a survey on public service delivery

A Survey on Public Service Delivery I

A Survey on

Public ServiceDelivery

A Survey on Public Service DeliveryII

Chapter I

Report : A Survey on Public Service Delivery

Research Consultant : Mr. Raghav Bista {Project Research and Engineering Associates (PRENA)}

Published : Kathmandu, November, 2015 Publisher : Transparency International - Nepal (TI Nepal) Chhakkubakku Marga, New Baneshwor Kathmandu, Nepal Phone: 977-1-4475062, 4475112 Email: [email protected] Website: www.tinepal.org FB/Twitter: tinepal Hotline: 1660 01 22211

Support : Royal Norwegian Embassy, Kathmandu, Nepal

Copyright : Transparency International - Nepal (A National Chapter accredited by Transparency International) All Rights Reserved.

ISBN : 978-9937-9068-0-7

The views and opinions expressed in the report do not necessarily correspond with those of Transparency International - Nepal

A Survey on Public Service Delivery III

Preface

Public service delivery has always been a matter of concern for government, service provider and service seeker. This report maps the experiences and perceptions of service seekers in 14 public service delivery institutions that were surveyed and collected in nine districts (Siraha, Rautahat, Dolakha, Bhaktapur, Baglung, Butwal, Banke, Dang and Darchula) where TI Nepal has its outreach programs.

The survey on public service delivery, with its statistical and graphical presentation, displays grievances of respondents related to corruption. It also discloses monetary and non-monetary means of corruption and bribery in providing public services. The survey supports the findings of TI Global Corruption Barometer 2013 about the increasing trend

of corruption in Nepal. It provides a baseline to policy makers to develop anti-corruption approaches and to introduce effective mechanisms in public service delivery.

We express our thanks to the research team of Project Research and Engineering Associates (PRENA) led by Mr. Raghav Bista. Additionally, we thank TI Nepal Affiliated Organisations based in the nine districts for their assistance during field work. Finally, our gratitude to the Royal Norwegian Embassy for funding this survey.

Bharat Bahadur ThapaPresident

A Survey on Public Service DeliveryIV

Chapter I

A Survey on Public Service Delivery V

Table of Contents

Preface III

List of Tables VI

List of Figures VII

Abbreviations and Acronyms VIII

Chapters Page No.Chapter 1: Introduction 1-4 1.1 Background and Context 1

1.2 Objectives 2

1.3 Scope of Study 2

1.4 Methodology 2

Chapter 2: Baseline Findings: Experiences on Service Delivery 5-13 2.1 Socio-Economy of Households 5

2.2 Experiences on Service Delivery 6

2.3 Unofficial Dealings and Extra Money 9

2.4 Direct Contact and Third Party Involvement 10

2.5 Work Incompletion on Service Delivery 12

Chapter 3: Baseline Findings: Perceptions on Service Delivery 15-20 3.1 Knowledge of Work Process 15

3.2 Information of Work Process 15

3.3 Reading of Citizen’s Charter 16

3.4 Effectiveness of Citizen’s Charter 17

3.5 Satisfaction Level on Service Delivery 18

3.6 Corruption Practices and Magnitude 19

Chapter 4: Conclusions and Recommendations 21

Appendix 23-31 Survey Questionnaire 23-28

Questionnaire (English Translation) 29-31

A Survey on Public Service DeliveryVI

Chapter I

List of Tables

S.N. Tables Page

Table 1 Age Distribution of Respondents 5

Table 2 Work Completion Status Time 7

Table 3 Work Completed in Expected Time by Gender 8

Table 4 Reasons for Completion of Work by Service Providers 9

Table 5 Extra Money Paid for Completion of Work on Time 9

Table 6 Extra Money Paid for Completion of Work by Gender 9

Table 7 Payment of Extra Money for Completion of Work 10

Table 8 Payment of Extra Money by Disaggregated Gender Distribution 10

Table 9 Third Party Involvement in Service Delivery 11

Table 10 Reasons for Incompletion of Work 12

Table 11 Impact of Work Incompletion Delays 12

Table 12 Complaint Status on Service Delivery 13

Table 13 Action Taken on Complaints on Service Delivery 13

Table 14 Work Process Information on Efficiency of Delivery of Services 15

Table 15 Work Process Information on Delivery of Services 15

Table 16 Information about Working Procedure on Service Delivery 16

Table 17 Citizen's Charter 16

Table 18 Careful Reading of Citizen's Charter 16

Table 19 Careful Reading of Citizen's Charter by Gender 17

Table 20 Work Completed after Reading of Citizen's Charter 17

Table 21 Effectiveness of Citizen's Charter 17

Table 22 Service Delivery as per People's Need/Expectations 18

Table 23 Satisfaction Level of People of Services 18

Table 24 Satisfaction Level of Staff Behavior on Service Delivery 19

Table 25 Reasons for Corruption by Gender 20

Table 26 Corruption Score Difference between Males and Females 20

A Survey on Public Service Delivery VII

List of Figures

Figure No Description Page

Figure 1 Office Visited by Respondents 6

Figure 2 Work Completion Status 7

Figure 3 Work Completed on Expected time 8

Figure 4 No Direct Contact with Officials on Service Delivery 11

Figure 5 Nature of Corruption in Offices 19

Figure 6 Corruption Level in the Districts 20

Figure 7 Corruption Range in the Districts 20

A Survey on Public Service DeliveryVIII

Chapter I

Abbreviations and Acronyms

ADB Asian Development Bank

AC Advisory Council

BS Bikram Sambat

CIAA Commission for the Investigation of the Abuse of Authority

CPI Corruption Perceptions Index

EC Executive Committee

ED Executive Director

GB General Body

GoN Government of Nepal

IA Integrity and Accountability

LGCDP Local Government Community Development Project

HH Households

MSC Management Sub-Committee

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

NGO Non-Governmental Organization

NPC National Planning Commission

NVC National Vigilance Center

OM Operational Manual

SG Secretary General

ToR Terms of Reference

TIN Transparency International Nepal

UNCAC United Nations Convention Against Corruption

WB World Bank

A Survey on Public Service Delivery 1

Corruption is a global phenomenon and a growing and vexing problem in Nepal. Over the last few years, incidents of corruption have received greater public attention. The media has vigorously exposed scams and corruption committed by higher authorities. Over the years, the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) reflected the worsening condition of Nepal in terms of transparency and accountability. In 2012, the Transparency International, CPI ranked Nepal 139 among 176 countries surveyed, with a score of 27 out of 100, making Nepal one of the most corrupt countries in South Asia. However, a slight improvement of CPI was observed in 2013 which scored 31 out of 100 and stood at 116 out of 177 countries. The CPI of Nepal in 2014 was in 29th rank, which was comparatively better among SAARC countries.

Transparency International Nepal (TIN) is a civil society organization registered at the District Administration Office, Kathmandu in 1996. TIN’s mission is for a corruption-free Nepal and working for anti-corruption movement.

TIN core values are:

n Transparencyn Accountabilityn Integrityn Couragen Justicen Solidarityn Democracyn Honour and Dignity

The main objective of TIN is to combat corruption in all its forms at the national and international level through advocacy, representation, networking, coalitions and awareness building, discourage abuse of public authority for personal gain, and motivate movements, organizations, groups, communities for a proactive role against corruption. TIN working tools focuses on building systems that inhibit corruption. It works as a non-partisan, impartial and independent organization.

Rationale for Baseline Study

People require a host of services: legal, livelihood, development, family matters and seek to complete the task as far as possible on time. The necessary public services required by the people are the following;

n Citizenship certificate, Passportn Land registration, transfer, land survey and

managementn Drinking water supply and sewerage servicesn Telephone and electricity servicesn Forestry servicesn local development planning and projects in VDC,

DDC and Municipalitiesn Driving Licensen Vehicle tax payment, registration, transfer n Others

The existing mechanisms and systems of public service delivery provided by different offices vary because of the functions they perform and the areas they cover which has been mentioned in the Citizen’s Charter. But customers/clients face inordinate problems with delays, time consuming hurdles with document collection in different offices leads to corruption by officials on the delivery of services.

In this regard, the public are reluctant to directly approach officials, that is why they prefer middleman. The survey on service delivery is to identify the magnitude of service delivery in district offices, and to indicate the factors for corruption and status of service delivery. It is expected that this study will provide useful baseline information on public service delivery in selected government offices.

This baseline survey’s rationality is based on two aspects: a) experience of people towards public services provided by selected government offices and b) perception of people on service delivery. The first aspect, mentioned above is associated with the experience of people who have faced problems during their particular work completion in different line agencies. The second aspect, is associated with what people expected from service delivery and people’s attitude on good governance.

Introduction and Methodology1.1 Background and Context

Chapter 1

A Survey on Public Service Delivery2

Chapter I1.2 Objectives

The main objective of the baseline survey on public service delivery is to find out the baseline indicators of the service delivery system and to collate the perceptions of the customers/clients on service delivery with the result indicators to reduce corruption and recommend for good governance in service delivery.

