Woreda-City Government Benchmarking Survey Draft Reportsiteresources.worldbank.org/.../Resources/benchmarking_report.pdf · GTZ - German Technical Cooperation "Woreda-City Government

GTZ - German Technical Cooperation

"Woreda-City Government Benchmarking Survey"

(PART II - Survey Round 1 of 2)

Draft Report

Addis Ababa June, 2005

Selam Development Consultants P.O.Box 27419 code 1000 Tel. 536488, Fax 536489

Email: [email protected] Addis Abeba

Selam Development Consultants - Draft Report

GTZ - Consultancy Services to Conduct Woreda City Government Survey (Part II)

.ii.

Contents

Page

ACRONYMS ..........................................................................................................................................................VI ACRONYMS ..........................................................................................................................................................VI PROJECT DATA SHEET (SYNOPSIS)............................................................................................................... 1 I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 2 II. OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED OUTPUTS ................................................................................................ 4

2.1 SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES: .................................................................................................4 2.2 EXPECTED OUTPUT .......................................................................................................5

III. METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................................................ 6 3.1 PRIMARY DATA..............................................................................................................6 3.2 SECONDARY DATA AND SAMPLING................................................................................7 3.3 SAMPLING AND SURVEY PROCEDURE.............................................................................7 3.4 DATA ENTRY AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURE.....................................................................8

IV. WOREDA/MUNICIPALITY BENCHMARKING: THE ISSUES............................................................. 9 4.1 IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS .............................................................................................9 4.2. OVERVIEW OF BENCHMARKING ISSUES .....................................................................10 4.3 INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE IN BENCHMARKING.....................................................14 4.4 PREVIOUS BENCHMARKING STUDIES IN ETHIOPIA.....................................................19 4.5 THE PREMISES OF THE CURRENT BENCHMARKING SURVEY ......................................19

V. REVIEW OF RESULTS OF THE FIRST PHASE OF BENCHMARKING STUDY............................. 23 5.1 VALIDATION OF THE VIABILITY OF WOREDA/MUNICIPAL BENCHMARKING .................23 5.2 ASSESSMENT OF DATA AVAILABILITY.........................................................................24 5.3 DESIGN OF QUESTIONNAIRE .......................................................................................24 5.4 SELECTION OF REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE WOREDAS AND MUNICIPALITIES................25

VII. ANALYSIS OF BENCHMARKING SURVEY RESULTS...................................................................... 31 7.1. RESULTS FOR SAMPLE WOREDAS...............................................................................31 7.1.1 - General Information on Surveyed Woredas .........................................................31 7.1.2 Financial Autonomy and Performance...................................................................33

7.1.2.1 Sources of Revenue - Budget, Tax, Fees and commercial Activities .......................................... 34 7.1.2.2 Expenditure Pattern in Target Woredas........................................................................................ 52

7.1.3 Institutional Capacity..............................................................................................58 7.1.3.1 Procedural Comprehensiveness of Budget Preparation and Accounting..................................... 58 7.1.3.2 Efficiency and Appropriateness of Tax and Fee Collection Procedures ..................................... 60

7.1.4 Public Information, Participation, Empowerment and Corruption control ...........68 7.1.4.1 Access to Information and Community Consultation .................................................................. 68 7.1.4.2 Local Government Support to NGOs and CBOs.......................................................................... 69

7.1.5 Service Delivery Performance ................................................................................70 7.1.5.1 Basic Access of population to selected services........................................................................... 70 7.1.5.2 Agricultural and Food Security Service Delivery ........................................................................72

7.2. RESULTS FOR SAMPLE MUNICIPALITIES....................................................................78 7.2.1 - General Information on Surveyed Municipalities ................................................78


.iii.

7.2.2 Financial Autonomy and Performance...................................................................79 7.2.2.1 Sources of Revenue - Budget, Tax, Fees and Commercial Activities ......................................... 80 7.2.2.2 Expenditure Pattern in Target municipalities ............................................................................... 94

7.2.3 Institutional Capacity............................................................................................101 7.1.3.3 Human Resource and Capacity Building ..................................................................108

7.2.4 Public Information, Participation, Empowerment and Corruption Control..........................................................................................................................111

7.2.4.1 Community Consultation and Access to Information...........................................111 7.2.4.2 Local Government Support to NGOs and CBOs .....................................................113

7.2.5 Service Delivery Performance in Sample Municipalities .....................................114 7.2.5.1 Basic Access of population to selected services.........................................................................114 7.2.5.2 Solid Waste Management ................................................................................................116

7.3 BENCHMARKING OF WOREDAS AND MUNICIPALITIES ..............................................122 7.3.1 INDICATOR DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................122 7.3.2 BENCHMARKING RESULT SUMMARY TABLES.........................................................129

VIII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................................................135 8.1 ON WOREDAS ............................................................................................................135 8.2 ON MUNICIPALITIES .................................................................................................141

ANNEX I: BIBLIOGRAPHY.............................................................................................................................149 ANNEX II: LIST OF CONTACTED PERSONS IN WOREDAS AND MUNICIPALITIES ...................150 ANNEX III: LIST OF URBAN CENTERS SELECTED FOR URBAN MANAGEMENT REFORM PROGRAM IN THE FOUR MAJOR REGIONS ...........................................................................................155

List of Tables

Page Table 1 - Definitions of Important Terms..................................................................................9 Table 2 list of some of the Scandinavian countries benchmarking projects............................17 Table 3: Selected Criteria for a stratified sample of woredas..................................................26 Table 4: Overview: Results from stratified random sampling by criteria ...............................26 Table 5: Overview: Results from stratified random sampling by region.................................27 Table 6: Selected woredas to be included in the sample .........................................................28 Table 7: Selected municipalities ..............................................................................................30 Table W-1: Population, land size, food security status and accessibility ...............................32 Table W-2: Budgeted and Actual Revenue ............................................................................34 Table W-3: Sources of Actual Revenue...................................................................................36 Table W-4: Capital Investment Portion of Total Budgeted Revenue ......................................38 Table W-5: Revenues secured from International Donors ......................................................40 Table W-6: Salary and non-Salary portion of Revenue...........................................................42 Table W-7: Actual Tax collection in Sample Woredas ...........................................................45 Table W-8: Actual Collection Fees in Sample Woredas .........................................................48 Table W-9: Revenues from Commercial Activities.................................................................51 Table W-10: Budget and Actual Expenditure in Sample Woredas .........................................54 Table W-11: Sectoral Composition of Actual Expenditure of sample woredas by Region ....56 Table W-12: Compliance with Key Financial Management Issues in the Sample Woredas ..58 Table W-13: TIN Assignment in Sample Woredas .................................................................60


.iv.

Table W-14: Tax/Fee Assessment in Sample Woredas...........................................................62 Table W-15: Initiative for taxpayer education and Service Quality Assessment in Sample

Woredas ...........................................................................................................................63 Table W-16: Staffing level of sample woredas........................................................................64 Table W-17: Compliance with Modern Human Resource Management approaches..............66 Table W-18: Public Access to written Information and Community Consultation.................68 Table W-19: Status of basic service by delivery actors ..........................................................71 Table W-20: Service Quality Assessment in Sample Woredas ...............................................72 Table W-21: Basic Data on Agricultural service.....................................................................72 Table W-22: Agricultural Inputs Distributed in the sample woredas ......................................74 Table W-23: Services made available for majority of farmers................................................76 Table M-1: Population, land sizes and accessibility...............................................................78 Table M-2: Budgeted and Actual Revenue..............................................................................80 Table M-3: Sources of Actual Revenue...................................................................................83 Table M-4: Capital Investment Portion of Total Budgeted Revenue in Sample Municipalities

..........................................................................................................................................84 Table M-5: Funds received from international donors and NGOs ..........................................86 Table M-6: Taxes Collected in the Target Municipalities .......................................................87 Table M-7: Actual fees and service charges collected by sample municipalities....................90 Table M-8: Revenues from Commercial Activities of Sample Municipalities .......................92 Table M-9: Expenditure in Municipal Functions – Totals (in Birr) ........................................94 Table M-10: Expenditure in Municipal Functions - Details of Budget and Expenditure (1 of

2) ......................................................................................................................................96 Table M-11: Expenditure in Municipal Functions - Details of Budget and Expenditure (2 of

2) ......................................................................................................................................97 Table M-12: Expenditure in State Functions - Totals.............................................................98 Table M-13: Expenditure in State Functions - Details of Budget and Expenditure ..............100 Table M-14: Procedural comprehensiveness of budget preparation and accounting practices

........................................................................................................................................102 Table M-15: TIN Assignment in Sample Municipalities ......................................................104 Table M-16: Tax/Fee Assessment in the Sample Municipalities ..........................................106 Table M-17: Initiative for Taxpayer Tducation and Service Quality Assessment ................107 Table M-18: Staffing of sample municipalities .....................................................................108 Table M-19: Compliance with Modern Human Resource Management approaches............111 Table M-20: Public Access to Written Information and Community Consultation ..............112 Table M-21: Basic access of population to selected services ...............................................115 Table M-22: Service quality Assessment in Sample Woredas ..............................................116 Table M-23: Solid waste disposal service coverage ..............................................................117 Table M-24: Staff for solid waste management.....................................................................118 Table M-25: Treatment of solid waste after collection..........................................................119 Table M-26: Problems faced for solid waste collection service ............................................121


.v.

List of Figures

Page Fig. 1: How benchmarking supports organizational learning.................................................11 Fig. 2 The UK /European Business Excellence Model Used in Benchmarking......................16 Fig.W-1: Mean Per Capita Revenue of Woredas in the four Regions....................................36 Fig. W-2: Composition of Mean Revenue of Woredas by Budget Source (in Birr) ...............38 Fig.W-3: Per capita Capital Budget of Sample woredas by Region (In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y)40 Fig. W-4: Earmarked transfer from regions for salary and non-salary expenses ....................44 Fig. W-5: Mean Actual Tax Collected in Sample Woredas by Region...................................46 Fig. W-6: Average Collection of Fees (In Birr)......................................................................49 Fig. W-7: Average Budget and Actual Expenditure of Sample Woredas in the four Regions55 Fig W-8: Sector Expenditure Budget and Actual of Sample woredas by Region ...................56 Fig. W-9: Average time needed to pay taxes (in minutes) ......................................................62 Fig. W-10: Publication of Tax Assessment Procedures...........................................................63 Fig. W-11: Major problems in staff recruitment.....................................................................66 Fig. W-12: Efficiency of Distributed Inputs ............................................................................76 Fig. M-1: Mean per Capita Revenue of Municipalities in the four Regions ..........................81 Fig. M-2: Composition of Mean Revenue of Municipalities by Budget Source (in Birr).......82 Fig. M-3: Per Capita Capital Budget of Sample Municipalities by Region - In Birr .............85 Fig. M-4: Mean Actual Tax Collected in Sample Municipalities by Region ..........................88 Fig. M-5: Average Collection of Fees in Sample Municipalities (In Birr)..............................91 Fig. M-6:- Share of municipal expenditure types in the mean value.......................................95 Fig M-7: Share of Sectors in Average Municipal State Function Expenditure by region.......99 Fig. M-8: Average Time needed to pay taxes in Sample Municipalities...............................106 Fig. M-9: Publication of Tax Assessment Procedures...........................................................107 Fig M-10: Major problems in staff recruitment in municipalities ........................................110 Fig. M-11: Frequency of solid waste collection in municipalities........................................120


.vi.

AAAcccrrrooonnnyyymmmsss ADLI Agriculture Development Led Industrialization AAA Analytical and Advisory Activities ACSI Amhara Credit and Savings Institutions APQC American Productivity and Quality Center BIS Budget Information System BoFED Bureau of Finance and Economic Development CBDSD Capacity Building for Decentralized Service Delivery CBO Community-Based Organizations CSA Central Statistical Authority DA Development Agents DfID Department for International Development E.F.Y Ethiopian Fiscal Year E.C. Ethiopian Calendar FDRE Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia FM Financial Management G.C. Gregorian Calendar GTZ German Technical Cooperation HIPC Highly Indebted Poor Countries HR Human Resource HTML Hyper Text Mark-up Language IDA International Development Association IGR Institutional Governance Review IMF International Monetary Fund ISO International Standards Organization MMPDP Municipal Management and Policy Development Program MoFED Ministry of Finance and Economic Development NGO Non Governmental Organizations OCSSC Oromia Credit and Savings Share Company OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development PI Performance Indicators PPA Participatory Poverty Assessment PSCAP Public Sector Capacity building Programme SDPRP Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Programme SNNPR Southern Nations, Nationalities and Peoples' Region SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences TIN Tax Identification Number TOR Terms of Reference UDF Urban Development Fund



.1.

PPPrrrooojjjeeecccttt DDDaaatttaaa SSShhheeeeeettt (((sssyyynnnooopppsssiiisss)))

Project Title:

Woreda/City Government Benchmarking Survey

Project Areas: 48 Woredas and 30 Municipalities in Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP Regions in two rounds. Current coverage: 23 woredas and 17 Municipalities of the mentioned regions. Round 1 of 2.

Country: Ethiopia

Project No.: RS/BM/04/01

Notification of Award: 15/04/2005

Contract Date: 20/04/2005

Completion Date: 22/11/2005

Funding: GTZ Ethiopia Office, Tel. 251-1-653198, [email protected]

Beneficiary: Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, Tel. 251-1-226667

Consultant: Selam Development Consultants, Tel. 251-1-536489

Date of Report: 15/06/2005

Reporting Period: Draft Report – First Round Survey

Author of Report: Selam Development Consultants


.2.

III... IIInnntttrrroooddduuuccctttiiiooonnn An important policy pursued by the Government of Ethiopia in recent years is democratic decentralization aimed at empowering municipalities and woredas. In line with this, apart from woreda decentralization, the Government launched efforts to modernize the legal, fiscal, and administrative systems of municipalities that govern urban centers and their rural vicinity. The ongoing restructuring effort seeks to empower municipalities and woredas to undertake service delivery and economic activities necessary for the sustainable development of the country. This institutional transformation agenda includes clarifying and harmonizing the legal framework for woredas and municipalities; the continued innovation of sub-regional fiscal instruments such as transfers and other revenue sharing arrangements; the role and functional restructuring of regional bureau as well as woredas and municipalities; the sequenced implementation of civil service reforms across governmental institutions, and the establishment of sectoral monitoring arrangements as part of the multi-sectoral fiscal system with regions. Consequently, a far-reaching national program of capacity building at the federal, regional, and local levels was put in place in 2001. The Public Sector Capacity Building Program (PSCAP) was then designed to address issues related to strengthening of working systems, improving organizational effectiveness and rapid development of human resources in the public, private, civil society, and higher education sectors. PSCAP has been designed with the assistance of the donor communities including the World Bank. The project appraisal document prepared by the World Bank requires the Woreda/municipal benchmarking survey in four rounds during the PSCAP life span as one of the main credit conditions. The first round of the planned benchmarking survey has already been carried out by an international consultant addressing issues related to data availability and methodologies for future surveys. The current woreda and municipal benchmarking is the second of the envisaged surveys and attempts to establish a baseline data and indicative benchmarks for selected sample woredas and municipalities across the four


.3.

larger Regional states of the country. The sample size established by the international consultant in Phase I of the benchmarking study had been split into two equal samples to meet the deadlines required by the PSCAP project appraisal document. Hence, this report deals with the results of the survey conducted in the first half of the sample containing 23 woredas and 17 municipalities. This report presents the findings and recommendations of the assigned consultant. Thus, the report is conveniently divided into eight sections including this Introduction. The next section presents the objective and scope of the study. Section four describes the methodology used by the consultant. In section five, the report illustrates the theoretical and methodological issues related to woreda/municipal benchmarking including international and local experiences. Section six presents the results of the survey conducted in Phase I by the international consultant with the aim of establishing a flow in documenting the benchmarking effort. One of the core parts of this report, section seven, presents the findings of the current survey and summary benchmarks for both woredas and municipalities. The last section, section eight, provides the major conclusions and recommendations of the consultant along with the lessons learned from this benchmarking exercise.


.4.

IIIIII... OOObbbjjjeeeccctttiiivvveeesss aaannnddd EEExxxpppeeecccttteeeddd ooouuutttpppuuutttsss

As per the TOR, the overall objectives of the assignment for a national or international institution for the woreda-city government survey is the collection and interpretation of data on the present institutional (governance) system, the financial and human resource management system and the service delivery capacity and capability for selected services.

2.1 Specific Objectives:

The survey shall be based on the concept of the woreda city government benchmarking system, the methodology and the samples proposed by the consultant engaged under part 1, which is already completed. This survey shall produce an information base on the subjects mentioned above for an initial number of:

48 sample woredas 32 sample city governments from different grades

The data collection and reporting on the total sample size shall be divided in two parts.

Data and report for the first sub-sample is due to be delivered on June 15, 2005; the size of the sub-sample for phase one is to be defined by the consultant carrying out the data collection. The size of the sub-sample for phase one depends on considerations about the number of Woredas and municipalities that can be covered within the given time frame (June 15, 2005).

The reduced sample size must reflect the proportional distribution between Woredas and municipalities according to the total sample size stated in the ToR.

The sample size for phase two has to cover the remaining number of local Woredas and municipalities, thus ensuring that the total sample size is covered by November 22, 2005.

An updated specification of the deadlines for the outputs is provided in the following section.


.5.

2.2 Expected output

An information system on the situation of Woreda – City Governments, which covers the above mentioned topics. The information system has to be IT based and flexible to be expanded horizontally (including more Woredas and City Governments) as well as vertically (to include additional indicators or deepen the initial indicators in terms of quantity and quality). The output is expected at the end of phase 1 (15.06.2005).

A manual on the survey conducted, which allows the repetition in following years by Government or other institutions. The output is expected at the end of phase 2 (22.11.2005)

Data analysis results of Woredas and Municipalities as per specifications detailed in the data analysis section of this document. Due to the changes of the ToR, two data analysis reports have to be submitted, each covering the results of the data collection of the respective phases.


.6.

IIIIIIIII... MMMeeettthhhooodddooolllooogggyyy

The methodology used by the consultant includes all the pertinent tools and techniques that facilitate faster and accurate collection and analysis of data. The specific approach was presented to the client in the technical proposal of the consultant. Thereafter, the Client had reviewed, commented and approved the proposed methodology and approach of the consultant.

3.1 Primary Data One of the outputs from the first phase of the benchmarking study was a 25 page questionnaire to be used in the current study. The consultant assigned for this study had to quickly familiarize himself with the logic, content and flow of the designed questionnaire. The inception report submitted to the client outlined the suggestions of the consultant to improve/clarify question items and flows of the questionnaire. The consultant engaged in the previous phase had clarified all the issues that needed attention. Based on this, the questionnaire was finalized for the pre-test phase. Questionnaire pre-test was thereafter conducted in Shebedino Woreda and Adama Municipality to spot question items that need refinement and assess the overall relevancy, data availability and flow of the designed questionnaire. Pre-test resulted showed that the questionnaire was very suitable for the intended purpose except minor modifications. On the other hand, the pre-test revealed where the bulk of the needed data was available among the 18-24 government offices. Thus, the actual survey was then conducted in 23 woredas and 17 municipalities of the four larger regions, namely, Amhara, Tigray, Oromia and SNNP Regions. The survey was conducted by sixteen enumerators grouped in eight teams. Besides, field level supervision and coordination was carried out by the team leader and the statistician working full time for this survey. To ensure data quality, most of the people in the surveyed jurisdictions were contacted again by telephone to clarify ambiguity in the data and also to confirm some of the provided figures. Regional BoFEDs were also contacted to cross check figures related to budget block-grant and other financial data.


.7.

3.2 Secondary Data and Sampling The consultant also conducted review of relevant literature. The term "Benchmarking" is new and its Definition can be a minefield for disputes. The desk research carried out by the consultant helped clarify many of the involved issues and sharpened the direction of the survey. Internet was the source of most of the literature relevant to the issue of benchmarking as well as the experience of other countries. However, the core document reviewed for this study was the final report produced by the international consultant for phase I of the benchmarking study. Other reviewed literatures include the following:

FDRE Central statistical Authority's, Statistical Abstract, 2004 Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program (SDPRP) Document,

MoFED, 2003. PSCAP - Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, March 2004. PSCAP - Monitoring and Evaluation Document, Ministry of Capacity Building, June

2004. Ethiopia Participatory Poverty Assessment 2004-05, PPA Manual, Nov. 2004. Ethiopia-Regionalization Study, World Bank, June 2000. Ethiopia-Country Financial Accountability Assessment, Vol I - Main Report, World

Bank, June 2003. Ethiopia: Fiduciary Assessment, Final Draft Report, MoFED/DfID, Feb. 2005 FDRE: Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, Annual Progress Report, IMF, Feb. 2004. Others as listed in Annex I

3.3 Sampling and survey procedure With regard to sample size, the consultant has used the sample indicated in the final report of the Phase I of the benchmarking study. Moreover, as agreed with the client, the splitting of the sample into two was performed using the following criteria.

From the woredas categorized as REMOTE in each region, we took one woreda to compensate for the shortage of time.

Two woredas in each region that are categorized as Food Insecure. Depending on accessibility, either one or two woredas that are

categorized as non-Remote. If two Food Secure Woredas are selected then only one Non-remote woreda is selected and Vice-versa.


.8.

Either one or two woredas that are categorized as Food Secure. If two Non-remote Woredas are selected then only one food Secure woreda is selected and Vice-versa.

Municipalities are chosen based on Size. Hence, two fairly large, one Medium Sized and one small sized Town was selected from the four Regions making up 4 survey towns per Region.

Applying the above criteria, the sample size was split in exactly two units and the current survey was targeting the selected 24 woredas and 16 municipalities. The survey procedure was then designed to ensure data quality and timely completion of the survey. Yet, due to mistake of enumerators Alamata woreda was taken as Alamata municipality altering the planned survey coverage to an actual coverage of 23 woredas and 17 municipalities.

3.4 Data Entry and Analysis Procedure The consultant had designed a simple data entry software that simulate the designed questionnaire and provides audit trial print outs of filled Questionnaires to verify the data entered. A test run was performed on actual data to ensure the accuracy of the data entry software. As a result, data entry was completed in a timely manner. Parallel to data entry, the two statisticians assigned for the study constructed dummy tables to ease data analysis. For the purpose of analysis, the data entered was extracted using SQL queries to the SPSS Statistical software. Thus, all the needed analysis was performed using the SPSS software.


.9.

IIIVVV... WWWooorrreeedddaaa///MMMuuunnniiiccciiipppaaallliiitttyyy BBBeeennnccchhhmmmaaarrrkkkiiinnnggg::: TTThhheee IIIssssssuuueeesss While preparing this report, we found an extensive body of research and literature that defines benchmarking. Despite the fact that the literature is varied, researchers and authors tend to use similar elements when describing the process of benchmarking. Rather than recreate existing benchmarking processes, we borrowed ideas from recognized works and adapted them to best fit the Woreda and Municipality Benchmarking Survey.

4.1 Important Definitions Benchmarking, best practices and related concepts mean different things to different people in different contexts. Definitions of each of the key concepts were developed, through the literature review process, to ensure a clear and common understanding of the subject matter. The definitions are provided below. Table 1 - Definitions of Important Terms

Term Definition

Benchmarking The continuous, systematic process of measuring and assessing products, services and practices of recognized leaders in the field to determine the extent to which they might be adapted to achieve superior performance.

Benchmark An external point of reference by which the performance of activity, function, operation, process or service can be measured.

Financial Management Benchmark

An external point of reference by which the quality or value of financial functional areas can be measured.

Best Practices Management practices and work processes that lead to "best-of-the-class" or superior performance. Best practices


.10.

Term Definition

serve as goals for organizations striving for excellence.

Metrics Elements of a measurement system consisting of performance indicators, measures and measurement methodologies.

Performance Metric

A quantitative or qualitative measure to determine how well an organization is doing. Performance metrics are metrics that we can compare against others (Entire Organizations, departments, etc.) to assess performance.

4.2. Overview of Benchmarking Issues Benchmarking is a managerial technique that is popular among both private and public sector organizations. Its usefulness is contested, however, especially for public sector organizations1. Skeptics claim that benchmarking is a time-consuming window-dressing exercise, while optimists see it as a potent driver for improvement.

Most will agree that benchmarking owes much of its popularity and contestability alike to the fact that it is derived from the performance management doctrine, which in turn is part of the so-called "New Public Management". According to Christopher Hood2, the new public management is a body of administrative doctrines that has discredited Progressive Public Administration’s answers to administrative what-to-do questions in government. Performance management is arguably one of the most frequently implemented among the doctrines that comprise this new theory. Benchmarking is portrayed and used by different actors in organizations from all sectors of society. What most approaches seem to agree on is that measuring and comparing of performance are the central techniques, and that the objective of any benchmarking exercise is to improve some aspect of organizational performance. What aspect of organizational performance to

1 Pollitt, C. and G. Bouckaert (2000): Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford:

Oxford University Press 2 Hood, C. (1998): The Art of the State. Culture, Rhetoric and Public Management. Oxford: Oxford

University Press


.11.

measure is however a contested issue. Some approaches to benchmarking emphasize measures of the organization’s outcome effectiveness, others on measures of procedural effectiveness, and yet others on measures of the organizations’ structural effectiveness

Another point of disagreement within the benchmarking practitioners is with whom or what to compare performance. Some, such as the OECD3, state that “The basic idea behind benchmarking is simple: Find an organization that is best at what your own organization does [and] study how it achieves such results”. An alternative approach is to measure the performance of the organization in question against some pre-set, normative standard. An example of the latter is the Norwegian “Municipal compass” scheme. The requirements for ISO-certification could also be framed as this type of benchmarking.

How can techniques like measurement and comparison of performance make benchmarking a potent driver of organizational improvement? One way into this is to go by way of a theoretical framework that addresses the question “how do organizations improve”. March and Olsen’s “complete cycle of organizational learning”4 allows these two questions to be addressed together. In Figure 1 this model has been adapted to the purposes of this woreda/municipality benchmarking report.

Fig. 1: How benchmarking supports organizational learning

3 OECD: “International Benchmarking Experiences in the OECD Countries”. Paper presented at

Conference in Copenhagen, February 1997 4 March, J.G. and J.P. Olsen (1976): Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations. Oslo: Scandinavian

University Press.


.12.

Informed by this approach, we will consider how benchmarking attempts to support each of the arrows in the learning cycle. Below each arrow is addressed separately.

Supporting arrow 1: Benchmarking gives an external assessment of performance

Arrow number one in the organizational learning cycle represents the process through which the organization seeks feedback concerning its performance. Benchmarking argues that an external assessment of the organization’s performance, represented by e.g. information about the performance of other organizations, is a good source of feedback. As the conference paper from OECD5 puts it:

“It is difficult to asses and evaluate the performance of an organization, even if it has been measured. Is a 70% satisfaction of customers good or bad performance? Is the measured cost per student in a primary school, high or low? Is the process for benefit payments in a social security office efficient or not? Benchmarking is an important instrument for comparing and evaluating performance in a more objective way”.

The benchmarking literature argues, however, that in order to avoid defensive, destructive reactions from the participants, it is a prerequisite that the benchmarking data are comprehensible, valid (i.e. perceived as relevant) and reliable.

Supporting arrow 2: Benchmarking generates new ideas and heightens motivation to improve

Arrow number two represents the process by which feedback from the environment affects the beliefs and preferences of the individual organizational participant. Benchmarking attempts to take on two challenges connected with this process.

5 OECD: “International Benchmarking Experiences in the OECD Countries”. Paper presented at

Conference in Copenhagen, February 1997. Page 2.


.13.

One challenge is how to generate new ideas, as there is little impetus for the individual to change his/her beliefs or preferences if the feedback from the environment does not provide any ideas on how to improve. Generating ideas about how to improve is arguably a main thrust of the benchmarking technique. According to the previously cited OECD paper (p.5), benchmarking can:

“expose areas where improvement is needed and reveal underlying problems of an organization or a group of organizations, (…) identify superior processes in order to adopt them and get better insight in to best practice, [and] focus on (…) the links between individual processes and the overall performance of an organization”.

The second challenge concerns motivation. Why should the individual organizational participant want to change? The situation in the public sector is often contrasted with the private sector. It is argued that in the private sector (ideally a free market with perfect information), organizations are under a continuous pressure to improve, as the organization that produces the best goods or services “wins”, meaning either profitability or survival. Public sector organizations are not under the same competitive pressure. Hence, it can be assumed that its participants do not share the private sector organizations’ motivation to continuously improve.

The validity of these claims is not the topic here. What seems uncontested in the literature is that one of the greatest potential achievements of benchmarking in the public sector is that it motivates public sector organizational participants to improve. One of the reasons for this is that benchmarking provides an external assessment of the organization’s performance. A second reason is that it activates the employees’ professional pride. Nobody wants to be perceived as poor performers when faced with peers. This resembles to what the benchmarking literature calls peer-group control.

Supporting arrow 3: Translation and Interpretation

Arrow number three represents the process by which changes in the beliefs and preferences of an individual affect those of the organization of which he/she is a member. This requires interpretation. Interpretation denotes the


.14.

process of translating events and developing shared understanding and conceptual schemes among members of the organization, or its leaders. Thus, it can reasonably assumed that whether the process of translation and interpretation succeeds depends on a variety of factors, ranging from the formal and informal standing of the individuals concerned to how the organization facilitates learning processes in order to make use of the individuals’ new experiences.

Supporting arrow 4: Implementation

Arrow number four is about implementation. It represents the process by which changes in the beliefs and preferences of the organization affect the organization’s actions. The benchmarking technique does not aspire to overcome the long range of obstacles that are usually faced during implementation. What benchmarking can do is to help identify excellent performers among organizations comparable to one’s own. It is then up to the participants in the benchmarking activities to find out to whether and how one can learn how to achieve excellent results from the benchmarked cases.

4.3 International Experience in Benchmarking "We are all benchmarkers now!"6 - This enthusiastic assertion by the former President of the European Commission, Jaques Slanter, in 1999 was echoed in 2004 in question form: "All benchmarkers now?” The overall answer may be summarized as "Yes, nearly all, indeed, surprisingly many". Internationally, the speed and spread of acceptance of the benchmarking exercise are impressive indeed. In USA a leading role in performance benchmarking is played by the American Productivity and Quality Center, APQC7. In its first decade since its establishement in 1977, the APQC made great efforts and stayed focused on its mission of increasing productivity in U.S. companies. The evolution of using best practices and benchmarking as tools for breakthrough improvement led APQC to form the International Benchmarking Clearinghouse in 1992. Although APQC is focused more on private sector, 6 The European Union Benchmarking Experience: Euphoria or Fatigue?. European Integration online papers. Vol. 8. No. 5. By Michael Zangle, 2004 7 for more details refer to the online resource Http://www.apqc.org. The summary here is extracted form the history section of this website.


.15.

the role it played to implement performance measurement, improvement systems in public sector organizations, etc, is undeniable fact. On the other hand, there are also a dozen of focused organizations helping the benchmarking of the public sector in the US. For instance, each year in Massachusetts8, 351 cities and towns individually wrestle with setting budgets under increasingly tight fiscal pressures. Appreciating this fact and cognizant of the lack of broad "benchmarking" information for municipalities, an organization called "Municipal Yardstick" is helping City Administrations of Massachusetts to benchmark their $15 billion aggregate annual spending, staffing levels, and salaries with their peers. In the United Kingdom, there has been significant reform of the public sector since 1979. In the UK9, Local authorities are responsible for a wide range of essential services, such as education, housing, land use planning, social services and waste disposal. Hence, there are initiatives to measure the performance of individual schools, hospitals and ambulance trusts and emergency services, which allow organisations to benchmark their performance against other, similar, services. Responsibility for the results benchmarking programme in the UK lies with the Audit Commission. The Commission, formed in 1982, has the task of auditing local authority expenditure in England and Wales. From its establishment to date, it has conducted national level studies in local governments' performance designed to promote economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the provision of services by the bodies which it covers.

8 For details see the web resource www.municipalitybenchmarking.com 9 Performance Benchmarking in the Public Sector: The United Kingdom Experience, Jeremy

Cowper and Dr. Martin Samuels, Next Steps Team, Office of Public Services Cabinet Office, United Kingdom, 2004


.16.

Fig. 2 The UK /European Business Excellence Model Used in Benchmarking In Germany, the Federal Government launched in December 1999 the "Modern State - Modern Administration" program. Business administration tools such as target agreements, cost-output accounting, controlling, budgeting, creativity management have helped increase the capacity, efficiency and transparency of the federal administration's activities. Another particularly effective means to enhance the public administration's operational efficiency is competition through benchmarking. Therefore, several inter- and intra-ministerial benchmarking rings have been established since the year 2000. In the mid-nineties the German municipalities were amid a "boom of performance measurement" which can be seen from the huge number of municipalities engaged in benchmarking projects and networks of public service comparisons. The first institution coming up, in 1992, with a benchmarking project was the Bertelsmann Foundation10. The foundation gathered over 150 municipalities for public service comparisons in a number of policy fields. The project was completed in 1998. In 1996 the so-called IKO-Network of the KGSt11 was established as an internal information system for the German municipalities designed for Performance Indicator based public service comparisons and benchmarking projects at the local level. Within this overall network of the KGSt a huge number of sub-

10 Sabine Kuhlmann, Benchmarking and Performance Measurement in German Local

Governments, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Paper presented at the Round Table in Oslo, may 2003.

11 The KGSt is a non-profit organization, mainly funded by the municipalities, with a long and excellent record in consulting particularly local authorities in administrative and organizational matters.


.17.

networks, the so called "Circles of comparison" ("Vergleichsringe") measuring and comparing administrative performance and the quality of public service delivery in various policy areas have emerged in most parts of Germany. In Norway12, the Local Government Data Registration and Information Scheme (Norwegian abbreviation: KOSTRA) started in 1995 as a pilot benchmarking project with four municipalities. From 2002 reporting to KOSTRA was made compulsory for all 434 Norwegian municipalities. KOSTRA's Benchmarking figures are publicly accessible on the internet, free of charge. On the other hand, many Scandinavian countries had put in place benchmarking projects that have helped the comparison of performance in their respective local governments. Table 2 list of some of the Scandinavian countries benchmarking projects

Initiative Where? When? How many municipalities are involved?

What measures are focused?

Who’s responsible?

Municipality networks for innovation and efficiency

Norway 2001-present

193 Structural, procedural and output efficiency

The Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities and the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development.

The Local Government Data Registration and Information Scheme

Norway 1995-present

All 435 Outcome efficiency

The Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development. Run by Statistics Norway

Networks for comparison of quality

Sweden 1999-present

20 Structural, procedural and output efficiency

The Swedish Association of Local Authorities

Sweden's Statistical Databases

Sweden 1997-present

All 290 Outcome efficiency

Several ministries. Run by Statistics Sweden.

Key Local Government Indicators

Denmark 1993-present

All 271 Structural and output efficiency

Ministry of the Interior

12 Jostein Askim, Benchmarking in Local Government Service Delivery: Window-

Dressing Or a Potent Driver For Improvement?, Institutt for statsvitenskap Universitetet i Oslo, Norway, 2004


.18.

Initiative Where? When? How many municipalities are involved?

What measures are focused?

Who’s responsible?

The municipal compass

Norway, Sweden, Denmark

1996-present

Approximately 100

Structural efficiency

The Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities

Source: Jostein Askim, Benchmarking in Local Government Service Delivery: Window-Dressing Or a Potent Driver For Improvement?, Institutt for statsvitenskap Universitetet i Oslo, Norway, 2004

In Africa, the use of benchmarking leaves much to be desired. The Country Financial Accountability Assessment that is performed for individual African Countries by staff of the World Bank can be taken as baselines but with limited relevance since their focus is mostly the fiduciary assessment of National Governments. In recent years, many African countries including Ethiopia have initiated Decentralization and Local Government empowerment programs with a "Push" and partial financing from the World Bank. Though there is limited benchmarking exercises in the continent, two cases are worth mentioning: The Benin "Decentralized City Management Project - 2005" and Uganda's "Local Government Integrated Fiduciary Assessment - 2004" Benin's "Decentralized City Management Project" objective13 was to provide better quality and more cost effective basic services to urban residents, especially the poor, of Benin’s three main cities (Cotonou, Porto Novo and Parakou). These three cities were chosen because they had the special status of “Circonscription Urbaine” (CU – urban area with a special semi-autonomous status), indicating municipalities’ existing technical and financial capabilities upon which to build. The completion report of the project (2000 - 2004) makes an attempt to benchmark important service delivery indicators in the target towns. The Objective14 of Uganda's "Local Government Integrated Fiduciary Assessment (2004)” was to assess the state of public financial management systems and practices in Ugandan local government. For the purpose of the study, a baseline was taken from a previously conducted "Financial 13 Republic of Benin: first decentralized city management project. Implementation report, The World Bank, Country Department, Africa Region, March 30, 2005 14 The Republic of Uganda, Country Integrated Fiduciary Assessment 2004 (In Five

Volumes) Volume V: Local Government Integrated Fiduciary Assessment (LGIFA), The World Bank, 2004


.19.

