local government management of service delivery

1LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

1LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT MANUAL

September, 2020

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA

2 LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

2LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

iLOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL


LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT MANUAL

September, 2020

ii LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

iiLO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

iiiLOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

CONTENTS

Foreword v

Acronyms/Abbreviations vi

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Background to Management of Service Delivery Assessments 1

2 Background to Assessment of LG Management of Service Delivery 3

2.1 Scope of the LG Management of Service Delivery Assessment 3

2.2 Principles for the design of the assessment system 3

2.3 Overview of Minimum Conditions 3

2.4 Overview of Performance Measures and Relative Scores 4

SECTION 2: ASSESSING LG MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY 5

3 Preparatory Activities 5

3.1 Orientation of the Local Governments 5

3.2 Team Composition and Coordination 5

3.3 Training of the LG PA and QA teams 7

4 Collection of Data to Inform the Assessment Process 7

4.1 Collection of data from secondary sources at the national level 7

4.2 Field based LG Performance Assessment 8

4.3 Reporting 8

5 Quality Assurance and Results Verification 9

5.1 Spot Checks 9

5.2 Independent Verification of Process and Results 9

6 Review, Approval, Use and Dissemination of the Results 11

6.1 Grievance Handling 11

6.2 Approval of results 11

6.3 Synthesis Report 12

6.4 Use of Results and Impact 12

iv LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

6.4.1 Use of the results to allocate part of the development grants 12

6.4.2 Use of results for performance improvement planning 13

6.5 Dissemination of Results 13

7 Institutional Arrangements and Timing 14

7.1 Institutional Arrangements 14

7.2 Timing of Activities 15

SECTION 3: INDICATORS AND ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE 16

8 Crosscutting Performance Assessment 16

8.1 Crosscutting Minimum Conditions 16

8.2 Crosscutting Performance Measures 19

9 Education Performance Assessment 32

9.1 Education Minimum Conditions 32

9.2 Education Performance Measures 33

10 Health Performance Assessment 41

10.1 Health Minimum Conditions 41

10.2 Health Performance Measures 42

11 Water and Environment Performance Assessment 57

11.1 Water and Environment Minimum Conditions 57

11.2 Water and Environment Performance Measures 58

12 Micro-scale Irrigation Performance Assessment 68

12.1 Micro-scale Irrigation Minimum Conditions 69

12.2 Micro-scale Irrigation Performance Measures 70

ANNEXES 82

Annex 1 Code of Ethics for the Assessment Teams 82

Annex 2 Exit Declaration Form 83

vLOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

FOREWORD

In a bid to improve delivery of services to all citizens the Government of Uganda introduced a decentralization policy under the Constitution of 1995 and the Local Government Act Cap 243. Under the decentralization policy, LGs are mandated to deliver a wide range of basic services and the Ministries, Departments and Agencies to provide standards, guidelines as well as supervisory support. To finance the delivery of basic services, the central government makes transfers to LGs.

Following a series of reviews conducted on the country’s fiscal decentralization reforms, with support from the World Bank, in FY 2015/16 GoU took measures to revise its LG transfers system under the Uganda Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfer Reform. The core program objectives include; i) Restoring adequacy in financing of decentralized service delivery; ii) Ensuring equity in allocation of funds to LGs for service delivery; and iii) Improving the efficiency of LGs in the delivery of services.

The Local Government Performance Assessment system is aimed at attaining the third objective of the Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfer Reform. This revised manual sets out a performance and improvement framework with more outcome driven indicators also associated with an incentive system to ensure improved institutional and service delivery performance of Local Governments.

The manual has been jointly developed by relevant Ministries, Departments and Agencies(MDAs) in close consultation with local Governments. It provides detailed information and guidelines on the objectives, processes, organization and management of the Performance system to be applied including activities prior to, during and after assessment.

I trust that this manual will be efficiently utilized in order to contribute to efforts to improve LG performance and service delivery. I also encourage Local Governments to embrace this manual as a key tool to not only prepare for the assessment process but also use it as a basis for continuous improvements in the execution of their mandated roles and responsibilities.

Finally, I would like to take his opportunity to thank all representatives from the various MDAs and LGs that made compilation of this manual possible. These include; Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development; Ministry of Local Government; Local Government Finance Commission; Ministry of Education and Sports; Ministry of Health; Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries; Ministry of Water and Environment; Ministry of Public Service; National Environment Management Authority and Local Governments.

My office also acknowledges the technical and financial support received through the Overseas Development Institute-Budget Strengthening Initiative (ODI-BSI) and the World Bank. I look forward to further collaboration with all stakeholders in improving service delivery in the country.

For God and my Country.

Kaima Godfrey

FOR PERMANENT SECRETARY

vi LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

ACRONYMS/ABBREVIATIONS

AAA Automated Attendance Analysis

AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome

AWP Annual Work Plan

BoG Board of Governors

BoQ Bills of Quantities

CAO Chief Administration Officer

CAN Capacity Assessment Needs

CC Consultative Committees

CFO Chief Finance Officer

CMU Construction Management Unit

CPD Continuous Professional Development

CRC Centralized Grievance Redress Committee

CRP Complaints Referral Path

CSOs Civil Society Organizations

D/CAO Deputy Chief Administrative Officer

DCDO District Community Development Officer

DDEG Discretionary Development Equalization Grant

DEO District Education Officer

DES Directorate of Education Standards

DHMT District Health Management Team

DHO District Health Officer

DIS District Inspector of Schools

DPO District Production Office

DPs Development Partners

DSC District Service Commission

DTPC District Technical Planning Committee

DWO District Water Officer

DWSCC District Water and Sanitation Coordination Committee

EMIS Education Management Information System

ENR Environment and Natural Resources

ESIAs Environmental Social Impact Assessment

ESMPs Environmental Social Management Plans

FD SC Fiscal Decentralization Sub Committee

FDTC Fiscal Decentralization Technical Committee

FY Financial Year

GBV Gender Based Violence

GRC Grievance Redress Committee

viiLOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

GRM Grievance Redress Mechanism

H/T Head Teacher

HC Health Center

HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus

HLG Higher Local Government

HMIS Health Management Information System

HoDs Heads of Departments

HRIS Human Resource Information System

HRM Human Resource Management

HSDs Health Sub Districts

HUMC Health Unit Management Committee

IA Internal Audit

IFMIS Integrated Financial Management System

IGG Inspector General of Government

IPFs Indicative Planning Figures

IPPS Integrated Personnel Payroll System

IVF Independent Verification Agent

LG PA Local Government Performance Assessment

LG PAC Local Government Public Accounts Committee

LGDP Local Government Development Plan

LGFC Local Government Finance commission

LGs Local Governments

LLGs Lower Local Governments

LLHF Lower Local Health Facilities

M&E/LGs Directorate of Monitoring and Evaluation/Local Government

MAAIF Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries

MCs Minimum Conditions

MDAs Ministries, Departments, and Agencies

MEO Municipal Education Officer

MIS Management Information System

MMOH Municipal Medical Officer of Health

MoES Ministry of Education and Sports

MOFPED Ministry of Finance Planning and Economic Development

MOU Memorandum of Understanding

MoH Ministry of Health

MoLG Ministry of Local Government

MoLHUD Ministry of Lands Housing and Urban Development

MoPS Ministry of Public Service

MTPC Municipal Technical Planning Committee

viii LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT MANUAL

NEMA National Environment Management Authority

NWR None Wage Recurrent

OAG Office of the Auditor General

OPAMS Online Performance Assessment Management System

OPD Out Patient Department

OPM Office of the Prime Minister

OSR Own Source Revenue

OTIMS Online Transfer Information Management System

PBS Program Budgeting System

PDU Procurement Disposal Unit

PFMA Public Finance Management Act

PFO Principal Finance Officer

PHC Primary Health Care

PHRO Principal Human Resource Officer

PI Performance Improvement

PIP Performance Improvement Plan

PIT Project Implementation Team

PMO Principal Medical Officer

PMs Performance Measures

PNFP Private Not for Profit

PPDA Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Authority

PPEs Personal Protective Equipment

PS Permanent Secretary

QA Quality Assurance

QBPR Quarterly Budget Performance Reports

USE Universal Secondary Education

RBF Results Based Financing

SAA Senior Account Assistant

SAS Senior Assistant Secretary

SFO Senior Finance Officer

SMC School Management Committee

SPA School Performance Assessment

TC Technical Committee

TF Task Force

TPC Technical Planning Committee

ToR Terms of Reference

VAC Violence Against Children

WSCs Water and Sanitation Committees

WSS Water Supply and Sanitation Services


SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

1 Background to Management of Service Delivery Assessments

The Government of Uganda (GoU) is implementing the decentralization policy where: (i) the Local Governments (LGs) have the primary mandate of providing front line services in most basic services areas; and (ii) Central Government provides guidance through sector policies, standards, sector budget guidelines, technical supervision and support. In order to implement their service delivery mandates, Government has been transferring resources to Local Governments since 1993/94 where the funding, which was UGX 0.79 trillion (in UGX 2019/20 terms), has increased to UGX 3.81 trillion in FY 2019/20. The increase notwithstanding, there are a number of challenges notably: the limited discretion for LGs to decide on allocations of resources; visible inequities in the allocation of resources across LGs; lack of incentives for LGs to account for resources; and reduced real per capita value of transfers. Therefore, Government designed and has been implementing Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfer Reforms since 2015.

One of the key elements of the intergovernmental fiscal transfer reforms was the design and implementation of the Local Government Performance Assessment (LG PA) system under the leadership of the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM). The LG PA which has been focusing on: (i) accountability requirements; and (ii) crosscutting and sector (education, health and water) functional processes and systems, focusing on areas which were impediment for effective service delivery and bottlenecks in organization, administration and execution, has been conducted for three years where indicators were kept stable, also to ensure performance-trend analysis. The performance assessment results were used in the allocation of development grants in FYs 2019/20 and 2020/21 as well as in the design and implementation of Local Government Performance Improvement Plans (LG PIPs). The implementation of the assessment has led to improvement in the management of resources for service delivery as depicted in the improvement of LGs performance assessment results. For example, the overall average scores improved from 56% in the assessment conducted in 2017 to 68% in the assessment conducted in 2019.

The foregoing performance improvements notwithstanding, Government has noted that to address the existing constraints to the delivery of sufficient and quality services to citizens requires not only increased adequacy and equity of transfers but also strengthened: (i) Central Government oversight and support; (ii) capacity of Local Governments in the management of services; and (iii) service delivery performance at the facility level. In addition, after 3 years of implementation there is need to refine some of the indicators and up-date them based on lessons learned, e.g. removing indicators which are now largely complied with, and introducing new ones focusing on emerging challenges. Therefore, a new performance assessment and improvement framework to incentivize improved management and delivery of services has been developed under the coordination of OPM as depicted in the table below:


Overview of the Revised Performance Assessment and Improvement Framework

IssueLevel 1 – Service Delivery Facility and LLG

PerformanceLevel 2 LG Management of

Service Delivery

Level 3 CG Management of Service Delivery

1a) Schools 1b) Health 1c) LLGs2a Minimum conditions (MCs)

2b: Performance measures (PMs)

Education, Health, Water & Environment, Micro-scale Irrigation and Crosscutting MDAs

1. Objective

Incentivize improvements in processes and outputs at the school level

Incentivize improvements in processes and delivery of health services

Incentivize improvements in LLG management & service delivery

Address basic safeguards and core blockages to service delivery.

Incentivize improvements in the LG management of Education, Health, Water & Environment; micro-scale Irrigation and Crosscutting issues

Incentivize improvement in Central Government Management of Service Delivery

2. Timing To be decided to be decided Sept – Jan Sept – Jan Sept – Jan Sept – Jan

3. Assessment Method and compilation of results

Use school inspection reports

Use DHMTC Reports

District /Municipal

Contracted private firm

Contracted private firm

MDAs reporting against agreed actions.

4. Quality Assurance and verification of results

Contracted firm Contracted firm Contracted firm

Contracted firm

Spot checks & Contracted firm

Contracted firm

5. Impact/use

₋ Allocation of part of the capitation grants:

₋ Performance improvement support

₋ Allocation of part of the NWR grants;


₋ Allocation part of the DDEG;


₋ Impact on the allocation of the performance component of the development grants;

₋ Inform performance improvement support

₋ Impact on the size of grant from World Bank to GoU

This Assessment Manual focuses on Level 2 which is Local Government Management of Service Delivery.


2 Background to Assessment of LG Management of Service Delivery

2.1 Scope of the LG Management of Service Delivery Assessment

The assessment of Local Government Management of Service Delivery has two elements:a) Minimum conditions (seen as core performance indicators) which focusses on key

bottlenecks for service delivery and safeguards management.

b) Performance measures, which are sectoral assessments, will be used to evaluate service delivery in the Districts/Municipalities as a whole, and for some areas aggregating performance information from facilities and Lower Local Governments (LLGs) and assessing compliance with performance reporting and improvement support.

The Minimum Conditions (MCs) and Performance Measures (PMs) were harmonized across the different assessment areas – see section 3. Below is a summary of the MCs and PMs.

2.2 Principles for the design of the assessment system

The selection and formulation of the minimum conditions and performance measures have been done using a number of core design principles for design of LG performance assessment systems. These are outlined below:

a) Attribution of performance measures covering areas where the efforts of the LGs matter (i.e. the LGs are able to improve performance on the selected measure):

b) Address identified core blockages to service delivery:c) Ensure credibility and neutrality of the assessment processd) Ensure effective and timely administration of rewards and sanctions:e) Cost-effectiveness in assessing the measures and aimed to provide sustainability in

LG management and operations (value for money)

2.3 Overview of Minimum Conditions

The aspects assessed under minimum conditions include:

a) For crosscutting:· Human Resource Management and Development· Safeguards:

o Fiduciary safeguards (Financial management and reporting)o Environmental and Social requirements

b) For Education, Health and Water and Micro-Scale Irrigation:· Human Resource Management and Development· Environmental and Social requirements


2.4 Overview of Performance Measures and Relative Scores

The Performance Measures to be assessed are summarised below and are elaborated in sections 8 – 12 of this Manual.

Performance Area and Performance Measures for all assessments)

A Local Government Service Delivery Results.

Service Delivery Outcomes

Service Delivery Performance

Investment Performance

Achievement of standards

B Performance Reporting and Performance Improvement

Accuracy of reported information

Reporting and Performance Improvement

C Human Resource Management and Development

Budgeting for and actual recruitment and deployment of staff

Performance management

Payroll management (for crosscutting only)

Pension Payroll management (for crosscutting only)

D Management, Monitoring and Supervision of Services.

Planning, Budgeting and Transfer of Funds for Service Delivery

Routine oversight and monitoring

Mobilization and promotion of service delivery

E Investment Management

Planning and budgeting for investments

Procurement, contract management/execution

F Environment and Social Safeguards

Grievance redress

Safeguards for service delivery

Safeguards in the delivery of investments

G Financial Management(for crosscutting only)

Book-keeping

Internal audit and follow-up on audit

H Local Revenues (for crosscutting only)

Predictability

Revenue mobilization performance

Revenue sharing

I Governance, Oversight, Transparency and Accountability (for crosscutting only)

Transparency and accountability

Reporting to IGG


SECTION 2: ASSESSING LG MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY

3 Preparatory Activities

3.1 Orientation of the Local Governments

To ensure that the LGs are sufficiently prepared for the assessment, the following activities will be undertaken before the actual performance assessment is conducted:

a) The Performance Assessment Manual will be printed and distributed to all LGs.

b) The LG Performance Assessment Task Force will inform, orient and train LGs on the PA Manual as well as the implications of their performance scores prior to the actual assessments.

c) The respective MDAs will provide support to the LGs in preparation for the assessments as part of their inspection, support supervision and mentoring mandates.

d) LGs shall prepare for the assessments in advance. This will involve conducting internal ‘mock’ assessments to determine the extent to which they have complied with the minimum conditions and expected performance. In case there are some gaps, these should be addressed before the assessment. LGs shall collect and have ready all documents required at the point of time for the assessment. Evidence, which is not available during the assessment/field-work, will not be considered in the scoring of performance of a LG (i.e. a LG will not receive marks on these).

e) The LGs will be informed about the assessment schedules prior to arrival of the assessment teams.

f) The sampled LGs will also be informed about visits by any quality assurance teams, which may review the quality of the process and results of the assessment and should be available for this.

3.2 Team Composition and Coordination

The LG PA of the Districts and Municipalities will be conducted by external independent teams, which will be contracted to perform the exercise in a quality and credible manner. The teams shall be mobilized and undergo training before the assessment every year.

The Local Governments will be assessed in four (4) clusters. Each cluster will have:

a) One (1) overall Team Leader who will also serve as an Internal Quality Assurance Personb) Three (3) sub- teams of eight (8) consultants each, to ensure timely implementation within

each cluster. Each sub-team will nominate a sub-team leader from amongst the Assessors who will ensure compliance to the assessment process as well as comprehensive and quality reporting. The compositions of the sub-teams and indicative activities during the performance assessment exercise is summarized in the table below:


Indicative compositions of the sub-teams and activities

No Expert MDAs to be visited Activities on Day 1 Activities on Day 2

1.

LG Planning and Financial Management Specialist (Sub-team Leader)1

₋ Office of the Auditor General (OAG)

₋ Internal Auditor General

₋ MoFPED

₋ CAO/TC office₋ Chief Finance

Officer₋ Internal audit

₋ District Planner₋ Physical Planner₋ Clerk to the council

2.

LG Human Resource Management/ Administration Expert

₋ MoPS₋ MoLG

₋ CAO’s office₋ Human Resource

Management (HRM) Division

₋ Collect information from a sample of 3 LLGs (for all assessments)

3.

Project Execution Expert (Engineer)/with procurement experiences

₋ MoH (Engineering Unit)

₋ MoES (CMU)₋ MoWT

₋ District Engineer ₋ Procurement and

Disposal Unit

₋ Sample at least 3 construction sites (education, health and DDEG)

4.Environment and social Management Specialist

₋ NEMA₋ MoGLSD

₋ Environmental Officer₋ DCDO₋ District designated

Grievance Coordinator

₋ Sample at least 3 construction sites (education, health and DDEG) to assess compliance with good environmental and social safeguards practices

5. Health Specialist ₋ MoH ₋ DHO/PMO₋ Sample at least 3 Health

Facilities (not with construction)

6. Education Specialist ₋ MoES (DES,₋ DEO₋ DIS

₋ Sample at least 3 Schools (not with construction)

7.Water Management Specialist

₋ MoWE ₋ District Water Office₋ Sample at least 3 water

sources in three different sub-counties

8.

Agriculture Engineer (for LGs eligible to receive micro-irrigation grant only)

₋ MAAIF₋ District Production

Office₋ Agricultural Engineer

₋ Sample at least 3 completed micro-scale irrigation installations in different LLGs

1 This expert will also cover the few issues on governance/transparency which are cross-cutting.


3.3 Training of the LG PA and QA teams

The LG Performance Assessment Task Force will conduct a comprehensive training of both the assessment and Independent Verification teams before the assessment is conducted. The objective of the training will be to ensure that all team members have internalized the performance assessment manual, including the rationale behind the process, the scoring and means of verification of the performance measures. One of the elements that will be emphasized is the need for maintaining credibility of the assessment systems and team members will therefore be required to sign the Code of Ethics for the assessment. During the training, understanding of the task will be harmonized and data collection templates further refined and check lists for assessment drawn from the manual will be up-dated and linked with the particular year for assessment.

4 Collection of Data to Inform the Assessment Process

4.1 Collection of data from secondary sources at the national level

To ensure that the assessment system is cost-effective, data regarding performance measures that can be collected from secondary sources will be collected at the national level. The MDAs from which secondary data will be collected are summarized in the table below.

No Area MDA to be Visited

1. LG Planning and Financial Management ₋ Office of the Auditor General (OAG)₋ Internal Auditor General₋ MoFPED

2. LG Human Resource Management₋ MoPS ₋ MoLG

3. Project Execution ₋ MoH (Engineering Unit)₋ MoES (CMU)₋ MOWT

4. Environment and social Management ₋ NEMA₋ MoGLSD

5. Health ₋ MoH

6. Education ₋ MoES (DES)

7. Water Management ₋ MoWE

8. Micro-scale irrigation ₋ MAAIF

The assessment team will compile LG draft reports identifying areas that need to be further clarified during the field-work. This will be done in conjunction with the desk-based collection of information for the review of the compliance with the minimum access conditions. During the training of the assessment teams contact focal points in various MDAs and other agencies will be provided to facilitate data availability.


4.2 Field based LG Performance Assessment

This will take place from September- December every year. The model of the field assessment will involve:

a) Entry meeting: When commencing the LG-PA in each LG, the Consultant will meet/get in contact with the core management team in each LG and present the full Consultant’s team, affirm itinerary and ensure agreement of the LGPA timeline.

b) Data collection from the District/Municipality and a sample of LLGs and facilities: The respective LGPA team members will visit all participating LGs in their cluster and undertake the assessment process as per the LG PA Manual. The teams are expected to visit and spend two days in each Local Government. The working style of the assessors should be friendly but firm, with opportunities to provide advice to the LGs during the process. If either the individual or documentary evidence is not available by the time of the assessment, then it should be deemed not available.

c) Debriefing meeting/session to highlight the emerging findings, seek clarifications and give the LG an opportunity to provide more information. The Consultant will strictly use a pre-determined format to present at the debrief, take minutes of the meeting and fill the Exit Form (to be provided) which will be signed by the CAO/TC with comments from the LG.

d) Compiling of the LG Performance Assessment Reports which will be a detailed report per LG, consolidating performance findings and scores from both the desk-based review and field work. Each assessor shall compile the findings and up-load in the Online Performance Assessment Management System (OPAMs) not later than 2 days after the assessment of each LG.

e) Each contracted firm must have an Internal Quality Assurance (QA) person per cluster to review the reports done by the assessors and save the results as “complete” not later than 5 days after the field work in a LG. The process of compiling the reports will be automated to ensure standardization, make the process easier, allow for deeper analysis and better publication of the results.

4.3 Reporting

Based on the above process and consultations, the LG PA team will provide a report of the results up-loaded in the OPAMs.


5 Quality Assurance and Results Verification

5.1 Spot Checks

The spot check will among other issues review a sample of LGs and their assessments, and review whether the LG PA teams are in place and operation as per TOR, duration of the field work, sampling and assessment procedures followed, working styles, and procedures. The Spot Check Teams will be composed of experienced members from the LG PA task force and will work in sub-teams.

The spot check will provide detailed reports, on the findings and observations as well as recommendations for the future assessment procedures, using a reporting format developed by the Task Force with core findings and recommendations. This will also provide observations on the weaker and strong areas of LGs performance, and input to the Performance Improvement planning.

The report from the spot check should be ready by the team leaders for the spot check teams (with input from each team member), and be presented and discussed in the LG PA Task force as well as in the FD Technical Committee.

5.2 Independent Verification of Process and Results

The purpose of quality assurance (QA) is to verify whether the process and results of the LGPA conducted by the Assessment Team(s) are valid, reliable, and hence overall credible. To achieve this the QA firm will undertake the following tasks:

a) Participate in the training to be organized by the Office of the Prime Minister and conducted by the LG PA Task Force. The objective of the training will be to ensure that all team members have internalized the LG PA manual, including the rationale behind the process, the scoring and means of verification of the minimum conditions and performance measures. One of the elements that will be emphasized is the need for maintaining credibility of the assessment system and QA team members will therefore be required to sign the Code of Ethics for this role before executing the assignment.

b) Review and verify the LG PA team composition prior to their departure to the field, against their team members (experts) indicated in the technical proposal.

c) Prepare and submit a draft Inception Report to OPM which will present the QA findings regarding (b) above and an indicative mobilization plan, with a schedule for secondary data collection and review, amongst others.

d) Collection and thorough review of requisite data from secondary sources at the national level as stipulated in the LG PA Manual.

e) Sample LGs to be visited: With the guidance of OPM, progressively sample LGs per assessment cluster to be visited by the QA team, with justification for selection, for prior approval by the client. The sampling will be done progressively to allow for review of reports, discussion, and reconciliation with the assessment firms, facilitated by the Local Government Performance Assessment Task Force (LGPA TF)2.

2 Sample of the first half of LGs to be quality assured should be done towards the end of week 1 of the LGPA and the 2nd half after week 3 of the LGPA, subject to direction by OPM.


f) Conduct field-based Quality Assurance of LG Performance Assessment. This will involve:i. Entry meeting: When commencing the LG-PA QA in each LG, the Consultant will

meet/get in contact with the core management team in each LG and present the full Consultant’s team, affirm itinerary and ensure agreement of the LGPA QA timeline.

ii. The QA team shall check whether the LGPA team mobilization in the field is identical to the one presented by the assessment firm(s) during procurement and orientation training of assessors, carried out by the Task Force and check their working process/style. If firms have presented different persons, OPM should ask them to stop the affected personnel and replace the right persons (this should be within a limited time frame or else their contract is terminated, or other contractual sanctions will be undertaken.

iii. Data collection from the District/Municipality and a sample of LLGs and facilities: The respective QA team will visit the sampled LGs for QA (same sample LGs as for the LG PA). They will undertake the assessment process as per the LG PA Manual but with use of the results of the LG PA team as the starting point for reference. The teams are expected to visit and spend two days in a Local Government to enable comparison of the results.

iv. Debriefing meeting/session to, seek clarifications and give the LG an opportunity to provide more information. The Consultant will strictly use a pre-determined format to present at the debrief, take minutes of the meeting and fill the Exit Form which will be signed by the CAO/TC with comments from the LG.

v. Compiling of the LG QA Performance Assessment Reports which will be a detailed report per LG, consolidating performance findings and scores from both the desk-based review and field work. Each QA team member shall compile the findings and up-load in the Online Performance Assessment Management System (OPAMs) using the QA format no later than 2 days after the assessment of each LG. The QA format in OPAMs will provide for reporting against the Assessment reports submitted as “complete” by the assessors, exploring the reasons for any deviations in results (if any) and with a section requiring the opinion of the QA based on their findings3. The contracted firm must have an internal reviewer of their reports before they are saved in OPAMS as “complete” no later than 1 day after the field work in a LG. The process of compiling the reports will be automated as much as possible to ensure standardization, make comparison with the LG PA reports easier, allow for a section to adduce the opinion of the QA based on the LGPA results posted thus far.

g) Each of the QA sub-teams are expected to cover 2 sampled LGs per week, compile a report on those, with findings, and comparison of results with the LG PA team, provide narrative for reasons for any deviation, and present at a meeting convened by the LG PA Task Force to reconcile the findings with the assessment firm(s) in the following week. Based on this the IVA will meet with the Task Force to review findings and identify major deviations in results if any. The LG PA Task Force will follow up on

3 A specific format will be provided.


the deviations during the spot checks. Based on the outcome of such a meeting and spot check findings the assessment firm(s) will uphold the exercise as is, adjust where recommended or, if there are major deviations, be required to do re-assessment of LG(s) in question. Similarly, the IVA team may be requested to review original findings and evidence.

h) Compile a synthesis report summarizing key highlights of the findings and scores for all LGs sampled, comparison with the scores of the LGPA and narrative on each indicator of reasons for deviations and providing a succinct opinion on the validity of the LG PA results. This report will also encompass a review of changes made by the LG PA, based on the findings from the IVA, and the subsequent Task Force interventions and whether these adhere with the IVA findings. This report will follow a format provided by OPM before the exercise.

6 Review, Approval, Use and Dissemination of the Results

6.1 Grievance Handling

The LGs will have a short window to submit grievances as the system has other inbuilt quality checks and balances to ensure neutrality and objectivity as outlined below.

a) The LGs should raise issues during the exit meeting focusing on processes and evidence (and sign Exit Form);

b) LGs will be given an opportunity to review their respective reports online (OPAMS) after the results have been approved by the LG PA Task Force;

c) The LGs will communicate grievance(s) (if any) in writing by the CAO/TC with supporting evidence to the Secretariat of the Performance Assessment Task force, Permanent Secretary OPM within a period not exceeding 5 working days from the time when the reports have been opened for LGs to review;

d) The LG PA Task Force will consider the grievances provide feedback to the LGs.

e) The LG PA Task Force will request the assessment teams in writing to make any adjustments that may arise from addressing of the grievances.

6.2 Approval of results

The LG Task Force will send the final LG PA results to the Fiscal Decentralisation (FD)– TC for approval. The FD-TC will review and discuss the recommendations made by the LG PA Task Force and approve the final results of the LG Performance Assessment. Results will be shared with FD-SC comprised of the core Permanent Secretaries for the performance-based grant system (OPM, MoPS, MoFPED, MoLG, MoLHUD; MoWE, MoH, MAAIF, MoES) and the Secretary of LGFC and the political oversight committee for buy-in and information.


6.3 Synthesis Report

Based on the reports from the LG PA firm, the LG Performance Assessment Task Force with its Secretariat under OPM, will produce the synthesis report, purely based on the results up-loaded in the OPAMs.

6.4 Use of Results and Impact

The results of the assessment will be used to:

a) Allocate part of the development grants

a) Inform performance improvement planning

6.4.1 Use of the results to allocate part of the development grants

The allocation formulae for the performance grants will have two components:

₋ Component 1: Allocation drawn on a need-based formula:₋ Component 2: Allocation based on the performance assessment results computed

as: % of Minimum Conditions met multiplied by the results of performance measures, divided by 100 and then weighted with the basic formula, see below.

Table: Weight of the basic component and performance component as at FY 2020/21

Grant Ad hoc/core minimum allocations Performance Grant

Basic Formula %age

Performance element (% MC met X PM score/100 then weighted with the basic formula)

DDEG N/A 50 50

Education Costs for construction of secondary schools

50

50

Health Costs for up-grading health centre II to III. 0 100

Water and Environment NA 50 50

Micro-scale Irrigation NA 60 40


Table: Factoring in of compliance with minimum conditions (“key performance measures”):

For example, if

Percentage (%) of MCs met is as

With the PM Scores being (%) – example

Then the Final Score will be (%) which must be weighted to the basic formula

100 70 70 points75 70 52.5 points 50 70 35 points 25 70 17.5 points 0 70 0 points

The implications are:

a. If all MCs are met, then the final score will be equal to the score from the PMs.

b. Every MCs not met reduces the final score.

c. If all MCs are not met, then the final score is 0 irrespective of the PM score. Therefore, the LG forfeits the performance component of the grant if it does not meet all the MCs.

d. This system stresses the importance of MCs (and give this a significant impact) on a continuous calibrated scale, rather than a system of on/off to the entire performance component of the grant.

6.4.2 Use of results for performance improvement planning

The results of the LG PA exercise are used to support the development and implementation of (i) performance improvement plans for LGs that have performed poorly; and (ii) thematic performance improvement plans.

6.5 Dissemination of Results

The results will be disseminated through websites, (OTIMS/OPAMS) publications, and feed back to each of the LGs. The results will also be included in the GAPR. A national dissemination event will also be organised by OPM.


7 Institutional Arrangements and Timing

7.1 Institutional Arrangements

The table below shows the main tasks of each of the stakeholders in the assessment system. Stakeholder Indicative Tasks

LG PA Task Force

₋ Develop and review the LG PA Manual;₋ Training of the contracted Assessment Firm and IVA₋ Conduct spot checks of the LG PA exercise₋ Review and recommend the results for approval to the FD TC

FD TC ₋ Verifies and approve the results of the LG PA and informs FD SC

OPM (Secretariat)

₋ Coordinates and chairs the LG PA task force₋ Operates the OPAMs₋ Guiding and supervising the contracted assessment and IVA firms₋ Coordinates the work on the synthesis report and publication of results₋ Use the results in the GAPR and other M&E tools ₋ Follow-up of actions and recommendations

MoLG₋ Coordinates the performance improvement planning and follow-up on

results

MoFPED

₋ Supports on all aspects of finance, including timely releases of funds against results

₋ Uses the results for allocation of grants₋ Uses results for general LG monitoring and evaluation systems

Sector ministries including MoPS

₋ Support the LG PA and sharing of information on guidelines, support PIP, and follow-up

₋ Use the results to explore areas where legal and institutional framework as well as guidance should be strengthened

₋ Develop mitigating measures to enhance performance

LGs₋ Provide information for the LG PA₋ Use results to address capacity gaps and performance improvements ₋ Follow-up on results, and develop PIPs

OAG ₋ Provides audit opinion of LGs to be used for the LG PA

Private assessors (teams)

₋ Conduct neutral and objective assessment

Private IVA ₋ Provide quality assurance of the results


7.2 Timing of Activities

The bar-chart below provides a snapshot of the overall process and timing4.

Bar-Chart 1: Overview of the timing of the assessment of HLGs

Core steps in the LG PA and QA process

July Aug Sept Oct Nov. Dec Jan. Feb. March April June

Team mobilized for the LG PA and the IVA

Training of the LG PA and IVA teams

Data collection central level

Field level assessment

Review of grievances based on draft reports

Independent Verification of the Process and Results (through-out the process)

Spot checks by LG Task Force (through-out)

Reconciliation between LG PA & IVA reports

Incorporation of audit results of LGs

Finalization of the LG PA

Final review in LG PA task force

Approval by FD TC

Impact on grant allocations

Synthesis report

Communication to LGs

Follow up on results, PIP, guidelines etc.

4 Due to up-start of the new LG PA system, the timing is indicative and may be adjusted as need be.

16LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

SE

CT

ION

3:

IND

ICAT

OR

S A

ND

AS

SE

SS

ME

NT

PR

OC

ED

UR

E

8 C

ross

cutt

ing

Perf

orm

ance

Ass

essm

ent

8.1

Cro

sscu

ttin

g M

inim

um C

ondi

tion

s

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Min

imum

Con

diti

onSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

A)

Hum

an

Reso

urce

M

anag

emen

t an

d D

evel

opm

ent

Max

imum

sc

ore

for

this

ar

ea is

52

1.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as r

ecru

ited

or

form

ally

req

uest

ed fo

r se

cond

men

t of

sta

ff fo

r al

l cri

tical

pos

ition

s in

the

D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

al C

ounc

il de

part

men

ts.

Max

imum

sco

re is

37.

If L

G h

as r

ecru

ited

or r

eque

sted

for

seco

ndm

ent

of:

Hea

ds o

f D

epar

tmen

ts:

a. C

hief

Fin

ance

Offi

cer/

Prin

cipa

l Fin

ance

Offi

cer,

scor

e 3

or e

lse

0b.

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r/Se

nior

Pla

nner

, sco

re 3

or

else

0c.

Dis

tric

t En

gine

er/P

rinc

ipal

Eng

inee

r, sc

ore

3 or

els

e 0

d. D

istr

ict

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es O

ffice

r/Se

nior

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r, sc

ore

3 or

els

e 0

e. D

istr

ict

Prod

uctio

n O

ffice

r/Se

nior

Vet

erin

ary

Offi

cer,

scor

e 3

or e

lse

0f.

Dis

tric

t C

omm

unity

Dev

elop

men

t O

ffice

r/ P

rinc

ipal

C

DO

, sco

re 3

or

else

0g.

Dis

tric

t C

omm

erci

al O

ffice

r/Pr

inci

pal C

omm

erci

al

Offi

cer,

scor

e 3

or e

lse

0

Oth

er c

riti

cal s

taff

:h.

Pr

ocur

emen

t St

affi.

A S

enio

r Pr

ocur

emen

t O

ffice

r (M

unic

ipal

: Pr

ocur

emen

t O

ffice

r, 2

or e

lse

0.

ii.

Pro

cure

men

t O

ffice

r (M

unic

ipal

Ass

ista

nt

Proc

urem

ent

Offi

cer)

, sco

re 2

or

else

0i.

Prin

cipa

l Hum

an R

esou

rce

Offi

cer,

scor

e 2

or e

lse

0j.

A S

enio

r En

viro

nmen

t O

ffice

r, sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

k.

