1 MID-TERM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE LEADERSHIP, EMPOWERMENT, ADVOCACY AND DEVELOPMENT (LEAD) PROJECT FINAL REPORT December 2013 This publication was made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United State Agency for International Development (USAID/Nigeria) under the Nigeria Monitoring and Evaluation Management Services II Project (NMEMSII) implemented by The Mitchell Group INC., Contract No. 620-M-00-00001-00. The author’s views in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United State Government. i Mid-term Performance Evaluation of the Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy and Development (LEAD) Project Prepared by USAID/Nigeria’s Monitoring and Evaluation Project II (MEMS II) Project Contract No. 620-M-00-11-00001-00 The Mitchell Group, Inc. (TMG) Final Report DISCLAIMER The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the Unites States Agency for International Development of the Unites States Government. ii Contents Contents …………………………………………………………………………… ii Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………………… iii Acronyms …………………………………………………………………………… iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY …………………………………………………………… 1 Evaluation Purpose …………………………………………………………… 1 Project Background …………………………………………………………… 1 Evaluation Question, Design, Methods and Limitations …………………………… 1 Design …………………………………………………………………………… 2 Methodology and Limitations …………………………………………………… 2 Findings and Conclusions …………………………………………………………… 2 EVALUATION PURPOSE & EVALUATION QUESTIONS …………………………… 4 Evaluation Purpose ………………………………………………………… 4 Evaluation Questions …………………………………………………………… 4 PROJECT BACKGROUND …………………………………………………………… 5 The Development Context ………………………………………………………… 5 Leads Objectives …………………………………………………………………… 7 Funding …………………………………………………………………………… 7 EVALUATION METHODS & LIMITATIONS …………………………………… 8 Overview …………………………………………………………………………… 8 Assessment Team …………………………………………………………………… 9 Methodology …………………………………………………………………… 9 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS …………………… 11 Findings …………………………………………………………………………… 11 Conclusions …………………………………………………………………… 33 Recommendations …………………………………………………………… 35 ANNEX I: Evaluation Scope of Work …………………………………………… 1-17 ANNEX II: Evaluation Work Plan …………………………………………………… 18-30 ANNEX III: Bibliography of Documents Collected and Reviewed ………………… 31-39 ANNEX IV: People Interviewed …………………………………………………… 40-48 ANNEX V: LGDF Web Diagrams for CLGAs …………………………………… 49-50 ANNEX VI: OCA Web Diagrams for CSOs …………………………………… 51-52 ANNEX VII: Summary of LGA and Focus Group Discussions …………………… 53-78 ANNEX VIII: Reports on Sokoto, Bauchi Water Point Special Study …………… 79-112 ANNEX IX: Selected Photographs from Site Visits and LEAD Records …………… 113-114 ANNEX X: LEAD Project Organogram …………………………………………… 115-118 ANNEX XI: Local Government Areas and Ward Committees …………………… 119-128 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Evaluation Team was composed of Edward Birgells, Team Leader; Dr. Kabir Mato, Team Member; and Dr. Adewale Adeogun, Team Member. They were supported in their field work by Murtala Dangulle, water assessor in Sokoto; Haliru Ibrahim Gidadawo, focus group discussion coordinator in Sokoto; and Ahmed Danladi Water and Yaya Abubakar, water assessors in Bauchi. The evaluation team appreciated the oversight of Evan Scott Thomas, MEMS II Chief of Party, as well as the support of Zakariya Zakari, Deputy Chief of Party, and Nura Nasir, Senior M&E Specialist, who trained focus group facilitators and coordinated team logistics. They were also appreciative of the help provided by Olayinka Martins, RTI’s M&E Specialist, who facilitated data collection and collation. In addition, the team wishes to thank Mr. Adamu Igoche, USAID’s Agreement Officer’s Representative for the LEAD project, for his participation in the evaluation team’s field work in Bauchi and his overall support to evaluation activities. The LEAD Evaluation Team also is grateful to the following organizations and individuals for their assistance to the TEAM throughout the duration of the Evaluation:  Chief of Party and staff of the LEAD project  Governments of Sokoto and Bauchi States  Civil Society Organizations visited  Community Groups visited iv Acronyms A/COR    Agreement / Contracting Officer’s Representative BASNEC   Bauchi State Network of Civil Society Groups BWG     Budget Working Group CBO     Community Based Organization CBP     Capacity Building Plan CBSP     Community Based Strategic Plan CDC     Community Development Committees CLGA     Champion Local Government Area CONSS    Coalition of Networks of NGO in Sokoto State CPMCW   Centre for the Promotion of Maternal and Child Welfare CSO     Civil Society Organization FAWOYDI   Fahimta Women & Youth Development Initiative FSS      Focus States Strategy HIV                   Human Immuno Deficiency Virus IGR     Internally Generated Revenue LEAD       Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy and Development LGA     Local Government Area LGDF     Local Government Development Framework MDAs      Ministries, Departments and Agencies NEI     Northern Education Initiative NGO     Non‐ Governmental Organization NMEMS II   Nigeria Monitoring and Evaluation Management Services II            OCA     Organizational Capacity Assessment ODAP     Organizational Development Action Planning v PDG     Peace and Democratic Governance PMP     Performance Management Plan RTI     Research Triangle Institute RUWASSA   Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Agency SDT     Service Delivery Team SIDHAS   Strengthening Integrated Delivery of HIV/AIDS SIP     Service Improvement Plan SUBEB     State Universal Basic Education Board TEAM     The Evaluation Team TSHIP     Targeted State High Impact Project USAID     United States Agency for International Development WASH     Water Sanitation and Hygiene WASHCOM   Water Sanitation and Hygiene Committee WDC     Ward Development Committee YMCA     Young Men’s Christian Association Page | 1 Executive Summary Evaluation Purpose The purpose of this “mid-term” evaluation of the Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy and Development Project (LEAD) is to evaluate achievement towards expected results and document best practices and lessons learned during the project’s implementation. Specifically the evaluation has assessed the project’s results against its targets; effectiveness of project interventions; quality of project management; implications or impact of security vulnerabilities on project implementation and performance; and the impact of coordination and collaboration on results achieved. The evaluation also provides guidance and options for consideration for future local governance program interventions. Project Background USAID/Nigeria, as part of its 2010-2013 strategy, is implementing the Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy and Development Project (LEAD). The objective of LEAD is to improve local governance by working with state and local governments to: 1) Strengthen capacity of governments to build better relations with communities, promote effectiveness and strengthen management capacity of service departments, 2) Increase transparency of local government operations through a more participatory budget process based on sound analysis of services and revenue potential; strengthen the capacity of state governments to monitor budget expenditures and promote greater transparency in local government, 3) Bring constitutionally mandated Fiscal Responsibility and Public Procurement Laws to the local government level, 4) Strengthen the organizational and service capacity of a broad range of organizations at the state and local level for service planning, budgeting and monitoring, and 5) Service improvements in health and education through collaboration with other Focused State Projects and support local governments in selected services such as water and sanitation. LEAD is part of the Focus States Strategy (FSS) that USAID/Nigeria is implementing in Bauchi and Sokoto States in northern Nigeria. The FSS is a governance model created to demonstrate and achieve efficiency and synergy in programming by concentrating USAID resources in States that USAID believes resources can be effectively used. The current FSS model incorporates health, education and local government development programs. Evaluation Questions, Design, Methods and Limitations Question 1: What are the outcomes of the LEAD intervention in terms of strengthening capacity for planning, budgeting and implementation, mobilizing civil society organizations and assistance in planning, budgeting and financing resulting in improvement in service delivery? Sub-questions: a) To what extent are LEAD activities sufficient for achieving USAID/Nigeria’s democracy and governance objectives, as well as USAID/Nigeria’s governance approach? b) How have the project’s interventions increased access to government services and interventions? Question 2: How successful is the project’s engagement with key stakeholders including the State Government, Local Government and Civil Society Organizations? Page | 2 Question 3: How successful were the project’s management systems, organizational policies and procedures in facilitating the achievement of expected results and overall project goals? Sub-questions: a) How has coordination and collaboration with other projects and other donors in the focus states impacted the LEAD project’s outcomes? b) The Focus States Assessment found that there are significant differences in the governance environment in Sokoto and Bauchi. How have these governance issues affected implementation, and what lessons can be learned for the future? Question 4: What important lessons can we derive from implementation of the LEAD intervention regarding security and its impact on the achievement of the project’s objectives and how sustainable are the project’s interventions? Sub-questions: a) LEAD indicators largely track process activities. What new indicators may be useful in the next project to measure improvements in State and Local government service provision? b) What activities were less successful, and what recommendations can be made to achieve their purposes in the future? Design The Evaluation Team developed a work plan and methodology to answer the evaluation questions related to the purpose of the evaluation. Specifically, the Evaluation Team:  Assessed project results against defined targets contained in the approved Performance Monitoring Plan  Assessed the effectiveness of the project’s interventions  Assessed the quality of the project’s management  Assessed the impact of security vulnerabilities on the project’s implementation and performance  Assessed the Impact of coordination and collaboration on the results achieved  Provided guidance and options for future local governance program interventions Methodology and Limitations The Evaluation Team used a qualitative approach to address the evaluation questions and the accomplishment of the intermediate results and indicators found in the Results Framework. The methodology consisted of interviews and focus group discussions with staff members, key government officials and members of civil society organizations (CSOs), supported up by a thorough desk study of relevant documentation and performance indicators. Findings and Conclusions Project Results Against Defined Targets: The LEAD Performance Monitoring Plan identifies twenty indicators measuring the performance of four Intermediate Results and eight sub-Intermediate Results. Nine of the indicators have been met and exceeded their life of project targets based on 2011 and 2012 data. More indicators will meet targets when 2013 data is analyzed. The LEAD project is on schedule to meet and exceed most of the remaining targets. Page | 3 The Effectiveness of Project Interventions: The LEAD project has introduced a participatory local government development model to the two focus states, which has resulted in synergies effectively linking state and local governments with civil society and community groups. The LEAD project’s approach, involving problem assessment, capacity building and results monitoring, has led to the strengthened capacity of ten target “champion local government areas” selected in 2010. An additional ten local government areas were added to the champions list in 2012, with the result that the LEAD project is now working with 20 out of the 43 local government areas in the two states. The project has facilitated the improvement of internal structures and the strategic planning capacity of local government agencies; increased the transparency of local government operations; increased local government revenues; increased the capacity of local organizations; and improved service delivery, particularly in the water sector. The LEAD project is proving to be an effective model with the potential for replication. Political forces outside of USAID or beyond the control of the LEAD project’s management have been the principal issues limiting the effectiveness of LEAD. The biggest issues have been State control over the Joint State/Local Government Budget; and the continuous transfer of trained staff from champion local governments to other local governments. In Bauchi, an additional issue is the appointment of local government leadership by the State, rather than the installation of elected representatives as mandated by the Nigerian constitution. The Quality of Project Management: Approximately a third of LEAD staff positions are vacant. This is a function of difficulties in recruitment, retention of staff, and funding issues. The LEAD project needs to be more consistent in its training programs and the development of content for these programs. Security Vulnerabilities on Project Implementation and Performance: Security issues have had an impact on project implementation and performance, particularly in Bauchi. Programs have been delayed as more care is put into the location and timing of workshops and training events. USAID has been limited in its ability to effectively monitor programs due to travel limitations. There is evidence that internally generated revenues, a key component of the project, have been impacted due to security concerns of Bauchi business people. USG programs are not being targeted by insurgents. There is no reason to assume, given the current security posture in the States, that the LEAD project cannot have a sustainable impact. Given the upsurge in terrorist activity in Saharan Africa, security will continue to be a factor in Nigeria’s programs. Security will have an impact on how USAID measures impact in its Performance Monitoring Plans. The Impact of Coordination and Collaboration on Results Achieved: The LEAD project is coordinating and collaborating well with the other Focus States partners in health and education. This was documented in the Focus States Strategy Assessment. The LEAD project has worked closely with the World Bank Capacity Building Program, which is providing assistance to senior level officials in Bauchi on financial sector reform. The LEAD project is planning to increase its coordination in the water and sanitation sectors with other USAID programs, WASH and SUWASSA, as well as with other donors, which are funding major water and sanitation activities in both Bauchi and Sokoto. This will require support from USAID technical offices, which USAID/Nigeria’s Peace and Democratic Governance Team should initiate and coordinate. Guidance and Options for Future Local Governance Program Interventions: The LEAD project has demonstrated its potential to be an effective local government development model. In its pilot phase it has gained wide acceptance and had a positive impact in both Sokoto and Bauchi States. Making local government more effective is essential to good governance in Nigeria, since it is the only Page | 4 exposure most Nigerians have to government. The LEAD project’s