Issuu on Google+

GUIDELINES FOR DATA COLLECTION ASSESSMENTS  OF  GOOD  URBAN   GOVERNANCE  IN  NIGERIA  

1


2


Preface The project “Assessment of Good Urban Governance in Nigeria” is a joint effort of UNDP and UN-HABITAT offices in Nigeria, and UNDP’s Oslo Governance Centre supports it financially and technically. The main aim of the project is to strengthen national capacity in the assessment of urban governance challenges in Nigeria as a prime step towards determining programmatic and policy responses to achieving sustainable urbanization and good urban governance. The strategies adopted toward realization of the expected outcomes of the project include participatory approach through the involvement of stakeholders in urban governance and urban gatekeepers from the pilot cities in Nigeria. In order to ensure national ownership and sustainability of the project, the project is being implemented by National Technical Committee (NTC). NTC is made up of representatives from National Planning Commission, National Bureau of Statistics, Federal Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development, Federal Capital Development Authority and Association of Local Governments of Nigeria (ALGON), UNDP Nigeria, UN Habitat Nigeria and host of other stakeholders including representatives of the academic communities. The project is hosted in National Bureau of Statistics, Nigeria. The National Technical Committee (NTC) on Assessment of Good Urban Governance(GUG) in conjunction with selected experts developed the Framework for measurement of Good urban governance in Nigeria The framework specified elements and indicators for measuring governance of the political and administrative regimes of the city through the Local Government authorities. The measurement of good urban governance shall include situational analysis of the city systems, critical evaluation of mechanisms, institutions and processes employed by all to combat the problems that stress the city systems and the effectiveness of these responses in solving the problems. The Selection of the GUG elements and related indicators are based on due consideration of the following: • The relevance of the selected Governance principles/ Elements in Nigeria cultural and political context • If the data are readily available and easily collectable at the city level • If the indicators are really useful to assess urban governance • If the indicators are easy to understand and use by the assessors and citizens • If the selected indicators can help guide policy directions, participatory governance and greater city responsiveness The Framework and the guidelines were developed through the contributions of Prof Johnson Falade, Prof. Alex Gboyega, Prof Wole Morenikeji, Dr Seyi Fabiyi, Mr Isiaka olarewaju, Arc(Mrs) Eucharia Alozie, Mrs Sakirat Yusuf, Mr Rabiu Yusuf, Mr Mathew Alao, and Ms Shipra Narang Suri

Seyi Fabiyi (PhD) National Project Officer (Assessment of Good Urban Governance Project in Nigeria)

3


ASSESSMENT OF GOOD URBAN GOVERNANCE PROJECT IN NIGERIA

Guidelines for Field data collection

4


Table of contents 1.0. Chapter 1: Introduction 1.1.Background to GUG project 1.2. Objectives of the manaual 1.3. Structure of the manual Chapter 2: Effectiveness 2.1.Definition of effectivenes element 2.2.Indicator 1: Vision statement for LGA/municipal 2.3. Indicator 2: Service delivery 2.4. Indicator 3: Subsidiarity 2.5. indicator 4:Resource Mobilisation and Management Chapter 3: Equity 3.1. Definition of equity element 3.2. Indicator 5: Pro-poor Policy 3.3. Indicator 6: Citizen charter 3.4. Indicator 7: provision for informal business 3.5. Indicator 8: Gender Equity 3.6. Indicator 9: Access to education 3.7. Indicator 10: Human right and rule of law Chapter 4:Participation 4.1. Definition of participation element 4.2. Indicator 11: Civic engagement and Consensus orientation 4.3. Indicator 12: Partnership building Chapter 5:Secuirty 5.1. Definition of Secuirty element 5.2. Indicator 13: Capacity for effective policing 5.3. Indicator 14: Rate of Crime 5.4. Indicator 15: Environmental Security measures 5.5. Indicator 16: Conflcit resolution Measures 5.6. Indicator 17: Tenure Security Chapter 6: Accountability 6.1. Definition of Accountability element 6.2. Indcator 18: Free flow of information 6.3. Indcator 19: Mechanism for performance measurement 6.4. Indicator 20: Due Process in award of contracts 6.5. Indicator 21: Indepenendt audit 6.6. indicator 22: Code of conduct 6.7. Indicator 23: Citizens’ demand for accountability Chapter 7: Analysis and Computation of GUG index 7.1: Introduction to computation of GUG indices Chapter 8: Guidelines for reporting Appendix 1: Process management for field survey Appendix 11: Household Questionnaire Appendix III: Featured Questions in the GUG frameworks

Page 3 3 4 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 11 11 11 12 12 12 12 12 13 14 14 14 14 15 15 16 17 26 27 37 41

5


CHAPTER ONE 1. Background Good Governance is closely linked with sustainable human development (UNDP 1994). Therefore developing the capacity for good governance in a society is sine qua non to achieving suitable development, through the elimination of poverty, and creation of enabling environment in which every member of the society can enjoy long, healthy and creative lives. UNDP defines governance as processes, regulations or the results of interactions between the legislative and executive governments, the civil society, the judiciary, and the people’ (UNDP 1997). Governance is the system of values, policies and institutions by which a society manages its economic, political and social affairs through interactions within and among the state, civil society and private sector. It is the way a society organizes itself to make and implement decisions achieving mutual understanding, agreement and action. Governance also refers to the mechanisms and processes for citizens and groups to articulate their interests mediate their differences and exercise their legal rights and obligations. The rules, institutions and practices set limits and provide incentives for individuals, organizations and firms. Governance, including its social, political and economic dimensions, operates at every level of human enterprise, be it the household, village, municipality, nation, region or globe. — UNDP Strategy Note on Governance for Human development, 2000. Good Urban Governance therefore focuses on the entrenchment and pursuit of certain principles and ideals in the city administration that promote inclusiveness and democratic norms in decision making with the view to enhancing the citizen well being. The basic aim of good urban governance is to promote the welfare of the people and deepening democratic culture and values at the city level. Good governance has been at the forefront of poverty reduction strategy at all levels of governance.

