December 2019 This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). It was prepared independently by Linda Beck, Souleymane Barry, Aly Tounkara, Aly Diaw, and Abdoulaye Bousso, Management Systems International, a Tetra Tech Company, for the USAID/Senegal Mission-Wide Monitoring and Evaluation Project. USAID GOVERNANCE FOR LOCAL DEVELOPMENT MIDTERM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION USAID GOVERNANCE FOR LOCAL DEVELOPMENT MIDTERM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION December 2019 Contracted under AID-685-C-15-00003 USAID/Senegal Mission-Wide Monitoring and Evaluation Project Cover Photo: Focus group with women in Koumpentoum, Tambacounda Credit: MEP Senegal DISCLAIMER This report is made possible by the support of the American People through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID.) The contents of this study/report/website are the sole responsibility of the contractor and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States Government. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation i CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES II LIST OF FIGURES 2 ACRONYMS III EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 ACTIVITY BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES 1 EVALUATION PURPOSE AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS 1 EVALUATION METHODS AND LIMITATIONS 1 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 2 TIMELINESS 3 RECOMMENDATIONS 5 ACTIVITY BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES 8 EVALUATION PURPOSE AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS 8 EVALUATION PURPOSE 8 EVALUATION QUESTIONS 9 EVALUATION METHODS, SOURCES, AND LIMITATIONS 10 DATA COLLECTION METHODS AND SOURCES 10 EVALUATION LIMITATIONS 11 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 11 QUESTION 1. 11 QUESTION 2. 22 QUESTION 3. 24 QUESTION 4. 27 RECOMMENDATIONS 33 QUESTION 1. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND RESOURCE MOBILIZATION 33 QUESTION 2. THEORY OF CHANGE 35 QUESTION 3. SUSTAINABILITY OF TOOLS 35 QUESTION 4. GOLD’S IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICE SECTORS 36 ANNEXES 37 ANNEX I: EVALUATION STATEMENT OF WORK 37 ANNEX II: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TABLE 55 ANNEX III: RECOMMENDATIONS MATRIX AND ACTION PLAN 79 ANNEX IV: DATA COLLECTION METHODS 95 ANNEX V: DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS 99 ANNEX VI: LIST OF KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS 105 ANNEX VII: SOURCES OF INFORMATION: DOCUMENTS CONSULTED 116 ANNEX VIII: DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST 140 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation ii LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1. RESULT 1 INDICATORS ...........................................................................................................................12 TABLE 2. EVOLUTION OF IGGB SCORES 2017–2019.......................................................................................13 TABLE 3. RESULT 2 INDICATORS ...........................................................................................................................16 TABLE 4. RESULT 3 INDICATORS ...........................................................................................................................17 TABLE 5. COMMUNITY RADIO BROADCAST THEMES FOR YEARS 1 AND 2 .......................................19 TABLE 6. INTEGRATION INDICATORS ................................................................................................................25 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. CHANGE IN LOCAL TAXES FROM 2016 TO 2017.......................................................................15 FIGURE 2. COMPARISON OF GOLD COMMUNE BUDGETS WITH THEIR COMPTES ADMINISTRATIFS ....................16 FIGURE 3. NUMBER OF GOLD COMMUNES: TARGET VERSUS ACTUAL FOR YEARS 1–3................21 FIGURE 4. GOLD’S THEORY OF CHANGE ..........................................................................................................22 FIGURE 5. COMPARISON OF FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS: BAGADADJI 2017 .........................................29 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation iii ACRONYMS ACT Animateur Collectivité Territoriale AOR Agreement Officer’s Representative AMELP Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan ARD Regional Agency for Development ASUFOR Association des Usagers du Forage CA Compte Administratif CLA Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting CT Collectivités Territoriales CVA Citizen Voice and Action DGID Direction des Impôts et Domaines DGCPT Direction Générale de la Comptabilité Publique et du Trésor DRG Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance DRGP Democracy, Human Rights, Governance, and Peace EDIC Community Public Dialogue Space EGO Economic Growth Office GPC Groupe Citoyen de Plaidoyer GoLD Governance for Local Development GoS Government of Senegal IGGB Integrated Good Governance Barometer IP Implementing Partner M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MCTDAT Ministry of Territorial Governance, Development, and Planning MSI Management Systems International NGO Nongovernmental Organization Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation iv PIRS Performance Indicator Reference Sheet PPL Policy, Planning, and Learning PSE Plan Sénégal Émergent RTI Research Triangle Institute SMP Performance Measurement System URAC Union of Community Radios USAID U.S. Agency for International Development WASH Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ACTIVITY BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES In September 2016, United States Agency for International Development (USAID)/Senegal awarded Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International a five-year cooperative agreement to support the Government of Senegal’s (GoS’s) decentralization program through USAID Governance for Local Development (GoLD). GoLD’s implementation is guided by three main Activity-specific results in support of USAID’s Intermediate Result 3.2: Responsive democratic governance strengthened: Result 1: Capacity of local government to respond to citizen demand increased. Result 2: Mobilization and management of local public resources improved. Result 3: Increased community participation in service delivery management, targeting core public services of health; education; water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH); and nutrition. 1 Currently operating in four regions—Kedougou, Kolda, Sédhiou, and Tambacounda—GoLD builds on Senegal’s decentralization reforms and Plan Sénégal Emergent (PSE) to strengthen responsive and accountable governance closer to citizens and to improve service delivery. GoLD focuses on innovative approaches to improve service delivery and works toward building these approaches’ long-term sustainability. EVALUATION PURPOSE AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS This evaluation assesses GoLD’s progress toward expected results; the sustainability of its approach and governance tools; and its impact on public service delivery in health, education, WASH, and nutrition. The evaluation addresses four evaluation questions: 1. What is GoLD’s progress to date towards expected results and timelines of its workplans? 2. Is the original GoLD theory of change still relevant and complete? Does it sufficiently address cross-sector integration and central-local relations? 3. How relevant, effective and potentially sustainable is GoLD's approach in promoting participatory governance, in terms of its governance tools and strategic partnerships? 4. Has GoLD demonstrated a current and/or potential impact on public service delivery in core sectors and is this likely to be substantiality beyond the project? EVALUATION METHODS AND LIMITATIONS The evaluation used a desk review of Activity documents and data as well as data collected from field site visits to a purposeful sample of collectivités territoriales (CTs) where GoLD works. The evaluation team conducted interviews in Dakar with national-level stakeholders and GoLD and USAID staff from all 1 RTI International, “GOLD FY2018 Annual Report” (USAID, 2018). Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 2 technical offices. In total, the evaluation team completed more than 108 key informant interviews, 29 group discussions, and 18 focus groups, in addition to two participant observations at GoLD-sponsored events—the GoLD annual retreat in Dakar and a GoLD gender tool workshop in Kolda. Once findings and conclusions were validated, a recommendations workshop was held in Dakar with representatives from GoLD and its partners, the GoS, and USAID technical offices. The workshop developed practical and actionable recommendations to address some of the challenges identified by the evaluation. Evaluation limitations included fieldwork timing; fieldwork was conducted in summer 2019 when most USAID technical staff were on vacation and could not be interviewed. The evaluation team extended time for interviews to fall 2019 to complete all interviews with technical staff. Additional limitations included limited availability of adequate GoLD and CT data to systematically analyze GoLD’s effect on public service delivery and increase in local revenue collection. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS QUESTION 1: WHAT IS GOLD’S PROGRESS TO DATE TOWARD EXPECTED RESULTS AND WORK PLAN TIMELINES? Result 1: Capacity of local government to respond to citizen demand increased. During interviews and focus groups in selected CTs, informants from key stakeholder categories referenced extensive though varying levels of programming to build local officials’ capacity, including trainings on governance tools and the roles and responsibilities of sectoral management committee members. GoLD’s interventions improved the capacity and competence of locally elected officials and their staff (Secrétaire municipal, municipal advisers, and technical commission members). The CTs the team visited clearly used the participatory budgeting process, involving community members in annual local budget development. However, forumsthrough which these citizen groups could track expenditures against the planned budget were lacking. Result 2: Mobilization and management of local public resources improved. GoLD assesses the change in local resources invested in public service delivery as well as the percentage change in CTs’ own-source revenue, both of which require access to official comptes administratifs (CAs) of the implemented CT budgets. In most CTs the team visited, local officials and community leaders reported improved local tax collection, although the level of increase varied. GoLD activities (census of taxpayers, establishment of local tax commissions, increased community awareness through training) strengthened the local tax collecting system, particularly for the IMF4 portion of taxes, leading directly to an increase in the tax base available to local authorities. Systematic CA data for fiscal year 2018 will not be available, however, until early 2020. Most CT resources still come from the national-level line ministries, and their allocation is predetermined. GoLD does not ask the CTs to track any additional revenue sources from the diaspora, individuals, or institutions that may provide direct or in-kind contributions to support local service delivery. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 3 Result 3: Increased community participation in service delivery management, targeting core public services of health, education, WASH, and nutrition. GoLD is meeting and/or exceeding most of its indicators on community/citizen participation in service delivery. Women’s groups are clearly involved in CT budget planning, as are persons with disabilities groups. Women remain absent, however, from CT management. On the indicator for communication and public awareness raising, the Union of Community Radios (URAC) did not reach its target for radio programs on governance and public service delivery at the CT level. More pressingly, some CTs visited lacked or had only limited coverage by URAC radio stations. Another indicator that fell short of its target was the number of citizen advocacy groups developing and implementing service delivery improvement plans—one of the more important indicators. Community capacity-building initiatives with the Citizen Voice and Action (CVA) approach and participatory budgeting have boosted community participation in public service delivery. In both regions visited, most citizen advocacy activities resulted in sustained investments in key sectors (education, WASH, and health). TIMELINESS GoLD’s initial implementation was slower than anticipated in Years 1 and 2, but GoLD caught up by Year 3. GoLD has just completed the second Integrated Good Governance Barometer (IGGB) for the pilot communes, and the second performance measurement systems will not be completed before winter 2020 at the earliest. Implementation delays in participatory budgeting and the CVA approach have been minor and/or are being rectified. GoLD staff attributed a delay in implementing the proposed peer-to-peer approach to the need to strengthen its programming first. QUESTION 2: IS THE ORIGINAL GOLD THEORY OF CHANGE STILL RELEVANT AND COMPLETE? DOES IT SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESS CROSS-SECTOR INTEGRATION AND CENTRAL-LOCAL RELATIONS? Interviews with various stakeholders indicated that the GoLD theory of change remains relevant and uncontested. However, it lacks national-level engagement to address critical issues such as fiscal transfers and collaboration with ministerial services. All stakeholders interviewed recognized that resources (staff, funding, and materials) and decision making on budget allocations are concentrated at the national government level, both within the Ministry of Territorial Communities and the public service line ministries (health, education, water, and sanitation). GoLD’s theory of change refers to “support for USAID integration strategy to improve basic services, including coordination and planning hubs, cross-sector social accountability mechanisms, knowledge platforms, and policy working groups.” However, the current GoLD results frameworks have limited means to effectively track basic public service delivery improvements. This challenge is discussed more in the response to Question 4 on public service delivery. QUESTION 3: HOW RELEVANT, EFFECTIVE, AND POTENTIALLY SUSTAINABLE IS GOLD'S APPROACH IN PROMOTING PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE, AS EVIDENCED BY ITS GOVERNANCE TOOLS AND STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS? GoLD staff have worked extensively to build effective strategic alliances with GoS decentralization actors as well as USAID sector implementing partners (IPs) operating in the four GoLD regions. GoLD’s strongest strategic partnerships with external actors are with the Ministry of Territorial Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 4 Governance, Development, and Planning at the national level and the Regional Agency for Development (ARD) at the regional level, which works closely with GoLD staff in both Kolda and Tambacounda. GoLD has clear roles and responsibilities for its partners, including World Vision, Environmental Development Action in the Third World (ENDA), Ecopop, and URAC, but is struggling with its relationships with African Federations of Senegal Women (FAFS) as FAFS, whose operations are limited to Dakar, cannot support women’s mobilization efforts in the four GoLD regions. There are also some weak links between GoLD and the various deconcentrated technical services at the regional and department levels. GoLD’s tools are relevant but face sustainability challenges. IGGB and CVA sustainability is not assured as they are labor intensive and require skill and commitment not yet evident in most communes. All recommendations workshop participants recognized the need to harmonize GoLD tools with the GoS’s assessment tools, including the E-Tax application to be piloted by GoLD, which differs from the Ministry of Finance’s E-Tax application. QUESTION 4: HAS GOLD DEMONSTRATED A CURRENT AND/OR POTENTIAL IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY IN CORE SECTORS AND IS THIS IMPACT LIKELY TO BE SUSTAINABLE BEYOND THE PROJECT? All CTs visited showed clear evidence of CT public service support in education, WASH, and health. This local initiative was seen prior to GoLD and will continue after GoLD. Advocacy activities through the CVA groups have had significant effects in key sectors, particularly in the health and water sectors (health, water and school infrastructure, compliance with sector norms standards, a platform for communities to meet and discuss sector-specific concerns and needs, communities managing public services). However, paucity of disaggregated data on spending across each sector limits the evaluation team’s ability to systematically assess spending increases. Most GoLD indicators on technical committee and citizen committee advocacy in expenditures lack clear definitions and sector targets. GoLD tracks sector allocations in the developed CT budgets but does not track actual expenditures in each sector, limiting the ability to identify systematic impact on public service delivery spending. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 5 RECOMMENDATIONS QUESTION 1: COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND RESOURCE MOBILIZATION COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Participatory budgeting GoLD should: • Encourage local authorities to adopt participatory budgeting as a tool for local budget planning. • Support and institutionalize the Community Public Dialogue Space (EDIC) as a forum for citizen participation in monitoring and evaluating the budget process (every six months). • Develop a national campaign advocating for the institutionalization of participatory budgeting and EDIC. Inclusion of handicapped individuals GoLD should: • Identify local associations and strengthen its collaboration with them. • Improve documentation of its efforts to consider handicapped individuals’ interests and needs. Local women’s leadership GoLD should: • Develop and implement a plan of action to reinforce women’s leadership within CT administration. • Support the implementation of Senegal’s Equality Law (Parité) in collaboration with the MCT. • Explore partnerships with other women’s organizations that have strong networks in each region in which GoLD works. • Strengthen collaboration with IPs to promote social inclusion (joint activities and incorporation of gender-sensitive approaches in programming). Measuring radio broadcast reach and impact GoLD should: • Strengthen collaboration with IPs in the health sector (Neema, RSS+, and SHOPS+) that have expertise in this area of communication to benefit from the best practices of other USAID￾funded programs, such as Japp Na Ci. • Conduct a participatory audience study that integrates communication mechanisms to measure broadcasts’ impact on their audience. • Conduct an impact study to measure broadcasts’ effects on knowledge and understanding of local governance. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 6 • Explore ways to provide radio program coverage in the communes not covered by the URAC network of community radio stations. LOCAL RESOURCE MOBILIZATION AND MANAGEMENT Lack of data on increased local resource mobilization In collaboration with Direction Générale des Impôts et Domaines (DGID)/Direction Générale de la Comptabilité Publique et du Trésor (DGCPT), USAID, and CTs, GoLD should: • Strengthen its collaboration with DGID and DGCPT to improve CTs’ access to financial information (compte de gestion and other budget documents). • Widen the revenue sources (direct resource mobilization) tracked by the project beyond the CA. • Consider the timing of the CT fiscal year, which follows the calendar year and ends on December 31. • Strengthen CT capacity to put in place a simplified financial tracking system for all financial expenses and tracking. • Implement an electronic financial tracking system in CTs. Such a system will require capacity building and coaching. Limited commune capacity to mobilize resources In collaboration with DGCPT, ARD, and MCT, GoLD should: • Conduct a full assessment of potential revenue sources for each CT. • Support the creation and application of local fiscal commissions to increase revenue sources and improve revenue collection. • Support CTs’ ability to identify new, innovative revenue sources such as public-private partnerships, sister cities, and CT marketing. • Support CTs’ ability to document private donations (particularly from diaspora) as well as in￾kind contribution and community fundraising campaigns to track larger-level direct resource mobilization (DRM). • Review CT budget allocations to ensure an appropriate balance of funds allocated for service delivery as opposed to internal CT management. QUESTION 2: THEORY OF CHANGE Lack of collaboration between GoLD and the central government In collaboration with USAID, GoLD should: • Include work at the national level to improve two-way communication on CT budget allocations and revenue. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 7 • At the regional level, establish strong working relationships with the governor in the project’s planning to ensure deconcentrated actors’ awareness and participation. In collaboration with the Ministry of Territorial Governance, Development, and Planning (MCTDAT), GoLD should: • Put in place a data management system at the national level that synchronizes CT data. • Work more closely with MCTDAT to ensure that data collected by GoLD inform public policy debates. • Strengthen CT capacity to manage the transfer of resources from the central government. QUESTION 3: SUSTAINABILITY OF TOOLS IGGB, CVA, and Y-Tax sustainability GoLD should: • Work with the ARD to harmonize GoLD tools with GoS tools rather than duplicate. • Move forward in piloting the E-Tax tool supported by the GoS, as opposed to the GoLD tool, to avoid duplication. • Develop a strategy to consolidate local understanding and capacity to use a CVA approach among groupes citoyens de Plaidoyer (GCP) in each sector. QUESTION 4: GOLD’S IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICE SECTORS GoLD’s indicators inadequately capture sectoral developments USAID and GoLD should: • Revive the Working Group on Governance Integration within USAID across technical offices to encourage consistent expectations of GoLD for measuring CT technical service delivery. • Support GoLD’s monitoring and evaluation system to strengthen its data collection process and better capture and analyze the volume of information being collected. • Review and revise GoLD’s indicators to clarify data collection tools, means of measurement, and ways to consistently measure increase in direct resource mobilization, budget allocations, and budget expenditures for each technical sector. • Clarify each technical sector’s definitions of what constitutes health, water and sanitation, nutrition, and education in CT budgets. • Ensure that indicators are adequately disaggregated by technical sector. • Clarify in the indicator definitions the technical committees (e.g., school management committees (CGEs) for education, health committees for health) to target and track for capacity building and partnership within GoLD’s CT work. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 8 ACTIVITY BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Based on the Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance (DRG) Country Strategic Assessment of 2013, United States Agency for International Development (USAID)/Senegal Democracy, Human Rights, Governance, and Peace (DRGP) developed Governance for Local Development (GoLD), an activity addressing local governance with an explicitly intersectoral approach designed to increase synergy and efficiency through cost sharing.2 In September 2016, USAID/Senegal awarded Research Triangle Institute (RTI) International a five-year cooperative agreement to support the Government of Senegal’s (GoS’s) decentralization program through GoLD. GoLD’s implementation is guided by three main Activity-specific results in support of USAID’s Intermediate Result 3.2: Responsive democratic governance strengthened: Result 1: Capacity of local government to respond to citizen demand increased. Result 2: Mobilization and management of local public resources improved. Result 3: Increased community participation in service delivery management, targeting four core public services of health; education; water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH); and nutrition. 3 Currently operating in four regions (Map I), GoLD builds on Senegal’s decentralization reforms and Plan Sénégal Emergent (PSE) to strengthen responsive and accountable governance that operates closer to Senegalese citizens to improve public service delivery and management. GoLD seeks to promote innovative approaches to enhance local governance and ensure these approaches’ long-term sustainability. EVALUATION PURPOSE AND EVALUATION QUESTIONS EVALUATION PURPOSE This midterm performance evaluation of USAID GoLD is the second phase of a year-long learning and evaluation support task designed to provide information, feedback, and recommendations to the DRG Senegal team in support of the USAID GoLD Learning Agenda. This evaluation assesses GoLD’s progress toward expected results, the sustainability of its approach and governance tools, and its impact on public service delivery in health, education, WASH, and nutrition. The report findings and conclusions are based on extensive interviews, focus groups, and documentation review conducted by the evaluation team, which was assembled by the USAID/Senegal Monitoring and Evaluation Project (MEP). Analysis of the findings at an October 2019 workshop generated the report 2 Tetra Tech, “Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance Strategic Assessment Framework” (USAID, September 2014). 3 RTI International, “GoLD FY2018 Annual Report” (USAID, 2018). Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 9 recommendations, which are intended to strengthen GoLD results and provide lessons that could apply to future USAID intersectoral programming on decentralization. EVALUATION QUESTIONS This midterm performance evaluation seeks to support USAID GoLD’s Learning Agenda by assessing the strengths and limitations of GoLD’s approach to promoting responsive democratic local governance that may in turn improve core service delivery, which has been progressively decentralized in Senegal. The evaluation assesses GoLD’s progress to date through four evaluation questions: 1. What is GoLD’s progress to date towards expected results and timelines of its workplans? 2. Is the original GoLD theory of change still relevant and complete? Does it sufficiently address cross-sector integration and central-local relations? 3. How relevant, effective and potentially sustainable is GoLD's approach in promoting participatory governance, in terms of its governance tools and strategic partnerships? 4. Has GoLD demonstrated a current and/or potential impact on public service delivery in core sectors and is this likely to be substantiality beyond the project. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 10 EVALUATION METHODS, SOURCES, AND LIMITATIONS DATA COLLECTION METHODS AND SOURCES The GoLD midterm performance evaluation was designed to generate empirical data based on high-quality, replicable research methods. The evaluation began with a desk review in July 2019 that updated the documentation produced by key actors since the learning assessment, including USAID, GoS, GoLD, and international donors and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) working in related sectors, as well as academic analyses relevant to GoLD and this evaluation. The evaluation team explicitly sought quantitative as well as qualitative data, including data on baselines and indicators. Documents collected during the desk review were supplemented by extensive field research documentation collected by the evaluation team. During three weeks of field research in July and August 2019, the team conducted semistructured interviews and group discussions with a wide range of stakeholders in 10 localities, for a total of more than 108 key informant interviews, 29 group discussions, and 18 focus groups, in addition to two participant observations at GoLD￾sponsored events—the GoLD annual retreat in Dakar and a GoLD gender tool workshop in Kolda. A list of interviews conducted can be found in Annex IV. These interviews provided the team with the opportunity to gather stakeholder perceptions of GoLD’s achievements to date, underlying assumptions, participatory approach, governance tools, and potential impact on local governance and service delivery. The evaluation team also analyzed quantitative secondary data gathered from local collectivities to complement the data provided by RTI on GoLD result indicators. A table of the sources used for each evaluation question is available in Annex II, in addition to other more detailed information about the team’s data collection methods. Although GoLD has field sites in four regions, the evaluation team concentrated its information and data collection from stakeholders in two regions where GoLD is currently operating, Kolda and Tambacounda, in addition to Dakar, where GoLD, its implementing partners (IPs), USAID, and other donors are headquartered (Map 1). Concentrating on these two regions permitted the team to undertake a more in-depth yet comparative analysis than the site visit to a single region (Kédougou) during the learning assessment due to limited time and team members. Despite its larger team of experts, the evaluation team decided not to visit all four GoLD regions to ensure that sectoral experts would visit each evaluation site. Dividing the team would have permitted the local governance, education, health, and WASH experts to visit only half of the evaluation sites. Instead, they worked as an effective team, comparing their observations and sharing data collected during daily debriefings in the field. In each selected region, the evaluation team interviewed key actors at the regional, district, and commune levels. In both Kolda and Tambacounda, the team selected one of the three regional departments based on GoLD’s active presence in the department (Velingara instead of Kolda) or on logistics if the Activity is operating in more than one district (Tambacounda). At the department level, the team selected at least one local collectivity where RTI piloted GoLD in 2017 and at least one more recent field site initiated in 2018 to assess GoLD’s achievements in the piloted localities where GoLD staff has had the most time to implement activities (Bagadadji, Koumpentoum, and Missirah) while also assessing GoLD’s capacity to adapt its approach and tools based on prior experience (Diaobe, Mereto, and Pata). In Dakar, the evaluation team met with six stakeholder categories: USAID staff members; RTI; GoLD IPs; donors heavily implicated in supporting decentralization and local governance; and related GoS ministries, including the core sectors in which GoLD seeks to improve service delivery. At the Kolda and Tambacounda field sites, the evaluation team similarly set up interviews with GoLD staff members, IPs, local administrative and elected officials, and leaders of local community-based organizations and community radio. Focus group discussions were also held Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 11 with men, women, and youth in each community. All interviews were recorded unless participants objected, in which case a designated note taker distributed detailed notes to the team, and team members who were at the meeting added information. Recorded interviews were then translated into French and transcribed. These transcriptions and notes from the interviews and focus group discussions, along with documentation reviewed, were the basis for the evaluation team’s analysis. Data collected through the desk review, semi￾structured individual interviews, and focus groups were analyzed using thematic and content analysis, triangulating data sources to confirm findings and identify areas of divergence and their possible origin. The evaluation team also analyzed quantitative data from GoLD indicators, as well as financial information gathered from the CT annual budget and CAs, focusing on 10 representative results indicators that are most closely connected to the evaluation questions. EVALUATION LIMITATIONS Although the evaluation team conducted critical interviews with USAID staff, they would have ideally had more and earlier contact with them. As USAID staff had limited availability in July and August when the evaluation team was conducting field research, MEP extended the data collection period through October to meet in person or by Skype with all technical offices, mitigating this limitation’s impact. Although GoLD staff spent countless hours meeting with the evaluation team and provided a long list of documents necessary for their analysis, the evaluation team had limited access to performance measurement data because the evaluation took place prior to receipt of critical outcome data on performance indicators, including the 2018 CAs and follow-up Integrated Good Governance Barometer (IGGB) and performance measurement system (SMP) results. The evaluation was also constrained by limited disaggregation of data by technical sector, which limited the evaluation team’s ability to assess the impact on each core sector. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS QUESTION 1. WHAT IS GOLD’S PROGRESS TO DATE TOWARD EXPECTED RESULTS AND WORK PLAN TIMELINES? RESULT 1: INCREASED CAPACITY OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO RESPOND TO CITIZEN DEMAND During interviews and focus groups conducted by the evaluation team in selected CTs, informants from various key stakeholder categories referenced extensive though varying levels of programming to build local officials’ capacity, including trainings on governance tools and the roles and responsibilities of sectoral management committee members. This finding was verified by extensive documentation of GoLD programming and data collected for Result I indicators, although GoLD’s ability to meet its 2018 Indicator 3 targets on CT use of participatory budgeting varied (Table 1). Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 12 Table 1. Result 1 Indicators 2017 2018 Target Year 1 Actual Year 1 Target Year 2 Actual Year 2 3. Percentage of CTs using participatory budgeting 10% 13% 20% 19% 5. Number of people trained in governance and local leadership 100 217 600 649 6. Percentage of CTs with at least one technical committee 0 0 10% 13% 8. Percentage of CTs that comply with public procurement procedures 0 0 10% 13% Source: GoLD work plans, AMELP, and annual reports 2016–2019. In both regions visited, stakeholder interviews and focus groups revealed that the capacity-building activities have had real impact, allowing local and even regional authorities to develop new skills. This feedback was received particularly from technical commission members responsible for overseeing local public service delivery in the education, health, and WASH sectors. Citizen Voice and Action (CVA) CT facilitators (ACTs), a major GoLD innovation, allow CTs to strengthen their staff and outreach ability. The ACTs, whose salaries are paid from the CT budget, are responsible for supporting the town hall participatory process. GoLD provided a motorbike and a computer for each ACT, which will be given to the town hall to support ACT work. “GoLD provides equipment for ACTs: a computer, a motorcycle and fuel, and once the project ends, it can use these means to organize meetings, but also to follow up in the field” (ACT in Koumpentoum, Tambacounda Region). Higher-level analysis of CT behavior and systems change was to be completed as part of project midline data collection, three months after evaluation completion (December 2019). The critical performance measurement indicator is based on change in commune performance as measured by the IGGB. Preliminary results indicated some improvement, though to varying levels. Analysis of IGGB scores in the eight pilot CTs from 2017 to 2019 revealed a score increase for the municipalities of Médina Chérif (46 percent) and Salémata (42 percent). On the other hand, other communes such as Bagadadji (8 percent), Missirah (7 percent), and Tanaff (6 percent) experienced only modest improvements in their operations (Table 2). The other CTs are scheduled to have a follow-up IGGB in Year 4, 2020. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 13 Table 2. Evolution of IGGB scores 2017–2019 Commune Score 2017Score 2019% Change Bambali 43 59 37% Salémata 50 71 42% Koumpentoum54 71 31% Missirah 59 63 7% Medina Chérif 59 86 46% Tanaff 62 66 6% Dindifélo 64 82 28% Bagadadji 73 79 8% Average 58 72 26% Source: GoLD preliminary analysis, October 2019. GoLD’s Result 1 also depends on another indicator that relies on the GoS SMP, which was piloted by the Program National de Développement Local (PNDL) but is currently on hold pending further review. GoLD has not yet reported any improvement in sectoral service committee performance, but there is evidence of increased comprehension of their roles and responsibilities (see Question 4). Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 14 RESULT 2: IMPROVED LOCAL PUBLIC RESOURCE MOBILIZATION AND MANAGEMENT In most CTs visited by the evaluation team, local officials and community leaders reported improved tax collection for the IMF4 funds, although the level of increase varied.4 Communities that participated in focus groups reported that GoLD’s awareness, orientation, and training activities on local taxation provided them with a better understanding of local taxes’ importance. Citizens subject to the IMF4 tax payment were opposed to it before GoLD’s arrival, with the CTs having a very low level of tax recovery. Now, at the community level, the populations have strongly committed themselves to reinforcing the IMF4 recovery mechanism, which has expanded to include women. 4 The evaluation team concurred with GoLD that IMF4 taxes are the most appropriate measure of improved local tax collection since they are the only taxes directly collected by the communes other than patents, which are disappearing as a source of local tax revenue and thus not relevant for this indicator. Since GoLD started, it organized trainings to make us understand their purpose. After the training, we were split into two groups [based on neighborhoods], the "Guinaw Rail" group and the "Escale" group. After that we went around neighborhoods; we went to each neighborhood to discuss with the population to explain the objectives of CVA, and everyone was happy. – Koumpentoum Health Commission Member, Tambacounda Region When they came here, they did a lot of training and it was formations where all members of the community were represented....We were trained in several areas; we were trained in the field of health first with the standards, so that we can know the norms and standards of health services. – Pata Health Commission Member, Kolda Region We have been trained on the standards that exist and those that do not exist. After the norms, health performance measures were evaluated, and we were also trained on that so that we know how we measure performance results. After that, we did a field trip to monitor standards in health service delivery; following the standards follow-up, we completed an evaluation of the performance measures. – Bagadadji Health Commission Member, Kolda Region. Apart from that, they even trained us on procurement standards and norms. Me who speaks to you, personally, I was in the local procurement commission for years….But I never knew how it happened, it was when we were trained by GoLD that I understood how it should happen. – WASH Commission Member, Diaobé, Kolda Region GOLD is a project that really is a partner of choice—the best partner if I can say so in the commune of Koumpentoum because as you said earlier when we were elected as councilors, at the time we did not know many things, but when GoLD came, they really trained us and put us on a clear direction. – Koumpentoum Education Technical Commission Member, Tambacounda Region Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 15 Most communes also reported more timely voting for the commune budgets. And nearly all communes reported having neighborhood forums that informants described as contributing to a better understanding of budget process and allocation. Although the 2018 CAs are not yet available, the preliminary 2017 results are favorable. According to data collected by the evaluation team directly from the CTs visited during fieldwork, IMF4 tax collection clearly grew between 2016 and 2017 but at varying levels across the eight pilot communes (Figure 1). In the CTs of Bagadadji, Bambali, Médina Chérif, and Missirah, IMF4 tax recovery has grown significantly. This upward trend is much more marked in Médina Chérif, where IMF4 value rose from 35,000 FCFA (US$500) to more than 3,500,000 FCFA (US$5,880). On the other hand, Koumpentoum commune saw a slight decline in tax revenue during this period. Figure 1. Change in Local Taxes from 2016 to 2017 Source: Commune Comptes Administratifs, 2016–2017. GoLD assesses the change in local resources invested in public service delivery as well as the percentage change in CTs’ own-source revenue, both of which require access to official CAs of the implemented budgets. The CAs for 2018, the first complete year of implemented GoLD programming, will not be available until the end of 2019. The 0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000 IMF4-2016 IMF4-2017 It was when GoLD arrived that they let us know that we have the duty to pay taxes. They also made us understand that it is not only men who have to pay taxes, but we women are also concerned for the payment of taxes. – Women’s focus group member, Koumpentoum CT, Tambacounda, Region Before the town hall could not even collect 300,000 francs CFA (US$500) for taxes, but now thanks to GoLD’s awareness raising, the town hall was able to collect taxes of up to two million francs CFA (US$3,360). Before we thought it was the agents of the town hall who shared the tax money. That's why we refused to pay taxes for years. But we know through these trainings where the money goes, how it is used, and what it serves. Now people are enthusiastic to pay taxes. – Women’s focus group member, Diaobé CT, Kolda Region Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 16 evaluation team considered substituting the communes’ budgets, but when they compared prior budgets and currently available CAs, they found the proposed budgets to differ dramatically from the implemented budgets (Figure 2). Also, despite rises in local tax revenue generated by the CTs, there is still a disparity—in some cases a large one—between the budgets planned and the available revenue. GoLD does not require the CTs to systematically track any additional funds they receive from the Senegalese diaspora, community members, and community institutions—whether cash contributions, other donor or NGO investments in these sectors, or in-kind contributions. Also, CT budgets are often unrealistic in terms of the actual money available and spent. Planned budget allocations for sectors are therefore not a valid proxy for increase in spending. Figure 2. Comparison of GoLD Commune Budgets with Their Comptes Administratifs Source: Commune Comptes Administratifs, 2016–2017. The percentage of CTs that implemented social accountability tools and those with plans that integrated development partners in the four key sectors exceeded their targets in Year 2 (Table 3), although the baseline of zero may understate prior activity, as discussed below with other indicator baselines. Table 3. Result 2 Indicators 2017 2018 Target Year 1 Actual Year 1 Target Year 2 Actual Year 2 12. Percentage of CTs implementing SAC tools 0 0 10% 19% 13. Percentage of CTs whose plans integrate development partners’ planned interventions in four key sectors 0 0 10% 11% Source: GoLD work plans, AMELP, and annual reports, 2016–2019. 0 50,000,000 100,000,000 150,000,000 200,000,000 250,000,000 300,000,000 350,000,000 400,000,000 450,000,000 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 2016 2017 Tanaff Bambali Dindifélo Salémata Kptoum Missirah Médina Chérif Bagadadji Budget Compte administratif Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 17 RESULT 3: INCREASED COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION IN SERVICE DELIVERY MANAGEMENT In at least three communes visited by the evaluation team (Bagadadji, Pata, and Missira), CVA workshops were organized just days prior to the evaluation team’s arrival even though GoLD has been operating there for at least one or even two years. GoLD staff indicated that all communes have experienced delays in completing CVA training but that training will be complete by the end of the project’s third year. The CVA training approach GoLD used initially, which was adapted from WorldVision (GoLD’s citizen participation partner), was lengthy and labor intensive. It often took six months or more to complete the entire training cycle, causing delays in the rollout of CVA activities. GoLD decided to adapt the training strategy to overcome initial implementation delays and to focus on training and implementation in the form of action and results. GoLD has shortened the CVA implementation process, significantly reducing the time required to complete activities. In each department, as part of the CVA approach, GoLD has asked CTs to designate ACTs to support the project’s citizen mobilization and advocacy outreach portion and fill the gap arising from the delayed CVA training. In every department in which the evaluation team travelled, they met with these ACTs, who work with each of the GoLD CTs in their district to encourage the use of CVA tools. GoLD has generally met or exceeded its Result 3 targets (Table 4); however, the accuracy of the baselines established as zero is uncertain, as discussed below. Table 4. Result 3 Indicators 2017 2018 Target Year 1 Actual Year 1 Target Year 2 Actual Year 2 14. Number of citizen advocacy groups developing/implementing service delivery improvement plan 0 0 30 22 15. Number of women, youth, disabled civil society organizations (CSOs) participating in budget process/advocating for service delivery 0 0 20 24 16. Number of USG-supported activities to promote women’s civic participation 20 26 40 58 18. Number of radio programs/spots raising citizen awareness of basic services 0 0 200 113 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 18 2017 2018 Target Year 1 Actual Year 1 Target Year 2 Actual Year 2 19. Number of CSO advocacy activities on community-identified issues 0 0 4 4 20. Number of CSOs receiving USG assistance involving advocacy activities 0 0 4 4 Source: GoLD work plans, AMELP, and annual reports, 2016–2019. SOCIAL INCLUSION Women in each CT visited reported being heavily involved in GoLD activities, including IGGB consultations, CVA workshops, participatory budget processes, hygiene and sanitation activities, mobilizing tax collection, and lobbying to conform to standards in the various sectors. “It was not only the councilors, the neighborhood delegates who were invited to the GoLD activities; the women are also strongly involved in the project activities. I’ll give you a concrete example: we were told that some women must be involved and present during the vote of the budgets and that is a big change” (woman focus group participant in Diaobé CT, Kolda Region). But although women hold several key positions on GoLD’s national and regional staff, at least in Tambacounda, women do not typically hold leadership positions at the commune and district levels (e.g., mayor, ACT, GPC/CVA, facilitator). In each CT visited, the evaluation team asked local officials and women’s focus group participants about African Federations of Senegal Women (FAFS), a GoLD partner that focuses on mobilizing women’s involvement in all GoLD activities, but none of the communes visited could identify a FAFS representative. When one of FAFS’s regional leaders was asked to help identify a FAFS representative in the GoLD communes visited, she had to make multiple phone calls to identify who allegedly plays thisrole. Discussions with GoLD staff indicated that the gender action plan, which was drafted more than a year ago, is still to be finalized. Only 2 of the 19 GoLD performance indicators measure social inclusion. They are both standard In fact, overall, when I took the initial approach, I took six months to one year. I took all the time for the training sessions. But after the GoLD project, there really was a change. We adapted the tool to be able in one location, over two to three months, to roll out the process in a municipality and to start already achieving the results. – Senior representative in charge of citizen participation, GoLD, Dakar It was with GoLD that we learned the number of people who need to be treated in a health care center; we realized that the number of people who are treated at our health post is equal to the number of people that should be treated across three health posts, and in addition to that we only have one doctor and one midwife. – Focus group participant in Diaobé CT, Kolda Region Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 19 indicators that count the number of women involved in activities, but there are no higher-level qualitative measures of engagement of women or persons with disabilities in CT decision-making processes. At the national level, there is no GoLD action plan to include handicapped individuals, and the sole representative of a national NGO representing their interests at the GoLD annual retreat commented that this was the first time he had been approached by the staff for input. There was no evidence of any consultation with regional organizations or efforts within the communes to ensure the participation of handicapped individuals in GoLD programming. COMMUNICATION GoLD works through the Union of Community Radios (URAC) to broadcast a wide variety of local governance messages informing the public about CTs’ role in delivering public services and goods as well as citizen rights to participate in CT budget planning and oversight. Interviews and focus groups conducted by the evaluation team clearly demonstrated enhanced dissemination of information about local governance issues to varying degrees in the communes visited. Although some informants referenced local community radio (CR) broadcasts during these meetings, trainings and other workshops were more frequently cited as sources of information. URAC did not meet its target of 200 radio programs broadcast in Year 2, only having broadcast 115 programs. GoLD has no higher-level indicator to measure the increase in public awareness these broadcasts effect. However, the USAID/Health Office has offered the services of an audience measurement company based in Dakar that could incorporate questions in their standardized questionnaire to provide feedback to GoLD around at least awareness of the broadcasts and knowledge of the topics. Based on documentation provided by GoLD, the distribution of CR broadcasts among its CTs varied, with a slightly larger concentration in Tambacounda than in the other three regions in the first two years. (URAC provided a list of broadcasts to verify the GoLD list). There was also significant variability in the topics covered, presumably reflecting greater programming in health and WASH than in education due to the recent arrival of the new USAID￾funded education Activity Passerelles (Table 5). Table 5. Community Radio Broadcast Themes for Years 1 and 2 Kédougou Kolda Sédhiou Tambacounda Total Local governance 2 2 4 7 15 Health governance 12 12 6 12 42 WASH 8 5 12 14 39 Food security and nutrition 0 1 0 1 2 All sectors 3 4 5 5 17 Total 25 24 27 39 115 Source: GoLD list of community radio broadcasts, 2019. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 20 INDICATOR BASELINES AND DEFINITIONS Most baselines for Result 1 indicators on use of participatory budgeting, training on local governance, CTs with technical commissions, sectoral service management committees, and public procurement procedures are set at zero by GoLD. However, interviews and focus group discussions in the CTs indicated that this is an underestimation in at least some if not most cases where these practices existed before GoLD’s arrival. There is a similar issue for the Result 2 indicator on CTs’ use of social accountability tools, as at least some if not most CTs reported engaging in some form of social accountability prior to GoLD. The baselines of zero for Result 3 indicators on citizen advocacy groups; women’s, youth, and disabled persons’ organizations; and information and communication programs appear to ignore the activism of citizen advocacy groups; involvement of women, youth, and/or vulnerable groups in participatory budgeting; radio programming on local governance; and service delivery that reportedly predated GoLD activities in at least some CTs. In the performance indicator reference sheets (PIRS), most indicators are unclear on the source to be used to measure the rating. For example, some indicators have several sources without specifying which should be used if the sources provide conflicting information. Other indicators vaguely refer to a document such as a CA without specifying the information and line item to be used. Indicator definitions related to disaggregation by sector and to sector-specific entities and services also lacked clarity. The data used to support the indicator on measuring improvements in public procurement processes are taken from post-training participant assessments and in fact measure only increases in knowledge of public procurement norms. GoLD does not measure whether public procurement processes are improving, as outlined in the PIRS. These inconsistencies and lack of clarity limited the evaluation team’s ability to systematically track increases in revenues generated by and allocated to specific sectors. TIMELINE GoLD’s initial implementation was slower than anticipated in Years 1 and 2, but GoLD caught up by Year 3 (Figure 3). In addition, these implementation delays were more significant during the project’s second fiscal year. GoLD has just completed the second IGGB for the pilot communes, and the second SMPs will not be completed before winter 2020 at the earliest. Implementation delays with participatory budgeting and the CVA approach have been minor and/or are being rectified. GoLD staff attributed a delay in implementing the proposed peer-to-peer approach to the need to strengthen its programming first. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 21 Figure 3. Number of GoLD Communes: Target versus Actual for Years 1–3 Source: GoLD work plans, AMELP, and annual reports, 2016–2019. CONCLUSION GoLD programming has contributed to extensive capacity building of local officials. Variability among communes, however, may warrant a comparative analysis of contributing factors. For example, Missirah has a significantly lower improvement rate for its IGGB than either Koumpentoum or Médina Chérif, which had comparable initial scores. It will be critical for GoLD to analyze this disparity so that it may be addressed in Missirah and other similarly situated communes. Moreover, if PNDL suspends its SMP implementation, GoLD will need to seek a substitute source, possibly incorporating into its IGGB questions about CT technical capacity. One of GoLD’s most impressive accomplishments is that nearly all CTs demonstrate improvements in local tax collection, greater transparency in budget planning, and more timely voting of the CT budget. The results, however, are preliminary and should be closely followed as the 2018 CAs are processed. Concern also remains about the local tax bases’ limited capacity to address the needs of core service sectors, which varies among CTs but is seen as insufficient across the board, as will be discussed under Question 2. GoLD’s contribution to community advocacy has been more limited or delayed than its contribution to capacity building for local officials, as both stakeholders and GoLD staff have attested. The creation of the new district-level facilitator position may help jump-start community advocacy where there have been delays. The addition of a new indicator (17) on the percentage of civil society actors who understand the norms and standards of performance by public service delivery sectors will provide important data on Result 3. The lack of women assuming leadership positions at the commune and district levels may be attributed in part to sociocultural biases, though this is difficult to verify without a clear baseline on the level of social inclusion prior to GoLD. Limited disaggregation of indicators, the lack of a regional staff member responsible for data collection or programming on social inclusion, delayed development and finalizing of a gender action plan, and FAFS’s weak local representation may also contribute to continued gender bias. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Implementation in CTs Targets Implementation in CTs Actual Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 22 GoLD has an extensive communication network, including radio broadcasts contracted by URAC. Although ensuring geographic and thematic distribution is critical, GoLD must also be able to evaluate the impact of both the broadcasts it is sponsoring. The zero baselines for indicators should be reconsidered where activities took place and/or structures were in place prior to GoLD. GoLD needs to review the source and/or formulation of its indicators, particularly disaggregation based on sector, gender, and handicapped individuals. GoLD has generally adhered to the programming timeline established in its work plans, with some delays—most notably the second PDNL SMP. Given the strong possibility that a second SMP will not be implemented, GoLD may need to consider a replacement measurement for the change in CT technical capacities, such as an IGGB that focuses on technical performance issues covered by the SMP. QUESTION 2. IS THE ORIGINAL GOLD THEORY OF CHANGE STILL RELEVANT AND COMPLETE? DOES IT SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESS CROSS-SECTOR INTEGRATION AND CENTRAL-LOCAL RELATIONS? GoLD’s theory of change is based on the premise that improved CT management, planning, and budgeting capacity; an active citizen role in the CT planning and implementation process; and greater CT local source revenue will improve local government transparency, responsiveness, accountability, and effectiveness within a more decentralized system (Figure 4). GoLD’s ultimate goal is to improve public service delivery in line with community needs, increase government legitimacy, and develop a stronger social contract. To date, no significant changes have been made to the theory of change. Figure 4. GoLD’s Theory of Change Interviews with various stakeholders indicated that the GoLD theory of change remains relevant and uncontested. However, it is missing national-level engagement to address critical issues such as fiscal transfers and collaboration Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 23 with ministerial services. All stakeholders interviewed recognized that resources (staff, funding, and materials) and decision making on budget allocations are concentrated at the national government level, both within the Ministry of Territorial Communities and in the public service line ministries (health, education, water, and sanitation). GoLD’s theory of change refers to “support for USAID integration strategy to improve basic services, including coordination and planning hubs, cross-sector social accountability mechanisms, knowledge platforms, and policy working groups.” But cross-sectoral integration support is not an operative part of the results framework in the theory of change. Nevertheless, GoLD’s collaborative approach with other USAID technical offices in Dakar and its integrated strategy with their activities have provided important synergy and efficiency. Moreover, this cross￾sectoral integration is arguably essential to achieving GoLD’s goal of improved local governance and service delivery. In the regions, members of GoLD’s regional staff as well as representatives of deconcentrated technical services in the regional capitals reported challenges in their collaboration. These challenges were varyingly attributed to a lack of memoranda of understanding with either sectoral ministries or governors to whom these services report or to dissatisfaction with the lack or level of compensation in comparison with other USAID projects or donors. CONCLUSION Despite significant evidence of its commitment to and practice of cross-sectoral integration, GoLD’s theory of change refers to an integrative strategy only as a preamble that is not fully incorporated into its results framework. This has not prevented GoLD from effectively engaging in cross-sectoral collaboration with other USAID technical offices and their activities that geographically overlap with GoLD’s activities. However, addressing the lack of attention to central-local relations in GoLD’s theory of change may help address regional technical services’ reluctance to collaborate with GoLD’s regional staff. At the national level, we have seen that GoLD has no intervention at the central level. That is lacking, because you are speaking at the beginning of your remarks about the issue of sustainability, the sustainability of the interventions. And anything that cannot be institutionalized at the central level, certainly could be doomed....It is a weakness that we are trying to correct with an extension of GoLD for all that has been experienced in these communes, it can be capitalized upon by the Ministry of Decentralization. – Focal point practicing in a technical office at USAID If at the central level the question is taken care of, that's fine. But if it is not supported, it can be a problem. Let's not forget that each time a tool is deemed efficient, the first thing we think about is how to capitalize on it and take it to scale. – COP of a USAID project collaborating with GoLD So, if at the beginning, this approach is not an impulsive approach that has involved the highest authorities at the central level, the stage of scaling up is still a problem....Maybe also GoLD's approach has failed to take into account certain requirements at the central level, at the institutional level. – Agent of Ministry of Territorial Communities Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 24 QUESTION 3. HOW RELEVANT, EFFECTIVE, AND POTENTIALLY SUSTAINABLE IS GOLD’S APPROACH TO PROMOTING PARTICIPATORY GOVERNANCE, AS EVIDENCED BY ITS GOVERNANCE TOOLS AND STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS? GOLD’S STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS At the outset, DRG and GoLD staff met with significant resistance from USAID technical offices that were required to financially contribute to the Activity’s budget. Through extensive consultations and negotiations, GoLD has developed dynamic strategic partnerships with these offices and their IPs in the four regions where GoLD is being implemented: • GoLD has developed an action plan that promotes its various activities with the USAID-funded health programs with Neema and RSS+. “Yes, frankly, it's a merging of local staff of RSS+ and GoLD, now supported by the national office as well. We have sent a team to Kolda to also assist in the implementation of the comité de développement sanitaire (CDS)....Really I think that with the collaboration in the field, GoLD is in any case part of our best experiences in synergy” (member of RSS+ senior management in Dakar). • More recently, GoLD has developed an action plan that promotes its various activities with the new USAID-funded education program Passerelles. Previous education activities were not located in GoLD regions, hindering their collaboration during Year 1. “I was really pleased when USAID GoLD told me that they did not have partners to rely on to be able to do some of the education work. But as you're here, we're going to work a lot....a plan has been sent to me, there are deadlines that have been agreed upon, implementation methods and that will lead to the signing of a protocol” (Passerelle regional coordinator). • GoLD has developed good synergy in the WASH sector with partners such as Sanitamba and ACCES. "With GoLD, we worked on the development of two booklets, one for water service and one for hygiene that has not yet been released. We also had working groups with GoLD on financial plans and planning workshops, etc.” (member of ACCES senior management in Dakar). • GoLD is currently developing an action plan with USAID-funded nutrition program Feed the Future and has been collaborating with nutrition programs Africa Lead and Kawolor. "We have a synergy plan with GoLD to see what worked well, what did not work well, how we can really boost our common goals to shift the lines of governance in the communes we share. We are in eight regions, but we share with GoLD two regions in the South (Sédhiou and Kolda). We have very good relations of collaboration" (member of Kawolor's top management in Dakar). As a result, GoLD has met or exceeded two of its four targets for indicators that measure its integration with other programs (Table 6). Although GoLD has not met all its targets for Indicators 25 and 26, the data reflect extensive integrated programming. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 25 Table 6. Integration Indicators Indicator 2017 2018 Target Year 1 Actual Year 1 Target Year 2 Actual Year 2 25. Number of USG-financed programs initiated by GoLD 10 10 12 8 26. Number of activities implemented with another USG-financed program 30 21 70 65 27. Number of programs with which GoLD organized meetings 10 20 12 12 28. Number of GoLD activities in collaboration with another program 10 33 30 36 Sources: GoLD revised indicators (2019), work plans (2017–2019), AMELP (2019), and annual reports (2017 and 2018). Despite GoLD’s extensive collaboration, interviews with GoLD’s and other USAID-funded activities’ staff conducted by RTI in late 2018 to early 2019 as part of the GoLD sector project partnership study revealed a lack of shared understanding of each other's missions, perceived incompatibility, and problems with joint actions. That said, the staff of all three USAID technical offices with whom the evaluation team met expressed their hopeful yet reserved judgement about the benefits of collaborating with GoLD. However, staff in one of the three technical offices expressed concern about a lack of sector-specific indicators, which limits their ability to assess GoLD’s effect on their sector. Although this is currently being renegotiated, staff members indicated that this limitation could impact the sustainability of cross-sectoral collaboration and joint funding of governance activities. The perceived need for sector-specific indicators may be tied to the limited number of GoLD indicators that are disaggregated by sector: • Indicator 6: Percentage of CTs with at least one technical committee. • Indicator 7: Number of sectoral service management committees that have improved their performance. • Indicator 9: Change in percentage of CT resources invested in public sectoral services. • Indicator 19: Number of advocacy activities organized by CSOs on issues identified by the community. Whereas Environmental Development Action in the Third World (ENDA) and World Vision staff members are fully embedded in the GoLD national and regional staff, and African Freedom of Expression Exchange (AFEX) and URAC have a clear contractual relationship with GoLD, GoLD’s strategic partnership with FAFS continues to try to find its footing. As a result, GoLD is currently exploring other options to promote social inclusion, particularly gender. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 26 GoLD’s strongest strategic partnerships with external actors are with the Ministry of Territorial Governance, Development, and Planning (MCTDAT) at the national level and the Regional Agency for Development (ARD) at the regional level, which works closely with GoLD staff in both Kolda and Tambacounda. However, collaboration between GoLD and the various technical services at the regional and department levels has been relatively weak, particularly in Kolda. As mentioned above, this weakness may be attributed to a lack of memoranda of understanding with their titular ministries and/or governors. Another factor cited is regional administrators’ unwillingness to participate in GoLD programming in the absence of per diem and/or transport commensurate with other donor projects, including other USAID-funded activities. This factor was more relevant in the education and WASH sectors. In the health sector, the partnership with technical services (Région Médicale and District Sanitaire) are more effective due to a very active collaboration with the USAID health program. GOLD’S GOVERNANCE TOOLS IGGB has been effectively implemented in all selected CTs as a baseline that also initiated enhancement of participatory local governance. To both reinforce the tool’s appropriation and gather data for GoLD’s overarching Indicator 1, a second follow-up IGGB has just been completed in piloted CTs. Although the reports are not yet available, preliminary results are favorable. Follow-up IGGBs will be conducted in Year 4 in the remaining CTs that more recently joined GoLD. In Year 5, GoLD intends to conduct a third and final IGGB in the piloted CTs. The CVA approach has been employed in all CT communes to varying degrees, with some significant delays in CVA training. As a result of low CVA programming, GoLD has created a facilitator position in each district, but this position appears to coordinate more with the ACT than with the GPC in each commune. Similarly, participatory budgeting has been employed in about a fifth of the CTs, several of which had been exposed to this tool prior to GoLD. According to all stakeholder categories, participatory budgeting has focused largely on budget formulation, with little if any effort to involve community members in monitoring and evaluation of budget implementation after its adoption, although recently GoLD has reported working with CTs on their 2018 CA. Although a few CTs were selected to pilot Y-Tax, including Bagadadji and Koumpentoum, where the evaluation team conducted interviews, this tool has not yet been implemented due to the need for coordination with the Ministry of Finance, which currently uses another version of the tool, E-Tax. Community leaders are hoping to see some version of this program implemented in their communes. SUSTAINABILITY OF GOLD’S INTEGRATIVE APPROACH AND GOVERNANCE TOOLS IGGB and CVA sustainability is not assured as they are labor intensive and require both skill and commitment that are not yet evident in the majority of communes, based on interviews in the CTs and discussions with other stakeholders, most notably ARD regional staff, despite the recent statement by the Secrétaire d’Etat auprès du Ministère de la Justice. Participatory budgeting appears sustainable where it has been implemented, especially when it predated the Activity, at least as a mechanism for input into budget formulation. Y-Tax implementation requires adoption of a convention by the Ministry of Finance, as data are needed from the central government, which has been using E-Tax. There are also some costs involved (e.g., phone credits) that will need to be addressed to ensure sustainability. Similarly, GoLD decided to drop Sen-Bridge based on its lack of sustainability beyond the life of the Activity due to high cost (phone credits). Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 27 CONCLUSION GoLD has extensive, dynamic strategic relationships with USAID technical sectors, its IPs, and ARD. There is less coordination with deconcentrated technical offices at the regional level; this coordination might be strengthened by incorporating central-local relations into GoLD’s theory of change, as mentioned above (Conclusion 2.2). Further disaggregation of GoLD’s current indicators could lessen USAID technical offices’ perceived need for sector-specific indicators. GoLD has employed its governance tools in all CTs to varying degrees, and they are well aligned with the promotion of participatory governance. GoLD will need to ensure that participatory budgeting is applied and, if necessary, adapted or complemented with another tool to promote community participation in the monitoring and evaluation of implemented budgets (CAs). GoLD staff will also need to resolve the issues surrounding Y-Tax implementation, possibly replacing it with a tool favored by the GoS. The sustainability of GoLD’s integrative approach has been largely assured by its extensive cross-sectoral programming but will depend largely on perceived if not measurable results. Given challenges associated with the IGGB and Y-Tax, the must sustainable tools appear to be participatory budgeting and some form of CVA, in general a participatory approach to local governance, particularly in CTs that had employed these types of tools prior to GoLD. QUESTION 4. HAS GOLD DEMONSTRATED A CURRENT OR POTENTIAL IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICE DELIVERY IN CORE SECTORS AND IS THIS IMPACT LIKELY TO BE SUSTAINABLE BEYOND THE PROJECT? IMPROVEMENTS IN GOVERNANCE CAPACITY BUILDING AND SUSTAINABILITY GoLD has led capacity-building trainings to varying degrees in all CTs on standards and norms for public service sectors and the roles and responsibilities of technical commission members for health, education, and WASH. They have also produced booklets on standards and norms for each of the technical sectors. In the health sector, GoLD has helped develop CT operational plans in at least two of the six communes visited. In the WASH sector, there is evidence of improved governance through GoLD’s support of the establishment of Comités locaux de pilotage and production of a booklet on hydrology to raise community awareness on good governance of water services. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 28 Photo: Cover page of the illustrated booklet, showing the involvement of all community members (men, women, children) in water management in rural areas Education programming has been more limited than health and WASH programming given the absence of a USAID￾funded education project in the four GoLD regions until the 2018 launch of Passerelles. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 29 IMPROVEMENTS IN SECTORAL INFRASTRUCTURE AND QUALITY OF SERVICE The CT budgets examined by the evaluation team show increased consideration of public service delivery and needs in budget formulation to varying degrees. As noted above, evaluation timing prevented the team from fully assessing GoLD’s impact on communal budgets, including sectoral expenditures, as the CAs were not yet available for 2018 and 2019 and the budget and annual investment plan (PIA) do not reflect the real expenses. Neither the PIA nor the proposed budgets can be relied on to evaluate changes in sectoral investment (Figure 5). As illustrated in the case of Bagadadji commune in Kolda, the PIA and budgets were generally not in line with the actual CA expenditures. Allocations for education, for example, were significantly greater in both the PIA and the budget. Figure 5. Comparison of Financial Documents: Bagadadji 2017 Despite a lack of evidence from official expenditures, there was clear evidence of GoLD programming supporting new if not increased expenditures in at least one service sector in all the communes visited by the evaluation team. In the health sector, GoLD has contributed to service delivery improvements in most of the communes visited, though in different forms and to varying degrees, including construction of a clinic and pharmacy in Bagadadji. These high-impact social achievements in Bagadadji are the result of advocacy activities developed by the communities, which, thanks to the training received from GoLD, are now fully aware of health standards and norms. In addition, GoLD health interventions have significantly strengthened collaboration between health facilities and local authorities. Commitments have been made and respected by local authorities, which has helped significantly improve the quality of patient care. 0 10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000 50,000,000 60,000,000 Sante Education WASH PIA Budget Comptes Admin Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 30 GoLD activities also included building and equipping an operating room and hiring three security guards in Koumpentoum. GoLD also facilitated hiring of an ambulance driver and installment of three solar panels for the Pata health clinic, as well as the hiring of a technician and ambulance driver and construction of housing for a midwife in Diaobe. CVA group advocacy has clearly resulted in concrete interventions in the health sector. In both regions, the municipalities benefited from sustained investment (e.g., Koumpentoum and Bagadadji). However, the impact of GoLD's activities in the health sector is not consistent across all CTs and should therefore be assessed depending on the municipalities visited. Based on interviews and evaluation team observations, the improvement in health services is more significant in Koumpentoum and Bagadadji and less extensive in the other communes visited (Diaobé, Méréto, Missirah, Pata). Before the intervention of GoLD, we really did not feel the collaboration between the health care center and the local community; it has really improved the collaboration with the commune….I can say that the arrival of GoLD has improved the collaboration, especially with the construction of the hospital ward, the construction of the pharmacy depot. It improved because the health care center was too narrow and we did not have a lot of space, so that was a problem; it improved the rotation and management of patients and especially at the level of organizing rows of medication. – Nursing head of health post ([Spell out]ICP) in Bagadadji CT, Kolda Region Now we have two separate rooms thanks to our request for change and the support of the town hall....There were women who gave birth next to sick patients in the same room; they trained us until we could advocate and lobby to change this situation. We talked about it and the mayor supported us and there was a separation because we had another room. – Woman focus group member, Bagadadji CT, Kolda Region The GoLD activities have been very useful and interesting for the health sector, especially with the identification of gaps with different stakeholders....The surgery room was neither equipped nor functional, and it was as a result of the advocacy that we were able to equip it and have it fully operational. Before, for any operation, it was necessary to travel all the way to Tambacounda (100 km/62 miles). – [Spell out]CDM in Koumpentoum, Tambacounda Region The CVA group also allowed the health care center to have a hospital ward for the sick; previously there was none. Patients were hospitalized at the maternity ward. When we went there to monitor the standards taught by GoLD, there was no room for hospitalization and in the performance measures, people identified that there are men who are hospitalized there. With that we had to lobby at the level of the mayor who built with his own funds, a room just for hospitalization. – Official of the citizen advocacy group in Bagadadji, Kolda Region Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 31 Photo: Pharmacy in Bagadadji (Kolda), July 2019. GoLD has also contributed to improved WASH infrastructure in some CTs, most notably: • Water pipes installed in Koumpentoum (Tambacounda), although some commune areas continue to lack sufficient water. • Conflict resolution in Koumpentoum between the population/the former Association des Usagers du Forage (ASUFOR) and the delegation des services publiques (DSP/SOGES) with GoLD’s partner organization AFEX. The resolution of this conflict has helped strengthen WASH sector governance in Koumpentoum. “In Koumpentoum, for example, GoLD mediated a meeting between SOGES, a part of the population, specifically the former ASUFOR community members and the prefect (...) the authorities explained to citizens that there are procedures to be followed with the recent revisions to the DSP" (senior official within SOGES, Tambacounda Region). • Latrines constructed in Missirah. • Boreholes constructed in Bagadadji, although not all are functional. Photo: Water canal in Pata (Kolda), July 2019. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 32 Although the lack of geographic overlap with a USAID-funded education program until recently has limited GoLD’s involvement in this sector, GoLD activities have contributed to improvements in the delivery of education services in several CTs, including: • Construction of a security wall surrounding a primary school in Bagadadji. "The CVA training with the education sector impacted schools because the elementary school did not have a fence or wall around it, but thanks to the advocacy and training that we followed, we managed to fence in the school of Bagadadji" (ACT in Bagadadji, Kolda Region). • Construction of two classrooms in Koumpentoum. "In the third and fourth schools, they were made out of temporary shelters. He built two classrooms and fenced in the school....Really on the field of education, the mayor really does a lot of work to praise in the area of education; the mayor is doing everything possible" (member of the education commission in Koumpentoum). • Provision of school desks in Pata. • Campaign to address sanitation in and around a school in Koumpentoum. Photo: Campaign to encourage hand washing, Bagadadji (Kolda), July 2019. SECTORAL DATA AND INDICATORS A lack of access to data disaggregated by sector for GoLD indicators hindered the evaluation team's capacity to assess the current and/or potential impact on public service delivery in core sectors. As noted above, reliable data about the funds spent in the various technical sectors will not be available until the CAs are completed at the end of 2019 for the 2018 budgets. These data, however, will not capture all local investments in the service sectors—specifically, the fonds de cooperation and fonds de dotation from the national government and grants and donations from individuals, NGOs, and community-based organizations. The sectoral allocation of these alternative investment sources is also likely to be impacted by GoLD activities and trainings. GoLD staff interpreted this as a limitation on their capacity to measure the Activity’s impact on public service delivery that may warrant discarding Indicator 9 on change in the percentage of local resources invested in public services by the CTs (data for which have not been reported to date). In addition, there is no clarity in the indicators on specific definitions of sector expenditures nor the targeted sector-specific committees that GoLD targets. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 33 CONCLUSION GoLD trainings that improve understanding of norms, standards, roles, and responsibilities in each sector will make improvements in local governance and public service delivery more sustainable although concerns remain about the sustainability of new allocations and investments beyond the Activity. There is clear evidence of improved infrastructure and quality of public service delivery in CTs where GoLD is working but limited ability to gauge variability across CTs and sectors or improvements in investments until more data are available from the CAs and/or indicators disaggregated by sector. Limited disaggregation of indicator data by sector hinders the ability of GoLD and its partners and evaluators to assess the Activity’s impact on public service delivery. Moreover, to provide an accurate assessment of GoLD’s impact on sectoral spending, GoLD will need to collect data from CT mayors’ offices on other funding sources— specifically, fonds de cooperation, fonds de dotation, and grants and donations. RECOMMENDATIONS The GoLD midterm evaluation recommendations workshop was conducted on November 4, 2019, in Dakar. The workshop was attended by GoLD staff; USAID DRGP staff; and technical offices, as well as GoS partners. After the evaluation findings and conclusions were presented, the participants were divided into smaller groups to develop recommendations. A summary of their recommendations is presented here. (See Annex X for a more complete matrix.) QUESTION 1. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION AND RESOURCE MOBILIZATION COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Participatory budgeting GoLD should: • Encourage local authorities to adopt participatory budgeting as a tool for local budget planning. • Support and institutionalize the Community Public Dialogue Space (EDIC) as a forum for citizen participation in monitoring and evaluation of the budget process (every six months). • Develop a national campaign advocating for the institutionalization of participatory budgeting and EDIC. Inclusion of handicapped individuals GoLD should: • Identify local associations and strengthen its collaboration with them. • Improve documentation of its efforts to consider the interests and needs of handicapped individuals. Women’s local leadership GoLD should: Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 34 • Develop and implement a plan of action to reinforce women’s leadership within the CT administration. • Support the implementation of Senegal’s Equality Law (Parité) in collaboration with the Ministry of Territorial Communities (MCT). • Explore partnerships with other women’s organizations that have strong networks in each of the regions in which GoLD works. • Strengthen collaboration with IPs to promote social inclusion (joint activities and incorporation of gender￾sensitive approaches in programming). Measuring radio broadcast reach and impact GoLD should: • Strengthen collaboration with IPs in the health sector (Neema, RSS+, and SHOPS+) that have expertise in this area of communication to benefit from the best practices of other USAID-funded programs, such as Japp Na Ci. • Conduct a participatory audience study that integrates communication mechanisms to measure broadcasts’ impact on their audience. • Conduct an impact study to measure broadcasts’ effects on knowledge and understanding of local governance. • Explore ways to provide radio program coverage in the communes not covered by the URAC network of community radio stations. LOCAL RESOURCE MOBILIZATION AND MANAGEMENT Lack of data on increased local resource mobilization In collaboration with DGID/ Direction Générale de la Comptabilité Publique et du Trésor (DGCPT), USAID, and CTs, GoLD should: • Strengthen its collaboration with DGID and DGCPT to improve CTs’ access to financial information (compte de gestion and other budget documents). • Widen the revenue sources (direct resource mobilization) tracked by the project beyond the CA. • Consider the timing of the CT fiscal year, which follows the calendar year and ends on December 31. • Strengthen CT capacity to put in place a simplified financial tracking system for all financial expenses and tracking. • Implement an electronic financial tracking system in CTs. Such a system will require capacity building and coaching. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 35 Limited commune capacity to mobilize resources In collaboration with DGCPT, ARD, and MCT, GoLD should: • Conduct a full assessment of potential revenue sources for each CT. • Support the creation and application of local fiscal commissions to increase revenue sources and improve revenue collection. • Support CTs’ ability to identify new, innovative revenue sources such as public-private partnerships, sister cities, and CT marketing. • Support CTs’ ability to document private donations (particularly from diaspora) as well as in-kind contribution and community fundraising campaigns to track larger-level direct resource mobilization (DRM). • Review CT budget allocations to ensure an appropriate balance of funds allocated for service delivery as opposed to internal CT management. QUESTION 2. THEORY OF CHANGE Lack of collaboration between GoLD and the central government In collaboration with USAID, GoLD should: • Include work at the national level to improve two-way communication on CT budget allocations and revenue. • At the regional level, establish strong working relationships with the governor in the project’s planning to ensure deconcentrated actors’ awareness and participation. In collaboration with the Ministry of Territorial Governance, Development, and Planning (MCTDAT), GoLD should: • Implement a national-level data management system that synchronizes CT data. • Work more closely with MCTDAT to ensure that data collected by GoLD inform public policy debates. • Strengthen CT capacity to manage the transfer of resources from the central government. QUESTION 3. SUSTAINABILITY OF TOOLS IGGB, CVA, and Y-Tax sustainability GoLD should: • Work with the ARD to harmonize GoLD tools with GoS tools rather than duplicate. • Move forward in piloting the Y-Tax tool supported by the GoS as opposed to the GoLD tool to avoid duplication. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 36 • Develop a strategy to consolidate local understanding and capacity to use a CVA approach among GCPs in each sector. QUESTION 4. GOLD’S IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICE SECTORS GoLD’s indicators inadequately capture sectoral developments USAID and GoLD should: • Revive the Working Group on Governance Integration within USAID across technical offices to encourage consistent expectations of GoLD in measuring CT technical service delivery. • Support GoLD’s monitoring and evaluation system to strengthen its data collection process and better capture and analyze the volume of information being collected. • Review and revise GoLD’s indicators to clarify data collection tools, means of measurement, and ways to consistently measure increase in direct resource mobilization, budget allocations, and budget expenditures for each technical sector. • Clarify each technical sector’s definitions of what constitutes health, water and sanitation, nutrition, and education in CT budgets. • Ensure that indicators are adequately disaggregated by technical sector. • Clarify in the indicator definitions the technical committees (e.g., school management committees (CGEs) for education, health committees for health) to target and track for capacity building and partnership within GoLD’s CT work. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 37 ANNEXES ANNEX I: EVALUATION STATEMENT OF WORK GOVERNANCE FOR LOCAL DEVELOPMENT LEARNING & EVALUATION SUPPORT STATEMENT OF WORK Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 38 GOVERNANCE FOR LOCAL DEVELOPMENT LEARNING & EVALUATION SUPPORT Statement of Work Contracted under AID-685-C-15-00003 USAID Senegal Monitoring and Evaluation Project DISCLAIMER The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 39 CONTENTS ACRONYMS 40 1. STATEMENT OF WORK DETAIL 41 2. ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION 41 3. DEVELOPMENT HYPOTHESIS AND IMPLEMENTATION 42 4. EXISTING PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SOURCES 42 5. TASK PURPOSE, AUDIENCE, AND INTENDED USES 43 6. TASK REQUIREMENT 43 7. GENDER DISAGGREGATION AND GENDER DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS 44 8. APPROACH 44 10. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS 47 11. DELIVERABLES 47 12. TEAM COMPOSITION 48 13. PARTICIPATION OF USAID STAFF AND PARTNERS 52 14. SCHEDULING AND LOGISTICS 52 15. DISSEMINATION 52 16. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 53 16. ATTACHED REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 53 17. AUTHORIZATIONS 53 APPENDIX II: DOCUMENT REVIEW MATRIX ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX III: RESULTS FRAMEWORKERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX IV: RESPONSE MATRIX ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX V: GANNT CHART ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX VI: CVS ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX VII: CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENTSERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. APPENDIX VIII: USAID CRITERIA TO ENSURE THE QUALITY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 40 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 41 Acronyms AOR Agreement Officer’s Representative CL Collectivité Locales COR Contract Officer’s Representative DRG Democracy, Human Rights and Governance GOLD Governance for Local Development GOS Government of Senegal MEP Monitoring and Evaluation Project POC Point of contact PSE Plan Sénégal Emergent TOC Theory of Change USAID United States Agency for International Development WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 42 1. Statement of Work Detail 2. Activity Description In September 2016, USAID/Senegal awarded RTI International a five-year cooperative agreement to support the Government of Senegal’s (GOS’s) decentralization program. USAID Governance for Local Development (GOLD)s implementation is guided by the framework of three main Activity-specific results (see Figure 1) in support of USAID’s Intermediate Result 3.2: Responsive democratic governance strengthened: • Result 1: Capacity of local government to respond to citizen demand increased • Result 2: Mobilization and management of local public resources improved • Result 3: Community participation in service delivery management (Health; Education; Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene [WASH] and Agriculture) increased.5 GOLD builds upon Senegal’s decentralization reforms and Plan Sénégal Emergent (PSE) to strengthen responsive and accountable governance closer to citizens and to improve service delivery. The activity focuses on innovative approaches to improve service delivery, and works toward building long-term sustainability of these approaches. 