approach should form the core of future USAID governance and service delivery programs in Nigeria. Governance issues need to be addressed strategically, and the LEAD project should be expanded to States in the six geo-political zones of Nigeria. Networks of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) should be developed in each of the zones. Programs to inform opinion makers about the impact of the LEAD project need to be developed. The private sector needs to become more involved in the project’s activities. Programs of other USAID technical offices need to be linked to supporting good governance. Therefore, the USAID Mission should develop a new Focus States Strategy. There were marked weaknesses in the prior Strategy which need to be addressed. These have been identified in the Focus States Strategy Assessment and in other documentation prepared under the Nigeria Monitoring and Evaluation Management Services II (NMEMSII). Evaluation Purpose & Evaluation Questions Evaluation Purpose The purpose of this “mid-term” evaluation of the Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy and Development (LEAD) project is to evaluate achievement towards expected results and document best practices and lessons learned during the project’s implementation. Specifically, the evaluation has assessed the project’s results against its targets; effectiveness of the project’s interventions; quality of the project’s management; implications or impact of security vulnerabilities on project implementation and performance; and the impact of coordination and collaboration on results achieved. The evaluation also provides guidance and options for consideration for future local governance program interventions. The primary users of the evaluation are USAID/Nigeria’s Peace and Democratic Governance (PDG) Team, and Program Office. USAID will use the findings and the lessons learned for managing activities in high threat and conflict environments. The evaluation will be instructive for mid-course corrections and project management going forward. The evaluation provides evidence of results achieved, successes, challenges and lessons learned, which will be used to readjust the project’s activities. Other key stakeholders and partners will use the findings to strengthen coordination and collaboration with government and other donor programs to ensure achieving sustainable optimum results. Evaluation Questions To the degree possible gender considerations were analyzed in conjunction with the evaluation questions. The key evaluation questions are: Question 1: What are the outcomes of the LEAD intervention in terms of strengthening capacity for planning, budgeting and implementation, mobilizing civil society organizations and assistance in planning, budgeting and financing resulting in improvement in service delivery? Sub-questions: c) To what extent are LEAD activities sufficient for achieving USAID/Nigeria’s democracy and governance objectives, as well as USAID/Nigeria’s governance approach? Page | 5 d) How have the project’s interventions increased access to government services and interventions? Question 2: How successful is the project’s engagement with key stakeholders, including the State Government, Local Government and Civil Society Organizations? Question 3: How successful were the project’s management systems, organizational policies and procedures in facilitating the achievement of expected results and overall project goal? Sub-questions: c) How has coordination and collaboration with other projects and other donors in the focus states impacted LEAD project’s outcomes? d) The Focus States Assessment found that there are significant differences in the governance environment in Sokoto and Bauchi How have these governance issues affected implementation, and what lessons can be learned for the future? Question 4: What important lessons can we derive from implementation of the LEAD intervention regarding security and its impact on the achievement of the project’s objectives and how sustainable are project interventions? Sub‐questions:   a) LEAD indicators largely track process activities. What new indicators may be useful in the next project to measure improvements in State and Local government service provision?   b) What activities were less successful, and what recommendations can be made to achieve their purposes in the future? Project Background The Development Context Corruption remains the bane of good governance in Nigeria. Poor governance has impoverished the Nigerian masses, created a gulf between the haves and have-nots, and completely eroded the provision of basic social services including education, healthcare, and economic infrastructure. State and local governments that are responsible for the provision of these services are neither equipped nor prepared to carry out their responsibilities. Citizens lack the capacity to articulate their needs or hold their government accountable. Modalities for disbursement of funds and the management of such funds are not standardized across states and local governments. All these leave a wide gap in fiscal transparency thereby enriching corrupt government officials. The objectives of USAID/Nigeria’s development strategy (2010-2013) are to increase access to quality social services; improve the rule of law and responsive governance; and expand community empowerment. Improving governance is the key cross-cutting objective, if sector programs are to succeed. Creating synergies to build the capacity of government to deliver these services is an essential objective of the strategy and a key premise upon which all local government programs are based. Page | 6 The strategy calls for engagement with state and local governments, civil society, and the private sector. Approaches include:  Build the capacity of key officials to plan, budget, track, manage and evaluate their fiscal and administrative responsibilities  Reinforce policies and systems to improve transparency  Mobilize civil society and the private sector to participate in community planning and budgeting, monitoring, financial flows and assess the quality of services rendered  Assist civil society groups to hold elected officials responsible for their actions Based upon criteria such as governance, need, Nigerian Government priorities and foreign policy priorities, USAID selected Bauchi and Sokoto States in which to focus its health, education and governance interventions. A Focus States Strategy (FSS) was developed to create a governance model to demonstrate and achieve, effectiveness, efficiency, and synergy in programming by concentrating resources in Bauchi and Sokoto States. The Focus State Strategy was assessed earlier this year. 1 Three regional flagship projects valued at $169 million formed the core of the FSS. These are:  Targeted States High Impact Project (TSHIP); $85,453,015; August 2009-August 2014  Northern Education Initiative (NEI); $43,598,500; November, 2009-September, 2013  Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy, and Development (LEAD); $39,955,377; November, 2009-November 2014. Three additional national level projects with activities in Bauchi and Sokoto States were also incorporated into the FSS. These are:  Strengthening Integrated Delivery of HIV/AIDS Services (SIDHAS); National Funding: $224,400,034; September, 2011-September, 2016  Water Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH); National Funding $3,877,270; September, 2009-March, 2014  Fistula Care (Fistula); National Funding: $17, 143,300; September, 2007-September, 2013 Leadership, Empowerment, Advocacy and Development (LEAD): The LEAD project is working in eight Local Government Areas (LGA) in Bauchi State and twelve in Sokoto State. Local Government Areas represent the third tier of government in Nigeria, after the federal and state level. There are 774 LGAs in Nigeria, each representing populations from 150,000 to 800,000 people. Sokoto State has twenty three LGAs and Bauchi State has twenty, for a total of forty three LGAs. Each LGA is headed by a chairman who acts as chief executive of the LGA. The legislative functions are performed by a council. The offices of the chairman and councilors are elected posts, and it is the responsibility of the Governors in each state to call elections. Several States, including Bauchi, do not have elected councils and the chairmen and the councilors are appointed as caretaker committees. The functions of the LGAs are to provide basic public services for citizens. The LGA councils have the power to collect taxes and other levies within their locality. The major source of funds for local 1Focus States Assessment, Final Report, the Mitchell Group, MEMS II, March, 2013. Page | 7 governments is from the Federation Accounts. Other revenue sources are from Internally Generated Revenues (IGR) such as taxes and fees. IGR are a small percentage of the total revenue for LGAs. However, due to reduced levels from the Federal Accounts to the States, generating more IGR is becoming an objective of many state and local governments to augment the shortfall from the Federation Account. The ward is the smallest political structure, consisting of a geographical area with a population of 10,000 to 30,000 people. Each LGA has on average 10 wards under its jurisdiction. Each ward is represented by a councilor in the LGA. The Ward Development Committee consists of representatives from Village Development Committees and serves as the supreme body for development activities carried out in the ward. It is linked to the LGA through a representative serving on the LGA Management Committee. The LEAD Project’s Objectives: The goal of the LEAD project is to improve local governance by working with state and local governments to:  Strengthen capacity of governments to build better relations with communities, promote effectiveness and strengthen management capacity of service departments. The LEAD project works with state governments on legislative changes that provide more citizens access to information on local decision making  Increase transparency of local government operations through a more participatory budget process based on sound analysis of services and revenue potential; strengthen the capacity of state governments to monitor budget expenditures and promote greater transparency in local government. The LEAD project works to bring constitutionally mandated Fiscal Responsibility and Public Procurement Laws to the local government level  Strengthen the organizational and service capacity of a broad range of organizations at the state and local level for service planning, budgeting and monitoring  Service improvements in health and education through collaboration with other FSS projects and support LGA in selected services such as water and sanitation The LEAD project’s development hypothesis (see LEAD Project Results Framework, illustrated below) is that by addressing both the demand and supply side of local government service, accountability and development will be strengthened, which makes the system work more effectively through partnership building. The LEAD project’s Performance Monitoring Plan (PMP) for May1, 2010, through November 11, 2014, identifies intermediate results, sub results and indicators, which are shown in the Results Framework presented on the next page. Funding: As of June 30, 2013, USAID/Nigeria had obligated $25,912,913 for the LEAD project activities in Bauchi and Sokoto states. A summary of disbursements by Intermediate Results is as follows: Disbursements by Intermediate Result (IR) Bauchi Sokoto Total   IR1 $    4,432,651 $    3,259,784 $     7,692,435 IR2 $    3,803,457 $    2,609,903 $     6,413,360 IR3 $    2,539,314 $    1,657,245 $     4,196,560 IR4 $    3,364,209 $    2,694,081 $     6,058,290 Total   $  14,139,632 $  10,221,013 $  24,360,645 Source: Figures provided by RTI. Costs include management and home office costs for each IR. Page | 8 LEAD Project Results Framework Source: LEAD Project Indictor 3.1.1: Number of local mechanisms supported with USG assistance for citizen to engage their local government RTI LEAD Project Result: Local Government Foundation of Democratic Governance in Targeted States (Bauchi and Sokoto) of Nigeria Strengthened Indictor 3.1.3: Number of Participatory Planning Sessions conducted Indictor 4.1.2: Number of water point maintenance as a result of technical assistance by the project Indictor (GJD) 1.1.1: Number of sub￾national government entities receiving USG assistance to improve their performance Indictor 2.1.1: Number of community priority projects included in the LGA budget Indictor 3.1.2: Number of local groups support by sub-grantees Indictor 4.1.1: Number of people in target area with access to improved drinking water supply as a result of USG assistance Indictor (GJD) 1.1.2: Number of government officials receiving USG supported anti-corruption training Sub-IR 1.1: Targeted local governments’ strategic capacity improved Sub-IR 2.1: Targeted LGA budget and fiscal planning skills improved Sub-IR 3.1: Partnership between CSOs and LGAs strengthened Sub-IR 4.1: Local involvement in infrastructure rehabilitation increased Indictor (GJD) 1.2.1: Number of training days provided to executive branch personnel with USG assistance Sub-IR 1.2: Targeted local governments’ internal structures improved Indictor 2.2.1: Percentage change in internally generated revenue in LGA Sub-IR 2.2: Locally Generated Revenue increased Indictor 3.2.1 (GJD): Number of people affiliated with non-governmental organizations receiving USG supported anti-corruption training Indictor 3.2.3: Number of mobilization activities conducted by partner CSOs Indictor 3.2.2: Number of advocacy activities conducted by partner CSOs Sub-IR 3.2: CSO/NGO advocacy mobilization activities increased Indictor 4.1.3: Number of community associations that actively participate in the process of local infrastructure building Indictor 4.2.2: Number of activities/project jointly implemented by CSO and LGA Indictor 4.2.1: Number of stakeholder groups functioning to establish state and local level policies regarding water and Sub-IR 4.2: Service delivery partnership between LGA and CSO improved IR 1: Capacity of local government strengthened IR 2: Transparency of local government operations and fiscal management increased IR 3: Capacity of local organizations for citizens’ engagements strengthened IR 4: Service delivery improved Indictor 1.A: Aggregate score of target local governments on Local Government Development Framework (LGDF) Indictor 2.A: Number of LGA with standard financial operating procedure Indictor 3.A: Number of CSOs assessed using Organizational Capacity Assessment (OCA) Indictor 4.A: Number of service improvement plans (SIPs) produced by targeted LGAs Page | 9 Evaluation Methods & Limitations Overview The Evaluation Team (TEAM) developed a work plan and methodology to answer the evaluation questions related to the purpose of the evaluation. Specifically the TEAM:  Assessed the project’s results against defined targets contained in the approved Performance Monitoring Plan  Assessed the effectiveness of the project’s interventions  Assessed the quality of the project’s management  Assessed the impact of security vulnerabilities on the project’s implementation and performance  Assessed the impact of coordination and collaboration on the results achieved  Provided guidance and options for future local governance program interventions The TEAM focused on determining the observable intended and unintended outcomes of the LEAD project’s operations at the State, local government and community level in selected Local Government Areas (LGAs) in Sokoto and Bauchi States, with particular reference to:  Strengthening the capacity of the LGAs through participatory strategic planning, council effectiveness training, town hall meetings, and community priority setting  Increasing the transparency of the LGA operations, through increasing internally generated funds, improving the budget process, capacity