LOCAL DEVELOPMENT GRANTS MANAGEMENT AND SERVICE DELIVERY: A CASE STUDY OF WAKISO DISTRICT-UGANDA
169
Transcript of LOCAL DEVELOPMENT GRANTS MANAGEMENT AND SERVICE DELIVERY: A CASE STUDY OF WAKISO DISTRICT-UGANDA
i
DEDICATION
This research thesis is dedicated to Joseph, John, Patra, Joel and Jeremy; my
children.
careers
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The realization of this work was only possible due to several people's support, to
which expressing my gratitude. I sincerely thank the Almighty God for whom I
am humbled and grateful for this achievement. To Dr Stella Kyohairwe and Mrs
Pross Naggita Oluka, I am indebted for their relentless supervision and
encouragement throughout this work.
My earnest appreciation goes to staff of Uganda Management Institute for their
professional guidance and services throughout the course. I extend my appreciation
to Wakiso District Local Government for accepting this study to be conducted
there. The valuable input from Ms Annet Namugga, Senior Population Officer of
Wakiso district and Ms Juliet Nantumbwe, Economic Planner Kira Town Council
cannot go without say. They ably coordinated the data collection process.
To my children and husband, I will forever be thankful to you for your relentless
patience during my long hours of absence from you.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION .............................................................................................................. i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS............................................................................................iii
LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................... x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................................... xi
CHAPTER ONE .......................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1
1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background to the Study ................................................................................1
1.1.1 Historical Background .............................................................................1
1.1.2 Theoretical Background...........................................................................4
1.1.3 Conceptual Background...........................................................................6
1.1.4 Contextual Background............................................................................8
1.2.4 Contextual Background ............................................................................9
1.2 Statement of the Problem .............................................................................13
1.3 Purpose of the Study....................................................................................15
1.4 Objectives of the Study ................................................................................15
1.5 Research Questions ......................................................................................16
1.6 Hypotheses ...................................................................................................16
1.7 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................17
iv
1.8 Significance of the Study .............................................................................20
1.9 Justification of the Study..............................................................................21
1.10 Scope of the Study.....................................................................................22
1.10.1 Content Scope ........................................................................................22
1.10.2 Geographical Scope ..............................................................................22
1.10.3 Time Scope.............................................................................................23
1.11 Operational Definitions of Terms and Concepts ......................................23
CHAPTER TWO ....................................................................................................... 24
LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 24
2.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 24
2.1 Theoretical Review.......................................................................................25
2.2 Decentralized Planning for Local Development Grants and Service Delivery29
2.3 Budgeting for Local Development Grants and Service Delivery ................31
2.3.1 Resource Mobilization ...........................................................................32
2.3.2 Resource Allocation...............................................................................32
2.3.3 Resource Spending/Expenditure............................................................35
2.4 Local Development Grant implementation and Service Delivery ...............35
2.4.1 Participation and Service Delivery ........................................................35
2.4.2 Local Development Grant Guidelines for Service Delivery..................36
2.4.3 Technical Capacity and Service Delivery..............................................37
2.5 Monitoring and Evaluation of the Local Development Grant .....................39
2.6 Service Delivery in Local Governments ......................................................41
2.7 Summary of Literature Review ....................................................................44
CHAPTER THREE.................................................................................................... 46
v
METHODOLOGY..................................................................................................... 46
3.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 46
3.1 Research Design ...........................................................................................46
3.2 Study Population ..........................................................................................47
3.3 Determination of the Sample Size................................................................48
3.4 Sampling Techniques and Procedures..........................................................49
3.5 Data Collection Methods..............................................................................50
3.5.1 Questionnaire Survey.............................................................................52
3.5.2 Structured Interviews ...........................................................................53
3.5.3 Interviews...............................................................................................53
3.5.4 Self-Administered Questionnaires .........................................................54
3.5.5 Documentary Review.............................................................................54
3.5.6 Observation................................................................................................55
3.6 Data Collection Instruments.........................................................................55
3.6.1 Questionnaires........................................................................................55
3.6.2 Interview Guides ....................................................................................56
3.6.3 Documentary Analysis...........................................................................56
3.7 Validity and Reliability ................................................................................57
3.7.1 Validity...................................................................................................57
3.7.2 Reliability...............................................................................................58
3.8 Procedure of Data Collection .......................................................................60
3.9 Data Management and Analysis...................................................................60
3.9.1 Quantitative Data Analysis ....................................................................60
3.9.2 Qualitative Data Analysis ......................................................................61
3.9.3 Quality Control ......................................................................................61
3.10 Measurements of the Research Variables ....................................................61
vi
3.11 Ethical Considerations...............................................................................62
CHAPTER FOUR...................................................................................................... 63
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS .......... 63
4.0 Introduction ...................................................................................................... 63
4.1 Response Rate ..............................................................................................64
4.2 Background Characteristics of Respondents...............................................65
4.2.1 Distribution of Respondents by Level of Local Government................65
4.2.2 Category of Respondents .......................................................................66
4.2.3 Sex of Respondents................................................................................67
4.2.4 Age of Respondents ...............................................................................68
4.2.5 Level of Education of Respondents .......................................................69
4.2.6 Participation in Planning by Respondents .............................................71
4.2.7 Level of Participation in Planning by Respondents...............................71
4.3 Descriptive Statistics for the Study Variables...........................................72
4.3.1 Descriptive Statistics for Decentralized Planning and Service Delivery73
4.3.2 Descriptive Statistics for Budgeting and Service Delivery ...................75
4.3.3 Descriptive Statistics for Implementation and Service Delivery...........78
4.3.4 Descriptive Statistics for Monitoring & Evaluation and Service Delivery82
4.3.5 Descriptive Statistics for Service Delivery ............................................84
4.4 Correlation Analysis.....................................................................................86
4.4.1 Relationship between Decentralized planning and Service Delivery....87
4.4.2 Relationship between Budgeting and Service Delivery ........................88
4.4.3 Relationship between LDG Implementation and Service Delivery ......89
vii
4.4.4 Relationship between Monitoring and Evaluation; and Service Delivery90
4.5 Regression Analysis .....................................................................................92
4.6 Conclusion...................................................................................................94
CHAPTER FIVE........................................................................................................ 95
SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 95
5.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................95
5.1 Summary of the Findings .............................................................................95
5.1.1 Decentralized Planning and Service Delivery .......................................95
5.1.2 Local Development Grants Budgeting and Service Delivery................96
5.1.3 Local Development Grants Implementation and Service Delivery.......96
5.1.4 Monitoring & Evaluation and Service Delivery ....................................96
5.2 Discussion of Research Findings ................................................................. 97
5.2.1 Decentralized Planning and Service Delivery .......................................97
5.2.2 ..............99
5.2.3 Implementation and Service Delivery .................................................103
5.2.4 Monitoring & Evaluation and Service Delivery ..................................105
5.2.5 Service delivery....................................................................................107
5.3 Conclusions ................................................................................................108
5.3.1 Decentralized planning and Service Delivery .....................................108
5.3.2 Local Development Grant Budgeting and Service Delivery ...............108
5.3.3 Implementation and Service Delivery .................................................109
5.3.4 Monitoring and Evaluation and Service Delivery ...............................109
5.4 Recommendations ...................................................................................110
5.4.1 Decentralization and Service Delivery ................................................110
5.4.2 Budgeting and Service Delivery ..........................................................110
viii
5.4.3 Implementation and Service Delivery .................................................111
5.4.4 Monitoring and Evaluation and Service Delivery ...............................111
5.5 Limitations and Contributions of the Study ...............................................112
5.6 Areas for Further Research .......................................................................112
REFERENCES......................................................................................................... 114
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................... 122
RESEARCH TOOLS................................................................................................. 122
APPENDIX I: Questionnaire...............................................................................122
Appendix IV: Focus Group Discussion Interview Guide....................................134
Appendix V: Documentary Review Guide..........................................................136
Appendix VI: Observation Guide........................................................................137
Appendix VII: Selected LDG projects implemented 2009/10 in the study area . 138
Appendix VIII: ACCOUNTABILITY FORM D: PHYSICAL PROGRESSREPORT ..............................................................................................................141
Appendix IX: FORM E- ANNUAL QUARTERLY WORK PLAN July 2009 toJune 2010 .............................................................................................................142
Appendix X: FORM G - REPORT ON INVESTMENT INVENTORIES FOR FY2009/2010 ............................................................................................................144
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Wakiso District Conditional Grants (2006- 2011)
Figure 2: Local Dev
Figure 3: Conceptual framework: LDG management and service delivery 18
Figure 4: Distribution of Respondents by Age....................................................69
Figure 5: Distribution of Respondents by Level of Education............................70
Figure 6: Funds budgeted and released FY2008/9- 2011/12
x
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Showing Study Population 49
Table 2: Showing Summary of Data Collection Methods and Instruments.......51
Table 3: Showing the Validity Index..................................................................57
Table 4:
Table 5: Showing Response Rate.......................................................................64
Table 6: Distribution of Respondents by Level of Local Government ..........66
Table 7: Showing Category of Respondents .....................................................67
Table 8: Showing Sex of Respondents...............................................................68
Table 9: Showing Participation in Planning by Respondents............................71
Table 10: Level of Participation in Planning by Respondents.............................72
Table 11: Decentralized Planning and Service Delivery.....................................74
Table 12: Budgeting for the LDG in Wakiso District.........................................76
Table 13: LDG Implementation and service delivery in Wakiso.........................79
Table 14: Monitoring and evaluation for the Local Development Grant............83
Table 15: Showing Descriptive Statistics for Service Delivery...........................85
Table 16: s............................86
Table 17: Regression Model summary of LDG Management with Service
Delivery...............................................................................................93
xi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
CG Central Government
DDP District Development Plan
FGD Focus Group Discussion
FY Financial Year
IPFs Indicative Planning Figure
LDG Local Development Grant
LG Local Government
LGA Local Government Act
LGFC Local Government Finance Commission
LGMSD Local Government Management and Service Delivery
LOGICS Local Government Information Communication System
MoLG Ministry of Local Government
NPA National planning Authority
OBT Output Budgeting Tool
PPAs Programme Priority Areas
TPC Technical Planning Committee
SC Sub County
xii
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Introduction
This chapter gives an overview of the impact of local development
grants management on service delivery. In this study local development
grants management is conceived as the independent variable while
service delivery is the dependent variable. This chapter presents the
background to the study, statement of the problem, purpose, objectives of
the study, research questions, hypotheses, scope of the study,
significance, justification and operational definition of terms, all in
relations to the study variables mentioned above.
1.1 Background to the Study
Over the past decade, local development grants have emerged as a new
intervention in which specific actions are requested, received and paid
for. Performance based grants in intergovernmental fiscal transfers
system is not a new phenomenon worldwide though relatively few
countries are practicing it (Steffensen, 2009).
Many developing countries with a history of strong centralization in their
policymaking styles started to transfer new taxing and spending powers
to their sub national governments, with the aim of making the allocation
of public resources more efficient and effective. Furthermore,
2
decentralization efforts have had the explicit goal to involve the
participation of citizens in the definition of policy priorities (Carlos
Moreno, 2004). A number of countries have therefore embedded fiscal
incentives into their conditionals grants transfer system for years, to
stimulate funding in specific areas. This is done through conditional
grants, grant access conditions, minimum service standards and
requirements for specific actions to be undertaken in order to get access
to grants (Steffensen, 2010).
Performance-based funding, (also same as conditional grants) emerged in
the 1970s in the education sector of the United States and were
developed to improve the quality of education by funding results attained
rather than funding according to the size of an institution or standard
budgeting procedures. Today, conditional grants are employed by a
number of development organizations and governments with aim of
increasing accountability, efficiency and effectiveness of funded
programs and services (The Global Fund, 2009). Furthermore
governments are demonstrating growing interest in the measurement of
performance in the public sector to demonstrate value for money.
The conditional grants were first introduced in Uganda in 1995 to
promote fiscal decentralization stipulated in the 1993 Decentralization
policy. In response, Uganda has made a shift in the systems of
governance, from a centralized system of governance to a decentralized
3
one. The funding modality shifted from block grants to conditional and
unconditional grants. The 1995 Constitution of Uganda, (Article 193)
provides for three types of fiscal transfers namely; unconditional,
conditional and equalization grants. Conditional grants are the most
revenue, unconditional grants, 10.8 percent and equalization grants 3.14
percent (LGFC, 2010).
In Uganda, central government grant transfers to local governments
began in the advent of decentralization in the fiscal year 1993/94 with a
vote system. In the current decentralized system of local governance,
local development grants are one of the conditional grants transferred to
local governments as budget support. Fiscal decentralization therefore
became more pronounced in Uganda after the promulgation of the 1995
Constitution and more services were devolved to local governments and
the system of central transfers streamlined. From 2000, Uganda was
supported by International Development Agency through the Local
Government Development Programme I and II in the implementation of
the Decentralization policy through provision of local development
grants. This was piloted under the Local Government Development
Programme I and later rolled out under Local Government Development
Programme II with International Development Agency and development
Uganda budget and Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF).
4
Local development grants are meant for local governments to access
funds for investment in local development and poverty reduction,
particularly related to infrastructure improvements based on their
development plans (MoLG, 2011). From FY2006/7, government of
Uganda has fully financed local development grants using local resources
and now continues to fund local development grants to a tune of about
US$40 million annually. The decision by government to make local
development grants an integral part of the national budget ensures
sustainability of local development grants (Odero, 2004).
This study was guided by the Resource Dependency theory and Principal
Agent theory. These theories both argue for financial accountability,
equity in service delivery, prompt responsiveness to community concerns
by government and can best be achieved through creation and transfer of
administrative, fiscal, financial, political powers and responsibility from
the Centre to autonomous local governments in respect to planning and
budgeting, decision making, resource mobilization, utilization and
accountability (Scott, 2010).
The Resource Dependency theory suggests that power is based on the
control of resources that are considered strategic within the organization
and often expressed in terms of budgets and resource allocations
(Mudambi, 2007). The Resource Dependency theory proposes that
5
actors lacking in essential resources will seek to establish relationships
with (i.e. be dependent upon) others in order to obtain needed resources.
The local development grant therefore is an incentive based policy
instrument predicated on the resource dependency theory. This theory
puts forth that changes in resource availability will threaten organizations
and encourage adaptation for continued existence.
On the other hand, the principal agent theory explains how to best
organize relationships in which one party (the principal who is central
government in this case) determines the work, which another party (the
agent- in this case local government) undertakes (Eisenhardt, 1989). The
theory argues that under conditions of incomplete information and
uncertainty, which characterize most business settings, two agency
problems arise: adverse selection and moral hazard. Adverse selection is
the condition under which the principal cannot ascertain if the agent
accurately represents its ability to do the work for which it is being paid.
Moral hazard is the condition under which the principal cannot be sure if
the agent has put forth maximal effort. In this study, the principal agent
theory was also applied to clarify the issues arising in local development
grant management and service delivery. The principal agent theory
helps in determining the best incentives for both the principal and agent
in enacting a successful transaction, as well as seeking to reduce the
expenses that are related to any potential disagreements between the
broker and the client. This is the reason local governments and central
6
government in Uganda sign a contract for utilization of local
development grants every financial year. Therefore, these theories were
management and service delivery in local governments.
The general definition of a grant is simply; money transferred from one
organization to another. The concept underlying this study is derived
from the works of Cheema (1983) and Diana Conyers (2007) who define
financial decentralization as the transfer of power, authority and
responsibility to plan, make decisions, mobilization and utilization of
powers from central government to local governments. Conditional
grants are funds transferred for a specific purpose that may not be used
for any other purpose, while unconditional grants on the other hand, can
be used for any purpose the recipient deems fit. Conditional grants are
one of the intergovernmental transfers which are an essential component
of local government financing which in recent years, have increasingly
become a mechanism for transferring funds to external parties such as
local governments for the purpose of achieving particular government
policy objectives through efficient and effective service delivery
(Steffensen, 2010).
In the case of local governments in Uganda, grants are of two broad
categories: conditional grants and unconditional grants. Local
7
development grants are one of the conditional grants to local
governments that come as non-sectoral grants and discretionary grants.
Conditional grants can be given by the Provincial, Central and Federal
governments as well as by local governments (Anwar Shah, 2006). In
this case conditional grants to local governments in Uganda all come
through central government transfers.
In the implementation of local development grants, results are rewarded
with payments, aiming principally to resolve issues of access, utilization
and provider performance (World Health Organization, 2011). Local
development g utilization provides incentives to improve
predetermined performance actions or targets. In principal, local
development grants seek to change behaviors of individuals, institutions
and local governments and of the system itself in relation to service
delivery (World Health Organization, 2011). Local development grants
are non-sectoral conditional grants distributed on a formula basis to all
local governments in Uganda for investment in local infrastructure in
accordance with local needs as determined through local planning and
budgeting processes. Although all local governments are eligible to
receive local development grants, actual access is determined by
capacity, accountability, and performance conditionalities which are
designed to incentivize improvements in sustainable service delivery at
local level.