Seni

or L

and

Man

agem

ent

Offi

cer,

scor

e 2

or e

lse

0l.

A S

enio

r A

ccou

ntan

t, s

core

2 o

r el

se 0

m. P

rinc

ipal

Inte

rnal

Aud

itor

for

Dis

tric

ts a

nd S

enio

r In

tern

al A

udito

r fo

r M

Cs,

sco

re 2

or

else

0n.

Pri

ncip

al H

uman

Res

ourc

e O

ffice

r (S

ecre

tary

DSC

),

scor

e 2

or e

lse

0

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion,

obt

ain

the

appo

intm

ent

lett

ers

of t

he D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

al C

ounc

il de

part

men

t’s s

taff

as

liste

d to

est

ablis

h th

at t

hey

are

subs

tant

ivel

y re

crui

ted.

In c

ase

the

posi

tions

are

not

fille

d, g

et

evid

ence

from

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion

that

the

LG

req

uest

ed fo

r se

cond

men

t fr

om t

he

Cen

tral

Gov

ernm

ent

(CG

)

·A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

·C

opy(

s) o

f le

tter

(s)

from

LG

to

CG

re

ques

ting

for

seco

ndm

ent

of

staff

to

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

Cou

ncil

depa

rtm

ents

.

17LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Min

imum

Con

diti

onSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

2.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as r

ecru

ited

or

form

ally

req

uest

ed fo

r se

cond

men

t of

st

aff fo

r al

l ess

entia

l pos

ition

s in

eve

ry

LLG

Max

imum

sco

re is

15

If L

G h

as r

ecru

ited

or r

eque

sted

for

seco

ndm

ent

of:

a.S

enio

r A

ssis

tant

Sec

reta

ries

in a

ll LL

GS,

sco

re 5

or

else

0

b.A

Com

mun

ity D

evel

opm

ent

Offi

cer

or S

enio

r C

DO

in

case

of

Tow

n C

ounc

ils, i

n al

l LLG

S, s

core

5 o

r el

se 0

. c.

A S

enio

r A

ccou

nts

Ass

ista

nt o

r an

Acc

ount

s A

ssis

tant

in

all L

LGS,

sco

re 5

or

else

0.

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion,

obt

ain

the

appo

intm

ent

lett

ers

of t

he L

LG s

taff

as

liste

d to

es

tabl

ish

that

the

y ar

e su

bsta

ntiv

ely

recr

uite

d.

In c

ase

the

posi

tions

are

not

fille

d, g

et

evid

ence

from

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion

that

the

LG

req

uest

ed fo

r se

cond

men

t fr

om t

he

Min

istr

y of

Loc

al G

over

nmen

t (M

oLG

)

·A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

·C

opy

of le

tter

fr

om L

G t

o M

oLG

re

ques

ting

for

seco

ndm

ent

of

staff

to

Dis

tric

t fo

r de

ploy

men

t to

LL

Gs.

B)

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al

Requ

irem

ents

Max

imum

sc

ore

is 1

6

3.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as r

elea

sed

all

fund

s al

loca

ted

for

the

impl

emen

tatio

n of

env

iron

men

tal a

nd s

ocia

l saf

egua

rds

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY.

Max

imum

sco

re is

4

If t

he L

G h

as r

elea

sed

100

% o

f fu

nds

allo

cate

d in

the

pr

evio

us F

Y to

:

a. N

atur

al R

esou

rces

dep

artm

ent,

sco

re 2

or

else

0 a

nd;

b.

Com

mun

ity B

ased

Ser

vice

s de

part

men

t sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

.

From

the

Chi

ef F

inan

ce O

ffice

r/Pr

inci

pal

Fina

nce

Offi

cer

obta

in a

nd r

evie

w t

he L

G

Fina

l Acc

ount

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y an

d ch

eck

whe

ther

allo

catio

ns h

ave

been

re

leas

ed t

o th

e N

atur

al R

esou

rces

and

C

omm

unity

Bas

ed S

ervi

ces

depa

rtm

ents

fo

r im

plem

enta

tion

of e

nvir

onm

enta

l and

so

cial

saf

egua

rds

as p

er g

uide

lines

.

LG F

inal

Acc

ount

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y

4.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as c

arri

ed o

ut

Envi

ronm

enta

l, So

cial

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

scre

enin

g/En

viro

nmen

t an

d So

cial

Impa

ct A

sses

smen

ts (

ESIA

s) a

nd

deve

lope

d co

sted

Env

iron

men

t an

d So

cial

Man

agem

ent

Plan

s (E

SMPs

) (i

nclu

ding

chi

ld p

rote

ctio

n pl

ans)

whe

re

appl

icab

le, p

rior

to

com

men

cem

ent

of

all c

ivil

wor

ks.

Max

imum

sco

re is

12

a. I

f th

e LG

has

car

ried

out

Env

iron

men

tal,

Soci

al a

nd

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

scre

enin

g, s

core

4 o

r el

se 0

b. I

f th

e LG

has

car

ried

out

Env

iron

men

t an

d So

cial

Im

pact

Ass

essm

ents

(ES

IAs)

pri

or t

o co

mm

ence

men

t of

all

civi

l wor

ks fo

r al

l pro

ject

s im

plem

ente

d us

ing

the

Dis

cret

iona

ry D

evel

opm

ent

Equa

lizat

ion

Gra

nt (

DD

EG),

sc

ore

4 or

0.

c. I

f th

e LG

has

a C

oste

d ES

MPs

for

all p

roje

cts

impl

emen

ted

usin

g th

e D

iscr

etio

nary

Dev

elop

men

t Eq

ualiz

atio

n G

rant

(D

DEG

); s

core

4 o

r 0

.

From

the

LG

Env

iron

men

t offi

cer

and

CD

O, o

btai

n th

e En

viro

nmen

tal

and

Soci

al S

cree

ning

For

m (

or w

here

ap

plic

able

: ESI

As

repo

rts,

ESM

Ps)

for

all

proj

ects

impl

emen

ted

usin

g th

e D

DEG

for

the

prev

ious

FY,

to

veri

fy w

heth

er:

•E&

S sc

reen

ing

was

com

plet

ed,

ESIA

/ESM

Ps p

repa

red

and

cost

ed

as r

equi

red

and

impl

emen

ted/

follo

wed

up

whe

re a

pplic

able

, pri

or t

o co

mm

ence

men

t of

all

civi

l wor

ks.

·En

viro

nmen

tal a

nd

Soci

al s

cree

ning

Fo

rms

·ES

IAs

repo

rts

C)

Fina

ncia

l M

anag

emen

t an

d Re

port

ing

Max

imum

sc

ore

is 3

2

5.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG d

oes

not

have

an

adve

rse

or d

iscl

aim

er a

udit

opin

ion

for

the

prev

ious

FY.

Max

imum

sco

re is

10

If a

LG

has

a c

lean

aud

it op

inio

n, s

core

10

;

If a

LG

has

a q

ualifi

ed a

udit

opin

ion,

sco

re 5

If a

LG

has

an

adve

rse

or d

iscl

aim

er a

udit

opin

ion

for

the

prev

ious

FY,

sco

re 0

From

the

Offi

ce o

f th

e A

udito

r G

ener

al

(OAG

) ob

tain

and

rev

iew

the

list

of

LGs

whi

ch h

ave

been

aud

ited

to e

stab

lish

the

audi

t op

inio

n.

Not

e: T

he a

udit

resu

lts

are

supp

osed

to

be

read

y by

the

end

of

Dec

embe

r. Th

eref

ore,

thi

s w

ill b

e th

e la

st is

sue

to b

e re

view

ed in

Jan

uary

.

·A

udit

Repo

rt

18LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Min

imum

Con

diti

onSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

6.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as p

rovi

ded

info

rmat

ion

to t

he P

S/ST

on

the

stat

us o

f im

plem

enta

tion

of In

tern

al

Aud

itor

Gen

eral

and

Aud

itor

Gen

eral

fin

ding

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us fi

nanc

ial

year

by

end

of F

ebru

ary

(PFM

A s

. 11

2g).

Thi

s st

atem

ent

incl

udes

issu

es,

reco

mm

enda

tions

, and

act

ions

aga

inst

al

l find

ings

whe

re t

he In

tern

al A

udito

r an

d A

udito

r G

ener

al r

ecom

men

ded

the

Acc

ount

ing

Offi

cer

to a

ct (

PFM

Act

20

15).

Max

imum

sco

re is

10

If t

he L

G h

as p

rovi

ded

info

rmat

ion

to t

he P

S/ST

on

the

stat

us o

f im

plem

enta

tion

of In

tern

al A

udito

r G

ener

al a

nd

Aud

itor

Gen

eral

find

ings

for

the

prev

ious

fina

ncia

l yea

r by

en

d of

Feb

ruar

y (P

FMA

s. 1

1 2g

), s

core

10

or

else

0.

From

MoF

PED

’s In

vent

ory/

reco

rd o

f LG

sub

mis

sion

s of

sta

tem

ents

ent

itled

“A

ctio

ns t

o A

ddre

ss In

tern

al A

udito

r G

ener

al’s

find

ings

”, C

heck

whe

ther

a L

G

subm

itte

d a

com

plet

e re

spon

se t

o th

e In

tern

al A

udito

r an

d A

udito

r G

ener

al’s

re

port

(s).

MoF

PED

’s In

vent

ory

of L

G s

ubm

issi

ons

of

stat

emen

ts e

ntitl

ed

“Act

ions

to

Add

ress

In

tern

al A

udito

r G

ener

al’s

find

ings

”

7.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as s

ubm

itte

d an

an

nual

per

form

ance

con

trac

t by

Aug

ust

31st

of

the

curr

ent

FY

Max

imum

sco

re is

4

If t

he L

G h

as s

ubm

itte

d an

ann

ual p

erfo

rman

ce c

ontr

act

by A

ugus

t 31

st o

f th

e cu

rren

t FY

, sco

re 4

or

else

0.

From

MoF

PED

/BPE

D in

vent

ory/

sche

dule

of

LG

sub

mis

sion

s of

per

form

ance

co

ntra

cts,

che

ck d

ates

of

subm

issi

on a

nd

issu

ance

of

ackn

owle

dgem

ent

rece

ipts

.

MoF

PED

/BPE

D

inve

ntor

y/sc

hedu

le

of L

G s

ubm

issi

ons

of p

erfo

rman

ce

cont

ract

s

8.Ev

iden

ce

that

th

e LG

ha

s su

bmit

ted

the

Ann

ual P

erfo

rman

ce R

epor

t fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y on

or

befo

re A

ugus

t 31

, of

th

e cu

rren

t Fi

nanc

ial Y

ear

Max

imum

sco

re is

4

If t

he L

G h

as s

ubm

itte

d th

e A

nnua

l Pe

rfor

man

ce R

epor

t fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y on

or

befo

re A

ugus

t 31

, of

the

cur

rent

Fi

nanc

ial Y

ear,

scor

e 4

or e

lse

0.

From

MoF

PED

/BPE

D o

ffici

al r

ecor

d/in

vent

ory

of L

G s

ubm

issi

ons

of A

nnua

l Pe

rfor

man

ce R

epor

ts t

o M

oFPE

D, c

heck

th

e da

te M

oFPE

D r

ecei

ved

the

Ann

ual

Perf

orm

ance

Rep

ort.

MoF

PED

/BPE

D o

ffici

al

reco

rd/i

nven

tory

of

LG s

ubm

issi

ons

of

Ann

ual P

erfo

rman

ce

Repo

rts

9.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as s

ubm

itte

d Q

uart

erly

Bud

get

Perf

orm

ance

Rep

orts

(Q

BPRs

) fo

r al

l the

four

qua

rter

s of

the

pr

evio

us F

Y by

Aug

ust

31, o

f th

e cu

rren

t Fi

nanc

ial Y

ear

Max

imum

sco

re is

4

If t

he L

G h

as s

ubm

itte

d Q

uart

erly

Bud

get

Perf

orm

ance

Re

port

s (Q

BPRs

) fo

r al

l the

four

qua

rter

s of

the

pre

viou

s FY

by

Aug

ust

31, o

f th

e cu

rren

t Fi

nanc

ial Y

ear,

scor

e 4

or

else

0.

From

MoF

PED

/BPE

D o

ffici

al r

ecor

d/

inve

ntor

y of

LG

sub

mis

sion

s of

QBP

Rs

to M

oFPE

D, c

heck

the

dat

e M

oFPE

D

rece

ived

the

Qua

rter

ly P

erfo

rman

ce

Repo

rts:

Not

e: T

imel

y su

bmis

sion

of

each

qu

arte

rly

repo

rt is

not

a m

inim

um

cond

itio

n. H

owev

er, b

y A

ugus

t 31

, all

quar

terl

y re

port

s sh

ould

be

ava

ilabl

e).

MoF

PED

/BPE

D o

ffici

al

reco

rd/

inve

ntor

y of

LG

sub

mis

sion

s of

Qua

rter

ly B

udge

t Pe

rfor

man

ce R

epor

ts

19LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

8.2

Cro

sscu

ttin

g Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

res

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

A.

Loca

l G

over

nmen

t Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Resu

lts.

Max

imum

poi

nts:

14 p

oint

s on

thi

s th

emat

ic a

rea

1.Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Out

com

es o

f D

DEG

inve

stm

ents

Max

imum

4

poin

ts o

n th

is

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

·Ev

iden

ce t

hat

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

impl

emen

ted

usin

g D

DEG

fund

ing

are

func

tiona

l and

util

ized

as

per

the

purp

ose

of t

he p

roje

ct(s

):

·If

so:

Sco

re 4

or

else

0

From

the

Pla

nner

rec

eive

the

list

of

all p

roje

cts:

·Se

lect

a s

ampl

e of

3 p

revi

ousl

y co

mpl

eted

pro

ject

s,

e.g.

a c

lass

room

, hea

lth

cent

er, p

ark,

ser

vice

et

c. fu

nded

by

DD

EG a

nd r

evie

w if

the

str

uctu

re

or s

ervi

ce is

use

d by

ben

efici

arie

s as

per

des

ign/

pr

ofile

.

·AW

P fo

r pr

evio

us F

Y·

Ann

ual b

udge

t pe

rfor

man

ce r

epor

t fo

r pr

evio

us F

Y·

Revi

ew s

ampl

e of

3

proj

ects

fina

nced

by

DD

EG in

the

pre

viou

s FY

.

2.Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Perf

orm

ance

M

axim

um 6

po

ints

on

this

pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.I

f th

e av

erag

e sc

ore

in t

he o

vera

ll LL

G

perf

orm

ance

ass

essm

ent

incr

ease

d fr

om

prev

ious

ass

essm

ent5 :

o

by m

ore

than

10

%: S

core

3o

5-10

% in

crea

se: S

core

2o

Belo

w 5

% S

core

0

From

the

Pla

nner

rec

eive

and

rev

iew

:

·Th

e ap

prov

ed r

esul

ts fr

om t

he a

nnua

l per

form

ance

as

sess

men

ts o

f th

e LL

Gs

for

the

curr

ent

year

as

wel

l as

the

prev

ious

ass

essm

ent

year

.

·Pe

rfor

man

ce a

sses

smen

t re

sult

s fr

om t

he r

epor

t pr

oduc

ed b

y O

PM

·Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

DD

EG fu

nded

in

vest

men

t pr

ojec

ts im

plem

ente

d in

th

e pr

evio

us F

Y w

ere

com

plet

ed a

s pe

r pe

rfor

man

ce c

ontr

act

(wit

h AW

P) b

y en

d of

the

FY.

·If

10

0%

the

pro

ject

s w

ere

com

plet

ed :

Scor

e 3

·If

80

-99%

: Sco

re 2

·If

bel

ow 8

0%

: 0

From

MoF

PED

/BPE

D o

btai

n an

d re

view

the

ann

ual

perf

orm

ance

rep

ort

to:

·Id

entif

y pr

ojec

ts p

lann

ed t

o be

impl

emen

ted

in t

he

prev

ious

FY

·O

btai

n th

e A

nnua

l Per

form

ance

rep

ort

to id

entif

y pr

ojec

ts im

plem

ente

d·

Cal

cula

te p

erce

nt o

f pl

anne

d pr

ojec

ts t

hat

wer

e co

mpl

eted

.

·A

nnua

l bud

get

perf

orm

ance

rep

ort

3.In

vest

men

t Pe

rfor

man

ce

Max

imum

4

poin

ts o

n th

is

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.I

f th

e LG

bud

gete

d an

d sp

ent

all t

he

DD

EG fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y on

elig

ible

pr

ojec

ts/a

ctiv

ities

as

per

the

DD

EG

gran

t, b

udge

t, a

nd im

plem

enta

tion

guid

elin

es: S

core

26 o

r el

se s

core

0.

From

the

Pla

nner

obt

ain

a lis

t of

DD

EG p

roje

cts

and:

·A

sses

s w

heth

er t

hese

are

wit

hin

the

elig

ible

ex

pend

iture

s as

defi

ned

in t

he D

DEG

gui

delin

es.

·AW

P fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y·

Ann

ual b

udge

t pe

rfor

man

ce r

epor

t fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y·

DD

EG g

rant

gui

delin

es

for

the

prev

ious

FY

b.I

f th

e va

riat

ions

in t

he c

ontr

act

pric

e fo

r sa

mpl

e of

DD

EG fu

nded

infr

astr

uctu

re

inve

stm

ents

for

the

prev

ious

FY

are

wit

hin

+/-

20%

of

the

LG E

ngin

eers

es

timat

es, s

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

Wor

ks D

epar

tmen

t, o

btai

n an

d sa

mpl

e 3

(or

all i

f le

ss t

han

3) D

DEG

fund

ed p

roje

cts

for

the

prev

ious

FY

and

calc

ulat

e th

e va

riat

ions

in t

he

cont

ract

pri

ce t

o de

term

ine

whe

ther

the

y ar

e al

l wit

hin

+/-

20%

of

the

LG E

ngin

eers

est

imat

es

·Sa

mpl

e D

DEG

fund

ed

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

for

the

last

FY

·C

ost

estim

ates

as

per

the

AWP

5 N

ote:

Sco

res

can

only

be

prov

ided

whe

n th

ere

has

been

tw

o ye

ars

of a

sses

smen

ts c

ondu

cted

of

LLG

s. H

ence

a L

G w

ill b

e av

aile

d a

scor

e 0

unt

il th

en. T

his

is s

imila

r fo

r al

l LG

s an

d w

ill

ther

efor

e no

t im

pact

on

the

gran

t al

loca

tions

for

each

LG

bef

ore

this

per

form

ance

mea

sure

kic

ks in

. 6

In c

ases

whe

re o

nly

one

scor

e is

pro

vide

d, “

othe

r in

stan

ces/

non-

fulfi

lmen

t of

the

tex

t” w

ill b

e ra

nked

as:

Sco

re 0

.

20LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

B. P

erfo

rman

ce

Repo

rtin

g an

d Pe

rfor

man

ce

Impr

ovem

ent

Max

imum

poi

nts:

12 p

oint

s on

thi

s th

emat

ic a

rea

4.A

ccur

acy

of r

epor

ted

info

rmat

ion

Max

imum

4

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a.E

vide

nce

that

info

rmat

ion

on t

he

posi

tions

fille

d in

LLG

s as

per

min

imum

st

affing

sta

ndar

ds is

acc

urat

e, s

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

HRM

Div

isio

n ob

tain

the

sta

ff s

truc

ture

and

st

aff li

sts

for

LLG

s:

·Ta

ke a

ran

dom

sam

ple

of 3

LLG

s an

d re

view

w

heth

er t

he s

taffi

ng is

in p

lace

as

per

the

min

imum

st

anda

rds

and

staff

list

·LL

G S

taff

list

s fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

a.E

vide

nce

that

infr

astr

uctu

re c

onst

ruct

ed

usin

g th

e D

DEG

is in

pla

ce a

s pe

r re

port

s pr

oduc

ed b

y th

e LG

: ·

If 1

00

% in

pla

ce: S

core

2, e

lse

scor

e 0

.

Not

e: if

the

re a

re n

o re

port

s pr

oduc

ed t

o re

view

: Sco

re 0

From

the

Pla

nner

rec

eive

and

rev

iew

:

·W

heth

er t

here

are

rep

orts

on

infr

astr

uctu

re

cons

truc

ted

·Ta

ke r

ando

m s

ampl

e of

3 in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s co

mpl

eted

last

yea

r or

und

er c

ompl

etio

n an

d co

mpa

re t

he a

ctua

l lev

el o

f co

mpl

etio

n w

ith

the

repo

rts.

·AW

P·

Repo

rts

·Sa

mpl

e of

3 p

roje

cts.

5.Re

port

ing

and

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t7

Max

imum

8

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

con

duct

ed a

cr

edib

le a

sses

smen

t of

LLG

s as

ver

ified

du

ring

the

Nat

iona

l Loc

al G

over

nmen

t Pe

rfor

man

ce A

sses

smen

t Ex

erci

se.

o If

the

re is

not

diff

eren

ce in

the

as

sess

men

t re

sult

s of

the

LG

and

na

tiona

l ass

essm

ent

in a

ll LL

Gs

scor

e 4

or e

lse

0.

From

the

Pla

nner

:

·Re

ceiv

e th

e re

sult

s fr

om t

he L

LGs

perf

orm

ance

as

sess

men

t m

ade

by t

he n

atio

nal a

sses

smen

t fir

m a

nd t

he d

istr

ict/

mun

icip

ality

. Com

pare

and

de

term

ine

if th

ere

is a

diff

eren

ce b

etw

een

the

two.

(Not

e on

ly a

pplic

able

whe

n th

e sy

stem

of

LLG

a

sses

smen

ts h

as

been

intr

oduc

ed)

·A

sses

smen

t re

sult

s co

nduc

ted

by t

he

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

ity·

Ass

essm

ent

resu

lts

from

th

e N

atio

nal A

sses

smen

t Te

am

b.T

he D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

ality

has

dev

elop

ed

perf

orm

ance

impr

ovem

ent

plan

s fo

r at

le

ast

30%

of

the

low

est

perf

orm

ing

LLG

s fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

, bas

ed o

n th

e pr

evio

us

asse

ssm

ent

resu

lts.

Sco

re: 2

or

else

sco

re

0c.T

he D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

ality

has

im

plem

ente

d th

e PI

P fo

r th

e 30

% lo

wes

t pe

rfor

min

g LL

Gs

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY:

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

HRM

div

isio

n ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

·Th

e pe

rfor

man

ce im

prov

emen

t pl

ans

and

impl

emen

tatio

n re

cord

s to

ass

ess

whe

ther

30

%

of t

he lo

wes

t pe

rfor

man

ce L

LGs

as d

eter

min

ed in

th

e la

st L

G P

A h

ave

been

tar

gete

d in

pla

nnin

g an

d ac

tual

exe

cutio

n.

Not

e on

ly a

pplic

able

whe

n th

e sy

stem

of

LLG

a

sses

smen

ts h

as

been

intr

oduc

ed)

·Th

e LG

PA

rep

ort

·Pe

rfor

man

ce

impr

ovem

ent

plan

s·

Impl

emen

tatio

n an

d pr

ogre

ss r

epor

ts

7 N

ote:

For

par

ts o

f th

is p

erfo

rman

ce m

easu

re, p

oint

s ca

n on

ly b

e gi

ven

in t

he s

ubse

quen

t as

sess

men

ts. H

owev

er, u

ntil

achi

evem

ent,

rat

e 0

sho

uld

be g

iven

. Th

is is

sim

ilar

for

all L

Gs,

and

will

the

refo

re n

ot

impa

ct o

n th

e re

lativ

e sc

ores

and

gra

nt a

lloca

tions

bef

ore

the

syst

em o

f LL

G a

sses

smen

t is

intr

oduc

ed.

21LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

C.

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

and

Dev

elop

men

t

Max

imum

poi

nts:

9 po

ints

on

this

th

emat

ic a

rea

6.B

udge

ting

for

and

actu

al r

ecru

itm

ent

and

depl

oym

ent

of s

taff

Max

imum

2

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a. E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

con

solid

ated

an

d su

bmit

ted

the

staffi

ng r

equi

rem

ents

fo

r th

e co

min

g FY

to

the

MoP

S by

Se

ptem

ber

30th

, wit

h co

py t

o th

e re

spec

tive

MD

As

and

MoF

PED.

Sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

MoP

S

·O

btai

n th

e le

tter

s fr

om t

he H

LG w

ith

the

requ

este

d st

affing

req

uire

men

ts a

nd r

evie

w t

he t

imin

g of

the

su

bmis

sion

.

Not

e on

tim

ing:

If a

sses

smen

t is

con

duct

ed in

e.g

. O

ctob

er 2

020

, the

sub

mis

sion

dea

dlin

e is

the

mon

th

befo

re (

30th

Sep

t 20

20)

for

the

staffi

ng r

equi

rem

ents

fo

r th

e co

min

g FY

(20

21/2

2).

·LG

Sta

ff r

equi

rem

ent

lett

ers

to M

oPS

7.Pe

rfor

man

ce

man

agem

ent

Max

imum

5

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

ality

ha

s co

nduc

ted

a tr

acki

ng a

nd a

naly

sis

of s

taff

att

enda

nce

(as

guid

ed b

y M

inis

try

of P

ublic

Ser

vice

CSI

):

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

HRM

Div

isio

n ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

·Tr

acki

ng r

epor

ts a

nd a

naly

sis

of s

taff

att

enda

nce

as

per

guid

elin

es b

y M

PS C

SI

·Tr

acki

ng r

epor

ts a

nd

anal

ysis

b.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

con

duct

ed a

n ap

prai

sal w

ith

the

follo

win

g fe

atur

es:

i. H

oDs

have

bee

n ap

prai

sed

as p

er

guid

elin

es is

sued

by

MoP

S du

ring

the

pr

evio

us F

Y: S

core

1, o

r el

se 0

ii.

(in

add

ition

to

“a”

abov

e) h

as a

lso

impl

emen

ted

adm

inis

trat

ive

rew

ards

and

sa

nctio

ns o

n tim

e as

pro

vide

d fo

r in

the

gu

idel

ines

: Sco

re 1

or

else

0iii

. Has

est

ablis

hed

a C

onsu

ltativ

e C

omm

itte

e (C

C)

for

staff

gri

evan

ce

redr

ess

whi

ch is

func

tiona

l. Sc

ore

1 or

el

se 0

From

the

HRM

Div

isio

n ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

·Re

view

per

sonn

el fi

les

to a

sses

s w

heth

er t

he H

oDs

wer

e ap

prai

sed

duri

ng t

he p

revi

ous

FY.

·W

heth

er a

dmin

istr

ativ

e re

war

ds a

nd s

anct

ions

wer

e im

plem

ente

d,

·an

d w

heth

er a

CC

for

staff

gri

evan

ce h

as b

een

esta

blis

hed

and

is o

pera

tiona

l (i.e

. has

con

side

red

case

s).

·St

aff s

truc

ture

s·

Staff

list

s·

Perf

orm

ance

pla

n·

App

rais

al r

epor

ts·

Pers

onne

l file

s·

List

of

mem

bers

of

the

cons

ulta

tive

com

mit

tee

and

min

utes

of

its

mee

tings

8.Pa

yrol

l m

anag

emen

t

Max

imum

1

poin

t on

thi

s Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

a. E

vide

nce

that

10

0%

of

the

staff

rec

ruite

d du

ring

the

pre

viou

s FY

hav

e ac

cess

ed t

he

sala

ry p

ayro

ll no

t la

ter

than

tw

o m

onth

s af

ter

appo

intm

ent:

Sco

re 1

.

From

the

HRM

Uni

t ob

tain

:·

The

list

of a

ll st

aff t

hat

wer

e re

crui

ted

and

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er t

hey

acce

ssed

the

sal

ary

payr

oll

duri

ng t

he p

revi

ous

FY, n

ot la

ter

than

2 m

onth

s af

ter

appo

intm

ent

·Sa

lary

pay

roll

·Re

crui

ted

staff

list

s

22LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

9.Pe

nsio

n Pa

yrol

l m

anag

emen

t

Max

imum

1

poin

t on

thi

s Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

a. E

vide

nce

that

10

0%

of

staff

tha

t re

tired

du

ring

the

pre

viou

s FY

hav

e ac

cess

ed

the

pens

ion

payr

oll n

ot la

ter

than

tw

o m

onth

s af

ter

retir

emen

t: S

core

1.

From

the

HRM

Uni

t ob

tain

the

list

of

staff

tha

t re

tired

du

ring

the

pre

viou

s FY

. Obt

ain

the

pens

ion

payr

oll t

o de

term

ine

whe

ther

sta

ff a

cces

sed

the

pens

ion

payr

oll

wit

hin

two

mon

ths

of r

etir

emen

t.

·Pe

nsio

n pa

yrol

l ·

Retir

ed s

taff

list

D. M

anag

emen

t,

Mon

itori

ng a

nd

Supe

rvis

ion

of

Serv

ices

.

Max

imum

poi

nts:

10

poi

nts

on t

his

them

atic

are

a

10.

Effec

tive

Plan

ning

, B

udge

ting

and

Tran

sfer

of

Fund

s fo

r Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Max

imum

6

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a.I

f di

rect

tra

nsfe

rs (

DD

EG)

to L

LGs

wer

e ex

ecut

ed in

acc

orda

nce

wit

h th

e re

quir

emen

ts o

f th

e bu

dget

in p

revi

ous

FY:

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

CFO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·W

heth

er D

DEG

to

LLG

s w

ere

tran

sfer

red

in fu

ll as

pe

r th

e re

quir

emen

ts in

the

bud

get

for

the

prev

ious

FY

.

·A

nnua

l wor

k-pl

an a

nd

budg

et·

Rele

ase

lett

ers

·D

ocum

enta

tion

for

tran

sfer

of

fund

s

b.I

f th

e LG

did

tim

ely

war

rant

ing/

ve

rific

atio

n of

dir

ect

DD

EG t

rans

fers

to

LLG

s fo

r th

e la

st F

Y, in

acc

orda

nce

to t

he

requ

irem

ents

of

the

budg

et:

Scor

e: 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

CFO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·Fr

om t

he C

FO/S

FO o

btai

n an

d re

view

rec

ords

of

whe

n w

arra

ntin

g/ve

rific

atio

n w

as d

one

for

the

prev

ious

FY

rele

ases

of

dire

ct D

DEG

tra

nsfe

rs t

o LL

Gs

and

revi

ew w

heth

er t

hese

wer

e co

nduc

ted

timel

y (N

ote:

Tim

ely

war

rant

ing

for

a LG

mea

ns: 5

w

orki

ng d

ays

from

the

dat

e of

rec

eipt

of

rele

ases

fr

om M

oFPE

D)

.

·C

opie

s of

war

rant

s su

bmit

ted

to M

oFPE

D fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y

c.I

f th

e LG

invo

iced

and

com

mun

icat

ed

all D

DEG

tra

nsfe

rs fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y to

LL

Gs

wit

hin

5 w

orki

ng d

ays

from

the

dat

e of

fund

s re

leas

e in

eac

h qu

arte

r:

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

MoF

PED

obt

ain

and

revi

ew t

he L

LG a

lloca

tion

rele

ase

brea

kdow

ns fo

r al

l the

4 q

uart

ers

of t

he

prev

ious

FY;

From

the

CFO

obt

ain

quar

terl

y co

rres

pond

ence

issu

ed

by C

AO/T

C t

o LL

Gs

on D

DEG

rel

ease

s.

From

3 s

ampl

ed L

LGs,

obt

ain

and

chec

k th

e da

tes

of

invo

icin

g an

d co

rres

pond

ence

from

CAO

/TC

:

·Es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

, for

eac

h qu

arte

r, th

e C

AO/T

C

invo

iced

and

com

mun

icat

ed r

elea

ses

to L

LGs

wit

hin

5 w

orki

ng d

ays

from

the

rel

ease

dat

e.

·LL

G a

lloca

tion

rele

ase

brea

kdow

ns fo

r al

l the

4

quar

ters

of

the

prev

ious

FY

·C

AO/T

C q

uart

erly

co

rres

pond

ence

to

LLG

s on

DD

EG r

elea

ses

·LL

G r

ecor

ds o

n re

ceip

t of

D

DEG

rel

ease

s

23LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

11.

Rout

ine

over

sigh

t an

d m

onito

ring

Max

imum

4

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a.E

vide

nce

that

the

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

ity

has

supe

rvis

ed o

r m

ento

red

all L

LGs

in

the

Dis

tric

t /M

unic

ipal

ity a

t le

ast

once

pe

r qu

arte

r co

nsis

tent

wit

h gu

idel

ines

: Sc

ore

2 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

Pla

nner

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·Th

e su

perv

isio

n or

men

tori

ng r

epor

ts t

o as

sess

w

heth

er a

ll LL

Gs

have

bee

n su

perv

ised

or

men

tore

d at

leas

t qu

arte

rly.

·Fi

eld

mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts

b.E

vide

nce

that

the

res

ults

/rep

orts

of

supp

ort

supe

rvis

ion

and

mon

itori

ng

visi

ts w

ere

disc

usse

d in

the

TPC

, use

d by

the

Dis

tric

t/ M

unic

ipal

ity t

o m

ake

reco

mm

enda

tions

for

corr

ectiv

e ac

tions

an

d fo

llow

ed-u

p: S

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

Pla

nner

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·W

heth

er t

he m

onito

ring

rep

orts

wer

e di

scus

sed

in

the

TPC

and

evi

denc

e fo

r co

rrec

tive

actio

ns a

nd

follo

w-u

p (e

ach

quar

terl

y m

eetin

g sh

ould

dis

cuss

an

d fo

llow

-up

on fi

ndin

gs).

·Fi

eld

mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts·

Min

utes

from

mee

tings

in

TPC

·C

orre

spon

denc

e to

LL

Gs

from

the

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

ity o

n co

rrec

tive

actio

ns t

o ta

ke

(adm

inis

trat

ive

circ

ular

s)

E. I

nves

tmen

t M

anag

emen

t

Max

imum

poi

nts:

20 p

oint

s on

thi

s th

emat

ic a

rea

12.

Plan

ning

and

bu

dget

ing

for

inve

stm

ents

is

con

duct

ed

effec

tivel

y

Max

imum

12

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a.E

vide

nce

that

the

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

ity

mai

ntai

ns a

n up

-dat

ed a

sset

s re

gist

er

cove

ring

det

ails

on

build

ings

, veh

icle

, etc

. as

per

form

at in

the

acc

ount

ing

man

ual:

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

scor

e 0

Not

e: t

he a

sset

s co

vere

d m

ust

incl

ude,

bu

t no

t lim

ited

to: l

and,

bui

ldin

gs,

veh

icle

s an

d in

fra

stru

ctur

e. If

tho

se c

ore

ass

ets

are

mis

sing

sco

re 0

From

CFO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·W

heth

er t

he a

sset

s re

gist

er c

over

s al

l ass

ets

and

is

up t

o da

te (

note

eve

n if

a LG

is o

n IF

MIS

, it

mus

t be

ab

le t

o pr

int

out

the

asse

ts r

egis

ter)

·A

sset

s re

gist

er a

nd

prin

ts fr

om e

.g. I

FMIS

b.E

vide

nce

that

the

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

ity

has

used

the

Boa

rd o

f Su

rvey

Rep

ort

of t

he p

revi

ous

FY t

o m

ake

Ass

ets

Man

agem

ent

deci

sion

s in

clud

ing

proc

urem

ent

of n

ew a

sset

s, m

aint

enan

ce

of e

xist

ing

asse

ts a

nd d

ispo

sal o

f as

sets

: Sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

From

the

CFO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·W

heth

er t

he B

oard

of

Surv

ey R

epor

t an

d/or

th

e as

sets

str

ateg

ic p

lan

of t

he p

revi

ous

FY w

as

used

as

a so

urce

of

guid

ance

on

proc

urem

ent,

m

aint

enan

ce, a

nd d

ispo

sal o

f as

sets

.

