NL-KVK-27195046-IDEAL VNG International IDEAL is a programme by VNG International that works on the involvement of citizens in local governance in seven countries facing fragility or conflict. The participation of citizens contributes to inclusive decision-making. It improves local governance and the delivery of basic services. It makes local governance more sustainable and increases welfare and stability. Our drive and expertise is to support local governments in building bridges with all their citizens - including marginalised groups. Being part of VNG (the Association of Netherlands Municipalities) we benefit from over a hundred years of experience in the field of local governance. IDEAL targets local governments and local government associations in 7 countries: Burundi, Mali, Palestinian Territories, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan and Uganda. IDEAL will be implemented by VNG International, the International Cooperation Agency of the Association of Netherlands Municipalities, from 1st January 2017 until 31st December 2021. The programme started with a six-month inception phase, during which management structures have been set up, a communication & visibility strategy has been developed (incl. a website), the M&E methodology has been finalised, and the baseline has been carried out. Activity implementation started in July 1st, 2017. The overall programme is managed from VNG International headquarters in The Hague. The country programmes are managed by local teams (led by a Resident Programme Manager) jointly with programme managers based in The Hague. Each country programme works towards the three outcomes by focusing on a specific policy sector that is related to fragility at the local level. Various technical approaches are used, varying from on-the-job coaching, training, workshops, grants, study visits, and inter-municipal cooperation. Inclusive DEcisions At Local Level (IDEAL) is a new programme, funded by the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which targets 7 countries: Burundi, Mali, Palestine, Rwanda, Somalia, South Sudan and Uganda. These countries are or have been affected by past or present conflict and cope with various dimensions and degrees of fragility. We share the widely held view, expressed by OECD and many other organisations, that weak capacity or political will of government institutions to carry out basic governance functions in an effective and inclusive manner and to develop mutually constructive relations with the population are among the most significant causes of fragility and instability. The absence of a functioning 'social contract' between state and citizens reduces the prospects of human security, poverty alleviation, sustainable social and economic development and proper management of public and natural resources. It is therefore exactly this problem, the weak social contract, that the IDEAL programme aims to address, thereby contributing to the ability of local governments to better cope with fragility risks. The program will run for five years (Jan 2017 – Dec 2021), and has a budget of €17,5mln. IDEAL builds on the lessons learned from a previous programme (Local Government Capacity Programme, LGCP, 2012-2016). Overall Programme The impact of IDEAL is: The stronger social contract between local governments and citizens has enhanced local governments' capacity to cope with fragility risks. In order for local governments to establish a strong social contract, they need to be perceived as legitimate actors (from an input and output point of view) and they need an enabling institutional and policy environment that empowers them. Therefore, the IDEAL programme outcomes are: * Outcome 1: Service delivery by local governments in key policy areas is more responsive and effective ("Output legitimacy"). * Outcome 2: Decision-making processes at the local level in key policy areas are more inclusive and participatory ("Input legitimacy"). * Outcome 3: The policy and institutional environments of local governments has improved ("Enabling Environment"). The main target group is local governments in selected target areas of the 7 countries. Furthermore, each country programme has selected a target group (usually the local government association) that can play a key role in contributing to a more enabling environment for local governments. Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs VNG International Akvo Foundation VNG International Maxime Smeets Project Manager maxime.smeets@vng.nl http://www.vng-international.nl Nassaulaan 12 2514 JS Den Haag The Netherlands VNG International Nicole Ward-Boot Senior Project Manager nicole.boot@vng.nl http://www.vng-international.nl Nassaulaan 12 2514 JS Den Haag The Netherlands VNG International Susan Paardekam Project Manager susan.paardekam@vng.nl http://www.vng-international.nl Nassaulaan 12 2514 JS Den Haag The Netherlands -1.970579 30.104429 -3.361378 29.359878 0.347596 32.58252 12.639232 -8.002889 31.952162 35.233154 4.859363 31.57125 52.070498 4.3007 9.562389 44.077013 3362566 3818945 4035319 3428011 2855159 3362566 Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs VNG International 3818945 Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs VNG International 415047 VNG International VNG International 400442 VNG International VNG International 529533 VNG International VNG International 419759 VNG International VNG International 450216 VNG International VNG International 598989 VNG International VNG International 297435 VNG International VNG International 360854 VNG International VNG International 415487 VNG International VNG International 309952 VNG International VNG International 429357 VNG International VNG International 532317 VNG International VNG International 301145 VNG International VNG International 283781 VNG International VNG International 450311 VNG International VNG International 291873 VNG International VNG International 395790 VNG International VNG International 392283 VNG International VNG International 278033 VNG International VNG International 301183 VNG International VNG