8
Since 1999, Uganda has been actively pursuing fiscal reforms for the
public sector. Although local government authorities play a significant
role in the delivery of key government services in Uganda, the resources
provided by central government to the local level are tightly controlled
by central government. To date, Uganda has achieved considerable
amount of decentralization. There has been a growing interest in the use
of national incentives to promote local government reform and improved
service delivery (MoLG, 2006). A demand has always existed in public
administration for tools and instruments that measure effectiveness,
responsiveness and efficiency of public administration. Observing the
trend of development conditional grants over five years in Wakiso
district, local development grants form a substantial proportion of
resources to the district as indicated in figure 1 below.
Local development grants are implemented such that local governments
are motivated to deliver services in compliance with set standards.
Measures are put in place to reward or sanction Local governments
according to their performance. Local governments are able to meet the
demands of their constituents and thereof fulfill their mandate through
the use of conditional grants from central government.
10
with a 20 percent bonus of local development grant and 20 percent
penalty for poor performance and static for average performance based
on performance measures set (MoLG, 2011). The purpose of local
development grants is to facilitate the attainment of the minimum service
delivery packages as set by government.
Anwar (2006) asserts that the key character of conditional grants is that
the extent to which local governments access transfers from central
government is conditioned upon their overall performance in utilization
of transfers. Nonetheless, before the local governments access local
development grant, which is discretionary, they have got to meet a set of
minimum requirements that ensure proper utilization of the funds. In
addition, an assessment of performance is done in retrospect to reward
local governments that perform well by giving them 20 percent more and
penalize local governments that perform poorly by giving them 20
percent less their local development grant allocation. Performance
measures provide an incentive for improving administration of service
delivery and resource management while delivering services. However,
there are provisions to support local governments (through the capacity
building grant and mentoring activities) to attain the indicators in a
sustainable manner.
These minimum conditions and performance measures are derived from
the Uganda laws and guidelines including; the Local Governments Act,
11
Local Government Finance and Accounting Regulations, Local
Government Procurement and Disposal Regulations, the National Gender
Policy, the National Environment Policy, as well as guidelines for
implementing sector specific conditional grants. The purpose of the
annual local government assessment exercise also promotes downwards
accountability and resource management at local government levels
(MoLG, 2011).
Local development grants are intended to provide incentives for local
governments to undertake specific activities and have guidelines that
specify the type of expenditures that can be financed by the grant and
demand attainment of certain results in service delivery. Local
development grants have also incorporated matching provisions requiring
the local governments to finance a specific percentage of expenditures
using their own resources i.e. at least 10 percent of the grant received.
This is indicated in figure 2 below.
13
Bridging this gap is the purpose of local development grants. The annual
performance reporting system (LoGICS) for monitoring grant utilization
is in place.
Service delivery is the provision of goods and services to all persons
especially those that cannot be provided by the private sector (Kotler,
2002). Service delivery is also referred to as the provision of services that
are fair, constant and dependable at the minimum cost and tailored to the
priorities and needs of the local people. However, service delivery seems
not to be significant improvement as most indicators are still below the
set national standards. Overall, the study seeks to examine management
of local development grants and its contribution to service delivery
improvement in Wakiso district.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Wakiso district local government receives local development grants
every financial year and yet the service delivery indicators are still poor.
Wakiso district local government has been getting rewards for improved
performance and service delivery according to the Local Government
Assessment reports over the years, the quality of service delivery
especially in the health and education sectors seem not to be significantly
improving (Wakiso District Local Government, 2010). It is evident that
the reward and motivation aspect of local development grants is not
realized because the indicative planning figures (IPFs) have been
14
reducing according to the statistics shown in Figure 2 above. The focus
of local development grants are on primary health care, primary
education, water and sanitation, feeder and access roads, agricultural
extension was aimed at promoting service delivery both as a means and
an end to decentralization (Okidi, 2008). Bearing in mind that local
development grants are meant to enhance and improve local governments
institutional performance for sustainable and decentralized service
delivery and ensure a full package of services is achieved according to
the set standards in sectors, this is raising questions to the practicability
of the reward system of the performance based grant system in Uganda
with reference to effective and efficient service delivery.
Wakiso district indicates that there are slight improvements in services
delivered; but the district has not achieved the set minimum packages in
service delivery set by central government. One example is sanitation
which cannot be complete without water. Wakiso district in its work plan
set out to improve access to safe water and provide adequate water and
sanitation facilities. In education, the pupil teacher ratio was at 60:1
against 40:1 standard; primary school completion rates have improved
from 29 percent to 81 percent; classroom-pupil is 1:48 against 1:40 set
by government; there is demand for health facilities to be constructed in
the district local government.
15
This study examines management of local development grants and
investigates its influence on service delivery in Wakiso district local
Government. It is expected that the more the proportion and growth of
the conditional grants to district local governments, the better the
services delivered. However, it is not clear whether local development
grants transferred to local governments over the years in Uganda have
translated into improvement in service delivery. Therefore,
understanding local development grants management and their role in
addressing the pertinent and priority local government problems is
critical, if local governments are to fulfill their mandate of service
delivery. It is for this reason that this study explored the relationship
between the local development grants and service delivery.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of local development
grants management on service delivery in Wakiso district local
government.
1.4 Objectives of the Study
i) To determine the extent to which decentralized planning for local
development grants influences service delivery in Wakiso district
local government.
16
ii) To assess the extent to which decentralized budgeting for local
development grant influences service delivery in Wakiso district local
government.
iii) To assess whether the implementation of local development grants
influence service delivery in Wakiso district local government.
iv) To assess whether monitoring and evaluation of local development
grants influence service delivery in Wakiso district local government.
1.5 Research Questions
i) To what extent does decentralized planning for local development
grants influence service delivery in Wakiso district local
government?
ii) To what extent does decentralized budgeting for local development
grants influence service delivery in Wakiso district local
government?
iii)How does implementation of local development grants influence
service delivery in Wakiso district local government?
iv) How does monitoring and evaluation of local development grants
influence service delivery in Wakiso district local government?
1.6 Hypotheses
H1: Decentralized planning for local development grants
significantly affects service delivery;
17
H2: Decentralized budgeting for local development grants
significantly affects service delivery;
H3: Implementation of local development grants significantly
affects service delivery;
H4: Monitoring and evaluation of local development grants
significantly affects service delivery.
1.7 Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework is hinged on the idea of (Amin, 2005) which
requires that a conceptual framework is relevant to adequately present the
relationship between the independent and dependent variables in a study.
18
Figure 3: Conceptual framework illustrating the relationship between
Local Development Grants management and Local Government service
delivery.
Local Development Grant Management (IV) Local Government ServiceDelivery (DV)
Source: Modified from Local Government Action Activists guide, 2012
Decentralised PlanningPlanning (what, how, when, where and who)
Effectiveness andefficiency of:
Health services,
Education services
Water and sanitationservices
Decentralised BudgetingResource mobilizationResource allocationResource spending/Expenditure
ImplementationParticipationGuidelinesTechnical capacity
Monitoring and EvaluationSupervision
Reporting
Monitoring andevaluation system
19
Referring to the conceptual framework for this study presented in figure
3 above, the independent variable is local development g
management, while the dependent variable is service delivery in local
governments. Anwar (2006) and Steffensen (2010) assert that the
conditional grants have influence on the delivery of social services to
local governments.
The independent variable is conceptualized to have four dimensions
namely; (i) decentralized planning; (ii) budgeting, (iii) implementation of
local development grants and (iv) monitoring and evaluation of local
development grants. The model above illustrates the relationship between
local development grants management and service delivery in local
governments. Decentralized planning for local development grants is
perceived to have an effect on the quality of services delivered. This
involves decision making over the local development g
by the relevant authorities and structures. This promotes participation
that enhances accountability and ownership of programmes and projects
by the communities (MoLG, 2006). It is for this reason a decentralized
approach to local government planning was adopted in Uganda.
Similarly the conceptual framework shows that budgeting for local
development grants influence service delivery in local governments.
Services examined included; health, education, water and sanitation.
Specifically, the way local development grants are mobilized; where it is
20
allocated; and how it is spent in the local government to deliver these
social services. The actual expenditure of local development grants is
what is referred to as implementation and this has a number of issues that
eventually affect the quality of goods and services provided to the
beneficiaries in local governments. This includes compliance and
adherence to set laws and guidelines; and technical capacity of local
governments to use the funds as it should. In this study, monitoring and
evaluation of local development grants is also perceived to include;
supervision, reporting and monitoring and evaluation. Service delivery is
perceived in terms projects implemented to deliver services to local
governments using local development grants. Specifically health,
education, water and sanitation projects are examined.
1.8 Significance of the Study
This study improves understanding on the contribution of local
development grants management and service delivery in Wakiso district
local government.
This study also contributes a valuable body of knowledge on local
development grants and how the identified grant management factors
influence service delivery. Therefore, adding onto the existing
knowledge on the subject and therefore form useful material for
academic and policy reference.
21
This study facilitates understanding in rationalization of sectoral
allocations and intra district disparities in terms of service delivery and
guide improvement of the programme and resource rationalization.
The research findings and recommendations provide government and
policy makers with information to enhance accountability and equity in
service delivery and improve on programme management in regard to
local development grants.
1.9 Justification of the Study
Local governments are given powers to deliver some services to citizens
according to the Constitution of Uganda and Local Government Act
(2007), Schedule II and to be able to fulfill this mandate; central
government transfers conditional grants such as local development grants
to local governments. The purpose of conditionality of the grants is to
ensure that national priorities are taken care of. Therefore, it was
important for this study to investigate how local development grants are
managed with a purpose of delivering services effectively and efficiently
to local governments. The researcher sought to find out whether local
development grants were creating improvement in service delivery in
Wakiso district.
22
1.10 Scope of the Study
The scope of this study is tackled in three dimensions; geographical
location of the area where the study was conducted, the content of what
the study covered and the timeframe of the study as described below.
The content the study analyzed was local development grants
management and service delivery in Wakiso district. It also explored how
management of local development grants (planning, budgeting,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation) influences local government
service delivery. The study also sought to find out how the planning and
budgeting processes influence allocation and access of local development
grant across sectors (health, education, water and sanitation) and
priorities in Wakiso district local government. It also analyzed how
implementation, monitoring and evaluation for local development grants
influence service delivery. The relationship of the local development
grant management and local government service delivery was examined
in the health, education and water sectors.
This study was conducted in Wakiso District Local government in
Uganda. It is located on coordinates: 00 24N, 32 29E. Wakiso District is
located in central region bordering Kampala city, Mpigi, Luwero,
Nakaseke, and Mityana districts in the North; Mukono in the east and
23
Kalangala district to the south. Wakiso district has a total area of
2,807.75 square kilometers, with an estimated population of 1,315,300
(Uganda Bureau of Statistics, 2010) growing at a rate of 4.1 percent per
annum. Wakiso district is made up of 4 counties, 15 sub counties, 1
Municipal Council and 4 Town Councils. The specific focus of the study
was Kira Town Council, Masulita sub county, Nsangi sub county and
Wakiso District Local Government.
Regarding the timeframe, the study covered a 3-year period i.e. financial
years 2008/9 to 2010/11. This timeframe was thought sufficient enough
to provide a sound analysis on the management of local development
grants and service delivery.
1.11 Operational Definitions of Terms and Concepts
Service delivery: Refers to the infrastructure, processes, systems and
services that are put in place by various providers for meeting the needs
of target communities. These facilities may include water supply and
sanitation services, educational and health facilities; road construction
and maintenance; power supply; and other physical infrastructure and
utilities.
Decentralization: it entails the transfer of planning, budgeting, decision
making and administrative authority from central to local government.
24
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction
This chapter reviewed literature and theoretical frameworks on local
development grants management and service delivery in local
governments, in relation to the study objectives and research questions.
The notion of making local development grants work to bring about
efficient and effective service delivery is one that should be earnestly
pursued. The theoretical frameworks that provide the basis for this study
were examined to ensure the work is academically sound and grounded.
In addition, the literature reviewed includes an exploration of local
development grants management in local governments in the context of
service delivery. Local development grants management dimensions are
perceived to influence service delivery in local governments. Various
sources of literature were reviewed; such as scholarly journals, text
books, government publications, reports, previous studies, statutory
instruments and council minutes were used to provide information for
this chapter. The study principally provided an understanding on the
management of the Local Development Grants and its relationships on
service delivery in Wakiso District Local Government.
25
2.1 Theoretical Review
While it is possible to profile a range of theories that could provide a
framework for a public administration study such as this, the researcher
approached the issue of theories from a relevance and applicability point
of view. This indicates that the theories and related issues were discussed
not just exploratory but focused to ground the work herein specifically
Local Development Grants management.
The resource dependency theory was one of the theories used for this
study. The basis of resource dependency theory posits that power is
based on control of resources that are considered strategic within the
organization and is often expressed in terms of budgets and resource
allocations (Ram Mudambi, 2007). The Resource Dependency theory
proposes that actors lacking in essential resources will seek to establish
relationships with (i.e. be dependent upon) others in order to obtain
needed resources. This questions the argument that Local Governments
are autonomous and have powers of planning and budgeting. In this case
the relationship between central government and local governments in
Uganda is based on the Resource Dependency Theory. Local
Development Grants are incentive based policy instrument predicated on
resource dependency theory. This theory puts forth that changes in
resource availability will threaten organizations and encourage adaptation
for continued existence.
26
According to UNDP, economic rationales for performance oriented
transfers stem from the emphasis on contract based management under
the new public management framework and strengthening demand for
good governance by lowering the transaction costs for citizens in
obtaining public services under the new institutional economics approach
(Anwar, 2006). In this case, because the leaders of public institutions are
significantly dependent on state appropriations, the theory postulates that
they will take the measures necessary to retain or enhance the institutions
funding, therein abide by the set conditions by central government. This
may involve encouraging more efficient resource allocation and
improving programme performance (Thomas L. Harnisch, 2011). This in
other words means that interdependence indirectly helps improve
performance since local government interest is funds (Casciaro Tiziana,
2005).
The Resource dependence theory focuses on the exercise of power,
control, and negotiation of interdependencies to secure a stable inflow of
vital resources and reduce uncertainty (Carpenter, 1992). This argument
is supported by the 1995 constitution of Uganda (Article 193, section 3)
that defines the utilization of the conditional grant to be determined by
both central government and local government through the planning and
budgeting processes (Republic of Uganda 1995). From a resource
dependence point of view, performance measurement systems; embedded
in Local Development Grants implementation, can be considered as tools
27
closely linked with the exercise of power, self-interest and political
advocacy (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978).
The other theory used in this study is the Principal-Agent theory that has
motivated consideration of conditional grants (such as Local
Development Grants) as one of the ways of paying institutions to deliver
services efficiently and effectively (Rena Eichler, Paul Auxila, John
Pollok, 2001). According to the principal agent theory, the financier is
the principal, who in this study is the central governemnt (through budget
support financing modalities such as local development grants).
The principal purchases the services from an agent, i.e. the Local
government. Because the principal cannot perfectly monitor the activities
of the agent, it has less-than-perfect information about what it is
purchasing. There may be questions about issues such as whether the
agent is providing services of adequate quality, whether the target
population is actually being served, or whether funds are being used
efficiently. Because intensive monitoring is prohibitively costly, another
option is to design a contract that provides incentives to the agent to
best interest to do so. This is in line with the policy instruments such as;
Local Government Act (1997) second schedule that stipulates the
functions and services of central government (part 1) and local
governments (part 2), the Local Government National Assessment
28
conducted annually and the LGMSD memorundum of understanding
signed between the central government and Local government on local
development grants utilisation. In the words of Tanzi (2000, p. 445):
go through many stages at which mistakes, indifference, passive
resistance, implicit opposition, and various forms of principal-agent
problems
Many tend to agree with this statement as an expirience local
governments go through while spending conditional grants. Consistent
with this theory, local development grants establish indicators of
performance that define what central government demands and that
gives local governments (agents) financial incentives for achieving
defined performance targets (defined in the performance based grant
system in Uganda). Because the payment mechanism rewards results,
institutions that provide services can be expected to examine the ways in
which they structure and organize service delivery and use resources.
Central government, (the principal) delegates decision-making
responsibilities to the local government (the agent) during planning and
budgeting processes but guided by conditionalities of use of local
development grants. problems arise in this relationship
those of central government. In other words, the subsidiary will act to
29
pursue its own interests, even when these diverge from those of the
institution as a whole (Mudambi, 2007).