·Bo

ard

of S

urve

y Re

port

fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y·

Ass

ets

stra

tegi

c pl

an

24LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

c.

Evid

ence

tha

t D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

ality

ha

s a

func

tion

al p

hysi

cal p

lann

ing

com

mit

tee

in p

lace

whi

ch h

as

subm

itte

d at

leas

t 4

sets

of

min

utes

of

Phy

sica

l Pla

nnin

g C

omm

itte

e to

the

M

oLH

UD.

If s

o Sc

ore

2. O

ther

wis

e Sc

ore

0.

From

MoL

HU

D e

stab

lish

whe

ther

the

dis

tric

t/ M

LG

subm

itte

d at

leas

t 4

sets

of

min

utes

of

Phys

ical

Pl

anni

ng C

omm

itte

e to

the

MoL

HU

D.

From

the

Phy

sica

l Pla

nner

obt

ain

and

rev

iew

(no

t fo

r sc

orin

g):

·W

heth

er t

he c

omm

ittee

ha

s su

bmitt

ed a

Phy

sica

l D

evel

opm

ent

Plan

tha

t w

as

appr

oved

by

Cou

ncil

to

the

Nat

iona

l Phy

sica

l Pla

nnin

g Bo

ard.

·Li

st o

f th

e m

embe

rs o

f th

e Ph

ysic

al P

lann

ing

Com

mitt

ee t

o es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

it is

pro

perl

y an

d fu

lly c

onst

itute

d.·

Bui

ldin

g Pl

an, R

egis

trat

ion

Book

and

min

utes

of

phys

ica

l pla

nnin

g co

mm

ittee

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er

all

the

subm

issi

ons

for

new

inve

stm

ents

wer

e co

nsid

ered

with

in 3

0 d

ays

afte

r su

bmis

sion

·A

ppro

ved

Phys

ical

D

evel

opm

ent

Plan

·A

ppro

ved

Ann

ual w

ork

plan

·Pl

ans

subm

issi

on r

egis

ter

·M

inut

es o

f th

e ph

ysic

al

plan

ning

com

mit

tee

·M

inut

es o

f N

atio

nal

Phys

ical

Pla

nnin

g Bo

ard

·A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

for

the

mem

bers

of

Phys

ical

Pl

anni

ng C

omm

itte

es

For

DD

EG fi

nanc

ed p

roje

cts:

d.E

vide

nce

that

the

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

ity

has

cond

ucte

d a

desk

app

rais

al fo

r al

l pr

ojec

ts in

the

bud

get

- to

est

ablis

h w

heth

er t

he p

rior

itize

d in

vest

men

ts a

re:

(i)

deri

ved

from

the

LG

Dev

elop

men

t Pl

an; (

ii) e

ligib

le fo

r ex

pend

iture

as

per

sect

or g

uide

lines

and

fund

ing

sour

ce (

e.g.

DD

EG).

If d

esk

appr

aisa

l is

cond

ucte

d an

d if

all p

roje

cts

are

deri

ved

from

the

LG

DP:

Sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

pla

nner

obt

ain

and

revi

ew d

esk

appr

aisa

l re

port

s:

·Es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

the

des

k ap

prai

sals

wer

e co

nduc

ted

and

if in

vest

men

ts w

ere

deri

ved

from

th

e LG

Dev

elop

men

t Pl

an.

·LG

Dev

elop

men

t Pl

an·

App

rais

al r

epor

ts (

desk

ap

prai

sals

)·

Scre

enin

g no

tes

For

DD

EG fi

nanc

ed p

roje

cts:

e.E

vide

nce

that

LG

con

duct

ed fi

eld

appr

aisa

l to

chec

k fo

r (i

) te

chni

cal

feas

ibili

ty, (

ii) E

nvir

onm

enta

l and

soc

ial

acce

ptab

ility

and

(iii

) cu

stom

ized

des

ign

for

inve

stm

ent

proj

ects

of

the

prev

ious

FY

: Sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

Pla

nner

sam

ple

and

revi

ew:

·3

proj

ects

(or

all

if le

ss)

to c

heck

whe

ther

fiel

d ap

prai

sals

wer

e co

nduc

ted

and

if sc

rutin

y fo

r te

chni

cal f

easi

bilit

y en

viro

nmen

tal a

nd s

ocia

lly

acce

ptab

ility

and

des

igns

cus

tom

ized

for

inve

stm

ent

proj

ects

was

don

e.

·Fieldap

praisalrep

orts

25LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

f.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

proj

ect

profi

les

wit

h co

stin

g ha

ve b

een

deve

lope

d an

d di

scus

sed

by T

PC fo

r al

l inv

estm

ents

in

the

AWP

for

the

curr

ent

FY, a

s pe

r LG

Pl

anni

ng g

uide

line

and

DD

EG g

uide

lines

: Sc

ore

1 or

els

e sc

ore

0.

From

the

pla

nner

che

ck w

heth

er:

·Th

e m

inut

es fr

om t

he T

PC in

dica

te t

hat

all p

roje

ct

profi

les

for

inve

stm

ents

wer

e di

scus

sed

by t

he T

PC

and

chec

k w

heth

er t

hey

adhe

re t

o th

e fo

rmat

s in

the

LG

pla

nnin

g gu

idel

ine

(use

a s

ampl

e of

3

proj

ects

).

·M

inut

es o

f TP

C·

AWP

·Pr

ojec

t ap

prai

sal r

epor

ts·

Plan

ning

gui

delin

es·

Proj

ect

profi

les

g.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

scr

eene

d fo

r en

viro

nmen

tal a

nd s

ocia

l ris

ks/i

mpa

ct

and

put

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res

whe

re

requ

ired

bef

ore

bein

g ap

prov

ed fo

r co

nstr

uctio

n us

ing

chec

klis

ts: S

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r re

view

:

·W

heth

er t

he L

G d

urin

g th

e de

sk a

nd fi

eld-

base

d ap

prai

sals

and

had

scr

eene

d pr

ojec

ts fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

for

envi

ronm

enta

l and

soc

ial i

mpa

ct a

nd

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res

put

in p

lace

whe

re r

equi

red.

(s

ampl

e 3

inve

stm

ent

proj

ects

, or

all p

roje

cts

if th

e LG

has

less

pro

ject

s)

·A

ppra

isal

rep

orts

(de

sk

and

field

app

rais

als)

·LG

DP

·Fi

lled

E&S

Scre

enin

g fo

rms

·M

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s·

Sam

pled

pro

ject

s

13.

Proc

urem

ent,

co

ntra

ct

man

agem

ent/

exec

utio

n

Max

imum

8

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a.E

vide

nce

that

all

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

for

the

curr

ent

FY t

o be

impl

emen

ted

usin

g th

e D

DEG

wer

e in

corp

orat

ed in

the

LG

app

rove

d pr

ocur

emen

t pl

an S

core

1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t U

nit

obta

in a

nd r

evie

w:

·Th

e pr

ocur

emen

t pl

an a

nd c

heck

tha

t it

is a

s pe

r re

gula

tions

and

tha

t it

cove

rs a

ll in

vest

men

ts

·Pr

ocur

emen

t pl

an fo

r cu

rren

t FY

b.E

vide

nce

that

all

infr

astr

uctu

re

proj

ects

to

be im

plem

ente

d in

the

cu

rren

t FY

usi

ng D

DEG

wer

e ap

prov

ed

by t

he C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee

befo

re

com

men

cem

ent

of c

onst

ruct

ion:

Sco

re 1

or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

PD

U o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

·M

inut

es fr

om t

he m

eetin

gs in

the

con

trac

ts

com

mit

tee

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er a

ll D

DEG

in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s an

d th

e re

spec

tive

bidd

ing

docu

men

ts w

ere

appr

oved

bef

ore

com

men

cem

ent.

(s

ampl

e 3

proj

ects

)

·M

inut

es fr

om t

he

Con

trac

t C

omm

itte

e

c.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

pro

perl

y es

tabl

ishe

d th

e Pr

ojec

t Im

plem

enta

tion

team

as

spec

ified

in t

he s

ecto

r gu

idel

ines

: Sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

From

the

PD

U o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

·W

heth

er t

he L

G h

as e

stab

lishe

d th

e Pr

ojec

t Im

plem

enta

tion

Team

8 (PI

T) a

s pe

r gu

idel

ines

. ·

Con

trac

t M

anag

emen

t Pl

an in

pla

ce

·C

opie

s of

lett

ers

from

th

e C

AO/T

C d

esig

natin

g m

embe

rs o

f th

e Pr

ojec

t Im

plem

enta

tion

Team

.

8 T

he p

roje

ct im

plem

enta

tion

team

com

pris

es o

f: (

i) C

ontr

act

Man

ager

; (ii)

Pro

ject

Man

ager

; (iii

) cl

erk

of w

orks

, Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r, C

omm

unity

Dev

elop

men

t O

ffice

r &

Lab

our

Offi

cer

26LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

d.E

vide

nce

that

all

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

impl

emen

ted

usin

g D

DEG

follo

wed

the

st

anda

rd t

echn

ical

des

igns

pro

vide

d by

th

e LG

Eng

inee

r: S

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

Wor

ks D

epar

tmen

t ob

tain

info

rmat

ion

and

revi

ew:

·A

sam

ple

3 pr

ojec

ts im

plem

ente

d by

DD

EG fu

nds

and

revi

ew e

vide

nce

that

pro

ject

s im

plem

ente

d fo

llow

ed t

he t

echn

ical

des

igns

(al

so r

evie

w if

the

re

are

e.g.

no

maj

or o

r m

inor

def

ects

suc

h as

sur

face

cr

acks

in fl

oor

scre

ed, s

plas

h ap

ron

and

mas

onry

w

orks

, pee

ling

of fi

nish

es o

ff m

ason

ry s

urfa

ces

and

case

s of

poo

r fin

ishi

ng o

f w

orks

, gri

lle d

oor

off h

inge

s an

d no

han

dles

on

man

hole

cov

ers

etc

wer

e vi

sibl

e in

the

pro

ject

faci

litie

s in

the

sam

pled

pr

ojec

ts).

·Fi

eld

revi

ews

·C

ompl

etio

n re

port

s

e.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

p

rovi

ded

supe

rvis

ion

by t

he r

elev

ant

tech

nica

l offi

cers

of

each

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

ct

prio

r to

ver

ifica

tion

and

cert

ifica

tion

of

wor

ks in

pre

viou

s FY

. Sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re

0

From

the

dis

tric

t/m

unic

ipal

eng

inee

r ob

tain

and

re

view

:

·W

heth

er t

he t

echn

ical

offi

cers

(D

E/M

E,

envi

ronm

enta

l offi

cer,

CD

O)

have

sup

ervi

sed

each

pr

ojec

t (s

ite m

eetin

gs w

ith

cont

ract

ors)

pri

or t

o ve

rific

atio

n an

d ce

rtifi

catio

n of

wor

ks·

Revi

ew a

sam

ple

of 3

pro

ject

s w

hich

all

mus

t co

mpl

y.

·Pr

ocur

emen

t fil

es·

AWP

·C

ertifi

catio

n fil

es·

Com

plet

ion

cert

ifica

tes

·Si

gned

E&

S co

mpl

ianc

e ce

rtifi

catio

n fo

rms

·Su

perv

isio

n re

port

s

f.Th

e LG

has

ver

ified

wor

ks (

cert

ified

) an

d in

itiat

ed p

aym

ents

of

cont

ract

ors

wit

hin

spec

ified

tim

efra

mes

as

per

cont

ract

(w

ithi

n 2

mon

ths

if no

agr

eem

ent)

: Sco

re

1 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t U

nit

obta

in a

nd r

evie

w:

·A

ll th

e w

orks

pro

cure

men

t fil

es fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y an

d de

term

ine

whe

ther

the

y w

ere

appr

opri

atel

y ce

rtifi

ed i.

e. in

teri

m a

nd c

ompl

etio

n ce

rtifi

cate

s is

sued

for

all p

roje

cts

base

d on

tec

hnic

al

supe

rvis

ion

and

whe

ther

the

con

trac

ts a

re p

aid

wit

hin

spec

ified

tim

e.

·Pr

ocur

emen

t fil

es·

AWP

·C

ertifi

catio

n fil

es·

Com

plet

ion

cert

ifica

tes

g.T

he L

G h

as a

com

plet

e pr

ocur

emen

t fil

e in

pla

ce fo

r ea

ch c

ontr

act

wit

h al

l rec

ords

as

req

uire

d by

the

PPD

A L

aw: S

core

1 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t U

nit

revi

ew:

·Th

e co

ntra

cts

regi

ster

and

che

ck w

heth

er t

here

are

co

mpl

eted

file

s fo

r al

l pro

cure

men

ts (

sam

ple)

.

·Pr

ocur

emen

t Pl

an fo

r cu

rren

t FY

·C

ontr

acts

reg

iste

r ·

Proc

urem

ent

files

27LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

F. E

nvir

onm

ent

and

Soci

al

Safe

guar

ds.

Max

imum

poi

nts:

16 p

oint

s on

thi

s th

emat

ic a

rea

14.

Gri

evan

ce r

edre

ss

mec

hani

sm

oper

atio

nal.

Max

imum

5

poin

ts o

n th

is

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.E

vide

nce

that

the

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

ity

has

i) d

esig

nate

d a

pers

on t

o co

ordi

nate

re

spon

se t

o fe

ed-b

ack

(gri

evan

ce /

com

plai

nts)

and

ii)

esta

blis

hed

a ce

ntra

lized

Gri

evan

ce R

edre

ss

Com

mit

tee

(GRC

), w

ith

optio

nal c

o-op

tion

of r

elev

ant

depa

rtm

enta

l hea

ds/

staff

as

rele

vant

sco

re: 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

des

igna

ted

Gri

evan

ce R

edre

ss C

oord

inat

or

obta

in in

form

atio

n, e

stab

lish:

·W

heth

er t

he L

G h

as d

esig

nate

d a

pers

on a

nd t

hat

ther

e is

evi

denc

e th

at t

he r

espo

nsib

le p

erso

n ha

s be

en d

esig

nate

d to

coo

rdin

ate

resp

onse

to

the

feed

back

/com

plai

nts

and

whe

ther

a c

entr

aliz

ed

GRC

has

bee

n es

tabl

ishe

d.

·Le

tter

des

igna

ting

the

pers

on in

clud

ing

the

task

s·

Min

utes

from

the

GRC

b.T

he L

G h

as s

peci

fied

a sy

stem

for

reco

rdin

g, in

vest

igat

ing

and

resp

ondi

ng

to g

riev

ance

s, w

hich

incl

udes

a

cent

raliz

ed c

ompl

aint

s lo

g w

ith

clea

r in

form

atio

n an

d re

fere

nce

for

onw

ard

actio

n (a

defi

ned

com

plai

nts

refe

rral

pa

th),

and

pub

lic d

ispl

ay o

f in

form

atio

n

at d

istr

ict/

mun

icip

al o

ffice

s. I

f so

: Sco

re

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

des

igna

ted

pers

on o

btai

n in

form

atio

n on

w

heth

er t

he d

istr

ict

/mun

icip

ality

has

:

·A

spe

cifie

d sy

stem

for

reco

rdin

g, in

vest

igat

ing

and

resp

ondi

ng t

o gr

ieva

nces

, whi

ch in

clud

es a

ce

ntra

lized

com

plai

nts

log

wit

h cl

ear

info

rmat

ion

and

refe

renc

e fo

r on

war

d ac

tion

(a d

efine

d co

mpl

aint

s re

ferr

al p

ath)

, an

d th

e pu

blic

dis

play

of

info

rmat

ion

at

dist

rict

/mun

icip

al o

ffice

s.

·Fo

rmal

des

crip

tion

of t

he

CRD

sys

tem

;·

Cen

tral

ized

com

plai

nts

log;

·W

eb-s

its,

pub

lic d

ispl

ay

stan

ds

c.D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

ality

has

pub

liciz

ed t

he

grie

vanc

e re

dres

s m

echa

nism

s so

tha

t ag

grie

ved

part

ies

know

whe

re t

o re

port

an

d ge

t re

dres

s. If

so:

Sco

re 1

or

else

0

From

the

web

site

s or

oth

er p

ublic

mea

ns r

evie

w:

·W

heth

er t

he D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

ality

has

pub

liciz

ed

the

grie

vanc

e re

dres

s m

echa

nism

s so

tha

t ag

grie

ved

part

ies

know

whe

re t

o re

port

and

get

re

dres

s

·W

ebsi

tes

·Pu

blic

dis

play

sta

nds

15.

Safe

guar

ds fo

r se

rvic

e de

liver

y of

inve

stm

ents

eff

ectiv

ely

hand

led.

Max

imum

11

poin

ts o

n th

is

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t En

viro

nmen

t, S

ocia

l and

C

limat

e ch

ange

inte

rven

tions

hav

e be

en in

tegr

ated

into

LG

Dev

elop

men

t Pl

ans,

ann

ual w

ork

plan

s an

d bu

dget

s co

mpl

ied

wit

h: S

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0b.

Evid

ence

tha

t LG

s ha

ve d

isse

min

ated

to

LLG

s th

e en

hanc

ed D

DEG

gui

delin

es

(str

eng

then

ed t

o in

clud

e en

viro

nmen

t,

clim

ate

chan

ge m

itiga

tion

(gre

en

infr

astr

uctu

res,

was

te m

anag

emen

t eq

uipm

ent

and

infr

astr

uctu

res)

and

ad

apta

tion

and

soci

al r

isk

man

agem

ent

scor

e 1

or e

lse

0

From

the

pla

nner

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·W

heth

er t

he E

nvir

onm

ent,

Soc

ial a

nd C

limat

e ch

ange

inte

rven

tions

hav

e be

en in

tegr

ated

into

LG

D

evel

opm

ent

Plan

s, a

nnua

l wor

k pl

ans

and

budg

ets

(sel

ect

a sa

mpl

e of

3 in

vest

men

ts fo

r re

view

and

all

mus

t co

mpl

y to

get

a s

core

)·

Whe

ther

enh

ance

d D

DEG

gui

delin

es h

ave

been

di

ssem

inat

ed t

o LL

Gs

·LG

Dev

elop

men

t Pl

an·

AWP

·B

udge

ts·

Enha

nced

DD

EG

guid

elin

es

28LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

(For

inve

stm

ents

fina

nced

from

the

DD

EG

othe

r th

an h

ealt

h, e

duca

tion,

wat

er, a

nd

irri

gatio

n):

c.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

inco

rpor

ated

co

sted

Env

iron

men

t an

d So

cial

M

anag

emen

t Pl

ans

(ESM

Ps)

into

de

sign

s, B

oQs,

bid

ding

and

con

trac

tual

do

cum

ents

for

DD

EG in

fras

truc

ture

pr

ojec

ts o

f th

e pr

evio

us F

Y, w

here

ne

cess

ary:

sco

re 3

or

else

sco

re 0

d.

Exam

ples

of

proj

ects

wit

h co

stin

g of

the

ad

ditio

nal i

mpa

ct fr

om c

limat

e ch

ange

. Sc

ore

3 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

tal O

ffice

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·Sc

reen

ing

form

s, c

ostin

g of

ESM

P, a

nd fr

om t

he

Proc

urem

ent

Uni

t w

heth

er t

he c

oste

d ES

MP

has

been

inco

rpor

ated

in t

he B

oQs,

and

con

trac

t/bi

ddin

g do

cum

ents

and

exa

mpl

es o

f co

stin

g of

ad

ditio

nal c

osts

of

addr

essi

ng c

limat

e ch

ange

ad

apta

tion.

·E

& S

Scr

eeni

ng fo

rms

·ES

IAs/

ESM

Ps·

BoQ

·B

iddi

ng d

ocum

ent

and

BoQ

inco

rpor

atin

g ES

HS

prov

isio

ns·

Con

trac

t do

cum

ents

e.

Evid

ence

tha

t al

l pro

ject

s ar

e im

plem

ente

d on

land

whe

re t

he

LG h

as p

roof

of

owne

rshi

p, a

cces

s,

and

avai

labi

lity

(e.g

. a la

nd t

itle,

ag

reem

ent;

For

mal

Con

sent

, MoU

s,

etc.

), w

itho

ut a

ny e

ncum

bran

ces:

Sco

re

1 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r/C

DO

obt

ain:

·A

sam

ple

of a

t le

ast

3 pr

ojec

ts t

o ch

eck

whe

ther

th

ere

is p

roof

of

land

ow

ners

hip.

·EM

SP r

evie

w r

epor

ts·

Cer

tifica

tion

form

s·

Scre

enin

g fil

es.

f.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

envi

ronm

enta

l offi

cer

and

CD

O c

ondu

cts

supp

ort

supe

rvis

ion

and

mon

itori

ng t

o as

cert

ain

com

plia

nce

wit

h ES

MPs

; and

pro

vide

m

onth

ly r

epor

ts: S

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

tal O

ffice

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·ES

IAs/

ESM

Ps fo

r in

vest

men

t pr

ojec

ts·

E &

S m

onito

ring

rep

orts

·

Sam

ple

3 pr

ojec

ts w

hich

all

have

to

com

ply

to g

et

scor

e

·EM

SPs

· E

& S

mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts

g.

Evid

ence

tha

t E&

S co

mpl

ianc

e C

ertifi

catio

n fo

rms

are

com

plet

ed a

nd

sign

ed b

y En

viro

nmen

tal O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

pri

or t

o pa

ymen

ts o

f co

ntra

ctor

s’

invo

ices

/cer

tifica

tes

at in

teri

m a

nd

final

sta

ges

of p

roje

cts:

Sco

re 1

or

else

sc

ore

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

tal O

ffice

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·En

viro

nmen

tal a

nd S

ocia

l com

plia

nce

cert

ifica

tes

wit

h EO

’s s

igna

ture

·

Paym

ent

cert

ifica

te·

(sam

ple

3 pr

ojec

ts w

hich

all

mus

t co

mpl

y to

get

sc

ore)

.

·Si

gned

E &

S C

ompl

ianc

e C

ertifi

catio

n fo

rms

·

Mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts·

Paym

ent

reco

rds

29LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

G.

Fina

ncia

l M

anag

emen

t

Max

imum

poi

nts:

6 po

ints

on

this

th

emat

ic a

rea

16.

LG m

akes

m

onth

ly B

ank

reco

ncili

atio

ns

Max

imum

2

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a. E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

mak

es m

onth

ly

bank

rec

onci

liatio

ns a

nd a

re u

p to

-dat

e at

the

poi

nt o

f tim

e of

the

ass

essm

ent:

Sc

ore

2 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

CFO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·Ba

nk r

econ

cilia

tions

and

est

ablis

h th

at t

hey

are

done

and

up

to-d

ate.

(Not

e th

at u

p to

-dat

e m

eans

max

imum

of

one-

mon

th

dela

y). R

evie

w a

sam

ple

of m

onth

s, in

clud

ing

the

fina

l mon

th o

f th

e FY

. In

case

the

re a

re m

ulti

ple

bank

ac

coun

ts, m

ake

a sa

mpl

e of

3 o

f th

ese.

·Ba

nk r

econ

cilia

tions

fr

om p

revi

ous

FY a

nd

reco

ncili

atio

ns fo

r th

e m

onth

s pr

ior

to t

he

asse

ssm

ent

for

curr

ent

FY

LG e

xecu

tes

the

Inte

rnal

A

udit

func

tion

in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith

the

LGA

Sec

tion

90 Max

imum

4

poin

ts o

n th

is

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.E

vide

nce

that

LG

has

pro

duce

d al

l qu

arte

rly

inte

rnal

aud

it (I

A)

repo

rts

for

the

prev

ious

FY.

Sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

Inte

rnal

aud

it ob

tain

and

rev

iew

·Th

e in

tern

al a

udit

repo

rts

·M

inut

es fr

om IA

·IA

rep

orts

for

prev

ious

FY

·M

inut

es fr

om IA

mee

tings

·

Subm

issi

on le

tter

s

b.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

pro

vide

d in

form

atio

n to

the

Cou

ncil/

cha

irpe

rson

an

d th

e LG

PAC

on

the

stat

us o

f im

plem

enta

tion

of in

tern

al a

udit

findi

ngs

for

the

prev

ious

FY

i.e. i

nfor

mat

ion

on fo

llow

up

on a

udit

quer

ies

from

all

quar

terl

y au

dit

repo

rts.

Sco

re 1

or

else

sc

ore

0

From

the

Inte

rnal

aud

it ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

·Th

e in

tern

al a

udit

repo

rts

·Le

tter

s on

follo

w u

p on

IA r

ecom

men

datio

ns·

Revi

ew o

f m

inut

es fr

om IA

·IA

rep

orts

·M

inut

es fr

om IA

mee

tings

·

Subm

issi

on le

tter

s·

LG P

AC m

inut

es

c.E

vide

nce

that

inte

rnal

aud

it re

port

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y w

ere

subm

itte

d to

LG

A

ccou

ntin

g O

ffice

r, LG

PAC

and

tha

t LG

PA

C h

as r

evie

wed

the

m a

nd fo

llow

ed-u

p:

Scor

e 1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

Inte

rnal

aud

it ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

·Th

e in

tern

al a

udit

repo

rts

·Le

tter

s on

follo

w u

p on

IA r

ecom

men

datio

ns·

Subm

issi

ons

to L

G a

ccou

ntin

g offi

ce a

nd L

G P

AC

·M

inut

es fr

om L

G P

AC o

n ho

w t

hey

follo

wed

up

·IA

rep

orts

·M

inut

es fr

om IA

mee

tings

·

Subm

issi

on le

tter

s·

LG P

AC m

inut

es

30LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

H.

Loc

al R

even

ues

Max

imum

6

scor

e fo

r th

is p

erfo

rman

ce

area

.

18.

LG h

as c

olle

cted

lo

cal r

even

ues

as p

er b

udge

t (c

olle

ctio

n ra

tio)

Max

imum

2

poin

ts o

n th

is

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.I

f re

venu

e co

llect

ion

ratio

(th

e pe

rcen

tage

of

loca

l rev

enue

col

lect

ed

agai

nst

plan

ned

for

the

prev

ious

FY

(bud

get

real

izat

ion)

is w

ithi

n +

/- 1

0 %

: th

en s

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0.

From

the

CFO

, obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·O

rigi

nal b

udge

t an

d bu

dget

exe

cutio

n re

port

s to

de

term

ine

the

ratio

of

reve

nue

budg

eted

tha

t ha

s be

en c

olle

cted

.

·A

nnua

l (or

igin

al)

budg

et

for

prev

ious

FY

·A

nnua

l fina

ncia

l st

atem

ents

for

prev

ious

FY

19.

The

LG h

as

incr

ease

d LG

ow

n so

urce

rev

enue

s in

th

e la

st fi

nanc

ial

year

com

pare

d to

th

e on

e be

fore

the

pr

evio

us fi

nanc

ial

year

(la

st F

Y ye

ar

but

one)

Max

imum

2

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re.

a.I

f in

crea

se in

OSR

(ex

clud

ing

one/

off,

e.g.

sal

e of

ass

ets,

but

incl

udin

g ar

rear

s co

llect

ed in

the

yea

r) fr

om p

revi

ous

FY

but

one

to p

revi

ous

FY

·If

mor

e th

an 1

0 %

: sco

re 2

.·

If t

he in

crea

se is

from

5%

-10

%: s

core

1.

·If

the

incr

ease

is le

ss t

han

5 %

: sco

re 0

.

From

the

CFO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·A

nnua

l fina

ncia

l acc

ount

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us t

wo

FYs

to c

alcu

late

the

per

cent

age

incr

ease

on

OSR

co

llect

ion.

·A

nnua

l fina

ncia

l acc

ount

s fo

r pr

evio

us y

ear

and

prev

ious

yea

r bu

t on

e.

20.

Loca

l rev

enue

ad

min

istr

atio

n,

allo

catio

n, a

nd

tran

spar

ency

Max

imum

2

poin

ts o

n th

is

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re.

a. I

f th

e LG

rem

itte

d th

e m

anda

tory

LLG

sh

are

of lo

cal r

even

ues

duri

ng t

he

prev

ious

FY:

sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

CFO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew a

nnua

l fina

ncia

l ac

coun

ts t

o de

term

ine

whe

ther

:

·Th

e H

LG h

as r

emit

ted

the

man

dato

ry L

LG s

hare

of

loca

l rev

enue

s

·A

nnua

l fina

ncia

l st

atem

ent

from

pre

viou

s FY

.

I. Tr

ansp

aren

cy a

nd

Acc

ount

abili

ty.

Max

imum

poi

nts:

7 po

ints

on

th

is

them

atic

are

a

21.

LG s

hare

s in

form

atio

n w

ith

citi

zens

Max

imum

6

poin

ts o

n th

is

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

re

a.E

vide

nce

that

the

pro

cure

men

t pl

an a

nd

awar

ded

cont

ract

s an

d al

l am

ount

s ar

e pu

blis

hed:

Sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

PD

U o

btai

n ev

iden

ce fo

r:

·Pu

blic

ized

info

rmat

ion

to c

itize

ns o

n aw

arde

d co

ntra

cts

and

amou

nts.

·N

otic

e bo

ards

and

oth

er

mea

ns o

f pu

blic

atio

n e.

g.

web

site

31LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

b.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

per

form

ance

as

sess

men

t re

sult

s an

d im

plic

atio

ns a

re

publ

ishe

d e.

g. o

n th

e bu

dget

web

site

for

the

prev

ious

yea

r: S

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

Pla

nner

obt

ain

evid

ence

for:

·Pu

blic

ized

info

rmat

ion

to c

itize

ns o

n LG

pe

rfor

man

ce a

sses

smen

t re

sult

s an

d im

plic

atio

ns

repo

rts

·N

otic

e bo

ards

and

oth

er

mea

ns o

f pu

blic

atio

n e.

g.

web

site

c.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

dur

ing

the

prev

ious

FY

con

duct

ed d

iscu

ssio

ns (

e.g.

mun

icip

al

urba

n fo

ra, b

araz

as, r

adio

pro

gram

mes

et

c.)

wit

h th

e pu

blic

to

prov

ide

feed

-bac

k on

sta

tus

of a

ctiv

ity im

plem

enta

tion:

Sc

ore

1 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

Pla

nner

obt

ain

and

revi

ew e

vide

nce

of:

·M

eetin

gs o

f fe

ed-b

ack

to t

he p

ublic

on

stat

us o

f pr

ojec

t im

plem

enta

tion.

·M

inut

es o

f m

eetin

gs w

ith

LLG

s an

d w

ith

the

publ

ic·

Scri

pts

for

radi

o pr

ogra

ms,

etc

.

d.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

mad

e pu

blic

ly

avai

labl

e in

form

atio

n on

i) t

ax r

ates

, ii)

co

llect

ion

proc

edur

es, a

nd ii

i) p

roce

dure

s fo

r ap

peal

: If

all i

, ii,

iii c

ompl

ied

wit

h:

Scor

e 1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

CFO

and

not

ice

boar

ds, r

evie

w e

vide

nce

that

:

·(i

), (

ii) a

nd (

iii)

have

bee

n co

nduc

ted

and

that

in

form

atio

n is

ava

ilabl

e at

poi

nt o

f tim

e fo

r LG

PA

.

·N

otic

e bo

ards

·O

ther

pub

licat

ion

mea

ns

22.

Repo

rtin

g to

IGG

Max

imum

1

poin

t on

thi

s Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

a. L

G h

as p

repa

red

an IG

G r

epor

t w

hich

will

in

clud

e a

list

of c

ases

of

alle

ged

frau

d an

d co

rrup

tion

and

thei

r st

atus

incl

. ad

min

istr

ativ

e an

d ac

tion

take

n/be

ing

take

n, a

nd t

he r

epor

t ha

s be

en p

rese

nted

an

d di

scus

sed

in t

he c

ounc

il an

d ot

her

fora

. Sco

re 1

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

cle

rk t

o th

e co

unci

l obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·Th

e Re

port

on

IGG

wit

h is

sues

and

mea

sure

s ta

ken

·M

inut

es fr

om t

he c

ounc

il m

eetin

gs a

nd r

evie

w

actio

ns t

aken

·Re

port

on

IGG

issu

es

·C

ounc

il m

inut

es

32LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

9 E

duca

tion

Per

form

ance

Ass

essm

ent

9.1

Edu

cati

on M

inim

um C

ondi

tion

s

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Min

imum

Con

diti

onSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

A)

Hum

an

Reso

urce

M

anag

emen

t an

d D

evel

opm

ent

Max

imum

sco

re

is 7

0

1.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as

subs

tant

ivel

y re

crui

ted

or fo

rmal

ly

requ

este

d fo

r se

cond

men

t of

sta

ff

for

all c

ritic

al p

ositi

ons

in t

he

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

Edu

catio

n O

ffice

na

mel

y:

If t

he L

G h

as s

ubst

antiv

ely

recr

uite

d or

fo

rmal

ly r

eque

sted

for

seco

ndm

ent

of:

a) D

istr

ict

Educ

atio

n O

ffice

r/ P

rinc

ipal

Ed

ucat

ion

Offi

cer,

scor

e 30

or

else

0.

b) A

ll D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

al In

spec

tor

of

Scho

ols,

sco

re 4

0 o

r el

se 0

.

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion,

obt

ain

the

appo

intm

ent

lett

ers

of t

he D

istr

ict

Educ

atio

n/M

unic

ipal

O

ffice

sta

ff a

s lis

ted

to e

stab

lish

that

the

y ar

e su

bsta

ntiv

ely

recr

uite

d.

In c

ase

the

posi

tions

are

not

fille

d, g

et

evid

ence

from

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion

that

the

LG

re

ques

ted

for

seco

ndm

ent

from

the

Min

istr

y of

Edu

catio

n (M

oES)

.

·A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

·C

opy

of le

tter

from

LG

to

MoE

S re

ques

ting

for

seco

ndm

ent

of s

taff

to

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

Ed

ucat

ion

Offi

ce.

B)

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al

Requ

irem

ents

Max

imum

sco

re

is 3

0

2.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

prio

r to

co

mm

ence

men

t of

all

civi

l w

orks

for

all E

duca

tion

sect

or

proj

ects

the

LG

has

car

ried

out

: En

viro

nmen

tal,

Soci

al a

nd C

limat

e C

hang

e sc

reen

ing/

Envi

ronm

ent

Soci

al Im

pact

Ass

essm

ents

(ES

IAs)

If t

he L

G c

arri

ed o

ut:

a.E

nvir

onm

enta

l, So

cial

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

scre

enin

g/En

viro

nmen

t,

scor

e 15

or

else

0.

b.S

ocia

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ents

(ES

IAs)

, sc

ore

15 o

r el

se 0

.

From

the

LG

Env

iron

men

t offi

cer,

obta

in t

he

Envi

ronm

enta

l and

Soc

ial S

cree

ning

For

m (

or

whe

re a

pplic

able

: ESI

As

repo

rts,

ESM

Ps)

for

all E

duca

tion

proj

ects

for

the

prev

ious

FY,

to

veri

fy w

heth

er:

•E

& S

scr

eeni

ng w

as c

ompl

eted

, ESI

As/

ESM

Ps p

repa

red

and

cost

ed a

nd

impl

emen

ted/

follo

wed

up.

·En

viro

nmen

tal a

nd S

ocia

l sc

reen

ing

Form

s·

ESIA

s re

port

s·

Cos

ted

ESM

Ps

33LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

9.2

Educ

atio

n Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

res

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Perf

orm

ance

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

A.

Loca

l G

over

nmen

t Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Resu

lts

Max

imum

24

scor

e fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

ar

ea

1.Le

arni

ng O

utco

mes

: The

LG

has

impr

oved

PLE

and

U

SE p

ass

rate

s.