5 GOLD FY2017 Annual Report USAID SOW Manager Aliou Kébé Activity COR/AOR Aliou Kébé MEP SOW Manager Sadio Coulibaly Activity Title USAID Governance for Local Development (GOLD) Activity Period 2016-2021 Award/Contract # AID-685-A-16-00006 Funding $19,998,364.00 Implementing Organization RTI International Geographic Coverage Tambacounda, Kédougou, Kolda and Sédhiou Task Governance for Local Development Learning & Evaluation Task Start and End Dates June 2018-October 2019 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 43 GOLD’s interventions include: 1) Build collectivités locales (CL) capacities in fundamental planning, budgeting, financial management, and citizen engagement; 2) Improve CL capacity to coordinate with and integrate donor development programs into planning and budgeting processes for local development plans and service delivery; 3) Increase CL local own-source revenues to successfully fund new functions; 4) Improve the ability of sectoral management bodies to provide oversight and manage resources accountably and transparently; and (5) Amplify efforts to reduce corruption and increase public confidence in government.6 3. Development Hypothesis and Implementation GOLD’s Theory of Change (TOC) is based upon the premise that if the management, planning and budgeting capacity of CLs is improved and citizens have an active role in the CL planning and implementation process and CLs can increase their local source revenue, then there will be improved local government transparency responsiveness, accountability and effectiveness within a more decentralized system. The ultimate impact of the activity is to improve public service delivery in line with community needs, increase government legitimacy and develop a stronger social contract. To date, no significant changes have been made to the TOC. 4. Existing Performance Information Sources USAID will provide the Evaluation Team with a package of Activity background materials, including: 6 GOLD Cooperative Agreement # AID-685-A-16-00006 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 44 • Cooperative Agreement and modifications. • All activity quarterly reports through FY18 Q2, annual reports, annual work plans, Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plans (AMELP) and any modifications to AMELP; • Baseline and current data collected on activity indicators; • USAID/DRG learning questions and GOLD research scopes; • Political Economic Analysis and targeted reports developed by GOLD; and • Any relevant studies or background reports used to support the activity, produced by GOLD or its partners. All background documents will be provided to the MEP Team by June 8, 2018. 5. Task Purpose, Audience, and Intended Uses The purpose of this learning and evaluation support task is to provide answers to one of USAID/DRG GOLD’s learning questions, review GOLD’s baseline data and to conduct a midterm performance evaluation. The task is intended to provide support to the DRG team over a year-long period to provide learning and performance insights to the GOLD activity. The evaluation will cover the years 1 through 3 of the GOLD activity and assist the DRG Office to determine if critical assumptions in the TOC are still valid. (see Annex IX). The primary audience for this evaluation is USAID/Senegal Democracy, Human Rights, Peace and Governance (DRG) Office. The secondary audience is the GOLD implementing partner, Research Triangle Institute, and its partners and the relevant stakeholders working to support decentralization in Senegal. The evaluation will include a recommendations workshop which will involve all key GOLD stakeholders meeting together to jointly develop recommendations to address the evaluation findings. The result of the recommendations workshop will be a recommendations action plan agreed to by all partners which will be used to support GOLD’s Year 4 Work Plan and to identify any potential areas for additional collaboration with the GOS. 6. Task Requirement The task will be divided into two phases: the first assessing learning questions and conducting a review of GOLD’s baseline data and the second conducting a performance evaluation. It is expected that the first phase will feed into the midterm performance evaluation. Based on the assessment of GOLDs baseline data, additional data collection may be requested, as agreed upon by the DRG Office. Phase I: Learning Agenda Support The first phase of this task will explore one of the USAID/DRG GOLD learning questions as part of their GOLD Learning Agenda (see Annex IX). Specifically, the team will examine GOLD Learning Agenda question #1: How effective is GOLD’s participatory design and planning strategy in terms of GOLD’s collaboration with its partners? Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 45 The team will also examine whether the implementation processes of the USAID GOLD Activity meets the expected needs of the USAID Mission in particular the technical teams, Program Office and Front Office. Both of these questions will be answered through a survey with all Mission Offices involved in GOLD followed by qualitative interviews with technical offices, PRM and Front Office. Interviews will also be held with GOLD partners to assess the perception and practice of collaborative planning and implementation and perceived strengths and weaknesses of this approach. In addition to reviewing these learning questions, the team will also review the baseline data for GOLD and make any recommendations to the USAID/DRG Office for additional data or preparations that should be made to prepare for the midterm performance evaluation. Any additional data collection recommended to the DRG Office will require additional time and level of effort added to this task. The results of this initial phase will be presented to USAID, across the Mission, working first with the DRG Office and then making formal presentations to the technical office, front office and PRM. The results from this phase will also be shared with GOLD implementer, Research Triangle Institute (RTI); their local research partner, Initiative prospective agricole et rurale (IPAR) and Gov-Lab. The information will also be used to feed into the evaluation workplan which will be developed in early 2019. Phase II: Performance Evaluation The performance evaluation will assess the degree to which GOLD is on track to achieve its year three￾activity targets. The following principal questions will guide this evaluation: 1) What is GOLD’s progress to date towards expected results and timelines of the workplans? 2) How relevant is the original GOLD TOC in terms of central-local integration? 3) How relevant, effective and potentially sustainable are the GOLD governance tools? 4) Has there been any effect to date on improved public service delivery by sector in GOLD target CLs? What is the potential for sustainability of any improvements? 7. Gender Disaggregation and Gender Differential effects The team will incorporate questions around gender in planning with the technical teams to as part of the first phase of this task. The team will seek information on whether technical teams feel that gender is adequately addressed in the collaborative planning process across the different offices of the Mission. For phase two, the team will focus on questions four and five as part of the evaluation with a gender lens; particularly in terms of gender inclusiveness in planning and management and ensuring that all genders and their interests are taken into account in the overall implementation of GOLD. The evaluation team will assess the citizen participation in CL planning, budgeting and implementation to assess how actively both male and female traditional organizations and local leaders are involved in the discussion and decision-making process. 8. Approach Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 46 1. Learning Support (Phase 1) The MEP Team will conduct a learning assessment as the first phase of this task. The learning assessment will explore the first GOLD learning question related to the collaborative design and management approach of GOLD which cuts across all technical offices within the Mission. The team will examine all documents from GOLD, with particular attention to planning documents and M&E reporting documents as part of an initial desk review. The review will help to see how the various technical offices have input to workplan and M&E indicators, targets and reporting. Following the desk review, the team will conduct in-person interviews with Mission technical offices, PRM and the front office. In addition, interviews will be held with GOLD implementing partner, RTI and their GOLD partners. An anonymous survey will also be distributed to Mission staff involved in GOLD and GOLD implementing partners. The outcome of this assessment will be presented to the DRG Office for validation and then a formal presentation will be made to the Mission staff, followed by the GOLD staff. 2. Evaluation Design (Phase 2) As part of Phase 2 of this task, the MEP Team will conduct a Performance Evaluation of GOLD. The primary data source for this evaluation will be the main stakeholders in the Activity -- mainly direct beneficiaries, including members of CLs; mayors, their staff and advisors as well as members of the community including traditional leaders, local authorities, and community-based associations and organizations. Key informants for this evaluation will also include members of the GOLD staff in Dakar and in the field, as well as members of the USAID/DRG team, AOR and the relevant central level agencies within the GOS. This statement of work requires that the Evaluation Team develop and submit for approval a detailed work plan with proposed methodology within the first seven days of the evaluation schedule. A central part of the work plan will be the getting to answers matrix which will support the creation of the evaluation methodology based on the evaluation questions. The following is a sample of the matrix: EVALUATION QUESTIONS TYPE OF ANSWER NEEDED DATA COLLECTION METHODS DATA SOURCE(S) SAMPLING OR SELECTION CRITERIA DATA ANALYSIS METHODS  Descriptive  Comparative (normative)  Cause and Effect Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 47 The evaluation team’s methodology will include • Completion of a document review prior to the arrival of expat team members in Senegal; • At least three data collection methods to address each of the identified evaluation questions in order to triangulate data. Suggested data collection tools are: survey, key informant interviews, group interviews and focus groups discussions. • GOLD has already identified eight target CLs that are the first CLs participating in the Activity that serve as their learning and research sites. These sites will be used as part of the sample for this evaluation in addition to more recently introduced CLs that will be randomly selected by the evaluation team and identified in the evaluation workplan. • The four methods (surveys, key informant interviews, group interviews and focus group discussions) will be coded separately. • The survey questionnaire and qualitative interviews will be analyzed using statistical software. • Gender, geographic location, and role (beneficiary, implementer, service provider) disaggregation will be included in the data analysis. 3. Data Collection Methods The data collection methodology to be used by the team will consist of two steps: Step 1: Document review The team will review a wide range of documentation including the GOLD cooperative agreement, modifications, Activity Workplan, Annual Workplans, Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (AMELP), project databases, quarterly and annual reports and special reports and studies conducted by the Activity as means of understanding and comparing both expected and actual performance. The team will also discuss any relevant activity-related documents from other technical offices that interface directly with GOLD. Step 2: Quantitative and qualitative field research As part of its qualitative and quantitative research, the team will find the best fit for purpose, including the following research instruments: • Quantitative analysis of activity performance data to date • Key informant interviews: Open questions for interviewing program stakeholders: (USAID/DRG, GOLD and RTI senior staff), mayors and local authorities (préfet, sous-préfets and traditional leaders), and central level authorities working on decentralization. • Group interviews: Targeted questions with GOLD central and field staff as well as other implementing partners working in coordination with GOLD Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 48 • Focus groups: Focus groups with community members, civil society leaders to discuss program effects on individuals and institutions. • Other emerging methodologies may be considered. Other data sources, such as secondary data available from the projects itself, research studies, or from the Government of Senegal will also be considered. 9. Strengths and Limitations USAID’s evaluation policy states that any methodological strengths and limitations are to be communicated explicitly. The work plan developed by the evaluation team is required to include limitations in the methodology and approach, as well as limitations in the data to be used, either primary or secondary data, as part of the evaluation. 10. Deliverables The deliverables for this task include: Phase 1 • Work Plan: Detailed work plan which will indicate detailed calendar, data collection tools and persons to be interviewed/surveyed to respond to the identified learning question. The work plan will be submitted to the MEP Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and DRG point of contact (POC) for approval prior to fieldwork. • Assessment briefing with DRG Office for validation. A subsequent briefing will then be held across the Mission and with the GOLD IP, RTI and its partners. • Assessment report providing all findings related to the learning question related to collaborative design, planning, management and reporting as well as findings regarding GOLD baseline data. Recommendations for improving baseline data in preparation for the midterm evaluation will also be included in this report. Phase 2 • Work Plan: Detailed work plan which will indicate methodology, data analysis, detailed calendar, and data collection tools for the elaboration of the evaluation. The work plan will be submitted to the MEP Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and DRG point of contact (POC) for approval prior to fieldwork. • Progress Report: A brief written report of the data collection progress made in the field covering key scheduled activities, status of completion, and constraints encountered during the data collection process. • Data Walk/Initial Findings Presentation: A discussion, which may include a PowerPoint presentation, that reviews the initial findings and conclusions table and the supporting evidence and data collected. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 49 • Initial presentation (s): A PowerPoint presentation to the USAID Mission on findings and conclusions of the evaluation. The presentation should not be more than 15 slides. Additional presentations will be made to GOLD staff as well as key central government officials and targeted CLs. • Recommendations Workshop(s): A workshop with the key stakeholders to develop, discuss, and validate recommendations. The exact number and audience will be determined through conversations with the USAID/GOLD management team and GOLD teams. • Submission of Draft Evaluation Report: The team will submit a draft report to the MEP COR and DRG POC who will provide comments for revision and finalization of the report ten working days following the draft submission. • Final Report: A written and electronic document that includes a table of contents, methodology, findings, conclusions, lessons learned, and recommendations. The final report will be submitted in English and will include: o A 20-page report with a clear discussion of the data and evidence, the subsequent findings prompted by analysis of the data and evidence, conclusions driven by the findings, and recommendations generated from the conclusions and based on the recommendations workshop. Other tables representing detailed findings may be attached as an annex. The final report will include a database with all collected information and statistical analyses as an annex. o A one-page evaluation fact sheet(s) highlighting target findings for decision-making. These fact sheets will respond to the question: Who needs to know what, and by when? The fact sheet(s) may be developed during report drafting, based on discussions with the evaluation team, PRM and the technical team. o A three-page executive summary that provides a brief discussion of the evaluation purpose, basic methodology, findings, conclusions, and recommendations. 11. Team Composition The task team will be led by Dr. Linda Beck, who has a PhD in Political Science with a Minor in African Studies. She has extensive experience working in West Africa over the last 18 years supporting political analysis, research and technical guidance in a range of democracy and governance interventions. an experienced governance and democracy specialist. Dr. Beck has experience working with USAID/DRG assessment approaches and recently completed a USAID Assessment of Democracy, Human Rights and Governance in Côte d’Ivoire, in 2015 and the same USAID/DRG assessment in Senegal in 2012. Additionally, she produced a report on Senegal’s budget transparency and accountability in 2011 and conducted a World Bank study on Civic Engagement and Decentralization in Senegal. Dr. Beck will lead the Phase 1 learning assessment with a Senegalese decentralization expert. Dr. Beck will also lead the Phase 2 midterm evaluation for continuity. For the GOLD evaluation, Dr. Beck will be supported by a Senegalese decentralization specialist, a community health sector specialist, a community water and sanitation specialist, a community agriculture specialist and a public financial management specialist. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 50 The evaluation team will be supported by a MEP M&E Manager who will accompany the team in the field. Two enumerators will conduct the qualitative interviews and take notes. All interviews, and focus groups will be recorded and transcribed for analysis. Sadio Coulibaly will serve as the task manager overseeing the overall administration of the evaluation. All team members are required to provide a signed statement attesting that they have no conflict of interest, or describing any existing conflict of interest. MEP Senegal’s Technical Director, Deborah Orsini will review the findings, conclusions and recommendations matrix as well as the draft and final reports for technical quality. Dates Tasks/Deliverables Estimated LOE (in days) Team Leader Decentralization Specialist Community Health Specialist Community WASH Specialist Community agriculture Specialist PFM Specialist Enumerators July 11, 2018 Signature of SOW July 9-20 Recruitment of team Phase 1: Learning Support (2018) July 16-20 Desk review (baseline data review) and workplan development 5 5 July 21-22 Team Leader arrives in Dakar 2 July 23-26 Team Leader participates in GOLD retreat 4 July 27 Team Leader departs Dakar 1 August 13 Submit Phase I Workplan to DRG for approval August 20 Receive workplan approval from DRG August 6-20 Confirm DC appointments September 9 TL travel to DC 1 September 10 Interviews in DC 1 September 11 TL departs DC 1 September 1- 30 Confirm Dakar and region appointments September 29- 30 Team Leader arrives in Dakar 2 October 1-4- Interviews with USAID/Senegal staff, and GOLD implementing partners 4 4 TASKS/DELIVERABLES AND LOE Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 51 Dates Tasks/Deliverables Estimated LOE (in days) Team Leader Decentralization Specialist Community Health Specialist Community WASH Specialist Community agriculture Specialist PFM Specialist Enumerators October 5 Travel to field 1 1 October 6-8 Field interviews 2 2 October 9 Return to Dakar 1 1 October 8-10 Review of transcripts and analysis 1 1 October 10- 11 Development of initial briefing 1 1 October 11 Presentation of findings to DRG Office 1 1 October 12 Presentation to Mission (morning) October 12 Presentation to GOLD partners (afternoon) 1 1 October 12- 13 Team leader departs Dakar 1 October 15- 22 Report writing 5 2 October 29 Submit draft report November 13 Feedback from DRG Office November 27 Finalization of report 3 1 Nov-May On-going support to GOLD Learning Steering Committee 7 2 Total Estimated LOE 45 22 Phase 2: GOLD Performance Evaluation (2019) May 20-23 Desk review and completion of answering questions with secondary data 4 May 27-29 Development of workplan and tools 3 2 1 1 1 1 June 3 Submit workplan to DRG Office for approval June 3-7 Confirm appointments and field schedule Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 52 Dates Tasks/Deliverables Estimated LOE (in days) Team Leader Decentralization Specialist Community Health Specialist Community WASH Specialist Community agriculture Specialist PFM Specialist Enumerators June 11 Approval of Workplan by DRG June 15-16 Team Leader Travels to Dakar 2 June 17 Team Coordination Meeting and initial meeting with USAID/DRG staff 1 1 1 1 1 1 June 18 Train enumerators 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 June 19-21 Interviews with USAID/Senegal staff, GOLD staff and other Dakar based stakeholders 2 2 1 1 1 1 June 22 Depart for regions 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 June 24-26 Initial regional interviews/focus groups 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 June 27 Core team returns to Dakar 1 1 1 1 1 1 June 28 Core Team Preliminary data analysis 1 1 1 1 1 1 June 27-29 Enumeration team continues qualitative interviews 3 June 30 Enumerators return to Dakar 1 July 1 Data walk with USAID/DRG (findings and initial presentation) 1 1 1 1 1 1 July 2 Presentation with Mission 1 1 1 1 1 1 July 2 Presentation to GOLD July 2-3 TL return to USA 1 July 3-10 Development of findings, conclusions table and integration of qualitative findings 6 3 3 3 3 3 3 July 17 Validation of findings and conclusions by USAID July 15-16 Return of Team Leader to Dakar 2 July 19 Recommendations workshop with GOLD, USAID and GoS 1 1 1 1 1 1 July 20 Finalization of recommendations action plan 1 1 1 1 1 1 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 53 Dates Tasks/Deliverables Estimated LOE (in days) Team Leader Decentralization Specialist Community Health Specialist Community WASH Specialist Community agriculture Specialist PFM Specialist Enumerators July 20-21 Departure of Team Leader 1 July 22-26 Development of draft report 5 4 2 2 2 2 August 5 Submission of draft report August 20 Feedback from USAID on report August 21-30 Revisions to report 2 2 September 6 Submission of final report Total Estimated LOE 40 25 19 19 19 19 12x2 = 24 12. Participation of USAID Staff and Partners It is expected that the USAID/Senegal DRG Office will provide an initial in-brief with the evaluation team during the Team Planning Meeting. Upon completion of the work plan and tool development, USAID/DRG Office will be expected to review and approve the work plan and tools. As part of the evaluation, USAID/DRG Agreement Officer’s Representative (AOR) and DRG Office Director will be interviewed as well as all Activity Managers in the Public Health Office, Economic Growth, and Education. All GOLD partners will be interviewed as part of this evaluation. At the completion of the fieldwork, it is expected that USAID, GOLD, and GoS stakeholders will participate in a presentation of the evaluation’s initial findings and conclusions and provide input to support the validation of findings. USAID/DRG Office, GOLD staff and GoS stakeholders will allocate one day to participating in the co￾development of recommendations that will address evaluation findings. 13. Scheduling and Logistics MEP Senegal will arrange all logistics for fieldwork. MEP Senegal (for the USAID/Senegal DRG Team) will request introductory communications for the evaluation team. All appointments will be made by MEP Senegal staff and team members. 14. Dissemination The focus of the dissemination of findings and conclusions via presentation, will be done to ensure wide buy-in and validation of the findings and conclusions. The recommendations workshop will allow for additional input and buy-in from USAID/DRG, GOLD and GoS and will increase interest in the evaluation report itself. The report will be disseminated to all GoS partners to ensure wide sharing of lessons learned in the decentralization process. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 54 15. Reporting Requirements It is expected that this report will be drafted and finalized in English and then translated into French. The report itself should not be longer than 20 pages total, excluding the Annexes. A draft evaluation report template is attached to this SOW in Annex IX, which is based on the USAID evaluation report template and guidance (http://usaidlearninglab.org/library/evaluation-report-template and How-To Note Preparing Evaluation Reports - http://usaidlearninglab.org/library/how-note- preparing-evaluation￾reports). The report includes Appendix 1, which is the Mandatory Reference on Evaluation. The report will be branded with the standard USAID branding requirements and will be formally submitted to the DEC upon approval. Additional copies of the final report in French will be made available to all stakeholders participating in the initial findings briefings and recommendations workshop. Copies in English will be shared with relevant USG offices within USAID/DRG Center. 16. Attached Reference Documents Please check all that apply below. Budget Document review matrix Results framework Response matrix Gantt chart CVs Conflict of Interest Statements USAID evaluation policy USAID evaluation report structure 17. Authorizations The undersigned hereby authorize the following items (checked below) for the Statement of Work (SOW) described above: Completion of the SOW, as described above; Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 55 SOW staffing, as described above; Concurrence with Contracting Officer’s Travel Approval for the Consultant(s), requested above (if received prior to review). [COR to either sign below or indicate approval in a return email] __________________________________________ ________________ Office Director Date __________________________________________ ________________ Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) Date Fatou Thiam, or designate Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 56 ANNEX II: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS TABLE FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS EQ I. What is GOLD’s progress to date towards expected results and timelines of the workplans? RESULT 1: Increased Capacity of Local Government to Respond to Citizen Demand F1. Extensive programming to promote capacity of local officials in the majority of communes evidenced by Indicators 3, 5, 6, and 8, verified in interviews and focus groups conducted in selected CTs among informants from different categories of key stakeholders along with extensive GoLD documentation. C1. CAPACITY BUILDING: GoLD programming has contributed to extensive capacity building particularly of local officials (Result 1). However, the lack of data related to measurements in improvements in local government procedures limits the ability to show the effect of the training other than increasing knowledge. Indicator 5: Number of people trained exceeding the target in both Year 1 by 217% (217/100 people) and Year 2 by 108% (649/600 people). Indicator 6: Percentage of target CTs with at least one technical commission in place to develop/implement a social service delivery plan exceeded target by 3 %. Indicator 8: Percentage of target CTS that comply with public procurement procedures for procuring local goods and services exceeded target by 3%. Indicator 3: Percentage of target CTs using participatory budgeting and planning process exceeded target in Year 1 (>3%) but did not quite make target in Year 2 (<1%). Interviews and focus group discussions conducted in selected CTs referenced extensive though varying levels of programming to build the capacity of local officials, including trainings on governance tools (BBGI, CVA, Participatory Budgeting) and roles and responsibilities of sectoral management committees. Informants from different categories of stakeholders repeatedly indicated that GoLD's performance has been strongest in Result 1 (capacity building of local government) Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 57 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS Different categories of stakeholders reported having participated in multiple trainings organized by GoLD that improved their understanding of their roles in their respective technical commissions. Interviews and focus group discussions indicated that programming was weaker in some CTs (Missirah and Mereto) and less was done in the Education Sector. F2. There is limited data available at this time on the increased capacity of local government as measurements for three critical indicators (1, 2 and 7) are not available. General Indicator 1-percentage change in integrated governance performance target is based on a second follow-up BBGI that was scheduled for Year 3 for the 8 piloted CTs. Preliminary results suggest varied level of improvement. Indicator 2-percentage change in technical capacities of target CTs is based on a second follow-up SMP that was scheduled for Year 3 but has not yet been conducted by PNDL which plans to conduct the SMP in early 2020. Indicator 7 - number of social service management committees that have improved their performance was revised in the 2019 AMELP to begin measurement in Year 3 but no data is currently available. RESULT 2: Improved Mobilization and Management of Local Public Resources F3. Based on extensive documentation, interviews and focus group discussions, GoLD programming has contributed to improved tax collection, transparency in budget planning, and timely budget votes in the majority of CTS. C2. MOBILIZED LOCAL RESOURCES: Improvement in tax collection, transparency of budget planning, and timely budget votes in nearly all CTs (Result 2). There remain concerns about the capacity of local tax base to address the needs of core service sectors. Local officials and community leaders in most CTs reported improved tax collection although the level of increase in IMF4 funds varied. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 58 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS Improvement in timely vote of commune budgets was reported in the majority of communes based on interviews and documentation. Improved transparency in budget planning via public posting of annual budget and Annual Investment Plan (PIA) reported by focus groups in Pata. Meetings and forums to inform citizens about the importance of paying local taxes positively impacted tax collection to varying degrees in most CTs with mass mobilization by women reported in Pata, Diaobe and Mereto. Neighborhood forums were reported in nearly all CTs involving community leaders that contributed to a better understanding of budget process and allocation. F4. There is limited data available to verify increased mobilization of resources (Indicators 9-10) as Comptes Administratifs (CAs) for 2018 are not available until the end of 2019. Indicator 9: Reporting on the change in percentage of local resources invested in sectoral services by target CTs begins in Year 3 although the data is not yet available until the CAs are submitted by the CTs and there are some concerns about the capacity to disaggregate this data. Despite evidence of improved tax collection in nearly all CTs, there remains a limited capacity to generate new local funds in all communes, a fact recognized by all stakeholders and supported by the CT budgets and PIAs for 2017-2019. Indicator 10: Reporting on the percentage change in GoLD CTs own source revenues was to begin in Year 3 although the data is not available until the CAs are submitted by the CTs. Indicator 11: Reporting on the number of GoLD CTs that have increased the number of opportunities to Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 59 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS generate revenue begins in Year 3 although the data is not available until the CAs are submitted by the CTs. F5. Two of the five indicators for Result 2 (indicators 12 and 13) regarding social accountability and integration of development partners exceeded their targets in Year 2, the first year targets were scheduled to be reported. Indicator 11: The percentage of CTs implementing social accountability tools exceeded its target in Year 2 by 3%. Indicator 12: Percentage of CTs with plans that integrate development partners' planned interventions in the four key sectors exceeded its target in Year 2 by 1%. RESULT 3: Increased Community Participation in Service Delivery Management of Core Sectors F6. Based on extensive documentation, interviews and focus group discussions, GoLD has engaged in capacity-building trainings for community participation in local governance in all CTs to varying degrees. C3. CAPACITY BUILDING: GoLD programming has contributed to community advocacy but it has been more limited or delayed than capacity building for local officials (C1). F7. CVA training has been delayed at least some communes with workshops organized to explain CVA to community leaders organized just prior to the evaluation team’s arrival although GoLD has been operating there for at least one or even two years (e.g., Bagadadji, Missirah and Pata). F8. The creation of a new facilitator position in each district with GoLD CTs appears to be encouraging CVA training and potentially related programming. F9. GoLD has had a mixed record in meeting its indicators for Result 3, having meet the targets of two of its indicators (19 and 20), exceeding its Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 60 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS targets of two others (15 and 16) while failing to meet one (14): Indicator 19: GoLD met its target of 4 advocacy activities organized by CSOs on issues identified by the community though the team considered this target to be low. Indicator 20: GoLD met its target 4 citizen advocacy groups receiving USG assistance. Indicator 15: 24 organizations of women, youths or vulnerable groups participated in Participatory Budgeting, four more than anticipated, although the evaluation team does not have their disaggregation by type or commune (20%). Indicator 16: Cumulatively, the GoLD has supported 58 activities to promote the civic participation of women, 18 more than anticipated (45%). Indicator 14: 22 out the target of 30 citizen advocacy groups developed and implemented a service delivery improvement plan (73%). F10. SOCIAL INCLUSION: Women in each CT reported being heavily involved in activities organized by GoLD, including: the BBGI consultations, CVA workshops, participatory budget processes, hygiene and sanitation activities, mobilizing tax collection, and lobbying to conform to standards in the different sectors. C5. SOCIAL INCLUSION: Women are heavily involved in GoLD activities; however, delayed adoption of a gender strategy may be contributing to or prevent GoLD from addressing limited access to leadership positions in the CTs while indicators could more fully capture the impact of GoLD’s programming on women, girls, and other vulnerable groups such as people with disabilities. Identification of more representative partners with dynamic programming at the local level could enhance GoLD’s social inclusion. F11. Women hold a number of key positions in GoLD's national and regional staff, specifically Tambacounda, however, at the commune and district level women infrequently hold leaderships (i.e., mayor, ACT, GPC/CVA, facilitator). In addition to socio-cultural biases, this may be attributed in part to GoLD policies and practices: The lack of a regional staff member responsible for social inclusion. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 61 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS A lack of gender sensitivity in GoLD policies such as the job description for the recently hired district facilitators that required applicants to be able to drive a motorcycle rather than an expressed willingness to learn to drive or find other transport. NB: All facilitators in Tambacounda and Kolda are male. The significant delay in developing and finalizing a Gender Action Plan, which is not yet approved by USAID DRG. A lack of GoLD indicators measuring gender inclusion other than the disaggregation of two indicators (#5 and #15) and one regarding USG-supported activities targeting women (#16). F12. In the CTs visited, the evaluation team was not able to identify a FAFS representative, which had been designated as GoLD’s IP for Social Inclusion. Nearly all communal stakeholders, including local officials and women community leaders, were not familiar with FAFS, and regional actors consider FAFS to be unrepresentative or inactive outside of the national and to some degree the regional capitals, particularly Tambacounda. F13. While some handicapped individuals have participated in GoLD activities and workshops, there is a lack of mechanisms to ensure their participation necessary for the discussion if not resolution of their concerns. Handicapped individuals who were interviewed at the national, regional and CT levels all criticized a lack of mechanisms that would ensure their concerns are heard and thus not addressed, such as access to public facilities, obtaining a carte d’égalité des chances, or access to credit. There is only one indicator that disaggregates for the handicapped (#15) Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 62 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS GoLD has no Social Inclusion Action plan for the handicapped or other vulnerable groups. There is no baseline on the participation, leadership or budget allocations for handicapped individuals. F14. COMMUNICATION: Dissemination of information to the local population has been enhanced through GoLD activities and community radio (CR) broadcasts on local governance issues although GoLD did not reach its target of 200 radio programs in Year 2 C5. COMMUNICATION: GoLD has an extensive communication network including radio broadcasts contracted by URAC. However, URAC fell under its target number of broadcasts and the team found that there is not radio coverage in all of the GoLD communes, thereby reducing Although unable to obtain a list of all the programs, the outreach in certain communities. broadcasts are reportedly largely interactive with themes related to good governance, participatory budgeting and payment of local taxes according to URAC broadcasters. Indicator 16: 113 of the targeted 200 radio programs were broadcast to raise citizen awareness and use of basic services (56%). F15. The reach and impact of the CR broadcasts and other information communications is difficult to assess without systematic measurement of the programs (e.g., pre/post testing). According to various categories of informants, including URAC broadcasters, the impact of broadcasts was limited by several factors including: infrequency of broadcasts and/or competing events (e.g., wedding, baptisms, football matches) that limit their audience; weak capacity of local broadcasters despite GoLD trainings as they turnover frequently given poor compensation; and limited equipment and technical capacity. F16. The distribution of CR broadcasts among GoLD CTs varied according to the list of broadcasts received from GoLD. (URAC and no other stakeholder was able to provide a list of broadcasts). Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 63 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS Regional distribution was fairly even, although 40 out 115 broadcasts occurred in Tambacounda during the first two years with 24-26 in each of the other regions. Among the pilot CTs, 3 of the 8 CTs had none in the first two years of the project, while Koumpentoum had 13 out of 31 (42%). There was some thematic distribution although none specifically about governance in the education sector: 42 on Health governance, 39 on WASH, 2 on Nutrition, and 17 on “all sectors.” F17. INDICATOR BASELINES: The baselines for Result 1 Indicators 3 and 5-8 are reported as zero although interviews and focus group discussions in the CTs would indicate that this is an underestimation in at least some if not the majority of cases. C6. INDICATOR BASELINES, SOURCES & DISAGGREGATION: The zero baselines for indicators should be reconsidered as there were activities and the presence of a structure prior to GoLD. A review of the source and/or formulation of indicators may be required, particularly the sectoral disaggregation. Indicator 3: Local officials and community leaders in several CTs reported having conducted participatory budgeting prior to GoLD. Indicator 5: Local officials and community leaders in several CTs reported working with other projects, including USAID on local governance and leadership. Indicator 6: Prior to GoLD, all CTs had technical commissions with varying capacity that should be captured in the baseline. Indicator 7: Prior to GoLD, most if not all CTs had comites de gestion for the technical services with varying capacity that should be captured in the baseline. Indicator 8: While most if not all CTs would not have completely complied with public procurement procedures for procuring local goods and services, there would have been some variability that should be captured in the baseline. F18. The baseline of zero for Result 2 Indicator 12 appears to be an underestimation of social Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 64 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS accountability activities prior to GoLD in at least in some if not the majority of CTs. Local officials and community leaders in most CTs reported social accountability activities prior to the arrival of GoLD though to varying degrees. F19. The baselines of zero for Result 3 Indicators 14, 15 and 18 appear to ignore the activism of citizen advocacy groups, involvement of women, youth and/or vulnerable groups in participatory budgeting, radio programming on local governance and service delivery that reportedly pre-dated GoLD activities in at least some CTs. F20. Confirmation of measurements for indicators was difficult due to a lack of precision in the PIRS of what information was going to be used in the identified source or sources. F21. TIMELINESS: Based on GoLD's AMELP (2017 and 2019), Work Plans and Annual Reports (Years 1 and 2), Interviews and Focus Groups, the Activity has been generally adhering to its timeline with some notable exceptions: C7. TIMELINE: GoLD generally adhered to the programming timeline established in its workplans with some delays, most notably the 2nd SMP that is to be implemented by PDNL. Given the strong possibility that a second SMP will not be implemented, GoLD may need to consider a replacement measurement for Indicator 2, such as a BBGI that focuses on technical performance issues covered by the SMP as GoLD has with other issues such as the BBGI focusing on Malaria. While GoLD is operational in all four regions, there was some delay in setting up offices in Sehdiou and Kedougou but they are currently fully operational. Initial implementation in CTs was behind schedule in the first and second years but has caught up during the third year. The 2nd SMP scheduled for the third year has been delayed as a result of PNDL’s decision to wait until the beginning of 2020 with possible further delays as it reconsiders the tool. Baselines other than the BBGI and SMP were not established (noted above). Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 65 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS Delays with CVA and Participatory Budgeting noted above appears to be minor and/or currently being rectified by GoLD. The peer to peer approach has not yet been implemented as previously planned. EQ 2. Is the GoLD Theory of Change still relevant and complete? Does it sufficiently address cross-sector integration and central-local relations? Center-Local Relations F22. GoLD's Theory of Change remains relevant and is uncontested by any stakeholders with whom the Evaluation Team spoke or any documentation consulted during the desk review or collected during field work. C8. Center-Local Relations: The GoLD TOC is still valid; however, it is missing a critical element of Center￾Local relations to address critical issues such as fiscal transfers and collaboration with ministerial F23. GoLD's Theory of Change does not services. reference the relevance of center-local relations aspects to improve local governance and public service management and delivery. F24. All categories of stakeholders recognized the concentration of resources (staff, funding, and materials) at Central versus Local administrative offices of core service sectors despite decades of decentralization and deconcentration. F25. All categories of stakeholders at all levels repeatedly asserted that that GoLD’s results cannot be obtained without incorporating center-local relations. The importance of addressing Central-Local relations in order to achieve the Activity's results, particularly Result 2, was first raised early on in the Applied PEA on Fiscal Transfers from National to Local Government in Senegal (October 2017). Each category of stakeholders, including GOS officials, acknowledged the problems associated with fiscal Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 66 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS transfers in meetings during both the Learning Assessment and Midterm Performance Evaluation. While the level of constraints is recognized to be dependent on the local economic base, no CT has been or is likely to be able to raise locally sufficient funds to address the priorities identified for each (or any) core service sectors based on the BBGIs conducted in each CT. Cross-Sectoral Approach F26. GoLD's Theory of Change references a cross-sectoral approach in its initial statement of the Activity’s objective to “support for USAID integration strategy to improve basic services, including: coordination and planning hubs, cross-sector social accountability mechanism, knowledge platform and policy working group.” But the theory itself does not incorporate these elements as contributing to change, which focuses on the three-pronged results framework. C9. Cross-Sector Integration: Despite significant evidence of its commitment to and practice of cross￾sectoral integration, GoLD’s TOC only makes reference to an integrative strategy as a preamble that is not fully incorporated into its results framework. F27. GoLD's emphasis on integrated governance is evident in its close collaboration with USAID technical sectors at the national level and with their Activities at the regional and CT levels, providing important synergy and economies that are arguably essential to GoLD’s pursuit of change in improved local governance and service delivery. Interviews with GoLD and USAID technical sector staff in Dakar, Kolda and Tambacounda reflect extensive and growing cross-sectoral programming, particularly in Education, Health and WASH, less so in Agriculture/Economic Growth. Interviews with GoLD and USAID technical sector staff indicted the benefits of cross-sectoral collaboration, Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 67 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS along with extensive documentation of their synergy and cost-benefits of their collaboration. F28. Interviews with various stakeholders particularly at the regional level repeatedly referred to obstacles to collaborating with technical service offices at the regional in contrast with the CT level. This was attributed to a lack of MOUs with either sectoral ministries or governors to whom these services report. EQ 3. How relevant, effective and potentially sustainable is GoLD's approach in promoting participatory governance, in terms of its governance tools and strategic partnerships? Strategic Partnerships F29. GoLD met or exceeded two of its targets Indicators that measure its integration with other programs while it has not yet met its targets for programs financed by the US Government: C10. Strategic Partnerships: GoLD has extensive, dynamic strategic relationships with USAID technical sectors, its IPs, and ARD. There is less coordination with deconcentrated technical offices at the regional level that might be strengthened by incorporating Center-Local relations in GoLD’s TOC. GoLD meet with 20 other programs, double its target, in Year 1 and met its target of 12 in Year 2 (Indicator 27). GoLD exceeded its target for the number of activities conducted in collaboration with another program by more than three-fold in Year 1 (33 programs) and by 20 percent in Year 2 (36 programs; Indicator 28). Gold met its target for the number of programs financed by the USG initiated by GoLD in Year 1 but was able to only complete three-quarters of its target in Year 2. GoLD failed to meet its target for activities implemented with another program financed by the USG in Years 1 and 2. F30. After much work and effort, GoLD has developed dynamic Strategic Partnerships with other USAID IPs in key technical sectors, Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 68 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS specifically Health, WASH, Nutrition, and more recently Education. F31. GoLD has developed an Action Plan that promotes its various activities with the USAID￾funded health programs of Neema and RSS+. GoLD shares office space with Neema in Kolda and meets regularly with the Health Activity's staff to coordinate their joint programming. In all CTs where USAID Health programs (Neema and RSS+) and GoLD are simultaneously operating, there is strong collaboration between the Activities. Various ICP members interviewed in both Kolda and Tamba (Mereto, Missirah, Diaobe, Bagadadji and Pata) confirmed the benefits they have received in the form of the training of their members on their roles and responsibilities. In each of the CTs visited, members of the health commissions confirmed having benefited from the collaboration between the Health Program (Neema and RSS+) and GoLD. The Neema Activity has used GoLD partnership with community radios to broadcast programs about health including malaria prevention, maternal health, neo-natal care, and family planning F32. More recently, GoLD has developed an Action Plan that promotes its various activities with the new USAID-funded education program Passerelles. Previous Education Activities were not located in GoLD regions, hindering their collaboration during Year 1. F33. GoLD has developed good synergy in the WASH sector with partners such as Sanitamba and ACCES. F34. GoLD is currently developing an Action Plan with USAID-funded nutrition program, Feed the Future, and has been collaborating Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 69 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS with nutrition programs Africa Lead and Kawolor. F35. Despite extensive collaboration, the GoLD Sector project partnership study conducted by RTI in Winter 2019 revealed a lack of shared understanding of each other's mission, perceived incompatibility, and problems with joint actions during interviews with the staffs of GoLD other USAID funded Activities. F36. The staff in one of the three USAID technical offices expressed concern about a lack of sector specific indicators. Although this is currently being discussed, staff members indicated that this could impact the sustainability of cross-sectoral collaboration and joint funding of governance Activities. F37. GoLD has only four indicators that are disaggregated by sector: 6 - Percentage of CTs with at least one technical committee (minimal); 7- Number of sectoral service management committees that have improved their performance (vague); 9- Change in percent of CT resources invested in public sectoral services; 19- Number of advocacy activities organized by CSOs on issues identified by the community. F38. While ENDA and World Vision staff members are fully embedded in the GoLD national and regional staff, and AFEX and URAC have a clear contractual relationship with GoLD, its strategic partnership with FAFS continues to try to find its footing. As a result, GoLD is currently exploring other options to promote social inclusion, particularly gender. At the national level, some headway has been made in developing a Gender Action plan but has not yet been finalized for implementation. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 70 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS At the local level, mayors, deputy mayors, the ACTs, GPC/CVA leaders and district facilitators were characteristically unaware of the women who allegedly represented FAFS in their communes. As recently as September, GoLD is beginning to consider other strategic partners who have a stronger local representation and/or more frequent activities with women at the communal level such as Platforme de Kolda, and is exploring collaboration with ARLS, which has been operating in Thiès and Diourbel, to have exchanges with women in the four GoLD Regions. F39. The strongest strategic partnerships with external actors are the Ministry of Territorial Governance, Development and Planning at the national level and the ARD at the regional level, which works closely with GoLD staff in both Kolda and Tambacounda. F40. Collaboration between GoLD and the various technical services at the regional level has been relatively weak, particularly in Kolda. This was attributed to problems related to a lack of an MOU with their titular ministries and/or governors. Another factor cited is an unwillingness of regional administrators to participate in GoLD programming in the absence of per diem and/or transport commensurate with other donor projects including other USAID funded activities. In the education sector in Kolda, the school inspectors at the regional level are not familiar with GoLD and have no contact, as revealed during a meeting with the Kolda IEF and his Secretary General. In Tambacounda, there is a weak partnership between the IEF and GoLD as a result of a prior relationship between World Vision and IEF. This partnership only extends to the CTs that were covered by World Vision’s programs. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 71 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS The implication of the technical services in the Health Sector is slight stronger due to extensive collaboration between the regional medical services at the regional and district level with Neema and RSS+. This was confirmed by members of the ICP, MCD and MCR. GoLD has built a strong partnership with ARD and works closely with them in the implementation of their activities. F42. The staffs of USAID and IPs appreciate the recent creation of a weekly briefing although several of both categories of stakeholders reported the need for more dialogue and consultation with GoLD staff at the national level similar to though perhaps not as frequent as at the regional level. GoLD Tools F43. Governance tools employed by GoLD are well aligned with the promotion of participatory governance, specifically the BBGI, Participatory Budgeting, CVA, and Y-Tax based on an analysis of GoLD summaries and discussion with all categories of stakeholders. C11. Governance Tools: GoLD has employed its governance tools in all CTs to varying degrees and they are well aligned with the promotion of participatory governance. F44. BBGI has been effectively implemented in all selected CTs as a baseline that also initiated enhancement of participatory local governance based on GoLD documents and interviews/focus groups in regional offices and CTs. A second follow-up BBGI (Indicator 1) has just been completed in piloted CTs and will be conducted in Year 4 in other CTs that more recently joined GoLD. F41. Sustainability of the GoLD’s tools unclear, given that ARD has not committed to continued use GoLD tools to promote participatory governance, specifically BBGI. Indeed, both national and regional staff have confirmed that they do not plan to do so in the future. F45. The CVA approach has been employed in all CTs communes to varying degrees with some Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 72 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS significant delays in CVA training as noted above. F46. As a result of low CVA programming GoLD has created a Facilitator position in each district but they appear to coordinate more with the ACT than the GPC in each commune. F47. Participatory Budgeting has been employed in some CTs, including those that had used this tool prior to GoLD. F48. According to all categories of stakeholders, implementation of Participatory Budgeting has been largely focused on budget formulation with little if any effort to implicate community members in monitoring and evaluation of budget implementation after its adoption although recently GoLD has reported working with CTs on their 2018 Comptes Administratif. F49. A few CTs were selected to pilot Y-Tax including Bagadadji and Koumpentoum, although it has not yet been implemented. The Ministry of Finance has a tool similar to Y-Tax which appears to be duplicative of the tool’s purpose F50. Sustainability of BBGI and CVA are not assured given that they are labor intensive and require both a level of skill and commitment that is not yet evident in the majority of communes based on interviews in the CTs and discussions with other stakeholders, most notably ARD regional staff, despite the recent statement by the Secrétaire d’Etat auprès du Ministère de la Justice. C12. Sustainability: In terms of Strategic Partnerships, GoLD has establish a strong relationship with ARD although the institutionalization of the BBGI and sustainability Y-Tax have not yet been assured. Perhaps the most sustainable tool is Participatory Budgeting and some form of CVA, in general a participatory approach to local governance, particularly in those CTs that had employed these types of tools prior to the initiation of GoLD. F51. The sustainability of Participatory Budgeting where it has been implemented, especially when it predates the Activity, appears to be likely at least a mechanism for input into budget formulation based on interviews with CT officials and local leaders. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 73 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS F53. Sen-Bridge has not been implemented beyond its pilot as GoLD staff determined it is sustainable beyond the life of the Activity due to high cost (phone credits). EQ 4. Has GoLD demonstrated a current and/or potential impact on public service delivery in core sectors and is this likely to be substantiality beyond the project? General Observations on Sectoral Impact C13. Infrastructure and Quality of Service: There is clear evidence of improved infrastructure and quality of public service delivery in CTs where GoLD is working but limited ability to gauge variability across CTs and sectors. C14. Indicators: Limited disaggregated data by sector hinders the ability to assess GoLD’s impact on public service delivery. C15. Capacity Building and Sustainability: GoLD trainings that improve understanding of norms, standards, roles and responsibilities in each sector will increase sustainability of improvements in local governance and public service delivery although there remain concerns about the sustainability of new allocations and investments beyond the Activity. F54. GoLD’s has had extensive capacity-building trainings in CTs on standards and norms for public service sectors and the roles and responsibilities of technical commission members for Health, Education & WASH. F55. In all CTs visited, GoLD activity(s) are associated with at least one if not several improvements in some form of service delivery. F56. Increased consideration of Public Service issues and needs in budget formulations in CTs with participatory budgets. F57. However, a lack of access to disaggregated data by sector for GoLD indicators has hindered the evaluation team's capacity to assess the current and/or potential impact on public service delivery in core sectors. The team identified the follow indicators as candidates for further disaggregation: # 12 Percentage CTs providing access to social accountability tools; #14 Number of advocacy groups; #18 Number of broadcasts; #25-26 Number of groups financed by US Government linked to GoLD activity and number of those implemented; Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 74 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS #27-28 Number of programs/institutions GoLD initiated meetings and number of activities implemented. F58. Reliable data about the funds spent in the Technical Sectors will not be available until the Comptes Administratifs are finalized at the end of 2019 for the 2018 budgets. F59. To provide an accurate assessment of the impact of GoLD on sectoral spending, however, GoLD will need to collect data from the Mayors’ Office regarding other direct resources mobilized (DRM), specifically Fonds de cooperation, Fonds de dotation, and Dons et legs as GoLD staff acknowledge that its impact local sources of funding is not limited to official CT budgets. F60. SUSTAINABILITY - GoLD has created connections with pre-existing entities that are likely to ensure the sustainability of its achievements after the project, such as: Collaboration with the ARDs; Creation of ACT posts which have come to serve as the technical arm of the CTs; Involvement of technical services even if improvement is needed (e.g., consistency in per diems). HEALTH SECTOR F61. CAPACITY BUILDING: Inclusion of different types of CT stakeholders in health sector trainings enhanced participants understanding of their roles and responsibilities: According to GoLD and Neema staff, they have been collaborating to train members of the local Health Development Committees (CDS) in different CTs (Pata, Diaobe, Bagadadji, Missirah, Mereto and Koumpentoum) to improve their knowledge of their roles and responsibilities in the Committee. During Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 75 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS interviews with CDS members they confirmed the benefit of these trainings. Health care providers in the majority of communes (Bagadadji, Diaobe, Mereto, Missirah and Koumpentoum) confirmed that they had been involved in GoLD activities related to the Health sector, most notably CDS trainings and workshops on sectoral norms and standards. GoLD helped organize activities to increase awareness about how to prevent malaria and discourage home births that decrease the risk of maternal and infant mortality. Awareness activities was broadcasted among the rural radios in partnership with Gold on themes such as: usage of mosquito nets; prenatal medical and family planning in Bagadadji, Pata, Diaobé and Mereto. Organization of an anti-malaria awareness campaign in Bagadadji through the use of BBGI. F62. INFRASTRUCTURE/INVESTMENTS: GoLD has contributed to improvements in the delivery of health services in most communes though to varying degrees, including: Construction for clinic and pharmacy in Bagadadji. Construction of waiting room for health clinic in Ibrahima Nima (Bagadadji). Construction of operating room, hiring of 3 guards for security and orientation of patients in Koumpentoum. Recruit a technician and subsidize housing for Midwife in Diaobe. Commune of Diaobe hired an ambulance driver and a cleaning lady for the health clinic and contributed 2 million CFA to construct lodging for the midwife. They were also able to increase their ability to purchase medicine from 2 to 3 million CFA between 2017 to 2018. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 76 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS Lobbying by the ICP in Pata resulted in the hiring of an ambulance driver, 3 solar panels for the Health Clinic which had been prevented from using its sonogram due to a lack of electricity. This had obliged pregnant women to go all the way to Kolda if they needed a sonogram. In Bagadadji, the CT had been spending 500,000 CFA to enroll 30 pregnant women and other economically disadvantaged people into the health mutual fund to improve their access to health care. With an increase in taxes collection, this sum was increased to 1 million CFA in 2019. The CT also built a maternity center for pregnant women. In Koumpentoum, CVA activities supported by GoLD permitted the CT to purchase a welcome center to direct patients, an oxygen concentrator, equipment for an operating room, and an incubator as well as hire an anesthesiologist. F63. GOVERNANCE: In addition to capacity building and infrastructural investments, the quality of service in the health sector has been improved with support by GoLD by the development of CT Operational Plans (POCT) in Diaobe and Pata that permitted the communes to manage better their Health sector. EDUCATION F64. CAPACITY BUILDING: GoLD-sponsored programming in the majority of CTs has reinforced the capacity of actors involved in the Education Sector through trainings that enhance their appreciation of norms and standards and their understandings of roles and responsibilities. Education commissioners in Pata, Diaobe and Missirah indicated that GoLD activities have reinforced their capacity in terms of a better appreciation of the norms Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 77 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS and standards in the Education sector and a better understanding of their roles and responsibilities. In Pata, however, commission members asserted that the trainings could have been more complete if they had included all of its members. F65. INFRASTRUCTURE: GoLD has contributed to improvements in the delivery of education services several communes following lobbying by CVA Groups: Construction wall surrounding primary school in Bagadadji; Construction of two classrooms in Sare Souma (Koumpentoum); Need for separate toilets for girls and boys (Bagadadji); Reduction of students sharing desks (Pata); Sanitation in and around school (Koumpentoum). F66. GOVERNANCE: GoLD-sponsored trainings permitted an improvement in governance structures for schools as commissions (CGE, APE) became revitalized and more dynamic, and new forums were created to promote student participation (gouvernements scolaires). F67. CONFLICT RESOLUTION: In some CTs there was evidence of improved communication and dialogue among local actors that permitted a reduction in tensions and conflicts in the Education Sector: According to members of the Education Commissions in Pata and Diaobe, GoLD has contributed to improved communication, transparency, and greater social cohesion in their CTs. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 78 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS According to IEF in Tambacounda and the Education Commission in Diaobe, relations between the technical services and the population have improved. However, members of the Education Commissions of Koumpentoum and Mereto indicated that GoLD has not yet engaged in activities in the Education Sector, attributable in part to the weakness of the GPC use of CVA to which other actors interviewed in these two CTs referred. F68. Activities in the Education sector were more limited in both regions than in Health and WASH sectors, most likely tied to the lack of a USAID Activity in the GoLD regions until the implementation of Passerelles. Evidence of improved financing of the Education sector as a result of GoLD activities in Pata, Tamba and Misirah. According to the IEF in Tamba, the conditions of schools has improved with the arrival of GoLD. WASH F69. CAPACITY BUILDING - GoLD has conducted a lot of training programs related to WASH in the majority of CTs, most notably: GoLD programming connected commune leaders with SOGES who helped train them in the management of hydraulic infrastructure and equipment in Koumpentoum, Mereto (Tamba) and Bagadadji (Kolda). Interviews and Focus Group Discussions revealed different categories of stakeholders, particularly members of WASH commissions, in most of the CTs have gained a better understanding of the norms and standards in WASH. F70. INFRASTRUCTURE - GoLD has contributed to improved WASH infrastructure in some but not all CTS, most notably: Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 79 FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS Water pipes in Koumpentoum although some areas in the CT continue to lack access to sufficient water. Latrines have been constructed in Missirah. Boreholes in Bagadadji although not all are functional. Community priorities identified in Pata to repair water system and ICP lodging were not achieved due to a lack of funding F71. GOVERNANCE - Interviews and focus groups in both regions demonstrated improved governance in the WASH sector, including: Establishment of CLPs; Integration of WASH issues in CT participatory budgets; Production of the booklet on hydrology; Improved relations between SOGES and the population of Koumpentoum following intervention by AFEX. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 80 ANNEX III: RECOMMENDATIONS MATRIX AND ACTION PLAN Groupe 1 : Question de la mobilisation de la communauté et de son implication dans la prestation des services publics # Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 1 Utilisation du budget participatif dans certaines communes. Cependant, il existe encore des résistances fortes pour la participation effective des citoyens dans le suivi et l’exécution budgétaire • Sensibiliser les autorités locales à adopter le BP comme un outil de planification locale • Accompagner et formaliser les EDIC comme des espaces de participation citoyenne au suivi et à l’exécution budgétaire (tous les 6 mois) • développer un plaidoyer national fort en faveur de l’institutionnalisation du BP et des EDIC BP donne des résultats Nécessité d’instituer des mécanismes de participation citoyenne (coût) GoLD résultat 1 et 2 GoLD GoLD ARD ARD ARD Juin 2020 X X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 81 # Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 2 il n’existe pas un mécanisme formel favorisant l’implication des personnes en situation de handicap même si GoLD les associe de manière ponctuelle dans la plupart de ses activités (ateliers, rencontres). • Répertorier les associations existantes au niveau local et renforcer le niveau de collaboration • Mieux documenter les efforts déployés par GoLD pour la prise en compte des besoins des handicapés Il existe bien un mécanisme formel ; le programme travaille avec les Associations. des personnes en situation de handicap GoLD résultat 3/Genre GoLD DCOP Septemb re 2020 Septemb re 2020 X 3 Au niveau des CT et départements les femmes sont reléguées à des rôles secondaires. • Elaborer et mettre en œuvre un plan de renforcement du leadership des femmes • Renforcer le suivi de la mise en œuvre de la Parité en collaboration avec le Ministère des collectivités territoriales Cette problématique va au-delà du Programme GoLD GoLD Résultat 3/Genre et FAFS GoLD Résultat 3/Genre et FAFS Cellule Genre du MCT et DCOP Décemb re 2019 X 4 Des difficultés pour identifier une représentante de FAFS dans les CT. En tant que partenaire d’appui de GoLD, FAFS est méconnue de la plupart des acteurs communautaires • S’ouvrir aux organisations de femmes existantes au niveau communautaire pour plus de représentativité de FAFS GoLD fait des recommandations à la FAFS mais ne s’immisce pas dans le renouvellement des FAFS GoLD/cellu le Genre Ministère collectivité Décemb re 2020 X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 82 # Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 instances de la fédération 5 Le partenariat avec FAFS n’est pas dynamique poussant GoLD à explorer d’autres options afin de promouvoir l’inclusion sociale notamment les aspects liés au genre. • Poursuivre la stratégie de diversification du partenariat local (ANE, ARLS) • Renforcer le partenariat avec les institutions et les organisations de la société civile (Ministère-CT, ONG) pour une meilleure prise en compte de l’inclusion au niveau des CT • Renforcer la collaboration avec les IPs sur l’inclusion sociale (activités conjointes, planification sensible au genre) GoLD résultat 3 / Genre GoLD résultat 3 / Genre GoLD résultat 3 / Genre DCOP DCOP Décemb re 2019 Décemb re 2019 X X X 6 Une difficulté à mesurer la portée et l’impact des émissions radio du fait de l’absence d’un dispositif de mesure systématique des effets • Renforcer la collaboration dans le domaine de la communication avec les IPs du secteur de la santé (NEEMA ; RSS+ ; SHOPS+). Les groupes d’écoutes, les focus group, la méthode TRANSECTE (outil GoLD résultat 3 URAC Juin 2020 X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 83 # Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 des programmes (par exemple, des enquêtes avant/après). Le bureau santé est prêt à mettre à disposition toute son expertise afin de capitaliser les bonnes pratiques à l’œuvre (Jàpp na ci) • Faire une étude d’audience participative (audimat) qui intègre des mécanismes communautaires de mesure de la perception des émissions • Faire une étude d’impact pour mesurer les effets induits en termes d’appropriation des règles de bonne gouvernance locale. de mesure d’audience). GoLD doit également prendre langue avec les activités de communication initiées par NEEMA (jàpp na ci) pour des interventions synergiques. GoLD résultat 3 GoLD résultat 3 URAC Déc 2020 Déc 2020 X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 84 # Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 URAC X 7 La durabilité du BBGI et du CVA n’est pas encore assurée étant donné qu’il requiert beaucoup d’efforts et un niveau élevé de compétence et d’engagement, ce qui n’est pas encore évident dans la plupart des CT et ARD malgré la récente déclaration du Secrétaire d’état auprès du ministère de la justice BBGI : • Négocier avec le ministère pour l’intégration du BBGI et SMP CVA : • Elaborer une stratégie visant à consolider au niveau communautaire le processus de mise en œuvre du CVA en travaillant étroitement avec les GCP pour chaque secteur. Seules les 2 premières années du processus ont été évaluées sur les 5ans du projet CTs, GoLD GoLD résultat 3 ARD World Vision Fin 2021 Fin 2020 X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 85 Groupe 2 : Question de la génération des revenus Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 1 Indisponibilité des données pour mesurer l’augmentation de la mobilisation des ressources car les comptes administratifs de 2018 ne sont disponibles qu’en fin 2019. • Renforcer la collaboration avec la DGID et DGCPT pour disposer des informations financières (compte de gestion, documents budgétaires) • Elargir le champ d’investigation aux comptes de gestion élaboré par le comptable afin de recueillir les données financières complètes sans dépendre des comptes administratifs élaboré sur le principe N-1 (recours au CL6 par exemple, qui présente la situation périodique d’exécution du budget) • Tenir compte de l’année fiscale des collectivités territoriales (du 1er Janvier au 31 Décembre) • Renforcer les capacités des CTs et les inciter à mettre en GoLD et DGID/DGC PT GoLD et DGCPT GoLD & DGID et DGCPT GoLD Au plus tard 31 Décemb re Au plus tard 31 Décemb re X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 86 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 place un dispositif allégé de collecte des données financières (documenter la gestion et les opérations financières ; enregistrement des pièces de suivi d’ordonnancement des recettes et des dépenses) • Contribuer à l’informatisation des mécanismes de gestion budgétaire (coaching et renforcement de capacités des acteurs des CTs) GoLD/USAI D GoLD et CTs GoLD et USAID GoLD, CTs et Services techniques régionaux ---------- X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 87 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 DGCPT et GoLD DGCPT X 2 Une économie locale à faible potentiel ne permettant pas de mobiliser des ressources suffisantes afin de prendre en charge les besoins des secteurs clés. • Evaluation de l’assiette et du potentiel fiscal (recensement contribuables, diagnostics) ; • Faciliter la promotion et l’appropriation des Commissions de la fiscalité locale CFL pour une amélioration de l’assiette (création, formation, recensement et recouvrement) ; • Identification des sources de financement innovantes (DeL, PPP, marketing territorial, intercommunalité etc.) ; Améliorer la viabilité des territoires en corrigeant le découpage territorial CT ; DGID, DGCP, GoLD Idem GoLD, DGID, CT Idem ; + tard 30 juin de l’année Toute l’année X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 88 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 • Formation et coaching des CT dans le Développement économique local, Peer to Peer, Marketing territorial etc. Idem + ARD + PNDL, ADL, HCCT GoLD CT+ GoLD et Partenaires identifiés ARD X 3 La capacité de générer de nouveaux fonds locaux dans toutes les communes reste limitée, un fait reconnu par toutes les parties prenantes et confirmé à travers les budgets et comptes administratifs 2016-2017. • Rationalisation des dépenses de fonctionnement pour impacter et maximiser l’investissement dans les services à fort impact social ; • Accompagner les CTs à augmenter leurs opportunités de génération de recettes (mise en relation, forum, jumelage, partenariat) • Documenter davantage les autres sources de financement et les nouvelles dynamiques de mobilisation de ressources non fiscales au niveau communautaire (dons Cette faiblesse dans la mobilisation de nouvelles ressources explique le faible niveau d’investissement des CT (PIL-PTI et PAI) DGCPT - GoLD ; ARD GoLD￾DCPT ; CT ; DCGP et GoLD DCGP￾GoLD Perman ent Idem X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 89 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 et legs, mutualisation de ressources au niveau communautaire, autres non formels) GoLD Ministère des collectivités GoLD X 4 Une collecte tardive des données financières pour les CTs soutenues par GoLD et dont les ressources propres ont connu une augmentation. La mesure des CTs ayant augmenté le nombre d’opportunités de génération de revenus se fait au cours de la troisième année, alors que ces données pouvaient être disponibles annuellement • Maintenir l’année 3 comme année d’évaluation de l’augmentation des ressources propres • Faire en sorte que les données portant sur l’indicateur 11(CTs accroissant le nombre d’opportunités) soient collectées à partir de la 2e année. -Augmentation ressources propres : non mesurable à la 1ere année, car la 1ere année c’est la SDR. 2e année, identification, planification et mise en œuvre des actions. 3e année : Evaluation. -Autres problèmes. indisponibilité des données à cause de non concordance avec l’année fiscale de la CT. CT ; GoLD ; CT ; GoLD ; CT-GoLD DGID￾DGCP CT-GoLD DGID￾DGCP - X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 90 GROUPE 3 : Questions sur les relations entre le niveau central et le niveau local et sur la théorie du changement Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 1 La collaboration entre GoLD et le niveau central (ministère) est quasi- inexistante ; elle est plus forte au niveau des CTs qu’au niveau régional (gouverneur et ses services techniques déconcentrés) • Approfondir les axes synergiques avec les autres (IPs) de l’USAID évoluant dans les régions d’intervention de GoLD • - Appuyer et accompagner les CTs à mobiliser les services techniques déconcentrés via une meilleure implication du Gouverneur. collaboration particulièrement faible à Kolda GoLD n’a pas vocation à établir un partenariat avec les STDs sectoriels. GoLD a comme porte d’entrée la CT. Le partenariat avec les STDs sectoriels est du ressort des IPs sectoriels Il faut travailler sur le niveau central pour faciliter l’accès à l’information. ANSD doit désagréger les données par CT - GoLD Point focal USAID GoLD Point focal USAID Gouverneu r - GoLD - GoLD 31 Décemb re 2019 X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 91 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 3 La théorie du changement de GoLD ne met pas en relief la pertinence des relations centre￾local, en vue d’améliorer la gouvernance locale et la prestation des services publics. • -La théorie du changement de GoLD gagnerait à être réadaptée en mettant l’accent sur les relations entre le niveau central et le niveau local • Mettre en cohérence la planification locale et les orientations stratégiques au niveau national • Mettre en place un système harmonisé de gestion des données des CTs au niveau central • Travailler plus étroitement avec le MGTDAT pour la prise en compte des résultats de GoLD dans la formulation des politiques publiques (capitalisation) • Veiller à travailler systématiquement avec les outils déjà existants au niveau central et les améliorer pour mieux assurer l’ancrage institutionnel (exemple : le Gouvernement utilise déjà l’outil ETAX qui est une - MGTDAT ; GoLD GoLD GoLD - ADL; USAID PNDL/MG DAT MGDAT 31 Décemb re 2019 X X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 92 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 application Web au service des contribuables pour leur permettre de déclarer et payer leurs impôts et taxes en ligne). GoLD GOLD ARD; PNDL ARD; PNDL; DGID X 4 Toutes les parties prenantes ont reconnu qu’il y a une concentration des ressources (personnel, finances, décisions et matériels) au niveau central • Renforcer au niveau des CTs la libre gestion des transferts de ressources de l’Etat. Intercommunalité pour renforcer les capacités de mobilisation des CTs au niveau du FECT (renforcement de capacités, AT, réfléchir ensemble, travailler au niveau local pour avoir une incidence au niveau national) MCTDAT GoLD ARD ; GoLD 31 Décemb re 2019 X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 93 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 GROUPE 4 : Impact sectoriel Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 1 Les indicateurs de performance figurant dans le cadre de résultats ne reflètent pas clairement les changements mesurables spécifiques à chaque secteur-clé (Education, Santé, WASH, Nutrition). Ce manque de désagrégation de certains indicateurs constitue une contrainte qui réduit la possibilité d’évaluer l’impact actuel et/ou potentiel de GoLD sur la • Redynamiser le groupe de travail Intégration et Gouvernance au sein de l’USAID pour décliner des orientations claires et harmoniser les attentes croisées entre les différents bureaux The Education Office does not ask for individual indictors DRGP DRGP/AO R 31 décemb re 2019 X • Mieux documenter les investissements sectoriels au niveau des CTs COP, DCOP, S&E DRGP/AO R Mars 2020 X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 94 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 prestation des services publics dans les secteurs-clés • Renforcer le système M & E de Gold en augmentant le personnel afin d’avoir un dispositif de reporting plus adapté compte tenu du volume important d’informations à capturer • Reformuler certains indicateurs avec une terminologie claire en tenant compte des critères suivants (désagrégation par secteur et par commune, Baseline qui tienne compte des acquis antérieurs à GoLD, source, cible) • Appuyer les CT à accéder aux données sectorielles (santé, éducation, Wash, nutrition) • Changer l’intitulé de l’indicateurs « % de CT qui ont au moins un comité technique qui élabore et met en œuvre un plan de prestation de services sociaux » en « Nombre de commissions techniques qui GoLD S&E GoLD, RTI DRGP/AO R USAID 31 Décemb re 2019 31 Décemb re 2019 X X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 95 Constatations Recommandations Commentaires Responsabl e de l’action Responsa ble suivi Date limite Niveau de Priorité 1 2 3 mettent en œuvre un plan de prestations de services sectoriels » S&E GoLD, RTI S&E GoLD, RTI DRGP/AO R DRGP/AO 31 Décemb re 2019 31 Décemb re 2019 X X 3 La mesure des indicateurs était difficile en raison du manque de précision et d’une définition claire dans les PIRS des activités spécifiques à renseigner par rapport aux secteurs WASH, nutrition, santé, éducation, etc. • Mieux définir les indicateurs sectoriels dans les PIRS et mentionner spécifiquement les instances où ces données seront capturées (CGE, CDS ; comité de gestion du forage, comité de salubrité et d’hygiène) S&E GoLD DCOP GoLD et USAID/AO R 31 Décemb re 2019 X Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 96 ANNEX IV: DATA COLLECTION METHODS Monitoring and Evaluation Question Data Collection Method Data Sources MEQ 1. What is GoLD’s progress to date toward expected results and work plan timelines? - Review of GoLD documents and reports - Semistructured interviews - Focus group interviews - Quantitative secondary data analysis - GoLD political economy analysis, work plan, and annual and periodic activity reports, with focus on baseline and indicators - USAID, GoS, and other reports and articles on participatory governance, decentralization, and public service delivery (general and Senegal specific) - Updated publications and reports on Senegal’s political economy by analysts such as the EIU and Freedom House - DRG, Health, WASH, Economic Growth Office (EGO) staff and front office -RTI GoLD staff -GoLD IP staff members -Representatives of GoS ministries (La Gouvernance Locale, La Bonne Gouvernance et la Protection de l’Enfance, La Santé et l’Action Sociale, L’Hydraulique et de l’Assainissement) -World Bank and AFD staff members on the Donor Group on Decentralization - Local administrative officials (préfet, chefs des départements techniques), elected officials (regional and commune counselors; health, education, agriculture, and WASH committee members), and other community leaders MEQ 2. How relevant is the original theory of change in terms of cross-sector and central-local integrations? - Review of GoLD documents and reports - Review of studies and analyses on - GoLD theory of change, political economy analysis, work plan, and annual and periodic activity reports - USAID, GoS, and other reports and articles on participatory governance, Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 97 Monitoring and Evaluation Question Data Collection Method Data Sources decentralization and public service delivery (general and Senegal specific) - Semi-structured interviews - Focus group interviews decentralization, and public service delivery (general and Senegal specific) - Updated publications and reports on Senegal’s political economy by analysts such as the EIU and Freedom House -DRG staff and PPL - USAID Dakar DRG, health, WASH, EGO staff and front office -RTI GoLD staff -GoLD IP staff members -Representatives of GoS Ministries (La Gouvernance Locale; La Bonne Gouvernance et la Protection de l’Enfance; La Santé et l’Action Sociale; L’Hydraulique et de l’Assainissement) -World Bank and AFD staff members on the Donor Group on Decentralization - Local administrative officials (préfet, chefs des départements techniques) elected officials (regional and commune counselors; health, education, agriculture, and WASH committee members) and other community Leaders MEQ 3: How relevant, effective, and potentially sustainable is the USAID/GoLD approach (including use of tools and strategic partnerships) in promoting participatory governance? - Review of GoLD documents and reports - Semistructured interviews - Focus group interviews - GoLD summaries of governance tools and reports on their adaptation(s) - USAID Dakar, DRG, health, WASH, and EGO staff and front office -RTI GoLD staff -GoLD IP staff members -Representatives of GoS ministries (La Gouvernance Locale, La Bonne Gouvernance et la Protection de l’Enfance, La Santé et l’Action Sociale, L’Hydraulique et de l’Assainissement) Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 98 Monitoring and Evaluation Question Data Collection Method Data Sources -World Bank and AFD staff members on the Donor Group on Decentralization - Local administrative officials (préfet, chefs des départements techniques), elected officials (regional and commune counselors; health, education, agriculture, and WASH committee members) and other community Leaders - Focus groups or group discussions with communities MEQ 4. Has GoLD demonstrated a current or potential impact on public service delivery in core sectors and is this impact likely to be sustainable beyond the project? - Review of studies and analyses on decentralization, public service delivery, and intersectoral collaboration (general and Senegal specific) and GoLD documents and reports - Semistructured interviews - Focus group interviews - GOLD TOC, PEA, work plan, annual and periodic activity reports - USAID, GOS, and other reports and articles on participatory governance, decentralization, public service delivery, and intersectoral collaboration (general and Senegal specific) - USAID Dakar DRG, health, WASH, and EGO staff and front office -RTI GoLD staff -GoLD IP staff members -Representatives of GoS ministries (La Gouvernance Locale, La Bonne Gouvernance et la Protection de l’Enfance, La Santé et l’Action Sociale, L’Hydraulique et de l’Assainissement) -World Bank and AFD staff members on the Donor Group on Decentralization - Local administrative officials (préfet, chefs des départements techniques), elected officials (regional and commune counselors; health, education, agriculture, and WASH committee members), and other community leaders Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 99 Monitoring and Evaluation Question Data Collection Method Data Sources -Focus groups or group discussions with communities Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 100 ANNEX V: DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS categories of stakeholders – USAID and Donor staff, RTI staff; IP staffs; and local officials and community leaders (CTs). The questions are organized by the five Monitoring & Evaluation questions and related sub￾questions to insure each is adequately responded to in the interviews and focus groups. Prior to each interview and focus group, these questions will be further tailored based upon the role, experiences and knowledge of each informant, prioritizing those questions that will accordingly provide the maximum information and insights. NB: The other members of the team who are specialists in decentralization, health and WASH have not yet had an opportunity to contribute to fine tuning these questions. MEQ 1. What is GOLD’s progress to date towards expected results and timelines of the workplans? 1. From your perspective, what has been GOLD biggest achievements? 2. How do these compare with its expected results? 3. Have they been achieved in a time fashion even if not in line with its original timelines? 4. What indicators (evidence) are you aware of that demonstrates GOLD has achieved its expected results? How does this compare with an established baseline? (Ask for documentation and illustrations). 5. What if any unanticipated results have been achieved by GOLD? Any unanticipated negative outcomes/ramifications? 6. How has GOLD adjusted its expected results based on feedback, experience in the field, and/or changes in the political economy environment? If there have been adjustments, has the Theory of Change been adapted accordingly when necessary? MEQ 2. How relevant is the original theory of change in terms of cross-sector integration and central-local inter-relations? 1. Senegal has been undergoing decentralization for over two decades now. What have been the greatest challenges in this process? In economic, political and/or socio-cultural terms (e.g., literacy, gender or social stratification)? – USAID/Donor, RTI, IPs, CTs 2. What challenges do local governments face to insure effective service delivery management? In terms of skills, resources and/or political culture, i.e., attitudes toward participatory governance? Among local administrators and/or elected officials? – USAID/Donor, RTI, IPs, CTs 3. Is the capacity (and/or incentives) of citizens and their community leaders to participate in local governance impacting service delivery management? What are the obstacles: their skills, resources and/or political culture? – USAID/Donor, RTI, IPs, CTs 4. Do CTs (your CT) have the capacity to improve their (its) revenue streams? By what means (e.g. improve access to funding (current and/or new) from the central government, improved tax collection, new taxes and if so on what). – USAID/Donor, RTI, IPs, CTs 5. What if any challenges or opportunities have arisen that might have caused you to question GOLD’s TOC that: if management, planning and budget capacity of CTs is improved, citizens are actively involved in the planning and implementation processes, and CTs increase their local source revenue there will be improved local governance and thus service delivery as well as government legitimacy and a stronger social contract? Specifically, does the TOC need to address the relationship between the Central Government and CTs? – USAID-Dakar staff, RTI, IPs 6. How does the TOC inform the development of specific GOLD activities? -- USAID-Dakar, RTI, IPs Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 101 7. Is social inclusion (GOLD’s fourth result) sufficiently addressed in (incorporated into) the TOC? In terms of gender, youth, and people with disabilities?– USAID Staff, RTI, IPs MEQ 3. How effective and potentially sustainable is the USAID/GOLD approach (including use of tools and strategic partnerships) in promoting participatory governance? 1. How have the governance tools been identified, adopted and adapted by GOLD? – USAID-Dakar DRG, RTI, IPs 2. How do each of these tools contribute to the four result set out in the GOLD framework? Break this down for each tool and be sure to inquire specifically about the fourth result re: social inclusion. – USAID-Dakar DRG, RTI, IPs 3. Is the use of each of these tools sustainable beyond the life of the GOLD project? In terms of human and financial resources as well as commitment by stakeholders? Break this down for each tool – USAID-Dakar DRG, RTI, IPs 4. Which type of tool(s) would best support CT development beyond the duration of the GOLD project? – USAID/Donor, RTI, IPs, CTs MEQ 4. Has GOLD demonstrated a current or potential impact on public service delivery in core sectors and is this likely to be sustainable beyond the project? 1. What if any evidence is there that GOLD has had an impact on public service delivery? In which sector(s)? (Ask for document and illustrations). 2. What if any evidence is there that GOLD is likely to have impact public service delivery in the near future? In which sector(s)? (Ask for documentation and illustrations.) 3. Are the current and/or anticipated impact(s) of GOLD on public service delivery like to be sustainable? What evidence (theory) do you have to support your assessment? (Ask for documentation and illustrations.) Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 102 Ce guide cible essentiellement les acteurs techniques collectivités locales. INTRODUCTION o Merci de nous recevoir pour cette interview. o Cet entretien fait partie de l'évaluation à mi-parcours du projet USAID GOLD. o L'interview cherche à documenter votre expérience avec le projet USAID GOLD. o L’entretien nous prendra environ une heure. o Nous vous serions reconnaissants de nous autoriser à enregistrer cette interview. Ces réponses seront anonymes. Si vous êtes d'accord on peut démarrer l’entretien. MEQ 1. Quels sont les progrès de GOLD à ce jour par rapport aux résultats attendus et aux calendriers des plans de travail? 1. Quel a été votre collaboration avec ACCES? 2. Quels ont été les résultats WASH les plus significatifs obtenus par le projet? Citez ces résultats de façon détaillée et Expliciter le pourquoi et le comment ? 3. Quels sont les succès majeurs ? 4. Y ‘a-t-il eu des échecs ? 5. Quels ont été les obstacles ? 6. Quelles sont les opportunités à exploiter par le projet GOLD ? 7. Les engagements de GOLD ont-ils été respectés dans le temps ? MEQ 2. Quelle est la pertinence de la théorie originale du changement en termes (A) d'intégration intersectorielle avec gouvernance) et (B) d'interrelations centre-local? 1. -Inclusion social : quelles sont les parties prenantes de communautés impliquées dans la mise en œuvre de GOLG ? 2. L’aspect genre est elle pris en compte ? 3. Les couches telles que les jeunes, les femmes, les handicapés sont-elles bien pris en compte dans le projet ? 4. Capacitation des ressources : avez-vous subi des formations dans le cadre de gold ? lesquelles ? e vous en satisfaits ? MEQ 3. Dans quelle mesure l'approche GOLD, y compris l'utilisation d'outils, d'activités et de partenariats stratégiques, est-elle efficace et potentiellement durable dans la promotion de la gouvernance participative? Les Outils: BBGI, SMP, Y-Tax, Sen-Bridge etc. 1. Connaissez-vous les outils gold dans le domaine du WASH ? ex le CVA ? 2. Selon vous GOLD a-t-il été efficace dans l’incitation de projet WASH dans votre collectivité ? comment ? 3. Pensez-vous avoir les outils nécessaires pour continuer le travail de GOLD après le projet ? 4. Quels sont les leviers sur lesquels GOLD doit s’appuyer pour assurer la durabilité post projet ? Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 103 MEQ 4. GOLD a-t-il eu un impact actuel ou potentiel sur la prestation de services publics dans les secteurs clés et est-ce que cela sera probablement durable au-delà du projet? 1. Gold vous a-t-il permit de réaliser des infrastructures ou services dans le domaine du WASH ? (Eau –Hygiène et Assainissement) 2. Quels sont ces réalisations ? 3. Ont elle eu des impacts significatifs dans votre localité ? 4. Quels sont les impacts significatifs en termes de gouvernance du secteur WASH ? (capacité techniques de vos services, et implication des populations. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 104 GUIDE FOCUS GROUP AVEC LES COMMUNAUTES (Femmes, Hommes, Jeunes) Connaissance du programme et expériences avec GOLD 1. Connaissance du programme GOLD : connaissez-vous ou avez-vous entendu parler de ? Font quoi ? où et avec qui ? objectifs/Résultats visés ? 2. Parlez-nous de votre expérience avec le programme GOLD : a. Participation aux activités (ou à certaines activités) menées par GOLD ou ses partenaires (Lesquelles, quand, où, etc. ?) b. Avez-vous participé à d’autres activités comme : (Relance sur les thèmes ci-dessous) o BBGI o Budgétisation participative o Evénements/réunions communautaires o Activités du CVA o Formation sur le leadership local (ou autres types de formation) o Autres c. Avez-vous développé des compétences en participant à ces activités ? Appréciation des interventions et des réalisations du programme GOLD [Il s’agit des appréciations sur les interventions et résultats, changements et effets du programme GOLD dans le fonctionnement des CT, des services publics, des prestations des services, etc.] 3. Est-ce que (et comment ?) les activités du programme GOLD ont-elles permis d’améliorer la prestation des services dans : (Aborder chaque secteur : Disponibilité, Accès, Qualité) a. Education b. Santé c. Nutrition d. WASH e. La redevabilité et la transparence dans la gestion des ressources locales 4. Quels sont les meilleurs succès de ce projet dans votre zone ? Quelle est la meilleure réalisation qu’il a faite pour les populations de votre localité ? [approfondir] 5. Quels sont les obstacles, limites ou contraintes dans la mise en œuvre des activités de ce projet dans votre localité ? 6. Diffusion des spots, messages et émissions dans les radios locales o Connaissance et écoute des émissions et spots dans les radios o Quelles émissions (Nom, fréquence diffusion, etc.) o Secteurs et domaines couverts par les émissions et spots écoutés o Sur la gestion des CT et la transparence o Sur la participation communautaire dans la budgétisation des CT o Sur les secteurs clés : Education, Santé, Nutrition, WASH o Autres thèmes/domaines 7. Connaissances acquises grâce à ces émissions, spots radios [Modérateur : Sonder et approfondir les réponses] Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 105 Implication/participation des communautés dans la gestion des services (Santé, Education, Nutrition, WASH, CT) 8. Activités mises en œuvre ou soutenues par le programme GOLD pour une meilleure implication des femmes/Hommes/jeunes dans la gouvernance et dans la gestion des services ? 9. Réalisations et résultats obtenus grâce au programme GOLD ont-ils des chances de se maintenir après la fin du programme ? Si oui comment ? Si non pourquoi ? 10. Rôles et contributions des populations pour maintenir ces acquis et assurer la pérennité des réalisations du projet (mobilisation sociale, sensibilisation etc.) ? 11. Y’a-t-il des activités et réalisations du projet qui n’ont pas bien réussi ? [Lesquelles et pourquoi] 12. Conseils et recommandations pour la suite du programme GOLD pour une meilleure atteinte des résultats attendus à la fin du programme ? Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 106 ANNEX VI: LIST OF KEY INFORMANT INTERVIEW PARTICIPANTS Note: There were a total of 155 interviews. In some cases, multiple individuals participated in the same interview but are indicated on separate lines. # Structure Name Responsibility Dakar 1 USAID Samba Barry Directeur Adjoint DRG 2 USAID Babacar Lô Conseiller Principal en Renforcement des systèmes de Santé 3 USAID Xavier Preciado Directeur Adjoint EGO 4 USAID Seynabou Diallo DRG/Genre 5 USAID Sala Bâ Directrice Adjointe Bureau Education 6 USAID David Bruns Directeur du Bureau Education 7 USAID Malick Diop Spécialiste de l’éducation-Contact GOLD 8 GOLD Jean Michel Dufils Chef de Projet 9 GOLD Mamadou Lamarana Barry Responsable Résultat 1-2 ENDA-ECOPOP 9 GOLD Balla Fall Niang Responsable Résultat 3 World Vision 10 GOLD Mamadou Diako Coordinateur Technique 11 GOLD Moussa Faye Spécialiste de la Gouvernance 12 GOLD Asse Bahid Sow Responsable de la Communication 13 GOLD Fatoumata Guissé Responsable Suivi-évaluation 14 GOLD Aminata Ndiaye Responsable Inclusion Sociale et Partenariat Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 107 # Structure Name Responsibility PARTENAIRES STRATEGIQUES GOLD 15 ENDA ECOPOP Abdoulaye Cissé Responsable des programmes de formation et du renforcement organisationnel 16 WORLD VISION Diegane Ndiaye Directeur des opérations 17 FAFS Absa Sylla Secrétaire Exécutif Dakar 18 URAC Talla Dieng Président National 19 ACCES Ann Wessling Chef de Projet 20 KAWOLOR Abderhamane Djire Adjoint au Chef de Projet 21 NEEMA Babacar Guèye Chef de Projet IntraHealth International 22 Association Nationale des Handicapés Moteurs du Sénégal Banda Dieye Président 23 USAID/RSS+ Mame Cor Ndour Chef de Projet Abt RSS+ 24 Passerelle Oumar Ba Directeur Technique National GOUVERNEMENTS 25 Agence de Développement local (ADL) Yaye Fatou Niang Responsable de l’Observatoire National des Territoires et la plateforme genre 26 Agence de Développement local (ADL) Aliou Kandji Directeur du système d’information 27 Agence de Développement Municipal (ADM) Mamadou Wade Secrétaire Général Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 108 # Structure Name Responsibility 27 Agence de Développement Municipal (ADM) Ndéye Ngoné Sy Chargée de programme 27 Agence de Développement Municipal (ADM) Dr. Ndèye Marème Samb Coordonnatrice du PACASEN 28 Ministère des Collectivités Territoriales (CTs) Khady Dieng Gueye Directrice Adjointe des Collectivités Territoriales 29 Ministère des Collectivités Territoriales (CTs) Ndeye Maty Ndoye Seck Coordinatrice du bureau Genre 30 Ministère de la Justice Cheikh Fall Mbaye Directeur de la promotion de la bonne Gouvernance 31 Programme National de Développement Local (PNDL) Ousseynou Touré Chargé de communication 32 Ministère des Finances-Direction des Taxes locales (DGID) Bocar Diallo Spécialiste de la fiscalité locale 33 Cellule de Lutte Contre la Malnutrition (CLM) Abdou Dieng Chargé de communication AUTRES PTFs 34 Banque Mondiale Julie Camy Consultante en décentralisation (Banque Mondiale) 35 UNICEF Babacar Ndaw Spécialiste des politiques sociales (UNICEF) KOLDA 36 GOLD Lamine Dieme Coordinateur 36 GOLD Aba Moussa Ba Responsable résultat 1-2 36 GOLD Rodrigue Mendes Responsable résultats 3 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 109 # Structure Name Responsibility GOUVERNEMENTS 37 GOLD Lamine Diéme Coordinateur 38 ARD Abdoul Anne Directeur régional 39 ARD Amadou Diallo Chef de division de la planification et du renforcement des capacités 40 ARD Maimouna Ba Coordinatrice régionale de la plateforme des femmes 41 ADL Mar Seck Coordinateur Régional 42 Service régional de l'assainissement Dethie Sarr Chef du bureau régional 43 Service régional des centres fiscaux Hamath Diako Chef du Bureau Régional 43 Service régional des centres fiscaux Saidou FAYE Adjoint au Chef du bureau régional 44 Direction régionale de l’hydraulique Moustapha Thiam Directeur Régional de l’hydraulique 45 IEF Kabine Diané Inspecteur d’enseignement PARTENAIRES GOLD 46 ACCES Nathalie Christine Gomis Coordinatrice Régionale 47 Passerelle Louise Diène Seck Coordinatrice Régionale 48 URAC Thiedo Balde Responsable régional 49 FAFS Niania Sylla Responsable régionale 50 UNICEF Amadou Korsène Ly Responsable politique Sociale 51 RSS+ Lamine Beye conseiller en renforcement des systèmes de santé Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 110 # Structure Name Responsibility 52 NEEMA Seydi Ba Gassama Coordinateur Régional 53 Préfecture VELINGARA Abdourahmane Ndiaye Préfet 54 Conseil départemental VELINGARA Chérif Diao Secrétaire Général 55 Service Départemental du Trésor VELINGARA Moustapha Gueye Inspecteur DIAOBE 56 Maire Mamadou Baldé 1er Adjoint au Maire 57 ACT Samba Baldé ACT 58 Facilitateur Départemental Gold Sana Kébé Facilitateur Départemental Gold 59 GPC/CVA Seckou Diao GPC/CVA 60 radio communautaire Niomadio Baldé Directeur des programmes 61 Focus Group: Jeunes Mamadou Camara Président conseil communal des jeunes 62 Focus Group: Femmes Fatoumata Diao Présidente communale du réseau des femmes 63 Focus Group: Hommes El hadji Mamadou Balde Délégué de quartier 64 Commission Santé Boubacar Diallo Président 65 Commission Education Fodé Kébé Président 66 Commission Wash Harouna kanté Président 67 ICP Ndaraw Guèye ICP 68 CDS Boubacar Diallo Secrétaire Exécutif Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 111 # Structure Name Responsibility PATA 69 Mairie Aliou Badara Baldé Maire 70 Mairie Mamadou Baldé Secrétaire Municipal 71 ACT Abasse Balde ACT 72 Facilitateur départemental Gold Aliou Mballo Facilitateur 73 GPC/CVA Ousmane Balde GPC/CVA 74 radio communautaire Penda Danso Directeur des programmes 75 Focus Group: Hommes Dicory Baldé Maraichers 76 Focus Group: Jeunes Idrissa Baldé Commerçant 77 Focus Group: Femmes Toulaye Baldé Présidente GPF 78 Commission Wash Kalidou Aidara Président 79 Commission Santé Bacary Baldé Président 80 Commission Education siby balde Président 81 CDS Diegui Balde Secrétaire exécutif BAGADADJI 82 Mairie Samba Baldé 2ième adjoint au maire 83 Mairie Lamine Camara Secrétaire Municipal 84 ACT Amadou Baldé ACT 85 Facilitateur Amadou Sadio Diallo Facilitateur Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 112 # Structure Name Responsibility 86 GCP Leader Ibrahima Diao Responsable GCP 87 Commission Santé Malang Diamanka Président 88 Commission Education Diadongui SEYDI Président 89 Commission Wash Ibrahima Diao Président 90 Focus Group: Hommes Oumar Diao Agriculteur 91 Focus Group: Femmes Adama Kébé Président GPF 92 Focus Group: Jeunes Abdoulaye Seydi Agriculteur 93 ICP Astou Dieng ICP 94 CDS M. Moussa DIAO Adjoint au Secrétaire Exécutif TAMBA 95 USAID Abdoulaye Ndao Coordinateur 96 GOLD Madické Seck Coordinateur 96 GOLD Fanta Chimère Diaw Responsable résultats 1-2 96 GOLD Emma Françoise Sarr Responsable résultats 3 GOUVERNEMENT 97 Adjoint au Gouverneur Ahmadou Coumba Ndiaye chargé des affaires administratives 98 ARD Sidy Coulibaly Chef de la Division Planification, Renforcement de capacités 99 Brigade régionale d'hygiène M. Wade Chef du Bureau Régional 100 Service régional de la planification Salou Bathily Chef de service Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 113 # Structure Name Responsibility 101 Direction régionale de l'hydraulique Mamadou Samb Directeur régional 102 SRADL Rokheya Cissokho Directeur régional 103 IEF Ousmane Fall Inspecteur Adjoint 104 SOGES (OFOR) M.Kane Superviseur 105 MCD/MCR Siré Sagna Adjoint au MCD 106 Préfecture Pape Demba Diallo Préfet 107 Conseil Départemental Hubert Ndeye Secrétaire Général 108 Service Départemental du Trésor M. CISSE Inspecteur 109 Mairie Bounama KANTE Adjoint au Maire PARTENAIRES GOLD 110 Acces Bintou Bamba Coordinateur Wash et Nutrition 111 Neema Dr. Saiba Cissokho Coordinateur Régional Bureau USAID/Tamba 112 URAC Souleymane Mboup Responsable Régional 113 SANI TAMBA farba diouf Chargé de programmes Eau vive Thiès KOUMPENTOUM 114 Mairie Arona Bamba 1er Adjoint au maire 115 ACT Bassirou Fall ACT 116 Facilitateur ibrahima Ndiaye Facilitateur 117 CVA Aliou Diallo CVA Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 114 # Structure Name Responsibility 118 Facilitateur Mohamed Sidy Ndao Inspecteur de la jeunesse 119 CDS Cheikh Goumbala Secrétaire Exécutif Adjoint 120 Commission Santé Djibril Coulibaly Président 121 Commission Education Catherine Coly Président 122 Commission Wash Aliou Diallo Président 123 Focus Group: Hommes Pape Fary SOW Agriculteur 124 Focus Group: Femmes Oumou Top Commerçante 125 Focus Group: Jeunes Abdou Top Membres ASC 126 MCD Kalidou BA MCD 127 Préfecture Hamdy Mbengue Préfet 128 Sous-Préfecture Pape Sandéné Sene Sous-Préfet MISSIRAH 129 Maire Séni Sylla Maire 130 ACT Moussa Sylla ACT 131 Facilitateur Becaye Diarra Facilitateur GOLD 132 CVA World Vision Michel Bianquinch Animateur 133 CVA Koutobo Sylla Coordinator 134 ICP Assane Dieng Infirmier Chef de poste 135 CDS Mamadou Macalou Secrétaire exécutif Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 115 # Structure Name Responsibility 136 Commission Education Diba Cissokho Président 137 Commission Santé Nouhmou Danfakha Président 138 Commission Wash Diouma DIONE Président 139 Focus Group: Hommes Ibrahima Gassama Délégué de quartier 140 Focus Group: Femmes Mariama Sylla Président GPF 141 Focus Group: Jeunes Balla Camara Enseignant 142 Personnes en situation de handicap Haoussou Kaba Président des handicapés MERETO 143 Mairie Aladji BA Maire 144 Mairie M. Ndiaye Secrétaire municipal 145 ACT Abdoulaye Diallo ACT 146 CVA/GCP Sydia Cissé Membre CVA 147 ICP M. Sow ICP 148 CDS Moustapha Diallo Secrétaire Exécutif 149 Commission Santé Cheikh Faye Président 143 Mairie Aladji BA Maire 144 Mairie M. Ndiaye Secrétaire municipal 145 ACT Abdoulaye Diallo ACT 146 CVA/GCP Sydia Cissé Membre CVA Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 116 # Structure Name Responsibility 147 ICP M. Sow ICP 148 CDS Moustapha Diallo Secrétaire Exécutif 149 Commission Santé Cheikh Faye Président 150 Commission Education Ibrahima Dione Président 151 Commission WASH Mamadou Thiaw Président 152 Focus Group: Hommes Rawane Sarr CGE 153 Focus Group: Femmes Mariama LY GPF 154 Focus Group: Jeunes Saliou faye Conseil communal de la jeunesse 155 Personnes en situation de handicap Alpha Nafor Président Association des personnes vivant avec un Handicap Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 117 ANNEX VII: SOURCES OF INFORMATION: DOCUMENTS CONSULTED Articles, Ouvrages, Documents de travail Ashman, Darcy, Brian Calhoon, and Awa Fall-Diop. 2017. “Gender Analysis for the Follow-On USAID/Senegal CDCS (2019–2024).” Dakar: Management Systems International produced for USAID, June 12. Arandel, C. et al. 2016. “DRG Cross-Sector Support Project: DRG Integration Case Study Synthesis.” Washington DC: Social Impact and RTI International, March. Beck, Linda. 2003. “Democratization and the ‘Hidden Public’: The Impact of Patronage Politics on Senegalese Women.” Comparative Politics 35, no. 2: 147–159. Beck, Linda. 2001. “Reining in the Marabouts? Democratization and Local Governance in Senegal.” African Affairs 100, no. 401: 601–621. Beck, Linda, Lamine Dramé, Mame Aissatou Mbaye, and Ndate Gueye. 2018. “Shaking the Mango Tree: Learning Support for Governance for Local Development (GOLD).” Dakar: MSI, November. Brinkerhoof, Derick W. 2019. “Selected Findings: GOLD-Sector Project Partnership Study.” Internal Memo, June 23. Brinkerhoff, Derick W. 2000. “Democratic Governance and Sectoral Policy Reform: Tracing Linkages and Exploring Synergies.” World Development. 28, no. 4: 601–615. Brinkerhoff, Derick W., and Jana C. Hertz. 2018. “Research Concept Note: Assessing the Added Value of GOLD to Sector Service Delivery.” RTI International, 9 February. Brinkerhoff, J. M. 2002. “Assessing and Improving Partnership Relationships and Outcomes: A Proposed Framework.” Evaluation and Program Planning 25: 215–231. Charles, C., and S. McNulty. 1998. “Partnering for Results: Assessing the Impacts of Inter-Sectoral Partnering.” USAID, Document PN-ACD-34. October. Diallo, Bocar. Plan de mobilisation de ressources de la commune de Bagadadji (Kolda). USAID Governance for Local Development, April 2018. Fox, J. 2016. “Scaling Accountability through Vertically Integrated Civil Society Policy Monitoring and Advocacy.” Working Paper. Washington, DC, and Brighton, UK: American University, Accountability Research Center and University of Sussex, Institute for USAID/Senegal. Juul, Kristine. 2006. “Decentralization, Local Taxation, and Citizenship in Senegal.” Development and Change 37, no. 4: 821–846. Manor, James. 1999. The Political Economy of Democratic Decentralization. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 118 Management Systems International. 2017. “Gender Analysis for the Follow-Up USAID/Senegal CDCS 2019–2024.” June 12. Ministry of Health and Social Action. 2019. Rapport sur la Formation des membres de CDS des postes de santé de Dioulacolon ; Bambadinka ; Salikegne ; Coumbacara et de Guiro Yoro Bocar sur les paquets complets y compris outils harmonisés. Région Médicale de Kolda, District sanitaire de Kolda. 16–18 Janvier. Patterson, Amy S. 2013. “The Impact of Senegal’s Decentralization on Women in Local Governance.” Canadian Journal of African Studies 36, no. 3: 490–529. Région de Sédhiou. 2018. Gouvernance. Rapport de la Conférence Territoriale Senegal, Republic of. Nd. Manuel d’Intégration du Genre dans les Projets et Programmes, MGTDAT. Senegal, Republic of, Coopération Senegal-Luxembourg and UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women. Nd. Rapport de l’audit genre et plan d’institutionnalisation du genre du MGLDAT: Rapport final. Smoke, P. 2015. “Accountability and Service Delivery in Decentralizing Environments: Understanding Context and Strategically Advancing Reform.” In A Governance Practitioner’s Notebook: Alternative Ideas and Approaches, edited by A. Whaites et al., 219–232. Paris: OECD, DAC Network on Governance. Tilly, Charles. 1992. Coercion, Capital and European States. Cambridge: Blackwell. Wetterberg, A., D. W. Brinkerhoff, and J. Hertz (eds). 2016. Governance and Service Delivery: Practical Applications of Social Accountability across Sectors. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI Press. Williams, Martin. 2010. “The Gold Standard of Governance: Mining, Decentralization, and State Power in Senegal,” Politique Africaine 117: 127–148. USAID. 2019. Stratégie genre et inclusion des groupes vulnérables du programme USAID-GOLD (Draft. RTI. January. USAID. 2019. Health Learning Agenda. Support: Statement of Work. USAID. 2019. Gold Integrated Governance Value-Add Research Study: Summary of Research Design as of 2/21/19. USAID. 2018. USAID Governance for Local Development: Annual Report FY2018. Dakar: October. USAID. 2018. Governance for Local Development Learning & Evaluation Support: Statement of Work. Dakar: June. USAID. 2017. GOLD Applied Political Economy Analysis (PEA): Fiscal Transfers from National to Local Government in Senegal. Draft Report. Research Triangle Park, NC: RTI International for USAID/Senegal, October. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 119 USAID. 2017. GOLD Integrated Performance Measurement System for CTs (SMP-CT). RTI, May. USAID. 2016. Governance for Local Development: Year 1 Work Plan, November 1, 2016-September 30, 2017. Dakar: December. USAID. 2018. Governance for Local Development: Year 2 Work Plan, October 1, 2017-September 30, 2018. Plus Annexes Dakar: September. USAID. 2019. Governance for Local Development: Year 3 Work Plan. October 1, 2018 – September 30, 2019. USAID. 2019. Liste des participants à l’atelier de partage WorkPlan FY20. Juillet. RTI USAID. ND. Workshop Presentation of Results PTA GOLD Consolidation 1FY 20 Travaux de Groupes USAID. 2016. Draft stratégie d’inclusion et de ciblage du genre, des jeunes, des personnes vulnérables du programme gouvernance local pour le développement. RTI. USAID. 2016. DRG/Senegal Project 2016-2023: Strengthen Responsive Democratic Governance (PAD). USAID. 2016. DRG Integration: Case Study Synthesis Report, September 8. USAID. 2015. Senegal Country Development Cooperation Strategy, 2012-2016, [LJB16] March. USAID. 2013. Democracy, Human Rights, and Governance Assessment of Senegal: Final Report. January. USAID. ND. Governance for Local Development: Learning Agenda Matrix. Dakar. USAID. ND. Governance for Local Development: Tableau des Indicateurs GOLD. Dakar. USAID. ND. Governance for Local Development: Note Méthodologie de mise en œuvre du BBGI. RTI. USAID. 2017. Governance for Local Development: Applied Political Economy Analysis: Fiscal Transfers from National to Local Government in Senegal. Dakar: October. USAID. 2019. Quarterly report– Q2, FY 2019. January 1 to march 31, 2019. ACCES Commune de Koussanar. 2019. Lettre engagement sur l’honneur de prise en charge financière de 100 ouvrages d’assainissement des ménages vulnérables Commune de Sinthiou Mamadou Boubou. ND. Lettre d’engagement sur l’honneur de prise en charge financière de 50 ouvrages d’assainissement des ménages vulnérables ANSD. 2016. situation économique et sociale du Sénégal ANSD. ND. Requête EDS-MICS, ANSD SANI PEPAM. ND. Feuille de route POST-OMD 2014-2025 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 120 Swiss Centre for International Health. 2015. Enquête ménage : comportements en matière d’hygiène et d’assainissement et de volonté de payer en milieu rural au Sénégal. Basel, 25 Septembre PEPAM. 2016. Actualisation du manuel des projets d’eau potable en milieu rural, version finale. Mars PEPAM. 2016. Rapport d’audit genre du ministère de l’hydraulique et de l’assainissement, rapport final. Octobre PEPAM. 2014. Guide méthodologique pour l’élaboration d’un plan de gestion des eaux, version finale, juillet PEPAM. 2016. Plan d’institutionnalisation du genre du ministère de l’hydraulique et de l’assainissement - PIG/MHA -Octobre GLAAS. ND. Introduction à l’agenda 2030 pour le développement durable PEPAM. 2006. Définition des indicateurs de suivi, version finale Septembre USAID CDCS (2018) USAID. 2018. Scaling market-based sanitation, Desk Review on Market-Based Rural Sanitation Development Programs USAID DRG (2015), Senegal Project 2016-2023: “Strengthen Responsive Democratic Governance” Groupe de coordination générale des partenaires techniques et financiers au Sénégal (G50). Décembre 2016. USAID. Nd. Axes de synergie GOLD PASSERELLES_VVF. RTI USAID. Nd. Gender inclusion sociale activites Kawolor. RTI USAID. Nd. Plan d'action FAFS Vélingara_kolda USAID. Nd. Stratégie genre et inclusion des couches vulnérables de Gold USAID. ND. Analyse des résultats du PISAM sur le BBGI USAID. ND. Quel est le potentiel de durabilité du Baromètre de Bonne Gouvernance Intégré (BBGI) dans les communes partenaires de GOLD USAID. ND. Plan de durabilité du Baromètre de Bonne Gouvernance Intégré (BBGI) USAID. ND. Programme Gouvernance et Paix au Sénégal 2010-2014. USAID/PGP-Sénégal USAID. 2019. Protocole d’accord-cadre entre USAID Passerelles et USAID GoLD USAID. ND. Rapport d’analyse BBG. Programme Gouvernance et Paix au Sénégal (PGP-Sénégal) Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 121 USAID. ND. Stratégie globale de synergie entre GoLD et Passerelles USAID. ND. Note conceptuelle pour l’amélioration du service d’état-civil. USAID/GOLD et USAID/Passerelles USAID. 2019. Compte rendu visite d’échanges entre USAID/GOLD et l’association rurale de lutte contre le sida et du développement économique et social (ARLS/DES) de Thieneba USAID. 2019. Weekly, N°14 Semaine du 2 au 6 Septembre 2019 USAID. 2019. Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan, Juin 2019 USAID. ND. Atelier de planification pour la mise en œuvre du programme USAID/GOLD pour l’année 4 (FY2020) USAID. ND. Atelier de planification intégrée USAID GOLD, octobre 2019-septembre 2020 USAID. 2019. Approfondissement réalisations FY18- AXES FY19. RTI USAID. 2018 Retraite annuelle 2018. Introduction. RTI USAID. 2019. Maquette de présentation des réalisations FY 18 - AXES FY 19. RTI USAID. 2019. Présentation Résultat 2 FY19. RTI USAID. 2019. Présentation retraite FY18 - R3. RTI USAID. 2019. Présentation résultats Transversaux FY19 sur l’inclusion sociale. RTI USAID. 2019. Présentation des réalisations sur l’intégration FY 18 - AXES FY 19. RTI USAID. 2019. Maquette de présentation des résultats FY19 Communication. RTI USAID. 2019. Maquette de présentation des opérations PTA FY19. RTI USAID. 2019. Maquette de présentation sur la coopération FY19. RTI USAID. 2019. Maquette de présentation des réalisations FY18-AXES FY19 sur le suivi évaluation et apprentissage. RTI USAID. 2018. Journée MEL et des recherches, séance sur l’étude de partenariat 25 juillet 2018. RTI USAID. ND. Performance Indicator Reference Sheets (PIRSs) pour les indicateurs de gestion du programme. RTI USAID. ND. Mise en œuvre des plans d’action issus de l’engagement communautaire. RTI USAID. 2019. Performance Indicator Reference Sheet Wash. RTI USAID. 2019. Performance Indicator Reference Sheet FEED THE FUTURE. RTI Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 122 USAID. 2019. Point sur l’évolution des indicateurs de GOLD de 2016 à 2019. RTI USAID. 2019. Rapport atelier d’orientation des membres du comité régional de formation élargi sur le projet GOLD. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport formation sur la politique en Education et les normes et standards de qualité de l'Education, Missirah. RTI USAID. 2019. Success Story au Centre de Santé de Koumpentoum, Juin. RTI USAID. 2017. Compte Rendu Visite directrice USAID Tambacounda, Décembre. RTI USAID. ND. Résumé réalisations phares. RTI USAID. 2019. Success Story du forage de Ndame, Juin USAID. ND. Success story dans la commune Ndame. RTI USAID. ND. Investissement humain des populations de Salémata pour une commune qui respecte les normes du WASH. RTI USAID. ND. Adoption d’une démarche participative et concertée de la gestion de la santé par le Conseil municipal de Médina Cherif et les techniciens de la santé. RTI USAID. ND. La mobilisation de l’impôt sur le minimum fiscal emmène plus de ressources financières dans la commune de Sinthiang Koundara. RTI USAID. ND. Les acteurs se mobilisent pour l’accès à l’eau de qualité dans la commune de Salémata. RTI USAID. ND. Le Secteur de la Santé accroît ses capacités à fournir des services de qualité grâce aux ressources locales mobilisées par la commune de Bagadadji. RTI USAID. ND. Information on rural water reforms allows people to engage in water management. RTI USAID. ND. Draft consolidation PTA Consolidation 1FY 2020. RTI USAID. ND. Draft consolidation PTA 1FY 2020. Education. RTI USAID. ND Draft PTA GOLD consolidation 1FY 20 travaux groupe-sécurité alimentaire. RTI USAID. ND. Draft PTA Consolidation 1FY 20 Travaux Groupes INCLUSION SOCIALE. RTI USAID. ND. Draft PTA Consolidation 1FY 20 Travaux Groupes –SANTE. RTI USAID. ND. Draft PTA GOLD Consolidation 1FY 20 Travaux de Groupes WASH. RTI USAID. 2017. Governance for Local Development: Activity Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (AMELP). Dakar: RTI, May; revised April 2019. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 123 USAID. 2019. Governance for Local Development: Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan. RTI USAID. 2019. Activity Monitoring, Evaluation, and Learning Plan (Revised June 2019). GoLD/RTI USAID. 2017. Governance for Local Development: Annual Report. September 5, 2016-September, 30, 2017. RTI USAID. 2018. Gouvernance Locale pour le Développement. Rapport annuel 1er octobre 2017 – 30 septembre 2018. RTI USAID. ND. Liste des collectivités locales partenaires. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu atelier de partage du canevas de l’AMELP et d’actualisation des feuilles de références. Février. RTI USAID. 2019. Liste des activités réalisées 2017-2018-2019 USAID. ND. Description technique du projet. RTI USAID. ND. Note de capitalisation du forum régional des partenaires et investisseurs (FRPI) des collectivités territoriales de Tambacounda. RTI USAID. 2019. Plan d’action sur les activités synergiques GoLD-NEEMA-RSS+. Mars. RTI USAID. 2018. Plan de synergie sur les projets et programmes financés par USAID dans les régions de Tamba et Kédougou. RTI USAID. 2016. Governance for Local Development. Quarterly Report September 5 – December 31. RTI USAID. 2017. Governance for Local Development. Quarterly Report, January 1 – March 31, 2017. RTI USAID. 2017. Governance for Local Development. Rapport trimestriel 1 avril - 30 Juin, 2017. RTI USAID. 2017. Governance for Local Development. Rapport Trimestriel 1er Juillet – 30 Septembre 2017. RTI USAID. 2018. Governance for Local Development. Rapport Trimestriel 1er janvier – 31 mars 2018. RTI USAID. 2018. Governance for Local Development. Quarterly Report, April 1-June 30. RTI USAID. 2018. Governance for Local Development. Rapport Trimestriel. 1er Juillet – 30 Septembre. RTI USAID. 2018. Governance for Local Development. Rapport Trimestriel. 1er octobre-31 décembre. RTI USAID. 2019. Governance for Local Development. Rapport Trimestriel.1er janvier -31 mars. RTI USAID. 2019. Governance for Local Development. Rapport Trimestriel. 1er avril – 30 juin. RTI USAID. 2018. Plan de mobilisation des ressources financières des CT. RTI Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 124 USAID. ND. Liste des membres des différentes commissions du conseil municipal de la commune de Diaobé-Kabendou. RTI USAID. 2019. Document de planification sur l’IMF4. Diaobé-Kabendou. RTI USAID. 2018. Contribution au rapport Annuel 1er octobre 2017 – 30 septembre 2018. RTI USAID. ND. Document de contribution aux activités de coordination à TAMBA. RTI USAID. 2019. Contribution au rapport Trimestriel 1er janvier – 31 mars 2019. RTI USAID. ND. Fiche synoptique de présentation de la Commune de KOUMPENTOUM. RTI USAID. 