The specific objectives of the study were as follows;

n to collect baseline data on perception and experience of the people on service delivery.

n to analyze the data and prepare baseline indicators of public service delivery

n to assess the results of the baseline survey and recommend measures on good governance for service delivery.

1.3 Scope of the Study

This baseline research was carried out in nine selected districts: Siraha, Dolakha, Bhaktapur, Rautahat, Rupandehi, Baglung, Banke, Dang and Darchula of Nepal. The survey was carried out in public service delivery offices of districts with service seekers and customers/clients. For this, the assistance of TIN Affiliated Organizations (AOs) based at the municipalities was necessary.

The purpose of this study is to access the general public’s concerns with public service delivery in the districts surveyed. The study also indicates whether public service delivery is improving vis-a-vis good governance. This study may also indicate the level of corruption in public service delivery in the government offices of districts surveyed. The findings of this study can be considered representative of the level of corruption at the national level. However, it cannot be generalized, due to the restricted sample size.

1.4 Methodology

The Baseline Survey of Public Service Delivery (Perceptions and Experiences) was based on the aforementioned scope of the study. The consultant’s task during the assignment was streamlined comprehensively to meet the objectives by covering the scope of study outlined on the Concept Note.

The methodology is outlined in the following sub-sections for the required tasks and activities. The study

was based exclusively on quantitative data from the baseline survey.

1.4.1 Sample Size

The sample size for the baseline survey was computed as follows;

Where Z = Value of standard normal distribution i.e. 1.96 for 95 % confidence level

p = proportion of service seekers or/and clients, approximately 50% (conservative assumption)

δ = Permissible error i.e. 0.05 (considered)

Where D is the Design Effect

Now, n = (1.96)2 (0.50) (1-0.50) (0.05)2

= 3.84 *0.50 *0.50 0.0025

= 0.96

0.0025

= 384.33

The estimated sample size after adjusting for the Design Effect was:

N = n*D= n *3,

After adjusting for Design Effect, the final sample size was: 384.33× 3 = 1153

While computing the sample size, there was no data available on the proportion of service seekers/clients for the districts surveyed. Therefore, the proportion p = 0.5 was taken conservatively, and was used to compute the sample size while the design effect is generally set as 2. This study sets the design effect as 3 in order to increase the sample size so that estimates are expected to be more precise due to a larger sample size.

The sample households in each district was allocated using Probability Proportion to Size Sampling (PPS) of the households distributed in the respective districts. The household sampling distribution is listed in the following table.

n = z2

p(1-p)

δ2

1-a/2


S.N. Districts District Code Sample Size

1 Siraha 16 148

2 Dolakha 22 100

3 Bhaktapur 26 100

4 Rautahat 32 134

5 Baglung 45 100

6 Rupandehi 49 206

7 Banke 57 119

8 Dang 56 146

9 Darchula 75 100

Total 1153

1.4.2 Sampling Methods

Multistage purposive sampling was applied to select the sample households in the sample districts. Under this sampling method, the following steps were adopted to select the samples:

Step 1: In each selected district the households were distributed 60% (in municipalities) and 40% (in VDCs) wherever applicable. However, in the district of Bhaktapur, all households were in the municipality, and in Darchula all households were in the VDCs.

Step 2: Allocate the sample number of households in the municipality and VDCs in each ward of the respective households.

Step 3: Select households at random in wards.

Sample size was distributed in the Municipality and VDCs as follows:

The Sample Size of Municipalities and VDCs

Districts Nagarpalika VDCs

Siraha Siraha Nagarplaika -88Harkapara -20Belaha -20Laxmania -20

Dolakha Bhimeshor NP -61Bhirkot -13Sailungeshor- 13Namgu -13

Bhaktapur All Nagarpalika -100

Rautahat Gaur NP -80Bairiya -18Sarautha - 18Mathiya -18

Baglung Baglung NP -61Tityang -13Malika -13Palakot -13

Rupandehi Sidharthanagar NP -124Bagaha -27Hatibangai -27Chilhiya -27

Banke Nepalgunj NP -71Indrapur-16Purini -16Bebhar -16

Dang Tulsipur NP -88Halwar -19Tarigaun -19Manpur -19

Darchula Khalanga -33Knate -33Khar -34

Translation of Questionnaire

The questionnaire was prepared in Nepali and was approved by TIN. The approved questionnaire was then translated into English. The Nepali questionnaire was used for the pre-test.

Pre-test of Questionnaire

The survey questionnaire was pre-tested at Lalitpur. After the pre-test was completed the consultant finalized the questionnaire, incorporating comments and corrections. The finalized questionnaire was used for the field survey.

Selection and Orientation of Surveyor and Supervisor

The surveyor and supervisor were selected from qualified and experienced candidates from both the local and other related field. The qualification of the surveyor was intermediate level education with experience in data collection. Supervisors needed a bachelor level education with experience in data collection and supervision. The selection of surveyors and supervisors were carried out with the help of NGOs working locally.

A two day orientation program was held in Lalitpur to provide comprehensive knowledge on the use of tables, software, and survey techniques. A practical exercise for the collection of data was also conducted during the orientation-training program. Resource personnel imparted professional training.

1.4.3 Data Collection

The data collection was carried out in the respective sample households in the VDCs. The interviews were personal interviews with respondents.

Monitoring and Supervision

Supervisors carried out monitoring and supervision of daily activities of data collection. The supervisors rechecked the data and information during the data collection period. The survey team members and supervisors met and discussed the validity of the information from the field on a daily basis, wherever possible. If some information was found to be doubtful, then the survey team member was sent to the field again.


Chapter IThe team members also visited each of the sample areas during the data collection period and supervised and monitored the status and quality of data collection process.

1.4.4 Data Entry

Computer Software for Data Entry

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software was used for data entry and analysis of the data.

Data Analysis

The quality of the data entry was determined through verification of entered data in the questionnaire form

on the basis of sampling mistakes and errors in entry, if found, were corrected. The entered data was refined, and the data consistency, outliers, range, etc. were assessed for each variable through the use of SPSS.

Descriptive statistical measures such as range, percentage, etc. were computed to summarise the data. Diagrams and graphs were created so that readers can understand the information at a glance.


The baseline survey findings are drawn from the experiences and perceptions of respondents on service delivery with different line agencies on good governance and corruption. The baseline survey interviewed local residents who had experience in accessing services or getting work done at their local offices in the district. There were 14 offices that were usually visited by the public and these offices provided the necessary services. The study has developed baseline indicators on public service delivery by measuring the level of corruption and good governance.

2.1 Socio-Economy of Households

The survey was conducted in 9 districts covering 8 municipalities and 24 VDCs on a regional and ecological basis. The data was analyzed on various demographic, occupational and others parameters as follows.

2.1.1 Gender Distribution

There were three categories of distribution of gender namely: males, females and third gender among respondents. It is shown in the following figure.

Of the total respondents, approximately two-thirds were males 74.6%, 25.3% were females, and the remaining 0.1% were of the third gender.

2.1.2 Age Distribution

The age of the respondents ranged widely from below 40 years to more than 70 years. The age distribution of the respondents are given below;

Table 1: Age Distribution of Respondents

S.N. Age Group (years) Numbers Percentages

1 Less than 40 652 56.5

2 41-50 298 25.8

3 51-60 131 11.4

4 61-70 57 4.9

5 Above 70 15 1.3

Total 1153 100.00

Source: Field Survey, 2015

The age distribution of respondents shows that 56.5 percent of respondents are between 25-40 years. Whereas 25.8 percent of respondents falls between the ages of 41-50 years.

2.1.3 Educational Status of Households

The educational status of households can be considered as indicative of the level of awareness in public service delivery and good governance as well as corruption. The respondents’ education level was collected during the interview. The educational status of the respondents is given below;

The chart above shows that the percentage of respondents who were illiterate (cannot read or write) was 12%, whereas those who were literate were 36%, 27% of respondents had completed SLC, and 25% had

attended/completed higher education. This indicates that a substantial percentage of respondents are literate, and this percentage is significantly higher than the national average. The reason behind this might be that most of the respondents were from municipalities.

Baseline Findings: Experiences on Service Delivery2. Experiences on Service Delivery

Chapter 2


Chapter I

2.1.4 Occupation

The occupation of the respondents represents their income and economic status. The survey may have been biased as it was conducted mostly in municipalities. The occupation of respondents was categorized into five groups. The occupation of the respondents is shown below;

At 43%, agriculture was the major occupation of the respondents, followed by business at 34%. Only 4% of respondents were engaged in foreign employment. The respondents involvement in trade and business was higher due to them living in municipalities.

2.2 Experiences of Service Delivery

This baseline study draws on the experiences of respondents attempting to access services from government officials related to their work. The experiences of respondents indicated whether they completed the work, the duration of the work, whether they paid additional money required for the completion of work, whether there were involvement of third parties to complete the work, and what was the cost of the work not being completed on schedule, etc.