Max

imum

7 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) T

he L

G P

LE p

ass

rate

has

impr

oved

bet

wee

n th

e pr

evio

us s

choo

l yea

r bu

t on

e an

d th

e pr

evio

us

year

₋If

impr

ovem

ent

by m

ore

than

5%

sco

re 4

₋Be

twee

n 1

and

5% s

core

2₋

No

impr

ovem

ent

scor

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Ed

ucat

ion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

·Th

e PL

E re

sult

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us s

choo

l yea

r bu

t on

e an

d th

e pr

evio

us y

ear

·C

alcu

late

the

per

cent

age

of p

upils

tha

t pa

ssed

bet

wee

n gr

ade

1 an

d 3

for

both

yea

rs·

Then

cal

cula

te t

he p

erce

ntag

e in

crea

se b

etw

een

the

prev

ious

sc

hool

yea

r bu

t on

e an

d th

e pr

evio

us y

ear

₋U

NEB

PLE

Res

ults

b) T

he L

G U

CE

pass

rat

e ha

s im

prov

ed b

etw

een

the

prev

ious

sch

ool y

ear

but

one

and

the

prev

ious

ye

ar₋

If im

prov

emen

t by

mor

e th

an 5

% s

core

3₋

Betw

een

1 an

d 5%

sco

re 2

₋N

o im

prov

emen

t sc

ore

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Ed

ucat

ion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

·U

CE

resu

lts

for

USE

sch

ools

onl

y fo

r th

e pr

evio

us s

choo

l yea

r bu

t on

e an

d th

e pr

evio

us y

ear

·C

alcu

late

the

per

cent

age

of s

tude

nts

that

pas

sed

betw

een

grad

e 1

and

3 fo

r bo

th y

ears

·Th

en c

alcu

late

the

per

cent

age

incr

ease

bet

wee

n th

e pr

evio

us

scho

ol y

ear

but

one

and

the

prev

ious

yea

r

₋U

NEB

UC

E Re

sult

s

2.Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Perf

orm

ance

: Inc

reas

e in

the

ave

rage

sco

re

in t

he e

duca

tion

LLG

pe

rfor

man

ce a

sses

smen

t.

Max

imum

2 p

oint

s

a) A

vera

ge s

core

in t

he e

duca

tion

LLG

per

form

ance

ha

s im

prov

ed b

etw

een

the

prev

ious

yea

r bu

t on

e an

d th

e pr

evio

us y

ear

₋If

impr

ovem

ent

by m

ore

than

5%

sco

re 2

₋Be

twee

n 1

and

5% s

core

1₋

No

impr

ovem

ent

scor

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r ob

tain

:

The

LLG

per

form

ance

rep

ort

and

calc

ulat

e th

e pe

rcen

tage

ch

ange

in s

core

of

the

educ

atio

n LL

G p

erfo

rman

ce a

sses

smen

t

Not

e: T

o be

sco

red

Zero

for

all

LGs

in Y

1 &

Y2

Repo

rt o

n LL

G

perf

orm

ance

as

sess

men

t

3.In

vest

men

t Pe

rfor

man

ce:

The

LG h

as m

anag

ed

educ

atio

n pr

ojec

ts a

s pe

r gu

idel

ines

Max

imum

8 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) I

f th

e ed

ucat

ion

deve

lopm

ent

gran

t ha

s be

en

used

on

elig

ible

act

iviti

es a

s de

fined

in t

he s

ecto

r gu

idel

ines

: sco

re 2

₋El

se s

core

0

₋Fr

om t

he D

istr

ict

Educ

atio

n O

ffice

, obt

ain

sect

or g

uide

lines

and

de

term

ine

elig

ible

act

iviti

es t

hen

revi

ew t

he b

udge

t pe

rfor

man

ce

repo

rt t

o es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

the

edu

catio

n de

velo

pmen

t gr

ant

was

use

d on

elig

ible

act

iviti

es

₋B

udge

t Pe

rfor

man

ce

Repo

rts

₋Ed

ucat

ion

sect

or

guid

elin

es

b) I

f th

e D

EO, E

nvir

onm

ent

Offi

cer

and

CD

O

cert

ified

wor

ks o

n Ed

ucat

ion

cons

truc

tion

proj

ects

im

plem

ente

d in

the

pre

viou

s FY

bef

ore

the

LG

mad

e pa

ymen

ts t

o th

e co

ntra

ctor

s sc

ore

2 or

els

e sc

ore

0

₋Fr

om t

he C

hief

Fin

ance

Offi

cer

(CFO

) ob

tain

and

rev

iew

pa

ymen

t vo

uche

rs fo

r al

l Edu

catio

n co

nstr

uctio

n pr

ojec

ts

cont

ract

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y to

est

ablis

h w

heth

er c

ertifi

catio

n of

w

orks

was

don

e be

fore

the

LG

mad

e pa

ymen

ts t

o co

ntra

ctor

s.

₋Pa

ymen

t vo

uche

rs

to c

ontr

acto

rs

c) I

f th

e va

riat

ions

in t

he c

ontr

act

pric

e ar

e w

ithi

n +

/-20

% o

f th

e M

oWT

estim

ates

sco

re 2

or

else

sc

ore

0

₋Fr

om t

he L

G E

ngin

eer,

obta

in: (

i) M

oWT

estim

ates

; and

(ii)

co

ntra

cts

and

calc

ulat

e th

e va

riat

ions

in t

he c

ontr

act

pric

e to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

the

y ar

e w

ithi

n +

/-20

% o

f th

e M

oWT

estim

ates

•En

gine

ers

Estim

ates

•C

ontr

acts

d)

Evid

ence

tha

t ed

ucat

ion

proj

ects

wer

e co

mpl

eted

as

per

wor

k pl

an in

the

pre

viou

s FY

₋If

10

0%

sco

re 2

₋Be

twee

n 80

– 9

9% s

core

1₋

Belo

w 8

0%

sco

re 0

₋Fr

om t

he D

istr

ict

Educ

atio

n O

ffice

, obt

ain:

(i)

the

con

trac

ts

and

wor

k sc

hedu

le; a

nd (

ii) b

udge

t pe

rfor

man

ce r

epor

t fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

edu

catio

n pr

ojec

ts w

ere

com

plet

ed a

s pe

r w

ork

plan

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY

•C

ontr

acts

; and

•B

udge

t pe

rfor

man

ce r

epor

t

34LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Perf

orm

ance

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

4.Ac

hiev

emen

t of

st

anda

rds:

The

LG

has

m

et p

resc

ribe

d sc

hool

st

affing

and

infr

astr

uctu

re

stan

dard

s

Max

imum

6 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

rec

ruite

d pr

imar

y sc

hool

tea

cher

s as

per

the

pre

scri

bed

MoE

S st

affing

gui

delin

es

₋If

10

0%

: sco

re 3

₋If

80

- 9

9%: s

core

2₋

If 7

0 –

79%

sco

re: 1

, ₋

Belo

w 7

0%

sco

re 0

₋Fr

om t

he H

uman

Res

ourc

e O

ffice

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

·Th

e st

affing

str

uctu

re fo

r sc

hool

s

·Te

ache

r st

aff li

st·

Cal

cula

te t

he p

erce

nt o

f fil

led

staff

pos

ition

s

₋LG

app

rove

d st

ruct

ure

₋H

RM s

taff

reg

iste

rs

b)

Perc

ent

of s

choo

ls in

LG

tha

t m

eet

basi

c re

quir

emen

ts a

nd m

inim

um s

tand

ards

set

out

in

the

DES

gui

delin

es,

₋If

abo

ve 7

0%

sco

re: 3

₋If

bet

wee

n 60

- 6

9%, s

core

: 2₋

If b

etw

een

50 -

59%

, sco

re: 1

₋Be

low

50

sco

re:0

₋Fr

om t

he D

EO, o

btai

n lis

t of

reg

iste

red

UPE

and

USE

sch

ools

; and

th

e co

nsol

idat

ed S

choo

ls A

sset

Reg

iste

r fo

r bo

th U

PE a

nd U

SE

scho

ols

from

the

pre

viou

s tw

o FY

s.

₋C

alcu

late

the

per

cent

of

scho

ols

that

mee

t pr

escr

ibed

min

imum

st

anda

rds.

₋D

ES b

asic

re

quir

emen

ts a

nd

min

imum

sta

ndar

ds

for

scho

ols.

₋Li

st o

f re

gist

ered

sc

hool

s in

pe

rfor

man

ce

cont

ract

₋C

onso

lidat

ed

LG s

choo

l ass

et

regi

ster

B.

Perf

orm

ance

Re

port

ing

and

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t

Max

imum

16

scor

e fo

r th

is p

er-

form

ance

are

a

5.Ac

cura

cy o

f re

port

ed

info

rmat

ion:

The

LG

has

ac

cura

tely

rep

orte

d on

te

achi

ng s

taff

in p

lace

, sc

hool

infr

astr

uctu

re a

nd

serv

ice

perf

orm

ance

.

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

acc

urat

ely

repo

rted

on

teac

hers

and

whe

re t

hey

are

depl

oyed

.₋

If a

ccur

acy

of in

form

atio

n is

10

0%

sco

re 2

-El

se s

core

: 0

₋Fr

om t

he L

G E

duca

tion

office

obt

ain

teac

her

depl

oym

ent

₋Sa

mpl

e at

leas

t 3

scho

ols

in d

iffer

ent

LLG

s in

a L

G t

o ve

rify

w

heth

er t

he s

taff

are

in s

choo

ls w

here

the

y ar

e re

port

ed

depl

oyed

.

₋Te

ache

r de

ploy

men

t lis

t

b) E

vide

nce

that

LG

has

a s

choo

l ass

et r

egis

ter

accu

rate

ly r

epor

ting

on t

he in

fras

truc

ture

in a

ll re

gist

ered

pri

mar

y sc

hool

s.₋

If a

ccur

acy

of in

form

atio

n is

10

0%

sco

re 2

₋El

se s

core

: 0

₋Fr

om t

he L

G E

duca

tion

office

obt

ain

info

rmat

ion

on 3

sch

ools

sa

mpl

ed fr

om d

iffer

ent

LLG

and

for

each

cas

e, v

erif

y w

heth

er

infr

astr

uctu

re a

nd e

quip

men

t is

in p

lace

as

per

the

cons

olid

ated

as

set

regi

ster

₋C

onso

lidat

ed

LG s

choo

l ass

et

regi

ster

6.Sc

hool

com

plia

nce

and

perf

orm

ance

im

prov

emen

t:

Max

imum

12

poin

ts o

n th

is p

erfo

rman

ce m

easu

re

a)

The

LG h

as e

nsur

ed t

hat

all r

egis

tere

d pr

imar

y sc

hool

s ha

ve c

ompl

ied

wit

h M

oES

annu

al

budg

etin

g an

d re

port

ing

guid

elin

es a

nd t

hat

they

hav

e su

bmit

ted

repo

rts

(sig

ned

by t

he

head

tea

cher

and

cha

ir o

f th

e SM

C)

to t

he D

EO

by J

anua

ry 3

0.

Repo

rts

shou

ld in

clud

e am

ong

othe

rs, i

) hi

ghlig

hts

of s

choo

l per

form

ance

, ii)

a

reco

ncile

d ca

sh fl

ow s

tate

men

t, ii

i) a

n an

nual

bu

dget

and

exp

endi

ture

rep

ort,

and

iv)

an a

sset

re

gist

er:

-If

10

0%

sch

ool s

ubm

issi

on t

o LG

, sco

re: 4

-Be

twee

n 80

– 9

9% s

core

: 2-

Belo

w 8

0%

sco

re 0

•Fr

om D

EO/M

EO, o

btai

n an

d re

view

sub

mit

ted

copi

es o

f an

nual

sc

hool

rep

orts

and

bud

gets

from

the

pre

viou

s FY

.•

Sam

ple

at le

ast

3 sc

hool

s to

est

ablis

h th

e ex

tent

to

whi

ch

regi

ster

ed p

rim

ary

scho

ols

have

com

plie

d w

ith

MoE

S an

nual

bu

dget

ing

and

repo

rtin

g gu

idel

ines

and

tha

t th

ey h

ave

subm

itte

d re

port

s

•Li

st o

f re

gist

ered

sc

hool

s in

pe

rfor

man

ce

cont

ract

•Re

conc

iled

cash

flo

w s

tate

men

t,

•A

nnua

l bud

get

and

expe

nditu

re r

epor

t•

An

asse

t re

gist

er

35LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Perf

orm

ance

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

b)U

PE s

choo

ls s

uppo

rted

to

prep

are

and

impl

emen

t SI

Ps in

line

wit

h in

spec

tion

reco

mm

enda

tions

:-

If 5

0%

sco

re: 4

-Be

twee

n 3

0–

49%

sco

re: 2

-Be

low

30

% s

core

0

•Fr

om t

he L

G E

duca

tion

office

, obt

ain

and

revi

ew t

he in

spec

tion

repo

rt fr

om t

he p

revi

ous

FY a

nd id

entif

y th

e sc

hool

s w

hich

wer

e su

ppor

ted

to d

evel

op S

IPs

• S

ampl

e 3

scho

ols

and

veri

fy w

heth

er t

hey

wer

e su

ppor

ted

to

deve

lop

SIPs

•Re

port

on

SIPs

•Sc

hool

im

prov

emen

t pl

ans

in s

ampl

e sc

hool

s

c)

If t

he L

G h

as c

olle

cted

and

com

pile

d EM

IS r

etur

n fo

rms

for

all r

egis

tere

d sc

hool

s fr

om t

he p

revi

ous

FY y

ear:

-If

10

0%

sco

re: 4

:-

Betw

een

90 –

99%

sco

re 2

-Be

low

90

% s

core

0

•Fr

om M

oES

obta

in a

nd c

ross

-che

ck E

MIS

dat

a su

bmis

sion

s ag

ains

t th

e lis

t of

sch

ools

sub

mit

ted

by t

he L

G in

the

pe

rfor

man

ce c

ontr

act.

•Li

st o

f Sc

hool

s fr

om

LG p

erfo

rman

ce

cont

ract

•EM

IS d

ata

extr

act

from

MoE

S•

List

of

scho

ols

from

PB

S an

d ve

rify

wit

h th

at o

n O

TIM

S

C.

Hum

an

Reso

urce

M

anag

emen

t an

d D

evel

opm

ent

Max

imum

16

scor

e fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

ar

ea

7.B

udge

ting

for

and

actu

al r

ecru

itm

ent

and

depl

oym

ent

of s

taff

: LG

has

sub

stan

tivel

y re

crui

ted

all p

rim

ary

scho

ol t

each

ers

whe

re

ther

e is

a w

age

bill

prov

isio

n

Max

imum

8 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

bud

gete

d fo

r a

head

te

ache

r an

d a

min

imum

of

7 te

ache

rs p

er

scho

ol o

r a

min

imum

of

one

teac

her

per

clas

s fo

r sc

hool

s w

ith

less

tha

n P.

7 fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

: Sc

ore

4 or

els

e, s

core

: 0

-Fr

om t

he L

G P

erfo

rman

ce C

ontr

act:

i) o

btai

n th

e lis

t of

sch

ools

; ii)

the

sta

ff li

st; a

nd e

stab

lish

whe

ther

the

LG

has

bud

gete

d fo

r sc

hool

tea

cher

s as

per

sta

ffing

nor

ms/

guid

elin

es.

•Pe

rfor

man

ce

cont

ract

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

dep

loye

d te

ache

rs a

s pe

r se

ctor

gui

delin

es in

the

cur

rent

FY,

Scor

e 3

else

sco

re: 0

-Fr

om t

he D

EO, o

btai

n an

d re

view

: i)

the

teac

hers

’ lis

t to

est

ablis

h w

heth

er t

each

ers

have

bee

n de

ploy

ed a

s pe

r se

ctor

gui

delin

e/st

affing

nor

ms

-Sa

mpl

e at

leas

t 3

scho

ols

to v

erif

y w

heth

er t

he t

each

ers

as

indi

cate

d in

the

sta

ff li

sts

are

depl

oyed

in t

hose

sch

ools

.

•Li

st o

f sc

hool

s•

Staff

list

s •

Staff

att

enda

nce

regi

ster

c)

If t

each

er d

eplo

ymen

t da

ta h

as b

een

diss

emin

ated

or

publ

iciz

ed o

n LG

and

or

scho

ol

notic

e bo

ard,

sco

re: 1

els

e, s

core

: 0

•Fr

om t

he D

EO, i

nfor

mat

ion

on t

each

er d

eplo

ymen

t •

Sam

ple

at le

ast

3 sc

hool

s pe

r su

b-c

ount

y an

d ch

eck

whe

ther

the

lis

t of

tea

cher

s de

ploy

ed is

dis

play

ed o

n th

e sc

hool

not

ice

boar

d.

•St

aff li

sts

and

actu

al d

eplo

ymen

t pe

r sc

hool

on

LG

and

scho

ol n

otic

e bo

ards

36LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Perf

orm

ance

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

8.Pe

rfor

man

ce

man

agem

ent:

App

rais

als

have

bee

n co

nduc

ted

for

all e

duca

tion

man

agem

ent

staff

, hea

d te

ache

rs in

the

reg

iste

red

prim

ary

and

seco

ndar

y sc

hool

s, a

nd t

rain

ing

cond

ucte

d to

add

ress

id

entifi

ed c

apac

ity g

aps.

Max

imum

8 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) I

f al

l pri

mar

y sc

hool

hea

d te

ache

rs h

ave

been

ap

prai

sed

wit

h ev

iden

ce o

f ap

prai

sal r

epor

ts

subm

itte

d to

HRM

wit

h co

py t

o D

EO/M

EO

Scor

e: 2

or

else

, sco

re: 0

•Fr

om H

RM, o

btai

n an

d re

view

cop

ies

of H

/T a

ppra

isal

s fr

om S

AS

for

the

prev

ious

sch

ool y

ear.

•Sc

hool

and

hea

d te

ache

r lis

ts•

SAS’

s H

/T a

ppra

isal

re

port

s su

bmit

ted

to H

RM

b) I

f al

l sec

onda

ry s

choo

l hea

d te

ache

rs h

ave

been

ap

prai

sed

wit

h ev

iden

ce o

f ap

prai

sal r

epor

ts

subm

itte

d by

D/C

AO (

or C

hair

BoG

) to

HRM

Sc

ore:

2 o

r el

se, s

core

: 0

•Fr

om H

uman

Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t, o

btai

n an

d re

view

cop

ies

of H

/T a

ppra

isal

s re

ceiv

ed fo

r th

e pr

evio

us s

choo

l yea

r. •

Scho

ol a

nd h

ead

teac

her

lists

•H

/T p

erfo

rman

ce

plan

•H

/T a

ppra

isal

re

port

s

c) I

f al

l sta

ff in

the

LG

Edu

catio

n de

part

men

t ha

ve

been

app

rais

ed a

gain

st t

heir

per

form

ance

pla

ns

scor

e: 2

.-

Else

, sco

re: 0

•Fr

om t

he L

G H

R de

part

men

t, o

btai

n an

d re

view

app

rais

als

for

all

scho

ol in

spec

tors

and

edu

catio

n m

anag

emen

t st

aff c

ondu

cted

in

the

prev

ious

FY.

•H

RM s

taff

reg

iste

r•

Staff

per

form

ance

pl

ans

and

appr

aisa

l re

port

s

d) T

he L

G h

as p

repa

red

a tr

aini

ng p

lan

to a

ddre

ss

iden

tified

sta

ff c

apac

ity g

aps

at t

he s

choo

l and

LG

leve

l, sc

ore:

2-

Else

, sco

re: 0

•Fr

om t

he D

EO/M

EO, o

btai

n an

d re

view

the

tra

inin

g pl

an

deve

lope

d ov

er t

he p

revi

ous

FY.

•LG

Tra

inin

g pl

an

for

the

Educ

atio

n D

epar

tmen

t

D.

Man

agem

ent,

M

onito

ring

an

d Su

perv

i-si

on o

f Se

r-vi

ces

Max

imum

sco

re

20 fo

r th

is p

er-

form

ance

are

a

9.Pl

anni

ng, B

udge

ting

and

Tran

sfer

of

Fund

s fo

r Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery:

The

Lo

cal G

over

nmen

t ha

s al

loca

ted

and

spen

t fu

nds

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery

as

pres

crib

ed in

the

sec

tor

guid

elin

es.

Max

imum

8 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) T

he L

G h

as c

onfir

med

in w

ritin

g th

e lis

t of

sc

hool

s, t

heir

enr

olm

ent

and

budg

et a

lloca

tion

in t

he P

rogr

amm

e B

udge

ting

Syst

em (

PBS)

by

Dec

embe

r 15

th a

nnua

lly.

If 1

00

% c

ompl

ianc

e, s

core

:2 o

r el

se, s

core

: 0

•Fr

om M

oES

obta

in c

opie

s of

LG

sub

mis

sion

s an

d le

tter

s co

mm

unic

atin

g co

rrec

tions

/ re

visi

ons

of s

choo

l lis

ts a

nd

enro

lmen

t nu

mbe

rs.

•Li

st o

f sc

hool

s fr

om

PBS

vs. s

choo

l lis

t su

bmit

ted

to M

oES

•Le

tter

from

CAO

/TC

sub

mit

ting

or

corr

ectin

g th

e lis

t of

sch

ools

and

en

rolm

ent.

b) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

mad

e al

loca

tions

to

insp

ectio

n an

d m

onito

ring

func

tions

in li

ne w

ith

the

sect

or g

uide

lines

.If

10

0%

com

plia

nce,

sco

re:2

els

e, s

core

: 0

•Fr

om t

he D

EO o

btai

n an

d re

view

a c

opy

of t

he E

duca

tion

sect

or

guid

elin

es•

From

the

Pla

nner

, obt

ain

and

revi

ew t

he a

nnua

l sec

tor

wor

k pl

an

for

the

prev

ious

FY

alon

gsid

e ex

pend

iture

s on

the

insp

ectio

n an

d m

onito

ring

func

tions

to

chec

k w

heth

er a

ctiv

ities

tha

t w

ere

cond

ucte

d co

mpl

ied

to s

ecto

r gu

idel

ines

•Se

ctor

Gui

delin

es•

Ann

ual W

ork

plan

•G

uide

lines

C

ompl

ianc

e re

port

s fr

om M

oFPE

D

c) E

vide

nce

that

LG

sub

mit

ted

war

rant

s fo

r sc

hool

’s

capi

tatio

n w

ithi

n 5

days

for

the

last

3 q

uart

ers

If 1

00

% c

ompl

ianc

e, s

core

: 2 e

lse

scor

e: 0

•Fr

om M

oFPE

D o

btai

n PB

S tim

esta

mp

of L

G w

arra

nt s

ubm

issi

on

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er L

G s

ubm

itte

d w

arra

nts

for

scho

ol’s

ca

pita

tion

wit

hin

5 da

ys fo

r th

e la

st 3

qua

rter

s

•PB

S re

port

s fr

om

MoF

PED.

d) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

invo

iced

and

the

DEO

/M

EO h

as c

omm

unic

ated

/ pu

blic

ized

cap

itatio

n re

leas

es t

o sc

hool

s w

ithi

n th

ree

wor

king

day

s of

re

leas

e fr

om M

oFPE

D.If

10

0%

com

plia

nce,

sco

re: 2

els

e, s

core

: 0

•Fr

om M

oFPE

D o

btai

n an

d re

view

cop

ies

of L

G r

elea

se c

ircu

lars

ov

er t

he la

st 3

qua

rter

s, a

nd fr

om t

he L

G o

btai

n in

voic

es o

f ca

pita

tion

to s

choo

ls.

Nex

t, s

ampl

e 3

scho

ols

from

diff

eren

t su

b co

untie

s in

a L

G t

o ve

rify

whe

ther

the

DEO

/MEO

com

mun

icat

ed/

publ

iciz

ed w

ithi

n th

ree

wor

king

day

s of

the

rel

ease

.

•LG

Rel

ease

cir

cula

r fr

om M

oFPE

D•

Rele

ase

info

rmat

ion

on L

G/S

choo

l not

ice

boar

ds•

Invo

ices

of

capi

tatio

n to

sch

ools

37LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Perf

orm

ance

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

10.

Rout

ine

over

sigh

t an

d m

onito

ring

Max

imum

10

poi

nts

on

this

per

form

ance

mea

sure

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

Edu

catio

n de

part

men

t ha

s pr

epar

ed a

n in

spec

tion

plan

and

mee

tings

co

nduc

ted

to p

lan

for

scho

ol in

spec

tions

.-

If 1

00

% c

ompl

ianc

e, s

core

: 2, e

lse

scor

e: 0

•Fr

om D

EO/M

EO o

r D

IS, o

btai

n co

pies

of

the

insp

ectio

n pl

an a

nd

or m

inut

es o

f pr

epar

ator

y in

spec

tion

and

mon

itori

ng m

eetin

gs

for

the

prev

ious

thr

ee s

choo

l ter

ms.

•LG

insp

ectio

n pl

an•

Min

utes

of

prep

arat

ory

insp

ectio

n an

d m

onito

ring

act

iviti

es

b)

Perc

ent

of r

egis

tere

d U

PE s

choo

ls t

hat

have

bee

n in

spec

ted

and

mon

itore

d, a

nd fi

ndin

gs c

ompi

led

in t

he D

EO/M

EO’s

mon

itori

ng r

epor

t:-

If 1

00

% s

core

: 2-

Betw

een

80 –

99%

sco

re 1

-Be

low

80

%: s

core

0

•Fr

om t

he D

IS o

btai

n LG

insp

ectio

n an

d m

onito

ring

rep

orts

, to

esta

blis

h th

e nu

mbe

r of

sch

ools

insp

ecte

d an

d m

onito

red

from

th

e pr

evio

us t

hree

sch

ool t

erm

s, a

nd c

ompa

re w

ith

the

tota

l lis

t of

reg

iste

red

UPE

sch

ools

from

PB

S.

•Sc

hool

list

from

PB

S •

LG in

spec

tion

plan

fr

om t

he p

revi

ous

FY•

LG in

spec

tion

and

mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts

from

the

pre

viou

s th

ree

scho

ol t

erm

s.

c) E

vide

nce

that

insp

ectio

n re

port

s ha

ve b

een

disc

usse

d an

d us

ed t

o re

com

men

d co

rrec

tive

actio

ns, a

nd t

hat

thos

e ac

tions

hav

e su

bseq

uent

ly

been

follo

wed

-up,

Scor

e: 2

or

else

, sco

re: 0

•Fr

om t

he D

EO/

MEO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

•M

inut

es o

f de

part

- m

enta

l mee

tings

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er:

Scho

ol in

spec

tion

repo

rts

wer

e di

scus

sed

and

used

to

mak

e re

com

men

datio

ns fo

r co

rrec

tive

actio

ns d

urin

g th

e pr

evio

us F

Y.•

Sam

ple

3 sc

hool

s to

ver

ify

whe

ther

the

DIS

has

follo

wed

up

on

insp

ectio

n re

com

men

datio

ns.

•In

form

atio

n fr

om

Sam

ple

scho

ols

•M

inut

es fr

om

Dep

artm

enta

l m

eetin

gs•

Vis

itor’

s bo

ok a

t th

e sc

hool

leve

l

d)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

IS a

nd D

EO h

ave

pres

ente

d fin

ding

s fr

om in

spec

tion

and

mon

itori

ng r

esul

ts t

o re

spec

tive

scho

ols

and

subm

itte

d th

ese

repo

rts

to t

he D

irec

tora

te o

f Ed

ucat

ion

Stan

dard

s (D

ES)

in t

he M

inis

try

of E

duca

tion

and

Spor

ts (

MoE

S):

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

scor

e: 0

•Fr

om t

he D

EO o

btai

n th

e lis

t of

sch

ools

and

sam

ple

3 sc

hool

s fr

om d

iffer

ent

LLG

s to

est

ablis

h w

heth

er c

opie

s of

the

insp

ectio

n re

port

s fr

om t

he p

revi

ous

thre

e te

rms

wer

e le

ft b

ehin

d.•

From

DES

obt

ain

and

revi

ew: A

list

of

LGs

that

hav

e su

bmit

ted

scho

ol in

spec

tion

repo

rts.

•Fr

om D

EO/M

EO c

heck

whe

ther

: the

DEO

/MEO

has

a le

tter

of

ackn

owledg

emen

tfromDES

•In

form

atio

n fr

om

Sam

ple

scho

ols

•M

inut

es fr

om

Dep

artm

enta

l m

eetin

gs•

Scho

ol in

spec

tion

repo

rts

•M

inut

es o

f SM

C

mee

tings

•D

ES r

ecor

ds o

n sc

hool

insp

ectio

n.•

Ack

now

ledg

emen

t le

tter

s

e) E

vide

nce

that

the

cou

ncil

com

mit

tee

resp

onsi

ble

for

educ

atio

n m

et a

nd d

iscu

ssed

ser

vice

del

iver

y is

sues

in

clud

ing

insp

ectio

n an

d m

onito

ring

fin

ding

s, p

erfo

rman

ce a

sses

smen

t re

sult

s, L

G P

AC

repo

rts

etc.

dur

ing

the

prev

ious

FY:

sco

re 2

or

else

sc

ore:

0

•Fr

om t

he C

lerk

to

Cou

ncil

obta

in a

nd r

evie

w:

•Ed

ucat

ion

sect

or

sta

ndin

g co

mm

itte

e m

eetin

g m

inut

es –

ch

eck

if th

e co

unci

l has

dis

cuss

ed s

ervi

ce d

eliv

ery

issu

es.

•M

inut

es fr

om s

ecto

r co

mm

itte

e m

eetin

gs•

Min

utes

from

C

ounc

il mee

tings

11.

Mob

iliza

tion

of p

aren

ts t

o at

trac

t le

arne

rs

Max

imum

2 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

Edu

catio

n de

part

men

t ha

s co

nduc

ted

activ

ities

to

mob

ilize

, att

ract

and

ret

ain

child

ren

at s

choo

l, s

core

: 2 o

r el

se s

core

: 0

•Fr

om t

he D

EO o

btai

n an

d re

view

rep

orts

from

eve

nts

or

mee

tings

hel

d w

ith

scho

ol c

omm

uniti

es.

•M

inut

es o

r re

port

s fr

om m

obili

zatio

n ev

ents

hel

d•

Reco

rds

of

com

mun

icat

ion

incl

udin

g po

ster

s or

ra

dio

talk

sho

ws

etc.

38LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Perf

orm

ance

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

E.

Inve

stm

ent

Man

agem

ent

Max

imum

sco

re

12 fo

r th

is p

erfo

r-m

ance

are

a

12.

Plan

ning

and

bud

getin

g fo

r in

vest

men

ts

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) E

vide

nce

that

the

re is

an

up t

o-da

te L

G a

sset

re

gist

er w

hich

set

s ou

t sc

hool

faci

litie

s an

d eq

uipm

ent

rela

tive

to b

asic

sta

ndar

ds, s

core

: 2,

else

sco

re: 0

•Fr

om t

he L

G e

duca

tion

depa

rtm

ent

obta

in a

cop

y of

the

ass

et

regi

ster

from

the

pre

viou

s FY

and

che

ck a

sam

ple

of 3

sch

ools

in

diff

eren

t su

b-c

ount

ies

to v

alid

ate

this

info

rmat

ion.

•Fo

rmat

1 in

the

Se

ctor

gui

delin

es•

LG s

choo

ls’ a

sset

re

gist

er•

Sam

ple

of s

choo

ls

b) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

con

duct

ed a

des

k ap

prai

sal f

or a

ll se

ctor

pro

ject

s in

the

bud

get

to e

stab

lish

whe

ther

the

pri

oriti

zed

inve

stm

ent

is: (

i) d

eriv

ed fr

om t

he L

GD

P; (

ii) e

ligib

le fo

r ex

pend

iture

und

er s

ecto

r gu

idel

ines

and

fund

ing

sour

ce (

e.g.

sec

tor

deve

lopm

ent

gran

t, D

DEG

).

If a

ppra

isal

s w

ere

cond

ucte

d fo

r al

l pro

ject

s th

at

wer

e pl

anne

d in

the

pre

viou

s FY

, sco

re: 1

or

else

, sc

ore:

0

-Fr

om t

he L

G P

lann

er o

btai

n an

d re

view

the

ann

ual w

ork

plan

and

as

cert

ain

alig

nmen

t of

pla

ns w

ith

info

rmat

ion

from

the

LG

DP

and

the

elig

ibili

ty c

rite

ria

wit

hin

the

sect

or g

uide

lines

.-

Then

from

the

LG

eng

inee

r, ob

tain

cop

ies

of fi

eld

appr

aisa

ls

cond

ucte

d fo

r th

e pl

anne

d pr

ojec

ts.

•LG

DP

•Se

ctor

Gui

delin

es•

Sect

or P

roje

ct

appr

aisa

l rep

orts

c) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

con

duct

ed fi

eld

App

rais

al fo

r: (

i) t

echn

ical

feas

ibili

ty; (

ii)

envi

ronm

enta

l and

soc

ial a

ccep

tabi

lity;

and

(iii

) cu

stom

ized

des

igns

ove

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y, s

core

1

else

sco

re: 0

•Fr

om t

he E

nvir

onm

ent

office

r ob

tain

and

rev

iew

the

com

plet

ed

copy

of

the

proj

ect

scre

enin

g fo

rm/c

heck

list:

•

Che

ck a

sam

ple

of 3

sch

ool c

onst

ruct

ion

proj

ects

to

valid

ate

LG

repo

rted

info

rmat

ion

•En

viro

nmen

tal a

nd

soci

al s

afeg

uard

s sc

reen

ing

chec

klis

t (F

orm

at 3

in t

he

sect

or g

uide

lines

)•

Fiel

d A

ppra

isal

re

port

in li

ne w

ith

the

chec

klis

t

13.

Proc

urem

ent,

con

trac

t m

anag

emen

t/ex

ecut

ion

Max

imum

9 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) I

f th

e LG

Edu

catio

n de

part

men

t ha

s bu

dget

ed fo

r an

d en

sure

d th

at p

lann

ed s

ecto

r in

fras

truc

ture

pr

ojec

ts h

ave

been

app

rove

d an

d in

corp

orat

ed

into

the

pro

cure

men

t pl

an, s

core

: 1, e

lse

scor

e: 0

•Fr

om t

he P

DU

obt

ain

and

revi

ew p

rocu

rem

ent

plan

for

the

curr

ent

FY t

o es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

edu

catio

n se

ctor

infr

astr

uctu

re

proj

ects

hav

e be

en in

corp

orat

ed

•A

ppro

ved

Proc

urem

ent

Plan

b) E

vide

nce

that

the

sch

ool i

nfra

stru

ctur

e w

as

appr

oved

by

the

Con

trac

ts C

omm

itte

e an

d cl

eare

d by

the

Sol

icito

r G

ener

al (

whe

re a

bove

th

e th

resh

old)

bef

ore

the

com

men

cem

ent

of

cons

truc

tion,

sco

re: 1

, els

e sc

ore:

0

•Fr

om t

he P

rocu

rem

ent

Uni

t, o

btai

n an

d re

view

the

sec

tor

proc

urem

ent

plan

and

min

utes

to

esta

blis

h w

heth

er p

lann

ed

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

wer

e di

scus

sed

and

appr

oved

.

•Se

ctor

pro

cure

men

t pl

an•

Min

utes

from

co

ntra

cts

com

mit

tee

mee

tings

c) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

est

ablis

hed

a Pr

ojec

t Im

plem

enta

tion

Team

(PI

T) fo

r sc

hool

co

nstr

uctio

n pr

ojec

ts c

onst

ruct

ed w

ithi

n th

e la

st

FY a

s pe

r gu

idel

ines

sco

re: 1

, els

e sc

ore:

0

•Fr

om t

he D

istr

ict

engi

neer

, obt

ain

the

com

posi

tion

of t

he P

roje

ct

Impl

emen

tatio

n Te

am•

PIT

Com

posi

tion

d) E

vide

nce

that

the

sch

ool i

nfra

stru

ctur

e fo

llow

ed

the

stan

dard

tec

hnic

al d

esig

ns p

rovi

ded

by t

he

MoE

S Sc

ore:

1, e

lse,

sco

re: 0

•Fr

om t

he M

oES

CM

U o

btai

n an

d re

view

sta

ndar

d te

chni

cal

desi

gns

for

scho

ols.

