Annual assessments of local authorities tanzania and uganda
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 11

Annual Assessments of Local Authorities: Tanzania and Uganda PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 45 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Annual Assessments of Local Authorities: Tanzania and Uganda. Matt Glasser AFTU1 29 March 2005. UG Local Government Development Programme I and II LGDP I was small scale pilot, LGDP II includes all Local Government Units (LGUs). TZ Local Government Support Programme

Download Presentation

Annual Assessments of Local Authorities: Tanzania and Uganda

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Annual assessments of local authorities tanzania and uganda

Annual Assessments of Local Authorities:Tanzania and Uganda

Matt Glasser

AFTU1

29 March 2005


Tz and ug similar approaches

UG Local Government Development Programme I and II

LGDP I was small scale pilot, LGDP II includes all Local Government Units (LGUs)

TZ Local Government Support Programme

Supports GoT’s new LG Capital Development Grant System

Designed to be a pilot

Parallel funding from many donors led to Big bang”– no pilot!

TZ and UG: Similar Approaches


Tz and ug objective build intergovernmental transfer system

TZ and UG Objective: build intergovernmental transfer system

  • Premise:

    • Local capital investment decisions are best made locally, provided there is participation, accountability, and management capacity

    • Link between financing and performance

  • Formula-based transfers subject to annual assessment

    • LGAs that pass with minor defects receive lower amounts

    • LGAs that score very high receive extra amounts

    • LGAs that fail completely do not receive these capital grants


Tz current and future intergovernmental transfer system

TZ: current and future intergovernmental transfer system

CURRENT

  • Sectoral capital programmes

  • Sectoral operating transfers

    OBJECTIVE:

  • Local discretion as to capital investment priorities

  • Operating / equalization transfers


Tanzania lgcdg system

Tanzania LGCDG System

  • “Manual for the Assessment of Participating Councils Against Minimum Access Conditions and Performance Measurement Criteria”

  • Initially, assessments by independent accounting firm, with participation by PO-RALG

  • Eventually, assessments by PO-RALG staff, with post-audit by independent accounting firm

  • Capital grants paired with capacity building grants

    See: http://www.poralg.go.tz/systemic_reforms/lgcdg.php


Tz and ug minimum conditions

TZ and UG: Minimum Conditions

  • Derived from existing laws, regulations and guidelines

  • Simple, quantitative, yes/no

  • Purposes:

    • Ensure minimum safeguards for public funds

    • Promote compliance with legal and regulatory framework


Tz performance indicators

TZ: Performance Indicators

  • Reward for good performance, sanction for bad

  • Qualitative, evaluative, policy-driven

    • Financial management

    • Development planning

    • Procurement

    • Project implementation

    • Human resource development

    • Transparency

    • Accountability

    • Participatory planning

    • Pro-poor budgeting


Tz performance indicators weights and scoring

Functional Area

Pot’l Score

Minimum for CG

Minimum for bonus

A. Financial Management

15

7

12

B. Fiscal Capacity

15

7

12

C. Development Planning

20

10

14

D. Transparency / Accountability

10

4

8

E. Interaction with LLG.

5

2

5

F. Human Resource Dev’t

10

4

8

G. Procurement

10

5

7

H. Project Implementation

10

4

7

I. Council Functional Processes

5

2

3

TZ: Performance IndicatorsWeights and scoring


Tz and ug capacity building grants

TZ and UG: Capacity Building Grants

  • Only access criterion is the existence of a CB plan

  • Some rules about how spent:

    • Limited equipment

    • Limited degree programmes for officials

  • Intended to help LGAs address shortcomings identified in annual assessments


Tz initial screening vs annual assessment

TZ: Initial screening vs. annual assessment

  • When LGSP was intended as a pilot, a universe of 47 potentially eligible was established through rough screening

  • First annual assessment undertaken for those 47

  • 25 of these qualified for capital grants in the first year


Ug results to date

UG: results to date

  • 42 LGUs now qualify (vs. 19 initially)

  • 16 now get bonuses (vs. 0 initially)

  • 89% have functional planning committees and LT development plans (vs. 30% initially)

  • Improved compliance with LG Act and accounting regulations (79% vs. 38%)

  • Improved LG revenue performance

  • LGUs generally spend on Government’s national priorities

  • Significant benefits perceived by affected residents in both services and transparency


  • Login