Kathmandu, September 7
As many as 66 district coordination committees, 46 municipalities and 2,327 rural municipalities have succeeded in meeting the indicators of Minimum Conditions and Performance Measure.
According to the results published by the Ministry of Federal Affairs and Local Development for the fiscal 2015-16, performance of nine DCCs, 12 municipalities and 830 rural municipalities (including 152 which did not submit their performance report) were not up to the mark and failed to meet the indicators.
The MoFALD had evaluated the performance of 3,005 out of 3,157 rural municipalities that had submitted their progress report. The results approved and published by Supervision and Management Committee, which has MoFALD secretary as its chair, show that Dailekh made it to the top of the list of DDCs with 89 marks, followed by Pyuthan (second with 88 marks) and Banke (third with 86 marks). Under the category of municipality, Butwal and Ghorahi scored 91 marks each to stand first while Dhankuta and Hetauda finished second with 90 marks each and Kamalamai came in third with 87 marks.
Local Level Fiscal Commission established in 2006 as per the Local Self-Governance Act conducts evaluation of performance of DCCs, municipalities and rural municipalities every fiscal. The existing local levels used to be called local bodies (district development committees, municipalities and VDCs) when their performance during the fiscal 2015-16 were evaluated.
Kathmandu is among 14 districts which been listed in first group under the DCC category on the basis of marks it scored. Similarly, Bhaktapur featured in third group while 12 DCCs, including Lalitpur, failed to score the prescribed minimum marks (40) in performance evaluation.
In terms of municipalities, Kathmandu and Bhaktapur have been confined to the third group. Similarly, 12 municipalities, including Lalitpur did not even meet the minimum conditions. Local levels, which score minimum marks and meet all indicators of performance, are provided with additional unconditional grants to encourage others to make more efforts to improve their fiscal management and service delivery.
Indicators of minimum conditions are annual programme and budget approval, annual progress review, quarterly and annual progress report, municipal account operation, tax and income source documentation, auditing and irregularities settlement, property management, building construction and map approval, publication of income expenditure and tax rate and personnel management.
Performance is measured on the progress made in local governance, fiscal and financial resource mobilisation, planning and programme management, organisation and human resource development and urban basic service management.