2017. Compte rendu de la présentation de l’outil SEN BRIDGE à l’équipe municipale de Koumpentoum, Novembre. RTI UNICEF. 2018. Le guide des Collectivités Territoriales amies des enfants. Septembre 2019 USAID. ND. Check liste activités réalisées par GOLD dans la commune de Bagadadji (1) USAID. ND. Check liste activités réalisées par GOLD dans la commune de Diaobé (1) Water and Sanitation Program. 2015. Evaluations des performances du programme d’assainissement rural au Sénégal USAID. 2019. Evolution des ressources propres de 16 communes (2015-201). GoLD/RTI USAID. 2019. Opportunités de mobilisation de ressources (recettes) pour les CTs. GoLD/RTI USAID. 2019. Liste des activités de formation par CTs et par année. GoLD/RTI USAID. 2019. Liste des indicateurs désagrégés par secteur. GoLD/RTI USAID. ND. Tableau récapitulatif des activités de GoLD. GoLD/RTI USAID. ND. Liste des activités de GoLD par CTs. GoLD/RTI USAID. 2019. Analyse des tendances de la gestion des finances locales des communes d’évaluation à mi￾parcours (2016-2017). GoLD/RTI Arrêtés, textes réglementaires, Conventions Arrêté interministériel fixant le tarif de l'eau Notto, Diosmone, Palmarin et Gorom lamsar Arrêté ministériel du 12 Avril 2018-00 77 62 portant répartition du fonds de dotation de la décentralisation entre les départements, les communes et les services de l’état au titre de l’année 2018 Arrêté ministériel du 12 Avril 2018-00 77 98 accordant des fonds de concours aux départements et aux communes au titre de l’année 2018 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 125 Arrêté N°4 portant création du cadre de concertation de la commune de Bagadadji.13 avril Arrêté portant création du cadre de concertation de la commune de Méréto Arrêté portant répartition du fonds de dotation de la décentralisation entre les départements, les communes Arrêté portant mise en place d’un CDS dans la Commune de Bagadaji. 07 aout 2015 Avis de recrutement des facilitateurs communautaires dans les communes d’intervention de Kédougou Avis de recrutement des facilitateurs communautaires dans la commune de Saraya Avis de recrutement des facilitateurs communautaires dans la commune de Goudiry Décret n° 2007-545 du 25 avril 2007 portant code des marchés publics Ministère de l’économie des finances et du Plan. 2015. Arrêté N° 07 01 2015 fixant les seuils de contrôle à priori des dossiers de marché, pris en application de l’article 141 du codes des marchés publics Ministère de l’économie des finances et du Plan. 2015. Arrêté N° 22 01 2015 pris en application de l’article 79 du code des marchés publics, relatif aux procédures applicables aux marchés passés par certaines communes Ministère de l’économie des finances et du Plan. 2015. Arrêté N° 07 01 2015 relatifs aux modalités de mise en œuvre des procédures de demande de renseignement et de prix Ministère de l’économie des finances et du Plan. 2015. Arrêté N° 22 01 2015 relatifs aux commissions régionales et départementales des marchés publics dans les régions autres que Dakar, pris en application de l’article 36, alinéa 7 du code des marchés publics Ministère de l’économie des finances et du Plan. 2016. Arrêté N° 16 11 2016 fixant le taux de la redevance de régulation sur les marchés publics et délégation de services publics Ministère de l’économie des finances et du Plan. 2015. Arrêté N° 22 15 2015 fixant les seuils en dessous desquels il n’est pas requis de garantie de soumission Ministère de la Gouvernance des territoriales, du développement et de l’aménagement du territoire. 2019. et les services de l’état Ministère de la santé et de l’action sociale, 2017, stratégie nationale de financement de la santé (SNFS) pour tendre vers la couverture sanitaire universelle. Draft du 22 juin 2017 Note de service portant désignation des membres de la commission de la fiscalité locale de la commune de Bagadadji. 6 novembre OFOR. 2016. Protocole d’accord entre l’association des maires du Sénégal et l’OFOR, mars. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 126 Journal officiel de la République du Sénégal, loi n° 2018-10 du 30 mars 2018 modifiant certaines dispositions du code général des Impôts Loi n° 96-06 du 22 mars 1996 portant Code des Collectivités locales Loi n°2012-31 Du 31 Décembre 2012 portant Code général des impôts Loi n° 2013-10 du 28 décembre 2013 portant Code général des Collectivités locales Secrétariat du gouvernement. 2019. loi n°2019-12 du 08 juillet 2019 modifiant le code Général des collectivités territoriales Enquête de satisfaction auprès des populations de la DSP de Notto, Diosmone, Palmarin, Gorom lampsar NDP-GL USAID. 2018. Arrêté cadre de concertation. RTI • Arrêté cadre de concertation Bamba Thialene, Août • Arrêté cadre de concertation Dakately, Août • Arrêté cadre de concertation Kothiary, Novembre • Arrêté cadre de concertation Koussanar, Août • Arrêté cadre de concertation Bala, Décembre • Arrêté cadre de concertation Dar Salam, Septembre • Arrêté cadre de concertation Fongolimbi, Novembre • Arrêté cadre de concertation Kevoye, Août • Arrêté cadre de concertation Khossanto, Août • Arrêté cadre de concertation Mereto, Août • Arrêté cadre de concertation Kevoye, Août USAID. 2017. Arrêté comité de pilotage. RTI • Arrêté Comité de pilotage CVA Dindéfélo, Juin • Arrêté Comité de pilotage CVA Koumpentoum, Mai • Arrêté Comité de pilotage CVA Koumpentoum, juin • Arrêté Comité de pilotage CVA Missirah, juin • Arrêté Comité de pilotage CVA Salémata, juin • Arrêté Comité de pilotage CVA Sinthiou Malem, juin • Arrêté Comité de pilotage CVA Ndam, juin • Arrêté cadre de concertation Saraya, Janvier • Arrêté cadre de concertation diaobé • Accord cadre commune de Koumpentoum • Procès-verbal de Massirah 2018 • Procès-verbal de bira • Procès-verbal du groupe citoyen de plaidoyer a Hamdallaye tessan • Procès-verbal sankagne USAID. 2018. Accord de subvention en nature entre GOLD et la commune de Koumpentoum, Mai. RTI Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 127 USAID. 2018. Mémorandum visite USAID, janvier. RTI USAID. 2017. Arrêté portant mise en place de comité de pilotage du CVA. 9 Juin. RTI Introduction générale à l’acte III de la décentralisation ND USAID. 2017. Protocole d’accord-cadre entre la Commune de Pata et le Programme USAID GOLD. Novembre. RTI Données financières des communes (Budgets, comptes administratifs, PIA, Quittance IMF4) • Budget Bagadadji 2016 ; 2017 ; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Bambali 2017; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Salémata 2017; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Diaobé 2017; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Pata 2015; 2016 ; 2017 ; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Mereto 2015; 2016 ; 2017 ; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Koumpentoum 2017; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Dindéfelo 2017; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Medina Cherif 2017; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Missirah 2017 ; 2018 ; 2019 • Budget Tanaff 2016 ; 2017 ; 2018 ; 2019 • Commune de Saré Yoba, 2019. Recettes IMF4 mobilisées • Ministère de l’économie et des finances, DGCPT. 2019. Quittance de versement en numéraire N°2219000820 de la commune de Kerewane • Ministère de l’économie et des finances, DGCPT. 2019. Quittance de versement en numéraire N°2519000245 de la commune de Sinthiang Koundara Comptes administratifs • Bagadadji 2016 ; 2017 • Bambali 2016 ; 2017 • Salémata 2016 ; 2017 • Diaobé 2016 ; 2017 • Pata 2016 ; 2017 • Mereto 2016 ; 2017 • Koumpentoum 2016 ; 2017 • Dindéfélo 2016 ; 2017 • Medina Cherif 2016 ; 2017 • Tanaff 2016 ; 2017 • Missirah 2016 ; 2017 • Compte rendu d’exécution 2016 (Meréto) • Compte rendu d’exécution gestion 2017 (Méréto) Plan d’investissement annuel (PIA) • Bagadadji 2017; 2018 ; 2019 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 128 • Bambali 2017, 2018 ; 2019 • Salémata 2018 ; 2019 • Diaobé ; 2017 ; 2018 ; 2019 • Pata 2017 ; 2018 ; 2019 • Mereto 2019 • Koumpentoum 2017; 2018 ; 2019 • Dindéfélo 2018; 2019 • Medina Cherif 2018; 2019 • Tanaff 2017; 2018 ; 2019 • Missirah 2019 • Feuille de présence PIA commune de Bele, Janvier 2019 • Feuille de présence PIA commune de Kothiary • Feuille de présence PIA commune de Koussanar • Compte rendu adoption PIA Bagadadji 2019 USAID. ND. Analyse triennale compare des recettes locales: Kédougou,” RTI. • Kédougou. Gestion 2015-2016-2017 • Salémata • Dakately • Bandafai • Khossanto • Fongolimbi • Kevoye USAID. ND. Analyse triennale compare des recettes locales: Tambacounda,” RTI. • Koupentoum • Sinthiou B. Aly • Koussanar • Goudiry • Mereto • Bamba Thialen • Missirah • Kothiary • Ballou • Bele • Bala • Bakel • Tamba • Sinthiou Malem • Ndame • Département Tamba • Département Kafrine • Département Bakel • Département Goudiry Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 129 USAID. ND. Analyse triennale comparée des recettes locales: Kolda,” RTI. • Bagadadji, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Diaobé, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Dioulacoulon, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Kéréwane, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Kolda, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Linkiring, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Médina cherif, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Médina Gounas, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Médina Yoro Foula, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Pata, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Sare Yoba, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Sinthiang Koundara, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 • Thieyty, Analyse des recettes 2014-2015-2016 Plan d’action, niveau de réalisation des activités USAID. ND. Plan d’Actions d’Engagement Communautaire: Kolda. RTI USAID. ND. Plan d’Actions d’Engagement Communautaire: Tambacounda. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport de Restitution : Atelier de Restitution et d’Elaboration de Plan d’Actions d’Engagement Communautaire : Bagadadji. 18 July. RTI USAID. 2019. Plan d’action engagement communautaire CVA : Bagadadji (Poste de sante). 28 Juin. RTI USAID. 2019. Plan d’action engagement communautaire CVA : Bagadadji (Forage). 28 Juin. RTI USAID. ND. Rapport suivi plan d'action engagement communautaire des forages de Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. ND. Rapport suivi plan d'action engagement communautaire centre sante Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. ND. Plan d'actions engagement communautaire CVA Centre santé. RTI USAID. ND. Plan d'actions engagement communautaire CVA Forage GINAW RAIL. RTI USAID. ND. Plan d'actions engagement communautaire CVA Forage TRAVAUX. RTI USAID. 2019. Plan d’action du GCP de Bagadadji. Mars, Février, janvier. RTI USAID. 2018. Plan d’action du GCP de Bagadadji. Décembre. RTI USAID. 2019. Rapport mensuel de l’ACT de Bagadadji, Décembre 2018, Janvier et Février 2019 USAID. ND. Plans d'actions CVA forage Bidiancoto. RTI USAID. ND. Plans d'actions CVA Poste santé Bira. RTI Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 130 USAID. ND. Plans d'actions CVA poste sante Gouloumbou. RTI USAID. ND. Plans d'actions CVA Poste santé Missirah. RTI USAID. ND. Plans d'actions CVA Poste santé Tessan. RTI USAID 2019. Plan d’action engagement communautaire CVA de la Commune de Bagadadji. RTI USAID. Niveau réalisation Plan d’action Centre de sante Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. Niveau réalisation plan d'action Wash Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. Niveau réalisation plan d'action Wash Ginaw rail. RTI USAID. ND. Rapport de suivi Wash Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de Sankagne. RTI USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de santé Bira. RTI USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de santé Gouloumbou. RTI USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de santé Missirah. RTI USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de santé Tessan. RTI USAID. 2018. Plan d'action opérationnel des comités locaux et de Gestion Wash Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. 2018. Plan d'action opérationnel des comités locaux et de Gestion Wash Missirah. RTI USAID. ND. Données suivi des normes du centre de santé de Koumpentoum 2018-2019 USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de Sankagne 2018-2019 USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de santé Bira 2018-2019 USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de santé Gouloumbou 2018-2019 USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de santé Missirah 2018-2019 USAID. ND. Données suivi des Normes poste de santé Tessan 2018-2019 USAID. ND. Données mesures de performances du poste de sante de hamdallaye Tessan 2018-2019 USAID. ND. Tableau de suivi des normes hydrauliques Diam Diam USAID. ND. Tableau de suivi des normes forage Botou Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 131 USAID. ND. Tableau de suivi des normes hydraulique Sinthiou maléme USAID. ND. Tableau de suivi des normes poste Sinthiou malem USAID. ND. Tableau de suivi des normes sante Botou USAID. 2018. Processus pour l’élaboration du Budget participatif de la Commune de Bagadadji. Novembre. RTI USAID. ND. Rapport financier de la mise en œuvre des activités de formation, de sensibilisation, de distribution et de suivi du projet PUR WASH dans les villages et/ quartiers de la Commune de Bagadadji USAID. 2018. Atelier de mise en œuvre du BBGI dans la Commune de Bagadadji. 11-13 décembre 2018 USAID. NB. Situation de la mobilisation du Minimum Fiscal dans la Commune de Bagadadji. RTI USAID. 2018. Procès-Verbal de la mise en place du CDS de Bagadadji. 15 aout 2018. RTI USAID. NB. Liste des membres de la Commission Fiscale de la Commune de Bagadadji. RTI USAID. 2018. Plan d’accompagnement de GOLD pour la mise en œuvre des activités d’auto-évaluation des performances (SMP-CT) dans la Commune de Bagadadji. RTI USAID. ND. Rapport mensuel volontaires CVA Bagadadji. RTI USAID. ND. Formation sur les YCC avec Nicodeme. RTI Ministère de l’emploi, de la formation professionnelle, et de l’artisanat. ND. Information sur les certificats de spécialité USAID. 2018. Compte rendu mission PIA de la commune de Méréto, décembre. RTI USAID. 2017. Compte rendu d’accord-cadre entre la commune de Méréto et USAID GOLD, décembre. RTI USAID. 2019. Rapport de formation des membres du GCP sur l’approche CVA, juillet. RTI USAID. ND. Liste des membres du GCP dans la commune de Méréto USAID. 2018. Rapport d’évaluation de performance du poste de santé de Koussanar, Septembre. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport de formation des membres du GCP de Sinthiou Malem sur l’approche CVA, juillet 2018 USAID. 2019. Rapport mensuel facilitateur Méréto, Juin. RTI USAID. 2019. Rapport mensuel facilitateur Méréto, 2019. RTI USAID. 2019. Rapport mensuel facilitateur Méréto, Juillet. RTI Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 132 USAID. 2019. Rapport mensuel facilitateur Méréto, Mai. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport de la journée d’élaboration du PIA à Koussanar, décembre. RTI USAID. 2018. “GOLD Atelier de collecte des données, de restitution des résultats de la mesure de performance en gouvernance et d’élaboration de plan d’action”: • Bakel (Tamba), 19-21 April 2018. • Balloul • Thialene, 8-10 February 2018. • Bele (Tamba), 23-25 February 2018. • Sinthiou Bocar Aly (Tambacounda), 26-28 February 2018. • Goudiry, 23-25 April 2018. • Kerewane, 23 February 2018. • Koussanar,” ND. • Mereto, 14-16 February 2018. • Ndame, 5-7 February 2018. • Maleme (Tambacounda), ND. • Tambacounda, 2018. • Bagadadji Janvier 2017 • Lutte contre le paludisme à Bagadadji Décembre 2018. • Dioabé, Février 2018 • Dioulacolo, Février 2018 • Linkiring, Février 2018 • Médina Gounas, Février 2018 • Médina Yoro Foula, Février 2018 • Pata, Février 2018 • Saré Yoba, Février 2018 • Sinthiang, Koundara Février 2018 USAID. 2018. Atelier de collecte des données et de restitution des résultats de la mesure de performance en gouvernance dans la Commune de Diaobé. 22-24 Février. USAID. Rapport de mesure de performances de la commune de Bambaly pour la période 2015-2016 USAID. Rapport de mesure de performances de la commune de Tanaff pour la période 2015-2016 USAID. 2018. données de mesure de performances du poste de sante de Sankagne USAID. ND. Données de mesures performances forage Gouloumbou Missirah USAID. 2018. Mesure performances forage de Bidiankoto 2018 Missirah USAID. ND. Mesures de performances poste sante de Bira USAID. 2017. Atelier de collecte des données et de restitution des résultats de la mesure de performance en gouvernance dans la commune de Koumpentoum Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 133 USAID. ND. Rapport de suivi de collecte des données, normes et mesures de performance à Pata USAID. 2018. Rapport de formation des membres des groupes citoyens de plaidoyer de la commune de Bagadadji sur l’approche CVA, le suivi des normes et l’évaluation des mesures de performance. RTI USAID. 2018. L’Evaluation des mesures de performances : Bagadadji (Forage). 15 July. RTI USAID. 2018. L’Evaluation des mesures de performances : Bagadadji (Poste de sante). 15 July. RTI USAID. ND. Données évaluation des performances forage de travaux USAID. ND. Données suivi des normes du centre de santé de Koumpentoum USAID. ND. Données mesures de performance centre de santé Koumpentoum USAID. ND. Données mesures de performances du poste de sante de hamdallaye Tessan USAID. 2018. Données mesures de performance centre de santé Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. 2018. Données évaluation des performances des forages de travaux Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. 2018. Données mesures des performances des forages Guinaw rail Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. 2018. Suivi des normes forage Guinaw rail Koumpentoum. RTI USAID. 2018. Données de mesure des performances des forages de Gouloumbou et Missirah. RTI USAID. 2018. Données de mesure des performances des forages de Bidiankoto. RTI USAID. 2018. Données de mesure de performances du poste de sante de Sankagne 2018. RTI USAID. 2018. Données de mesure de performances poste santé de Bira. RTI USAID. 2018. Données mesures de performances du poste de sante de Missirah. RTI USAID. 2018. Données mesures de performances poste de sante de Gouloumbou.RTI USAID. ND. Tableau de synthèse de l’évaluation des mesures de performance du forage de sinthiou maleme USAID. ND. Tableau de synthèse de l’évaluation des mesures de performance du forage de BOTOU USAID. ND. Tableau de synthèse de l’évaluation des mesures de performance du poste de sante Sinthiou Maleme USAID.2017. Rapport régional de la mesure de performance des collectivités territoriales de la région de Tambacounda, Edition 2016. April. ARD Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 134 USAID. 2018. Atelier de collecte des données et de restitution des résultats de la mesure de. TAMBA. RTI USAID. 2017-2018. GOLD BBGI Baselines: • Diaobe 22-24 February 2018 • Linkering, ND. • Medina Gounas 21-23 February 2018 • Pata, ND. • Salémata, ND. • Sare Yoba Diega, 10-13 February 2018 • Sinthiang Koundara, 24-26 February 2017? • Thietty, 3-5 February 2018 • Missirah, 18-19 May 2017? • Koumpentoum (Tambacounda), 15-16 May 2017? • Bakel, Avril 2018. • Ballou, Avril 2018. • Bamba Thialène, Février 2018. • Bele Février 2018 • Goudiry, Avril 2018. • Kothiary, Janvier 2018. • Mereto. Février 2018 • TAMBA. Février 2018 • Koussanar. Février 2018. • Sinthiou Malem. Février 2018. • Bamba Thialène. Février 2018. • Sinthiou Bocar Aly. Mars 2018. • Bala. Mars 2018. USAID. 2017. GOLD Rapport : Situation sur l’état de mobilisation et de gestion des ressources publiques, Dakar : RTI, 2017. • Bagadadji, Kolda • Medina-Cherif, Kolda • Bambali, Sedhiou • Tanaff, Sedhiou • Koumpentoum, Tamba • Missirah, Tamba • Dindefelo, Kédougou • Salémata, Kédougou USAID. ND. Compte rendu et évaluation POA • Compte rendu de l’atelier d’élaboration du plan intégré de formation des IPS • Compte rendu atelier régional planification GOLD Kolda • Compte rendu formation Wash Bagadadji • Compte rendu Rencontre de Synergie GOLD-Kawolor Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 135 • Compte Rendu rencontres Kawolor ACCES et GOLD • Compte rendu Réunion de validation du modèle de base de données Bona • Compte Rendu réunion de validation du modèle de base de données MYF • Evaluation de l’apport fiscal des femmes dans les communes • Evaluation POA du forage de Bagadadji, juin 2019 • Evaluation POA du forage d’Ibrahima Nima • Evaluation POA forage Sare Sandiong • Evaluation POA poste de santé Bagadadji • Evaluation POA poste de santé Nima Documents de formation, rapports, comptes rendus et feuilles de présence ARMP. ND. Directives en matière d’analyse de la capacité financière, proposées pour les marchés de travaux grande taille ARMP. ND. Demande de proposition des marchés de prestations intellectuelles de montant important, les nouveaux éléments du dossier type de la demande de proposition ARMP. ND. Contrat de services pour les actions extérieures de l’union européenne. Contrat n001/nd/2015/armp/draj/fed finance par le Fed ARMP. ND. Présentation Thème 1- Généralités et bonne gourvernance dans les marchés publics, présenté par Thierno Ousmane Sy ARMP. ND. Présentation Thème 2- Rôle et Responsabilités de la PRM ARMP. ND. Présentation Thème 3- Rôle et Responsabilités de la CPM ARMP. ND. Présentation Thème 4- Rôle et Responsabilités de la CM USAID. 2018. Feuille de présence atelier d’application de l’outil BBGI au paludisme à Bagadadji, RTI USAID. 2019. Feuille de présence du suivi de mise en œuvre plan d’actions Wash commune de Bagadadji USAID. ND. Feuilles de présence du Groupe 1 BBGI Bagadadji USAID. ND. Feuilles de présence du Groupe 2 BBGI Bagadadji USAID. ND. Feuilles Présence BBGI Bagadadji USAID. ND. Feuilles Présence BBGI Diaobé-Kabendou USAID. ND. Feuilles Présence BBGI Pata USAID. ND. Feuille de présence POCL J1 Koumpentoum USAID. ND. Feuille de présence POCL J2 Koumpentoum Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 136 USAID. ND. Feuille de présence POCL J1 Tamba USAID. ND. Feuille de présence POCL J2 Tamba USAID. 2019. Formation des membres des comités de pilotage des trois forages de la commune de Bambali sur la GAF de l’ouvrage et la nouvelle réforme de l’hydraulique rurale, Mai 2019 USAID. 2019. Liste présence de la formation des membres des GCP de Pata sur l’approche CVA, juin 2019 USAID. ND. Manuel du participant sur la passation de marché USAID. ND. Manuel du participant sur la Gestion Administrative et financière USAID. 2019. Rapport d’atelier de formation des membres des comités de développement sanitaire (CDS) : Rapport d’activité session de la commune de Vélingara. 16-18 Janvier. USAID. 2017. Formation des membres du cadre de concertation de la commune de Bagadadji sur l’approche CVA et sur leurs rôles et responsabilités. 22-23 Juin. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport: Atelier d’administration du Baromètre de Bonne Gouvernance Intégré (BBGI) Commune de Pata. 24-26 Février. USAID. 2018. Rapport d’activités : Bagadadji Cadre de concertation. 2-5 July. USAID. 2018. DRAFT Plan action Hydraulique rurale-CVA forage. 18 July. USAID. 2019. Ateliers régionaux de renforcement des capacités des OSCs (des régions de Kédougou, Kolda et Saint-Louis) sur l’outil de Certification citoyenne du projet PACT et sur l’Observatoire citoyen numériques sur l’Eau et l’Assainissement. 17-26 janvier 2019 USAID. ND. Module de formation sur le rôle et responsabilités de la Cellule de Passation de Marché. Formateur : Thierno Ousmane Sy USAID. ND. Module de formation sur le rôle et responsabilités de la Personne responsable des Passations de Marché. Formateur : Thierno Ousmane Sy USAID. ND. Module de formation sur les généralités et bonne gouvernances dans les marchés publics. Formateur : Thierno Ousmane Sy USAID. 2018. Atelier de formation des membres des groupes citoyens de plaidoyer sur l’approche CVA, le suivi des normes et l’évaluation des mesures de performances. 23-24-25 février 2019 dans la Commune de Bagadadji USAID. 2018. Rapport : Formation des membres du cadre de concertation de la commune de Pata. 16- 17 August. Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 137 USAID. 2018. Rapport : Formation des membres du cadre de concertation de la commune de Diaobe Kabendou. 13-14 Septembre. USAID. 2018. Rapport de l’atelier de formation des maires et prestataire sur les CDS du district sanitaire de Vélingara. December to Janvier. USAID. 2019. Rapport d’activités : rencontres de coordination et d’évaluation des plans d’actions d’engagement communautaire CVA : Medina Cherif et Bagadadji. Mars. USAID. ND. Suivi des Changements (Outcomes) Formation des commissions techniques et des comités locaux de la commune de Salémata USAID. ND. Compte rendu formation WASH Bagadadji. USAID. ND. Activités réalisées par le programme USAID/GOLD dans la Commune de Bagadadji. USAID. ND. Manuel du Participant sur la gestion administrative et financière. USAID. ND. Manuel du Participant sur la passation de marches. USAID. 2018. Rapport : Formation des commissions techniques, des agents municipaux et locaux en charge de la planification et du WASH sur leurs rôles et responsabilités et le genre sensible en WASH dans la commune de Bagadadji. Février. GOLD and NRCE USAID. ND. Programme de Formation-Séminaire Passation des Marchés - Bonne gouvernance - Rôles et responsabilités des organes -USAID du 1er au 2 septembre USAID. 2018. Rapport de formation des commissions techniques, des agents municipaux, des comités locaux en charge de la planification et du Wash (eau, hygiène et assainissement) dans la commune de Koumpentoum, janvier. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport de formation des commissions techniques et des comités locaux de la commune de Missirah en charge des questions de Wash (eau, hygiène et assainissement) Février. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport formation en passation des marchés en direction des élus locaux à Tamba, Septembre. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport mission de formation ACT, FC et SM sur les outils et approche Gold à Tamba, Septembre. RTI USAID. 2019. Rapport atelier de renforcement des capacités techniques des collectivités territoriales (communes et conseils départementaux partenaires de la région de Tambacounda dans l'élaboration de compte administratif et la préparation du processus budgétaire 2019 USAID. 2018. Compte rendu du forum communal de Ndam, Décembre 2018. RTI USAID. 2018. Compte rendu du forum communal de Mereto, Décembre 2018 Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 138 USAID. 2019. Compte rendu du forum communal de Bele. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu du forum de Kothiary. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu du forum de Koussanar. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu du forum des partenaires et investisseurs des collectivités territoriales de Tamba. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu du forum de Missirah, Janvier 2019 USAID. 2019. Compte rendu atelier de renforcement des capacités des élus et acteurs communautaires sur la GAF dans le cadre du FOG signé entre l’USAID, GOLD et l’ARD de Tambacounda. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu atelier de renforcement des capacités des élus et acteurs communautaires sur la GAF à Bakel. RTI USAID. 2019. Rapport d’activités ateliers départementaux de renforcement de capacités sur la passation des marchés publics. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu de la mission de recensement des contribuables IMF4 à Bamba Thialène. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu de la mission de recensement des contribuables IMF4 à Koussanar, RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu de la mission de recensement des contribuables IMF4 à Sinthiou Bocar Aly. GOLD.RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu de la mission de recensement des contribuables IMF4 à Ballou. RTI USAID. 2019. Compte rendu de la mission de recensement des contribuables IMF4 à Bala. GOLD.RTI USAID. ND. Compte rendu formation sur l’approche CVA Koumpentoum USAID. ND. Rapport formation atelier de renforcement des capacités des élus et acteurs communautaires sur la GAF dans le cadre du FOG signé entre USAID/GOLD et l’ARD de Tambacounda (Koumpentoum). RTI USAID. ND. Rapport formation atelier de renforcement des capacités des élus et acteurs communautaires sur la GAF dans le cadre du FOG signé entre USAID/GOLD et l’ARD de Tambacounda (Bakel). RTI USAID. ND. Rapport de la formation des relais portant sur la CPS. GOLD. RTI USAID. ND. Rapport de la formation du comité de pilotage de Missirah sur l’approche CVA. RTI USAID. ND. Rapport de la première journée de la formation sur le SMNI (Missirah). RTI USAID. ND. Rapport de la troisième journée de l’approche CVA (Missirah). RTI USAID. 2017. Rapport de la formation des groupes de plaidoyer sur le CVA. RTI Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 139 USAID. ND. Rapport formation membre cadre de concertation Mereto USAID. 2018. Compte tendu atelier d’orientation POCL SANTE de Tamba, Mars. RTI USAID. 2018. Rapport d’atelier d’élaboration des POCL Santé, Mars. RTI USAID. 2019. Feuille de présence formation GAF. RTI • Formation GAF J1 BAKEL • Formation GAF J2 BAKEL • Formation GAF J3 BAKEL • Formation GAF J1 Koumpentoum • Formation GAF J2 Koumpentoum • Formation GAF J3 Koumpentoum • Formation GAF J1 Tamba • Formation GAF J2 Tamba • Formation GAF J3 à Tamba USAID. 2018. Feuille de présence formation sur la passation de marché. RTI • Formation sur la passation de marché pour les régions de Kédougou et Tamba, J1 • Formation sur la passation de marché à Bakel, J1 • Formation sur la passation de marché à Bakel, J2 • Formation sur la passation de marché à Bakel, J3 • Formation sur la passation de marché à Koumpentoum, J1 • Formation sur la passation de marché à Koumpentoum, J2 • Formation sur la passation de marché à Koumpentoum, J3 USAID. ND. Feuille de présence activité de recensement. RTI • Recensement IMF4 Bala • Recensement IMF4 Balou • Recensement IMF4 Bamba Thialène • Recensement IMF4 Koussanar • Recensement IMF4 Sinthiou Bocar Aly USAID. 2019. Rapports mensuels facilitateur Tamba. RTI • Rapport mensuel facilitateur Koumpentoum, Avril • Rapport mensuel facilitateur Koumpentoum, février • Rapport mensuel facilitateur Koumpentoum, janvier • Rapport mensuel facilitateur Koumpentoum, Juin • Rapport mensuel facilitateur Koumpentoum, Mai • Rapport mensuel facilitateur département Tamba, Avril • Rapport mensuel facilitateur département Tamba, Février • Rapport mensuel facilitateur département Tamba, Janvier • Rapport mensuel facilitateur département Tamba, Juillet Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 140 • Rapport mensuel facilitateur département Tamba, Juin • Rapport mensuel facilitateur département Tamba, Mai • Rapport mensuel facilitateur département Tamba, Mars USAID. 2018. Rapports mensuels facilitateur. RTI • Rapport mensuel facilitateur Koumpentoum, décembre • Rapport mensuel facilitateur Koumpentoum, Novembre • Rapport mensuel facilitateur Koumpentoum, Octobre • Rapport mensuel facilitateur département de Tamba Governance for Local Development Midterm Performance Evaluation 141 ANNEX VIII: DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST No conflict of interest listed. U.S. Agency for International Development 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20523