|Objective • Executive Summary
As a major component of LEEMP, the Local Government Scorecard Assessment and Capacity Building sub-project seeks to identify local governments worthy of participation in the project based on their relative service delivery effectiveness and responsiveness to communities. Consequently, the Local Government Scorecard Assessment instrument emphasizes key governance criteria to determine the level of performance of local governments. The assessment instrument has four broad sections: (i) responsiveness to communities, (ii) administrative operation, (iii) overall financial integrity, and (iv) budget and financial appraisal which are used to assess the local governments. These are respectively measured by specific indicators.
Responsiveness of local government to communities is measured by eight indices of project implementation, project abandonment, overall councillorsí responsiveness, councillorsí meeting with community, and consultation on budget issues, responsiveness to request assistance, performance of community outreach, staff and chairmanís accessibility to the members of the community.
Administrative operation is measured by the following sub-indices: cooperation between political and career staff, overall compliance with administrative and financial procedures, compliance with borrowing procedures and staff development.
The third index, budget and financial appraisal is measured by recent audit report, compliance with procurement procedures, appropriateness of borrowing, payment of advances by political and career staff, and fulfilment of reporting requirement.
The fourth index, budget and financial appraisal is measured by the following cluster of sub-indices: fraction of actual expenditure to budgeted expenditure, the ratio of actual internally generated revenue (IGR) to projected IGR, the ratio of the wage bill (excluding political staff) to total recurrent expenditure, the ratio of Chairmanís office budget to total number of political office holders, the ratio of capital expenditure on health, drinking water and environmental sanitation to total capital expenditure.
Two reports emerged out of this study, the first elaborates on the context and methodology of the study. The second provides a detailed result of the assessment of rural local governments in the nine states investigated. The following section will present a summary of the assessment.
Rural local governments in Adamawa state appear to have good administrative operations with the best local government scoring 83.64% and the poorest 40%. Community responsiveness is not as good as administrative operations. In the former, the highest score is 62.78% while the lowest score is 11.78%. From the result, only three local governments scored above 50% in the area of responsiveness to communities. Thus, it is clearly established that rural local governments in Adamawa state are generally not responsive to the needs of the local people. Overall financial integrity is poorer still. Here the highest performing local government records a score of 58.7% while the lowest score is 28.3%. The highest score in budget and financial appraisal is 72.43% while the lowest score is 34.71%. Most local governments in Adamawa state perform below 50% in the overall score. Only five local governments scored 50%. The overall performance and ranking of local governments in Adamawa state reveals that Madagali LGA tops the list with an aggregate score of 57.64%. Lamurde local government occupies the second position (51.20%) takes the third position. Hong local government has the least score of 34.57%.
Rural local governments in Bauchi state performed at about average in all the indices on which this assessment has been based. However, they have not demonstrated excellence or outstanding performance in any of the indices. The highest overall score recorded by any local government has been below 55%. Interestingly, the margin of difference amongst the local government is not wide. Only two of the local governments in Bauchi state have performed above 50% in index of financial appraisal while only one achieved over 50% in community responsiveness. The local governments however have good record in administrative operations and overall financial integrity.
The overall performance of all the local governments in Bauchi state is shown in table 3.6. The table reveals that Shira LG occupies the first position with 52.94&% followed by Drazo LG in the second position with 51.38 % and Kirfi LG takes the third position with 48 .94%. Shira LGís strength is in overall financial integrity (3.91 or 14.8/20), and administrative operation (76.35 or 15.27). It performed below average in financial appraisal. The last position is taken by Gaide LG with a score of 34.66%.