2.2 Decentralized Planning for Local Development Grants and
Service Delivery
The decision making process through participatory, bottom up planning,
local needs focused at all levels of local governments is a very important
aspect of local development grants management (Steffensen, 2010). This
is in line with the principles of decentralization. Christine Wong and
West (1995), point out in their study that, setting conditions while
planning minimizes ambiguous decision making and tends to depend on
local leaders personal decisions. This is in agreement with the reason for
conditional grants. In Uganda, the legal instruments such as the
Constitution of Uganda, 1995 and Local Government Act 1997,
empowers the local governments with responsibility of delivering
services and promoting participatory decision making.
Steffensen (2010) contends that in planning and budgeting for local
development grants, for local governments, across and within sectors,
decision making and budgeting in the local government play a major role
in determining the efficiency and effectiveness of local governments in
delivering services to their citizens. The Constitution of the Republic of
Uganda (1995) and the Decentralization Policy empowers the local
governments, with the responsibility of service delivery and promotion of
30
popular participation and empowerment of local communities in decision
making on matters that concern them. Article 190 of the Constitution of
Uganda (1995) specifically provides that District/Municipal councils
shall prepare comprehensive and integrated development plans
incorporating the plans of lower local governments and thereafter submit
to the National Planning Authority.
Anwar (2006) asserts that there is always some degree of conflict among
priorities established by various levels of government and one way to
induce local governments to follow priorities established by central
government is for central government to use its spending power in
providing conditional grants. This is in agreement with the resource
dependency theory. Contrary to the above, by central government overly
getting involved in local government decision making, this biases the
system towards centralized outcomes and yet the grants are intended to
facilitate decentralized decision making for delivery of services.
Academics such as Wilde (1968); Scott (1952), Oates and Walace E
(1972) assert that the expenditure choices of local government are
determined by the preferences of local decision-makers subject to their
financial availability. The five year district development plans are the
basis of developing budgets. In Uganda, the Ministry of Finance,
Planning and Economic Development advises Local Governments of
their Indicative Planning Figures (IPFs), thus need to have incorporated
31
all activities intended to be undertake in the next financial years in local
government development plans. However, every District Development
Plan is resource constrained and this calls for careful prioritization and
rationalization of resources available.
Planning and budgeting processes are explicitly results-oriented. Local
governments set objectives, and identify outputs and activities to be
carried out over the five years. Alula Berhe Kidani (2011) does not
wholly agree with the above argument as he avers that, even where
resources are available, local governments are often not empowered to
decide on how to use them. This perpetuates a fiscal dependency on
central government that reinforces excessive upward accountability. On
the basis of the above discussion, it is clear that the principle agent theory
and resource dependency theory are two pillars upon which to understand
decision-making by managers (Mudambi, 2007).
2.3 Budgeting for Local Development Grants and Service Delivery
Exploring and understanding the nature of fiscal transfers is vital for
ensuring the efficiency and equity of local service provision. Local
governments should formulate development plans they are able to
finance and implement. First, the resource estimates should be realistic
based on what the local government expects to collect and receive from
central government and other sources. This implies that the budgets must
be balanced and local governments should have the technical, financial
32
and institutional capacity (internal or outsource) to implement these
plans. Local governments should also take into consideration the amount
of time available to implement the projects.
The local governments are mandated to collect revenue both locally and
from other sources, however, how local governments have used the fiscal
space is questionable given the restriction in own reven
evident that local governments largely rely and depend on transfers
received from central government (MoLG, 2011). Local development
grants are designed such that per capita allocation is based on local
government performance and determines whether local governments will
gain or lose local development grants. A 20 percent bonus or penalty is
applied according to local government performance. Local governments
are also conditioned to contribute at least 10 percent of the local
development grants as local contribution.
How resources are allocated is perceived to have a bearing on service
delivery. Available literature suggests that the authority that determines
the priority areas for spending the conditional grants is critical in
determining quality of services delivered (Wong et al. 1995). Literature
also suggests that in a decentralized government, services are
administered by local officials who are accountable to elected local
33
councils; however, limited discretion is noted in local officials
implementing their expenditure responsibilities (Boex, J., and Martinez-
Vazquez, J. 2004). Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic
Development in Uganda gives Local governments indicative budget
ceilings for the preceding financial year. High conditional grants imply
limited discretion for local governments on budget decisions (LGFC,
2010).
The sectoral negotiations for expenditure of conditional grants, is held
annually in Uganda and the aim is to provide a forum for national and
local governments to discuss and agree on the allocation of sector
conditional grants. These conditional grants consist of monies given to
local governments to finance programmes agreed upon between the
national and local governments. The entire negotiation process is
facilitated and chaired by the Local Governments Finance Commission,
and results into an agreed set of actions and grant allocation guidelines to
be adhered to by both national and local governments for the specific
sectors concerned (LGFC, 2010). While budgetary allocations to local
governments are notionally based on a set of objectives, local service
and modified by central government line ministries and Ministry of
Finance, Planning and Economic Development as part of central
development grants
have formulae used for equitable allocation of resources to local
34
governments. However, some flexibility is supposed to be maintained
through the bottom-up budgeting approach, whose aim is to incorporate
the needs of the lowest levels of local governments. It also integrates a
provision for local governments to reallocate funds after the budgetary
process is complete based on arising needs. The flexibility provision
allows local governments up to 10 percent elasticity for the reallocation
of sector budget funds based on local priorities. The provision aims not
only to ensure that individual local governments are able to meet specific
needs, but also serves as a means by which the central government can
evaluate the accuracy of sector budgeting. The rationale is that, if a large
percentage of local governments consistently reallocate funds from one
sector to another, there may be overfunding in one sector budget line and
underfunding in another (MoLG, 2010).
Theoretically, flexibility provides local governments an outlet through
which to communicate funding priorities to central government. The only
alternative route for local governments to spend outside their allocated
budget lines is by generating their own revenue, which they can then use
for locally prioritized needs (LGFC, 2010). Therefore what a local
government considers a priority may never be fully funded since the local
revenue collected has over time dwindled significantly. The
to local governments (MoLG 2010).
35
How each local government chooses to spend its available resources is
reflected in its annual work plan and budget. According to the 2008/2009
and 2009/2010 approved national budget estimates, 20.6 percent and
17.2 percent of the national budget was released to local governments
respectively. Although the amount of funds slightly increased from 1.078
to 1.178 Billion Ug Shillings the proportions decreased in the said years
(MoLG, 2013). However, Robin (2010) opines that experience has
shown that there is no one-to-one link between increases in public
spending and improvement in service delivery performance.
2.4 Local Development Grant implementation and Service
Delivery
The conceptual framework also depicts that, the available guidelines for
management, access and utilization of local development grants have
effect on services delivery.
and allocation of financial resources to improve basic service delivery is
pivotal. As the sphere of government closest to the community, and
responsible for the delivery of basic services, structures must exist to
allow for dialogue in respect to key priorities and challenges at the local
level.
36
Researchers such as Steffensen (2010) point out one universal concern
today that accountability relationship between local governments and
communities is still weak. And yet the regulatory reforms and
mechanisms for local governments encourage compliance. The
dependency of local governments on conditional grants affects
community service delivery. This is supported by the resource
dependency theory that asserts that local governments will always abide
by the conditions of central government in utilization of the grant since it
is the major source of financing in service delivery.
Uganda has made significant progress in fiscal decentralization. Its legal
and institutional framework is well defined i.e. the 1995 Constitution,
Local Government Act (1997), Local Government finance regulations,
procurement guidelines, etc. Organizations and governments perform a
number of activities in environments that require regulation. Like any
other country, each has its own laws and regulations which vary
according to the social, economic, political systems in place. Local
development grants have implementation guidelines for local
governments documented in the LGMSD Operational Manual 2011.
These guidelines are entrenched in the legal instruments for compliance.
These legal instruments include; the Constitution of Uganda, Local
Government Act 1997, Local Government Finance and Accounting
Regulations, 2007.
37
Local government officials tend to substantially be constrained in
responding to local needs by the existence of inflexible central
government guidelines and conditionalities attached to the centralized
financing of local government service. Watson (2003) critiques that since
local governments are highly dependent on allocations from central
government to fund their core responsibilities; the limited discretion
accorded them as a result of the system of central government allocations
is seen as a major impediment to assuring the adequate, efficient and
equitable service delivery to local governments.
In the most general terms, capacity consists of a local government's
ability to solve its problems and achieve its objectives and goals.
According to Carnegie (2000), capacity of local government includes
staff competence and asserts that organizations are made up of people
who are linked in a formal structure guided by managerial leadership for
accomplishment of set goals. UNDP (2005) contends that a coherent
decentralization reform must be designed in such a way that financial
resources and fiscal competencies assigned to local governments match
their tasks and responsibilities. This view is supported by Uganda Debt
Network (2003) by Mukono district where communities argued that local
n skilled staff hampers ability to
plan and implement projects and programmes for service delivery. These
needs should be addressed first before tackling funding challenges in the
38
local government as funding cannot resolve these issues. Capacity of
local government to implement the decentralized system of governance is
critical for achieving success. Okidi et al., (2008) argues that, there are
severe capacity gaps in a majority of local governments. This has
perpetuated the problem of coordination between the central authorities
and local governments and inequality in levels of development. But even
if local governments have available resources and competencies, they
often still lack the necessary capacities to effectively utilize them. This
includes the capacities of effective financial management and accounting
and the capacities to link budget with providing effective and efficient
infrastructure and other public services at local level. Like Bischoff, Ivo;
Blaeschke, Frédéric (2013) argue, the use of conditional grants may then
be justified.
However, Ribot (2008) notes that decentralized fiscal resources must be
significant and sufficient to cover the costs of decentralized
responsibilities. Following this assertion, the proportion of the
conditional grant is a key factor in delivering efficient services in local
government. While others argue that, what the grant can do in delivering
efficient and effective services is what matters. Therefore, examining
how the proportion of local development grants affect service delivery in
local government performance remains important. Capacity building is a
critical component of the implementation of the local development grant
39
and it is intended to enhance capacity of local governments to fulfill their
mandates through meeting their capacity building needs (MoLG, 2011).
2.5 Monitoring and Evaluation of the Local Development Grant
Participatory monitoring is critical in financial accountability. Therefore
involvement of communities in monitoring and evaluation is essential for
accountability and service delivery (Uganda Debt Network 2003).
Onyach Ola in Okidi (2008) argues that continuous monitoring and
evaluation overtime has promoted a series of refinements of the local
government development programmes; leading to substantial
improvements in local government planning, resource allocation,
investments, management of development resources especially through
increased transparency and decision making. However, Williamson Tim
(2003) argues that multiplicity of funding sources undermines planning
and target setting.
Local development grants ensure that funding decisions are based on a
transparent assessment of results against time-bound targets (The Global
Fund, 2009). It is therefore important to note that the basis of the
disbursement of local development grants is increasingly on the
achievement of pre-agreed output performance targets and process
benchmarks within an agreed time frame. Based on the aforementioned
statement, local development grants have put in place monitoring and
reporting mechanisms to measure progress towards achievement of
40
performance targets set. It is worth noting that local development grants
are monitored and evaluated for four major reasons: i.e. as a management
tool; for documenting lessons learned; for policy reforms; and for impact
evaluation.
The Local Government Information and Communication System
(LOGICS), which is the monitoring and evaluation system, which was
developed to monitor the performance of local governments in areas of
administration and service delivery in Uganda. The annual performance
process and development grant reporting tools for monitoring grant
utilization are in place. Annual performance assessment overtime has
successfully measured the performance of local governments in a robust
and standardized manner. This is a very useful tool in promoting local
performance in service delivery (Steffensen, 2009).
During the planning process, local governments are mandated to prepare
monitoring plans as part of the five-year local government development
plans. This monitoring plan guides in ascertaining whether the local
government is on the right track in attaining set objectives. It should be
noted that these are mainly process indicators and this is a weakness.
Other monitoring tools include; Accountability form D that monitors the
physical progress on a quarterly basis; the LDG financial summary sheet
A that tracks expenditure by description. The Annual Quarterly work
41
plan Form E guides on what to monitor. The output/outcome/impact
monitoring reports (Form F) submitted at end of every financial year
(FY), is intended to capture investment outputs in terms of numbers of
facilities created, size of structure in case of construction and water
tanks; their outcome and impact on the people; number of beneficiaries
by sex. The other important monitoring reporting tool is Form G: Reports
on investment inventories. This helps local governments to compile all
investments implemented and funded by local development grants,
completed or incomplete by status during the FY. It takes stock of local
development grants disbursed and investments completed (MoLG, 2011).
The output budgeting tool (OBT) is another monitoring tool that is used
to track implementation of work plans against released funds, however
does not measure impact achieved from the resources spent.
2.6 Service Delivery in Local Governments
In this study, service delivery is measured by two factors: efficiency and
effectiveness; which are important for any organization (Diana Marieta
Mihaiu, Alin Opreana, Marian Pompiliu Cristescu (2010). This is in line
with the value for money concept of service delivery supported by
LGMSD programme where the local development grant is expended
(MoLG 2011). The study examined health, education, water and
sanitation services in Wakiso district.
42
According to Wen (1998), the traditional motives for conditional grants
are to promote equity by ensuring adequate quantities of certain public
services across the local government. Steffensen (2010) argues that the
experience of Brazil and Latin America shows that provision of
conditional grants to local governments over time has enhanced
improvement in service delivery. As compared to traditional financing
mechanisms, performance incentives encourage and enable good
governance, transparency, and accountability (Steffensen, 2010).
An organization has a set of objectives which it has to fulfill within the
available resources. How far it is able to achieve its goals/objectives with
minimum utilization of resources determines its effectiveness and
efficiency levels respectively. Efficiency is concerned with the
investment. Effectiveness is referred to as the extent to which objectives
have been achieved and the relationship between the intended impact and
the actual impact of an activity. It includes: quality of finished activity or
investment product (with reference to adherence to standards); utilization
of finished investment; operation and maintenance considerations and
budgeted for. This is in line with the Ministry of Local Government
(2011) that underscores that, to measure effectiveness of local
development grants, local governments and its collaborators will monitor
to establish whether the projects and activities have been done and in the
right way. Also to check whether the completed projects are operational
and serving the planned purpose.
43
meeting organizational goals. Effectiveness is an output measure and
looks at what the organization achieves in terms of its objectives
(Mihaiu, Opreana, Cristescu, 2010). Effectiveness is the application of
human effort to bring about the desired results. This is in agreement with
the MoLG (2011) that asserts that, to evaluate local development grants
(for efficiency), local governments will establish whether the project
implemented is being utilized by the intended beneficiaries to the
expected level and has achieved its objective and created an impact.
Efficiency is the proportion of total organizational resources that
contribute to productivity during the production process. The more
resources unused during the production process, the higher the efficiency.
The situation, organizational resources refers not only to inputs used in
delivery of outputs but also related human effort. It considers output in
relation to input.
To monitor efficiency, a local government establishes whether the
process through which a project is implemented is consistent with the
accepted rules and regulations and is cost effective MoLG (2011).
Efficiency is therefore capability of utilizing a minimum level of inputs
to produce a maximum level outputs (goods and services) with the least
amount of wastage in the shortest possible time. Steffensen (2010)
emphasizes the conditional grants are provided as transfers, where the
aim of the central government is to oblige local governments to supply a
44
minimum quantity or standard of certain public goods. The conditional
grants such as local development grants in Uganda are aimed at
promoting a positive change in service delivery in local governments.
They are particular meant to promote strong incentives for local
governments and to improve key performance areas. Therefore,
conditional grants enhance improvement in management, capacity and
organizational learning and hence improve accountability (Steffensen,
2010).
Literature available from Steffensen (2010) and Blaeschke et al (2010)
suggest that inefficiencies exist in local government and thus the need for
conditional grants since there are proven benefits of conditional grants to
Local Governments in terms of performance outcomes, strengthened
management systems and that they help improve the institutional
architecture of the Local Government sectors by linking expenditure of
public funds to performance. The aforementioned justifies the argument
of Eichler et al., (2001) that the primary objective of conditional grants is
to provide support to local governments to deliver efficient quality
services.
2.7 Summary of Literature Review
Conclusively, literature suggests that there are still gaps in the
information as to whether local development grants management affects
service delivery in local government. A strong argument coming out is
45
that where resources are available, local governments are often not fully
empowered to decide on how to use them and this may jeopardize service
delivery in local government. This negatively affects the realization of
decentralization policy objectives of decision making by local
governments.
A sizeable number of researchers argue that the dominant decision of
central government in local government biases the system towards
centralized outcomes and yet the grants are intended to facilitate
decentralized decision making. It is also noted that decentralized fiscal
resources must be significant and sufficient to cover the costs of
decentralized responsibilities, in principal this is what local development
grants do. However, literature also cites that the design of the
intergovernmental transfer system affect the dependency on central
government for the services local governments have to provide and these
transfers affect the local revenue raising ability of local governments.