On the one hand, the respondents expected their work to be completed on time without hurdles and delays and on the other hand; they expected to receive speedy and effective services. However, there is a gap between service delivery and service access, which ultimately leads to corrupt practices in the name of quick services. The experience of the respondents have been assessed and analyzed with the baseline indicators in the following sections.

2.2.1 Offices Visited for Services

There were 14 offices often used where respondents went to access government services for their personal, social, family and economic needs, etc. The frequency of office visits is given below:

Figure 1: Offices Visited



The above bar chart shows that respondents visited the Municipality (46.7%), Land Revenue Office (45.5%), District Administrative Office (34.1%) Village Development Committee (29.4%) and Land Survey Office (18.5 %). Respondents were mainly involved with the Land Revenue Office, Municipality, District Administration Office, and Village Development Committee office.

2.2.2 Work Completion Rate of Public Service Delivery

Public services must be delivered according to the rules and regulations of a particular office. It was found that some service seekers had been able to complete their work while others were not able to complete their work. Work completion rate of the respondents is shown in figure 2.

Figure 2. Work Completion Rate

Field Survey, 2015

The work completion levels of different service delivery agencies indicated that the Municipality Offices had the highest completion levels with 95.7 %,the inland tax revenue followed with 95% followed by the Village Development Committee at 94.4%, District Administration Office at 92.6%, Land Reform Office at 92.2%, and the Land Revenue Office 87.6%. The study indicates that service providers had completed a minimum of 70% of work. The remaining was to be completed in due course.

2.2.3 Work Completion Time

The work completion time by line offices was taken as the time needed for necessary services to be provided. The service providing offices had different work completion timelines. The work completion timelines of different offices are shown in the following table:

Table 2: Work Completion Time (Days)


The table above shows the number of days needed (maximum and minimum) for goods and services provided by different offices in the districts. The minimum time required for completion of work was reported to be 1 day for all districts, whereas the maximum time could be as long as 90 days. The time needed for work from the Land Reform Office could be between 1 to 30 days, while the District Forest Offices had a work completion time of between 1 and 3 days.

In the judiciary, the time needed to complete work varied between 1 to 90 days. The longer time required for completion in the judiciary is due to legal complexities and duration of legal procedures.

2.2.4 Work Completion on Expected Time

The actual work completion time against expected work completion time is another indicator that has been analyzed to determine the efficiency of different service delivery offices. Information about work completion time against expected work completion time is given below:

SN Offices Minimum Maximum1 Land Revenue Office 1 302 Land Survey Office 1 203 Land Reform Office 1 304 District Administration Office 1 305 District Development Office 1 206 Municipality Office 1 307 Village Development Committee Office 1 258 District Education Office 1 309 District Agriculture Development Office 1 1510 District Forest Office 1 311 Transport Management Office 1 1012 Water Supply Corporation 1 3013 Revenue and Tax Office 1 514 Judiciary 1 90


Chapter IFigure 3: Work Completed on Expected Time


The above bar chart shows that work that was completed on time on the expectation of the respondents according to the timeframe was highest at the Inland Revenue Office. It had the shortest timeframe. The Municipality Office completed 92.6% of work within the expected timeframe. The District Forest Office and District Administration Office also had a high level of work completion on time as expected by the respondents. This result indicates that on average, work was completed at the expectation of the respondents. However, the judiciary had taken a longer time to complete the work on expected timelines. With only 70% of work completed when respondents thought it would be completed by that time. This reveals that 30% of respondents are adversely effected from work not being completed as expected.

Table 3: Work Completed on Expected Time by Gender (in Percentage)

Source: Field Survey

The work completed on expected time consists of respondents experiences of work completed in different offices. The work completion levels is analysed by disaggregating gender. This indicates that a majority of work completed was by males in all of the above offices. In the Water Supply Corporation females (44.3 %) were able to complete work on expected time. This indicates that females went to pay water supply bills and completed work on expected time.

2.2.5 Work Completion Behavior

Work completed provides services to respondents in a timely and effective manner. The study analyzed the reasons for completion of work on time. It indicates the most common reasons for completion of work on time:

SN Offices Males(%)

Females (%)

Total(%)

1 Land Revenue Office 349 (85.7) 58(14.3) 407 (88.5)

2 Land Survey Office 132(82.5) 28(17.5) 160(82.9)

3 Land Reform Office 21(80.8) 5 (19.2) 26(83.9)

4District Administration Office

285 (85.3) 49(14.7) 334(91.8)

5District Development Office

36(70.6) 15(29.4) 51(73.9)

6 Municipality Office 372(77.8) 106(22.2) 478(92.6

7Village Development Committee

204(70.6) 85(29.4) 289(90.3)

8 District Education Office 22(81.5) 5(18.5) 27(81.8)

9District Agriculture Development Committee

20(64.5) 11(35.5) 31(75.6)

10 District Forest Office 7(70) 3(30) 10(90.9)

11Transport Management Office

49(77.8) 14(22.2) 63(81.8)

12 Water supply Corporation 44(55.7) 35(44.3) 79(77.5)

13 Revenue and Tax Office 99(80.7) 21(19.3) 109(94.8)

14 Judiciary 17(81.0) 4(19.0) 21(70.0)


Table 4: Reasons for Completion of Work by Service Providers


The judiciary had the highest levels of unofficial payments (i.e. bribes) out of all the service providers. This is a clear indication of the level of corruption. In general, respondents were willing to pay a bribe than deal with the lengthy time needed for work completion. The Municipality Office, Agriculture Development Office, Inland Revenue Office and Water Supply Corporation Office had the highest work completion time. The work completed by personal contact was found to be the highest in the District Development Committee followed by the District Education Office and District Administration Office.

2.3 Unofficial Dealings and Extra Money

2.3.1 Payment of Extra Money

Respondents were asked whether they paid extra or an additional fee more than the amount due in order to complete work. The service providers, charge

both official and, occasionally, unofficial fees. Some respondents were willing to pay an extra amount to ensure that work is completed on time. The proportion of respondents who paid bribes and those who did not pay bribes are shown below:

Table 5: Extra Money Paid for Completion of Work on Time

SN Offices Yes No Total % Paid

1 Land Revenue Office 157 303 460 34.1

2 Land Survey Office 50 133 183 27.3

3 Land Reform Office 9 22 31 29.0

4 District Administration Office 30 334 364 8.2

5 District Development Committee 14 55 69 20.3

6 Municipality Office 21 495 516 4.1

7 Village Development Committee Office 28 292 320 8.8

8 District Education Office 2 31 33 6.1

9 District Agriculture Development Office 3 44 47 6.4

10 District Forest Office 2 10 12 16.7

11 Transport Management Office 19 54 73 26.0

12 Water supply Corporation 7 95 102 6.9

13 Revenue and Tax Office 11 104 115 9.6

14 Judiciary 4 26 30 13.3

Source: Field Survey 2015

The table above shows extra money paid on top of official fees to complete work on time. 34.1% of respondents paid bribes to the Land Revenue Office. This indicates that a high number of bribes were paid so as to ensure work completion on time. These offices dealt with to land/property purchase, sale, transfer of ownership, and management. The extra money paid for completion of work by gender is given below;

Table 6: Extra Money Paid for Completion of Work by Gender

Offices

Required documents

not provided on time

Due to Known People

Recomm endation

Assis-tance from staff

Money demanded

given (bribe)

Total

Land Revenue Office 192 66 13 70 119 460

Land Survey Office 87 59 7 11 19 183

Land Reform Office 17 7 1 2 4 31

District Administration Office

199 119 11 14 21 364

District Development Committee

18 32 12 3 4 69

Municipality Office 357 112 4 13 30 516

Village Development Committee

202 86 12 5 15 320

District Education Office

14 12 0 2 5 33

District Agriculture Development Office

31 10 2 2 2 47

District Forest Office 5 4 1 1 1 12

Transport Management Office

26 20 3 12 12 73

Water supply Corporation 67 15 4 2 14 102

Revenue and Tax Office 78 23 3 5 6 115

Judiciary 5 8 6 0 11 30

SN Offices Males % Females % Total %

1 Land Revenue Office 129 82.2 28 17.8 157 34.1

2 Land Survey Office 42 84 8 16 50 27.3

3 Land Reform Office 8 88.9 1 11.1 9 29.0

4 District Administration Office 28 93.3 2 6.7 30 8.2

5 District Development Committee 12 85.7 2 14.3 14 20.3

6 Municipality Office 16 76.2 5 23.8 21 4.1

7 Village Development Committee Office 18 64.3 10 35.7 28 8.8


Chapter I


The extra money paid for completion of work found that more than 60 percent of males paid money in different offices. Females also paid extra money in various offices, mainly the Water Supply Corporation and Transport Management Offices.

The additional fees were not a part of official remuneration for staff. Furthermore, all bribes were paid voluntarily allowing clients to offer the amount they were willing to pay. As such, the amount of extra money paid as a bribe varied within offices. The study indicates the amount of bribe paid led to completion of work on time below:

Table 7: Payment of Extra Money for Completion of Work

SN Offices Minimum (Rs)

Maximum (Rs.)