Management Study" and a sample was agreed of four of the 56 districts nationwide and one municipality of the 13. The four Local Governments were thought to represent a spectrum of capacities, geographical locations, and involvement in new initiatives in Public Financial Management. Hence, a benchmarking tool was developed to measure the performance of individual districts and municipalities against international good practice in financial management. The designed tool for the study examines financial management in the areas of primary budget outturns, medium-term planning and budget formulation, budget execution, accounting and reporting, and external accountability.

4.4 Previous Benchmarking Studies in Ethiopia

In reports produced about Ethiopia, it is not uncommon to find sketchy information about the improvements of service delivery at the local level. However, no comprehensive benchmarking study has been undertaken so far on the situation of service delivery at the woreda or at the municipal level. Nevertheless, two previous benchmarking studies are worth mentioning. One of the studies conducted by IMF and World Bank staff, dealt with how well existing systems tracked poverty-reducing spending in the context of the Enhanced HIPC Initiative. This study benchmarked the budget formulation, execution, and reporting used in Ethiopia vis-à-vis poverty-reducing spending. Another study was a Fiduciary Benchmarking exercise that has been performed by MoFED/DfID/EU Task force which was completed in February, 2005. The Objective of this Fiduciary Assessment Benchmarking study was to assess if Budgets (i) are not used for the intended purpose, (ii) do not achieve value for money, and (iii) are not properly accounted for. Hence, there is no precedence in Ethiopia with regard to service delivery benchmarking at the local level.

4.5 The Premises of the Current Benchmarking Survey In recognition of the constraints to service delivery, the Government launched a decentralization program designed to shift decision-making closer to the people at the “grass roots level” and to improve the responsiveness of service delivery at the local level. As part of the


.20.

Decentralized Service Delivery Program, a series of important legal, fiscal and administrative measures were rapidly introduced in 2001 in Amhara, Oromia, SNNP, and Tigray Regions to empower the local government of woreda and municipality levels to deliver the bulk of basic services in a responsive manner and to promote local economic development. The challenges related to the abovementioned grass root level transformation process are many. Hence, the country's Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program (SDPRP), apart from ensuring the short term stability of intergovernmental design, sets forth a forward-looking agenda for supporting democratic decentralization within regions. As one of the core elements of the SDPRP, a Public Sector Capacity Building program (PSCAP) was designed to address issues related with deficiencies in implementation capacity of the woredas and municipalities. PSCAP is a federal specific purpose grant designed for capacity building with the objective of enabling federal, regional and local institutions to deliver efficient and effective services. It is also an instrument to empower citizens through public participation in local democratic institution and create government environment conducive to value creation. With regard to PSCAP, the success of woreda and municipal decentralization efforts depends on the development of a robust intergovernmental fiscal framework consisting of appropriate fiscal instruments that can meet the recurrent, capacity building or performance, as well as the investment needs of the local government level. An important element in the design of PSCAP is to provide performance incentives to the Regions15. By using the "Drawing Rights" approach, PSCAP allows to reallocate funds in favour of better performers within and across years until the end of the program cycle. This means also that regions can transfer funds from poor performing to better performing woredas and municipalities as well as across PSCAP subprograms, year in year-out. Hence, support provided under PSCAP is intended to rapidly build up the basic regional and local capacities needed to effectively manage the additional fiscal resources generated at the regional level. Increase in subsidy transfers at the local level, through the regional-to-woreda block grants as well as lump sum, agency fee, and project-based capital transfers to municipalities, has been already instituted in the four largest regions 15 It is to be noted that the Regions are entitled to 80% of PSCAP finance while the Federal subcomponent receives its 20% share.


.21.

during 2002 and 2003. In 2004, as highlighted in the PSCAP appraisal document, the woreda block grant constituted16 45% of total regional expenditures in Tigray, 51% in Amhara, 47% in Oromia, and 81% in SNNP regions. In recent years, there has been a renewed recognition that rural development strategies can only have a limited impact without adequate urban development. Consequently, there is a consensus among policy makers on the establishment of well-defined and functioning local institutions such as municipalities as well as grassroots/community structures as prerequisites for any meaningful and sustainable measures to address poverty and other issues. It is for this reason that the GTZ assisted MMPDP and the IDA financed CBDSD projects are giving priority to decentralized structures and municipalities in the four regions, and the Development Assistance Group (DAG) supporting an urban poverty action research study for secondary cities. All the four major regions have, through the GTZ financed MMPDP, put in place legislation establishing municipalities, empowering them with some functional and fiscal responsibilities. The legislation was put in place after comprehensive studies and consultations with the communities and stakeholders in the respective regions. Elections have already been held in some regions and local communities now have Councillors representing them. To introduce urban management reform, a number of towns and cities have been selected in the four major regions of the country: Oromia, Amhara, Tigray and SNNPR. The number of towns/cities selected to conduct the reform program are 12 in Amhara, 12 in Tigray, 21 in Oromia and 19 in SNNPR. The list of towns/cities selected for reform in each region is attached in Annex III. Recently, a growing body of work in formal institutional analysis17 has identified four “institutional quality” variables that are typically impacted by

16 FDRE, Public Sector Capacity Building Program Support Project, Project Appraisal Document, The World Bank, March 25,2004. P. 13

17 Ethiopia: Issues in state transformation: Decentralization, delivery, and democracy; An Institutional Governance Review (IGR) Concept Note, The World Bank, 2004


.22.

reform efforts. At any given level of government institutional quality variables are:

(i) the inclusiveness of planning and prioritization process; (ii) the adequacy and predictability of financial and human

resource management; (iii) the flexibility of delivery arrangements; and (iv) the enforceability of various regulations and standards on

inputs and outputs. In line with the above framework, the project appraisal document prepared by the World Bank requires the Woreda/municipal benchmarking survey in four rounds during the PSCAP life span as one of the main credit conditions. In fact, this is the major premise to conduct benchmarking studies on decentralized woredas and reforming municipalities in the four larger regions. Thus, the current benchmarking survey is an attempt to establish a baseline data and as far as possible evaluate the ongoing decentralization effort in line with the above framework.


.23.

VVV... RRReeevvviiieeewww ooofff rrreeesssuuullltttsss ooofff ttthhheee FFFiiirrrsssttt PPPhhhaaassseee ooofff BBBeeennnccchhhmmmaaarrrkkkiiinnnggg SSStttuuudddyyy As mentioned elsewhere, the first Phase of this benchmarking study has helped in many ways to streamline the benchmarking survey in this phase. The TOR for the first phase of benchmarking was in a nutshell as follows:

▪ A conceptual study for a woreda-city government benchmarking study should be developed,

▪ Assessment of data availability,

▪ Selection of survey sample, and

▪ Development of a draft for benchmarking indicators.

To fulfil the requirements of above tasks, an international consultant was assigned. Hence, major outcomes of the previous study phase will be summarized in the following pages as to provide a comprehensive account of the whole benchmarking exercise carried out so far.

5.1 Validation of the viability of woreda/municipal benchmarking While Ethiopia is extensively engaged in the design and implementation of numerous reform programs, the search for effective monitoring and evaluation tools, as part of project design methodologies, has been persistent. In a number of documents, benchmarking is mentioned as a tool to track service delivery performance at the local level to evaluate the impact of the Government's decentralization efforts. The PSCAP project appraisal document of the World Bank has even encapsulated "Benchmarking survey" of woredas and municipalities as one of the legal covenants for the "Main Credit Conditions". Yet, whether benchmarking is possible to carry out has never been proved or disproved by any previous study. The first validation of the possibility of Benchmarking woredas and municipalities from the conceptual point of view was carried out by the first phase of this study.


.24.

5.2 Assessment of Data Availability Once the potential usefulness of benchmarking at the conceptual level was established, a major concern for the first phase was the availability of data that refers specifically to service delivery status in woredas and municipalities. To assess the existence and accessibility of data needed to perform a benchmarking exercise, the international consultant had carried out a review of information published by Government Agencies such as the Central Statistical Authority (CSA) and line Ministry Offices. This review was complemented by field visits to Golgolcha and Wonago woredas as well as the municipalities of Shashemene, Yirgalem and Addis Ababa. Besides, MoFED and the Ministries of Federal Affairs, Revenue and Capacity Building along with relevant regional bureaus from the SNNP region were contacted by the consultant to assess existing initiatives for data collection. Donor communities including CIDA, DfID, GTZ, Kfw, EU, SIDA, UNDP and the World Bank were consulted on issues related to benchmarking tool design and performance measurement of service delivery at the woreda and municipal level. Consequently, the first phase of this study had confirmed the availability of needed data for conducting benchmarking for both woredas and municipalities.

5.3 Design of Questionnaire One of the core accomplishments of the first phase of the benchmarking survey was the design of a 25 page detailed questionnaire that was administered during this phase of the survey. The questionnaire was designed in a manner that is conducive to capture all the needed data for conducting the woreda and municipal benchmarking. The four sections of the questionnaire are focused and address issues on the following topics:

1. Baseline Information

▫ General information, population size and accessibility

2. Financial autonomy of local government

▫ Sources of revenue

▫ Expenditure of local government

3. Institutional Capacity

▫ Financial Management


.25.

▫ Human Resources

▫ Empowerment, Participation and Corruption-control

4. Service Performance

▫ For woredas and municipalities: basic access to services

▫ For woredas only: agricultural services

▫ For municipalities only: solid waste collection

5.4 Selection of representative sample woredas and municipalities Another important issue dealt with in the first phase was the selection of a representative sample size from the target regions. The following part will describe the assumptions and criteria used by the international consultant ("AS IS”) to select a representative sample for the actual survey which is conducted under this phase of the study. Stratified Random Sampling, also sometimes called proportional or quota random sampling, involves dividing the “population” – here the jurisdictions – into homogeneous subgroups and then taking a simple random sample in each subgroup. As a result from the consultation, two criteria were selected to differ between groups of woredas:

▪ Remoteness of woredas and

▪ Need of food aid in woredas.

The remoteness of a woreda is defined by the average distance of the woreda to the next all-weather road in km. A woreda is classified as remote, if the average distance is lower than the distance in the group of woredas in the four selected regions. The need of food aid is defined by the percentage of the population in need of food aid. A woreda is classified as food insecure, if the percentage of the population in need of food aid is higher than the average in the group of woredas in the four selected regions. These two criteria were selected, because:

▪ Remoteness is a proxy for infrastructure availability and condition, and


.26.

▪ The need of food aid is a proxy for the dominance of the agricultural sector in a woreda, and thus, an indicator for income generation in non-agricultural sectors.

The two indicators have been used in various studies conducted by or on behalf of the World Bank in Ethiopia. Table 3: Selected Criteria for a stratified sample of woredas

REMOTE WOREDA (access to nearest all-weather road larger than average in the four “big” regions)

FOOD INSECURE AREA (percentage of population in need of food aid higher than average in the four “big” regions)

NON-REMOTE WOREDA (access to nearest all-weather road smaller than average in the four “big” regions)

FOOD SECURE AREA (percentage of population in need of food aid smaller than average in the four “big” regions)

The selection of these two criteria allows later to differ between groups of woredas. According to the list of woredas as provided by the World Bank, there are 398 woredas in the four big regions. Table 4: Overview: Results from stratified random sampling by criteria N = the number of cases in the sampling frame

(the number of woredas in the four big regions)

398

nR1 = food insecure woredas 118 nR2 = food secure woredas 280 nF1 = remote woredas 211 nF2 = non-remote woredas 187 N = the number of cases in the sample 48 The sample is about 12% of the number of cases in the sampling frame. The sample is thus rather small, covering four woredas in each of the selected criteria. The sample will cover for each criterion four woredas. As the number of woredas in the four regions is very different – ranging from about 180 in Oromia to only about 35 in Tigray – the sample should consider the distribution of woredas over the four regions.


.27.

According to the CSA, there are 35 woredas in Tigray, 106 in Amhara, 180 in Oromia and 77 in SNNPR. The woredas were assigned to the following groups: Table 5: Overview: Results from stratified random sampling by region N = the number of cases in the sampling frame

(the number of woredas in the four big regions)

398

nR1 = food insecure woredas (represents 30% of sample frame)

118

of which in Amhara 41 of which in Oromia 33 of which in Tigray 25 of which in SNNPR 18 nR2 = food secure woredas

(represents 70% of sample frame) 280

of which in Amhara 65 of which in Oromia 147 of which in Tigray 10 of which in SNNPR 59 nF1 = remote woredas


of which in Amhara 93 of which in Oromia 53 of which in Tigray 9 of which in SNNPR 32 nF2 = non-remote woredas


of which in Amhara 13 of which in Oromia 53 of which in Tigray 26 of which in SNNPR 45 N = the number of cases in the sample 48 As the results from the data collection should allow to generalize on the level of

▪ criteria selected and

▪ by region,


.28.

There is no need to balance different absolute numbers of jurisdictions in each group. Neither it is necessary to balance with population data, as the results are based on the institutional capacity of woredas. The basic assumption is that institutional capacity is not dependent on population size. Table 6: Selected woredas to be included in the sample Region number of woredas to be

included Names of selected woredas

12 woredas in total, 3 remote areas Sekela

Debre Tabor Dessie Zuria

3 non-remote areas Weldia Kobo Habru

3 food insecure areas Kutaber Sekota Gidan

Amhara

3 food secure areas Lay Bet and Tach Fogera Awabel

12 woredas in total, 3 remote areas Dawo

Guduru Mana

3 non-remote areas Boji Mesela Dodola

3 food insecure areas Goba Koricha Kurfa Chele Arero

Oromia

3 food secure areas Ayra Guliso Cheliya Metu

12 woredas in total, Tigray 3 remote areas Tselenti

Kafta Humera Tsegede


.29.

3 non-remote areas Kola Temben Atsbi Wenberta Alamata

3 food insecure areas Laelay Adiyabo Werie Lehe Wukro

3 food secure areas Erob Gulomahda Medebay Zana

12 woredas in total, of which

3 remote areas Besketo Chencha Amaro

3 non-remote areas Kedida Gamela Salamago Bench

3 food insecure areas Konso Kucha Lanfro

SNNPR

3 food secure areas Yirgachefe Sinanana Dinsh Shebedino

The Sample selection for municipalities in the four selected regions: As there are municipalities in the four big regions only, and the number of city administrations is rather small in the regions not covered in the first round of this benchmarking, the sample frame covers municipalities only that were acknowledged status of a “reforming town”. The sample here is a random sampling in every region. Sample frame are all municipalities which have been classified as reforming towns. Information was received by regional governments and UDBCO.


.30.

Table 7: Selected municipalities Region number of municipalities to be

included names of selected

municipalities Amhara 8 municipalities Bahir Dar

Gonder Dessie Debre Birhan Debre Tabor Woreta Lalibela Hayk

Oromia 8 municipalities Adaamaa Naqamtee Shaashamannee Amboo Moojoo Zuwaay Walisoo Gobbaa

Tigray 8 municipalities Wukro Adi-Gudum Rama Adwa Endalssie Adigrat Mekelle Enticho

SNNPR 8 municipalities Yirga-Alem Durame Jinka Alaba Tepi Dilla Arbaminch Wolkite

32 municipalities in total



.31.

VVVIIIIII... AAAnnnaaalllyyysssiiisss ooofff BBBeeennnccchhhmmmaaarrrkkkiiinnnggg SSSuuurrrvvveeeyyy RRReeesssuuullltttsss The survey was conducted in 23 woredas and 17 municipalities of Amhara, Oromia, SNNP and Tigray regions using the questionnaire designed in phase I of the Benchmarking Study. The initial survey plan was to cover 6 woredas and 4 municipalities in each of the mentioned regions. However, enumerators had mistakenly taken Alamata woreda for Alamata municipality and the result is a coverage of 5 woredas but also an additional municipality in Tigray region. Other than that the other regions were covered as per the plan. By nature, woredas and municipalities are entities that differ in their source of revenue, service type, population density, accessibility, etc. Hence, their difference calls for a separate treatment, comparison and presentation of the generated data through the survey. Therefore, in the next subsection we will devote our attention to the survey result of woredas and follow this with a separate subsection dealing with municipalities. These two subsections will mostly focus on summarising and presenting the survey results both for woredas and for municipalities. However, the core issue here is to benchmark individual woredas and municipalities based on a set of comprehensive performance indicators. The last subsection will attempt to summarize the data gathered about individual jurisdictions by drawing a set of benchmarking indicators.

7.1. Results for Sample Woredas The results of the survey in the sample woredas is presented in five headings dealing with general information; financial autonomy and performance; institutional capacity; public access to information, empowerment and corruption; and, service delivery performance.

7.1.1 - General Information on Surveyed Woredas For the four covered regions, the total population in the target woredas of this benchmarking study was 3,733,562 while the land size covered by the target 23 woredas is 36,114 sq. km. On the other hand, the mean



.32.

population size shows 162,328 with a mean land size of 1570 sq. km. yielding an average population density of 616 persons per sq. km. Table W-1 shows a summary information on population, land size, remoteness, population density and food security status of the sample woredas. Table W-1: Population*, land size, food security status and accessibility

Region Woreda Name Population Land Size (sq. km.)

Population Density

Food Secure?

Remote?

Fogera 249,820 1,095 228.15 Yes

Habru 225,602 5,582 40.42 No*

Kutaber 167,778 949 176.79 No*

Sekela 113,680 579 196.34 No* Yes

Sekota 174,280 3,174 54.91 No*

Weldia 40,804 4 10,201.00 No**

Total 971,964 11,383 85.39

Amhara

Mean 161,994 1,897.17 85.39

Boji 111,983 966 115.92 Yes

Cheliya 233,510 1,854 125.95 Yes

Gubakorcha 187,892 1,478 127.13 No**

Gudru 147,706 2,397 61.62 Yes Yes

Kurfa chele 52,672 260 202.58 No*

Mettu 150,262 1,461 102.85 Yes

Total 884,025 8,416 105.04

Oromia

Mean 147,337.50 1,402.67 105.04

Gulomakda 104,556 634 164.91 No*

Kafte Humera 69,219 6,197 11.17 Yes Yes

Kelete awlaelo 109,353 1,010 108.27 No*

Laelaye adiyabo 105,195 1,821 57.77 Yes

Atsbi Womberta 111,323 885 125.79 No*

Total 499,646 10,547 47.37

Tigray

Mean 99,929.20 2,109.40 47.37

Basketo 46,984 421 111.60 No* Yes

Kedida Gamila 197,262 351 562.00 No*

Konso 218,180 2,276 95.86 No*

Kucha 141,461 1,384 102.21 No*

SNNP

Shebedino 581,418 1,035 561.76 No**

* Population and land size data is taken from the CSA.



.33.

Region Woreda Name Population Land Size (sq. km.)

Population Density

Food Secure?

Remote?

Yiregachifee 192,622 301 639.94 Yes

Total 1,377,927 5,768 238.89 Mean 229,654.50 961.33 238.89

Total for all regions 3,733,562 36,114 103.38 Mean for all regions 162,328.78 1,570.17 103.38

Note: * food insecure but receives additional funding ** Food insecure but does not receive additional funding The region that showed a larger population size was the SNNP region with a population of 1.38 million whereas the smallest population size was found in Tigray region with a total of 499,646. One of the reasons why Tigray showed a smaller population size is that our survey has covered one woreda less in this region. However, even if we had covered one more woreda it appears that Tigray still will have the smaller population size of all surveyed regions. Among the survey woredas, Shebedino in SNNP shows a larger population size (581,418) whereas Woldia Zuria in Amhara has the smallest population size (40,000). Woldia Zuria woreda also shows the smallest land size (4 sq. km.) but the highest population density (10,201 per sq. km.) among all surveyed woredas. The survey reveals that 8 of the 23 surveyed woredas or 35% are food secure, 12 (or 52%) are food insecure and receive additional funding, and the remaining 3 (or 13%) are food insecure but not receiving additional funding. Woldia Zuria in Amhara, Goba Koricha in Oromia and Shebedino in the SNNP are the woredas not receiving food security subsidy despite the fact that they have a population categorized as food insecure. The survey in this round, on the other hand, has covered one remote woreda from each of the four regions. These were Sekela in Amhara, Gudru in Oromia, Kafte Humera in Tigray and Basketo in the SNNP Region.

7.1.2 Financial Autonomy and Performance In this subsection of the survey analysis, we will explore the core aspect of decentralization which is the fiscal autonomy of woredas in the different regions. The following pages will describe the sources of revenue, tax income, collection of fees and the manner budgets are spent in the sample woredas.



.34.

7.1.2.1 Sources of Revenue - Budget, Tax, Fees and commercial Activities The major source of revenue for all surveyed woredas is revenue secured through the "unconditional-block-grant" of budgets from the Regional Government. The four target regions which are also referred to as reforming regions pursued the "block grant" as a consolidated, multi-sector funding option for woredas, while simultaneously retaining some degree of control over woreda spending consistent with fiscal transition and regional priorities (for example, education, health, or adequate staffing of remote jurisdictions). When instituting the block grant system, regional officials limited the discretion of individual woredas in expenditure assignments through providing budget guidelines on the functional and economic split of expenditures. In parallel, regions continued to draw on federal programs such as sector capital grants (for primary education and healthcare) that fund specific capital projects that were planned or underway, as well as food security transfers received in both cash and kind. Table W-2: Budgeted and Actual Revenue

(In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y)

Region Woreda Name Budgeted Revenue Actual Revenue Per Capita Revenue

Fogera 3,104,941.00 9,827,959.00 39.34 Habru 8,308,491.00 8,308,491.00 36.83 Kutaber 7,773,596.00 8,315,718.00 49.56 Sekela 1,420,558.00 7,670,055.00 67.47 Sekota 18,765,600.00 10,231,908.00 58.71 Weldia 6,323,340.00 6,323,340.00 154.97 Total 45,696,526.00 50,677,471.00 52.14

Amhara

Mean 7,616,087.67 8,446,245.17 52.14 Boji 18,511,975.00 6,705,462.00 59.88 Cheliya 1,774,000.00 6,557,645.00 28.08 Gubakorcha 226,693.00 4,747,054.00 25.26 Gudru 8,654,760.00 5,761,503.00 39.01 Kurfa chele 468,000.00 3,187,788.00 60.52 Mettu 12,827,730.00 12,827,730.00 85.37 Total 42,463,158.00 39,787,182.00 45.01

Oromia

Mean 7,077,193.00 6,631,197.00 45.01 Gulomakda 1,188,190.00 7,337,640.00 70.18 Kafte Humera 12,000,000.00 11,659,460.00 168.44

Kelete awlaelo 950,000.00 8,115,675.00 74.22

Tigray

Laelaye adiyabo 6,941,830.00 7,906,984.00 75.17



.35.

Region Woreda Name Budgeted Revenue Actual Revenue Per Capita Revenue

Atsbi Womberta 8,329,301.00 7,666,600.00 68.87 Total 29,409,321.00 42,686,359.00 85.43 Mean 5,881,864.20 8,537,271.80 85.43 Basketo 673,000.00 5,058,300.00 107.66

Kedida Gamila 10,659,600.00 9,459,000.00 47.95 Konso 12,356,000.00 12,356,000.00 56.63 Kucha 5,933,058.00 5,917,550.00 41.83 Shebedino 20,979,292.00 12,356,000.00 21.25 Yiregachifee 10,696,000.00 10,696,000.00 55.53 Total 61,296,950.00 55,842,850.00 40.53

SNNP

Mean 10,216,158.33 9,307,141.67 40.53 Total for all regions 178,865,955.00 188,993,862.00 50.62 Mean for all regions 7,776,780.65 8,217,124.43 50.62

The previous description being the framework at the theoretical level, the performance of woredas with regard to proper budgeting of their revenue leaves much to be desired. Three typical cases emerge when analyzing the budget figures provided by the woredas during the survey. In one of the cases, they are only drawing planned budgetary figures for income to be secured by collecting taxes and fees within their own jurisdiction (see for instance Sekela in Amhara, Gubakoricha in Oromia, Klite Awlaelo in Tigray and Basketo in SNNP). In the other case, they are drawing unrealistically huge budget plans that fails during the review process at the region level (See the figures in Sekota of Amhara, Boji of Oromia and Shebedino of SNNP). In the worst of the cases, the woredas do not plan their budget but wait the actual release of the budget thus becoming unable to tell planned budget figures for revenues (See Atsbi in Tigray, Metu in Oromia, Konso in SNNP and Habru in Amhara). This fact shows that the regions need to build the budget planning capacity of their respective woredas. With regard to actual revenue of the target woredas in 1996 E.F.Y, the survey revealed that they have secured a total of 189 million Birr with an average of 8.22 million Birr per woreda. In absolute terms, the larger share of budget was secured by the woredas in the SNNP with 55.8 million while the smaller revenue share was taken by the woredas in Oromia Region with 39.8 million Birr. The average budget allocated for the sample woredas shows Birr 6.63 million for Oromia, 8.45 million for Amhara, 8.54 million for Tigray and 9.31 million for SNNP Region. Among the surveyed woredas the



.36.

maximum actual budget amount went to Shebedino woreda in SNNP while the minimum was observed in Kurfa Chele of Oromia. Fig.W-1: Mean Per Capita Revenue of Woredas in the four Regions

The mean per capita budget revenue for all the regions was found to be Birr 64.9. The largest mean per capita budget revenue was observed in woredas of the Tigray region with Birr 85.43 and the least or Birr 40.53 was observed in woredas of SNNP region. Although the SNNP region shows the lions share of the total budget of the sample woredas, its mean per capita budget revenue was somewhat tampered by its larger population size. The mean for the Amhara region shows Birr 52.14 as per capita budget revenue. Table W-3: Sources of Actual Revenue

(In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y) Sources of Revenue

Region Woreda Name Total Revenue Block Grant Subsidy Loans/Grant

Fogera 9,827,959.00 9,144,065.00 0.00 683,894.00 Habru 8,308,491.00 8,308,491.00 0.00 0.00 Kutaber 8,315,718.00 7,773,596.00 0.00 542,122.00 Sekela 7,670,055.00 7,025,800.00 0.00 644,255.00 Sekota 10,231,908.00 9,672,854.00 0.00 559,054.00 Weldia 6,323,340.00 6,323,340.00 0.00 0.00 Total 50,677,471.00 48,248,146.00 0.00 2,429,325.00

Amhara

Mean 8,446,245.17 8,041,357.67 0.00 404,887.50 Oromia Boji 6,705,462.00 6,548,916.00 156,546.00 0.00

40.53

64.9 45.01

52.14

85.43

020406080

100Amhara

Oromia

TigraySNNP

Mean for all regions

Per capita Budget Revenue (In Birr)



.37.

Sources of Revenue Region Woreda Name Total Revenue

Block Grant Subsidy Loans/Grant Cheliya 6,557,645.00 6,557,645.00 0.00 0.00 Gubakorcha 4,747,054.00 4,747,054.00 0.00 0.00 Gudru 5,761,503.00 5,540,957.00 220,546.00 0.00 Kurfa chele 3,187,788.00 2,452,889.00 0.00 734,899.00 Mettu 12,827,730.00 12,827,730.00 0.00 0.00 Total 39,787,182.00 38,675,191.00 377,092.00 734,899.00 Mean 6,631,197.00 6,445,865.17 62,848.67 122,483.17 Gulomakda 7,337,640.00 6,637,640.00 700,000.00 0.00 Kafte Humera 11,659,460.00 10,481,550.00 1,177,910.00 0.00

Kelete awlaelo 8,115,675.00 8,115,675.00 0.00 0.00

Laelaye adiyabo 7,906,984.00 7,906,984.00 0.00 0.00 Atsbi Womberta 7,666,600.00 7,666,600.00 0.00 0.00 Total 42,686,359.00 40,808,449.00 1,877,910.00 0.00

Tigray

Mean 8,537,271.80 8,161,689.80 375,582.00 0.00 Basketo 5,058,300.00 4080347 329,953.00 648,000.00

Kedida Gamila 9,459,000.00 9459000 0.00 0.00 Konso 12,356,000.00 12356000 0.00 0.00 Kucha 5,917,550.00 5882550 0.00 35,000.00 Shebedino 12,356,000.00 10898000 0.00 1,458,000.00 Yiregachifee 10,696,000.00 10083000 0.00 613,000.00 Total 55,842,850.00 52,758,897.00 329,953.00 2,754,000.00

SNNP

Mean 9,307,141.67 8,793,149.50 54,992.17 459,000.00 Total for all regions 188,993,862.00 180,490,683.00 2,584,955.00 5,918,224.00 Mean for all regions 8,217,124.43 7,847,421.00 112,389.35 257,314.09

Block grant from the respective region to the surveyed woredas is a major source of budgeted revenue constituting 95.5% of the total. Budget subsidies are usually transferred to woredas whenever the initial block grant becomes insufficient to cover the monetary need of woredas. The reasons for subsidies may be an initially constrained allocation of the block grant by the region to the woreda or an over consumption of budget resources due to unforeseen expenses resulting from filling vacancies, cost over run of capital projects, emergency situations, inadequate collection of planned own revenue, etc. Thus, subsidies transferred by all regions accounted for only Birr 2,584,955 or 1.37% of the total budgeted revenue of the sample woredas. Tigray region has used more subsidy procedure than other regions with Birr 1,877,910 or 72.65% of all subsidies. Amhara region has not used subsidy transfers while Oromia and SNNP regions have transferred subsidies amounting to Birr 377,092 (or 14.79%) and 329,953 (or 12.76%) of the total subsidy, respectively. Although the amount of subsidies is



.38.

negligible in the total budgeted revenue of the sample woredas, its existence shows mostly inadequate planning of actual budget needs or too little effort to secure own revenues by the woredas. Fig. W-2: Composition of Mean Revenue of Woredas by Budget Source (in Birr)

The loan/grant portion of the budgeted revenue added up to Birr 5,918,224 or 3.13% of the total for all regions. The region having the largest portion in the loan/grant figure was the SNNP region with 2,754,000 (or 47%), followed by Amhara region with 2,429,325 (or 41%) and Oromia region sharing the total with 734,899 (or 12%). None of the woredas in Tigray reported a loan/grant component in their revenue. However, this situation is unlikely because MoFED reports indicate that there are a number of projects underway through sectoral grants or loans from donors. The most likely reason for not reporting may be unawareness by woreda staff of the loan/grant component of their budget revenue. Table W-4: Capital Investment Portion of Total Budgeted Revenue

(In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y) Capital Investment Transfer and own fund

Region Woreda Name Budget Actual Regional Community

Per Capita Investment

Fogera 273,200.00 267,298.00 267,298.00 0.00 1.07

Habru 3,617,058.00 3,617,058.00 3,617,058.00 0.00 16.03

Kutaber 1,050,118.00 1,050,118.00 1,050,118.00 0.00 6.26

Sekela 1,178,578.00 1,161,320.00 1,161,320.00 0.00 10.22

Sekota 2,872,233.00 2,601,408.00 2,601,408.00 0.00 14.93

Weldia 382,080.00 382,080.00 382,080.00 0.00 9.36

Total 9,373,267.00 9,079,282.00 9,079,282.00 0.00 57.87

Amhara

Mean 1,562,211.17 1,513,213.67 1,513,213.67 0.00 9.64 Boji 988,812.00 988,812.00 723,492.00 265,320.00 8.83 Oromia

Cheliya 590,188.00 590,188.00 120,000.00 470188 2.53

0.001,000,000.002,000,000.003,000,000.004,000,000.005,000,000.006,000,000.007,000,000.008,000,000.009,000,000.00

10,000,000.00T

otal

rev

enue

Blo

ck G

rant

Subs

idy

Loa

n/G

rant

AmharaOromiaTigraySNNPMean For All



.39.

Capital Investment Transfer and own fund Region Woreda Name

Budget Actual Regional Community Per Capita Investment

Gubakorcha 1,086,042.00 732,686.00 732,686.00 0 3.90

Guduru 756,150.00 638,716.00 638,716.00 0 4.32

Kurfa chele 60,597.00 130,210.00 130,210.00 0 2.47

Mettu 1,139,349.00 1,020,767.00 1,020,767.00 0 6.79

Total 4,621,138.00 4,101,379.00 3,365,871.00 735,508.00 28.85 Mean 770,189.67 683,563.17 560,978.50 122,584.67 4.81 Gulomakda 861,840.00 861,840.00 861,840.00 0 8.24

Kafte Humera 2,988,100.00 2,988,100.00 2,988,100.00 0 43.17

Kelete awlaelo 2,206,320.00 2,206,320.00 2,206,320.00 0 20.18 Laelaye adiyabo 1,072,932.00 1,072,932.00 1,072,932.00 0 10.20 Atsbi Womberta 733,604.00 733,604.00 733,604.00 0 6.59

Total 7,862,796.00 7,862,796.00 7,862,796.00 0.00 88.38

Tigray

Mean 1,572,559.20 1,572,559.20 1,572,559.20 0.00 15.53 Basketo 955,900.00 955,900.00 955,900.00 0 20.35 Kedida Gamila 1,040,000.00 1,040,000.00 1,040,000.00 0 5.27

Konso 2,900,101.00 2,900,101.00 2,900,101.00 0 13.29

Kucha 543,800.00 528,290.00 528,290.00 0 3.73

Shebedino 2,031,719.00 1,499,453.00 690,583.00 808,870.00 2.58

Yiregachifee 2,468,826.00 2,468,826.00 2,358,826.00 110,000.00 12.82

Total 9,940,346.00 9,392,570.00 8,473,700.00 918,870.00 58.04

SNNP

Mean 1,656,724.33 1,565,428.33 1,412,283.33 153,145.00 9.67 Total for all regions 31,797,547.00 30,436,027.00 28,781,649.00 1,654,378.00 8.15 Mean for all regions 1,382,502.04 1,323,305.52 1,251,376.04 71,929.48 8.15

The total capital budget allocated for all the survey woredas was Birr 30,436,027 or 16.1% of the actual budget revenue. Varying from region to region, the sample woredas have secured their capital budgets from regional transfers and community contributions. In 17.4% of the sample woredas community contribution for capital investments has been observed. Even then the regions practicing community contribution as portion of capital budget were the SNNP and Oromia regions. In Amhara and Tigray regions this trend was not observed at all. This fact shows that even in those regions having community contribution for capital investments, there is less effort to mobilize community resources for development purposes.



.40.

Fig.W-3: Per capita Capital Budget of Sample woredas by Region (In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y)

Amhara, 9.64

Oromia, 4.81

Tigray, 15.53

SNNP, 8.15

0

5

10

15

20

Amhara 9.64

Oromia 4.81

Tigray 15.53

SNNP 8.15

Per capita Investment

The survey revealed that for the sample woredas the mean per capita budget for capital investment was higher in Tigray region with Birr 15.53, followed by Amhara and Oromia regions each with Birr 9.64 and 8.15, respectively. The region showing the least per capita budget for capital investment was Oromia with Birr 4.81. Table W-5: Revenues secured from International Donors

(In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y) Revenue from donors for

Region Woreda Name Total Revenue Food Security

Non-Food Security

Revenue from other NGOs Others

Fogera 224,340.00 224,340.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Habru 3,737,053.00 3,625,766.00 111,287.00 0.00 0.00 Kutaber 1,346,054.00 1,295,679.00 0.00 50,375.00 0.00 Sekela 4,782,298.00 4,586,609.00 195,689.00 0.00 0.00 Sekota 758,209.00 0.00 0.00 758,209.00 0.00 Weldia 160,000.00 0.00 0.00 160,000.00 0.00 Total 11,007,954.00 9,732,394.00 306,976.00 968,584.00 0.00

Amhara

Mean 1,834,659.00 1,622,065.67 51,162.67 161,430.67 0.00 Boji 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cheliya 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Gubakorcha 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Guduru 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Kurfa chele 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mettu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Oromia

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00



.41.