Therefore the conditionalities of local development grants affect service
delivery.
46
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction
This chapter presents a description of research methodology that was
used to carry out the study. It covered the research design, study
population, determination of sample size, sampling techniques and
procedures, data collection methods, data collection instruments, validity
and reliability of research instruments, procedure of data collection, data
analysis and measurement of variables.
3.1 Research Design
The study applied a cross sectional study design that was quantitative and
qualitative. This was combined with descriptive design which describes
the contribution of the independent variables to dependent variables. A
case study approach was adopted for reasons identified by Kothari (2009)
who suggests that the advantage of a qualitative analysis is that it
analyses an entire social unit. It also facilitates a thorough understanding
of the phenomena. However, a case study approach gives an in depth
understanding of complex factors that may be working within a social
unit because it provides clues and ideas of understanding complex
behavior and situation in specific detail (Bhandarkar, 2003). Therefore
the case study approach provided an in depth description and analysis of
local development grants in delivering services to local governments.
47
3.2 Study Population
A study population should be one that is affected by the problem under
investigation and enables generalization of the findings to the entire
population and leads to the selection of a sample that will not destroy the
characteristics of the elements of the entire population (Amin, 2005). The
study targeted policy makers and technical staff in Wakiso district local
government involved in the management of the local development grant.
This data was obtained from the personnel department records and
district Local council office. The policy makers comprise of councilors
from the district. The study targeted technical staff that are members of
technical planning committees, councilors, and technical staff at district
who occupy strategic positions which have a direct bearing on
management of conditional grants in the local government. This category
of study population constituted a core of decision makers in regard to
resources in local government and service delivery.
Given the fact that district and sub county councilors are representatives
of the communities, and they also reside in the communities, they were
deemed appropriate to give representative views of their communities.
The study targeted three sub counties representing 12 percent of local
governments in Wakiso district. Therefore the selection of the sample for
this study was selected based on the aforementioned population.
Although the study had a target population of 89 respondents in the
48
sampled areas, a sample size of 73 respondents were selected. The
sampling techniques used are outlined below.
3.3 Determination of the Sample Size
Kothari (1985) asserts that a sample size of any study must be large
enough to give a confidence interval of desired width and therefore the
sample size was chosen by a logical process. The sample consisted of one
conveniently selected district local government (Wakiso). The sample
size selection was guided by Krejcie and Morgan (1970) tables cited by
Barifaijo and Basheka (2010).
Therefore a sample of 73 respondents was selected from a sampling
frame constructed from an up to date list of the categories mentioned
above, each constituting a stratum of four (4) local governments of
Masulita, Nsangi, Kira Town Council, and Wakiso District Local
government as shown in table 1 below.
49
Table 1: Showing Study Population and Sample Size
Category of Respondents Population
Size
Sample
Size
Sampling
Technique
District councilors 34 30 Systematic random
sampling
Sectoral committees
members
15 12 Purposive sampling
Sub county chiefs 3 3 Purposive sampling
Sub county chairpersons 3 3 Purposive sampling
Sub county Technical
Planning committee
members
15 12 Purposive sampling
District technical planning
committee members
12 10 Purposive sampling
Project Management
Committees
5 3 Purposive sampling
Total 87 73
Source: Researcher
3.4 Sampling Techniques and Procedures
The researcher a technique that was appropriate and relevant for the
study was used i.e. purposive sampling and systematic random sampling,
as described below.
50
In this study purposive sampling technique was applied to select subjects
that were considered to be relevant for the study. However, judgment of
the investigator was more important than obtaining a probability. The
purposive sampling technique, also called judgment sampling, was the
deliberate choice of an informant due to the qualities the informant
possesses. It is a non- random technique. The results of purposeful
sampling are usually expected to be more accurate than those achieved
with an alternative form of sampling. Therefore, in this study, sub
counties and target category of respondents where purposively selected to
include those that are easy to reach to save time.
Systematic random sampling technique was also used. This was obtained
by choosing an element at random from the elements and selecting every
kth consecutive element. It is a convenient and easier way to select and to
administer than a random or stratified random sampling because it has an
appeal through spreading the sample evenly over the population (Cochan,
1946).
3.5 Data Collection Methods
This study collected both qualitative and quantitative type of data from
two sources i.e. primary and secondary sources as discussed below.
51
Table 2: Showing Summary of Data Collection Methods and
Instruments
Types of
Data
Data
source
Research
Method
Instruments Remarks
Quantitative Primary
Self-
administered
Questionnaires
Structured
questionnaires
Efficiency,
consistency,
fairness.
Qualitative Primary Key Informant
Interviews
Interview
guide
Knowledgeable
of the subject
matter
Structured
Interviews
Interview
guide
Ease of
comparison,
Focus Group
Discussion
Interview
guides
In-depth and
varied views
Observation Observation
Guides
Evaluate
physical aspects
Secondary Documentary
review
Documentary
review Guide
Insight into
critical subject
issues
52
Three methods of data collection are usually used for social research;
questionnaire, observation and interview. This study was social in nature
and therefore these three methods were used to collect the primary data
for the study i.e. interview (appendix 1), questionnaire guide (appendix
2) and observation (Appendix 5). Questionnaire survey, face to face
interviews, observation and document analysis were used as tools for
collecting data. The selection of these tools was guided by the nature of
data collected. Secondary data was obtained through documentary
reviews.
A questionnaire is survey method that utilizes a standardized set or list of
questions given to individuals or groups, the results of which can be
consistently compared and contrasted. On the other hand, structured and
self -administered questionnaires were used to collect primary data in
order to ensure organized procedures and control of the scope of
responses within the objectives and research questions of the study. The
questionnaires were designed and administered to sampled technical
officers, the interview guide was used for sampled councilors, and focus
group discussion was conducted for technical planning committees and
project management committees. Self-administered questionnaires were
distributed to 73 respondents. As recommended by Sekaran (2005) and
Barifaijo et al (2010), both open ended and closed ended questions where
included in the questionnaire to ensure variety of responses with a wider
53
and true opinions from respondents. The questionnaires were distributed
in Wakiso District, Kira Town Council, Masulita and Nsangi sub
counties.
Structured interviews were preferred for this study because they are more
effective in both quality of information obtained and efficiency during
the interview process. They also enhanced consistency since all
respondents were treated the same and made comparison between
responses possible since the same questions and response evaluation
options were used. Fairness was also enhanced because all respondents
were treated objectively and structured interviews also enabled
documentation of views consistently and objectivity in the interview
process. Key informant interviews were conducted to targeted
respondents with specific skills and knowledge in the subject matter.
The researcher used face to face interview method as recommended by
Sekaran (2003) and Barifaijo et al. (2010) to gather in-depth data through
direct verbal interaction. The interviews, where conducted with the
technical planning committees of the local governments selected in
Wakiso district for the study. Amin (2005) argued that interviews help
the researcher in getting first-hand information, clarify the questions by
54
using the appropriate language, clear doubts, and establish rapport and
probe more information from the respondents.
The self-administered questionnaire is a questionnaire that a respondent
completes by his/herself. Care was taken in the design of the
questionnaires to ensure clarity. Questions were designed to measure
dichotomous responses such as, yes or no, and responses on an interval
level such as Likert scale (bipolar 1-5 ratings). Open-ended questions
were also used in the questionnaires, though these required more time to
read. Self-administered questionnaires offer researchers the potential to
reach a large number of respondents. However, the researcher was
careful that, unlike interviewing respondents or administering
questionnaires in person, a high response rate was not likely, so the
researcher targeted a high volume of responses, a much higher number of
questionnaires were distributed.
Secondary data was collected through documentary review and analysis.
Documentary analysis technique was used to obtain an insight into local
development grants management in Wakiso district local government.
Such documents included; Wakiso District and sub county development
plans, district and sub county budgets, council and standing committee
minutes, programme reports, Technical Planning Committee minutes,
55
grant guidelines and operational procedures, LDG reporting forms. A
combination of both primary and secondary data has enriched this study.
Observation was a technique used to verify whether local development
grants projects were indeed providing the services they were meant to.
The following projects where visited: Construction of a 2 classroom
block at Ssumbwe P/S Wakiso Sub-county Ssumbwe Parish, Kawanda
Health Centre II at Nabweru Kawanda Parish, and a 10,000-litres-water-
harvesting tank for Lube Health Centre II.
3.6 Data Collection Instruments
Data collection instruments used corresponded to data collection methods
identified for this study above. These instruments used included; self-
administered questionnaires, interview guide, observation guide and
documentary review guide. The questionnaire was used to collect
primary data from the respondents. An examination and review was
conducted on development plans, budgets, and annual reports, both at
district and sub counties guided by the documentary review guide. This
was complemented by observation on selected LDG projects.
Questionnaires were used for this study to collect information from key
informants since the study was concerned with variables that cannot be
56
observed directly such as experiences, views, perceptions of respondents.
Such information was best collected through questionnaires. The
respondents for the sample were quite big and the time was limited
rendering the questionnaire the ideal data collection tool. Given the
nature of respondents who are busy and scattered this was an ideal
approach and instrument to collect data.
The researcher used an interview guide as recommended by Barifaijo et
al. 2010, and Sekaran (2005) to obtain data from policy makers and
technical staff. The interview guide helped the interviewer to concentrate
on the topic of discussion, it was also flexible and easy to handle. It
allowed face to face interactions and clarification on contentious issues
which arose.
Documentary analysis was used to enable the researcher compare
findings from primary data on the same topic (Amin 2005). The
researcher sourced documents from, Journals, the internet text books and
any other published source of relevant information.
57
3.7 Validity and Reliability
Validity refers to how accurately instruments capture data that gives
meaningful inferences (Mugenda and Mugenda, 2003). This ensured that
the instruments used yielded relevant and correct data.
Table 3: Showing the Validity Index
Number of Respondents Total Number of Items CVI
56 64 0.875
Source: Primary Data
The instruments used were tested by two experts for ambiguity, difficult
and relevancy of questions to ensure construct, content and face validity.
In addition, content validity index (CVI) for the questionnaire was
computed using the following formula.
CVI = Number of items declared valid by judges
Total number of items
CVI= n/N
Where n= items that rated relevant
58
N= total number of items
If the CVI for the questionnaire was above 0.7, which was recommended
by Nunnally (1967) cited by Kent (2001), the questionnaire was
considered suitable for collecting data.
Reliability refers to the degree to which the instruments consistently
measure whatever it is measuring (Amin 2005: 293). The Cronbach`s
items. An instrument is reliable if it produces the same results whenever
it is repeatedly used to measure trait or concept from the same
respondents even by other researchers. To ensure reliability of research
instruments, the questionnaires were pretested and the necessary
adjustments were made. To pretest the questionnaires, a pilot test was
administered on 17 respondents in Soroti District local government and
the results subjected to Cronbach alpha reliability; a test of internal
consistency.
Nunnally and Bernstein (1971) recommend that the reliability of the
instrument should be about or above 0.7. Besides, the interview guide
was piloted on purposively selected respondents and adjustments made
before the study.
coefficient test as stated in the following formula:
60
3.8 Procedure of Data Collection
A field assistant administered the questionnaires to the identified
respondents through face to face interviews by help of the interview
guides. Focus group discussions were conducted for key respondents
because of their roles in local development grants management in
Wakiso district; (technical planning committees, user committees,
standing committees). A review of relevant documents based on the
theme of the study was done. Data was collected from the selected lower
local governments in Wakiso district local government from 73
respondents. Qualitative data was collected from the respondents by the
research assistants using questionnaires, interviews and focus discussion
groups.
3.9 Data Management and Analysis
Two types of analyses were conducted i.e. quantitative and qualitative
analyses. The following subsections explain the analyses in detail.
The quantitative data collected was compiled, sorted edited and coded to
have the required quality, accuracy and completeness. It was entered into
the computer for analysis using Statistical Package for Social Sciences
to measure the
relationship between local development grants management and service
delivery. A correlation close to +1 or -1 showed that there was very
61
strong relationship between the variables whereas a correlation close to 0
showed a weak or no relationship. Correlation analysis was used to
determine the change in variables. The coefficient of determination was
used to determine the magnitude of variance in local development grants
management and service delivery. The significance of the correlation
results was to determine whether to accept or reject the hypothesis.
Besides, regression analysis was also run to explain how local
development grants management affects service delivery.
In qualitative analysis, content analysis was used to edit the data and
reorganize it into meaningful shorter sentences. This was then presented
as quotations to supplement the quantitative data in order to have a clear
interpretation of the results.
The instruments were piloted in the district of Soroti and modified to
improve validity and reliability coefficients of 86 percent. Items with
validity and reliability coefficient of at least 70 percent are considered
reliable and valid (Kathuri, et al, 1993).
3.10 Measurements of the Research Variables
Local development grants management was measured using the
dimensions of decentralised planning, decentralised budgeting,
62
implementation and monitoring and evaluation. All these measures were
anchored on a 5- point likert scale of 1-strongly agree, 2-agree, 3-
undecided, 4-disagree, and 5-strongly disagree. However focus group
discussions gave an insight and analysis of the issues in the study.
The ethical problem in this study was the privacy and confidentiality of
the respondents. Given the role that research plays in shaping public
administration area, the researcher made every effort to ensure that issues
were truthfully presented, and handled meticulously throughout the
research process, while maintaining objectivity. The researcher from time
to time sought guidance from the academic supervisors. Every effort was
made to acknowledge sources of information consulted or utilized in the
course of the research.
63
CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF
RESULTS
4.0 Introduction
This chapter gives the presentation, analysis and interpretation of the
results of the study. The trend of the discussion is focused on the
relationship between and among the study variables in an attempt to
answer the research questions. The variables of the study and their
percentages are presented in tables, graphs and statistical tests to show
the relationship between research variables. Descriptive statistics are
presented later in the chapter to explore the results pertaining to the study
based on the research objectives as stated below:
i) To determine the extent to which decentralized planning for local
development grants influences service delivery in Wakiso District
local government.
ii) To assess the extent to which decentralized budgeting for local
development grants influences service delivery in Wakiso district
local government.
iii) To assess whether the implementation of local development grants
influence service delivery in Wakiso district local government.
iv) To assess whether monitoring and evaluation of local development
grants influences service delivery in Wakiso district local government.
64
4.1 Response Rate
Frederick and Wiseman (2003) assert that a response rate has to be
presented in research findings as they present the validity of the study
and failure to do so put the validity of the study findings into question.
Response rate was frequently used to compare survey quality. The study
targeted a sample of 73 respondents. A total of 73 questionnaires were
distributed and 56 questionnaires were received back thus, accounting for
77 percent response rate. This is shown in table 5 below.
Table 5: Response Rate
Category Population Sample
Size
Response
Rate
District councilors 34 17 94 percent
Sectoral committees members 15 12 80 percent
Sub county chiefs 3 3 100 percent
Sub county chairpersons 3 3 100 percent
Sub county Technical Planning
committee members
15 9 60 percent
District technical planning
committee members
12 10 83 percent
Project Management Committees 5 3 100 percent
Total 89 73 77 percent
Source: Primary data
65
According to Amin (2005), for a valid research to be conducted, a
minimum of 30 participants are required for the study. From table 5
above, the findings indicated that all categories of respondents, except
one district councillor participated in the study, therefore accounting for
77 percent participation by the local government members of Wakiso
district.
4.2 Background Characteristics of Respondents
This section examines the characteristics of the study respondents. This
section gives the number of people who responded to the study with
regards to the characteristics of the respondents in relation to the Local
Government, category of respondents, sex, age, level of education,
participation in planning for local development grants, and the level of
participation. This was done to enable the researcher have an
understanding of the respondents characteristics and form appropriate
judgment on the research findings.
Frequency table was used to present and analyse data on name of local
government of the respondents. This is illustrated in table 6 below.
66
Table 6: Distribution of Respondents by Level of Local
Government
Level of Local
GovernmentFrequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
District 16 28.6 28.6 28.6
Town council 11 19.6 19.6 48.2
Sub-county 29 51.8 51.8 100.0
Total 56 100.0 100.0
Source: Primary data
From table 6 above, the results indicated that half (51 percent) of the
respondents were from Sub-county, while 29 percent were from districts.
Further analysis from our data indicated that 20 percent of the
respondents were from Town Council. The justification is that most of
the local government grants are channelled to development activities
which are implemented at the sub-county level.
Frequency table 7 below shows analysis of data by category of the
respondents.
67
Table 7: Category of Respondents
Category of
RespondentsFrequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Technical staff 41 71.4 71.4 71.4
Politician 15 28.6 28.6 100.0
Total 56 100.0 100.0
Source: Primary data
From table 7 above, the results indicated that 71 percent of the
respondents were technical staff, while 29 percent were politicians. The
justification is that most of the local government grants are handled by
technical people and also the grants are mainly for technical activities
both at the district, town council, and sub-county levels.
