MIDTERM EVALUATION
PARAGUAY MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT 
December 2004 
This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It 
was prepared by Julie Otterbein for Chemonics International. 
PARAGUAY MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT 
A Task Order under the Financial Services IQC 
Contract No. PCE-I-03-99-00007-00, Task Order No. 03 
The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States 
Agency for International Development or the United States Government. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
CONTENTS 
Executive Summary i 
Introduction 1 
SECTION I Review of Project Activities and Results 2 
A. Improvements in Local Resources 3 
B. Improvement in Services 5 
C. Improvement in Community Participation 6 
D. Transparency, Accountability, and Integrity 10 
E. Improvement in Financial Position 11 
F. Replication and Dissemination of MFP Model 12 
G. Sustainability of the Project 15 
SECTION II Strengths and Weaknesses of the Partnerships between Municipalities and Project 17 
 A. Strengths 17 
 B. Weaknesses 17 
SECTION III Conclusions and Recommendations 19 
A. Project Approach and Organization 19 
B. Replication and Sustainability 19 
C. System-wide Indicators and Policy Agenda 20 
ANNEX A Documents Reviewed A-1 
ANNEX B Persons Interviewed B-1 
ANNEX C Considerations and Criteria for Selecting Municipalities C-1 
ANNEX D Guía de Entrevistas D-1 
3 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) 

Executive Summary 
The objectives of the Municipal Finance Project (MFP) are to increase local revenues and 
investments in services, and to strengthen citizen participation, transparency, accountability, and 
integrity in municipal operations. Some of the results of the project are: 
• Improvement in local resources. By focusing first on large delinquent taxpayers and setting 
up systems for improving cadastres and collections, the project has been able to show a quick 
flow of new resources. Municipalities have seen significant increases in revenues. 
• Improvement in services. Seven municipalities have made improvements in solid waste and 
sewerage, compared with the goal of 25 by 2004. The MFP seems to have shifted its focus 
away from services to small community projects. Greater emphasis is needed on services. 
• Improvement in community participation. This has been the weakest component of the MFP 
in many municipalities. The numbers of audiencias públicas held and community projects 
funded do not adequately measure progress in this area. More effective community 
participation may require additional efforts in a number of municipalities. 
• Replication. Work is under way in the new Unidad de Apoyo Municipal (U.A.M.) in two 
gobernaciones. In Caagazu, both the governor and the MFP consultant are optimistic that the 
U.A.M. will operate independently within a year or two. There are still many obstacles to 
overcome, but the U.A.M. may by the best option for MFP replication. 
Key Conclusions and Recommendations 
The MFP should place much less emphasis on working fast. It should establish schedules for 
each municipality that reflects its realities. The beginning of the project in each municipality 
should be more collaborative with technical staff and the community than it now is. 
The decentralized model of on-the-job training is good, but the MFP should establish checks and 
balances and quality control. Currently, there is no way for grievances or complaints to be 
voiced by municipal counterparts. Also, some consultants may short-change components because 
of lack of experience or interest. 
The MFP and USAID should consider trade-offs in trying to reach all 38 municipalities, such as 
assisting fewer and providing additional assistance to municipalities that encounter problems 
during implementation.
The MFP should help develop indicators that are useful to municipalities (not just to the MFP) 
to measure progress over the medium and long term. 
There should be a clearer set of objectives for national-level policy discussions. 

Introduction 
The original Municipal and Rural Finance project, approved in September 2001, was designed to 
assist financial institutions and increase the availability of new sources of financing for urban 
and rural municipalities and small businesses. Funds were never allocated for the rural 
component. Also, it shortly became clear that municipalities could not take advantage of private 
sources of financing until they were more financially solvent and lending institutions had more 
accessible loan terms.1
In August 2003, Modification No 5 substantially changed the scope of the renamed Municipal 
Finance Project (MFP), refocusing the project to work with municipalities on increasing local 
revenues and creditworthiness. This modification increased the number of target municipalities 
to 38 and the number of projects to be financed to 50. The project’s initial completion date of 
June 30, 2003, was extended to September 30, 2006. 
The objectives of the MFP are to strengthen the ability of municipalities to increase revenues; to 
ensure that increases in revenues are used to implement new or improved services; to implement 
new or improved mechanisms for citizen participation, transparency, accountability, and 
integrity in tax administration and service delivery; and to support management policies that will 
lead to sound financial bases for municipal operations and improved creditworthiness. 
Additionally, the project is expected to promote dissemination and replication of its model and to 
support policies that promote local government financial autonomy. 
The terms of reference (TOR) for the midterm evaluation called for a review of the MFP’s 
results to date, a sample survey of municipalities at different stages of project assistance, 
identification of problems and issues, a review of the strategy for replication and dissemination 
of results, and recommendations for the time remaining in the project. 
Field work was carried out from October 18 to November 11, 2004, and included documentation 
review (see Annex A). Interviews were conducted with project staff, representatives of USAID 
and other institutions, and intendentes, municipal council members, technical staff, and 
representatives of community groups in participating municipalities. (See Annex B, Persons 
Interviewed.) Guidelines were developed for selecting 10 municipalities that were visited by a 
two-person team (Julie Otterbein and David Douglass) over six days. These municipalities 
ranged in size from less than 10,000 people (San Bernardino) to more than 200,000 (Ciudad del 
Este). The sample included municipalities that were more rural than urban (Emboscada) and 
others that are very urban (Limpio), and municipalities that were considered success stories and 
those that experienced problems in implementation. (See Annex C, Selection Guidelines and 
Characteristics of Sample Municipalities, and Annex D, Guía de Entrevista.) A visit was also 
made to one governor’s office to learn about efforts to replicate the project model. Finally, 
briefings were held for USAID and project staff on the evaluation’s findings and 
recommendations. 
 
1
 Banks were lending at rates as high as 35 percent for only two- to four-year terms. 
SECTION I 
Review of Project Activities and Results 
It should be noted upfront that the MFP has accomplished a great deal in its first three years, 
even though there are areas or components which need to be strengthened. 
The MFP uses an approach that differs from other USAID-sponsored municipal projects. Other 
projects employ well-defined training modules, such as revenue collection and tax base; 
budgeting and accounting; urban planning and investment; public services; and community 
participation, governance, and transparency. Municipal staffs are brought together for training, 
usually for two weeks, followed by on-the-job training in each municipality. The same core 
group of trainers rotates among municipalities. Training and technical assistance typically lasts 
20-24 months per municipality. 
The MFP’s approach is decentralized, intensive on-the-job training. It has a larger staff of 
consultants2
 working simultaneously in a large number of municipalities. The MFP advertises 
itself as providing help on finance, accounting, transparency, and community participation in 
“200 days”3
 — or about seven months. It expects to complete ambitious work on the financial 
component — i.e., data collection, property tax, reorganization of municipal tax unit, 
reassessment of values, new municipal ordinances, and collections from the largest taxpayers 
(modulo contensioso) — in just three months.4
 This timeframe is not realistic. Several issues 
stem from this desired timeframe, as well as from the project’s decentralized approach. 
The project has been under way for three years. For sample municipalities, technical assistance 
has been completed or is estimated to be completed shortly. Table 1 shows that technical 
assistance generally lasts considerably longer than seven months and in fact averages about 15 
months. 
Project consultants say that after an initial learning curve, they are able to provide technical 
assistance in new municipalities in much less time. While it may be possible to cut down on time 
per municipality, the desired seven-month timeframe is still unrealistic and could be 
counterproductive if assistance is curtailed too soon. 
Municipalities in the sample that had completed the technical assistance showed very different 
levels of advancement. In some case, there seemed to be a real “graduation” from assistance. In 
others, there was progress but continuing problems as well, particularly in the community 
participation component. For example, Caagazu, which is scheduled to finish technical assistance 
this month, could still improve its organization of community groups and establish an outreach 
 
2
 Currently 16 long-term consultants and a number of short-term consultants in specialized areas such as computer 
systems. Five of these long-term consultants are provided under subcontracts with Alter Vida, Mujeres Por la 
Democracia, and International Financial Services (IFS). 3
 Pamphlet for distribution, titled “Proyectos Finanzas Municipales, Municipios Creciendo,” USAID/Chemonics. 4 Guía para Mejorar Las Finanzas Municipales, Asunción, September 2004. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
office. San Bernardino, which completed activities in June, is quite weak in community 
participation. Villeta, also scheduled to complete work this month, still has not finished 
reorganizing its tax office. The community participation component is not working in Presidente 
Franco, and is very weak in Emboscada. 
The MFP and USAID should review project goals to 
decide if it is better to reach 38 municipalities with some 
sacrifice in the quality of assistance or to provide 
additional assistance to municipalities that encounter 
problems in implementation and not reach as many. 
Table 1: 
Duration of Project Assistance in 
Sample Municipalities
Months of Technical Assistance
Ciudad del Este 11 (est.*) 
Presidente Franco 19 (est.*) 
Caaguazu 11 
Coronel Oviedo 19 
Villarrica 15 (est.*) 
Ñemby 12 
Villeta 14 (est.*) 
Emboscada 20 
Limpio 20 
San Bernardino 16 
*Based on estimated completion dates 
The evaluation’s TOR called for a review of the project 
results. Sections A through G use 10 areas identified in 
USAID’s performance monitoring plan as points of 
reference. In each area, USAID provided quantitative 
benchmarks and a number of illustrative ways to measure 
results. 