International 450072 VNG International VNG International 311728 VNG International VNG International 448825 VNG International VNG International 500146 VNG International VNG International 4035319 VNG International Enabling environment is a set of interrelated conditions that impact on the capacity of local governments to engage in development processes in a sustained and effective manner. By policy environment we refer to the set of legal, administrative and procedural frameworks that affect the capacity of the local governments to drive development process and change. By institutional environment we refer to the set of inter-institutional relations that determine the capacities of the local governments to carry out their functions. The enabling environment index combines the four indexes under Outcome 3 measuring the policy and institutional environment of local governments through perception and objective indicators. The index is scored on a range of 0 (very poor) to 100 (very good). This index is made up of 3 indicators measured through focus group discussions with local government representatives and stakeholders: 1. Key documents relevant for service delivery in the policy area are published and circulated among stakeholders 2. Legislation and policies are informed by national or international good practices in the policy area 3. The advocacy of the local government association (or the LG) is reflected in national policy initiatives in the policy area The Policy Environment (objective) index shows the average score attributed by an analyst across these three indicators on a scale from 0 to 100, based on whether these elements are embedded and sustainable (75-100%), existent and positive but with room for improvement (50-75%), existent but insufficient (25-50%), or inexistent, very poor, with a negative impact (0-25%). This index is made up of 3 indicators measured through focus group discussions with local government representatives and stakeholders: 1. Policy coordination mechanisms between stakeholders in the policy area are regularly implemented 2. The LG remunerates the local government association for its services in the policy area 3. The local government association provides support to LGs to provide gender sensitive policies and related services in the policy area The Institutional Environment (objective) index shows the average score attributed by an analyst across these three indicators on a scale from 0 to 100, based on whether these elements are embedded and sustainable (75-100%), existent and positive but with room for improvement (50-75%), existent but insufficient (25-50%), or inexistent, very poor, with a negative impact (0-25%). This index is made up of 4 indicators measured through a survey with political actors and LG stakeholders. 1. The local government association participates in multi-stakeholders activities relevant to policy area 2. There is good coordination between stakeholders when it comes to improving the quality of service delivery in policy area 3. The local government is aware of the role of the local government association and the services it provides related to the policy area. 4. The local government association provides high quality services to its members in policy area. The Institutional Environment (perception) index shows the average percentage of respondents who answered ‘Strongly agree’, ‘Agree’, or ‘Yes' across these four indicators, for the specific policy area selected in each country programme. This index is made up of 4 indicators measured through a survey with political actors and LG stakeholders: 1. The legal framework outlining the roles and responsibilities of the local government is clear for the policy area 2. The national policy making procedures for policy area allows participation of the local government and relevant stakeholders 3. The local government needs are reflected in national policy documents related to policy area 4. Women’s needs are integrated in the national policies in policy area | Youth’s needs are integrated in the national policies in policy area. The policy environment (perception) index shows the average percentage of respondents who answered ‘Strongly agree’, ‘Agree’, or ‘Yes' across these four indicators, for the specific policy area selected in each country programme. Input legitimacy is the part of the institutions’ legitimacy, which is based on their capacity to both accommodate the active participation of citizens’ throughout the decision-making process (participation) and to ensure adequate representation of all interests in society at various levels of governance in a fair and equal manner (inclusiveness). The input legitimacy index combines the four indexes under Outcome 2 measuring participation and inclusiveness through perception and objective indicators. The index is scored on a range of 0 (very poor) to 100 (very good). This index is made up of 3 indicators measured through focus group discussions with local government representatives and stakeholders: 1. Citizens are involved in participatory activities organised by the local government as inputs for policy making in the policy area 2. The participatory activities organised for the policy making process by the local government in the policy area are timely and regular 3. Information generated at the local government in the policy area is shared regularly with citizens The participation (objective) index shows the average score attributed by an analyst across these three indicators on a scale from 0 to 100, based on whether these elements are embedded and sustainable (75-100%), existent and positive but with room for improvement (50-75%), existent but insufficient (25-50%), or inexistent, very poor, with a negative impact (0-25%). This index is made up of 3 indicators measured through focus group discussions with local government representatives and stakeholders: 1. The local government policies in the policy area are informed by stakeholders 2. There is transparency in the selection of stakeholders in participatory mechanisms in the policy area 3. The local government