The country's push for one-stop service delivery is being presented as a bold new reform in public administration. It is a key part of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP)-led government's 100-day agenda, conceived in the wake of the Gen Z movement that called for more accountable, transparent, and citizen-centric governance. With public frustration mounting despite successive movements, the RSP government has put service delivery reform at the centre of its plan to rebuild public trust.This is reflected in points 10, 21, and 26 of their 100-point agenda. Reform efforts towards service delivery through a one-stop model did not happenat the federal level. It started in local governments (LGs) with three municipalities in Karnali Province drawing attention in 2023 for leading the way. Prior to making national headlines, the One-Stop Service Delivery (OSSD) model was piloted under the European Union Support to Inclusive Federalism Programme, implemented by UNDP to complement the federal government's Provincial and Local Governance Support Programme(PLGSP). In Dullu, Panchapuri, and Chaurjahari municipalities, the model brought services under one roof, reduced the burden on citizens, and improved responsiveness. The effortwentbeyondtechnical design. It required close work with provincial and local officials, a clearunderstanding of local contexts, and constant adjustments to meet citizens' needs. Over time, what began as an ideabecame a functioning system that improved access to services, reduced red tape, and strengthened accountability in local governance. The OSSD model introduced a single entry point for citizens, supported by office automation system via services digitalisation, real-time online tracking, simple procedures, and regular feedback. It did away with the need to move from office to office, which reduced confusion, delays, and hassle. The results in 2024 by the EU and UNDP programme in the three local governments (LGs)were immediate and measurable. Earlier, services could take one to three days and sometimes up to a week. After the programme, most services were completed within three to four hours, with some taking less than an hour. Citizen satisfaction increased sharply. Earlier, only 3 percent of service users were satisfied, while 27 percent were dissatisfied, and 54 percent remained neutral. After OSSD, over 85 percent reported satisfaction. Perceptions of fairness also improved. Earlier, about half of respondents said they faced discrimination in service delivery. After the reform, such complaints largely disappeared. Awareness increased as well. Before, 78 percent of citizens were unaware of the citizen charter, and, after the reform,over 80 percent were aware of available services and their rights. Access to services improved. Earlier, 35 percent said municipal offices were not accessible for persons with disabilities and elderly citizens. Facilities for women,especially lactating mothers,also improved significantly.Public perception of officials changed, too. Before the reform, only 8percent rated officials' behaviour as good. After implementation, more than 70 percent reported positive interactions. Although the pilot phase has ended, the system continues in the three municipalities, and several others have adopted or are replicating it through PLGSP phase II across all provinces.The main challenge was not technological, but building trust among both service providers and users. What seemed like a simple solution took nearly a year of consensus-building among decision-makers. Through a series of consultations, and engagements by UNDP, stakeholders were convinced that change was both needed and possible. In regions like Karnali,where development gaps are wide, some resistance to new systems is expected. A key barrier to the OSSD model was not policy, resources or capacity, but mindset. The RSP government's 100-day pledge is widely seen as bold and includes several initiatives that have already proven successful at the local level, such as one-stop service centres, digital integration, time-bound service delivery, appointment systems, and trackable processes. This shows growing recognition of integrated service delivery at the national level. But it also raises a key question. Why do successful local innovations take so long to be adopted nationally? Such delays reflect a gap between pilot initiatives and policy adoption. Too often, good ideas stay within projects instead of being part of national reform. This gap slows progress and weakens evidence-based policymaking. There's increasing emphasis on digitalisation and efficiency in reform narratives. Rightly so. While these aspects are important, they are not sufficient. In Nepal, where digital literacy and access remain uneven, an overly technology-driven approach risks excluding vulnerable populations such as elderly, persons with disabilities, single women, landless, and poor who are unfamiliar with digital systems. If reforms are not designed with these groups in mind, they risk benefiting only those already in a stronger position. The OSSD model offers key lessons for scaling governance reform. Real change requires a shift in mindset, not just new systems. Local governments must be ready to adopt and sustain reforms. Solutions should reflect local realities, not be designed in theory, and continuous citizen feedback is vital to improve service delivery and accountability.Lessons show that governance reform is not a one-time effort but a continuous process that requires adaptation, learning, and political commitment. To make a real impact, one-stop service delivery reform must go beyond symbolic commitments and focus on full implementation. A mix of digital platforms and physical support is needed to promote inclusion. A strategy is essential to address bureaucratic resistance. Any successful models should be scaled up. Appointment-based services in government offices should be introduced carefully so they improve efficiency without disadvantaging people unfamiliar with them. Success in the short, medium, and long term should be measured not just by technology, but by how accessible and responsive public services are for marginalised communities. The authors are development practitioners