legislative strengthening program in cote d’ivoire

January 13, 2018

Legislative Strengthening Program in Cote d’Ivoire

Final Report

DECEMBER 2012 - DECEMBER 2017

Implemented by the State University of New York Center for International Development Contract Number: AID-OAA-I-12-00005 Order Number: AID-TO-624-13-00001

2 Notre Dame Drive, Albany, New York 12208

USAID Contract No: AID-624-TO-13-00001

This document was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by the State University of New York Center for International Development (SUNY/CID.)

Legislative Strengthening Program in Cote D’Ivoire

Legislative Strengthening Program in Cote d’Ivoire (LSP) Implemented by the State University of New York Center for International Development State University Plaza, Albany, New York 12246 Contact: David E. Guinn, JD, PhD Senior Associate/Project Director Tel.: +1 (518) 443-2716 : +1 (518) 443-5126 E-mail: [email protected] Sonia Carrascal Sr. Project Manager Tel : +1 (518) 443-2255 FAX : +225 22-41-85-41 E-mail : [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


ABBREVIATIONS ANCI National Assembly of Cote d'Ivoire ANQ National Assembly of Quebec ANRMP National Public Procurement Regulatory Authority APF Parliamentary Assembly of the Francophonie APNAC African Parliamentarian Network against Corruption ARV Anti-Retroviral CAEF Commission on Economic and Financial Affairs CAPEC Economic Policy Analysis Cell of CIRES CASC Social and Cultural Affairs Commission CEI Electoral Commission Bureau CICAN National Assembly Communications Unit CIE Ivorian Electricity Company CITI2 Côte d’Ivoire Transition Initiative2 CNC National Coalition for Change CO Contracting Officer COP Chief of Party COR Contracting Officer Representative CRSTE Commission of Research, Science, Technology and Environment CSC Citizen Scorecard CSO Civil Society Organization CSR Corporate Social Responsibility DGDDL Directorate-General of Decentralization and Local Development DSL Director of Legislative Services FEMPACI Constitutive General Assembly of the Women Caucus GoCI Government of Cote d'Ivoire GOPAC Global Organization of Parliamentarians against Corruption HABG High Authority for Good Governance HIV/AIDS Human Immunodeficiency Virus / Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome HR Human Resources ICT Information and Communications Technology IFES International Foundation for Electoral Systems IGF Inspector General of Finance INSAAC National Higher Institute of Arts and Cultural Action ISTC Communication Sciences and Technology Institute LSP Legislative Strengthening Program LTTA Long-Term Technical Assistance M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MACA Abidjan Remand and Reformatory Home MOU Memorandum of Understanding MP Member of Parliament


NA National Assembly NDI National Democratic Institute NGO Non-Governmental Organization ONUCI United Nations Organizations in Cote d'Ivoire PAC Program Advisory Committee PNCS National Program on Social Cohesion POECI Civil Society Organizations for Election Observation in Cote d’Ivoire PRADD Property Rights and Artisanal Diamond Development PTAN National Assembly Work Plan PWYP Publish What You Pay Network ROSCI-CCAP

Network of Ivorian Civil Society Organizations on Citizen Oversight of Public Actions

SDA Documentation and Archive Service SEAP Education and Parliamentary Assistance Service SG Secretary General SNRC Capacity Building National Secretariat SUNY/CID State University of New York / Center for International Development TO Task Order UNCAC UN Convention Against Corruption UNDP United Nations Development Program USAID United States Agency for International Development WAEMU West African Economic and Monetary Union WANEP West Africa Network for Peace-Building

Legislative Strengthening Program in Cote d’Ivoire P a g e | 1

CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 3 II. POLITICAL CONTEXT ............................................................................................................. 10 III. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY AND MANAGEMENT................................................... 13

Working Collaboratively: Establish management bodies for the program .................................. 13 Learning ........................................................................................................................................ 14 Adapting ....................................................................................................................................... 15 Collaboration and Coordination with Other Implementers and Donors ...................................... 15

IV. ACHIEVEMENTS AND RESULTS BY OBJECTIVE............................................................ 17 OBJECTIVE 1: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY BETTER ABLE TO FULFILL ITS BASIC LEGISLATIVE, REPRESENTATIONAL AND OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS ......................... 17 1. INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT/INTERNAL MANAGEMENT .................................. 17

Support the NA’s Strategic and Work Planning Development ................................................ 17

Provide Technical Assistance to Improve HR Services of the NA. ......................................... 20 Provide Trainings to Build the Capacity of ANCI Staff ........................................................... 22 Support the Secretariat in Meeting Basic ICT Needs. .............................................................. 23 Support the NA’s Capacity to Effectively Communicate with the Public. .............................. 24 Support Review of the NA Rules and Procedures .................................................................... 25 Support for the creation of special Gender and Youth Permanent Commission ...................... 27 New Member Orientation Program .......................................................................................... 31

2. LEGISLATION ....................................................................................................................... 32 Human Capacity Building ........................................................................................................ 33 Commission Operations/Management ...................................................................................... 34 Research infrastructure ............................................................................................................. 35 Developing Supplemental Resources ....................................................................................... 36

3. OVERSIGHT ........................................................................................................................... 36 National Budget Review Support ............................................................................................. 36 Anticorruption ........................................................................................................................... 37 Build Capacity in Use of Oversight Tools ................................................................................ 39 Commission Site Visits/Public Hearings .................................................................................. 40 Hearing and Oversight Questions ............................................................................................. 43

Impact and Assessment of Objective 1 Accomplishments........................................................... 43 OBJECTIVE 2: IMPROVED NATIONAL ASSEMBLY DEPUTY CONSTITUENCY REPRESENTATION AND OVERSIGHT IN A SELECT NUMBER OF CONSTITUENCIES ...................................................................................................................................................... 45 Background: The Problem ........................................................................................................... 45 Project Implementation and Initial Findings ................................................................................ 47

Goals and Objectives of the Platform Initiatives ...................................................................... 47

Design/Buy-in ........................................................................................................................... 48 Citizen Score Card Survey ........................................................................................................ 49 Program Introduction/Civic Education ..................................................................................... 52

Platform Make-up ..................................................................................................................... 53 Leadership and Management .................................................................................................... 53 Platform Capacity Building ...................................................................................................... 55 Platform and Support Activities ............................................................................................... 56

Impact and Assessments ............................................................................................................... 56


OBJECTIVE 3: IMPROVED AUDIT AND BUDGET OVERSIGHT IN COTE D’IVOIRE ... 59

Capacity Building on Effective Budgetary Oversight and Reporting for ANCI ...................... 59 Capacity Building of Audit Court Staff: ICT Skills Building Workshops ............................... 60 Help establish effective Archiving and ICT ............................................................................. 60 Assessment................................................................................................................................ 60

V. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIION ............................................................................................ 62 VI. CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED .......................................................................... 65 VII. PROGRAM PMP INDICATORS AND RESULTS ................................................................ 71 Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................... 75


I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SUNY/CID is pleased to submit its Final Report for the entire duration of the Program 2012-2017 for the USAID/Legislative Strengthening Program in Cote d’Ivoire (LSP). The LSP commenced startup activities in January 2013 to provide technical support to enhance legislative capacity within the National Assembly and special support to a select group of deputies to engage with their constituencies within target constituencies to improve service delivery. The overarching objectives of the program are:

1. A National Assembly better able to fulfill its basic legislative, representational and oversight functions.

2. Improved National Assembly Deputy Constituency representation and oversight in a select number of constituencies.

3. Improvement of audit and budget oversight capacity in Cote d’Ivoire. (added in April 2017)

These objectives support USAID/West Africa’s Strategic Objective of governing justly and democratically, and fall under Program Area 2.2 Good Governance. LSP’s support to the National Assembly has been divided into three components. Component 1 addresses the first program objective: a National Assembly better able to fulfill its basic legislative, oversight and representational functions. This Component focuses on enhancing the capacity of the National Assembly to carry out its constitutional and institutional mission. Activities are centered on internal management, legislative processes, and oversight functions of the National Assembly. Component 2 addresses the second objective: improved National Assembly MP Constituency representation and oversight in a select number of constituencies. This component focuses on the representational function of the Members of Parliament. Component 3 addresses the third objective: Enhancing Fiscal Transparency by improving audit and budget oversight capacity in Cote d’Ivoire. This component specifically provides capacity building support to the Audit Court of Cote d’Ivoire PROGRAM HIGHLIGHTS Implementation Strategy SUNY/CID has a long history of thinking and working politically, an implementation strategy that includes close attention to the needs and wants of its partners, a collaborative engagement with them to promote local buy-in and ownership, and an adaptive/iterative work process similar to USAID’s Collaborating, Learning, and Adapting framework for implementation. SUNY/CID also solicited the collaboration and cooperation of other program implementers and donors to assure effective coordinated support for the National Assembly based on the National Assembly’s own strategic development plan. As found by DI evaluators for the Mid-Term Evaluation, this collaborative strategy was extremely effective:


The quality of this strategy was evidenced by the decision by all the other donors and partners to adopt the PSAN and the PTANs as the overarching framework for all their technical inputs and contributions. This was extremely effective. It mobilized additional resources, specialized technical assistance and added value through other donors1. (emphasis added.)

OBJECTIVE 1: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY BETTER ABLE TO FULFILL ITS BASIC

LEGISLATIVE, REPRESENTATIONAL AND OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS LSP provided support to the ANCI to enhance the internal institutional management of the National Assembly by its Secretariat, as well as its core functions in terms of lawmaking, oversight over government actions, and representation. KEY ACTIVITIES Among the key activities supported by LSP were the following: INSTITUTIONAL STRENGTHENING Strategic Planning/Work Planning: LSP provided three support initiatives: Supporting the development and monitoring of the Annual Strategic plan; supported the National Assembly Communications Unit (CICAN) in the development and operations of its annual work planning; and supported the ANCI in the development of the second four-year strategic plan (the 2017-2020 PSAN). ICT Needs: LSP provided the ANCI with state of the art electronic voting systems, expanded its wifi network, and procured equipment to facilitate electronic transcription of plenary activities. Human Capacity Trainings: LSP provided both formal presentation trainings and mentoring of staff in the course of carrying out their tasks. This included 2602 trainings (trainings multiplied by the number of MPs/staff participants). Support Gender and Women: LSP provided training and support to the Women’s Caucus and successfully advocated for the establishment of a Special Women’s Commission and process for enhanced protection of women’s issues. Support Youth: LSP supported two meetings of the Youth Parliament and established and managed a youth internship program within the National Assembly. Conducted New Members Orientation: LSP supported the new members orientation in 2017 and provided the ANCI with resources to repeat the training in the future.

1 Democracy International, Mid-Term Performance Evaluation: Legislative Strengthening Program – Draft Evaluation (USAID, April 2017), p. 2


LAW MAKING To facilitate the National Assembly’s review of proposed legislation, LSP conducted developmental activities in four areas: commission operations/management, human capacity building, and developing supplemental resources. Commission Operations: Since most legislative work takes place in commission, LSP provided technical assistance to commission leadership and staff to train the staff to be more effective in supporting the commission members and working with the commissions on improving their practices and procedures. Human Capacity: LSP provided training in research and analysis, commission structures and practices and mentored staff in the conduct of their work. Develop supplemental Resources: LSP worked with the commissions encouraging them to draw on publicly available resources of expertise, particularly CSOs and educational institutions. LSP created a manual identifying CSO resources by topic. OVERSIGHT Site Visits: LSP’s primary focus in the area of oversight was to support the commissions in the conduct of oversight site visits. LSP supported 11 field visits covering the entire country. ASSESMENT Assessing the accomplishments of LSP under Objective 1 is very difficult. As noted in the DI Mid-Term Evaluation, “‘Management capacity of the administration’ is difficult to separate from functions of oversight, legislation and representation, since these functions also depend on internal support services from the administration.”2 Moreover, inculcating reforms within a complex political organization takes a significant period of time – far in excess of the duration of LSP’s support. Nonetheless, there were a number of indications that progress had been made in the development of the ANCIs capacity to fulfill its basic functions. These include the following: Strategic Planning: The ANCI not only conscientiously developed an annual strategic workplan (PTAN), it valued strategic planning, agreed and collaborated with LSP to assure that LSP and other donor’s support was in accord with the overall strategic plan (PSAN) and it to principle lead in drafting the new 2017-2020 Strategic Plan – a significant achievement. Improved Staff Capacity and Function: During the course of project implementation, LSP staff noted a steady improvement in the capacity of staff and MPs to carry out their duties. This was particularly evident in the applied activities, such as site visits, in which staff were initially trained in supporting the activity and in subsequent iterations took increasing responsibility for supporting the activity. As reported in the DI Evaluation: “Based on interviews and focus groups, perceptions on parliament’s administration improved significantly. The third most commonly expressed opinion, given by 150 interviewees, was: ‘Parliament is more effective now in administration and 2 Id. p. 10 .


its staff more committed and effective.’”3 Moreover, the improvement was not just limited to staff. As another interviewee stated to DI evaluators, “Staff and MPs are much more pro-active now that they feel more able and trained.”4 Work in Civil Manner in Face of Potential Conflict: One of the great concerns of ANCI leadership at the outset of the project was building positive relationships and being able to work collaboratively in the face of the recent conflicts. Based on concerns over the potential revival of conflict, ANCI had initially resisted efforts by LSP to promote revisions in the Rules of Procedure and the conduct of anti-corruption activities. By 2017, ANCI had significantly recovered from these concerns and worked with LSP to revise its rules of procedure and to participate in a number of anti-corruption activities and trainings.5 Establish a special Gender Commission and other Gender Initiatives: In spite of initially strong resistance to the idea of a gender commission, based on a belief that gender issues were adequately being addressed within the existing commission structure, in 2016 ANCI agreed to form a special commission on gender. However, in an admirable display of independence, the ANCI did not simply accept the model of gender treatment advocated by USAID and other donors – it asserted itself and tailored the idea of attending to concerns over gender according to its own view of how to address the problem by integrating gender within each commission (supported by a focal point) and using the special gender commission to only address those laws or issues exclusively focused on gender equity. Steady Improvement in Site Visits: As noted above, the understanding of most MPs about the nature of commission site visits at the outset of the project was limited. During the course of project implementation, the commissions increasingly used the site visits to substantively review government activities in the regions and then to bring their findings back and share them with the National Assembly as a whole. Indeed, they advanced to the point of using their findings as the basis for questioning line ministries. SUMMARY In summary, as found by DI in its evaluation: “The LSP has contributed to significantly improved capacity of MPs and staff, improved infrastructure of the National Assembly, improved ANCI administration/management and human resources systems, and has made significant progress in modernizing the voting systems.”6

OBJECTIVE 2: IMPROVED NATIONAL ASSEMBLY DEPUTY CONSTITUENCY REPRESENTATION AND OVERSIGHT IN A SELECT NUMBER OF CONSTITUENCIES

In LSP sought to enhance the legislator’s work on representation by creating constituency Platforms or work groups in which legislators joined with local governmental and civil society leaders to collaborate in monitoring and advocating for improvements in public service delivery 3 Id. p. 11 4 Id. 5 See Objective 3 below. 6 Id. Democracy International


by the national government. LSP piloted this approach in 24 constituencies spread across the country. KEY ACTIVITIES Among the key activities supported by LSP were the following: Design Platforms and Selection Process: Since the goal of the platforms initiative was to develop an intervention that would link parliamentarians with local leaders to work together to promote improved service delivery and test the efficacy of that intervention, LSP started by designing the platform (i.e. its membership and methods by which participants could engage in helping to co-create its operational administration and means of work. To help test its efficacy, LSP developed selection criteria to identify pilot constituencies in which the platforms would be establish along with 10 demographically similar group of control constituencies against which to evaluate the effectiveness of the platforms. Finally, because there were more MPs interested in participating in the initiative, LSP developed a fair and open method for selecting the MPs to participate on a competitive basis. Establish a means of promoting Platform Activities: LSP established a partnership with 22 local radio stations in which LSP provided the radio stations with training and a limited amount of needed equipment, while the radio stations agreed to cover and promote platform activities in their constituencies. Public Education: To inform the public of the activities of the platforms and the role of the parliament, LSP developed a public education program of public events, printed publications, and radio broadcasts. Public education events drew 12,284 participants. (The total number of people involved in Platform and outreach activities totaled 27,752.) Platforms created: LSP worked with the MPs and constituency representative to help form the platforms, adopt a charter for organization, and develop their work plans for the year. Platforms trained: LSP provided two trainings for each of the 24 platforms covering everything from platform management skills to the government processes service delivery and how the platforms could affect that. ASSESSEMENT Concept Design Based on the project interactions with the platforms once they were operational, the general design of the platforms appears valid and effective, a conclusion DI’s evaluators agreed with.7 At the same time, variations in the platform structures developed on the ground, including who asserted primary leadership of the platforms, demonstrated that the concept of collaborative community engagement is susceptible to adjustments to meet local needs and conditions. Additional research needs to be conducted on the management structure in particular to determine whether or not there is an optimal form of platform leadership.

7 Id., p. 22-23


Effects on Services Platform performance varied from one constituency to another with some being successful, while others were less so. This was often dependent upon whether the MP or another platform member was able to effectively provide leadership for the platform. Nonetheless, as reported by the DI Assessment team (2017) “Preliminary findings showed… [that p]articipants were able to document success stories in public service delivery. These services are related to improvement of security, water supply, electricity, education and health.”8 Impact on Public Perceptions The Platform initiative, on the whole, had a positive impact on public perceptions about public service delivery (potentially reflecting actual improvements in service delivery) and the public’s perception of their MP. Promoting Civil Collaboration and Cooperation As previously noted, as a post conflict country, concerns over friction between ethnic, social, and cultural communities remains high and the Platforms were intended to create a neutral forum in which representatives from diverse communities could come together and safely engage in discussion of and collaboration on efforts to improve future public services. The DI Mid-Term Evaluation reported two findings in this regard. Among the 4 top open responses to the Key informant interview, was the statement: “Platforms are effective for improving MP representation, resolving community conflicts, networking, interaction between local government and citizens, and informing about gender-related legal issues.”9 (emphasis added.) Further, the report noted that: “Collaboration among different stakeholders was an important factor needed for a successful Platform, as well as an active leadership.”10

OBJECTIVE 3: IMPROVED AUDIT AND BUDGET OVERSIGHT IN COTE D’IVOIRE

In an effort to improve the level of transparency in Cote d’Ivoire’s fiscal processes and activities, LSP supported a number of training activities aimed at strengthening knowledge and oversight of public expenditures, supporting collaboration within and between the National Assembly and Audit Court in monitoring fiscal activities, and providing assistance to strengthen the operational capacity of the Audit Court. KEY ACTIVITIES Capacity Building on Effective Budgetary Oversight and Reporting for ANCI LSP supported training for ANCI commission members on the role of the Audit Court and the monitoring of public finances. Capacity Building of Audit Court Staff: ICT Skills Building Workshops LSP provided training for staff and magistrates in basic software programs. Procure necessary Software and Equipment to support ICT needs LSP providing support to the Audit Court to help meet their ICT needs. LSP procured anti-virus licenses for the Audit Court

8 Id. p. 24 9 Id. p. 20 10 Id. p. 23


computers, 40 copies of MS Office, and a generator for the Audit Court building to ensure adequate power connectivity for the Court office spaces. ASSESSMENT Given the extremely short period of implementation (roughly six months) one cannot assess the results or outcomes of this initiative. In terms of outputs, LSP addressed key needs identified by the court including a very successful training with the ANCI, providing ICT support and training to the judges and staff, and providing necessary ICT software and infrastructure.