A. Improvements in Local Resources 
USAID’s performance monitoring plan calls for financial improvements in 21 municipalities by 
2004. The project is currently working in 24. 
After signing a convenio with a mayor and city council, some of the first steps of the MFP are to 
identify large delinquent taxpayers, reassess and adjust the value of properties,5
 initiate the 
process of notification (three stages), and negotiate for payment of delinquent taxes or take court 
action. This is called the componente contensioso and can bring a municipality into conflict with 
wealthy constituents who often have avoided taxes for years. This component may be unique 
among USAID-sponsored municipal development programs in its successful use of legal suits 
against delinquent property owners. 
Mayors reported that most of these large taxpayers have negotiated with the municipality and 
paid their taxes. However, about 200 property owners thus far have been taken to court in all 
MFP municipalities.6
 The court has ruled in favor of the municipality every time. This 
component helps the MFP show a relatively quick flow of new resources and sets an example 
that all citizens, no matter their position, must meet their obligations. 
Project consultants work on a number of other fronts to improve the cadastre and collections 
systems for commercial license fees as well as property tax. All of the municipalities visited have 
seen significant changes in local revenue generation. Every mayor was very conscious of the 
impact the project’s work on his operations and felt that the horizons of the municipality were 
expanding. Generally, municipalities that have participated longest in the project are in the 
strongest financial position. 
 
5
 Article 216 of Law No. 125/91 (enacted January 9, 1992) allows authorities to revalue properties where 
construction has been made but not reported and apply that valuation retroactively for up to five years. 
6
 Informe de Actividades Subcontrato AJE/Finanzas Municipales, por M.E. Radice, Noviembre de 2004. 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 3 
USAID’s performance monitoring plan provided several possible benchmarks to measure 
improvements in locally generated resources. The one used by the MFP is “property tax 
collections increase by 40 percent as compared to the same period of the prior years, starting 60 
days after the consultancy begins. A minimum eight-month period will be used for comparison.” 
It is important for the MFP and municipalities to see this as just one of a number of indicators 
that can measure progress in developing a financial base for municipal operations over the 
medium to long term. Table 2 shows the percent change in property tax income and commercial 
business license income for 2002 and 2003. Since data are available for only nine months in 
2004 (January to September), that period is compared with the same nine months in 2003. 
The data show a lot of variability among municipalities. There were substantial ups and downs in 
property tax revenues even before the MFP began.7
 To see trends, these indicators should be 
tracked over a minimum of three to five years, rather than one to two years. 
Table 2: MFP start dates; % Change in Property Tax/Commercial License Fees, by year; & % 
Change Income since MFP start
Property Tax 
(% change) 
Comm. License Fees 
(% change) 
MFP Start 
02-03 03-04 
(9 mos) 
02-03 03-04 
(9 mos) 
% Change 
Income since 
start* 
Ciudad del Este 2/04 NA 23.9 NA NA 42.1 
Presidente Franco 4/03 59.8 30.0 46.3 11.6 70.2 
Caaguazu 4/03 100.5 106.8 NA 17.8 98.9 
Coronel Oviedo 3/02 94.0 8.3 22.1 15.2 96.9 
Villarrica 3/02 67.7 -4.8 43.4 8.1 93.8 
Villeta 5/03 43.7 36.5 -7.7 87.0 80.4 
Ñemby 11/02 115.3 32.6 50.0 -2.2 111.9 
Emboscada 11/02 3.4 88.7 51.9 -15.3 65.6 
Limpio 5/02 34.4 29.0 NA NA 121.0 
San Bernardino 1/03 NA 32.3 NA 126.5 43.6 
* NOTE: For reporting to USAID, the MFP calculates changes in income from project start-up. This figure 
includes municipal rental income, property taxes, and license fees.
Another benchmark suggested in USAID’s performance monitoring plan is “the number of 
properties on which tax is collected increases 20 percent as compared with the same period of the 
prior year.” This would be an extremely interesting indicator, but it is not available from the data 
now being collected by the MFP. It was difficult to get even anecdotal information in interviews 
with technical staff. It is an indicator that is used in other municipal projects in the region and 
provides a measure of what share of the universe of taxpayers is actually paying. 
The MFP and municipalities have a lot of information on changes in the database, such as the 
number of properties that could eventually become part of the municipality’s tax collection 
system. With the help of project consultants, municipalities often doubled, tripled, or quadrupled 
the number of properties identified for the tax map. In Caaguazu, the original database had only 
 
7
 For example, in Caaguazu, property tax collection increased by 21 percent in 2001 over the previous year. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
about 2,500 entries, and now it contains more than 35,000 properties. Consultants have helped 
municipalities combine data from the Servicio Nacional de Catastro (SNC)8
, an Inter-American 
Development Bank project in the late 1990s that had excellent (although never used) data for a 
number of municipalities, satellite photographs, and many other sources. 
This does not necessarily mean that municipalities are collecting from a much larger group of tax 
payers. Updating tax rolls is time-consuming and tedious. Most municipalities are still in the 
middle or early stages of updating their rolls; often they are still working on the properties that 
were in their original database. In Coronel Oviedo, for example, which is a very well organized 
municipality, staff said that they were only about half way through the process of updating their 
original cadastre and that they haven’t even started work on properties added from new data 
sources. They made a proposal to the mayor for a program to speed up this work, which would 
cost about G200 million. It has not been approved. 
B. Improvement in Services 
In the area of services, the USAID performance monitoring plan called for improvement in 25 
services by 2004. Illustrative indicators pertained to basic urban services, such as the number of 
hours with water service or percent of households with adequate solid waste collection. 
The following table provides information on the seven municipalities that have made 
improvements in basic services — six in solid waste and one in sewerage.9
 In some places, there 
may be work on services that is not reflected in project documentation. For example, in 
Emboscada, collaboration among a Peace Corps volunteer, Alter Vida, the MFP, and the 
municipality was proposed for the development of a recycling program to reduce solid waste. 
Five municipalities had projects funded with resources generated from tax collections and were 
tracked by the MFP. These projects were both physical, such as building a landfills, and 
theoretical, using studies to improve collections for these services. CEAMSO carried out 
preparatory studies where landfills were built. These studies compiled baseline data on the 
number of people benefiting from solid waste collection services. However, the MFP is not 
tracking changes on this indicator to see if there have been improvements in service or expansion 
in coverage. Neither does it track information on collections for services as part of its financial 
monitoring system. 
The MFP is not now focusing on basic services. This may be due in part to the abilities or 
interests of project consultants. Some consultants have a professional background in municipal 
work and have tended to work more with municipalities on basic services. 
 
8
 The SNC was charged with all cadastral work until 1992 when it was decentralized to municipalities. 9
 There may be additional cases where there was improvement, but there is not project documentation. For example, 
in Emboscada, we were told there was collaboration by a Peace Corps volunteer, Alter Vida, the Municipality and 
the MFP to set up a recycling program to help reduce solid waste. 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 5 
Table 3: Basic Services Projects and Costs, where available (in millions)
Coronel Oviedo Solid waste study/data base G35.0 
Landfill G20.0 
Limpio Sewerage study/data base G40.0 
Villarrica Solid waste study/data base G200.0 
Landfill G45.0 
Caaguazu Solid waste study/data base G35.0 
Landfill G20.0 
Coronel Bogado Landfill G50.0 
Landfill G56.0 
Villeta Landfill NA 
Villa Elisa Landfill NA 
Municipalities are still financing projects which can be classified as municipal-wide, such as 
access roads and beautification of municipal buildings/parks, but not municipality-wide services 
such as solid-waste collection or water. The focus of both municipalities and the MFP seems to 
have shifted to small neighborhood projects such as road improvements, foot bridges, wells, and 
community centers. These community projects directly respond to felt needs and are seen as a 
way to increase acceptance of the tax collection component of the project. (Section C on 
Community Participation discusses community projects in greater detail.) 
Every municipality is experiencing problems in services. These problems not only effect the 
health of citizens but also economic investment. One of the key roles of local government is to 
provide these services. Landfill projects are not always more expensive than community projects 
(see average cost of community projects in Table 4). Studies on collections and the database are 
costly but perhaps could be done in stages over more than one year. 
A recommendation of the evaluation is that greater emphasis should be placed on basic services. 
If project consultants are unable to assist municipalities on this component because of time 
constraints or lack of knowledge or experience, perhaps another group could be subcontracted to 
work on improving services and collections. 
C. Improvement in Community Participation 
Whereas mayors, council members, and technical staff were generally satisfied with the MFP, 
community groups’ satisfaction was far less consistent. The USAID performance monitoring 
plan calls for 21 municipalities “with at least one participating mechanism implemented for 
citizens and customers in financial administration and/or services.” Included in the possible types 
of participation were: citizen participation in the decision-making process, citizen committees to 
help manage service delivery, committees for follow-up on audiencias públicas, and community 
auditors. 
An important development for the MFP and community participation was the proposal to set up 
local municipal development funds with a percentage of the increased tax collections resulting 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
from project assistance. A minimum of 35 percent of the annual increases in collections is 
recommended for the municipal development funds. 
Some municipalities have established a fund but are not always using the recommended formula. 
In Caagazu, the municipal council decided not to create a fund, but there is a budget line item for 
community projects. A few municipalities use both the proceeds from tax collections and 
royalties to fund community projects. In most cases, amounts being set aside for community 
projects seem significant by local standards, particularly in comparison with previous years and 
previous local government administrations. 