1 Land Revenue Office 100 25000

2 Land Survey Office 50 5000

3 Land Reform Office 100 15000

4 District Administration Office 50 8000

5 District Development Office 300 5000

6 Municipality Office 100 1000

7Village Development Committee Office 20 1000

8 District Education Office 500 1000

9District Agriculture Development Office 200 5000

10 District Forest Office 100 500

11 Transport Management Office 100 4000

12 Water supply Corporation 100 1000

13 Revenue and Tax Office 100 2000

14 Judiciary 100 10000

Source: Field Survey, 2015.

The payment of bribes for the completion of work in different offices has been outlined above. The survey

found that the amount of bribe amounts ranged from as low as Rs. 100 to a maximum of Rs. 25000. The Land Revenue Office, had the highest bribes reportedly paid out of all of the offices. The lowest bribe paid was in the Village Development Committee Office with bribes as low as Rs. 20. Disaggregated by males and females in the payment of extra money to offices for completion of work has been analysed. The payment of extra money by gender is given below:

Table 8: Payment of Extra Money Disaggregated by Gender


* One respondent only ** Two respondents

The experience of payment of extra money for completion of work by males is higher than females. Females are found to pay more than males to Village Development Committees, Transport Management Offices, Water supply Corporation. Females paid extra money for completion of work in these offices.

2.4 Direct Contact and Third Party Involvement

2.4.1 Contact with Officials on Service Delivery

While there should be direct contact between service providers and service seekers, this is often not the case. In order to ensure effective service delivery, the public

SN OfficesMean ±SD

Males Females

1 Land Revenue Office 876.56±2512.06 1160.34±1528.50

2 Land Survey Office 303.49± 752.33 121.43±39.34

3 Land Reform Office 2200±5181.0 300±0*

4 District Administration Office 948.15±1709.73 833.33±288.67

5 District Development Office 1425±1687.45 750±353.55**

6 Municipality Office 378.57±321.48 428.57±303.94

7 Village Development Committee Office 197.22±181.68 350±313.58

8 District Education Office 1000±0* 500±0*

9 District Agriculture Development Office 5000±0** 200±0*

10 District Forest Office 300±282.84**

11 Transport Management Office 1207.69±1068.06 1666.06±1329.16

12 Water supply Corporation 266.67±208.16 500±391.58

13 Revenue and Tax Office 522.22±578.31 600±141**

14 Judiciary 3900±4633.93 0

SN Offices Males % Females % Total %

8 District Education Office 1 50 1 50 2 6.1

9 District Agriculture Development Office 3 100 0 0 3 6.4

10 District Forest Office 0 0 2 100 2 16.7

11 Transport Management Office 12 63.2 7 36.8 19 26.0

12 Water supply Corporation 3 42.9 4 57.1 7 6.9

13 Revenue and Tax Office 9 81.8 2 18.2 11 9.6

14 Judiciary 3 75 1 25 4 13.3


needs to be able to contact officials with questions and concerns. The level of direct contact between service seekers and service providers is shown below:

Figure 4: No Direct Contact with Officials on Service Delivery

Source: Field Survey

The figure shows the percentage of respondents that had no direct contact with government officials. The Judiciary had the highest level of no direct contact between service seekers and service providers at 43.5%. The lowest level of no direct contact was in the Land Revenue Office with only 6.9% of service seekers not contacting officials. This means there is higher direct contact with officials in the Land Revenue Offices.

2.4.2 Third Party Involvement

In some cases, when contact with officials was not possible, third parties were involved to ensure that work was completed. Third party involvement was seen mostly in cases where there was no contact with officials. Although, there is no provision for third party involvement in service delivery, direct or indirect involvement by third party is listed below for different offices:

Table 9: Third Party Involvement in Service Delivery

SN Offices Middleman Friends Legalagents Others

1 Land Revenue Office 22 18 200 4

2 Land Survey Office 6 14 33 2

3 Land Reform Office 0 2 8 0

4 District Administration Office 13 22 31 2

5 District Development Office 3 5 11 0

6 Municipality Office 15 26 15 3

7 Village Development Committee Office 12 28 8 3

8 District Education Office 1 4 0 1

9 District Agriculture Development Office 3 9 4 2

10 District Forest Office 1 1 0 0

11 Transport Management Office 9 9 10 0


Chapter I


The involvement of third party agents was highest in the Land Revenue Offices. Legal agents involvement was also evident in Land Survey Offices, Land Reform Office, Judiciary, and Inland Revenue Office. A lack of awareness by service seekers and the lengthy legal processes were fertile grounds for third party involvement. Respondents preferred to use legal agents in order to facilititate direct contact with concerned officials. The involvement of middlemen was high in the District Forest Office. Similarly, friends often facilitated work in the District Education Office, Agriculture Development Office, Municipality Office, and VDCs.

2.5 Work Incompletion in Service Delivery

2.5.1 Reasons for Non-Completion of Work

Respondents expect services to be completed on time as completion is necessary to achieve social, economic, personal, family, and employment aspirations. There are a number of processes that must be undertaken for completion of services, such as submission of documents. Service delivery requires that all necessary documents and fees be paid for timely completion of work. The survey investigated the causes for late completion of work and the results are shown below:

Table 10: Reasons for Incompletion of Services


The table above shows the reasons for work that was not completed. In general, work was not completed due to deliberate delays by staff . Incomplete documentation causing delays was highest in the Land Reform and Agriculture Development Offices. Lack of money for payment of fees was highest in the District Development Committees and Inland Revenue Offices. Non payment of bribes was highest in the Judiciary followed by the Land Reform and Land Revenue Offices.

2.5.2 Costs of Incomplete Work

Incomplete work has a number of costs involved for service seekers, as it impacts on their social, economic, and personal lives. Incomplete work is a concern due to these costs. The areas of cost on service seekers have been analyzed below:

Table 11: Costs of Service Delays


The delays by the Inland Revenue Offices had the highest costs on households and family affairs, followed by the

SN Offices Household Affairs

Social Dealings

Finan-cies

No Impact












12 Water supply Corporation 10 2 3 0

13 Revenue and Tax Office 4 1 1 0

14 Judiciary 7 2 5 0

SN Offices Middleman Friends Legalagents Others








SN Offices

Inade-quate docu-ments

Lack of money to pay gover-nment fees

Delibe-rate

delays by staff

Demanded Money

(bribe) not given












Water Supply Office, District Development Committee, and Land Survey Office. The Municipality Office, Village Development Committee and Agriculture Development Office had the highest costs on social dealings and households affairs. While the impact of financial costs impact on service seekers were mostly in the District Education Office, District Forest Office, Land Reform Office, Judiciary and, Land Revenue Office.

2.5.3 Complaints against Incomplete Work

Respondents did their best to complete work from offices and were not interested to lodge complaints against officials. The baseline study indicates the status of complaints or no complaints for incompleted work . Most of the respondents had not complained about incompleted work. This indicates that complaints against officials and staff were not preferred by respondents. This deference to power has been evident from the very beginning and is one of the values for poor governance. The baseline study has also found that the highest complaints were against District Development Offices, Forest and Agriculture Development Offices, Municipality Offices is given in table below:

Table 12: Complaint Status on Service Delivery

SN OfficesYes No Don’t

KnowM F Total M F Total

1 Land Revenue Office 11 5 16 27 17 44 5

2 Land Survey Office 4 1 5 13 3 16 1

3 Land Reform Office 1 0 1 2 1 3 0

4 District Administration Office 4 2 6 12 7 19 2

5 District Development Office 3 0 3 1 0 1 2

6 Municipality Office 7 2 9 9 3 12 1

7 Village Development Committee Office 3 1 4 9 4 13 1

8 District Education Office 1 1 2 2 1 3 2

9 District Agriculture Development Office 0 0 0 7 1 8 0

10 District Forest Office 1 1 2 3 0 3 0

11 Transport Management Office 4 0 4 8 2 10 2

12 Water supply Corporation 5 1 6 7 1 8 1

13 Revenue and Tax Office 1 0 1 1 1 2 3

14 Judiciary 3 2 5 7 1 8 1


When line offices failed to complete work, individuals tried to complete their work without officials. The

baseline survey indicates whether respondents complained or had not complained about incomplete work. Most of the respondents chose not to complain about incomplete work This apathy has become part of our bureaucratic culture in this context. The highest numbers of complaints were recorded in the District Development Office, Forest and Agriculture Development Office, and Municipality Office.

Complaints against incompletion of work were lodged with the concerned authorities for action against officials and offices. The disaggregated complaints by males and females indicates that most of the complaints are registered by males.