II. POLITICAL CONTEXT The most important contextual issue in Cote d’Ivoire is its status as a post-conflict country. While the country has made incredible strides in addressing many of the fictions that contributed to the prior violence, strengthening public institutions, and establishing a level of security that allowed the UN to withdraw its peace keeping forces, the fragility of this peace weighs heavily on the minds of most Ivorians and their leaders. As a consequence, every political or social event of significance must be evaluated as to how it may or may not affect peace. IN THE NEWS A number of significant political events took place in Cote d’Ivoire during the period of program implementation that presented challenges to project implementation. These included:

1. Social cohesion / instability in the country 2. Presidential elections 3. Constitutional referendum 4. Legislative elections

Yet, despite the threats of disruption, the project successfully negotiated each of these events suffering at most some delays in implementation. Social Cohesion/Instability in the Country Cote d’Ivoire is a post conflict country that is still recovering from the turmoil of the civil wars preceding the election and establishment of the government of President Alassane Ouattara in 2011. Despite the surrender to and prosecution of former president Laurent Gbagbo by the International Criminal Court generating some complaints from his former supporters and the investigations of the independent commission established to examine atrocities arising out of the 2011 postelection violence, on a political level all active political parties have remained engaged in maintaining a civil political process. Conflict and violence has arisen over the failure of the government to live up to some peace settlement promises particularly in relation to employment in and compensation paid to the military. In both 2016 and 2017 a number of military commands participated in limited protests and/or insurrections, with the most serious occurring January, in which a mutiny started in the city of Bouake and then extended to the cities of Daloa, Korhogo, Odienné, Daoukro, Man, and Abidjan. The soldiers demanded improved living conditions and the payment of premiums that had been promised to them. By the end of January, peace had been restored after negotiations between the State and military representatives on meeting some of these demands. Protests, strikes and sometimes violence involving students (2016), utilities rate payers (2016) and civil services (2016) have also taken place. Presidential Elections and Inauguration. 2015 saw the first presidential elections following the contested 2011 elections. While there were some protests and calls to boycott the elections by members of the National Coalition for Change, in the end 33 individuals ran for president. On October 25, 2015, Cote d’Ivoire held its


presidential elections. Election day passed peacefully and quietly with a 52.86% voter turnout. On November 2, 2015, the Constitutional Council confirmed that Mr. Alassane Ouattara won a second term with 83.66% of the votes. Mr. Ouattara was sworn in on November 3, 2015. During his inauguration, the President announced he would call for a referendum on a revision of the Ivorian constitution in the year 2016. The president also asserted that he would not call for early legislative elections and that the ANCI would finish its mandate through December 2016. The New Constitution In 2016, a new constitution was drafted introducing the position of a Vice-President and a related change in presidential secession in favor of that office and a bicameral parliament compose a Senate and National Assembly. The new constitution also clarified the conditions applicable to become president, including removing the age limit, and aligning legislative and presidential elections While a platform of 23 opposition political parties formally opposed the constitution based on objection to specific provisions within the document and that it was drafted by a committee of experts, without any national process of consensus building to allow all segments of society to weigh in on their general interest, the National Assembly passed the bill on October 11 and it was put forward for a referendum vote on October 30, 2016. The Front Populaire Ivoirene (FPI), the main political opposition party, called into question the contents of the Constitutional bill and encouraged supporters to boycott the referendum. Less than half the population (42%) turned out for the vote; however of those who voted, 93% voted to adopt the new Constitution. The Constitution of the 3rd Republic was promulgated on November 8, 2016 by President Alassane Ouattara. Legislative Elections Cote d’Ivoire held the legislative elections on December 18, 2016. These elections saw the participation of all the political parties in the country. There were 187 registered candidates from the Front Populaire Ivoiriene (FPI), namely from the faction of the party led by Pascal Affi, while Aboudramane Sangare, the leader of the other main FPI faction, called for a ballot boycott and urged members not to present themselves. There were also a large number of independents candidates, many of whom were part of the ruling coalition party but had not been presented as candidates by their party. The elections occurred fairly peacefully with a 34% turnout by the population. The overall results were as follows:

167 seats went to RHDP 75 seats went to independents 6 seats went to UDPCI 3 seats went to UPCI 3 seats went to FPI

There are just over 100 newly elected MPs accounting for 40% of all seats and the number of women elected rose from 25 to 29 accounting for 11% of all seats. NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ACTIVITIES The main highlights of the National Assembly during the period of LSP implementation are as follows:


The National Assembly has been a very active law maker throughout the period of LSP’s implementation, averaging passing 40+ laws a year for the first 4 years. The 5th year saw a dramatic drop following the legislative election in late 2016 and the start of a new legislature in April 2017. Year Ordinary Session(s) Extraordinary Session(s) Total 2013 27 21 46 2014 28 33 61 2015 22/11 3/1/2/3* 42 2016 21/18 1 40 2017 5 5

*4th extraordinary session ended 11 Jan. 2016 In addition, on August 12, 2016, the National Assembly approved the ratification of an economic partnership treaty with the European Union and on October 11, 2016, it ratified the new constitution for submission to a public referendum. With LSP support, commissions of the National Assembly conducted 8 field visit oversight missions during the period of 2014 - 2016 addressing such topics as the Ebola outbreak, the security forces, prisons, and public healthcare. IMPACT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LSP The most significant impact of this politico-social context rests on the fact that Cote d’Ivoire is a post-conflict country. Every activity supported by LSP, both within the National Assembly and outside it, had to be evaluated according to how it contributed to maintaining and enhancing the peace or threatened that peace. As noted by respondents to the Democracy International conducted Mid-Term Performance Evaluation, “The leadership felt that the priority in the post-conflict context was to focus on learning to live together in peace towards a better standard of living – in order to not slip back into civil war.” 11 As a consequence, as will be described more fully below, some planned activities identified in the assessment and/or original proposal that were deemed by ANCI leadership as too politically threatening, were significantly restricted (such as work on the rules of procedure) or ultimately not implemented (such as supporting the ANCI to seek greater control over its budget.) For the most part, external events that took part during the program implementation period (such as the Presidential election and the limited outbreaks of discontent) had minimal negative impact on program activities. The legislative elections in December 2016 did result in a slow down for the LSP program during the last quarter, particularly in the lead up to the election as MPs were focused on their campaigns. However, LSP had planned its implementation schedule to take this into account.

11 Id. Democracy International p. 26.


III. IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY AND MANAGEMENT SUNY/CID has a long history of thinking and working politically, a implementation strategy that includes close attention to the needs and wants of its partners, a collaborative engagement with them to promote local buy-in and ownership, and an adaptive/iterative work process similar to USAID’s Collaborating, Learning and Adapting framework for implementation. SUNY/CID also solicited the collaboration and cooperation of other program implementers and donors to assure effective coordinated support for the National Assembly. These approaches heavily informed the development hypothesis used by the project and ways in which the project was implemented by SUNY/CID. Working Collaboratively: Establish management bodies for the program In line with SUNY/CID’s long-standing practice of thinking and working politically through close coordination and collaboration with its local counterparts, in its proposal for the project, SUNY/CID had proposed working with the ANCI to establish a formal program Steering Committee composed of MPs and members of the ANCI leadership who, it was expected, would periodically review LSP programming and provide guidance as to the needs and desires of the ANCI. This is a means to both gather regular feedback on the effectiveness of the projects implementation and a method of promoting local ownership of the project. Under normal SUNY/CID practices, project leadership would at the same time work very closely with the Secretary General and other administrative leaders on a monthly if not weekly basis to coordinate project delivery, seek ongoing input, and promote local ownerships of all activities. However, at some point during project start up, this second approach was formalized into a second committee, identified as the Executive Committee, composed of MPs, the Secretary General, and Department Heads from within the Secretariat. Moreover, efforts were made to engage with both committees on an unusually frequent basis. Whereas, in most projects SUNY/CID would meet with a Steering Committee either annually or biannually, with this project, efforts were initiated to


meet once every month with the Executive Committee and once every other month with the Steering Committee. In an effort to improve the committees’ engagement with LSP and enhance their program management skills, LSP provided them, in separate sessions, a capacity building workshop on the management and monitoring of the institutional support program and the public-private partnerships. While this workshop was deemed successful by the participants and did lead to improved interactions during committee meetings, the overall effort proved awkward and lacking in local support. In the end, instead of a series of frequent independent meetings of the two groups, LSP met with each committee twice a year in separate sessions on the same day (one in the morning and one in the afternoon). At these meetings, LSP reported on its prior 6 months of programming, sought feedback from each of the committees, and advised them as to upcoming planned activities. While having committee engagement was useful, having two committees proved to be redundant, though there was resistance to consolidation. This formal structure was then supplemented by SUNY/CID’s normal practice of frequent engagement with the Secretary General, Administrative leaders, and key MPs (such as those heading LSP supported commissions) where program activities were regularly discussed, adjusted as necessary, and feedback given. Learning In order to assure that LSP was addressing the actual needs of the ANCI and achieving its objectives, LSP assessed and reassessed the needs of the ANCI and the effectiveness of its activities. Three activities were of particular note in this regard: a needs assessment at the outset of the project, day-to-day staff engagement with the ANCI, and periodic meetings with the executive committees to review project performance and PMP data. a) Conduct the Needs Assessment of the National Assembly (NA) In order to assure that that project would meet the actual needs of the National Assembly, at the outset of the project LSP conducted a comprehensive needs assessment of the NA in late 2013. After receiving approval from the Secretary General, the Needs Assessment of the ANCI began on 22 October 2013. It was conducted by a team of three international consultants supported by LSP program team. Two consultants were mobilized by SUNY and the third by Assemblée Parlementaire de la Francophonie/ Initiative Multilatérale de Coopération Interparlementaire Francophone (APF/IMCIF). The initial draft report submitted on 29 November 2013 and was approved by the NA and USAID in February 2014. The assessment analyzed the structure and fulfillment of the main parliamentary duties and current capacity of the ANCI and its units with regard to standard parliamentary practices. The mission proposed and prioritized the types of long, medium, and short-term training and technical assistance likely to contribute to meet those needs. The report also provided information on the current status of ANCI units and institutional tools, and made recommendations, inter alia, on the Strategic Plan, the NA Work Plan, the NA Information and Communication Centre, the Legislative Research Unit and the Human Resource Development Plan.


The findings were used by LSP as a part of its project work planning, starting in 2014, and were similarly incorporated by the ANCI within its annual work plans (PTAN.) b) Ongoing Assessment and Evaluation Throughout the course of the project, LSP had 5 to 6 program officers exclusively assigned to working with the ANCI under this Objective. They were regularly in touch with key counterparts (department leaders and chairs of commissions and political groups) both to plan for and managing upcoming activities and to obtain information about current events within the ANCI that might affect programming opportunities or challenges. c) Periodic Meetings with Executive Committees Moreover, in its biannual meetings with the executive and steering committee, the project reviewed the prior 6 month’s activities by the project, advised as to planned future programming, and sought ANCI member’s inputs. This resulted in serious consideration of programming effectiveness in achieving the goals of the project on a regular basis. Finally, once a year, LSP conducted its regular project review as a part of developing its next annual work plan. This was a month to two month process involving a review of progress on all activities accomplished to date, the interests expressed by the ANCI for support for particular initiative, and consideration of how future activities could help contribute to achieving the overall goals of the project. Adapting Parliaments are, by nature, dynamic institutions responding to outside influences and internal changes. Accordingly, in its assessment, LSP constantly sought both be aware of how this dynamic could potentially affect programming, but more importantly, when these changing circumstances offered particular opportunities to promote the development of the ANCI and the advancement of project goals. Based on this assessment, LSP made adjustments to its programming to address new challenges or to take advantage of opportunities that presented themselves. In some cases, these changes could be made quickly throughout the course of the year through the adjustment or revision of an existing planned activity to address changed circumstances. For example: with the outbreak of the Ebola crisis in 2014, there was an extraordinarily level of interest by the public and by the ANCI in reviewing the government’s efforts to address the threat. LSP had already started working with commissions within the ANCI on the use of site visits as a means of government oversight. Accordingly, it was able to quickly deploy resources to support a special commission in a nationwide review of the risks that Ebola would become a significant health threat (such as looking at the movement of peoples at the boarders and the practices of hunters seeking wild game) along with the preventive and potential response activities being undertaken by the government. Collaboration and Coordination with Other Implementers and Donors LSP continues its practice of working with the ANCI and other major donors and implementers supporting the National Assembly, including the World Bank, UNDP, Inter-Parliamentary Union,


Association of Francophone Parliaments, and the National Assembly of Quebec as well as other USAID funded programs to coordinate and collaborate in technical support activities. This avoids unnecessary waste and duplication and helps deepen support by allowing each implementer’s programming to build on that provided by the others. All such collaboration was done in close consultation with USAID.

Developmentally more significant, in its works supporting the ANCI’s development and implementation of its Strategic Development Plan and Annual Work Plans, LSP worked with the ANCI to assure that this coordinated support was guided by the ANCI’s 2013-2016 Strategic Plan. Not only did LSP specifically link all of its coordinated activities with other implementer to the ANCIs Strategic Plan, the ANCI itself consciously work with all donors and implementers to assure that they were also supporting the Strategic Plan.

L'Assemblée Parlementaire de la Francophonie (APF)

International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) (USAID)

United National Organizations in Cote d'Ivoire (ONUCI)

Catholic Relief Services (CRS)/Caritas

National Democratic Institute (NDI) (USAID)

United National Population Fund (UNPF)

Cote d'Ivoire Transition Initiative 2 (CITI2) (USAID) Projustice (USAID) United Nations Development

Program (UNDP)

International Labor Organization (ILO)

Property Rights and Artisanal Diamond Development (PRADD) (USAID)

World Bank

Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) UN Women


IV. ACHIEVEMENTS AND RESULTS BY OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE 1: NATIONAL ASSEMBLY BETTER ABLE TO FULFILL ITS BASIC

LEGISLATIVE, REPRESENTATIONAL AND OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS LSP provided support to the ANCI to enhance the internal institutional management of the National Assembly by its Secretariat, as well as its core functions in terms of lawmaking, oversight over government actions, and representation.

1. INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT/INTERNAL MANAGEMENT

Support the NA’s Strategic and Work Planning Development Many developing legislatures, like their counterparts among the ministries, operate on a reactive basis to the demands placed upon them and within a limited time frame. They do not think strategically. Many fail to develop or adhere to articulated work plans to help manage their institutions much less develop longer term strategic plans to help guide their development until pressed to do so by donors. That was not the case with Cote d’Ivoire where, with the reported assistance of UNDP, the ANCI had drafted its first five-year strategic plan (the 2012-2016 PSAN) and formally adopted it in February 2013. Perhaps more significantly, concurrent with the development of the PSAN, the ANCI had developed and adopted its first annual work plan, the 2012 PTAN for the period of July 2012 through June 2013. As was evident, the ANCI was not going through the motions of strategic planning – it was committed to that process. To assist the ANCI in managing its operations and development through work planning and strategic planning, LSP provided three support initiatives: Supporting the development and monitoring of the Annual Strategic plan; supported the National Assembly Communications Unit (CICAN) in the development and operations of its annual work planning; and supported the ANCI in the development of the second four-year strategic plan (the 2017-2020 PSAN). Support the ANCI’s Annual Work Planning for its PTAN Given its interest in strategic planning, upon LSP’s start-up, the ANCI sought LSP’s assistance to support the development and ongoing monitoring of the PTAN. Given this opening, LSP quickly moved to support the strategic process as an ongoing initiative. Starting in early 2013, LSP began working with ANCI leadership to refine the PTAN and in the summer held its first PTAN workshop, a three-day retreat involving 19 MPs, 23 ANCI staff members and 4 LSP staff, during which the strategic plan committee of the ANCI with LSP expert support assessed the implementation of the 2012 PTAN and reviewed and finalized the new 2013 PTAN.


A mid-term assessment of the 2013 PTAN was then held in January 2014, with even more members and staff in attendance, to review the implementation of the PTAN, including challenges and lessons learned, and strategize on how to implement the remaining parts of the PTAN. The main result of the commissions’ work was the unanimous agreement of the participants to establish an institutional framework that will support the implementation and monitoring of PTAN activities as well as the funding arrangements for these activities. It was decided that ANCI would appoint a manager to run this institutional framework. LSP would provide technical assistance to the appointed manager to help implementing the PTAN activities. Further developments occurred in the 2014 PTAN development workshop in August where, in addition to reviewing the NA’s performance under the 2013 PTAN and the review and finalization of the 2014 PTAN, it was agreed that the ANCI would begin to implement a program of monitoring and evaluation of the PTAN implementation throughout the year. While initially supported by part time consultants provided by LSP, by 2015, at the single PTAN workshop held that year, the ANCI agreed to utilize its own personnel to oversee the implementation and monitoring of the PTAN. It then dedicated 14 persons to the monitoring of the PTAN, including one MP representative from each of the 6 Permanent Commissions, one MP representative from each of the 5 parliamentary groups and a representative from the General Secretariat and a representative from the Cabinet of the President. In 2016, the development of the 2016 PTAN was combined with work to formally implement a monitoring and evaluation program to measure and evaluate the implementation of the work plan (a crucial next stage in work plan management) and with the initial preparations for the 2017-2020 PSAN within a workshop underwritten by the World Bank. This strategic planning process was important not only in promoting a clearer understanding of the mission of the ANCI and the steps needed to improve its performance, it provided a framework and guidance for all donor supported activities within the ANCI. From its inception, LSP was dedicated to working closely with other donor implemented projects to assure the coordination of support activities and to avoid the waste of resources commonly arising from multiple programs replicating the same types of support activities. To structure that collaboration, LSP used the PSAN and PTAN as the basis for its support and as the ANCI approved framework for other donors’ programs as well, an approach supported by the ANCI. To enhance this donor buy-in, LSP worked to engage other donor implementers (such as UNDP, ONUCI, UNWOMEN and the World Bank) as participants in the strategic planning workshops. Develop Comprehensive Communications Strategy and the CICAN’s Annual Work Plan In addition to supporting the ANCI in its overall work planning, LSP also worked with the National Assembly’s Communication Unit (CICAN) in the development of an overall communications strategy for the ANCI along with the development and management of a work plan to put that strategy into effect. That process included working with CICAN staff and ANCI leadership in 2014 to develop the overall communications strategy, submitting that strategy to

Quester Abdoulaye Kone speaks at the PTAN Closing Ceremony - Jan. 31, 2014


ANCI leadership for validation and approval, and then providing a workshop to all CICAN staff to assure that they understood the strategy. Then, in 2015, LSP supported the formal adoption and implementation of the 2014-2015 Communication work plan through a workshop (held on March 11 to 13 in Yamoussoukro in collaboration with the AP) followed by direct technical assistance. The workshop was attended by 33 participants including 2 MPs, 30 ANCI staff members and a communications expert. In witness of the importance of this topic, the Secretary General, Chief of Staff of ANCI President Soro, the Finance Director, and the Director of Legislative Services were all active participants ensuring that the resulting plan would have the full support of the ANCI leadership. In addition to approving the new annual work plan and to demonstrate the linkage between an activities focused work plan and its relationship to broader institutional concerns, the workshop leaders encouraged participants to not only discuss the content of informational programming and the best methods of communicating that to the public but also how to improve internal communications within the National Assembly to assure that the CICAN was provided with the information necessary to tell the National Assembly’s story to the public. To assist in the operationalizing the communications work plan, LSP worked with the CICAN on an implementation plan in which LSP helped the CICAN identify the priority communications activities for the National Assembly, develop scopes of work for these activities and identify potential partners to provide financial and technical assistance to the CICAN for their implementation. While this support effort was not directly targeting the ANCI’s overall strategic planning process, the skills in strategic thinking and work planning were developed and refined among the staff contributing to the ANCI’s capacity to take primary responsibility for developing the 2017-2020 PSAN. Support the Development of the 2017-2020 Strategic Plan While not included in the original proposal, supporting the development of the 2017-2020 Strategic Plan (2017-2020 PSAN) was a natural extension of the objective under this Activity as it brought to completion the process of Strategic plan development, from inception, through execution, to evaluation and reform in a new strategic plan.