Bayelsa has the lowest number of local Governments (8) among the nine states surveyed for this study. There is poor responsiveness to community needs by rural local government in Bayelsa state. There is poor responsiveness to community needs by rural local government in Bayelsa state. The highest score by Yenagoa in this index of assessment is very poor (16.95% or 6.78/40%). The consequence of the above is that local communities are not feeling the presence of the LGAs in development. This has adverse implications for socio-economic life, poverty level and legitimacy of government. The fact that the community representatives who are political office holders at the LGAs do not consult with the people means that a wide gap exists between the governed and those who govern. It must however be noted that only three rural local governments have not performed above average in the area of administrative operations.
The overall performance of all the eight local government in Bayelsa state as shown in table 4.5 and 4.6 indicates that each of them scores below 40%. Nonetheless, the strongest Local Governments are Nembe (23.04%), Ekeremor (21.29%) and kolokuma/ Opokuma (16.03%)
Twenty rural Local Governments were selected for the scorecard assessment project in this state. Generally, rural local governments in Benue state have very poor standing in overall financial integrity. The highest score on this index, achieved by logo local Governments, is 50 or 10/20%. Overall, the local government in Benue state record impressive performance in the area of administrative operations. The first three local Governments record an average of score of about 70%. The final results of this exercise shows that Vande-kya Local Government is in the first position in the overall ranking with 42.61%. Okpokwu LGA is placed second with a score of 42.56%. Gwert-East LGA occupies the third with position 40.27%. All rural local government falls below average in overall performance. Only three local governments have been able to achieve 40%.
Scorecard assessment was carried out in fifteen rural LGAs of Enugu state. Generally, rural local government in Enugu state record a dismal overall performance in the scorecard assessment. They fall below 40% in the assessment. They are particularly weak in the index of overall financial integrity, below average in responsiveness to communities but performed about average in administrative operations. The performance of all the local government in Enugu state is below average. Generally, their responsiveness to communities is not satisfactory (below average) while none of the local Governments achieved average score in the area of overall financial integrity.
Oji River LGA (38.29%) holds the first position in the assessment, followed by Igbo-Eze North LGA (36.09%) and Ezeagu LGA (35.68%) respectively.
From the assessment, of twenty four local governments in Imo state , Isu local government is ranked the best followed by the Ehime Mbano LGA, second and Ideato South LGA, third position, Owerri West LGA is ranked fourth position; Ideato north LGA , fifth position ; Abo Mbaise LGA , sixth position; Ezihintte LGA seventh ; and Ngor Okpoala LGA , eight position. Oguta LGA has the least rating at 24th with 12.61%, followed by Orsu 23rd (19.78%). The overall performance of the rural LGAs in Imo State thus varies from a score of 12.61% to 52.52%. This means that the best LG performance is only just fair
The general contour of performance of the LGAs is prominently defined by the dismal performance of the LGAs in responsiveness to communities. Out of the 24 LGAs assessed, 21(87.5%) have a performance that is less than 50%. Only 3 LGAs actually score 50% or more, with only LGA scoring above 60%. This means that rural LGAs in Imo state are not efficiently complementing the acknowledged virile community development efforts of the local communities. It also means that administrative operation (over two-thirds of the LGAs score 50% and above) and moderately fair performance in overall financial integrity (just over half the LGAs score 50% and above) into community responsiveness.
The overall performance of LGs in Katsina state is arrived at after analysing all the field data as sectionalised into responsiveness to the communities, administrative operations and overall financial integrity. Adjusted to 100%, the result of the analysis shows that Batagarawa LGA is first with 51.21%, while Kaita and Maiíadua LGA are second and third with 47.73% and 44.88% respectively. These are followed closely by Bindawa LGA (44.74%), Sabuwa LGA (43.73%) and Matazu LGA (41.60%) in fourth, fifth and sixth positions, respectively. On the other hand the least performing and therefore least ranked LGAs are Baure in 21st position with 29.92%, Kurfi in 22nd position with 23.69% and Dan-Musa bringing the rear in 23rd position with just 13.31%.