•V

isit

the

scho

ol in

fras

truc

ture

to

asce

rtai

n w

heth

er t

he s

tand

ard

tech

nica

l des

igns

pro

vide

d by

the

MoE

S w

ere

follo

wed

•M

oES

tech

nica

l de

sign

s•

Phys

ical

che

cks

in

sam

ple

scho

ols

•C

lerk

s of

wor

ks

repo

rts

to E

ngin

eer

and

DEO

.

39LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Perf

orm

ance

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

e) E

vide

nce

that

mon

thly

site

mee

tings

wer

e co

nduc

ted

for

all s

ecto

r in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s pl

anne

d in

the

pre

viou

s FY

sco

re: 1

, els

e sc

ore:

0

•Fr

om t

he L

G o

btai

n an

d re

view

rep

orts

/ m

inut

es o

f th

e pr

ojec

ts

site

mee

tings

tha

t w

ere

mon

itore

d.

•Li

st o

f se

ctor

sp

ecifi

c in

fras

truc

ture

pr

ojec

ts in

AW

P•

Repo

rts

and

Min

utes

from

site

m

onito

ring

vis

its

f)

If t

here

’s e

vide

nce

that

dur

ing

criti

cal s

tage

s of

co

nstr

uctio

n of

pla

nned

sec

tor

infr

astr

uctu

re

proj

ects

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY, a

t le

ast

1 m

onth

ly

join

t te

chni

cal s

uper

visi

on in

volv

ing

engi

neer

s,

envi

ronm

ent

office

rs, C

DO

s et

c ..,

has

bee

n co

nduc

ted

scor

e: 1

, els

e sc

ore:

0

•Fr

om t

he L

G e

ngin

eer

obta

in r

ecor

ds/

repo

rts

from

site

su

perv

isio

n ac

tiviti

es t

o en

sure

tha

t th

is in

volv

ed p

artic

ipat

ion

of e

ngin

eers

, env

iron

men

t offi

cers

, CD

Os,

at

criti

cal s

tage

s of

co

nstr

uctio

n.

•Re

port

s an

d M

inut

es fr

om s

ite

supe

rvis

ion

and

mon

itori

ng v

isit

s

g) I

f se

ctor

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

have

bee

n pr

oper

ly e

xecu

ted

and

paym

ents

to

cont

ract

ors

mad

e w

ithi

n sp

ecifi

ed t

imef

ram

es w

ithi

n th

e co

ntra

ct, s

core

: 1, e

lse

scor

e: 0

•Fr

om t

he C

FO, o

btai

n an

d re

view

of

cont

ract

s an

d de

term

ine

whe

ther

pay

men

t re

ques

ts fo

r se

ctor

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

wer

e in

itiat

ed a

nd e

xecu

ted

as p

er c

ontr

act

and

impl

emen

tatio

n re

sult

s.

•Li

st o

f se

ctor

pr

ojec

ts fr

om A

WP

•Pr

ojec

t co

ntra

cts

and

paym

ents

sc

hedu

le•

Site

sup

ervi

sion

re

port

s•

Cop

y of

con

trac

tor

paym

ent

slip

s

h) I

f th

e LG

Edu

catio

n de

part

men

t tim

ely

subm

itte

d a

proc

urem

ent

plan

in a

ccor

danc

e w

ith

the

PPD

A

requ

irem

ents

to

the

proc

urem

ent

unit

by A

pril

30,

scor

e: 1

, els

e, s

core

: 0

•Fr

om t

he P

rocu

rem

ent

unit

(PD

U o

btai

n fil

es/

reco

rds

on a

ll se

ctor

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

impl

emen

ted

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY t

o as

cert

ain

com

plia

nce.

•Se

ctor

Pro

cure

men

t Pl

an

•C

ontr

act

impl

emen

tatio

n pr

ogre

ss r

epor

ts•

Min

utes

from

co

ntra

cts

com

mit

tee

mee

tings

i)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

a c

ompl

ete

proc

urem

ent

file

for

each

sch

ool i

nfra

stru

ctur

e co

ntra

ct w

ith

all r

ecor

ds a

s re

quir

ed b

y th

e PP

DA

La

w9

scor

e 1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

₋Fr

om t

he P

DU

obt

ain

and

revi

ew p

rocu

rem

ent

files

for

scho

ol

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

for

the

prev

ious

FY

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er

they

are

com

plet

e.

•Pr

ocur

emen

t fil

es fo

r sc

hool

in

fras

truc

ture

pr

ojec

ts

9 A

com

plet

e pr

ocur

emen

t fil

e m

ust

have

the

Eva

luat

ion

Repo

rt a

ppro

ved

by t

he C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee,

Wor

ks C

ontr

act,

and

min

utes

of

Con

trac

ts C

omm

itte

e de

cisi

ons

40LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Perf

orm

ance

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

F.

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al

Safe

guar

ds

Max

imum

sc

ore

12 fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

ar

ea

14.

Gri

evan

ce r

edre

ss: L

G

Educ

atio

n gr

ieva

nces

ha

ve b

een

reco

rded

, in

vest

igat

ed, a

nd

resp

onde

d to

in li

ne w

ith

the

LG g

riev

ance

red

ress

fr

amew

ork.

Max

imum

3 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) E

vide

nce

that

gri

evan

ces

have

bee

n re

cord

ed,

inve

stig

ated

, res

pond

ed t

o an

d re

cord

ed in

line

w

ith

the

grie

vanc

e re

dres

s fr

amew

ork

scor

e: 3

, el

se s

core

: 0

•Fr

om t

he L

G d

esig

nate

Gri

evan

ce R

edre

ss O

ffice

r ob

tain

and

re

view

the

gri

evan

ce r

edre

ss fr

amew

ork

to e

stab

lish

whe

ther

the

gr

ieva

nces

hav

e be

en r

ecor

ded,

inve

stig

ated

, res

pond

ed t

o an

d re

cord

ed in

line

wit

h th

e gr

ieva

nce

redr

ess

fram

ewor

k

•G

riev

ance

red

ress

fr

amew

ork

15.

Safe

guar

ds fo

r se

rvic

e de

liver

y.

Max

imum

3 p

oint

on

this

pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) E

vide

nce

that

LG

has

dis

sem

inat

ed t

he E

duca

tion

guid

elin

es t

o pr

ovid

e fo

r ac

cess

to

land

(w

itho

ut

encu

mbr

ance

), p

rope

r si

ting

of s

choo

ls, ‘

gree

n’

scho

ols

and

ener

gy a

nd w

ater

con

serv

atio

n

Scor

e: 3

, or

else

sco

re: 0

•Fr

om t

he E

nvir

onm

ent

Offi

cer,

obta

in a

nd r

evie

w e

vide

nce

of

diss

emin

atio

n of

Edu

catio

n gu

idel

ines

.•

Che

ck a

sam

ple

of 3

sch

ools

in d

iffer

ent

sub

-cou

ntie

s to

con

firm

w

heth

er e

duca

tion

gui

delin

es h

ave

been

dis

sem

inat

ed

•Ev

iden

ce o

f di

ssem

inat

ion

of e

duca

tion

guid

elin

es

inco

rpor

atin

g E&

S re

quir

emen

ts.

•Sa

mpl

e sc

hool

s.

16.

Safe

guar

ds in

the

del

iver

y of

inve

stm

ents

Max

imum

6 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a) L

G h

as in

pla

ce a

cos

ted

ESM

P an

d th

is is

in

corp

orat

ed w

ithi

n th

e Bo

Qs

and

cont

ract

ual

docu

men

ts, s

core

: 2, e

lse

scor

e: 0

•Fr

om t

he L

G p

rocu

rem

ent

unit

revi

ew E

SMP

and

proj

ect

BoQ

s to

ens

ure

that

saf

egua

rd r

equi

rem

ents

wit

hin

the

Educ

atio

n gu

idel

ines

hav

e be

en in

corp

orat

ed.

•ES

MP

•Bo

Qs

b) I

f th

ere

is p

roof

of

land

ow

ners

hip,

acc

ess

of -

sc

hool

con

stru

ctio

n pr

ojec

ts, s

core

: 1, e

lse

scor

e:

0

•Fr

om t

he E

nvir

onm

ent

Offi

cer

Proc

urem

ent

unit

obta

in a

nd

revi

ew d

ocum

ents

to

asce

rtai

n th

at la

nd is

ava

ilabl

e to

con

duct

pl

anne

d sc

hool

con

stru

ctio

n pr

ojec

ts.

•La

nd t

itle/

ag

reem

ent

•M

oU o

r Le

tter

of

cons

ent

from

the

la

ndow

ner

c) E

vide

nce

that

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

co

nduc

ted

supp

ort

supe

rvis

ion

and

mon

itori

ng

(wit

h th

e te

chni

cal t

eam

) to

asc

erta

in c

ompl

ianc

e w

ith

ESM

Ps in

clud

ing

follo

w u

p on

rec

omm

ende

d co

rrec

tive

actio

ns; a

nd p

repa

red

mon

thly

m

onito

ring

rep

orts

, sco

re: 2

, els

e sc

ore:

0

•Fr

om t

he e

nvir

onm

enta

l and

com

mun

ity d

evel

opm

ent

offici

als,

ob

tain

and

rev

iew

pro

ject

rep

orts

on

mon

itori

ng a

nd s

uper

visi

on

activ

ities

con

duct

ed o

ver

the

prev

ious

FY.

•M

onth

ly R

epor

ts

from

mon

itori

ng

and

supe

rvis

ion

activ

ities

d) I

f th

e E&

S ce

rtifi

catio

ns w

ere

appr

oved

and

si

gned

by

the

envi

ronm

enta

l offi

cer

and

CD

O

prio

r to

exe

cutin

g th

e pr

ojec

t co

ntra

ctor

pa

ymen

ts

Scor

e: 1

, els

e sc

ore:

0

•Fr

om t

he E

nvir

onm

ent

Offi

cer,

obta

in a

cop

y of

con

trac

tor

cert

ifica

tes

and

veri

fy w

heth

er t

he e

nvir

onm

enta

l offi

cer

and

CD

O c

ount

er-s

igne

d at

the

inte

rim

and

fina

l sta

ges

of a

ll on

goin

g pr

ojec

ts.

•D

ates

and

Si

gnat

ures

on

Con

trac

tor

cert

ifica

tion

form

s

41LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

10

Hea

lth

Perf

orm

ance

Ass

essm

ent

10.1

H

ealt

h M

inim

um C

ondi

tion

s

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Min

imum

Con

diti

onSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

A)

Hum

an

Reso

urce

M

anag

emen

t an

d D

evel

opm

ent

1.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

Dis

tric

t ha

s su

bsta

ntiv

ely

recr

uite

d or

form

ally

req

uest

ed fo

r se

cond

men

t of

sta

ff fo

r al

l cr

itica

l pos

ition

s.

App

licab

le t

o D

istr

icts

onl

y.

Max

imum

sco

re is

70

If t

he L

G h

as s

ubst

antiv

ely

recr

uite

d or

form

ally

re

ques

ted

for

seco

ndm

ent

of:

a. D

istr

ict

Hea

lth

Offi

cer,

scor

e 10

or

else

0.

b. A

ssis

tant

Dis

tric

t H

ealt

h O

ffice

r M

ater

nal,

Chi

ld

Hea

lth

and

Nur

sing

, sco

re 1

0 o

r el

se 0

c. A

ssis

tant

Dis

tric

t H

ealt

h O

ffice

r En

viro

nmen

tal

Hea

lth,

sco

re 1

0 o

r el

se 0

.d.

Pri

ncip

al H

ealt

h In

spec

tor

(Sen

ior

Envi

ronm

ent

Offi

cer)

, sco

re 1

0 o

r el

se 0

.e.

Sen

ior

Hea

lth

Educ

ator

, sco

re 1

0 o

r el

se 0

.f.

Bio

stat

istic

ian,

sco

re 1

0 o

r 0

.g.

Dis

tric

t C

old

Cha

in T

echn

icia

n, s

core

10

or

else

0.

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion,

obt

ain

and

revi

ew t

he

appo

intm

ent

lett

ers

of t

he D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

al

Hea

lth

Offi

ce s

taff

as

liste

d to

est

ablis

h th

at

they

are

sub

stan

tivel

y re

crui

ted.

In c

ase

the

posi

tion

is n

ot fi

lled,

get

evi

denc

e fr

om t

he H

uman

Res

ourc

e M

anag

emen

t (H

RM)

Div

isio

n th

at t

he L

G r

eque

sted

for

seco

ndm

ent

for

dist

rict

s fr

om t

he M

inis

try

of H

ealt

h (M

oH)

and

Mun

icip

aliti

es fr

om t

he

Dis

tric

t

•A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

•C

opy

of le

tter

fr

om L

G t

o M

oH

requ

estin

g fo

r se

cond

men

t of

sta

ff

to D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

al

Hea

lth

Offi

ce.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e M

unic

ipal

ity h

as in

pla

ce

or fo

rmal

ly r

eque

sted

for

seco

ndm

ent

of s

taff

for

all

criti

cal p

ositi

ons.

App

licab

le t

o M

Cs

only

.

Max

imum

sco

re is

70

If t

he M

C h

as in

pla

ce o

r fo

rmal

ly r

eque

sted

for

seco

ndm

ent

of s

taff

:

h. M

edic

al O

ffice

r of

Hea

lth

Serv

ices

/Pr

inci

pal

Med

ical

Offi

cer,

scor

e 30

or

else

0.

i. Pr

inci

pal H

ealt

h In

spec

tor,

scor

e 20

or

else

0.

j. H

ealt

h Ed

ucat

or, s

core

20

or

else

0

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion,

obt

ain

and

revi

ew t

he

appo

intm

ent

lett

ers

of t

he D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

al

Hea

lth

Offi

ce s

taff

as

liste

d to

est

ablis

h th

at

they

are

sub

stan

tivel

y re

crui

ted.

In c

ase

the

posi

tions

are

not

fille

d, g

et

evid

ence

from

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion

that

the

LG

re

ques

ted

for

seco

ndm

ent

for

dist

rict

s fr

om t

he M

inis

try

of H

ealt

h (M

oH)

and

Mun

icip

aliti

es fr

om t

he D

istr

ict

•A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

•C

opy

of le

tter

fr

om L

G t

o M

oH

requ

estin

g fo

r se

cond

men

t of

sta

ff

to D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

al

Hea

lth

Offi

ce.

B)

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al

Requ

irem

ents

Max

imum

sc

ore

is 3

0

2.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

prio

r to

co

mm

ence

men

t of

all

civi

l wor

ks fo

r al

l Hea

lth

sect

or p

roje

cts,

the

LG

has

ca

rrie

d ou

t: E

nvir

onm

enta

l, So

cial

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

scre

enin

g/En

viro

nmen

t So

cial

Impa

ct A

sses

smen

ts

(ESI

As)

If t

he L

G c

arri

ed o

ut:

a.E

nvir

onm

enta

l, So

cial

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

scre

enin

g/En

viro

nmen

t, s

core

15

or e

lse

0.

b.S

ocia

l Im

pact

Ass

essm

ents

(ES

IAs)

, sc

ore

15 o

r el

se

0.

From

the

LG

Env

iron

men

t offi

cer

and

CD

O,

obta

in t

he

Envi

ronm

enta

l and

Soc

ial S

cree

ning

(E&

S)

Form

for

all H

ealt

h pr

ojec

ts fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

, to

ver

ify

whe

ther

:

•E&

S w

as c

ompl

eted

and

, whe

ther

ESI

As/

ESM

Ps w

ere

prep

ared

and

cos

ted

and

impl

emen

ted/

follo

wed

up.

•Fi

lled

in

envi

ronm

enta

l and

So

cial

scr

eeni

ng

Form

s•

ESIA

s re

port

s

42LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

10.2

H

ealt

h Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

res

Gui

danc

e on

Sam

plin

g of

site

s fo

r in

dic

ator

s w

here

site

vis

its

are

requ

ired

: Sam

ple

3 he

alt

h fa

cilit

ies

or a

ll w

here

the

y ar

e le

ss t

han

3. P

refe

rabl

y us

e th

e sa

me

site

s sa

mpl

ed w

here

fiel

d ve

rific

atio

n is

re

quir

ed t

hrou

ghou

t th

e a

sses

smen

t fo

r a

giv

en L

G, t

o m

inim

ize

on t

rans

port

log

isti

cal r

equi

rem

ents

and

for

effec

tive

use

of

tim

e.

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

A.

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent

Serv

ice

Del

iver

y Re

sult

s

Max

imum

sco

re:

18 fo

r th

is p

erfo

rman

ce

area

1.O

utco

me:

The

LG

has

reg

iste

red

high

er

perc

enta

ge o

f th

e po

pula

tion

acce

ssin

g he

alth

car

e se

rvic

es.

Max

imum

2 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

If t

he L

G r

egis

tere

d In

crea

sed

utili

zatio

n of

Hea

lth

Car

e Se

rvic

es

(foc

us o

n to

tal O

PD a

tten

danc

e,

and

deliv

erie

s.•

By 2

0%

or

mor

e, s

core

2•

Less

tha

n 20

%, s

core

0

From

the

Bio

stat

istic

ian,

sam

ple

3 H

ealt

h U

nit

Ann

ual R

epor

ts (

HM

IS 1

07)

an

d co

mpa

re O

PD a

tten

danc

e an

d de

liver

ies

in F

Y un

der

asse

ssm

ent

wit

h th

e FY

bef

ore.

Hea

lth

Uni

t A

nnua

l Rep

orts

(H

MIS

10

7) a

t th

e D

istr

ict

2.Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Perf

orm

ance

: Ave

rage

sc

ore

in t

he H

ealt

h LL

G p

erfo

rman

ce

asse

ssm

ent.

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

Not

e: T

o ha

ve z

ero

wai

t fo

r ye

ar o

ne.

a.

If t

he a

vera

ge s

core

in H

ealt

h fo

r LL

G

perf

orm

ance

ass

essm

ent

is:

•A

bove

70

%; s

core

2•

50 –

69%

sco

re 1

•Be

low

50

%; s

core

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r ob

tain

the

LLG

pe

rfor

man

ce r

epor

t an

d ca

lcul

ate

the

aver

age

scor

e of

heal

th fo

r LL

G p

erfo

rman

ce a

sses

smen

t

Not

e: T

o be

sco

red

Zero

for

all

LGs

in

Y1 &

Y2

Repo

rt o

n LL

G a

nnua

l pe

rfor

man

ce a

sses

smen

t

b.

If t

he a

vera

ge s

core

in t

he R

BF

quar

terl

y qu

ality

faci

lity

asse

ssm

ent

for

HC

IIIs

and

IVs

is:

•A

bove

75%

; sco

re 2

•65

– 7

4%; s

core

1•

Belo

w 6

5%10

; sco

re 0

From

the

DH

O o

btai

n an

d re

view

RBF

Fa

cilit

y as

sess

men

t re

cord

s to

est

ablis

h th

e av

erag

e sc

ore

atta

ined

by

HC

IIIs

an

d H

C IV

s in

a L

G p

artic

ipat

ing

in R

BF

Dis

tric

t Re

port

s on

RBF

Fac

ility

A

sses

smen

t fo

r th

e la

st q

uart

er o

f th

e Fi

nanc

ial Y

ear.

3.In

vest

men

t pe

rfor

man

ce: T

he L

G

has

man

aged

hea

lth

proj

ects

as

per

guid

elin

es.

Max

imum

8 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

If t

he L

G b

udge

ted

and

spen

t al

l th

e he

alth

dev

elop

men

t gr

ant

for

the

prev

ious

FY

on e

ligib

le a

ctiv

ities

as

per

the

hea

lth

gran

t an

d bu

dget

gu

idel

ines

, sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

.

From

the

Pla

nner

, obt

ain

and

revi

ew

the

budg

et p

erfo

rman

ce r

epor

t fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y to

est

ablis

h w

heth

er t

he

heal

th d

evel

opm

ent

gran

t w

as u

sed

on

elig

ible

act

iviti

es.

•A

nnua

l Bud

get

Perf

orm

ance

Re

port

for

the

prev

ious

FY.

•LG

hea

lth

gran

t an

d bu

dget

gu

idel

ines

for

the

prev

ious

FY

b.

If t

he D

HO

/MM

OH

, LG

Eng

inee

r, En

viro

nmen

t O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

ce

rtifi

ed w

orks

on

heal

th p

roje

cts

befo

re t

he L

G m

ade

paym

ents

to

the

cont

ract

ors/

sup

plie

rs s

core

2 o

r el

se

scor

e 0

From

the

Chi

ef F

inan

ce O

ffice

r ob

tain

an

d re

view

pay

men

t vo

uche

rs fo

r al

l he

alth

pro

ject

con

trac

ts fo

r th

e pr

evio

us

FY, t

o es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

cer

tifica

tion

of w

orks

was

don

e be

fore

the

LG

mad

e pa

ymen

ts t

o th

e su

pplie

rs

•Pa

ymen

t vo

uche

rs fo

r al

l co

ntra

ctor

s/ s

uppl

iers

10

Min

imum

Sco

re fo

r fa

cilit

ies

to q

ualif

y fo

r RB

F is

65%

thu

s sh

ould

not

go

belo

w.

43LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

c.

If t

he v

aria

tions

in t

he c

ontr

act

pric

e of

sam

pled

hea

lth

infr

astr

uctu

re in

vest

men

ts a

re

wit

hin

+/-

20%

of

the

MoW

T En

gine

ers

estim

ates

, sco

re 2

or

else

sc

ore

0

•Fr

om t

he L

G E

ngin

eer,

obta

in

and

sam

ple

3 (o

r al

l if

less

tha

n 3)

wor

ks/s

uppl

ier

cont

ract

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y an

d ca

lcul

ate

the

vari

atio

ns in

the

con

trac

t pr

ice

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er t

hey

are

wit

hin

+/-

20%

of

the

MoW

T En

gine

ers

estim

ates

•M

oWT

Engi

neer

s Es

timat

es•

Sam

ple

wor

ks/s

uppl

ier

cont

ract

s fo

r H

ealt

h in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s fo

r th

e la

st F

Y

d.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e he

alth

sec

tor

inve

stm

ent

proj

ects

impl

emen

ted

in

the

prev

ious

FY

wer

e co

mpl

eted

as

per

wor

k pl

an b

y en

d of

the

FY

•If

10

0 %

Sco

re 2

•Be

twee

n 80

and

99%

sco

re 1

•le

ss t

han

80 %

: Sco

re 0

From

the

LG

Eng

inee

r ob

tain

: (i)

the

w

orks

con

trac

ts; a

nd (

ii) t

he A

nnua

l bud

-ge

t pe

rfor

man

ce r

epor

t fo

r the

pre

viou

s FY

, to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er h

ealt

h pr

ojec

ts

whe

re c

ontr

acts

wer

e si

gned

wer

e co

m-

plet

ed.

•W

orks

con

trac

ts fo

r he

alth

pr

ojec

ts fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y•

4.Ac

hiev

emen

t of

Sta

ndar

ds:

The

LG

has

met

he

alth

sta

ffing

and

infr

astr

uctu

re fa

cilit

y st

anda

rds

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

rec

ruite

d st

aff fo

r al

l HC

IIIs

and

HC

IVs

as p

er

staffi

ng s

truc

ture

•

If a

bove

90

% s

core

2•

If 7

5% -

90

%: s

core

1•

Belo

w 7

5 %

: sco

re 0

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

•Th

e st

affing

str

uctu

re fo

r H

CIII

s an

d H

CIV

s •

The

LG H

ealt

h w

age

•Th

e st

aff li

st/H

uman

Res

ourc

e In

form

atio

n Sy

stem

rep

ort/

D

atab

ase

•Pa

yrol

l

Cal

cula

te t

he %

age

of h

ealt

h fa

cilit

y w

orke

rs p

ositi

ons

tha

t ar

e fil

led

•St

aff s

truc

ture

•St

aff L

ist/

/ H

uman

Res

ourc

e In

form

atio

n Sy

stem

rep

ort/

D

atab

ase

•A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

from

Re

cord

s/Re

gist

ry•

Bud

get

of t

he c

urre

nt F

Y sh

owin

g th

e W

age

bill

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

hea

lth

infr

astr

uctu

re c

onst

ruct

ion

proj

ects

m

eet

the

appr

oved

MoH

Fac

ility

In

fras

truc

ture

Des

igns

.•

If 1

00

% s

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

LG

Eng

inee

r ob

tain

:

•Th

e in

vent

ory

of e

xist

ing

and

new

ly

cons

truc

ted

heal

th fa

cilit

ies.

•Fo

r al

l hea

lth

faci

litie

s an

d ch

eck

whe

ther

the

y co

nfor

m t

o th

e ap

prov

ed d

esig

ns.

•M

oH H

ealt

h fa

cilit

y in

fras

truc

ture

des

igns

•

Inve

ntor

y of

exi

stin

g an

d ne

wly

co

nstr

ucte

d he

alth

faci

litie

s

B.

Perf

orm

ance

Re

port

ing

and

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t

Max

imum

sco

re 1

8 fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

5.Ac

cura

cy o

f Re

port

ed In

form

atio

n: T

he

LG m

aint

ains

and

rep

orts

acc

urat

e in

form

atio

n

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t in

form

atio

n on

po

sitio

ns o

f he

alth

wor

kers

fille

d is

ac

cura

te: S

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Offi

ce

•O

btai

n th

e st

aff li

st fo

r cu

rren

t FY

.•

Sam

ple

3 he

alth

faci

litie

s fr

om

the

staff

list

for

the

curr

ent

FY t

o es

tabl

ish

that

the

hea

lth

wor

kers

ar

e in

pla

ce a

s in

dica

ted

in t

he

staff

list

.

•H

ealt

h fa

cilit

y st

aff li

st fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

•C

urre

nt F

Y Re

port

on

faci

lity

staffi

ng L

evel

s.

44LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t in

form

atio

n on

hea

lth

faci

litie

s up

grad

ed o

r co

nstr

ucte

d an

d fu

nctio

nal i

s ac

cura

te: S

core

2

or e

lse

0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n:

•Th

e lis

t of

upg

rade

d or

co

nstr

ucte

d he

alth

faci

litie

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y. E

stab

lish

whe

ther

in

form

atio

n su

bmit

ted

in t

he

PBS

on c

onst

ruct

ion

stat

us a

nd

func

tiona

lity

is a

ccur

ate.

•Li

st o

f up

grad

ed o

r co

nstr

ucte

d he

alth

faci

litie

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y.

•A

nnua

l PB

S Re

port

for

prev

ious

FY.

6.H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

y C

ompl

ianc

e to

the

Bud

get

and

Gra

nt G

uide

lines

, Res

ult

Base

d Fi

nanc

ing

and

Perf

orm

ance

Impr

ovem

ent:

LG

has

enf

orce

d H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

y C

ompl

ianc

e, R

esul

t Ba

sed

Fina

ncin

g an

d im

plem

ente

d Pe

rfor

man

ce Im

prov

emen

t su

ppor

t.

Max

imum

14

poin

ts o

n th

is p

erfo

rman

ce

mea

sure

a)

Hea

lth

faci

litie

s pr

epar

ed a

nd

subm

itte

d A

nnua

l Wor

k pl

ans

&

budg

ets

to t

he D

HO

/MM

OH

by

Mar

ch 3

1st

of t

he p

revi

ous

FY a

s pe

r th

e LG

Pla

nnin

g G

uide

lines

for

Hea

lth

Sect

or:

•Sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n co

pies

of

Hea

lth

faci

lity

Ann

ual W

ork

plan

s &

Bud

-ge

ts fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y.

•Sa

mpl

e su

bmis

sion

s of

3 fa

cilit

ies

and

chec

k w

heth

er t

heir

bud

gets

co

nfor

m t

o th

e pr

escr

ibed

form

ats

•H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

y an

nual

wor

k pl

an a

nd b

udge

t fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y•

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent

Plan

ning

G

uide

lines

for

the

Hea

lth

Sect

or.

b)

Hea

lth

faci

litie

s pr

epar

ed a

nd

subm

itte

d to

the

DH

O/M

MO

H

Ann

ual B

udge

t Pe

rfor

man

ce

Repo

rts

for

the

prev

ious

FY

by J

uly

15th

of

the

prev

ious

FY

as p

er t

he

Bud

get

and

Gra

nt G

uide

lines

11:

•Sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n co

pies

of

Hea

lth

faci

lity

Ann

ual B

udge

t Pe

rfor

-m

ance

Rep

orts

for

the

prev

ious

FY.

Sam

ple

subm

issi

ons

of 3

faci

litie

s an

d ch

eck

whe

ther

the

ir A

nnua

l Bud

get

Perf

orm

ance

Rep

orts

con

form

to

the

Bud

get

and

Gra

nt G

uide

lines

.

•H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

y A

nnua

l Bud

get

Perf

orm

ance

Rep

ort

for

the

prev

ious

FY

c)

Hea

lth

faci

litie

s ha

ve d

evel

oped

an

d re

port

ed o

n im

plem

enta

tion

of fa

cilit

y im

prov

emen

t pl

ans

that

inco

rpor

ate

perf

orm

ance

is

sues

iden

tified

in m

onito

ring

and

as

sess

men

t re

port

s

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n co

pies

of

subm

issi

on o

f H

ealt

h fa

cilit

y im

prov

e-m

ent

plan

s fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

.

•Sa

mpl

e su

bmis

sion

s of

3

faci

litie

s an

d ch

eck

whe

ther

the

ir

impr

ovem

ent

plan

s in

corp

orat

e pe

rfor

man

ce is

sues

iden

tified

in

DH

MT

mon

itori

ng a

nd a

sses

smen

t re

port

s:

•H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

y im

prov

emen

t pl

ans

for

the

curr

ent

FY

•D

HM

T m

onito

ring

and

as

sess

men

t re

port

s

11

The

gui

delin

es p

resc

ribe

the

form

at to

incl

ude:

a) h

ighl

ight

s of

perf

orm

ance

, b) a

reco

ncile

d ca

sh fl

ow st

atem

ent,

c) a

n an

nual

exp

endi

tureand

bud

getrep

ort,d)anassetregisterand

f)th

erepo

rthasbee

nen

dorsed

byth

eincha

rgee

and

the

chai

r of t

he H

UM

C/Ho

spita

l Boa

rd

45LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

d)

Evid

ence

tha

t he

alth

faci

litie

s su

bmit

ted

up t

o da

te m

onth

ly a

nd

quar

terl

y H

MIS

rep

orts

tim

ely

(7

days

follo

win

g th

e en

d of

eac

h m

onth

and

qua

rter

) If

10

0%

, sco

re

2 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H c

heck

for

the

reco

rd o

f su

bmis

sion

s an

d es

tabl

ish

timel

ines

s of

mon

thly

and

qua

rter

ly

Repo

rts.

Sam

ple

subm

issi

ons

of 3

faci

litie

s an

d ch

eck

for

timel

ines

s of

all

mon

thly

(1

2) a

nd q

uart

erly

(4)

rep

orts

for

the

prev

ious

FY.

Hea

lth

Faci

lity

HM

IS R

epor

ts 1

04

and

105

for

the

prev

ious

FY.

e)

Evid

ence

tha

t H

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies

subm

itte

d RB

F in

voic

es t

imel

y (b

y 15

th o

f th

e m

onth

follo

win

g en

d of

th

e qu

arte

r). I

f 10

0%

, sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

Not

e: M

unic

ipa

litie

s su

bmit

to d

istr

icts

From

the

DH

O c

heck

for

the

reco

rd o

f su

bmis

sion

s an

d es

tabl

ish

timel

ines

s.

Sam

ple

subm

issi

ons

of 3

Hea

lth

faci

litie

s RB

F in

voic

es a

nd c

heck

for

timel

ines

s of

su

bmis

sion

for

the

prev

ious

qua

rter

.

Hea

lth

Faci

lity

reco

rd o

f su

bmis

sion

s of

RBF

invo

ices

f)If

the

LG

tim

ely

(by

end

of 3

rd

wee

k of

the

mon

th fo

llow

ing

end

of t

he q

uart

er)

veri

fied,

com

pile

d an

d su

bmit

ted

to M

OH

faci

lity

RBF

invo

ices

for

all R

BF H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

ies,

if

100

%, s

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

MoH

obt

ain

copy

of

DH

MT

subm

issi

ons

of fa

cilit

y RB

F in

voic

es, a

nd

chec

k su

bmis

sion

dat

es.

•D

HM

T su

bmis

sion

s of

faci

lity

RBF

invo

ices

to

MoH

g)

If t

he L

G t

imel

y (b

y en

d of

the

firs

t m

onth

of

the

follo

win

g qu

arte

r)

com

pile

d an

d su

bmit

ted

all

quar

terl

y (4

) B

udge

t Pe

rfor

man

ce

Repo

rts.

If 1

00

%, s

core

1 o

r el

se

scor

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t/M

unic

ipal

Pla

nner

ob

tain

cop

y of

Hea

lth

Dep

artm

ent

Subm

issi

ons

of Q

uart

erly

Bud

get

Perf

orm

ance

Rep

orts

for

the

prev

ious

FY

and

not

e th

e da

tes

of s

ubm

issi

on t

o Pl

anne

r fo

r C

onso

lidat

ion.

•LG

sub

mis

sion

s to

MoF

PED

•H

ealt

h D

epar

tmen

t qu

arte

rly

perf

orm

ance

rep

orts

h)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

:i.

Dev

elop

ed a

n ap

prov

ed

Perf

orm

ance

Impr

ovem

ent

Plan

for

the

wea

kest

per

form

ing

heal

th fa

cilit

ies,

sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

ii.

Impl

emen

ted

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t Pl

an fo

r w

eake

st

perf

orm

ing

faci

litie

s, s

core

1 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t H

ealt

h O

ffice

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

•(i

) th

e A

ppro

ved

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t Pl

an; a

nd (

ii)

PIP

impl

emen

tatio

n re

port

s to

es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

the

LG

dev

elop

ed

and

impl

emen

ted

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t Pl

an fo

r th

e lo

wes

t pe

rfor

min

g he

alth

faci

litie

s.

•A

ppro

ved

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t Pl

an.

•PI

P im

plem

enta

tion

repo

rts

46LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

C.

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

and

Dev

elop

men

t

Max

imum

sco

re 1

6 fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

7.B

udge

ting

for,

actu

al r

ecru

itmen

t an

d de

ploy

men

t of

sta

ff: T

he L

ocal

G

over

nmen

t ha

s bu

dget

ed fo

r, re

crui

ted

and

depl

oyed

sta

ff a

s pe

r gu

idel

ines

Max

imum

9 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

:i.

Bud

gete

d fo

r he

alth

wor

kers

as

per

gui

delin

es/i

n ac

cord

ance

wit

h th

e st

affing

nor

ms

scor

e 2

or e

lse

0ii.

Dep

loye

d he

alth

wor

kers

as

per

guid

elin

es (

all t

he h

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies

to

have

at

leas

t 75

% o

f st

aff r

equi

red)

in

acco

rdan

ce w

ith

the

staffi

ng n

orm

s sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

(i)

the

LG p

erfo

rman

ce c

ontr

act;

and

(i

i) s

taff

list

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er t

he

LG B

udge

ted

for

heal

th w

orke

rs a

s pe

r gu

idel

ines

and

dep

loye

d th

em a

s pe

r gu

idel

ines

•LG

Per

form

ance

con

trac

t•

App

rove

d st

ruct

ures

•de

ploy

men

t lis

t

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t he

alth

wor

kers

are

w

orki

ng in

hea

lth

faci

litie

s w

here

th

ey a

re d

eplo

yed,

sco

re 3

or

else

sc

ore

0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H, o

btai

n th

e he

alth

w

orke

rs d

eplo

ymen

t lis

t an

d sa

mpl

e 3

heal

th fa

cilit

ies.

