Ε. Conclusions Findings Recommendations area where the lack of funding was due to the administrative inadequacy and tardiness we described above, which resulted in the failure to use the relevant amounts of the regular programme and in having a funding gap since 1.7.2015, extending throughout 2016. The gap was covered with successive temporary allocations from the state budget.237 By the end of 2016, the designated managing authority of the Ministry of Interior - Department of Citizen Protection issued the amending decision dated 17.10.2016238 for the funding from the AMIF of the action for the facilities and the functionality of the Detention Centers. The funding issue, based on the Greek Ombudsman’s experience must be examined from three aspects: • A bsorption of available funds (outside of state budget) • T heir suitable and optimum use • T ransparency and accountability Although one could justify for 2015, due to the largely unpredictable and urgent needs, significant deviations from a planned, rational and transparent procedure related to the financing and availability of the money, the same does not apply for the period from 2016 to this day. By reviewing each aspect, we make the following observations, conclusions and recommendations: According to the figures of the European Commission, Greece has received or will receive particularly high amounts related to the management of the refugee/ migrant issue. A large part of this money relates to the living conditions of those remaining in the country either directly (food, shelter, medical and pharmaceutical care) or indirectly (Asylum, RICs). Part of this money is given as emergency funding and other means from regular funding procedures. Even though part of this money is available to international organisations, such as the UNHCR, or NGOs, a large part was channelled from 2015 and up to this day to the Greek authorities.239 Fund absorption 237 Government Gazette Β 1287/29-6-2015, further to the JMD published in Government Gazette Β 118/21-1-2015. 238 http://www.mopocp.gov.gr/images/stories//2016/ prokirikseis16/17102016-apofasi_amif.pdf 239 For the allocation between state agencies, as well as NGOs, see https:// 82 Despite the particularly increased financing, the country could not absorb a significant part of the non-extraordinary funding. The most typical example of this failure is the programmed funding from the EU-AMIF for 2016, amounting to approximately 86.5 million euros, out of which only 1.9 million were absorbed.240 This of course is in direct contrast to the Internal Security Fund (ISF), which absorbed the greatest part of the funding.241 The inadequate absorption in 2015 and 2016 constituted one of the fundamental issues related to the living conditions of the refugee/migrant population, which is ultimately attributed to weaknesses of the state mechanism. Despite the fact that the well-known weaknesses and confines of the Greek Administration run through all life areas of anyone living in the country, in this case an additional weakness emerges: The inability of an immediate, or even slightly delayed, response to emergencies, to a change of circumstances and to new situations. In this sense, the weakness that emerged does not pertain only to the involved agencies for the management of the specific population, but the overall Greek Administration, and consequently, the country’s entire population. The Greek Ombudsman does not have adequate information available, allowing a global view and evaluation of the method of the disposal, allocation and use of the funding. It therefore reserves the right to revisit the issue, if needed, after a special investigation. Nevertheless, from its involvement with the issue from the start and its ongoing monitoring, important issues were ascertained, which if nothing else, are directly related with the failure of coordination, the diffusion of responsibilities and the lack of a special framework for decision-making and accountability. Shortcomings and a fragmentary manner in the allocation of the funds may be easily observed, and potentially even justified in some cases, also at the first stages. However, a Appropriate and optimum use of the funds ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/europeanagenda-migration/background-information/docs/20161208/factsheet_ managing_refugee_crisis_eu_financial_support_greece_-_update_en.pdf. For all available funds, see https://ec.europa.eu/neighbourhood-enlargement/sites/near/ files/20161208-4th_report_on_the_progress_made_in_the_implementation_of_ the_eu-turkey_statement_en_0.pdf, pg. 8. 240 See in detail: http://www.amifisf.gr/pdfs/%CE%95%CF%84%CE%AE%CF %83%CE%B9%CE%B1%20%CE%88%CE%BA%CE%B8%CE%B5%CF%83% CE%B7%20%CE%95%CE%A0%20%CE%A4%CE%91%CE%9C%CE%95%20 2016.pdf 241 http://www.amifisf.gr/pdfs/%CE%95%CF%84%CE%AE%CF%83%CE%B 9%CE%B1%20%CE%88%CE%BA%CE%B8%CE%B5%CF%83%CE%B7%20 %CE%95%CE%A0%20%CE%A4%CE%95%CE%91%202016.pdf