The MFP uses the audiencia pública to bring together neighborhood groups, or comisiones 
vecinales, and civic organizations to present projects to be funded by municipal funds. The use 
of the audiencia pública is new in some municipalities. Others held Audiencias in years prior to 
the MFP; one has had six to date. Except for Ciudad del Este, municipalities in the sample held 
at least one audiencia pública during MFP assistance; six held two. 
The MFP tracks the number of audiencias públicas and the number and cost of approved 
community projects in participating municipalities as its principal indicators for community 
participation. MFP data was supplemented in the following table with information on the number 
of people attending the meetings and the number of projects presented.10 
 
Table 4: No. of Audiencias Públicas Presupuestarias (APP), Attendance, Proposed and Approved Projects, 
and Costs
APPs People 
Attend. 
Proposed 
Projects 
Total 
Cost 
Average 
Cost 
’03 ’04 ’03 ’04 ’03 ’04 
Approved 
Projects (in millions) 
Ciudad del Este ------------------------------ NA -------------------------------------------------- 
Presidente Franco X X NA 35 NA NA NA 
Caaguazu X X 97 73 55 19 51 G601.2 G11.9 
Coronel Oviedo X X 83 NA 23 29 19 G531.5 G28.0 
Villarrica X 350 44 35 G1,558.9 G44.5 
Villeta X X 60 120 30 53 28 G227.5 G8.1 
Ñemby X X 450 700 70 120 38 G901.6 G23.7 
Emboscada X 106 32 NA NA NA 
Limpio X X* 120 68 67 G476.6 G10.4 
San Bernardino X 80 34 19 G148.9 G7.8 
*Scheduled 
Needs identified by community groups far exceed the number of projects funded. The normal 
procedure is for a group to present a carpeta with a list of projects and an indication of priorities. 
In Presidente Franco, for example, each group presented an average of 10 proposals — or 350 
potential projects — not just the 35 indicated in this table. Other municipalities might limit 
groups to three projects, but requests always exceed available resources. Where funding for 
projects has become more available, the number of comisiones participating in the audiencia 
pública and the number of requests have increased. Ñemby is a good example. In 2004, 120 
 
10 Edy Juvinel de Egea organized meetings with community representatives in sample municipalities. She also 
provided the evaluation team with additional background on community groups, Audiencias Publicas, and how the 
municipal is organized to deal with community groups. 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 7 
projects were presented, compared with 70 in 2003. Conversely, where expectations are not met, 
frustration rises and the number of projects presented in later audiencias públicas falls. 
One municipality, Villarrica, is reconsidering use of audiencias públicas for the purpose of 
identifying community projects. The mayor believes that expectations are getting too high and 
that there may be more effective ways to identify community projects. For Villarrica and perhaps 
other municipalities, community-based budgeting — i.e., allocating a specific amount of 
resources to a geographic area or coalition of groups that work together to develop priorities and 
to program funds — might be a useful approach. 
The audiencia pública does not need to be used for identifying community projects. In most 
countries, it is used for presenting the municipality’s annual budget and the works accomplished 
over the year. It can also be used to promote specific programs, such as environmental action. 
There are a number of other indicators of community participation that shed light on relations 
between municipalities and community groups and the ability of citizens to affect decision￾making. The existence of an office within the municipality for community outreach proves that 
importance is placed on this function. In one municipality, a council member said that he 
disagreed with creating such an office because it gave too much importance to neighborhood 
commissions while ignoring other members of the community such as businessmen. However, 
many municipalities see the establishment of such an office as a pressing need. Some have a paid 
employee (e.g. Villarrica, Ñemby, and Limpio), while others have a full-time volunteer (Coronel 
Oviedo) working out of a municipal office. The following table presents information on which 
municipalities have an office dedicated to community outreach; the number of commissions (not 
necessarily all active); and whether the commissions are organized into groups, for example, 
committees on education, health, etc. There seems to be active community participation in places 
with elected coordinating groups, such as Coronel Oviedo and Villarrica. 
There are also less quantifiable indicators. Some municipalities have young mayors with good 
organizational skills who delegate authority, such as in Ñemby and Coronel Oviedo. In these 
places, community outreach offices are particularly effective. Other mayors are old-fashioned; 
they deal directly with the public on everything. In “Intendente-dominated” municipalities, a 
person who has not spoken to the mayor has not gotten an answer. In these municipalities, 
offices for community outreach are not very effective. The composition of selection committees 
for projects is also important. Only some have representatives of the community. 
In Table 5, the last indicator is purely subjective, based on the satisfaction or frustration the 
evaluation team heard from community groups on the field trip. We did not meet community 
groups in Ciudad del Este; in Limpio, only two representatives of comisiones were available. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Table 5: Additional Indicators of Community Participation
Has Office / 
Community 
Outreach 
No. Commissions Commissions 
Organized / 
Networks 
Community 
Satisfaction with 
Municipality 
(& Project) 
Ciudad del Este ----------------------------- NA ----------------------------------------- 
Presidente Franco No 35 No Poor 
Caaguazu No 65 partial Average to Good 
Coronel Oviedo Yes 300 Yes Very Good 
Villarrica Yes 225+15 groups Yes Very Good 
Villeta No 40 No Good 
Ñemby Yes 284 ? Excellent 
Emboscada No 30 active No Poor 
Limpio Yes 102 No NA 
San Bernardino No 34 No Poor to Average 
The importance of access and channels of communication cannot be overstressed enough. We 
heard a great deal of frustration in Presidente Franco with both the municipality and the project 
because almost no community projects have been built. (“Chemonics only wants to collect 
taxes.”) In Emboscada, community groups are very positive about the project consultant (whom 
they all know) but are frustrated with the lack of agreement between the Junta Comunal and 
Intendente and lack of responsiveness to community needs. In San Bernardino, community 
groups had not seen much new investment and had other issues to discuss with the mayor, but 
they had few opportunities to meet with him. (They suggested setting specific times during the 
week for consultations with community groups.) 
Dissatisfied community groups tend to feel that no one listens to them. They do not have a way 
to find out if and when their projects will be funded. A year after submitting a proposal, some do 
not know why their project was rejected. In several places there were complaints that the 
municipality only wants to construct roads and bridges and will not help them with health and 
education needs. 
The subject of health and education projects came up in a number of municipalities where the 
administrations believe that the Ministries of Health and Education are responsible for requests 
in these sectors and that the municipality’s job is to provide infrastructure, such as roads and 
bridges. Frustration levels are higher in these places because felt needs are not being addressed 
either by national institutions or the municipalities. Other municipalities take a much more 
pragmatic approach, i.e., “if it is important and we can’t get the resources elsewhere, we will 
fund education and health projects.” It would be better if all municipalities were this flexible. At 
a minimum, a better job should be done in some municipalities of communicating to the public 
what projects will be considered for funding. 
The opposite end of the continuum can be found in Ñemby, where community groups feel that 
the Intendente and Junta are working together and are responsive to their needs. They have a 
coordinator within the municipality who can tell them the status of their projects. People in 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 9 
Ñemby say that they are working with the municipality to get projects done and are willing to 
contribute a significant amount of counterpart resources to make projects happen. 
Also in Ñemby, a pilot project was developed to see if community groups could help the 
municipality in tax collection. In two communities, comisiones pledged to help with notifications 
on property tax for a given period. In return, the municipality pledged to them an amount equal 
to 25 percent of the taxes collected during that period in project-related investment. This is seen 
as a kind of bonus program, since these groups are also eligible for municipal development funds 
for projects. The program worked well in pilot neighborhoods and will be expanded to others. A 
similar program was tested in Emboscada and may be expanded. An effort was also made in 
Limpio but did not prove fruitful. 
The role of project consultants in community participation activities appears to vary quite a bit. 
In some places, consultants have advocated for coordinating groups and offices within 
municipalities and have given workshops to representatives of comisiones groups to help them 
prepare projects for an audiencia pública. In others, there was little advocacy for community 
participation. In addition, preparatory seminars for audiencias públicas were not accomplished, 
and audiencias were announced with very little lead time. In San Bernardino, we were told that 
Alter Vida had done a better job preparing the municipality and community groups for 
audiencias públicas in previous years than the MFP did for the most recent one. 
The project might want to consider subcontracting some of the work on the community 
participation component in order to provide a more consistent approach and coverage. Also, 
training of trainers should be part of this component. In one municipality where project activities 
have been completed, we were asked if project consultants could come back and do another 
seminar for community groups in rural areas. This would be less likely to happen if locals are 
prepared as trainers. Given the good report from San Bernardino on Alter Vida’s work on 
preparing comisiones for the audiencia pública, this might be an area in which Alter Vida could 
play a larger role in the project 
D. Transparency, Accountability, and Integrity 
Three of USAID’s performance indicators are combined in this section because there is less 
information on results. Performance indicators call for 21 municipalities to have mechanisms 
implemented by 2004 in transparency, accountability, and integrity. 
The audiencia pública is seen by many project staff as both a transparency and accountability 
activity since one of its purposes is to present the municipality’s budget to the public. However, 
most community groups do not see this as the principal reason for the meetings. They focus 
instead on presenting their requests for projects. (The evaluation team was not able to attend an 
Audiencia Pública to see how much emphasis is given to the annual budget and how much 
discussion it generates.) 