6


Though it is easy to identify good urban governance especially based on evaluation of city efficiency and effectiveness, it is difficult to measure the degree of good governance in terms of inclusiveness, participation, equity and democratic norms. Good Governance is pioneered by UNDP (UNDP 1997) and was initially measured by nine elements, principles and themes, which include rule of law, transparency, responsiveness,

consensus

orientation,

equity,

effectiveness

and

efficiency,

accountability, strategic vision and participation. Good governance principles have been applied to different tiers of government such as national, regional (provincial) and at local level. UN Habitat has been in the vanguard of promoting Good Urban Governance at the local (city) level. The nine governance principles were reviewed and customised to urban administrative level during the UN inter-agency meeting in June 2001 and adopted five principles for measuring good urban governance as follows:

• Effectiveness (includes efficiency, subsidiarity and strategic vision) • Equity (includes sustainability, gender equality and intergenerational equity) • Accountability (includes transparency, rule of law and responsiveness) • Participation (includes citizenship, consensus orientation and civic engagement) • Security (includes conflict resolution, human security and environmental sanitation) These five elements were adopted for measuring good urban governance in Nigeria and were used to develop framework and indicators. UNDP and UN Habitat collaborated to support the assessments of Good Urban Governance project in Nigeria in order to strengthen national capacity in the assessment of urban governance challenges in Nigeria as a prime step towards determining programmatic and policy responses to achieving sustainable urbanization and good urban governance The specific objectives of the project include: •

To identify appropriate national indicators on good urban governance, 7


To develop framework for good urban governance in pilot cities

To develop national capacity in the measurement of good urban governance.

To provide urban governance Information resources centres

To reinforce stakeholders –driven policy dialogue on good urban governance in Nigeria

The adopted elements and relevant indicators shall be used to evaluate urban governance in the selected pilot Local governments in Nigeria during the implementation of the project. 1.2. About the manual The manual presents the guidelines and methodologies that will be used by field survey consultants to gather all relevant data on urban governance in their respective local government areas. 1.2.1.Objectives of the Manual 1. To define concepts and terms used in the framework to achieve a common understanding among consultants. 2. To guide the field data collectors on methodology to be adopted to collect the data and information in an objective and non-partisan way, and in techniques of analysis and reporting. 3. To guide the consultants on the reasons behind the weighting and scoring of the indicator used in the framework 4. To recommend sources for data gathering, and advance process management for field work, stakeholders consultation and focus group discussions. 5. To recommend the report structure. 1.2.2. Structure of the Manual The manual is divided into eight chapters. While chapter one presents the introduction to the document, chapter two shows the focus indicators and questions under Effectiveness. Chapter three and four discuss focuss areas and indicators on Equity and Participation respectively. Chapter five presents questions and indicators on Security element while chapter six presents Accountability indicators.

8


Chapter seven presents the selected indicators for weighting and the methods of computing the index. Chapter eight proposes a structure for the final report to be developed by the field survey consultants.

9


CHAPTER TWO EFFECTIVENESS 2.1.Definition of Effectiveness Effectiveness relates to the efficiency in delivery of public servces to promote local economic development. Cities must be financially sound and cost-effective in their management of revenue sources and expenditures. The administration and delivery of services, must be based on comparative advantage of government, the private sector and communities to contribute formally or informally to the urban economy. Good governance means that processes and institutions produce results that meet the needs of society while making the best use of resources at their disposal. Indicators EF1. Vision statement The questions asked for measuring this indicator are focused on issues such as whether the LG has formally adopted, disseminated and used a Vision/mission statement or a strategic plan; as well as the process of preparation and adoption of such a statement or plan. The following four questions are necessary for this indicator: EF 1.1.

Adoption and availability of a vision/mission statement of the LG

EF 1.2.

Process of preparation and adoption of the vision/mission statement or

the strategic plan(s) EF 1.3.

Use of the adopted statements and/or strategic plan

EF 1.4.

Dissemination of the statements and/or strategic plan

EF2. Service delivery This indicator focuses on the LG’s performance of its 14 Constitutional roles as listed in the Fourth Schedule; the budget allocation for carrying out these functions; partnership building with the private sector in carrying out their constitutional obligation; and the grievance redressal mechanism, including whether the public can express their dissatisfaction about function performed, and the response time for addressing complaints. Questions include:

10


EF 2.1.

Performance of Constitutional Roles, budget allocation and partnership

EF 2.2.

Clear and transparent procedures for accessing services provided LG

EF 2.3.

Grievance redressal system

EF3.

Subsidiarity

Subsidiarity implies the delegation of power, responsibilities and resources for performing specific tasks, to the lowest appropriate level of governance. The questions included under this indicator probe into the autonomy of LG in discharging its Constitutional roles without undue interference from higher authorities in the areas like budgets, project implementation, and access to loans.

