ISFED interviewed individuals left homeless in the aftermath of the June 13-14 natural disaster in Tbilisi and assessed effectiveness of assistance provided to them by the state. 

The report provides an overview of the reforms and changes undertaken by the Georgian Dream government in over 20 key public policy areas, independent assessment and recommendations to tackle problems. These are areas which were often discussed by civil society and the authors believe more efforts are needed: general governance, electoral reform, local self-governance, human rights and equality, economy and investment environment, foreign policy, open government and media environment.

On May 22nd, 2015 International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) presented its third interim report on monitoring the process of Certification and Competition in Public Service. 

ISFED faced certain obstacles in implementation of monitoring in 14 out of 58 municipalities. 5  local self-government agencies allowed only a few non-governmental organizations to monitor the process of interviews but certain restrictions applied. 9 self-government authorities refused to allow organizations monitor their current or scheduled interviews.  Notably, none of the self-governing territories allowed us to monitor the process of decision-making. Further, in addition to restricting our access to interviews, observer of ISFED was subjected to pressure by unauthorized individuals in Terjola Municipality. We believe that the reasons why commissions curtailed rights of monitoring organizations are completely unsubstantiated and groundless.

The International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED) is implementing monitoring of bodies of local self-government in all self-governing communities and cities of Georgia by means of 73 observers

The present report is an account of monitoring the 2014 local self-government elections of Georgia by the International Society for Fair Elections and Democracy (ISFED).

Parties were not being particularly active during the pre-election period of the second round of the local self-government elections. Compared to the pre-election period of the previous round, the number of meetings held by candidates with voters significantly decreased.