Mayors reported that the MFP helped them to improve the municipality’s accounting. However, 
it was not possible to examine practices in each municipality to see how systems have changed. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Some municipalities have Web sites with the annual municipal budget. Villarrica’s Web site also 
has the salary of every employee. This is one way to be transparent, but it may not be effective 
until more citizens have access to computers. 
Mayors were asked if they have a system or office for internal auditing. Only some have such an 
operation. Mayors were also asked if there is a representative of Controlaria Ciudana to provide 
community oversight of municipal operations. Mayors were dismissive of this group. Only one 
municipality has a representative, and we were told that the person is not trained, does not 
understand the role, and is not effective. 
It is not clear what a mechanism for integrity might be. However, the MFP produced two videos 
(CDs) which are shown in every municipality. The first, Una Cuestión de Actitud, targets 
technical staff. It addresses professionalism in treating the public, and the importance of work 
ethic in carrying out notifications, reassessing property values, and ensuring that data are 
correctly entered into the system. The second video, Una Cuestión de Compromiso, targets 
municipal councils. It addresses the importance of dialogue, knowing the legal bases for action, 
cooperation with the Intendente, and integrity in applying the law. It also touches on the differing 
roles of councils and Intendentes and community expectations. 
E. Improvement in Financial Position 
USAID’s performance indicators call for 15 municipalities to show “a balanced financial 
position or at least substantial improvement” by 2004. One benchmark is a 10 percent 
operational surplus of expenditures over income. Data are not yet available for 2004, but this is 
an indicator that will need to be looked at more closely when the data do become available. 
Before the MFP began, the imbalance between income and expenditures had become so bad in a 
number of municipalities that they were unable to pay staff on a regular basis, sometimes for 
months at a time. Now municipalities are beginning to see improvement in a wide variety of 
income sources. None of the municipalities are currently having difficulty in meeting payroll, 
and most have channeled some current revenue into new investments. 
Municipalities need to manage their expenses to have sustained surpluses. Project consultants 
have worked with them on this, and a number of officials said that they had made progress in 
reducing expenditures. At the same time, the need exists for additional computers and 
equipment, additional training for staff, more investment in improving the property tax base, and 
better pay for staff who have been trained. A number of MFP-trained staff have moved on to 
better paying jobs. Several mayors spoke of the need to adjust salaries across the board to retain 
staff. There is also, of course, the growing demand for funding for community projects. The 
MFP is designed to help municipalities create surpluses over the medium and long term. Over 
the short term, continuing pressures on expenditures make it difficult to make dramatic changes 
in operational surpluses. 
Because of the continuing pressure on expenditures, it is likely that data on operational surpluses, 
like the data on tax collections, will show a lot of variability in the short term. As this is an 
extremely important indicator of the long-term financial health of municipalities, it should be 
tracked over five to eight years instead of used as a short-term indicator of results. 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 11 
F. Replication and Dissemination of MFP Model 
USAID’s performance plan calls for 80 municipalities “outreached with dissemination and/or 
replicability activities” by 2004. From the viewpoint of the project, this benchmark was met and 
surpassed, as more than 500 people attended four meetings and seminars during 2003 and 2004 
at which MFP activities were presented. However, it is not clear from available information how 
many different municipalities were represented in these meetings. Aspects of dissemination and 
replication are discussed below. 
F1. Dissemination Meetings and Seminars 
To date, the MFP has organized three meetings and participated in a congress organized by 
AJUMPA11 at which two project consultants made a presentation. 
Table 6: Dates and Attendance at Dissemination Meetings 
Meeting of 4 
Mayors 
AJUMPA 
Congress* 
Training 
Workshop 
Seminar on Municipal 
Finance 
Date November 
2003 
November 
2003 
July 2004 September 2004 
Location Asunción Asunción Oviedo San Bernardino 
Total number of municipalities 8 41 5 48 
(Number from project) (8) NA (5) (15 est.) 
Number of attendees 90 200 35 185 
*Presentation was given by two project consultants. 
People who attended meetings were positive about opportunities to share experiences, and the 
meetings should continue if possible through 2006. Other, more permanent forms of information 
exchange also should be explored. For example, a Web site for technical staff could be a useful 
way to share information on laws, ordinances, etc., and to solve problems. Perhaps a 
municipality like Villarrica would be willing to host such a site. 
F2. Best Practices, Manuals and other Written Material
The project has missed many opportunities to share best practices. It has not developed materials 
that can be used readily outside the project. It is important to produce these materials for non￾participating municipalities, replicating organizations, national-level counterparts, and USAID 
and development agencies in other countries. 
In-house PowerPoint training is developed by individual consultants (usually those with 
municipal experience) for other project consultants. This training may be excellent, but it is not 
packaged as anything resembling a training manual. The MFP uses a Plan Maestro de Trabajo as 
a guide. It is a long list of things to do in each municipality, but it is not a manual that could be 
used by anyone outside the project without a great deal more material. 
 
11 Asociación de Juntas Municipales de Paraguay. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Two of dissemination meetings listed above were in-house workshops. No written material is 
available from the “meeting of four mayors.” The Oviedo workshop used material from the final 
report of the MFP consultant. The presentation at the AJUMPA congress was not written up. 
The only meeting for which a written agenda could be found was the two-day San Bernardino 
seminar. Topics were wide-ranging. A speaker from the Ministerio de Hacienda talked about the 
vision of the national government on the current situation and future of municipal finance. Other 
speakers addressed the problems of small municipalities, the role of the private sector in 
municipal administration, and similar topics. There were small-group sessions to review issues 
and make recommendations. During field visits, a number of mayors referred to the San 
Bernardino meeting, mentioning, for example, discussions on the need for a municipal civil 
service. The only document available from this seminar was the Guía Para Mejorar Las 
Finanzas Municipales. There are no other papers, no summaries of meetings, and no 
recommendations. 
There is no well-written baseline information on municipalities.12 A lot of information is 
collected in the course of the technical assistance, but it is not compiled. A report called 
Diagnóstico Financiero was prepared for some municipalities. It reviewed surplus/deficit data 
and trends in collections and was used in part to convince mayors and councils of the urgency of 
their financial situation. It was discontinued because it was not useful to MFP staff. 
A final report is prepared for each municipality at completion of project activities. The first one, 
for Coronel Oviedo, was lengthy but informative about the wide-ranging activities of the project 
there. Subsequent final reports have become much less informative. They follow a format that is 
based on the list of activities in the Plan Maestro de Trabajo. The MFP may wish to reconsider 
the purpose of the final report to see if it can be made more useful by focusing more on 
accomplishments, lessons learned, problem areas, actions taken, obstacles to success, areas of 
strength and weakness, and an assessment of overall progress made in the municipality. 
The project relies exclusively on electronic files that are not well organized. Consultants use 
different protocols to name and file documents. Except for financial data, which is maintained on 
all municipalities on a regular basis, no performance indicators are kept for every municipality. It 
is difficult to find information on the same subject for all municipalities. 
The MFP should consider hiring someone to document MFP activities, to prepare materials such 
as best practices and case studies for a larger audience, and even perhaps to better package 
project materials for internal use. 
F3. Regional Models to Replicate MFP Work in Smaller Municipalities 
The USAID performance plan calls for “three regional entities supported and strengthened in 
providing technical assistance to local governments as a means to replicate successful practices 
and ensure sustainability” by the end of the project. Work is under way in two offices of 
Gobernación, in the Departments of Central and Caaguazu. A visit was made to the Gobernación
 
12 Many USAID projects prepare municipal assessments which include information on population size, urban/rural 
composition, economic situation, financial analyses, review of staffing, etc. 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 13 
in Caaguazu to meet with the governor and with technical staff of the recently created U.A. M., 
or Unidad de Apoyo Municipal. 
MFP consultants have been working with U.A.M staff members since May 2004 and plan to 
work with them for at least one year. MFP staff has been working on systems within the 
Gobernación, to ensure that income from municipalities (15 percent transfer), royalties, etc., are 
tracked and that U.A.M will have a more clearly defined and transparent operational budget. 
Equipment and a vehicle have taken time to procure but are now being provided. Currently, 
U.A.M staff are supported by a fixed amount reimbursement agreement (FARA). 
Four municipalities have signed agreements with Gobernación. MFP consultants are working 
closely with U.A.M staff in Santa Rosa de Mbutuy, Repatriación, Juan Manuel Frutos, and J.E. 
Estigarribia. The governor sees the U.A.M as a new important role for Gobernación. The MFP 
consultant working in Caaguazu is also very optimistic about the future of the U.A.M. The most 
important question that remains to be answered is when U.A.M staff will be able to work alone 
in municipalities. This is the point at which replication begins. 
The U.A.M may be the best avenue for replicating the MDP, though there are many obstacles to 
overcome. If the MDP decides to work in a third Gobernación, a larger upfront investment in 
equipment might be warranted, to help the unit become effective sooner. 
F4. Replication of the Project by NGOs and Private Firms 
The MFP has several subcontracts with local organizations to provide consultants to work with 
MFP consultants in designated municipalities. One consultant from International Financial 
Services (IFS), two from Mujeres Por La Democracia, and two from Alter Vida are now working 
with project consultants in five municipalities. Four of these consultants began working with the 
MFP in April of this year and one in September. The relationship is expected to last one year. 