Revenue from donors for

Region Woreda Name Total Revenue Food Security

Non-Food Security

Revenue from other NGOs Others

Mean 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Gulomakda 55,655,825.00 1,655,825.00 54,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 Kafte Humera 2,960,000.00 0.00 2,960,000.00 0.00 0.00 Kelete awlaelo 4,006,909.00 1,800,589.00 0.00 706,320.00 1,500,000.00 Laelaye adiyabo 2,997,836.00 1,496,000.00 1,501,836.00 0.00 0.00 Atsbi Womberta 2,175,465.00 2,175,465.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 67,796,035.00 7,127,879.00 58,461,836.00 706,320.00 1,500,000.00

Tigray

Mean 13,559,207.00 1,425,575.80 11,692,367.20 141,264.00 300,000.00 Basketo 1,850,644.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,850,644.00 Kedida Gamila 200,000.00 0.00 0.00 200,000.00 0.00 Konso 1,448,900.00 0.00 1,448,900.00 0.00 0.00 Kucha 1,075,675.00 1,075,675.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Shebedino 1,245,122.00 588,600.00 236,000.00 420,522.00 0.00 Yiregachifee 144,079.00 144,079.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 5,964,420.00 1,808,354.00 1,684,900.00 620,522.00 1,850,644.00

SNNP

Mean 994,070.00 301,392.33 280,816.67 103,420.33 308,440.67 Total for all regions 84,768,409.00 18,668,627.00 60,453,712.00 2,295,426.00 3,350,644.00 Mean for all regions 3,685,583.00 811,679.43 2,628,422.26 99,801.13 145,680.17

The budgeted revenue of the sample woredas as shown in Table W-2 excludes funds transferred from international donors and NGOs. Thus, an additional total fund of 84.8 million Birr was transferred to the target woredas by International Donors. In relative terms this amount constitutes about 44.85% of the budgeted revenue. One thing worth mentioning is that non-food security transfers are having the lion's share of these resource accounting for 60.5 million Birr. Of these, 55.5 million Birr was reported by Gulomakeda and Laelay Adiyabo woredas in Tigray. These two woredas were heavily affected by the Ethio-Eritrea war and the transfer from donors, especially the World Bank, were targeted at rehabilitating Zalanbesa town in Gulomakeda woreda (54 million Birr) and Shiraro in Laelay Adiyabo Woreda (1.5 million). The above being the partial reason for securing donor funds, the regional distribution of transfers for food security purposes is found to be uneven with Oromia woredas reporting no fund and the Amhara region woredas receiving Birr 9.7 million or 52% of the transfer. The sample woredas in



.42.

Tigray and SNNP regions have received Birr 7.1 million and 1.8 million for food security purposes, respectively. Revenues from NGOs for the sample woredas of all regions added up to Birr 2.2 million. Of this amount, Amhara region woredas secured Birr 968,584 (or 40.2%), Tigray woredas reported Birr 706,320 (or 30.78%) and the SNNP woredas confirmed the receipt of Birr 620,522 (or 27%) while all he sample woredas from Oromia reported to have no fund coming from NGOs. Table W-6: Salary and non-Salary portion of Revenue

In Birr

Region Woreda Name Transfer for

Salaries Transfer for

others Actual Capital

Budget

Transfer for Others Minus Cap. Budget

Fogera 7,037,227.00 2,790,732.00 267,298.00 2,523,434.00

Habru 7,020,864.49 1,287,626.71 3,617,058.00 (2,329,431.29)

Kutaber 6,666,540.00 1,649,178.00 1,050,118.00 599,060.00

Sekela 3,908,995.00 3,761,060.00 1,161,320.00 2,599,740.00

Sekota 5,570,493.00 4,661,415.00 2,601,408.00 2,060,007.00

Weldia 3,599,757.00 2,723,583.00 382,080.00 2,341,503.00

Total 33,803,876.49 16,873,594.71 9,079,282.00 7,794,312.71

Amhara

Mean 5,633,979.42 2,812,265.79 1,513,213.67 1,299,052.12

Boji 5,484,622.65 1,220,839.20 988,812.00 232,027.20

Cheliya 5,155,203.00 1,402,442.00 590,188.00 812,254.00

Gubakorcha 2,591,757.00 2,155,297.00 732,686.00 1,422,611.00

Gudru 4,584,007.00 1,177,496.00 638,716.00 538,780.00

Kurfa chele 2,525,974.53 661,813.47 130,210.00 531,603.47

Mettu 10,365,992.00 2,461,738.00 1,020,767.00 1,440,971.00

Total 30,707,556.18 9,079,625.67 4,101,379.00 4,978,246.67

Oromia

Mean 5,117,926.03 1,513,270.95 683,563.17 829,707.78

Gulomakda 6,739,676.96 597,963.00 861,840.00 (263,877.00)

Kafte Humera 6,128,610.00 5,530,850.00 2,988,100.00 2,542,750.00

Kelete awlaelo 4,381,193.00 3,734,482.00 2,206,320.00 1,528,162.00

Laelaye adiyabo 3,844,701.00 4,062,283.00 1,072,932.00 2,989,351.00

Atsbi Womberta 4,953,927.00 2,712,673.00 733,604.00 1,979,069.00

Total 26,048,107.96 16,638,251.00 7,862,796.00 8,775,455.00

Tigray

Mean 5,209,621.59 3,327,650.20 1,572,559.20 1,755,091.00

Basketo 3,148,705.00 1,909,595.00 955,900.00 953,695.00

Kedida Gamila 9,427,290.00 31,710.00 1,040,000.00 -1,008,290.00

Konso 7,427,690.00 4,928,310.00 2,900,101.00 2,028,209.00

Kucha 4,256,334.00 1,661,216.00 528,290.00 1,132,926.00

Shebedino 10,241,078.00 2,114,922.00 1,499,453.00 615,469.00

SNNP

Yiregachifee 5,552,419.00 5,143,581.00 2,468,826.00 2,674,755.00



.43.

Region Woreda Name Transfer for

Salaries Transfer for

others Actual Capital

Budget

Transfer for Others Minus Cap. Budget

Total 40,053,516.00 15,789,334.00 9,392,570.00 6,396,764.00

Mean 6,675,586.00 2,631,555.67 1,565,428.33 1,066,127.34

Total for all regions 130,613,056.63 58,380,805.38 30,436,027.00

27,944,778.38

Mean for all regions 5,678,828.55 2,538,295.89 1,323,305.52 1,214,990.37

One of the questions that sample woredas were asked was the actual salary transfer they received from their respective regional government or their Zonal Council. The actual budgeted revenue is supposed to be split into salary transfer, capital investment and administrative overheads such as house rent (if any), lighting, telephone and stationary expenses, fuel and lubricants, etc. The analysis of the total budgeted revenue along these lines reveals that only Birr 27 million out of 189 million or 14.3% have been spent on administrative overheads. The portion spent on salaries shows Birr 130.6 million or 69.1% of the total budget revenue. The calculated average expense on employees of all sample woredas in a given month of the year thus shows Birr 614.5 for salary per employee and Birr 131 per employee for any other expense excluding capital investments. This fact shows that most of the budget revenue in almost all woredas goes to salaries and the need for other necessary expenses cannot be covered with such a meagre resource. Hence, considering all the facts, the minimal portion of non-salary transfers is one of the main problems that need to be tackled if we are to better the service delivery capacity of woredas. Another irregularity observed in some sample woredas is the use of actual capital investment funds for salaries and vice versa. One typical case of consuming transfers for capital investment is Kedida Gamila woreda of the SNNP region. The Regional Government had allocated a transferred Birr 1,040,000 for capital budget. However, the woreda had over consumption for salaries resulting in actual capital investments of only birr 31,710. In other cases, the portion allotted for salaries could not be consumed and it appears that the fund was either returned to the regional government or used as an additional capital investment.



.44.

Fig. W-4: Earmarked transfer from regions for salary and non-salary expenses

0.00

10,000,000.00

20,000,000.00

30,000,000.00

40,000,000.00

50,000,000.00

Tran

sfer

s in

Birr

Amhara

Oromia

Tigray

SNNP

Reg

ions

Amhara 33,803,876.49 16,873,594.71

Oromia 30,707,556.18 9,079,625.67

Tigray 26,048,107.96 16,638,251.00

SNNP 40,053,516.00 15,789,334.00

Salary Non-salry

As shown in the above figure, the transfer portions of salary and non-salary budget vary among the surveyed regions. In this regard, the regions showing limited transfers for non-salary expenditure are Oromia and the SNNP regions with 29.6 and 39.4 percent of transfers for non-salary budget, respectively. Tigray and Amhara regions are relatively better in enabling their woredas for a better service delivery by transferring 63% and 49.9% of the total budget for non-salary expenses.



.45.

Table W-7: Actual Tax collection in Sample Woredas In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y

Total Tax Drug Sale Tax Land Tax Profit Tax Income Tax Wall and Roof Tax Agricultural Tax Other Taxes Region Woreda Name

Birr Payers Birr Birr Birr Birr Birr Birr Birr

Fogera 854,498.00 NA 0.00 0.00 179,789.00 199,332.00 0.00 475,377.00 0.00

Habru 2,132,838.00 NA 172,185.00 621,833.00 53,030.00 669,130.00 0.00 616,660.00 0.00

Kutaber 997,336.00 1,426.00 0.00 230,784.00 51,991.00 537,972.00 0.00 174,981.00 1,608.00

Sekela 706,115.00 NA 0.00 283,956.00 24,056.00 93,604.00 0.00 304,499.00 0.00

Sekota 1,296,254.00 NA 130,043.00 336,480.00 110,692.00 591,449.00 0.00 4,499.00 123,091.00

Weldia 2,277,653.00 NA 0.00 0.00 729,825.00 1,175,537.00 0.00 100.00 372,191.00

Total 8,264,694.00 1,426.00 302,228.00 1,473,053.00 1,149,383.00 3,267,024.00 0.00 1,576,116.00 496,890.00

Amhara

Mean 1,377,449.00 237.67 50,371.33 245,508.83 191,563.83 544,504.00 0.00 262,686.00 82,815.00 Boji 1,001,822.00 15,099.00 65,518.00 225,307.00 128,622.00 476,839.00 0.00 105,536.00 0.00

Cheliya 1,741,435.00 28,957.00 9,175.00 413,687.00 313,958.00 458,849.00 0.00 392,869.00 152,897.00

Gubakorcha 422,972.00 15,386.00 0.00 79,448.00 0.00 198,654.00 0.00 119,171.00 25,699.00

Guduru 1,498,695.00 26,711.00 64,869.00 404,418.00 71,903.00 22,870.00 0.00 354,361.00 580,274.00

Kurfa chele 244,359.00 516.00 0.00 56,207.00 108,036.00 0.00 0.00 80,116.00 0.00

Mettu 4,321,600.00 37,057.00 40,830.00 414,125.00 407,077.00 3,139,197.00 0.00 265,875.00 54,496.00

Total 9,230,883.00 123,726.00 180,392.00 1,593,192.00 1,029,596.00 4,296,409.00 0.00 1,317,928.00 813,366.00

Oromia

Mean 1,538,480.50 20,621.00 30,065.33 265,532.00 171,599.33 716,068.17 0.00 219,654.67 135,561.00 Gulomakda 1,952,197.00 16,163.00 0.00 246,230.00 1,174,109.00 515,636.00 0.00 0.00 16,222.00

Kafte Humera 7,154,110.00 21,000.00 0.00 5,404,955.00 1,170,198.00 454,811.00 0.00 124,146.00 0.00

Kelete awlaelo 742,417.00 604.00 72,393.00 131,600.00 42,006.00 456,909.00 0.00 39,509.00 0.00

Laelaye adiyabo 898,392.00 NA 0.00 137,327.00 128,018.00 522,752.00 0.00 110,295.00 0.00

Atsbi Womberta 916,109.00 612.00 0.00 188,395.00 143,725.00 424,357.00 0.00 159,632.00 0.00

Total 11,663,225.00 38,379.00 72,393.00 6,108,507.00 2,658,056.00 2,374,465.00 0.00 433,582.00 16,222.00

Tigray

Mean 2,332,645.00 7,675.80 14,478.60 1,221,701.40 531,611.20 474,893.00 0.00 86,716.40 3,244.40 Basketo 552,514.00 317,796.00 7,894.00 112,593.00 0.00 241,729.00 0.00 190,298.00 0.00

Kedida Gamila 1,440,148.00 31,317.00 54,516.00 241,680.00 17,479.00 726,778.00 0.00 399,695.00 0.00

Konso 887,347.00 35,348.00 5,437.00 58,603.00 70,753.00 673,608.00 531.00 78,415.00 0.00

SNNP

Kucha 1,227,986.00 39,973.00 163,938.00 278,605.00 48,556.00 363,270.00 2,523.00 371,094.00 0.00



.46.

Total Tax Drug Sale Tax Land Tax Profit Tax Income Tax Wall and Roof Tax Agricultural Tax Other Taxes Region Woreda Name

Birr Payers Birr Birr Birr Birr Birr Birr Birr

Shebedino 1,800,724.00 105,200.00 83,676.00 0.00 254,220.00 860,123.00 0.00 602,705.00 0.00

Yiregachifee 3,379,497.00 0.00 104,540.00 157,132.00 1,934,672.00 599,441.00 0.00 272,262.00 311,450.00

Total 9,288,216.00 529,634.00 420,001.00 848,613.00 2,325,680.00 3,464,949.00 3,054.00 1,914,469.00 311,450.00 Mean 1,548,036.00 88,272.33 70,000.17 141,435.50 387,613.33 577,491.50 509.00 319,078.17 51,908.33

Total for all regions 38,447,018.00 693,165.00 975,014.00 10,023,365.00 7,162,715.00 13,402,847.00 3,054.00 5,242,095.00 1,637,928.00 Mean for all regions 1,671,609.48 30,137.61 42,391.91 435,798.48 311,422.39 582,732.48 132.78 227,917.17 71,214.26

Fig. W-5: Mean Actual Tax Collected in Sample Woredas by Region

0.00

500,000.00

1,000,000.00

1,500,000.00

2,000,000.00

2,500,000.00

Amhara 1,377,449.00

Oromia 1,538,480.50

Tigray 2,332,645.00

SNNP 1,548,036.00

Tax Collected



.47.

Local government tax collection is one of the key indicators of its self-sufficiency and fiscal autonomy. In this regard, the mean value of actual tax collection for all surveyed woredas shows Birr 1,671,609 whereas the Total shows Birr 38.4 million. During the survey, most woredas were not able to provide an accurate figure of taxpayers for each of the requested tax category and this limits us to draw the average tax for payers in the different jurisdictions and regions. Nonetheless, even with a small number of payers reported, the tentative average amount paid by individual taxpayers was really minimal showing only Birr 55.46. The structure of tax collection is also skewed towards Employees' income tax and land tax contributing 60.9% of the total tax in all regions. Another irregularity is the land tax collected by Kafta Humera woreda, the "Agriculture Paradise", in Tigray region which contributes to 14.1% of the whole tax collected in all regions. The share of business profit tax leaves much to be desired with figures even lower than Employees' income tax and contributing solely 18.63% of the tax collected in all regions. The situation with agricultural tax is also similar to that of profit tax with contributions to the total tax of the sample woredas in the four regions by only 13.63%. With regard to inter-regional comparison of sample woredas, the average tax collected by target woredas in Tigray shows the relatively higher figure of Birr 2,332,645 mainly due to Kafta Humera's contribution to the total regional tax by Birr 7,154,110. In the other regions, jumpy figures such as the one mentioned for Kafta Humera is not observed. However, the SNNP region is the second best with average tax collections amounting to Birr 1,548,036, again the average being pushed by the coffee-rich Yirgacheffe woreda by Birr 3,379,497. Oromia region shows an average tax collection of Birr 1,538,480 and we note the mean value is affected negatively by the remote Kurfa Chelle woreda (Birr 244,359 only).



.48.

Table W-8: Actual Collection Fees in Sample Woredas

In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y

Region Woreda Name

Total Fees Collected

Market Fees and Livestock market dues

Sanitary Services

Slaughter House and

Abattoir

Public Record Fees

Building Plan

Approval

Property Registration

and Surveying

Fees for Vehicles and Bus Terminal Penalties

Licensing fees Other fee

Fogera 18,422.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15,455.00 2,967.00 0.00

Habru 107,955.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 87,505.00 20,450.00 0.00

Kutaber 21,716.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18,052.00 3,664.00 0.00

Sekela 41,095.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38,531.00 2,564.00 0.00

Sekota 301,899.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 98,698.00 0.00 203,201.00

Weldia 341,881.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49,099.00 450.00 292,332.00

Total 832,968.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 307,340.00 30,095.00 495,533.00

Amhara

Mean 138,828.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 51,223.33 5,015.83 82,588.83 Boji 109,474.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 38,483.00 0.00 70,991.00

Cheliya 57,482.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 57,482.00 0.00 0.00

Gubakorcha 1,376.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,376.00 0.00 0.00

Guduru 29,264.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 29,264.00 0.00 0.00

Kurfa chele 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mettu 215,488.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 207,418.00 8,070.00 0.00

Total 413,084.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 334,023.00 8,070.00 70,991.00

Oromia

Mean 68,847.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55,670.50 1,345.00 11,831.83 Gulomakda 49,226.00 13,250.00 0.00 0.00 17,600.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 18,376.00 0.00 0.00

Kafte Humera 1,346,644.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 70,201.00 115,412.00 1,161,031.00

Kelete awlaelo 60,968.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60,968.00 0.00 0.00 Laelaye adiyabo 114,399.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 86,831.00 0.00 27,568.00 Atsbi Womberta 153,218.00 22,052.00 7,597.00 3,150.00 0.00 90,476.00 16,819.00 884.00 12,240.00 0.00 0.00

Total 1,724,455.00 35,302.00 7,597.00 3,150.00 17,600.00 90,476.00 16,819.00 884.00 248,616.00 115,412.00 1,188,599.00

Tigray

Mean 344,891.00 7,060.40 1,519.40 630.00 3,520.00 18,095.20 3,363.80 176.80 49,723.20 23,082.40 237,719.80



.49.

Region Woreda Name

Total Fees Collected

Market Fees and Livestock market dues

Sanitary Services

Slaughter House and

Abattoir

Public Record Fees

Building Plan

Approval

Property Registration

and Surveying

Fees for Vehicles and Bus Terminal Penalties

Licensing fees Other fee

Basketo 18,035.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 184.00 0.00 0.00 17,851.00 0.00 0.00 Kedida Gamila 94,024.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 22,552.00 0.00 71,472.00

Konso 664,196.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 17,551.00 8,001.00 638,644.00

Kucha 52,557.00 38,665.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13,892.00 0.00 0.00

Shebedino 44,908.00 41,124.00 0.00 3,168.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 616.00 0.00 0.00

Yiregachifee 162,113.00 1,542.00 11,545.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 16,585.00 131,939.00

Total 1,035,833.00 81,331.00 11,545.00 3,168.00 0.00 684.00 0.00 2.00 72,462.00 24,586.00 842,055.00

SNNP

Mean 172,638.83 13,555.17 1,924.17 528.00 0.00 114.00 0.00 0.33 12,077.00 4,097.67 140,342.50

Total for all regions 4,006,340.00 116,633.00 19,142.00 6,318.00 17,600.00 91,160.00 16,819.00 886.00 962,441.00 178,163.00 2,597,178.00 Mean for all regions 174,188.70 5,071.00 832.26 274.70 765.22 3,963.48 731.26 38.52 41,845.26 7,746.22 112,920.78

0.00

50,000.00

100,000.00

150,000.00

200,000.00

250,000.00

300,000.00

350,000.00

Birr

Amhara 68,847.33

Oromia 138,828.00

Tigray 344,891.00

SNNP 172,638.83

Average Fees Collected by Woredas

Fig. W-6: Average Collection of Fees (In Birr)



.50.

As shown in Table W-8, other important sources of income for local government are the different service fees charged to citizens. This being the fact, most potentially collectible service fee categories are not existent in the majority of the surveyed sample woredas. Lack of service provision in the areas of market fees and livestock dues, slaughter houses and abattoirs, sanitary services, approval of building plans, etc, are observed in the majority of the sample woredas. Indeed, these services are not meant to be provided by woreda administration. Thus, most of the fees collected by the sample woredas originated from penalties amounting to Birr 962,441 (or 24%) and unclassified or other fees amounting to 2,597,178 (or 65%) thus sharing 89% of the total fees collected by the same. Among all the surveyed woredas, the largest collection of fees is observed in Kafta Humera with Birr 1,346,644 pushing the average collection of fees for sample woredas in Tigray to Birr 344,891. The inter-regional comparison of average in service fee collection by the sample woredas puts those in Oromia region as the best with a mean value of Birr 413,084. The average for Oromia woredas would have been even higher had it not been affected by amazingly low figures in two of the six woredas - Kurfa Chelle collected no fees whereas Guba Koricha had collected only Birr 1,376. The SNNP region sample woredas show an average collection of fees amounting to Birr 172,638 with abysmal differences in reported fees. For the SNNP region, the woreda showing the best figure in the collection of fees is Konso with Birr 664,196 while the lowest figure is reported by Basketo woreda collecting only Birr 18,035. The sample woredas in the Amhara region are the least when compared with woredas in the other regions having a mean value for collection of fees amounting to Birr 138,828. Among the sample woredas in Amhara, Woldia reported the highest collection of Birr 341,881 while Fogera shows the minimum collection amounting to Birr 18,422. The analysis of the structure and composition of collected fees in all woredas of all regions shows among other things the gap in services delivery and a potential to introduce more of these fees. The woredas having minimal collection level can work towards increasing their collection effort thereby securing more income for their local government. To see if there is any relationships between food security level of the woredas and their level of collection of services fees, a correlation



.51.

coefficient was calculated and shows a very negligible and even negative correlation (R = - 0.182) among theses two factors. This fact is also corroborated by the correlation coefficient of remoteness of woredas and the level of service fees collection which shows (R = 0.3) a non - strong positive correlation among theses two variables. Hence, all woredas should try to increase their level of service fee collection despite the fact that they are food insecure or remote. Table W-9: Revenues from Commercial Activities

In Birr for 1996 E.F.Y Rental Income from

Region Woreda Name

Total Revenue

Revenue from Asset

Sales

Income from

Companies and

Enterprises

Technical Equipment

Property Others

Fogera 5,914.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5,914.00 0.00

Habru 7,083.00 0.00 0.00 7,083.00 0.00 0.00

Kutaber 16,166.00 0.00 15,892.00 0.00 274.00 0.00

Sekela 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Sekota 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Weldia 87,069.00 63,556.00 0.00 0.00 23,513.00 0.00

Total 116,232.00 63,556.00 15,892.00 7,083.00 29,701.00 0.00

Amhara

Mean 19,372.00 10,592.67 2,648.67 1,180.50 4,950.17 0.00 Boji 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Cheliya 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Gubakorcha 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Guduru 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Kurfa Chele 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mettu 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Oromia

Mean 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Gulomakda 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Kafte Humera 435,840.00 435,840.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Kelete awlaelo 15,552.00 13,092.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2,460.00 Laelaye adiyabo 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Atsbi Womberta 158,938.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 158,938.00 0.00

Total 610,330.00 448,932.00 0.00 0.00 158,938.00 2,460.00

Tigray

Mean 122,066.00 89,786.40 0.00 0.00 31,787.60 492.00 Basketo 79,448.00 4,483.00 74,965.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Kedida Gamila 1,111.00 1,111.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

SNNP

Konso 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00



.52.

Rental Income from

Region Woreda Name

Total Revenue

Revenue from Asset

Sales

Income from

Companies and

Enterprises

Technical Equipment Property Others

Kucha 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Shebedino 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Yiregachifee 15,927.00 6,396.00 9,531.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 96,486.00 11,990.00 84,496.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mean 16,081.00 1,998.33 14,082.67 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total for all regions 823,048.00 524,478.00 100,388.00 7,083.00 188,639.00 2,460.00 Mean for all regions 35,784.70 22,803.39 4,364.70 307.96 8,201.70 106.96

As Table W-9 shows, the average income secured from commercial activities by the sample woredas in the four regions amounts only to Birr 35, 784.70. Yet, for such an average, the revenue from assets sales has contributed Birr 22,803 and the share of other typically commercial activities such as property or equipment renting was minimal with a contribution of Birr 8,600.62. The woreda reporting the highest income from commercial activities was again Kafta Humera in Tigray region which has secured Birr 435,840 from asset sales. Another interesting fact is that the entire six Oromia sample woredas have reported no income from commercial activities. On the other hand, the woredas reporting income from rental of properly were only four, of which three are woredas in Amhara region and one in Tigray region. Again, it appears to be an open choice for the local government of woredas to engage in beneficial income generating activities such as property renting.

7.1.2.2 Expenditure Pattern in Target Woredas The survey has also attempted to address the issue of budget expenditure in the sample woredas. Hence, the results show a mean value of Birr 7.97 million actual expenditure for all the 23 surveyed woredas. The average of the sample woredas for expenditure varies from region to region. The largest average figure was reported by the SNNP sample woredas with Birr 9.08 million while the lowest average figure belonged to woredas in Oromia region with Birr 6.29 million. The sample woredas in Tigray region show a mean value for actual expenditure that amounts to Birr 8.46 million standing second in inter- regional comparison. The mean value of the



.53.

woredas in the Amhara region places them third with Birr 8.1 million actual expenditure. Fig. W-7 shows the mean actual expenditure of sample woredas by region. With regard to variations between budget and actual expenditure figures, the survey shows no considerable deviation for most of the sampled woredas. Concerning budgets and actual expenditure for administration, the largest variation was found in woredas of the SNNP region with actual expenditure figures showing a decrease by about 20%. For woredas in Tigray region, actual administration expenditures show an increase by 30% whereas Amhara and Oromia regions have almost matched budget and actual figures.



.54.

Table W-10: Budget and Actual Expenditure in Sample Woredas In Birr 1996 E.F.Y

Total Expenditure Administration Education Health Agriculture Other Region Woreda Name

Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual

Fogera 8,654,012 9,522,629 325,402 344,499 3,746,554 3,722,116 1,042,854 1,927,012 1,123,762 979,127 2,415,440 2,549,875

Habru 7,701,210 7,688,370 1,082,200 1,081,480 1,141,290 1,141,290 2,256,480 2,256,480 1,673,690 1,673,690 1,547,550 1,535,430

Kutaber 8,332,180 8,302,521 1,736,100 1,743,400 1,928,630 1,928,580 747,290 741,901 1,840,000 1,840,000 2,080,160 2,048,640

Sekela 10,058,380 7,522,540 860,240 901,520 2,347,310 2,054,790 2,971,160 263,600 2,319,670 2,741,890 1,560,000 1,560,740

Sekota 8,825,094 9,481,345 1,827,186 1,771,402 2,994,611 3,723,110 1,689,843 1,696,930 1,155,331 1,133,809 1,158,123 1,156,094

Weldia 6,323,340 6,217,701 1,288,186 1,251,942 3,603,004 2,810,110 419,807 569,146 181,008 1,204,473 831,335 382,030

Total 49,894,216 48,735,106 7,119,314 7,094,243 15,761,399 15,379,996 9,127,434 7,455,069 8,293,461 9,572,989 9,592,608 9,232,809

Amhara

Mean 8,315,703 8,122,518 1,186,552 1,182,374 2,626,900 2,563,333 1,521,239 1,242,512 1,382,244 1,595,498 1,598,768 1,538,802

Boji 6,121,151 6,120,560 1,216,052 1,322,061 3,530,972 3,403,477 219,061 211,304 826,030 849,642 329,036 334,076

Cheliya 5,967,457 6,478,191 1,189,656 1,037,464 3,325,719 3,320,000 641,175 640,000 325,238 268,099 485,669 1,212,628

Gubakorcha 4,182,357 3,874,804 1,232,453 1,195,906 1,642,386 1,390,947 413,389 406,865 372,784 359,741 521,345 521,345

Guduru 5,964,943 5,826,854 1,395,984 1,394,042 2,343,555 2,342,679 739,042 665,503 1,486,362 1,424,630 0 0

Kurfa chele 3,187,788 3,059,842 986,553 915,915 1,072,749 1,084,951 300,619 313,666 285,417 271,262 542,450 474,048

Mettu 12,209,538 12,415,497 1,399,602 1,437,078 4,241,948 4,287,961 3,260,720 3,283,735 2,271,990 2,371,475 1,035,278 1,035,248

Total 37,633,234 37,775,748 7,420,300 7,302,466 16,157,329 15,830,015 5,574,006 5,521,073 5,567,821 5,544,849 2,913,778 3,577,345

Oromia

Mean 6,272,206 6,295,958 1,236,717 1,217,078 2,692,888 2,638,336 929,001 920,179 927,970 924,142 485,630 596,224

Gulomakda 8,372,971 8,072,971 598,845 598,845 3,888,052 3,588,052 938,206 938,206 1,094,414 1,094,414 1,853,454 1,853,454

Kafte Humera 10,253,300 11,572,259 653,890 1,425,969 3,154,056 3,315,435 1,748,045 1,670,314 1,972,547 1,223,960 2,724,762 3,936,581 Kelete awlaelo 6,685,354 7,942,353 360,590 525,256 2,311,663 2,981,949 790,011 875,963 1,714,099 1,940,214 1,508,991 1,618,971 Laelaye adiyabo 7,038,828 7,539,588 1,010,016 1,010,016 2,304,824 2,304,824 1,917,702 1,917,702 1,403,143 1,903,903 403,143 403,143 Atsbi Womberta 7,180,591 7,177,723 433,043 433,043 2,688,976 2,688,951 1,779,908 1,779,853 1,064,251 1,063,837 1,214,413 1,212,039

Total 39,531,044 42,304,894 3,056,384 3,993,129 14,347,571 14,879,211 7,173,872 7,182,038 7,248,454 7,226,328 7,704,763 9,024,188

Tigray

Mean 7,906,209 8,460,979 611,277 798,626 2,869,514 2,975,842 1,434,774 1,436,408 1,449,691 1,445,266 1,540,953 1,804,838

Basketo 4,958,000 4,919,953 1,488,231 1,208,627 1,889,985 2,000,237 511,000 517,980 1,068,784 1,193,109 0 0 SNNP

Kedida Gamila 8,449,575 9,153,273 543,894 582,239 4,095,100 4,540,411 579,400 366,969 1,955,968 1,563,994 1,275,213 2,099,660



.55.

Total Expenditure Administration Education Health Agriculture Other Region Woreda Name

Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual

Konso 11,455,900 11,946,351 1,914,700 1,963,385 4,314,300 4,234,428 1,244,400 1,898,752 2,177,700 2,011,518 1,804,800 1,838,268

Kucha 5,639,258 5,628,456 354,174 344,752 2,735,454 2,734,641 503,136 503,036 974,731 974,531 1,071,763 1,071,496

Shebedino 14,411,401 12,348,058 468,594 449,647 7,101,982 5,553,481 1,557,295 1,537,295 3,088,841 2,681,850 2,194,689 2,125,785

Yiregachifee 11,002,640 10,512,491 3,593,701 2,248,856 2,633,710 2,580,820 1,478,501 1,454,515 1,405,864 2,247,725 1,890,864 1,980,575

Total 55,916,774 54,508,582 8,363,294 6,797,506 22,770,531 21,644,018 5,873,732 6,278,547 10,671,888 10,672,727 8,237,329 9,115,784

Mean 9,319,462 9,084,764 1,393,882 1,132,918 3,795,089 3,607,336 978,955 1,046,425 1,778,648 1,778,788 1,372,888 1,519,297

Total for all regions 182,975,269 183,324,330 25,959,292 25,187,344 69,036,830 67,733,240 27,749,044 26,436,727 31,781,624 33,016,893 28,448,479 30,950,126

Mean for all regions 7,955,446 7,970,623 1,128,665 1,095,102 3,001,601 2,944,923 1,206,480 1,149,423 1,381,810 1,435,517 1,236,890 1,345,658

Fig. W-7: Average Budget and Actual Expenditure of Sample Woredas in the four Regions

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000B

irr

Amhara 8,315,703 8,122,518

Oromia 6,272,206 6,295,958

Tigray 7,906,209 8,460,979

SNNP 9,319,462 9,084,764

Budgeted Exp. Actual Exp.



.56.

As shown in the following figure, expenditures in education show invariably a higher proportion in the total budgeted and actual expenditures of all sample woredas. The higher share of education within the total actual expenditure is found in woredas of Oromia region with 41.9% while the smallest share is observable in sample woredas of Amhara region with 31.6%. Inter-regional comparisons, in absolute terms, exhibit a relatively higher spending figures for education in the sample woredas of Tigray region albeit the education sector share in the total expenditures of the woredas places Tigray region third when compared to the other regions. Fig W-8: Sector Expenditure Budget and Actual of Sample woredas by Region

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual

Administration Education Health Agriculture OtherExpenditure by Sector

AmharaOromiaTigraySNNP

Table W-11: Sectoral Composition of Actual Expenditure of sample woredas by Region

Actual Expenditures as % of Total Region Admin. Educ. Health Agric. Other Amhara 14.6% 31.6% 15.3% 19.6% 18.9% Oromia 19.3% 41.9% 14.6% 14.7% 9.5% Tigray 9.4% 35.2% 17.0% 17.1% 21.3% SNNP 12.5% 39.7% 11.5% 19.6% 16.7%

The budget and actual expenditure for health reveal no major variation in all regions and its share in the total actual expenditure ranges from 17.0% in Tigray to 15.3% and 11.5% in both Amhara and SNNP regions, respectively. In absolute terms, sample woredas in Tigray show a higher level of actual expenditure in health with a



.57.

mean value of Birr 1.44 million whereas the sample woredas in Oromia show the smallest absolute figure with a mean value of Birr 927,970. The most astonishing finding of the survey is that the mean actual expenditure on agriculture was only 18% of the total expenditure in the sample woredas for all regions. Just comparing the actual figures of individual woredas, expenditures for agriculture range from 4% in Cheliya of Oromia to 36% in Sekela of Amhara. Besides, both the statistical mode and median showed 17% as the most repeated value and the value found in the middle of actual agriculture expenditure for the sample woredas. This situation calls for some reflection on the following major lines of policy direction of the government: aren't the woredas supposed to be a major implementer of ADLI as policy? Can we rest assured by the effort of the woreda to our "food insecure" farmers? Is this expenditure share enough to tackle the secular problems of Ethiopian agriculture? Etc.



.58.

7.1.3 Institutional Capacity

7.1.3.1 Procedural Comprehensiveness of Budget Preparation and Accounting

Under the umbrella of the Civil Service Reform Project, a component called the Expenditure Management and Control Program has been operating since 1997 (E.C. 1991) to improve budget cycle management in Ethiopia, starting from the federal level and then working its way to the regions for the Decentralization Support Activity. The central elements of the program are a new chart of accounts and a double-entry computerized accounting system to replace the existing manual single-entry system. The new chart of accounts provides for uniform classifiers for type of expenditure (economic classification) across capital and current budgets, improved functional classification and a new code for cost centers which designates the unit which is responsible for managing that part of the budget. This new chart has been applied at the federal level since E.F.Y 1994 (2001/02), and was adopted by most regions the following year. On the other hand, the new accounting system - fully computerised, using double-entry bookings and based on accrual accounting which is called Budget Information System (BIS) - has been applied at the federal level since E.F.Y 1995 (2002/03). It was also being introduced in the SNNP region on a trial basis in F.Y 1995: the budget has been prepared using the new classifiers, staff have been trained, and the new accounting system has been in use since then in the mentioned region. However, since a number of woredas have no electricity and computers, the system continues to be manual in many of the sample woredas of all regions. In view of the above, the survey shows that most (91.3%) of the sample woredas in all regions have already formulated strategic plans and that these plans are linked to budget allocation in 87% of the woredas. In fact, this situation seems to be one of the outcomes of the ongoing civil service reform program of the government. Table W-12: Compliance with Key Financial Management Issues in the Sample Woredas

Percent of Woredas complying Fin. Mgmt Issues No. Key Financial Management(FM) Issues

Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP

Average % for all regions

Budgeting 1 Have FM strategic Plan 100 100 80 83 91.3

2 Strategic Plan is linked with Budget allocation 83 100 80 83 87.0



.59.

