Population: 130 million (75% rural) Density: 876/sq km

1. BANGLADESH : Country Profile • Population: 130 million (75% rural) • Density: 876/sq km • Poverty: 58% poor people live in rural areas; 40% rural pop. are poor (against 14% urban pop.) LOCAL GOVERNMENT & ADMINISTRATION Division (06) District (Zila, 64): Average popul. : 2 million Deconcentrated level Sub-District (Upazila, 469): Average popul. : 255,000 Union (Union Parishad, 4488) Average popul. : 30,000 9 wards(Gram Sarkar) Elected authorities

2. National Policy/Institutional Context • Local Government established in 1870 (Union Parishad is the oldest & lowest LG Tier); • Articles 11, 59 & 60 of Constitution lay the framework for decentralised governance (“the republic shall be a democracy in which effective participation by the people through their elected representatives in administration at all levels should be ensured”); • Some policy statements (eg. PRSP) point to potential role of LGs & indicate the LGs as the key vehicle for local level service delivery.

3. Delegated Responsibilities of UP • Maintenance of Law & order and assist to administration to maintain Law & order • Adoption of measures for preventing crime, disorder and smuggling • Adoption & implementation of development schemes • Promotion of Family Planning • Development of local resources and their use • Protection & maintenance of Public property • Review the development activities of all agencies and recommendation to Upazila Nirbahi Officer • Motivation & Persuation of the people to install sanitary latrine • Registration of births, deaths, blinds, beggars and destitutes • Conducting of census of all kinds.

4. Origin of SLGDF Project • Local Government Division, Union Parishads & Community • Initiated by UNCDF based on the scope created by 1991 & 1997 Local government Commission’s reports. a.Key points • Efficient Service delivery to community • Participatory responsive Local Governance • Transparent and accountable local government • Empowerment of Local Government, Community and the Women b. Rationale behind the initiative • Lack of transparency and accountability in the LGs • Lack of coherent policy of local governance • Limited authority and financial power of LGs(Specially UPs) • Community access to LG activities are limited • Poor Service delivery to the community

5. Sirajganj Local Governance Development Fund Project Implementing Agency: Local Government Division Ministry of LGRD & Cooperatives Funded by UNCDF & UNDP Duration : 5 Years Started in July 2000

6. Major Tools & Approaches in relation to Social Accountability • Participatory Performance Assessment of Ups- through Community Score Cards. • Participatory Planning and budgeting • Social Audit in the form of Supervisions Committees. • Scheme notice boards & complaint books • Dissemination of information through UP notice boards, community gathering.

7. Process • A certain level of funds are announced for the UP based on the Community Score Card and also development criteria like: population, area and vulnerability. • UP organises ward meetings to form Ward Development Committees (WDC). WDC members given 2 days training on participatory tools. • WDCs organize ward meetings-separately with men and women- and decide the priority activities of the ward. • WDC employees the line agency for preparing estimates at 2% fees.

8. Process contd… • The UP organises a meeting with all WDCs and discuss proposals and budgets and further prioritize the proposals based on fund availability. This is an open session and all citizens can participate. • Projects addressing priority issues like: poverty , women, education etc are given a priority over others.

9. Process contd… • A draft budget is circulated by the UP to all citizens and invite them for discussions on a scheduled day. • The draft budget is debated in this meeting. • Citizens suggestions are taken to finalize the UP budget.

10. Process contd.. • The WDCs are responsible for planning, budgeting and execution. • The Supervisions Committee is responsible for supervisions and social audit.

11. Results • In 2004, Participatory Performance Assessment conducted in 81 Ups. 73 Unions have got access to the project fund fulfil the defined criteria. Funds received by 65 Ups. • 95% unions have improved their performances after the score card. Now more transparency and inclusiveness in their operations. • Household Tax collection enhanced from Tk. 17,76,750 (FY’2001-2002) to Tk. 58,42,660.00(FY’2003-2004)- 300% increase.

12. Results(Quantitative) • In FY’2001-02, average budget of the UPs were Tk.6,26,242 while it become Tk.17,11,531 in FY’2004-05. The gap between plan and actual income-expenditure also been reduced. • 40% Corruption reduced in scheme implementation. • Community contribution (average 10% of the total cost) in development schemes are evident.

13. Impacts/Outcomes • Union Parishads(UPs) in the project area have gained trust of the community • Transparency and accountability in the Union Parishads have been enhanced • Community are getting better services from the UPs. • Community has access to the local decision making process • Community owned the local development initiatives • Better quality projects are implemented.Optimum and efficient use of fund has been ensured. • More local resources are mobilized for local development • Women’s voices are being raised and heard

14. Impacts/Outcomes • For the first time, the central Government allocated fund for Union Parishads in Fy’2004-05. • Central government also issued Guideline for use of decentralized fund based on the learning of SLGDF • Donor agencies are attracted by the initiative and an informal network has established. Most of the LG initiatives are incorporating SLGDF learning.