One of the purposes of these subcontracts is to develop capacity within local institutions that 
municipalities could access on a paid basis after the completion of the MFP. Time will tell 
whether a market for technical assistance will develop within municipalities, but a number of 
people believe it will not happen in the short run. Some of the obstacles are: 
• Unwillingness in municipalities to pay for technical assistance. On the field visits, municipal 
staff were asked if they have ever paid for training and if they see this as a possibility in the 
future. It is probably not surprising that they indicated that municipalities are not in a 
financial position to pay for training. As municipalities complete intensive technical 
assistance, the MFP should consider promoting a municipal budget line item for staff 
development and training. Perhaps the MFP could begin to charge a nominal fee for project 
assistance after the first stage is over. The “monitoring” stage is viewed by most 
municipalities as less intensive assistance that they all expect to receive through the end of 
the project in 2006. The MFP consultant comes once a week instead of four or five times but 
is still there to help them. If some form of payment could be built into this stage, it might 
begin to accustom municipalities to pay for services. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
• Lack of affordable providers of municipal services. MFP consultants and some of the 
consultants in the subcontracts are probably too highly paid to be readily accessible to 
municipalities on a full-cost basis. It is more likely that a cadre of locally available experts 
will become available through inter-municipal exchanges. (See Sub-section F5.) 
• Lack of institutional focus on municipal finance. Representatives of Alter Vida say they are 
fully capable of developing the same components as the MFP. However they view 
themselves as a community development organization and not as a change agent for 
municipal finance. Therefore they are likely to market themselves differently than the MFP 
does. This is probably true with other subcontractors as well. 
F5. Municipality-to-Municipality Training 
Several collaborations between municipalities developed as a result of the project. The first 
agreement made available five technical staff from Ñemby to work with counterparts in 
Carapegua under the supervision of a MFP consultant. A FARA covered per diem, 
transportation, and a small stipend for Ñemby staff for the six months that the agreement lasted. 
The MFP consultant working in Carapegua believes that help from Ñemby staff shortened the 
length of time spent in Carapegua (less than nine months) and proved extremely beneficial to 
both staffs. Carapegua staff learned more quickly because their colleagues “spoke the same 
language,” and Ñemby staff gained confidence and managerial experience. In the view of the 
MFP consultant, the Ñemby staff would be excellent advisors to municipalities in the 
department. He could envision them giving seminars and short-term training in the future. 
Similar arrangements are under way or being initiated with staff from Villarrica and Coronel 
Oviedo and new municipalities. The MFP consultant for these municipalities also believes that 
this will improve technical assistance and will shorten the time it takes to complete components. 
MFP consultants do not believe that municipality-to-municipality assistance is likely without 
FARA. This mechanism probably should be seen more as a way to strengthen assistance than to 
replicate assistance beyond the life of the MFP. 
Only certain municipalities seem to be in a position to offer this assistance to others. First, staff 
size must be large enough so that a few individuals can be loaned without stopping all 
operations. From the sample of 10, Ñemby, Villarrica, and Coronel Oviedo have the most to 
offer other municipalities in almost every respect. 
G. Sustainability of the Project 
USAID’s performance plan hopes to see 35 municipalities still running in “an effective, 
sustainable, participatory, transparent, accountable, and integrity-oriented matter at the end of the 
contract.” 
The problem of staff turnover was mentioned previously. In Coronel Oviedo, about half of the 
staff members we talked to were new. They would like to receive training similar to that which 
their predecessors received from the MFP. This may not be possible since project activities have 
ended and the municipality is in the monitoring stage. 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 15 
Another problem that looms in 2006 is the possibility that many trained staff will be let go if new 
administrations are elected. A professional municipal career track that is more protected from 
political change should be one of the themes for national-level policy discussion. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
SECTION II 
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Partnerships between 
Municipalities and Project 
The TOR called for an assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the MFP model. 
A. Strengths 
On-the-job training is effective. Municipal staffs say that they learned more because consultants 
worked with them on a day-to-day basis for an extended period. This method compared 
favorably to assistance they had received previously from NGOs, which was described as 
“seminars lasting one or a few days and then the expert was gone.” 
Initial emphasis on large, delinquent taxpayers is good. This sets a tone that all citizens must 
fulfill their obligations and speeds the flow of resources. In a relatively short period of time, the 
MFP has been able to get staffs trained and equipped to work on this group of taxpayers and to 
begin the longer-term work on cadastre and collections. 
Creative solutions emerge when consultants look at problems in new ways, e.g., Ñemby’s model 
to involve community groups in tax collection. 
Consultants are invested in the success of the municipalities where they work. They are 
passionate about “their” municipalities and want them to succeed. 
B. Weaknesses 
Time has become too much of a driving factor for the MFP. It may cause activities to be closed 
out in some places before they should be. (Presidente Franco might be one such case.) 
Consultants are trying very hard to shorten the timeframes for assistance, but each municipality 
will have factors that speed up or slow down the pace of assistance. The mayor of Limpio was 
clear that they are making changes at the municipality’s own pace, which is much slower than 
the timeframe recommended by the project consultant. However, he said that 80 percent of MFP 
recommendations have been implemented, and they may get to all of them … eventually. The 
constant emphasis on time may account in part for the following issue. 
Some consultants are too aggressive. One mayor called it a “lack of tact and diplomacy.” 
Technical staff in one municipality felt that they were not consulted and that consultants were 
pushy and arrogant. In another, staff felt that a consultant threatened their jobs. One consultant 
described sending in a “SWAT team” where things were not happening fast enough. While the 
majority of consultants are very professional and extremely well-regarded in the municipalities 
where they work, the MFP needs a system of checks and balances. Municipal staff have no one 
to consult if they have complaints or grievances, and mayors or council members may fear that 
assistance will be terminated if they voice concerns about a consultant. 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 17 
Individual consultants may not have sufficient experience in some components, e.g., community 
participation or basic services, and may not provide as much attention as these issues deserve. 
To date, criteria have not been used for selecting municipalities. Resources outstripped demand, 
so municipalities were accepted on a first-come-first-serve basis. There might be greater progress 
today if it had been possible to apply selection criteria. A pre-project assessment is now being 
used to determine whether a municipality has potential from the standpoint of political will. It 
might be useful to apply other criteria as well, such as the financial base of the municipality. The 
MFP seems to have been more successful in larger, stronger municipalities. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
SECTION III 
Conclusions and Recommendations 
A. Project Approach and Organization 
The MFP should place much less emphasis on working quickly. It should establish schedules for 
each municipality that reflect their realities. In particular, it is important to ratchet down the pace 
at project start-up to make it more collaborative with technical staff and the community. 
The MFP should establish mechanisms for quality control. Perhaps this can be accomplished by 
rethinking the role of the coordinator. Currently coordinators act as mentors to consultants and 
assist the chief of party. Coordinators are themselves consultants in municipalities, and therefore 
sometimes “oversee” their own work. The project needs checks and balances to ensure the 
quality of assistance in each municipality, to determine if remedial action is needed, and to 
intervene when problems arise. Also, the project might consider subcontracting work on 
community participation and basic services to specialized groups for more consistent coverage. 
The MFP and USAID should consider whether it is more important to reach all 38 
municipalities than to reach fewer with better assistance. The value of providing more assistance 
in municipalities that encounter problems in implementation vs. reaching all 38 municipalities 
must be considered carefully. 
More attention should be given to producing case studies, best practices and materials that are 
useful to a wider audience. It is important to produce these materials for non-participating 
municipalities, national-level counterparts, and USAID and development agencies in other 
countries. The MFP should consider hiring someone to develop written training manuals and 
project documentation, as well as to organize the project’s electronic files. 
The MFP should assess overall progress of municipalities at the time of project completion. The 
term “graduation” may not be particularly useful. However, other ways can be found to describe 
the status of municipalities. 
B. Replication and Sustainability 
Gobernación’s UAM may represent the best hope for replication of MFP activities; it should be 
given as much attention as it needs to succeed. The project should consider a larger upfront 
investment in these offices so that initial work is not delayed. 
As municipalities complete intensive assistance, the MFP should consider promoting a line item 
in municipal budgets for staff development and training and perhaps begin to charge for project 
assistance after the completion of intensive assistance. This might accustom municipalities to 
paying for private sector services. 
PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 19 
Training of trainers should be given greater emphasis in each municipality. This would better 
prepare people within the community to carry on training after the project ends. 
Efforts should be made to increase exchanges between municipalities. The project should 
continue to promote cross-fertilization between mayors, council members, and technical staff. A 
municipal Web site for technical staff might be another avenue to increase exchanges. 
C. System-Wide Indicators and Policy Agenda 
The MFP should help develop indicators that are useful to municipalities, not just the project. 
MFP staff should help municipalities to develop a much broader-based system of indicators to 
measure their progress over time in financial and other areas of action. These might include 
coverage of basic services and measures of community participation. 
There should be a clearer set of objectives for national-level discussions. The MFP has not 
stressed sector-wide policies, even though a policy agenda is an element of the MFP’s scope of 
work.13 Only one meeting has taken place between project staff and Controlaria Nacional and 
none with other national actors. A MFP policy dialogue should address topics such as cadastre, 
titling, accounting/reporting, and protecting municipal line employees when there are elections. 
 
13 In the 2003 work plan, a reference was made to progress on municipal policy reform by another USAID project 
(ARD). In its September 2003 quarterly report, “policy reform” was redefined to mean changes in local government 
policy. 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
ANNEX A 
Documents Reviewed 
Original contract scope of work, signed September 2001, and modification No. 5 (scope of 
work), signed August 2003. 