Percent of Woredas complying Fin. Mgmt Issues No. Key Financial Management(FM) Issues



3 Have a multi-year financial outlook based on revenue and expenditure forecast

50 83 80 67 69.6

4 Submit budget to Regional Gov. for approval 83 100 20 100 78.3

5 Prepare and distribute annual report to the council after closing accounts

100 83 100 83 91.3

Accounting and Auditing 1 Use double-entry accounting 67 17 100 83 65.2 2 Use ICT support for accounting 33 17 20 33 26.1

3 Regular reconciliation of fiscal and bank records 83 50 60 67 65.2

4 Do not have bad credits in the book 67 67 100 67 74.0 5 Use asset depreciation 50 17 20 17 26.1

6 Do not have backlogs larger than one year 17 50 80 33 47.8

7 Prepare regularly standardized audit reports 50 33 60 67 52.2

8 Record procurement decision making for auditability

83 67 100 83 82.6

9 Completed Internal audit for last fiscal year 83 33 20 50 47.8

10 External audit reports not older than two years 83 50 60 50 60.9

Moreover, forecast of revenue and expenditure is carried out in 69% of all sample woredas which is also linked to a multi-year financial outlook. Asked whether they submit budgets to their regional government, 100% of the sample woredas said ‘yes’ in the SNNP and Oromia regions whereas 83% and 20% of sample woredas answered positively in Amhara and Tigray, respectively. As far as the distribution of annual financial reports to the respective council is concerned, sample woredas answered 'yes' in 100% of the cases in both Amhara and Oromia regions while only 83% of those in Tigray and Amhara replied positively. Asset depreciation practices are followed in an irregular manner from region to region with 17% in both Oromia and SNNP regions, improving to 20% and 50% of the sample in Amhara and Tigray regions, respectively. The survey also revealed that account backlogs spanning more than one year are common in 47.8% of the sample woredas in all regions. Regular preparation of standardized audit reports is found in 50%, 33%, 60% and 67% of the sample woredas for Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. With regard to the completion of the internal fiscal audit for 1996 E.F.Y,



.60.

83% of Amhara, 33% of Oromia, 20% of Tigray and 50% of SNNP sample woredas were found to have updated internal audits. Besides, external audits have also been preformed in 83%, 50%, 60% and 50% of the sample woredas of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. All in all, the survey found a weak compliance with auditing standards and unchanged "single entry" accounting procedures requiring immediate attention if fiscal decentralization is to be implemented efficiently. The survey showed that the newly introduced double entry accounting system is being used in 67%, 17%, 100% and 83% of the sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. Computer assisted accounting has been found really low for all sample woredas and only 26% of them are using mostly PC hardware without adequate software. A regular reconciliation of fiscal and bank records is carried out by only 65.2% of all sample woredas and the region showing the least percentage for its sample is Oromia with 50% of the woredas. Woreda finance people argue that this becomes a difficult case when bank branches are located far away from the woreda.

7.1.3.2 Efficiency and Appropriateness of Tax and Fee Collection Procedures a) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) Registration A national program for the registration and identification of business tax payers is underway in which the leading role is played by the Federal Inland Revenue. In line with this, the taxpayers identification number (TIN) system including a software was developed in 2003 by a South African company and is being implemented throughout the country. At the woreda level, the implementation of this program becomes the responsibility of the woredas' finance and economic development office.

Table W-13: TIN Assignment in Sample Woredas TIN

Region Woreda Name Assigned in 1996 E.F.Y.

Assigned up to April 1997

E.F.Y.

To be assigned until 2000 E.F.Y.

Fogera 280 376 587 Habru 352 352 531 Kutaber 126 126 202 Sekela 0 90 298 Sekota 764 764 1000 Weldia 399 399 800 Total 1921 2107 3418

Amhara

Mean 320.2 351.2 569.7 Oromia Boji 0 0 0



.61.

TIN

Region Woreda Name Assigned in 1996 E.F.Y.

Assigned up to April 1997

E.F.Y.

To be assigned until 2000 E.F.Y.

Cheliya 16 282 90 Gubakorcha 46 125 75 Guduru 0 28 300 Kurfa chele 28 36 80 Mettu 57 326 269 Total 147 797 814 Mean 24.5 159.4 135.7 Gulomakda 0 6 83 Kafte Humera 0 0 0 Kelete awlaelo 0 45 0 Laelaye adiyabo 0 0 0 Atsbi Womberta 0 135 265 Total 0 186 348

Tigray

Mean 0 62 69.6 Basketo 117 117 250 Kedida Gamila 0 42 133 Konso 198 256 736 Kucha 0 38 70 Shebedino 212 212 225 Yiregachifee 0 0 0 Total 527 665 1414

SNNP

Mean 87.8 133.0 235.7 During the survey, the effort to assign TIN to taxpayer in each sample woreda was evaluated and the results show that in all regions most of the sample woredas have assigned a reasonable number of TINs. The region found to be in the forefront is Amhara with the average per sample woreda reaching 351 TINs assigned to taxpayers. Oromia region follows suit with a mean value for TIN assignment in the sample woredas showing 159 and the SNNP sample woredas coming after with 133 assigned TIN as average. Tigray region appear to have started the process very late in 1997 E.F.Y and therefore the mean value for the sample woredas in this region is 62 assigned TIN numbers. It is also noted in the survey results that three of the five sample woredas in Tigray are not having even any plans to assign TIN up to the year 2000 (E.F.Y.). A similar lack of plan is also observed in Yirgacheffe of SNNP and Boji of Oromia regions. b) Initiatives to increase taxation and other revenues



.62.

The survey has also revealed that there is a very weak initiative to increase the tax/fee base and the level of taxation. Among the sample woredas in all regions it was found that only 40 % have previous experience assessing current tax or fee systems and the potential of payers. In this regard, the worst cases have been found in both Amhara and Oromia regions sample woredas with 83% of them reporting no initiative at all to assess tax/fee potential of payers. Similarly, conducting studies on new possible taxes was performed only by 50%, 33%, 60% and 33% of the sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. Table W-14: Tax/Fee Assessment in Sample Woredas

Percent of Woredas having in place the Assessment Method No. Tax/Fee Potential assessment method used



1 Conduct study to increase existing tax rates 17 17 60 67 40 2 Study on new possible taxes 50 33 60 50 48 3 Tax comparison with other jurisdiction 33 33 60 33 40

A better situation is observed in the case of tariff reviews where the average for all is 60% and both Oromia and SNNP regions sample woredas had reported about the existence of such reviews. Table W-14 shows a summary by region regarding tax/fee assessment in sample woredas. c) Service Efficiency of Tax System At the woreda level, the legendary "Ethiopian Bureaucracy" gives way to efficiency because of the small size of the served population. Thus, it is not supervising to get answer for tax payment time in minutes rather than days or months. Fig. W-9: Average time needed to pay taxes (in minutes)

0

20

40

Min

utes

es

Amhara 18.8

Oromia 21.7

Tigray 25

SNNP 15

Regions



.63.

In the surveyed woredas, we have found that paying taxes takes on average 15 to 25 minutes which is a good performance by any standard. Fig. W-10: Publication of Tax Assessment Procedures

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Perc

ent o

f Wor

edas

Regions

Not Published 0 17 20 17

Partially, For some Taxes 33 0 40 0

Yes, for All Taxes 67 83 40 83


The publication of tax assessment procedure shows variation among the surveyed regions. Hence, in 83% of the sample woredas in both Oromia and SNNP regions tax assessment procedures are made to be known by all concerned parties. In the Amhara region 100% of the sample woredas are publishing their tax assessment procedures either fully (67%) or partially (33%). In 80% of the sample woredas in Tigray a similar situation to that of Amhara region is observed though 20% of the sampled are not publishing their procedure at all. On the other hand, in 100% of the sample woredas of all regions it was observed that they are having initiative to educate taxpayers and evaluation of service quality regarding tax collection was preformed 100%, 60%, 67% and 67% in the sample woredas of SNNP, Tigray, Oromia, and Amhara regions, respectively.

Table W-15: Initiative for taxpayer education and Service Quality Assessment in Sample Woredas

Percent of Woredas

Regions With Procedures for Taxpayer Education

Evaluating Service Quality for Tax Collection

Amhara 100 67 Oromia 100 67 Tigray 100 60 SNNP 100 100



.64.

7.1.3.3 Human Resource and Capacity Building At the woredas level, although office equipment and financial assets are required for a smooth delivery of services, human resources are by far the most important factors affecting their efficiency. People design and implement the services, control quality, allocate scarce financial resources and set the overall strategies and objectives of the woredas. Table W-16: Staffing level of sample woredas

Region Woreda Name Total Staff Vacancies Contracted

Experts Contracted Laborers

Fogera 1175 221 110 0 Habru 1084 184 239 15 Kutaber 871 209 0 0 Sekela 693 109 32 0 Sekota 957 257 75 0 Weldia 490 64 0 0 Total 5270 1044 456 15

Amhara

Mean 878 174 76 3 Boji 715 178 0 0 Cheliya 789 222 11 0 Gubakorcha 702 340 20 0 Guduru 714 149 0 0 Kurfa chele 637 121 0 0 Mettu 522 47 0 0 Total 4079 1057 31 0

Oromia

Mean 680 176 5 0 Gulomakda 785 62 60 0 Kafte Humera 644 39 0 0 Kelete awlaelo 612 8 0 0 Laelaye adiyabo 607 114 0 0 Atsbi Womberta 635 10 0 0 Total 3283 233 60 0

Tigray

Mean 657 47 12 0 Basketo 404 98 27 0 Kedida Gamila 1461 4 6 0 Konso 1163 188 103 0 Kucha 574 228 0 0 Shebedino 1218 104 0 0

SNNP

Yiregachifee 263 50 0 0 Total 5083 672 136 0 Mean 847 112 23 0



.65.

Region Woreda Name Total Staff Vacancies Contracted

Experts Contracted Laborers

Total for all regions 17715 3006 683 15 Mean for all regions 770 131 30 1

Cognizant of these facts, the survey has attempted to evaluate the staffing level and the human resource capacity building effort of the sample woredas as far as human resources and capability to service delivery. Hence, the survey has shown a mean value of total staff of 770 employees and a vacancy level of 131 job posts for all sample woredas. At the regional level the mean values for total staffing of woredas vary from 657 in Tigray to 878 employees in Amhara. The average values of total staffing for Oromia and SNNP sample woredas show 680 and 847 employees, respectively. Among all sample woredas regardless of their region, the highest total staffing level was observed in Kedida Gamila woreda of SNNP region while the least figure was reported by Yirgacheffe woreda of the same region. The mean value of vacancy in all sample woredas in relative terms was 17% of the total approved job positions with Oromia sample woredas showing the highest figure of 26% of vacancy as average. The mean values of the other regions were 20%, 13.2% and 7.2% for SNNP, Amhara and Tigray regions, respectively. To compensate for the level of vacancy, most sample woredas had recourse to contracted experts in a varying degree from region to region. Although the mean value of contracted employees for all regions was 30, in absolute terms the Amhara region sample woredas had shown the highest figure with 76 contracted employees. The mean values of contracted employees for the other regions are lower than the overall average and the sample woredas average values in absolute terms show 31, 23 and 12 contracted employees for Oromia, SNNP and Tigray, respectively. Fig. W-11 shows the major problems faced by the sample woredas while recruiting employees.



.66.

Fig. W-11: Major problems in staff recruitment

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

ent o

f Wor

edas

Regions

Low Atractiveness of Location 50 83 100 50

Payment not Attractive enough 50 100 40 33

Candidates not meeting Criteria 50 83 60 17

Other 0 83 0 17


Table W-17: Compliance with Modern Human Resource Management approaches

Percent of Woredas complying with Key Human Resource

Management Issue No. Key Human Resource Management Issue



1 Job description for all jobs 50 50 80 83 65 2 Performance indicators for all jobs 50 50 40 100 61 3 Written HR policy handed out to staff 67 17 40 50 43

4 Regular performance appraisal of employees 83 17 100 50 61

The survey assessment had also evaluated the compliance of the sample woredas with principles and practice of modern management. Accordingly, the result show somewhat acceptable level of modern human resource management approaches. The issuing of job description for all jobs is practiced in 65% of all sample woredas with Amhara and Oromia sample woredas falling below this average with only 50% of their sample woredas using job descriptions. Tigray and SNNP sample woredas reported higher values and show averages of 80% and 83%, respectively. Compliance with issuance of performance indicators and regularity in performance appraisal of employees is dissimilar across the regions. While the SNNP region



.67.

samples had reported a 100% issuance of performance indicators, in 50% of them a regular appraisal of performance was not carried out. The samples from Tigray have reported exactly the opposite of what is observed in the SNNP region. In the Amhara region, although most sample woredas (83%) are carrying out performance appraisal, in half of them neither job descriptions nor performance indicators are issued to their employees. The survey also showed that sample woredas from Oromia are found in bad shape when it comes to modern human resources approaches.



.68.

7.1.4 Public Information, Participation, Empowerment and Corruption control

7.1.4.1 Access to Information and Community Consultation Transparency of woreda institutions is one of the critical aspects of democratized decentralization and yardstick by which their accountability to citizens and stockholders is measured. The appraisal of public access to important documentation such as budgets, annual reports, strategic plan, tax assessment, decision taken by the council was carried out and recorded in the questionnaire in the most direct way. Officials in the surveyed woredas were asked to produce a copy of the requested document and to show the assigned enumerators. If all went right then public access is measured positively for the target woreda. Table W-18: Public Access to written Information and Community Consultation

Percent of Woredas Complying No.

Key Areas of Public Information and Community Consultation


Average % for all woredas

Citizens and Stakeholders have Access to Written Information on 1 Budget 100 83 60 74 79.25 2 Annual Reports 100 83 60 83 81.5 3 Audit Reports 33 83 0 52 42 4 Strategic Plan 100 83 100 96 94.75 5 Tax Assessment 50 67 20 57 48.5 6 Service provided by local government 83 83 80 83 82.25 7 Agenda of Council Meetings 83 67 0 52 50.5 8 Decisions Taken by Council 100 83 60 78 80.25

Regional Average of Public Access (%) 81.1 79.0 47.5 71.9 69.9 The Community is consulted while

1 Formulating strategic plan 100 100 80 83 91 2 Preparing Budgets 50 83 40 50 56 3 Introducing change in service delivery 83 67 40 67 64

Regional Average of Community Cons. (%) 77.7 83.3 53.3 66.7 70.3Consulting members of the community

1 Citizens 83 100 60 83 83 2 Business Community 67 83 20 33 52 3 Women's Associations 67 100 20 50 61 4 NGOs and CBOs 50 67 60 17 48 5 Disadvantage People 17 0 0 0 4 6 Kebeles 83 100 80 100 91



.69.

Percent of Woredas Complying No.

Key Areas of Public Information and Community Consultation


Average % for all woredas

7 Regional Government Agencies 50 67 60 83 65 8 Federal Government Agencies 0 0 0 50 13

Publication of community consultations

1 Community participations and decisions are written down and made public

67 83 60 67 70

2 Results of community participation is reported to council members

100 100 60 83 87

Consequently, average results for public access to most of the requested documents in all regions had shown a positive measure ranging from 51% for council agendas and audit reports to 95% for strategic plans. The region showing better public access was Amhara (81.1%) while the least public access was calculated for sample woredas of Tigray (47.5%). The sample woredas of Oromia and SNNP regions show values that are close to the average of all sample woredas (69.9%) with averages of 79% and 71.9%, respectively. During the survey the level of community consultation had also been assessed and the results show that the sample woredas are consulting the community while formulating strategic plans, budgets and to introduce changes in service delivery in 78%, 83%, 53% and 67% of the cases in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The overall average of the sample woredas in all regions revealed that there is a reasonable level of community consultation by showing a mean value of 70.3% of woredas practicing community consultations. The Kebele leadership (91%), citizens (83%), women associations (61%) and regional government agencies (65%) are the most consulted by the woredas while planning for their activities. The survey has also revealed that the results of community consultation are written down and made public in most sample woredas which can be judged by the average result of 70% of the cases for all regions.

7.1.4.2 Local Government Support to NGOs and CBOs With regard to the outreach level of the woreda employees, all the sample woredas in Amhara, Tigray and SNNP regions have assigned some of their employees on permanent basis to their respective rural kebeles. On the contrary, only 50% of the sample woredas in Oromia have employees assigned permanently in rural kebeles.



.70.

Involvement with technical support to NGOs and CBOs, on the other hand, shows and average of 70% of all sample woredas. The technical support to CBOs and NGOs varies across regions and the mean values showing the percent of woredas providing such support in each region reveal 67%, 100%, 20% and 83% for Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. On the other hand, most sample woredas (78% of all) say they had an up-to-date list of NGOs and CBOs operating in their respective jurisdiction. Partnering for development with NGOs and other self-help groups is also confirmed by 100%, 83%, 40% and 83% of the sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively.

7.1.5 Service Delivery Performance The major reason d'etre of the woreda administration is the delivery of services to its inhabitants. Appreciating this fact, the questionnaire used for the field survey included measurement questions for about fifteen basic service types. The questions helped to assess which services were available and who delivered them.

7.1.5.1 Basic Access of population to selected services The survey results show that for most services that were considered "basic" the involvement of woreda and municipal offices was found to be satisfactory. During the survey it was learned that woredas and municipalities in the same jurisdiction were delivering together 57%, 39%, 49% and 42% of the "basic" services in the sample woredas of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. Conversely, the role played by federal, regional and zonal agencies is remarkably low. The combined participation rate of these agencies as "basic service delivery" actors show 21%, 21%, 19% and 27% for the sample woredas of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions respectively. The role of these agencies is found to be more accentuated in certain "investment-intensive-and-integrated" service types such as roads, water supply, secondary education and primary health care due to the existence of several regional or federal level projects.



.71. .71.

Table W-19: Status of basic service by delivery actors Basic Service Delivery Actors (Percentage of woredas-multiple answers allowed)

Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP No Service Type NA FRZ WG Mun Other* NA FRZ WG Mun Other* NA FRZ WG Mun Other* NA FRZ WG Mun Other*

1 Public Transport 67 17 0 0 16 67 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 0 100 33 0 0 0 67

2 Solid waste collection 0 0 0 50 50 100 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 40 0 100 0 0 0 0

3 Liquid waste disposal 67 0 0 0 33 100 0 0 0 0 80 0 0 0 20 100 0 0 0 0

4 Street Cleaning 0 0 17 67 16 100 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 40 0 50 0 0 33 17

5 Sanitation 0 0 50 67 0 67 0 17 17 0 0 0 80 40 0 17 0 50 33 0

6 Roads 0 34 50 50 0 17 67 17 17 0 0 60 40 20 0 33 33 33 17 0

7 Housing 67 0 17 17 0 67 0 0 17 16 100 0 0 0 0 67 17 17 0 0

8 Water Supply 0 34 83 0 0 100 33 0 0 0 40 60 0 0 0 50 67 0 0

9 Electricity 0 67 17 0 16 50 50 0 0 0 20 80 0 0 0 17 51 17 33 0

10 Slaughter House 67 0 0 0 33 50 0 0 33 17 40 0 0 60 0 17 0 33 50 0

11 Primary Health Care 17 0 83 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 60 80 0 0 0 50 67 0 0

12 Primary Education 0 34 83 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 50 50 0 0

13 Secondary Education 0 50 67 0 0 17 50 33 33 0 0 40 100 0 0 0 50 33 17 0

14 Agricultural Services 0 17 100 0 0 17 33 100 0 0 0 0 60 0 40 0 33 67 0 0

15 Micro-finance 0 67 33 0 0 17 17 67 0 0 0 0 20 0 80 17 67 17 0 0 % by delivery actors for

all services 19 21 40 17 3 45 21 31 8 0 24 19 36 13 8 30 27 30 12 1

Note: FRZ= Federal, Regional, Zonal Institutions. WG= Woreda Government. Mun= Municipality * Other includes Private businesses, NGOs and CBOs



.72.

Respondent in the sample woredas were asked whether they evaluate the quality of rendered services and the results show encouraging results. Asking citizens about quality of service is common in 100%, 83%, 80% and 83% of the sample woredas of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The regularity of services quality assessment was also satisfactory showing an overall average of 70% of the sample woredas. The publishing of service performance results is a very common practice in the sample woredas of all surveyed regions.

Table W-20: Service Quality Assessment in Sample Woredas

Percent of Woredas in

No. Task Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP


1 Assessing the quality of service by asking citizens 100 83 80 83 87

2 Assessing service quality regularly 67 83 60 67 70 3 Publish service performance results 100 100 100 100 100

7.1.5.2 Agricultural and Food Security Service Delivery The service selected for detailed survey in part I of the Benchmarking study were agriculture for woredas and solid waste disposal for municipalities. Accordingly, the questionnaire contained about eight specific questions aimed at the assessment of the level of agricultural services in the sample woredas.

Table W-21: Basic Data on Agricultural service

Development Agents

Region Woreda Name Agricultural

Land use (in Ha) Total

Working in

Kebeles

Average Training Days per

year

Cost of salaries for Agriculture

Fogera 51,472.0 72.0 36.0 10.0 1,566,428.00

Habru 20,919.0 56.0 55.0 90.0 91,329.00

Kutaber 12,732.0 27.0 27.0 30.0 1,107,757.00

Sekela 19,089.0 39.0 29.0 10.0 432,149.00

Sekota 32,067.0 70.0 59.0 0.0 1,117,995.00

Weldia 71.0 5.0 5.0 39.6 40,695.00

Total 136,350.0 269.0 211.0 179.6 4,356,353.00

Amhara

Mean 22,725.0 44.8 35.2 29.9 871,270.60 Oromia Boji 34,594.0 42.0 18.0 20.0 385,624.00



.73.

Development Agents

Region Woreda Name Agricultural

Land use (in Ha) Total

Working in

Kebeles

Average Training Days per

year

Cost of salaries for Agriculture

Cheliya 67,215.0 30.0 15.0 28.0 268,099.00

Gubakorcha 24,472.0 12.0 1.0 3.0 22,024.00

Guduru 55,919.0 20.0 20.0 10.0 96,720.00

Kurfa chele 17,478.0 5.0 2.0 22.0 285,417.00

Mettu 27,045.0 36.0 36.0 40.0 599,592.00

Total 226,723.0 145.0 92.0 123.0 1,657,476.00 Mean 37,787.2 24.2 15.3 20.5 331,495.20 Atsbi Womberta 21,142.0 45.0 41.0 0.0 1,063,837.00

Gulomakda 18,948.0 61.0 9.0 10.0 737,894.00

Kafte Humera 174,101.0 31.0 13.0 12.0 2,119,815.00

Kelete awlaelo 21,090.0 54.0 41.0 30.0 1,079,550.00

Laelaye adiyabo 49,181.0 77.0 45.0 14.0 669,007.00

Total 284,462.0 268.0 149.0 66.0 5,670,103.00

Tigray

Mean 56,892.4 53.6 29.8 13.2 1,134,020.60 Basketo 17,821.0 43.0 29.0 10.0 380,963.00

Kedida Gamila 22,028.0 62.0 40.0 8.0 632,100.00

Konso 76,000.0 89.0 50.0 3.0 1,071,669.00

Kucha 28,395.0 85.0 84.0 5.0 0

Shebedino 30,551.0 152.0 120.0 1.0 801,686.00

Yirgacheffe 24,954.0 101.0 69.0 4.8 1,342,455.00

Total 199,749.0 532.0 392.0 31.8 4,228,873.00

SNNP

Mean 33,291.5 88.7 65.3 5.3 845,774.60 Total for all regions 847,284.0 1,214.0 844.0 400.4 15,912,805.00 Mean for all regions 36,838.4 52.8 36.7 17.4 691,861.09

In this regard, the survey results show average land use of 22.73, 37.8, 56.9 and 33.3 thousand hectares for the sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. These figures reveal that the sample woredas in Tigray are having a greater level of land use for agriculture and the woredas in SNNP region are having the least level of land use compared to the other regions. Although the survey attempted to gather data related to average house hold income per year, most sample woredas, especially in Tigray region, were not able to provide accurate figures. The same is true with data related to increase in household income in the last five years. Therefore, the lack of data limits us to provide any meaningful interpretation about house hold income.



.74.

The deployment and use of development agents (DAs) is one of the important measurements of how close the woreda administration is to the farmers. In this regard, the survey results show mean values of 45, 24, 54 and 89 total development agents per woreda in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The average number of DAs per woreda being 53, we found that both the Amhara and Oromia regions are using by far a lesser number of DAs in their respective sample woredas. In principle, the permanent deployment of DAs to rural Kebeles shows a continued commitment and technical assistance to the farmers. Consequently, it is possible to note that in all regions there are DAs assigned permanently to their respective rural Kebeles. However, the mean value of DAs assigned in rural kebeles in each region ranges from 15 to 65 DAs. Accordingly, the average number of DAs was 35, 15, 29 and 65 for the sample woredas of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. In the same line, the average training of DAs was 30, 21, 13 and 5 days per DA/year in the sample woredas of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The cost of salaries for the function of agriculture is dissimilar across the regions showing mean values of Birr 871 270, 331 495, 1 134 020 and 845 774 for the sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The survey result also shows that the average cost of salaries for all samples in all regions was Birr 691 861. On the other hand, one of the most important agricultural services expected from the woredas is the distribution of agricultural inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides, farm tools, etc. In view of this, the survey has attempted to measure the involvement of the woredas in providing agricultural inputs.

Table W-22: Agricultural Inputs Distributed in the sample woredas

Value of Distributed Inputs

No. Region Total Average

% Distributed

free of charge

% Distributed on cash or

credit 1 Amhara 6,610,242.00 1,101,707.00 16.67 50.00 2 Oromia 11,351,559.00 1,891,926.50 0.00 100.00 3 Tigray 18,977,140.00 3,795,428.00 1.40 98.60 4 SNNP 2,180,035.00 363,339.17 11.33 72.00



.75.

The results show that the mean values of distributed inputs to farmers were Birr 1.1 million, 1.89 million, 3.8 million and 363 339 for sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. As appreciated from these figures the SNNP sample woredas are found to be the less involved ones in agricultural input distribution when compared to the woredas in the other three regions. In contrast, the woredas in Tigray show a satisfactory level of service when it come to distributing input to farmers. Distribution of agricultural inputs for free is not a common practice in all regions. However, both Amhara and SNNP woredas show the highest figures for free distribution of inputs with 17% and 11% out of the total value of distributed agricultural inputs, respectively. During the survey respondents in the sample woredas were asked to evaluate the impact of distributed inputs in the productivity of farmers. Thus, 100% of the sample woredas in both SNNP and Amhara regions agree that the inputs had contributed to increase significantly the yield per hectare whereas 80% and 67% of the sample woredas in Tigray and SNNP have stated the same thing. Asked whether the distributed inputs affected positively the income of farmers, all the sample woredas in both Tigray and Amhara responded positively while the woredas in Oromia (33%) and SNNP (67%) agreed somehow to this statement. On other hand, the impact assessment of inputs on plant disease is low in all cases with only 20%, 33%, 0% and 50% of the sample woredas agreeing in such impact in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively as shown in Fig. W-12.



.76.

Fig. W-12: Efficiency of Distributed Inputs

0102030405060708090

100

Perc

ent o

f Wor

edas

Regions

Significant Increse of Yield Per Hectare 80 100 100 67

Significant Increse of Farmers Income 100 33 100 67

Significant Increse of Land Use 20 50 17 50

Significant Decrease of Plant Diseases 20 33 0 50

Tigray Oromia Amhara SNNP

Table W-23: Services made available for majority of farmers

Percent of woredas delivering the service

No. Service type offered Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP

Average for all

regions 1 Direct marketing of produce 50 33 20 50 39

2 Sale on market with reasonable distance 50 83 20 83 61

3 Transport made available to farmers 17 33 0 0 13

4 Food processing facilities 0 0 20 33 13 5 Cooperatives 83 83 80 100 87 6 Access to micro-finance 83 33 100 50 65

7

Training and technical assistance for off-farm income 50 50 80 17 48

8 Gender-specific training for women 100 83 20 17 57



.77.

Of all agricultural service types, the one that shows a higher level of involvement of the woreda agriculture offices is facilitation of farmer's cooperative. According to the survey results over 87 percent of the sample woredas in all regions are helping farmers to be organized in service cooperatives. Another important service is the granting of access to micro finance. In the surveyed regions, strong micro financing institutions are established by the regional governments, namely, Dedebit microfinance in Tigray, ACSI in Amhara, OCSSC in Oromia and Omo microfinance in the SNNP. Thus, the role played by most sample woredas is to link these regional micro finance institutions to credit interest groups in their jurisdictions. In this manner, 83%, 33%, 100% and 50% of the sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP region were facilitating farmers to get access to microfinance, respectively. Provision of training and technical assistance for off- farm income was also one of the services assessed during the survey and the results show that 48% of all the surveyed woredas said they have rendered such services to farmers. In the same line, gender-specific training for women has been provided in 100%, 83% 20% and 17% of the sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP region, respectively. The provision of food processing facilitates and making available transportation to farmers are services that show lower level involvement by the sample woredas showing average values for all regions of only 13% for both types of services. The reason for such low level involvement could be the required high level investment needed for the provision of these two services. Marketing of produces of farmer is practiced by 50% of the sample woredas, in both Amhara and SNNP region whereas the sample woredas in Oromia and Tigray show a lesser degree of involvement in this service with 33% and 20% of their sample woredas, respectively. Liaisoning buyers with farmers so that products are sold within reasonable distances are also practiced by the woreda agriculture offices. In this regard, the survey results show higher percentage figures of 83% of sample woredas in both Oromia and SNNP regions which is most likely caused by the production of cash crops such as coffee in most of the sample woredas of these two regions. The practice of these services in sample woredas of Tigray and Amhara regions is considerably lower with 20% and 50% of the woredas providing buyer-seller linking services, respectively.



.78.

7.2. Results for Sample Municipalities The results of the survey for the sample municipalities are presented in the following pages. For the sake of convenience, the analysis of results is divided into five parts dealing with general information; financial autonomy and performance; institutional capacity; public access to information, empowerment and corruption; and, service delivery performance.

7.2.1 - General Information on Surveyed Municipalities The total population in the surveyed 17 municipalities was 1,169,751 whereas the land size covered by the target municipalities is 255 km2. The mean population size for all municipalities shows 68,809 with a mean land size of 15 km2 yielding an average population density of 4591 persons per km2. In Table M-1, a detailed information regarding grade of municipality, population, land size and population density of the sample 17 municipalities is presented.

Table M-1: Population*, land sizes and accessibility

Region municipality

Name Grade of

municipality Population

Land size

(sq.km.) Population

Density Bahr dar 1 159,793 21 7,756.9 Dessie 1 161,554 20 8,077.7 Lalibella 3 14,451 10 1,445.1 Woreta 3 25,141 4 5,713.9 Total 360,939 55 6,562.5

Amhara

Mean 90,235 14 6,562.5 Nekemt 2 80,620 32 2,527.3 Weliso 3 43,443 11 3,878.8 Adama 1 218,110 43 5,048.8 Ambo 3 47,148 16 2,965.3 Total 389,321 102 3,809.4

Oromia

Mean 97,330 26 3,809.4 Mekelle 1 161,738 24 6,739.1 Rama 4 7,479 5 1,495.8 Wukro 3 27,322 7 3,737.6 Adwa 2 40,789 7 6,275.2 Alamata 3 43,619 7 5,975.2

Tigray

Total 280,947 50 5,606.6

* Population and land size data is taken from the CSA.



.79.

Region municipality

Name Grade of

municipality Population

Land size

(sq.km.) Population

Density Mean 56,189 10 5,606.6 Dilla 2 58,337 11 5,208.7 Durame 4 12,266 16 766.6 Yirgalem 3 41,824 11 3,668.8 Alaba Kulito 4 26,117 8.9 2,934.5 Total 138,544 48 2,916.7

SNNP

Mean 34,636 12 2,916.7 Total for all regions 1,169,751 255 4,590.7 Mean for all regions 68,809 15 4,590.7

The region that showed a larger population size for its municipalities was the Oromia region with a population of 389,321 whereas the smallest population size is found in SNNP region with a total of 138,544. Among the surveyed municipalities, Adama town in Oromia region shows a larger population size (218,110) whereas Rama town in Tigray has the smallest population size (7,479). The highest population density figure is observed in Dessie municipality of Amhara region with 8,077 persons per Km2 while the smallest population density figure is observed in Durame town of SNNP Region. With regard to the grade of municipalities, the survey shows that 4 of the 17 surveyed municipalities or 23.6% are Grade I, 3 (or 17.6%) are Grade II, 7 (or 41.2%) are Grade III and the remaining 3 or (17.6%) are Grade IV towns as categorized by their respective regions. The mean values of population living in the sample municipalities show 97 330, 90 235, 56 189 and 34 636 in Oromia, Amhara Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively.

7.2.2 Financial Autonomy and Performance Unlike the woredas, municipalities generate their financial resources from two sources: "block grants" transferred by their respective regions to cover for state functions; and own revenues resulting from local service fees and charges. The practice of state functions by municipalities is a recent phenomenon resulting from reforms introduced by regional governments of the surveyed municipalities. In this section of the survey analysis, we will explore the core aspect of decentralization which is the fiscal autonomy of municipalities in the different regions. The following



.80.

subsections will describe the sources of revenue, tax income, collection of fees and the manner budgets are spent in the sample municipalities.

7.2.2.1 Sources of Revenue - Budget, Tax, Fees and Commercial Activities Table M-2: Budgeted and Actual Revenue

In Birr†

Region Municipality

Name Budgeted Revenue

Actual Revenue

Per Capita Revenue

Bahr dar 31,217,860.0 22,582,675.00 141.3

Dessie 13,716,600.0 21,666,762.00 134.1

Lalibella 355,481.0 534,000.66 37.0

Woreta 453,928.0 443,196.00 17.6

Total 45,743,869.0 45,226,633.7 125.3

Amhara

Mean 11,435,967.3 11,306,658.4 125.3 Nekemt 15,612,449.0 8,976,016.00 111.3

Weliso 7,050,879.0 6,138,128.00 141.3

Adama 57,204,422.0 87,687,348.00 402.0

Ambo 3,900,367.0 5,786,593.00 122.7

Total 83,768,117.0 108,588,085.0 278.9

Oromia

Mean 20,942,029.3 27,147,021.3 278.9 Mekelle 30,000,000.0 34,145,238.00 211.1

Rama 687,500.0 1,016,012.10 135.8

Wukro 1,585,040.0 6,871,014.00 251.5

Adwa 10,266,354.0 9,826,049.00 240.9

Alamata 5,394,220.0 5,088,147.00 116.6

Total 47,933,114.0 56,946,460.1 202.7

Tigray

Mean 9,586,622.8 11,389,292.0 202.7 Dilla 6,022,554.0 3,318,000.00 56.9

Durame 1,801,000.0 2,873,467.00 234.3

Yirgalem 1,467,290.0 2,314,272.00 55.3

Alaba Kulito 4,550,000.0 3,660,759.00 140.2

Total 13,840,844.0 12,166,498.0 87.8

SNNP

Mean 3,460,211.0 3,041,624.5 87.8 91,285,944.0 222,927,676.8 190.6 Total for all regions

Mean for all regions 11,252,114.4 13,113,392.8 190.6

† All figures refer to 1996 E.F.Y data with the exception of data for municipalities in Oromia region. Oromia municipalities started state functions in 1997 E.F.Y. Thus Oromia municipalities' revenue is the sum total of 1996 E.F.Y municipal functions Budget/actual and 1997 E.F.Y. state function budget/actual as methodologically justified by our consultants and agreed by the client.



.81.