To lay the groundwork for the new PSAN, in 2016 LSP used the 2016 PTAN development workshop as a forum for the ANCI to review the review and analyze the implementation of the 2013-2016 PSAN. During the course of two workshops (the PTAN workshop supported by the World Bank and an LSP funded follow on) participants concluded that:

It was noted that only 25% of the 2015 PTAN activities were realized, with 95 activities out 382 achieved.

Inadequate funding was identified as the most challenging barrier. The PSAN is usually financed by ANCI development partners and is not taken into consideration in the National Assembly Budget. This situation resulted in the National Assembly being very dependent on international partners such as USAID, UNDP and the Word Bank, in executing activities outlined under the PSAN and further defined under the annual PTANs. Participants recommended that the National Assembly begin incorporating funds for the


PSAN and PTAN in the future ANCI budget in order to reduce its dependency on donor assistance

Lack of training: Participants underlined the fact that the focal points in charge of the PSAN do not usually have the required knowledge to run the activities. In addition of the lack of training, the lack of staff is also a handicap to the effective implementation of the PSAN. They are not enough staff to carry out the PSAN and this has a clear negative impact in the achievements rate.

In terms of the 2017-2021 PSAN, participants identified new priorities such as job-creation and the needs of Ivorian youth. Participants also noted the need to take into account the creation of the Senate in the drafting of the new Strategic Development Plan. Following this discussion, participants agreed to the following agenda for the drafting of the new PSAN.

To further support the development of the new PSAN, LSP developed a questionnaire to assist the National Assembly in outlining major strategic elements for the new PSAN. The questionnaire was submitted to parliamentary officials at the start of December and will be submitted to development partners in January. Once the responses are received, LSP will work with the drafting committee to incorporate the responses in the initial draft of the PSAN.

In 2017, LSP supported the development of the new 2017-2020 PSAN by organizing two key workshops. From 20 to 23 July 2017 LSP organized a workshop for the formulation and drafting of the Strategic Plan of the National Assembly of Côte d'Ivoire 2017-2020. The workshop was held in Bassam and involved a Joint Technical Committee composed of 10 members from ANCI and 5 LSP staff members. During this workshop, the committee completed a preliminary draft of the Strategic Plan 2017-2020 PSAN. LSP then engaged an international consultant to review the draft and submit a revised version with comments to the committee for further consideration.

The revised PSAN was then reviewed during a workshop held on July 31, 2017 in Abidjan. The participants included the Secretary General of ANCI, the deputies representing the organs of ANCI, the drafting committee of the PSAN, and the international consultant. The drafting committee presented the draft PSAN to the participants who discussed in detail and subjected to proposed revisions. The validated document is composed of 5 parts: the PSAN budgetary matrix; the PSAN logical framework matrix; the PSAN project; and the PSAN 2017-2020 financing plan. The international consultant was then charged with incorporating all of the amendments and presenting a clean copy to the ANCI for adoption. It is noteworthy that, unlike the development of the 2013-2016 PSAN which relied heavily on international support, with this strategic plan the ANCI and its team effectively worked to produce the core document that served as basis for the proposed PSAN. It was only then that it was reviewed by the international consultant. This demonstrates that the sustained support provided to the ANCI in its yearly work planning along with the work with the CICAN resulted in an effective transfer of strategic and work planning skills.

Provide Technical Assistance to Improve HR Services of the NA. Effective staff management and staff quality are crucial to a well running legislature. LSP sought to improve the Human Resources Service of the National Assembly on both a systemic basis


Service Department Heads reviewing proposed modifications to organizational structure of the ANCI - Mar. 18, 2016

(through an improved management system) and through capacity training of administrative staff. The overall goal of LSP in this area was to assist HR Services to assess Human Resources Policies, draft standardized job descriptions or terms of reference, and to help HR Services to draft its HR Action Plan. The November 2013 needs assessment conducted by LSP had found significant weaknesses in the human resources practices within the ANCI including issues of recruitment, hiring, retention, and staffing. The ANCI and Secretariat agreed with this assessment and the inclusion of this task within the annual workplan. Over the next three years, LSP, in collaboration with the Assembly of Francophone Parliamentarians (APF), identified two international experts to carry out a needs assessment of the HR services of the National Assembly and work with the ANCI to develop a new human resources management plan. During the first visit, in 2014, the two experts, Mr. Serge Bouchard and Mr. Male Diop, HR managers of the National Assembly of Quebec and Senegal respectively, held working sessions with the Secretary General, the Director of Human Resources and the Head of the Office of the National Assembly President to assess the organization chart of the National Assembly and collect data on the staff of the Assembly. They also reviewed the Development Plan of the Assembly and obtained recommendations from ANCI political and administrative leadership. The final reports outlining the consultants’ recommendations was submitted to the ANCI Secretary General and Head of the Office of the President in August. The reports proposed improvements in the human resource management of the National Assembly of Cote d'Ivoire and recommended their inclusion in the Strategic Development and Administration Plan for the ANCI that the Assembly already had in place. In June 2015, the National Assembly of Quebec, through APF, provided two HR experts, Mr. Serge Bouchard, the ANQ Director of Administration, and Ms. Catherine Matt, HR advisor for the ANQ, to support the implementation of some of the assessment recommendations. The experts provided trainings to the HR service personnel from in the following areas:

Development of scopes of work Development of a performance evaluation system for personnel of the ANCI Development of a recruitment plan for positions within the ANCI

The consultants conducted a series of all-day workshops with 5 members of the HR Service staff, including the Head of Human Resources, walking them through each step in these subject areas, focusing on responding to the current needs of the ANCI and working with the service to draw up

templates and documentation that can immediately be put into practical use. Subsequently, the experts submitted a mission report with the presentations, templates and tools covered during the training to the Secretary General and the Director of Cabinet of the National Assembly. Following the mission, the ANCI put together a technical committee to develop a new

organigram for the National Assembly that not only reflects the current state of the National


Assembly but also addresses anticipated changes. Finally, in 2016 LSP held a working seminar for all service department heads to review and validate the proposed revisions to the organizational chart for the ANCI and human resources management plan. Each member of the ANCI review committee was tasked to review, modify. and validate the proposed adjustments during the workshop. A total of 19 persons participated in the workshop, including directors and heads of services, members of the general secretariat as well as members of the Cabinet of the President of the National Assembly. Participants validated the logical framework, new organizational chart, scopes of work, and administrative regulations. While the experts involved in this initiative were each well received, as were the related trainings, and the reports accepted with some enthusiasm, in the end it was not implemented by the ANCI ostensibly due to financial constraints. The problem may have been one of attempting to achieve too much within a short time frame (the two relatively limited visits of the international consultants) as opposed to seeking incremental change through more sustained engagement, as had been achieved in the cast of PTAN management and the strategic plan monitoring and evaluation efforts.

Provide Trainings to Build the Capacity of ANCI Staff Throughout the course of project implementation, LSP provided a wide range to trainings to build the capacity of ANCI to provide staff support. In some cases, these trainings were built into specific areas of activities (such as mentoring staff to support commission site visits – as described later) or on a more general basis. For example, based upon an ongoing assessment of staff capacity and at the request of the National

Assembly, LSP provided a training to improve the writing and communication skills of ANCI administrators for 100 ANCI administrative personnel including the Secretary General and the Director of Legislative Services. Two MPs also participated. The seminar addressed writing techniques and communications in a public service environment, with particular emphasis on the parliamentary context. The training also discussed parliamentary administration ethics and the expected behavior of persons representing public service institutions.

Significantly, for this seminar the ANCI and LSP entered in a cost-sharing arrangement with the ANCI paying the full fees for one of the trainers and half of the fees for the other. This cost-sharing arrangement demonstrates both the close collaborative partnership which LSP and the ANCI have been able to achieve and maintain during the life of the LSP program and the political will and engagement of the ANCI in the successful delivery of support activities by its partners. In order to ensure the sustainability of the techniques taught during the seminar, the LSP program prepared a manual on administrative acts incorporating the tools covered during the seminar to be

Small working group responding to one of the assignments for the seminar – May 7, 2015


“We very much appreciate this collaboration between LSP and APF as well as the transparency of the process which allows for the adaptation of partner support to the greatest benefit to our Assembly.” -Ahouanzi Latte, Secretary General of the ANCI

used for use, as a reference tool for the parliamentary administrators. 300 copies of the manual were provided to the National Assembly for distribution in December 2015. Here again, LSP also worked with other implementers to encourage and assist in their providing similar (though not duplicative) trainings. For example, in 2014 UNDP held a seminar on the standards and best practices in the provision of the legislative services in Yamoussoukro for the Legislative Services Department. The seminar aimed to provide the leadership and staff of the Legislative Services branch with a clearer understanding of international standards regarding the roles and responsibilities of National Assembly staff and train the staff in the techniques of developing and reviewing legislation. LSP staff members participated in the seminar to assure consistency in technical support and avoid unnecessary duplication in trainings.

Support the Secretariat in Meeting Basic ICT Needs. The 2013 Needs Assessment stressed the need to assist the ANCI General Secretariat in the planning and development of its basic information and communication technology (ICT) needs. Accordingly, as part of the collaborative partnership between LSP and the Assembly of Francophone Parliamentarians (APF), in 2014 LSP engaged the services of Mr. Real Charlebois, Director of the IT Department of the National Assembly of Canada, to conduct an ICT needs assessment involving a full review of the ICT infrastructure and resources then in place at the NA. His final report to LSP included short-, medium-, and long-term recommendations for ICT enhancements which include management of ICT resources, policies and oversight procedures, and infrastructural improvements. The report was submitted to the ANCI in October 2014 after review by USAID. In December, the ANCI validated the report and outlined the National Assembly’s short-, medium-, and long-term priorities. In subsequent consultations, Mr. Charlebois assisted the ICT services in refining the priority needs of the ANCI and developing the specifications for these priorities. Three areas were identified as most important to the National Assembly:

Improvement and extension of the internet network within the National Assembly

Procurement and installation of e-voting equipment Procurement and installation of debate transcription

equipment Based on these priorities, the consultant developed an ICT implementation plan. The plan detailed the specifications for the equipment required, ensuring that all new equipment would be compatible with existing equipment. The plan also outlined an implementation strategy that sequences acquisition and instillation so as to allow the ANCI to grow its ICT infrastructure according to its needs and/or has the adequate resources to do so. APF/NORIA is an ANCI partner with funding set aside for ICT support to the National Assembly. In an effort to leverage resources and support collaborative engagement with other implementing partners, during the summer and early fall of 2015 LSP worked with APF/NORIA to coordinate


their support for the ANCI to meet the assessment priorities. It was agreed that APF/NORIA would immediately provide the Wi-Fi equipment and infrastructure, the ANCI’s top priority. Subsequently, LSP supported the procurement of e-voting equipment, additional WiFi enhancements, and the debate transcription equipment to document all parliamentary debates. With the installation of this e-voting equipment, the National Assembly joins a select club in which only 67% of all legislatures around the world, mostly in developed countries, have the capacity to conduct electronic voting.12 The system provides the ANCI with more transparency in the voting process and enables the ANCI to ascribe votes to individuals or conduct blind votes depending on the procedure they choose to follow. The equipment will also enable a more rapid vote count less prone to human error and recounts as the votes will be registered electronically as opposed to the current manual hand count system which is most frequently used.

Support the NA’s Capacity to Effectively Communicate with the Public. Establishing effective lines of communication with the public is important for any legislature so as to inform the public of issues of importance being addressed by the legislature. Such communication is even more important for post-conflict country in which such communication can contribute to reestablishing public trust in the legitimacy of the government through the legislature’s law making and/or supervision of the government. Fortunately, the ANCI appreciated the importance of informing the public of its work through an active National Assembly Communications Unit (CICAN). To strengthen the CICAN, it was provided three types of support: planning; capacity building; and material service delivery support. Perhaps the most important area of support related to previously described support for the CICAN in thinking strategically about its communications efforts and in developing work plans to execute that communications strategy. Communications skills are meaningless without meaningful information to share. Once the strategy and work plan was in place, LSP worked to improve the human systems and

capacity of the CICAN to communicate effectively. Since communication via that mass media requires not only the contributions of CICAN staff in making information presentable and available, but also the work of journalists to receive and translate that information for presentation in the media (whether print or broadcast), LSP provided a number of trainings for journalists (both under this institutional initiative and as a part of objective two’s platform work.) These trainings not only educated the journalists about the role and legislative processes of the ANCI so that they not only relate the activities carried out by the ANCI but also

12 IPU. World e-Parliament Report 2016. 34 (IPU 2016) available at: http://archive.ipu.org/pdf/publications/eparl16-en.pdf

Participants in journalists training – May 2015

http://archive.ipu.org/pdf/publications/eparl16-en.pdf



provide necessary context to explain, for example, the differences between a commission’s review of a bill and a commission holding a hearing to oversee government actions. Moreover, in order to cultivate effective relationships between journalists covering the ANCI and CICAN staff, LSP organized the training to be co-led by an LSP provided expert and by CICAN staff.

In addition to building capacity through specific trainings, LSP helped members of the CICAN and MPs to improve their skills through mentoring and trainings linked to certain types of communications activities. For example, LSP worked closely with the CICAN to redesign and populate its website, including trainings on website maintenance of actual website. LSP also worked with MPs on how to improve the presence on and communication through social media such as Facebook, blog accounts, and their use of their professional email accounts. This capacity building through mentoring and practice also extended to including CICAN staff as participants to handle public communications functions on other LSP supported activities such as commission field visits, public hearings, and platform activities (under Objective 2.)

Finally, LSP provided material assistance to the ANCI providing it with needed facilities and allowing it to execute certain communications activities. For example, in 2015-2015 LSP procured needed audiovisual equipment (cameras, tripods and microphones) needed to help record and broadcast ANCI related programming and, at various times, LSP helped the CICAN design, develop, and publish print outreach and promotion materials on the ANCI including a quarterly legislative newsletter.

Support Review of the NA Rules and Procedures The rules and procedures of legislature can significantly facilitate or inhibit institutional effectiveness. During the assessment of the ANCI, a number of weaknesses were identified in the NA’s Rules of Procedure and from the onset of active project implementation, LSP regularly consulted with ANCI leadership about the possibility of undertaking a review and revision of the rules to make them more efficient and effective. However, ANCI leadership resisted. A number of problematic rules were the result of post conflict political compromises to avoid significant conflicts with potential reverberations outside of the ANCI itself. Accordingly, ANCI leadership resisted reviewing the rules and was particularly concerned about involving outsiders within any review of the rules that might take place. Finally, following the ratification of the new constitution which includes changes in government, such as the establishment of a new Senate within the legislative branch, that necessitate a change in the rules of procedure, in early 2017 ANCI leadership agreed with LSP staff that the ANCI would need to review and revise the rules of procedure. While LSP had originally anticipated engaging an international consultant to work with the ANCI to help finalize the revision in August 2017, this engagement was put on hold when LSP’s existing obligation proved inadequate to meet all of the planned activities and operating expenses. Consequently, with LSP staff assistance, the ANCI has worked on its own to finalize the rules of procedure revisions. Ultimately, in terms of legislative development, ANCI’s taking on the primary responsibility for its review and revision of the rules of procedure may be considered a better developmental outcome than a perhaps more technically informed revision facilitated by an international expert.


Support the ANCI’s Budgeting and Financial Management The purpose of this task was to conduct activities to build the capacity of Questeurs and SFC staff to plan and implement a transparent NA budget that can be used as a basis for negotiation with the Executive. It cannot be denied that a legislature’s ability to control its own budget is a crucial guarantor of its independence. Nonetheless, despite repeated interventions by LSP, the ANCI resisted all LSP efforts to provide training and support in this area. All issues surrounding the budget (both the national budget and the internal parliamentary budget) are considered highly sensitive by various factions within the parliament. In particular, the President of the ANCI refused to share the budget with the MPs. This is also a sensitive issue between the ANCI and the Executive. Here again, because authority over the budget is related to the power sharing arrangements used to end the prior conflict, leaders within the ANCI were hesitant to engage on this issue and they were particularly sensitive to the possibility of foreign interference. Accordingly, LSP, ANCI, and USAID agreed to drop this initiative. That said, LSP provided some training and support on issues relating to the national budget including a workshop on gender sensitive budgeting and a manual on the budget process that was presented at the new member’s orientation in February 2017. Build the Capacity of the Commissions and Parliamentary Groups The vast majority of a legislature’s work is conducted under the auspice of its specialized committees (referred to as Commissions by the ANCI) and by specialized work groups of MPs (referred to as Parliamentary Groups by the ANCI.) Accordingly, from 2014 onward, LSP devoted significant resources to support the development and strengthening of these groups. At a basic level, LSP provided training and technical support to MPs and the staffs that support these groups starting with fundamental trainings on the nature of commissions and parliamentary groups including:

- International standards on the activities of Standing Committees and Parliamentary Groups;

- Mandates of Standing Committees and Parliamentary Groups; - Overview of essential standards and processes in drafting legislation; - Strategies for the action plan of a committee or parliamentary group at the National

Assembly; - How to Formulate and Initiate a “Good Law”; - How to Monitor Government Activity; and - Technical Support to Effectively Scrutinize Government-initiated Legislation

To assure sustainability LSP also developed and produced a range of basic manuals as resources for training and reference including manuals on legislative drafting, legislative oversight and field missions, legislative research and a guide to the budget process. Given the concerns of post-conflict recovery, LSPs work with the commissions and parliamentary groups also embraced a post conflict reconciliation and conflict prevention effort – particularly in the run up to the 2015 presidential elections. Having experience over a decade of conflict related to its prior presidential elections concerns were obviously high. To help address them, LSP


partnered with the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), Côte d’Ivoire Transition Initiative2 (CITI2)/OTI, West Africa Network for Peace Building (WANEP) and the National Program on Social Cohesion (PNCS) to conduct a workshop on conflict reconciliation, prevention, and management during the elections. The workshop was held in Dabou from September 18 to 20, 2015. A total of 59 participants took part and included 26 MPs, 21 ANCI administration staff, and 12 representatives from two CSO coalition groups, PEACE and POECI, working in the electoral process domain. The seminar provided the opportunity for USAID partners to present their contributions to peace promotion and civic education during the electoral period. Each partner institution presented their activities in support of peaceful and transparent elections which included early warning mechanisms to detect possible conflicts as a result of elections (WANEP), civic education campaigns to promote peaceful and credible elections (NDI & IFES), capacity building support to national and local institutions to manage elections (CITI2), as well as the role that MPs can play in promoting peace during elections (PNCS). The seminar also allowed MPs and CSO representatives to discuss their contributions as well as discuss each other’s views on the other’s roles and responsibilities during the election season. Some of the exchanges centered on the often negative views that each had of the other in past elections, with claims that both MPs and CSOs had borne some responsibilities in inciting instability. Participants also identified how each actor could be a vehicle for peace and social cohesion for the upcoming elections, as well as exchanged ideas on how both parties could work together to achieve these objectives. During the conference, a group of MPs and CSOs representatives worked together to draft a joint declaration on the engagement of the MPs and CSO representatives present in the promotion of peace and social cohesion during the elections. The declaration was finalized and read out at the end of the seminar, as well as published on the ANCI website13.

Support for the creation of special Gender and Youth Permanent Commission While promoting the gender equity through support for the professional development of women MPs and supporting gender sensitive legislative practices through a legislature are standard practices in SUNY/CID projects, from the start of LSP implementation, USAID repeatedly requested that LSP work with the ANCI to establish a special Gender and Youth Permanent Commission. Unfortunately, ANCI leadership had refused to include this issue in its strategic development plan and from the outset repeatedly rejected the idea of establishing such a permanent commission. ANCI leadership believed that such a special commission was not needed as gender issues could and should be dealt with within the existing commission structure.