Frequency table was used to present and analyse data on the sex of
respondents. This is illustrated in table 8 below. Over half (55 percent) of
the respondents were males while only 45 percent were females. Further
technical officers were males and majority (60 percent) of the politicians
were males. The justification is that most of the local government staff is
male with few female staff.
68
Table 8: Sex of Respondents
Sex of
RespondentsFrequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Male 31 55.4 55.4 55.4
Female 25 44.6 44.6 100.0
Total 56 100.0 100.0
Source: Primary data
Frequency table was used to present and analyse data on the age of
respondents and illustrated in Figure 1 below. Figure 1 below reveals that
half (52 percent) of the respondents were aged between 30 to 40 years
while those aged 41-59 constituted 29 percent. Further analysis shows
that there was no technical staff aged 60+ years except politicians who
formed 4 percent of the respondents. This is in agreement since the
retirement age for public officers; 60 years.
71
Frequency table was used to present and analyse data on participation in
planning by respondents. This is illustrated in table 9 below.
Table 9: Participation in Planning by Respondents
Participation
in PlanningFrequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Yes 52 92.8 92.8 92.8
No 4 7.2 7.2 100.0
Total 56 100.0 100.0
Source: Primary data
From table 9 above, the results indicated that majority (93 percent) of the
respondents participated in planning for their respective local
governments, while only 7 percent did not participate in local
government planning. The justification is that all local government
departments always develop departmental activities and budget forecasts,
which are to be approved by the district local government Council.
Frequency table was used to present and analyse data on level of
participation in planning by respondents. This is illustrated in table 10
below.
72
Table 10: Level of Participation in Planning by Respondents
Participation in
Planning Frequency Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
District 16 28.6 28.6 28.6
Sub county 34 60.7 60.7 89.3
Town council 6 10.7 10.7 100.0
Total 56 100.0 100.0
Source: Primary data
Results From table 10 above, indicated that majority (61 percent) of the
respondents participated in planning at sub-county level, while 29
percent participated in planning at the district level. Further analysis from
the results also indicated that only 10 percent of the respondents
participated in planning at town council level. This implied that majority
(61 percent) of the respondents participated in planning at sub-county
level. The justification is that most of the local government activities are
carried out at the sub-county level.
Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the variables under study. Data
on decentralization, budgeting, implementation, monitoring, evaluation,
and service delivery were collected b
understanding of the local government operations. The data was
presented in tabular form below.
73
Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the impact of decentralization
on service delivery. Data on the impact of decentralization on service
delivery local
government operations.
It is even more viable when planning is done with community
participation, as defined in the decentralization policy of Uganda.
(John Okidi and Madina Guloba, 2006) explains that
decentralisation entails the transfer of planning, decision making and
administrative authority from central to local government. This enhances
ownership and sustainability of the project and activity outcomes.
Results from the analysis on table 11 below indicate that participatory
planning by communities was notably done as strongly agreed by 11
percent and agreed by 43 percent of the respondents. This result indicates
that participatory planning is not done well at all levels of the Local
governments. However, contrary to this expectation it was noted from the
discussions and key informant interviews that community participation in
planning was still weak. This was said to be limited due to resource
constraints to reach all villages and cells. Discussions held with the
selected Project Management Committee members revealed that they did
74
not participate in planning in the village and parish levels but only during
implementation and maintenance of Local Development Grant projects.
Table 11: Decentralized Planning and Service Delivery
Decentralised Planning for
the LDG
Percentage of Respondents
Strongly
AgreeAgree Undecided Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
1. Decentralised Planning
for the LDG has improved
equitable service delivery
17.9 66.1 12.5 3.6 0
2. Decentralised planning
has consistently improved
over time
17.9 57.1 19.6 5.4 0
3. Bottom up planning for
the LDG is always followed
for the LDG
17.9 41.1 25.0 14.3 1.8
4. Community participates
in planning for the LDG10.7 42.9 25.0 17.9 3.6
Source: Primary data
It was remarkable to note that majority of the respondents (18 strongly
agreed) and 66 percent acknowledged that decentralised planning had
improved service delivery in Wakiso since they can see the physical
investments of local development grants that now serve the communities.
75
This is in harmony with the observation of local development grant
projects seen such as the distribution of desks to Bbaale Wasswa primary
school in Bbaale Mukwenda Parish, Masuliita Sub County; this has
improved quality of primary education.
serious challenges in education especially sitting facilities in school not
until the district procured desks using local development grants, our
a
member of the focus group discussion said.
Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the impact of local
development grant budgeting on service delivery. Data on the impact of
local development grant budgeting on service delivery was collected
ng of local government operations.
Analysis was done on the responses obtained on the dimensions of local
development grants budgeting that included; local development grant
mobilization, allocation and spending in Wakiso district. The objective
was to assess the extent to which local government budgeting for local
development grants influences service delivery in Wakiso district.
76
Table 12: Budgeting for the Local Development Grant in Wakiso
District Local Government
Local Development Grant
Budgeting
Percent of respondents
Strongly
Agree
Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Disagree
1. Co-funding LDG enhances
service delivery
3.6 64.3 21.4 10.7 0
2.. LGs contribute the LDG
Co funding willingly
16.1 33.9 16.1 32.1 1.8
3. LDG spending is guided by
approved budgets
28.6 44.6 10.7 10.7 1.8
4. Central Government spells
LDG conditions
41.1 46.4 8.9 3.6 0
5. LDG allocation across
sectors is transparent
7.1 60.7 16.1 10.7 5.4
6. Conditions for LDG
spending enhances service
delivery
3.7 66.7 25.9 3.7 0
7. LDG untimely release
affects efficient service
delivery
67.3 20.0 9.1 1.8 1.8
8. Local Council is influential
in LDG expenditure
23.6 45.5 21.8 9.1 0
9. LDG significantly improves
service delivery
32.1 58.9 5.4 3.6 0
Source: Primary data
77
Further analysis indicates that 68 percent of respondents agreed that local
government contribution to local development grant enhanced service
delivery. Results further indicate that 76 percent of the respondents
opined that local development grant spending in local governments is
guided by approved budgets and this has improved service delivery in
Wakiso district. The annual local government budgets are noted as very
strong instruments developed every fiscal year by local governments to
guide the expenditure of its resources. It is emphasized that these budgets
must be balanced and approved by respective local councils. All local
government budgets are meant to operationalise the development plans.
These budgets are based on the resource ceilings (IPFs) as provided by
the Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development. It is for
this reason that 76 percent of respondents agreed that local development
grant spending in the local government is guided by approved budgets.
Only 13 percent disagreed.
In the discussion and interviews conducted with respondents it was
reported that adhering to the approved budget while spending resources
was necessary since it made monitoring implementation easier and has
promoted transparency and trust from the beneficiaries.
Plan to avoid spending outside the identified areas. Blessing of the
council through budget approval suggests commitment of council to
78
addressing identified interventions by use of these reso Senior
Population Officer, Wakiso District.
Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the impact of implementation
of local development grants on service delivery. Data on the impact of
implementation on service delivery was
operations. The data is presented in table 13 below.
79
Table 13: Local Development Grant Implementation and Service
Delivery in Wakiso
Local Development Grant
Implementation and service
delivery
Percentage of respondents
Strongly
Agree
Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Disagree
1. LDG guidelines exist in Wakiso
district
54.5 32.7 10.9 1.8 0
2. LDG Implementation is
consistent with set guidelines
12.5 57.1 8.9 3.6 0
3. Adherence to LDG guidelines
enhanced Service delivery in
Wakiso
14.5 54.5 21.8 9.1 0
4. LG Assessment reports are useful
in improving LDG
implementation
23.6 56.4 14.5 3.6 1.8
5. I am familiar/conversant with the
LDG guidelines
7.3 58.2 14.5 20.0 0
6. LDG guidelines are simple and
clear
10.7 41.1 16.1 30.4 1.8
7. LDG guidelines are readily
available
8.9 32.1 21.4 32.1 5.4
8. LDG guidelines are user friendly
and flexible
5.5 32.7 25.5 36.4 0
9. Capacity gaps affect effective
and efficient service delivery in
Wakiso
10.9 41.8 23.6 21.8 1.8
Source: Primary Data
80
The study also sought to understand how the process of local
development grant implementation influenced service delivery in
Wakiso district. Data collected from respondents was analysed and
results are discussed in below.
Table 13 above summarizes the respondents understanding on
implementation of local development grants. This was assessed based on
existence and adherence to guidelines for local development grants; and
capacity of local governments to implement local development grants.
There was universal knowledge on existence of local development grant
guidelines as showed by 91 percent of respondents who acknowledged
local development grant guidelines existed in the local government.
About 70 percent agreed that local development grant guidelines are
useful in local development grant implementation. Specifically, they
emphasized that guidelines defined areas where the investments should
be spent to avoid spending in non-programme priority areas (PPAs) and
guide in horizontal allocation of funds across departments/sectors, thus
rationalizing funds. Other benefits realized from the use of guidelines
included performance assessment guidelines that ensure compliance with
minimum standards set, thus improving service delivery as funds are
spent on identified projects to bridge gaps in service delivery.
It is therefore worth noting that, although 64 percent of respondents were
familiar and conversant with local development grant guidelines, only 41
81
percent of them agreed that the guidelines were readily available. On the
other hand 52 percent of the respondents agreed that local development
grant guidelines are simple and clear but only one third of respondents
reported to have utilized these guidelines; and the most referred to
guideline was the local government budget, followed by the Local
Government Act (1997), annual work plans and Local Government
Management Service Delivery Manual 2011. Local government
development plans, and Local Government Financial and Accounting
Regulations 1997 were less used guidelines for local development grant
implementation. It was noted that only four (4) respondents referred to
the Constitution of Uganda during the implementation of the Local
Development Grant and only one respondent expressed to have used the
National Development Plan 2010/11-2014/15. However, overall the
guidelines were cited to be useful by all the key informants although
some inadequacies were cited.
community roles in the LDG implementation which is a contradiction
A technical officer in Nsangi Sub
County.
A key challenge cited by respondents in the utilization of the guidelines
was un-harmonized policy instruments. A case in point is the LGMSD
operational manual which stipulates that three-Year development plans
82
must be submitted to Ministry of Local Government at the beginning of
the financial year. On the other hand guidelines from National Planning
Authority are five year plan formats that are also contradicting.
Capacity for implementation of local development Grant was one other
area assessed to determine its effect on service delivery. All the
respondents agreed that the local governments in Wakiso district had
adequate capacity. While respondents agreed that capacity was a critical
factor in determining the level of implementation of local development
grants for service delivery, Wakiso district local government had only 65
percent staff positions filled (Wakiso DLG, 2011). The respondents
suggested that capacity is important for proper coordination, monitoring
and supervision of project implementation; proper resource management,
hence better quality of services delivered.
Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the impact of monitoring and
evaluation on service delivery. Data on the impact of monitoring and
e
understanding of local government operations. The data was presented in
table 14 below.
83
Table 14: Monitoring and evaluation for the Local Development
Grant
Monitoring , supervision
and evaluation for Local
Development Grants
Percentage of respondents
Strongly
Agree
Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Disagree
1. Monitoring the LDG is
important
44.6 46.4 7.1 1.8 0
2. LDG monitoring is
participatory
23.2 51.8 14.3 7.1 3.6
3. LDG monitoring tools
LDG are sufficient in
Wakiso
5.5 50.9 27.3 12.7 3.6
4.LDG Monitoring and
supervision improved
services
42.9 50.0 7.1 0 0
5. Feedback on LDG
performance is disseminated
7.4 40.7 20.4 22.2 9.3
Source: Primary data
Monitoring is a key aspect of resource utilization for service delivery. As
the table 14 above shows, 90 percent of the respondents agreed that it is
important to monitor utilization of local development grant since it
contributed towards improved service delivery. Subsequent local
development grant allocation is tagged to previous performance of local
development grant utilization or outputs. Data also shows 93 percent of
the respondents agreed that conducting monitoring and supervision for
84
local development grants had contributed to improved service delivery in
Wakiso district.
However, respondents reported that downward accountability is seen in
the feedback on allocations, and projects approved for the communities
through meetings and notices put up in public places. It should be noted
that the reporting tools for local development grants are mainly used by
focal officers only and this explains the reason only 56.4 percent of
respondents agreed the tools are sufficient. In Wakiso District LOGICs is
operational and instrumental in tracking progress in implementing local
development g
systems challenges. Other tools seen; such as accountability form D, on
quarterly physical progress (see appendix vii) and form E- annual
quarterly work plan (see appendix viii) clearly shows this.
The output Budgeting Tool was also mentioned by over half of the
respondents as a useful tool for monitoring implementation of local
development grants. It tracks only expenditures of funds released.
However, they noted that it does not measure the impact created by local
development grants on the beneficiaries.
Descriptive statistics were used to analyse service delivery. Data on
service delivery w
of local government operations. The data is presented below:
85
Table 15: Showing Descriptive Statistics for Service Delivery
Service Delivery
Percentage of respondents
Strongly
Agree
Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly
Disagree
1. LDG always provide
services on a timely basis
80.4 12.5 5.4 1.8 0
2. There is efficiency in
service delivery by LDG
85.7 8.9 5.4 0 0
3. LDG is always effective
in delivering services.
80.4 14.3 3.6 1.8 0
4. There is reliability in
services delivered by LDG
89.9 10.7 5.4 0 0
5. The LDG has enhanced
service delivery in Wakiso
District
32.1 58.9 5.4 3.6 0
Source: Primary data
From table 15 above, the results indicated that almost all (84 percent
strongly agreed and 11 agreed) respondents were in agreement that there
is reliability in service delivery through local development grants. While
80 percent strongly agreed and 14 percent agreed that local development
grants was effective in service delivery. Furthermore, 80 percent
strongly agreed and 13 percent agreed that local development grants
provided services on a timely basis. On the other hand, there is efficiency
in services delivered through local development grants as strongly agreed
by 86 percent and agreed by 9 percent of the respondents. Overall, 32
86
percent strongly agreed and 59 percent agreed that the local development
grants have enhanced service delivery.
4.4 Correlation Analysis
The relationships between the study variables were established by
running correlation analysis. The relationship between the
study variables (local government grants management components of
decentralization, budgeting, implementation, and monitoring; and
evaluation on service delivery) we
correlation. Correlation analysis results are indicated in table 16 below.
Table 16: Variables
1 2 3 4 5
Local Government Grants
Management (1)
1.000
Decentralized planning (2) .487** 1.000
Budgeting LDG (3) .542** .232* 1.000
Monitoring and Evaluation (4) .465** .127* .576** 1.000
Service Delivery (5) .423** .514** .336** .579** 1.000
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (1-tailed).
Source: Primary data
87
orrelation results from table 16 above, showed the
relationship between decentralized planning and service delivery. The
Pearson coefficient (r = 0.423**, p = 0.00<0.01) shows that there is a
positive correlation between decentralized planning and service delivery.
The correlation results showed that decentralized planning is a significant
predicator of service delivery, implying that decentralized planning for
local development grants leads to improved service delivery.
Hypothesis One:
Null hypothesis:
Ho: Decentralized planning has no significant positive relationship with
service delivery.
Alternate hypothesis:
H1: There is a significant positive relationship between decentralized
planning and service delivery.
1.
and the results are shown in table 16 above. Results show that there is a
significant positive relationship between decentralized planning for local
development grants and service delivery in Wakiso district (r = 0.423**,
88
p = 0.00<0.01). Since the correlation was found to be significant, the null
hypothesis (Ho) was rejected and the alternate hypothesis (H1) which
recognizes the existence of significant relationship between decentralized
planning for local development grants and service delivery was accepted.
16 above, showed the
relationship between budgeting local development grants and service
delivery. The Pearson coefficient (r = 0.514**, p = 0.00<0.01) shows that
there is a positive relationship between budgeting and service delivery.
The correlation results showed that budgeting local development grants is
a significant predicator of service delivery, implying that an efficient and
effective decentralized budgeting for local development grants leads to
improved and increased service delivery.
Hypothesis Two:
Null hypothesis:
Ho: Decentralised budgeting local development grants has no significant
positive relationship with service delivery.
Alternate hypothesis:
H1: There is a significant positive relationship between budgeting local
development grants and service delivery.
89
The hypothesis was
and the results are shown in table 16 above. It shows that there is a
significant positive relationship between budgeting local development
grants and service delivery in Wakiso district (r = 0.514**, p =
0.00<0.01). Since the correlation was found to be significant, the null
hypothesis (Ho) was rejected and the alternate hypothesis (H1) which
recognizes the existence of significant relationship between budgeting
local development grants and service delivery was accepted.
6 above showed a positive
relationship between local development grants implementation and
service delivery (Pearson coefficient (r = 0.336**, p = 0.00<0.01). The
correlation results showed that implementation is a significant predicator
of service delivery, implying that, an increase in implementation of local
development grants positively influence service delivery.
