A Users' Guide to Measuring Local Governance

14
Social Audit of Governance and Delivery of Public Services
(Pakistan)
Producer
Community Information, Empowerment and
Transparency (CIET) – a Pakistani NGO
History
The social audit of governance and public service
delivery was developed essentially to monitor the
devolution process initiated in Pakistan in 2001.
The devolution reform is intended to improve
access to public services, encourage sustainability
of local development initiatives, and enhance
public sector resources through community
mobilization, increased transparency and reduced
leakages of resources out of the system.
The social audit of governance and public service
delivery in Pakistan was developed in two phases.
An initial social audit was undertaken in 2001-02.
The second phase (2004 – 2009) further develops
this approach.The first social audit in 2002 focused
on overall satisfaction with public services while
that of 2004/5 also included an emphasis on local
government and citizen participation.
Objectives
The social audit of governance and public service
delivery has the following key objectives:
• to monitor the effects of, and inform policy
makers about, the devolution of public service
delivery and local governance;
• to assess the views of citizens about public
services, measure citizens’ knowledge about
local governance,and evaluate their participation;
and
• to increase the informed interaction between
communities and public service providers.
Applicability
The social audit of governance and public service
delivery can be used at any local government level.
However, it is best used in situations where public
services have been devolved to lower levels of
government, and where the local governments are
willing and interested in monitoring their own
performance and accepting feedback from citizens.
Types and sources of data used
Qualitative and quantitative data are used, collected
through household questionnaires, community
profile questionnaires, published and available
administrative data, interviews with elected
representatives and service providers, and focus
group discussions. Most of the information is
subjective, although objective information resting
on published and available administrative data is
also used.
Methodology
Within each district, representative communities are
selected by a two-stage stratified random sampling
process. The sampling frame in each district is
represented by the official list of union councils
within the district, which are stratified in rural and
urban types in order to include a proportion of urban
and rural sites according to the urban and rural
population proportions in the census. The allocated
number of union councils for the district is then
picked randomly from the list of urban and rural union
councils for the district. For each of the randomly
selected union councils, a list of communities and
villages is obtained and a random selection of one
community from each list is obtained.
The household questionnaire (organised into four
section: general, public services, local government
and community participation) together with the
community profile questionnaire focus on the use,
experience and perception of public services. These
findings are linked to the data collected from the
service providers, the elected representatives and
government officials, and analysed in order to identify
actions for improving service delivery. The findings
are discussed with communities through focus
groups in order to develop possible solutions that
would be discussed and implemented jointly by
service providers, planners and community
representatives.This cycle is expected to be repeated
regularly. Table 26 presents the two main themes
and the specific issues analysed in the social audit of
governance and public service delivery in 2004-05.
A Users’ Guide to Measuring Local Governance 111