEC manufactures home appliances. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 35

Eastern Europe and Central Asia

In FY 2009 nine projects were monitored in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. 

StarNet (Russia): OPIC’s monitoring visit to StarNet, a broadband internet provider in Moscow, revealed 

the company’s enormous contribution to Moscow’s “Metropolitan Area Network”. Compared to other 

broadband technologies, StarNet’s Ethernet service is reliable and affordable, which gives StarNet an 

advantage in Moscow’s competitive internet market. As a result of the OPIC supported expansion, the 

company created 150 positions and utilized a significant amount of local resources to build out its 

network, thereby supporting regional suppliers and workforce. Furthermore, StarNet’s operations deliver 

a service to consumers that positively catalyze communications. Reducing the transaction cost of 

information will benefit both: residential consumers and businesses that use the internet. 

Malika Hotel (Uzbekistan): OPIC’s monitoring visit to the Malika Hotel in Bukhara Uzbekistan 

demonstrated the impact that is possible when OPIC invests in tourism and hospitality developments. The 

Uzbek banking system’s limitations hinder development of a sustainable tourism industry in Uzbekistan. 

OPIC’s assistance bridged this gap, helping the Hotel to expand and renovate its facility. Occupancy 

rates at the new hotel hover around 90 percent during the tourist season, and the hotel employs 26 

people in various occupations around the hotel. Nearly all inputs are locally procured and the hotel’s 

success has spurred improvement among other tourist-oriented hotels to improve their facilities, 

strengthening Uzbekistan’s image as a tourist destination. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 36

VI. EXHIBITS 

1. U.S. EMPLOYMENT & ASSOC. EFFECTS, FY2009 ................................................. 37

2. BREAKOUT OF FINAL THIRD COUNTRY DESTINATION OF THE

 OUTPUT OF OPIC-SUPPORTED PROJECTS.......................................................... 38

3. U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS AND HOST-COUNTRY LOCATION OF OPIC-

 SUPPORTED PROJECTS, FY 2009........................................................................ 40

4. METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS ................... 44

5. OPIC’s DEVELOPMENT MATRIX EXPLAINED ....................................................... 45

6. OPIC’s FINANCIAL SERVICES DEVELOPMENT MATRIX EXPLAINED.................... 46

7. OPIC SITE MONITORING METHODOLOGY........................................................... 47

8. PACE REPORT .................................................................................................... 48
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 37

EXHIBIT 1: U.S. EMPLOYMENT & ASSOCIATED EFFECTS OF OPIC-SUPPORTED PROJECTS

FY 2009 (PROJECTIONS)

(All Dollar Figures are in Thousands)

Number U.S. Effect on

Industry of Current Account Final Destination of Project Output 2/ U.S. Effect on U.S. Employment 1/ 3/ U.S. Trade

Sector Projects Inflows 1/

Host 

Country U.S.

3rd 

Country Procurement 1/ Initial Operating Total Balance 1/

A. Projects with Positive Effects on Employment 4/

Manufacturing 5/ 9 $215,211 $270,218 $19,705 $28,788 $206,343 46 344 390 $116,686 

Minerals & Energy 4 $41,489 $72,013 $0 $0 $31,489 26 12 38 $41,489 

Other Services 18 $205,761 $564,777 $10,620 $41,759 $202,459 299 40 339 $152,661 

Positive Total 31 $462,462 

6

/ $907,009 $30,325 $70,547 $440,291 371 396 767 $310,837 

B. Projects with Neutral Effects on Employment 7/

Manufacturing /5 8 $600 $294,139 $17,606 $48,090 $0 0 0 0 ($87,428)

Minerals & Energy 6 $2,000 $43,251 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $2,000 

Other Services 72 $15,155 $900,308 $0 $62,441 $3,355 4 2 6 $15,155 

Neutral Total 86 $17,755 $1,237,698 $17,606 $110,530 $3,355 4 2 6 ($70,273)

C. Projects with Negative Effects on Employment 8/

Negative Total 0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 0 0 $0 

Net FY Total 117 $480,216 $2,144,707 $47,931 $181,078 $443,646 375 398 773 $240,563 

1/ Total effect during first five years of project operation.

2/ Average annual effect during first five years of project operation.

3/ Person years of employment.

4/ Projects with a U.S. employment effect of 2 or more jobs (10 person years or more of employment during the first 5 years of project operation).

