DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

L-R: Ms. Rose Gamwera, Secretary General ULGA; Mr. Ben Kumumanya, PS. MoLG and Dr. Arthur Bainomugisha, Executive Director ACODE in a group photo with award winners at the launch of the 8th Local Government Councils Scorecard Report FY 2018/19 at Hotel Africana in on 10th March 2020

Kumi, Ngora, and Soroti itself. Iteso is 1.0 Introduction the largest ethnic group in Soroti, followed by This brief is developed from the main Scorecard the Kumam, who speak Ateso and Kumamn Report titled, “The Local Government Councils respectively. Lukenye, Swahili, Luganda and Scorecard FY 2018/19. The Next Big Steps: Lugisu languages are commonly used by the Consolidating Gains of Decentralisation and business community. The district headquarters Repositioning the Local Government Sector is situated in Soroti Municipality which is in .” The brief provides key highlights approximately 116km (72 miles) by road of the performance of elected leaders and northeast of , the nearest large city. Council of Soroti District Local Government Soroti has a total projected population of during FY 2018/19. 296,833 with a population density of 248.9 persons per km2 (UBOS, 2014). 1.1 About the District 1.2 The Local Government Councils Located in the eastern part of Uganda, Soroti Scorecard Initiative (LGCSCI) District is bordered by district to the north, district to the east, Ngora The main building blocks in LGCSCI are the district to the southeast, to principles and core responsibilities of Local the south and district to the Governments as set out in Chapter 11 of the west. It is one of the original 38 districts that Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, the were created in Uganda upon the abolition of Local Governments Act (CAP 243) under the provinces in the 1980s. It is formerly the Section 10 (c), (d) and (e). The scorecard mother to Teso district which is now constituted comprises of five parameters based on the by the following districts: Katakwi, Amuria, core responsibilities of the local government Kapelebyong, Bukedea, Kaberamaido, Kalaki, Councils, District Chairpersons, Speakers

Eugene Gerald Ssemakula1 • Paul Okiring • Dinah Atai soroti DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

and Individual Councillors. These are Figure 1: Performance of District Council classified into five categories: Financial on Key Parameters Relative to National and management and oversight; Political Regional Average Performances functions and representation; Legislation and related functions; Development planning and constituency servicing and Monitoring service delivery. The parameters are broken down into quantitative and qualitative indicators. Separate scorecards are produced for the Chairperson, Speaker, Individual Councillors, and the District Council as a whole. The major rationale of the LGCSCI is to induce elected political leaders and representative organs to deliver on their electoral promises, improve public service delivery, ensure Source: Local Government Councils Scorecard Assessment FY 2018/19 accountability and promote good governance through periodic assessments. 2.2 The District Chairperson 1.3 Methodology During 2018/19, the Soroti District Chairperson, The 2018/19 LGCSCI assessment adopted Hon. George Michael Egunyu was serving his the use of participatory assessment second term in office. He subscribed to the ruling methods including face-to-face structured party, NRM and scored 68 out of a possible 100 interviews, civic engagement meetings, points and improving from 54 points scored in document review; key informant interviews; FY2016/17. This performance was however field verification visits and photography to below the national and regional average scores collect the relevant data. The assessment of 72 and 70 points respectively for Chairpersons. was conducted between July and September The chairperson registered good performance 2019. A total of 26 elected leaders (24 District on the parameter of Initiation of projects in the Councillors, Chairperson and Speaker) and district where he garnered 9 out of 10 possible Council were assessed using the different points. On the other hand, his worst performed tailor-made LGCSCI tools. parameter was in contact with the electorate where he scored 4 out of the 10 possible points, having failed to meet the required threshold. 2.0 Results of the Assessment Figure 2 illustrates the chairperson’s comparative performance at national and regional levels. 2.1 The District Council Figure 2: Performance of District The performance of Soroti District Council Chairperson on Key Parameters Relative was 76 out of a possible 100 points which to National and Regional Average was an improvement from 55 points scored Performances in FY 2016/17. The District scored 23 out of 30 points in monitoring services, 16 out of 20 points in planning and budgeting, 19 out of 20 points in accountability and 18 out of 20 points in the legislative function. This performance placed Soroti above the average score of 62 nationally placing the district at number 5 out of the 35 assessed districts. At the regional level, Soroti District emerged as the best of all the assessed districts in the Eastern Region. Figure 1

provides a comparative performance of the Source: Local Government Councils Scorecard Assessment FY 2018/19 district at national and regional levels.

