Assessment Form
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Local Government Performance Assessment Mayuge District (Vote Code: 535) Assessment Scores Crosscutting Minimum Conditions 67% Education Minimum Conditions 100% Health Minimum Conditions 75% Water & Environment Minimum Conditions 65% Micro-scale Irrigation Minimum Conditions 70% Crosscutting Performance Measures 46% Educational Performance Measures 77% Health Performance Measures 55% Water & Environment Performance Measures 61% Micro-scale Irrigation Performance Measures 24% 535 Crosscutting Performance Mayuge Measures 2020 District Summary of No. Definition of compliance Compliance justification Score requirements Local Government Service Delivery Results 1 4 Service Delivery • Evidence that infrastructure From a sampled list of projects funded by DDEG Outcomes of DDEG projects implemented using funds the following projects were completed and in investments DDEG funding are functional use by the intended beneficiaries and utilized as per the purpose Maximum 4 points on of the project(s): • The Mayuge District Headquarters building this performance construction works was completed by Quarter 4 FY measure • If so: Score 4 or else 0 2019/20. The Administration block was in use by the District staff. • Busaala HC III located in Busaala Subcounty, renovation work was completed by Quarter 4. The Health centre was functional as evidenced by the patience attendance turn up. 2 0 Service Delivery a. If the average score in the Not applicable. Performance overall LLG performance assessment increased from Maximum 6 points on previous assessment : this performance This was not in the assessment area. measure o by more than 10%: Score 3 o 5-10% increase: Score 2 o Below 5 % Score 0 2 3 Service Delivery b. Evidence that the DDEG There was evidence that DDEG funded investment Performance funded investment projects projects implemented in FY 2019/2020 were implemented in the previous completed as per the work plan. The LG had Maximum 6 points on FY were completed as per budgeted for 8 investment DDEG funded projects, this performance performance contract (with (Ref: page 96 of the Quarter 4 performance report). measure AWP) by end of the FY. For instance; • If 100% the projects were • Physical plan for Bugoto and Lugolole, the budget completed : Score 3 allocated was Ugx. 29,995,000 (Ref; page 59 of the Approved budget estimates which was spent 100% , • If 80-99%: Score 2 Ref. page 116 and 138 of Q4 respectively). • If below 80%: 0 • Bufulubi Building Construction, the AWP budget allocated was Ugx 11,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were completed by Q4, Ref. 105) • Busaala HC III Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 10,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were completed by Q4, Ref. 121) • Jagusi HC III Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 10,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were completed by Q4, Ref. 131) • Ndaiga PS Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 58,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were completed by Q4, Ref. 113) • Bukaleba Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 61,000,000;(Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were completed by Q4, Ref. 119) • District Headquarters Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 26,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were completed by Q4, Ref. 130) • District Headquarters Furniture and Fixtures - Executive Chairs 638, the budget allocated was Ugx 14,000,000;(Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were completed by Q4, Ref. 130) Percentage of completed projects was calculated by dividing completed (8) total projects over (8) projects multiplied by 100 projects completed as per work plan. All projects were at 100% completion as per the LGs Q4 performance report ( Ref: page 96) 3 2 Investment a. If the LG budgeted and There was evidence that the District had budgeted Performance spent all the DDEG for the and spent on all eligible DDEG projects for the FY previous FY on eligible 2019/20 on eligible projects; Ref Q4 LG Maximum 4 points on projects/activities as per the performance reports. this performance DDEG grant, budget, and measure implementation guidelines: The LG had budgeted for the following DDEG projects (Ref: page 21 and 22 of the budget Score 2 or else score 0. estimates) ; • Construction of second phase of Administrative block at District Headquarters • Construction of a 2-classroom block at Ndaiga Primary School • Construction of 2 stance lined latrine at Bufulubi HC II • Construction of staff house at Bishop Hanington • Construction of waste pits at Jaguzi and Busaala HC IIIs • Physical plan for Bugoto and Lugolole, • Bukaleba Building Construction • District Headquarters Furniture and Fixtures - Executive Chairs The LG DDEG budget performance was as follows; • Physical plan for Bugoto and Lugolole, the