The variations between budgeted and actual revenue of municipalities is abysmal. The total actual revenue of the sample municipalities is 244% of their budget. The reason for this disparity is invariably the introduction of state functions actual revenues without prior budgeting. The regions that reformed their municipalities earlier (Amhara and SNNP) show a more or less balanced budget and actual figures of revenue or even a lesser actual revenue figures. The municipality average actual revenue also varies from Birr 27.1 million for Oromia municipalities to Birr 3.04 million for municipalities in the SNNP Region. Both the Amhara and Tigray regions municipalities' average actual revenues, on the other hand, are very close and were Birr 11.3 million and 11.39 million, respectively. Thus, with regard to actual revenue of the target municipalities, the survey revealed that they have secured a total of 222.9 million Birr with an average of 13.11 million Birr per municipality. In absolute terms, the larger share of budget was secured by the municipalities in the Oromia with 108.59 million while the smaller revenue share was taken by the municipalities in SNNP region with 12.17 million Birr. The highest actual revenue figure of Oromia municipalities is due to an allocation (in 1997 E.F.Y) of Birr 50 million for internal road and other constructions in Adama town. Intensive infrastructure construction was required in Adama because it was designated the seat of the Regional Council of Ormia in 1996 E.F.Y. This is also reflected in the fact that Adama is the municipality that shows the highest absolute revenue of all sample municipalities. In contrast, among the surveyed municipalities the minimum actual budget was observed in Woreta municipality of Amhara region with Birr 443,196. Fig. M-1: Mean per Capita Revenue of Municipalities in the four Regions

87.8

190.69 278.9

125.3

202.7

020406080

100Amhara

Oromia

TigraySNNP

Mean for all regions

Per capita Budget Revenue (In Birr)



.82.

The mean per capita actual revenue for all the regions was found to be Birr 190.6. The largest mean per capita budget revenue was observed in municipalities of the Oromia region with Birr 278.9 and the least or Birr 87.8 was observed in municipalities of SNNP Region. The per capita mean values for actual budget revenue of Amhara and Tigray regions show Birr 125.3 and 202.7, respectively. If we consider the case of the allocation of Birr 50 million for Adama and the likelihood of similar allocation in the coming years, we can presume that the per capita actual budget revenues of Tigray municipalities is the highest. This statement is corroborated by the fact that subtracting the unplanned actual revenue from Oromia municipalities, we get a per capita actual revenue of only Birr 150.48 compared to Birr 202.7 for Tigray municipalities. Fig. M-2: Composition of Mean Revenue of Municipalities by Budget Source (in Birr)

0.00

5,000,000.00

10,000,000.00

15,000,000.00

20,000,000.00

25,000,000.00

30,000,000.00

Amhara 11,306,658.40 5,883,580.60 5,405,131.80 17,946.00

Oromia 27,147,021.30 20,344,236.30 6,769,785.00 33,000.00

Tigray 11,389,292.00 3,176,856.90 8,212,435.10 0

SNNP 3,041,624.50 573,497.40 2,468,127.10 0

Total Bock grant Own Revenue Laons/Grant

Block grant from the respective region to the surveyed municipalities is a major source of budgeted revenue constituting 55.3% of the total. Budget transfers from the regions to municipalities are mainly intended to be used for the newly introduced state functions. Unlike the case of woredas, subsidies are not observed in the municipalities.



.83.

Table M-3: Sources of Actual Revenue (In Birr)

Sources of Revenue

Region Municipality

Name Total Revenue Block Grant Own Revenue Loans/ Grant

Bahr dar 22,582,675.00 9,827,232.0 12,683,659.0 71,784.0 Dessie 21,666,762.00 13,581,678.9 8,085,083.2 0.0 Lalibella 534,000.66 90,410.7 443,590.0 0.0 Woreta 443,196.00 35,001.0 408,195.0 0.0 Total 45,226,633.7 23,534,322.5 21,620,527.2 71,784.0

Amhara

Mean 11,306,658.4 5,883,580.6 5,405,131.8 17,946.0 Nekemt 8,976,016.00 1,644,129.0 7,331,887.0 0.0 Weliso 6,138,128.00 2,732,983.0 3,405,145.0 0.0 Adama 87,687,348.00 73,374,827.0 14,312,521.0 0.0 Ambo 5,786,593.00 3,625,006.0 2,029,587.0 132,000.0 Total 108,588,085.0 81,376,945.0 27,079,140.0 132,000.0

Oromia

Mean 27,147,021.3 20,344,236.3 6,769,785.0 33,000.0 Mekelle 34,145,238.00 466,223.0 33,679,015.0 0.0 Rama 1,016,012.10 758,471.4 257,540.7 0.0 Wukro 6,871,014.00 5,849,025.0 1,021,989.0 0.0 Adwa 9,826,049.00 5,173,296.0 4,652,753.0 0.0 Alamata 5,088,147.00 3,637,269.0 1,450,878.0 0.0 Total 56,946,460.1 15,884,284.4 41,062,175.7 0.0

Tigray

Mean 11,389,292.0 3,176,856.9 8,212,435.1 0.0 Dilla 3,318,000.00 (1,509,366.00) 4,827,366.0 0.0 Durame 2,873,467.00 1,175,900.0 1,697,567.0 0.0 Yirgalem 2,314,272.00 (55,468.00) 2,369,740.0 0.0 Alaba Kulito 3,660,759.00 2,682,923.6 977,835.4 0.0 Total 12,166,498.0 2,293,989.6 9,872,508.4 0.0

SNNP

Mean 3,041,624.5 573,497.4 2,468,127.1 0.0

Total for all regions 222,927,676.8 123,089,541.5 99,634,351.3 203,784.0

Mean for all regions 13,113,392.8 7,240,561.3 5,860,844.2 11,987.3

The share of own revenues generated through tax and service fees collection is an important budget component for all municipalities. In this regard, own revenues of municipalities not only accounted for 44.7% of total revenues but also show a mean value of Birr 5.86 million compared to 7.24 million that is contributed by block grant. In absolute terms, the regions having the largest average portion of own revenue figure in the total actual revenue was Tigray with Birr 8.2 million and is followed by Oromia region with Birr 6.8 million. municipalities in Amhara and SNNP regions show average own revenues amounting to Birr 5.4 million and 2.5 million, respectively.



.84.

In relative terms, although the own revenue portion of the total appears to be a small figure, the municipalities in the SNNP have secured 81.15% of the total revenue with own tax and fee collections. The share of own revenue in the total for municipalities in the rest of the regions show 72.11%, 47.80% and 24.94% for Tigray, Amhara and Oromia. The survey data also shows that two municipalities, namely, Dilla and Yirgalem, have generated more than their allocated total budget for both municipal and state functions. On the other hand, only two municipalities, namely, Bahir Dar and Ambo had a loan/grant portion in their budgeted revenue which added up to Birr 203,784 or 0.22% of the total for all regions. This fact shows that most sample municipalities are not being assisted by donor grants or loans. Table M-4: Capital Investment Portion of Total Budgeted Revenue in Sample Municipalities

In Birr

Municipal function State function Total Region Municipality name

Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual

Per Capita

Inv.

Bahr dar 12,244,888.00 8,367,271.00 1,557,662.00 1,520,754.00 13,802,550.00 9,888,025.00 61.88

Dessie 2,692,600.00 2,142,793.00 0.00 150,000.00 2,692,600.00 2,292,793.00 14.19

Lalibella 89,446.00 77,767.00 0.00 0.00 89,446.00 77,767.00 5.38

Woreta 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 15,026,934.00 10,587,831.00 1,557,662.00 1,670,754.00 16,584,596.00 12,258,585.00 33.96

Amhara

Mean 3,756,733.50 2,646,957.75 389,415.50 417,688.50 4,146,149.00 3,064,646.25 33.96

Nekemt 885,000.00 787,540.00 0.00 0.00 885,000.00 787,540.00 9.77

Weliso 1,601,367.00 224,453.00 0.00 0.00 1,601,367.00 224,453.00 5.17

Adama 34,178,542.00 19,634,709.00 12,087,132.00 50,639,681.00 84,818,223.00 70,274,390.00 322.20

Ambo 640,676.00 620,885.00 0.00 0.00 640,676.00 620,885.00 13.17

Total 37,305,585.00 21,267,587.00 12,087,132.00 50,639,681.00 87,945,266.00 71,907,268.00 184.70

Oromia

Mean 9,326,396.25 5,316,896.75 3,021,783.00 12,659,920.25 21,986,316.50 17,976,817.00 184.70

Mekelle 3,950,967.00 3,228,300.00 473,737.00 410,737.00 4,424,704.00 3,639,037.00 22.50

Rama 535,001.71 535,001.71 0.00 0.00 535,001.71 535,001.71 71.53

Wukro 946,122.00 859,594.00 354,570.00 854,570.00 1,300,692.00 1,714,164.00 62.74

Adwa 2,603,488.00 1,081,531.00 430,777.00 430,777.00 3,034,265.00 1,512,308.00 37.08

Alamata 1,084,186.00 737,712.00 403,889.00 403,889.00 1,488,075.00 1,141,601.00 26.17

Total 9,119,764.71 6,442,138.71 1,662,973.00 2,099,973.00 10,782,737.71 8,542,111.71 30.40

Tigray

Mean 1,823,952.94 1,288,427.74 332,594.60 419,994.60 2,156,547.54 1,708,422.34 30.40

Dilla 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Durame 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Yirgalem 0.00 0.00 267,288.00 267,288.00 267,288.00 267,288.00 6.39

Alaba Kulito 743,185.00 224,276.00 121,500.00 121,500.00 864,685.00 345,776.00 13.24

Total 743,185.00 224,276.00 388,788.00 388,788.00 1,131,973.00 613,064.00 4.43

SNNP

Mean 185,796.25 56,069.00 97,197.00 97,197.00 282,993.25 153,266.00 4.43

Total for all regions 62,195,468.71 38,521,832.71 15,696,555.00 54,799,196.00 116,444,572.71 93,321,028.71 79.78

Mean for all regions 3,658,556.98 2,265,990.16 923,326.76 3,223,482.12 6,849,680.75 5,489,472.28 79.78



.85.

The total capital budget allocated for all the surveyed municipalities was Birr 93,321,028 or 42.86% of the actual budget revenue. Of the total Actual capital budget of all municipalities, Birr 38.5 million or 41.3% was allocated as capital budget for municipal functions while the major portion amounting to Birr 54.8 million was the actual capital budget of state functions. The above figure is inflated by the elsewhere mentioned transfer of 50 million Birr from the regional Government of Oromia to Adama municipality. This can be clearly seen in the inflated actual budget of state functions in Oromia reaching 50.64 million while the total for all regions shows 54.8 million. Besides, the "Normal" regions show total capital budget for state functions ranging from Birr 97,197 in SNNP to Birr 419, 994 in Tigray. The case of Amhara region is also very similar with a total showing Birr 417, 688. In any case, the SNNP municipalities are the ones allotting the smallest capital budget for state functions. The regions showing the highest figures for municipal capital budget are Oromia with Birr 21.3 million and Amhara with 10.6 million. The sample municipalities in Tigray show a total capital budget of 6.4 million and the SNNP municipalities have again the least municipal capital budget with Birr 0.22 million. The average values, on the other hand, show that for municipal function they have allocated Birr 5.3 million, 2.7 million, 1.3 million and 56,069 as capital budget in the sample municipalities of Oromia, Amhara, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The mean values for state functions in the sample municipalities of Oromia are extremely high showing Birr 12.7 million per municipality. The samples in the other regions had allotted Birr 0.42 million in both Amhara and Tigray regions while in the SNNP the municipalities' actual budget for state functions was Birr 97,197. Fig. M-3: Per Capita Capital Budget of Sample Municipalities by Region - In Birr

Per capita Capital Budget Amhara

Oromia

Tigray

SNNP 4.43

30.4

184.7

33.96



.86.

The survey revealed that for the sample municipalities the mean per capita budget for capital investment was higher in Oromia Region with Birr 184.7, followed by Amhara and Tigray Regions each with Birr 33.96 and 30.4, respectively. The region showing the least per capita budget for municipal capital investment was the SNNP region with Birr 4.43. Table M-5: Funds received from international donors and NGOs

Region Municipality name

Amount received

Secured from

Amhara Bahir Dar 3,281,427 NGO Wukro 354,570 Intl Donors - Food Security Tigray Adwa 340,200 NGO Yirgalem 38,976 Intl Donors - Non-Food Security SNNP Durame 38,769 Intl Donors - Food Security

Regarding funds gained from International donors and NGOs for food security and other purposes, only five of the municipalities said that they received some funding from these donors as can be seen in Table M-5. The Budgeted revenue of the sample municipalities as shown in Table M-2 excludes funds transferred from international donors and NGOs. Thus, an additional total fund of 4.05 million Birr was transferred to the target municipalities by International Donors and NGOs. In relative terms, this amount constitutes only about 1.82% of the total revenue of all sample municipalities. The highest figure for International Donors and NGOs assistance is observed in Bahir Dar of Amhara region constituting 81% of all transfers from these sources. In contrast, all of the sample municipalities from Oromia region have not received any fund directly from either donors or NGOs.



.87.

Table M-6: Taxes Collected in the Target Municipalities

In Birr

Region Municipality

Name Total Income

from Tax Drug sale

tax Land Tax Profit Tax Income Tax Wall and Roof Tax Agri. Tax Other Taxes

Bahr dar 11,272,750.00 0.00 0.00 4,645,733.00 5,954,873.00 0.00 197,737.00 474,407.00 Dessie 6,591,749.00 204,031.00 0.00 1,302,562.00 3,394,275.00 0.00 39,280.00 1,651,601.00 Lalibella 195,986.00 0.00 155,732.00 40,254.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Woreta 299,140.00 0.00 209,016.00 37,532.00 3,240.00 49,352.00 0.00 0.00 Total 18,359,625.00 204,031.00 364,748.00 6,026,081.00 9,352,388.00 49,352.00 237,017.00 2,126,008.00

Amhara

Mean 4,589,906.25 51,007.75 91,187.00 1,506,520.25 2,338,097.00 12,338.00 59,254.25 531,502.00 Nekemt 4,271,221.00 0.00 637,019.00 1,707,292.00 1,319,027.00 583,294.00 0.00 24,589.00 Weliso 2,407,464.00 7,433.00 0.00 794,096.00 730,271.00 111,383.00 0.00 764,281.00 Adama 8,056,996.00 0.00 1,045,858.00 0.00 0.00 366,548.00 0.00 6,644,590.00 Ambo 1,140,606.00 31,774.00 0.00 603,118.00 168,634.00 337,080.00 0.00 0.00 Total 15,876,287.00 39,207.00 1,682,877.00 3,104,506.00 2,217,932.00 1,398,305.00 0.00 7,433,460.00

Oromia

Mean 3,969,071.75 9,801.75 420,719.25 776,126.50 554,483.00 349,576.25 0.00 1,858,365.00 Mekelle 20,838,146.00 0.00 5,679,966.00 1,249,966.00 13,908,214.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rama 139,088.00 0.00 135,494.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,594.00 Wukro 760,859.00 0.00 0.00 398,660.00 316,431.00 0.00 0.00 45,768.00 Adwa 3,087,833.00 0.00 914,552.00 891,223.00 1,082,070.00 0.00 10,231.00 189,757.00 Alamata 673,029.00 0.00 288,903.00 52,115.00 321,345.00 0.00 0.00 10,666.00 Total 25,498,955.00 0.00 7,018,915.00 2,591,964.00 15,628,060.00 0.00 10,231.00 249,785.00

Tigray

Mean 5,099,791.00 0.00 1,403,783.00 518,392.80 3,125,612.00 0.00 2,046.20 49,957.00 Dilla 2,534,954.00 0.00 642,635.00 1,351,026.00 493,258.00 11,040.00 15,127.00 21,868.00 Durame 1,006,645.00 73,516.00 223,525.00 238,023.00 313,276.00 0.00 0.00 158,305.00 Yirgalem 1,266,941.00 33,451.00 281,579.00 378,729.00 482,442.00 33,220.00 14,803.00 42,717.00 Alaba Kulito 803,272.92 0.00 0.00 446,499.20 354,402.72 0.00 0.00 2,371.00 Total 5,611,812.92 106,967.00 1,147,739.00 2,414,277.20 1,643,378.72 44,260.00 29,930.00 225,261.00

SNNP

Mean 1,402,953.23 26,741.75 286,934.75 603,569.30 410,844.68 11,065.00 7,482.50 56,315.25 Total for all regions 65,346,679.92 350,205.00 10,214,279.00 14,136,828.20 28,841,758.72 1,491,917.00 277,178.00 10,034,514.00 Mean for all regions 3,843,922.35 20,600.29 600,839.94 831,578.13 1,696,574.04 87,759.82 16,304.59 590,265.53



.88.

As said elsewhere, local government tax collection is one of the key indicators of its self-sufficiency and fiscal autonomy. In this regard the mean value of actual tax collection for all surveyed municipalities shows Birr 3.8 million whereas the total shows Birr 65.3 million. During the survey, most municipalities were not able to provide an accurate figure of taxpayers for each of the requested tax category and this limits us to draw the average tax for payers in the different jurisdictions and regions. Fig. M-4: Mean Actual Tax Collected in Sample Municipalities by Region

0.00

1,000,000.00

2,000,000.00

3,000,000.00

4,000,000.00

5,000,000.00

6,000,000.00

Amhara 4,589,906.00

Oromia 3,969,071.00

Tigray 5,099,791.00

SNNP 1,402,953.00

Tax Collected

The structure of tax collection is also skewed towards Employees' income tax and profit tax contributing 65.8% of the total tax in all regions. The highest tax collection figure in Mekelle municipality with Birr 20.8 million a figure secured mostly by the high level of income and land tax. Unfortunately, Bahir Dar and Dessie municipalities were not able to provide us with land tax figures making this comparison somehow incomplete. On the other hand, the structure of the total tax of municipalities shows a somewhat desirable composition when we see at the contribution of profit tax, land tax, wall and roof tax, etc. However, unclassified taxes are also found with very high proportion in the total tax showing 15.4% of the total collected tax. This calls for a more classified tax structure to be implemented in the municipalities. With regard to inter-regional comparison of sample municipalities, the average tax collected by target municipalities in Tigray shows the relatively



.89.

higher figure of Birr 5,099,791 followed by Amhara region municipalities collecting Birr 4,589,906 as average. Oromia region is third with average tax collections for its municipalities amounting to Birr 3,969,071 and the municipalities in the SNNP show the least tax collection of all having the average of Birr 1,402,953. Perhaps, one of the reasons why the figures for the SNNP are lower is the grade of municipalities used in this sample which doesn't include Grade I towns.



.90.

Table M-7: Actual fees and service charges collected by sample municipalities In Birr

Region Municipality

Name Total fees collected

Market fees and Livestock market

dues

Sanitary Services

Slaughter House

Mortuary and Burial

Services

Public Record fees

Building Plan approval

Property Reg. and surveying

Fees for Vehicle reg. and bus

terminal Penalties

Licensing fees

other fees

Bahr dar 1,410,909.00 0.00 230,035.00 0.00 0.00 28,895.00 351,605.00 334,855.00 305,043.00 123,269.00 31,249.00 5,958.00

Dessie 1,493,334.15 58,000.00 179,427.30 275,352.00 0.00 26,583.40 291,832.15 324,809.35 198,277.95 85,504.00 53,548.00 0.00

Lalibella 247,604.00 30,430.00 495.00 0.00 0.00 1,790.00 91,205.00 0.00 5,170.00 52.00 0.00 118,462.00

Woreta 109,055.00 0.00 6,038.00 26,595.00 0.00 2,115.00 49,351.00 0.00 21,647.00 3,309.00 0.00 0.00

Total 3,260,902.15 88,430.00 415,995.30 301,947.00 0.00 59,383.40 783,993.15 659,664.35 530,137.95 212,134.00 84,797.00 124,420.00

Amhara

Mean 815,225.54 22,107.50 103,998.83 75,486.75 0.00 14,845.85 195,998.29 164,916.09 132,534.49 53,033.50 21,199.25 31,105.00

Nekemt 3,060,666.00 12,579.00 6,775.00 1,866,952.00 0.00 21,050.00 384,466.00 559,728.00 137,322.00 25,027.00 21,381.00 25,386.00

Weliso 997,681.00 194,711.00 5,419.00 62,300.00 0.00 5,600.00 124,983.00 38,050.00 0.00 61,787.00 93,643.00 411,188.00

Adama 6,255,525.00 1,989,329.00 111,699.00 358,164.00 5,810.00 34,604.00 2,870,641.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 885,278.00

Ambo 888,981.00 46,729.00 983.00 16,620.00 0.00 7,535.00 787,009.00 0.00 30,105.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 11,202,853.00 2,243,348.00 124,876.00 2,304,036.00 5,810.00 68,789.00 4,167,099.00 597,778.00 167,427.00 86,814.00 115,024.00 1,321,852.00

Oromia

Mean 2,800,713.25 560,837.00 31,219.00 576,009.00 1,452.50 17,197.25 1,041,774.75 149,444.50 41,856.75 21,703.50 28,756.00 330,463.00

Mekelle 12,840,869.00 712,555.00 130,285.00 233,757.00 0.00 35,495.00 5,079,106.00 0.00 138,162.00 1,106,235.00 0.00 5,405,274.00

Rama 118,452.71 6,358.00 594.00 3,375.00 0.00 0.00 46,780.71 0.00 230.00 0.00 53,939.00 7,176.00

Wukro 261,130.00 108,950.00 69,000.00 29,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 54,180.00 0.00 0.00

Adwa 1,564,920.00 21,076.00 74,193.00 6,240.00 0.00 0.00 922,895.00 0.00 1,570.00 135,816.00 227,549.00 175,581.00

Alamata 777,849.00 84,863.00 44,126.00 26,687.00 0.00 0.00 266,361.00 0.00 50,081.00 109,326.00 196,405.00 0.00

Total 15,563,220.71 933,802.00 318,198.00 299,059.00 0.00 35,495.00 6,315,142.71 0.00 190,043.00 1,405,557.00 477,893.00 5,588,031.00

Tigray

Mean 3,112,644.14 186,760.40 63,639.60 59,811.80 0.00 7,099.00 1,263,028.54 0.00 38,008.60 281,111.40 95,578.60 1,117,606.20

Dilla 2,292,412.00 39,485.00 6,117.00 191,904.00 0.00 0.00 3,776.00 0.00 220.00 2,992.00 116,677.00 1,931,241.00

Durame 690,922.00 171,608.00 0.00 4,054.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 515,260.00

Yirgalem 1,102,799.00 15,037.00 1,631.00 67,206.00 0.00 0.00 11,055.00 0.00 75,365.00 12,618.00 126,243.00 793,644.00

Alaba Kulito 174,562.50 70,817.50 44,850.00 3,145.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1,570.00 54,180.00 0.00 0.00

Total 4,260,695.50 296,947.50 52,598.00 266,309.00 0.00 0.00 14,831.00 0.00 77,155.00 69,790.00 242,920.00 3,240,145.00

SNNP

Mean 1,065,173.88 74,236.88 13,149.50 66,577.25 0.00 0.00 3,707.75 0.00 19,288.75 17,447.50 60,730.00 810,036.25

Total for all regions 34,287,671.36 3,562,527.50 911,667.30 3,171,351.00 5,810.00 163,667.40 11,281,065.86 1,257,442.35 964,762.95 1,774,295.00 920,634.00 10,274,448.00

Mean for all regions 2,016,921.84 209,560.44 53,627.49 186,550.06 341.76 9,627.49 663,592.11 73,967.20 56,750.76 104,370.29 54,154.94 604,379.29

Note: Fees from Fire brigade service was not reported in all the municipalities and hence omitted from the table.



.91.

The different service fees charged to citizens are another important source of income for municipal governments of all surveyed regions. Total service charges and fees for all municipalities amounted to Birr 34.3 million or 15.4% of their total revenue. The highest contribution in the total fee collected by all sample municipalities is made by 'building plan approvals' amounting to Birr 11.3 million or 32.9% and is followed by Market fees and livestock dues contributing with 3.6 million or 10.5% of the total. The other high figure income from fees is observed in slaughter house service charges showing a total for all municipalities of Birr 3.1 million or 9%. Altogether the above three services of municipalities are accounting for over 50% of the collected fees. On the other hand, most potentially collectible service fee categories are not existent or their performance is found to be low in the majority of the surveyed sample municipalities. Therefore, the municipalities can enhance their income from fees in the areas where there is lack of service provision or lower coverage such as fire brigade, public records, ambulance services, etc.

0.00

500,000.00

1,000,000.00

1,500,000.00

2,000,000.00

2,500,000.00

3,000,000.00

3,500,000.00

Amhara 815,225.00

Oromia 2,800,713.00

Tigray 3,112,644.00

SNNP 1,065,173.00

Average Fees Collected by Municipalities

Fig. M-5: Average Collection of Fees in Sample Municipalities (In Birr) Among all the surveyed municipalities, the one showing the largest collection of fees is Mekelle with Birr 12.8 million and the bulk of this income was collected from building plan approvals amounting to Birr 5 million. The second best municipality is Adama with a total collection of fees reaching Birr 6.3 million and again the highest share being observed in approval of building plans. The lowest figure is observed in Woreta



.92.

municipality which showed only Birr 109,000 as total collection of fees and service charges. With regard to comparisons of averages in service fee collection in the sample municipalities of the regions, the survey results show that the best achievers are the municipalities in Tigray with a mean value of Birr 3.1 million whereas those in Oromia region follow with Birr 2.8 million as average. The municipalities in SNNP and Amhara regions show a somewhat decreased income from fees reporting Birr 1 million and 0.8 million as average collection of fees, respectively. The municipalities in Amhara region show the least average collection of all despite the inclusion in our sample of two large cities. The analysis of the structure and composition of collected fees in all municipalities of all regions shows, among other things, the gap in services delivery and a potential to introduce more of these fees. The municipalities having minimal collection level can work towards increasing their collection effort thereby securing more income for their local government. The municipalities that are not providing some of the services can also try to introduce the services so that their income from service charges and fees is increased. Table M-8: Revenues from Commercial Activities of Sample Municipalities

In Birr Rental Income from

Region Municipal

Name Total Revenue

Income from asset sales

Income from Local Gov. Companies

and Enterprises

Technical Equip. Property Others

Bahr dar 1,192,669.00 0.00 950,946.00 300.00 241,423.00 0.00

Dessie 5,020.00 0.00 0.00 5,020.00 0.00 0.00

Lalibella 149,092.00 91,886.00 0.00 50,890.00 0.00 6,316.00

Woreta 18,505.00 0.00 0.00 18,505.00 0.00 0.00

Total 1,365,286.00 91,886.00 950,946.00 74,715.00 241,423.00 6,316.00

Amhara

Mean 341,321.50 22,971.50 237,736.50 18,678.75 60,355.75 1,579.00

Nekemt 183,023.00 62,788.00 0.00 69,654.00 50,581.00 0.00

Weliso 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Adama 912,810.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 912,810.00 0.00

Ambo 769,400.00 0.00 697,674.00 0.00 0.00 71,726.00

Total 1,865,233.00 62,788.00 697,674.00 69,654.00 963,391.00 71,726.00

Oromia

Mean 466,308.25 15,697.00 174,418.50 17,413.50 240,847.75 17,931.50

Mekelle 4,662,590.00 3,616,382.00 0.00 34,135.00 1,012,073.00 0.00

Rama 142,374.00 1,809.00 0.00 124,511.00 16,054.00 0.00

Wukro 26,659.00 20,000.00 0.00 0.00 6,659.00 0.00

Adwa 503,256.00 133,570.00 0.00 0.00 369,686.00 0.00

Tigray

Alamata 239,292.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 239,292.00 0.00



.93.

Rental Income from

Region Municipal

Name Total Revenue

Income from asset sales

Income from Local Gov. Companies

and Enterprises

Technical Equip. Property Others

Total 5,574,171.00 3,771,761.00 0.00 158,646.00 1,643,764.00 0.00 Mean 1,114,834.20 754,352.20 0.00 31,729.20 328,752.80 0.00

Dilla 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Durame 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Yirgalem 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Alaba Kulito 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

SNNP

Mean 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total for all regions 8,804,690.00 3,926,435.00 1,648,620.00 303,015.00 2,848,578.00 78,042.00 Mean for all regions 517,922.94 230,966.76 96,977.65 17,824.41 167,563.41 4,590.71

As can be seen from the above table, the total income secured from commercial activities by the sample municipalities in all regions reaches a total of Birr 8.8 million. It is also to be noted that municipalities in the SNNP region had no contribution to this total and also affect the mean value of all municipalities. The largest contribution to the total income from commercial activities comes from asset sales with a share of 3.9 million or 43% of the total. Property rental also plays an important role in the income of municipalities contributing Birr 2.8 million or 32% of the total. Equipment rental is reported by all municipalities in Amhara and some in Oromia and Tigray Regions. However, the level of income generated from equipment rentals is minimal showing only a total of Birr 303, 015 or 3.4%. The survey data also reveals that equipment rental figures can be as low as 300 Birr per annum showing a sporadic engagement of municipalities in this important activity. The highest figure for property rental is reported by Mekelle municipality while the highest for equipment rental is reported by Rama, both in Tigray region. The highest income from asset sale is also reported by Mekelle amounting to Birr 3.6 million while the figures reported by other municipalities is low and the second best figure for asset sale is observed in Adwa with Birr 133,570. Income from municipality owned companies and enterprises is reported only by Bahir Dar in Amhara and Ambo in Oromia and the income figures show Birr 950,946 and 697,674, respectively. With most of municipalities reporting no income from own businesses, we can conclude that the level of "commercialization" of the municipal activities is considerably low.



.94.

7.2.2.2 Expenditure Pattern in Target municipalities Unlike the Woredas, municipalities have two separate groups of expenditure, namely, municipal function expenditures and state function expenditures. For this reason our discussion will deal separately with these expenditures.

7.2.2.2.1 MUNICIPAL FUNCTION EXPENDITURE

The total municipal expenditure for all the sample municipalities show Birr 71.3 million and the mean value of the same show 4.1 million per municipality. Variations in budget and actual expenditure are observed in all regions. And the actual to budget ratio for all shows 63.7%. The highest municipal expenditure is observed in Adama municipality of Oromia with Birr 27 million while the lowest figure is reported by Lalibela municipality in Amhara region with Birr 293,109. Table M-9: Expenditure in Municipal Functions – Totals (in Birr)

Total Municipal expenditure Region

Municipal Name Budget Actual

Bahr dar 16,818,140.00 8,991,674.00

Dessie 10,047,200.00 6,689,530.00

Lalibella 390,380.00 293,109.00

Woreta 443,196.00 443,196.00

Total 27,698,916.00 16,417,509.00

Amhara

Mean 6,924,729.00 4,104,377.25

Nekemt 3,019,804.00 2,800,144.00

Weliso 4,054,813.00 1,633,522.00

Adama 41,787,542.00 27,173,916.00

Ambo 2,729,264.00 1,859,242.00

Total 51,591,423.00 33,466,824.00

Oromia

Mean 12,897,855.75 8,366,706.00

Mekelle 11,548,634.00 9,128,767.00

Rama 468,800.00 547,212.10

Wukro 5,272,309.00 1,598,704.00

Adwa 5,636,192.00 3,459,689.00

Alamata 1,972,522.00 1,524,118.00

Total 24,898,457.00 16,258,490.10

Tigray

Mean 4,979,691.40 3,251,698.02

Dilla 3,615,789.00 2,566,049.00

Durame 1,000,789.00 632,204.00

Yirgalem 1,319,780.00 1,245,805.00

SNNP

Alaba 1,772,760.00 736,155.00



.95.

Total Municipal expenditure Region

Municipal Name Budget Actual

Kulito

Total 7,709,118.00 5,180,213.00

Mean 1,927,279.50 1,295,053.25

Total for all regions 111,897,914.00 71,323,036.10

Mean for all regions 6,582,230.24 4,195,472.71

The inter-regional expenditure comparisons reveal that on average Oromia region municipalities had the highest municipal expenditure of Birr 8.4 million whereas the samples in the SNNP had lowest average figure of Birr 1.3 million. The municipalities in Amhara and Tigray show moderate municipal expenditures with Birr 4.1 million and 3.3 million, respectively. Table M-10 and M-11 shows the budget and actual expenditure of municipalities for the provision of municipal services in a detailed manner. According to the survey data, most municipal expenditure is related to local road construction and administrative expenses. The share of municipal expenditure for these two activities in the mean value of municipalities reaches Birr 25 million or 68% of the total. The expense level of electricity and street lighting comes third with a share of 7.96% while expenditures in drainage and markets have shares of 3.77% and 3.09% of the total, respectively. Fig. M-6:- Share of municipal expenditure types in the mean value

0.00200,000.00400,000.00600,000.00800,000.00

1,000,000.001,200,000.001,400,000.001,600,000.001,800,000.002,000,000.00

Adm

inis

trat

ion

Aba

ttoi

r se

rvic

es

Loc

al R

oads

Wat

er S

uppl

y

Sani

tary

Ser

vice

s

Stre

et C

lean

ing

Stre

et li

ght &

Ele

ctri

city

Dra

inag

e

Mar

kets

Fire

Bri

gade

& a

mbu

lanc

e

Oth

er



.96.

Table M-10: Expenditure in Municipal Functions - Details of Budget and Expenditure (1 of 2) In Birr

Administration Abattoir Services Local Roads Water Supply Sanitary Street Cleaning

Region Municipal

Name Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual

Bahr dar 2,323,301.00 1,730,362.00 120,000.00 99,436.00 7,265,616.00 4,063,546.00 35,364.00 21,711.00 0.00 0.00 278,000.00 261,279.00

Dessie 1,690,400.00 1,352,320.00 20,000.00 8,641.00 1,840,330.00 650,674.00 107,100.00 102,248.00 0.00 0.00 12,000.00 7,919.00

Lalibella 197,810.00 132,123.00 0.00 0.00 22,000.00 7,374.00 21,474.00 11,237.00 3,000.00 84.00 0.00 0.00

Woreta 85,394.00 60,779.00 25,000.00 26,595.00 20,000.00 9,593.00 4,000.00 2,602.00 0.00 0.00 10,000.00 10,747.00

Total 4,296,905.00 3,275,584.00 165,000.00 134,672.00 9,147,946.00 4,731,187.00 167,938.00 137,798.00 3,000.00 84.00 300,000.00 279,945.00

Amhara

Mean 1,074,226.25 818,896.00 41,250.00 33,668.00 2,286,986.50 1,182,796.75 41,984.50 34,449.50 750.00 21.00 75,000.00 69,986.25

Nekemt 425,000.00 417,340.00 50,000.00 37,842.00 400,000.00 333,208.00 15,000.00 4,398.00 20,000.00 14,535.00 0.00 0.00

Weliso 355,760.00 150,558.00 65,000.00 16,942.00 425,500.00 73,080.00 536,992.00 303,078.00 0.00 0.00 70,000.00 49,068.00

Adama 7,295,733.00 6,384,730.00 220,000.00 201,914.00 11,538,780.00 22,555,772.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 360,000.00 359,292.00

Ambo 0.00 0.00 8,000.00 3,583.00 200,000.00 183,783.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 8,076,493.00 6,952,628.00 343,000.00 260,281.00 12,564,280.00 23,145,843.00 551,992.00 307,476.00 20,000.00 14,535.00 430,000.00 408,360.00

Oromia

Mean 2,019,123.25 1,738,157.00 85,750.00 65,070.25 3,141,070.00 5,786,460.75 137,998.00 76,869.00 5,000.00 3,633.75 107,500.00 102,090.00

Mekelle 3,244,150.00 2,680,191.00 423.00 276,195.00 7,152,683.00 2,455,233.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rama 220,400.00 212,743.52 2,000.00 1,028.10 101,336.99 101,336.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6,800.00 6,800.00

Wukro 946,122.00 859,594.00 35,000.00 31,663.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 52,818.00 52,818.00 40,000.00 40,000.00 30,000.00 27,444.00

Adwa 696,824.00 597,538.00 0.00 0.00 235,821.00 17,635.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 46,600.00 45,202.00

Alamata 203,580.00 201,781.00 107,000.00 77,144.00 110,000.00 70,001.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 5,311,076.00 4,551,847.52 144,423.00 386,030.10 7,609,840.99 2,654,205.99 52,818.00 52,818.00 40,000.00 40,000.00 83,400.00 79,446.00

Tigray

Mean 1,062,215.20 910,369.50 28,884.60 77,206.02 1,521,968.20 530,841.20 10,563.60 10,563.60 8,000.00 8,000.00 16,680.00 15,889.20

Dilla 968,470.00 951,583.00 0.00 0.00 1,647,353.00 798,829.00 4,000.00 3,840.00 67,290.00 58,955.00 0.00 0.00

Durame 1,670,332.00 141,671.00 0.00 0.00 35,000.00 14,776.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Yirgalem 383,422.00 382,237.00 70,000.00 2,352.00 120,000.00 120,077.00 4,000.00 3,732.00 21,000.00 20,581.00 0.00 0.00 Alaba Kulito 714,205.00 607,411.00 7,417.00 7,146.00 30,000.00 8,921.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3,000.00 4,293.00

Total 3,736,429.00 2,082,902.00 77,417.00 9,498.00 1,832,353.00 942,603.00 8,000.00 7,572.00 88,290.00 79,536.00 3,000.00 4,293.00

SNNP

Mean 934,107.25 520,725.50 19,354.25 2,374.50 458,088.25 235,650.75 2,000.00 1,893.00 22,072.50 19,884.00 750.00 1,073.25

Total for all regions 21,420,903.00 16,862,961.52 729,840.00 790,481.10 31,154,419.99 31,473,838.99 780,748.00 505,664.00 151,290.00 134,155.00 816,400.00 772,044.00

Mean for all regions 1,260,053.12 991,938.91 42,931.76 46,498.89 1,832,612.94 1,851,402.29 45,926.35 29,744.94 8,899.41 7,891.47 48,023.53 45,414.35



.97.