2 soroti DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

2.3 Speaker of Council’s Performance, points, an improvement from the previous Soroti District Council assessment where he obtained 76 points out of 100 possible points. His performance was The Speaker of Soroti District Council was outstanding in all the 4 assessed parameters. Hon. Olebe Stephen, who was serving his first term as speaker at the time of the assessment, Figure 4: Performance of District having served as Deputy Speaker in the Councillors on Key Parameters Relative previous Council. Hon. Olebe subscribes to the to National and Regional Average UPC party. He scored 73 out of a possible 100 Performances. points, registering an improvement from 42 points obtained in the previous assessment. This score was above both the national and regional scores of Speakers of Councils that stood at 62 and 64 respectively. Figure 3 shows his performance. Overall, the speaker performed well in almost all the parameters (presiding over council, contact with electorate and participation in LLGs) with the exception of monitoring services in his constituency. This emerged after he failed to produce sufficient evidence for monitoring service delivery points as well as follow up actions from the monitoring Source: Local Government Councils Scorecard Assessment FY 2018/19 he undertook. Figure 3: The Speaker of Council’s Performance on Key Parameters Relative 3.0 Results of the Assessment to National and Regional Average Performances 3.1 Key Factors Enabling Good Performance • Good working relationship between the two arms of the district: There was a cordial working relationship between the technical officers and the committees of council with some committee members being transported by the technical officials during their monitoring activities. • Commitment and hard work: The councillors demonstrated a high level of Source: Local Government Councils Scorecard Assessment FY 2018/19 commitment to their roles especially those serving their first term. Majority of the best 2.4 District Councillors performing councillors were serving their first term and presented the zeal, positive The councillors registered overall improvement attitude and high level commitment to their from the previous assessment with an average score of 59 points attained in FY 2018/19 work hence the good performance. compared with 49 points obtained during FY 2016/17. This performance was comparatively higher than both the national and regional 3.2 Key Factors Affecting Performance averages of 43 and 40 points respectively. • Induction of newly elected Councillors This improved performance was across all for Special Interest Groups parameters as indicated in Figure 4. The best (Representing Workers, Older Persons): performing district councillor was Hon. Michael Due to lack of resources, both the Ministry Akol Okole scoring 93 out of 100 possible of Local Government and the local

3 soroti DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

governments were unable to adequately induct the new councillors. These 4.0 Recommendations councillors had not received induction on • The Council should prioritise appropriation what they are supposed to do in council of money in the district budget to facilitate which greatly affected their performance. standing committees of council to perform their monitoring function. • Insufficient follow-up by councillors to ensure that their actions translate into • Develop innovative avenues to enable tangible outcomes in terms of improvement councillors to execute their monitoring in service delivery. Most councillors carried mandate, for example through savings out their monitoring role, but because schemes to purchase motorcycles for ease they did not follow up on their actions it of mobility especially during monitoring. was difficult to realise positive changes in • The district leadership should strengthen service delivery. orientation and training for councillors: This • Failure to engage in lower local can be achieved by partnering with Civil governments: Majority of the councillors Society Organisations like ACODE in cases did not meet the threshold of participating where resources cannot be mobilised by in at least 4 LLG Council meetings. Some the district. The trainings should be at least meetings in Sub Counties had conflicting once in a financial year. Such trainings schedules with district council meetings should be thematic to cover aspects like while others did not provide minutes to (i) the Legislative roles, (ii) contact with substantiate claims of having engaged in the electorate, (iii) participation in the their lower local councils. lower local government, (iv) monitoring service delivery on national priority • Poor monitoring, record keeping and programme areas, (v) rules of procedure, documentation: A bigger proportion among others. It is also important that of councillors, under the parameter of refresher courses be organized to provide monitoring services, did not adequately other relevant information and skills to play this role and if they did, monitoring councillors. reports were rarely prepared. For those that monitored, often times feedback was • Standardise follow ups after monitoring: verbally reported to the technical staff for Council should introduce a standard action. Relatedly, poor record keeping also for follow ups by councillors and district affected the performance of councillors. leaders. Misplacement of reports and other records • The Speaker’s office should closely was noted from the clerk to council that monitor the Clerk to Council to ensure eventually saw her removal from office. timely production of minutes. • Untimely production of minutes: This • The Speaker of council should communicate was attributed to the fact that the role of and share the council schedule with LLGs, clerk to council is an assigned role. The such that the meetings for the respective officers assigned the responsibility of clerks councils are not colliding. to councils equally have other demanding responsibilities which they seemed to give more priority hence a delay in production of council minutes.

