Local Government Performance Assessment Katakwi District (Vote Code: 522) Assessment Scores Accountability Requirements % Crosscutting Performance Measures 77% Educational Performance Measures 96% Health Performance Measures 94% Water & Environment Performance Measures 85% 522 Accountability Requirements 2019 Katakwi District Definition of No. Summary of requirements Compliance justification Compliant? compliance Annual performance contract 1 Yes LG has submitted an annual • From MoFPED’s The LG submitted an Annual Performance performance contract of the inventory/schedule of Contract on 12th April, 2019 (done on line) forthcoming year by June 30 on LG submissions of and received by MoFPED on same date. the basis of the PFMAA and LG performance contracts, Budget guidelines for the coming check dates of The submission was in compliance with the financial year. submission and revised timeframe of by 31st August, 2019 issuance of receipts for this Local Goverment Assessment. and: o If LG submitted before or by due date, then state ‘compliant’ o If LG had not submitted or submitted later than the due date, state ‘non- compliant’ • From the Uganda budget website: www.budget.go.ug, check and compare recorded date therein with date of LG submission to confirm. Supporting Documents for the Budget required as per the PFMA are submitted and available 2 Yes LG has submitted a Budget that • From MoFPED’s The LG submitted on line a Budget for the includes a Procurement Plan for inventory of LG budget forthcoming FY (20 19/2020) on 23rd April the forthcoming FY by 30th June submissions, check 2019 under Ref and was received by (LG PPDA Regulations, 2006). whether: MoFPED on 23rd April, 2019. o The LG budget is The Budget contained a LG Procurement accompanied by a Plan for FY 2019/2020 Procurement Plan or not. If a LG submission includes a This submission was in compliance with Procurement Plan, the the revised date of submission of 31st LG is compliant; August, 2019 for this Local Government otherwise it is not Assessment. compliant. Reporting: submission of annual and quarterly budget performance reports 3 Yes LG has submitted the annual From MoFPED’s The LG submitted on line the Annual performance report for the official record/inventory Performance Report for the previous FY previous FY on or before 31st of LG submission of 2018/2019 on 31st July, 2019and July (as per LG Budget annual performance Acknowledged receipt by MoFPED on Preparation Guidelines for report submitted to 19thAugust, 2019. coming FY; PFMA Act, 2015) MoFPED, check the date MoFPED received the annual performance report: • If LG submitted report to MoFPED in time, then it is compliant • If LG submitted late or did not submit, then it is not compliant 4 Yes LG has submitted the quarterly From MoFPED’s Submission of the quarterly budget budget performance report for all official record/ performance reports during FY 2018/2019 the four quarters of the previous inventory of LG was done as follows: FY by end of the FY; PFMA Act, submission of quarterly 2015). reports submitted to MoFPED, check the Quarter Submission Acknowledgement date MoFPED received the quarterly Date Reference Date performance reports: Quarter 01 31st October, 2018 Not • If LG submitted all referenced 21st February, 2019 four reports to MoFPED of the Quarter 02 29th January, 2019 Not previous FY by July referenced 21st February, 2019 31, then it is compliant (timely submission of Quarter 03 11th May, 2019 Not each quarterly report, referenced 11th May, 2019 is not an accountability Quarter 04 31st July, 2019 Not requirement, but by referenced 19th August, 2019 end of the FY, all quarterly reports should be available). All the four quarterly budget performance • If LG submitted late reports for FY 2018/19 were submitted to or did not submit at all, MoFPED by 31st July 2019 as required by then it is not compliant. PFMA Act, 2015. Audit 5 No The LG has provided information From MoFPED’s The LG provided information to the PS/ST to the PS/ST on the status of Inventory/record of LG on the status of implementation of the implementation of Internal Auditor submissions of Internal Auditor General or Auditor General and the Auditor statements entitled General’s findings for the previous financial General’s findings for the “Actions to Address year 2018/2019 vide two letters: one on the previous financial year by end of Internal Auditor Internal Auditor General’s findings, the February (PFMA s. 11 2g). This General’s findings”, letter was written on 20th February, 2019 statement includes actions and received at the MoFPED on 18th against all find- ings where the Check: March, 2019. One on Auditor General’s Internal Audi- tor and the Auditor findings was written on 19th March, 2019 • If LG submitted a General recommended the and received at the MoFPED on 25th ‘Response’ (and Accounting Officer to take action March, 