PLAN DE ORDENAMIENTO TERRITORIAL

LEAD’s theory of change was that “by addressing both the demand and supply side of local government service, accountability and development will be strengthened, which makes the system work more effectively through partnership building” (The Mitchell Group, 2013, p. 7). The project aimed to achieve four original objectives:

1. Strengthen local government capacity to build relations with communities, and improve effective management of services. 2. Increase transparency of local government operations through a

participatory budget process, better monitoring, and introduction of mandated fiscal responsibility and public procurement laws.

Note: RTI colleagues Tijjani Mohammed, Callistus Donatus, Yvonne Sidhom, and Annette Uhlenberg contributed project documents, operational insights, and thorough comments on earlier drafts. F. Henry Healey of RTI provided helpful comments and parallels to the Nigeria Northern Education Initiative (NEI) case study that appears elsewhere in this book. The narrative and analysis in this chapter represent the views of the author alone and are focused on LEAD’s social accountability interventions. They do not reflect the project’s overall achievements.

26 _{In 2013, LEAD’s USAID funding was augmented by US$2 million from Chevron Corporation}

to expand project activities, adding Rivers State to Bauchi and Sokoto, which were LEAD’s original focus states. Because Rivers began activities 2 years later than Sokoto and Bauchi, the narrative in this chapter focuses on the latter two states unless otherwise indicated.

3. Strengthen capacity of local organizations for service planning, budgeting, and monitoring.

4. Improve service delivery through support to selected local government services, such as water and sanitation, and through collaboration with other USAID/Nigeria Focus States Strategy projects in education and health.27

Each of the first three objectives had direct links to social accountability. Although Objective 1 primarily focused on strengthening the supply side, it encouraged engagement with citizens as an avenue to enhance local governments’ decision making and effective service delivery (Table 11). The second objective aimed for greater transparency through increased citizen participation in planning, and the third addressed the demand side by building civil society and community-based organizations’ ability to engage with local governments.28

27 _{Specifically, USAID Nigeria facilitated/encouraged collaboration with two projects—Northern}

Education Initiative (NEI) (see case study) and Targeted States High Impact Project (TSHIP)— both of which worked in LEAD’s original target states of Bauchi and Sokoto.

28 _{For an explanation of the various types of social accountability purposes (service delivery,}

governance and democracy, and empowerment) and actions (transparency, coproduction, compliance, confrontation) described in these case studies, please refer to “Framing Social Accountability” in Chapter 2.

Table 11. Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy, and Development (LEAD) program activities, by objective

OBJECTIVE 1: Strengthen local government capacity

Local Government Development Framework (LGDF): The LGDF, introduced by RTI, was a collective self-assessment of LGA performance that provided inputs for a targeted capacity building plan (Bell & Bland, 2014). It was administered annually in CLGAs. Among the participants were representatives from civil society.

Strengthening of Ward Development Committees (WDCs): WDCs existed before LEAD began; they were the primary mechanism for mobilizing communities in CLGAs. LEAD assessed WDCs’ technical and management capabilities and degree of representativeness as the basis for action plans for organizational development.

Community priority setting: Introduced by LEAD, this process began with broad participation at the ward level and built toward LGA-wide priorities to be included in CLGA annual budgets.

Community-Based Strategic Plans (CBSPs): CBSPs drew on the results of community priority-setting to provide CLGAs with a guide for decisions on infrastructure and services based on citizens’ expressed needs. CBSPs did not exist before LEAD.

Social Accountability in Cross-Sectoral Service Delivery 127

(continued)

Table 11. Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy, and Development (LEAD) program activities, by objective

OBJECTIVE 1: Strengthen local government capacity (continued)

Town hall meetings: LEAD introduced these meetings for CLGAs to report publicly on annual activities and budget implementation, as a way to build a culture of accountability and regular reporting to citizens.

LGA archiving and document access systems: LEAD established record-keeping systems to facilitate public access to key LGA documents, such as budget, personnel, and council records.

OBJECTIVE 2: Increase transparency of local government operations

Internally generated revenues: LEAD found that LGAs were heavily reliant on federal grants, which had shrunk in size in recent years. In response, LEAD facilitated the establishment of Taxpayers’ Consultative Forums to map potential revenues, register taxpayers, and identify sources with highest potential for internally generated revenues.

Policy reforms: The project worked with CLGAs to operationalize existing fiscal responsibility and procurement laws, which often had not been implemented by local governments.

Stakeholder budget working groups: The purpose of these working groups was to “sensitize government to budget issues and to identify significant areas for improvement” (The Mitchell Group, 2013, p. 17). The groups operated at the state level, and members included traditional and religious leaders, civil society organizations (CSOs), the media, elected representatives, and officials from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning, and the Office of the Auditor General. For LEAD’s focus on health and education during the 2015–2016 extension, the budget working groups were cascaded down to LGAs.

OBJECTIVE 3: Strengthen capacity of local organizations

Organizational capacity assessments and strengthening: Capacity assessments of LEAD’s CSO subgrantee partners were updated over time to gauge progress and identify priorities for improving core capacities. Core capacities encompassed establishment of organizational objectives, governance, operations and management systems, human resources, financial and assets management, program planning, project management, strategic planning, community mobilization, and results monitoring.

Community Partnership Program grants: LEAD’s grants to CSOs encouraged collaboration between local governments and communities, supported CSO capacity building, and contributed to service improvements. Activities often were identified through CBSPs and service improvements prioritized by community members.

Mapping of state- and community-level organizations: LEAD built a database of CSOs active in each state and CLGA to facilitate linkages to donors and other development organizations.

Building and strengthening of CSO networks: LEAD supported CSO networking for peer- to-peer support and advocacy.

Public expenditure tracking: LEAD trained CSOs in how to gather information, analyze budget implementation, and examine performance related to service delivery.

Table 11. Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy, and Development (LEAD) program activities, by objective

OBJECTIVE 4: Improve service delivery

Service Improvement Plans (SIPs): LEAD facilitated SIP development through a series of participatory planning meetings that included representatives from CLGAs, WDCs, community-based organizations, and civil society (such as trade unions, community leaders, and women’s and youth groups). The meeting participants would jointly create a framework for sustainable maintenance of local services (mostly water, sanitation, and infrastructure). Policy reforms: LEAD facilitated the development of state-level water policies and implementation of the National Environmental Sanitation Law.

Improving water delivery capacity of state agencies: LEAD worked to strengthen the capacity of state agencies and local governments that were sharing responsibilities for water service in urban and rural areas.

Improving health, education, and other services: LEAD collaborated with USAID’s health and education projects to improve services at the local level. Areas of collaboration included coordinated SIP review, development of SIPs for specific services, and policy development and implementation.

CBSP = Community-Based Strategic Plan; CLGA = Champion Local Government Area; CSO = civil society organization; LGA = Local Government Area;

LGDF = Local Government Development Framework; SIP = Service Improvement Plan; WDC = Ward Development Committee.

During LEAD’s extension period (2015–2016), activities to support local government capacity building and transparency were consolidated, while capacity building for local organizations and improved service delivery remained separate objectives. However, the service delivery objective was refocused specifically on improving access to basic education and reading and on strengthening the health system. In terms of relative budget allocations, about a third of funds was spent on local government strengthening (Obj. 1), with about a quarter each for increased transparency (Obj. 2) and improving service delivery (Obj. 4) and one-fifth for strengthening citizen groups (Obj. 3). After 2014 there was a relative decline in allocations to local government capacity building activities, because many of the planned activities under this objective had been completed.