decisions in the policy area reflects women’s | youth needs The Inclusivity (objective) index shows the average score attributed by an analyst across these three indicators on a scale from 0 to 100, based on whether these elements are embedded and sustainable (75-100%), existent and positive but with room for improvement (50-75%), existent but insufficient (25-50%), or inexistent, very poor, with a negative impact (0-25%). This index is made up of 4 indicators measured through a citizen survey: 1. The local government gets the inputs of citizens when making decisions on policies related to policy area 2. Every group (young, women, sick, elderly, religion, ethnicity) in the society participates in decision making processes related to policy area 3. Citizens know how they can participate in decisions of the local governments (in policy area) 4. Citizens feel their opinion is important to the local government (in policy area) The participation (perception) index shows the average percentage of respondents who answered ‘Strongly agree’, ‘Agree’, or ‘Yes' across these four indicators, for the specific policy area selected in each country programme. This index is made up of 4 indicators measured through a citizen survey: 1. The local government involves relevant people/groups/institutions/organisations in decisions for the policy area 2. Citizens feel they can disagree on topics related to policy area with the leaders or other individuals in public 3. The local government treats the views and opinions of different groups equally on the policy area 4. Women (citizens) take active part in the decision making process on policy area | Youth (citizens) take active part in the decision making process on policy area The Inclusivity (perception) index shows the average percentage of respondents who answered ‘Strongly agree’, ‘Agree’, or ‘Yes' across these five indicators, for the specific policy area selected in each country programme. Output legitimacy is the part of the institution’s legitimacy that is constructed as a result of their perceived and observable achievements. By responsiveness we understand the capacity to address (identifiable) needs/demands by citizens and respond to existing (measurable) challenges in a community. By effectiveness we understand the degree to which policy objectives are achieved and the extent to which targeted problems are solved through concrete interventions of the local governments. The output legitimacy index combines the four indexes under Outcome 1 measuring responsiveness and effectiveness through perception and objective indicators. The index is scored on a range of 0 (very poor) to 100 (very good). This index is made up of 2 indicators measured through focus group discussions with local government representatives and stakeholders: 1. Policies clearly target citizens' concerns (match with citizens answers to answer 1 on key priorities in policy area during analysis) 2. The local government addresses the needs of various groups in the community related to service delivery in the policy area. The Responsiveness (objective) index shows the average score attributed by an analyst across these two indicators on a scale from 0 to 100, based on whether these elements are embedded and sustainable (75-100%), existent and positive but with room for improvement (50-75%), existent but insufficient (25-50%), or inexistent, very poor, with a negative impact (0-25%). This index is made up of 2 indicators measured through focus group discussions with local government representatives and stakeholders: 1. The services delivered by the local government solve the key issues in the policy area. 2. Roles of actors involved in policy implementation (incl. Services) are clearly defined in the policy area. The effectiveness (objective) index shows the average score attributed by an analyst across these two indicators on a scale from 0 to 100, based on whether these elements are embedded and sustainable (75-100%), existent and positive but with room for improvement (50-75%), existent but insufficient (25-50%), or inexistent, very poor, with a negative impact (0-25%). This index is made up of 4 indicators measured through a citizen survey: 1. The local government does enough to address top challenges in the community in the policy area 2. The local political leaders understand the needs of the local community in the policy area 3. The policies of the local government address the most urgent needs of women | youth in the policy area 4. Citizens can identify one action of the local government to answer their needs in the policy area The responsiveness (perception) index shows the average percentage of respondents who answered ‘Strongly agree’, ‘Agree’, or ‘Yes' across these four indicators, for the specific policy area selected in each country programme. This index is made up of 4 indicators measured through a citizen survey: 1. The local government has competent people to implement its strategy in the policy area. 2. The local government improves women's | young people’s lives in the policy area. 3. The local government is taking action to tackle factors which hinder its performance in the policy area. 4. Citizens are satisfied with the services related to policy area The effectiveness (perception) index shows the average percentage of respondents who answered ‘Strongly agree’, ‘Agree’, or ‘Yes' across these four indicators, for the specific policy area selected in each country programme. The contract between local governments and citizens is the mechanism by which everyone in a political community, either explicitly or tacitly, consents to state authority, thereby limiting some of her freedoms, in exchange for the state’s protection of their universal human rights and security and for the adequate provision of public goods and services. The program impact is measured by the social contract index, which combines the three level II outcome indices: output legitimacy index, input legitimacy index and enabling environment index. The social contract index is scored on a range of 0 (very poor) to 100 (very good).