development to implement fiscal and procurement laws  Strengthening the capacity of local organizations, through Civil Society Organizations’ (CSO) mapping and data base development, CSO organizational assessments, CSO capacity building, grants for community partnerships, and CSO networking and coalition building  Improving water service delivery, through improved water policies at the State level, Service Improvement Plans between LGAs and Ward Development Committees, LGA environmental health policies and collaboration with other USAID and donor Implementing Partners Methodology The TEAM used a qualitative approach to gain insight into the evaluation questions and accomplishment of the intermediate results and indicators found in the Results Framework. The methodology consisted of interviews and focus group discussions with staff members, key government officials and members of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), backed up by a thorough desk study of relevant documentation and performance indicators. The TEAM interviewed 305 people in Sokoto and Bauchi States and reviewed 207 documents. (See Annexes III- Bibliography; and IV- Persons Interviewed). The Team conducted 7 focus group discussions with community groups and civil society organizations in Sokoto and Bauchi. A detailed methodology matrix is provided in Annex II. The key approaches that were used to collect and analyze data for the evaluation are as follows: Review of Background Materials: Project documents relevant to the evaluation were collected for review and analysis, including project designs, scopes of work, annual and quarterly reports, annual work plans, technical and training materials, LEAD gender and social inclusion materials and relevant local government evaluations from other countries, as well as the Focus States Assessment, which was completed earlier this year. Page | 10 Review of Relevant Documentation: The TEAM reviewed key documents relating to the objectives of the evaluation. State and LGA planning documents and development plans, budgets, minutes of meetings were particularly important and were reviewed within the context of the principal areas of the evaluation. Interviews and Field Visits: The TEAM conducted both individual interviews and focus groups. These included meetings with USAID staff in Abuja and the LEAD project staff, State, LGA, CSO, and NGO leaders in Sokoto and Bauchi. The TEAM conducted field work in Sokoto from September 8-17 and in Bauchi from September 18-28. Field work included joint and individual meetings with management and relevant staff of the LEAD project. Subsequent meetings were held with state and local government officials and civil society organizations. The TEAM organized and conducted community level focus group discussions with local government leaders, ward development committee members, State government desk officers for the LEAD project, and representatives of Community Based Organizations (CBOs). The TEAM recruited and trained male and female facilitators for effective interaction with focus group participants. The TEAM focused field visits and focus groups on LGAs, community groups and project sites in Round One LGAs. The LEAD project has been working for four years with these groups and they offered the most promising avenues for assessing project success or failure. In Sokoto LGAs visited were Silame, Wamakko, Bodinga, Dange-Shuni. In Bauchi the TEAM visited Bauchi, Dass, and Ningi. Due to time limitations and travel time required to go to the destinations from the State capitals, the TEAM was not able to visit 50 percent of the LGAs as requested in the evaluation scope of work. Special Study: The MEMS II project funded two Nigerian consultants to review work undertaken by the LGAs and community groups to repair water points in Illela in Sokoto and Katagum in Bauchi. These special studies are included in Annex XIII. Page | 11 Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations Findings Question 1. What are the outcomes of the LEAD intervention in terms of strengthening capacity for planning, budgeting and implementation, mobilizing civil society organizations and assistance in planning, budgeting and financing resulting in improvement in service delivery? Summary of Findings: The LEAD project has introduced a number of inter-related participatory activities that are resulting in State and local governments engaging with communities in the prioritization of projects and in participatory budgeting. The project has been particularly effective in Sokoto, where many feel that the LEAD project is contributing to a cultural change in the relationships between State and local government and communities. The project is extremely popular in both States, and State officials in both Sokoto and Bauchi asked that the LEAD project be extended to all LGAs in the two States. The LEAD project has strengthened local government capacity for strategy development and improved internal structures. The participating Local Government Areas (LGA) are better organizationally, and have greater capacity for planning, budgeting and implementation. Improvements in internal structures are demonstrated by the Local Government Development Framework, where all participating LGAs have shown improvement in overall scores. Most have shown improvements in functional component scores as well. All of the initial group of the LGAs supported by the LEAD project have developed and ratified Community Based Strategic Plans, which demonstrate strengthened strategy development capacity. These Plans should be useful to donors in developing programs in the LGAs. Interviews and focus group discussions show that LGA staff are better trained and understand what their roles are. They are more engaged with communities, and the communities have been empowered. There is a healthy dialogue between local government and communities, particularly in Sokoto. Local government operations are more transparent. Six LGAs in Sokoto have adopted national standard financial operating procedures. The LEAD project has strengthened the capacity of the LGAs in Bauchi to conform to national plans. However, these LGAs have not formally adopted the operating procedures. The LGAs are increasing reliant on Internally Generated Revenue (IGR). The LEAD project assisted the LGAs in identifying sources of funding and establishing a tax base. One LGA -- Ningi, in Bauchi, reported a 27 fold increase in IGR in 2011 and 2012. Also, the LGAs have improved the accountability and transparency of budgets. Mobilization campaigns have been sponsored to inform taxpayers of their responsibilities; to build tax payer support; and to inform citizens of their rights on how their taxes are being spent. The LEAD project has supported the state governments in both Sokoto and Bauchi in the development of water policies, as well as passing Fiscal Responsibility and Procurement Laws to make State laws compatible with national laws. Sokoto passed its Fiscal Responsibility and Procurement Laws earlier this year and is making progress in establishing the institutional mechanisms to implement the laws, whereas Page | 12 the Bauchi State has done little to implement the laws. Similarly, for water policy: The Bauchi Water Policy has been on the books for over a year and little has been done to implement it. In Sokoto, passage of the Water Policy was delayed due to institutional changes in the State government. However, these issues have been resolved and the policy is now with the Executive Council for approval. The TEAM found that the effectiveness of the LGAs has been hampered by the continuous transfer of staff between the LEAD-sponsored LGAs and non-LEAD local governments. The LGA Directors continuously complained about this as weakening their organizational effectiveness. The situation is compounded in Bauchi, where executive staff are also transferred continuously, resulting in a continuous change in leadership. The capacity of Civil Society Organizations has been strengthened. The LEAD project has strengthened the capacity of thirteen CSOs in Bauchi and Sokoto. Through Organizational Capacity Assessment, the LEAD project has worked with the CSOs to identify areas that need improvement in organizational structure. The project has provided capacity building and measured progress. This has led to USAID funded grants to these organizations, resulting in increased CSO involvement at the community level. Due to decreased USAID funding in FY 2013, the LEAD project has ended the processing of sixteen additional grants it was planning. The LEAD project has built the capacity for CSOs to network. The LEAD project supports the Consortium of NGOs in Sokoto (CONSS), and in Bauchi has assisted in the creation of the Bauchi State Network of Civil Society Organizations (BASNEC). The TEAM found that the CSOs are proud to be a part of the LEAD project, and feel they have benefited both organizationally and in their abilities to liaise with State and local government and communities. Service delivery has been improved. Participants at Focus Group Discussions, particularly in Sokoto, were happy to discuss the number of projects that the LGAs have funded in their communities due to priority setting exercises and budget coordination with communities. Sixty community priority projects were included in LGA 2012 budgets in Sokoto and Bauchi. Ten LGAs have developed twenty-eight Service Improvement Plans (SIPs). Most of the Plans focus on the repair and maintenance of nonfunctional water points. By the end of 2012 the LEAD project’s capacity building efforts had assisted the LGAs and communities to rehabilitate 645 water points, which provide water to approximately 225,000 people in Bauchi and Sokoto. In Bauchi 75% of non-functional water points identified have been repaired. In Sokoto only 42 % have been repaired. Additional SIPS have been developed to include other community infrastructure, such as improving markets, abattoirs, parking lots and feeder roads. CSOs have played an important part in mobilizing communities, thus forming important partnerships with both communities and local governments. The TEAM found that community structures in Ilella in Sokoto and Katagum in Bauchi are not functioning as planned. Most are not providing the kind of assistance that communities need to continue with repair and maintenance efforts. Current capacity building and monitoring programs need to be reviewed so that community institutions work as planned. Gender issues are being addressed. Gender mainstreaming and social inclusion have been an important part of the LEAD project. The project’s efforts have sensitized the LGAs to gender issues. Women and the handicapped are part of all planning and capacity building efforts, and women have been appointed to director and sectional head positions in service departments in Bauchi. The TEAM found little evidence of greater participation by women in LGA operations in Sokoto. The TEAM feels this is due to the ultra-conservative nature of the state as well as to local government practices in Sokoto. Althuogh project resources have been focused on local government gender issues, virtually all non- Page | 13 elected positions are appointed by the Sokoto state government. It may be appropriate at this time to expand gender training to state government officials. Detailed Findings: A more detailed analysis and description of the Evaluation findings is presented below. The analysis addresses each Intermediate Result and indicators from the Results Framework. To the extent possible, figures for Sokoto and Bauchi are presented together for comparative purposes. The LEAD project selected the first round of LGAs in 2010. A competition was held, and the program was advertised broadly. Proposals were received from interested LGAs. Selection committees were established consisting of State government officials, academia, civil society, the media and traditional and religious leaders. The winners of the competition are referred to as Champion LGAs (CLGAs). CLGAs were selected on their commitment to improved governance, willingness to assist in rolling out programs to other LGAs, and the presence of other FSS partners in the same areas. Six Round 1 CLGAs were selected for Sokoto – Bodinga, Wamakko, Silame, Dange-Shuni, Illela and Isa. Four Round 1 CLGAs were selected for Bauchi – Bauchi, Ningi, Dass and Katagum In 2012 a second round of CLGAs were selected using the same procedure. Gudu, Goronyo, Rabah, Tambuwal, Sokoto South and Kebbe were selected as Round 2 CLGAs. In Sokoto there are now 12 CLGAs more than half of the total of 23 LGAs in Sokoto. In Bauchi, Gamawa, Jama’are, Misau and Kirfi Intermediate Result 1. Capacity of Local Governments Strengthened Indicator 1: Aggregate score of target local governments on Local Government Development Framework. See Text Sub IR1.1: Targeted local governments strategic capacity improved Indicator 1.1.1: Number of sub-national government entities receiving USG assistance to improve their performance. Target112 sub-national government entities (State, LGA, line ministries, agencies) Actual 186, Bauchi97, Sokoto 89 Indicator 1.1.2: Number of government officials receiving USG supported anti-corruption training. Target 1700 Actual 1344 (Bauchi M:422,F:4,T426; SokotoM:908,F:10, T: 918) Sub IR1.2: Targeted local government internal structures improved Indicator 1.2.1: Number of training days provided to executive branch personnel with USG assistance. Target 55 Actual number is 127 Page | 14 were added as Round 2 CLGAs, bringing the total to eight out of the twenty LGAs in Bauchi. (Verification: Minutes of selection committee meetings) Local Government Development Framework (LGDF) is an assessment tool administered to each of the Round 1and 2 CLGAs. LGDF assesses current institutional conditions, identifies areas for improvement and serves as a baseline for capacity building activities. Seven functional areas are measured: 1) Strategic policy and planning; 2) project planning; 3) institutional and personnel development; 4) assets management; 5) financial management; 6) service delivery; and 7) external relations. Scores range from 1-5. The LGDF has been administered annually to the Round 1 CLGAs and introduced to the Round 2 CLGAs in 2012. Each CLGA assessed their performance in each functional category against established criteria. The assessments were done with participation of CSOs, CBOs and other community groups. Women were part of the assessment groups. IR 1- Indicator1. Aggregate Score of Round 1CLGAs on Local Government Development Framework LGA Baseline Score 2010 Score 2012 % Change LGA Baseline Score 2010 Score 2012 % Change Bauchi 1.6 2.4 50% Bodinga 1.1 2.7 145% Dass 1.9 2.7 42% Denge-Shuni 1.2 2.5 108% Katagum 2.0 2.4 20% Illela 1.2 2.5 108% Ningi 1.5 2.7 80% Isa 1.1 2.6 136% Silame 0.9 2.3 156% Wamakko 1.3 2.8 115% The figures show increased capacity for all CLGAs. However, scores still appear to be below average for all Round 1 CLGAs. The average increase over the two years for Bauchi CLGAs was 48 percent, while Sokoto CLGAs increased their scores by an average of128 percent. The web diagrams contained in Annex V, show change by functional component over the two year period. In some areas, some Bauchi CLGAs improved little or not at all. While in Sokoto the CLGAs showed almost uniform improvement in all categories. (Verification: LEAD reports) Strengthened Local Government Structures: Based on the relatively low scores of the initial LGDF, the LEAD project developed capacity building plans with each of the CLGAs to strengthen their operations in each of the functional component areas. The project held a series of workshops and training programs to facilitate understanding of the inherent problems and to figure out ways to address them. In Sokoto the LEAD project facilitated capacity development with the participation of elected council members, personnel management department officials and staff from the services departments, such as finance, public works, budget and planning, health and education, and CSOs. In Bauchi, since CLGA executive members were not elected, they were not included in the training programs. The Capacity Building Plan (CBP) participation was limited to personnel management, other service departments and civil society. Ministry of Local Government Affairs was the lead State institution for elected officials in Sokoto. The Local Government Service Commissions in both Sokoto and Bauchi were the lead State agencies for staff training. The Ministries of Budget and Economic Planning in their roles as coordinating agencies for State governments were informed of the process. (Verification: LEAD records) At the beginning of the project, the responsibilities of CLGAs were not clearly defined and there was often confusion in overlapping duties. As a result, the LEAD project began Council Effectiveness Training Workshops for newly elected members in Sokoto. The officials are provided tool kits designed to Page | 15 strengthen their capacity in transparency and effectiveness. Participants include chairmen, vice-chairmen and elected councilors. Training includes: the constitutional role of the LGA; elected officials as local leaders; basic council procedures; committees and by-laws; gender and local governance; transparency and accountability principles. Training was also provided for non-elected CLGA staff. (Verification: LEAD records) Local Council and principal administrative officers of Sokoto’s CLGAs, and administrative officers in Bauchi’s CLGAs, informed the TEAM during field visits that the LEAD project training significantly increased their knowledge and improved their skills in governance. The Chairman of the Silame CLGA remarked that “RTI/LEAD gave us the opportunity to know our weaknesses and how to address them”. The Deputy Director for Personnel Management in Bodinga CLGA said that “Before most of us did not know our responsibilities. After LEAD developed the schedule of duties and trained us, all staff come to office regularly now.”