Other issues to be

investigated include whether the LG has decentralise its administration to lower tier to carry out specific function such as provision and maintenance of public services, community policing, development activities, conflict resolution among others. The questions emphasise the following aspects: EF 3.1.

Autonomy of LG

EF 3.2.

Interference with LG Constitutional roles

EF 3.3.

Decentralization of Functions to lower tiers by LG

EF 3.4.

Areas handled by sub-LG units

EF4. Resource Mobilization Resource mobilisation is an integral part of effectiveness. The questions included under this indicator are aimed to seek data on sources of income of the LG, the effectiveness of the system in place for collecting various rates and taxes and the predictability of statutory allocation to LG from higher tiers of government. The data also includes delegation of of tax collection to other agencies and the availability of computerized financial system in the LG. The questions focus on: EF 4.1.

Sources of LG Income

EF 4.2.

Collection and management of LG Internally Generated Resources

(IGR) EF 4.3.

Predictability of LG Statutory Allocation

11


EF5. LG Capacity Three questions for measuring this indicator include data on existing human resources disaggregated by cadre and gender, data on material resources and organizational structure of the LG. Other data to be collected include training organized for staff in the past three years and areas of critical capacity building needs. EF 5.1.

Existing capacity (Human and material resources)

EF 5.2.

Staff development

EF 5.3.

Critical Capacity Needs

12


CHAPTER THREE EQUITY

Equity in good urban governance relates to impartial or just treatment, requiring that similar cases be treated in similar way. A society’s well being depends on ensuring that all its members feel that they have a stake in it and do not feel excluded from the mainstream of society. This requires all groups, but particularly the most vulnerable, have opportunities to improve or maintain their well being. The sharing of power leads to equity in the access to and use of resources. Women and men must participate as equals in all urban decision-making, priority-setting and resource allocation processes. Inclusive cities provide everyone with access to nutrition, education, employment and livelihood, health care, shelter, safe drinking water, sanitation and other basic services. EQ1. Pro-Poor Policy The questions for measuring this indicator emphasise the availability and adoption of pro-poor policy and spatial distribution of basic services disaggregated by wards. EQ 1.1.

Availability and adoption of pro-poor policies in specific sectors,

EQ 1.2.

Equity in ward-wise distribution of basic services, including primary

education and primary health-care.

EQ2. Citizens’ Charter This indicator explored whether the LG has adopted a citizen charter or not, and if adopted when was it adopted and the popularisation of the charter among the citizen. EQ 2.1.

Availability, adoption and awareness of Citizens’ Charter

EQ3. Provision for Informal Business The questions for measuring this indicator are designed to provide information on both incentives as well as disincentives to informal business, cases of restriction on street trading, and whether there have been any confrontations between street traders and the authorities in the recent past. 13


EQ 3.1.

Incentive for informal business

EQ 3.2.

Regulatory control on informal business

EQ 3.3.

Restriction on street trading

EQ 3.4.

Confrontations between traders and authorities

EQ4. Gender Equity This indicator shall be measured by four questions focussing on the adoption of the affirmative action as directed by the Federal Government (or Constitution???), women in governance at the LG, the percentage of women that won election out of the total that contested, and percentage of women that voted in election out of those that registered. EQ 4.1.

Adoption of Affirmative Action

EQ 4.2.

Women participation in Governance

EQ 4.3.

Proportion of elected women councilors in the last election

EQ 4.4.

Women participation in voting in the last election

EQ5. Access to Education Two questions for measuring this indicator are designed to provide data on primary school net enrolment, and completion rate. The third one specifically addresses the enrolment an completion rates for girls. EQ 5.1.

Primary school net enrolment

EQ 5.2.

Primary school completion rate

EQ 5.3.

Measures adopted to raise enrolment and completion rates among girl

students EQ6. Human Right/Rule of Law The two questions set to measure this indicator are geared towards providing data on any abuses of human right that may arise from cultural practices, discriminating against women and unfair administration of justice by non-state entities or bodies in the LG. 14


EQ 6.1.

Prevalence of harmful Traditional Practices

EQ 6.2.

Illegal trials of crimes

15


CHPTER FOUR Participation 4.1. Definition of Participation element Participation by both men and women in local decision-making is the hallmark of good governance. In effect, all men, women, young people, the elderly, disabled or otherwise marginalised or vulnerable groups should have a voice in the city decision making directly, or through legitimate intermediate institutions that represent their interests. Participation is based on freedom of speech and associations and capacities to constructively engage the political office holders and institutions on issues relating to the welfare of citizen. The public sector can promote participation by enacting legislation that strengthens the freedom and plurality of media, establishing an independent electoral management body, and encouraging public input into decision making on government plans and budgeting. Participation requires enhanced capacity and skills of stakeholders and sustainable policies supported by institutions of public administration. PA1. Civic Engagement and Consensus Building There are several actors and many viewpoints in a local government area. Good governance requires mediation of the different interests in society to reach a broad consensus in society on what is in the best interest of the whole community and how this can be achieved. Civic engagement and consensus building is a measure of the involvements of different actors in urban governance. The set of six questions for measuring this indicator are designed to provide data on the role accorded to non-indigenes, the conduct of referenda in the LGA in the past three years, and involvement of women, children and the youth in decision making processes. The number of registered NGOs, CBOs in the LG, the involvement of traditional rulers in decision-making and innovative practices such as participatory budgeting and public expenditure tracking are also explored.