At

each

of

thes

e 3

heal

th fa

cilit

ies,

rev

iew

:

•(i

)the

Hea

lth

wor

kers

’ sta

ff li

sts;

(ii)

fa

cilit

y at

tend

ance

boo

k/re

gist

er

(DH

MT

supe

rvis

ion/

mon

itori

ng

repo

rts;

Aut

omat

ed A

tten

danc

e A

naly

sis

(AA

A)

repo

rt t

o de

term

ine

that

hea

lth

wor

kers

are

wor

king

w

here

the

y ar

e de

ploy

ed.

•H

ealt

h w

orke

r’s

depl

oym

ent

list

for

the

curr

ent

FY

•W

ork

Atte

ndan

ce b

ooks

/re

gist

ers

•D

HM

T su

perv

isio

n/

mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts fo

r cu

rren

t FY

•A

utom

ated

Att

enda

nce

Ana

lysi

s (A

AA

) re

port

•H

RIS

Dat

abas

e

c)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

pub

liciz

ed

heal

th w

orke

rs d

eplo

ymen

t an

d di

ssem

inat

ed b

y, a

mon

g ot

hers

, po

stin

g on

faci

lity

notic

e bo

ards

, fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

sco

re 2

or

else

sc

ore

0

From

DH

O/M

MO

Hs:

•ob

tain

and

che

ck c

ircu

lar

on

depl

oym

ent

of h

ealt

h w

orke

rs t

o he

ath

faci

litie

s fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

Sam

ple

3 he

alth

faci

litie

s an

d ch

eck

whe

ther

list

of

heal

th w

orke

rs fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

dep

loye

d is

dis

play

ed o

n th

e he

alth

faci

litie

s no

tice

boar

ds

•H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

y no

tice

boar

ds•

Cir

cula

r fr

om D

HO

/MM

OH

to

heal

th fa

cilit

y in

-cha

rges

47LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

8.Pe

rfor

man

ce m

anag

emen

t: T

he L

G h

as

appr

aise

d, t

aken

cor

rect

ive

actio

n an

d tr

aine

d H

ealt

h W

orke

rs.

Max

imum

6 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

HO

/MM

OH

s ha

s:

i.C

ondu

cted

ann

ual

perf

orm

ance

app

rais

al o

f al

l Hea

lth

faci

lity

In-c

harg

es a

gain

st t

he a

gree

d pe

rfor

man

ce p

lans

and

sub

mit

ted

a co

py

to H

RO d

urin

g th

e pr

evio

us F

Y sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

ii.

Ensu

red

that

Hea

lth

Faci

lity

In-c

harg

es c

ondu

cted

per

form

ance

ap

prai

sal o

f al

l hea

lth

faci

lity

wor

kers

ag

ains

t th

e ag

reed

per

form

ance

pla

ns

and

subm

itte

d a

copy

thr

ough

DH

O/

MM

OH

to

HRO

dur

ing

the

prev

ious

FY

scor

e 1

or e

lse

0iii.

Take

n co

rrec

tive

actio

ns

base

d on

the

app

rais

al r

epor

ts, s

core

2

or e

lse

0

From

the

LG

HR

depa

rtm

ent,

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

•A

sam

ple

of 1

0 h

ealt

h pe

rson

al fi

les

for

heal

th w

orke

rs t

o de

term

ine

whe

ther

the

y w

ere

appr

aise

d du

ring

the

pre

viou

s FY

•C

heck

whe

ther

cor

rect

ive

actio

ns,

if an

y, w

ere

take

n ba

sed

on t

he

appr

aisa

l rep

orts

.

•Pe

rson

al fi

les

of h

ealt

h fa

cilit

y in

-cha

rges

and

sta

ff•

App

rais

al r

epor

ts o

f fa

cilit

y he

alth

wor

kers

by

in-c

harg

es

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

:i.

cond

ucte

d tr

aini

ng o

f he

alth

w

orke

rs (

Con

tinuo

us P

rofe

ssio

nal

Dev

elop

men

t) in

acc

orda

nce

to t

he

trai

ning

pla

ns a

t D

istr

ict/

MC

leve

l, sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

ii.

Doc

umen

ted

trai

ning

act

iviti

es

in t

he t

rain

ing/

CPD

dat

abas

e, s

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n an

d re

view

fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y:

•(i

) tr

aini

ng r

epor

ts; (

ii) t

rain

ing

data

base

to

esta

blis

h th

at t

rain

ing

activ

ities

wer

e co

nduc

ted

and

docu

men

ted

in t

he t

rain

ing

data

base

•Tr

aini

ng r

epor

ts•

Trai

ning

dat

abas

e/ C

PD

Dat

abas

e

•C

PD p

lans

D.

Man

agem

ent,

M

onito

ring

and

Su

perv

isio

n of

Se

rvic

es

Max

imum

sco

re 2

0 fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

9.Pl

anni

ng, b

udge

ting

, and

tra

nsfe

r of

fun

ds

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery:

The

Loc

al G

over

nmen

t ha

s bu

dget

ed, u

sed

and

diss

emin

ated

fu

nds

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery

as p

er g

uide

lines

.

Max

imum

9 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e C

AO/T

own

Cle

rk c

onfir

med

the

list

of

Hea

lth

faci

litie

s (G

oU a

nd P

NFP

rec

eivi

ng

PHC

NW

R gr

ants

) an

d n

otifi

ed t

he

MO

H in

wri

ting

by S

epte

mbe

r 30

th

if a

heal

th fa

cilit

y ha

d be

en li

sted

in

corr

ectly

or

mis

sed

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY, s

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

HRO

(Re

gist

ry)

obta

in a

cop

y of

the

lett

er n

otif

ying

MoH

of

the

list

of

faci

litie

s ac

cess

ing

the

PHC

NW

R G

rant

s fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

.

Obt

ain

and

revi

ew t

he B

udge

t an

d G

rant

G

uide

lines

for

the

curr

ent

FY:

•C

heck

whe

ther

the

list

of

heal

th

faci

litie

s (G

oU a

nd P

NFP

faci

litie

s re

ceiv

ing

PHC

NW

R gr

ants

) rh

ymes

wit

h th

e on

e th

e C

AO/T

C

subm

itte

d in

the

LG

Bud

get

for

the

curr

ent

FY.

•C

opy

of le

tter

from

the

CAO

/To

wn

Cle

rk n

otif

ying

the

MO

H

of s

tatu

s of

list

of

heal

th

faci

litie

s if

corr

ect

or w

rong

.

48LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

mad

e al

loca

tions

tow

ards

mon

itori

ng

serv

ice

deliv

ery

and

man

agem

ent

of D

istr

ict

heal

th s

ervi

ces

in li

ne w

ith

the

heal

th s

ecto

r gr

ant

guid

elin

es

(15%

of

the

PHC

NW

R G

rant

for

LLH

F al

loca

tion

mad

e fo

r D

HO

/MM

OH

),

scor

e 2

or e

lse

scor

e 0

.

From

the

Pla

nner

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

•A

nnua

l Bud

get

Perf

orm

ance

Rep

ort

for

the

prev

ious

FY

and

chec

k w

heth

er a

lloca

tions

for

man

agem

ent

of D

istr

ict/

Mun

icip

al h

ealt

h se

rvic

es

was

mad

e.

Ann

ual B

udge

t Pe

rfor

man

ce

Repo

rt fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y

c.

If t

he L

G m

ade

timel

y12 w

arra

ntin

g/ve

rific

atio

n of

dir

ect

gran

t tr

ansf

ers

to h

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies

for

the

last

FY,

in

acco

rdan

ce t

o th

e re

quir

emen

ts o

f th

e bu

dget

sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

CFO

/SFO

obt

ain

and

revi

ew

reco

rds

of w

hen

war

rant

ing/

veri

ficat

ion

was

don

e fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y re

leas

es o

f PH

C N

WR

gran

t to

faci

litie

s

Cop

ies

of w

arra

nts

subm

itte

d to

M

oFPE

D fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y

d.

If t

he L

G in

voic

ed a

nd c

omm

unic

ated

al

l PH

C N

WR

Gra

nt t

rans

fers

for

the

prev

ious

FY

to h

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies

wit

hin

5 w

orki

ng d

ays

from

the

day

of

fund

s re

leas

e in

eac

h qu

arte

r, sc

ore

2 or

el

se s

core

0

From

MoF

PED

obt

ain

and

revi

ew t

he

cost

cen

tre

list

& L

LG a

lloca

tion

rele

ase

brea

kdow

ns fo

r al

l the

4 q

uart

ers

of t

he

prev

ious

FY.

From

the

CAO

/Tow

n C

lerk

obt

ain

quar

terl

y co

rres

pond

ence

to

faci

litie

s on

PH

C N

WR

gran

t re

leas

es.

From

3 s

ampl

ed h

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies,

ob

tain

and

rev

iew

ban

k st

atem

ents

to

esta

blis

h th

e da

tes;

com

pare

wit

h th

e co

rres

pond

ence

from

CAO

/Tow

n C

lerk

:

•Es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

, for

eac

h qu

arte

r, th

e C

AO/T

own

Cle

rk in

voic

ed a

nd

com

mun

icat

ed r

elea

ses

to h

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies

wit

hin

5 w

orki

ng d

ays

from

th

e re

leas

e da

te.

•C

ost

cent

re li

st &

LLG

al

loca

tion

rele

ase

brea

kdow

ns

for

all t

he 4

qua

rter

s of

the

pr

evio

us F

Y•

CAO

/Tow

n C

lerk

qua

rter

ly

corr

espo

nden

ce t

o he

alth

fa

cilit

ies

on P

HC

NW

R gr

ant

rele

ases

•H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

y re

cord

s on

re

ceip

t of

PH

C N

WR

gran

t re

leas

es

e.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

pub

liciz

ed

all t

he q

uart

erly

fina

ncia

l rel

ease

s to

al

l hea

lth

faci

litie

s w

ithi

n 5

wor

king

da

ys fr

om t

he d

ate

of r

ecei

pt o

f th

e ex

pend

iture

lim

its

from

MoF

PED

- e.

g.

thro

ugh

post

ing

on p

ublic

not

ice

boar

ds: s

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

Che

ck t

he L

G N

otic

e Bo

ards

and

LG

w

ebsi

te.

•es

tabl

ish

if th

e LG

(C

AO/T

own

Cle

rk)

publ

iciz

ed a

ll he

alth

faci

litie

s re

ceiv

ing

non-

wag

e re

curr

ent

gran

ts

•LG

not

ice

boar

ds

•LG

web

site

12

Tim

ely

war

rant

ing

for

a LG

mea

ns: 5

wor

king

day

s fr

om t

he d

ate

of r

ecei

pt o

f re

leas

es fr

om M

oFPE

D.

49LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

10.

Rout

ine

over

sigh

t an

d m

onito

ring

: The

LG

m

onito

red,

pro

vide

d ha

nds

-on

supp

ort

supe

rvis

ion

to h

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies.

Max

imum

7 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

hea

lth

depa

rtm

ent

impl

emen

ted

actio

n(s)

re

com

men

ded

by t

he D

HM

T Q

uart

erly

pe

rfor

man

ce r

evie

w m

eetin

g (s

) he

ld

duri

ng t

he p

revi

ous

FY, s

core

2 o

r el

se

scor

e 0

From

the

DH

O o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

•M

inut

es o

f th

e D

HM

T qu

arte

rly

revi

ew m

eetin

gs•

Repo

rts

on im

plem

enta

tion

of

actio

ns a

risi

ng fr

om t

he q

uart

erly

re

view

mee

tings

.

•M

inut

es o

f Q

uart

erly

rev

iew

m

eetin

gs•

DH

O/M

MO

H q

uart

erly

im

plem

enta

tion

repo

rts

b.If

the

LG

qua

rter

ly p

erfo

rman

ce

revi

ew m

eetin

gs in

volv

e al

l hea

lth

faci

litie

s in

cha

rges

, im

plem

entin

g pa

rtne

rs, D

HM

Ts, k

ey L

G d

epar

tmen

ts

e.g.

WA

SH, C

omm

unity

Dev

elop

men

t,

Educ

atio

n de

part

men

t, s

core

1 o

r el

se 0

From

the

DH

O/

obta

in a

nd re

view

min

utes

of

th

e qu

arte

rly

DH

MT

perf

orm

ance

re

view

mee

tings

•Es

tabl

ish

atte

ndan

ce

•M

inut

es o

f D

HM

T qu

arte

rly

perf

orm

ance

rev

iew

mee

tings

c.I

f the

LG

sup

ervi

sed

100

% o

f HC

IVs

and

Gen

eral

hos

pita

ls (

incl

udin

g PN

FPs

rece

ivin

g PH

C g

rant

) at

leas

t on

ce

ever

y qu

arte

r in

the

pre

viou

s FY

(w

here

ap

plic

able

) : s

core

1 o

r el

se, s

core

0If

not

app

licab

le, p

rovi

de t

he s

core

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H:

•O

btai

n th

e LG

qu

arte

rly

supp

ort

supe

rvis

ion

repo

rts

• M

inut

es o

f D

HT/

MH

T m

eetin

gs

•LG

qua

rter

ly s

uppo

rt s

uper

visi

on

repo

rts

d.E

vide

nce

that

DH

T/M

HT

ensu

red

that

H

ealth

Sub

Dis

tric

ts (

HSD

s) c

arrie

d ou

t su

ppor

t sup

ervi

sion

of l

ower

leve

l hea

lth

faci

litie

s w

ithin

the

pre

viou

s FY

(w

here

ap

plic

able

), s

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0•

If n

ot a

pplic

able

, pro

vide

the

sco

re

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H s

ampl

e 3

faci

litie

s an

d re

view

(fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y):

•H

SD S

uppo

rt S

uper

visi

on a

nd

Mon

itori

ng v

isit

repo

rts

•Fe

edba

ck fr

om t

he L

G H

ealt

h de

part

men

t to

HSD

s.

•H

SD s

uper

visi

on a

nd m

onito

ring

re

port

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y•

Feed

back

from

LG

hea

lth

depa

rtm

ent

to H

SDs

duri

ng t

he

last

FY

e.E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

use

d re

sult

s/re

port

s fr

om d

iscu

ssio

n of

the

su

ppor

t su

perv

isio

n an

d m

onito

ring

vi

sits

, to

mak

e re

com

men

datio

ns fo

r sp

ecifi

c co

rrec

tive

actio

ns a

nd t

hat

impl

emen

tatio

n of

the

se w

ere

follo

wed

up

dur

ing

the

prev

ious

FY,

sco

re 1

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

sam

pled

3 h

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies,

de

term

ine

whe

ther

the

Hea

lth

depa

rtm

ent

prov

ided

rec

omm

enda

tions

fr

om t

he s

uper

visi

on v

isit

s an

d ev

iden

ce

that

the

ir im

plem

enta

tion

was

follo

wed

-up

•Fe

edba

ck fr

om t

he L

G H

ealt

h de

part

men

t to

faci

litie

s•

Hea

lth

faci

lity

activ

ity r

epor

ts•

Supe

rvis

ion

Book

f.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG p

rovi

ded

supp

ort

to a

ll he

alth

faci

litie

s in

the

m

anag

emen

t of

med

icin

es a

nd h

ealth

su

pplie

s, d

urin

g th

e pr

evio

us F

Y: s

core

1

or e

lse,

sco

re 0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n m

edic

ines

an

d H

ealt

h su

pplie

s m

anag

emen

t su

perv

isio

n re

port

s:

•C

heck

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er

guid

ance

was

giv

en t

o he

alth

fa

cilit

y in

-cha

rges

on

secu

re, s

afe

stor

age

and

disp

osal

of

med

icin

es

and

heal

th s

uppl

ies

•Fe

edba

ck t

o he

alth

faci

lity

in-c

harg

es o

n m

edic

ines

m

anag

emen

t su

perv

isio

n re

com

men

datio

ns

•su

ppor

t su

perv

isio

n re

port

s

50LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

11.

Hea

lth

prom

otio

n, d

isea

se p

reve

ntio

n an

d so

cia

l mob

iliza

tion

: The

LG

Hea

lth

depa

rtm

ent c

ondu

cted

Hea

lth p

rom

otio

n,

dise

ase

prev

entio

n an

d so

cial

mob

iliza

tion

activ

ities

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

If t

he L

G a

lloca

ted

at le

ast

30%

of

Dis

tric

t /

Mun

icip

al H

ealt

h O

ffice

bu

dget

to

heal

th p

rom

otio

n an

d pr

even

tion

activ

ities

, Sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

Pla

nner

obt

ain

and

revi

ew:

•th

e D

HO

/MM

OH

bud

get

for

the

prev

ious

FY

•th

e A

nnua

l Bud

get

perf

orm

ance

re

port

for

Hea

lth

for

the

prev

ious

FY

Esta

blis

h w

heth

er a

t le

ast

30%

of

the

budg

et w

as a

lloca

ted.

•LG

App

rove

d A

nnua

l Bud

get

for

the

prev

ious

FY

•LG

Ann

ual B

udge

t Pe

rfor

man

ce R

epor

t fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y

b.

Evid

ence

of

DH

T/M

HT

led

heal

th

prom

otio

n, d

isea

se p

reve

ntio

n an

d so

cial

mob

iliza

tion

activ

ities

as

per

ToRs

for

DH

Ts, d

urin

g th

e pr

evio

us

FY s

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H O

btai

n an

d re

view

:

•Q

uart

erly

Hea

lth

Prom

otio

n A

ctiv

ity r

epor

ts a

nd m

eetin

g m

inut

es t

o es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

the

D

HT/

MH

T im

plem

ente

d he

alth

pr

omot

ion,

dis

ease

pre

vent

ion

and

soci

al m

obili

zatio

n ac

tiviti

es in

the

pr

evio

us F

Y

•Q

uart

erly

pro

gres

s re

port

s•

Mee

ting

min

utes

c.

Evid

ence

of

follo

w-u

p ac

tions

ta

ken

by t

he D

HT/

MH

T on

hea

lth

prom

otio

n an

d di

seas

e pr

even

tion

issu

es in

the

ir m

inut

es a

nd r

epor

ts:

scor

e 1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H O

btai

n an

d re

view

:

•Q

uart

erly

pro

gres

s re

port

s, D

HT/

MH

T m

inut

es t

o ch

eck

whe

ther

fo

llow

-up

actio

ns w

ere

take

n on

th

e he

alth

pro

mot

ion,

dis

ease

pr

even

tion

and

soci

al m

obili

zatio

n as

pect

s.

•Q

uart

erly

pro

gres

s re

port

s•

Mee

ting

min

utes

E.

Inve

stm

ent

Man

agem

ent

Max

imum

sco

re 1

4 fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

12.

Plan

ning

and

Bud

geti

ng fo

r In

vest

men

ts:

The

LG h

as c

arri

ed o

ut P

lann

ing

and

Bud

getin

g fo

r he

alth

inve

stm

ents

as

per

guid

elin

es.

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

an

upda

ted

Ass

et r

egis

ter

whi

ch s

ets

out

heal

th fa

cilit

ies

and

equi

pmen

t re

lativ

e to

bas

ic s

tand

ards

: Sco

re 1

or

els

e 0

From

the

MoH

, obt

ain

the

stan

dard

lis

t of

med

ical

equ

ipm

ent

for

Hea

lth

Faci

litie

s an

d se

rvic

e st

anda

rds.

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n a

Hea

lth

Faci

litie

s A

sset

Reg

iste

r fo

r th

e pr

evio

us

FY:

•Re

view

and

com

pare

bot

h to

es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

the

Ass

et

regi

ster

det

ails

hea

lth

faci

litie

s an

d eq

uipm

ent

in t

he L

G, r

elat

ive

to t

he

med

ical

equ

ipm

ent

list

and

serv

ice

stan

dard

s.

•H

ealt

h Fa

cilit

ies

Ass

et

Regi

ster

•Se

rvic

e St

anda

rds

list

for

heal

th fa

cilit

ies

•M

edic

al E

quip

men

t Li

st

51LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e pr

iori

tize

d in

vest

men

ts in

the

hea

lth

sect

or fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y w

ere:

(i)

der

ived

fr

om t

he L

G D

evel

opm

ent

Plan

; (i

i) d

esk

appr

aisa

l by

the

LG; a

nd

(iii)

elig

ible

for

expe

nditu

re u

nder

se

ctor

gui

delin

es a

nd fu

ndin

g so

urce

(e.

g. s

ecto

r de

velo

pmen

t gr

ant,

Dis

cret

iona

ry D

evel

opm

ent

Equa

lizat

ion

Gra

nt (

DD

EG))

: sco

re 1

or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

Plan

ner,

obta

in a

nd re

view

m

inut

es o

f D

TPC

for

the

prev

ious

FY,

to

che

ck if

pri

oriti

zed

AWP

inve

st-

men

ts fo

r he

alth

:

•ar

e de

rive

d fr

om t

he L

ocal

G

over

nmen

t D

evel

opm

ent

Plan

•de

sk a

ppra

ised

by

DTP

C/M

TPC

•el

igib

le u

nder

sec

tor

or fu

ndin

g so

urce

gra

nt g

uide

lines

•Fi

ve-y

ear

deve

lopm

ent

plan

•M

inut

es fr

om T

PC

•AW

P

•Pr

ojec

t ap

prai

sal r

epor

ts

c.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

ha

s co

nduc

ted

field

App

rais

al t

o ch

eck

for:

(i)

tec

hnic

al fe

asib

ility

; (i

i) e

nvir

onm

ent

and

soci

al

acce

ptab

ility

; and

(iii

) cu

stom

ized

de

sign

s to

site

con

ditio

ns: s

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

Plan

ner

obta

in fi

eld

visi

t re

port

s an

d ch

eck

if pr

iori

tize

d AW

P in

vest

men

ts fo

r he

alth

:

•w

ere

field

app

rais

ed fo

r te

chni

cal

feas

ibili

ty, e

nviro

nmen

tal a

nd

soci

al a

ccep

tabi

lity

•ha

d th

eir

desig

ns c

usto

miz

ed to

su

it si

te c

ondi

tions

, whe

re a

p-pl

icab

le

•Pr

ojec

t fie

ld a

ppra

isal

re

port

s

•

d.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e he

alth

faci

lity

inve

stm

ents

wer

e sc

reen

ed fo

r en

viro

nmen

tal a

nd s

ocia

l ris

ks

and

miti

gatio

n m

easu

res

put

in

plac

e be

fore

bei

ng a

ppro

ved

for

cons

truc

tion

usin

g th

e ch

eckl

ist:

sc

ore

1 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r ob

tain

an

d re

view

:•

Fille

d sc

reen

ing

form

s to

asc

erta

in

whe

ther

scr

eeni

ng w

as d

one

and

ESIA

s/ES

MPs

pre

pare

d an

d co

sted

•

revi

ew s

ite v

isit

repo

rts

to c

heck

for

com

plia

nce

to t

he r

isk

miti

gatio

n pl

an

•Fi

lled

scre

enin

g fo

rms

•ES

IAs/

ESM

Ps•

Site

vis

it re

port

s

52LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

13.

Proc

urem

ent,

con

trac

t m

anag

emen

t/ex

ecut

ion:

The

LG

pro

cure

d an

d m

anag

ed

heal

th c

ontr

acts

as

per

guid

elin

es

Max

imum

10

poi

nts

on t

his

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

hea

lth

depa

rtm

ent

timel

y (b

y Ap

ril 3

0

for

the

curr

ent F

Y )

subm

itte

d al

l its

infr

astr

uctu

re a

nd o

ther

pr

ocur

emen

t re

ques

ts t

o PD

U fo

r in

corp

orat

ion

into

the

app

rove

d LG

ann

ual w

ork

plan

, bud

get

and

proc

urem

ent

plan

s: s

core

1 o

r el

se

scor

e 0

b.

If th

e LG

Hea

lth d

epar

tmen

t su

bmitt

ed p

rocu

rem

ent r

eque

st

form

(Fo

rm P

P5)

to t

he P

DU

by

1st

Qua

rter

of t

he c

urre

nt F

Y: s

core

1 o

r el

se, s

core

0

From

the

PD

U o

btai

n an

d re

view

•

Subm

issi

ons

to P

DU

.

From

PD

U c

ross

chec

k •

Subm

issi

on fr

om D

HO

/MM

OH

•Su

bmis

sion

lett

ers

to t

he

PDU

/mem

os•

AWP

for

the

sect

or fo

r cu

rren

t FY

. •

Subm

issi

on le

tter

s /

mem

os

of c

opy

of F

orm

PP5

to

PDU

.

c.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e he

alth

in

fras

truc

ture

inve

stm

ents

for

the

prev

ious

FY

was

app

rove

d by

the

C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee

and

clea

red

by t

he S

olic

itor

Gen

eral

(w

here

ab

ove

the

thre

shol

d), b

efor

e co

mm

ence

men

t of

con

stru

ctio

n:

scor

e 1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t U

nit

obta

in a

nd

revi

ew:

•M

inut

es o

f th

e C

ontr

acts

C

omm

itte

e to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

the

hea

lth

infr

astr

uctu

re

inve

stm

ents

wer

e ap

prov

ed.

•Le

tter

from

the

Sol

icito

r G

ener

al,

whe

re a

pplic

able

•C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee

min

utes

for

the

prev

ious

FY

•Le

tter

from

the

Sol

icito

r G

ener

al

d.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

pr

oper

ly e

stab

lishe

d a

Proj

ect

Impl

emen

tatio

n te

am fo

r al

l hea

lth

proj

ects

com

pose

d of

: (i)

13 :

sco

re 1

or

els

e sc

ore

0If

the

re is

no

proj

ect,

pro

vide

the

sc

ore

From

the

LG

Eng

inee

r ch

eck

the

proj

ect

files

for

the

prev

ious

FY

to e

stab

lish

whe

ther

the

Pro

ject

Impl

emen

tatio

n Te

am w

as a

ppro

pria

tely

est

ablis

hed

Cop

ies

of le

tter

s/m

emos

from

the

C

AO/T

C d

esig

natin

g m

embe

rs o

f th

e Pr

ojec

t Im

plem

enta

tion

Team

.

e.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e he

alth

in

fras

truc

ture

follo

wed

the

sta

ndar

d te

chni

cal d

esig

ns p

rovi

ded

by t

he

MoH

: sco

re 1

or

else

sco

re 0

If t

here

is n

o pr

ojec

t, p

rovi

de t

he s

core

From

the

MoH

obt

ain

the

stan

dard

te

chni

cal d

esig

ns is

sued

to

LGs.

•Sa

mpl

e 3

heal

th fa

cilit

ies,

ch

eck

and

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er:

Foun

datio

n, w

allin

g, r

oom

si

zes,

roo

f st

ruct

ure

etc.

. are

as

per

des

igns

(ac

cord

ing

to

the

appl

icab

le le

vel o

f th

e co

nstr

uctio

n)

•st

anda

rd t

echn

ical

des

igns

•Si

te v

isit

13

The

pro

ject

impl

emen

tatio

n te

am c

ompr

ises

of:

(i)

Con

trac

t M

anag

er; (

ii) P

roje

ct M

anag

er; (

iii)

cler

k of

wor

ks: (

iv)

Envi

ronm

ent

Offi

cer;

(v)

Com

mun

ity D

evel

opm

ent

Offi

cer

& L

abou

r O

ffice

r

53LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

f.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

Cle

rk o

f W

orks

m

aint

ains

dai

ly r

ecor

ds t

hat

are

cons

olid

ated

wee

kly

to t

he D

istr

ict

Engi

neer

in c

opy

to t

he D

HO

, for

ea

ch h

ealt

h in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

: sc

ore

1 or

els

e sc

ore

0

If t

here

is n

o pr

ojec

t, p

rovi

de t

he

scor

e

From

the

LG

Eng

inee

r ob

tain

a c

opy

of

the

repo

rts

from

the

Cle

rk o

f W

orks

:

•re

view

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er t

he

wee

kly

repo

rts

are

cons

olid

ated

fr

om t

he d

aily

site

rep

orts

•C

opy

of C

lerk

of

Wor

k’s

cons

olid

ated

site

rep

ort

g.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

hel

d m

onth

ly

site

mee

tings

by

proj

ect

site

co

mm

itte

e: c

hair

ed b

y th

e C

AO/

Tow

n C

lerk

and

com

pris

ed o

f th

e Su

b-c

ount

y C

hief

(SA

S),

the

desi

gnat

ed c

ontr

act

and

proj

ect

man

ager

s, c

hair

pers

on

of t

he H

UM

C,

in-c

harg

e fo

r be

nefic

iary

faci

lity

, the

Com

mun

ity

Dev

elop

men

t an

d En

viro

nmen

tal

office

rs: s

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

If t

here

is n

o pr

ojec

t, p

rovi

de t

he

scor

e

From

the

LG

Eng

inee

r ob

tain

and

rev

iew

m

inut

es o

f si

te m

eetin

gs:

•C

heck

whe

ther

the

y ar

e he

ld

mon

thly

as

per

guid

elin

es;

atte

ndan

ce t

o es

tabl

ish

if th

e lis

ted

stak

ehol

ders

par

ticip

ated

Min

utes

of

site

mee

tings

for

heal

th in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s im

plem

ente

d in

the

last

FY

h.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

car

ried

out

te

chni

cal s

uper

visi

on o

f w

orks

at

all h

ealt

h in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s at

leas

t m

onth

ly, b

y th

e re

leva

nt

office

rs in

clud

ing

the

Engi

neer

s,

Envi

ronm

ent

office

rs, C

DO

s, a

t cr

itica

l sta

ges

of c

onst

ruct

ion:

sco

re

1, o

r el

se s

core

0

If t

here

is n

o pr

ojec

t, p

rovi

de t

he

scor

e

Sam

ple

and

visi

t 3

heal

th in

fras

truc

ture

si

tes.

Obt

ain

a si

te in

stru

ctio

n bo

ok a

nd

site

vis

itor’

s bo

ok fr

om t

he s

ite F

orem

an/

cons

truc

tion

team

.

•Re

view

site

inst

ruct

ion

and

visi

tor’

s bo

oks

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er

LG t

eam

(s)

supe

rvis

ed a

t le

ast

mon

thly

.•

Revi

ew m

onth

ly m

onito

ring

and

su

perv

isio

n re

port

s to

asc

erta

in

whe

ther

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

par

ticip

ated

in t

echn

ical

si

te v

isit

s

•Si

te in

stru

ctio

n bo

ok

•Si

te v

isito

r’s

book

•M

onth

ly s

uper

visi

on a

nd

mon

itori

ng r

epor

t (i

nclu

ding

E

& S

asp

ects

)

i.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

DH

O/M

MO

H

veri

fied

wor

ks a

nd in

itiat

ed

paym

ents

of

cont

ract

ors

wit

hin

spec

ified

tim

efra

mes

(w

ithi

n 2

wee

ks o

r 10

wor

king

day

s), s

core

1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

CFO

obt

ain:

A s

ampl

e of

3 c

ontr

acts

, rev

iew

and

de

term

ine

whe

ther

pay

men

t re

ques

ts

wer

e ce

rtifi

ed a

nd r

ecom

men

ded

on

time

•Sa

mpl

e co

ntra

cts

•Pa

ymen

t re

ques

ts fr

om

cont

ract

ors/

supp

liers

54LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

j.Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as a

co

mpl

ete

proc

urem

ent

file

for

each

he

alth

infr

astr

uctu

re c

ontr

act

wit

h al

l rec

ords

as

requ

ired

by

the

PPD

A

Law

14 s

core

1 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

PD

U o

btai

n an

d re

view

pr

ocur

emen

t fil

es fo

r he

alth

in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us

FY t

o de

term

ine

whe

ther

the

y ar

e co

mpl

ete.

Proc

urem

ent

files

for

heal

th

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

F.

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al S

afeg

uard

s

Max

imum

sco

re 1

4 fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

14.

Gri

evan

ce r

edre

ss: T

he L

G h

as e

stab

lishe

d a

mec

hani

sm o

f ad

dres

sing

hea

lth

sect

or

grie

vanc

es in

line

wit

h th

e LG

gri

evan

ce

redr

ess

fram

ewor

k

Max

imum

2 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e Lo

cal

Gov

ernm

ent

has

reco

rded

, in

vest

igat

ed, r

espo

nded

and

re

port

ed in

line

wit

h th

e LG

gr

ieva

nce

redr

ess

fram

ewor

k sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

Des

igna

ted

Gri

evan

ce O

ffice

r ob

tain

the

log

of g

riev

ance

s an

d ch

eck

whe

ther

the

y w

ere

reco

rded

, in

vest

igat

ed, r

espo

nded

and

rep

orte

d

·Lo

g of

gri

evan

ces

15.

Safe

guar

ds

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery:

LG

Hea

lth

Dep

artm

ent

ensu

res

safe

guar

ds fo

r se

rvic

e de

liver

y

Max

imum

5 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

di

ssem

inat

ed g

uide

lines

on

heal

th

care

/ m

edic

al w

aste

man

agem

ent

to h

ealt

h fa

cilit

ies15

: sco

re 2

poi

nts

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

sam

pled

hea

lth

faci

litie

s, fi

nd

out

whe

ther

:

•LG

has

issu

ed g

uide

lines

on

med

ical

w

aste

man

agem

ent

incl

udin

g gu

idel

ines

on

cons

truc

tion

of

med

ical

was

te fa

cilit

ies,

whe

re

appl

icab

le.

•Ev

iden

ce t

hat

LGs

follo

w u

p on

the

im

plem

enta

tion

of t

he h

ealt

h ca

re

was

te m

anag

emen

t gu

idel

ines

by

HC

s

•G

uide

lines

on

med

ical

was

te

man

agem

ent

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

in

plac

e a

func

tiona

l sys

tem

for

Med

ical

was

te m

anag

emen

t or

cen

tral

infr

astr

uctu

res

for

man

agin

g m

edic

al w

aste

(ei

ther

an

inci

nera

tor

or R

egis

tere

d w

aste

m

anag

emen

t se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er):

sc

ore

2or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r:

•C

onfir

m w

heth

er t

here

is a

de

dica

ted/

oper

atio

nal b

udge

t fo

r he

alth

car

e w

aste

man

agem

ent

• C

heck

whe

ther

the

re is

a

regi

ster

ed s

ervi

ce p

rovi

der

enga

ged

for

colle

ctio

n, s

tora

ge,

tran

spor

tatio

n, d

ispo

sal/

trea

tmen

t of

hea

lth

care

was

te o

r w

heth

er t

he

LG h

as it

s ow

n fu

nctio

nal s

yste

m

for

Med

ical

was

te m

anag

emen

t

•LG

Ann

ual b

udge

t fo

r cu

rren

t ye

ar•

Cop

y of

con

trac

t w

ith

was

te m

anag

emen

t se

rvic

e pr

ovid

er

•LG

wit

h fu

nctio

nal/

equi

pped

sy

stem

for

heal

th c

are

was

te

man

agem

ent

c.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

con

duct

ed

trai

ning

(s)

and

cre

ated

aw

aren

ess

in h

ealt

hcar

e w

aste

man

agem

ent

scor

e 1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

DH

O/M

MO

H o

btai

n an

d re

view

tr

aini

ng r

epor

ts t

o es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

tr

aini

ng a

nd a

war

enes

s ra

isin

g on

was

te

man

agem

ent

was

don

e

•Tr

aini

ng r

ecor

ds o

n w

aste

m

anag

emen

t

14

A c

ompl

ete

proc

urem

ent

file

mus

t ha

ve t

he E

valu

atio

n Re

port

app

rove

d by

the

Con

trac

ts C

omm

itte

e, W

orks

Con

trac

t, a

nd m

inut

es o

f C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee

deci

sion

s15

M

edic

al w

aste

incl

udes

dom

estic

; non

-inf

ectio

us; i

nfec

tious

; hig

hly

infe

ctio

us; e

xpir

ed m

edic

ines

and

sup

plie

s

55LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

16.