Hypothesis Three:
Null hypothesis:
Ho: Implementation of local development grants has no significant
positive relationship with service delivery.
90
Alternate hypothesis:
H1: There is a significant positive relationship between implementation
of local development grants and service delivery.
and the results are shown in table 16 above. It shows that there is a
significant positive relationship between implementation of local
development grants and service delivery in Wakiso district (r = 0.336**,
p = 0.00<0.01). Since the correlation was found to be significant, the null
hypothesis (Ho) was rejected and the alternate hypothesis (H1) which
recognizes the existence of significant relationship between
implementation of local development grants and service delivery was
accepted
6 above, showed the
relationship between monitoring and evaluation and service delivery. The
Pearson coefficient (r = 0.579**, p = 0.00<0.01) shows positive result,
hence an association. The correlation results showed that monitoring and
evaluation for local development grants is a significant predicator of
service delivery. This implied that an increase in monitoring and
91
evaluation for local development grants positively influence service
delivery.
Hypothesis Four:
Null hypothesis:
Ho: Monitoring and evaluation for local development grants has no
significant positive relationship with service delivery.
Alternate hypothesis:
H1: There is a significant positive relationship between monitoring and
evaluation for local development grants and service delivery.
oefficient of rank correlation
and the results are shown in table 16 above. It shows that there is a
significant positive relationship between monitoring and evaluation for
local development grants and service delivery in Wakiso district (r =
0.579**, p = 0.00<0.01). Since the correlation was found to be
significant, the null hypothesis (Ho) was rejected and the alternate
hypothesis (H1) which recognizes the existence of significant relationship
between monitoring and evaluation for local development grants and
service delivery was accepted.
92
4.5 Regression Analysis
Multiple regression analysis was used to establish the influence of the
independent variable on the dependent variable. The independent
variable considered was local development grants management
comprising of decentralized planning, budgeting, implementation, and
monitoring and evaluation, while the dependent variable considered was
service delivery. This is indicated in table 17 .
93
Table 17: Regression Analysis of Local Development Grants
Management with Service Delivery
Model Summary
Model R R
Square
Adjusted
R Square
Std.
Error of
the
Estimate
Change Statistics
R
Square
Change
F
Change
df
1
df
2
Sig. F
Change
1 .670a .451 .403 .556 .454 12.750 3 4
6
.000
Model Variable Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .454 .774 .586 .561
Decentralization .049 .184 .030 .267 .000
Budgeting .341 .111 .366 3.073 .004
Implementation .456 .125 .434 3.648 .001
Monitoring and
Evaluation
.233 .102 .243 2.881 .003
a. Predictors: (Constant), Decentralized planning, Budgeting,
Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation
b. Dependent variable: Service Delivery
The regression analysis results showed that about 40 percent of the
variations in service delivery by local development grants in Wakiso
district are explained by local government grants management
components of decentralized planning, budgeting, implementation, and
94
monitoring and evaluation. This means that about 60 percent of the
variations in service delivery by local development grants in Wakiso
district is explained by other factors and remain unexplained by this
study.
4.6 Conclusion
From the analysis, the researcher concludes that there is a strong
correlation between management of local development grants and service
delivery. It also concludes that giving the grants is just not enough to
achieve the results in service delivery but how it is managed and
administered determines the quality of the services delivered in local
governments.
95
CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
5.0 Introduction
This chapter presents the summary of the study, discussion of the
findings; conclusion and recommendations as drawn from the research
findings. The study was guided by four objectives, which were to assess
the influence of local development grants in service delivery in Wakiso
district. The chapter also shows the limitations of the study and suggests
areas for further research.
5.1 Summary of the Findings
The first objective was to determine the extent to which decentralized
planning for local development grants influence service delivery in
Wakiso district local government. The overall findings on this objective
(r = 0.423**, p = 0.00<0.01),
showed that there was a significant and positive relationship between
decentralized planning and service delivery in Wakiso district local
government. Therefore the findings agree with the research question that
decentralised planning for local development grants to a great extent
influences service delivery in Wakiso district.
96
The second objective was to assess the extent to which decentralized
budgeting for local development grant influences service delivery in
Wakiso District Local Government.
correlation approach (r = 0.514**, p = 0.00<0.01) showed that there was
a positive and significant relationship between decentralized budgeting
for local development grants and service delivery in Wakiso district local
government.
The third objective was to assess whether the implementation of local
development grants influence service delivery in Wakiso district local
government. (r =
0.336**, p = 0.00<0.01) showed that there was a positive and significant
relationship between implementation of local development grants and
service delivery in Wakiso district local government.
The fourth objective was to assess whether monitoring and evaluation of
local development grants influence service delivery in Wakiso district
Local government.
0.579**, p = 0.00<0.01) showed that there was a positive and significant
97
relationship between monitoring and evaluation of local development
grant and service delivery in Wakiso district Local government.
5.2 Discussion of Research Findings
The discussion of the research findings was guided by the objectives of
the study in combination with the reviewed literature.
The findings in this study are in agreement with the argument by
Steffensen (2010) that bottom up participatory decision making; that is
local-needs focused and in line with decentralization principles is vital in
the management of local development grants. This finding (
correlation r = 0.423**, p = 0.00<0.01) agrees with Wong et al (1995)
who argue that planning for grants is important since this involves
deciding on outputs for which the local development grants are to be
spent on. This further determines the efficiency and effectiveness with
which services are delivered. Anwar (2006) and Kidani (2011) on the
other hand fear that planning powers of local governments need to be
controlled by central government by giving conditionalities on local
to follow priorities established by central government (PPAs). The study
findings also agrees with UN-Habitat (2005) that accents that
participatory planning takes care of the dessending views(voices), and
provides alternatives. It is a platform to organise dissent, converts the
98
plausible into the right and the right into good decision. Every year Local
governments allocate funds for participatory planning i.e. Wakiso district
local government spent part of 22,539,616 UGX shillings for planning
for local development grants projects in FY 2009/2010 and 63,582,213
in FY 2010/2011 (appendix ix).
This finding is also in harmony with the resource dependency theory
applied in the study ; which resonates that within the policy framework
of decentralization, Local Councils (representing citizens) are treated as
the principal and the public officers as the agents (Robin, 2010). While
Wong et al (2009) in their study, agree that conditions should be set for
grants to avoid making ambiguous decisions, this must be guided by
legal instruments such as such as the Constitution of Uganda and Local
Government Act 1997 that empower local governments with
responsibility of delivering services and promoting participatory decision
making.
Furthermore, Steffensen (2010) supports this finding by the discourse
that planning and budgeting for local development grants across and
within sectors, greatly contributes to the local government efficiency
and effectiveness in service delivering.
99
Participatory budgeting has been advanced by budget practitioners and
academics as an important tool for inclusive and accountable in many
developing countries. Through participatory budgeting, citizens have the
opportunity to gain first-hand knowledge of government operations,
influence government policies, and hold government to account.
However, participatory processes also run the risk of being captured by
interest groups. Shah cautions that captured processes may continue to
promote elitism in government decision making (Shah, 2007).
The discourse advanced by Steffensen (2010) and Wong et al (2009), that
improved budgeting for Local Development Grants reasonably improves
service delivery in local governments is in confirmation of the study
findings. On the other hand, the classical foundations of fiscal
decentralization theory derived from the works of Charles Tiebout and
Wallace Oates (Moreno, 2004) support the view that local governments
should have control over their expenditure functions to improve the
efficiency of resource allocations, so does this study opine. Proper
financial management is one of the performance measures of local
development grants. This is evident in the management tools such as the
Wakiso District Financial Summary Sheet A (see appendix x). Mihaly
Hogye (2003) in theoretical approaches to public budgeting endorses that
the budget in a representative democracy should be made with complete
public consideration.
101
This t
decentralization in developing countries lacks a clear and comprehensive
contract between central and sub national governments: spending
responsibilities are vaguely defined and subject to changes, and that local
policymakers have incentives to overspend or under tax, have poor
information and expenditure management systems to guide their
decisions and control their budgets (Moreno, 2004). Although
Williamson (2003) argues that multiplicity of funding sources
undermines planning and target setting, these processes need to be
harmonized. Resources must therefore exist to support the introduction of
change (Julia Melker and Katherine Willoughby,(2005). How resources
are allocated is confirmed by this study to have effect on delivery of
services.
Available literature also suggests that the authority that determines the
priority areas for spending the conditional grants is critical in
determining quality of services delivered (Wong et al, 1995). Melker et
al (2005) and Boex, (2003) confirm the study findings that local
government officials currently endure tremendous pressure to a couple of
service delivery demands with limited revenue-generating options since
they are accountable to elected local councils; however, limited
discretion has been noted by local officials in implementing their
expenditure responsibilities. Resources must therefore exist to support
the introduction of change (service delivery) (Melker et al (2005).
102
The Principal-agent relationship is applicable to budgeting and service
delivery in Local Governments, where every financial year Local
governments pass of council resolutions and sign memoranda of
understanding (contracts) with the Ministry of Local Government as
commitment that they will spend Local development grants according to
agreement (MoLG, 2011). UN-Habitat (2005), argue that often services
fail to achieve their goals because of lack of resources for recurrent costs.
This concurs with the study findings that cite the operations and
maintenance cost for capital investments and infrastructure a challenge in
terms of skills, spares and deteriorating funds trend. In Wakiso district,
although a token fund is always earmarked for operations and
maintenance, it is often inadequate. This is similar to the findings of a
study by Balarkrishna Menon, James Mutero and Simon Macharia (2008)
done in Kenya, who note that the lopsided ration of per capita capital
expenditure to per capita recurrent expenditure in the city local
governments creates an imbalance leading to the low levels of investment
which creates poor service delivery.
However, Robin (2010) opines that experience has shown that there is no
one-to one link between increases in public spending and improvement in
service delivery performance. This agrees with the findings of the study
that the independent variables account for only 40 percent of the
explanation of the dependent variable (service delivery).
103
This finding is in line with the statement that participation of local
governments in implementation of local development grants is pivotal in
improving service delivery. Promoting the participation of communities
in the formulation, implementation, and supervision of the projects
carried out in local governments is one that Moreno (2004) emphasizes in
his study as fundamental for decentralization to thrive. Maureen Berner
(2004) on the other hand re-echoes that key public policy decisions are
made during the public budgeting process, so this creates an important
opportunity for meaningful citizen participation. In Wakiso district, the
annual budget conferences are the fora for local governments to identify
priorities for the preceding FY, but the budget lines are drawn by
technical planning committees, the Budget desk and standing committees
based on the indicative planning figures prior determined by MoFPED.
Although the regulatory reforms and mechanisms for local governments
encourage compliance, concern today is over accountability relationship
between local governments and communities that are still frail
(Steffensen (2010). Policy documents maintain that the legal framework
is well defined i.e. The 1995 Constitution of Uganda, Local Government
finance and accounting regulations, procurement guidelines, Local
Government Act (1997), however modification in tools and guidelines
have taken place and yet they are not streamlined nor harmonized. A case
in point is the local government harmonized planning guidelines are not
104
in line with the five year planning horizon adopted by government of
Uganda. This weakness was cited by Wakiso District Planning Unit. This
also calls for amendment of some parts of the Local Government Act.
The dependency of local governments on conditional grants affects
service delivery to communities. This is supported by the resource
dependency theory that asserts that local governments will always abide
by the conditions of central government in utilization of the grant since it
is the major source of financing in its service delivery. This is evident in
the FY 2009/2010 fourth quarter summary sheet for LLGs local
transfer where some had not honored their co
funding obligations, which affected the mount of local development grant
released to them. For example; Kira TC had only contributed 68.4
percent, Masuliita- 0 percent and Nsangi Sub County- 15.1 percent. In
FY 21/211, Kira TC had only contributed 0.3 percent, Masuliita- 0
percent and Nsangi Sub County- 51.6 percent
Capacity of local governments to implement the decentralized system of
governance is key for achieving results. Okidi et al., (2008) argues that,
there are severe capacity gaps in a majority of local governments. This
has perpetuated the problem of coordination between the central
authorities and local governments and inequality in levels of
development. However, in Wakiso district, the capacity levels are high
(above 80 percent).
105
However, like any other grants, local development grants have had some
drawbacks. A study by Rodríguez-Gómez (Moreno, 2004) points out that
the regulations established by some state governments for the operation
of local funds have considerably reduced the capacity of local
governments to participate in defining spending priorities and the scope
for local government participation may even diminish. Some local
governments still lack the necessary expertise to inform the public about
the norms that should be fulfilled in order to use the funds. Some
respondents in Wakiso avow to this finding.
This finding that there was a positive and significant relationship
between monitoring and evaluation of local development grants and
service delivery is in line with the statement by Uganda Debt Network
(2003) that participatory monitoring is critical in financial accountability
and service delivery. Findings also agree with Okidi (2008) that local
development grants monitoring and evaluation overtime has provided
opportunity improvements in local government management processes.
This study agrees with Steffensen (2001) and Anwar (2010), who
document that the Output Budgeting Tool is a robust tool for
performance tracking and gaps identification in service delivery and this
provides results based accountability that empowers citizens through
information and lowering transaction costs in demanding action and
106
accountability. The weakness cited was its inability to measure outcome
results.
Respondents in Wakiso local government reported that downward
accountability is seen in the feedback on allocations, and projects
approved for the communities through meetings and notices put in public
places. It should be noted that the reporting tools for the local
development grants are mainly used by focal officers only and this
explains the reason only 56.4 percent of respondents agreed the tools are
sufficient. Every year Local governments allocate funds for monitoring,
supervision, mentoring and backstopping activities of all district projects
i.e. Wakiso district local government spent part of 27,380,200 UGX
shillings in FY 2009/2010 and 56,572,000 in FY 2010/2011 (appendix
ix).
The Local Government Information and Communication System
(LoGICS), is developed to monitor the performance of Local
governments in areas of administration and service delivery. The annual
performance process and the local development grant reporting tools,
for the monitoring of the grant utilization are in place (appendices vii, vii,
ix, x). The reports show that monitoring
projects is budgeted for and conducted in Wakiso district. Annual
performance assessment has been conducted as internal assessment to all
local governments in the district (sub counties town councils and
107
municipal councils) and the National assessment conducted by MoLG is
then done every year in all district local governments (Wakiso DPU,
2013).
According to an assessment of the selected sector local development
grants projects implemented, it was evident that service delivery had
improved. In the health, education and water services, improvement of
infrastructure development is evident (appendix vi). For example;
construction of 4 health workers' staff quarters in Bweyogerere Ward in
Kira TC improved quality of care in the health facility since health
workers were accommodated within the service facility. Supply and
installation of 10 HDPE water tanks to UPE schools in district wide
improved education standards. Construction of 2 classrooms blocks at
Luwami and Kiziba Primary Schools at Masulita Sub-county has
improved the pupil classroom ratio and provision of seater desks to
Kirinya Primary School in Kira TC has improved on quality of
education. This supports Lindsay A.W (1982) argument that an
institution is important and relevant by its ability to effectively and
efficiently deliver services to its stakeholders.
108
5.3 Conclusions
Findings showed a significant positive relationship between between
decentralization and service delivery. The correlation results showed that
decentralization is a significant predicator of service delivery. This
implied that decentralization leads to improved service delivery by local
development grants.
Decentralized planning and budgeting for the local development grants,
for local governments, across and within sectors, decision making and
budgeting in the local government play a major role in determining the
efficiency and effectiveness of the local government in delivering
services to its citizens. Therefore, decentralized planning at all levels of
local government enhances service delivery.
The findings showed that there was a significant positive relationship
between budgeting and service delivery. This implied that an efficient
and effective budgeting of local development grants leads to improved
and increased service delivery. Resource allocation and utilization is
perceived to have a bearing on delivery of services. Budgeting to
determine the priority areas for spending the conditional grants is critical
in determining quality of services delivered. Citizens are generally closer
109
to local governments and their operations and can provide inputs on how
issues. As a result, local governments have the potential to be among the
most transparent and accountable levels of government. However, in the
absence of strong and transparent management systems, corruption,
inefficiency, and ineffective local government management is a very
likely possibility (Michael Schaeffer, 2005).
Further analysis from the findings indicated that there was a significant
positive relationship between implementation and service delivery. This
implied that an increase in implementation positively influence service
delivery by local development grants. Capacity of local government to
implement the decentralized system of governance is critical for
achieving success in service delivery.
The findings further indicated that there was a significant positive
relationship between monitoring and evaluation and service delivery.
This implied that an increase in monitoring and evaluation of local
positively influence service
delivery. Considering involvement of communities in monitoring and
evaluation is critical for accountability and service delivery.