16


PA 1.1.

Roles of non-indigenes in governance

PA 1.2.

Referendum on issues of public interest

PA 1.3.

Involvement of women, youth and children in decision-making

PA 1.4.

Presence of NGOs/CBOs in the LGA

PA 1.5.

Involvement of Traditional Rulers in decision-making

PA 1.6.

Practice of participatory budget and public expenditure tracking

PA2. Partnership Building Two questions have been set to measure this indicator. They will provide data on adoption of policy on Public Private Partnership by the LG with examples of project(s) already undertaken in the past three years, and for which sector(s). They will also provide information on whether the LG has formed partnerships deals with CBOs, NGOs and FBOs in the provision of social services (listed in the questionnaire). PA 2.1.

Policy on Public-Private Partnership (PPP)

PA 2.2.

Partnerships with CBOs, NGOs, FBOs

17


CHAPTER FIVE

SECURITY 5.1. Definition of security Every individual has the inalienable right to life, liberty and the security of person. Insecurity has a disproportionate impact on poor communities, often serving to marginalize them further. African cities must strive to avoid human conflicts and natural disasters by involving all stakeholders in crime and conflict prevention and disaster preparedness.

5.2.SE1.

Capacity for effective Policing

The three questions were set to provide data for measuring this indicator. These questions seek to provide data on existing challenges for effective policing with the range of areas of security challenge in the LG by looking at existing capacity for effective policing and the existence of the establishment of Police Community Relations Committees and their achievements (if any). SE 1.1.

Security challenges facing the LGA (do we need this? Too subjective,

may throw up very similar or vague responses. Re-consider.) SE 1.2.

Capacity for effectively policing

SE 1.3.

Police-Public Relation Committee

5.3. SE2.

Rates of crime

The figure for rate of crime is an indicator of security or insecurity in any area. The two questions were set to collect data on the number of reported crime, disaggregated by wards and fatality in the last three years and whether the LG has been able to establish a gender desk in the police station to handle gender based crimes. SE 2.1.

Reported crimes

SE 2.2.

Establishment of gender desk for crimes

18


5.4. SE3.

Environmental security measures

The six questions to measure this indicator will be used to collect data on the adoption of formal guidelines/standards for environmental design and management, the national building code, environmental pollution measures, waste management and the adoption of emergency preparedness strategies and measures. SE 3.1.

Guidelines/standards for safety in public spaces and buildings

SE 3.2.

Adoption of the National Building Code

SE 3.3.

Record of Collapsed Buildings over the past three years

SE 3.4.

Environmental Pollution measures

SE 3.5.

Waste management

SE 3.6.

Adoption of an Emergency Preparedness Plan

5.5. SE4.

Conflict resolution measures

Data will be collected on the various methods of alternative dispute resolution in place in the LGA for resolving conflict. SE 4.1. 5.6. SE5.

Methods of Alternative Dispute Resolution (with examples) Tenure Security

This indicator is measured by a set of questions, which are designed to collect data on access to land by vulnerable groups, incidence of forced eviction and the promotion of social housing by the local government. SE 5.1.

Access to land by Vulnerable Groups

SE 5.2.

Incidents of forced evictions

SE 5.3.

Adoption of Social Housing Policy

19


CHAPTER SIX

ACCOUNTABILITY 6.1. Definition of accountability Accountability is a key requirement of good governance. Not only governmental institutions but also the private sector and civil society organizations must be accountable to the public and to their institutional stakeholders. Who is accountable to whom varies depending on whether decisions or actions taken are internal or external to an organization or institution. In general, an organization or an institution is accountable to those who will be affected by its decisions or actions. Accountability cannot be enforced without transparency and the rule of law. Accountability rests on the establishment of criteria for evaluating the performance of public sector institutions. This includes economic and financial accountability brought about by efficiency in resource use, expenditure control, and internal and external audits. Accountability improves a government’s legitimacy. Accountability is linked with the issue of transparency, which implies the availability and clarity of information provided to the general public about government activity. Governments must not only provide information, but also ensure that as many citizens as possible have access to this information with the goal of increasing citizen participation. A lack of transparency creates opportunities for government corruption and reduces public sector efficiency. 6.2. AC1

Transparency and free flow of information

Transparency and free flow of information between the electorate and the political office holder is an indicator of good governance. Data will be collected on the free flow of information on the activities of the LG. AC 1.1.

Transparency and free flow of information (including methods usually

used, and examples) 6.3. AC.2

Mechanisms for performance measurement

20


The two questions set to measure this indicator are geared towards providing data on the use of yearly performance targets and instances, if any, of the LG being sanctioned for not meeting set targets, in the past three years. AC 2.1.

Use of Yearly Performance Standards

AC 2.2.

Sanction for negligence

6.4. AC.3

Elimination of corruption

As part of the national strategy to checkmate corruption, the national government passed legislation on “Due Process� for adoption by all tiers of governments. This indicator measures setting up of various processes and structures by the LG towards this end, especially in the award of contracts. AC 3.1. 6.5. AC. 4

Adoption of Due process Independent Audits

The questions seek to provide data on the conduct of annual account audit, dissemination of audit report using a number of media, and the implementation of the audit recommendations. AC 4.1.

Conduct of Annual Audit

AC 4.2.

Dissemination of Audit report

AC 4.3.