(Verification: Report on Institutionalizing Council Effectiveness in Sokoto State. Council effectiveness workshop for local government Council Sokoto State; workshop evaluation pre/posttest questionnaire; LEAD Sokoto State Activity Reports; Materials for council effectiveness training workshops Interviews with LGA officials.) Strengthened Community Structures. In addition to the CLGAs, the LEAD project facilitated the capacity building of 64 Ward Development Committees (WDC) in Sokoto. The project undertook an assessment of each WDC’s technical and management capacities, facilitated the development of operational guidelines and the development of action plans for organizational development. This program has built organizational capacity in the WDCs in improving effectiveness and in advocacy.2 (Verification: WDC work plans. Operational Guidelines for WDCs in the six CLGAs in Sokoto State, Summary of Focus Group Discussions in Sokoto). The LEAD project assisted the CLGAs and community groups to develop structures through which citizens provide input into the CLGA decision-making. These structures include community priority setting mechanisms, such as town hall meetings, public hearings, and strategic planning to ensure citizen inputs into decision making. CSOs in Bauchi and Sokoto have improved relationships and communications between LGAs and community groups. Organizations such as Bauchi State Network of Civil Society Groups (BASNEC) in Bauchi and Coalition of Networks of NGO in Sokoto State (CONSS) in Sokoto are providing advocacy among State, CLGAs and community based organizations. A principal source of funding for advocacy and empowerment programs has come from the LEAD grant program. (Verification: Focus Group Discussions in Sokoto and Bauchi, Discussions with CSOs; Discussions with State government officials) Gender Issues: The LGDF identified gender balance as a critical weakness. The LEAD project worked with each CLGA to insure that gender and social inclusion is mainstreamed into programming. Deliberate efforts were made to get women and other social groups to participate in the CLGA’s activities. These efforts include the inclusion of women’s CSOs in Council deliberations, inclusion of women on the CLGA service committees. The project also provided training to its staff on gender mainstreaming. The TEAM found limited involvement of women during community interactions with the LGAs. Few women were present to contribute to the TEAM’s interactions with the CLGAs in Sokoto. In Bauchi, the Dass CLGA Director of the Education and Social Development Directorate is a woman. 2 In 2010 the Governor of Bauchi dissolved the LGA Councils. The Councils sued and the Governor’s decision was reversed by the courts. He reinstated the Councils until the next elections in 2011 and then dissolved them. The Governor has not called elections to this day. All Council members are appointed from the Bauchi Civil Service. This action caused serious political divisiveness in Bauchi. LEAD determined that it was not possible to work with WDCs and still maintain the integrity and objectivity of the project. The decision was made to focus community efforts on CBOs. LEAD has periodically reviewed its decision, but has still not determined it is prudent to work with WDCs in Bauchi. Page | 16 Intermediate Result 2: Transparency of Local Government Operations and Fiscal Management Increased Indicator 2: Number of LGAs with standard financial operating procedures Target 10. Actual Sokoto 6, Bauchi 0. Sub IR 2.1 Targeted LGA budget and local planning skills improved Indicator 2.1.1 Number of community priority projects included in the LGA budget. Target 50 for both Sokoto and Bauchi. Actual 60 Sokoto, Bauchi 0 Sub IR 2.2 Locally generated revenue increased Indicator 2.2.2 Percentage change in internally generated revenue in LGAs. See Text In the Health Directorate, two sectional heads are women. In Ningi, the Primary Health Care Directorate is headed by a woman. A sectional head under the Water Directorate is also a woman. Participation of women in the LEAD project training programs for government officials is also extremely limited. (Verification: LEAD Gender Strategy. LEAD Gender and Social Inclusion work plans, Summary of LGA discussions, Indicator 1.1.2.) Community Based Strategic Plans (CBSP). All ten Round 1 CLGAs now have ratified CBSPs, which fill an important gap identified in the LGDF. The strategic planning process began with a meeting of CLGA officials and community leaders on the need for the plan. One hundred people (10 people from each of the wards of the CLGA) were nominated to represent the wards at a general meeting with the leadership of the CLGA Council. The group consisted of all categories of men and women, the physically challenged, women groups, youth, CSOs, CBOs, farmers, businessmen local government officials and technocrats. This group was later reduced to 40 members who received support from the LEAD project on how to develop the CBSP. The project then facilitated the CBSP drafting committee to develop the strategic plan. The CLGAs developed plans with the vision, goals and objectives for a 5 year strategic plan. Each CLGA held public hearings on the plan and incorporated the findings of the hearings into the final plan. All ten plans have been ratified by the Chairman of the CLGA and are now policy. (Verification: Copies of CBSP. LEAD Reports on CBSP process) In Sokoto the LEAD project supported the State Ministry for Local Government Affairs and Local Government Service Commission to provide guidelines to the CLGAs for application of the Financial Memoranda, such as uniform budget templates and contents of budgets. Currently the six Round 1CLGAs in Sokoto have formally adopted the guidelines. In collaboration with the Bauchi State, the Ministry for Local Government Affairs and Office of Auditor General for Local Government, the LGAs in Bauchi were strengthened to adhere to the Financial Memoranda in financial operations and budgeting. (Verification: Review of LEAD data base). Page | 17 Budget Skills Improved. The LEAD project introduced international best practices into the States’ budget process through the establishment of Stakeholder Budget Working Groups (BWGs) to sensitize government to budget issues and to identify significant areas for improvement. The BWGs consisted of traditional and religious leaders, CSOs, the media, member of the House of Assembly, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning and the Auditor General. The BWGs identified deficiencies of limited capacity in engaging citizens; lack of capacity for budget analysis among State and local governments; and the lack of oversight capacity with the House of Assembly and State agencies. The LEAD project facilitated the BWG’s to develop and implement a Strategy for Engaging Budget Process at the Local Level. This included programs for utilizing civil society to build the capacity of local governments and community groups in the budget process; capacity building in budget planning; and oversight by State government agencies and the Houses of Assembly. The CSOs were instrumental in linking community groups and the CLGAs to the budget process. In Sokoto, the CONSS built capacities of the WDCs and the CBOs on participatory budget development and tracking, as well as organized ‘budget literacy forum’ in communities. In Bauchi, Fahimta Women & Youth Development Initiative (FAWOYDI) facilitated the LGAs’ open meetings with citizens, where they were able to engage with their local government on the status of 2012 budget implementation. FAWOYDI also created forums for citizens’ to make inputs to the 2013 budget. BASNEC paid advocacy visits to the State Ministry of Women Affairs on gender mainstreaming. (Verification: Budget strategy document, report of CSOs/LGAs budget literacy capacity building, report of FAWOYDI on local mechanisms, & BASNEC report on advocacy visit to Ministry of Women Affairs) In Bauchi, capacity building of the State Legislators on oversight functions, led to the House of Assembly passing two important directives establishing the requirement to have the House approve all Local Government budgets, and created a committee for Local Government Affairs. The directive, titled “Submission of Budget Performance for the year 2012”, was given to the MOLGA by the Appropriations Committee of the House of Assembly and was sent to the Ministry on the 12th of December 2012. (Verification: Standing orders of the Bauchi State House of Assembly Amended 2012, Report of oversight function training conducted for legislators) The LEAD project undertook an Analysis of Inter-governmental Resource Flows, which revealed important deficiencies in the intergovernmental relations in resource allocations, some budgetary gaps in terms of the operations of the Joint Accounts and joint projects between the State and Local Governments. In Bauchi the analysis led to legislative process towards the reform of revenue sharing with the LGAs, as well as the operation of the joint projects, with an executive bill going through review CONSS Promotes Advocacy in Budget Process Participatory budgeting is an unheard of process in the region. The LEAD project supported the Consortium of NGOS in Sokoto (CONSS) to review the performance of the 2011 Sokoto State Budget and to perform an analysis of the 2012 budget. CONSS involved broad participation in the budget review exercise by consulting with business associations, CBOs, CSOs, faith based organizations, PTAs, the Nigerian Bar Association, market women and USAID FSS partners TSHIP and NEI. The Sokoto State House of Assembly in 2011 allowed CONSS to submit its remarks on the performance of the 2011 budget and its analysis of the 2012 budget to the House Committee on Finance and Appropriations. It incorporated CONSS remarks in the 2012 budget. For the 2013 budget CONSS, as well as other CSOs, were invited to comment on the budget by the House of Assembly. The Clerk of the SSHOA feels that CSOs have a great deal to contribute to the deliberations of the Assembly. CSOs are now invited to comment on various topics in the health, education and governance. Page | 18 at the Committee level in the State House of Assembly. Ten percent of the States’ internally generated revenue (IGR) is now allocated to the local governments. This is in addition to the IGR collected directly by the LGAs. In addition, budget calendars were developed in order to structure budget development to conform to the legislative schedule. Both Sokoto and Bauchi have established Joint State Local Government Planning Boards to more effectively plan and execute local government budgets. (Verification: Reports of analysis of Inter-Governmental Resource Flows, Reports of Joint state local government planning boards for Bauchi& Sokoto, and budget calendar. Team found no evidence that 10 % of State IGR is shared with LGAs.) Fiscal Responsibility and Procurement Laws: The LEAD project assisted the Sokoto State Government, Ministries and the House of Assembly in developing and passing two bills aimed at improving transparency and bringing local government operations into conformity with national law. The two laws will lead to the establishment of: 1) the Sokoto State Bureau for Public Procurement and Price Intelligence; and 2) the Fiscal Responsibility Commission responsible for the implementation of the Medium Term Expenditure Framework. In Bauchi the two laws were passed in 2008, before the LEAD project became operational. An economic governance project called REFORMS implemented by DAI and managed by the USAID/Nigeria EGE office worked in collaboration with the P/DG team to effect the passage of the two laws in Bauchi. Unfortunately the project could not facilitate the process for full implementation of the laws before its end date. As a result, the government could not implement the laws and they stood moribund. The LEAD project worked with the World Bank’s Capacity Building Project to provide training and institutional support to the State government to assist them in amending the laws. This involved significant training to senior level state and local government officials, as well as support in preparing the standard procurement documents such as the Public Procurement regulations, and the initial work on the Standard Bidding Document. Further consultations are on-going with the State Bureau on Public Procurement to finalize the Standard Bidding Document with larger stakeholders’ involvement, and support for capacity building of procurement desk officers at select State Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) and LGAs in the State. (Verification: Report of Training of Permanent Secretaries and Their Equivalents on Public Procurement and Financial Management Laws, Report of the Draft Review of Bauchi PPL) In Sokoto, the two amended laws were enacted in February, 2013. The State government is now developing the implementation arrangements for the two laws. The Public Procurement and Price Intelligence Bureau is scheduled to become operational in February, 2014. (Verification: Focus States Assessment, pp. 12-13. Discussions with Due Process Office Officials, as well as other State officials) Increases in Internally Generated Revenue (IGR). The LEAD project supported the CLGAs in identifying the highest potential sources of IGR. The CLGAs established Taxpayers’ Consultative Forums for establishing dialogue and tax/fee base mapping to register tax/fee payers, and map out the IGR sources with the highest potential for high revenues. The LEAD project facilitated increased interaction between the local government and the civil society groups with the principal State agencies; Board of Internal Revenue, Auditor General, Ministry of Local Government Affairs, Local Government Service Commission and the Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning. The State agencies work with local governments in providing guidance in ways to reduce fraud