13 L’engagement des Deputes a oeuvrer pour la paix. Assemblee Nationale de Côte d'Ivoire, 2015. http://www.assnat.ci/assembleenationale/?l-engagement-des-deputes-a-oeuvrer-pour-la-paix

Participants taking part in the seminar – Sept. 18, 2015

http://www.assnat.ci/assembleenationale/?l-engagement-des-deputes-a-oeuvrer-pour-la-paix


Addressing the Needs of Women Recognizing both that without a strong, focused mandate to address women’s issues, institutions (both governmental and private sector) generally fail to do so as androcentric bias is engrained in society14 and USAID’s strong commitment to creating a special women’s commission as the means of addressing this, SUNY/CID sought to carry out USAID’s wishes. At the same time, change could not happen without the cooperation of the ANCI and any attempt to force the adoption of a special commission risked provoking significant blow back. Accordingly,LSP sought to promote gender awareness and cultivate internal advocates for change by working with interested MPs and existing structures within the National Assembly to strengthen those structures (particularly the women’s caucus (CAUCUS FEMIPACI) and a Youth Parliament) to promote gender inclusive and youth policy considerations in their work, and to promote women’s professional development so that they could serve as role models and reform leaders. Accordingly, for example, in 2014 LSP supported the organization of a Gender Promotion Workshop at the ANCI’s Chamber (Rotonde) in which 17 MPs participated, including the ANCI Vice-President and Secretary General. The exchanges between the participants led to the identification of six major areas of concerns for women and youths in Cote d’Ivoire requiring donor assistance and ANCI’s attention:

- Access to education, especially in the rural/remote constituencies, for very young and youth females.

- Youth female early pregnancy and limited access to information and to contraceptives. - Access to land ownership and to family assets inheritance by heritage/succession. - Availability of female leaders as model and mentor for young females. - Violence against women in general and in particular, ‘forced’ and early wedding/

matrimonial arrangements, and sexual mutilation. - Role and promotion of women in the national reconciliation process and in peacekeeping.

LSP also engaged with CAUCUS FEMPACI which on May 19, through the Constitutive General Assembly of the Women Caucus adopted Internal Rules and designated its Bureau and President. Further, the caucus identified the issues of women’s access to income-generating activities and micro-credit lending as substantive priorities of the caucus. During the Succeeding Strategic Planning Workshop, supported by the IPU, participants examined ways to ensure inclusion of gender promotion activities within PTAN, while LSP worked with the participants to identify issues of concern that could be addressed within LSP’s work plan. LSP staff also participated in a Parliamentary conference for the FEMPACI Caucus, organized by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) at the National Assembly from November 11 to 12, 2014. The objective of the conference was to review the current level of participation by women parliamentarians at the national and international level, and define strategies and measures to reinforce and increase this participation in Cote d’Ivoire. LSP participated in this conference as a partner of the FEMPACI Caucus. At the end of the seminar, recommendations would put forward to introduce a bill mandating a 33 per cent quota of female representation in elected positions and

14 See, e.g. Lombardo, Emanuela and Petra Meier. “Policy.” The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, April 2015 Lisa Disch & Mary Hawkesworth, eds.


the setting up of a parity observatory. The seminar concluded with identifying several broad areas of action which the Caucus should focus on. These include:

- Raising awareness of the importance of women’s access to the parliament targeting political authorities, CSOs, media, and the population.

- Garner support from governmental and non-governmental institutions in reinforcing women candidature.

- Request continued support from partners in implementing the strategic objectives and activities of the Women’s Caucus.

- Request an audience with the President of the Republic, the President of the ANCI, political party leaders, and other key actors on the promotion of gender parity.

In order to both promote the consideration of women’s current issues of concern as well as promoting the professional development of caucus members, LSP proposed to the Caucus that it would support a number of field missions by members to examine those issues in their constituencies. After extensive discussions in 2015, in 2016, the Caucus determined that each of their constituencies had particular gender issues unique to each constituency. In order to select the topics and constituencies to be visited, and to enhance their development as leaders and issues advocates, LSP requested that each Caucus member submit a proposal of the activity they wanted to undertake. LSP received 12 proposed activities from 12 members of the Caucus during the last week of April and reached out to each of the members of the Caucus that submitted activity proposals to clarify and finalize their activities in accordance with the scope of LSP interventions. In the end, 6 missions were organized in the months of July and August with one in Abengourou, two in Yopougon, one in Bouaflé, one in Daoukro and one in Touba. The missions involved the MPs for those constituencies (along with other caucus members) and various associations of women and youth. During these missions 580 participants were questioned about the factors that impair the economic development and autonomy of women. Under a plan developed at the meeting, the MPs agreed to collaborate with the participating associations of women and youth in advocating that specialized government services departments provide information and trainings on funding sources, management and other skills trainings. In addition to working with FEMPACI, LSP also sought to promote attention to gender concerns as a part of its broader programming efforts. For example, in 2013, in partnership with the International Parliamentary Union (IPU), in the lead up to the consideration of the new national budget, LSP sponsored a workshop on Gender Budgeting. The workshop was chaired by the First Vice-President of ANCI and had 48 participants: 19 MPs (including 10 women) representing standing committees and parliamentary groups; 15 parliamentary staff members (including 4 women); 2 CAPEC experts; and 6 journalists (including 1 woman). As a result of LSP’s sustained engagement with the caucus and with ANCI leadership, ANCI leadership finally agreed to the creation of a special gender commission. In a workshop supported in partnership with UNWOMEN, UNDP, and UNFPA, the ANCI to develop their strategy for addressing gender equity and women’s issues. In addition to members of the women’s caucus, the workshop included representatives of the parliamentary groups and permanent commissions, the Ministry of Family and key civil society organizations. Forty (40) people attended the workshop.


Reading of Oral Question by the President of the Youth Parliament, Mlle SAHIE Lekpély Flore Andréa in Yamoussoukro – May 27, 2017

The first and foremost concern that they had, and had for several years, was they did not want to relegate the consideration of gender to one commission. Instead, while they recognized that there was some value is creating a specialized forum to address laws and actions specifically focused on issues of gender. At the same time, they wanted to develop cross cutting integration of gender in the parliament’s activities. To meet these concerns, the ANCI resolved to create a special commission on gender within the parliament and identify one gender focal point in each commission. This gender special commission will review and provide recommendations on all laws related to gender. (It should be noted that under Article 18 of the internal rules of procedure, a special commission is normally to be created to address one specific issue confronting the parliament, at the conclusion of which the commission ends. Using this as an ongoing mechanism for a topic area represents a new and potentially controversial interpretation of the rules.) At the same time, the gender focal point in each commission will be tasked with assuring that issues of gender are addressed in all commission activities. Addressing Issues of Youth While attention to issues of gender frequently include concerns about youth (family care, education, health, economic opportunities for young women etc.), the ANCI was unwilling to explicitly create either a specialized or joint commission targeting youth. Again, they felt that the issues of youth should be and were being addressed under the existing commissions. The one significant area specific outreach to youth is the ANCI’s support for a National Youth Parliament. The National Youth Parliament, through the process of a model legislative session, is

intended to educate students with the potential of becoming leaders of the future about the work of the ANCI. It also allows them to raise issues of youth concern as part of the Youth Parliamentary deliberations and present those concerns to MPs and Ministers who join the participants during their deliberations. LSP sponsored meetings of the National Youth Parliament in both 2016 and 2017. In 2016, the NYP’s Model Meeting centered around “Civic and political engagement of youth in Cote d’Ivoire’s democratic process” and the goal was to revitalize the National Youth Parliament as an interface between the youth and the government. In order to

provide them with some practical tools for engagement, the workshop also included training on advocacy and public policy monitoring. Throughout the course of the two days of the workshop, the 20 young participants, drawn from across the country, and 12 MPs engaged in a lively discussion of the issues. Among the recommendations coming out of these discussions was for the government to increase the opportunities for youth to participate in decision making at a local level and for the National Assembly to designate focal points in each of the parliament’s permanent commissions to assure a more effective interaction between youth and the National Assembly. During the 2017 meeting of the National Youth Parliament, LSP trained participants on how the ANCI conducts oversight over government actions, specifically focusing on executive actions


“The interns have been great – and we need them (along with other new staff).” Sr. Staff, DI Mid-Term Evaluation

addressing youth issues. As part of this training, LSP, in tandem with the National Assembly, discussed how to prepare and ask oral questions of the Executive. Participants focused on issues related to youth employment and the work of the Ministry of Youth, Youth Employment and Civic Service. The participants were then able to actually address their questions related to youth employment directly to representatives from Ministry who attended the meeting. The seminar also assisted the NPC members in preparing for their upcoming participation in the Francophone Youth Parliament meetings in Luxemburg in July 2017. Develop an ANCI Internship Program Like most African parliaments, the ANCI lacks the staff necessary to address all of its needs. In order to help it do so, LSP worked with the ANCI to establish an internship program. In 2016 and 2017, LSP, in collaboration with the National Assembly, recruited and engaged 10 interns selected on the basis of merit. The interns were distributed between three services under the purview of the Director of Legislative Services (DSL): the Studies and Parliamentary Assistance Services (SEAP) received 2 interns, the SDA received 5 interns, and the Parliamentary Debate Services (SDP) received 3 interns. In addition to providing assistance for the National Assembly, the internship program also represents a valuable youth outreach effort. It promotes the professional development of a group of talented young individuals, educates them about the needs of public service, and potentially cultivates them as future staff of the ANCI. Thus, in addition to receiving training in the specific tasks of their internship, LSP mentored them and provided additional trainings, such as a half-day training on report drafting techniques. LSP conducted regular check-ins with the interns on a monthly basis to monitor their work experience within each of the three services and provided additional capacity building support as needed over the period of their internship. LSP also provided the ANCI with limited basic equipment and supplies to enable the interns to better fulfill their tasks, notably headphones for the SDA interns in order facilitate their ability to transcribe ANCI debates.

New Member Orientation Program In December 2016, Cote d’Ivoire held legislative elections for the 2017-2020 legislature. This

new legislature included 100 newly elected MPs, representing 40% of all seats. In order to support a smooth transition from the old to the new legislature, the National Assembly, in partnership with LSP, NDI, and UN Women, organized a five day New

Participants at the New Member Orientation - February 5-10, 2017


Member Orientation program in Yamoussoukro from February 5 to 10, 2017. This workshop served as an orientation for the MPs of the 2017-2020 Legislature on the work of the Parliament and their role within the institution, specifically in regards to the legislative, oversight, and representational functions. While substantially targeting new members of the legislature, all returning MPs also participated, allowing them to share their experience and build effective working relationships with the new members. The workshop centered on the following themes, presented by a range of experts from the National Assembly, NDI, UN Women, and LSP:

The founding and history of the National Assembly in Cote d’Ivoire The National Assembly in a bicameral context The responsibility of the National Assembly in the budget process Promotion of gender in parliamentary work Parliamentary diplomacy Organization of the National Assembly of Cote d’Ivoire Relationship between MPs and Parliamentary Administrators Legislation drafting and analysis Overview of parliamentary oversight over government actions Overview of the collaborative community platforms

Each thematic area was followed by a question and answer period chaired by a panel of experts on the particular subject. The MPs were actively engaged throughout the seminar. Incumbent MPs readily shared their experiences in the previous legislature, both positive and negative, and all MPs demonstrated interest in receiving more information on many of the subjects presented. Overall, this activity was extremely well received by the National Assembly, with a strong participant turnout, averaging around 260 persons per session (and peaking around 300) throughout the entire week of the seminar. To further support future orientations for members and staff, LSP during the course of its programming also developed a number of guides and manuals on ANCI practice. These include:

Guide on Legislative Research Guide on Legislative Drafting Guide on the Budget Cycle Guide on Information Missions

These guides were drafted by LSP staff and experts, then edited and approved in consultation with ANCI staff. 2. LEGISLATION According to the OTI survey of citizen perceptions of the Parliament, the primary role of a Member of Parliament is the legislative role.15 Indeed, the ANCI is a relatively active legislative 15 The same poll also shows that citizens perceive the legislation passed so far is largely irrelevant to meeting their needs (66% of respondents), and that they are generally not familiar with Parliament’s oversight role. Research


body, reviewing, and passing approximately 40 pieces of legislation a year. Nonetheless, there are challenges. As is the case with almost all legislatures, the actual work of analysis and recommendations for change or approval is carried out in the specialized commissions and in the parliamentary groups. Interviews with leaders of these groups revealed two major concerns. First, they complained that they have very little time to review proposed legislation and produce reports on the bills. Second, nearly all of the MPs consulted in the 2013 Assessment reported that they do not have the capacity to understand the subject matter of many bills and that then need professional research assistance. These concerns are recognized by the ANCI as a whole. The legislative function is a priority pillar of the Strategic Plan, which recommends adequate time for consideration and study of legislation and proposes to develop staff research capacity and expand access to external partners the plan also identifies improving the conditions for MPs to initiate legislation. As is common in many parts of the developing world, such as Africa, the Executive is primarily responsible for drafting legislation. 16 While LSP did join the ANCI in lobbying the government to provide drafts of proposed laws with a greater lead time to allow effective deliberations, the ANCI was unable to compel compliance. Instead, LSP sought to work around this problem by promoting better processes and procedures. Specifically, to help address these issues, LSP conducted developmental activities in four areas: commission operations/management; human capacity building; research infrastructure; and developing supplemental resources.

Human Capacity Building In order to maximize the effectiveness of MPs, it is crucial that they have adequate staff support by well trained staff members. The build the capacity of ANCI staff, LSP offered a blended approach of providing formal trainings, supported by appropriate documentation, along with a program of sustained mentoring and experiential learning. Given the mutually beneficial and reinforcing character of commission law making activities and commission oversight activities, where for example, the skills or questioning a government official or minister can be applied to either an issue of oversight or a specific law, the capacity building in one area often impacts practice in the other. (See also the support described under 1.7 above.) LSP experts led staff and MP trainings in a range of activities regarding commission operations, research, law making and legislative drafting. For example, in August 2015, LSP organized a 4-day training workshop on legislative research and policy analyses as well as on the synthesis of legal texts for 22 parliamentary administrators and parliamentary assistants. The training was led Mr. Olivier Delamare, a Senior Advisor of the French Senate (provided through LSP’s partnership with the APF.) Participants in the workshop were introduced to several different concepts and methodologies:

Legislative research techniques, Methods of evaluating public policies,

International, Baseline Study on the Perception of the National Assembly by the Population Living in Côte d'Ivoire. AECOM Office of Transitions Initiatives, 2012. p. 14. 16 See, Barkin, Joel, ed. Legislative Power in Emerging African Democracies. Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2009.


Proper source citation practices and avoidance of plagiarism, Principal sources and sites of judicial information Methods of finding information using search tools Information monitoring

After the training workshop and discussions with participants, Mr. Delamare offered recommendations on improving the legislative research capacity of the ANCI which includes: ensuring reliable access to internet; developing a resource base which people can access; and developing judicial-political websites in Cote d’Ivoire. The training was subsequently incorporated in a manual on legislative research and policy analysis prepared by LSP in conjunction with the SDA. This type of training was also provided to parliamentary groups on the roles and responsibilities of Parliamentary Groups (PG) and assists the PG to improve and formalize their procedural, legislative and analytical practices. LSP supplemented and built on these formal trainings through the use of LSP supporting staff (three Commission Support Specialists and two Research Analysts) who would work with ANCI staff to demonstrate the application of certain skills and to mentor staff in the application of certain skills. For example, one way to expedite a commission’s deliberations over a bill is to provide the commission with an action oriented bill analysis. While the research and policy analysis workshop provided the basic skills of preparing this type of document, LSP sought to illustrate the value of such a bill analysis (to both staff and MP) and mentor staff in the creation of such analysis, LSP staff worked to provide bill analysis for a select number of bills (as identified by the ANCI). This averaged approximately 6 bills per year.

Commission Operations/Management In order to make the permanent commissions more effective law makers, it is necessary to not only strength the capacity of MPs and staff in the craft of law making (research, analysis, drafting, etc.), the commissions must be capacitated as deliberative bodies with effective administrative support. Activities therefore include broad support for administrative and deliberative functions as well as focusing on specific law-making acts. For example, in 2014 LSP provided support to the ANCI in the following activities:

- Supported the CAGI in preparing for a meeting with a delegation of Chinese MPs through researching Cote d’Ivoire legislation related to food security for discussion with the delegation.

- Assisted the President of the CAGI in preparation of a meeting with the international NGO "International Alert", for which LSP prepared documents related to the evolution of the conflict in Cote d’Ivoire and the conflict management and prevention strategies put in place since to be used during the meeting.

- Finalized the terms of reference for a training on civil protection for members of the CSD. - Assisted the Ivorian Chapter of the African Parliamentarian Network against Corruption

(APNAC-Afrique) in drafting their action plan.


- Supported the President of the CAGI for his meeting with the Christian Federation against Torture (ACAT). LSP researched the Commission’s actions and support to legislation addressing torture and conditions of detainees.

- Assisted the CRE in the review to authorize the ratifications made by the President of the Republic on 6 Conventions and 1 Treaty on November 14. LSP staff provided an analysis clarifying the meaning of the conventions and the treaty.

- Conducted research on legal texts addressing to sale of illicit medications and submitted this research document to the President of the CRE.

- Prepared a bibliography and summary of legal texts and conventions on child labor at the national and international level for the President of the Commission of Social and Cultural Affairs (CASC) in preparation for his mission to Turin, Italy on child labor prevention.

LSP staff also helped commission staff to organize a variety of meetings and other events in relationship to oversight and representation functions.

Research infrastructure While a number of other donors had provided research materials and resources (including computers) one of the most important research resources available to a legislature are the records and documents generated and/or collected by it as a part of its legislative work. LSP therefore focused heavily on supporting the ANCI in the development of a plan to shift from a paper based archiving system to an electronic version. In line with SUNY/CIDs standard practice and the implementation strategy adopted for LSP, LSP sought to work closely with the ANCI and its Documentation and Archive Service (SDP). Such close collaboration often slows the process of activity implementation as the project’s legislative counterparts may be resistant, may lack sufficient skills or may simply be distracted by their other duties. Unfortunately, in this case, problems with the counterpart resulted in the failure to bring this activity to full fruition. This effort started in 2014 when LSP, in collaboration with the APF, brought in an international expert, Mr. Denis Perreault, from the National Assembly of Quebec, to assess the operations and needs of the ANCI, work with the SDP on improving its operations and developed a transition plan involving both changes in archiving practice and a procurement plan to affect the transition to electronic archiving. When LSP brought Mr. Perreault back in 2015, he advised that the SDP had not adopted the practice reforms he had recommended and he advised that proceeding with the archiving equipment procurement was not warranted at that time. In line with this recommendation, LSP support staff continued to engage with the SDP encouraging the adopting of the revised practices. Finally, in 2016, when it appeared that they had in fact begun implementing the recommended processes, LSP advised that it would start the equipment procurement process. However, at that point, the SDP stated that it was unsatisfied with the recommended equipment and began a process of revising the procurement list. When this was completed, LSP, in association with the SDP, spent almost 8 months preparing a request for proposal, reviewing the bids in and negotiating for the procurement of the needed equipment. In the end, the procurement failed when the ANCI rejected the winning bidder just before the award was to take place and at a point in the life of the project in which it was too late to attempt another request for proposals.


While the collaborative approach to implementation is developmentally sound and generally successful, in this case it did result in a failure to procure the equipment.