Press Releases on Audit report

AC 4.4.

Action on Audit Report

6.6. AC5. Code of Conduct The questions are framed to provide data on the adoption of code of conduct by the LG, awareness and publication of the code, declaration and verification of assets by officials and family members during and after they have left offices, instances where officials have been corrupt and have been sanctioned. AC 5.1.

Adoption of Code of Conduct

AC 5.2.

Publication and awareness of Code of Conduct

AC 5.3.

Declaration of Assets of LG Officials and Family members

AC 5.4.

Verification of Declared assets of officials at retirement

AC 5.5.

Discipline of Corrupt Officials 21


6.7. AC6.

Citizens’ demand for accountability

The question will provide data on number of grievances expressed about the governance in the LG by the individuals, CBOs, NGOs, FBOs and PSOs (private sector organisations) in the last three years and how the issues raised were resolved by the LG. AC 6.1.

Freedom of Expression by the Citizens

22


CHAPTER SEVEN Computation of GUG Index 7.1. Critical indicators and scoring criteria Toward computing the GUG index as a measure of Good Urban Governnace and for comparision among participating Local Government Areas (LGAs), a few critical indicators have been identified for scoring. The 16 indicators identified for scoring under each element of governace are as follows: Element

Element

Selected indicators for weighting

Effectiveness

Vision statement for LGA/municipal

Code EF

Service delivery Resource Mobilisation and Management EQ

Equity

Pro-poor Policies Gender Equity Provision for informal business Access to education

PA

Participation

Civic engagement and Consensus orientation Partnership building

SE

Security

Rate of Crime Environmental Security Measures Tenure Security

AC

Accountability

Free Flow of Information Due Process in award of contracts Independent audit Citizen demand for accountability

23


A) Effectiveness A.1. Vision statement of LG : Assess the effectiveness of the LG in terms visioning good governnace and human development in its area on a scale of 0-4, as follows: Category

Score

No Vision/mission or strategic plan adopted

0

Adoption of vision without participatory approach

1

Adoption of vision with participatory approach, good publicity and 2 disemination. Adoption of vision with participatory approach, good publicity and its 5 application to guide socio economic development.

A.2. Service delivery: Assess the effectiveness of the LG in performing it’s statutory functions by assigning score of 1 for each function performed out of a total of 14 functions (refer to section 2.1 of the framework). Also provide scores for grievance redressal mechanisms Sn

Statutory roles

Yes

No

a.

Recommendations to State commission on economic planning

1

0

b.

collection of rates, radio and television licenses;

1

0

c.

establishment and maintenance of cemeteries, burial grounds and 1

0

homes for the destitute or infirm; d.

licensing of bicycles, trucks (other than mechanically propelled trucks), 1

0

canoes, wheel barrows and carts e.

establishment, maintenance and regulation of slaughter houses, 1

0

slaughter slabs, markets, motor parks and public conveniences; f.

construction and maintenance of roads, streets, street lightings, drains 1

0

and other public highways, parks, gardens, open spaces etc. g.

Naming of roads and streets and numbering of houses

1

0

h.

Provision and maintenance of public conveniences, sewage and refuse 1

0

disposal i.

registration of all births, deaths and marriages

1

24

0


j.

assessment of privately owned houses or tenements for the purpose of 1

0

levying such rates as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of a State; and k.

control and regulation of out-door advertising and hoarding, movement 1

0

and keeping of pets of all description, shops and kiosks, restaurants, bakeries, laundries, and licensing, regulation and control of the sale of liquor. l.

Provision and maintenance of primary, adult and vocational education;

1

0

m.

Development of agriculture and natural resources, other than the 1

0

exploitation of materials n.

Provision and maintenance of health services

1

Mechanism for Grievance redressal (refer to list in section 2.3 of framework) Variety of means to collect public complaints and feedback

Score

None

0

1-2 methods

1

More than 3 methods

2

A.3. Resource mobilisation: Assess the effectiveness of the LG to mobilise resources through Internaly Generated Revenue (IGR): IGR as a percentage of Statutory allocation

Score

Less than 20%

1

21- 40%

2

41-60%

3

61-80%

4

For Effectiveness, therefore, the maximum score is 25. If an LGA scores, for example, 22 points, their Effectiveness Score will be computed as (22/25) = 0.88.

25

0


B. Equity B. 4. Pro-poor Policies: Assess the capacity of the LG to translate adopted pro-poor policy into development programmes and projects. Projects and programmes

Score

No pro poor project and programme in place

0

1-3

1

4- 6

2

7–9

3

10 and above

4

B.5 Incentives for informal business: Assess the positive and negative measures which have an impact on informal businesses such as street trading. Incentives and disincentives

Score

No specific incentives, and restrictions on street trading in certain areas

0

Designated spaces for stalls

1

Easy access to permits and loans for informal businesses

2

Any other innovative policies to support informal businesses in addition 3 to designted spaces, and access to permits and loans B.6 Gender Equity: Percentage of women in decision-making positions (higher management or the elected council) Percentage of women in the LGA in Top management position and Score elected council No women officials or elected councillors

0

1-5%

1

6-15%

2

16-25%

3

26 – 35%

4

Above 35%

5

26


B.7. Access to Education: Assess the LG in terms of percenatge of primary school age children in school Percentage of children of school age enrolled in school