2.5.4 Action Taken on Complaints

There are institutions that are meant to pursue complaints such as the CIAA, NVC, and District Administrative Offices. These authorities are able to take action against corruption, abuse of authority, malpractices, delays, bribes, non-responsive dealings, etc… The instances of actions or inactions are detailed below:

Table 13: Action Taken on Complaints on Delivery of Service

SN Offices Yes No Don't Know

1 Land Revenue Office 3 8 5

2 Land Survey Office 1 3 1

3 Land Reform Office 0 1 0

4 District Administration Office 1 3 2

5 District Development Office 1 0 2

6 Municipality Office 4 2 3

7 Village Development Committee Office 2 1 1

8 District Education Office 0 2 0

9 District Agriculture Development Office 0 0 0

10 District Forest Office 1 0 1

11 Transport Management Office 2 2 0

12 Water supply Corporation 3 1 2

13 Revenue and Tax Office 0 1 0

14 Judiciary 0 2 3


The table above shows that the Village Development Committee, Municipality Office, Water Supply Office and District Forest Office had the highest number of complaints. No action was taken against the Inland Revenue Office, District Education Office, and Land Reform Office.


Chapter I


People have perceptions on service delivery. They need and expect good governance, corruption-free and effective services from line agencies. The baseline survey has collected data on perceptions of the respondents on public service delivery, in order to assess levels of satisfaction and efficient delivery of services.

3.1 Knowledge on Work Process

The public has the right to information on administrative process from which they are seeking services. Presented below is the level of public information on administrative working processes.

Table 14: Work Process Information on Efficient Delivery of Services

SN Offices Yes % No %

1 Land Revenue Office 405 77.1 120 22.9

2 Land Survey Office 169 79.3 44 20.7

3 Land Reform Office 28 82.4 6 17.6

4 District Administration Office 342 87.0 51 13.0

5 District Development Office 54 62.8 32 37.2

6 Municipality Office 487 90.4 52 9.6

7 Village Development Committee Office 286 84.4 53 15.6

8 District Education Office 34 85.0 6 15.0

9 District Agriculture Development Office 39 69.6 17 30.4

10 District Forest Office 10 58.8 7 41.2

11 Transport Management Office 58 65.2 31 34.8

12 Water supply Corporation 94 80.3 23 19.7

13 Revenue and Tax Office 88 72.7 33 27.3

14 Judiciary 18 41.9 25 58.1


The table above shows that most respondents had adequate information of administrative processes. The respondents were also aware of specific departments in offices. Respondents had the highest level of information on the activities of Municipality Office with with 90.4%. The respondents had the least information on the procedures and processes of the District Judiciary Office

of 41.9%. The gender distribution of work process information on service delivery is as follows;

Table 15: Work Process Information on Delivery of Services

Offices Males % Females % Total

Land Revenue Office 341 84.2 64 15.8 405

Land Survey Office 141 83.4 28 16.6 169

Land Reform Office 24 85.7 4 14.3 28

District Administration Office 294 86 48 14 342

District Development Office 42 77.8 12 22.2 54

Municipality Office 374 76.8 113 23.2 487

Village Development Committee Office 209 73.1 77 26.9 286

District Education Office 29 85.3 5 14.7 34

District Agriculture Development Office 31 79.5 8 20.5 39

District Forest Office 7 70 3 30 10

Transport Management Office 51 87.9 7 12.1 58

Water supply Corporation 56 59.6 38 40.4 94

Revenue and Tax Office 74 84.1 14 15.9 88

Judiciary 16 88.9 2 11.1 18


A majority of male respondents had information on work process on service delivery of offices that provided services. Females had information of work process of the Water Supply Corporation and Village Development Committee. Females went to the Water Supply Office for payment of bills and had information about payment of bills and process.

3.2 Information on Work Process

Objectively respondents would have information on work processes of offices, departments and sections where services are assigned. Respondents without information were they to seek for a particular service would need to identify the particular office through various sources such as office staff, office notice boards, citizen’s charter, friends, and office middleman, etc.

Baseline Findings: Perceptions on Service Delivery3. Perceptions on Service Delivery

Chapter 3


Chapter ITable 16: Information about Working

Procedures of Service Delivery


This study reveals that most respondents got their information about departmental operations from friends. In the case of the Judiciary, a higher percentage of respondents used middle men to get information on work procedures. The District Education Office had the highest percentage of respondents who got their information on work procedures from notices or Citizen’s Charter. The Land Survey Office and Land Reform Office had the lowest dissemination of information about operations from staff.

3.3 Reading the Citizen’s Charter

According to the tools of good governance, the government is obliged to display the Citizen’s Charter of an office so that people can have access to information about the office (such as fees, concerned officials, services provided, etc…). The baseline survey data shows that almost all offices display the Citizen’s Charter within office premises. The baseline survey investigated whether the public was aware of the Citizen’s Charter, read the information, and work was performed in a manner directed by it.

Citizen’s Charter is placed in areas of the office where the public can see them. Literate respondents generally read the Citizen’s Charter, first and then proceeded with their work requests at offices. However, it is difficult for illiterate respondents to seek services without

reading the Citizen’s Charter. The survey asked whether respondents noticed the Citizen’s Charter. The results are shown below;

Table 17: Citizen’s Charter Seen















14 Judiciary 11 25.6 32 74.4


The table above shows that most respondents did not notice the Citizen’s Charter. The respondents was not aware of the Citizen’s Charter. The Citizen’s Charter was often placed in government offices for officials to follow government directives instead of providing assistance to service seekers. At the least a few number of respondents noticed the Citizen’s Charter in the District Judiciary Office, followed by the Inland Revenue Office, and Water Supply Office.

In general, the Citizen’s Charter was not read carefully. The percentage of respondents reading the Citizen’s Charter is shown in the following table:

Table 18: Careful Reading of the Citizen’s Charter

SN Offices Yes % No % Total

1 Land Revenue Office 214 40.8 311 59.2 525

2 Land Survey Office 119 55.9 94 44.1 213

3 Land Reform Office 11 32.4 23 67.6 34

4 District Administration Office 163 41.5 230 58.5 393

5 District Development Office 27 31.4 59 68.6 86

6 Municipality Office 225 41.7 314 58.3 539

7 Village Development Committee Office 107 31.6 232 68.4 339

8 District Education Office 17 42.5 23 57.5 40

SN Offices Through friends

Asking Staff

Reading Information

Through Middleman

Oth-ers

1 Land Revenue Office 47 41 20 9 3






7Village Development Committee Office

11 20 22 0

8 District Education Office 2 1 3


10 District Forest Office 1 6

11 Transport Management Office 15 8 8

12 Water supply Corporation 6 10 7

13 Revenue and Tax Office 9 21 3



SN Offices Yes % No % Total

9 District Agriculture Development Office 17 30.4 39 69.6 56

10 District Forest Office 5 29.4 12 70.6 17

11 Transport Management Office 31 34.8 58 65.2 89

12 Water supply Corporation 41 35.0 76 65.0 117

13 Revenue and Tax Office 40 33.1 81 66.9 121

14 Judiciary 8 18.6 35 81.4 43


The table indicates that most respondents did not read the Citizen’s Charter carefully even if they noticed the charter on office premises. The highest rates of careful reading of the Citizen’s Charter were found at the District Education Office at 42.5%, Municipality Office at 41.7 %, and District Administrative Office at 41.5 %. The distribution of careful reading of the Citizen’s Charter by gender is given below:

Table 19: Careful Reading of the Citizen's Charter by Gender

Offices Males % Females % Total

Land Revenue Office 183 85.5 31 14.5 214

Land Survey Office 98 82.4 21 17.6 119

Land Reform Office 10 90.9 1 9.1 11

District Administration Office 138 84.7 25 15.3 163

District Development Committee 22 81.5 5 18.5 27

Municipality Office 164 72.9 61 27.1 225

Village Development Committee 80 74.8 27 25.2 107

District Education Office 12 70.6 5 29.4 17

District Agriculture Development Office 15 88.2 2 11.8 17

District Forest Office 4 80.0 1 20.0 5

Transport Management Office 27 87.1 4 12.9 31

Water supply Corporation 25 61.0 16 39.0 41

Revenue and Tax Office 35 87.5 5 12.5 40

Judiciary 8 100.0 0 0.0 8


The above table indicates that most male respondents read the Citizen’s Charter carefully than females. Female respondents (39.0 %) carefully read the Citizen’s Charter in the Water Supply Corporation.

Those who read the Citizen’s Charter carefully were better able to prepare for service requests. The baseline study shows the impact of the Citizen’s Charter in offices. The work completion status after reading the Citizen’s Charter is shown below:

Table 20: Work Completed after Reading the Citizen’s Charter















14 Judiciary 1 12.5 7 87.5


The table above indicates that a higher percentage of respondents completed their work after reading the Citizen’s Charter in the District Education Office, Municipality Office, and District Administrative Office. The study also indicates that only a few offices effectively made use of the Citizen’s Charter.

