(b) lJhen the evaluati-on of the flrsg phase !.ras conducled 1n Septeober l9g2{doctrent DEc/lRANscoM/rA /vr/r '(A)), the ErLuatlon was quite drfferent; r,ogrproJecta' at a iotal cost of US$15., blulon (27? tranaport ppoJects accountlngfor a lotal of US$14.J btUlon, and ,15 comnunlcatlons projecls accounting forus$1.o4 birLlon)' i{irh 45.2 percent of fundr.ng obuain€d 1n lhe caEe of trans-por.t and 6.5 percent ln lhe case of comunlcaiions. Stnce the Ecope of lhep-rogranrne was clearly Eoo g!.Bat, ig was reduced by the second Conference of!{l.nlsters of Transport and Coo'unlcati.ons as follor{s: +aS Ji"j";1"- ;;;;";;"_ttns us$6.9-b1ulon, rncLudlns Jld rransport p.;j;;;; tusielil-iiiii"r,'i;;;i"sobtalned: 84.5 percenr), and 42 comnunlcatrons iro,y-cts uS$gg,i ,iiii"",'--'--fundlng obtained: 1OO percent)r all oiher pro.ieets-havtng been defe!.red to lhesecond phase. (c) The breakdonn of thls reduced prograone has also changed considerably:J8€ transport pro3ects and-254 comuni;.;i;;;;;J;;;s in docunent DEc/TRANscoM/Cl4/I'lI/L/ co"".I (lsrch 198r), as conpared urrn 40i transponr proJects and 254coEnuntcatlons proJecis in docuEent ICDC/'/4 (ltarch tlglj. iro"!""", n" f""tn""Eentlon ls nade of the 'rreduced progra4!!e,r, elther ln the docuuents subBltted !othe Round. lable or Ln lhose subnltted to the Conference of Mlnlsters a! Conakry,slnce ECA takes as a baais for the progtaoDe the I,091 projects referred loabove. 57 - The fo!'€goln8 glves an j.dea of the olsglvln€s whlch typtfted ghe flrstphase, i.ncludlng the attenpts nade to lnflate bhe level of iundlng achleved bythe. devlce of tEnsfennlng unfunded proJects to the second phaae. AseEphaslzed by ECA llse1f a! the parts Round Table, the prograooe represenued aklnd of -genenal purpose prograllne of proj€cts sublrltted by governoents andascepted wlthout any very clear Justlftc;tion. Ihe prograoBe had been putiogether hastlly and, apant fron the prlonlty crllerta se! out. !n the Strategy,chere had been no guldellnes for the acceptance of proJects, such as the degieito lrh1ch they confot Bed !o the obJectlves of the Decade. In sone cases, EEAeven had dlfflculty ln deternlnlng by whom proJects had been suboltted(governuenls, pegtonal. bodles, lntenna!1onai oiganlzattons); lndeed, ,ruanyproJects (especlalLy 1n alr transport ) did not a€eE to have any lnltlator.,.,n(DEC/TRAIISCoM/nt / 3, paee 6i .
**Analysis**
This text appears to be discussing the evaluation of a project related to economic development, specifically in the transportation and communication sectors. The text mentions the allocation of funds, the reduction of a program, and the breakdown of projects into different categories. It also touches on the lack of clear justification for the acceptance of projects and the difficulties in determining who submitted certain projects.

**Category**
Transport and communication, Economic development