Score

Less than 10

1

11-20

2

21- 30

3

31 - 40

4

41 - 50

5

51 - 60

6

61 - 70

7

71 - 80

8

81- 90

9

Above 90

10

This computation should be based on net primary school enrolment. What programmes/policy are put in place to improve school enrolment in the last three years? (Mention them and specify improvement recorded in net enrolment

Programme

Score

Target specific 窶田onditional transfer (Pro-poor education programme like

3

scholarships or bursary) Enlightenment campaign

2

Others (specify)

1

The maximum score for Equity is thus 25 points. If an LGA scores 19 points (for example), their Equity Score will be computed as 19/25 = 0.76

27


C. Participation C. 8. Civic engagement and consesus orientation: Assess Civic engagement in the LG in terms of voters in the last election as a percentage of total registered voters, and the existence of NGOs/CBOs in the LGA. Percentage of

Score

10 and below

1

11-20

2

21- 30

3

31 - 40

4

41 - 50

5

51 - 60

6

61 - 70

7

71 - 80

8

81- 90

9

Above 90

10

No. of registered NGO/CBOs in the LGA, per 10,000 population

Score

Less than 5

1

6-15

2

16-25

3

26-35

4

Over 25

5

28


C.9. Partnership building: Assess the commitment of LG to partnership building by adopting a robust bye-laws and regulations on Public Private Partnership (PPP) Regulations to promote PPP

Yes

No

Policy on PPP adopted

1

0

Bye laws/ regulations on PPP in place

1

0

Ongoing partnership programes and projects, (including Score in partnership with the private sector, and/or with the community) None

0

1-5

1

6-10

2

More than 10

3

The maximum score for Participation is thus 20 points. If an LGA scores 12 points (for example), their Participation Score will be computed as 12/16 = 0.75

D. Security D.10. Crime rate : Assess the LG in terms of crime rate in the last one year. (How do you define crime rate? No. of crimes per 10,000 population in the last one year, or the last 12-month period for which data is available? Or some other definition?) Reported crime rate

Score

Less than 10

8

11-20

7

21- 30

6

31 - 40

5

41 - 50

4

51 - 60

3

61 - 70

2

71 - 80

1

29


Above 80

0

D.11. Environmental security measures: Assess the environmental security measures of LG in terms of the adoption of an action plan on emergency prepredness and land use design standards and regulations.

Environmental security measures

Yes

No

Emergency preparedness plan prepared and adopted

1

0

Emergency preparedness plan prepared through participatory 1

0

process, and disseminated widely to citizens National Building Code adopted by LG

1

0

Existence of building and zoning standards and regulations

1

0

D. 12. Tenure security: Assess the tenural security in the LG in terms of household heads with titles as a percentage of total households Percentage of household with secure land titles

Score

Less than 10%

1

11-20%

2

21-30%

3

31-40%

4

41-50%

5

51-60%

6

61-70%

7

Above 70%

8

(Please consult 2006 housing and population census data and household survey)

The maximum score for Security is thus 20 points. If an LGA scores 18 points (for example), their Equity Score will be computed as 18/20 = 0.90

30


E. Accountability E.13. Free flow of information: Assess the promotion of transparency in governance through free flow of information: Types

Yes

No

Publication of annual report

1

0

Dissemination of annual report

1

0

Periodic town hall/ CDA meetings

1

0

Mass media (Radio, TV and print)

1

0

Website and email

1

0

E.14. Due process: Assess the LG accountability in terms of eliminating curruption through the implementation of the due process policy Implementation of due process policy

Yes

No

For budgets

1

0

For tenders and contracts

1

0

E.15. Independent audit: Assess if an annual audit (internal or external) is conducted, and whether its results are widely disseminated and used. Annual independent audit

Yes

No

Internal

1

0

External

1

0

Audit report disseminated to stakeholders through print and 1

0

electronic media, website etc.

The maximum score for Accountability is thus 10 points. If an LGA scores 8 points (for example), their Accountability Score will be computed as 8/10 = 0.80

31


CHAPTER EIGHT GUIDELINE FOR REPORT WRITING The Urban Governance Assessment report of each LGA should be as analytical as possible. It should emphasise the findings of the assessment, but also provide a brief summary of the methodology adopted, the data sources and data collection techniques, and the challenges faced in conducting the assessment. If at all possible, the report should be written jointly by the consultant, a representative of the LGA, and a representative of civil society. At the very least, the draft report should be circulated to all key stakeholders and their views incorporated before it is finalised.

PROPOSED STRUCTURE OF REPORT OF GUG ASSESSMENT PROJECT Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION Project location Preamble on LG’s Buy into GUG Project Project Goals and Objectives Methodology for data collection GUG Framework Baseline survey Focussed Group Discussion Computation of GUG Index Structure of Report

PART 1: BASELINE SURVEY Chapter To be based on the Scope of the Questionnaire

PART 2: GUG ASSESSEMENT Chapter: EFFECTIVENESS EF1. Vision statement EF 1.5. Adoption and availability of a vision/mission statement of the LG EF 1.6. Process of preparation and adoption of vision/mission statement/strategic plan(s) EF 1.7. Use of the adopted vision/mission statement and/or strategic plan