5/ There is one project within the Agribusiness sector in Section A (positive effects) and in Section B (neutral effects). To protect business 

confidentiality, the data for these projects are included in the data for the Manufacturing sector.

6/ Totals may differ slightly from the sum of individual sectors due to rounding.

7/ Projects with a U.S. employment effect of plus or minus 2 jobs (plus/minus 10 person years of employment during the first 5 years of project operation).

8/ There were no projects supported in fiscal 2009 that resulted in the loss of any U.S. employment.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 38

EXHIBIT 2: BREAKOUT OF FINAL THIRD COUNTRY DESTINATION OF THE 

OUTPUT OF OPIC-SUPPORTED PROJECTS

FY 2009 (Projections)

PROJECTS WITH POSITIVE EFFECTS ON U.S. EMPLOYMENT 1/

Agribusiness

Mexico $19,750

Netherlands $1,733,000

United Kingdom $1,342,000

Unknown $62,000

Sector Total $3,156,750

Minerals and Energy

Sector Total $0

Manufacturing

Turkey $2,423,322

Italy $17,676,041

Asia Regional $4,747,000

Burkina Faso $150,000

Cote D'Ivoire $250,000

Liberia $85,200

South Africa $300,000

Sector Total $25,631,563

Services

Costa Rica $5,000,000

Dominican Republic $1,000,000

El Salvador $1,000,000

Germany $6,367,000

Global $4,240,000

Liberia $10,000

Panama $3,000,000

Sudan $1,050,937

Uganda $3,090,992

United Arab Emirates $17,000,000

Sector Total $41,758,929

TOTAL POSITIVE

EFFECTS $70,547,242

1/ There were no projects with positive U.S. employment effects that had sales to third countries.

There were no projects supported in fiscal 2009 that resulted in the loss of any U.S. employment.

Continued on next page
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 39

EXHIBIT 2 (continued): BREAKOUT OF FINAL THIRD COUNTRY DESTINATION OF 

THE OUTPUT OF OPIC-SUPPORTED PROJECTS, FY 2009 

(Projections)

PROJECTS WITH NEUTRAL EFFECTS ON U.S. EMPLOYMENT 3/ 

Agribusiness

Australia $2,075,700

United Kingdom $2,075,700

Sector Total $4,151,400

Minerals & Energy

Sector Total $0 2/

Manufacturing

Africa Regional $2,000,000

Angola $1,800,000

France $7,925,000

Italy $7,925,000

Libya $4,984,000

United Kingdom $15,850,000

Unknown $2,054,220

Tanzania $1,000,000

Zambia $400,000

Sector Total $43,938,220 2/

Services

Czech Republic $6,000,000

France $1,300,000

Global $28,315,458

India $3,994,403

Kenya $3,159,110

Mexico $201,865

Middle East Regional $1,470,000

Poland $12,000,000

Slovak Republic $6,000,000

Sector Total $62,440,836 2/

TOTAL NEUTRAL

EFFECTS $110,530,456

FY TOTAL $181,077,698

2/ Totals may differ slightly from the sum of individual countries due to rounding.

3/ Represents projects with a U.S. employment effect of plus or minus 2 jobs (plus/minus 10 person years of

employment during the first 5 years of project operation). There were no projects supported

in fiscal 2009 that resulted in the loss of any U.S. employment.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 40

EXHIBIT 3: U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS AND HOST-COUNTRY LOCATION OF OPICSUPPORTED PROJECTS, FY 2009

A. PROJECTS WITH POSITIVE EFFECTS ON EMPLOYMENT 1/

COUNTRY/REGION AGRICULTURE

MINERALS 

& 

ENERGY MANUFACTURING SERVICES TOTAL

Afghanistan 1 1 2

India 1 1 2

 Total Asia 0 2 2 0 4

Russia 4 4

Turkey 1 1

 Total Europe 0 0 1 4 5

Brazil 1 1

Chile 1 1

Colombia 1 1

Costa Rica 1 1

Haiti 1 1

Honduras 1 1

Jamaica 1 1

Latin America 2 2

Mexico 1 2 3

Panama 1 1

Peru 1 1

 Total Latin America 1 1 2 10 14

Iraq 1 1

Jordan 1 1

 Total Middle East & N. 

Africa 0 0 0 2 2

Angola 1 1

Ghana 1 1

Liberia 1 1 1 3

Tanzania 1 1

 Total Sub-Saharan Africa 0 1 3 2 6

TOTAL POSITIVE 1 4 8 18 31

1/ Projects with a U.S. employment effect of 2 or more jobs (10 person years or more of employment during the first 

 five years of operation). The vast majority of projects were in the services sector. Furthermore, there were no projects

 supported in 2009 that resulted in the loss of any U.S. employment.