3.4 Effectiveness of Citizen’s Charter

It is expected that by placing the Citizen’s Charter in visible places in offices would reduce the level of corruption. It provides the public with information about the working processes of departments. The effectiveness of the Citizen’s Charter is shown below;

Table 21: Effectiveness of Citizen Charter

SN Offices Highly Effective Effective Moderately

Effectiveless

EffectiveNot

Effective


2 Land Survey Office 9 35 53 23 93

3 Land Reform Office 2 3 8 1 20


9 150 41 60 133


Chapter I


Citizen’s Charter was found to be effective at the District Administration Office, Municipality Office, Water Supply Office, and Inland Revenue Office. The Citizen’s Charter was less effective at the District Education Office, District Forest Office and Judiciary. The respondents perceived that the Citizen’s Charter was not effective at the Transport Management Office, Land Reform Office, Land Survey Office, Land Revenue Office, and Judiciary.

The lack of awareness about the information that the Citizen’s Charter provides about service delivery means that respondents often relied on third party involvement. The effectiveness of the Citizen’s Charter was found not to discourage corruption.

3.5 Satisfaction Level of Service Delivery

This section examines the satisfaction of respondents on service delivery during visits to offices. The objective of service delivery is to satisfy clients/customers by providing services in a simple manner, in a small amount of time, and without any trouble. The baseline survey analyzed the level of satisfaction of respondents in service delivery.

Whether services were delivered by offices according to the needs of the respondents, or not, was examined. The results are shown below:

Table 22: Service Delivery as per Respondents’ Needs / Expectations










9 Agriculture Development Office 17 30.4 39 69.6



12 Water supply Office 41 35.0 76 65.0

13 Inland Revenue Office 60 49.6 61 50.4

14 Judiciary 21 48.8 22 51.2


The respondents perception to service delivery from different offices was negative. The service delivery mechanisms existing were not meeting the respondents demand on quality and effectiveness. Most of the respondents answered an emphatic “NO” indicating that service delivery had a low level of performance.

The table below indicates the level of satisfaction of respondents with public services provided by public offices is shown below:

Table 23: Level of Satisfaction by Respondents with Public Services

SN Offices Highly Effective Effective Moderately

Effectiveless

EffectiveNot

Effective


0 9 25 16 36

6 Municipality Office 25 187 168 46 113

7

Village Development Committee Office

26 56 96 71 90

8District Education Office

0 4 12 18 6

9


4 13 14 15 10

10 District Forest Office 0 0 8 6 3


0 21 16 11 41

12 Water supply Corporation 3 44 42 12 16

13 Revenue and Tax Office 4 43 37 13 24

14 Judiciary 0 4 13 9 17

SN Offices Highly Satisfied

Satis-fied

Moderately Satisfied

Littlesatisfaction

No satisfaction





0 66 205 40 82


0 16 51 9 10


7Village Development Committee

16 92 135 42 54


0 6 22 5 7

9


3 9 26 12 6



Satisfaction by respondents with public services were in the level of: highly satisfied, satisfied, moderately satisfied, little satisfaction and no satisfaction. Data presented in the table shows that, most of the respondents are moderately satisfied with services delivered by the different service delivery agencies. But in the case of Land Revenue office, Land Survey Office, Land Reform Office, Transport Management Office and the Judiciary, most of the service recipients were highly dissatisfied or not satisfied with the services. Again it can be pointed out from the data, not a single service recipient was highly satisfied with services provided by the District Administration Office, District Development Office, District Education Office, District Forest Office, Water Supply Corporation and the Judiciary.

The survey also found the level of satisfaction of respondents with officials and staff on service delivery. The results are shown below:

Table 24: Level of Satisfaction with Behavior of Staff on Service Delivery


The lowest levels of satisfaction with behavior of staff were found at the District Agriculture Development Office, Village Development Committee Office, Inland Revenue Office, and Land Survey Office. The Village Development Committee, Inland Revenue Office, Water Supply Office and District Agriculture Development Office had higher levels of respondent’s satisfaction. In general, the data suggests that respondents were satisfied with staff behavior on service delivery.

Respondents were not satisfied with behavior of staff at the Judiciary, Transport Management Office, Land Reform Office, and Land Revenue Office. In these offices the respondents had fewer occasions to interact with service delivery officials.

3.6 Corruption Practices and Magnitude

Respondents’ perception of the causes of corruption was also investigated. The nature of corruption in offices, ranges from petty to severe; with some officers creating hurdles and delays, in order to extort bribes to complete the work. The nature of corruption is detailed below:

Figure 5: Nature of Corruption in Offices

The figure shows the nature of corruption in offices where respondents usually paid money for completion of work. Respondents often paid bribes to officials for unwanted reasons for completion of work. A minimum level of corruption was stated as a necessity to perform requisite work.

The survey also concentrated on the major reasons for corruption as perceived by respondents in districts.


Satis-fied


Littlesatisfaction

No satisfaction



1 11 25 16 36



14 Judiciary 0 2 7 12 22


Satis-fied


little satisfaction

No satisfaction





0 52 208 42 91


0 10 43 17 16


7

Village Development Committee Office

12 76 141 59 51


0 5 24 4 7

9


3 10 26 11 6



0 8 20 22 39



14 Judiciary 0 2 11 8 22

Duly


Chapter IPerceptions such as: weak working modalities, political influence, social competition, poverty and illiteracy, and low awareness of corruption.

Table 25: Reasons for Corruption by Gender

SN Particulars Males % Females % Total

1 Government working Style 289 80.5 70 19.5 359

2 Political 118 64.5 65 35.5 183

3 Social Competition 41 70.7 17 29.3 58

4 Poverty and illiteracy 114 69.9 49 30.1 163

5 Low civic awareness 230 75.4 75 24.6 305

6 Others 75 88.2 10 11.8 85


The above table shows the main reasons for corruption disaggregated with gender perspective. The main reason for corruption was identified with weak administration. Males were highly identified the reasons of corruption with 80.5% whereas females were 19.5%. Lack of civic awareness was another main reason for corruption. Political influence was another reason which directly and indirectly increased corruption.

The level of corruption in district offices were also investigated by examining perceived changes in corruption levels (has corruption increased or decreased):

Figure 6: Corruption Level in Districts

The above figure shows that 42.9% of respondents stated that the level of corruption in districts had increased, While 27.1% of respondents believed that corruption had stayed the same.

Similarly, respondents were asked to range corruption ranking to assess corruption profile. The range obtained

in the districts, comprises the level of corruption rank which are given below:

Figure 7: Corruption Range in the Districts

Respondents were asked to rank the level of corruption in the districts. About 25.9% of respondents ranked the highest percentage (81-100 %) of corruption in the districts.. The majority of respondents about 43.5%, ranked (41-60 %) level corruption in the districts.

Table 26: Corruption Score Differences between Males and Females at District Level

Mean ±SD

Males FemalesMean

Differencep-value

65.29±24.38 61.50±20.04 3.78 0.009

The corruption score was rated significantly higher (p = 0.009) by male respondents (65.29±24.38) as compared to female respondents (61.50±20.04) indicating that males assigned a higher score for corruption in the districts than females.


The baseline survey investigated the level of corruption in public service delivery by gauging the perception of respondents. The survey was conducted in 9 districts incorporating both municipalities and Village Development Committees. Respondents who visited offices in their district for services were interviewed. The survey provided an overview of public services that were affected most by corruption.

There were 14 offices in 9 districts that provided public services. The highest percentage of respondents visited the Municipality Office and Land Revenue Office, while the lowest number of visits were to the District Forest Office. The work completion status showed that the Inland Revenue Office, VDC Office and Municipality Office had higher levels of work completion. There was high variation (between 1 and 90 days) for work to be completed at district Judiciary Offices.

Extra money paid for completion of work, was comparatively higher at the Land Revenue Office (Rs. 100 to Rs. 25,000), Land Reform Office (Rs. 100 to Rs. 15,000), and Judiciary (Rs.100 to Rs. 10,000). The experience of service delivery with no direct contact with officials was highest at Land Revenue Office. Similarly, third party involvement in service delivery was higher at the Land Revenue Office, Land Reform Office, and District Judicial Office.

Failure to provide services on time affected respondents social, livelihood, and household affairs. The impact on household affairs, was highest at the Land Survey Office, Water Supply Office, and District Administration Office. The Municipality Office and VDC Office had the highest impact on respondents social lives. The Land Reform Office, Municipality Office, and District Forest Office had the greatest impact on the respondents’s economic

lives. The DDC, District Forest Office and Municipality offices had the highest number of complaints.

Respondent’s information on work process in offices was found to be higher at the Water Supply Office and the VDC Office as compared to other offices. The Citizen’s Charter was found in the premises of every public office that provided information. Respondent’s ability to carefully read the Citizen’s Charter was found to be higher at the District Education Office, District Administration Office, and Municipality Office as compared with other offices. The effectiveness of the Citizen’s Charter was higher in the District Administration Office, Water Supply Office, Inland Revenue Office, and Municipality. The level of satisfaction of respondents with service delivery was found to be higher at the Inland Revenue Office, District Forest Office, and VDC. The weak administration of the government was perceived to be one of the main causes of corruption in district offices.