In general terms, the performance of rural LGAs in Katsina state, considering their responsiveness to communities, administrative operations and overall financial integrity leaves much to be desired as the overall scores range from very poor posted by Dan-Musa (13.31%) to just average (51.21%) recorded by the first ranked LGA, Batagarawa.
Generally in Niger state, the LGAs performed quite poorly in their community responsiveness. None of the local governments performed up to 50%, with the highest ranking local government scoring just 42.7%. The local governments are particularly weak in project implementation as all the local governments scored well below average. The overall performance in respect of the other sub indices of community responsiveness are also generally unimpressive, except for project abandonment and the accessibility of the chairmen, the two variables with the least consequence (weights), and perhaps, performance of community outreach staff.
On the other hand, the local governments perform a little bit above average in their administrative operations, with about 90% of them performing below average and the highest scoring local government posting a score that is as high as 75%. However, the financial integrity of most of the LGs is very questionable going by their generally very poor performance in overall financial integrity, where 90% of the LGs score well below average, while the others post a score that is just average, with the highest at 58%.
Finally, the local governments in niger state are simply weak in terms of financial and budgetary appraisal, with most of them lacking necessary data needed for proper evaluation. This recommends the need to direct urgent attention to internalising the development and adoption of standard book keeping as essential bedrock to financial prudence in the local government system, and all that this implies in respect of accountability and service delivery and responsiveness to local communities.
The final results show that Rijau local government ranks first with 42.83%. It is followed by Paiko (41.36%) and edati (39.52%) in second and third positions respectively, Rafi (38.69%), Katcha (38.69%) and Bosso (36.9%). On the other hand, the least performing local governments are Lapai (24.38%), Munya (22.95%) and Gurara (19.21%). Rijau, Paiko and Edati are thus the best three LGAs, while Rafi, Katcha and Bosso occupy the last three positions.
The general profile of the performance of the rural LGs in oyo state is significantly weak in their community responsiveness, where the highest ranked LG scores just 57.9% compared with 78.2% administrative operations and 61% for budget and financial appraisal. More significantly, only two of the 23 LGAs (about 9%) assessed scored above average in community responsiveness and project implementation, councillors meetings with local community and consultation on budget issues.
Over 80% of local governments score average or more in the administrative operations, with the entire group of LGAs posting best practise in staff development and only 22% reporting below average performance in cooperation between political and career staff. It is also in administrative operations that record the highest score (78.18%) by any local government in all the performance indicators under consideration. The overall score card assessment result in Oyo state shows that only 13% of the local governments performed above average. The local governments on top of the list are Irepo (1st position) with 56.4%, Olorunsogo (2nd position) with 54.0%, and Iwajowa (3rd position) with a score of 53.2%.
The local governments assessed have exhibited limited capacity for interaction with their communities. This is clearly evident in the very poor performance in the cluster of factors that make up the index of responsiveness to communities. Only six of the nine states have between one and four local governments scoring 50% in this index. Three states Bayelsa, Enugu and Niger have no record of local governments scoring at least 50%. In particular, community outreach staffs often perform below average while consultation on budget issues scarcely occurs. Local governments do not often respond to request assistance of their communities.
Interestingly, the local governments have generally demonstrated that they have the required administrative machinery to carry out statutory functions. The problem seems to be that they are not oriented towards accountability to their communities and citizens, and towards financial integrity. The local governments performed very poorly in financial and budget appraisal. In fact, local governments in some states have not been able to provide the accounting books needed to carry out this part of the assessment.
There is therefore a need for capacity building programmes to re-orientate local governments to interact with their communities, serve these communities and be accountable to them. Local governments must be able to meaningfully consult with their communities on budget issues. There is also a need to build capacity on standardised financial accounting and book-keeping as a foundation for prudence and accountability for effective service delivery.
Identification and Prioritisation of Critical Fadama Ecosystems (2005)
Scorecard Assessment of Rural Local Governments in Nine States of Nigeria (2005)
Local Empowerment and Environmental Management Project (LEEMP) (2005)