Safe

guar

ds

in t

he D

eliv

ery

of In

vest

men

t M

anag

emen

t: L

G H

ealt

h in

fras

truc

ture

pr

ojec

ts in

corp

orat

e En

viro

nmen

t an

d So

cial

Saf

egua

rds

in t

he d

eliv

ery

of t

he

inve

stm

ents

Max

imum

8 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t a

cost

ed E

SMP

was

in

corp

orat

ed in

to d

esig

ns, B

oQs,

bi

ddin

g an

d co

ntra

ctua

l doc

umen

ts

for

heal

th in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s of

the

pre

viou

s FY

: sco

re 2

or

else

sc

ore

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

obt

ain

and

chec

k w

heth

er a

co

sted

ESM

P w

as in

corp

orat

ed in

to

desi

gns,

BoQ

s, b

iddi

ng a

nd c

ontr

actu

al

docu

men

ts fo

r he

alth

infr

astr

uctu

re,

inco

rpor

atin

g En

viro

nmen

t So

cial

Hea

lth

and

Safe

ty s

afeg

uard

s.

•C

ontr

act

docu

men

ts fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y•

Vari

atio

n or

ders

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t al

l hea

lth

sect

or

proj

ects

are

impl

emen

ted

on

land

whe

re t

he L

G h

as p

roof

of

owne

rshi

p, a

cces

s an

d av

aila

bilit

y (e

.g. a

land

titl

e, a

gree

men

t;

Form

al C

onse

nt, M

oUs,

etc

.),

wit

hout

any

enc

umbr

ance

s: s

core

2

or e

lse,

sco

re 0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

the

re is

doc

umen

tatio

n on

land

ac

quis

ition

sta

tus.

Doc

umen

t on

land

ow

ners

hip/

acce

ss w

hich

cou

ld b

e:

•a

land

titl

e,

•La

nd a

gree

men

t.

•Fo

rmal

Con

sent

,•

MoU

56LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

c.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

con

duct

ed

supp

ort

supe

rvis

ion

and

mon

itori

ng

of h

ealt

h pr

ojec

ts t

o as

cert

ain

com

plia

nce

wit

h ES

MPs

; and

pr

ovid

e m

onth

ly r

epor

ts: s

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0.

From

the

CD

O a

nd E

nviro

nmen

t O

ffice

r:

·C

heck

the

mon

thly

mon

itori

ng r

epor

t fr

om t

he t

ime

of c

ontr

act

awar

d til

l th

e en

d.·

Che

ck fo

r co

nsis

tent

mon

itori

ng a

nd

enga

gem

ent

thro

ugho

ut t

he c

ontr

act

perio

d.

·Ev

iden

ce d

urin

g si

te in

spec

tion.

·Ev

iden

ce o

n fo

llow

up

by L

Gs

on

reco

mm

ende

d co

rrec

tive

mea

sure

s

Site

vis

it to

3 s

ampl

ed fa

cilit

ies

and

chec

k m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s

Exam

ples

incl

ude

(a)

over

all s

ite

mai

nten

ance

, e.g

. wel

l-m

anag

ed w

orki

ng

area

s, o

ily w

aste

and

sol

id w

aste

pro

perl

y st

ored

for

dis

posa

l; (b

) al

l PPE

s ar

e in

us

e; a

nd (

c) t

ree

plan

ting

/ la

ndsc

apin

g be

ing

done

or

done

or

surv

ival

rat

e.

(d)

traffi

c co

ntro

l sig

ns /

site

sig

nage

’s;

(e)

sens

itiz

atio

n of

wor

kers

on

labo

r in

flux

rela

ted

soci

al is

sues

suc

h as

HIV

/AI

DS,

Gen

der

Base

d Vi

olen

ce (

GBV

),

and

Viol

ence

Aga

inst

Chi

ldre

n (V

AC),

in

clud

ing

Chi

ld L

abor

(f)

gui

danc

e is

sued

to

HC

s an

d fo

llow

up

mad

e on

hea

lth

care

/med

ical

was

te in

clud

ing

guid

elin

es

for

the

cons

truc

tion

of

med

ical

was

te

dis

posa

l fac

iliti

es, w

here

app

licab

le.

Thes

e m

itig

atio

n m

easu

res

may

per

tain

to

the

impl

emen

tati

on o

r op

erat

ion

&

mai

nten

ance

pha

se.

•Pe

rfor

man

ce E

&S

mon

thly

M

onito

ring

rep

orts

from

the

tim

e of

con

trac

t aw

ard

to

date

d.

Evid

ence

tha

t Env

ironm

ent a

nd S

ocia

l C

ertifi

catio

n fo

rms

wer

e co

mpl

eted

an

d si

gned

by

the

LG E

nviro

nmen

t O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

, prio

r to

pay

men

ts

of c

ontr

acto

r in

voic

es/c

ertifi

cate

s at

in

terim

and

fina

l sta

ges

of a

ll he

alth

in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s sc

ore

2 or

els

e sc

ore

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r &

CD

O

obta

in a

nd c

heck

all

the

cont

ract

or

paym

ent

cert

ifica

tes

for

thei

r pr

ior

Envi

ronm

enta

l and

CD

O a

dvic

e.

Con

trac

tor

paym

ent

cert

ifica

tes

57LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

11 W

ater

and

Env

iron

men

t Pe

rfor

man

ce A

sses

smen

t

11.1

Wat

er a

nd E

nvir

onm

ent

Min

imum

Con

diti

ons

Perf

orm

ance

A

rea

No.

Min

imum

Con

diti

onSc

orin

g G

uide

Ass

essm

ent

Proc

edur

eM

eans

of

Veri

ficat

ion

A)

Hum

an

Reso

urce

M

anag

emen

t an

d D

evel

opm

ent

Max

imum

sco

re

is 7

0

1Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as r

ecru

ited

or

form

ally

req

uest

ed fo

r se

cond

men

t of

st

aff fo

r al

l cri

tical

pos

ition

s.

If t

he L

G h

as r

ecru

ited:

a.1

Civ

il En

gine

er (

Wat

er),

sco

re 1

5 or

els

e 0

.b.1

Ass

ista

nt W

ater

Offi

cer

for

mob

iliza

tion,

sco

re 1

0 o

r el

se 0

.c.1

Bor

ehol

e M

aint

enan

ce

Tech

nici

an/A

ssis

tant

Eng

inee

ring

O

ffice

r, sc

ore

10 o

r el

se 0

.d.1

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es O

ffice

r, sc

ore

15 o

r el

se 0

.e.1

Env

ironm

ent

Offi

cer,

scor

e 10

or

else

0.

f.Fo

rest

ry O

ffice

r, sc

ore

10 o

r el

se 0

.

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion,

obt

ain

the

appo

intm

ent

lett

ers

of t

he D

istr

ict

Wat

er O

ffice

st

aff a

s lis

ted

to e

stab

lish

that

the

y ar

e su

bsta

ntiv

ely

recr

uite

d.

In c

ase

the

posi

tions

are

not

fille

d, g

et

evid

ence

from

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion,

tha

t th

e LG

req

uest

ed fo

r se

cond

men

t fr

om t

he

Min

istr

y of

Wat

er a

nd E

nvir

onm

ent

(MW

E)

• A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

• C

opy

of le

tter

fr

om L

G t

o M

WE

requ

estin

g fo

r se

cond

men

t of

sta

ff

to D

istr

ict

Wat

er

Offi

ce

B)

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al

Requ

irem

ents

Max

imum

sco

re

is 3

0

2Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as c

arri

ed o

ut

Envi

ronm

enta

l. So

cial

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

scre

enin

g/En

viro

nmen

t an

d So

cial

Impa

ct A

sses

smen

t (E

SIA

s)

(inc

ludi

ng c

hild

pro

tect

ion

plan

s)

whe

re a

pplic

able

, and

abs

trac

tion

perm

its

have

bee

n is

sued

to

cont

ract

ors

by t

he D

irec

tora

te o

f W

ater

Re

sour

ces

Man

agem

ent

(DW

RM)

prio

r to

com

men

cem

ent

of a

ll ci

vil w

orks

on

all w

ater

sec

tor

proj

ects

If t

he L

G:

a.

Car

ried

out

Env

iron

men

tal,

Soci

al a

nd C

limat

e C

hang

e sc

reen

ing/

Envi

ronm

ent,

sco

re

10 o

r el

se 0

.b.

Car

ried

out

Soc

ial I

mpa

ct

Ass

essm

ents

(ES

IAs)

, sc

ore

10

or e

lse

0.

c.

Ensu

red

that

con

trac

tors

got

ab

stra

ctio

n pe

rmit

s is

sued

by

DW

RM, s

core

10

or

else

0.

From

the

LG

Env

ironm

ent O

ffice

r, ob

tain

the

En

viro

nmen

tal a

nd S

ocia

l Scr

eeni

ng F

orm

(or

w

here

app

licab

le E

SIAs

repo

rts)

for

all w

ater

in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y, to

ve

rify

whe

ther

:

·E&

S sc

reen

ing

was

com

plet

ed a

nd, w

here

m

itiga

tions

mea

sure

s w

ere

asse

ssed

, the

ris

k m

itiga

tion

plan

s w

ere

deve

lope

d an

d im

plem

ente

d/fo

llow

ed u

p.

From

the

DW

O c

heck

for

copi

es o

f abs

trac

tion

perm

its

• Fi

lled

Envi

ronm

enta

l an

d So

cial

Sc

reen

ing

Form

• ES

IAs

repo

rts

• A

bstr

actio

n pe

rmit

s

58LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

11.2

W

ater

and

Env

iron

men

t Pe

rfor

man

ce M

easu

res

N.B

: For

all

indi

cato

rs w

here

sam

plin

g of

faci

litie

s an

d re

cord

s is

to

be d

one,

ass

essm

ent

team

s sh

ould

use

a s

ampl

e of

3 u

nits

in d

iffer

ent

sub

-co

untie

s Pe

rfor

man

ce

area

No

Perf

orm

ance

M

easu

reSc

orin

g G

uide

Asse

ssm

ent p

roce

dure

sM

eans

of

veri

ficat

ion

A)

Loca

l G

over

nmen

t Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Resu

lts

Max

imum

sco

re:

20 p

oint

s fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

1W

ater

& E

nvir

onm

ent

Out

com

es: T

he L

G

has

regi

ster

ed h

igh

func

tiona

lity

of w

ater

so

urce

s an

d m

anag

emen

t co

mm

itte

es

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a.

% o

f ru

ral w

ater

sou

rces

tha

t ar

e fu

nctio

nal.

If t

he d

istr

ict

rura

l wat

er s

ourc

e fu

nctio

nalit

y as

pe

r th

e se

ctor

MIS

is:

o

90 -

10

0%

: sco

re 2

o

80-8

9%: s

core

1o

Belo

w 8

0%

: 0

From

the

Min

istr

y M

IS fo

r cu

rren

t FY

:

• C

heck

dat

a on

func

tiona

lity

of t

he

dist

rict

rur

al w

ater

sou

rces

• M

inis

try

MIS

b.

% o

f fa

cilit

ies

wit

h fu

nctio

nal w

ater

& s

anita

tion

com

mit

tees

(do

cum

ente

d w

ater

use

r fe

e co

llect

ion

reco

rds

and

utili

zatio

n w

ith

the

appr

oval

of

the

WSC

s).

If t

he d

istr

ict

WSS

faci

litie

s th

at h

ave

func

tiona

l WSC

s is

:o

90 -

10

0%

: sco

re 2

o

80-8

9%: s

core

1o

Belo

w 8

0%

: 0

From

the

Min

istr

y M

IS fo

r cu

rren

t FY

:

• C

heck

dat

a on

faci

litie

s w

ith

func

tiona

l wat

er a

nd s

anita

tion

com

mit

tees

• M

inis

try

MIS

2Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Perf

orm

ance

:

Aver

age

scor

e in

the

w

ater

and

env

iron

men

t LL

Gs

perf

orm

ance

as

sess

men

t

Max

imum

8 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a.

The

LG a

vera

ge s

core

in t

he w

ater

and

en

viro

nmen

t LL

Gs

perf

orm

ance

ass

essm

ent

for

the

curr

ent.

FY.

If L

G a

vera

ge s

core

s is

a.

Abo

ve 8

0%

sco

re 2

b.

60

-80

%: 1

c.

Belo

w 6

0: 0

(Onl

y ap

plic

able

whe

n LL

G a

sses

smen

t st

arts

)

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

the

ver

ified

sub

-co

untie

s w

ater

and

env

iron

men

t pe

rfor

man

ce a

sses

smen

t re

sult

s ch

ange

• Ve

rifie

d su

b-

coun

ties

Perf

orm

ance

as

sess

men

t re

sult

s

b.

% o

f bud

gete

d w

ater

pro

ject

s im

plem

ente

d in

the

su

b-co

untie

s w

ith s

afe

wat

er c

over

age

belo

w t

he

dist

rict a

vera

ge in

the

pre

viou

s FY

.

o If

100

% o

f wat

er p

roje

cts

are

impl

emen

ted

in

the

targ

eted

S/C

s: S

core

2

o If

80-9

9%: S

core

1

o If

belo

w 8

0 %

: Sco

re 0

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

the

ann

ual p

rogr

ess

repo

rts

and

chec

k w

heth

er t

he d

istr

ict

wat

er d

epar

tmen

t im

plem

ente

d bu

dget

ed w

ater

pro

ject

s in

the

ta

rget

ed s

ub-c

ount

ies

with

saf

e w

ater

co

vera

ge b

elow

the

dis

tric

t ave

rage

in

the

prev

ious

FY

• B

udge

t fo

r pr

evio

us

FY

• M

OU

wit

h ot

her

DPs

/CSO

s•

Ann

ual p

rogr

ess

repo

rts

for

prev

ious

FY

59LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

c.

If v

aria

tions

in t

he c

ontr

act

pric

e of

sam

pled

WSS

in

fras

truc

ture

inve

stm

ents

for

the

prev

ious

FY

are

wit

hin

+/-

20

% o

f en

gine

er’s

est

imat

eso

If w

ithi

n +

/-20

% s

core

2o

If n

ot s

core

zer

o

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t U

nit:

• Re

view

the

ann

ual b

udge

t an

d a

sam

ple

of 3

WSS

con

trac

ts (

or a

ll if

less

tha

n 3)

for

prev

ious

FY

and

chec

k w

heth

er v

aria

tions

are

wit

hin

+/-

20%

of

eng

inee

r’s

estim

ates

• Sa

mpl

e co

ntra

cts

• AW

P/B

udge

t

d.

% o

f WSS

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

com

plet

ed a

s pe

r an

nual

wor

k pl

an b

y en

d of

FY.

o

If 10

0%

pro

ject

s co

mpl

eted

: sco

re 2

o

If 80

-99%

pro

ject

s co

mpl

eted

: sco

re 1

o

If pr

ojec

ts c

ompl

eted

are

bel

ow 8

0%

: 0

From

DW

O/M

WE:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

th

e an

nual

bu

dget

pe

rfor

man

ce

repo

rt

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er

WSS

in

fras

truc

ture

pr

ojec

ts

wer

e co

mpl

eted

wit

hin

the

plan

ned

FY

• AW

P•

Ann

ual b

udge

t pe

rfor

man

ce

repo

rt

3Ac

hiev

emen

t of

St

anda

rds:

The

LG h

as m

et W

SS

infr

astr

uctu

re fa

cilit

y st

anda

rds

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a.

If t

here

is a

n in

crea

se in

the

% o

f w

ater

sup

ply

faci

litie

s th

at a

re fu

nctio

ning

o

If t

here

is a

n in

crea

se :

scor

e 2

o

If n

o in

crea

se: s

core

0.

From

the

Min

istr

y M

IS:

• O

btai

n da

ta o

n fu

nctio

nalit

y of

wat

er

faci

litie

s fo

r pr

evio

us F

Y bu

t one

and

•

Com

pare

func

tiona

lity

of w

ater

faci

litie

s fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y•

Com

pute

the

per

cent

age

incr

ease

in

func

tiona

lity

of w

ater

sup

ply

faci

litie

s

• M

inis

try

MIS

b.

If t

here

is a

n In

crea

se in

% o

f fa

cilit

ies

wit

h fu

nctio

nal w

ater

& s

anita

tion

com

mit

tees

(w

ith

docu

men

ted

wat

er u

ser

fee

colle

ctio

n re

cord

s an

d ut

iliza

tion

wit

h th

e ap

prov

al o

f th

e W

SCs)

.o

If in

crea

se is

mor

e th

an 5

% s

core

2o

If in

crea

se is

bet

wee

n 0

-5%

, sco

re 1

o

If t

here

is n

o in

crea

se :

scor

e 0

.

From

the

Min

istr

y M

IS:

• O

btai

n da

ta o

n fu

nctio

nalit

y W

SCs

for

prev

ious

FY

but

one

and

com

pare

fu

nctio

nalit

y of

WSC

for

the

prev

ious

FY

• C

alcu

late

the

per

cent

age

incr

ease

on

func

tiona

lity

of W

SCs

• M

inis

try

MIS

B)

Perf

orm

ance

Re

port

ing

and

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t

Max

imum

sco

re:

10 p

oint

s fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

4Ac

cura

cy o

f Re

port

ed

Info

rmat

ion:

The

LG

ha

s ac

cura

tely

rep

orte

d on

con

stru

cted

WSS

in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s an

d se

rvic

e pe

rfor

man

ce

Max

imum

3 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

The

DW

O h

as a

ccur

atel

y re

port

ed o

n W

SS fa

cilit

ies

cons

truc

ted

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY a

nd p

erfo

rman

ce o

f th

e fa

cilit

ies

is a

s re

port

ed: S

core

: 3

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n th

e an

nual

per

form

ance

re

port

for

prev

ious

FY

and

chec

k lis

t of

con

stru

cted

WSS

faci

litie

s.

• Sa

mpl

e 3

WSS

faci

litie

s to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

WSS

faci

litie

s w

ere

cons

truc

ted

and

are

func

tiona

l as

repo

rted

• A

nnua

l Pe

rfor

man

ce

repo

rt•

Sam

ple

WSS

fa

cilit

ies

60LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

5Re

port

ing

and

perf

orm

ance

im

prov

emen

t: T

he L

G

com

pile

s, u

pdat

es W

SS

info

rmat

ion

and

supp

orts

LL

Gs

to im

prov

e th

eir

perf

orm

ance

Max

imum

7 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

Wat

er O

ffice

col

lect

s an

d co

mpi

les

quar

terl

y in

form

atio

n on

sub

-cou

nty

wat

er s

uppl

y an

d sa

nita

tion,

func

tiona

lity

of

faci

litie

s an

d W

SCs,

saf

e w

ater

col

lect

ion

and

stor

age

and

com

mun

ity in

volv

emen

t): S

core

2

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n qu

arte

rly

WSS

rep

orts

and

ch

eck

that

the

DW

O c

olle

cts

and

com

plie

s qu

arte

rly

info

rmat

ion

on s

ub-c

ount

y w

ater

sup

ply

and

sani

tatio

n, fu

nctio

nalit

y of

faci

litie

s an

d W

SCs,

saf

e w

ater

col

lect

ion

and

stor

age

hygi

ene,

and

com

mun

ity

invo

lvem

ent

• Q

uart

erly

re

port

s

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

Wat

er O

ffice

upd

ates

the

M

IS (

WSS

dat

a) q

uart

erly

wit

h w

ater

sup

ply

and

sani

tatio

n in

form

atio

n (n

ew fa

cilit

ies,

pop

ulat

ion

serv

ed, f

unct

iona

lity

of W

SCs

and

WSS

faci

litie

s,

etc.

) an

d us

es c

ompi

led

info

rmat

ion

for

plan

ning

pu

rpos

es: S

core

3 o

r el

se 0

From

the

DW

O M

IS C

heck

tha

t:

• D

ata

on n

ew fa

cilit

ies,

pop

ulat

ion

serv

ed, f

unct

iona

lity

of W

SCs

and

WSS

faci

litie

s, e

tc.)

is u

pdat

ed o

n qu

arte

rly

basi

s an

d us

ed fo

r pl

anni

ng

• D

WO

MIS

•

c.

Evid

ence

tha

t D

WO

has

sup

port

ed t

he 2

5%

low

est

perf

orm

ing

LLG

s in

the

pre

viou

s FY

LL

G a

sses

smen

t to

dev

elop

and

impl

emen

t pe

rfor

man

ce im

prov

emen

t pl

ans:

Sco

re 2

or

else

0

Not

e: O

nly

appl

icab

le f

rom

the

ass

essm

ent

whe

re

ther

e ha

s be

en a

pre

viou

s a

sses

smen

t of

the

LLG

s’

perf

orm

ance

. In

case

the

re is

no

prev

ious

ass

essm

ent

scor

e 0

.

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n th

e LL

G w

ater

and

env

ironm

ent

perf

orm

ance

ass

essm

ent

repo

rt a

nd

esta

blis

h th

e 25

% lo

wes

t pe

rfor

min

g LL

Gs

• O

btai

n co

pies

of P

IPs

and

repo

rts

for

the

25%

low

est

perf

orm

ing

LLG

s in

the

pr

evio

us F

Y PA

and

est

ablis

h w

heth

er

perf

orm

ance

impr

ovem

ent

plan

s w

ere

deve

lope

d an

d PI

act

ions

hav

e be

en

impl

emen

ted

in t

he c

urre

nt F

Y

• LL

G

Perf

orm

ance

as

sess

men

t re

port

• C

opie

s of

LLG

PI

Ps•

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t re

port

s

C)

Hum

an

Reso

urce

s M

anag

emen

t an

d D

evel

opm

ent

Max

imum

sco

re:

10 p

oint

s fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

6B

udge

ting

for

Wat

er

& S

anita

tion

and

En

viro

nmen

t &

Nat

ura

l Re

sour

ces:

The

Loc

al

Gov

ernm

ent

has

budg

eted

for

staff

Max

imum

4 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

WO

has

bud

gete

d fo

r th

e fo

llow

ing

Wat

er &

San

itatio

n st

aff: 1

Civ

il En

gine

er(W

ater

);

2 A

ssis

tant

Wat

er O

ffice

rs (

1 fo

r m

obili

zatio

n an

d 1

for

sani

tatio

n &

hyg

iene

);

1 En

gine

erin

g A

ssis

tant

(W

ater

) &

1 B

oreh

ole

Mai

nten

ance

Tec

hnic

ian:

Sco

re 2

From

the

LG

Per

form

ance

Con

trac

t:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

the

sta

ff li

sts

and

valid

ate

that

the

DW

O h

as b

udge

ted

for

the

criti

cal s

taff

in t

he D

istr

ict

Wat

er O

ffice

• Pe

rfor

man

ce

Con

trac

t•

Staff

list

s

61LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e En

viro

nmen

t an

d N

atur

al

Reso

urce

s O

ffice

r ha

s bu

dget

ed fo

r th

e fo

llow

ing

Envi

ronm

ent

& N

atur

al R

esou

rces

sta

ff: 1

Nat

ural

Re

sour

ces

Offi

cer;

1 E

nvir

onm

ent

Offi

cer;

1 F

ores

try

Offi

cer:

Sco

re 2

From

the

LG

Per

form

ance

Con

trac

t:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

the

sta

ff li

sts

and

valid

ate

that

the

Env

iron

men

t &

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es O

ffice

r ha

s bu

dget

ed fo

r cr

itica

l sta

ff in

the

N

atur

al R

esou

rces

dep

artm

ent

• Pe

rfor

man

ce

Con

trac

t•

Staff

list

s

7Pe

rfor

man

ce

Man

agem

ent:

The

LG

ap

prai

sed

staff

and

co

nduc

ted

trai

ning

s in

line

wit

h th

e di

stri

ct

trai

ning

pla

ns.

Max

imum

6 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

The

DW

O h

as a

ppra

ised

Dis

tric

t W

ater

Offi

ce s

taff

ag

ains

t th

e ag

reed

per

form

ance

pla

ns d

urin

g th

e pr

evio

us F

Y: S

core

3

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

per

sonn

el fi

les

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er D

istr

ict

Wat

er

Offi

ce s

taff

wer

e ap

prai

sed

duri

ng t

he

prev

ious

FY.

• St

aff

perf

orm

ance

pl

ans

• Pe

rson

nel fi

les

b.

The

Dis

tric

t W

ater

Offi

ce h

as id

entifi

ed c

apac

ity

need

s of

sta

ff fr

om t

he p

erfo

rman

ce a

ppra

isal

pr

oces

s an

d en

sure

d th

at t

rain

ing

activ

ities

hav

e be

en c

ondu

cted

in a

dher

ence

to

the

trai

ning

pla

ns

at d

istr

ict

leve

l and

doc

umen

ted

in t

he t

rain

ing

data

base

: Sc

ore

3

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion:

• O

btai

n C

NA

rep

orts

and

tra

inin

g re

port

s an

d ch

eck

that

the

DW

O

subm

itte

d st

aff c

apac

ity n

eeds

to

the

PHRO

and

DW

O s

taff

wer

e tr

aine

d as

pe

r di

stri

ct t

rain

ing

plan

s

• C

apac

ity N

eeds

A

sses

smen

t re

port

s•

Trai

ning

pla

ns•

Trai

ning

rep

orts

• D

istr

ict

trai

ning

da

taba

se

D)

Man

agem

ent,

M

onit

orin

g,

supe

rvis

ion

of

Serv

ices

Max

imum

sco

re:

20 p

oint

s fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

8Pl

anni

ng, B

udge

ting

an

d Tr

ansf

er o

f Fu

nds

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery:

The

Lo

cal G

over

nmen

t ha

s al

loca

ted

and

spen

t fu

nds

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery

as

pres

crib

ed in

the

sec

tor

guid

elin

es.

Max

imum

6 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

WO

has

pri

oriti

zed

budg

et

allo

catio

ns t

o su

b-c

ount

ies

that

hav

e sa

fe w

ater

co

vera

ge b

elow

tha

t of

the

dis

tric

t:

•If

10

0 %

of

the

budg

et a

lloca

tion

for

the

curr

ent

FY is

allo

cate

d to

S/C

s be

low

the

di

stri

ct a

vera

ge c

over

age:

Sco

re 3

•If

80

-99%

: Sco

re 2

•

If 6

0-7

9: S

core

1•

If b

elow

60

%: S

core

0

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n th

e di

stri

ct a

vera

ge s

afe

wat

er c

over

age

figur

es, A

WP

and

budg

et a

nd d

eter

min

e w

heth

er s

ub-

coun

ties

wit

h sa

fe w

ater

cov

erag

e be

low

the

dis

tric

t av

erag

e ha

ve b

een

prio

riti

zed

in t

he a

lloca

tion

of fu

nds

• Sa

fe w

ater

co

vera

ge d

ata

• AW

P fo

r cu

rren

t FY

• B

udge

t fo

r cu

rren

t FY

62LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

WO

com

mun

icat

ed t

o th

e LL

Gs

thei

r re

spec

tive

allo

catio

ns p

er s

ourc

e to

be

cons

truc

ted

in t

he c

urre

nt F

Y: S

core

3

From

the

Dis

tric

t W

ater

Offi

ce:

• O

btai

n th

e di

stri

ct Q

uart

erly

sof

twar

e re

port

and

che

ck t

hat

the

DW

O

cond

ucte

d su

b-c

ount

y ad

voca

cy

mee

tings

and

am

ong

othe

r as

pect

s in

form

ed L

LGs

abou

t th

eir

allo

catio

ns

per

sour

ce

•D

istr

ict

and

sub

-co

unty

not

ice

boar

ds•

Dis

tric

t qu

arte

rly

soft

war

e re

port

9Ro

utin

e O

vers

ight

and

M

onito

ring

: The

LG

has

m

onito

red

WSS

faci

litie

s an

d pr

ovid

ed fo

llow

up

supp

ort.

Max

imum

8 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e di

stri

ct W

ater

Offi

ce h

as

mon

itore

d ea

ch o

f W

SS fa

cilit

ies

at le

ast

quar

terl

y (k

ey a

reas

to

incl

ude

func

tiona

lity

of W

ater

sup

ply

and

publ

ic s

anita

tion

faci

litie

s, e

nvir

onm

ent,

and

so

cial

saf

egua

rds,

etc

.)•

If m

ore

than

95%

of

the

WSS

faci

litie

s m

onito

red

quar

terl

y: s

core

4•

If 8

0-9

9% o

f th

e W

SS fa

cilit

ies

mon

itore

d qu

arte

rly:

sco

re 2

• If

less

tha

n 80

% o

f th

e W

SS fa

cilit

ies

mon

itore

d qu

arte

rly

scor

e 0

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n th

e nu

mbe

r an

d lis

t of

wat

er

and

sani

tatio

n pr

ojec

ts in

a L

G

• Re

view

mon

itori

ng p

lans

• C

heck

the

mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts o

f ea

ch

proj

ect

and

esta

blis

h w

heth

er t

he

LG m

onito

red

the

proj

ects

(in

clud

ing

E&S

aspe

cts)

• N

ote

whe

ther

the

y fo

llow

ed u

p on

re

com

men

ded

corr

ecti

ve a

ctio

ns.

• Li

st o

f w

ater

an

d sa

nita

tion

proj

ects

• M

onito

ring

pla

ns

and

repo

rts

for

prev

ious

FY

as

per

stan

dard

fo

rmat

s.

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

WO

con

duct

ed q

uart

erly

D

WSC

C m

eetin

gs a

nd a

mon

g ot

her

agen

da it

ems,

ke

y is

sues

iden

tified

from

qua

rter

ly m

onito

ring

of

WSS

faci

litie

s w

ere

disc

usse

d an

d re

med

ial a

ctio

ns

inco

rpor

ated

in t

he c

urre

nt F

Y AW

P. S

core

2

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n th

e D

WSC

C m

inut

es, D

WO

pr

ogre

ss r

epor

ts a

nd c

heck

whe

ther

ke

y is

sues

from

qua

rter

ly m

onito

ring

of

WSS

faci

litie

s w

ere

disc

usse

d.

• D

WSC

C m

inut

es•

DW

O p

rogr

ess

repo

rts

• AW

P

c.

The

Dis

tric

t W

ater

Offi

cer

publ

iciz

es b

udge

t al

loca

tions

for

the

curr

ent

FY t

o LL

Gs

wit

h sa

fe

wat

er c

over

age

belo

w t

he L

G a

vera

ge t

o al

l sub

-co

untie

s: S

core

2

From

the

Dis

tric

t an

d su

b-c

ount

y no

tice

boar

ds:

• C

heck

tha

t al

loca

tions

for

the

curr

ent

FY t

o LL

Gs

wit

h sa

fe w

ater

co

vera

ge b

elow

the

LG

ave

rage

hav

e be

en d

ispl

ayed

at

notic

e bo

ards

or

web

site

s

• N

otic

e bo

ards

• W

ebsi

tes

63LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

10M

obili

zatio

n fo

r W

SS is

co

nduc

ted

Max

imum

6 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce

mea

sure

a.

For

prev

ious

FY,

the

DW

O a

lloca

ted

a m

inim

um o

f 40

% o

f th

e N

WR

rura

l wat

er a

nd s

anita

tion

budg

et

as p

er s

ecto

r gu

idel

ines

tow

ards

mob

iliza

tion

activ

ities

: •

If fu

nds

wer

e al

loca

ted

scor

e 3

•If

not

sco

re 0

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n th

e AW

P fo

r pr

evio

us F

Y an

d ch

eck

that

fund

s w

ere

allo

cate

d as

pe

r se

ctor

gui

delin

es t

o fa

cilit

ate

com

mun

ity m

obili

zatio

n ac

tiviti

es

• AW

P

b.

For

the

prev

ious

FY,

the

Dis

tric

t W

ater

Offi

cer

in

liais

on w

ith

the

Com

mun

ity D

evel

opm

ent

Offi

cer

trai

ned

WSC

s on

the

ir r

oles

on

O&

M o

f W

SS

faci

litie

s: S

core

3.

From

the

DW

O a

nd C

DO

:

Obt

ain

the

annu

al s

oftw

are

repo

rt fo

r pr

evio

us F

Y an

d ch

eck

that

:

• W

SCs

wer

e es

tabl

ishe

d an

d tr

aine

d on

the

ir r

oles

and

on

O&

M o

f W

SS

faci

litie

s•

Sam

ple

3 W

SCs

to c

heck

on

reca

ll of

tr

aini

ng c

onte

nt

• D

istr

ict

Soft

war

e re

port

s•

Sam

ple

WSC

s

E) In

vest

men

t M

anag

emen

t

Max

imum

sco

re:

28 p

oint

s fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

11Pl

anni

ng a

nd B

udge

ting

for

Inve

stm

ents

is

cond

ucte

d eff

ectiv

ely

Max

imum

14

poin

ts

on t

his

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.

Exis

tenc

e of

an

up-t

o-da

te L

G a

sset

reg

iste

r w

hich

se

ts o

ut w

ater

sup

ply

and

sani

tatio

n fa

cilit

ies

by

loca

tion

and

LLG

:

Scor

e 4

or e

lse

0

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

the

ass

ets

regi

ster

fo

r W

SS fa

cilit

ies

and

chec

k th

at t

he

WSS

ass

ets

regi

ster

is d

etai

led

and

up t

o da

te.

• A

sset

s re

gist

er

• M

IS

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

DW

O h

as c

ondu

cted

a d

esk

appr

aisa

l for

all

WSS

pro

ject

s in

the

bud

get

to

esta

blis

h w

heth

er t

he p

rior

itize

d in

vest

men

ts w

ere

deri

ved

from

the

app

rove

d di

stri

ct d

evel

opm

ent

plan

s an

d ar

e el

igib

le fo

r ex

pend

iture

und

er s

ecto

r gu

idel

ines

(pr

iori

tize

inve

stm

ents

for

sub

-cou

ntie

s w

ith

safe

wat

er c

over

age

belo

w t

he d

istr

ict

aver

age

and

reha

bilit

atio

n of

non

-fun

ctio

nal

faci

litie

s) a

nd fu

ndin

g so

urce

(e.

g. s

ecto

r de

velo

pmen

t gr

ant,

DD

EG).

If d

esk

appr

aisa

l was

co

nduc

ted

and

if al

l pro

ject

s ar

e de

rive

d fr

om t

he

LGD

P an

d ar

e el

igib

le: S

core

4 o

r el

se s

core

0.

From

the

Pla

nner

:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

the

LG

DP,

AW

P/bu

dget

for

the

curr

ent

FY, W

SS s

ecto

r gr

ant

guid

elin

es a

nd a

ppro

ved

sub

-co

unty

pla

ns a

nd c

heck

tha

t D

WO

co

nduc

ted

a de

sk a

ppra

isal

for

all

WSS

pro

ject

s in

the

bud

get

for

the

curr

ent

FY w

as d

one

and

whe

ther

in

vest

men

ts a

re d

eriv

ed fr

om t

he

LGD

P an

d ar

e el

igib

le fo

r ex

pend

iture

un

der

the

sect

or g

uide

lines

.

• AW

P•

Loca

l G

over

nmen

t D

evel

opm

ent

Plan

Dis

tric

t•

WSS

gra

nt/

budg

et

guid

elin

es•

App

rove

d su

b-

coun

ty p

lans

64LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

c.

All

budg

eted

inve

stm

ents

for

curr

ent

FY h

ave

com

plet

ed a

pplic

atio

ns fr

om b

enefi

ciar

y co

mm

uniti

es: S

core

2

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n th

e co

mm

unity

app

licat

ion

files

and

che

ck t

hat

bene

ficia

ry

com

mun

ities

app

lied

for

WSS

in

vest

men

ts fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

• C

omm

unity

ap

plic

atio

n fil

es

d.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

con

duct

ed fi

eld

appr

aisa

l to

chec

k fo

r: (

i) t

echn

ical

feas

ibili

ty;

(ii)

env

iron

men

tal s

ocia

l acc

epta

bilit

y; a

nd (

iii)

cust

omiz

ed d

esig

ns fo

r W

SS p

roje

cts

for

curr

ent

FY. S

core

2

From

the

Pla

nner

:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

feas

ibili

ty s

tudy

re

port

; wat

er r

esou

rces

rep

ort

and

field

app

rais

al r

epor

t an

d es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

fiel

d-ba

sed

appr

aisa

ls w

ere

cond

ucte

d.