Paraguay Municipal and Rural Finance (PMRF) project work plan, December 10, 2001, and four 
quarterly reports for 2002. 
Work plan for Paraguay Municipal and Rural Finance project for January 1 – September 30, 
2003, and four quarterly reports for 2003. 
Municipal Finance Project work plan for fiscal year (FY) 2004 and three quarterly reports for 
2004 through June 30. 
Municipal Finance Project work plan, FY 2005. 
Proposed project design and activities (Chemonics proposal for extension of contract through 
September 2006.) 
Time and materials subcontracts II and III with International Financial Services (IFS) and 
Mujeres por la Democracia, effective April 28, 2004. 
Guía para Mejorar Las Finanzas Municipales, September 2004. 
Guía para el Manejo Integral de los Residuos Sólidos Urbanos en el Paraguay, The Urban 
Institute/Chemonics, April 2002. 
Informe de Actividades Subcontrato AJE/Finanzas Municipales, por Abo. ME Radice, 
November 2004. 
Evaluation of USAID/Paraguay’s program for more effective and accountable local government, 
February 20, 2003. 
Diagnóstico de la Situación, Relleno Sanitario de Residuos Sólidos Urbanos, Caaguazu, 
CEAMSO, 2003. 
Diagnóstico Financiero, Municipalidad de Coronel Oviedo, May 2002. 
Informe Consultoría de la Municipalidad de Coronel Oviedo (final report), Municipal Finance 
Project, Chemonics International Inc., Asunción, Paraguay, January 2004. 
Diagnóstico de la Situación, Relleno Sanitario de Residuos Sólidos Urbanos, Coronel Oviedo, 
CEAMSO. 
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED A-1 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Diagnóstico Financiero, Municipalidad de Villarrica, Septiembre 2002. 
Informe Consultoría Municipalidad de Villarrica (final report), Proyecto de Finanzas 
Municipales. 
Diagnóstico de la Situación, Relleno Sanitario de Residuos Sólidos Urbanos, Villarrica, 
CEAMSO, March 18, 2004. 
“Diagnóstico Preliminar,” Municipalidad de Villeta, presentado a la Intendencia y Junta 
Municipal, por Lic. Fredy Gimenez M., June 2003. 
Informe Consultoría Municipalidad de Ñemby (final report), Municipal Finance Project. 
Diagnóstico Financiero, Municipalidad de Emboscada, December 2002. 
Diagnóstico Financiero, Municipalidad de Limpio, June 2002. 
Informe Consultoría Municipalidad de Limpio (final report), Municipal Finance Project. 
A-2 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
ANNEX B 
Persons Interviewed 
USAID
Steve Marma, SO team leader for decentralization 
Eduardo Bogado, local government project officer 
Municipal Finance Project Office
Peter Doty, chief of party 
Tracy Shanks, project manager 
Venancio Leites, project consultant for San Bernardino, Villarrica 
Mercedes Juvenil, coordinator for works and services 
Ricardo Gaona, project consultant for Caagazu 
Victor Sanabria, project consultant for Ñemby 
Carlos Cubilla, project consultant for Emboscada 
Victor Rivarola, project consultant for Limpio 
Jorge Irala, project consultant for Ciudad del Este and Presidente Franco 
Fredy Gimenez, project consultant for Villeta 
Dimas Piris, project consultant for Coronel Oviedo 
Dirma Franco, project consultant 
Municipal Officials and Staff
Ciudad del Este
Alcides Ramirez: JM 
Ing. Carlos Nuñez: concejal 
Lic. Juan Angel Nuñez: concejal 
I.E. de Alegre: Concejal 
Javier Galeno Benitez: presidente 
Zenen Chamorro: concejal 
Ing. Nelson Aguinagalje: concejal 
Eduardo Morales: concejal 
José Demis Paredes: asesor jurídico 
Carlos Avalos Flores: director de recaudaciones 
Ireneo Franco: jefe de fiscalización 
Ma. Angélica Melgarejo: asistente de liquidación de impuestos 
Heriberto Molinas: encargado de notificaciones y cobranzas 
Walter Feltes: jefe de División Liquidaciones 
Denis Ledesma: asesor contable de fiscalización 
Evelio Zarza: asesor jurídico 
Ricardo Brizuela: jefe División Impuesto Inmobiliario. 
PERSONS INTERVIEWED B-1
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Caaguazú
Abog. Juan Benitez Cañete: secretario general 
Lic. Claudia Carolina Caballero: dirección de tributación 
Lic. Felicita Meza de Legal: directora de administración y finanzas 
Juan Ramón Piñanez: presidente de la junta 
Milciades Paniagua: concejal 
Felipe Nery Martinez Ramos: concejal 
Osvaldo F. Rios: concejal 
Francisco Medina Zárate: secretario de la junta municipal 
Juan Quiñonez: concejal 
Daniel Villalba: concejal 
Lic. Maria Vilma Villamayor Mongelos: concejal 
Dolly Duarte de Alvarenga: concejal 
Miguel Angel Lesme: copncejal 
Adolfo Montiel Brizuela: concejal 
Augusto Figueredo Amarilla: concejal 
Juan Armando Sandoval: concejal 
Antonio Vera Ruiz Diaz: concejal 
Lilian Noemi Villar: presidenta de la Coordinadora de Educadores Barriales 
Celso Ramón Cañete: vicepresidente de la Coordinadora de Educadores Barriales 
Mariano Mendoza Galeano: miembro de la Coordinadora de Educadores Barriales y Contraloría 
Ciudadana 
Nilsa Machoqui Armoa: presidenta de la Comisión Vecinal del Barrio San Francisco. 
Presidente Franco
Ruben Darío Benitez: director de recaudaciones 
Bacilio Torales: concejal 
Catalina Peña Ortega: concejal 
César Dario Benitez: concejal 
Juan Portillo: concejal 
Feliciano Bogado Benitez: concejal 
Representantes de Comisiones Vecinales 
Coronel Oviedo
Roque Olmedo: concejal 
Cristina Torales: notificación, liquidación y cobranzas 
Gustavo Díaz: grandes contribuyentes 
Lic. Mónica de Peña: dirección de recaudaciones 
Lic. Antonio Collante: jefe de patente y obras 
Lic. Elizabeth Delgado: inspectora del Departamento de Catastro 
Mirna Bianciotto: auxiliar patente comercial 
Fida Stanley de Nuñez 
Fernando Hector Riveros 
Anibal Mario Oviedo: junta de Potrero Cué 
Obdulio Gonzales: coordinadora de Comisiones Vecinales 
Catalina López de Martinez: comité de Taller de Costura 
B-2 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Alba Vda. de Mendoza: presidenta de la Comisión Ykua Kaaguy 
Graciela de Gómez: secretaria de la Comisión Ykua Kaaguy 
Gerardo Chavez: comisión vecinal de Ykua Sati 
Edith Miriam Ojeda Medina: comisión de salud (diabética) 
Villarrica
Lic. Juana de Boggino: jefe de grandes contribuyentes 
Abog. Fernando Colman: concejal 
Abog. Federico Alderete: intendente 
Fermina Enciso: concejala 
Gustavo Alvariza: concejal 
Antonio Zorrilla: concejal 
Diego Cano Giarala: dirección de cobranzas 
Miguel Eduardo Samudio: jefe de la Dirección de Otros Tributos 
Isaac Aguilar: director de administración y finanzas 
Carlos René Viera: presidente de la Comisión Vecinal “Corrales” 
Patrocinia de Ferreira: miembro de la comisión 
Severiano Martinez: coordinadora vecinal 
Mirta Benitez de Leguizamón: miembro de la comisión 
Pedro Gustavo Ortiz: coordinadora vecinal 
Gladys Romero: coordinadora de comisiones vecinales 
Meneleo Alderete: presidente de la coordinadora 
José Manuel Peralta: secretario de comisiones vecinales 
Alcides Nicolicchia Kurth: concejal 
Edwin Kaatz: comisión por Villarrica 
Alejandrina Acosta de Verdecchia: comisión vecinal de San José Obrero 
Verónica Escobar Gómez: comisión vecinal de Lomas Valentinas 
Máxima Vega Fernandez: comisión vecinal de Lomas Valentinas 
Presencia de Barreto: comisión Pro empedrado 
Juana de Maidana: lomas valentinas. 
Ñemby
Ever Daniel Ferreira: jefe de catastro 
Angel Bobadilla: director de tributación 
Herna A. Villamyor: directora de comisiones vecinales 
Mary Garay de Fernandez: directora de administración y finanzas 
Blas Lanzoni: intendente 
José Rodríguez: jefe de impuesto inmobiliario. 
PERSONS INTERVIEWED B-3 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Villeta
Hector Rotela: secretario general del municipio 
Elisa de K. 
Carlos Villalba 
Luis Verón: Concejal 
Venacio G. Soto 
Samuel Martinez 
Isabel Patiño 
Manuel Aguilar 
Paulina Ramirez 
Mirta Oviedo 
Mary Vega 
Lourdes Pereira 
Teresa Baez de Ruiz Díaz 
Leticia de Tomáis 
Miryam Fernández 
Jose Gamarra 
Carlos Arguello 
Raúl Maciel 
Petrona de Acosta 
Hugo Noguera 
Miryam Aguayo de Bonussi 
Noelia Bareiro: administración de base de datos 
Justo Ramirez: sección inmobiliario 
Sinforiana Benitez: patente comercial (liquidación) 
Eva Alvarenga: sección catastro 
Blanca Rodríguez: notificadota 
Delcira Espínola: encargada de notificaciones. 
