governance indicators: baseline study

Implemented by: تطبیق کننده:

BMZ Country Strategy, Governance Indicators Baseline

Study Dr. Akmal Samsor

JS Consultancy Services


German Coopera<on with Afghanistan

Outline

• Methodology of Qualita=ve Data Collec=on • Biographic Informa=on of FGDs par=cipants • Data Analysis Findings: •  Sec=on 1: Findings about the development projects implemented in FGDs’ districts •  Sec=on 2 : Findings about the quality of services delivered by sub-‐na=onal adminstra=ve bodies •  Sec=on 3: Findings about quality of services delivered by sub-‐na=onal judicial bodies


German Coopera<on with Afghanistan Methodology •  Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) used to collect data

• Data was collected in two phases •  In phase one, data from Balkh, Samangan and Baghlan were collected •  In phase two, data from Takhar, Kunduz and Badakhshan were collected

• Before the data collec=on all the data collectors were trained in Balkh and Takhar • A team of two persons (1 facilitator and 1 note taker) collected the data



Methodology

Data collec=on training in Balkh Data collec=on training in Takhar


German Coopera<on with Afghanistan Methodology •  FGDs’ Par=cipants: community

members and their representa=ves

•  Community members were informed to par=cipate in FGDs through an announcement in the near by villages of the district

•  Par=cipa=on in the FGDs was open to every one

•  The objec=ve, place and =me was clearly men=oned in the announcement

FGD in Qala-‐e-‐Zal district of Kunduz



FGDs Par<cipants: Informa<on

•  Total No. FGDs = 18 •  Total No. FGDs’ Par=cipants=209 • Mean No. of par=cipants per FGD=12 • Minimum No. of par=cipants per FGD=8 • Maximum No. of par=cipants per FGD=14 •  9 FGDs were conducted among males and 9 FGDs were conducted among females



Distribu2on of FGDs par2cipants by Gender

Female 52%

Male 48%

The par=cipa=on of females were more than males in the FGDs



Distribu<on of the FGDs par<cipants by Occupa<on

House Wife 30%

Teacher 9% Farmer

14%

Council Members

(Village,CDC,DDA) 12%

Student 10%

Others 25%



Sec<on 1: Findings about the development projects implemented in FGDs’ districts

During the FGDs we collected data regarding : 1.  Types of the development projects and names of the donors/

implementers of the projects; 2.  Par=cipa=on of the community members and their representa=ves in the

different phases of the development projects; and

3.  Sugges=ons to improve community par=cipa=on in the development projects.



Types of Development Project Implemented in the 18 Districts

1.7%

3.7%

4.4%

4.4%

4.7%

5.7%

6.7%

9.4%

9.7%

13.4%

17.5%

18.8%

Women Center

Electricity

Water Schemes

Canals

Moseque

Bridges

Livelihood

Health Facility

Wells

P. Wall

Roads/Streets

Schools



Name of Funding or Implemen<ng Agencies of the development projects

6

6

8

8

11

12

25

33

51

59

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Mission East

People

IRD

Afghan-‐Aid

Brac

Unicef

Don't Know

AK

GIZ

NSP



Community Par<cipa<on in the different phases of the development projects

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Need Assessment Project Design Implementa2on Monitoring Aaer Project Completa2on

Both

Female Only



Method used by implementer for community need assessment

Mee=ng with Representa=ves

36%

Through Councils 24%

Mee=ng with People 20%

Survey 12%

Indvidual Recommenda=on

8%



Sugges<ons: To improve community par<cipa<on in the development projects

1.5% 1.6%

5.9% 7.3% 10.3%

13.2% 16.2%

44.1%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

Timely Payment

Listen Neutrality/ Impar2ality

Local Man-‐Power

Need Based Projects

Strengthen Monitoring

Used Good Quality Material

Mobilize People



Sec<on 2 : Findings about the quality of services delivered by sub-‐na<onal adminstra<ve bodies

We collected data about the services of the sub-‐na=onal adminstra=ve bodies: 1.  Services that are most important or relevant to the communi=es;

2.  Standards used by the communi=es for quality services; 3.  Sugges=ons to improve the quality of the services; and

4.  Perceived presence of the corrupt prac=ces in delivery of the services.



Services delivered by the sub-‐na<onal adminstra<ve bodies most important or relevant to the par<cipants

29.2%

25.3%

20.8%

10.4% 7.8%

3.9% 2.7%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

Health Educa2on Agriculture Documents Rural Development

Electricity Legal



Standards used by the FGDs par<cipants to measure the quality of services

The data shows that: •  availability of services, •  level of community par=cipa=on, •  effec=veness of the services, •  efficiency of the services, •  technical competence of the staff delivering the services, •  =meliness of the services, •  presence of corrup=on, •  durability of services and •  quality of products delivered to clients

were some of the standards that were reported by the FGDs‘ par=cipants to assess the quality of services delivered by the sub-‐na=onal administra=ve bodies.



Sugges<on: Improve the quality of sub-‐na<onal administra<ve bodies

30.8%

25.6%

14.1%

14.1%

10.3%

5.1%

Improve the Recruitment Process

Strengthen the M&E System

Provision Of Equipements

Improve Community Par2cipa2on

Capacity Buidling of Staff

Bribe Preven2on



Distribu<on of responses: What is needed to fully u<lize services delivered by sub-‐na<onal bodies

Influence or Money Needed 93%

No Influence or Money 6%

Don't Know 1%



Sec<on 3: Findings about quality of services delivered by sub-‐na<onal judicial bodies

We collected data about sub-‐na=onal judicial bodies : 1.  Modes of resolu=on of civil disputes and reasons for using informal

system for resolu=on of civil disputes; 2.  Perceived quality of services delivered by the by the Hoqooq Offices;

and 3.  Perceived presence of corrupt prac=ces in the services delivered by

the formal judicial system.



Distribu<on of Responses: How civil disputes are usually resolved

Informal Judicial System 66%

Formal Judicial System 34%



Reasons for using informal system for dispute resolu<on

27.1% 27.1%

17.8%

13.1%

9.3%

5.6%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

Corrup2on Time Cost Effec2veness Shame Factor Trust



Services delivered by Hoqooq Offices

•  Hoqooq Offices were men=oned by a very small percentage (7%) of the FGDs' par=cipants as en=ty to resolve the civil disputes of the community members

•  Majority of the FGDs' par=cipants were not aware of the services delivered by the Hoqooq Offices or have not even heard the name of the Hoqooq Offices

•  Some of the FGDs' par=cipants confused the name of the Hoqooq Office with Human Rights Commission as in local language it is translated as "Hoqooq Bashar" and this similarity in name might have resulted in confusion.



Distribu<on of responses: Is it possible to get a fair decision in formal judicial system without influence or money

Some2mes 5% Yes

5%

No (Not at All) 90%



Next Steps

• Design quan==ve survey ques=onnaire based on the findings of the FGDs data • Conduct survey in the representa=ve sample of popula=on in the 18 districts • Analyzed data of the quan==ve survey and dral report •  Submit final baseline report



Thank You

Ques=ons/Comments

governance indicators: baseline study

Leadership & Management