LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

amuru DISTRICT 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

1.0 Introduction counties of Kilak South and Kilak North, 4 sub counties and 1 town council, 29 parishes and 394 This brief was developed from the scorecard villages. The local economy is private sector led report titled, “The Local Government Councils and driven by small scale trade and commerce; Scorecard FY 2018/19. The Next Big Steps: however, the prospect of two sugar factories in Consolidating Gains of Decentralisation and Lakang and Pacilo and the one stop border Repositioning the Local Government Sector in market at Elego is likely to give a boost to the .” The brief provides key highlights of local economy. the performance of elected leaders and Council 1.2 The Local Government Councils of Amuru District Local Government during FY Scorecard Initiative (LGCSCI) 2018/19. The main building blocks in LGCSCI are the 1.1 Brief about Amuru District principles and core responsibilities of Local Amuru district was previously part of District. Governments as set out in Chapter 11 of the It was created by an Act of Parliament and Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, the operationalized in July 2006. In July 2010, Amuru Local Governments Act (CAP 243) under lost County when was Section 10 (c), (d) and (e). The scorecard created. Amuru District is bordered by Adjumani comprises of five parameters based on the District to the north, and Lamwo core responsibilities of the local government District to the northeast, to Councils, District Chairpersons, Speakers and the east, Nwoya District to the south, Nebbi Individual Councillors. These are classified into District to the southwest and to the five categories: Financial management and west. The predominantly rural district is largely oversight; Political functions and representation; inhabited by the ethnic Acholi, although there Legislation and related functions; Development are other tribes settled especially in and planning and constituency servicing and Atiak Sub Counties. The District consists of 2 Monitoring service delivery. The parameters are

Phoebe Atukunda Kirungyi • Kenneth1 Rubangakene • Ronald Ogwanh amuru DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

broken down into quantitative and qualitative of; i); legislation, ii) accountability to citizens, indicators. Separate scorecards are produced iii) planning and budgeting, and iv) monitoring for the District Chairperson, Speaker, individual service delivery. Amuru District Council scored Councillors, and Council as a whole. an overall 61 out of a possible 100 points; an improvement from the previous score of 49 points The major rationale of the LGCSCI is to induce obtained in the 2016/17 assessment. This score elected political leaders and representative placed Amuru District Council in the 22nd position organs to deliver on their electoral promises, out of the 35 district councils assessed. improve public service delivery, ensure accountability and promote good governance Amuru District Council’s best performance through periodic assessments. was in the parameter of legislation in which it garnered 19 points from a possible 25 points. 1.3 Methodology This was enhanced by the fact that the district The 2018/19 LGCSCI assessment used face- council had passed more motions than in the to-face structured interviews, civic engagement previous assessment; it had passed ordinances meetings, documents’ review, key informant and put in place a number of conflict resolution interviews, field visits and photography to mechanisms. On the other hand, council’s collect the relevant data. The assessment was performance in the parameter of planning and conducted between November and December budgeting was undermined by a reduction in 2019. A total of 18 elected leaders (16 District the proportion of local revenue to the district Councillors, Chairperson and Speaker of budget. In the parameter of monitoring, council’s Council) and 6 Councillors were assessed using performance was also not impressive; it was secondary data. undermined by lack of sufficient evidence of monitoring undertaken by committees of council. There was no evidence of monitoring reports as 2.0 Results of the Assessment well as follow up actions undertaken to ensure positive outcomes. A summary of the Council’s This section highlights the performance of performance is presented in Figure 1 and Table Council, Chairperson, Speaker and Councillors 1 respectively. of Amuru District Local Government during the FY2018/19. 2.2 District Chairperson 2.1 District Council Hon. Michael Lakony was the District Chairperson of Amuru. He subscribes to the FDC party and Amuru District council consists of 19 elected the time of assessment, he was serving the leaders (who were elected to represent lower third year of his first term of office. Suffice to local governments and Special Interests Groups) note was that, Hon. Michael Lakony previously including Chairperson and Speaker of Council. served as the Councillor of Lamogi Sub County Out of these, 9 are female while 10 are male. and Speaker of Council between 2006 and 2011. The District Council which is the supreme organ The Chairman was assessed on 5 parameters; i) of the district was assessed on 4 parameters political leadership, ii) legislative role, iii) contact

Figure 1: Performance of Amuru District Figure 2: Performance of Amuru District Council on Key Parameters Relative Chairperson on Key Parameters Relative to National and Regional Average to National and Regional Average Performances Performances

Source: Local Government Council Scorecard Assessment FY 2818/19 Source: Local Government Council Scorecard Assessment FY 2818/19