In conclusion, the impact of incomplete work, delays, and the long period required for work affected the livelihoods of respondents. In order to ensure that work is completed in a timely manner, service seekers were often forced to pay bribes. Many cases of malpractice in offices were reported. The research suggests that offices related to property: Land Revenue Office, Land Survey Office, and Land Reform Office) have the highest under-the-table dealings necessary for work to be completed on time. The perception of respondents on governance and public service delivery was in line with the experience they faced in trying to get work completed. Furthermore, corruption is perceived to be increasing and service delivery mechanisms have not been improving. Awareness of service delivery mechanisms and Citizen’s Charters are very low which affects respondents demand to improve governance.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Chapter 4


Chapter I


Questionnaire code

District Code Area Code

6«fG;k/]G;L OG6/g]zgn g]kfn;fjf{hlgs ;]jf k|jfx;DaGwL cWoog, @)&!

;]jfu|fxL ;e]{If0f k|ZgfjnL

gd:sf/ .

6«fG;k/]G;L OG6/g]zgn g]kfn tkfO{+nfO{ xflb{s :jfut ub{5 .

g]kfnsf ;]jfk|bfos lgsfox?df e|i6frf/sf] k|s[lt, xb / cjwf/0ff l:ylt olsg ug{ 6«fG;k/]G;L OG6/g]zgn g]kfnn]

lhNnf:t/df of] cfwf/e"t ;j]{If0f ul//x]sf] 5 . o;} ;Gbe{df xfdL oxfF;Fu ljut ! jif{df ;fj{hlgs ;]jf lng] ;DaGwdf 5f]6f]

jftf{nfk ug{ rfxG5f}F . jftf{sf] nflu !% b]lv @) ldg]6 ;do nfUg]5 . oxfFn] lbg'ePsf] ;"rgf s]jn cg';Gwfg k|of]hgsf

nflu pkof]u ul/g]5 .

efu sM ;fj{hlgs ;]jf;DaGwL cg'ej

!= ljut ! jif{df tn pNn]lvt sfof{nox?af6 ;fj{hlgs -;/sf/L_ ;]jf lng'ePsf] lyof] . -lrGx nufpg]_

l;=g+= ;]jf lbg] sfof{nox¿ ;]jf 5f]6s/Ldf ;]jf sf]8 g+=

s= dfnkf]t sfof{no dfkf]

v= gfkL sfof{no gfkL

u= e"ld;'wf/ sfof{no e"ld

3= lhNnf k|zf;g sfof{no lhk|

ª= lhNnf ljsf; ;ldltsf] sfof{no lhlj;

r= gu/kflnsfsf] sfof{no gkf

5= uflj;sf] sfof{no uflj;

h= lhNnf lzIff sfof{no lhlz

em= lhNnf s[lif ljsf; sfof{no s[lif

`= lhNnf jg sfof{no jg

6= oftfoft Joj:yf sfof{no oftf

7= vfg]kfgL sfof{no vfkf

8= /fh:j tyf s/ sfof{no /fh:j

9= Gofofno Gofo

Survey Questionnaire

appendIx


Chapter Il;=g+= sfdsf] ljj/0f

;]jf sf]8 g+= -a9Ldf # j6f dfq lng]_

dfkf] gfkL e"ld lhk| lhlj; gkf uflj; lhlz s[lif jg oftf vfkf /fh:j Gofo

@=!

tkfO{+sf] sfd pNn]lvt ;DalGwt sfof{noaf6 ;DkGg eof] jf sfd afFsL 5 <!= ;DkGg eof]@= sfd afFsL 5

olb ;DkGg eof] eg]

@=!=! slt ;do nfu]sf] lyof] -lbg_

@=!=@sfd ;dod} ;DkGg eof] ls ePg <!= eof]@= ePg

@=!=#

olb sfd ;dodf eof] eg] s;/L sfd k"/f x'g ;s]sf] xf] <!= cfjZos sfuhft ;dod} k'u]sf] x'Fbf@= lrghfg eP/#= s;}n] egL lbP/ #= sd{rf/Ln] ;xof]u u/]/$= dfu]hlt k};f -3';_ lbP/

@=!=$;/sf/L b:t'/afx]s cGo /sd lbg'eof] ls ePg <!= lbP @= lbOg

@=!=% olb /sd lbg'ePsf eP, slt lbg'ePsf] lyof] <

@=!=^

tkfO{+n] sfdsf nflu sd{rf/L;Fu l;wf ;Dks{ ug'{ePsf] xf] <!= xf]@= xf]Og

@=!=&

olb xf]Og eg] tkfO{+sf] sfddf s;n] ;xof]u u/]sf] lyof] <!= ljrf}lnof@= ;fyLefO{ lrghfg#= n]vfk9L Joj;foL$= cGo

@=@ olb ;DkGg x'g ;s]g eg]

@=@=!

olb sfd x'g ;s]g eg] s'g sf/0fn] ubf{ sfd k"/f x'g g;s]sf] xf] <!= cfjZos sfuhft gk'u]sf] x'Fbf@= b:t'/ ltg]{ k};f geP/#= sd{rf/Ln] cfn6fn jf l9nf;':tL ubf{$= dfu] hlt k};f -3';_ glbP/

@=@=@

sfd ;DkGg x'g g;Sbf tkfO{+nfO{ s:tf] c;/ k/]sf] lyof] <!= 3/fo;L Jojxf/df@= ;fdflhs Jojxf/df#= cfly{s?kdf$= c;/ kb}{g

@=@=#

tkfO{+n] ef]Ug'k/]sf] ;d:ofsf lglDt st} ph'/–afh'/ ug{'ePsf] lyof] <!= lyof]@= lyPg#= yfxf 5}g

@=@=$

olb 5 eg] s'g ;+:yfdf ph'/L lbg'ePsf] lyof] <!= lhNnf k|zf;g sfof{no@= ;DalGwt sfof{no#= clVtof/ b'?kof]u cg';Gwfg cfof]u$= /fli6«o ;ts{tf s]Gb|%= 6«fG;k/]G;L OG6/g]zgn g]kfn


l;=g+= sfdsf] ljj/0f;]jf sf]8 g+= -a9Ldf # j6f dfq lng]_


@=@=%

olb ph'/L ug'{ePsf] lyPg eg] lsg gug'{ePsf] xf] <!= ph'/ ug]{ 7fpF yfxf geP/@= ph'/L ubf{ k'gM sfd ug{ c;lhnf] x'g]#= sf/afxL gx'g] 7fg]/

@=@=^

olb ph'/ ug'{ePsf] eP ,s] tkfO{+sf] ph'/L jf/] sf/jfxL eof] <!= eof]@= ePg#= yfxf 5}g

#= ;]jf;DaGwL ;r]tgf

#=!

tkfO{+nfO{ tkfO{sf] sfd s'g zfvf tyf kmfF6df uP/ ;DkGg x'G5 eGg] yfxf 5 <!= 5 @= 5}g

#=@

olb 5}g eg] tkfO{+n] s;/L hfgsf/L k|fKt ug'{eof] <!= ;fyLefO{dfkm{t\@= sd{rf/Lx?nfO{ ;f]w]/#= ;"rgf k9]/$= dWo:ystf{dfkm{t\%= cGo

#=#tkfO{+n] gful/s j8fkq x]g'{ePsf] 5 <!= 5 @= 5}g

#=$

tkfO{+n] o; sfof{non] k|bfg ug]{ ;]jf;DaGwL ;"rgf gful/s j8fkq Citizens Charter k9\g'ePsf] 5 <!= 5 @= 5}g

#=%

olb k9\g'ePsf] eP, cfjZos sfuhft agfPkZrft\ ;DalGwt zfvf tyf clwsf/Laf6 sfd k"/f ug'{ePsf] xf] <!= xf]@= xf]Og

efu @M ;]jf;DaGwL cjwf/0ff

l;=g+= sfdsf] ljj/0f;]jf sf]8 g+=


$=!

tkfO{+sf] ljrf/df sfof{noaf6 lbOPsf] ;]jf hgrfxfgfcg';f/ k|bfg ul/Psf] 5 jf 5}g <!= 5@= 5}g #= yfxf 5}g

$=@

tkfO{+sf] ljrf/df tkfO{+n] k|fKt ug'{ePsf] ;]jfdf sltsf] ;Gt'i6 x'g'x'G5 <!= clt ;Gt'i6@= ;Gtf]ifhgs#= l7s–l7s} $= s]xL dfqfdf ;Gtf]ifhgs%= c;Gt'i6


Chapter Il;=g+= sfdsf] ljj/0f

;]jf sf]8 g+=


$=#

tkfO{+sf] ljrf/df sfof{nosf sd{rf/Lx?n] ;]jfu|fxL;Fu sfdsf] l;nl;nfdf k|bfg ug]{ Jojxf/df sltsf] ;Gt'i6 x'g'x'G5 <!= clt ;Gt'i6@= ;Gtf]ifhgs#= l7s–l7s} $= s]xL dfqfdf ;Gtf]ifhgs%= c;Gt'i6