Developing Supplemental Resources While LSP encouraged the ANCI to seek additional funding to hire more staff, it was unable/unwilling to do so. LSP therefore sought ways to supplement the ANCI’s analytic and research resources though the use of non-permanent staff. The internship program, describe above, represented one low cost effort. The second was to encourage the commissions to engage with civil society organization and outside experts through the process of hearings or public events. Indeed, engagement with CSOs is valuable not only for the expertise they provide but also as a means of exercising the ANCI’s representation/outreach function. Accordingly, LSP routinely worked with commission staff to identify local experts and CSOs as potential participants in commission activities. To further enforce this, LSP created a CSO guide listing 130 significant CSOs identified both by name and by the substantive areas in which they work along with contact information.

3. OVERSIGHT As is common in Africa,17 given the fact that the ANCI’s law making capacity is, to a large degree, reactive, in the sense that the executive is in practice the principle drafter of legislation, the parliament’s role of overseeing the government is perhaps the most important function for any legislative body.18 Unfortunately, as is the case in many parts of the world,19 the 2013 Assessment report indicated that the ANCI’s oversight skills were limited, with participants highlighting the ANCI’s weakness in oversight of the national budget and its oversight in the delivery of services. LSP sought to address these concerns, undertook four initiatives: National Budget Review Support; Anticorruption; Build Capacity in Use of Oversight Tools, Commission Site Visits/Public Hearings; and Hearing and Oversight Questions.

National Budget Review Support As argued by James Madison in Federalist 58:20

This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people,

17 Id. Barkin 18 Stapenhurst, Rick, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M Olson, and Lisa von Trapp. Legislative Oversight and Budgeting: A World Perspective. World Bank Institute Development Studies. Washington, DC: World Bank. 2008. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/6547 19 Id. Barkin 20 Alexander Hamilton, John Madison and John Jay, The Federalist Papers. Clinton Rositer, ed.. New American Library, 1961


for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.

Unfortunately, while many MPs recognized the importance of budget review and the need for significant capacity building in terms of analysis and review of the budget, they were also very sensitive to the risks of conflict. As reported in the 2013 Assessment:

Some expressed sensitivity to the need to avoid conflict with the Executive which requires cooperation in order to solve the country’s economic difficulties. They expressed awareness that defeat of the Loi des Finances (Budget Bill) would most certainly invite a Presidential Decree (fr. “Ordonnance”). This Constitutional provision can be perceived as an impediment to Parliamentary sovereignty. Indeed in April 2013, the National Assembly was constrained to adopt a law allowing the head of the state to manage by Presidential Decree for one year in economic and social matters.

Here again, the post conflict environment in which certain compromises had been made in order to end the conflict and the fear of provoking further conflict left the ANCI leadership highly resistant to accepting LSP assistance in supporting or strengthening its work the budget law approval process. While LSP was prevented from actually working with the ANCI and its commissions on the budget process, to assure that MPs, staff, and interested civil society actors were, at a minimum, informed as to the budget process itself, LSP commissioned a Guide on the Budget Cycle to be drafted by experts from the Economic Policy Analysis Cell of CIRES (CAPEC). LSP then worked with CAPEC and ANCI experts to revise the manual for approval by ANCI and publication. The manual could then be used to provide training to future MPs, staff, and by CSOs wanting to understand the budget process and the actors involved. Building on this informational capacity building, LSP joined in a 3 day workshop in September 2017 sponsored by the World Bank. The workshop for 35 parliamentary administrators also reviewed the budget process and introduced participants to the new budget directives of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) that Cote d’Ivoire was expected to adhere to in the future.

Anticorruption Anticorruption is a significant problem in Cote d’Ivoire and efforts to remedy it is in many ways related to budget oversight. Here again, ANCI leadership was very sensitive to the potential for anticorruption efforts to be controversial and to touch post-conflict sore points. Nonetheless, the ANCI leadership agreed to LSP working to support the National Assembly’s Membership in the Global Organization of Parliamentarians against Corruption (GOPAC) and the UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC). The Ivoirian section of the Network of Parliamentarians against Corruption (APNAC) is intended to promote transparency in public procurement and the fight against corruption. LSP, in collaboration with APNAC carried out two activities in 2016 to advance this objective. The first activity was a workshop to discuss areas of collaboration between APNAC and civil


Participants at the Seminar on Public Health Delivery and Public Procurement Transparency - June 9-12, 2016

society in regards to providing oversight on public health services and public procurement transparence. For this activity, in line with its collaborative implementation strategy, LSP invited UNDP, which was integral in the formation of the APNAC Cote d’Ivoire division to partner with LSP to support the workshop meeting between APNAC and ROSCI-CCAP, the civil society organization with which APNAC signed a convention on working together to promote transparency and fight corruption. This seminar took places from June 9 to 11 in Grand Bassam and was attended by 61 persons including MP members of APNAC, representatives from ROSCI-CCAP, the Ministry of Health, the High Authority on Good Governance (HABG), and the National Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (ARNMP). The seminar began with an overview of the activities of ROSCI-CCAP and APNAC and was followed by an in-depth discussion on the provision of public health services and public procurement transparency. Representatives from the Ministry of Health, the HABG, and ARNMP offered an overview of their engagements in respect to the two themes of the workshop. After the presentations, discussions were held on the two subject areas presented from which recommendations were made, which include:

The National Assembly should lobby the Executive to increase the health budget to 15% of the general state budget.

The National Assembly should address oral questions to concerned Government representatives on corruption, particularly within the context of health delivery and public procurements.

The Ministry of Health (MoH) should put greater efforts to improving the health infrastructure and human resources throughout the country.

The MoH should draft a bill on public health codes. The MoH should conduct unannounced site visits to ensure that equipment provided by the

state to different health centers are existing and operational. The ARNMP should conduct regular monitoring and evaluation of public works activities. The ARNMP should conduct regular audits of public works delivered. The ARNMP should sanction concession holders that provide sub-quality work.

At the end of the workshop, APNAC and ROSCI-CCAP agreed that they would conduct the following oversight activities together:

Put in place an working group of CSOs to monitor health delivery actions; Conduct joint missions to constituencies to identify pockets vulnerable to corruption.

APNAC and ROSCI-CCAP plans on identifying the specific sites at a later date; and Produce public reports on findings and circulate them widely


Participants of the CSD Security Sector Oversight Seminar in Yamoussoukro – May 23, 2017

For the second activity, LSP supported an information mission with APNAC to evaluate the economic and social impact of the investments made by the government on the health sector in six cities divided in two groups:

- Group 1 : Adzopé- Abengourou – Agnibliékrou - Group 2 : Yamoussoukro- Bouaflé- Daloa

The mission took place from August 28 to September 2, 2016 and aimed to evaluate the social and economic impact of the investments made by the government on the national health sector, particularly in regards to working conditions of health personnel and quality of healthcare given to users, in line with the provisions outlined in the state budget. Overall findings from the mission indicated that the hospitals were generally in a state of disrepair with a lack of equipment required to perform the care the hospitals are tasked with providing, ranging from unstable electricity, lack of emergency vehicles such as ambulances, lack of sterile units, and unsafe disposal of medical waste. In regards to the healthcare personnel, the recruitment process was found to be less than vigorous resulting in engagement of unqualified personnel, non-payment of certain benefits such as housing benefits, discriminatory treatment of junior personnel, and general lack of performance incentives and insufficient training. The central conclusion was that there was a large gap between what the government was supposed to have provided in terms of personnel and material investment and what actually exists on the ground.

Build Capacity in Use of Oversight Tools Here, as elsewhere, LSP used a used both straight workshop training and supported mentoring. Some of the workshop training, in the form of a seminar led by one or more experts, provided overviews of oversight and the tools used by a legislature in its oversight efforts. Examples of these included the training for parliamentary groups and the orientation training, both of which provided, the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung Foundation (FES), and the National Council on Security (CNS) collaborated to support a capacity building workshop for members of the Security and Defense Commission of the National Assembly on parliamentary oversight of the security sector.

The workshop was held in Yamoussoukro from May 23 to 27, 2017 with 40 participants. The seminar covered several thematic areas regarding the security sector in Cote d’Ivoire and West Africa including security sector spending and financing, arms purchasing, military operations, counter-terrorism, and civil protection. The oversight role of Parliament, particularly the CSD, in these areas was addressed, and tools and approaches for conducting information missions drafting


oral/verbal questions for the relevant ministries were suggested. In addition, best practices and challenges from the previous legislature and around the region were shared, with deliberations on legislation which could reinforce the security sector in Cote d’Ivoire. The more significant oversight capacity building efforts by LSP were built around the ANCI’s express interest in commission site visits.

Commission Site Visits/Public Hearings Both during the period of proposal development and in the 2013 Needs Assessment, leaders of the ANCI had expressed significant interest in having the project support regional site visits to enhance the National Assembly’s contact with the public, exercise oversight authority, and improve the public’s perceptions of the Parliament. For purposes of promoting the development of oversight skills, this presented a golden opportunity. It offered three critical benefits. First, and most fundamentally, institutional reform requires interest and buy-in by the beneficiary institution. In supporting site visits LSP would be meeting the needs that the participating commissions had identified for themselves. Moreover, the supported site visits would be on topics and to locations selected by the benefiting commission. Second, it offered a capacity building opportunity that could take place within the context of work that commission was charged with doing in which the training (whether through workshops or mentoring) would be immediately applied in the carrying out of the site visit. Finally, the site visits could be linked with the use of a full range of oversight tools, from desk research, meetings with public officials, and public hearings to preparing oversight reports, questioning ministers, and making presentations to the ANCI in plenary. While respondents also included the idea that these visits would support the ANCI’s oversight function, it quickly became clear that many MPs referred to oversight, because they had received trainings about the role of a legislature and knew that a site visit fell within that role. However, in practice, most viewed a site visit as an opportunity to get out of Abidjan and make their presence known among their constituents as their MP – a sort of quasi-political campaign visit.

To address this, LSP developed a strategy of integrated workshop training and mentored support site visits. In March 2014, LSP recruited an international consultant, Ms, Hannah Shostack, to provide trainings and technical support in conducting oversight missions to three (3) Permanent Commissions, namely the Commission on Social and Cultural Affairs (CASC); the Commission on Security and Defense (CSD); and the Commission on Research, Science, Technology and


Environment (CRSTE). The technical support and training focused on developing focused topics for investigation, preparing background materials, identifying people and institutions of interest, planning the logistics of the visit, writing reports, and other follow-up activities following the field visit. The approaches developed in the support for these first three site visits would then be replicated in subsequent supported site visits with the support of LSP staff. As part of the initial training and support, LSP assisted the Commission for Social and Cultural Affairs (CASC) members in planning and conducting field visits within Abidjan as a pilot activity. On March 26, 2014, the SUNY/CID team accompanied 13 members of the commission to the Hemodialysis Center of Cocody and the Felix Houphouet Boigny Cocody University, led by its President Mr. Basil Fregbo. Following the visit, Ms. Shostack and the LSP team lead a debrief on the visits to discuss lessons learned and to help prepare for additional field visits. Participants were extremely pleased with the pilot visits and deeply appreciative of LSP’s support. The commission has initially seen oversight visits as an opportunity to meet constituents and learn about issues being faced in the areas visited. However, with LSP’s intervention, they started to appreciate that this was also an opportunity to conduct government oversight and use what they learned in reviewing future legislation. Ms. Shostack also developed an Oversight Field Visit Manual to enhance Commissioners ability to assess local problems and citizen concerns, identify local actors of interests and organize their oversight field visits agenda, objectives, and logistics. The manual was reviewed, vetted, and modified by a working group established within the National Assembly to ensure that the contents were relevant and within the context of the ANCI. A brochure was also created to serve as a quick reference guide for MPs outlining the major steps described in more detail in the manual. In March, LSP provided preparatory technical assistance for three oversight field visits with the CASC, CSD, and CRSTE. LSP assisted the commissions in identifying the objectives and sites for the respective field missions, reviewed and finalized the TORs, collected information on the themes to be addressed during the missions, conducted trainings on oversight tools, and prepared questions to be addressed during the site visits scheduled for the April. During the field visits, in April, LSP assisted in providing an overview of the basis of the oversight visits, inputs in discussions during the meetings, conducted debriefing sessions at the end of each day. The following field visits were conducted:

- On April 1-4, the CASC led open discussions with the Prefectural authorities and local traditional figures, with several university dignitaries and students of the University of Cocody and with the medical corps of the Regional Hospital Center and with the General Hospital regarding the situation of the education and health sector services. Comments and recommendations from the 61 participants of the working sessions and of the 237 attendees of the public forums were further discussed by the Commissioners upon their return and nurtured the preparation of their formal report (in May) and presentation of findings before the Assembly.

- Between April 13-20, the CSD met and worked with the Prefectural (Governorate) and local authorities, traditional leaders, and police and military authorities of Bangolo, Blolequin, Danané, Man, Tai and Zouan-Houen in the West Region to assess the general


security situation and ongoing issues as well as to gain a better understanding of their potential impact on the population. In total 359 citizens and local stakeholder delegates addressed their concerns to the ANCI CSD’s Commissioners and provided practical recommendations.

- During the last week of April (21-27) the CRSTE appraised the situation of the deforestation in the upper Eight parallel of the country and in particular, inside the Natural Park of Tai and the Forest of Tafire. Local authorities, traditional figures, and citizens provided their views on their environmental situation, on the recent evolution of the deforestation and the destruction of their natural resources, and proposed potential protective, rehabilitation and preventive measures. Similar to two other oversight field visits, engagement of the ANCI CSRTE in those constituencies mobilized around 200 participants comprising traditional local leaders, civil society associations and citizens, and the concerned executive authorities.

On June 30, the three permanent commissions, with LSP technical support, presented their findings before the National Assembly. After the presentation, the MPs unanimously thanked the Commissioners for their work and called for “a systemization of oversight missions in Constituencies and for active participation of concerned government ministers during the oversight sessions to favor oral questions and answers.” Over the course of the next two years, LSP supported 9 more commission site visits (for a total of 11 commission site visits) along with site visits by APNAC and the Women’s Caucus as described above.

Commission Oversight Site Visits

Commission Topic Notes Dates

Commission on Social and Cultural Affairs (CASC)

Status of higher education/hospitals and healthcare

61 participant / 237 attendees / 2 constituencies

Mar. 26/ April 1-4, 2014

Commission on Security and Defense (CSD)

Assess general security situation in West Region

359 attendees / 6 constituencies

Apr. 13-20, 2014

Commission on Research, Science, Technology and Environment (CRSTE)

Deforestation in upper Eighth parallel of the country - especially national parks.

200 participants

Apr. 21-27, 2014

Health and Social Monitoring Committee against Ebola (CVSSD)

Ebola

16 delegations - 49 MPs /140 localities/5000 participants

Oct. 28-Nov. 4, 2014

Commission on Social and Cultural Affairs (CASC)

HIV/AIDS 110 participants / 6 constituencies

Mar. 10-14, 2015

Commission on Research, Science, Technology and Environment (CRSTE)

Gold Mine / Gold Panning

7 MPs / 123 participants / 8 constituencies

Nov. 15-21, 2015


Minister of Transport, Gouassou Toure, answering questions on Urban and Inter-Urban Transport at the ANCI – June 30, 2016)

Commission Oversight Site Visits (Continued)

Commission Topic Notes Dates

Commission on Economic and Financial Affairs (CAEF)

Road Infrastructure and Rehabilitation

8 MPs / 4 staff / 2 road axes

Feb. 29 - Mar1 / Mar. 7-12, 2016

Commission on General and Institutional Affairs (CAGI)

Status of Penal System

9 MPs / 146 participants / 5 constituencies (Joint Mission)

Dec. 4-5,

2014/ Mar. 16-22, 2015 Commission on Social and Cultural

Affairs (CASC)

Commission on Security and Defense (CSD).

Conditions in military barracks

7 MPs / 3 staff / 4 provinces-barracks

Aug. 21-28, 2016

Hearing and Oversight Questions As noted above, site visits incorporate the use of a variety of oversight tools that can be used within the National Assembly building as well as on the road. For example, almost all of the site visits included public meetings as well as meetings in which the MPs questioned government official about the execution of their duties. In a number of cases it resulted in conducting public questioning of line ministers within the ANCI – a significant exercise of legislative authority. For example, in June 2016, LSP worked closely with two MPs to help them prepare oral questions to be addressed to the executive in plenary session. LSP worked with MP Adjaratou Traore Fadiga in developing the specific questions on the topic of urban and inter-urban transportation to be addressed to the Minister of Transport. The oral question was held on June 30, 2016 in the presence of the Minister. Subsequently, LSP supported MP Yacouba Sangare in the development of questions related to the state of road infrastructure throughout the country. This oral questioning was held on July 15, 2016 in the presence of the Minister of Economic Infrastructure. Impact and Assessment of Objective 1 Accomplishments Assessing the accomplishments of LSP under Objective 1 is very difficult. As noted in the DI Mid-Term Evaluation, “‘Management capacity of the administration’ is difficult to separate from


functions of oversight, legislation and representation, since these functions also depend on internal support services from the administration.”21 Moreover inculcating reforms within a complex political organization takes a significant period of time – far in excess of the duration of LSP’s support. Nonetheless, there were a number of indications that progress had been made in the development of the ANCIs capacity to fulfill its basic functions. These include the following: 1) Strategic Planning: The ANCI not only conscientiously developed an annual strategic workplan (PTAN), it valued strategic planning, agreed and collaborated with LSP to assure that LSP and other donor’s support was in accord with the overall strategic plan (PSAN) and it to principle lead in drafting the new 2017-2020 Strategic Plan – a significant achievement. 2) Improved Staff Capacity and Function: During the course of project implementation, LSP staff noted a steady improvement in the capacity of staff and MPs to carry out their duties. This was particularly evident in the applied activities, such as site visits, in which the staff was initially trained in supporting the activity and in subsequent iterations took increasing responsibility for supporting the activity. As reported in the DI Evaluation: “Based on interviews and focus groups, perceptions on parliament’s administration improved significantly. The third most commonly expressed opinion given by 150 interviewees was: ‘Parliament is more effective now in administration and its staff more committed and effective.’”22 Moreover, the improvement was not just limited to staff. As another interviewee stated to DI evaluators, “Staff and MPs are much more pro-active now that they feel more able and trained.”23 3) Work in Civil Manner in Face of Potential Conflict: One of the great concerns of ANCI leadership at the outset of the project was building positive relationships and being able to work collaboratively in the face of the recent conflicts. Based on concerns over the potential revival of conflict, ANCI had initially resisted efforts by LSP to promote revisions in the Rules of Procedure and the conduct of anti-corruption activities. By 2017, ANCI had significantly recovered from these concerns and worked with LSP to revise its rules of procedure and to participate in a number of anti-corruption activities and trainings.24 4) Establish a special Gender Commission and other Gender Initiatives: In spite of initially strong resistance to the idea of a gender commission, in 2016 ANCI agreed to form a special commission on gender. Moreover, the ANCI did not simply accept the model of gender treatment advocated by USAID and other donors – it asserted itself and tailored the idea of attending to concerns over gender according to its own view of how to address the problem by integrating gender within each commission (supported by a focal point) and using the special gender commission to only address those laws or issues exclusively focused on gender equity. 5) Steady Improvement in Site Visits: As noted above, the understanding of most MPs about the nature of commission site visits at the outset of the project was limited. During the course of project implementation, the commissions increasingly attended to using the site visits to substantively review government activities in the regions and then to bring their findings back and

21 Id. Democracy International p.10. 22 Id. p.11 23 Id. 24 See Objective 3 below.


share them with the National Assembly as a whole. Indeed, they advance to the point of using their findings as the basis for questioning line ministries. In summary, as found by DI in its evaluation: “The LSP has contributed to significantly improved capacity of MPs and staff, improved infrastructure of the National Assembly, improved ANCI administration/management and human resources systems, and has made significant progress in modernizing the voting systems.”25 OBJECTIVE 2: IMPROVED NATIONAL ASSEMBLY DEPUTY CONSTITUENCY

REPRESENTATION AND OVERSIGHT IN A SELECT NUMBER OF CONSTITUENCIES

Legislators have three primary functions: law-making, oversight, and representation. Representation, in turn, includes not only seeking to advance the political interest of that member’s constituency within the functions of law-making and oversight, but also frequently engaging with actors within the executive to address the concerns of individuals and small groups of constituents. Of the three, many studies have indicated that most legislators prefer their representation work. In LSP sought to enhance the legislator’s work on representation by creating constituency Platforms or work groups in which legislators joined with local governmental and civil society leaders to collaborate in monitoring and advocating for improvements in public service delivery by the national government. LSP piloted this approach in 24 constituencies spread across the country. Background: The Problem The delivery of agreed upon, fundamental public services is one of the primary duties of a government. Service delivery is particularly important in a post conflict state, like Cote d’Ivoire in which service delivery translates to public perceptions of governmental legitimacy and is crucial for rebuilding stability.26 Unfortunately, in the early 2000s, when USAID was developing its strategy for how to strengthen the new post conflict government, public service delivery was very poor. Typically, in a democracy, one influences service delivery in one of two ways: through the local government or through the central government. The natural first intervention involves engaging with local government leadership and holding them accountable through the ballot box. Unfortunately, in Cote d’Ivoire, governmental authority resides in the central government and local official report to it. Thus, USAID decided to support an intervention targeting the central government. To do so, the proposal designers focused on the representative function of parliamentarians.