2 amuru DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19 with electorates, iv) initiation and participation in a decline from the previous 62 points obtained in development projects and v) monitoring service the 2016/17 assessment. delivery. Hon. Lakony scored an overall 71 out Speakers’ best performance was exhibited under of a possible 100 points. This score was a huge the parameters of; presiding over meetings of leap from the previous 31 points he scored in council and contact with electorate. Analysis 2016/2017 that placed him in the 17th position out of the minutes of council provided sufficient of the 33 district chairpersons assessed. evidence, that the Speaker had provided effective Chairman’s highest score was in the parameter stewardship of the council; often steering council of monitoring service delivery which was in accordance with the provisions of the Rules enhanced by the fact that he provided sufficient of Procedure. Under his stewardship, several evidence for monitoring service delivery and lawful motions were passed by council. There followed up on the issues that arose to ensure was also sufficient evidence that Speaker had effective implementation. For instance, he is on held meetings with his electorate in Lamogi record for having intervened on the high rates of Sub-county. However, the Speaker’s overall absenteeism by health workers at Kaladima HCIII; performance was affected by his low scores he presented the matter before the DHO and it under the parameters of participation in the was addressed. On the other hand, Chairman’s lower local government and monitoring service performance in the parameter of political delivery. Although the Speaker claimed to have leadership and legislation was undermined by monitored, there were no reports submitted as lack of sufficient evidence on his engagement evidence for the monitoring exercise carried with central government on matters that arose out. In addition, he could not provide sufficient and failure by DEC to introduce bills in council. evidence of follow up actions for the monitoring A summary of the Chairperson’s performance is he had undertaken. A detailed breakdown of the shown in Figure 2 and Table 2. Speaker’s performance is presented in Table 3. 2.3 Speaker of Council 2.4 District Councillors Hon. Denis Rom was the Speaker of Council. He Sixteen councillors (7 males and 9 females) were also doubled as the councillor for Lamogi Sub- assessed in the year under review; 6 of these were county. Hon. Rom was serving his second term assessed using secondary data. The councillors of office as the councillor for Lamogi Sub-county were assessed on four parameters namely; i) having been previously elected in 2011. It should legislative role, ii) contact with electorates, iii) be noted that he had previously served as the participation in the lower local government, and District Vice Chairperson in council. The Speaker iv) monitoring service delivery. The councillors of Council was assessed on four parameters of; scored an average of 32 out of a possible 100 i) presiding over and preservation of order in points, a slight decrease from the 34 they scored council, ii) contact with electorate, iii) participation in the previous assessment. in the lower local government council, and v) monitoring service delivery. The Speaker scored an overall 51 out of a possible 100 points. This is Figure 4: Performance of Amuru District Councillors on Key Parameters Relative to National and Regional Average Figure 3: Speaker of Council’s Performance Performances on Key Parameters Relative to National and Regional Average Performances

Source: Local Government Council Scorecard Assessment FY 2818/19 Source: Local Government Council Scorecard Assessment FY 2818/19

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

The Councillors’ best performance was exhibited at LLGs. Whereas six (6) councillors did in the parameter of legislation in which they attend meetings at the sub counties, it scored an average of 11 out of a possible 25 was established that only one (1) had points. This was realised after more councillors delivered official communications during debated in the year under review than in the those meetings and submitted to the district previous assessment. The worst performance was council issues raised from the lower local exhibited under the parameters of participation in government. This perhaps explains the lower local governments and monitoring service conspicuous absence of issues from the delivery. Only six (6) councillors were found to sub counties in the discussions at the district have met the threshold of attending at least 4 council. meetings at the lower local governments. This is • Documentation and poor record keeping: perhaps because many lower local governments There was a challenge of documentation had not held the mandatory 6 meetings while in the Office of the Clerk to Council and at many councillors at the district especially the the LLGs. At individual level, majority of the special interest group representatives pointed councillors lacked documentary evidence out that they were not invited for the meetings. to back up their performance claims. The Councillors’ performance in the parameter of assessment being evidence-based, many monitoring was undermined by the fact that councillors lost points as marks could only majority of the councillors had failed to provide be awarded on presentation of documented sufficient evidence of having monitored service evidence. delivery units and or made follow up on the issues identified during monitoring. A detailed • Dormant structures of special interest breakdown of the councillors’ performance is groups: Structures such as the disability presented in Table 4. council, youth council, workers’ union and council for older persons were found dormant in the district. This affected their contact with 3.0 Critical Factors Affecting their electorate. From the findings of the Performance assessment, representatives of the special interest groups (workers, youths, PWDs, 3.1 Factors Enabling Performance and older persons) performed poorly in this parameter (contact with electorate). The innovation of penalties for absence from meetings: Amuru District Council passed a resolution in 2017 to penalize councillors who absent themselves from or come late for 4.0 Recommendations council and committee meetings by withholding • The District Executive Committee should their sitting allowance. Analysis of council and involve district councillors when carrying out committee minutes revealed that the rate of monitoring visits and supervision. absenteeism from the meetings have reduced and this perhaps explains the slight overall • All political leaders should endeavor to keep improvement in the parameter of legislation. records of their activities through the use of diaries and personal files. 3.2 Factors Hindering Performance • The office of the CAO should ensure Lower • Inadequate political monitoring by local governments endeavor to invite councillors and failure to follow up on councillors for their council meetings and issues identified during monitoring: councillors should endeavor to attend. Majority of the councillors did not meet the scorecard’s threshold of monitoring at least • The district council should appropriate some half of the service delivery units in their funds out of their local revenue to facilitate sub counties. Also, many councillors who monitoring activities by councillors. undertook monitoring had not followed up • The Office of the Speaker should strengthen with relevant offices to address the issues supervision of the Clerk to Council to ensure that they identified during monitoring. timely production and better management of • Participation in lower local government council minutes. meetings: Only six (6) of the councillors were found to have attended meetings