Table M-11: Expenditure in Municipal Functions - Details of Budget and Expenditure (2 of 2) In Birr

Electricity Street Lightening Drainage Markets Fire brigade and

ambulance Other

Region Municipal

Name Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual

Bahr dar 1,857,018.00 1,645,961.00 429,274.00 352,452.00 1,040,704.00 152,447.00 140,000.00 68,206.00 185,000.00 60,000.00 775,150.00 536,274.00

Dessie 227,500.00 189,890.00 224,900.00 179,920.00 399,620.00 109,753.00 961,000.00 961,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 0.00 0.00

Lalibella 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 72,000.00 45,938.00 43,320.00 26,850.00

Woreta 114,000.00 113,583.00 260,000.00 26,500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 2,198,518.00 1,949,434.00 914,174.00 558,872.00 1,440,324.00 262,200.00 1,101,000.00 1,029,206.00 282,000.00 130,938.00 818,470.00 563,124.00

Amhara

Mean 549,629.50 487,358.50 228,543.50 139,718.00 360,081.00 65,550.00 275,250.00 257,301.50 70,500.00 32,734.50 204,617.50 140,781.00

Nekemt 350,000.00 348,238.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 611,000.00 496,861.00

Weliso 0.00 0.00 250,000.00 0.00 428,122.00 2,261.00 0.00 0.00 69,292.00 69,292.00 0.00 1,591,881.00

Adama 300,000.00 300,000.00 433,310.00 408,083.00 1,276,312.00 668,373.00 0.00 0.00 30,181.00 27,260.00 225,000.00 185,188.00

Ambo 0.00 0.00 193,517.00 19,517.00 100,000.00 0.00 29,324.00 0.00 50,000.00 0.00 42,706.00 20,002.00

Total 650,000.00 648,238.00 876,827.00 427,600.00 1,804,434.00 670,634.00 29,324.00 0.00 174,473.00 121,552.00 878,706.00 2,293,932.00

Oromia

Mean 162,500.00 162,059.50 219,206.75 106,900.00 451,108.50 167,658.50 7,331.00 0.00 43,618.25 30,388.00 219,676.50 573,483.00

Mekelle 407,000.00 221,599.00 513,020.00 513,020.00 2,067,364.00 1,033,822.00 115,000.00 1,135,243.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Rama 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 52,500.00 13,146.91

Wukro 234,296.00 45,582.00 52,818.00 52,818.00 415,000.00 333,928.00 26,000.00 24,150.00 80,000.00 80,000.00 40,707.00 40,707.00

Adwa 280,591.00 253,319.00 0.00 0.00 706,985.00 128,897.00 15,819.00 13,716.00 0.00 0.00 169,234.00 146,366.00

Alamata 150,000.00 194,926.00 60,000.00 47,084.00 11,808.00 11,808.00 0.00 0.00 90,000.00 43,262.00 0.00 0.00

Total 1,071,887.00 715,426.00 625,838.00 612,922.00 3,201,157.00 1,508,455.00 156,819.00 1,173,109.00 170,000.00 123,262.00 262,441.00 200,219.91

Tigray

Mean 214,377.40 143,085.20 125,167.60 122,584.40 640,231.40 301,691.00 31,363.80 234,621.80 34,000.00 24,652.40 52,488.20 40,043.98

Dilla 165,000.00 171,344.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Durame 10,000.00 2,738.00 368,000.00 274,594.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 94,000.00 88,685.00 12,359.00 10,609.00

Yirgalem 34,000.00 36,742.00 80,000.00 75,252.00 250,000.00 244,088.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Alaba Kulito 30,000.00 17,882.00 643,185.00 184,273.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total 239,000.00 228,706.00 1,091,185.00 534,119.00 250,000.00 244,088.00 0.00 0.00 94,000.00 88,685.00 12,359.00 10,609.00

SNNP

Mean 59,750.00 57,176.50 272,796.25 133,529.75 62,500.00 61,022.00 0.00 0.00 23,500.00 22,171.25 3,089.75 2,652.25

Total for all regions 4,159,405.00 3,541,804.00 3,508,024.00 2,133,513.00 6,695,915.00 2,685,377.00 1,287,143.00 2,202,315.00 720,473.00 464,437.00 1,971,976.00 3,067,884.91

Mean for all regions 244,670.88 208,341.41 206,354.35 125,500.76 393,877.35 157,963.35 75,714.29 129,547.94 42,380.76 27,319.82 115,998.59 180,463.82



.98.

7.2.2.2.2 EXPENDITURE IN STATE FUNCTIONS

The state function expenditure of municipalities includes expenses related to education, health, administration, etc. The total expenditure of municipalities in all regions for state functions amount to Birr 150 million whereas the mean value shows Birr 8.8 million. The figure for the mean value is affected by zero expenditure in Lalibella and Woreta municipalities of Amhara region. Another factor affecting the expenditure figures for total and mean values is the highest expenditure of Adama showing 60 million Birr due to the transfer the elsewhere mentioned 50 million Birr for infrastructure development.

Table M-12: Expenditure in State Functions - Totals In Birr

Total State function Expenditure

Region Municipal

Name Budget Actual

Bahr dar 17,434,618.00 12,683,153.00

Dessie 15,029,320.00 14,977,232.00

Lalibella 0.00 0.00

Woreta 0.00 0.00

Total 32,463,938.00 27,660,385.00

Amhara

Mean 8,115,984.50 6,915,096.25

Nekemt 8,354,322.00 6,175,872.00

Weliso 4,856,921.00 4,504,606.00

Adama 62,612,832.00 60,513,432.00

Ambo 6,046,045.00 3,927,351.00

Total 81,870,120.00 75,121,261.00

Oromia

Mean 20,467,530.00 18,780,315.25

Mekelle 25,162,657.00 25,016,471.00

Rama 468,800.00 468,800.00

Wukro 5,500,000.00 5,272,310.00

Adwa 6,451,354.00 6,366,360.00

Alamata 4,716,000.00 3,564,029.00

Total 42,298,811.00 40,687,970.00

Tigray

Mean 8,459,762.20 8,137,594.00

Dilla 3,318,000.00 451,989.00

Durame 3,264,471.00 2,241,263.00

Yirgalem 1,068,467.00 1,068,467.00

Alaba Kulito 2,555,000.00 2,924,604.00

Total 10,205,938.00 6,686,323.00

SNNP

Mean 2,551,484.50 1,671,580.75

Total for all regions 166,838,807.00 150,155,939.00

Mean for all regions 9,814,047.47 8,832,702.29

Having in mind these irregularities, the inter-regional comparison of mean values show that municipalities in Oromia had the highest figure for state function expenditure with Birr 18.8 million as average. The second highest



.99.

figure was observed for municipalities in Tigray with average of Birr 8.1 million. While the samples for the Amhara region had an average of 6.9 million for state function expenditures. The lowest mean values are reported by the municipalities of the SNNP region with Birr 1.7 million. The expenditure figures for education are the highest in municipalities of all regions except Oromia. The share of education in the total expenditure of all municipalities was 39.5%. The second highest expenditure goes to "unclassified" or other expenses sharing 38.8% mainly due to the inflated figure of Adama municipality. Expenditure in health and administration show 11.8% of and 9% of the total expenditure of all municipalities, respectively. As expected, expenditures in agriculture represent only 0.47% of the total. Fig M-7: Share of Sectors in Average Municipal State Function Expenditure by region

0.00

2,000,000.00

4,000,000.00

6,000,000.00

8,000,000.00

10,000,000.00

12,000,000.00

14,000,000.00

Adm

inis

trat

ion

Edu

catio

n

Hea

lth

Agr

icul

ture

Oth

erAmharaOromiaTigraySNNP



.100.

Table M-13: Expenditure in State Functions - Details of Budget and Expenditure

In Birr Administration Education Health Agriculture Other

Region Municipal

Name Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Budget Actual Bahr dar 3,971,434.00 3,182,858.00 8,538,249.92 8,433,080.00 1,335,622.89 1,057,337.00 9,878.00 9,878.00 0.00 0.00 Dessie 357,858.00 413,322.00 8,647,656.00 8,649,344.00 6,023,806.00 5,914,566.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Lalibella 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Woreta 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 4,329,292.00 3,596,180.00 17,185,905.92 17,082,424.00 7,359,428.89 6,971,903.00 9,878.00 9,878.00 0.00 0.00

Amhara

Mean 1,082,323.00 899,045.00 4,296,476.48 4,270,606.00 1,839,857.22 1,742,975.75 2,469.50 2,469.50 0.00 0.00 Nekemt 737,736.00 6,455,966.00 5,040,978.00 490,004.00 301,541.00 18,964.00 13,086.00 142,938.00 82,531.00 Weliso 552,579.00 275,863.00 3,539,593.00 2,513,378.00 4,856,921.00 1,633,522.00 0.00 0.00 280,078.00 81,843.00 Adama 609,677.00 609,677.00 5,422,518.00 5,422,518.00 3,615,012.00 3,615,012.00 50,866,225.00 0.00 0.00 50,866,225.00 Ambo 792,664.00 502,945.00 4,766,152.00 3,267,490.00 349,617.00 87,367.00 13,467.00 2,560.00 124,145.00 66,989.00 Total 1,954,920.00 2,126,221.00 20,184,229.00 16,244,364.00 9,311,554.00 5,637,442.00 50,898,656.00 15,646.00 547,161.00 51,097,588.00

Oromia

Mean 651,640.00 531,555.25 5,046,057.25 4,061,091.00 2,327,888.50 1,409,360.50 12,724,664.00 3,911.50 136,790.25 12,774,397.00 Mekelle 3,079,365.00 3,050,678.00 11,842,885.00 11,842,059.00 2,922,486.00 2,921,718.00 415,357.00 411,322.00 6,863,008.00 6,790,694.00 Rama 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Wukro 1,180,347.00 880,231.00 3,735,342.00 3,512,821.00 614,620.00 524,688.00 0.00 0.00 354,570.00 354,570.00 Adwa 1,677,899.00 1,692,288.00 4,248,072.00 4,149,560.00 525,383.00 524,512.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Alamata 327,271.00 327,271.00 2,819,873.00 2,819,873.00 416,885.00 416,885.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 6,264,882.00 5,950,468.00 22,646,172.00 22,324,313.00 4,479,374.00 4,387,803.00 415,357.00 411,322.00 7,217,578.00 7,145,264.00

Tigray

Mean 1,252,976.40 1,190,093.60 4,529,234.40 4,464,862.60 895,874.80 877,560.60 83,071.40 82,264.40 1,443,515.60 1,429,052.80 Dilla 258,959.00 256,640.00 163,403.00 162,895.00 24,160.00 24,160.00 8,294.00 8,294.00 0.00 0.00 Durame 154,749.00 154,749.00 1,453,269.00 1,453,269.00 368,945.00 368,945.00 264,300.00 264,300.00 0.00 0.00 Yirgalem 1,318,000.00 1,068,467.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Alaba Kulito 515,345.00 438,934.00 2,011,637.00 2,052,419.00 386,944.00 378,251.00 0.00 0.00 41,074.00 55,000.00 Total 2,247,053.00 1,918,790.00 3,628,309.00 3,668,583.00 780,049.00 771,356.00 272,594.00 272,594.00 41,074.00 55,000.00

SNNP

Mean 561,763.25 479,697.50 907,077.25 917,145.75 195,012.25 192,839.00 68,148.50 68,148.50 10,268.50 13,750.00 Total for all regions 14,796,147.00 13,591,659.00 63,644,615.92 59,319,684.00 21,930,405.89 17,768,504.00 51,596,485.00 709,440.00 7,805,813.00 58,297,852.00 Mean for all regions 924,759.19 799,509.35 3,743,800.94 3,489,393.18 1,290,023.88 1,045,206.12 3,035,087.35 41,731.76 459,165.47 3,429,285.41



.101.

7.2.3 Institutional Capacity A study conducted by World Bank Staff in year 2000 noted the following:

"Municipalities fall outside the system of intra-governmental transfers, and must rely on self-generated revenues to fund the important services they provide. They are handicapped by a murky legal framework and an ambiguous position within regional government structures. An important dimension of the regionalization agenda is to ensure that municipalities provide urban services more effectively and contribute more broadly to economic growth."21

The municipal system under which budgets are prepared and reviewed is not standardized. In the absence of formal guidelines for budget preparation and approval, there is wide variation in practice, even across municipalities in the same region. The process through which budgets are prepared has different starting points (the revenue side vs. the expenditure side), involves the municipal departments and mayor/council members at different stages, and relies on various levels of public review. In addition, different levels of regional administration review and approve budgets in different cases. The current survey is based on a standard questionnaire without being supplemented with semi-formal methods of data gathering limiting our analysis to only the hard response figures. Before the next round of survey, the consultant has plans to carry out case studies and semi structured interviews on municipal budgeting and other issues to help the preparation of a more analytical report. For now, we will proceed with summarizing the findings from the survey. 7.2.3.1 Procedural Comprehensiveness of Budget Preparation and Accounting Municipalities, unlike Woredas, use their own ad hoc accounting system that shows elements of "Double-entry" accounting and also the Government style "Single Entry" system called 'voucher system'. Lack of chart of accounts is also observed in most municipalities. On the other hand, the Government's effort to introduce "Double-entry" accounting was mostly focused on woredas excluding the municipalities. For instance, municipality finance people have not participated in the "Double-entry" accounting system training conducted for municipality people. Hence, most measures of the procedural comprehensiveness of the budget preparation and accounting practices will highlight the "home-made" system of surveyed municipalities. 21 Ethiopia: Regionalization Study. The World Bank. June 2000. P. 37.



.102.

Table M-14: Procedural comprehensiveness of budget preparation and accounting practices

Percent of Municipalities complying Fin. Mgmt Issues

No. Key Financial Management(FM)

Issues Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP


Budgeting 1 Have FM strategic plan 100 75 100 100 94

2 Strategic Plan is linked with Budget allocation 100 50 100 75 81

3 Have a multi-year financial outlook based on revenue and expenditure forecast 50 25 100 100 69

4 Submit budget to Regional Gov. for approval 50 100 100 100 88

5 Prepare and distribute annual report to the council after closing accounts 75 100 100 100 94

Accounting and Auditing 1 Use double-entry accounting 50 25 100 100 69 2 Use ICT support for accounting 0 25 40 100 41

3 Regular reconciliation of fiscal and bank records 75 50 80 100 76

4 Do not have bad credits in the book 100 75 75 100 88 5 Use asset depreciation 0 0 20 50 18 6

Do not have backlogs larger than one year 0 50 40 50 35

7 Prepare regularly standardized audit reports 50 75 60 25 53

8 Record procurement decision making for auditability 100 100 80 100 95

9 Completed Internal audit for last fiscal year 25 25 60 25 34

10 External audit reports not older than two years 100 25 40 50 54

AS can be seen in Table M-14, the survey shows that most (94%) of the sample municipalities in all regions have already formulated strategic plans and that these plans are linked to budget allocation in 81% of the municipalities. Besides, forecast of revenue and expenditure is carried out in 69% of all sample municipalities which is also linked to a multi-year financial outlook. Asked whether they submit budgets to their regional government, all the sample municipalities said 'yes' in the Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions whereas only 50% of the sample municipalities in Amhara region answered positively. With regard to whether annual financial reports are sent to the respective council, all the sample municipalities of Oromia, Amhara and



.103.

Tigray answered "yes". On the other hand, in the Amhara region, only 75% of the sample municipalities are sending annual financial reports to the respective councils. Asset depreciation practices are followed only by a small number of municipalities in Tigray and SNNP regions with 20% and 50% of the samples, respectively. The sample municipalities in Amhara and Oromia regions do not use asset depreciation at all. Besides, the survey also revealed that account backlogs spanning more than one year are common in 65% of the sample municipalities in all regions while all samples in Amhara were the worst cases in this regard. Regular preparation of standardized audit reports is found in 50%, 75%, 60% and 25% of the sample municipalities for Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. With regard to the completion of the internal fiscal audit for 1996 E.F.Y, 25% of Amhara, 25% of Oromia, 60 % of Tigray and 25% of SNNP sample municipalities were found to have updated internal audits. Moreover, external audits have also been preformed during the last two years in 100%, 25%, 40% and 50% of the samples municipalities of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. All in all, the survey found a weak compliance with auditing standards with only 66% of all municipalities not having completed internal audit report for the last fiscal year and with 46% of them without external auditing in the last two years. According to the survey, a double entry accounting system is being used in 50%, 25%, 100% and 100% of the sample municipalities in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. Computer assisted accounting has been found really low for sample municipalities in Amhara, Oromia and Tigray with 0%, 25% and 40% of their respective sample municipalities. In contrast, all the Sample municipalities in the SNNP Region reported ICT support for accounting tasks. In all cases, the use of tailor made municipal accounting software or other off-the shelf accounting software is unlikely and the most widely used software is Excel - the ubiquitous spreadsheet program. The survey shows that regular reconciliation of fiscal and bank records is carried out by 76% of all sample municipalities and the region showing the least percentage for its samples is Oromia with 50% of the sample municipalities.



.104.

7.1.3. Efficiency and Appropriateness of Tax and Fee Collection Procedures a) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) Registration Municipalities are supposed to play a critical role in the national program for the registration and identification of business tax payers. In line with this, the responsibility for the implementation of this program lies with the municipalities' finance and economic development office. Table M-15 shows TIN assignment for the sampled municipalities.

Table M-15: TIN Assignment in Sample Municipalities

TIN

Region Municipal Name Assigned in 1996 E.F.Y.

Assigned up to April 1997 E.F.Y.

To be assigned until 2000

E.F.Y.

Bahr dar 0.00 14,688.00 70,000.00

Dessie 446.00 446.00 3,576.00

Lalibella 0.00 0.00 0.00

Woreta 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 446.00 15,134.00 73,576.00

Amhara

Mean 111.50 3,783.50 18,394.00 Nekemt 750.00 1,550.00 800.00

Weliso 0.00 35 693.00

Adama 0.00 3,750.00 1,500.00

Ambo 0.00 426.00 200.00 Total 750.00 5,761.00 3,193.00

Oromia

Mean 187.50 1,440.25 798.25 Mekelle 0.00 3,400.00 7,000.00

Rama 0.00 0.00 0.00

Wukro 0.00 400.00 650.00

Adwa 675.00 675.00 917.00

Alamata 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total 675.00 4,475.00 8,567.00

Tigray

Mean 135.00 895.00 1,713.40 Dilla 421.00 1,120.00 200.00

Durame 0.00 187.00 200.00

Yirgalem 0.00 346.00 254.00

Alaba Kulito 0.00 523.00 750.00 Total 421.00 2,176.00 1,404.00

SNNP

Mean 105.25 544.00 351.00 Total for all regions 2,292.00 27,546.00 86,740.00 Mean for all regions 134.82 1,620.35 5,102.35



.105.

The survey results show that in all regions most of the sample municipalities have assigned a reasonable number of TINs. However, Tigray and Amhara municipalities categorized with lower grades have reported zero TIN assignment. All in all, in absolute terms the 17 surveyed municipalities have issued a total of 27,546 TIN numbers up to April, 2005. The region found to be in the forefront is Amhara with the average per sample municipality reaching 3,783 TINs assigned to taxpayers. Oromia region follows suit with a mean value for TIN assignment in the sample municipalities showing 1,440 and the Tigray sample municipalities coming after with 895 assigned TIN as average. The smallest figure for TIN assignment is observed in the sample municipalities of the SNNP showing an average of 544 TINs assigned. With regard to plans up to the year 2000 (E.C), the surveyed municipalities are envisaging the issuance of 18 394, 798, 1 713 and 351 TINs as average in the municipalities of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The plans for 2000 (E.C.) show a 315% increase in TIN assignment over the actual figures of April 1997 (E.C.). b) Initiatives to increase taxation and other revenues The survey has also revealed that there is a somewhat acceptable level of initiative to increase the tax/fee base and the level of taxation. For the sample municipalities in all regions it was found that 59 % of them are having previous experience in assessing current tax or fee systems and the potential of payers. In this regard, the best cases have been found in both Amhara and Tigray regions sample municipalities with 75% and 60% of the sample municipalities reporting some previous initiative to assess tax/fee potential of payers. Similarly, conducting studies on new possible taxes was performed only by 50%, 100% and 40% of the sample municipalities in Amhara, Oromia and Tigray regions, respectively. In contrast to these regions, all the samples in the SNNP stated they had not performed any study to assess new tax types. Performing tax comparisons with other jurisdiction is found to be low in all municipalities with only 13% of the total municipalities reporting the making of comparisons with other jurisdiction. However, performing review of tariffs and service charges show a moderate figure with 59% of the total municipalities. Moreover, review of tariff fees and service charges was performed by 50%, 75%, 60% and 50% of the sampled municipalities of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively.



.106.

Table M-16: Tax/Fee Assessment in the Sample Municipalities Percent of municipalities having in

place the Assessment Method

No. Tax/Fee Potential assessment

method used Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP

Average % for

all regions

1 Conduct study on how to increase existing tax rates 75 50 60 50 59

2 Study on new possible taxes 50 100 40 0 48 3 Tax comparison with other

jurisdiction 25 25 0 0 13 4 Review tariff fees and service

charges 50 75 60 50 59 c) Service Efficiency of Tax System The survey results show that paying taxes in the sample municipalities takes in the

range of 18 to 55 minutes which can be judged as good performance. The highest

time for paying taxes is reported by Dilla with 120 Minutes while the lowest is seen

in Lalibela Municipality of Amhara with 5 Minutes (see Fig. M-8).

Fig. M-8: Average Time needed to pay taxes in Sample Municipalities

0102030405060

Tigray 20Oromia 20Amhara 17.5SNNP 55



.107.

Fig. M-9: Publication of Tax Assessment Procedures

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Perc

ent o

f mun

icip

al.

Regions

Not Published 25 0 20 0

Partially, For some Taxes 75 0 40 0

Yes, for All Taxes 0 100 40 100


The publication of tax assessment procedure shows variation among the surveyed regions (Fig. M-9). Hence, in 100% of the sample municipalities in both Oromia and SNNP regions, tax assessment procedures are made known by all concerned parties. In the Amhara region, 75% of the sample municipalities are publishing their tax assessment procedures partially while the sample municipalities in Tigray are publishing either fully (40%) or partially (40%) the tax assessment procedures. Besides, all the sample municipalities of Oromia and Tigray are having initiative to educate taxpayers while this trend is observed in 75% of the municipalities in Amhara and SNNP regions (Table M-17). Evaluation of service quality regarding tax collection was preformed in 25%, 75%, 100% and 75% of the sample municipalities of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively.

Table M-17: Initiative for Taxpayer Tducation and Service Quality Assessment

Percent of Municipalities Regions With Procedures for

Taxpayer Education Evaluating Service Quality

for Tax Collection

Amhara 75 25 Oromia 100 75 Tigray 100 100 SNNP 75 75



.108.

7.1.3.3 Human Resource and Capacity Building A)Staffing Level and Vacancies The survey evaluated the staffing level and the human resource capacity of the sample municipalities as far as human resources and capability to service delivery are linked directly. Hence, the survey has shown a mean value of total staff of 645 employees and a vacancy level of 85 or 13% job posts for all sample municipalities. At the regional level, the mean values for total staffing of municipalities vary from 815 in Amhara to 264 employees in SNNP. The average values of total staffing for Oromia and Tigray sample municipalities show 752 and 729 employees, respectively. Among all sample municipalities regardless of their region, the highest total staffing level was observed in Mekelle municipality of Tigray region with 1,821 employees while the least figure was reported by Woreta municipality in Amhara region with 16 employees. Table M-18: Staffing of sample municipalities

Staff Vacancies

Region Municipal

Name Total

for state functions

for municipal functions Total

vacancy rate

for state functions

for municipal functions

Total No. of

contracted experts

Total number of daily laborers

Bahr dar 1,571 1,333 238 146 9% 90 56 0 0 Dessie 1,649 1,471 178 332 20% 209 123 0 80 Lalibella 22 0 22 15 68% 0 15 10 12 Woreta 16 0 11 5 31% 0 5 0 17 Total 3,258 2,804 449 498 15% 299 199 10 109

Amhara

Mean 815 701 112 125 15% 75 50 3 27 Adama 1,063 898 165 125 12% 59 66 50 69 Ambo 582 548 34 282 48% 244 38 0 35 Nekemt 815 725 90 96 12% 24 72 8 81 Weliso 548 510 38 164 30% 106 58 0 0 Total 3,008 2,681 327 667 22% 433 234 58 185

Oromia

Mean 752 670 82 167 22% 108 59 15 46 Adwa 691 537 154 72 10% 61 11 0 0 Alamata 574 472 102 26 5% 24 2 0 3 Mekelle 1,821 320 63 47 3% 20 27 0 80 Rama 26 0 24 2 8% 0 0 0 0 Wukro 533 479 54 3 1% 3 0 9 0 Total 3,645 1,808 397 150 4% 108 40 9 83

Tigray

Mean 729 362 79 30 4% 22 8 2 17

SNNP Alaba Kulito 264 245 19 17 6% 6 11 0 0



.109.

Staff Vacancies

Region Municipal

Name Total

for state functions

for municipal functions Total

vacancy rate

for state functions

for municipal functions

Total No. of

contracted experts

Total number of daily laborers

Dilla 117 43 74 47 40% 29 18 0 17 Durame 222 201 21 3 1% 3 0 0 0 Yirgalem 454 396 58 67 15% 23 44 0 120 Total 1,057 885 172 134 13% 61 73 0 137 Mean 264 221 43 34 13% 15 18 0 34

Total for all regions 10,968 8,178 1,345 1,449 13% 901 546 77 514 Mean for all regions 645 481 79 85 13% 53 32 5 30

The mean value of vacancy in all sample municipalities in relative terms was 13% of the total approved job positions with Oromia sample municipalities showing the highest figure of 22% of vacancy as average. The mean values of the other regions were 13%, 15% and 4% for SNNP, Amhara and Tigray regions, respectively. To compensate for the level of vacancy, most sample municipalities had recourse to daily labourers in a varying degree from region to region. Although the mean value of daily labourers for all regions was 30, in absolute terms the Oromia region sample municipalities had shown the highest figure with 46 daily labourers. The mean values of daily labourers of sample municipalities of the other regions show average values in absolute terms of 34, 27 and 17 for SNNP, Amhara and Tigray, respectively. Fig. M-10 shows the major problems faced by the sample municipalities while recruiting employees.



.110.

Fig M-10: Major problems in staff recruitment in municipalities

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

ent o

f Wor

edas

Regions

Low Atractiveness of Location 25 0 60 0Payment not Attractive enough 100 100 20 50Candidates not meeting Criteria 25 25 20 100O ther 25 50 0 0

Amhara O romia Tigray SNNP

The survey assessment had also evaluated the compliance of the sample municipalities with principles and practice of modern management. Accordingly, the result show somewhat acceptable level of modern human resource management approaches. The issuing of Job description for all jobs is practiced in 71% of all sample municipalities with Amhara and Tigray sample municipalities falling below this average with 50% and 60% of their sample municipalities using job descriptions. Oromia and SNNP sample municipalities reported higher values and show averages of 75% and 100%, respectively.



.111.

Table M-19: Compliance with Modern Human Resource Management approaches

Percent of Municipalities complying with key HR Mgt.

Issue No.

Key Human Resource Management Issue Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP

Average % For

All Regions

1 Job Description for All Posts 50 75 60 100 71

2 Performance Indicator For Job Descriptions

50 50 60 50 53

3 Written HR policy handed out to staff 50 25 20 75 41

4 Regular Performance Appraisal of Employees

100 75 100 25 76

Compliance with issuance of performance indicators is very similar across the regions. The survey results show that 50% of the sample municipalities of Amhara, Oromia, and SNNP regions are issuing job descriptions while sample municipalities in Tigray show a higher figure for this indicator with 60%. Regularity of performance appraisal is reported by all sample municipalities in Amhara and SNNP regions whereas 75% and 25% of the samples in Oromia and Tigray reported compliance with this issue.

7.2.4 Public Information, Participation, Empowerment and Corruption Control

7.2.4.1 Community Consultation and Access to Information Perhaps the most important reason for strengthening municipalities is that they are the institutions that are closest to the people at the urban level. Well-functioning municipalities can increase the level of local participation in the development process and, by definition, enhance the degree of self-government. Municipalities are also typically in a better position than the central government to tap into local private firms, community organizations, and NGOs to serve as partners in development. In this regard, their transparency is one of the critical aspects of democratized decentralization and yardstick by which their accountability to citizens and stockholders is measured. The appraisal of public access to important documentation such as budgets, annual reports, strategic plan, tax assessment, decision taken by the council was carried out and recorded in the questionnaire in the most direct way. Officials in the surveyed municipalities were asked to produce a



.112.

copy of the requested document and to show the assigned enumerators. If they were able to produce and show the requested document then the level of public access for the municipality is measured positively. Consequently, average results for public access to most of the requested documents in all regions had shown a somewhat positive measure ranging from 41% for council agendas and audit reports to 82% for strategic plans. The region showing better public access was Oromia (81.1%) while the least public access was calculated for sample municipalities of Tigray (45%). The sample municipalities of Amhara and SNNP regions show values that are close to the average of all sample municipalities (58.4%) with averages of 50% and 59.3%, respectively. It is very interesting to note that the average of all municipalities is inferior to that of the Woredas, i.e., 58.4% against 69.9% for the sample woredas. The pattern of transparency in both municipalities and woredas is surprisingly similar when we see the lower figures associated with audit reports and the higher figures for strategic plans. Table M-20: Public Access to Written Information and Community Consultation

Percent of municipalities Complying

No. Key Areas of Public Information and

Community Consultation Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP

Average % For

All Regions

Citizens and Stakeholders have Access to Written Information On: 1 Budget 50 100 60 75 71

2 Annual Reports 75 100 60 50 71

3 Audit Reports 25 75 40 25 41

4 Strategic Plan 75 100 60 100 82

5 Tax Assessment 50 100 20 75 61

6 Services Provided by Local Government

50 100 60 50 65

7 Agenda of Council Meetings 25 50 20 75 41

8 Decisions Taken by Council 50 25 40 25 35

The Community is Consulted While

1 Formulating Strategic Plans 75 100 80 100 88

2 Preparing Budgets 75 100 80 75 82

3 Introducing Change in Service Delivery 50 75 80 75 71

Consulted Members of The Community

1 Citizens 75 75 80 50 71

2 Business Community 50 75 60 75 65

3 Women's Association 25 50 60 50 47

4 NGOs and CBOs 25 75 60 25 47

5 Disadvantaged People 0 25 20 0 12



.113.

Percent of municipalities Complying

No. Key Areas of Public Information and

Community Consultation Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP

Average % For

All Regions

6 Kebeles 75 75 80 75 76

7 Regional Government Agencies 75 50 80 100 76

8 Federal Government Agencies 25 25 40 50 35

Publication of Community Consultations

1 Community Participation and decisions are written down and made public

75 75 60 50 65

2 Results of Community Participation is reported o council members

100 75 100 100 94

The level of community consultation had also been assessed during the survey and the results show that the sample municipalities are consulting the community while formulating strategic plans, budgets and to introduce changes in service delivery in 67%, 92%, 80% and 83% of the cases in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The overall average of the sample municipalities in all regions revealed that there is a reasonable level of community consultation by showing a mean value of 80.33% of municipalities practicing community consultations. The Kebele leadership (76%), citizens (71%), Business community (65%) and regional government agencies (76%) are the most consulted by the municipalities while planning for their activities. The survey has also revealed that the results of community consultation are written down and made public in most sample municipalities which can be judged by the average result of 65% of the cases for all regions.

7.2.4.2 Local Government Support to NGOs and CBOs With regard to the outreach level of the municipal employees, all the sample municipalities in Amhara, Tigray and SNNP regions have assigned some of their employees on permanent basis to their respective rural kebeles. Involvement with technical support to NGOs and CBOs, on the other hand, shows an average of 71% of all sample municipalities. Technical support activities include provision of sectoral data, consultation for planning and implementation of NGO/CBO task, coordinating activities to avoid duplication of effort, etc. In line with this, the technical support to CBOs and NGOs varies across regions and the mean values showing the percent of



.114.

municipalities providing such support in each region reveal 25%, 100%, 60% and 100% for Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. On the other hand, most sample municipalities (76% of all) say they had an up-to-date list of NGOs and CBOs operating in their respective jurisdiction. Partnering for development with NGOs and other self-help groups is also confirmed by 50%, 75%, 60% and 75% of the sample municipalities in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively.

7.2.5 Service Delivery Performance in Sample Municipalities It is important to note that many of the services provided by municipalities generate important externalities across jurisdictions and involve complementarities across sectors for which different levels of government have responsibility. Municipal streets linkup to roads provided by higher levels of government, forming part of an integrated road network. Improved water and sanitation services under municipal jurisdiction can help to reduce demands on health services delivered by the states. Better municipal nursery schools enhance the chances of success when students graduate to state-provided primary and higher level schools. Good service provision in municipalities can also benefit rural residents who travel to municipalities for services unavailable in their villages. Thus, effective municipal service delivery is an important component of the overall system of public responsibilities in both urban and rural areas. Appreciating this fact, the questionnaire used for the field survey included measurement questions for about fifteen basic service types. The questions helped to assess which services were available and who delivered them.

7.2.5.1 Basic Access of population to selected services The survey results show that for most services that were considered "basic" the involvement of municipalities and their respective woredas was found to be satisfactory. During the survey it was learned that woredas and municipalities in the same jurisdiction were delivering together 57%, 61%, 61% and 63% of the "Basic" Services in the sample of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. Moreover, of the fifteen measured "basic" services, the municipal offices (without the woredas) were delivering as average 40%, 45%, 44% and 50% of the "basic" services in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively.



.115.