25 Id. Democracy International 26 Levi, M., Sacks, A., and Tyler, T., Conceptualizing Legitimacy, Measuring Legitimating Beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist vol. 53, no. 3, 2009, 345-375.


Here again, USAID confronted a challenge. A large major of parliamentarians throughout Africa favor and devote most of their efforts towards serving the representation function.27 As noted in a report by the International Parliamentary Union and UNDP, this is undoubtedly because "...voters are much more likely to judge MPs on their ability to provide support at local level than on their activity in legislation or control of government action.”28 Somewhat surprisingly, that was not the case in Côte d'Ivoire where, in a study sponsored by AECOM/OTI in 2012, a majority of constituents complained about "a total absence of MPs in their constituencies of origin [which they] perceived as treason to the population" and that there was "a complete lack of reporting on parliamentary business.”29 Added to this, the constitutional mandate for MPs is not to represent their constituents, but rather that: "Each MP shall be the representative of the nation as a whole."30 The program designers with USAID for the Legislative Strengthening Project in Cote d’Ivoire (LSP) decided to solicit proposals for an innovative new type of representation. Representation can typically be thought of in terms of either the MP facilitating individual constituency engagement with the government – a personal issues representation, or as the voice and representative of the community as a whole. In the former case, this means that many MPs seek to intervene on behalf of individual constituents by assisting individual or a small group of constituents to communicate their problems or concerns over a particular service of interaction with the government by either writing to the relevant government officials or agencies on behalf of that individual constituent or group or introducing that constituent or group to that government official or agency. In essence, they serve as a sort of ombudsman. For this, donors will commonly provide training and support on how to establish a constituency office. In the latter case, MPs seek to represent the interests of his/her constituents as a whole in the review of laws or in government oversight as determined by either the MPs knowledge of that constituency or through conducting public hearings in the constituency or other efforts to elicit public opinions. To support this representation function, donors commonly provide technical and material support for MPs to conduct public hearings in their constituencies. These hearing may also be labeled as oversight hearing in support of the related legislative role of government oversight. In both of these cases (i.e., individual and collective representation), the MPs act on behalf of a relatively passive constituent. In LSP, in light of the previous demonstration of limited engagement between MPs and their constituencies, the designers wanted a structured engagement between MPs and their constituents in which they would work together in the form of “Platforms” to identify local service delivery problems that the MPs could then advance to the national government. Thus, as refined by SUNY Center for International Development (SUNY/CID), the constituents participating in the Platforms not only convey local concerns to the MP, they represent a form of demand on the MP to meet with them and they participate as collaborators in the identification of local public service delivery concerns. Moreover, drawing on the MPs position within the government and her power to convene groups to work together, LSP helped establish collaborative Platforms that involved not only local civil society leaders (on behalf of the constituents) but also local government officials and, when appropriate, representatives drawn from the national government.

27 Id. Barkin 28 IPU/UNDP. Global Parliamentary Report: The Changing Nature of Parliamentary Representation. (2012). 29 Research International, Baseline Study on the Perception of the National Assembly by the Population Living in Côte d'Ivoire (AECOM/OTI 2012) finding cited in DI Mid-Term Evaluation p. 14. 30 Constitution of Cote d’Ivoire 2016: Art. 96


Considering the innovative nature of this effort, USAID further specified that it should be piloted in 24 demographically representative constituencies spread across the country and rigorously evaluated at the end of the project. The project does not end until December 13, 2017, so this is a preliminary review of some of the findings, though it lacks the data to be collected by the project in a final survey of impacts within the constituencies and a group of control constituencies. Instead, it draws heavily upon the findings of the mid-term assessment conducted in April 2017. Project Implementation and Initial Findings In order to illustrate both the nature of the collaborative Platform design and some of the challenges in its implementation, the following analysis will follow the key features of implementation starting with design/buy-in through project roll out. Goals and Objectives of the Platform Initiatives As contemplated within the Platforms initiative design, the Platforms were intended to advance the following three goals and objectives: better performance of the representation function; improved service deliver; and improved civility and collaboration at the community level.

Representation: The mechanism of the Platforms establishes an institutionalized means for the MP of assessing, at a granular level, the needs and desires of his/her constituency with respect to community wide issues, as opposed to individualized concerns. It also allows the MP to monitor the performance of the government in the delivery of public services – which can be brought back to the ANCI and advanced during public question periods and other oversight activities and, at the same time, to communicate with his/her constituency about activities and initiatives being advanced by the MP and the ANCI (part of the related role of outreach.) Finally, the presence of local civil and civil society representatives potentially creates a level of public demand for the MP to comply with his/her representation responsibilities.

Service Delivery Monitoring and Advocacy: The Platforms also create a collaborative multi-partisan forum to monitor local service delivery and, where problems are found, to collectively engage in discussions and advocacy on how to remedy those problems. Unlike a more typical CSO based project, the promotion of better service delivery is in general somewhat adversarial (in the sense of citizens demanding better service and seeking to hold politicians and government officials to account), the platform’s approach is to promote collaborative engagement in that both the government and its representative act alongside of their citizen/CSO counterparts. That said, the power of the MP(s) to bring problems to the attention of authorities in the capital and the concomitant capacity of the citizens/CSO members to potentially mobilize their fellow citizens/CSOs empowers them as partners in the Platform and not just as citizen informants. Civility Collaboration at the Community Level: As a post conflict country, tensions between ethnic, social, and culture groups remain an issue of significant concern. As noted in the DI Mid-Term Evaluation, in discussing the ANCI strategic plan, “The leadership felt that the priority in the post-conflict context was to focus on learning to live together in peace [and together to work] towards a better standard of living – in order to not slip back into civil war.”31 Thus, an

31 Id. Democracy International, p. 26.


Map outlining the five regions of Constituency Platform development.

important goal of the Platform initiative was to create an environment in which the diverse representatives drawn from across the full spectrum of citizens within the constituency could come together in safe environment to collaborative work to improve public services in their community. Design/Buy-in A key requirement of any legislative strengthening project is that the legislative counterparts (legislative leadership and MPs) must agree to and ultimately take ownership of the reform initiative.32 Added to that list in this case would also be the local constituents and their representatives who would participate in the Platforms. Reform cannot be imposed from the outside. To promote buy-in by the leadership of the ANCI, at the outset of the project, LSP staff started meeting regularly with the President of the ANCI and the Secretary General (SG) and other administrative department heads (as would be directly involved with project implementation) to discuss all aspects of the project, including the collaborative constituency Platforms Initiative. This included not only a description of the aims of the initiative but also working with the SG on the selection procedures for MPs and their constituencies (since this was a pilot project involving only 24 selected constituencies and therefore not available to all MPs) and the types of administrative support that the MPs would need to support the Platforms. As was to be expected, the SG sought to adjust the initiative to meet his political interests and needs – in particular his effort to assure that the President of the Assembly’s constituency was included among the selected constituencies –whereas SUNY/CID and USAID sought an objective selection criteria to avoid the perception of favoritism as well as to assure demographic/social/cultural diversity among the Platforms. Negotiations on this point and repeated redesigns of the selection criteria resulted in an 18 month delay in implementation. Nonetheless, while this did severely impact the duration of the Platforms operation, it did result in significant commitment by the ANCI in support of the Platforms including its designation of specific administrative support staff (drawn from a very small overall support staff) to support the MPs both within the ANCI on Platform work and by sending them into the constituencies when the MPs were present there for Platform activities. With respect to the MPs, while their constitutional mandate is for them to represent the nation as a whole and not simply their constituencies, there was substantial interest among the MPs to have their constituency selected. In order to assure demographic/social/cultural diversity, it was determined that the selected constituencies would be drawn from the center (Abdijan) and the four

32 See, e.g. USAID, 2000. Handbook on Legislative Strengthening. Center for Democracy and Governance, Washington DC. Available at: http://www.cid.suny.edu/Publications/pnacf632.pdf

http://www.cid.suny.edu/Publications/pnacf632.pdf


compass points of the country (north/east/south/west) and include constituencies of different sizes (distinguished by the number of MPs from that constituency – ranging from 1 (small) to 3 (large). However, to assure MP commitment, as an additional factor, SUNY/CID required interested MPs to file an application requesting that they and their constituency be included in the initiative. A total of 106 out of 255 MPs applied to participate. The final selection of 46 MPs was made jointly by committee made up of SUNY/CID, USAID, the ANCI, and 2 MP representatives. Both prior to and subsequent to their selection, MPs were informed that the purpose of the Platform was to promote enhanced representation. It was not intended to simply underwrite MP travel to the constituencies or to be used as a campaign device for the next election. Nonetheless, the amount of support being provided by the project for travel and per diems was a regular source of friction and out of the 46 MPs representing the 24 chosen constituencies, seven ultimately did not participate in the initiative – most of whom represented multi MP constituencies in which there were one or two other MPs participating. In order to obtain constituent/constituent representative buy-in, the project used a combination of public civic education efforts (see more details below) and small group meetings with key local representatives including: administrative governmental authorities, heads of public services, community leaders, religious leaders, and women’s and youth leaders. The public education campaign laid the groundwork understanding among the broader population about the nature of the Platform effort, while the small group meetings allowed more nuanced discussions and helped project staff make necessary adjustments to the implementation plan to take into account local social and political concerns and dynamics. At the conclusion of this education/consultation phase, local representatives of all the key stakeholders (local government officials, public services representatives, community and religious leaders, women’s leaders and youth leaders) were selected by mutual consent of all involved. For the most part, this selection process proved relatively successful, with local participation being positive – though in some cases, failure in leadership by the MP led to overall poor performance by the Platform. Citizen Score Card Survey The Platforms initiative had two objectives during the start-up phase. First, it was necessary to educate the public about the role of the parliament and its place in the delivery of public services. Second, it sought to promote citizen engagement with the MPs in advocating for improved public service delivery of those services deemed most critical to that constituency. In order to better target the public education effort and establish a baseline from which to operate, SUNY/CID conducted a CSC of the 24 constituencies plus 10 control constituencies (in which no interventions would be made) to assess public understanding of the role and functions of the ANCI along with other relevant political understandings. This would be used to determine to topics most important for inclusion in the public education initiative and to provide a baseline33 upon which to evaluate the success of the planned public education campaign (discussed below.) Not surprisingly, the public was poorly informed about the role of the ANCI and how public services were managed and administered. Moreover, the participants judged the performance of the ANCI and their MPs very poorly. 33 Note: The project did not conduct the final CSC survey. Thus, comparisons and measures of improvement will be taken from the Democracy International, Mid-Term Performance Evaluation : Legislative Strengthening Program – Draft Evaluation. USAID, April 2017.


Second, the CSC was used to ensure that the Platforms were addressing the actual public service delivery concerns of the citizens within each constituency, as opposed to the interests of the eventual members of the Platform. Indeed, the idea of working to identify the actual desires of the constituents was an important teaching moment for the Platforms. Operationally, the CSC asked respondents to identify the topic issues of greatest concern in their constituency, which were collated and ranked in priority. The top three service delivery concerns for most constituencies were: Health, Roads and Infrastructure, and Education – though the priority varied somewhat from constituency to constituency and with some constituencies prioritizing security as among the top three. While the Platforms were expected to honor the prioritization of interests specified by the constituents, some allowance was made to elect among the three top priorities. Distribution of responses by zone:


Breakdown of topics by constituency:

Zones Constituencies Priorities Services

Greater Abidjan

ANYAMA ET BROFODOUME, COMMUNES ET S/P

Security Health Education

BINGERVILLE, COMMUNES ET S/P

Electricity Security Water

KOUMASSI Roads and Infrastructures Waste and Sanitation Health

YOPOUGON Security Health Education

SOUTH

ABONGOUA, BIEBY ET YAKASSE-ATOBROU, COMMUNES ET SP

Roads and Infrastructures Water Electricity

CHIEPO, DIDOKO, NEBO ET OGOUDOU, COMMUNES ET S/P, DIVO S/P

Health Water Electricity

DAKPADOU ET SAGO, COMMUNES ET S/P

Roads and infrastructures Health Education

SAN PEDRO, COMMUNE Roads and infrastructures Water Electricity

NORTH

FERKE, COMMUNE Health Education Roads and Infrastructures

KORHOGO, COMMUNE Education Health Security

ODIENNE, COMMUNE Health Education Roads and Infrastructures

DIOMAN, FOUNGBESSO ET GUINTEGUELA, COMMUNES ET S/P, TOUBA, S/P

Health Roads and Infrastructures Water

WEST

BIANKOUMA, BLAPLEU, KPATA & SANTA, COMMUNES ET S/P

Health Education Roads and Infrastructures

DALOA, COMMUNE Health Education Water

BAZRA NATILS, DANANON, KETRO-BASSAM ET VAVOUA, COMMUNES ET S/P

Health Electricity Sanitation

BOUAFLE, COMMUNE Health Water Roads and Infrastructures


Traditional Leaders attending the Civic Education Campaign in Biankouma – Feb. 23, 2016

Zones Constituencies Priorities Services

EAST

ABENGOUROU, COMMUNE Electricity Health Education

BOUKO ET BOUNA, COMMUNES ET SP

Health Security Electricity

BONDO, LAOUDI-BA, SAPLI-SEPINGO, TAOUDI ET YEZIMALA, COMMUNES ET S/P

Education Health Roads and Infrastructures

SORABANGO ET TAGADI COMMUNES ET S/P

Health Roads and Infrastructures Education

CENTER

BOUAKE, COMMUNE Education Health Security

ANDO-KEKRENOU, BEOUMI ET KONDROBO, COMMUNES ET S/P

Health Water Electricity

DAOUKRO ET N’GATTAKRO COMMUNE ET S/P

Water Health Education

AYAOU-SRAN, DIBRI-ASRIKRO, SAKASSOU ET TOUMODI-SAKASSOU, COMMUNES ET S/P

Roads and Infrastructures Water Health

Program Introduction/Civic Education In order for citizens to assert their rights and demand the delivery of public services, it is obviously necessary that they know their rights, know the obligations of the government to deliver services, how government carries out those obligations, and the ways in which the public might intervene to influence government performance. As was anticipated and confirmed by the CSC survey, the citizens in the surveyed constituencies were not well informed on these issues. Accordingly, SUNY/CID designed a significant and sustained public education effort to remedy

this situation. The project had three objectives for this training: to introduce and lay the groundwork for the Platforms initiative; to broadly empower the public through a better understanding of its government and governance; and to counter misperceptions of the MPs role. First, as previously noted, the project sought to introduce the concept of the Platforms to the constituencies and to build support for their implementation. It was crucial that the public within the constituencies know about the Platforms, understand what they would be working on, and


appreciate and value the opportunity to work with the Platforms either individually or through their community representatives. Building on the traditional oral culture in Cote d’Ivoire, the project enlisted singers, dancers, and local theatre groups to help get the word out about the projects. The effort was wildly successful, ultimately engaging over 7,775 people in initial meetings about the Platforms. Second, the project continued its public education effort through additional public meetings, through training journalists on how to better cover the ANCI, and a collaborative program with 22 community radio stations who, in consideration of small grants to provide them with needed broadcasting equipment, agreed to cover all significant Platform activities and to broadcast informational programs prepared by the ANCI (with project support). In addition, the project supported additional public events to publicly discuss issues selected as priorities for each constituency. In the 24 constituencies this effort engaged with 7,121 participants for an average of 296 per constituency in 2016 and approximately 9,614 in 2017 for a total of 24,508 participating in a total of 73 forums. Third, the public education effort was intended to counter a common misperception about the role of the MP. In most of Africa, most constituents and many MPs view the role of the MP as similar to a traditional tribal leader34 with the expectation that the MP will help them with individual problems or difficulties such as funds to assist with a burial, school tuition costs, or other personal needs. For many MPs who feel compelled to meet these needs, this comes out of their own pockets. Obviously, if every visit to their constituency results in a drain on their personal assets, MPs will feel reluctant to visit their constituency. Whether or not this explains the prior absence of many MPs from their constituencies mentioned above, the project sought to counter this by educating the public not to expect this of their MP. Platform Make-up The Platforms, ranging from 15 to 25 people for each, are intended to be broadly representative of the key stakeholders within the constituency. As such, the Platforms included:

The MP or MPs (some constituencies had 2 or more MPs depending upon size) Locally elected Mayor The Prefecture (Appointee of the President) 1-2 Sub-Prefectures 1 Representative from each Public Services Agency Representatives from the Security Services (where security is a service concern) Civil Society Leaders Community, Tribal and Religious leaders (with attention to women and youth)

Some, because they hold official positions (the MP(s), Mayor, and government officials) were automatically included, while the local community representatives were selected through consultation and mutual consent of the citizens and CSOs within the constituency. Leadership and Management The role of leadership and management of the Platforms proved to be one of the most challenging and significant aspects of Platform formation and success. Its development within the Platform initiative evolved over time with unpredictable results. 34 See, Barkin,


At the outset, the Platform initiative was viewed as an elaboration upon the MPs representation function. Accordingly, program developers within SUNY/CID viewed the establishment of the Platforms as an exercise in the MP’s power to convene constituents and local officials and draw them into a form of collaborative engagement. As such, LSP staff expected that the MPs would provide overall leadership for the Platforms with administrative support provided by ANCI staff, all supported and supplemented by LSP. In some cases, this approach was adopted by the participating MP. For example, the MP in Abengourou, cited in the DI Mid-Term Evaluation , enthusiastically adopted the Platform framework as a means of representing her constituents. With her own funds, she supported a local constituency office which served as the administrative hub for the Platform in her community and she provided staff to provide administrative support.35 While the Mid-Term Evaluation found that strong MP presence and leadership lead to the perception of improved representation and service delivery, few MPs were in a position to provide the level of underwriting provided by the MP from Abengourou. Indeed, as LSP moved forward towards implementation and budget adjustments were made limiting the number of onsite support missions for the Platforms that could be underwritten by LSP, SUNY/CID had to rethink administration and management. In place of regular visits to support the Platforms, LSP sought a local focal point – an individual who could handle the day to day administration for the Platforms. Ideally, the focal point should also have access to offices or other facilities in which not only Platform equipment (computers, etc. provided by LSP) could be housed and also could hold regular meetings of the Platforms. In most cases, one of the sub-prefectures met these criteria. Moreover, because the sub-prefecture was a representative of the national government, was not a local politician or affiliated with a political party, they were viewed as neutral, unbiased facilitators of the Platform’s efforts. Lastly, because they were part of the government, they also had access to actors and processes within the government that were directly involved in service delivery in which case they could help facilitate meetings and engagement with these actors and their resources. Similar arguments can be made for leadership or co-leadership of the Platform by the local mayor (save that the mayor is by definition a politician.) These factors led ANCI administrative leadership to view leadership by the administrators (Prefectures and Sub-Prefectures), as preferable, a position shared by the LSP program officers supporting the Platforms initiative. A third alternative for leadership of the Platforms is that of the local representatives of the constituents. The concept of the collaborative Platform was, in part, based on the model of CSO empowerment programs. The idea is to promote “demand” for reforms and improvement in services by educating and empowering CSOs and their members to lobby for those reforms and improvements. In these cases, creating a forum in which representatives of the public and CSO participated as equals places a certain level of demand on both the government and the MP to listen to their concerns. At the same time empowering citizens and CSOs can be viewed badly by MPs who perceive themselves as being placed in an adversarial position with the citizens/CSOs. Hence any effort to empower the citizens/CSOs needs to be handled delicately. In this case, neither DI, in the Mid-Term, nor LSP staff were able to effectively determine what level of leadership may have come from the citizen/CSO members of the Platforms – a point deserving further research.