budget allocated was Ugx. 29,995,000 (Ref; page 59 of the Approved budget estimates which was spent 100%, Ref. page 116 and 138 of Q4 respectively). • Bufulubi Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 11,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which by Q4, the expenditure was Ugx. 11,000,000, Ref. 105) • Busaala HC III Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 10,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which of which by Q4, the expenditure was Ugx. 10,000,000, Ref. page 121) • Jagusi HC III Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 10,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which the expenditure by Q4 was Ugx. 10,000,000, Ref. page 131) • Ndaiga PS Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 58,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which the expenditure was Ugx. 58,000,000 by Q4, Ref. page 113) • Bukaleba Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 61,000,000;(Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which the expenditure by Q4 was Ugx. 61,000,000, Ref. page 119) • District Headquarters Building Construction, the budget allocated was Ugx 26,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget of which the expenditure by Q4 was Ugx. 26,000,000, Ref. 130) • District Headquarters Furniture and Fixtures - Executive Chairs 638, the budget allocated was Ugx 14,000,000;(Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which expenditure by Q4 was Ugx. 14,000,000, Ref. 130) The LG had spent 100% of the budgeted DDEG funds according to Q4 performance reports hence was compliant. 3 2 Investment b. If the variations in the All sampled projects under the DDEG funded Performance contract price for sample of projects for the previous FY, had their estimates less DDEG funded infrastructure by 20%. For instance: Maximum 4 points on investments for the previous this performance FY are within +/-20% of the LG a) Construction of two classroom block at Ndaiga measure Engineers estimates, Primary school, Kityerera Sub-county with MoWT's estimates were UGX, 58,000,000 while contractors’ score 2 or else score 0 estimates were UGX. 57,900,476 with a variation of UGX 99, 524 equivalent to 0.17%. b) Construction of two stance pit latrine and Urinal at Bufulubi HCII (Imanyiro Sub-county) with MoWT's estimates were UGX, 11,000,000 while contractors’ estimates were UGX. 11,000,000 with a variation of UGX 0 equivalent to 0. %. Construction of Placenta pit at Busaala HCII in Busakila Sub-county with MoWT's estimates were UGX, 10,000,000 while contractors’ estimates were UGX. 10,000,000 with a variation of UGX 0 equivalent to 0. %. Performance Reporting and Performance Improvement 4 0 Accuracy of reported a. Evidence that information on Not applicable. information the positions filled in LLGs as per minimum staffing The system of LLG assessments had not been Maximum 4 points on standards is accurate, introduced. this Performance Measure score 2 or else score 0 4 2 Accuracy of reported b. Evidence that infrastructure The report that was provided by the LG on progress information constructed using the DDEG is of infrastructure projects constructed using the in place as per reports DDEG funds dated 30th June 2020 indicated that Maximum 4 points on produced by the LG: the five projects were completed as follows; this Performance Measure • If 100 % in place: Score 2, • Busaala HC III building construction, the AWP else score 0. budget allocated was Ugx 10,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were Note: if there are no reports completed by Q4, Ref. 121) produced to review: Score 0 • District Headquarters Building Construction, the AWP budget allocated was Ugx 26,000,000; (Ref: 60 of Approved budget estimates of which works were completed by Q4, Ref. 130) 5 0 Reporting and a. Evidence that the LG Not applicable Performance conducted a credible Improvement assessment of LLGs as The system of LLG assessments had not been verified during the National introduced. Maximum 8 points on Local Government this Performance Performance Assessment Measure Exercise; If there is no difference in the assessment results of the LG and national assessment in all LLGs score 4 or else 0 5 0 Reporting and b. The District/ Municipality This is not applicable as there was no assessment Performance has developed performance of LLG in the previous FY Improvement improvement plans for at least 30% of the lowest performing Maximum 8 points on LLGs for the current FY, based this Performance on the previous assessment Measure results. Score: 2 or else score 0 5 0 Reporting and c. The District/ Municipality This was not applicable as there was no Performance has implemented the PIP for assessment of LLG in the previous FY Improvement the 30 % lowest performing LLGs in the previous FY: Maximum 8 points on this Performance Score 2 or else score 0 Measure Human Resource Management and Development 6 0 Budgeting for and a.