Table M-21: Basic access of population to selected services

Basic Service Delivery Actors (percentage of municipalities - Multiple answers were allowed)

Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP No Service Type

NA FRZ WG Mun Other* NA FRZ WG Mun Other* NA FRZ WG Mun Other* NA FRZ WG Mun Other*

1 Public transport 50 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 100 25 0 0 25 50

2 Solid waste collection 0 0 0 75 25 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 100 0 25 0 0 50 25

3 Liquid Waste Disposal 25 0 0 50 25 0 0 0 100 0 20 0 0 60 20 50 0 0 25 25

4 Street Cleaning 0 0 0 75 25 0 0 0 100 0 20 0 20 80 0 0 0 0 75 25

5 Sanitation 0 0 0 75 0 0 0 25 100 0 0 0 40 60 0 0 0 25 50 25

6 Roads 0 0 0 75 25 0 50 0 75 0 0 20 20 80 0 0 25 25 75 0

7 Housing 25 0 25 25 25 0 0 0 50 50 60 0 0 40 0 25 0 0 75 0

8 Water Supply 0 50 0 50 0 25 50 0 25 0 0 60 0 40 0 0 0 25 25 50

9 Electricity 0 50 0 25 25 0 75 0 25 0 0 60 0 40 0 0 50 0 50 0

10 Slaughter House 0 0 0 50 50 0 0 0 50 50 0 0 0 80 20 0 0 0 100 0

11 Primary Health Care 0 25 25 25 25 0 50 50 0 0 0 40 0 60 0 25 0 25 25 25

12 Primary Education 0 0 50 50 25 0 50 50 0 0 0 40 80 0 0 0 0 25 75 0

13 Secondary Education 0 25 50 25 0 0 50 60 0 0 0 60 60 0 0 0 25 25 50 0

14 Agricultural Services 0 0 75 0 25 25 25 0 25 25 20 40 20 20 0 0 0 25 50 25

15 Micro-finance 0 75 25 0 0 0 0 50 25 25 0 0 20 0 80 0 40 25 0 35

Total By Delivery Actors ( in %) 7 15 17 40 22 3 23 16 45 17 8 21 17 44 15 10 9 13 50 19

Note: FRZ= Federal, Regional, Zonal Institutions. WG= Woreda Government. Mun= Municipality. *Other includes NGO/CBO and Private Firms.



.116.

Conversely, the role played by federal, regional and zonal agencies is remarkably low. The combined participation rate of these agencies as "Basic service delivery" actors show 15%, 23%, 21% and 9% for the sample municipalities of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions respectively. The role of these agencies is found to be more accentuated in certain "investment-intensive-and-integrated" service types such as roads, water supply, secondary education and primary health care due to the existence of several regional or federal level projects. Table M-22: Service quality Assessment in Sample Woredas

Percent of municipalities in

No. Task Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP

Average % for All regions

1 Assessing the quality of Service by Asking Citizens

100 100 100 75 94

2 Assessing Service Quality Regularly 75 75 80 75 76

3 Publish Service Performance Results 100 100 100 100 100

Respondents in the sample municipalities were asked whether they evaluate the quality of rendered services and the results show encouraging results. Asking citizens about quality of service is common in all municipalities of Amhara, Oromia and Tigray while 75% of the SNNP sample municipalities are also doing the same. The regularity of services quality assessment was also satisfactory showing an overall average of 76% of the sample municipalities. The publishing of service performance results is a very common practice in the sample municipalities of all surveyed regions (See Table M-22).

7.2.5.2 Solid Waste Management The faster growth rate of cities of the developing world has outpaced the financial and manpower resources of municipalities to deal with provision and management of services, of which solid waste is the major one. Lack of these services greatly affects the urban poor, women and children who are vulnerable to health hazards. A report22 from the World Bank indicated that some 22 human diseases are related to improper solid waste management. Moreover, its effects are also reflected in reduced productivity, low income and poor quality of life and deteriorated environment. Similar to cities of most developing countries, provision of required services lags behind the need and development of settlements in urban areas of 22 World Development Report, The World Bank 1999



.117.

Ethiopia. Provision of solid and liquid waste collection and disposal is low (most urban areas lack the service). In addition to this, deterioration of the immediate environment in the households and their surrounding is increasing. The service selected for detailed survey in part I of the Benchmarking study were agriculture for woredas and solid waste disposal for municipalities. Accordingly, the questionnaire contained about eight specific questions aimed at the assessment of the level of solid waste disposal services in the sample municipalities. Table M-23: Solid waste disposal service coverage

annual amount of Percentage of

Region Municipal

Name No. of

Vehicles

Average age of

vehicles (years)

solid waste (m3)

organic solid

waste(m3)

solid waste recycled

(m3)

pop. covered

mun. area covered

Bahr dar 3 9 0 0 0 50 50

Dessie 3 15 1971 3614 0 50 60

Lalibella 0 0 0 0 0 52 52

Woreta* 0 0 NA 0 0 0 0

Total 6 24 1971 3614 0 152 162

Amhara

Mean 1.5 6 492.75 903.5 0 38 40.5 Adama 3 15 36752 NA 0 35 0

Ambo 1 15 22264 9504 12760 2 33

Nekemt 1 15 4023 NA 0 33 10

Weliso 1 18 17530 1920 15610 2 30

Total 6 63 80569 11424 28370 72 73

Oromia

Mean 1.5 15.75 20142.3 2856 7092.5 18 18.25 Adwa 3 10 2016 0 0 70 70

Alamata 1 3 NA 0 0 0 100

Mekelle 7 3 14101 0 0 0 6

Rama 1 10 1000 0 0 100 100

Wukro 1 2 1350 0 0 100 100

Total 13 28 18467 0 0 270 376

Tigray

Mean 2.6 5.6 3693.4 0 0 54 75.2 Alaba Kulito 0 0 432 0 0 0 0

Dilla 1 30 597 90 10 0 40

Durame* 0 0 NA 0 0 0 0

Yirgalem 1 6 6000 0 0 90 90

Total 2 36 7029 90 10 90 130

SNNP

Mean 0.5 9 1757.25 22.5 2.5 22.5 32.5 Total for all regions 27 151 108036 15128 28380 584 741

Mean for all regions 1.6 8.9 6355.1 889.9 1669.4 34.4 43.6

* No solid waste management service



.118.

In this regard, the survey results show that all the surveyed municipalities are making use of 27 vehicles for solid waste collection services with a mean value for a municipality showing 1.6 vehicles. Inter-regional comparisons in absolute terms show that Tigray municipalities have a total of 13 vehicles, followed by both Amhara and Oromia with 6 vehicles and the least of all being reported from municipalities in the SNNP with only 2 vehicles. The age of the vehicles under use by the municipalities ranges from 2 years in Wukro to 30 years in Dilla with an average age of 8.9 years of service. Although the smaller towns such as Woreta in Amhara and Durame in SNNP have no solid waste information, the data from the other municipalities show a total volume of solid waste reaching 108036 m3 with a mean value for all showing 6355 m3 of solid waste per annum. Solid waste recycling is performed by only three municipalities, namely, Ambo, Weliso and Dilla. The population coverage of solid waste service figures show that Tigray region municipalities have an excellent level of coverage with 54% as a mean value and the worst coverage figures are reported by Oromia municipalities having only a coverage of 18% of the population.

Table M-24: Staff for solid waste management

Staff for solid waste management Region

Municipal Name

Total Operational Daily Laborers

Cost of salaries for solid waste

(Birr)

Bahr dar 92 8 84 211,848.0 Dessie 20 12 8 70,560.0 Lalibella 12 2 10 23,122.0 Woreta* 0 0 0 0.0 Total 124 22 102 305,530.0

Amhara

Average 31 5.5 25.5 76,382.5 Adama 47 6 41 171,771.0 Ambo 39 12 27 64,958.0 Nekemt** 0 0 0 0.0 Weliso 34 12 22 60,520.0 Total 120 30 90 297,249.0

Oromia

Average 30 7.5 22.5 74,312.3 Adwa 12 9 3 50,000.0 Alamata 68 0 68 10,000.0 Mekelle 21 14 7 83,673.0 Rama 3 2 1 9,888.0 Wukro 23 23 0 34,248.0 Total 127 48 79 187,809.0

Tigray

Average 25.4 9.6 15.8 37,561.8



.119.

Staff for solid waste management Region

Municipal Name

Total Operational Daily Laborers

Cost of salaries for solid waste

(Birr)

Alaba Kulito 4 4 0 19,944.0 Dilla 43 17 26 70,000.0 Durame* 0 0 0 0.0 Yirgalem 20 0 20 2,600.0 Total 67 21 46 92,544.0

SNNP

Average 16.75 5.25 11.5 23,136.0 Total for all regions 438 121 317 883132 Mean for all regions 25.8 7.1 18.6 51948.9

* No solid waste management service ** Solid waste management service outsourced

The staffing of the solid waste function is one of the important measurements of how efficiently the municipality is performing this activity. In this regard, the survey results show mean values of 31, 30, 25 and 17 total staff per municipality in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The average number of solid waste staff per municipality being 26, we found that both the SNNP region is using by far a lesser number of average staff for its sample municipalities. The staff composition of the solid waste disposal service is skewed towards daily labourers with minimal participation of other staff category such as drivers, mechanics, management, etc. In this regard, the number of daily labourers among staff are reported to be on average 26, 23, 16 and 12 while mean values for other staff of this function show 6, 8, 10, and 5 for municipalities in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The average cost of salaries for solid waste functions varies from region to region with the highest cost figure being reported by Amhara region municipalities with Birr 76,383 while the lowest average figure is calculated for municipalities in the SNNP region with 23,136. Oromia and Tigray regions show in between average cost of salaries with Birr 74,312 and 37,562, respectively.

Table M-25: Treatment of solid waste after collection

Percentage of municipalities using the treatment method No. Type of treatment


Average % for

all

1 Dedicated land fill 25 75 60 0 40 2 Dumping 25 75 40 75 54 3 Solid waste burnt 75 50 0 0 31



.120.

Percentage of municipalities using the treatment method No. Type of treatment


Average % for

all

4 Different treatment for organic and non-organic waste 0 0 0 0 0

5 Sold or offered to people 0 0 0 0 0

Solid waste disposal methods were also assessed during the survey and the results show that dumping is the most used method showing an overall average of 54% while selling or giving for free solid waste is the non-practiced method. Besides, dedicated land fill and burning of solid wastes are used by 40% and 31% of all surveyed municipalities. Fig. M-11: Frequency of solid waste collection in municipalities

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Regular service at least once a week 75 75 60 50 65

Regular service less than once a week 0 25 20 25 18

Service provided when needed 25 0 20 0 12

Irregular service provided when possible 0 0 0 0 0

Amhara Oromia Tigray SNNP Average % for all

With regard to frequency of solid waste collection the most favoured collection frequency is "at-least-once-a-week" by 65% of all surveyed municipalities while the average for "Less-than-once-a-week" is reported by 18% of them. A smaller number of municipalities in Amhara and Tigray reported about their preference to collect solid waste as the need arises resulting in 12% average for all.



.121.

Table M-26: Problems faced for solid waste collection service

Percentage of municipalities facing the specific problem No. Type of problem


Average % for

all

1 Not enough suitable vehicles 75 100 80 75 82 2 Road conditions 50 75 80 50 65 3 Many illegal dumping sites 50 100 80 50 71

4 Fee collection or payments by citizens 25 25 20 50 29

5 Other* 25 25 20 0 18 * Entries for other include, among others, ‘no vehicle’ and ‘lack of budget’. Multiple choices allowed. The survey results also show that most municipalities (82% of the samples) are facing vehicle shortage and they cite this as the leading problem in solid waste disposal activities. The existence of many illegal dumping sites is also reported by 71% of the surveyed municipalities, a problem ranked second, while bad road conditions to collection and dumping sites are reported by 65% of all municipalities.



.122.

7.3 Benchmarking of Woredas and Municipalities The benchmarks were developed intuitively to assert the viability of developing performance indicators from the collected data. It is hoped that comments from the client and stakeholders will help to enrich the set of proposed/developed indicators and the rating metrics used for this round of the survey. Moreover, the planned second round survey will also be valuable by adding more woredas and municipalities in the benchmark. Having this in mind, we will present the definition of the indicators used and summarize the benchmarking findings for each of the surveyed jurisdiction.

7.3.1 Indicator Definitions No. Indicator used Description

1 Variation between Budgeted and actual Expenditure

Variation between budget and actual expenditure shows how accurately woredas and municipalities forecast and use their resources. The budget and actual figures are a summary of sectoral expenditures. This is a much more preferable approach than using the total revenue budget and actual. The indicator values are as follows: A: Budget and Actual expenditure are closely matched

showing an excellent level of planning. B: Budget and Actual expenditure are somehow

matched showing inconsistent planning that needs to be improved.

C: Budget and Actual expenditure are extremely

divergent showing a complete lack of planning procedure.

D: Actual expenditure is higher than budget showing

unplanned financing of expenditure. This also means a push towards using the undesirable subsidy procedures.

2 Salary expenditure against total Expenditure If the salary portion of expenditure is higher, mobility and

service delivery capacity of staff is limited. This situation also shows how constrained is the operational expenditure portion of the jurisdiction. The indicator values are as follows: A: The salary portion of the expenditures is fair enough

to allow for more operational and capital expenditures.



.123.

No. Indicator used Description B: The salary portion of the expenditures is

exaggerated but still allowing for acceptable levels of operational and capital expenditures.

C: The salary portion of the expenditures is extremely

inflated and the likelihood of acceptable levels of operational and capital expenditures is dubious.

D: Almost all expenditures of the jurisdiction are

related with salary expenses and a very low level of operational and capital expenditures is observed.

3 Own revenue as percentage of actual

expenditure

The indicator is a measure of financial self-sufficiency level of the jurisdiction. To get the indicator values, the sum of all collected taxes and fess is compared to the total expenditure. The values are not normative. They are based on comparisons of percentages among the surveyed jurisdictions. The indicator values are as follows: A: Relatively, a higher collection of taxes and fees

when compared to the expenditure level. B: Relatively, a moderate level of collection of taxes

and fees when compared to the expenditure level. This shows a need to improve the collection level.

C: Compared to other jurisdiction, a limited level of

own revenue is achieved by the jurisdiction to cover the required expenditure.

4 Increase in own taxes, fees and service

charges

This is a measure of actual (1996 E.F.Y.) and plans (1997 E.F.Y) collections of taxes, fees and service charges. This indicator is an additional assessment of the above (# 3) and depicts the trend of the jurisdiction towards improving own revenues. The indicator values are as follows: A: Relatively, a higher collection of taxes and fees

when compared to the expenditure level. B: Relatively, a moderate level of collection of taxes

and fees when compared to the expenditure level. This shows a need to improve the collection level.

C: Compared to other jurisdiction, a limited level of

own revenue is achieved by the jurisdiction to cover the required expenditure.

5 Budget utilization capacity as measured by

actual revenue and actual expenditure

The total revenue composed of Block grant, subsidies, loan/grants and own revenue is compared to the actual expenditure. If a jurisdiction is able to consume the allocated resources then its capacity to utilize budget can be judged as excellent. Otherwise, it shows lack of leadership, planning and staff leading to under consumption of the allocated financial resources.



.124.

No. Indicator used Description The indicator values are as follows: A: Budget and Actual expenditure are closely matched

showing an excellent level of planning. B: Budget and Actual expenditure are somehow

matched showing inconsistent planning that needs to be improved.

C: Budget and Actual expenditure are extremely

divergent showing a complete lack of planning procedure.

D: Actual expenditure is higher than budget showing

unplanned financing of expenditure. This also means a push towards using the undesirable subsidy procedures.

6 Capital budget against total budget The capital investment portion in the total budget shows the work-in-progress towards improving service delivery. If the portion of capital budget is minimal then there are no initiatives to improve the infrastructure of the jurisdiction. Higher portions show readiness to meet future service delivery demands in the given jurisdiction. The indicator values are as follows: A: Relatively, higher capital investments that guarantee

the readiness of the jurisdiction to meet future service demands.

B: Relatively, a moderate level of capital investments

that somehow guarantee the readiness of the jurisdiction to meet future service demands.

C: No Capital investment or its portion in the total

budget is negligible showing deteriorating service delivery in the jurisdiction.

7 Existence, transparency and inclusiveness of

the woreda/municipality's strategic plan

The importance of strategic plans can not be overemphasized. The financial strategic plan is sound if it is based on forecast of resources. Besides, if budget allocation is linked to the developed strategic plan then the jurisdiction is in a better financial management position. How the strategic plan was formulated and the practice of submitting the various progress and monitoring reports based on the strategic plan is also an indication of sound financial management. This indicator is a composite measure of the above issues. The indicator values are as follows: A: A strategic plan is used, budgets are forecasted

based on this plan and there is a high degree of transparency in reporting.



.125.

No. Indicator used Description B: A strategic plan is used but either budgets are not

forecasted based on this plan or transparency in reporting is unsatisfactory. The Financial management status needs to improve.

C: The financial management status of the jurisdiction

is poor.

8 Efficiency and comprehensiveness of

accounting and Auditing procedures

The indicator measures the use-of modern accounting practices and the soundness of auditing procedures. The composite index is based on use of double-entry accounting, ICT assisted accounting, regularity of reconciliation of fiscal and bank records, existence of account backlogs, and the state of internal and external auditing of the books. The indicator values are as follows: A: The jurisdiction has a better accounting and

auditing system that ensures better financial management.

B: The jurisdiction has a functioning but not best of the

class accounting and auditing procedures. It needs to improve the existing system.

C: The accounting and auditing procedures are below

standard and the status of the jurisdiction in this regard is very poor.

9 Enhancement of existing taxpayers base and

efficiency of tax collection

Jurisdictions should in principle assess continually the existing taxpayer base and consider the introduction of viable new taxes and fees for new type of services. This composite measure shows the effort of individual jurisdictions to increase their own revenue by conducting assessments on existing and new taxes/service fees. The indicator values are as follows: A: An excellent initiative to increase own revenue

through assessing the taxpayer base and viable new tax/fees

B: A moderate level initiative to increase own revenue

through assessing the taxpayer base and viable new tax/fees. The jurisdiction needs to increase such initiatives.

C: No initiative or few accomplishments towards

increasing own revenue through assessing the taxpayer base and viable new tax/fees. The initiative level of the jurisdiction poor and need to introduce such initiatives.

10 Appropriateness of staffing level High level of vacancies is a major bottleneck towards

effective service delivery. The staffing level is the number posts filled against the approved positions of the jurisdiction. However, assuming that approved positions



.126.

No. Indicator used Description are adequate for delivering the needed services, the more they are unfilled the more service delivery capacity is affected. Hence, the level of vacancy is a proxy indicator of the adequateness of staffing for the needed level of service delivery. The indicator values are as follows: A: The Jurisdiction is appropriately staffed to meet

service delivery demands. Few approved positions are vacant.

B: The Jurisdiction is more or less appropriately

staffed to meet service delivery demands. Quite a number of approved positions are vacant.

C: The Jurisdiction is poorly staffed to meet service

delivery needs. A relatively higher number of the approved positions are vacant.

11 Compliance with modern human resource

Approaches

Just a glimpse of the jurisdiction's management style is assessed by using this indicator. Whether job descriptions and performance measures are issued to employees and if performance appraisal of employees carried out regularly are summarized through this indicator. The indicator values are as follows: A: An excellent human resource management approach

is observed in the jurisdiction. B: The Jurisdiction some how used some modern ways

to manage its employees. There is a need to improve the personnel management approach.

C: The Jurisdiction is managing poorly its employees.

12 Information access level by the public and

stakeholders

This composite indicator measures the public access to basic information such as budgets, audit reports, strategic plans, tax assessment, services provided by the jurisdiction, etc. The indicator values are as follows: A: The jurisdiction can let access all or most of the

requested information. Information is found in written mode.

B: The Jurisdiction has reasonable number documents

that can be accessed by the public. It needs to improve its documentation and be more transparent.

C: The public access to critical documents in the

jurisdiction is very limited and need major improvements.



.127.

No. Indicator used Description 13 Community empowerment and participation

in local government and service delivery

Community participation in budget formulation, strategic planning and improvement of service delivery is measured by this composite indicator. The indicator can be taken as a measure of inclusiveness of the budget and the strategic plan (if formulated). The indicator values are as follows: A: High degree of consultation with citizens and

stakeholders. B: Moderate level of community consultation that need

improvement. C: A low level community consultation that needs

major efforts to improve the situation.

14 Level of Access to Basic Services and

appropriateness of delivery actors.

The index is calculated based on whether the selected fifteen basic services are provided mostly by the jurisdiction. The more the jurisdiction is involved with the delivery of the basic services the more positively the target is judged positively. For woredas, the service delivered by the municipalities within its jurisdiction is considered and vice-versa. The indicator values are as follows: A: The percentage of the services provided by the

jurisdiction and its higher/lower jurisdiction layers is satisfactory.

B: The percentage of the services provided by the

jurisdiction and its higher/lower jurisdiction layers is somehow acceptable but needs further improvement.

C: The coverage of basic services by the jurisdiction is

unsatisfactory.

15 (For Woreda Only) Agricultural services

availability to majority of farmers

This measure indicates availability of a range of typical agricultural services to the majority of farmers. The indicator shows if the woreda is providing critical support to the farmers with respect to cooperatives, technical assistance, direct marketing, food processing facilities, micro-finance, gender specific training, etc. The indicator values are as follows: A: The percentage of the services provided by the






.128.

No. Indicator used Description C: The coverage of basic services by the jurisdiction is

unsatisfactory.

16 (For Woreda Only) Cost of salaries for

agriculture compared to level of agricultural

land use

This indicator shows the staff efficiency of the agriculture function in the given woreda. The indicator values are as follows: A: The salary spent to service one hectare of land is

minimal showing efficiency of incurred costs in salaries.

B: The salary spent to service one hectare of land is

moderate showing a reasonable efficiency of incurred costs in salaries.

C: The salary spent to service one hectare of land is

high showing inefficiency of incurred costs in salaries.

17 (For Municipality Only) Solid waste disposal

services availability and population coverage

This measure indicates availability of a solid waste disposal services to the majority of the inhabitants of the jurisdiction. The degree of population coverage with this service. The indicator values are as follows: A: The percentage of the services provided by the




C: The coverage of basic services by the jurisdiction is

unsatisfactory.

18 (For Municipality Only) Cost of salaries for

agriculture compared to level of agricultural

land use

This indicator shows the staff efficiency of the agriculture function in the given woreda. The indicator values are as follows: A: The salary spent to service one hectare of land is

minimal showing efficiency of incurred costs in salaries.

B: The salary spent to service one hectare of land is

moderate showing a reasonable efficiency of incurred costs in salaries.

C: The salary spent to service one hectare of land is

high showing inefficiency of incurred costs in salaries.



.129.

7.3.2 Benchmarking Result Summary Tables

Woredas Amhara

No. Indicator Fogera Habru Kutaber Sekela Sekota Weldia

1 Variations between budgeted and actual expenditure A A A A A A 2 Salary expenditure against total expenditure C D C B B B 3 Own revenue as percentage of actual expenditure C C C C C C 4 Increase in own taxes/fees and service charges B B C C B B 5 Budget utilization capacity as measured by actual revenue and expenditure A B A A B A 6 Capital budget against total budget C B C C B C 7 Existence, transparency and inclusiveness of woredas/municipality strategic plan A B C A B B 8 Efficiency and comprehensiveness of Accounting and Auditing procedures C A B B B A 9 Enhancement of existing tax payers base and efficiency of tax collection A B C C C C

10 Appropriateness of staff level (vacancy rate) B B C B C B 11 Compliance with modern human resource approach A C A A A C 12 Consultation and information access level by the public and stakeholders A A A A A A 13 Community empowerment and participation in local government and service delivery C B C B B A 14 Level of access to basic services B A C B C A 15 Agricultural services availability to majority of farmers A B A A A A 16 Cost of salary against agricultural land use A B A A A A



.130.

Woredas (Continued...) Oromia

No. Indicators Boji Cheliya Gubakorcha Guduru Kurfa chele Mettu

1 Variations between budgeted and actual expenditure A D A A A D 2 Salary expenditure against total expenditure D C C C C C 3 Own revenue as percentage of actual expenditure C C C C C C 4 Increase in own taxes/fees and service charges C C C C C C 5 Budget utilization capacity as measured by actual revenue and expenditure B A C A B A 6 Capital budget against total budget C C C C C C 7 Existence, transparency and inclusiveness of woredas/municipality strategic plan A B A B A A 8 Efficiency and comprehensiveness of Accounting and Auditing procedures C C C C C C 9 Enhancement of existing tax payers base and efficiency of tax collection C C C C C A

10 Appropriateness of staff level (vacancy rate) C C C C B A 11 Compliance with modern human resource approach B C C C C B 12 Consultation and information access level by the public and stakeholders A A A A A C 13 Community empowerment and participation in local government and service delivery B B B B B B 14 Level of access to basic services C C C C C C 15 Agricultural services availability to majority of farmers A B A B A A 16 Cost of salary against agricultural land use A B C C A A



.131.

Woredas (Continued...) Tigray

No. Indicators Atsbi Womberta Gulomakda Kafte

Humera Kelete awlaelo

Laelaye adiyabo

1 Variations between budgeted and actual expenditure A D D D A 2 Salary expenditure against total expenditure C A C B C 3 Own revenue as percentage of actual expenditure C B C C C 4 Increase in own taxes/fees and service charges C C C A C 5 Budget utilization capacity as measured by actual revenue and expenditure A A A B B 6 Capital budget against total budget C B B C C 7 Existence, transparency and inclusiveness of woredas/municipality strategic plan B C B A B 8 Efficiency and comprehensiveness of Accounting and Auditing procedures B C A C A 9 Enhancement of existing tax payers base and efficiency of tax collection B C A C A

10 Appropriateness of staff level (vacancy rate) A A A B A 11 Compliance with modern human resource approach A B C A B 12 Consultation and information access level by the public and stakeholders B C C A A 13 Community empowerment and participation in local government and service delivery C C C C C 14 Level of access to basic services B C C C C 15 Agricultural services availability to majority of farmers B A B A B 16 Cost of salary against agricultural land use A A A A A



.132.

Woredas (Continued...)

SNNP No. Indicators

Basketo Kedida Gamila Konso Kucha Shebedino Yirga

chefee 1 Variations between budgeted and actual expenditure A D D A A A 2 Salary expenditure against total expenditure C D C C C B 3 Own revenue as percentage of actual expenditure C C C C C C 4 Increase in own taxes/fees and service charges C C B B C C 5 Budget utilization capacity as measured by actual revenue and expenditure A A A B A A 6 Capital budget against total budget C C B C C B 7 Existence, transparency and inclusiveness of woredas/municipality strategic plan A A A C B A 8 Efficiency and comprehensiveness of Accounting and Auditing procedures B A C C B C 9 Enhancement of existing tax payers base and efficiency of tax collection C A B A C C

10 Appropriateness of staff level (vacancy rate) C A B C A B 11 Compliance with modern human resource approach A A A C A A 12 Consultation and information access level by the public and stakeholders A C A A A A 13 Community empowerment and participation in local government and service delivery B B C B C C 14 Level of access to basic services C C C C A C 15 Agricultural services availability to majority of farmers B A B A A A 16 Cost of salary against agricultural land use A A A C A A



.133.

Municipalities Amhara Oromia

No.

Indicators Bahr Dar Dessie Lalibella Woreta Nekemt Weliso Adama Ambo

1 Variations between budgeted and actual expenditure C A B A B C B C 2 Salary expenditure against total expenditure C C A A C B A C 3 Own revenue as percentage of actual expenditure B C A A B B C C 4 Increase in own taxes/fees and service charges B B A A B C C C 5 Budget utilization capacity as measured by actual revenue and expenditure B A C A A A A A 6 Capital budget against total budget B C B C C C A C 7 Existence, transparency and inclusiveness of woredas/municipality strategic plan A B C C B C A C 8 Efficiency and comprehensiveness of Accounting and Auditing procedures B A C C C C B C 9 Enhancement of existing tax payers base and efficiency of tax collection C A C B A C B C 10 Appropriateness of staff level (vacancy rate) A C C C B C B C 11 Compliance with modern human resource approach C C A A B B A B 12 Information access level by the public and stakeholders C C A C B B A A 13 Community empowerment and participation in local government and service delivery B C B C A C A B 14 Level of access to basic services A B B A B B B C 15 Population coverage of solid waste A A A C B B B B 16 Cost of salary against annual solid waste coverage B B C C C B B B



.134.

Municipalities (continued...) Tigray SNNP

No.

Indicators Mekelle Rama Wukro Adwa Alamata Dilla Durami Yirgalem

Alaba Kulito

1 Variations between budgeted and actual expenditure A D C B B C C A B 2 Salary expenditure against total expenditure B A B B D D D A D 3 Own revenue as percentage of actual expenditure A C C C C A B A C 4 Increase in own taxes/fees and service charges B C C C C C C C C 5 Budget utilization capacity as measured by actual revenue and expenditure A C A A A B A A A 6 Capital budget against total budget C A B C B C C C C 7 Existence, transparency and inclusiveness of woredas/municipality strategic plan A A A A A A B A A 8 Efficiency and comprehensiveness of Accounting and Auditing procedures C A B C B A B A C 9 Enhancement of existing tax payers base and efficiency of tax collection B C C C B C C C C

10 Appropriateness of staff level (vacancy rate) B A A A A A C A B 11 Compliance with modern human resource approach C B A B A B A B C 12 Information access level by the public and stakeholders B C C C A B C A C 13 Community empowerment and participation in local government and service delivery A C A C B B C B C 14 Level of access to basic services C B A C B C C B A 15 Population coverage of solid waste A B B A C C C A C 16 Cost of salary against annual solid waste coverage B B A A C A C C C



.135.

VVVIIIIIIIII... CCCooonnncccllluuusssiiiooonnnsss aaannnddd RRReeecccooommmmmmeeennndddaaatttiiiooonnnsss The Benchmarking survey results have revealed important data on the status strength, limitations & opportunities of woredas and municipalities as grass-root level services delivery agents. The major conclusions and recommendations that can be drawn from this study are the following.

8.1 On Woredas The survey was conducted in 23 Woredas of Amhara, Oromia, SNNP and Tigray regions with a total population of 3,733,562 and a total land size of 36,114 km2. The surveyed Woredas are 35% food secure, 52% food insecure but receiving additional funding and 13% are food insecure with no additional funding for food security improvement. This being the general description of the surveyed target Woredas, the specific conclusions and recommendations are as follows:

• The average budget revenue of the sample woredas for 1996 E.F.Y. was Birr 8.4 million, 6.6 million, 8.54 million and 9.3 million in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions. On the other hand, the per capital actual budget for the same fiscal year shows Birr 85, 52, 45 and 40 for sample woredas in Tigray, Amhara, Oromia and SNNP regions, respectively.

• The comparison of budget and actual revenue figures show that there is

limited knowledge of budget planning in all sample woredas. Besides, classification of revenue by sources is not known in most woredas. Hence, regional bureaus of finance should provide training and technical assistance in budget planning procedures & classification of revenues.

• In most sample woredas, staff knowledge about "Conditional transfers" is not

observed. Besides, loans and grants are unclassified or presented without knowing the donor. This situation shall be corrected by the regional BoFEDs to ensure better budgeting practices.

• Budget subsides (or unplanned end-of-year transfers) are found to be minimal in all regions showing only 1.37 % of the total actual revenue. Even then, Tigray region has used more subsidy procedures than other regions sharing 72.65% of all subsidy transfers. Oromia and SNNP have transferred 14.79 % and 12.76 % of all subsides while the Amhara region has not used such transfers. Recourse to subsidy shows a not-so-strong budget



.136.

forecast. Thus, the regional BoFEDs should give enough attention to their budget forecasting procedures to avoid subsidies.

• Total capital budget allocated for all sample woredas was only 16.1% of the

total budget revenue. The mean value of actual capital budget shows Birr 1.3 million for samples in all regions. Besides, the per capita mean values for sample Woredas shows Birr 15.53, 9.67, 9.64 and 4.81 for Tigray, SNNP, Amhara, and Oromia regions. During the survey, it was observed in sample woredas of Oromia & SNNP the use of community contribution as part of capital investment actual budgets. Amhara & Tigray are not practicing this funding modality. Hence, woreda administrations should be encouraged more and more to use community contributions for capital investments.

• Revenue secured from international donors was also assessed though not

included in the actual budget revenue. Thus, an additional total fund amounting to Birr 84.8 million was transferred by international donors to the survey target woredas. Of these non-food security transfers constituted 60.5 million or 71.3% with most of it going to reconstruction of war affected areas in Tigray - Gulomakeda receiving 54 million and Laelay adiyabo taking 1.5 million. With regard to transfer for food security from international donors, the mean value for the sample woredas show Birr 1.6 million, 1.4 million and 0.3 million in Amhara, Tigray, and SNNP regions respectively. All sample woredas of Oromia have not received any transfer from donors

• The salary expense portion of all target woredas shows Birr 130.6 million or

69.1% of their total budget Revenue. The calculated average expense on employees of all sample woredas in a given month of the year thus shows Birr 614.5 for salary per employee and Birr 131 per employee for any other expense excluding capital investments. Inter-regional comparisons show that the regions having limited transfers for non-salary expenditure are Oromia and the SNNP Regions with 29.6 and 39.4 percent of transfers for non-salary budget, respectively. Tigray and Amhara regions are relatively better in enabling their woredas for a better service delivery by transferring 63% and 49.9% of the total budget for non-salary expenses. This fact shows that most of the budget revenue in almost all woredas goes to salaries and the need for other necessary expenses (fuel, stationery, electricity, perdiem, etc) cannot be covered with such a meagre resource. Hence, considering all the facts, the minimal portion of non-salary transfers is one of the main problems that need to be tackled if we are to better the service delivery capacity of woredas.



.137.

• Tax collection is one of the key indicators of self-sufficiency and fiscal autonomy of the woreda as an entity. In this regard, the mean value of actual tax collection for all surveyed woredas shows Birr 1,671,609 whereas the Total shows Birr 38.4 million or 20.3% of their total Revenue. The structure of tax collection is skewed towards Employees' income tax and land tax contributing 60.9% of the total tax in all regions. The share of business profit tax leaves much to be desired with figures even lower than Employees' income tax and contributing solely 18.63% of the tax collected in all regions. The situation with agricultural tax is also similar to that of profit tax with contributions to the total tax of the sample woredas in the four regions by only 13.63%. Hence, the woredas should not only strive to improve their tax collection effort but also need to balance their tax structure.

• Service charges and fees are not only important sources of income for the

woredas but also an indicator of service delivery coverage and levels. These being the facts, most potentially collectible service fee categories are not existent in the majority of the surveyed sample woredas and collected fees constituted 2.1% of the total revenue of all woredas. Hence, most of the fees collected by the sample woredas originated from penalties amounting to Birr 962,441 (or 24%) and unclassified or other fees amounting to 2,597,178 (or 65%) thus sharing 89% of the total fees collected by the same. The analysis of the structure and composition of collected fees in all woredas of all regions shows among other things the gap in services delivery and a potential to introduce more of these fees. This is true for all woredas regardless of their food security status since there is no meaningful statistical correlation between level of fee collection and food security status. The woredas having minimal collection level can work towards increasing their collection effort thereby securing more income for their local government.

• The average income secured from commercial activities by the sample woredas in the four regions amounts only to Birr 35,784.70. Yet, for such an average, the revenue from assets sales has contributed with 22,803 Birr and the share of other typically commercial activities such as property or equipment renting were minimal with a contribution of Birr 8,600.62. Again, there appears to be an open choice for the local government of woredas to engage in beneficial income generating activities such as property renting.

• With regard to expenditure, the results show a mean value of Birr 7.97 million

actual expenditure for all the 23 surveyed woredas. The average of the sample woredas for expenditure varies from region to region. The largest average



.138.

figure was reported by the SNNP sample woredas with Birr 9.08 million while the lowest average figure belonged to woredas in Oromia region with Birr 6.29 million. The sample woredas in Tigray and Amhara regions show a slightly higher than the average mean values for actual expenditure showing Birr 8.46 million and Birr 8.1 million of actual expenditure. The structure of expenditures shows that spending in education is invariably of higher proportions in the total budgeted and actual expenditures of all sample woredas with a share of 37%. However, the mean actual expenditure on agriculture was only 18% of the total expenditure in the sample woredas for all regions. Whether this share of agriculture can ensure the success of ADLI as a strategy is a dubious issue and we recommend all regions to evaluate the structure of woreda expenditure vis-à-vis major government policies.