35 Id. Democracy International


A work session with the platform members of the Anyama Platform - 2015

Platform Capacity Building The project next focused on building the capacity of the Platforms and their members to develop and carry out an action plan for how that Platform will promote improved service delivery. To promote sustainability of the initiative, SUNY/CID and the National Assembly sought and obtained the cooperation of the DGDDL in the development of this training activity. The DGDDL is the government institution dedicated to decentralization initiatives and support to the development of local collectives. This provides a permanent partnership to help ensure the sustainability of the collaborative community Platform initiative after the USAID funded project ends. The project, the ANCI and DGDDL worked together to develop the training modules and identify trainers to conduct the trainings in each constituency. SUNY/CID and the DGDDL designed the content of the training modules and the detailed agenda covering the three-day workshop. The DGDDL nominated 14 experts to develop the training modules and will provide two experts to travel with the LSP team to each of the 24 constituencies in which the program is implementing the Platforms. (These traveling experts will intermittently swap out with other experts to ensure that they are able to continue their work at the DGDDL.) Given the range of topics that needed to be covered and the goal of building capacity through an extended series of iterative training/application – training/applications, the training program was consolidated into two parts. The first set of training modules for Platform members covered the following themes:

Roles and Responsibilities of local authorities (MPs, Prefectures, Sub-prefectures, Mayors, service delivery directors, community leaders, and civil society) in local governance

Project planning process Programming and budgeting Participatory budgeting Budget execution and oversight

The training seminar also included the presentation of the CSC survey results in each of the pilot constituencies and the top three public service priorities identified by the constituents. The LSP and DGDDL trainers then helped Platform members develop an action plan for the year taking into consideration the public service priorities of their constituency as identified in the CSC. In addition, participants were provided with multiple tools for managing their activities, including an action plan template, which the members completed with LSP assistance, report presentation templates, and templates for meeting notes. For the second training seminar, LSP and DGDDL trainers provided training on:

Advocacy and advocacy techniques Fundraising techniques (to support their continued operations)


Again, the Platform participants were also supplied with tools and templates to support their work in these areas.

Platform and Support Activities At the time of their establishment, Platform members agreed to a basic charter of operations that provided that the Platform would meet on a monthly or bimonthly basis, with the meeting to be called by either the MP(s) or the Platform focal point (representative of the Prefecture). Specifically, for this initiative, the charter started with a preamble that clearly states: that the members of the Platform work on a free and voluntary basis; and that the Platform is apolitical and is intended to bring together diverse representatives from the constituencies in service of a common objective of promoting the improvement of the quality of public services delivered to the population. The charter is set out in four parts. Part one identifies the composition of the Platform and methods of selection. Part two identifies the mission of the Platform, while part three elaborates on its method of operation, and, finally, part four discusses how it will be sustained over time. While many features of these charters are common among all of the Platforms, adjustments to take into consideration local concerns were obviously important in ensuring local ownership and buy-in in the Platforms. The second key management document adopted by each Platform was an annual action plan developed with the assistance of the LSP. The action plan set forth the specific objectives for that year, identified the actions to be undertaken to meet those objectives and the resources required to underwrite those actions. At an early stage in the initial design for the initiative, it was anticipated that LSP would conduct regular field visits during the years of implementation to assure continued support and mentoring. However, this was deemed too costly and LSP attempted to substitute regular engagement with the focal point through phone calls as well as regular consultations with the participating MPs individually and as a group to provide direct support on how they could advance Platform objectives and to promote the sharing of information and experience among themselves. LSP also obtained agreement by the ANCI administrative leadership to provide designated staff members to support Platform activities and initiative. Impact and Assessments It is extremely difficult to assess the impact of the collaborative Platforms initiative. While 23 of the 24 Platforms were established in 2015 (the 24th in early 2016), the first capacity building workshops did not take place until 2016. Therefore, in practice, the Platforms have only been fully operational for approximately one year. The legislative elections in the fall of 2016 further complicated implementation. In order to avoid the appearance of interfering with the elections or political favoritism, LSP was not allowed to work in the field with the Platforms from September 2016 up through and immediately following the elections in November 2016. Finally, the results reported here based on internal project reporting and the DI conducted Mid-Term Evaluation which was based on a sampling of constituencies’ methodology as opposed to conducting detailed research in all of the original constituencies (both participating and control.) Concept Design


Minister for Infrastructure, Patrick Achi (on the right) with the MP of Yakassé Attobrou, Mr Aman Yapo (on the left), during the official ceremony marking the start of the road rehabilitation works. Yakassé-Attobrou – May 1, 2016

Based on the project interactions with the platforms once they were operational, the general design of the platforms appears valid and effective, a conclusion that DI’s evaluators agreed:

Evidence supports the findings that the design/technical approach to platforms was valid, including membership, types of training and processes…. The conceptual design of “Collaborative Platforms” was validated during a number of comments and discussions. The Secretary General of the National Assembly noted that the platforms are “a vital interface between citizens, civil society and administrative authorities, help to mobilize people for common aim, and make the National Assembly a stronger institution.” The structure of Platforms, involving representatives from administrative powers working around a table with citizen representatives, was effective at improving some local services, resolving services-related problems, or informing citizens of the issues, and thereby helping to avoid conflict. It is an effective instrument for citizen engagement with local authorities, and also increases visibility of the participating MP. The Action Planning process ensures that needs are captured and targeted. Collaboration among different stakeholders was an important factor needed for a successful Platform, as well as an active leadership.36

At the same time, variations in the platform structures developed on the ground, including who asserted primary leadership of the platforms demonstrated that the concept of collaborative community engagement is susceptible to adjustments to meet local needs and conditions. Additional research needs to be conducted on the management structure in particular to determine whether or not there is an optimal form of platform leadership.

Effects on Services Platform performance varied from one constituency to another with some being successful, while others were less so. This was often dependent upon whether the MP or another platform member was able to effectively provide leadership for the platform. Nonetheless, as reported by the DI Assessment Team (2017): “Preliminary findings showed…[that p]articipants were able to document success stories in public service delivery. These services are related to improvement of security, water supply, electricity, education and health”37. This was particularly true in the cases of Bengourou,

Anyama, and Bingerville. (p.22.) In Anyama, for example, the community had lost access to the only potable water resource (a well 30 kilometers away) due to security concerns and had been forced to draw its drinking water from the local marsh resulting in wide spread illnesses including schistosomiasis. The Anyama Platform targeted this water problem and successfully lobbied for

36 Id. p. 22-23 37 Id. p. 24


the government to provide regular deliveries of potable water.38 In Yakasse-Atttobru, platform efforts resulted in the resumption of work on asphalting the Yakasse-Attobrou-Adzope road. Impact on Public Perceptions The Platform initiative, on the whole had a positive impact on public perceptions about public service delivery (potentially reflect actual improvements in service delivery) and the public’s perception of their MP. In a content analysis of interviews from its Key Informant Interview survey, the DI Assessment Team found that the two comments most often repeated were:

Rank KII/FGD Comment

1 MP is more effective than previously: in terms of representation, oversight, availability, communicating law related issues, and visibility in communes

2 Platforms are effective for improving MP representation, resolving community conflicts, networking, interaction between local government and citizens, and informing about gender-related legal issues

(DI 2017, p. 15) In the analysis of its broader public opinion survey, the improvements in public perception are less striking, with perceptions in both pilot and control constituencies reporting relatively low levels of satisfaction with the performance of the ANCI and the performance and presence of the MP within their constituencies – though with a small (2%) but statistically significant improvement in the perception that their MPs are present and active in the constituency (15). Interestingly, the differences in negative perceptions are even greater between pilot and control constituencies where the negative perception is 9% lower than in the controls (15.) Promoting Civil Collaboration and Cooperation As previously noted, as a post conflict country, concerns over friction between ethnic, social, and cultural communities remains high and the Platforms were intended to create a neutral forum in which representatives from diverse communities could come together and safely engage in discussion of and collaboration on efforts to improve public services could take place. The DI Mid-Term Evaluation reported two findings in this regard. Among the 4 top open responses to the Key informant interview, was the statement: “Platforms are effective for improving MP representation, resolving community conflicts, networking, interaction between local government and citizens, and informing about gender-related legal issues”39.mphasis added). Further, the report noted that: “Collaboration among different stakeholders was an important factor needed for a successful Platform, as well as an active leadership.”40 Given the finding that overall the Platforms were successful, this objective appears to have also been achieved. Overall Assessment of Platforms Function According to internal project assessments, a majority of the Platforms are active and functioning at a reasonable level of performance. In the DI sampling of eight constituencies, five were deemed

38 SUNY Center for International Development. Water for Anyama – The Source of Life USAID| West Africa, 2017 Snapshot. Story available at: http://www.cid.suny.edu/newsroom/news2017/newsroom_2017_ci_water.shtml 39 Id. Democracy International p. 20 40 Id., p. 23

http://www.cid.suny.edu/newsroom/news2017/newsroom_2017_ci_water.shtml


acceptable while three (Bouake, Ferke and Daloa) were assessed as not functioning well.41 Summary Initial assessments suggest that the collaborative Platforms Initiative has proven generally successful in advancing the three principle goals of the initiative: improving MP representation; improving public service delivery; and improving the civil and collaborative engagement of diverse groups within the constituency community. Given the extremely short duration of the current project, the model deserves significantly further development and support including study of lingering questions about the proper management of the Platforms. OBJECTIVE 3: IMPROVED AUDIT AND BUDGET OVERSIGHT IN COTE D’IVOIRE At the end of March 2017, LSP was awarded $348,000 in additional funding under the Fiscal Transparency Funds to provide capacity building support to the Audit Court of Cote d’Ivoire. This funding is dedicated to the newly created Objective 3 of the program: Improved Audit and Budget Oversight Capacity in Cote d’Ivoire. The Audit Court (Cour des Comptes), has a mandate to oversee public finances, and is the body tasked with ensuring that public expenditures and accounting are in line with governing budgetary laws and general principles of public accounting. This body is authorized to assist the Legislature and the Executive in the oversight of the execution of finance laws and is responsible for providing an annual report on fiscal compliance as well as on specific subjects as requested by the National Assembly of Cote d’Ivoire (ANCI and the Government. In an effort to improve the level of transparency in Cote d’Ivoire’s fiscal processes and activities, LSP supported a number of training activities aimed at strengthening knowledge and oversight of public expenditures, supporting collaboration within and between the National Assembly and Audit Court in monitoring fiscal activities, and providing assistance to strengthen the operational capacity of the Audit Court.

Capacity Building on Effective Budgetary Oversight and Reporting for ANCI The Audit Court has a mandate to review and analyze the annual State budget and expenditures in terms of the legality of what is being proposed or has been expended in accordance with legislation and governing standards in place. As part of this mandate, the Court produces reports outlining their analysis and findings, which they share with the National Assembly, namely the Economic and Financial Affairs Commission (CAEF). The start of 2017 marked the beginning of a new legislature, with about a one-third turnover in Members of Parliament. The new legislature also brought with it a reformulation in the make-up of the Permanent Commissions, including the CAEF. In order to both educate the new parliament about the role and functions of the court and to promote better working relationships between the

41 Id, p. 16


two, LSP assisted the Court in facilitating a four-day seminar for members of the ANCI in Yamoussoukro from June 14 -17, 2017 with 72 participants from the ANCI and Audit Court. This capacity building seminar targeted members of the CAEF, representatives from each parliamentary group, and parliamentary administrators to explain the work of the Audit Court and the areas of engagement between the two institutions in ensuring effective oversight of the State budget. The seminar provided the ANCI participants with an overview of the mandate of the Audit Court, its role and responsibility in the oversight of public finances, as well as how this mandate is carried out. The Court outlined the reports it produces regarding the management of public finances by public enterprises, state and local authorities, and how the National Assembly should analyze these reports in exercising its budgetary oversight function of the Executive. Capacity Building of Audit Court Staff: ICT Skills Building Workshops The Audit Court is integrating more and more information technology into its workflow processes to improve efficiency and transparency in the work that it does. However, several of the magistrates and staff have very limited capacity in using basic IT tools. LSP provided with the Audit Court staff and judges with a series of trainings on basic computer skills, namely the use of MS Office applications such as MS Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. In addition, the magistrates and staff received training in conducting internet-based research to assist them in their work. Help establish effective Archiving and ICT Support Implementation of an Effective Archiving System The Audit Court must retain large volumes of public expenditure documentation for a period of at least 30 years. This left them facing severe space limitations without adequate facilities to house these documents. The Audit Court contracted a firm to put in place an electronic archiving system. However, there were some issues in the implementation of this system due to preconditions set forth by the firm before they are able to install the system. One of these preconditions was setting up adequate infrastructure, in terms of shelving and desk space, to support the archiving process. LSP supported the construction of this infrastructure in June 2017. Procure necessary Software and Equipment to support ICT needs LSP provided support to the Audit Court to help meet their ICT needs. LSP procured anti-virus licenses for the Audit Court computers, 40 copies of MS Office, and a generator for the Audit Court building to ensure adequate power connectivity for the Court office spaces.

Assessment Given the extremely short period of implementation (roughly six months) one cannot accurately assess the results or outcomes of this initiative. In terms of out puts, LSP addressed key needs identified by the Court including a very successful training with the ANCI, providing ICT support and training to the judges and staff, and providing necessary ICT software and infrastructure. These contributions do present the Audit Court with the tools to carry out its assigned functions.


It is also important to note that the budget oversight and reporting seminar represented an important linkage between the Audit Court and the ANCI. The Court is a new institution with an important role to play in assuring the integrity of the budget in Cote d’Ivoire in which it will need the strong support of the ANCI in carrying out its work. At the same time, the ANCI needs the data generated by the Audit Court to carry out its own role in budget development, review, and oversight. The success of the seminar, as reported by the participants, represents a positive first step in building this important relationship.


V. PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIION Startup Problems During the start-up and first year of project implementation, the project ran into severe problems. The originally selected COP, while eminently qualified by experience, failed to establish an effective working relationship with the ANCI. Indeed, after a few months, the ANCI began to actively refuse to cooperate with the project. At the same time, the originally selected DCOP delayed his deployment for approximately four months and the Administrative Manager struggled to handle the demands of her position. The home office Project Director deployed for an extended period of time to cover the delay in deploying the DCOP, and, when the initial COP was released in October, to cover until the replacement was identified and deployed. The project was also supported on a regular visiting basis by the Home Office Project Manager. While all of these staff members had significant experience that suggested that they should be able to do an exemplary job for the project and all had received glowing recommendations, in practice, they failed to advance the project. Therefore, in January 2014, SUNY/CID replaced the Project Director with Senior Associate David Guinn and hired a new COP, Geraldine Pelzer. Very shortly thereafter, SUNY/CID replaced the DCOP, eliminated the administrative manager position, replaced the HO Project Manager and hired a significant number of new staff. Moreover, whereas the project had effectively only carried out 3 activities in 2013, by October 2014, the project became fully operational carrying out support activities for over 21 tasks (as identified in the work plan). Management The program management structure underwent some transitions. During the initial design, the program was to be managed by a COP, DCOP, and Administrative Manager, with long-term support by two component mangers (for Objectives 1 and 2 respectively), additional program officers and support staff. This would then be supplemented with short-term technical consultants. The field team would then be strongly supported by a Home Office Project Director, responsible for the overall technical direction and substantial contributions to technical planning and implementation, and a Home Office Project Manager, responsible for financial management and contractual compliance. MSI, as the prime sub on the task order, was responsible for supplying the DCOP and M&E Officer and in providing technical and management support for M&E and other technical duties as required. During the startup and initial year of the project, the Project Director changed the management structure to limit the number of full time technical staff to two program officers, with the balance of the support anticipated to come from short-term consultants. With the appointment of David Guinn as Project Director, LSP resumed the original management staffing structure (with the exception of the fact that the Administrative Manager position was eliminated and the


responsibilities shifted primarily to the DCOP) and many of the M&E duties held by the DCOP were shifted to an M&E manager. Moreover, the DCOP became a direct employee of SUNY/CID. Work Planning LSP was managed off of an annual work plan which, due to the fact that the project started in December, was designed according to the calendar year. Work planning generally started in August with a review of activities to date by the staff. This was followed by consultations with the leaders within the ANCI (the Secretary General, Direct of Legislative Support, and others with which LSP engaged) and with the COR. A rough draft of the work plan would be developed. Then, according to the original project design and standard SUNY/CID practice, the HO Project Director and Project Manager were then supposed to visit the project during the Fall to closely review proposed activities for the work plan, assure that they were advancing the project to meet project goals and objectives, and to review and proposed realignments within the budget as needed. Unfortunately, the field visits of the Project Director and Project Manager were rarely approved and in no event were both approved at the same time. This did result in significant delays in work planning and in making necessary budgetary adjustments. Once the work plan was finalized, it was submitted to USAID for initial review, followed by submission to the ANCI for its review and approval. Once approved by the ANCI, the final work plan was submitted to USAID. Contractual The project was initiated with a Task Order under the Legislative Strengthening IQC in December 13, 2012. The Task Order was the subject of 5 modifications: two were budget realignments, two were obligation increases; and one involved the award of additional funding. Specifically, in March 2017, LSP was awarded $348,000 in additional funding under the Fiscal Transparency Funds initiative within USAID to provide capacity building support to the Audit Court of Cote d’Ivoire. This funding resulted in the addition of Objective 3 of the program: Improved Audit and Budget Oversight Capacity in Cote d’Ivoire. Staffing Staffing has been a challenge for the project, with significant turn over. The causes of that turmoil varied between international staff and local staff. International Staff: Turnover in international staff generally fell into two categories: those whose performance was unsatisfactory and those who left for personal reasons. As previously noted, the performance of all of the international staff (COP, DCOP, Administrative Manager, Project Director, and Project Manager) proved unsatisfactory and they were replaced during the first year of operations. Subsequent turn over in the COP and DCOP positions were the result of personals concerns or issues outside the control of SUNY/CID. Local Staff: Turnover among local staff was also disappointingly high. While there were a few positions in which the staff member was released for poor performance, for the most part, staff


members left because they received job offers with a significant increase in salary that LSP was unable to get USAID approval to meet.