in revenue generation and remittances. This tax base has been computerized, with computers provided through the Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning and software and training provided through the LEAD project in Sokoto. In Bauchi the process of computerizing the IGR data from the tax/fee base mapping is underway with a recent IT gap assessment conducted in the Round 1 CLGAs in collaboration with the Ministry for Local Page | 19 Government Affairs and Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning. The LEAD project provided training for local government staff, civil society and staff enumerators through workshops for the mapping exercise. Stakeholder Consultation Forums were established to provide for the continuous engagement with constituents to ensure participation through transparency and accountability. Public enlightenment campaigns were undertaken in each CLGA providing information to citizens on the benefits of increased tax revenues and their duty to pay. CSOs worked with communities to provide information about their rights as citizens to demand information on how funds were being spent. Many feel that increased citizen involvement is the key to the success of the program. The Sokoto Board of Internal Revenue has adopted the techniques introduced by the LEAD project for tax collection at the State level. According to the head of the Board, State revenues have increased dramatically. Last year’s collections amounted to N14.9 billion. This year in the January to June period revenues amounted to N10 billion. (Verification: LEAD documentation and minutes of meetings. Discussions with State and local government officials. Meeting with Sokoto State Board of Internal Revenue) Increases in the IGR have been utilized principally for maintenance operations and infrastructure improvements in the CLGAs. The Dass CLGA cleaned up a dump site and developed a market space on the cleared site. The Grain Market was fenced in for improved grain tax collection. Ningi has renovated the abattoir in its central market, as well as constructing a new abattoir in Nasaru. Bauchi resurfaced the poultry market at Muda Lawal market. The Illela CLGA has improved drainage at its market. The Silame CLGA has constructed new concrete slabs at the abattoir. Bodinga improved facilities in market places, abattoirs and parking lots. Denge-Shuni provided funds to support emergency ambulance services and the creation of a revolving drug fund. Several CLGAs fund ongoing maintenance of water projects with the IGR funds. (Verification: Discussions with LGA officials. Annex VII: Summary of LGA and Focus Group Discussions) Sub IR 2.2 seeks to increase locally generated funds. Indicator 2.2.1 measures the percentage change in IGR by CLGA, as illustrated in the table below: BAUCHI SOKOTO LGA 2010 2011 2012 LGA 2010 2011 2012 Naira Naira % Naira % Naira Naira % Naira % Bauchi 23,212,512 36,306,576 56 29,506,947 -19 Bodinga 1,934,850 3,426,605 77 4,332,875 26 Dass 7,430,058 4,935,839 -34 7,829,413 59 Denge￾Shuni 2,975,170 4,740,889 59 4,819,120 2 Katagum 37,137,834 30,001,895 -19 43,894,588 46 Illela 5,506,181 5,990,784 9 6,115,181 2 Ningi 9,910,242 11,294,363 14 317,923,769 2,715 Isa 620,845 738,690 19 905,825 23 Wamakko 8,416,330 11,832,781 41 13,943,101 18 Silame 598,070 1,130,550 89 2,972,010 163 The negative gains in Bauchi and Katagum were the result of security issues. Many businesses shut down for prolonged periods during times of high tension, thus affecting tax revenues. Other declines in Katagum and Dass were the result of security in addition to weak leadership. (Verification: Reports on IGR collection from CLGAs and the Bureaus of Internal Revenue in Sokoto and Bauchi. Discussions with LEAD staff) Page | 20 Intermediate Result 3: Capacity of local organizations for citizen’s engagement strengthened Indicator 3: Number of CSOs assessed using Organizational Capacity Assessment See Text Sub IR 3.1: Partnership between CSOs and LGAs strengthened Indicator 3.1.1. Number of local mechanisms supported with USG assistance for citizens to engage their local government. Target 200 town hall meetings, workshops). 154 held. (Bauchi 64, Sokoto 88). Indicator 3.1.2 Number of local groups supported by sub-grantees. Target 150. Actual 194. (Bauchi 48, Sokoto 146). Indicator 3.1.3 Number of participatory planning sessions conducted. Target 400, Actual 468, (Bauchi 173, Sokoto 2950 Sub IR 3.2: CSO/NGO advocacy/mobilization activities increased Indicator 3.2.1 Number of people affiliated with non-government organizations receiving USG supported anti-corruption training. Target 700. Actual653. (Bauchi, Male-17, Female-63, Total 180, Sokoto, Male346, Female 190, Total 653). Indicator 3.2.2 Number of advocacy activities conducted by partner CSOs. Target 700. Actual 233.(Bauchi109, Sokoto 124). Indicator 3.2.3 Number of mobilization activities conducted by partner CSOs. Target 740. Actual443. (Bauchi 246, Sokoto 187) Life-of-project targets in the PMP were to increase IGR by 45% over baseline values. The only CLGA to achieve that figure is Ningi in Bauchi. Illela and Isa have not achieved the figure in Sokoto. However, the LEAD project’s efforts have resulted in impressive gains in the IGR in several CLGAs. Of particular note is the 27 fold increase in one year in Ningi and the more than 2 fold increase over two years in Silame. The IGR results demonstrate the project’s effectiveness in encouraging participatory development processes by increasing citizens’ participation in the budget process. The LGAs’ leadership is another important component in increasing the IGR. Currently, the lions-share of the LGAs’ funds are received via the Joint State/Local Government Account. Under the Constitution, State governments have control over the Account. As a result of decreased revenues received from the Federal Account, due to decreases in oil and gas revenues, there is greater competition for funds between State and local governments. State governments often fund their priorities at the expense of local governments. In Bauchi, this is done through the State/LGA priority project arrangement that is dominated by the State government’s decisions. State governments often dictate how local governments should use their funds without consultation, and the amounts given are often tied to activities specified by the State government to the detriment of agreed community priority projects in the approved LGA budget. The CLGA officials in Sokoto complained they are given a much smaller percentage of funds than was originally planned, and without consultation. This leaves some community based projects unfunded and acts as a deterrent in the long-term of increasing citizen participation with the LGAs in the budget process. In Bauchi, traditional leaders and local officials complained the CLGAs had not received funding, outside of the monthly allocations for salaries. This has left little for operations and capital projects. The national funding crisis, along with the progress made in increasing internally generated revenues under the LEAD project has resulted in increased interest on the part of local government officials in accelerating the growth of the IGR. (Verification: Discussions with the Emirs of Bauchi and Dass. Discussions with CLGA officials. Discussions with State Bureau of Internal Revenue officials) Page | 21 Thirteen Civil Society Organizations Strengthened. The LEAD project has utilized the Organizational Capacity Assessment (OCA) as a tool for measuring the organizational status of community based organizations. Thirteen CSOs are participating in the OCA process; seven in Bauchi and six in Sokoto. The OCA measures organizational capacity in a number of areas, on a scale of 1-4, including: 1) vision, mission and objectives; 2) organizational governance; 3) operations and management systems; 4) human resources; 5) financial and assets management; 6) program planning; 7) project management; 8) strategic planning; 9) community mobilization; and 10) results monitoring. The initial OCA established a baseline, in which capacity building programs were developed for each participating organization. The OCA has been administered annually to access progress. The CSOs interviewed as part of this evaluation have praised the OCA and how it has benefited their organizations. All feel their strategic planning capacity have been improved. Many are more capable at developing proposals. Several have begun relationships with private sector firms and philanthropic organizations, as a result of the LEAD project’s capacity building programs in fund raising. USAID/Nigeria reports that in field visits to Sokoto, some CSO groups acknowledged that, based on the training they received from LEAD, they were able to write proposals which received funding. As part of its year five work plan the LEAD project intends to sponsor closer contacts between the CSOs, private sector firms and philanthropic organizations through an “Opportunity Fair” in Bauchi and Sokoto. The Fair would give the CSOs and funding organizations the opportunity to meet and network. The CSOs who had taken the OCA before praised the way the LEAD project provided capacity building. “It was different and better”. “LEAD took the time required to present the OCA tools properly, to provide technical advice and access each organization’s progress.” Use of the Organizational Capacity Assessment has not been limited to the LEAD project’s thirteen sub￾grantees. The OCA was administered to five potential CSO sub-grantees in Bauchi and six in Sokoto before the project learned it would not be able to increase its grants program due to reduced incremental funding in FY 2013. Additionally, the CSO has been used to assess five additional CSOs for a combined total of 16 Civil Society Organizations plus the LEAD project’s 13 sub-grantees. Indicator 3: Number of CSOs assessed using Organizational Capacity Assessment3 BAUCHI SOKOTO CSO BASELINE SCORE CURRENT SCORE CSO BASELINE SCORE CURRENT SCORE AHEAD 2.40 2.71 CPMCW 2.3 3.4 CITAD 2.42 2.75 CONSS 2.4 2.6 FAWOYDI 2.81 2.96 CHANGE 2.4 3 RWDP 2.68 2.85 FOMWAN 2.4 3 WEIN 2.32 2.79 LHI 2.4 2.9 WODASS 2.68 3.16 STCI 2.5 3.3 YMCA 2.34 2.61 Community Partnership Grants: Grants are designed to support the CSOs’ efforts to link communities and local governments in productive areas, improve relationships between communities and local governments and support communities in presenting their needs to local councils. The LEAD 3 Interpretation of overall capacity index scores: 1.0 – 1.9 = below expectation 2.0 – 2.9 = As expected 3.0 – 3.9 = Better than Expected 4.0 = Surpassing expectations/completed Page | 22 project, under a cooperative agreement, is supposed to provide small grants to CSOs to foster better governance between local governments and communities, support the CSO’s capacity building, as well as the LEAD project’s three other objectives, and reinforce the project’s experiential learning approach. The LEAD project has administered a grants program to CSOs that are OCA eligible, and thirteen grants have been approved to date. The CSO sub-grantees were selected through an open and competitive process in accordance with the project’s approved grants manual. The program was advertised broadly, and the CSOs were invited to submit proposals to become part of the LEAD grants program. A selection committee was formed, comprised of the LEAD project staff from the four Objective Teams, in addition to representatives from TSHIP and NEI. The CSOs were selected based on their commitment for improving their governance capacity. Follow-up assessments were made by the selection committee to verify a CSO’s supporting information. Each organization’s capacity to manage the grant was also confirmed before an award was made by examining the scopes of previous projects implemented and internal control processes. The grants have provided a valuable tool linking local government, civil society and communities together. (Verification: Minutes of Selection Committee Meetings) The LEAD project’s management has expressed concern about the limited number of grants it has been able to provide to meet its objectives. Initially, there was intense scrutiny on the part of USAID/Nigeria in managing the grants program. This was true even though the grants manual was developed and approved by USAID and all grants are of modest amounts averaging $43,936, with the largest being $100,514. This scrutiny resulted in dramatically delaying the approval of grants. In FY2013 the LEAD project had an additional 20 grants ready for approval, but had to cut back due to funding issues. As a result, grant activity was limited to no-cost extensions for CSOs that had not fully expended their awards. This has affected relationships between the LEAD project staff and the CSO community, and has impacted on the ability of the LEAD project to support its objectives. CSO Networking and Coordination: The Consortium of NGOs in Sokoto (CONSS) is a network of CSOs. The CONSS received support from the European Union for ten years, dating back to 1999, and has been an important factor in the evolution of participatory local government in Sokoto. The CONSS is working with the WDCs and communities in Sokoto and linking them and their issues with all sectors of State and local government. The CONSS is participating in the LEAD OCA program and is receiving capacity building support in organizational development and improving networking skills. With LEAD project support the CONSS has increased its network from 76 organizations in 2010 to 100 today. It has more visibility and is now working in 16 LGAs in Sokoto. It is now registered with the State and the Corporate Affairs Commission. The LEAD project has facilitated the CONSS’ relationships with various levels of State government, including the MBEP and the MOLGA. (Verification: Discussions with CONSS officials, Ministry officials and SSHOA) The LEAD project, seeing the need for a civil society network in Bauchi, invited Bauchi State’s CSOs to a two day conference in November, 2011 in Kano to discuss interest and the way forward to developing a Bauchi network. The Kano conference led to the establishment of the Bauchi State Network of Civil Society Organizations (BASNEC), consisting of 50 CSOs. The LEAD project facilitated the development of the BASNEC charter and its organizational development. The BASNEC is now a registered organization and plans to participate in the OCA. Page | 23 Intermediate Result 4: Service Delivery Improved Indicator 4: Number of Service Improvement Plans produced by targeted LGAs Target 40. Actual 28. (Bauchi 20, Sokoto 8) Sub IR 4.1 Local involvement in infrastructure rehabilitation increased Indicator 4.1.1 Number of people in target areas with improved drinking water supply as a result of USG assistance Indicator 4.1.2 Number of water point maintenance carried out as a result of technical assistance by the project Indicator4.1.3 Number of community associations that actively participate in the process of local infrastructure building projects. Target 148 Actual 207. (Bauchi 67, Sokoto 140 Sub IR4.2 Service delivery partnership between LGA and CSO improved Indicator 4.2.1 Number of stakeholder groups functioning to establish state and local level policies regarding water and environmental sanitation. Target 4. Bauchi 2, Sokoto 1, Actual 3. Indicator 4.2.2 Number of activities/projects jointly implemented by CSO and LGA. Target 10, Bauchi 2, Sokoto 0, Actual 2 The BASNEC has conducted Bauchi State Budget Roundtable discussions with State representatives, local governments, CSOs and other stakeholders for input to the House of Assembly; made presentations to the Federal Committee on Constitutional Review for the Northeast Region on local government autonomy; started the “Radio Link” call-in program where people discuss local issues with State officials; and intervened in the 2013 teacher’s strike, where the Governor fired 5,000 teachers and education workers, requiring the State