• With regard to institutional assessment of financial management practices,

the survey shows that most (91.3%) of the sample woredas in all regions have already formulated strategic plans and that these plans are linked to budget allocation in 87% of the woredas. In fact, this situation seems one of the outcomes of the ongoing civil service reform program of the government. The newly introduced double-entry accounting system is being used by 65% of the sample woredas whereas ICT support for accounting tasks is observed in only 26% of the cases though limited to using excel spreadsheets. Besides, asset depreciation practices are reported by 26% of the samples while most woredas (65.2%) are reconciling fiscal and bank records on regular basis. Regular preparation of standardized audit reports is found in 50%, 33%, 60% and 67% of the sample woredas for Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. Besides, external audits have also been preformed in 83%, 50%, 60% and 50% of the samples woredas of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. All in all, the survey found a weak compliance to auditing standards and unchanged "single entry" accounting procedures requiring immediate attention if fiscal decentralization is to be implemented efficiently.

• The effort to assign TIN to taxpayer in each sample woreda was evaluated and

the results show that in all regions most of the sample woredas have assigned a reasonable number of TINs with 3755 total assigned TINs up to April 1997 E.C. Showing a mean value of 198 TINs per woreda. The plans up to year 2000 E.C. shows a total of 5994 with a mean value of 261 TINs to be assigned in each woreda. The survey has also revealed that there is a very weak initiative to increase the tax/fee base and the level of taxation. For the sample woredas in all regions it was found that 60 % of them with no previously initiative of assessing current tax or fee systems and the potential of payers. In this



.139.

regard, the worst cases have been found in both Amhara and Oromia regions sample woredas with 83% of them reporting no initiative at all to assess tax/fee potential of payers. In the surveyed woredas we have found that paying taxes takes only as average 15 to 25 minutes which is a good performance by any standard. Thus, is it recommended to all regions to introduce a tax/fee review system that will help the woredas to gain more own revenues through tax/fee income.

• In relation to Human Resources, the survey has shown a mean value of total

staff of 770 employees and a vacancy level of 131 or 17% of the job posts for all sample woredas. At the regional level the mean values for total staffing of woredas vary from 657 in Tigray to 878 employees in Amhara. The average values of total staffing for Oromia and SNNP sample woredas show 680 and 847 employees, respectively. Compliance of the sample woredas with principles and practices of modern management was evaluated during the survey and the results show a somewhat acceptable level of modern human resource management approaches. Issuing of Job description for all jobs is practiced in 65% of all surveyed woredas while issuance of performance indicators and regularity in performance appraisal of employees is dissimilar across the regions. To remedy the irregularities observed, the Regional Civil Service Offices and BoFEDs should assist the woredas to develop guidelines for consistent human resource management.

• Administrative transparency related survey results show that public access to

most of the requested documents in all regions had shown a positive measure ranging from 52% for council agendas and audit reports to 96% for strategic plans. The region showing better public access was Amhara (81.1%) while the least public access was calculated for sample woredas of Tigray (47.5%). The sample woredas of Oromia and SNNP regions show values that are close to the average of all sample woredas (69.9%) with mean values of 79% and 71.9%, respectively. In this regard, we recommend all regions to press on the good results and encourage their woredas to be more transparent.

• For most services that were considered "Basic", the survey results show that

the involvement of woreda and municipal offices in all regions was found to be somehow satisfactory. The survey revealed that woredas and municipalities in the same jurisdiction were delivering together 57%, 39%, 49% and 42% of the "basic" services in the sample woredas of Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. This fact shows that woredas in both Tigray and Amhara regions have a lower level provision of basic services and should try to improve their situation. The impact of distributed inputs on increasing productivity



.140.

and thereby the income of farmers was mostly positive while the impact assessment of inputs on plant disease is low in all cases with only 20%, 33%, 0% and 50% of the sample woredas agreeing in such impact in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively.

• Agricultural service delivery was the sample service selected to be covered in

detail by the survey. In this regard, the survey results show average land use of 22.73, 37.8, 56.9 and 33.3 thousand hectares for the sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. These figures reveal that the sample woredas in Tigray are having a greater level of land use for agriculture and the woredas in SNNP region are having the least level of land use compared to the other regions. Besides, the survey results also show mean values of 45, 24, 54 and 89 total development agents per woreda in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The average number of DAs per woreda being 53, we found that both the Amhara and Oromia regions are using by far a lesser number of DAs in their respective sample woredas.

• On the other hand, one of the most important agricultural services expected

from the woreda is the distribution of agricultural inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides, farm tools, etc. The results show that the mean values of distributed inputs to farmers were Birr 1.1 million, 1.89 million, 3.8 million and 363 339 for sample woredas in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. As appreciated from these figures the SNNP sample woredas are found to be the less involved ones in agricultural input distribution when compared to the woredas in the other three regions. In contrast, the woredas in Tigray show a satisfactory level of service when it come to distributing input to farmers.



.141.

8.2 On Municipalities The total population in the surveyed 17 municipalities was 1,169,751 whereas the land size covered by the target municipalities is 255 Km2. The mean population size for all municipalities shows 68,809 with a mean land size of 15 Km2 yielding an average population density of 4590 persons per Km2. With regard to the grade of municipalities, the survey shows that 4 of the 17 surveyed municipalities or 23.6% are Grade I, 3 (or 17.6%) are Grade II, 7 (or 41.2%) are Grade III and the remaining 3 or (17.6%) are Grade IV towns as categorized by their respective regions. Unlike woredas, municipalities generate their financial income from two sources: "block grants" transferred by their respective regions to cover for state functions; and own revenues resulting from local service fees and charges. The practice of state functions by municipalities is a recent phenomenon resulting from reforms introduced by regional governments of the surveyed municipalities. The above remarks being a general outline, the major conclusion drawn on the performance of municipalities and our recommendations are as follows:

• The municipal system under which budgets are prepared and reviewed is not standardized. In the absence of formal guidelines for budget preparation and approval, there is wide variation in practice, even across municipalities in the same region. The process through which budgets are prepared has different starting points (the revenue side vs. the expenditure side), involves the municipal departments and mayor/council members at different stages, and relies on various levels of public review. In addition, different levels of regional administration review and approve budgets in different cases. On the other hand, recent legislations released by the reforming towns are limited mostly to resolving boundary issues without providing a consistent mechanism that ensures revenue autonomy, budgeting procedures, expenditure management modalities. Hence, if the municipalities are to be catalyzed as service delivery agents then a comprehensive legislation shall be formulated.

• With regard to actual revenue of the target municipalities, the survey revealed

that they have secured a total of 222.9 million Birr with an average of 13.11 million Birr per municipality. In absolute terms, the larger share of budget was secured by the municipalities in the Oromia with 108.59 million while the smaller revenue share was taken by the municipalities in SNNP Region with 12.17 million Birr. The highest actual revenue figure of Oromia municipalities is due to an allocation (in 1997 E.F.Y) of Birr 50 million for urgent internal road and other constructions in Adama town. Intensive infrastructure construction was required in Adama because it was designated the seat of the



.142.

Regional council of Ormia in 1996 E.F.Y. This is also reflected in the fact that Adama is the municipality that shows the highest absolute revenue of all sample municipalities. In contrast, among the surveyed municipalities the minimum actual budget was observed in Woreta municipality of Amhara region with Birr 443,196.

• The mean per capita actual revenue for all the regions was found to be Birr

190.6. The largest mean per capita budget revenue was observed in municipalities of the Oromia region with Birr 278.9 and the least or Birr 87.8 was observed in municipalities of SNNP Region. The per capita mean values for actual budget revenue of Amhara and Tigray regions show Birr 125.3 and 202.7, respectively.

• Block grant from the respective region to the surveyed municipalities is a

major source of budgeted revenue constituting 55.3% of the total. Budget transfers from the regions to municipalities are mainly intended to be used for the newly introduced state functions. Unlike the case of woredas, subsidies are not observed in the municipalities.

• The share of own revenues generated through tax and service fees collection is

an important budget component for all municipalities. In this regard, own revenues of municipalities not only accounted for 44.7% of total revenues but also show a mean value of Birr 5.86 million compared to 7.24 million that is contributed by block grant. In absolute terms, the regions having the largest average portion of own revenue figure in the total actual revenue was Tigray with Birr 8.2 million and is followed by Oromia region with Birr 6.8 million. Municipalities in Amhara and SNNP regions show average own revenues amounting to Birr 5.4 million and 2.5 million. In relative terms, the share of own revenue in the total revenue of municipalities show 81.15%,72.11%, 47.80% and 24.94% for SNNP, Tigray, Amhara and Oromia.

• The survey revealed that only two municipalities, namely, Bahir Dar and

Ambo had a loan/grant portion in their budgeted revenue which added up to Birr 203,784 or 0.22% of the total for all regions. This fact shows that most sample municipalities are not being assisted by donor grants or loans.

• The total capital budget allocated for all the surveyed municipalities was Birr

93,321,028 or 42.86% of the actual budget revenue. Of the total Actual capital budget of all municipalities, Birr 38.5 million or 41.3% was allocated as capital budget for municipal functions while the major portion amounting to Birr 54.8 million was the actual capital budget of state functions. (The above



.143.

figure is inflated by the elsewhere mentioned transfer of 50 million Birr from the regional Government of Oromia to Adama municipality.) The survey also revealed that for the sample municipalities the mean per capita budget for capital investment was higher in Oromia region with Birr 184.7, followed by Amhara and Tigray regions each with Birr 33.96 and 30.4, respectively. The region showing the least per capita budget for municipal capital investment was the SNNP with Birr 4.43.

• With regard to funds transferred from international donors and NGOs for food

security and other purposes, only five of the municipalities have received some funding from these sources. Thus, an additional total fund of 4.05 million Birr was transferred to the target municipalities by International Donors and NGOs. In relative terms, this amount constitutes only about 1.82% of the total revenue of all sample municipalities. This fact shows that urban areas are not benefiting from international transfers as much as the woredas.

• The mean value of actual tax collection for all surveyed municipalities shows

Birr 3.8 million whereas the total shows Birr 65.3 million. In line with this, inter-region comparison of sample municipalities show that the average tax collected by target municipalities in Tigray shows the relatively higher figure of Birr 5,099,791 followed by Amhara region municipalities collecting Birr 4,589,906 as average. Oromia region is third with average tax collections for its municipalities amounting to Birr 3,969,071 and the municipalities in the SNNP show the least tax collection of all having the average of Birr 1,402,953.

• Total service charges and fees for all municipalities amounted to Birr 34.3

million or 15.4% of their total revenue. The highest contribution in the total fee collected by all sample municipalities is made by building plan approvals amounting to Birr 11.3 million or 32.9% and is followed by Market fees and livestock dues contributing with 3.6 million or 10.5% of the total. The other high income figure from fees is observed in slaughter house service charges showing a total for all municipalities of Birr 3.1 million or 9%. Altogether the above three services of municipalities are accounting for over 50% of the collected fees. On the other hand, most potentially collectible service fee categories are not existent or their performance is found to be low in the majority of the surveyed sample municipalities. The analysis of the structure and composition of collected fees in all municipalities of all regions shows among other things the gap in services delivery and a potential to introduce more of these fees. The municipalities having minimal collection level can work towards increasing their collection effort thereby securing more income for their local government. The municipalities that are not



.144.

providing some of the services can also try to introduce the services so that their income from service charges and fees is increased.

• Income secured from commercial activities by the sample municipalities in all

regions reaches a total of Birr 8.8 million. The largest contribution to this total income comes from asset sales with a share of 3.9 million or 43% of the total. Property rental also plays an important role in the income of municipalities contributing Birr 2.8 million or 32% of the total. Equipment rental is reported by all municipalities in Amhara and some in Oromia and Tigray regions. However, the level of income generated from this activity is minimal showing only a total of Birr 303, 015 or 3.4%. Income from municipality owned companies and enterprises is reported only by Bahir Dar in Amhara and Ambo in Oromia and the income figures show Birr 950,946 and 697,674, respectively. With most of municipalities reporting no income from own businesses, we can conclude that the level of "commercialization" of the municipal activities is considerably low. We recommend municipalities to expand the commercial activity especially property rental income to achieve higher levels of own revenue thus ensuring self-sufficiency.

• The total municipal function expenditure for all the sample municipalities

shows Birr 71.3 million and the mean value of the same show 4.1 million per municipality. Variations in budget and actual expenditure are observed in all regions. And the actual to budget ratio for all shows 63.7%. The highest municipal expenditure is observed in Adama municipality of Oromia with Birr 27 million while the lowest figure is reported by Lalibela municipality in Amhara region with Birr 293,109. Most municipal expenditure is related to local road construction and administrative expenses. The share of municipal expenditure for these two activities in the mean value of municipalities reaches Birr 25 million or 68% of the total. The expense level of electricity and street lighting comes third with a share of 7.96% while expenditures in drainage and markets have shares of 3.77% and 3.09% of the total, respectively.

• The state function expenditure of municipalities includes expenses related to

education, health, administration, etc. The total expenditure of municipalities in all regions for state functions amount to Birr 150 million whereas the mean value shows Birr 8.8 million. Inter -regional comparisons of mean values show that municipalities in Oromia had the highest figure for state function expenditure with Birr 18.8 million as average. The second highest figure was observed for municipalities in Tigray with average of Birr 8.1 million. While the samples for the Amhara region had an average of 6.9



.145.

million for state function expenditures. The lowest mean values are reported by the municipalities of the SNNP region with Birr 1.7 million. The share of education in the total expenditure of all municipalities was 39.5%. The second highest expenditure goes to "unclassified" or other expenses sharing 38.8% mainly due to the inflated figure of Adama municipality. Expenditure in health and administration show 11.8% and 9% of the total expenditure of all municipalities, respectively. As expected, expenditures in agriculture represent only 0.47% of the total.

• Municipalities, unlike woredas, use their own ad hoc accounting system that

shows elements of "Double-entry" accounting and also the Government style "Single Entry" system called voucher system. Lack of chart of accounts is also observed in most municipalities. On the other hand, the Government effort to introduce "Double-entry" accounting was mostly focused on woredas excluding the municipalities. For instance, municipality finance people have not participated in the "Double-entry" accounting system training conducted for municipality people. Besides, computer assisted accounting has been found really low for sample municipalities in Amhara, Oromia and Tigray with 0%, 25% and 40% of their respective sample municipalities. In contrast, all the sample municipalities in the SNNP region reported ICT support for accounting tasks. In all cases, the use of tailor made municipal accounting software or other off-the shelf accounting software is not observed. We recommend that a standard double-entry system is put in place for municipal functions and the modified double-entry government accounting system for state functions. Furthermore, off-the-shelf softwares such as peachtree for municipal functions and BIS for state functions can be introduced to computerize the accounting function.

• The survey results show that in all regions most of the sample municipalities

have assigned a reasonable number of TINs. However, Tigray and Amhara municipalities categorized with lower grades have reported zero TIN assignment. All in all, in absolute terms the 17 surveyed municipalities have issued a total of 27,546 TIN numbers up to April, 2005. The region found to be in the forefront is Amhara with the average per sample municipality reaching 3,783 TINs assigned to taxpayers. The plans for 2000 (E.C.) show a 315% increase in TIN assignment over the actual figures of April 1997 (E.C.).

• The survey has also revealed that there is a somewhat acceptable level of

initiative to increase the tax/fee base and the level of taxation. For the sample municipalities in all regions it was found that 59% of them are having previously experience assessing current tax or fee systems and the potential of



.146.

payers. In this regard, the best cases have been found in both Amhara and Tigray regions sample municipalities with 75% and 60% of the sample municipalities reporting some previous initiative to assess tax/fee potential of payers. Similarly, conducting studies on new possible taxes was performed only by 50%, 100% and 40% of the sample municipalities in Amhara, Oromia and Tigray regions, respectively. In contrast to these regions, all the samples in the SNNP stated they had not performed any study to assess new tax types. The survey results show that paying taxes in the sample municipalities takes in the range of 18 to 55 minutes which can be judged as good performance. The highest time for paying taxes is reported by Dilla with 120 Minutes while the lowest is seen in Lalibela Municipality of Amhara with 5 Minutes.

• As far as human resources are concerned, the survey results show a mean

value of total staff of 645 employees and a vacancy level of 85 or 13% job posts for all sample municipalities. At the regional level, the mean values for total staffing of municipalities vary from 815 in Amhara to 264 employees in SNNP. The average values of total staffing for Oromia and Tigray sample municipalities show 752 and 729 employees, respectively. The mean value of vacancy in all sample municipalities in relative terms was 13% of the total approved job positions with Oromia sample municipalities showing the highest figure of 22% of vacancy as average. The mean values of the other regions were 13%, 15% and 4% for SNNP, Amhara and Tigray, respectively. The compliance of the sample municipalities with principles and practice of modern management were found to be somewhat acceptable. The issuing of Job description for all jobs is practiced in 71% of all sample municipalities with Amhara and Tigray sample municipalities falling below this average with 50% and 60% of their sample municipalities using job descriptions. Oromia and SNNP sample municipalities reported higher values and show averages of 75% and 100%, respectively.

• The appraisal of public access to important documentation such as budgets,

annual reports, strategic plan, tax assessment, decision taken by the council shows a somewhat positive measure ranging from 41% for council agendas and audit reports to 82% for strategic plans. The region showing better public access was Oromia (81.1%) while the least public access was calculated for sample municipalities of Tigray (45%). The sample municipalities of Amhara and SNNP regions show values that are close to the average of all sample municipalities (58.4%) with averages of 50% and 59.3%, respectively. It is very interesting to note that the average of all municipalities is inferior to that of the woredas, i.e., 58.4% against 69.9% for the sample woredas. The pattern of transparency in both municipalities and woredas is surprisingly similar when



.147.

we see the lower figures associated with audit reports and the higher figures for strategic plans. On the other hand, the overall average of the sample municipalities in all regions revealed that there is a reasonable level of community consultation by showing a mean value of 80.33% of municipalities practicing community consultations.

• The involvement of municipalities and their respective woredas in the delivery

of most services that were considered "basic" was found to be satisfactory. Woredas and municipalities in the same jurisdiction are delivering together 57%, 61%, 61% and 63% of the "basic" services in the samples for Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. Moreover, of the fifteen measured "basic" services, the municipal offices (without the woredas) were delivering as average 40%, 45%, 44% and 50% of the "Basic" services in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. Survey results related to evaluation of the quality of rendered services show encouraging results. Asking citizens about quality of service is common in all municipalities of Amhara, Oromia and Tigray while 75% of the SNNP sample municipalities are also doing the same. The regularity of services quality assessment was also satisfactory showing an overall average of 76% of the sample municipalities. The publishing of service performance results is a very common practice in the sample municipalities of all surveyed regions.

• Solid waste disposal service delivery was the sample municipal service type

selected to be covered in detail by the survey. In this regard, the survey results show that all the surveyed municipalities are making use of 27 vehicles for solid waste collection services with a mean value for a municipality showing 1.6 vehicles. Inter-regional comparisons in absolute terms show that Tigray municipalities have a total of 13 vehicles, followed by both Amhara and Oromia with 6 vehicles and the least of all being reported from municipalities in the SNNP with only 2 vehicles. The age of the vehicles under use by the municipalities ranges from 2 years in Wukro to 30 years in Dilla with an average age of 8.9 years of service.

• Although the smaller towns such as Woreta in Amhara and Durame in SNNP have no solid waste information, the data from the other municipalities show a total volume of solid waste reaching 108036 m3 with a mean value for all showing 6355 m3 of solid waste per annum. Solid waste recycling is performed by only three municipalities, namely, Ambo, Woliso and Dilla. The population coverage of solid waste service figures show that Tigray region municipalities have excellent level of coverage with 54% as a mean value and the worst



.148.

coverage figures are reported by Oromia municipalities having only a coverage of 18% of the population.

• The staffing of the solid waste function is one of the important measurements of how efficiently the municipality is performing this activity. In this regard, the survey results show mean values of 31, 30, 25 and 17 total staff per municipality in Amhara, Oromia, Tigray and SNNP regions, respectively. The average cost of salaries for solid waste functions varies from region to region with the highest cost figure being reported by Amhara region municipalities with Birr 76,383 while the lowest average figure is calculated for municipalities in the SNNP region with 23,136. Oromia and Tigray regions show in between average cost of salaries with Birr 74,312 and 37,562, respectively. With regard to frequency of solid waste collection the most favoured collection frequency is "at-least-once-a-week" by 65% of all surveyed municipalities while the average for "Less-than-once-a-week" is reported by 18% of them. A smaller number of municipalities in Amhara and Tigray reported about their preference to collect solid waste as the need arises resulting in 12% average for all.



.149.

AAAnnnnnneeexxx III::: BBBiiibbbllliiiooogggrrraaappphhhyyy

1. Ethiopia Participatory Poverty Assessment 2004-05, PPA Manual, Nov. 2004.

2. Ethiopia: Fiduciary Assessment, Final Draft Report, MoFED/DfID, Feb. 2005

3. Ethiopia: Issues in state transformation: Decentralization, delivery, and democracy; An Institutional Governance Review (IGR) Concept Note, The World Bank, 2004

4. Ethiopia-Country Financial Accountability Assessment, Vol I - Main Report, World Bank, June 2003.

5. Ethiopia-Regionalization Study, World Bank, June 2000.

6. FDRE Central statistical Authority's, Statistical Abstract, 2004

7. FDRE: Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, Annual Progress Report, IMF, Feb. 2004.

8. Hood, C. (1998): The Art of the State. Culture, Rhetoric and Public Management. Oxford: Oxford University Press

9. Jostein Askim, Benchmarking in Local Government Service Delivery: Window-Dressing Or a Potent Driver For Improvement?, Institutt for statsvitenskap Universitetet i Oslo, Norway, 2004

10. March, J.G. and J.P. Olsen (1976): Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.

11. OECD: “International Benchmarking Experiences in the OECD Countries”. Paper presented at Conference in Copenhagen, February, 1997.

12. Performance Benchmarking in the Public Sector: The United Kingdom Experience, Jeremy Cowper and Dr. Martin Samuels, Next Steps Team, Office of Public Services Cabinet Office, United Kingdom, 2004

13. Pollitt, C. and G. Bouckaert (2000): Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press

14. PSCAP - Monitoring and Evaluation Document, Ministry of Capacity Building, June 2004.

15. PSCAP - Project Appraisal Document, World Bank, March 2004.

16. Sabine Kuhlmann, Benchmarking and Performance Measurement in German Local Governments, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Paper presented at the Round Table in Oslo, may 2003.

17. Scott W.R. (1992): Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. pp. 353-358; and Wilson, JQ. (1989): Bureaucracy. New York: Basic Books.

18. Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction Program (SDPRP) Document, MoFED, 2003.

19. The European Union Benchmarking Experience: Euphoria or Fatigue?. European Integration online papers. Vol. 8. No. 5. By Michael Zangle, 2004

20. The Republic of Uganda, Country Integrated Fiduciary Assessment 2004 (In Five Volumes) Volume V: Local Government Integrated Fiduciary Assessment (LGIFA), The World Bank, 2000-

21. Republic of Benin: first decentralized city management project. Implementation report, The World Bank, Country Department, Africa Region, March 30, 2005



.150.

AAAnnnnnneeexxx IIIIII::: LLLiiisssttt ooofff CCCooonnntttaaacccttteeeddd PPPeeerrrsssooonnnsss iiinnn WWWooorrreeedddaaasss aaannnddd MMMuuunnniiiccciiipppaaallliiitttiiieeesss

Woreda/

Municipality

Name

Position

Telephone No. Werede Municipality head 753158 Rama Tikabo Woreda administration 753169 Haile Abera Mayor 03117648 Mersele Temesegen Finance and budget head 03117654 Getachew Kidane Budget Office head 03118631 Embete Abebe Accountant 03117654 Abebe Arega Pool coordinator 03116127 Mulat agegn C.B.O head 03115594

Dessie

Asgede Feleke C.B.O Inspector 03113786 Amsalu Desalenge Mayor 364462 Yeneneshe Abera Expert 364462 Gelena Nugera Head 364462 Maide Tadese Revenue 362628 Benya Tadese Administration 364201

Ambo

Yenesa kebeta Expert 362628 Ambaye DCPs, head 08204665 Molla Kebede Policy Dep't head 08201356 Tilahun Budget, head 08204666 Essey kebede Revenue, head 08294666 Desalgne Simshaw Budget Off. 08200941 Wondesa Bekeno Human Resource 08203377 Getu Public Relations 08209119 Shiky Nur Statistics and paying head 082000913 Hassen Husseen financial, head 08203377 Yekoye Workie accountant 08202621 Ashagre Ayana city Administration 08207342 Yeshinshinaysew Yiheyis Plan Expert 08206124

Bahir Dar

Tadesse Kebede City services head 08206124 Teshome Mursa Administrator 07270042 Getent Tolosa Accountant 07 270090

Welde Yohannes Expert 07270009 Genet Deselny Expert 07270009

Cheliya

Zeleke Talemerg Expert 07270009 Banti Ago Woreda Administrator 07270090 Olana Aga Agriculture Expert 770007 Tamiru Tesso Tax collector 770006 Teferi Getahun Property and Management head 770006

Boji

Gemachu Kitila Education and Capacity building head

770008

Mesfin Tadese Head FED 09739886 Adera Tefera Expert 05121120 Wendeye Tadese Head 09739977 Kefele Debebe Expert 09739977

Kurfa Chele

Sinteyu Asefa Expert 09739977 Derebe Chokele Planning expert Mohamed Ahmed Accountant Gezachew Hirpho Head Debebe Haile Head

Goba Koricha

Belay Dnfeera Head

No telephone



.151.

Woreda/ Municipality

Name

Position

Telephone No.

Mikel Smed Expert Mitku Beyene Administration andFinance 07412661 Alemu Tekle Planning and programming dept 07412661 Birhanu Demissie Finance head 07411859 Yodit Yemane Finance expert 07411859 Esubalew Alemu Revenue Expert 07411859

Metu

Kebebush Abebe Finance follow up Expert 07412661 Getacho Numara Dept. head 0911073643 Mulugeta Gemeda Property and Management Expert 0911073643 Derejie Tadese Agriculture Dep't head 0911073643

Guduru

Buze Wakebeka Public relation head 0911073643 Meaza Tadle Budget and Planning head 430021 Atakelte Agriculture plan program 430020 Gebre Tsegay head of agriculture head 430020 Berhan Berhe Accountant 430020 Zekariase Kiras capacity Building Expert 430001/430320 Iyasu Goshu Woreda Administration 430063 Girmay G/egzabre Finance income Expert 430021 Saba Alemayehu Finance - Accountant 430021 Akelil Gebremedhin Finance Office representative 430021 Alemeseged Finance and Economic head 480070 Beleye Agriculture 480021 Belaye capacity Building 480053

Kelete Awlalo

Getachew Administration Office Antenhe Finance and Economic dev' head 753783 Tsegazab Plan Agriculture Office 753650 Kirose Administrator

Laelay Adiyabo

Abraha Capacity Building Girmay Kahasay Finance and Eco, dep't Expert 4112910 Genete Gamenya Plan and budget Expert 412910 Mesgena W/silasie Woreda Administrator 406704 Berhane Tsegaye Capacity Building 407144/406704 Haylay Berhane Agriculture Sector head 410285 Kestela Extension team leader 410285

Atsbi Wemberta

Atakeltie Huluf Public Information 417144 Gadebo Debisa Assistant Administrator Matta Maldya Finance and Economic dev't Yenenehe Gizaw Planning Lemma Mude Public relation

Kucha

Berhanu Onkie Planning Alem Abraham Co-ordinate of Agriculture Kibrom Fesemaye Revenue Dep't head Goltema S/selasie Finance head

Gulomakda

Negusue k/Maria yam Plan and budget head

No telephone

Debo Tunka manager 129004/254292 ( Abera Abare MoFED Manger Yadeta Mekasa Public Relation 112097 Wake Dessse human resource 111811 Kumssa Kufa Revenue dep't office 129001 Aman Capacity Building

Adama

Bayessa Geleta Plan Dep't 112003 Michael Abrham Mayor 04 430327 Wedemenhe Girma Capacity Building 04430087 Kiddeya Abrha Human Resource head 04430087

Wukro

Hiwot Abay 04040338/39



.152.


Name

Position

Telephone No.

Haptu Planning Budget 04430338/39 Getu Meskele Head 560063 Zelalem Mulate Planand Budgeting Dep't head 560865 Melaw Hawaz Melese Aragaw Finance Hamza Shemelse Pr

Alaba Kulito

Ayano Somenonume Mayor 560854 Bisrat G/ cherkos Finance head 712096 Birhane Negash Exp, Accountant 711232 Belay G/Medhin Revenue head 711232 Haftu Municipal head 711520 Alganesh Reta Capacity Building head

Adwa

Abaya Mereid Governer Geezey Werku Expert 01412064 Atelech Tadele Expert 014107060 Mekonene Gedesa Accountant Alemu Regassa Kentiba

Weliso

Tefera Cedele Expert Berhanu Kasse Municipality head 08460026 Merew Alemu Accountant Woreta

Alemush Cashier Wudajo Dealegne Social Service 03360016 Berhanu Golla Budget head 03360016 Mesay Belay Municipal Administration 03360086 Mulugeta G/mariam Administration 03360006

Lalibela

Tamralech Demeke Social Service officer 03360016 Gemechu Boru Mayor 07612076 Chimdessa Merga team leader 07613367/09810044 Tadese Amente Manager of the municipality 07613351 Dagne Asefa Finance head 07615489 Taea Ayana Finance expert 07613368 Bekele sori Finance and Eco, head 07615470 Tamrat Biratu pool Admin and Finance

Nekemte

Asefa Kebede Land management head 07612005 Arega Tsegie Mayor 06251076 AlemayehuAbraham Infrastructure Office 06251226 Endris Fulassa Municipality 06250014 Markos Galo Finance head 06251077 Tadle Shoni Infrastructure 06251081

Yirgalem

WendafrashW/Giorgise Rep. of finance 06251077 Tefera kebede Mayor 06310567 Yergalem Tska CBO head 06310103 Getahun Bogale Agriculture Office 06310613 Asrat Telahun Treasuries 06310107 Akius Mekuria Municipal head 06312668

Dilla

Demss Assregdew Person administration 06310571 matewose Oreshiso Mayor 540136 Bogale Bankiso Finance head 06540458 Alemu Tembiso Municipal manger 06540420 Abraham Abiebo Woreda Tech,distr, head 06540022 Ermias head of revenue 06540458

Durame

Temesgen Tessema Personnel 06540136 Kidu Hailezegi Mayor 740460 Alamata

Asefa Alemayehu Finance and Economical dev/prepare



.153.


Name

Position

Telephone No.

Teka Mengesha Woreda Administrator Public Information

740460

Hiwot Tadele Accountant 740025 Hailu Tadege Capacity Building head 740120 Asefa Teferi Civil service representatives 740120 Abraha Desta Municipal Manger 740232 Redae Gedion 740806 Belay Mersha Woreda Administrator 03310432 Mesfin Ambachew Team Leader 03312077 Belaynehe Worku HRM 03312572 Zerihun Shiferaw Finance 03312583 Tibebu Bezabhi General Account 03310713

Weldia

Getahun Sisay Project Study Expert 03310713 Hailu Tunia Administrator 06320539 Shiferaw Roba Head Administrator 06320537 Mekete Tamen Rural Device 06320547 Abebe Hailu Rural dev't Dep’t 06320236 Admasu Guyi Administration Service 06320654 Tsegaie Pertros Plan and Budget 06320061

Yirgacheffe

Alemayhu Senbta Rep, f Revenue 06320538 Adola alyte Administrator 06812052 Kust Weyo Public relation 06811796 Rhal sira Revenue office 06812365 Worku Ayenew Budget Expert 06812365 Sisay Wolde Planning 06812365 Musse Gezhephe 06812365

Konso

Gasse Galdo Agriculture Desk 06812365 Madafrot Worku Woreda Administrator 09115659 Tadese Beyene Head Revenue 09115659 Mebratu Pawlose Finance and Economic 09115659

Basketo

Damtew Bezabehe Economic and Finance Assistants 09110656 Mekonnen Desta Administrator head 06540414 Berhanu Larebo Rep of finance 06540061 Shawel Bekele Plan and Budget 06540061 Gemeda Kabiso Rep of Infrastructure 06540010 Yohannes Lalieso Crop Production team Leader 06540022

Kedida Gamila

Abrham Aboebo Crop production and distribution 06540022 Alemu Tekiase Woreda Administrator 03330049 Getachew Hassen Budgetary 03330035 Habru

Ibraim Hassen Budgetary 03330035 Berhanu Solomon Woreda Council 06260021 Sunara Comey Woreda Deputy Council 06263300 Matiyas Semago Payment head 06260334/260048 Tshaye Asefa Revenue Expert 06260334/260048 Mekedese Tadese Accounts Payable 06260334/260048 Bekele Yunburn Audit Inspector 06260334/260048 Fekadu Tekeda Natural Resources Dep't head 06260226 Genete Kebede Rural Dep't Payment Section 06260226

Shebedino

Asefa Planand budget Team 06260226 Kelkay Tsegaye Finance head 0919015152 Asmare Mekonnen Revenue dep't head 09260226 Aynaddis Molla Head administrator 0919015152 Atalaye Kebrete Assistant public relation 0919015152 Abebe Yehyise Plan head 0919015152

Sekela

Simegnew Negash Plan program Officer Head 0919015152



.154.


Name

Position

Telephone No.

Kefeyalew Mengistie Civil Service Expert 0919015152 Zelalem Yifru Information center 0919015152 Molla Worke Accountant 0919015152 Gashaw and Ualem Personnel 0919015152 Bezengaw Debas Plan and Program 0919015152 Desalgne Kase Planand program Expert 0919015152 Yilma Eshetu Woreda Administrator 09715950 Mesfin Dayna Finance 09715950 Tilahun Awoko Agriculture Desk 09715950

Kutaber

Mohamed Human resource 09715950 Abrham Muche Assistant head 08460064 Askal Girmay Plan and Program Head 085460048 Zewdu Nahnsenay Press and Information 084660117 Chalachew Belay Public Relation 08460125 Melkamu Jember Plan and Project head 08460651 Getamehone Delle Civil Service Inspector 08460651 Esubalew Yohannes Revenue 08460042 Zenebe Alem Plan Dev't Expenditure) 08460042 Yetemegn Finance Officer 084600459 Kibret Mohammed Capacity Building 08460049/459

Fogera

Sintayehu Ayal Assistant Administrator 08460106/037 Wondmagene Wodajo Woreda administrator 03400005 Hailu Misawll Finance Civil 03400003 Hailu Demissie Civil service 03400188 Birhanu Fantaye Plan and Program Dep't head 03400136 Ayelign Sisay Water and Crop development 0340009 Shibabaw Temesgen Inputs Dep't head 03400134

Sekota

Daniel W/ Girorgiese F.Sand D.P head 03400134 Abebe asrat Town Finance and Econmic Dev't offi

(budget expert) 406839

Mekelle Solomon G/her Town Municipality (Planning and

Programming Expert) 415128



.155.

AAANNNNNNEEEXXX IIIIIIIII::: LLLiiisssttt ooofff UUUrrrbbbaaannn CCCeeennnttteeerrrsss SSSeeellleeecccttteeeddd fffooorrr UUUrrrbbbaaannn MMMaaannnaaagggeeemmmeeennnttt

RRReeefffooorrrmmm PPPrrrooogggrrraaammm iiinnn ttthhheee fffooouuurrr MMMaaajjjooorrr RRReeegggiiiooonnnsss

No. Amhara Tigray Oromia SNNPR

1 Bahir Dar Mekelle Adama Awassa

2 Gonder Adigrat Bishoftu Arbaminch

3 Dessie Axum Jimma Sodo

4 Kombolcha Endessilassie Shashemene Dilla

5 Weldia Alamata Chiro Hosana

6 Debreberhan Adwa Robe Yirgalem

7 Kemissie Maychew Yabello Butagira

8 Finoteselam Korem Negelle Sewla

9 Sekota Wukro Asela Welkite

10 Debretabor Humera Aweday AlabaKulito

11 Enjibara Sheraro Fiche Boditi

12 DebreMarkos Abiy Adi Sebeta Jinka

13 Holeta Areka

14 Sendafa Yirgachefe

15 Nekemte AletaWendo

16 Gimbi Bonga

17 Metu Mizan/Aman

18 Ambo Teppi

19 Weliso Durame

20 Dukem

21 Burayu

Documents

Woreda-City Government Benchmarking Survey Draft Reportsiteresources.worldbank.org/.../Resources/benchmarking_report.pdf · GTZ - German Technical Cooperation "Woreda-City Government