Emboscada
Jorge Ramón Quiñónez: secretario general 
Patricia Zárate: Auxiliar de catastro 
Gustavo Ramón Amarilla: Departamento de Hacienda 
Crisaldo Mora Ortega: Departamento de Recaudación 
Laura Cáceres: Departamento de Hacienda 
Victor Ramón Perez Pereira: secretario de intendencia 
Limpio
Roman Toñanez: secretario general 
Alberto Coronel: secretario de recursos humanos 
Adriana Vallejos Ibáñez: encargada de adquisiciones 
Gloria Abreu: Departamento de Impuesto Inmobiliario 
Julio Díaz Díaz: director del Departamento de Impuesto Inmobiliario 
Blanca Aveiro de Pereira: directora del Departamento de Recaudaciones 
Francisco Javier Machuca: director del Departamento de Catastro 
Blanca Saralicia Ruiz: directora del Departamento de Desarrollo Local 
B-4 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Ramon Barboza: consejo inter-sectorial oñondivepa para el Desarrollo Sanitario (CIODECO) 
Luis Gutierrez: consejo inter-sectorial oñondivepa para el Desarrollo Sanitario 
(CIODECO)/Asociación de Agua y Medioambiente (AMA) 
San Bernardino
Vicenta Millot: asesoría presupuestaria 
Isabelino Cañete: concejal 
Manuel López: periodista 
Maximi Fiorio Soto: presidente CSE 
Luis Aguilar Rios: intendente 
Francisco Aguilar Rios: concejal municipal 
Adolfo Milllot: concejal 
Pablo Alfredo Mora Vallejos 
Felix Aguirre 
Emilse Zoria Gómez 
Limpia Ortiz 
Nilda Martinez: presidenta Comisión Vecinal Barrio Colón 
Elizabeth de Ramirez: tesorera de la comisión Vecinal P.E. 
Maria Molinas de Villasanti: miembro por empleado 
Nelly Maidana: presidenta de la Comisión Por Escuela 
Maximiliano Soto: Departamento de Concejo Solidario 
Blasida Vera Riquelme: Pro Tesorera Comisión Pro Capilla S.L. 
Crispín Fleitas 
Valentín Fleitas: presidente 
Lorenzo Aguilera: auxiliar de cobranzas 
Juan Soto: jefe del Departamento de Tránsito 
Daniel Vera: auxiliar de informática 
Julian Aguilar Rios: director Departamento Inmobiliario 
Teresita Bobadilla: Hacienda / Tesorería 
Luis Vargas: contador 
Nicolás Britos: catastro 
Eugenio Oehme: Departamento de Planificación Urbana 
Gobernación de Caaguazú
Juan Ramón Samudio: UAM – Informática 
Marisol Gauto: encargada de la UAM 
Oscar Cardozo: asesor jurídico de la UAM 
José Maria González: asistente de la UAM 
PERSONS INTERVIEWED B-5 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
Others
Robert Aselin, consultant to USAID on the strategic plan 
Oscar Rodriquez, consultant to USAID on the strategic plan 
Ing. Jorge Abbate C. Director Ejecutivo, Alter Vida 
Arq. Romy Vaesken Tibucio, coordinación, Alter Vida 
Ruben Dario Sanabria, técnico, Alter Vida 
B-6 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 
ANNEX C 
Considerations and Criteria for Selecting Municipalities 
A. Size and Financial Category of Municipality 
The 22 municipalities that are currently involved in the project are generally medium to large, 
with some smaller municipalities. Most of the municipalities have fairly large budgets, but even 
some of the smaller municipalities may have higher than average income generated locally.14 For 
example, San Bernardino is a resort community with high income, but a small permanent 
population. Sample selection took into account these factors. 
B. Time in the Project 
The sample took into account how long municipalities have been involved in the project. In five 
of the sample municipalities, technical assistance has been completed. In four it is ongoing, and 
in one it is just beginning. 
C. Sample Characteristics 
Municipality Population15 Financial Category Project Start 
San Bernardino 9,550 Group I 01/22/03 
Ciudad de Este 222,109 Group I 2/25/04 
Presidente Franco 53,660 Group I 4/02/03 
Caaguazu 100,132 Group I 4/01/03 
Coronel Oviedo 85,499 Group I 3/07/02 
Villarrica 55,000 Group I 8/05/02 
Ñemby 71,000 Group II 11/11/02 
Villeta 22,830 Group II 5/29/03 
Emboscada 12,370 Group III 11/10/02 
Limpio 72,510 Group I 5/31/02 
D. Other Factors 
We also wanted to take into account less quantifiable factors. For instance, if there was a 
municipality with a good example of citizen participation, one with noted excellence in revenue 
generation, or some with problems getting projects off the ground, we wanted to include these 
municipalities if at all possible. There was also interest in making sure that political affiliations 
were fairly represented. Additional notes provided by project staff on the sample are: 
 
14 A national decree ranked municipalities by groups as follows: Using the average budget of the 17 department 
capitals, Group I municipalities had budgets less than 50% of the average; Group II 12-50% of the average; Group 
III 3-12% of the average and Group IV less than 3%. 
15 According to the National Census of 2002. 
CONSIDERATIONS AND CRITERIA FOR SELECTING MUNICIPALITIES C-1 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
The sample represents a good cross-section of political affiliations. Four municipalities have 
Colorado Party mayors or “intendentes” (Oviedo, Caaguazu, Presidente Franco, Ciudad del 
Este), and there are six liberals. 
San Bernardino. This is one of the original 12 municipalities. Here we will see a broad cross￾section of the different elements of tax collection along with elements from TAPES (program of 
accountability, transparency, participation, ethics). The project had a small setback some time 
ago because the municipality was providing inaccurate info about tax recovery, so a change of 
strategy was needed in 2004. 
Ciudad del Este. One of the newer municipalities (the project started in February) and the largest 
city involved in the project. They have started to look at tax issues, but not other elements of the 
project. They have been reluctant to hold an audiencia pública but recently have warmed to the 
idea and may hold one in the near future. 
Presidente Franco. Work on their municipal development fund is more advanced than 
elsewhere. They held an audiencia pública but there seems to be very little follow-on from it. 
They have not implemented many works or services. 
Caaguazu. This municipality is not a stellar performer, specifically in terms of the democracy 
and governance TAPES components. Given its size and nice rural/urban mix, however, it is 
certainly compelling to include in the survey. The project has provided additional technical 
assistance to help with garbage collection services, including a new site and payment plan. 
Coronel Oviedo. One of the very first municipalities assisted under the project. It has a great 
income-enhancement track record and good TAPES balance. There is also an interesting 
sustainability issue: income enhancement declined when project assistance was completed, then 
recovered somewhat. 
Villarrica. This is a great success story for the project, all-around. Especially in the TAPES 
components. 
Ñemby. This is considered an award-winning municipality and a success story for the project. It 
recently won an award in Miami as one of the five most innovative municipalities in Latin 
America. Also, there is successful work with a replication mechanism aimed at pairing Ñemby 
with another municipality, Carapegua, to teach best practices). 
Villeta. Although Villeta is located in the urbanized Central Department, it has a large rural 
population. It experienced a significant increase in tax revenues and has had considerable success 
in TAPES as well as accounting reform. 
Emboscada. There is strong community awareness and participation, in spite of serious problems 
with tax collection, management, and corruption issues. It is very rural. 
Limpio. This was the first municipality in the project. Initially the project applied a user fees 
approach, helping with the sewage services. Then the project altered into its methodology, signed 
C-2 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
a memorandum of understanding and began tax collection work. This approach was used in 
subsequent municipalities. However, Limpio is not an outstanding example. The municipality 
has had its share of problems, including falling tax revenues. 
CONSIDERATIONS AND CRITERIA FOR SELECTING MUNICIPALITIES C-3 

CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
ANNEX D 
Evaluación de Medio Tiempo del Proyecto Finanzas 
Municipales 
Guía de Entrevistas 
A.) Preguntas para los Intendentes / Concejales Municipales
1. ¿Cuándo escuchó por primera vez del Proyecto Finanzas Municipales? 
2. ¿Cuándo fue firmado el Convenio entre Chemonics y Municipio? 
3. ¿Cuáles son las responsabilidades de la Municipalidad bajo ese Convenio? 
4. ¿La municipalidad cumplió totalmente esas responsabilidades? 
5. ¿De cuánto tiempo fue la asistencia proveída por el Proyecto de Finanzas? (si todavía 
no se completó, ¿cuando está previsto que termine la asistencia?) 
6. (Para el Ms. Original) ¿qué contactos Usted continúa teniendo con el equipo del 
proyecto? 
7. ¿Cuáles fueron los mayores logros de la municipalidad y del equipo del proyecto? 
8. ¿Qué problemas encontró al trabajar en temas de gerenciamiento y financieros con el 
equipo del proyecto? 
9. ¿Cómo se resolvieron? 
10. Además del trabajo de impuesto inmobiliario, ¿el equipo del proyecto le asistió en las 
siguientes áreas? 
• Contabilidad y reportes de la información financiera 
• Manejo de los gastos 
• Tecnología de la información 
• Cumplimiento de regulaciones ambientales para los proyectos de servicios 
11. Antes de que el proyecto iniciara, ¿Cuáles eran las principales fuentes de ingreso de 
la municipalidad? 