government to rescind the order. (Verification: Discussions with BASNEC Leadership) Service Improvement Plan (SIP): The SIP is a comprehensive framework for sustainable water maintenance for water service delivery. The Plan seeks to achieve effective, responsive, inclusive and ethical water maintenance at the local level. It was developed through a series of participatory activities involving all of the critical stakeholders to create ownership and ensure commitment to the Plan. The LEAD project supported a special workshop in Kano in October 2011. Five service directors and the Head of Administration for each Round 1 (Verification: Report on Kano Service Improvement Methodology Workshop) SIP committees, with technical support from the LEAD project conducted collaborative group assessments of water facilities in the CLGAs in December, 2011. It was found that on average 50% of water points break down within two years of construction due to: poor planning and budgeting; ineffective maintenance systems; lack of technical knowhow; communication gap between LGAs and communities; and continuous development of new water systems while ignoring the maintenance of existing systems. Another finding was that over 70 percent of water systems in some of the LGAs were dysfunctional, with some requiring as little as N 5000 ($30-$35) to repair. Important community self￾help measures were also identified. (Verification: Water Facilities Assessments) Building the capacity of communities to do simple repairs and maintenance is what the SIP is built on. The CLGAs deal with the more complicated repairs. Capacity building was done through training by water departments of the CLGAs and CSOs. Youth from villages were trained in the basic repair and maintenance of the water points. Wards were provided tool kits, which were kept in the care of the Ward head. Service Delivery Teams were established at the LGA level to handle higher level Page | 24 maintenance and repair issues and to advise water resources service staff on issues. Annual work plans were developed. (Verification: Training Reports; LEAD Training Data Base for Bauchi and Sokoto) The MEMS II project funded civil engineers with experience in the water sector to undertake brief analyses of the Water Repair and Maintenance Program in Illela and Katagum LGAs. In Illela the consultant inspected 28 water points that were randomly selected. In Katagum 30 water points were inspected. The full consultant reports for each State are contained in Annex VIII. In Illela, the consultant found that only 55% percent of the 28 water points inspected were operational. Forty two percent were broken down and 3% were not yet commissioned. Many WASHCOMS are extremely weak, and do not know their responsibilities and have little information on how to undertake repairs. The impact of CBOs has been minimal. Training does not appear to be adequate for communities to repair and maintain their water facilities. In Katagum, the consultant found that in 87% of the locations visited the water points were functional. The impact of LEAD intervention is much more visible in Katagum than in Illela. However, only 40% of the sites visited had a defined WASHCOM associated with it. Many Water Sanitation and Hygiene Committees (WASHCOMS) are not aware that CBO assistance is available in their area. Tool kits given to train CBOs are not adequate to perform the duties required. The LEAD project has had an impact in changing the way communities view service delivery. Sixty percent of repairs are made by service delivery teams. Twenty-three percent of communities are served by trained CBOs. Before the LEAD project most communities would rely on private contractors for repairs. Their work was expensive and often not competent. Some CLGAs decided to expand the water repair and maintenance focus to include sanitation issues, with a focus on markets, abattoirs and parking lots. Many needed repairs and improved drainage, as well as periodic cleanups to be kept sanitary. Several CSOs in both Sokoto and Bauchi have partnered with CLGAs and communities in repairing infrastructure and sponsoring market clean-ups. Traditional leaders have also lent their support. The Emir of DASS, for example, personally participates in the monthly clean up the Dass market to encourage community support. The objective of sub-IR 4.1 is to increase local involvement in infrastructure rehabilitation. Indicator 4.1.1: Number of people in target areas with access to improved drinking water supply as a result of USG assistance and Indicator 4.1.2: Number of water point maintenance activities carried out as a result of LEAD technical assistance measure the impact of IR4.1. The chart below depicts the number of water points repaired, along with estimates of population served by CLGA. In 2011 and 2012, 226,400 people in Bauchi and Sokoto obtained access to improved drinking water supply as a result of the LEAD project facilitated repair and maintenance programs. This was the result of the repair of 645 water points in 2011 and 2012. The LEAD project reports that at the end of June, 2013, an additional 68,400 people had improved access, bringing the total to 295,000. An additional 209 water points were repaired in the first six months of 2013. Bringing the total to 854. (This could not be verified. The TEAM did not have access to the data for 2013). Bauchi CLGAs were able to repair 75 percent of the water points identified as non-functional in 2010. Ningi topped the list by repairing 90 percent of its non-functional water points. Sokoto CLGAs were able to repair only 42 percent of their non-functional water points. (Verification: Monthly reports from LEAD Local government coordinators. Quarterly reports from CLGAs). Page | 25 Number of water points repaired, with estimates of population served, by CLGA Bauchi Sokoto LGA Non￾Functional Re-paired 2011 Repaired FY 2012 Total (11+12) Pop. Served LGA Non￾Functional Repaired FY 2011 Repaired FY 2012 Total ( 2011 + 2012) Pop. Served Bauchi 145 22 78 110 38,500 Bodinga 116 11 46 57 19,950 Dass 74 21 36 57 19,950 Denge￾Shuni 78 9 8 17 5,950 Katagum 163 18 95 113 39,550 Illela 129 11 10 21 7,350 Ningi 131 37 81 119 41,650 Isa 126 12 66 78 27,300 Silame 129 18 31 49 17,150 Wamakko 182 11 13 24 8,400 Total 513 98 290 399 139,650 760 72 174 246 86,100 Source: LEAD project. Water policies in Sokoto and Bauchi: In order to eliminate fragmentation in the development and implementation of water activities in the two States, the LEAD project has facilitated ministries, water authorities, the Houses of Assembly and community organizations to develop water policies in Sokoto and Bauchi4. The water policy in Bauchi was adopted in November 2011. It included establishing a Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Agency (RUWASSA) for rural water. Urban water supply and distribution remained with the Bauchi State Water Board (BSWB). Since then there has been little state action to actually implement the policy aside from forming a working group and a formal policy launch in February 2013 supported by the LEAD project. The LEAD project’s attempts to move the policy implementation process forward has met with limited success. The Policy in Sokoto has been drafted, but approval has been delayed due to the establishment of a new Ministry of Rural Development who has to clear the policy. When the evaluation was underway, the Policy was with the State Executive Council for review. (Verification: Letter dated July 12, 2013 informing LEAD of forwarding the draft Water Supply and Sanitation Policy to the State Executive Council from Director of Administration) National Environmental Sanitation Law to Sokoto: The LEAD project has supported the Sokoto Ministry of Environment in adopting national guidelines through the development of a Sokoto Environmental Sanitation Law. The project provided resources to the Ministry for a comprehensive review of the issues involved. The LEAD project facilitated the drafting of the law, as well as support for public hearings. The draft law was reviewed in a public forum with all stakeholders, and is being 4The role of the LEAD project and the other FSS flagship partners in the development of the policies was assessed in the Focus States Assessment pp13 Page | 26 reviewed by the State Executive Council. It will then be submitted to the Sokoto House of Assembly for deliberation and passage. (Verification: Meeting held with the Ministry of Environment on September 12, 2013) Sub-question1a: To what extent are LEAD activities sufficient for achieving USAID/Nigeria’s democracy and governance objectives as well as USAID/Nigeria’s governance approach? Improving governance is the foundation for the USAID program in Nigeria. The LEAD project has demonstrated success in piloting workable governance models in Sokoto and Bauchi. The key parameters of the model - inclusiveness, building the effectiveness of institutions and community empowerment - is working. This has been accomplished in a cost effective manner. Fourteen million dollars has been disbursed for programs in Bauchi and $10 million in Sokoto. The LEAD project has been implemented with Nigerian staff. The importance of political will has been shown to be a deciding factor in effectiveness. USAID/Nigeria needs to incorporate the LEAD governance model into a broader strategy if it wants to achieve its governance objectives. The following are some suggestions USAID may want to consider going forward. USAID should consider implementing the model in States in additional geo-political zones in Nigeria. This will broaden impact and facilitate the promotion of good governance principles nationally. The achievements of the program need to be broadly publicized. National, regional and state champions supporting governance need to be identified and introduced to the LEAD project model. Information packages should be developed and disseminated to opinion leaders – CSOs, academics, the media, community leaders, student groups, private sector groups- in all geo-political zones. USAID should continue to support civil society networks, such as those in Sokoto and Bauchi. Both the CONSS and the BASNEC have been essential in connecting communities with government, and in monitoring the impact of government decisions. Similar networks in other States need to be established and supported. USAID needs to involve the private sector in its governance programs. Private sector involvement is a key component to the Rivers State program, but its absence is a major weakness in the current Bauchi and Sokoto programs. The private sector has an interest in good governance and could be joined with civil society in promoting efforts or act as a funding source for civil society programs. The objectives of the Community Based Strategic Plans cannot be achieved without strong private sector involvement. USAID needs to continue to evolve and develop its Focus States Strategy. The LEAD, TSHIP and NEI projects were able to develop important synergies that need to be continued and expanded. Sectoral programs alone cannot implement cross sectoral governance programs without a strategic framework. FSS is a useful model that should provide this strategic framework. Page | 27 The current FSS approach focuses on the following areas: health, water and sanitation, education and governance. Consideration should be given to expanding the FSS approach to other areas that are of significant importance to local governments and communities, as expressed in interviews and contained in the Community Based Strategic Plans that have recently been ratified. These are agriculture development, particularly as it pertains to addressing youth unemployment. Youth unemployment will be a major area of concern if USAID develops more counter-insurgency activities. Unemployed youth and the related issue of drug use among young men is an important recruiting ground for terrorist groups. An FSS approach incorporating youth economic and social issues, primary health, water and sanitation, basic education, private sector, governance and gender should form the basis for a future strategic approach to an expanded governance approach. Keeping the local government focus in future activities will be important. It is the only interface with government that most Nigerians have. Strengthening this interface and its interaction with State government and communities is probably the most effective way of establishing the writ of government in Nigeria. The only way that the LEAD project will become sustainable is if the States themselves take over the capacity building role for local governments. The Team does not believe Bauchi and Sokoto States are prepared or capable to do this. State governments themselves are institutionally weak. USAID should consider providing greater support to State governments to build more appropriate support systems for local governments and ward development committees. Technical projects should support the capacity building of technical ministries as appropriate, within a governance framework. Any future programming needs to support strong community development. Unless communities have the knowledge and the tools to lobby the State, it is unlikely there will be political reform at the State level. Empowered communities are the key to long-term reform. Sub-question 1b: How have the project interventions increased access to government services and interventions? Local governments and communities were able to repair 645 non-functional water points in 2011 and 2012. Approximately 225,000 people benefitted from these programs. These facilities were repaired principally with the CLGA budgetary and community self-help resources. The LEAD project and the CSO community provided capacity building support. In the TEAMs opinion, this is a USAID success story. The LEAD project inspired community priority setting, and participatory budgeting resulted in improved service delivery to communities. Annex VII, summarizes Focus Group Discussions and contains several examples of improved access to government services and interventions. Following are some examples from Sokoto: The Wamakko WDC requested the construction of a cemetery, the construction of Islamic schools, and the construction of a well in the CLGAs 2012 budget. The LGA implemented the construction of the cemetery and the Islamic school. In Dange Shuni the WDC requested the construction of schools, wells, waterways and the rehabilitation of dispensaries, and the construction of health facilities. All the requests have been implemented except the construction of clinics. Page | 28 Question 2: How successful is the project’s engagement with key stakeholders including the State Government, Local Government and Civil Society Organizations? The LEAD project has done an excellent job of engaging the various elements of state and local government and civil society to meet the project’s objectives. The project has introduced a system of citizen participation into governance affairs that is recognized at all levels – state, local government, civil society and the community –WDCs and CBOs. State government officials that the TEAM interviewed were extremely knowledgeable of the role that the LEAD project has played. The Ministries of Budget and Economic Planning in both Sokoto and Bauchi have been significant partners. The MBEP in Sokoto has suggested that USAID provide greater assistance to State governments in the next phase of the LEAD project. The State government is willing to provide greater counterpart funding, and they would like to be a partner with USAID in the design and implementation of the next phase of the LEAD project. In Bauchi, the LEAD project played an important role with the MBEP, partnering with the World Bank in capacity building. The LEAD project’s engagement with numerous State ministries and agencies in the execution of the IGR program won praise from all. Excellent relations were developed with the Bureaus for Internal Revenue for both States, as well as the