32


EF 1.8. Dissemination of the vision/mission statement-s and/or strategic plan. EF2. Service delivery EF 2.4. Performance of Constitutional Roles, budget allocation and partnership EF 2.5. Clear and transparent procedures for accessing services provided LG EF 2.6. Grievance redress system EF3. Subsidiarity EF 3.5. Autonomy of LG EF 3.6. Interference with LG Constitutional roles EF 3.7. Decentralization of Functions to lower tiers by LG EF 3.8. Areas handled by sub-LG units EF4. Resource Mobilization EF 4.4. Sources of LG Income EF 4.5. Collection and management of LG Internally Generated Resources (IGR) EF 4.6. Predictability of LG Statutory Allocation EF5. LG Capacity EF 5.4. Existing capacity (Human and material resources and organizational structure) EF 5.5. Staff development EF 5.6. Critical capacity building Needs

Chapter: EQUITY EQ1. Pro-Poor Policy EQ 1.3. Availability and adoption of pro-poor policies in specific sectors, EQ 1.4. Equity in distribution of basic services EQ2. Citizens’ Charter EQ 2.2. Availability, adoption and awareness of Citizens’ Charter EQ 3.5. Incentive for informal business EQ 3.6. Regulatory control on informal business EQ 3.7. Restriction on street trading EQ 3.8. Confrontations between traders and authorities EQ4. Gender Equity EQ 4.5. Adoption of Affirmative Action EQ 4.6. Women participation in Governance EQ 4.7. Proportion of elected women councilors in the last election EQ 4.8. Women participation in voting in the last election EQ5. Access to Education EQ 5.4. Primary school net enrolment EQ 5.5. Primary school completion rate EQ 5.6. Measures adopted to raise enrolment and completion rates among girl students EQ6. Human Right/Rule of Law EQ 6.3. Harmful Traditional Practices EQ 6.4. Illegal trials of crimes

Chapter: PARTICIPATION PA1. Civic Engagement and Consensus Building PA 1.7. Roles of non-indigenes in governance PA 1.8. Referendum on issues of public interest PA 1.9. Participation in Election PA 1.10. Involvement of women, youth and children in decision-making 33


PA 1.11. Presence of NGOs/CBOs in the LGA PA 1.12. Involvement of Traditional Rulers in decision-making PA 1.13. Practice of participatory budget and public expenditure tracking PA2. Partnership Building PA 2.3. Policy on Public-Private Partnership (PPP) PA 2.4. Partnerships with CBOs, NGOs, FBOs

Chapter: SECURITY SE1. Capacity for effective Policing SE 1.4. Security challenges facing the LGA SE 1.5. Capacity for effectively policing SE 1.6. Police-Public Relation Committee SE2. Rates of crime SE 2.3. Reported crimes SE 2.4. Establishment of gender desk for crimes SE3. Environmental security measures SE 3.7. Guidelines/standards for safety in public spaces and buildings SE 3.8. Adoption of the National Building Code SE 3.9. Record of Collapsed Buildings over the past three years SE 3.10. Environmental Pollution measures SE 3.11. Waste management SE 3.12. Adoption of an Emergency Preparedness Plan SE4. Conflict resolution measures SE 4.2. Methods of Alternative Dispute Resolution (with examples) SE5. Tenure Security SE 5.4. Access to land by Vulnerable Groups SE 5.5. Incidents of forced evictions SE 5.6. Adoption of Social Housing Policy

Chapter: ACCOUNTABILITY AC1 Transparency and free flow of information AC1.1 Transparency and free flow of information AC.2 Mechanisms for performance measurement AC 2.3. Use of Yearly Performance Standards AC 2.4. Sanction for negligence AC.3 Elimination of corruption AC 3.2. Adoption of Due process AC 3.1. Adoption of Due process AC. 4 Independent Audits AC 4.5. Conduct of Annual Audit AC 4.6. Dissemination of Audit report AC 4.7. Press Releases on Audit report AC 4.8. Action on Audit Report AC5. Code of Conduct AC 5.6. Adoption of Code of Conduct AC 5.7. Publication and awareness of Code of Conduct AC 5.8. Declaration of Assets of LG Officials and Family members AC 5.9. Verification of Declared assets of officials at retirement AC 5.10. Discipline of Corrupt Officials AC6. Citizens’ demand for accountability AC 6.1 Freedom of Expression by the Citizens 34


FOCUSSED GROUP DISCUSSIONS Information collected on relevant aspects of the elements below will be discussed in the related sections above. Effectiveness (See EF1.1-EF1.4; EF2.1-EF2.3; EF3.2 AND EF4.3) Equity (See EQ1.1, EQ2.1, EQ3.1, EQ3.3-3.4; EQ4.1-4.2 AND EQ6.1) Participation (See PA 1.1-1.3; PA 1.6) Security (See SE1.1; SE 2.1. SE 4.1, SE51.-5.3) Accountability (See AC2.2; AC4.1-4.2; AC4.4 and AC6.1)

PART THREE Chapter: CHALLENGES AND OOPRTUNITIES GOVERNANCE IN NIGERIA

OF GOOD URBAN

CHAPTER: GUG INDEX EFFECTIVENESS 1. Vision statement for LGA/municipal 2. Service delivery 3. Resource Mobilisation and Management

EQUITY 4. 5. 6. 7.

Pro-poor Policies Gender Equity Suggest also include EQ 3 informal business Access to education

PARTICIPATION 8. Civic engagement and Consensus orientation 9. Partnership building

SECURITY 10. Rate of Crime 11. Environmental Security Measures 12. Tenure Security

ACCOUNTABILITY 13. 14. 15. 16.