4

soroti DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub

45 35 29 30 23 17

Environment ENR

5 4 3 4 3 2

FAL FAL

5 0 2 4 3 1

Water Sources Water Agriculture

7 6 4

4 1 2 Roads Roads

4 3 2 7 6 5

Water Schools

4 3 2

7 7 5 Health Health

5 5 3

7 7 5

Education Agriculture

Monitoring Service Delivery

Monitoring Service Delivery

5 5 3 7 5 5

Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub

20 16 14

Local Revenue Local 10 9 9 NGOS 11 7 5

5 5 5 District Budget District Communal Projects Communal 4 4 4

2 1 1

Projects Budgeting Mission and Vision Plans, Initiation of Initiated Projects Planning and

5 5 5

3 3 3 Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub

25 19 15

Accountability 10 4 8

Issues by Electorate by Issues

Principles of of Principles 5 2 4

with 3 1 0 Electorate Meetings

Contact Involvement of CSO of Involvement Electorate 5 2 4

2 2 2 Sub Total Sub Accountability

15 9 9 Administrative Administrative Bills by Executive by Bills

8 8 5

5 3 2

Accountability Accountability Political Role Executive Motions

8 5 5

8 4 5

Fiscal Accountability Fiscal Legislative Council

2 2 2 4 3 3

Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub

25 18 16 20 11 16

Capacity Building Capacity Central Gov’t Central

4 1 3

3 1 2

Commissions/Boards Petitions

2 1 2 2 1 1

Servants Legislative Resources Legislative

4 4 3 Civil Oversight

Public Hearings Public 4 0 3 State of Affairs of State

2 1 1

2 2 2 Initiatives Monitoring Admin Monitoring

Political Leadership Political Conflict Resolution Resolution Conflict 5 4 4

1 1 1 DEC Ordinances 3 3 2

3 1 2 Legislation

Council 2018/19

Motions Passed by The The by Passed Motions 100 68 72

3 3 2

2016/17 Committees of Council of Committees Perfor mance

3 2 2

100 54 62 Membership to ULGA to Membership Terms

2 2 1 2

Rules of Procedure of Rules

2 2 2 Party Political

2018/19 NRM 100 76 62 Gender

M 2016/17 100 55 51

Identifiers District Performance Name George Egunyu Score Average Max Score Soroti Average Table 1: Soroti District Council’s Performance FY 2018/19 Performance District Council’s Soroti 1: Table FY 2018/19 Performance District Chairperson’s Soroti 2: Table

5

soroti DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub

45 24 24 45 29 22 29 29 26 18 11 17 3 10 5 3 3 8 3 22 45 42 41 41 30 31 33 45 40 20

ENR ENR Environment

5 4 1 4 4 5 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 5 1

5 4 3

FAL FAL

FAL 5 3 1 2 5 5 1 5 4 5 4 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5

Roads Roads

Roads

7 5 4 7 5 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 0 5 1 1 1 1 1 3 7 7 7 5 3 5 7 7 3 7

Water Water Water

7 5 4 7 5 5 7 5 5 7 0 5 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 7 7 7 5 3 5 7 3 3 7

Agriculture Agriculture Agriculture

7 1 3

7 5 5 3 5 5 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 7 7 3 3 5 1 5 7 7 3

Education

Education 7 3 4 Education

7 7 7 5 7 5 7 7 5 7 5 5 7 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 0 0 5 0 4 7

Monitoring Service Delivery Health Health 7 3 5 Health Monitoring Service Delivery Monitoring Service Delivery

7 5 5 7 5 1 5 0 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 7 7 7 5 7 5 7 7 3 7

4 Participation in LLG in Participation Meetings

10 10 Meetings

Sub County County Sub LLG County Sub

LLG LLG

10 0 4 6 4 0 4 10 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 10 10 10 6 10 10 4 0 0 10

Sub Total Sub

Sub Total Sub 20 20 16 Total Sub

20 20 20 20 17 20 17 20 20 20 20 20 17 12 20 19 13 17 9 9 9 9 3 9 9 15 20

Coordinating Centre Coordinating Office

9 9 8 Office

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 9 9 9 9 9 2 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