110
There is need for an effective and harmonized decentralized planning and
budgeting processes at all levels in Uganda; central government and local
governments. Harmonized planning guidelines are necessary to avoid
confusion on which approach to use for planning given the changes to the
five year planning horizon recently adopted with the inception of the
National Vision and National Development Plan 2010/11-2012/15. This
may help in giving a clear direction to planning for all actors in
development and especially local governments, thus promoting efficient
service delivery.
Based on objective two, there should be an effective budget committee in
place in each of the districts to over-see resource mobilization and
allocation for the local development grants. The Uganda Local
Government Finance Commission and MoFPED should review the
resource allocation criteria to Local Governments for equitable resource
allocation to local governments. This will aid improve equitable service
delivery. Major budget cuts (even to the local development grants) have
also over time affected implementation of the investment projects and
thus affect public service provision. The recommendation is for central
government to publish formulae that specifies ceilings and floors for
provisions.
111
In management of local development grants, local governments have
been capacitated to plan and manage financial resources for effective and
sustainable delivery of services. The study also recommends that
consideration be taken by government to design all conditional grants as
performance based with management modalities similar to the local
development grants since this research has revealed that it improves
service delivery significantly.
With regard to objective three, local government in all districts with local
development grants should ensure embark on capacity building of its
stakeholders such as technical officers, politicians, civil society engaged
and communities involved in local development grants management.
Also widely disseminate implementation guidelines. Local governments
should ensure that they have capacity to implement and manage the
existing grants in order to ensure efficient service delivery and own the
projects for sustainability.
Based on objective four, local government authorities in all districts
should invest more in sharing and giving feedback to communities
regarding service delivery projects and also improve on LoGICS
operation. This should be harmonized with the Output Budgeting Tool
112
(OBT) to ensure timely and accurate accountability streamlined to cater
for changes and facilitate performance measurement in service delivery.
This is likely to lead to more resource mobilization for better service
delivery.
5.5 Limitations and Contributions of the Study
This study was limited to only Wakiso district local government. This
therefore makes it difficult to generalize the findings to other districts in
Uganda. Besides, there was difficulty experienced in obtaining
documentary evidence such as reports on the management of local
development grants and service delivery especially from lower local
governments.
5.6 Areas for Further Research
This study has analysed management for local development grants in
Wakiso local governments with reference to service delivery. However,
as may be expected the scale of this debate is therefore extensive and
multifaceted. To generate achievable policy strategies, there is need to
conduct more studies to allow further case studies and assessment of
local development grant management in depth. Exploring the following
as future research strategies can facilitate attainment of in-depth
information in the subject area. Based on the study findings, further
research is worth conducting in the areas suggested below.
113
1. Conduct a comparative study on management of major conditional
grants to understand the benefits of different grants on service
delivery and which approaches have created more improvement in
delivering efficient and effective service to local governments.
2. Further studies could be carried out to establish the impact of local
development grants in specifically promoting service delivery in local
governments. This will provide the outcomes realized overtime in
utilization of local development grants.
3. Besides, a study investigating budgeting controls for local
development grants in local governments could be another area for
further research
114
REFERENCES
Alula Berhe Kidani (2011). Local Government Discretion Financial
Accountability is an Integral Part of Decentralization.
http://news.sudanvisiondaily.com/details.html?rsnpid=198999
Amin E. M. (2005). Social Science Research, Conception, Methodology
and Analysis, Makerere University Press. Kampala.
Balarkrishna Menon, James Mutero and Simon Macharia (2008).
Decentralisation and Local Governments in Kenya. International
Studies programme. Working paper 08-32. George State
University- Andrew Young School of Policy Studies.
Barifaijo, K., Basheka, B., & Oonyu, J. (2010). How to Write a Good
Dissertation/Thesis: A Guide to Graduate Students. Kampala: The
New Vision Printing and Publishing Company Ltd.
Berner, Maureen and Sonya Smith. 2004. The State of states: A review
of state requirements for citizen participation in the local
government budget process. State and Local Government Review
36 (2): 140-150.
Bhandarkar D, "Computer-Based Aiding To Reduce Human Error in
Real-Time Complex Decision Making," presented at Summer
Computer Simulation Conference, Montreal, Canada, 2003.
Blaeschke, I. B. (2010, May 18). Conditional grants to independent
regional governments: The trade-off between incentives and
wasteful grant-seeking. Joint discussion paper series in economics,
No. 30-2010 .
115
Blane Lewis and Paul Smoke. September 2011. Indonesian and
international experience Perspectives for fiscal decentralisation
and its impact on economic development and social welfare
(draft).
Boex, J. (2003). The incidence of local government allocations in
Tanzania. Public Administration and Development, 23(5), 381-
391.
Boex, J., & Martinez-Vazquez, J. (2004). The determinants of the
incidence of intergovernmental grants: A survey of the
international experience. Public Finance & Management, 4(4).
Carlos Moreno. (2004). Fiscal performance of local governments in
Mexico under Decentralization: a political explanation. LBJ School
of Public Affairs. University of Texas at Austin
Carpenter, V. a. (1992). GAAP as a symbol of legitimacy: New York
State's decision to adopt generally accepted accounting principles.
Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17: 613-643. Accounting
Organisations and Society , 17:613-643.
Casciaro, Tiziana and Mikotak Jan Piskorsi. 2005. Power imbalance,
mutual dependence and constraint absorption: A closer look at the
resource dependency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly
50:167-99
Cheema, G. a. (1983). Decentralization and Development: Policy
Implementation in Developing Countries. California , Beverly
Hills: Sage Publications.
116
Cobb, G. F. (2009). Resource Dependency Theory: Past and Future.
University of Michigan.
Cochran, W. G. (1946). Relative accuracy of systematic and stratified
random samples for a certain class of populations. The Annals of
Mathematical Statistics, 164-177.
Conyers, D. (1990). Decentralisation and Development Planning: A
comparative perspective in
Conyers, D. (2007), Decentralisation and Service Delivery: Lessons
from Sub-Saharan Africa. IDS Bulletin, 38: 18 32.
doi: 10.1111/j.1759-5436.2007.tb00334.x
Diana Marieta Mihaiu, A. O. (2010). Effiiency, Effectiveness and
Performance of Public Sector. Romanian Journal Of Economic
Forecasting .
Diana Marieta Mihaiu, A. O. (2010). Effiiency, Effectiveness and
Performance of Public Sector. Romanian Journal Of Economic
Forecasting 4/2010.
Eisenhardt, 1985
Herbert, 2011,
http://news.sudanvisiondaily.com/details.html?rsnpid=199815
http://localgovernmentaction.org/activists-guide/key-processes/municipal_budget
Ivo bischolf & Frederic Blaeschke, 2013,0 Working Paper
and influence activities in the public sector: The trade-off in
performance budgeting and conditional grants. Joint Discussion
Paper Series in Economics, No. 20-2013.
117
Jesper Steffensen. (2010). Performance-Based Grant Sysytems: Concept
and International Expirience. UNCDF.
John A. Okidi and Madina Guloba, 2006. Decentralisation and
Development: Emerging issues from
(Kampala: Economic Policy Research CentreGuloba, 2008-
Makerere University).
Julia Melkers and Katherine Willoughby (March/April 2005), Vol. 65,
No. 2. Models of Performance-Measurement Use in Local
Governments: Understanding Budgeting, Communication, and
Lasting Effects.Public Administration Review. University of
Illinois Chicago & Georgia State University.
Kathleen M. Eisenhardt. Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review
The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14, No. 1 (Jan., 1989).
Published by: Academy of Management Article Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/258191
Kathuri, N. J., & Pals, D. A. (1993). Introduction to educational
research. Educational Media Centre. Egerton University.
Kothari, C. R. (2009). Research methodology: methods and techniques.
New Age International.
Kotler, P. (2002) Marketing Management: Analysis, Implementation and
Control. Prentice Hall, India.
Lindsay, A. W. (1982). Institutional Performance in Higher Education:
The efficiency Dimension. American Educational Association ,
175-199.
118
Local Government Finance Commission. (2003). Allocation Principles,
ormulae, Modalities and Flow of Central Governmnet Transfers
Phase One. Kampala: LGFC.
Michael Schaeffer (March 2005) Quick Start: Framework for Effective
Local Government Finance
Michael Schaeffer. (2005). Quick start framework for effective local
government finance.
Ministry of Local Government. (2011). LGMSD Operational Manual
2011. Kampala: Ministry of Local Government.
Modell, S. (2001). Performance measurement and institutional
processes: A study of managerial responses to public sector
reform. Management Accounting Research , 12:437-464.
Mugenda O. M and Mugenda A.G., (1999) Research Methods:
Quantitative and Qualitative approaches. African Centre for
Technology Studies (ACTS), Nairobi, Kenya
Oates, Wallace E. (1972) Fiscal Federalism (New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich).
Odero, K. K. (2004). PRSPs in Decentralized Contexts:Comparative
Lessons on Local Planning andFiscal Dimensions-Uganda Study.
Kampala: Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic
Development.
Okidi,John A; Guloba, Madina. (2006, September). Decentralisation and
Development: Emerging Issues form Uganda's expirience.
Occassional Paper No. 31 , p. 4.
119
Oso, W.Y and Onen D (Ed). (2009). A general guide to writing research
proposals and report.. A handbook for beginning researchers.
Kenya: Jomo Kenyatta Foundation.
Pfeffer J, Salancik G (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A
Resource Dependence Perspective . New York: NY. Haper and
Row Publisher
Ram Mudambi, T. P. (2007). Agency theory and resource dependency
theory: Complementary explanations for subsidiary power in
multinational corporations. Basingstoke: Palgave-Macmillan.
Rena Eichler, Paul Auxila, John Pollok. (2001). Performance Based
Payment to improve the Impact of Health Services: Evidence from
Haiti. World Bank Institute Online Journal .
Republic of Uganda. (1995). Constitution of The Republic of Uganda.
Uganda Law Reform.
Ribot, J. C. (2008). African Decentralization Local Actors, Powers and
Accountability. Democracy, Governance and Human Rights Issue
No. 8.
Economica.Scott, A. D. (1952). The evaluation of federal grants.
Economica, 377-394.
Scott, L. E. (2010). Assessing the Evidence of the Impact of Governance
on Development Outcomes and Poverty Reduction- Issues Paper.
International Development Department, University of
Birmingham.
120
Sekaran U., (2003), Research Methods for Business: A skill-Building
Approach, Fourth Edition, Southern Illinois University of
Carbondale; New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Shah Anwar. (October 2006). A Practitioners Guide to
Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers. World Bank Policy Research
Working Paper 4039 .
Shah Anwar. Public Sector Governance And Accountability
participatory Budgeting . World Bank 2007)
Shah Anwar; Broadway Robin. (2010). Intergovernmental Transfers:
Principles and Practice. The World Bank.
Steffensen, J. (2009). Sector upport in Practice; Desk Study Local
Governmen Sector in Uganda. London: Overseas Development
Institute.
The Global Fund. (2009). Performance- Based Fund at the Global
Fund. Switzerland: The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis
and Malaria.
Thomas L. Harnisch, 2011. Performance based funding: a re-emerging
strategy in Public higher Education Financing . American
Association of State Colleges and Universities.
Uganda Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Statistical Abstract. Kampala:
UBOS.
Wakiso District Local Government, (2010). Wakiso District Five Year
DevelopmentPlan 2010/11- 2014/15. Kampala, Uganda.
121
West, L. A., & Wong, Christine. P. (1995). Fiscal decentralization and
growing regional disparities in rural China: some evidence in the
provision of social services. Oxford Review of Economic Policy,
11(4), 70-84.
-in-
National Tax Journal.
Williamson, T. (2003). Targets and results in Public sector
management: Uganda Case study. London: Oversees Development
Institute.
World Health Organisation (2011, 04). Performance-based grants for
reproductive health in the Phillipes. Retrieved January 25, 2012.
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2011/WHO_RHR_11.04_eng.pdf
122
APPENDICES
RESEARCH TOOLS
APPENDIX I: Questionnaire
UGANDA MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE
COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
Dear Respondent,
I am conducting a study on the Local Development Grant and
performance of Local governments in service delivery in Wakiso District
Local Government. Your participation will be highly appreciated
The study will provide new required information to the different
stakeholders including policy makers at various levels in improving
understanding the contribution and relationship between the Local
development grant and performance of Local governments in Uganda
and in particular to Wakiso District.
NB: The information you provide will strictly be used for purpose of this
study and confidentially will be upheld.
SECTION A: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Please tick t
i. District
ii. Sub County
iii.
123
2. Category of Respondent (Tick the appropriate response)
i. Technical staff: ( ) ii. Department/sub county:
Councillor: ( )
3. Sex of respondent: (b)
4. Age Group (a) 18-29 years (b) 30-40
© 41 59 years (d) 60 years
and above
5. Highest Level of Education:
i. Primary ( )
ii. Secondary education ( )
iii. Diploma ( )
iv. Degree ( )
v. Masters Degree ( )
vi. PhD ( )
SECTION B
Decentralised planning and LDG in Wakiso District Local
government
a. Do you participate in planning for the LDG in Wakiso District
Yes/No
b. If yes, at what level?
a. District e. Department/sector
124
b. Sub county
c. Parish
d. Village
I would like to get your opinion about the planning, budgeting and
implementation and monitoring and evaluation of the LDG in Wakiso
district in providing efficient and effective services using the Local
Development Grant. Please circle the appropriate response.
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither
agree
nor
disagree
Disagree Strongly
disagree
Decentralised planning for the Local Development Grant
1 All decisions regarding the
Local Development Grant
are fully decentralized to
LGs in Wakiso
1 2 3 4 5
2 Decentralised planning has
improved equitable service
delivery in Wakiso district
local government
1 2 3 4 5
3 Planning for the Local
Development Grant has
consistently improved over
time since its introduction
1 2 3 4 5
4 Bottom up approach of 1 2 3 4 5
125
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither
agree
nor
disagree
Disagree Strongly
disagree
planning is always followed
in planning for the Local
Development Grant
5 Communities in Wakiso
regularly/always participate
in planning for activities for
the Local Development
Grants
1 2 3 4 5
B Budgeting for the LDG and service delivery
1 The LG contributes the co
funding without any hustle
1 2 3 4 5
2 The co-founding of LG to
LDG has enhanced efficient
service delivery in Wakiso
1 2 3 4 5
3
spending is always guided by
the approved budgets
1 2 3 4 5
4 Conditions spelt by central
government on where the
Local Development Grants
exist
1 2 3 4 5
5 Allocation of the LDG across
sectors is done transparently
in consultation with sectors
1 2 3 4 5
126
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither
agree
nor
disagree
Disagree Strongly
disagree
7 Central government has a
major decision on how much
LDG is allocated across
sectors
1 2 3 4 5
8 Untimely release of LDG
affects efficient service
delivery in Wakiso DLG
1 2 3 4 5
9 The Council is influential in
determining where the Local
Development Grant should
be spent
1 2 3 4 5
10 The Local Development
Grant has significant
contribution towards
improvement of service
delivery in Wakiso District
1 2 3 4 5
C Implementation of the LDG and service delivery
1 There are guidelines that
govern management of
Local Development Grant in
Wakiso District LG
1 2 3 4 5
2 Implementation and
utilization of the Local
Development Grant is
1 2 3 4 5
127
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither
agree
nor
disagree
Disagree Strongly
disagree
always consistent with set
guidelines
3 Adherence to set Local
Development Grant
guidelines has enabled
improvement in service
delivery
1 2 3 4 5
4 LG Assessment reports are
useful in improving
implementation of the LDG
in Wakiso District LG
1 2 3 4 5
5 There are guidelines to guide
the utilization and
management of the Local
Development Grant in
Wakiso district.
1 2 3 4 5
6 I am familiar and conversant
with the Local Development
Grant guidelines
1 2 3 4 5
7 The Local Development
Grant guidelines are simple,
clear and readily available
for the Local Development
Grant management
1 2 3 4 5
128
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither
agree
nor
disagree
Disagree Strongly
disagree
8 The Local Development
Grant guidelines are readily
available and widely
disseminated
1 2 3 4 5
9 The LDG guidelines are user
friendly and flexible
1 2 3 4 5
17 The effective and efficient
service delivery in is affected
by capacity gaps in Wakiso
district
1 2 3 4 5
18 Capacity of Wakiso is
adequate to manage the
Local Development Grant
for efficient and effective
service delivery.
1 2 3 4 5
Monitoring and evaluation of the LDG
1 Monitoring and evaluation is
conducted for the LDG
1 2 3 4 5
2 I understand why it is
important to do monitoring
of the LDG
1 2 3 4 5
3 The monitoring for the LDG
is participatory
1 2 3 4 5
4 The M&E tools for the LDG 1 2 3 4 5
129
Strongly
agree
Agree Neither
agree
nor
disagree
Disagree Strongly
disagree
are sufficient
5 Feedback is always shared
with stakeholders on LDG
performance
1 2 3 4 5
Service delivery
1 There is reliability in
services delivered through
the LDG
2 The LDG is effective in
service delivery
3 There is efficiency in service
delivery through the LDG
4 Services delivered through
LDG are timely
What are some of the major challenges of management of the Local Development
Grant in Wakiso District?