4

amuru DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub

45 32 29

30 14 17

Environment

ENR 5 5 3

4 4 2

FAL

FAL 5 0 2

4 0 1

Water Sources Water

Agriculture 7 7 4

4 0 2

Roads

Roads 7 7 5

4 0 2

Delivery Schools Delivery

Water 7 3 5

4 2 2

Health Health

7 7 5

Monitoring Service 5 3 3 Monitoring Service

Agriculture Education

7 3 5 5 5 3

Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub 9

10 10

20 13 14

NGOs

5 5 5 Local Revenue Local

4 5

11 Communal Projects Communal District Budget District 2 2 1

4 4 4

Projects

Initiation of Initiated Projects 3 3 3 Budgeting Mission and Vision Plans,

Planning and 5 5 5

Sub Total Sub

8

Sub Total Sub 10 10

25 15 15 electorate by Issues

5 5 4

Principles of Accountability of Principles with 3 1 0 Electorate Meetings

5 5 4 Contact

Electorate

Involvement of CSO of Involvement

2 2 2 Total Sub 6 9

15

Accountability Bills by Executive by Bills

5 0 2

Administrative Administrative 8 3 5 Motions Executive Motions

8 4 5

Role Accountability Accountability Political

8 6 5

Legislative Council 2 2 2

Fiscal Accountability Fiscal 4 3 3 Total Sub

20 16 16 Sub Total Sub

Central Gov’t Central

4 2 3 25 19 16

Capacity Building Capacity

Commissions/Boards

2 2 2 3 3 2

Servants Petitions

4 2 3

2 1 1 Oversight Civil Civil Oversight

Legislative Resources Legislative

4 3 3 Affairs of State

2 2 2

Public Hearings Public 2 0 1 Admin Monitoring

5 5 4

Political Leadership Political Initiatives DEC

3 2 3 Conflict Resolution Resolution Conflict 1 1 1

2018/19 Ordinances 74 72

3 3 2

100

Legislation

Council 2016/17

Perfor Motions passed by the the by passed Motions 31 62 mance

3 2 2

100

Terms 1 Committees of Council of Committees

3 2 2

Political Party Political Membership to ULGA to Membership

2 2 1

FDC Rules of Procedure of Rules

2 2 2 District 2018/19

Amuru

61 62

100 Gender 2016/17 M

49 51

100 Identifiers

Name District Performance Amuru Average Max Score Max Score Micheal Lakony Score Average Table 1: Performance of Amuru District Council FY 2018/19 of Amuru Performance 1: Table FY 2018/19 District Chairperson of Amuru Performance 2: Table