Continued on next 

page
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 41

Exhibit 3 (cont): U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS AND HOST COUNTRY LOCATION OF OPIC-SUPPORTED 

PROJECTS

B. PROJECTS WITH NEUTRAL EFFECTS ON EMPLOYMENT 1/

COUNTRY/REGION AGRICULTURE

MINERALS 

& ENERGY MANUFACTURING SERVICES TOTAL

Azerbaijan 4 4

India 2 2 4

Kazakhstan 2 2

Mongolia 1 1

Philippines 1 1

Uzbekistan 1 1

Vietnam 1 1

Western Samoa 1 1

 Total Asia 1 3 0 11 15

Armenia 1 1

Bosnia-Herzegovina 1 1

Bulgaria 2 2

Europe Regional 1 1

Georgia 1 5 6

Moldova 1 1

Poland 1 1

Romania 3 3

Russia 1 1 2

Turkey 2 1 3

 Total Europe 0 0 4 17 21

All OPIC Countries 1 5 6

 Total Global 0 1 0 5 6

1/ Projects with a U.S. employment effect of 2 or more jobs (10 person years or more of employment during the first 

 five years of operation). The vast majority of projects were in the services sector. Furthermore, there were no projects

 supported in 2009 that resulted in the loss of any U.S. employment.

Continued on next page
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 42

EXHIBIT 3 (cont): U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS AND HOST COUNTRY LOCATION OF OPIC-SUPPORTED 

PROJECTS

B. PROJECTS WITH NEUTRAL EFFECTS ON EMPLOYMENT 1/ (continued)

COUNTRY/REGION AGRICULTURE

MINERALS 

& 

ENERGY MANUFACTURING SERVICES TOTAL

Gabon 1 1

Ghana 1 1 2

Liberia 1 1

Mali 1 1

Nigeria 1 1

South Africa 1 4 5

Uganda 1 1

 Total Sub-Saharan Africa 0 0 2 10 12

Bolivia 1 1

Brazil 1 1

Chile 1 1

Costa Rica 2 2

Dominican Republic 1 1

Ecuador 1 1

El Salvador 2 2

Guatemala 2 2

Honduras 2 2

Mexico 2 3 5

Nicaragua 3 3

Panama 2 2

Peru 1 1

 Total Latin America 0 2 0 22 24

Algeria 1 1

Iraq 1 1

Israel 1 1

Jordan 1 1

Lebanon 1 1

Morocco 1 1

Tunisia 1 1

West Bank 1 1

 Total Middle East & N. 

Africa 0 0 1 7 8

TOTAL NEUTRAL 1 6 7 72 86

1/ Projects with a U.S. employment effect of 2 or more jobs (10 person years or more of employment during the first 

 five years of operation). The vast majority of projects were in the services sector. Furthermore, there were no projects

 supported in 2009 that resulted in the loss of any U.S. employment.

Continued on next 

page
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 43

EXHIBIT 3 (cont): U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS AND HOST COUNTRY LOCATION OF OPIC-SUPPORTED 

PROJECTS

C. PROJECTS WITH NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON EMPLOYMENT 1/

COUNTRY/REGION AGRICULTURE

MINERALS 

& ENERGY MANUFACTURING SERVICES TOTAL

TOTAL NEGATIVE 0 0 0 0 0

D. TOTAL PROJECT EFFECTS ON EMPLOYMENT

TOTAL EFFECTS:

10 15 90 117

Positive, Neutral

& Negative

ALL OPIC COUNTRIES 2

1/ Projects with a U.S. employment effect of 2 or more jobs (10 person years or more of employment during the first 

 five years of operation). The vast majority of projects were in the services sector. Furthermore, there were no projects

 supported in 2009 that resulted in the loss of any U.S. employment.
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 44

EXHIBIT 4: METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING U.S. EMPLOYMENT EFFECTS 

Each project seeking OPIC support is reviewed on a case-by-case basis to estimate its U.S. employment 

effects. OPIC obtains estimates from the investor of the projected initial and operational procurement 

from the United States by value and specific type of good or service. The U.S. employment generated by 

a project’s initial and five-year operational procurement of goods and services is estimated by considering 

the direct and indirect employment necessary to produce those goods and services. That is, the 

employment effects incorporate the direct employment necessary to produce the procured goods and 

services, as well as the indirect employment required for the production of the associated intermediate 

inputs. 