VI. CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED Challenges LSP faced four serious challenges affecting program delivery and the results achieved: limited time for programming; the post conflict context; limited ANCI resources for staff; and making the platforms sustainable. Time and sustained engagement Institutional change requires a substantial investment in time allowing for both capacity building and the enculturation of new practices, policies and processes.42 Two key reasons support this assertion. First, in implementing a reform project, it is first necessary to establish a strong relationship of trust. Where that fails, as happened with LSP at the outset, effective implementation becomes impossible. The project had to exert significant efforts in year two to rebuild trust and gain ANCI cooperation and collaboration in project activities. Moreover, LSP staff had to continually work to strengthen that relationship so as to overcome sensitivities to the idea of “outsiders” or “foreigners” becoming overly involved in ANCI business, such as their concern with LSP working with them on their rules of procedure or helping them analyze proposed legislation. Second, it is often necessary for a project to not only provide an initial capacity building, it may also be necessary to provide follow up trainings and/or support to assure that the lessons learned are translated into practice. Given a relatively short time line for implementation with a wide range of planned activities intended to address an equally wide ranging set of needs, there is pressure to provide a targeted support activity and move on. This can undercut the support effort. For example, while LSP’s two visits by the experts from the National Assembly of Quebec in support of Human Resources were successful in themselves, the Human Resources department were slow in carrying the work to the next stage. The department needed continued and repeated support by the international expert to assure that they made the full transition from knowledge to practice. By contrast, the LSP initiative to support site visits as a form of oversight was largely successful because it was repeated relatively frequently (11 site visits) with close collaboration and mentoring of ANCI staff and commissions by LSP program officers. Post Conflict Environment As previously noted, the most significant impact of this political-social context rests on the fact that Cote d’Ivoire is a post-conflict country. Every activity supported by LSP, both within the National Assembly and outside it, had to be evaluated according to how it contributed to

42 See, e.g. Greg Power, The politics of parliamentary strengthening: Understanding political incentives and institutional behaviour in parliament support strategies. Westminster Foundation for Democracy & Global Partners & Associates. 2011. London. Retrieved from http://www.gpgovernance.net/publication/the-politics-of-parliamentary-strengthening/; Guinn, David E. Engaging the demand dynamic: promoting internal forces for reform through targeted legislative strengthening support. The Journal of Legislative Studies, (2016).

http://www.gpgovernance.net/publication/the-politics-of-parliamentary-strengthening/

http://www.gpgovernance.net/publication/the-politics-of-parliamentary-strengthening/


maintaining and enhancing the peace or threatened that peace. Within the ANCI, a careful balancing of power and interest had been implemented as a part of the peace settlement, that many ANCI leaders feared could be upset through proposals for institutional change. As noted by respondent to the Democracy International conducted Mid-Term Performance Evaluation, “The leadership felt that the priority in the post-conflict context was to focus on learning to live together in peace towards a better standard of living – in order to not slip back into civil war.” 43 As a consequence, some planned activities identified in the assessment and/or original proposal that were deemed by ANCI leadership as too politically threatening, were significantly restricted (such as work on the rules of procedure) or ultimately not implemented (such as supporting the ANCI to seek greater control over its budget.) This post conflict environment further increased the need for the building of strong relationships of trust – which takes time. By the final year of the project, based on the efforts of LSP to build that strong level of trust, activities that had been rejected by ANCI leadership at the start of the project, were tentatively allowed to proceed, including participation in working on the rules of procedure. Limited ANCI Staff Resources As is the case with many if not most developing legislatures, the ANCI has limited resources for adequate staffing. The actual human capacity of existing staff is relatively good. They were responsive to training and increasingly assumed responsibility for assuming the duties they were being trained for. Nonetheless, there were far too few of them. As one staff member commented ruefully to a DI evaluation interviewer: “We are faster now (and more accurate) because of the training but the work load grows even faster.”44 Sustaining the Collaborative Community Platforms The sustainability of the collaborative community platforms will continue to be challenging due to the financial constraints faced by the platforms themselves. In an effort to promote their sustainability, LSP engaged ANCI administrators and the DGDDL, a state institution, to create direct linkages between the platforms, the National Assembly, and state actors in an effort to provide a resource network that the platforms can tap in to. The tools for sustainable operations are in place, with both the executive and local leaders now aware of the capacity of the platforms and an agreement by the DGDDL to continue providing training support at government expense. Moreover, even after LSP financial support ended, a majority of the platforms continued operating – at least for the balance of 2017. So, there is some hope that the platforms will be adopted over the longer term. Lessons Learned In General Local Buy-In and Ownership – Power of Positive Relations This project again illustrates the importance of obtaining local buy-in and ownership of the project and, that to achieve this, it is critically important that the project management and staff must build strong working relationships with local leadership. Failure to establish and build a trusting 43 Id. Democracy International. p. .26. 44 Id. p. 12


relationship at the outset of the project almost doomed the project for failure. The successful cultivation of those relationships of trust over the life of the project subsequently allowed the project to engage the ANCI in reform initiatives that appeared impossible at the outset of the project. Major Initiatives Require Focused and Sustained Support While some support efforts can be targeted and accomplished fairly quickly (such as providing a training on software skills or the procurement of needed infrastructure supports), larger systemic impacting efforts require much more sustained and ongoing support. The human resources support provided by LSP, while successful in itself, needed more ongoing, high level support and engagement to bring it to fruition. By contrast, the sustained ongoing support for site visits saw substantial improvements over time. Collaborative Implementation Based on ANCI Visions Works While many critics and donors complain about the waste in development funding caused by the duplication of efforts by different donors working separately, coordinating among donors and their implementers is more often honored in the breach than in practice. In part, it would appear that this is because it is difficult for all of the donors/implementers to agree on what is most important and how to achieve it. The World Bank will focus on public finance while UNWomen will be looking at women. LSP overcame this problem by working with the ANCI to assure that its own strategic development plan accurately identified the pressing needs, was comprehensive and that all parties (donors and the ANCI itself) saw the value of making sure that their effort mutually contributed to and reinforced that strategy for development. As found by the DI evaluators:

The quality of this strategy was evidenced by the decision by all the other donors and partners to adopt the PSAN and the PTANs as the overarching framework for all their technical inputs and contributions. This was extremely effective. It mobilized additional resources, specialized technical assistance and added value through other donors. Management capacity was developed through many capacity building activities delivered by the partners or LSP. The PSAN was relatively thorough in its themes and goals.45 (emphasis added.)

Platforms The overall Platforms initiative can be tentatively described as a success. Nonetheless, there are certain issues that proved particularly challenging and/or that may require further work and study. Nature of the Platforms As revealed in the DI Mid-Term Evaluation, the exact nature of the Platforms remained somewhat unclear to the assessment team and to some of the key informants interviewed by the team. Indeed, at a few points in the report, the DI evaluation team suggested that the Platform’s function could be equally served by different mechanisms46. Constituency Offices: Establishing a constituency office is a common method of promoting improved representation. The DI team correctly noted that a constituency office, properly 45 Id. 46 Id.


resourced, could assume many of the administrative functions currently delegated to the focal point of the Platforms (Prefecture/Sub-prefecture)47; however, while this would allow the MP to assert greater leadership over the Platform, it would potentially weaken the concept of the Platform as a form of collaborate engagement in the resolution of public service delivery problem. Constituency offices frequently focus on resolving individual issues of concern in relation to government services and, while they can keep an MP informed of general trends and concerns, they are not designed to provide structure feedback and engagement that the Platforms are intended to supply. They could thus confuse the distinction between representation as serving individual constituents with the representation of broad community interests. Moreover, constituency offices may not facilitate civil collaborate engagement among members of the community in that the constituency office is identified as an MP service office with some implications for the MP’s future runs for office. The local mayor of other politically engaged Platform members may therefore view the Platform as a politically biased activity. Advisory Body to Local Government: At another point, the DI evaluators referred to the Platforms as “an advisory body to local government.”48 . Presumably, this is in part because local government officials are included among the Platform membership and, at a minimum, administrative leadership is provided by government officials in the form of the focal points. This appears to undervalue the actual authority and persuasive force held by the citizen/CSO members and the MP(s). While it is true that in many ways the citizen members of the Platforms do provide advice, at the same time they are an important representative sample of the community, they represent community groups within the constituency and they are being trained in techniques of project management and advocacy that can be directed at both governmental officials within and without the Platforms. Moreover, the MP(s) retain their capacities as MPs to take the concerns of the citizen/CSO members directly to the national government as well as their persuasive authority towards the local government officials. CSO Demand Modelling: The idea of empowering the citizen/CSO members of the Platforms was always implicit in the Platform design – yet it ultimately remained somewhat vague and unrefined. The CSO empowerment model in practice has often been viewed by government officials and legislators as a system in which donors are creating adversaries for them resulting in tension and distrust between the two sides. Clearly, in creating a unified Platform with the additional goal of promoting civil collaborative engagement, empowerment of the citizens/CSOs cannot come at the expense of government and MP members. Nonetheless, additional attention and study needs to take place on how to best empower and reflect the interest of the citizens and CSOs in the leadership of the Platforms. Leadership and Management The evolution of Platform leadership and management was partly the result of changes in project budgeting and implementation and partly a natural evolution based in the interests and level of engagement of those involved in the Platforms. To a certain extent one might describe this as a form of natural experimentation in leadership forms. Unfortunately, due to the very short period of implementation, this evolutionary process cannot be fairly evaluated. While one can say that where MPs and/or government official asserted significant leadership, the Platforms flourished, that does not resolve what is the best model for leadership. Possible models of leadership include 47 Id. p. 24 48 Id. p. 17


the Platform being: led by the MP; led by a local government official; co-led by the MP(s) and local officials; or co-led by either the MP or local officials and by a citizen/CSO leader. In part the answer to this question in terms of the final option also depends upon the final understanding of the nature of the Platforms and the role of the citizen/CSO within it. Duration of Support As previously noted, the platforms have been in operation for approximately two years. This is a very short time in which to determine their efficacy. Moreover, due to cost concerns the level of support provided by LSP was substantially reduced, from two planned interventions per year in the field to a total of three field visits (platform set up; first training work shop; second training workshop) supplemented by distance support via phone and skype. As argued by Greg Power and many others, in the development of institutions and processes, time is often more important than the amount of money provided in support.49 In this case the intensity and duration of LSP support was limited. This does raise interesting issues for further research. Given the success demonstrated in this project, what were the features that allowed that success? Would the platforms have been more successful with more extended support? Does that extended support require greater in the field interventions or is distance support adequate? Electoral Consequences While it was critically important for USAID and SUNY/CID to introduce and support the Platforms initiative in a politically neutral manner (so as not to suggest that the USG was favoring one candidate over another) and, equally, that the Platforms themselves be structured as an inclusive bi-partisan/multi-partisan means of promoting community-wide interests, in any Legislative Strengthening program one of the main incentives for MPs to participate in the program is that doing so improves their prospects for re-election. Insofar as voters vote for or against their MPs based on the MP’s performance of her duties (a foundation virtue of democratic accountability), any effort to help an MP to become a better MP will potentially contribute to their re-election. It is therefore important to ask the question: Insofar as the Platforms were successful, did they contribute to the re-election of the involved MPs in the 2016 legislative elections? The answer appears affirmative – but ambiguous. In line with international averages, Cote d’Ivoire had an overall turn-over rate of 54.16%. Over half of all MPs failed to be re-elected. In the pilot Platform constituencies, however, the turn-over rate was 39.13%. Over 60% of the serving MPs were re-elected. However, while this would appear to suggest that the Platform initiative did contribute to the re-election of the involved members – and we believe this to be, largely the case as suggested by the improved perception of MPs and service deliver held by the citizens in the pilot Platform constituencies. At the same time, all seven of the MPs who failed to follow through on their commitments to work with the Platforms were nonetheless re-elected as well. There are a couple of factors that may have contributed to what appears to be an anomalous result. First, the seven were all members of multi-member constituencies. Thus, to the extent that the Platforms were successful due to the efforts of the active MP(s) who were being rewarded for their

49 See, e.g. Power


efforts, the non-contributing MP could have effectively “ridden on the electoral coattails” of the active MP(s). Adding strength to this possibility is the fact that MPs are elected according to a party list rather than an individual candidate vote. Again, the non-performing MP may have been carried by party member MPs whose popularity may have been influenced by their work on the Platforms. In any event, this is an issue deserving further study.


VII. PROGRAM PMP INDICATORS AND RESULTS

Indicator Number Indicator Title Unit of

Measure

2013 Baseline

Value

2014 Target

2014 Actuals Baseline Revised

2015 Targets 2015

Actuals Baseline 2016 Targets

2016 Actuals Baseline 2017

Targets 2017

Actuals

C-Ind 8

%of satisfactory scores & higher on the Citizen Score Card Survey

% of individuals 58% -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- --

F-GNDR 4

% of target pop. reporting increased agreement w/ the concept that males and females should have equal access to economic, social and political opportunities

% of individuals 92% -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- --

C-Ind 7

% of individuals who trust that ANCI is exercising its constitutional functions in the best interest of the citizen

% of individuals 54% -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- --

C-Ind 6

% of individuals who trust that ANCI is improving the nat. leg. framework to better serve the citizen

% of individuals 47% -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- --

C-Ind 5

% of individuals who agree w/ the statement that public service in their municipality is better than the preceding year

% of individuals 43% -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --- --

C-Ind 4 # of ANCI docs made available to the Public

Number of documents 85 95 8 8 11 9 8 9 9 8 3 4


Indicator Number Indicator Title Unit of

Measure

2013 Baseline

Value

2014 Target

2014 Actuals Baseline Revised

2015 Targets 2015

Actuals Baseline 2016 Targets

2016 Actuals Baseline 2017

Targets 2017

Actuals

F-Ind. 2.2.1-4

# of exec. oversight actions taken by the leg. w/ USG assistance.

Number of actions 0 10 8 0 12 10 0 9 11 0 2 0

F-Ind. 2.2.1-6

# of Public Forums in which MP and Members of the Public Interact w/ USG assistance

Number of actions 0 24 24 0 27 31 0 30 40 0 29 32

C-Ind 3

#of participants of Members of the Public into LSP-CI activities

Number of individuals 0 2 400 7 851 0 7 322 7 953 0 6601 9008 0 3592 6421

C-Ind 2

# of LSP-CI tech. deliverables appropriated by ANCI

Number of documents 1 5 6 1 8 7 0 8 3 1 6 4

C-Ind 1 # of participants into LSP-CI activities.

Number of individuals 0 2 500 8 451 0 7 764 8 425 0 7101 9946 0 4392 7013


General Comments on Indicators C-Ind 5, 6,7 &8 and F-GNDR 4 – These indicators are related to the Citizen Score Card survey. The baseline survey was conducted in 2015 and an end-line survey was expected to be conducted in 2017 to see whether there has been any change in perception from 2015 to 2017. The end-line survey was cancelled due to delays in receiving additional funding obligation by USAID. C-Ind 4 – Number of ANCI documents made available to the public: The ANCI’s production of publicly available documents remained relatively stable throughout the implementation period save for 2017, in which the number dropped in half. This was, in large part, due to the parliamentary elections in November 2016 and the preparations for the inauguration of the new parliament in the first quarter of calendar year 2017. F-Ind. 2.2.1-3 – Number of draft laws subject to substantive amendment & final vote that benefitted from USG support: The number of laws supported by LSP varied each year and, in many cases, reflected the priorities of the ANCI as to which ones they were willing to work with LSP to address. In 2015, when LSP sought to increase its support by providing legislative analysis reports on proposed laws, the ANCI resisted such efforts and only allowed LSP to work on 3 laws. At trust increased, this grew to 9 laws in 2016. Given the reduced period of programming (due to the inauguration of the new parliament in the first quarter of 2017 and the ending of programming at the end of 2017), the total number of laws worked on decreased to 5 – though even that exceeded the anticipated target of 4 laws for the year. F-Ind. 2.2.1-4 - Number of executive oversight actions taken by the legislature with USG assistance: Throughout the course of 2014, 2015 and 2016, LSP supported the ANCI in carrying out 8 to 11 actions per year. While this represents a limited number, the qualitative importance of those oversight actions was significant far beyond the number achieved. Due to the electoral transition project closeout, LSP was unable to support any oversight actions in 2017. F-Ind. 2.2.1-6 – Number of public forums in which Members of Parliament and Members of the Public interact with USG assistance: There has been a steady increase of public forums involving members of parliament and the public since the outset of the project, increasing steadily from 24 in 2014, to 31 in 2015 and to 40 in 2016. While the number of forums decreased slightly in 2017 to 32, even that exceeded the target of 29 for the year and this was achieved in spite of the transition to the new parliament and the close out of the project. C-Ind 3 – Number of participants of Members of the Public in LSP activities: LSP was extraordinarily successful in promoting public outreach and the interaction between MPs and members of the public. Yearly totals of participating individuals ranged from 6,421 (2017) to 9008 (2016) with total number of participants of 27.752 for the life of the project. C-Ind 2 – Number of LSP technical deliverables appropriated by ANCI: There has been a steady development of technical deliverables over the term of the project ranging from 3 (2016) to 7 (2015.) Among the most important of the deliverables are the manuals on research, budget, CSO support, legislative process and committee operations. C-Ind 1 – Number of participants in LSP activities: LSP was successful in engaging staff and members as participants in LSP activities. In every year, except for the final abbreviated period of


year 2017, LSP exceeded its annual targets. This indicator included both the participants under C-Ind-3 above along with the participation of staff and MPs. The numbers of staff and MP participants by years broken by Target/Actual were: 2014 – 100/600; 2015 – 442/472; 2016 – 500/938; and 2017 – 800/592.


Bibliography

Barkin, Joel, ed. Legislative Power in Emerging African Democracies. Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2009.

Constitution of Cote d’Ivoire. 2016. Article 96.

Democracy International Mid-Term Performance Evaluation: Legislative Strengthening Program – Draft Evaluation. USAID, April 2017.

Guinn, David E. Engaging the demand dynamic: promoting internal forces for reform through targeted legislative strengthening support. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 2016.

Hamilton, Alexander, John Madison and John Jay. The Federalist Papers. Clinton Rositer, ed. New American Library, 1961.

IPU. World e-Parliament Report 2016. 34 (IPU 2016) available at: http://archive.ipu.org/pdf/publications/eparl16-en.pdf.

IPU/UNDP. Global Parliamentary Report: The Changing Nature of Parliamentary Representation. 2012.

L’engagement des Deputes a oeuvrer pour la paix. Assemblee Nationale de Côte d'Ivoire, 2015.

Levi, M. and A. Sacks, et al. Conceptualizing Legitimacy, Measuring Legitimating Beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 53, no. 3, 2009, 345-375.

Lombardo, Emanuela and Petra Meier. “Policy.” The Oxford Handbook of Feminist Theory, April 2015 Lisa Disch & Mary Hawkesworth, eds

Power, Greg. The politics of parliamentary strengthening: Understanding political incentives and institutional behaviour in parliament support strategies. Westminster Foundation for Democracy & Global Partners & Associates, 2011, London.

Research International. Baseline Study on the Perception of the National Assembly by the Population Living in Côte d'Ivoire. AECOM Office of Transitions Initiatives, 2012, p. 14.

Stapenhurst, Rick, Riccardo Pelizzo, David M Olson, and Lisa von Trapp. Legislative Oversight and Budgeting: A World Perspective. World Bank Institute Development Studies. Washington, DC : World Bank. 2008. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/6547

SUNY Center for International Development. Water for Anyama – The Source of Life USAID| West Africa, 2017 Snapshot. Story available at: http://www.cid.suny.edu/newsroom/news2017/newsroom_2017_ci_water.shtml.

USAID, 2000. Handbook on Legislative Strengthening. Center for Democracy and Governance., Washington DC. Available at: http://www.cid.suny.edu/Publications/pnacf632.pdf


http://www.cid.suny.edu/newsroom/news2017/newsroom_2017_ci_water.shtml

http://www.cid.suny.edu/Publications/pnacf632.pdf

legislative strengthening program in cote d’ivoire

Documents