Ministries of Local Government Affairs and the Local Government Service Commissions. The Commissioner for the Bureau of Internal Revenue in Bauchi has requested greater support for State institutions in the next phase of the LEAD project. The Commissioner’s personal request was for the project to assist Bauchi to harmonize its tax and fee structure. The Minister of Environment in Sokoto also lobbied for greater assistance at the State level. “State governments need to develop appropriate systems and they need the capacity building to implement the systems. This is the only way to have an effective State and Local Government System. USAID should develop MOUs with the State governments, and have organizations such as CONSS monitor the MOU for USAID.” The head of training for the Local Government Service Commission in Sokoto believes that the LEAD project has transformed the LGAs. They are taken increasingly seriously by Government, due to the impact of LEAD. Before the LEAD project, the LGAs had no defined role and were moribund. Executive leaders in Sokoto have benefitted from council effectiveness training and staff are better equipped to perform their duties. In our visits to the field in Sokoto the Team was impressed by the excitement that the LGA officials brought to the meetings. They were knowledgeable about their areas and they were happy to discuss the accomplishments and the problems they are having. In Bauchi the relationship is different. The leadership is appointed and their appointments are usually for only a few months until they are transferred again. However, the Bauchi LGAs have engaged well with the LEAD project, as evidenced by their cooperation in the Local Government Development Framework, Community Based Strategic Planning and IGR activities. Civil Society Organizations are playing a vital role in the LEAD project. Some CSOs have benefitted from the OCA and have commented positively on the way that the LEAD project has implemented the program. They have developed excellent linkages between communities and local and State governments. Both the CONSS and the BASNEC’s officials state they have benefitted from the project’s capacity training. Page | 29 Question 3: How successful were the project’s management systems, organizational policies and procedures in facilitating the achievement of expected results and overall project goal? The LEAD project’s organization charts are attached as Annex X. The project has 71 full time employees working in its Bauchi and Sokoto Offices. Over a third (24) full time positions are vacant. According to the project’s management, this is due to terminations, as well as staffing cuts forced by reductions in FY 2013 funding. The LEAD project has half the local government coordinators that it needs to operate effectively. In addition, some key staff have been transferred to Rivers State, to begin implementation of the new program. MEMS II project staff have commented on the lack of consistency in training programs, including both the curriculum and the content of the training, and that this may be contributing to inconsistency in results between the two offices. The LEAD project maintains that it is reflecting differences in the training needs of the two States. Staffing issues appear to be the principal organizational problem facing the LEAD project, and several technical, monitoring and evaluation staff need to be hired. Implementation will suffer if these important staff functions are not filled. Sub-question 3a: How has coordination and collaboration with other projects and other donors in the focus states impacted LEAD project outcomes? The Focus States Assessment concluded that there is a great deal of coordination and collaboration between the LEAD project and the other flagship FSS Implementing Partners. Each partner shares and contributes to individual work plans. The Chiefs of Party meet quarterly to review progress on work plans and discuss issues. Staffs meet regularly to discuss implementation issues. An informal secretariat has been established to track issues. Each Implementing Partner has made resources available for the other partners’ activities in order to accomplish joint objectives. The LEAD project has also worked closely and collaboratively with the World Bank and the Ministry of Budget and Economic Planning in Bauchi in strengthening financial sector reforms. The LEAD project worked with the World Bank’s Capacity Building Project to provide training and institutional support to the State government to assist them in amending the Fiscal Responsibility Law. This involved significant training to senior level state and local government officials, as well as support in preparing standard procurement documents such as the Public Procurement Regulations, and initial work on the Standard Bidding Document. Further consultation is going on with the State Bureau on Public Procurement to finalize the Standard Bidding Document with larger stakeholders’ involvement, and support for capacity building of procurement desk officers at select State MDAs and LGAs in Bauchi. The water sector is an area that needs greater coordination with other projects and other donors. In addition to the water projects under the LEAD project, USAID is funding WOFAN to implement the WASH program in 22 communities in Bauchi and Kano. SUWASA is supported by the USAID Regional Mission in Nairobi and is supporting urban water systems in Bauchi. JICA and DfID are supporting UNICEF under the SHAWN project to provide hand dug wells at schools and hand pumps at three LGAs in Bauchi. JICA is also supporting water supply and distribution systems in Bauchi, Katsina, Kaduna, and Sokoto. Page | 30 As part of its year 5 work plan the LEAD project intends to collaborate in water policy implementation more closely with USAID’s water sector projects in Bauchi, SUWASA and WASH, plus UNICEF’s SHAWN project and JICA’s grant-in aid program for rural water supply, which is also operating in Bauchi State. The P/DG Team needs to support and encourage this by linking its technical offices and the USAID/REDSO Office in Nairobi with the coordination effort. Sub-question 3b: The Focus States Assessment found that there are significant differences in the governance environment in Sokoto and Bauchi. How have these governance issues affected implementation, and what lessons can be learned for the future? The impact of the governance differences in Sokoto and Bauchi are documented throughout the evaluation report. Bauchi State’s CLGAs have scored lower on the LGDF than those in Sokoto. Internal structures have also developed differently in Bauchi than in Sokoto. This depicts weak leadership in several directorships as a result of political appointments and the lack of accountability. Bauchi has failed to implement legislation and policies that the LEAD project has assisted with. The Bauchi CLGAs have not adopted national standard operating procedures for budgets. The biggest issues are the appointment, rather than the election, of LGA leadership; coupled with the regular transfer of executive officials. The Bauchi State’s LGAs are administrative offices, not representatives of the people. Bauchi State is not unique in this regard in Nigeria. Only about a quarter of the LGAs have elected officials. It should be noted that when the LEAD project began, Bauchi was considered the champion State and Sokoto was the laggard. The election of 2011 changed the political dynamics in both states. Our understanding is that the current dynamics in Bauchi are also changing, because people generally are not pleased with current political leadership. In addition, the incumbent is prevented from serving again due to term limits. The Emir of Bauchi was extremely pointed in our interview with him on this issue. “Until political changes are made in Bauchi LEAD’s impact will be limited. People want elected councils. LGA management does not report to the people. They are administrators and political appointees.” Lessons to be learned from the Bauchi experience make it important to have formal and detailed understandings with state governments. USAID should consider developing Strategic Frameworks with each state. Such Frameworks would describe the objectives, activities and resources to be provided by both parties. Duties and responsibilities of the state should include: conditions supporting democratic processes; identifying and providing funding, co-financing for training and local government support from State coffers; fixing formulas from the Joint State/LGA account; prohibiting the confiscation of the IGR from the LGAs; and streamlining the LGA project approval process. The Frameworks should identify the means by which the parties can resolve differences at both the administrative and political levels. The Frameworks should be part of Memorandums of Understanding signed by the Mission Director and each Governor. MOUs are not legal documents, but they do lay out understandings of the parties and are useful in providing and enforcing the focus necessary to move governance objectives forward. There is a current MOU for the Focus State Program, but it is vague and meaningless for determining responsibilities of both parties. The LEAD project has already begun the long-term solution to the problem. Through empowering communities and strengthening CSOs, the foundations for addressing the lack of political participation have been laid. USAID should continue its support for community empowerment and CSO capacity building programs. This is probably one of the most effective ways to address these important issues in the long-term. People want change. They need the tools and the support to work with their government to effect change. USAID has started this process in Sokoto and Bauchi. Page | 31 4. What important lessons can we derive from implementation of the LEAD intervention regarding, security and its impact on the achievement of the project’s objectives and how sustainable are project interventions? A thorough examination of the security issues confronting the FSS partners, including the LEAD project, was provided in the Focused States Assessment. Since that time the security situation in Bauchi has stabilized due to the Nigerian military’s campaigns to neutralize the movements of Boko Haram. The LEAD project staff report an improved environment. However, the history of insurgencies suggests that insurgent groups are generally not defeated solely be military campaigns and there is every likelihood that terrorist groups are regrouping and may increase their militancy in the future. In Sokoto, there is increased Nigerian military presence since the FSS Assessment. Over the summer several Boko Haram cells were discovered and a major shipment of arms was confiscated in Sokoto. In July a police station was attacked in the Drazo LGA of Bauchi State, adjacent to the Misau champion LGA. In September, fifty students were murdered in dormitories at an agricultural college in Yobe State. Security has had an impact on project activities. For example, worsening security may be one of the principal factors in the decrease in the IGR collections in Bauchi CLGA in 2011. Similarly, capacity building and advocacy activities have been impacted by the security situation. The LEAD teams do not travel during periods of security alerts. Similarly, CSOs associated with the LEAD project are more cautious during these periods. Workshops bringing together stakeholders from both Bauchi and Sokoto in common venues in Kano and Kaduna are no longer feasible. Capacity building workshops and meetings are now smaller with training occurring over extended timelines to minimize larger groups and length of travel for participants as well as the LEAD staff. USAID staff are also limited in their ability to monitor programs, particularly in Bauchi. There is no evidence to suggest that terrorist groups are targeting USG projects at this time. The TEAM does not believe that the current situation in either Sokoto or Bauchi is serious enough to suggest that the LEAD interventions cannot be sustained. The security situation needs to be consistently monitored and appropriate training of all Implementing Partner staff maintained. Future designs should build in organizational flexibility to account for the need for Implementing Partners to address increased security challenges. This could include lowering the profile of projects even further by working directly through government agencies, such as the Ministry of Local Government Affairs. The USAID Mission may also want to give consideration to hiring local Nigerian consulting firms to station staff in volatile areas that can provide essential political, economic, and security monitoring of the situation in the states, in addition to monitoring the activities of USAID’s Implementing Partners on a continuous basis. This in no way takes the place of USAID monitoring, but given the current circumstances, it may be the only way of obtaining solid and continuous information on the States and the activities of the IPs since USAID staff are constrained on their ability to monitor in volatile areas. Another consideration is to acknowledge that program activities designed to realize progress against results framework performance indicators no longer progress in a linear manner in an asymmetric security environment. As a result, the LEAD project’s 2012 and 2013 activities have been re-structured, and in some instances re-scheduled or deferred, due to spikes in Boko Haram attacks, particularly in northern Bauchi State. The IGR mobilization campaign in Misau, Gamawa, and Jama’are was deferred until late 2013. Service-based budget training for Gamawa and Jama’are was rescheduled as well. The Focus States Assessment recommended that USAID be more direct with its Implementing Partners in security matters. If someone is kidnapped or murdered, it will not only be a personal tragedy, but will directly and profoundly impact the implementation of programs. One way to insure that all Implementing Parties have equal protection is to have all agree on common security postures and Page | 32 practices, in areas such as staff training, procedures, and infrastructure. All Implementing Partners need to adhere to minimum standards, and USAID should ensure that these standards are being adhered to. The TEAM recommends that the Africa Bureau consider meeting with the senior management of each Implementing Party working in Bauchi and Sokoto to establish common standards, and have all Implementing Partners agree to these standards. Agreements and contracts can be amended to obligate parties to implement and fund agreed upon security measures. Terrorists are able to obtain local support for two reasons. First, is the failure of governments to provide for the security and wellbeing of their citizens. Second, is the use of common cultural, religious and ideological ideals to gain support from communities and elites. Terrorist support comes from all levels of society. Programs like the LEAD, TSHIP and NEI projects have provided increased services to communities, while at the same time helping develop a governance system in which government is made more responsive to citizen needs. The FSS approach will be extremely useful if the Mission decides to address counter insurgency issues in its next strategy. Community ownership is an important tool in development, as well as in anti-terrorism programs. The LEAD/FSS model should be carefully examined as a way for providing needed primary services, while at the same time building the communities stake in keeping and maintaining these services. The third tier of government in Nigeria has the best opportunity to profoundly influence people. It is responsible for the peoples’ basic needs, and building effective local governments is the surest way of establishing the legitimacy of government in the eyes of the common man in Nigeria. Sub-question 4a: LEAD indicators largely track process activities. What new indicators may be useful in the next