130
KEY INFORMANTS
Secto .Sub
County
A PLANNING
1. What is your role in planning
for the Local Development
Grant?
i. Identification of activities (
)
ii. Prioritization (
)
iii. Budgeting (
)
iv.
2. Describe how activities financed by the LDG are identified and planned for in
Wakiso District---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Who are the categories of
stakeholders involved in
allocation of the LDG in
Wakiso District Local
Government
Tick all that apply
i. District Local Council ( )
i. District Executive Committee ( )
ii. Technical Planning Committee ( )
iii. Standing Committee ( )
iv. Parish Development Committees ( )
v. Civil Society Organisations ( )
vi. Village councils ( )
vii. Project Management Committees ( )
viii. Central government ( )
ix.
4 How influential is the LG council in determining where the LDG is
131
spent?-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
B LDG IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES
1 Are you aware of any guidelines in place to guide LDG
management
Yes/No
2 If yes, are these guidelines adhered to in deciding how and
where the LDG is spent?
Yes/No/
3 Can you name some of the
guidelines in place to guide
the management of the Local
Development Grant
(Tick applicable ones)
i. Local Government Act
ii. LG Finance & Accounting
Regulations
iii. Constitution of Uganda
iv. District Development Plan
v. LG Budget
vi. Annual work plans
vii. LGMSD Manual
viii. Others (specify)
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
4 Do you think the Local Development Grants guidelines have
been useful in improving efficient and effective service delivery
in Wakiso district?
Yes/No/
5 Please explain how the LDG guidelines have either improved or not improved
efficient and effective service delivery. ----------------------------------------------
6 .
7 If no. why and what gaps do you think exist in these guidelines?
C LDG BUDGETING AND SERVICE DELIVERY
1 Does Wakiso district council have any influence
in determining where the LDG should be spent
Yes
No
( )
( )
132
(tick appropriate response) ( )
2 How does the LG determine how much LDG it
receives for the FY? (probe)
Depends on the needs of LG
A formulae determined by
CG
3 How is the LDG allocated across sectors? What are the considerations?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
4 Is there any flexibility is the allocation of the LDG ? Describe if any.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
5 Does Wakiso district have any influence in
determining where the Local Development Grant
should be spent
Yes
No
( )
( )
( )
6 What are the challenges of the LDG management in Wakiso District? (Probe)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------
7 Name at least 3 projects that have benefited from
the LDG in Wakiso district between 2008-2011.
i
ii
iii
8 Wakiso District receives the LDG every FY as a
conditional grant. Do you know the reason
why/purpose central government transfers the
Local Development Grant to Local government?
Yes
No
9 Give the purpose /reasons central government transfers the LDG to Local
government
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
133
10
What are the challenges of the Local Development Grant management in Wakiso
District
D Capacity of Wakiso District LG to manage the Local Development Grant
1 How strong is the capacity Wakiso district for management of the Local
Development Grant? (Probe). -------------------------------------------------------------
2 How does this situation affect effective and efficient service delivery in Wakiso
district? (probe)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
3 What capacity gaps exist in Wakiso district for effective management of the
Local Development Grant for efficient and effective service delivery? -------------
Monitoring and evaluation
1 How Monitoring and evaluation is is conducted for the LDG? Probe
2 Do you understand your role in monitoring of the LDG?
3 Is monitoring system for the LDG is participatory?
4 Are M&E tools for the LDG are sufficient in your view? Explain (probe)
5 Feedback is always shared with stakeholders on LDG performance (probe)
134
Appendix IV: Focus Group Discussion Interview Guide
i.
ii. What projects have been implemented using the Local Development
Grant in Wakiso district?
i. ---------------------------------------------------------------------
ii. ---------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. --------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. Are you satisfied with the implementation of the projects where
the LDG has been used? Probe further..--------------------------------
iv. What are your roles in the implementation of the LDG? -----------------
v. At what levels of the planning cycle does your committee/office get
involved in the management of the Local Development Grants?
i. Planning
ii. Budgeting
iii. Implementation
iv. Project Monitoring and supervision
vi. How has Wakiso district ensured that the project financed by the
Local Development Grant delivers efficient and effective services?
vii. Does Wakiso district local government have adequate capacity to
deliver efficient and effective service delivery? Yes/No. Probe for
more information.
viii. If No, What are some critical capacity gaps of the local
government in management of Local Development Grants? Probe
135
ix. What challenges exist in the management of the Local Development
Grants, with specific reference to effective and efficient service
delivery in Wakiso district Local Government?
x. How useful are Local Development Grants implementation guidelines
for the achievement of effective and efficient service delivery in
Wakiso district?
xi. How flexible are the Local Development Grants guidelines towards
enhancement of efficient and effective service delivery?
xii. The Local Governments are supposed to contribute 10 percent of
the Local Development Grant allocation every financial year (FY).
Does this local contribution have any effect on the amount received
by Wakiso? How significant is it?
xiii. Does this contribution have influence on effective and efficient
service delivery in Wakiso district? (probe for explanations and
examples)
xiv. How accountable is Wakiso district local government over the
Local Development Grant to beneficiaries? Probe further for
examples.
xv.Monitoring and evaluation is conducted for the LDG
I understand why it is important to do monitoring of the LDG
xvii. The monitoring system for the LDG is participatory
xviii. The M&E tools for the LDG are sufficient
xix. Feedback is always shared with stakeholders on LDG performance
136
Appendix V: Documentary Review Guide
1. Technical Committee minutes for the 3 years in the selected sub
counties and District
2. Implementation M&E reports for LDG
3. Council Minutes
4. Standing Committee Minutes
5. LG Assessment reports for the 3 years under study (district and sub
county)
6. Project reports
7. Joint Assistance and Review on Decentralization reports for the
period under study
137
Appendix VI: Observation Guide
1. Visit a project funded by a LDG and check whether being
utilized by beneficiaries e.g. school, health facility, water source.
2. What is the status; complete, ongoing or incomplete and why?
138
Appendix VII: Selected LDG projects implemented 2009/10 in the
study area
Local
Govt
Sector Project Description Budget Actual
Spent
Status
District Educatio
n
Construction of a 2
classroom block at
Ssumbwe P/S Wakiso
Sub-county Ssumbwe
Parish
25,000,0
00
39,389,23
1
Complet
e
District Water Supply and installation of
10 HDPE water tanks to
UPE schools District wide
48,000,0
00
31,972,40
0
Complet
e
District Health Roofing of Kawanda
Health Centre II at
Nabweru Kawanda Parish
20,000,0
00
14,047,35
2
Complet
e
District Educatio
n
Procurement of 14 three
seater school desks to
Kabagano P/S
980,000 980,000
Desks
procured
and in
use
District Sanitatio
n
Payment of outstanding
obligation on construction
of 3-stance water borne
latrine at the Sub-county
Headquarters
14,223,3
10
14,223,30
9
Project
complete
and
being
utilised
District Water Purchase of a 10,000 litre
water harvesting tank for
Lube Health Centre II
4,185,00
0
4,185,000
Procured
and
being
utilised
139
Nsangi
S/C
Educatio
n
Construction of staff
house at Bandwe Primary
school
36,089,9
03
39,517,40
8
Complet
e
Nsangi
S/C
Educatio
n
Construction of teachers'
house at Nankonge P/S 36,902,1
84
29,088,71
1
Work in
progress
Masuliit
a S/C
Educatio
n
Completion of a 6 unit
staff house at Kanzize
Primary School in
Kanzize Parish
8,571,13
4
9,008,000 Project
complete
Masuliit
a S/C
Educatio
n
Monitoring and
evaluation of completion
of a 6 unit staff house at
Kankize P/S
742,750 1,044,000 Monitori
ng for
the
quarter
done
Kira
T/C
Administ
ration
Monitoring and
supervision of Town
Council projects
4,000,00
0
4,000,000
Monitori
ng for
the
period
done
Kira
T/C
Administ
ration
Project Investment
servicing costs 24,397,8
11
24,475,81
1
Funds
utilised
as per
guideline
s
Kira
T/C
Health Construction of four units
of health workers' staff
quarters in Bweyogerere
75,000,0
00
77,447,78
2
Project
complete
d
140
Ward
Kira
T/C
Educatio
n
Construction of a 2
classroom block and
office in Kirinya COU
P/S Kirinya Ward
41,434,3
44
41,434,34
4
On going
Source: DPU Wakiso District (Extracted from: Form G- Report on investment
inventories for FY 2009/2010)
141
Appendix VIII: ACCOUNTABILITY FORM D: PHYSICAL PROGRESS REPORT
Sector
ProjectDescription
Category
Budget
Expenditure By Quarters Source OfFunds Com
ments Quantified Cost 1st 2nd 3rd 4th LDG
Admin(MasuliitaSC)
MonitoringandSupervision
S/County 742,7
50
- 360,000
210,000
474,000
1,044,000 Monitoringdone
Bankcharges
S/County
350,000 87,0
00
119,000
76,000
90,000
372,000 Paid
InvestmentServicingCosts
S/County
742,750
128000
488,000
128,000
556,000
1,300,000 FundsUtilized
Education(MasuliitaSC)
Completionof staffhouse atKanzize PS
District
8,571,134
- 5,508,000 -
3,500,000
9,008,000 Complete
Admin(KiraTC)
Investmentservicingcosts
TownCouncil
24,397,811
170,811
24,157,500
55,500
92,000
24,475,811
Fundsutilised
Health(KiraTC)
Construction of healthworkers'staffquarters inBweyogerere
District 75,00
0,000
-4,948,854
- 2,498,928 77,447,78
2
Completed
EducationHealth(KiraSC)
Aclassroomblock &officeConstruction inKirinya PS
District 40,00
0,000
- - -41,434,344
41,434,344
Ongoing
Source: Wakiso District Planning Unit- 2012
142
Appendix IX: FORM E- ANNUAL QUARTERLY WORK PLAN July 2009 to June
2010
Wakiso District Local Government LDG Program/Projects
DEPART
MNT
SUB-
SECTOR
PROJECT
DESCRIPTION
CO
DE
CATEG
ORY
BUDGET
ED
PLANNED EXPENDITURE BY QUARTERS SOURCE
OF
FUNDS
(QUANTITAFIABLE
)
PROJEC
T COST
July-Sept Oct-Dec Jan- Mar April-
June
LDG
Managemen
t Support
Services
Administrat
ion
Investment Servicing
Costs (Designing and
Bid document
preparation)
231
001
B 29,250,00
0
7,124,000 9,915,61
6
5,500,000
-
22,539,61
6
Retooling 231
001
B 29,250,00
0
14,300,00
0
- -
12,154,00
0
26,454,00
0
Planning Monitoring,
supervision, mentoring
and backstopping
activities of all District
projects
231
001
B 29,250,00
0
14,790,20
0
12,590,0
00
-
-
27,380,20
0
Council Completion of
Speaker's Chambers at
the District
Headquarter
231
001
B 70,000,00
0
40,414,44
1
34,903,1
25
-
-
75,317,56
6
Finance and
Planning
Veterinary Wakiso Agro-
processing project and
warehouse for
industrial, agro
processing machines in
Busukuma
231
001
C 95,000,00
0
42,194,56
3
- 25,000,00
0
26,214,47
2
93,409,03
5
Health Construction of 4 VIP
pit latrines (Kitende
P/S, Kigoowa UMEA
P/S, St. Jude Bbanda
C/S Bbanda Parish )
231
001
B 20,000,00
0
- - -
-
Health Payment of retention
on fencing of
Buwambo Health
Centre IV Gombe S/C
231
001
C 15,000,00
0
5,110,822 - - -
5,110,822
Education Construction of
Luwami and Kiziba
Primary School
231
001
C 15,000,00
0
- - - -
-
Education Construction of a
classroom block at
Ssumbwe P/S Wakiso
Sub-county
231
001
C 25,000,00
0
- - 13,577,76
4
25,811,46
7
39,389,23
1
Roads Tarmac of Bunamwaya
- Star road Makindye
Sub-county
231
001
A 100,000,0
00
- - - 85,500,00
0
85,500,00
0
Installation of culverts
on Bunamwaya
Mutumdwe road
84,851,00
0
-
-
16,435,00
0
30,178,72
4
46,613,72
4
Water Supply and installation
of 10 HDPE water
231
001
C 48,000,00
0 15,986,20
- - 15,986,20
0
31,972,40
143
tanks to UPE schools
District wide
0 0
Health
Services
Extension of piped
water from Wattuba
231
001
C 5,000,000 - - - 4,832,640
4,832,640
Physical
Planning
Construction of a solid
waste demonstartion
centre at Lukwanga in
Wakiso Sub-county
231
001
C 20,000,00
0
- - - 22,436,15
0
22,436,15
0
ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC ETC
Total
Source: Wakiso District Planning Unit- 2012
144
Appendix X: FORM G - REPORT ON INVESTMENT INVENTORIES FOR FY
2009/2010
SECTOR
PROJECTDESCRIPTIO
NBUDGET
ACTUALSPENT
STARTDATE
ACTUAL END
EXPECTED COM
MENT QUANTITY COS
TLDG DATE END
DATEAdministration
InvestmentServicing Costs(Design and Biddoc. preparation,projectappraisal, &screening, datacollection and gendermainstreamingof 3DDP)
29,250,000
22,539,616 01/10/09 30/03/10 N/A Fundsutilized
Planning
Monitoring,supervision,mentoring and backstoppingall Districtprojects
29,250,000
27,380,200 01/07/09 30/12/09 N/A Monito
ringdoneandreportsare onfile
Health
Construction of3 VIP 4 stancepit latrines(Kitende P/S,KigoowaUMEA P/S, St.Jude BbandaC/S at Ssisa,Nangabo andWakiso Sub-countyrespectively )
20,000,000
-01/07/09 N/A 30/06/1
1Projectto be implementedin FY2010/2011
Health
Payment ofretention onfencing ofBuwamboHealth CentreIV Gombe S/C
15,000,000
5,110,822 01/07/09 30/09/09 N/A Completed
145
BuwamboParish
Education
Construction ofa 2 classroomblock atSsumbwe P/SWakiso Sub-countySsumbwe Parish
25,000,000
39,389,231 01/10/09 30/06/10 N/A Projectcompleted andbeingused
Water
Installation of10 HDPE watertanks to 10UPE schoolsDistrict
48,000,000 31,972,400
01/07/09 30/06/10 N/A operational
Source: Wakiso District Planning Unit- 2012
146
Appendix XI: Financial Summary Sheet A For the period April to June 2010
Wakiso District Local Government - Local Development Grant Currency: Uganda Shillings
(I) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)
PeriodAmount Annual budget Year to date
AvailableBudget
(e) OpeningBalance (3,049,575) (f) Advancereceived 897,449,000
(g) Co-funding 28,920,075 (h) Availablefunds 923,319,500 Expenditure bydescription 84,034,213
1. Fixed Assets - 1,617,093,705 1,712,802,247 (95,708,542)2. InvestmentServicing 6,400,000 95,123,159 34,439,616 60,683,543
3. Monitoring - 95,123,159 27,380,200 67,742,959
4. Retooling 12,154,000 95,123,159 26,454,000 68,669,159 (I) Grand Totalexpenditure 859,388,213 1,902,463,182 1,801,076,063 101,387,119
(j) Closing balance 63,931,287 (k) Outstandingobligations - (l) Plannedexpenditure 1,902,463,182 (m) TotalRequirements 1,902,463,182 (n) Less closingbalance 63,931,287 (o) Advancerequested 1,838,531,895 (p) Others 58,560,100
Co-funding to date, this FY 29,640,025Prepared by
Certified by:
147
Chief Finance Officer
ChiefAdministrativeOfficer
XXXXXX xxxxxxxxxDate:
Source: Wakiso District Planning Unit- 2012
Buy your books fast and straightforward online - at one of world’s
fastest growing online book stores! Environmentally sound due to
Print-on-Demand technologies.
Buy your books online at
www.get-morebooks.com
Kaufen Sie Ihre Bücher schnell und unkompliziert online – auf einer
der am schnellsten wachsenden Buchhandelsplattformen weltweit!
Dank Print-On-Demand umwelt- und ressourcenschonend produzi-
ert.
Bücher schneller online kaufen
www.morebooks.deVDM Verlagsservicegesellschaft mbH
Heinrich-Böcking-Str. 6-8 Telefon: +49 681 3720 174 [email protected] - 66121 Saarbrücken Telefax: +49 681 3720 1749 www.vdm-vsg.de