2019. provide details), then it in lines with applicable laws. is compliant Noted that in both cases receipt of the information in the MoFPED was after end of • If LG did not submit February, 2019. a’ response’, then it is non-compliant Internal Auditor General FY 2018/2019 • If there is a Total number of queries raised Total response for all –LG is number of queries cleared Total number compliant of queries pending • If there are partial or 8 not all issues 7 1 responded to – LG is not compliant. The only pending query was on irregular award of Council Chambers Contract. The LGPAC in their meeting held on 25th November, 2018 under Minute 5.7.1 recommended further investigations to be carried out but had not been implemented. (A) Office of the Auditor General FY 2017/2018 Total number of queries raised Total number of queries cleared Total number of queries pending 17 17 Nil 6 Yes The audit opinion of LG Financial The Auditor General's Opinion on the Statement (issued in January) is Financial statements of Katakwi DLG for not adverse or disclaimer. the Financial Year ended 30th June, 2019 was Unqualified. 522 Crosscutting Katakwi Performance District Measures 2019 Summary of No. Definition of compliance Compliance justification Score requirements Planning, budgeting and execution 1 1 All new Evidence that a district/ File number : CR/214/44 infrastructure municipality has: projects in: (i) a Name Designation and Appointment date municipality / (ii) • A functional Physical Alia Seraphine Chairperson 28/08/2017 in a district are Planning Committee in place that considers new approved by the Ekwith Emmanuel Member 28/08/2017 respective investments on time: score 1. Physical Planning Amali Samuel Member 28/08/2017 Committees and are consistent Echaetu Andrew Member 28/08/2017 with the approved Aleli Martin Secretary 28/08/2017 Physical Plans Okure Joseph Member 28/08/2017 Maximum 4 points for this Timo Catherine Member 28/08/2017 performance measure. AtimAngella Member 28/08/2017 Apio Lydia Member 28/08/2017 1 0 All new • Evidence that district/ MLG There was no evidence that the DLG submitted minutes infrastructure has submitted at least 4 sets of of the Physical Planning Committee to MoLHUD as projects in: (i) a minutes of Physical Planning required by the guidelines. municipality / (ii) Committee to the MoLHUD in a district are score 1. approved by the respective Physical Planning Committees and are consistent with the approved Physical Plans Maximum 4 points for this performance measure. 1 0 All new • All infrastructure investments The DLG did not have a Physical Development Plan. infrastructure are consistent with the projects in: (i) a approved Physical municipality / (ii) Development Plan: score 1 or in a district are else 0 approved by the respective Physical Planning Committees and are consistent with the approved Physical Plans Maximum 4 points for this performance measure. 1 0 All new • Action area plan prepared for There was no action plan for financial year 2018/2019 infrastructure the previous FY: score 1 or projects in: (i) a else 0 municipality / (ii) in a district are approved by the respective Physical Planning Committees and are consistent with the approved Physical Plans Maximum 4 points for this performance measure. 2 2 The prioritized • Evidence that priorities in Priorities in AWP for FY 2019/2020: investment AWP for the current FY are activities in the based on the outcomes of 1. HR&ADMIN: Payment of Salaries, Arrears, Staff approved AWP for budget conferences: score 2. Recruitment. the current FY are 2.WATER: Rehabilitation, Drilling of Borehole derived from the approved five- Construction of the pipe water scheme. year 3. HEALTH: construction of Radiology unit, private ward, development plan, theatre in Toroma HCIV. are based on discussions in Sinking of 5 stance pit latrine annual reviews and 4.PRODUCTION: Post Harvest Handling, Value Addition budget The priorities were discussed in the Budget Conference conferences and held on: 14th/11/2018. have project profiles Maximum 5 points on this performance measure. 2 1 The prioritized • Evidence that the capital HEALTH investment investments in the approved activities in the Annual work plan for the Construction of a Radiology unit at katakwi hospital approved AWP for current AWP pg 55 the current FY are FY are derived from the derived from the Construction of a 6.2km Administration block approved five- approved five-year year development plan. If pg 64 of DDPII. differences appear, a development plan, justification has to be provided EDUCATION are based on and evidence provided that it discussions in was Rehabilitation of classroom annual reviews Drilling and casting of boreholes and approved by the Council. Score 1. AWP pg 65 budget conferences and Development Plan have project Pg 226 profiles 5 year DEVELOPMENT PLAN Maximum 5 points on this Pg 226 performance measure.