Meeting Electorate Meeting Electorate Meeting Meetings Electorate Meetings 8 Contact Contact Contact 11 11

Electorate Electorate Electorate

11 11 11 8 11 8 11 11 11 11 11 8 3 11 10 7 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 11 11

Sub Total Sub Total Sub

Sub Total Sub 21 18 21 21 21 14 16 21 25 21 18 10 11 9 14 21 18 21 14 16 16 21 9 9 17 25 21

25 19 17

Special Skills Special Special Skills Special

Special Skills Special 4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

5 0 0

Motion Motion

Record of Motions of Record

5 5 2 2 0 0 5 5 2 5 5 0 0 5 0 0 3 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 5 0 5 3 3 2

Committee Committee Records Book Records

2 2 2

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8

Legislation Legislation

Plenary Plenary

Committee 3 2 2

Business Business 8 8 8 8 8 8 1 8 8 8 8 8 0 1 1 1 8 8 8 1 8 8 8 1 1 6 8

% Change % Change % Rules of Procedure of Rules 11 9 9 7

89 100 40 17 112 -29 -38 -6 8 -23 163 34 39 39 8 41 20 15 15 29

Presiding over Council Presiding over

Chairing Council Chairing

2018/2019 3 3 3 2018/2019

92 85 81 79 78 76 76 71 100 70 64 62 56 55 55 55 52 37 33 32 28 27 26 21 59 100 93

% Change % 74 18

2016/17 2016/17 Performance Performance

100 37 31 40 47 26 52 53 34 26 35 8 49 66 61 75 56 65 66 66 55 100 76

2018/19 Terms Served Served Terms 73 62 Served Terms

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 1

100

Gender Gender Performance 2016/17 42 57 M F F M F F M M F M F F M F F M M M M F M F M M

100

Terms Served Served Terms 2 2

Gender Constituency Constituency FY 2018/19

M District

Soroti Youth Katine S/C Gweri S/C S/C Tubur/Katine Tubur Asuret/Soroti S/C Div Western Soroti S/C Older Persons Youth PWD Asuret S/C Eastern/Western Div Kamuda Kamuda Workers S/C Eastern Div Gweri Northern Div Northern Div Workers Older Persons Arapai S/C Arapai

Constituency Political Political Identifiers Identifiers

PWD NRM NRM NRM FDC NRM FDC IND NRM NRM FDC NRM FDC FDC NRM NRM NRM FDC IND NRM NRM NRM FDC NRM FDC Political Party Political Identifiers

UPC

Name Name Name Maximum Scores Maximum Stephen Olebe Average Maximum Scores Maximum Elieru John Brown Iruo Vicky Alum Jane John Calvin Elenyu Margaret Amongin Elizabeth Alungo Oringo Peter Akol Fred Agumo* Jennifer Mohammed Nasur Rhoda Apeduno* Betty Anyakoit* Anatu* Patrick Recho Akol Abiro Jane Average Bob Owiny John Enomu Jorem Opian Obicho Rose Tino Edoru Ekuu Simon Peter Susan AgnesApolot John Bosco Okwii Arimu Francis Maximum Scores Maximum Okole Michael Akol Table 3: Speaker of Council’s Performance Performance Speaker of Council’s 3: Table FY 2018/19 Performance District Councillors’ Soroti 4: Table *Councillors Assessed Using Secondary Data

6

soroti DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19 Sub Total Sub

45 29 22 29 29 26 18 11 17 3 10 5 3 3 8 3 22 ENR

5 4 1 4 4 5 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 FAL

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Roads

7 5 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 0 5 1 1 1 1 1 3 Water

7 5 5 7 5 5 7 0 5 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 Agriculture

7 5 5 3 5 5 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 Education

7 5 5 7 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 1 0 0 5 0 4 Monitoring Service Delivery Health

7 5 5 7 5 1 5 0 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 4

Meetings Sub County County Sub

LLG 10 0 4 6 4 0 4 10 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 Sub Total Sub

20 20 20 17 12 20 19 13 17 9 9 9 9 3 9 9 15 Office

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6 9 9 9 9 9 2 9 9 9 Contact Electorate Meeting

Electorate

11 11 11 8 3 11 10 7 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 Sub Total Sub