Free Flow of Information Due Process in award of contracts Independent audit Citizen demand for accountability  

Chapter: CHALLENGES OF GOOD URBAN GOVERNANCE Chapter: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS APPENDICES BIBLIOGRAPHY

35


APPENDIX 1 PROCESS MANAGEMENT FOR FIELD SURVEY

36


This section describes methodologies and specific procedural steps that field survey consultant will follow in order to carry out credible assessment of the urban governance in the Local Government. Three principal methods are recommended, for data gathering in the assessment of Good urban governance in the Local Governments. These include Desktop study/ contextual analysis of publications, Focus Group Discussion and Structured and unstructured interview. i. Desktop study/ Contextual Analysis of Published and anecdotal materials Desktop study/ contextual analysis in the assessment of GUG refers to a thorough evaluation of all relevant publications (in whatever medium, including multi-media) in the Local government administrative archives.. The consultant shall conduct a study to answer all questions listed under the column Local Government Administrative Records (LAREC) column of the Framework. The documents that will be examined include existing documentations on laws, policies, gazette and political decisions, minutes of meetings, executive decisions and activities, and petitions and protests, audit reports and audit query, staff records, strategic plan documents, advocacy tools, accounts and budget documents, police crime records, State independent Electoral commission documents and any other relevant anecdotal records in the LG. The consultant shall also examine other relevant publications outside the government institutional archives, such as newspaper articles and independent publications from CSOs that are relevant to the Local government administration. The consultant shall ensure that contextual analyses of these documents are based primarily on the featured questions in the framework with the sole aims of provided data for indicators. ii. Focus Group Discussion (FGD) is a form of qualitative research in which a group of people are asked about their perceptions, opinions, beliefs and attitudes towards a product, service, concept, idea, or events on issues of governance in the Local Government.

The consultants shall conduct FGD to extract data about the

perceptions, opinion and attitudes of the target groups on the governance issues. The consultant shall draw up questions that answer to the requirements of the indicators 37


and ask such questions in an interactive group setting where participants are free to talk with other group members. It is advised that people from similar backgrounds or experiences (e.g., market women association, National Automobile Technician Association) are brought together to discuss specific topics of interest to the consultant. In the event that a sizeable number of these groups could not be drafted to the meeting, the executive members of these associations may be invited for discussion. The consultant may send the questions to the target group in advance in order to enable them crystallise their thoughts and probably consult among members before the discussion. iii. Structured and Unstructured interview Two types of interview methods shall be adopted in the assessment of Good urban Governance in the LG. A structured interview shall be conducted on selected households to obtain data on their perceptions, opinion and attitudes to governance in the Local government. Household heads shall be interviewed to provide data about the households. In the case of household interview, a stratified random sampling shall be used to select enumeration areas while simple, random shall be used to select households for interview. See appendix 2 for the structured questionnaire for household. Unstructured Interview: The consultant shall identify key actors and specific individuals in the Local Government that can provide data on the featured questions in the framework. The questions shall be restructured according to the prevailing situation and peculiar circumstance during the interview. The following key urban gate keepers and actors are specifically recommended for unstructured interview: •

Local Government Political office Holders ( Chairperson/vice chairman, Councillors)

•

Local government administrative officials( such as accountant, clerks, secretaries, personal assistants,)

38


•

Professional in the LG administration( such as engineers, Town planners, Architect, e.t.c)

•

Gender desk officers in the Police station, and LG

iv. Steps to data collection a) Courtesy visit on the political head of the LG The consultant on arrival at the LG should visit the Chairman or the political head of the local government to obtain formal consent for the assessment. The consultant shall provide a sufficient explanation on the aim, outputs and outcome of the assessment of good urban governance project, the benefits accruing to the LG particularly and the Nation in general from the successful implementation of the project. The consultant should avoid any form of misrepresentations in the presentation of the outputs and outcomes of the project. It is noteworthy that though some local governments are rich in data others have very scanty records/ data, therefore, the consultant must ensure that all critical data are sourced or use surrogate data where specific data are not available. b) Meeting with relevant stakeholders

The consultant shall set up meetings with the key actors in urban administartion in the LG. It is expected that the consultant shall set up these meetings as soon as he arrives at the Local government. The purpose of the meeting not only to gather necessary data but also to convince the stakeholders of the relevance, and the use of the project. The consultants shall also use this meeting to involve the stakeholders in the assessment process and develop and mainatin relations. This meeting can be in form of stakeholder workshop or series of meetings with different groups dependng peculiarity of the LG.. The consultant shall explain the benfit of the study to the stakeholders, inform the stakholders that they may be contacted both as individuals and collectives in the course of the study. The focus of this meeting should be to gain the confidnece pf the stakeholders and to ensure buy-in to the project.

39


c) Recording and data coding The dataframe and questionnaire are provided to the consultants as guide and should not be used as field book. It is expected that responses will be recorded in a separate note book which clearly identify the interviewee name, title, insitutions and date of interview and the name of the interviewer. In the case of official records , findings are tarbulated based on the requirement of the questions and the indicators in the field book for further analysis in the consultant report. The consultant will submit both the processed data and the report. The records on the filed book will not be published but will be in the archive of GUG National information resource centre .

40


APPENDIX II HOUSEHOLD QUESTIONNIARE

41


APPENDIX III LAREC QUESTIONAIRE

42


APPENDIX IV GUG FRAMEWORK AND INDICATORS

43


Guidelines datacollect nig