project to measure improvements in State and Local government service provision? The LEAD project was designed to build the capacity, accountability and responsiveness of local government to its citizens. It is building the foundation on which other programs in health, education and water and sanitation provide direct services to communities through elected representatives or appointed officials. This approach has had some success, as well as issues.5 Governance indicators can be classified in several ways to measure inputs, outputs, processes, outcomes, and impact. Most projects use a mix of different approaches. Combining input-based and output-based indicators is always much more effective than using only one method. Integrated approaches provide a stronger factual basis and a much more sound foundation for development planning, and policy making, than do approaches with a strict emphasis on only one type of indicator or only one measurement approach. The selection of indicators is dependent upon aspects of the project to be monitored - inputs, processes, outputs, and outcomes - and the aspects of performance for which it will hold the intervention accountable - economy, efficiency and effectiveness. The choice of indicators is a task for all those involved in the implementation and monitoring of projects. Collaboration ensures the system is useful for meeting all participants’ information needs. Increasing the usefulness of the indicator system reduces the opportunity cost for compiling and providing data. 5 Conceptual and strategic issues with the FSS were discussed in Nigeria Focus States Strategy: Potential Outcomes and Indicators of Internal Program Synergy, Final Report, the Mitchell Group, MEMSII, September, 2011. Operational and strategic issues are discussed in the FSS Assessment already mentioned. Page | 33 Input data, as well as data on the socioeconomic context of service delivery, are frequently used to allocate resources. Monitoring inputs is useful for financial oversight. However, this reveals little about what services are delivered, their quality, or policy impacts. As one moves from inputs to outcomes, measurement becomes increasingly difficult. In recent years there has been a shift toward outcome indicators. This reflects an increasing desire to hold policy makers and implementers accountable, not only for what services are delivered, but for achieving policy goals - improved governance. Given the long gestation period for local government projects to bear results, future projects should include a mix of process as well as impact indicators. PMPs are supposed to be reviewed and amended over time to take account of changes in a project’s progress. USAID should develop relevant indices of institutional uptake for state and local governments that take into account negotiated institutional strengthening MOUs with state and local governments. This could include streamlining processes with State governments to administer the LGA requests and budgets; the amount of funding under Federal Accounts allocated to the LGA budgets; and changes in the transfer of staff so as not to delete the effectiveness of the LGAs. Indicators for citizens’ perceptions of development benefits, the source of benefits and perceptions of sustainability of benefits over time should be considered. Periodic comparative citizen surveys in focus areas, and indices of community sentiments and perceptions should also be considered. These steps are expensive and take a long time to develop, but offer a way for consistently measuring impact over time. This will be increasingly important if the LEAD project is expanded. These sets of indicators can be adapted to take account of individual projects such as the LEAD project, or include more strategic approaches as those suggested under the FSS. Sub-question 4b: What activities were less successful, and what recommendations can be made to achieve their purposes in the future? The LEAD project is implementing an inter-related series of components that improve State and local government effectiveness, build relationships with and empower communities and civil society organizations. All of the components of the LEAD project are necessary. Success was limited mainly due to lack of political will on the part of state governments to implement change and fund local government budgets. The pilot nature of the LEAD project led to the transfer of trained staff to non￾LEAD local governments, thus limiting the effectiveness of the Champion LGAs. This impact will diminish over time as more of the LGAs are brought under the program in future years. The lesson from the LEAD project is to anticipate and attempt to manage those areas that are not in USAID’s nor the LEAD project’s management control. Constant monitoring of the political and economic environment of the states is necessary, to identify when state and local governments begin to change course for better or worse. Who are the key players in this change? The usefulness of MOUs in this regard has already been discussed. Page | 34 Conclusion Project Results Against Defined Targets: The Lead Performance Monitoring Plan identifies twenty indicators measuring the performance of four Intermediate Results and eight sub-Intermediate Results. Nine of the indicators have been met and exceeded their life of project targets, based on 2011 and 2012 data. More indicators will meet targets when 2013 data is analyzed. The LEAD project is on target to meet most of the remaining targets. Without funds for the Grants program, there will be little incentive for the CSOs to participate in the Organizational Capacity Assessments. These indicators will have to be revisited, if the grants program is not reactivated. IR 1 Capacity of local governments strengthened has produced the most results based in the indicators. The improvement in capacity, along with improved internal structures of the CLGAs, has been adequately measured by the LGDF. Most CLGAs are still below average, and continued capacity building is required. Improvements in strategic capacity and performance is measured by capacity assistance and resulted in the development and ratification of Community Based Strategic Plans for all round 1 CLGAS. IR 3 Capacity of local organizations for citizen’ engagement is rated second. The CSOs participating in the OCA have had solid gains in improving their organizational capacity. They have met targets supporting local groups and participatory planning. More effort needs to be put into increasing advocacy and mobilization activities. This is an issue involving funding for the grants program, but also requires renewed focus on implementation. IR 4 Service delivery improved is ranked third. Impressive gains in water points repaired and people served for Bauchi was offset by the relatively weak performance in Sokoto. Little progress is being made in stakeholder groups establishing policies on water and environmental sanitation and the number of joint projects implemented by CSOs and LGAs. These two areas need attention on the part of the LEAD project’s management and USAID. Similarly, the poor performance of the Sokoto CLGAs in the water sector. IR 2 Transparency of local government operations and fiscal management increased. Impressive gains in the IGR have been offset by poor adaptation of financial operating procedures in Bauchi. Little reform has been formally adopted in Bauchi. Effectiveness of Project Interventions: The LEAD approach, combiningassessment of the problem, capacity building and results monitoring, is demonstrating that, given the political will, moribund local government institutions can be transformed into effective local governments; communities can be empowered; and service delivery can be improved. The job is not yet completed in the two focus states, but the efforts are proceeding. Even in Bauchi, the CLGAs have improved, communities have a voice, and there have been solid improvements in service delivery on the part of local governments. The LEAD project is an effective model and it has been professionally implemented through its Implementing Partners. Weaknesses in implementation have been identified and should be addressed. Political forces outside of USAID or the LEAD project management’s control have been the principal issues in limiting the effectiveness of the project in both Bauchi and Sokoto. The biggest issues impacting the effectiveness of the LEAD project, has been state control over the Joint State/ Local Government Budget; continuous transfer of trained staff from CLGAs to non-LEAD LGAs by Local Government Service Commissions; and the appointment of the CLGA leadership in Bauchi. All of these are major issues which the LEAD project’s Implementing Partners are not capable of dealing with by themselves. Page | 35 It is not certain that USAID’s involvement in these issues would have resolved them. It is an area that USAID should have monitored more closely and brought to the attention of state officials. The LEAD project needs to improve its Results Monitoring, particularly in Sokoto. The project needs to focus its priorities on the implementation of the CBSPs and in improving implementation of Service Improvement Plans. Quality of Project Management: The LEAD project’s staffing vacancies need to be filled. USAID should review with the LEAD project’s and the MEM II training approach to make sure that training programs meet objectives. Security Vulnerabilities on Project Implementation and Performance: Security issues have had an impact on project implementation and performance in Bauchi. Programs have been delayed, more care is put into the location and timing of workshops and training events. USAID has been limited in its ability to effectively monitor programs due to travel limitations. There is evidence that the IGR has been impacted due to the security concerns of Bauchi business people. There is no evidence that USG programs are being targeted by insurgents. There is no reason to assume, given the current security posture in Bauchi, that the LEAD project cannot have a sustainable impact. Volatile security situations are being dealt with regularly in a number of USAID programs. Given the upsurge in terrorist activity in Saharan Africa, security will continue to be a major factor in Nigeria. Security will have an impact on how USAID measures impact in its Performance Monitoring Plans. Security factors should be part of monitoring documents. USAID needs to understand that the direct relationships between inputs and project results may become opaque. The Impact of Coordination and Collaboration on Results Achieved: The LEAD project is coordinating and collaborating with the other Focus States partners. This has been documented in the Focus States Assessment. The LEAD project has worked closely with the World Bank Capacity Building Program providing assistance to senior level officials in Bauchi on financial sector reform. The LEAD project is planning to increase its coordination in the water and sanitation sector with other USAID programs, WASH and SUWASSA. As well as with JICA, DfID and UNICEF, who are funding major water and sanitation activities in both Bauchi and Sokoto. This will require support from USAID technical offices, and the Peace and Democratic Governance Team needs to coordinate this. Guidance and Options for Future Local Governance Program Interventions: The LEAD project is an effective local government development model, which has had wide acceptance and impact in both Sokoto and Bauchi. Making local government more effective is essential to good governance in Nigeria, since it is the only exposure most Nigerians have to government. It should form the core of future USAID governance programs in Nigeria. Governance needs to be addressed strategically not through a project process. Page | 36 Recommendations Develop an Amended Focus State Strategy: FSS should be developed further in line with the recommendations in previous evaluations and assessments within the next six months. The principal objective of the Strategy is to improve governance and service delivery. The Mission should consider the creation of inter-sectoral teams to jointly develop programs and to incorporate existing programs into a governance framework. As a first step, the P/DG Team should distribute CBSPs and SIPs to all technical offices for information purposes. P/DG should chair meetings to discuss the Plans and how various offices could contribute to the objectives of the CLGA vision documents. Any support should be coordinated through LEAD’s offices in Bauchi and Sokoto. The inter-sectoral approach will be useful not only in terms of information sharing, but also to identify key governance issues in the two focus states, as well as other states in Nigeria, and how to possibly address them using the LEAD project as a model. This will be an important input into further design of governance and service delivery programs. If project design and the resulting implementing documents remain sectorally focused, LEAD’s management will remain stove-piped. It is essential that cross-cutting objectives are clearly described in project documents, and the roles of the Implementing Partners defined with clear performance indicators. The A/CORs should receive quarterly reports, and attend meetings of other projects related to cross-cutting governance objectives. Grants and contracts should be managed and monitored with cross-cutting objectives in mind, and not as strictly technical programs. With this interaction the foundations/components of the cross sectoral governance strategy will evolve. The Mission should then be in a position to develop a concrete framework for governance and service delivery. Letter to Bauchi Governor. USAID needs to begin a dialogue with the political powers in Bauchi, regarding issues described in the evaluation report. This dialogue will be necessary, if USAID continues a long-term relationship with Bauchi, as well as establishing an audit trail. We suggest a letter, outlining the issues identified with the Bauchi program. The LEAD project will be willing to provide talking points. USAID may follow up with a meeting with the Governor. (He spends most of his time in Abuja). LEAD Needs to Focus on Implementing Strategies and Plans. LEAD’s future work plans should focus on accelerating implementation. The project has assisted the CLGAs in developing strategies and plans, and it needs to turn its attention to assisting CLGAs to implement those strategies and plans. The CBSPs, while important in concept, will be difficult for the CLGAs to coordinate with state governments and to manage. The TEAM feels that SIPs will provide similar challenges for the CLGAs. Not all of the CLGAs are equal. Some will require extra effort to be successful. Nigeria is full of plans that are never implemented. The greatest impact LEAD can now have is to accelerate the implementation of the CBSPs and SIPS, and not leave them as empty plans that were never implemented. SIP support should be reviewed. Both water repair and management studies identified weaknesses in the community based models for repair and maintenance that the LEAD project is supporting. Conditions appear to be worse in Illela than in Katagum, but the same issues have been identified. It is recommended that USAID have the MEMS II project undertake additional studies in the remaining Round 1 CLGAs in Sokoto and Bauchi to determine if this is a systemic problem. Based on the results, the LEAD project should develop a plan of action to address the issues identified. Gender Approach should be reviewed by USAID and LEAD. Outside of LEAD-funded and guided activities, there does not appear to be significant buy-in from state and local governments, particularly in Sokoto. This may be due to the ultra conservative nature of communities as well as the lack of training for state officials responsible for the appointment of non-elected local officials. Indicators that measure progress in gender should be developed.