5

amuru DISTRICT LOCAL GOVERNMENT council SCORECARD assessment FY 2018/19

Sub Total Sub Sub Total Sub

45 18 24 45 33 28 16 26 21 11 16

ENR

Environment 5 5 3

5 2 5 2 5 5 4 5

FAL

FAL 5 0 1 5 0 2 0 0 2 0 0

Roads

Roads 7 3 3 0 1 0 0 3 7 3 4 Water

7 7 1 0 7 0 3 7

Water 7 3 4 Agriculture

7 7 3 7 3 0 3 0

Agriculture 7 3 3 Education

7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1

Education 7 2 4 Health Monitoring Service Delivery 7 7 7 0 3 7 0 0

Monitoring Service Delivery

Health

7 2 5 Meetings Sub County County Sub 6 6 6 6 6 0

10 10

LLG Participation in LLG in Participation 0 4

10 LLG Total Sub

9

20 20 17 17 17 17 16 Sub Total Sub 20 17 16 Office

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 6

Coordinating Centre Coordinating 9 9 8 Contact Electorate Meeting

Electorate

8 8 8 8 7 3 11 11 Meetings Electorate Meetings 8 8

Contact

11 Electorate Total Sub

5 1

25 21 11 13 11 17

Sub Total Sub Special Skills Special

25 16 17

4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

Special Skills Special 5 0 0 Motion

5 5 2 2 2 0 2 2

Record of Motions of Record 3 3 2 Committee

8 8 8 8 0 0 0 8 Legislation

Records Book Records 2 2 2 Plenary

8 8 1 3 3 1 8 7

Business Committee Business 3 2 2 % Change %

Rules of Procedure of Rules 10 15 74 13 13

-14 -36 9 7 7

Presiding over Council Presiding over 2018/2019 Chairing Council Chairing 3 2 3 80 62 56 54 45 44 42 100

Perfor mance

% Change % 2016/17

18

-18 73 54 65 31 40 39 66

100

2018/19 Terms Served Served Terms

51 62

1 1 4 1 1 2 2 100

Gender 2016/17 F F F M M M M 62 57

Performance 100

Terms Served Served Terms 2 2

Constituency Gender

M

District Atiak S/C Amuru S/C S/C Pabbo S/C Pabbo Amuru S/C Atiak S/C Amuru TC Political Amuru

FDC FDC FDC FDC FDC FDC NRM Constituency Identifiers

Lamogi

Identifiers

Political Party Political Name

IND Name Maximum Scores Maximum Denis Rom Average Scores Maximum John Bosco Ocan Okello Apollo Kagwa Catherine Apio Oywa Richard Abola Lacaka Lucy Adong Ekanya Alice Akello Martine Akera Table 4: Performance of Amuru District Councillors FY 2018/19 District Councillors of Amuru Performance 4: Table Table 3: Speaker of Council, Amuru District FY 2018/19 Amuru Speaker of Council, 3: Table

6

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

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 27 11 ENR

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 FAL

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Roads

7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Water

7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Agriculture

7 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Education

7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Health

Monitoring Service Delivery 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

Meetings Sub County County Sub 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

10

LLG Sub Total Sub

2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 20 Office

9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Contact Electorate Meeting

Electorate 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11 Sub Total Sub

9 9 9 9 25 11 21 19 16 11 Special Skills Special

4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Motion

5 0 5 2 5 0 0 0 0 2 Committee

8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 6 Legislation Plenary

8 3 8 8 3 1 1 1 1 4 % Change %

0 -9

60 22 -77 -63 220 200 2018/2019 9 9 9 9 40 21 19 16 32 100

Perfor mance 2016/17 5 3

25 23 19 39 24 34

100 Sick Terms Served Served Terms

1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 Gender

F F F F F F M M M Constituency

Lamogi S/C Youth PWD Youth Amuru TC Older Persons PWD Workers Older Persons Political FDC NRM NRM NRM NRM NRM NRM NRM NRM

Identifiers Name Maximum Scores Maximum Adoch Jennifer Naku* Jane Okumu* Santo Lawrence Denish Ojok Mapenduzi Abwot* Pamela Airi Okello Tom Nighty Aparo* Caroline Monica Aber* Rose Lapor* Average **Councillors Assessed Using Secondary Data. under review. Year of the Financial much bedridden for Rose Lapor was Hon. legal due to a protracted under review not assessed because he had joined council in the year (Male) was representative Workers’ the Clement Arop, Hon. battle.

7 amuru 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. Amuru District Local Government (2019), Minutes of Amuru District Council FY 2018/19 (2019), Minutes of Standing Committees of Amuru District Council FY 2018/19 (2019), Minutes of the District Executive Committee FY 2018/19 (2015), District Development Plan 2015/2016-2019/2020 Republic of Uganda (1995), Constitution of the Republic of Uganda (1997), Local Governments Act (CAP 243) as amended UBOS (2019), District Population Projection 2015-2030

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 Africa 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 Phoebe Atukunda Kirungyi is a Research Officer at the Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment (ACODE) - one of the leading public policy research think tanks in Eastern and Southern Africa Sub-regions. Phoebe has been a researcher under ACODE’s Local Government Council Scorecard Initiative since 2013. Phoebe has contributed to ACODE’s research work and published in ACODE’s different publication series. Kenneth Rubangakene is the Lead Researcher for Amuru district under the LGCSCI. He is a Research Assistant with Center for African Research Environmental Justice Advocates in northern Uganda .He is also a member of national coalition for human rights defender Uganda-. Previously, he worked as a research assistant with Gulu support the children organization Ronald Ogwanh is a District Researcher, Amuru District under the LGCSCI. He also works for GOAL/UHI (Uganda Heart Institute) as a research assistant for a clinical trial project called Goal-Trial based in Gulu District.

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