25 21 18 10 11 9 14 21 18 21 14 16 16 21 9 9 17 Special Skills Special

4 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Motion

5 5 2 2 0 0 5 5 2 5 5 0 0 5 0 0 3 Committee

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Legislation Plenary

8 8 8 0 1 1 1 8 8 8 1 8 8 8 1 1 6 % Change %

89 100 40 17 112 -29 -38 -6 8 -23 163 34 2018/2019

100 70 64 62 56 55 55 55 52 37 33 32 28 27 26 21 59 2016/17 Performance

100 37 31 40 47 26 52 53 34 26 35 8 49 Terms Served Served Terms

1 1 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 3 2 3 1 1 1 Gender

M F F M F F M M F M F F M F F Constituency

Older Persons Youth PWD Asuret S/C Eastern/Western Div Kamuda Kamuda Workers S/C Arapai Eastern Div Gweri Northern Div Northern Div Workers Older Persons Political Identifiers

NRM NRM NRM FDC NRM FDC IND NRM NRM FDC NRM FDC FDC NRM NRM Name Maximum Scores Maximum Elieru John Brown Iruo Vicky Alum Jane John Calvin Elenyu Margaret Amongin Elizabeth Alungo Oringo Peter Akol Fred Agumo* Jennifer Mohammed Nasur Rhoda Apeduno* Betty Anyakoit* Anatu* Patrick Recho Akol Abiro Jane Average *Councillors Assessed Using Secondary Data

7 soroti DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

REFERENCES Bainomugisha, A., Mbabazi, J., Muhwezi, W., W., Bogere, G., Atukunda, P., Ssemakula, E.G., Otile, O., M., Kasalirwe, F., Mukwaya, N., R., Akena, W., Ayesigwa, R., The Local Government Councils Scorecard FY 2018/19: The Next Big Steps; Consolidating Gains of Decentralisation and Repositioning the Local Government Sector in Uganda. ACODE Policy Research Paper Series No. 96, 2020. Soroti District Local Government (2019), Minutes of Soroti District Council FY 2018/19 (2019), Minutes of Standing Committees of Soroti District Council FY 2018/19 (2019), Minutes of the District Executive Committee FY 2018/19 (2015), District Development Plan 2015/2016-2019/2020 (2018), Budget Framework Paper FY 2018/2019 Republic of Uganda (1995), Constitution of the Republic of Uganda (1997), Local Governments Act (CAP 243) as amended UBOS (2014), National Housing and Population Census Report.

About ACODE: The Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment (ACODE) is an independent public policy research and advocacy Think Tank based in Uganda, working in the East and Southern sub-regions on a wide range of public policy issues. Our core business is policy research and analysis, outreach and capacity building. Since it’s founding 19 years ago, ACODE has emerged as one of the leading regional public policy think tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa. For the last 8 consecutive years, ACODE has been recognized among the Top-100 Think Tanks worldwide by the University of Pennsylvania’s annual Global-Go-To Think Tank Index Reports. About LGCSCI: The Local Government Councils Scorecard Initiative (LGCSCI) is a policy research and capacity building initiative implemented by ACODE and ULGA. The initiative is a strategic social accountability initiative that enables citizens to demand excellence of their local governments and enables local governments to respond effectively and efficiently to those demands with the aim of improving service delivery.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS Eugene Gerald Ssemakula: Eugene is a researcher who for the past 14 years has undertaken various social research assignments with interests in Monitoring and Evaluation, Local Governance, financing and accountability. He is currently a Research Fellow with the Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment (ACODE), where for the past 10 years has conducted annual capacity building and assessment of political leaders under the Local Government Councils Scorecard initiative. His publications can be accessed at www.acode-u.org Okiring Paul is development professional with over 14 years’ experience in civil society work. He is the current Executive Director of Teso Anticorruption Coalition (TAC) and a known governance and accountability CSO leader in the Teso sub region. Dinah Atai is a District Researcher with ACODE since 2015. She works with Teso Anti-Corruption Coalition as an M&E Officer. Dinah Holds a Master’s of Science Degree in Management studies with abiasin Monitoring and Evaluation.

ADVOCATES COALITION FOR DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT Plot 96, Kanjokya Street, Kamwokya. P. O. Box 29836, Kampala. Tel: +256 312 812150 Email: [email protected]; [email protected]. Website: www.acode-u.org

WITH SUPPORT FROM:

8