OPIC details each type of U.S. good or service procured for each project and calculates the employment 

effect in that industrial sector as well as in the sectors that supply necessary components or inputs. By 

using this methodology, OPIC is able to ascertain employment-generation levels with greater precision 

than if it used an across-the-board average for all U.S. exports. By including indirect effects, OPIC's 

employment figures present a more accurate picture of the benefits accruing to U.S. workers from the 

procurement of goods and services. Finally, to confirm its estimates, OPIC monitors actual economic 

effects after project start-up and throughout the life of the OPIC’s involvement with the project. OPIC’s 

monitoring is described in further detail in the Monitoring section. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 45

EXHIBIT 5: OPIC’s DEVELOPMENT MATRIX EXPLAINED 

OPIC supports projects that are likely to serve as foundations for long-term economic growth, especially 

those that improve upon the host country’s infrastructure and provide the basic human necessities of 

shelter, food, water and health care – these types of projects are assessed on OPIC’s standard 

development matrix. Through this development impact assessment, OPIC evaluates and scores every 

proposed project in 26 key areas across three broad categories that objectively quantify its expected 

contribution to host-country development. 

 Category I covers job creation, training, local procurement, corporate social responsibility, and 

equal employment opportunity – five highly-weighted impacts that should be demonstrated by any 

project, regardless of sector or the level of economic development within the host country. 

 Category II covers 20 additional development indicators within such broad areas as human 

capacity building (degree of training), private sector development, resource leveraging, social 

effects, infrastructure improvements, macroeconomic and institutional effects, and 

technology/knowledge transfer. The degree to which projects demonstrate these additional 

developmental benefits depends significantly on the features of a given project. 

 Category III adjusts for the host country’s per capita GNP, reflecting both OPIC’s priority to steer 

investment into the poorest countries and the reality that nations most in need often lack the 

capacity to support more developmentally sophisticated investments. 

A project must score at least 50 out of 160 possible points on the matrix to be considered developmental

and clearly eligible for OPIC support. A score of 100 to 160 qualifies a project as highly developmental. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 46

EXHIBIT 6: OPIC’s FINANCIAL SERVICES DEVELOPMENT MATRIX EXPLAINED 

As more of OPIC’s projects focus on financial services, it became evident that in many cases the 

development matrix, originally created for traditional “bricks and mortar” projects, did not capture 

accurately the developmental impact of these projects. A new model was developed tailored to 

assessing the development impacts of financial services projects. The general structure of the financial 

services matrix is similar to the standard development matrix, but includes core indicators that are specific 

to financial services-related projects. These core indicators result in a development matrix that is a more 

comprehensive and accurate measurement of the developmental impact of financial services projects. 

The types of projects that are scored on the financial services matrix include framework agreements, 

investment funds, mortgage finance and securitization projects, microfinance facilities, and general bank 

lending. 

To support its developmental mission, OPIC evaluates and scores every proposed project in 11 key areas 

across three broad categories that objectively quantify its expected contribution to host-country 

development. 

 Category I covers financial instrument innovation or augmentation, multiplier/spillover effects, 

corporate governance, and capital mobilization and complementarity – four highly-weighted 

impacts that should be demonstrated by any project, regardless of sector or the level of economic 

development within the host country. 

 Category II covers six additional development indicators within such broad areas as sustainability, 

economic diversification, human capacity building (job creation and training), social effects, 

macroeconomic and institutional effects, and technology/knowledge transfer. The degree to 

which projects demonstrate these additional developmental benefits depends significantly on the 

features of a given project. 

 Category III adjusts for the host country’s per capita GNP, reflecting both OPIC’s priority to steer 

investment into the poorest countries and the reality that nations most in need often lack the 

capacity to support more developmentally sophisticated investments. 

A project must score at least 50 out of 160 possible points on the matrix to be considered developmental

and clearly eligible for OPIC support. A score of 100 to 160 qualifies a project as highly developmental. 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 47

EXHIBIT 7: OPIC SITE MONITORING METHODOLOGY 

(Statutory Disciplines: Environment, U.S. Economic Impact, Labor and Human 

Rights, Host Country Developmental Impact) 

OPIC performs comprehensive and integrated monitoring to evaluate the U.S. and host-country economic 

effects as well as the environmental, health and safety (EHS) and labor and human rights impacts of its 

projects. OPIC’s integrated project monitoring is designed to ensure that each project complies with 

statutory and contractual requirements in these areas. Project monitoring consists of site visits to 

projects, in addition to the analysis of information submitted annually by investors in the form of an online 

“Self Monitoring Questionnaire.” As of 1993, Self Monitoring Questionnaires are required of all investors 

per the OPIC finance agreement or insurance contract. 