D-1 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
12. ¿Esto cambió desde que el proyecto inició su asistencia?, Si es así, ¿Cuáles son las 
principales fuentes de ingreso ahora? 
13. ¿Qué porcentaje del total del ingreso de la municipalidad proviene del impuesto 
inmobiliario? ¿Porcentaje proveniente de patentes comerciales? 
14. ¿Cuál considera Usted que será la tendencia de ingresos locales en los siguientes 
años? 
15. ¿La municipalidad creó un fondo de desarrollo con los ingresos generados como 
resultado del proyecto? 
16. ¿Cómo fue montado este fondo y cómo es administrado? 
17. Entendemos que varios proyectos fueron presentados para la utilización de los 
recursos del fondo de desarrollo ¿Cómo se eligieron esos proyectos? 
18. ¿Alguno de los proyectos de servicios fueron de beneficio para toda la municipalidad 
(comunidad) ej. Relleno sanitario, etc. 
19. ¿Cómo reaccionó la comunidad al proyecto que se estaba llevando a cabo? 
20. ¿Planea Usted seguir depositando un porcentaje de sus ingresos en el fondo de 
desarrollo para nuevos proyectos? 
21. Cuando acabe la asistencia técnica de USAID, ¿dónde buscará asistencia en el futuro? 
22. ¿Qué ONG´s están trabajando en esta municipalidad? (Alter Vida, Contraloría 
Ciudadana, Gestión Local, Transparencia Internacional, Geasa, First, Proena, 
Ceamso)? 
23. ¿Qué relación tiene la municipalidad con la firma Asesoría Jurídica Empresarial? 
24. ¿Tienen o tuvieron antes cualquier otro tipo de asistencia de otra organización sobre 
administración municipal? 
25. ¿Alguna vez pagó por asistencia recibida? 
26. ¿Está dispuesto a pagar para recibir asistencia del sector privado en el futuro? 
(explorar) 
27. ¿Cuál es la relación entre esta municipalidad y la gobernación? 
28. ¿Reciben apoyo técnico de la gobernación?, si es así explique que tipo de apoyo. 
D-2 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
29. ¿Participa la municipalidad en algún tipo de asociación de municipalidades? Si es así, 
describa las actividades. 
30. ¿Ha brindado asistencia técnica a Municipalidades vecinas en base a las experiencias 
del Proyecto? 
31. ¿Ha participado en alguna actividad, como seminarios y conferencias, a fin de 
compartir sus experiencias con otras municipalidades? 
32. En su experiencia ¿existen otras maneras de diseminar la información entre otras 
municipalidades? Ej. Publicaciones, páginas web, etc. 
33. ¿Tiene Usted contacto directo con organizaciones a nivel nacional sobre temas 
municipales? ¿Usted reporta anualmente su presupuesto a la gobernación o a alguna 
organización a nivel nacional? 
34. ¿Cambió Usted la organización de este gobierno municipal como resultado de la 
asistencia de este proyecto? Si es así ¿Cómo fue? 
35. ¿Han cambiado las prácticas de gerenciamiento como resultado del proyecto?, si es 
así, Explique cómo. 
36. ¿Cómo se comunica tradicionalmente el gobierno municipal con le público? ¿Las 
formas de comunicación han cambiado como resultado del proyecto? 
37. ¿Hay algún tipo de conflicto con la comunidad como resultado de las actividades de 
recaudación de impuestos? Si es así ¿cómo fueron resueltos? 
38. ¿Qué grupos comunicaros son los mas activos en temas municipales? 
39. ¿Ha realizado audiencias públicas? Si así ¿cuántas ha realizado? 
40. ¿Qué tipo de aceptación tuvieron las audiencias públicas? ¿Planea continuar con las 
audiencias públicas en el futuro? 
41. ¿Usted tienen alguna manera formal de evaluar esos encuentros (audiencias 
públicas)? 
42. ¿La Municipalidad tiene un departamento u oficina con la finalidad de 
relacionamiento con grupos comunitarios? 
43. ¿Han Establecido un sistema de u oficina de contraloría interna? 
44. ¿Qué podría recomendar al Proyecto para mejorar su trabajo con otras 
Municipalidades en el último periodo? 
EVALUACIÓN DE MEDIO TIEMPO DEL PROYECTO DE FINANZAS MUNICIPALES D-3 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
B.) Preguntas para el staff de Impuesto Inmobiliario
Obtener si está disponible: 
Total de hogares en la municipalidad: 
Total de hogares relevados en el catastro: 2002 2003 2004 
Total anual de impuestos inmobiliarios cargados: 2002 2003 2004 
Total anual de recaudaciones de impuestos a la propiedad: 2002 2003 2004 
Total de de morosos: 2002 2003 2004 
% de morosos: 2002 2003 2004 
Promedio de meses de atraso: 
Monto total de impuestos no pagados: 2002 2003 2004 
Monto total de morosos recuperados luego de la asistencia del 
proyecto: 
2002 2003 2004 
1. ¿Cuál fue el primer paso tomado cuándo se inició la asistencia del proyecto? 
2. ¿Podría describir las acciones realizadas en relación a los grandes contribuyentes que 
debían sus impuestos? 
3. ¿Fue posible negociar un arreglo con la mayoría de estos propietarios? 
4. ¿Qué resultados obtuvo con otros propietarios que debían impuestos? 
5. ¿Fue capaz de reducir el total de propietarios morosos como resultado de esta asistencia? 
¿De cuánto fue la reducción? 
6. ¿Existen grupos de propietarios representativos de los impuestos que no pueden ser 
recaudados? Por ejemplo, hemos escuchado de propiedades que fueron distribuidas hace 
años, de acuerdo a la reforma agraria y estos no poseen títulos claros. ¿Qué pasa con las 
propiedades municipales? 
7. ¿Qué porcentaje del total de propiedades estos grupos representan? 
8. ¿El proyecto asiste en la actualización del catastro? Si es así, ¿qué se hizo? 
9. Si no se actualizó el catastro, ¿De qué fecha es el último catastro realizado? 
10. ¿Con que frecuencia se planean las actualizaciones? 
11. ¿Podría explicar cómo trabaja la reliquidación? ¿Cuántas propiedades fueron sujetas a la 
reliquidación? 
12. ¿Los valores fiscales están actualizados? (¿Qué bases se utilizan para este propósito?) 
D-4 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
13. ¿La organización de su unidad ha cambiado como resultado de la asistencia proveída por el 
proyecto? Si es así ¿Cómo cambió? 
14. ¿Tiene el software y el entrenamiento necesario para continuar reduciendo la morosidad y 
mantener actualizados las planillas de los impuestos? 
15. Como resultado del Proyecto ¿hubo cambios en alguna de las siguientes áreas? 
- contabilidad y reportes sobre la información financiera. 
- Manejo de gastos. 
- Tecnología de la información. 
- Cumplimiento de regulaciones ambientales para los proyectos de servicios. 
16. ¿Podría responder algunas preguntas generales acerca de las recaudaciones municipales de 
servicios como agua y recolección de basura? Si es así continúa con lo que sigue abajo: 
Obtener si está disponible: 
Servicios de agua y recolección de basura 
Total de propiedades cubiertas por el 
servicio 
2002 2003 2004 
Total de propiedades cargadas por el 
servicio (%de cobertura) 
2002 2003 2004 
Costo del servicio (mensual o anual) y % 
del costo cubierto por el costo 
2002 2003 2004 
17. ¿Los costos y la recaudación por servicios como agua y recolección de basura han 
cambiado como resultado de la asistencia técnica del proyecto? 
18. ¿Ha habido algún cambio organizacionala en la manera en que la municipalidad maneja 
esos servicios? 
19. ¿Qué obstáculos tiene la municipalidad en la recaudación de esos servicios? 
C.) Preguntas para los grupos comunitarios (Comisiones Vecinales) 
1. ¿Cómo se comunica normalmente la municipalidad con el público? Y ustedes con 
ellos? 
2. ¿Alguna vez han participado en reuniones realizadas por la municipalidad? Si es así 
¿cuándo fue y cuáles fueron los puntos tratados? ¿Qué tan informativas fueron estas 
reuniones? 
3. ¿Planea continuar asistiendo a estas reuniones públicas? 
4. ¿Están al tanto de los esfuerzos que realiza la municipalidad para recaudar los 
impuestos vencidos? Si es así ¿qué información tiene usted? 
5. ¿Se planteó alguna inquietud referente a estos esfuerzos? 
EVALUACIÓN DE MEDIO TIEMPO DEL PROYECTO DE FINANZAS MUNICIPALES D-5 
CHEMONICS INTERNATIONAL INC. 
6. Si hay algún problema en la comunidad, ¿Cómo comunican ese problema a los 
oficiales municipales? 
7. ¿Los gobiernos locales comparten la información con la comunidad sobre 
presupuesto y costos de proyectos? 
8. ¿Están al tanto de los esfuerzos de la municipalidad para crear fondos de desarrollo 
para los proyectos comunitarios? ¿Participaron ustedes en la presentación , selección 
o construcción de algún proyecto municipal? 
9. ¿Mejoraron los servicios en la municipalidad? Explorar mejoras y necesidades 
prioritarias. 
10. ¿Con quienes tienen mas contacto dentro de la municipalidad? 
D-6 PARAGUAY: MUNICIPAL FINANCE PROJECT (MFP) — MID-TERM EVALUATION