$=$

gful/s j8fkqaf6 sfof{nosf] sfd–sf/jfxLdf sltsf] k|efjsf/L x'G5 <!= clt k|efjsf/L@= k|efjsf/L#= l7s–l7s} $= s]xL xb;Dd k|efjsf/L%= s'g} k|efj gk/]sf]

$=% tkfO{+sf] ljrf/df ;]jfk|bfos sfof{nox¿df s:tf] k|s[ltsf] e|i6frf/ x'g] u/]sf] b]lvG5 <

ljj/0f sf]8 g++=

!= ;fwf/0f lrofkfg ug]{

@= cK7Øf/f] kf/L /sd lng]

#= sfd l56f] ul/lbG5' egL /sd lng]

$= sfd ldnfO{ lbPjfkt\

%= cGo =================

$=^ e|i6frf/sf] d'Vo sf/s s] xf]nf h:tf] nfU5 <

ljj/0f sf]8 g+=

!= ;/sf/sf] sfo{z}nL

@= /fhgLlts

#= ;fdflhs xf]8afhL

$= ul/aL tyf clzIff

%= gful/s ;r]tgfsf] sdL

^= cGo =================

$=& tkfO{+sf] ljrf/df oL lgsfox¿ s'g xb;Dd e|i6frf/af6 k|efljt /x]sf] 7fGg'x'G5 < pko'Qm c+s 5gf}6 ug'{xf]nf .

!= x'Fb} gePsf] @= sd e|i6 #= w]/} e|i6

$= k"/} e|i6 %= yfxf 5}g ^= eGg grfx]sf]

l;=g+= sfof{nox¿ sf]8 g+=

s dfnkf]t sfof{no

v gfkL sfof{no

u e"ld;'wf/ sfof{no

3= lhNnf k|zf;g sfof{no

ª= lhNnf ljsf; ;ldltsf] sfof{no

r gu/kflnsfsf] sfof{no


l;=g+= sfof{nox¿ sf]8 g+=

5 uflj;sf] sfof{no

h= lhNnf lzIff sfof{no

em= lhNnf s[lif ljsf; sfof{no

`= lhNnf jg sfof{no

6= oftfoft Joj:yf sfof{no

7= vfg]kfgL sfof{no

8= /fh:j tyf s/ sfof{no

9= Gofofno

%= tkfO{+sf] lhNnfdf ljut ! jif{df e|i6frf/sf] cj:yf s:tf] 5 <

ljj/0f sf]8 g+=

!= w]/} a9]sf] 5

@= yf]/} a9]sf] 5

#= p:t} 5

$= yf]/} 36]sf] 5

%= w]/} 36]sf] 5

^= yfxf 5}g

%=! e|i6frf/sf] dfqfsf] lx;fan] tkfO{+sf] lhNnfnfO{ slt c+s lbg'x'G5 <

!)) n] cToflws/ ) n] Go"g e|i6frf/ cj:yfnfO{ hgfpF5 .

s= cGtjf{tf{ lbg] JolQmsf] ;DaGwL sf]8 g++=

!=! gfdM ================================================================

!=@ 7]ufgf s= lhNnf ============================ v= uflj;÷gu/kflnsf ================================ u= j8f g+= ==========

!=# lnËM s= k'?if v= dlxnf u= t];|f] lnË

!=$ pd]/ jif{ ============= !=% 3/ kl/jf/ ;+Vof ===================

!=^ lzIff M =========== -!= lg/If/, @= ;fIf/, #= P;Pn;L, $= pRrlzIff_

!=& d'Vo k]zf========== -!= s[lif, @= Jofkf/, #= ;/sf/L / lghL gf]s/L, $= Hofnf dhb"/L, %= j}b]lzs /f]huf/L_

!=* kmf]g g+= ===================================

!=( cGtjf{tf{ lbg] JolQmsf] k|sf/ s_ 3/d'nL v_ cGo ;b:o

v= 3/w'/L;DaGwL

!=!) 3/kl/jf/sf] d'Vo cfDbfgLsf] ;|f]t =========================

!=!! 3/kl/jf/sf] dfl;s cfo ?= ==================================

!=!@ 3/kl/jf/sf] dfl;s vr{ ?= ===================================

!=!# 3/d'nLsf] lnËM s= k'¿if v= dlxnf u= t];|f] lnË

tkfO{+sf] cd"No ;dosf] nflu wGojfb .

;e]{o/sf] gfdM =================================== ;xL ldltM ========================================


Chapter Il6Kk0fL tyf ;'emfj


Part A: Experience on Public Service Delivery

Have you taken any service/s from public 1. (government) offices during the last one year ?

Public Service Delivery Offices:n Land Revenue Officen Land Survey Officen Land Reform Officen District Administration Officen District Development Committeen Municipalityn Village Development Committeen District Education Officen District Agricultural Development Officen District Forest Officen Transport Management Officen Water Supply Corporationn Revenue and Tax Officen Judiciary

Details of Work

2.1 Was your work completed or is still pending at the concerned office?

a. completed

b. awaiting completion

If Completed,

2.1.1 How much time was taken (days) ?

2.1.2 Was the work completed in time ?

Yes No

2.1.3 If the work was completed in time, what promoted completion ?

1. Required document was timely provided

2. Due to known people

3. Recommendation

4. Assistance from staff

5. Demanded amount was given (bribe)

2.1.4 Did you give extra money other than the government fee ?

1. Did 2. Did not give

2.1.5 If you gave extra money, what was the amount?

2.1.6 Did you contact the public officials directly for your work ?

a. Yes b. No

2.1.7 If not, then who assisted you in your work ?

1. Middleman

2. Known friends/persons

3. Para-legal assistant

4. Others…

2.2 If the work was not accomplished…

2.2.1 If the work was not completed, what was the reason for non-completion ?

1. Inadequate documents

2. Lack of money to pay government fees

3. Deliberate delay by staff

4. Demanded money (bribe) was not given

2.2.2 What impact did you face when the work was not completed ?

1. In household affairs

2. In social dealing

3. In financial aspects

4. No Impact

2.2.3 Did you complain anywhere for your problems ?

a. Yes b. No c. Don't know

2.2.4 If yes, where did you file complaints?

1. DAO

2. Concerned Office

Questionnaire (English Translation)


Chapter I 3. CIAA

4. NVC

5. TIN

6. Others….

2.2.5 If you did not complain, what were the reasons for not complaining ?

1. Did not know where to lodge complaints

2. Grievance would hamper the future works

3. No action would be taken

2.2.6 If you complained, was there any action taken ?

a. Yes b. No c. Don't Know

3.1 Awareness about services

3.2 Do you know which section/division you have to go to get your work done ?

a. Yes b. No

3.3 If not, how did you get the basic information ?

1. Through friends

2. By asking staff

3. By reading

4. Through middlemen

5. Others…

3.4 Have you seen Citizen's Charter ?

a. Yes b. No

3.5 Have you read the Citizen's Charter of the office visited ?

1. Yes 2. No

3.6 If you have read Citizen's Charter, did you approach the officials with all necessary documents to get your work completed ?

a. Yes b. No

Part B: Perceptions on Public Service Delivery

4.1 In your view does the office provide services as per public expectations ?

a. Yes b. No c. Don't know

4.2 How satisfied you are in the services that you have received ?

a. Extremely satisfied

b. Satisfied

c. Modest

d. Only slightly satisfied

e. Dissatisfied

4.3 How satisfied you are with the behavior of officials during service delivery to people?

a. Extremely satisfied

b. Satisfied

c. Modest

d. Only slightly satisfied

e. Dissatisfied

4.4 How effective is the Citizen's Charter in the works/services of an office ?

a. Extremely effective

b. Effective

c. Modest

d. Only slightly effective

e. Not effective

4.5 In your view, what types of corruption are perceived to exist in public service delivery institutions ?

1. Ordinary tips/petty payments

2. Delay induced extortion

3. Speed money for urgent completion

4. To get work done as per one's need

5. Others…

4.6 What do you perceive are main reasons of corruption ?

1. Governmental working style

2. Political

3. Social competition

4. Poverty and illiteracy

5. Low civic awareness

6. Others…

4.7 In your view, how corruption infected are these institutions? Select the appropriate answer.

1. Not corrupt


2. Least corrupt

3. Highly corrupt

4. Completely corrupt

5. Don't know

6. No opinion

Public Service Delivery Offices:

n Land Revenue Office

n Land Survey Office

n Land Reform Office

n District Administration Office

n District Development Committee

n Municipality

n Village Development Committee

n District Education Office

n District Agricultural Development Office

n District Forest Office

n Transport Management Office

n Water Supply Corporation

n Revenue and Tax Office

n Judiciary

5. How would you rate the situation of corruption in your district during the last one year ?

a. Highly increased

b. Increased a little

c. Remained same

d. Decreased a little

e. Highly decreased

f. don't know

5.1 How much score would you award your district on level of corruption in your district ?

100 denotes extreme corruption

0 denotes no corruption

a survey on public service delivery

Documents