Using sampling theory, OPIC identifies investment projects that OIP staff across all disciplines will site 

monitor during a three-year period, drawing active projects that exhibit specific characteristics within the 

portfolio. OPIC currently is site monitoring projects that were supported by OPIC during fiscal years 2003 

through 2005. The sample of projects selected for site monitoring includes: (1) a random sample of 

projects supported by the agency during a three-year period or “monitoring round”; (2) projects supported 

during this period that are sensitive with respect to U.S. economic effects, labor and human rights or 

environment, health and safety issues; and (3) projects from other years that have either not been sitemonitored in the past or that fit in logistically with randomly sampled project in similar regions or countries. 

This “sensitive project” sample ultimately provides a conservative bias to the monitored results. 

Labor and Human Rights

OPIC monitors projects for compliance with contractual worker rights requirements through a combination 

of annual reporting by companies as well as site visits to both random and selected samples of projects. 

OPIC targets its worker rights monitoring efforts toward countries and sectors with a higher potential for 

possible worker rights violations. 

Because certain areas of worker rights violations may be difficult to identify from a typical project site 

monitoring visit, in instances when OPIC determines further investigation is warranted for a project, OPIC 

employs trained and certified labor rights auditors, usually recruited from the NGO community with 

reputations for impartiality and credibility among both the labor and business communities, to perform a 

full project audit. The auditors spend as much time as necessary to investigate thoroughly potential 

violations. At a minimum, an audit would include independent and confidential interviews with 

employees, management, government officials and knowledgeable local NGOs and organized labor 

groups. 

In order to improve its monitoring process, the Labor and Human Rights Group continues to review and 

refine its on-site monitoring strategies, as well as its contractual instruments to communicate better to 

potential investors OPIC’s expectations with respect to worker rights and how worker rights best can be 

protected under diverse project and corporate structures, particularly projects involving contractors and 

subcontractors. 

Environment, Health, and Safety (EHS) 

With respect to EHS issues, projects selected for site monitoring in a given year are prioritized based on 

an environmental and social risk rating. Environmental and social risk ratings are based on several 

factors including project sensitivity, host country context, project-level environmental and social 

management system, and investor experience in implementing projects of similar complexity. OPIC 

assesses the EHS and social performance of a project against applicable benchmarks including contract 

conditions, international standards and guidelines, and industry best practices. Factors included in the 
OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 48

performance assessment include an evaluation of the project’s environmental and social management 

systems, the effectiveness of mitigation, including pollution controls in risk reduction, and the efficiency of 

the operations, including energy efficiency. 

U.S. Economic Impact

All projects visited are evaluated for their actual impact on the United States and host country economies, 

including the employment generation effects of the investments. Those projects deemed sensitive with 

respect to U.S. economic effects are visited to ensure that they are not negatively impacting the U.S. 

economy. This exercise includes verifying export levels to the U.S. (if any) or to other countries, 

calculating the U.S. balance of payments impact, and verifying compliance with any restrictions put 

forward in the OPIC loan agreement or insurance contract (e.g. restrictions on exporting to the U.S. or 

significant U.S. export markets). 

Developmental Impact

Regarding host country economic impact, projects are reviewed across the same criteria as used at the 

time of project approval. Thus, an “apples-to-apples” comparison can be made between original 

estimates and actual operations. For example, if a project originally expects to hire 100 local workers, 

actual employment numbers are verified and compared to the forecast. Additionally, if a project is 

expected to build a school for the children of its employees, this will be verified. Other developmental 

impacts not identified or anticipated at the time of application also are evaluated and quantified during site 

monitoring. Finally, the project is scored using actual findings against the initial developmental impact 

evaluation using the same criteria projected in the project’s original OPIC clearance. 

OPIC Annual Policy Report 2009 50

2008 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report 

Prepared for: 

Overseas Private Investment Corporation 

May 2010 





































*

* Information has been Redacted in accordance with the two principled exceptions of the Foreign Aid Transparency and Accountability Act 

(FATAA) of 2016; including the health and security of implementing partners, as well as national interest of the United States.