• Fe

asib

ility

stu

dy•

Repo

rt•

Wat

er r

esou

rces

re

port

•

Fiel

d ap

prai

sal

repo

rt

e.

Evid

ence

tha

t al

l wat

er in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

wer

e sc

reen

ed fo

r en

viro

nmen

tal

and

soci

al r

isks

/ im

pact

s an

d ES

IA/E

SMPs

pr

epar

ed b

efor

e be

ing

appr

oved

for

cons

truc

tion

- co

sted

ESM

Ps in

corp

orat

ed in

to d

esig

ns, B

oQs,

bi

ddin

g an

d co

ntra

ct d

ocum

ents

. Sco

re 2

From

the

EN

R offi

ce:

• ch

eck

that

scr

eeni

ng w

as c

ondu

cted

fo

r al

l WSS

pro

ject

s fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

, and

ESI

A/c

oste

d ES

MPs

pre

pare

d (w

here

req

uire

d) a

nd w

heth

er t

he

prop

osed

miti

gatio

ns m

easu

res

wer

e pu

t in

pla

ce

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

3 s

ampl

e co

ntra

cts

of o

ngoi

ng W

SS p

roje

cts

and

esta

blis

h w

heth

er t

hey

cont

ain

a cl

ause

on

envi

ronm

enta

l and

soc

ial

prot

ectio

n re

quir

emen

ts

• Fi

lled

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al S

cree

ning

fo

rms

• ES

IA/c

oste

d ES

MPs

• Sa

mpl

e w

ater

pr

ojec

ts

12Pr

ocur

emen

t an

d C

ontr

act

Man

agem

ent/

exec

utio

n: T

he L

G h

as

effec

tivel

y m

anag

ed t

he

WSS

pro

cure

men

ts

Max

imum

14

poin

ts

on t

his

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e w

ater

infr

astr

uctu

re

inve

stm

ents

wer

e in

corp

orat

ed in

the

LG

app

rove

d pr

ocur

emen

t pl

an: S

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

the

PD

U o

btai

n an

d re

view

the

pr

ocur

emen

t pl

an a

nd c

heck

tha

t w

ater

an

d sa

nita

tion

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

wer

e in

corp

orat

ed in

the

pro

cure

men

t pl

an

• Pr

ocur

emen

t pl

an

65LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e w

ater

sup

ply

and

publ

ic

sani

tatio

n in

fras

truc

ture

for

the

prev

ious

FY

was

ap

prov

ed b

y th

e C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee

befo

re

com

men

cem

ent

of c

onst

ruct

ion

Scor

e 2:

From

the

PD

U:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

min

utes

of

the

cont

ract

s co

mm

itte

e to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

wat

er s

uppl

y an

d pu

blic

sa

nita

tion

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts

for

the

prev

ious

FY

wer

e ap

prov

ed

by t

he C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee

befo

re

com

men

cem

ent

of c

onst

ruct

ion

• M

inut

es o

f C

ontr

acts

C

omm

itte

e

c.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

istr

ict

Wat

er O

ffice

r pr

oper

ly

esta

blis

hed

the

Proj

ect

Impl

emen

tatio

n te

am a

s sp

ecifi

ed in

the

Wat

er s

ecto

r gu

idel

ines

Sco

re 2

:

From

the

PD

U:

• O

btai

n th

e pr

ocur

emen

t fil

e an

d ch

eck

that

the

LG

est

ablis

hed

the

Proj

ect

Impl

emen

tatio

n te

am a

s sp

ecifi

ed in

the

sec

tor

guid

elin

es

• Li

st o

f pr

ojec

t Im

plem

enta

tion

team

mem

bers

d.

Evid

ence

tha

t w

ater

and

pub

lic s

anita

tion

infr

astr

uctu

re s

ampl

ed w

ere

cons

truc

ted

as p

er

the

stan

dard

tec

hnic

al d

esig

ns p

rovi

ded

by t

he

DW

O: S

core

2

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n th

e st

anda

rd t

echn

ical

des

igns

• Sa

mpl

e 3

WSS

con

trac

ts

and

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er W

SS

infr

astr

uctu

re w

ere

cons

truc

ted

as p

er t

he t

echn

ical

des

ign

spec

ifica

tions

• St

anda

rd

tech

nica

l des

igns

• Sa

mpl

e co

ntra

cts

• Sa

mpl

e W

SS

proj

ects

e.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e re

leva

nt t

echn

ical

offi

cers

ca

rry

out

mon

thly

tec

hnic

al s

uper

visi

on o

f W

SS

infr

astr

uctu

re p

roje

cts:

Sco

re 2

From

the

DW

O:

• O

btai

n co

ntra

ct m

anag

emen

t pl

an,

mon

thly

sup

ervi

sion

rep

orts

and

de

term

ine

whe

ther

The

Dis

tric

t En

gine

er, D

WO

, Env

iron

men

t an

d C

omm

unity

Dev

elop

men

t O

ffice

r pa

rtic

ipat

ed in

sup

ervi

sing

WSS

pr

ojec

ts•

Obt

ain

min

utes

of

site

mee

tings

and

de

term

ine

whe

ther

act

ions

bet

wee

n th

e D

WO

and

the

con

trac

tor/

cons

ulta

nt w

ere

impl

emen

ted

by t

he

cont

ract

or

• C

ontr

act

Man

agem

ent

Plan

• Su

perv

isio

n Re

port

s•

Min

utes

of

Site

M

eetin

gs

66LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

f.Fo

r th

e sa

mpl

ed c

ontr

acts

, the

re is

evi

denc

e th

at

the

DW

O h

as v

erifi

ed w

orks

and

initi

ated

pay

men

ts

of c

ontr

acto

rs w

ithi

n sp

ecifi

ed t

imef

ram

es in

the

co

ntra

cts

o

If 1

00

% c

ontr

acts

pai

d on

tim

e:

Scor

e 2

o

If n

ot s

core

0

From

the

CFO

:•

Obt

ain

and

revi

ew a

sam

ple

of

cont

ract

s an

d de

term

ine

whe

ther

pa

ymen

t re

ques

ts w

ere

cert

ified

and

re

com

men

ded

for

paym

ent

as p

er

cont

ract

and

pay

men

t re

ques

ts

• Pa

ymen

t re

ques

ts•

Sam

ple

cont

ract

s

g.

Evid

ence

tha

t a

com

plet

e pr

ocur

emen

t fil

e fo

r w

ater

infr

astr

uctu

re in

vest

men

ts is

in p

lace

for

each

con

trac

t w

ith

all r

ecor

ds a

s re

quir

ed b

y th

e PP

DA

Law

: Sco

re 2

, If

not

scor

e 0

From

the

PD

U:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

pro

cure

men

t fil

e to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

eac

h co

ntra

ct

has

all r

elev

ant

reco

rds

as p

er t

he

PPD

A la

w

• Pr

ocur

emen

t fil

e

F) E

nvir

onm

enta

l an

d So

cial

Re

quir

emen

ts

Max

imum

sco

re:

16 p

oint

s fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

13G

riev

ance

Red

ress

: The

LG

has

est

ablis

hed

a m

echa

nism

of

addr

essi

ng

WSS

rel

ated

gri

evan

ces

in

line

wit

h th

e LG

gri

evan

ce

redr

ess

fram

ewor

k

Max

imum

3 p

oint

s th

is

perf

orm

ance

mea

sure

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

WO

in li

aiso

n w

ith

the

Dis

tric

t G

riev

ance

s Re

dres

s C

omm

itte

e re

cord

ed, i

nves

tigat

ed,

resp

onde

d to

and

rep

orte

d on

wat

er a

nd e

nvir

onm

ent

grie

vanc

es a

s pe

r th

e LG

gri

evan

ce r

edre

ss fr

amew

ork:

Sc

ore

3, If

not

sco

re 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t de

sign

ated

Gri

evan

ce

Coo

rdin

ator

:

• O

btai

n th

e LG

gri

evan

ce r

edre

ss

fram

ewor

k an

d gr

ieva

nces

log

and

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er t

he G

riev

ance

s Re

dres

s C

omm

itte

e ap

prop

riat

ely

reco

rded

, inv

estig

ated

, res

pond

ed

to a

nd r

epor

ted

on a

ll w

ater

and

en

viro

nmen

t re

late

d gr

ieva

nces

• LG

gri

evan

ces

redr

ess

fram

ewor

k•

Gri

evan

ces

log

14Sa

fegu

ards

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery

Max

imum

3 p

oint

s on

thi

s pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

WO

and

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r ha

ve d

isse

min

ated

gui

delin

es o

n w

ater

sou

rce

& c

atch

men

t pr

otec

tion

and

natu

ral r

esou

rce

man

agem

ent

to C

DO

s: S

core

3, I

f no

t sc

ore

0

From

the

DW

O &

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r:

• O

btai

n m

inut

es o

f m

eetin

gs w

ith

CD

Os

and

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er w

ater

so

urce

and

cat

chm

ent

prot

ectio

n an

d; n

atur

al r

esou

rce

man

agem

ent

guid

elin

es w

ere

diss

emin

ated

• G

uide

lines

for

wate

r so

urce

and

ca

tchm

ent p

rote

ctio

n an

d na

tura

l res

ourc

e m

anag

emen

t•

Fille

d E&

S sc

reen

ing

form

s•

EIA

repo

rts/

ESM

Ps•

Sam

ple

cont

ract

s•

Land

agr

eem

ents

/tit

les

and

MO

Us

• Si

gned

E&

S Co

mpl

ianc

e Ce

rtifi

catio

n fo

rms

• M

onth

ly m

onito

ring

repo

rts

67LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

ar

eaN

oPe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deAs

sess

men

t pro

cedu

res

Mea

ns o

f ve

rific

atio

n

15Sa

fegu

ards

in t

he

Del

iver

y of

Inve

stm

ents

Max

imum

10

poi

nts

on t

his

perf

orm

ance

m

easu

re

a.

Evid

ence

tha

t w

ater

sou

rce

prot

ectio

n pl

ans

&

natu

ral

reso

urce

m

anag

emen

t pl

ans

for

WSS

fa

cilit

ies

cons

truc

ted

in

the

prev

ious

FY

w

ere

prep

ared

and

impl

emen

ted:

Sco

re 3

, If

not

sco

re

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

ch

eck

that

:

• W

ater

sou

rce

prot

ectio

n pl

ans

and

natu

ral r

esou

rce

man

agem

ent

plan

s fo

r W

SS in

fras

truc

ture

pro

ject

s co

nstr

ucte

d du

ring

the

pre

viou

s FY

w

ere

prep

ared

and

impl

emen

ted

b.

Evid

ence

tha

t al

l W

SS p

roje

cts

are

impl

emen

ted

on l

and

whe

re t

he L

G h

as p

roof

of

cons

ent

(e.g

. a

land

titl

e, a

gree

men

t; F

orm

al C

onse

nt,

MoU

s,

etc.

), w

itho

ut a

ny e

ncum

bran

ces:

Sco

re 3

, If

not

sc

ore

0

From

the

Env

iron

men

t O

ffice

r:

• O

btai

n th

e AW

P, c

opie

s of

land

tit

les,

agr

eem

ents

and

MO

Us

to

dete

rmin

e th

at a

ll W

SS p

roje

cts

wer

e im

plem

ente

d on

land

whe

re t

he L

G

has

proo

f of

ow

ners

hip

c.

Evid

ence

th

at

E&S

Cer

tifica

tion

form

s ar

e co

mpl

eted

and

sig

ned

by E

nvir

onm

enta

l O

ffice

r an

d C

DO

pri

or to

pay

men

ts o

f con

trac

tor

invo

ices

/ce

rtifi

cate

s at

inte

rim

and

fina

l sta

ges

of p

roje

cts:

Sc

ore

2, If

not

sco

re 0

From

the

CFO

:

• O

btai

n an

d re

view

a s

ampl

e of

3

inte

rim

and

fina

l pay

men

t ce

rtifi

cate

s an

d ch

eck

that

The

Env

iron

men

tal

Offi

cer

and

CD

O c

ompl

eted

and

si

gned

E&

S C

ertifi

catio

n fo

rms

d.

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e C

DO

and

env

iron

men

t O

ffice

rs

unde

rtak

es m

onito

ring

to

asce

rtai

n co

mpl

ianc

e w

ith

ESM

Ps; a

nd p

rovi

de m

onth

ly r

epor

ts: S

core

2,

If n

ot s

core

0

Fro

m t

he E

NR

office

and

CD

O:

• O

btai

n ES

MPs

and

mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts

and

chec

k th

at m

itiga

tion

mea

sure

s w

ere

impl

emen

ted

and

mon

thly

re

port

s w

ere

com

pile

d.


12 Micro-scale Irrigation Performance Assessment

1. Micro-scale irrigation performance assessment will only be conducted in districts selected to receive the micro-scale irrigation grant.

2. All indicators will be assessed starting in FY 2020/21. The indicators which are not applicable during the year of assessment will be scored 0. This is because:

a) It will provide a baseline and a basis for trend analysis. b) It will not disadvantage any LG as all will score 0 – level ground.

c) The districts are supposed to be performing the functions even without the micro-scale irrigation grant

3. The results for the assessment to be conducted in FY 2020/21 and FY 2021/22 will be used for monitoring and evaluation purposes and to develop performance improvement plans but not to impact on the allocation of the grants. This is because the districts will not have received and used the grants in FY 2019/20 (assessed in 2020/21); and the grants received in 2020/21 (assessed in 2021/22) are only for complementary services. Therefore, the results of the performance assessment to be conducted in FY 2022/23 will be the first to be used to impact on the allocation of grants for FY 2023/24. This is because the LGs would have received and used the capital development grant for FY 2021/22. The table below provides an overview of how the performance assessment and use of the results will be phased in relation to the flow of funds and implementation of activities in the 40 phase 1 districts. The same principles will apply when micro-scale irrigation grant is replicated countrywide.

No 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23

Activity Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1. Flow of funds and implementation of activities

100% of grant for awareness raising

75% capital development (equipment procurement, installation and payments) ; and 25% complementary services

75% capital development (equipment procurement, installation and payments) ; and 25% complementary services)

2. LG Performance Assessment Exercise

XX XX XX

3. Use of results in development and implementation of PIPs

XX XX XX XX XX XX XX XX

4. Use of results to allocate part of the grants16

N/A17

NA18 XX19

16 Note: Assessment in Y1 – mainly assesses performance in Y1-1; and impacts on allocation for Y1+117 No grant during Y1-1 (2019/20)18 Grant in Y1-1 (2020/21) only focuses on awareness raising/complementary services19 Assess use of grant in Y1-1 (2021/22) to impact on allocations in 2022/23

69LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

12.1

Mic

ro-s

cale

Irri

gati

on M

inim

um C

ondi

tion

s

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.M

inim

um C

ondi

tion

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

A)

Hum

an

Reso

urce

M

anag

emen

t an

d D

evel

opm

ent

Max

imum

sco

re

is 7

0

1Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as r

ecru

ited

or r

eque

sted

for

seco

ndm

ent

of s

taff

fo

r al

l cri

tical

pos

ition

s in

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce r

espo

nsib

le fo

r m

icro

-sca

le ir

riga

tion

If t

he L

G h

as r

ecru

ited

the

Seni

or A

gric

ultu

re E

ngin

eer

scor

e 70

or

else

0.

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion,

obt

ain

the

appo

intm

ent

lett

ers

of t

he S

enio

r A

gric

ultu

ral E

ngin

eer

to e

stab

lish

that

the

y ar

e su

bsta

ntiv

ely

recr

uite

d.

In c

ase

the

posi

tions

are

not

fille

d, g

et e

vide

nce

from

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

(HRM

) D

ivis

ion

that

the

LG

req

uest

ed fo

r se

cond

men

t fr

om M

AAI

F.

₋A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

₋C

opy

of le

tter

from

LG

to

MA

AIF

requ

estin

g fo

r se

cond

men

t of

sta

ff t

o D

istr

ict

Prod

uctio

n O

ffice

.

B)

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al

Requ

irem

ents

Max

imum

sco

re

is 3

0

2Ev

iden

ce t

hat

the

LG h

as c

arri

ed o

ut

Envi

ronm

enta

l, So

cial

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

scre

enin

g ha

ve b

een

carr

ied

out

for

pote

ntia

l inv

estm

ents

and

w

here

req

uire

d co

sted

ESM

Ps

deve

lope

d.

If t

he L

G:

a.

Car

ried

out

Env

iron

men

tal,

Soci

al a

nd C

limat

e C

hang

e sc

reen

ing

scor

e 15

or

else

0

.b.

Car

ried

out

Soc

ial I

mpa

ct

Ass

essm

ents

(ES

IAs)

whe

re

requ

ired

, sco

re 1

5 or

els

e 0

.

From

the

LG

Env

iron

men

t offi

cer,

obta

in t

he

Envi

ronm

enta

l and

Soc

ial S

cree

ning

For

m,

ESM

Ps p

repa

red

(whe

re a

pplic

able

), fo

r al

l mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n pr

ojec

ts t

o ve

rify

w

heth

er:

·E

& S

scr

eeni

ng w

as c

arri

ed o

ut

·ES

MP

prep

ared

and

cos

ted

(whe

re

requ

ired

).

·Fi

lled

Envi

ronm

enta

l and

So

cial

scr

eeni

ng F

orm

s·

ESIA

Rep

orts

·C

oste

d ES

MPs

70LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

12.2

Mic

ro-s

cale

Irri

gati

on P

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

res

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

A.

Loca

l Gov

ernm

ent

Serv

ice

Del

iver

y Re

sult

s

Max

imum

20

po

ints

for

this

pe

rfor

man

ce a

rea

1O

utco

me:

The

LG

has

incr

ease

d ac

reag

e of

new

ly

irri

gate

d la

nd

Max

imum

sco

re 4

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

up

to-d

ate

data

on

irri

gate

d la

nd fo

r th

e la

st

two

FYs

disa

ggre

gate

d be

twee

n m

icro

-sca

le ir

riga

tion

gran

t be

nefic

iari

es a

nd n

on-b

enefi

ciar

ies

– s

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

·D

ata

on ir

riga

ted

land

for

the

last

tw

o FY

s to

de

term

ine

whe

ther

the

LG

has

up

to-d

ate

data

on

irri

gate

d la

nd d

isag

greg

ated

bet

wee

n m

icro

-sc

ale

irri

gatio

n gr

ant

bene

ficia

ries

and

non

-be

nefic

iari

es

•D

ata

on ir

riga

ted

land

fo

r th

e la

st t

wo

FYs

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

incr

ease

d ac

reag

e of

new

ly ir

riga

ted

land

in

the

prev

ious

FY

as c

ompa

red

to

prev

ious

FY

but

one:

•By

mor

e th

an 5

% s

core

2•

Betw

een

1% a

nd 4

% s

core

1•

If n

o in

crea

se s

core

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

·D

ata

on ir

riga

ted

land

for

the

last

tw

o FY

s to

ca

lcul

ate

the

incr

ease

in a

crea

ge o

f ne

wly

ir

riga

ted

land

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY a

s co

mpa

red

to

prev

ious

FY

but

one

•D

ata

on ir

riga

ted

land

fo

r th

e la

st t

wo

FYs

2Se

rvic

e D

eliv

ery

Perf

orm

ance

: Av

erag

e sc

ore

in

the

mic

ro-s

cale

ir

riga

tion

for

the

LLG

per

form

ance

as

sess

men

t.

Max

imum

sco

re 4

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e av

erag

e sc

ore

in

the

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n fo

r LL

G

perf

orm

ance

ass

essm

ent

is:

•A

bove

70

%; s

core

4•

60 –

69%

; sco

re 2

•Be

low

60

%; s

core

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r ob

tain

:

·th

e LL

G p

erfo

rman

ce r

epor

t an

d ca

lcul

ate

the

aver

age

scor

e of

the

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n fo

r LL

G p

erfo

rman

ce a

sses

smen

t

•Re

port

on

LLG

pe

rfor

man

ce

asse

ssm

ent

3In

vest

men

t Pe

rfor

man

ce: T

he

LG h

as m

anag

ed

the

supp

ly a

nd

inst

alla

tion

of m

icro

-sc

ale

irri

gatio

ns

equi

pmen

t as

per

gu

idel

ines

Max

imum

sco

re 6

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e de

velo

pmen

t co

mpo

nent

of

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n gr

ant

has

been

use

d on

elig

ible

ac

tiviti

es (

proc

urem

ent

and

inst

alla

tion

of ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t,

incl

udin

g ac

com

pany

ing

supp

lier

man

uals

and

tra

inin

g):

Scor

e 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce, o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

·Th

e bu

dget

per

form

ance

rep

ort

to e

stab

lish

whe

ther

the

dev

elop

men

t co

mpo

nent

of

mic

ro-

scal

e ir

riga

tion

gran

t w

as u

sed

on e

ligib

le

activ

ities

•B

udge

t Pe

rfor

man

ce

Repo

rts

71LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e ap

prov

ed

farm

er s

igne

d an

Acc

epta

nce

Form

con

firm

ing

that

equ

ipm

ent

is

wor

king

wel

l, be

fore

the

LG

mad

e pa

ymen

ts t

o th

e su

pplie

rs:

Scor

e 1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

Chi

ef F

inan

ce O

ffice

r ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

·Pa

ymen

t vo

uche

rs fo

r al

l equ

ipm

ent

supp

liers

to

esta

blis

h w

heth

er t

he fa

rmer

Acc

epta

nce

Form

co

nfirm

ing

that

equ

ipm

ent

is w

orki

ng w

ell w

ere

atta

ched

bef

ore

the

LG m

ade

paym

ents

to

the

supp

liers

•Pa

ymen

t vo

uche

rs

for

all e

quip

men

t su

pplie

rs

c)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e va

riat

ions

in t

he

cont

ract

pri

ce a

re w

ithi

n +

/-20

% o

f th

e A

gric

ultu

re E

ngin

eers

est

imat

es:

Scor

e 1

or e

lse

scor

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce, o

btai

n:

·(i

) fa

rm v

isit

repo

rt; (

ii) s

elec

ted

supp

lier

quot

e;

and

(iii)

the

sup

plie

r co

ntra

cts

and

calc

ulat

e th

e va

riat

ions

in t

he c

ontr

act

pric

e (c

ontr

act

vari

atio

n or

ders

) to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

the

y ar

e w

ithi

n +

/-20

% o

f th

e A

gric

ultu

re E

ngin

eers

es

timat

es

•Fa

rm v

isit

repo

rt.

•Su

pplie

r qu

ote

•Su

pplie

r co

ntra

cts

d)

Evid

ence

tha

t m

icro

-sca

le ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t w

here

con

trac

ts w

ere

sign

ed d

urin

g th

e pr

evio

us F

Y w

ere

inst

alle

d/co

mpl

eted

wit

hin

the

prev

ious

FY

•If

10

0%

sco

re 2

•Be

twee

n 80

– 9

9% s

core

1•

Belo

w 8

0%

sco

re 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce, o

btai

n:

·(i

) th

e su

pplie

r co

ntra

cts;

and

(ii)

bud

get

perf

orm

ance

rep

ort

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

whe

re

cont

ract

s w

ere

sign

ed w

ere

inst

alle

d du

ring

last

FY

•Su

pplie

r co

ntra

cts.

•

Com

plet

ion

cert

ifica

tes;

and

•B

udge

t pe

rfor

man

ce

repo

rt

72LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

4Ac

hiev

emen

t of

st

anda

rds:

The

LG

ha

s m

et s

taffi

ng

and

mic

ro-s

cale

ir

riga

tion

stan

dard

s

Max

imum

sco

re 6

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

rec

ruite

d LL

G e

xten

sion

wor

kers

as

per

staffi

ng

stru

ctur

e

•If

10

0%

sco

re 2

•If

75

– 9

9% s

core

1•

If b

elow

75%

sco

re 0

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋Th

e st

affing

str

uctu

re fo

r LL

G e

xten

sion

wor

kers

(A

gric

ultu

re, V

eter

inar

y, F

ishe

ries

, Ent

omol

ogy)

₋Th

e st

aff li

st₋

Cal

cula

te t

he %

age

of L

LG e

xten

sion

wor

kers

th

at a

re fi

lled

•St

aff s

truc

ture

LLG

ex

tens

ion

wor

kers

•St

aff L

ist

LLG

ex

tens

ion

wor

kers

•A

ppoi

ntm

ent

lett

ers

LLG

ext

ensi

on w

orke

rs

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e m

icro

-sca

le

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

mee

ts

stan

dard

s as

defi

ned

by M

AAI

F•

If 1

00

% s

core

2 o

r el

se s

core

0

From

the

Agr

icul

tura

l Eng

inee

r:

•O

btai

n in

vent

ory

of m

icro

-sca

le ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t su

pplie

d•

Sam

ple

3 co

mpl

eted

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n in

stal

latio

ns in

diff

eren

t LL

Gs

to a

scer

tain

w

heth

er t

hey

mee

t st

anda

rds

•In

vent

ory

of in

stal

led

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e in

stal

led

mic

ro-

scal

e ir

riga

tion

syst

ems

duri

ng la

st

FY a

re fu

nctio

nal

•If

10

0%

are

func

tiona

l sco

re 2

or

else

sco

re 0

From

the

Agr

icul

tura

l Eng

inee

r:

•O

btai

n th

e lis

t of

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

inst

alle

d du

ring

the

pre

viou

s FY

•Sa

mpl

e 3

inst

alle

d ir

riga

tion

faci

litie

s in

diff

eren

t LL

Gs

to c

heck

func

tiona

lity

•In

vent

ory

of in

stal

led

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

B.

Perf

orm

ance

Re

port

ing

and

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t

Max

imum

10

po

ints

for

this

pe

rfor

man

ce a

rea

5Ac

cura

cy

of r

epor

ted

info

rmat

ion:

Th

e LG

has

re

port

ed a

ccur

ate

info

rmat

ion

Max

imum

sco

re 4

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t in

form

atio

n on

po

sitio

n of

ext

ensi

on w

orke

rs fi

lled

is

accu

rate

: Sco

re 2

or

else

0

From

the

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Offi

ce o

btai

n:

₋Th

e st

aff li

st.

₋Sa

mpl

e 3

LLG

s to

est

ablis

h th

at t

he e

xten

sion

w

orke

rs a

re in

pla

ce a

s in

dica

ted

in t

he s

taff

list

•St

aff li

sts

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t in

form

atio

n on

mic

ro-

scal

e ir

riga

tion

syst

em in

stal

led

and

func

tioni

ng is

acc

urat

e: S

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

Agr

icul

tura

l Eng

inee

r ob

tain

:

•Th

e in

vent

ory

of in

stal

led

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent.

•

Sam

ple

3 an

d es

tabl

ish

whe

ther

info

rmat

ion

subm

itte

d on

inst

alla

tion

and

func

tiona

lity

is

accu

rate

•In

vent

ory

of m

icro

-sc

ale

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

inst

alle

d

73LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

6Re

port

ing

and

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t: T

he

LG h

as c

olle

cted

an

d en

tere

d in

form

atio

n in

to

MIS

, and

dev

elop

ed

and

impl

emen

ted

perf

orm

ance

im

prov

emen

t pl

ans

Max

imum

sco

re 6

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t in

form

atio

n is

co

llect

ed q

uart

erly

on

new

ly

irri

gate

d la

nd, f

unct

iona

lity

of

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

inst

alle

d;

prov

isio

n of

com

plem

enta

ry s

ervi

ces

and

farm

er E

xpre

ssio

n of

Inte

rest

: Sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce, o

btai

n an

d re

view

.

₋Q

uart

erly

sup

ervi

sion

and

mon

itori

ng r

epor

ts

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er t

hey

are

com

pile

d an

d co

ver

sub

-cou

nty

irri

gate

d la

nd, f

unct

iona

lity

of

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent;

com

plem

enta

ry s

ervi

ces

and

farm

er a

pplic

atio

ns

•Q

uart

erly

sup

ervi

sion

an

d m

onito

ring

re

port

s

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

ent

ered

up

to-d

ate

LLG

info

rmat

ion

into

MIS

: Sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

•M

IS r

epor

ts t

o de

term

ine

whe

ther

up

to-d

ate

LLG

per

form

ance

info

rmat

ion

is s

ubm

itte

d

•M

IS r

epor

ts

c)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

pre

pare

d a

quar

terl

y re

port

usi

ng in

form

atio

n co

mpi

led

from

LLG

s in

the

MIS

: Sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋Q

uart

erly

rep

orts

wit

h in

form

atio

n fr

om t

he L

LGs

in t

he M

IS

•Q

uart

erly

rep

orts

d)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

:i.

Dev

elop

ed a

n ap

prov

ed

Perf

orm

ance

Impr

ovem

ent

Plan

for

the

low

est

perf

orm

ing

LLG

s sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

ii.

Impl

emen

ted

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t Pl

an fo

r lo

wes

t pe

rfor

min

g LL

Gs:

Sco

re 1

or

else

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋(i

) th

e A

ppro

ved

Perf

orm

ance

Impr

ovem

ent

Plan

; an

d (i

i) P

IP im

plem

enta

tion

repo

rts

to e

stab

lish

whe

ther

the

LG

dev

elop

ed a

nd im

plem

ente

d Pe

rfor

man

ce Im

prov

emen

t Pl

an fo

r th

e lo

wes

t pe

rfor

min

g LL

Gs

•A

ppro

ved

Perf

orm

ance

Im

prov

emen

t Pl

an.

•PI

P im

plem

enta

tion

repo

rts

74LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

C.

Hum

an R

esou

rce

Man

agem

ent

and

Dev

elop

men

t

Max

imum

10

po

ints

for

this

pe

rfor

man

ce a

rea

7B

udge

ting

for,

actu

al r

ecru

itmen

t an

d de

ploy

men

t of

sta

ff: T

he L

ocal

G

over

nmen

t ha

s bu

dget

ed, a

ctua

lly

recr

uite

d an

d de

ploy

ed s

taff

as

per

guid

elin

es

Max

imum

sco

re 6

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

:i.

Bud

gete

d fo

r ex

tens

ion

wor

kers

as

per

gui

delin

es/i

n ac

cord

ance

wit

h th

e st

affing

nor

ms

scor

e 1

or e

lse

0ii.

Dep

loye

d ex

tens

ion

wor

kers

as

per

guid

elin

es s

core

1 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋(i

) th

e LG

per

form

ance

con

trac

t; a

nd (

ii) s

taff

lis

t to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

the

LG

Bud

gete

d fo

r ex

tens

ion

wor

kers

as

per

guid

elin

es a

nd d

eplo

yed

exte

nsio

n w

orke

rs a

s pe

r gu

idel

ines

•Pe

rfor

man

ce

Con

trac

t of

cur

rent

FY

•St

aff r

egis

ters

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t ex

tens

ion

wor

kers

ar

e w

orki

ng in

LLG

s w

here

the

y ar

e de

ploy

ed:

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

0

From

the

SA

S in

a s

ampl

e of

at

leas

t 3

LLG

s, o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋(i

) th

e st

aff li

sts;

(ii)

att

enda

nce

book

; (iii

) SA

S su

perv

isio

n/ m

onito

ring

rep

orts

to

dete

rmin

e th

at e

xten

sion

wor

kers

are

wor

king

in L

LGs

whe

re

they

are

dep

loye

d

•C

urre

nt s

taff

list

•At

tend

ance

boo

ks•

Supe

rvis

ion/

m

onito

ring

rep

orts

c)

Evid

ence

tha

t ex

tens

ion

wor

kers

de

ploy

men

t ha

s be

en p

ublic

ized

an

d di

ssem

inat

ed t

o LL

Gs

by a

mon

g ot

hers

dis

play

ing

staff

list

on

the

LLG

not

ice

boar

d. S

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

the

CAO

’s o

ffice

obt

ain

and:

₋C

heck

cir

cula

r fr

om C

AO t

o SA

S sh

owin

g de

tails

of

Ext

ensi

on w

orke

rs d

eplo

yed

in L

LG₋

In a

sam

ple

of a

t le

ast

3 LL

Gs

chec

k LL

G n

otic

e bo

ard

to e

stab

lish

whe

ther

the

SA

S po

sted

the

lis

t of

Ext

ensi

on w

orke

rs.

•N

otic

e bo

ards

of

LLG

s•

Cir

cula

r fr

om C

AO t

o LL

Gs

8Pe

rfor

man

ce

man

agem

ent:

The

LG

has

app

rais

ed,

take

n co

rrec

tive

actio

n an

d tr

aine

d Ex

tens

ion

Wor

kers

Max

imum

sco

re 4

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

istr

ict

Prod

uctio

n C

oord

inat

or h

as:

i.C

ondu

cted

ann

ual

perf

orm

ance

app

rais

al o

f al

l Ext

ensi

on

Wor

kers

aga

inst

the

agr

eed

perf

orm

ance

pl

ans

and

has

subm

itte

d a

copy

to

HRO

du

ring

the

pre

viou

s FY

: Sc

ore

1 el

se 0

ii.

Take

n co

rrec

tive

actio

ns: S

core

1

or e

lse

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t H

R de

part

men

t ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

₋Pe

rson

al fi

les

for

exte

nsio

n w

orke

rs a

nd s

ampl

e at

leas

t 10

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er t

hey

wer

e ap

prai

sed

duri

ng t

he p

revi

ous

FY

•Pe

rson

al fi

les

•A

ppra

isal

rep

orts

75LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t:i.

Trai

ning

act

iviti

es w

ere

cond

ucte

d in

acc

orda

nce

to t

he t

rain

ing

plan

s at

Dis

tric

t le

vel:

Sco

re 1

or

else

0ii.

Evid

ence

tha

t tr

aini

ng a

ctiv

ities

w

ere

docu

men

ted

in t

he t

rain

ing

data

base

: Sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋(i

) tr

aini

ng r

epor

ts; (

ii) t

rain

ing

data

base

to

esta

blis

h th

at t

rain

ing

activ

ities

wer

e co

nduc

ted

and

docu

men

ted

in t

he t

rain

ing

data

base

•Tr

aini

ng r

epor

ts•

Trai

ning

dat

abas

e

D.

Man

agem

ent,

M

onito

ring

and

Su

perv

isio

n of

Se

rvic

es

Max

imum

22

poin

ts fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

9Pl

anni

ng, b

udge

ting

an

d tr

ansf

er o

f fu

nds

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery:

The

Loc

al

Gov

ernm

ent

has

budg

eted

, use

d an

d di

ssem

inat

ed fu

nds

for

serv

ice

deliv

ery

as p

er g

uide

lines

.

Max

imum

sco

re 1

0

a) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG h

as a

ppro

pria

tely

al

loca

ted

the

mic

ro s

cale

irrig

atio

n gr

ant

betw

een

(i) c

apita

l dev

elop

men

t (m

icro

sc

ale

irrig

atio

n eq

uipm

ent)

; and

(ii)

com

plem

enta

ry s

ervi

ces (

in F

Y 20

20/2

1 10

0%

to c

ompl

emen

tary

ser

vice

s;

star

ting

from

FY

2021

/22

– 75

% c

apita

l de

velo

pmen

t; an

d 25

% c

ompl

emen

tary

se

rvic

es):

Sco

re 2

or e

lse 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r, ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

₋Th

e Pe

rfor

man

ce C

ontr

act

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er t

he L

G h

as a

ppro

pria

tely

allo

cate

d th

e m

icro

sca

le ir

riga

tion

gran

t be

twee

n (i

) ca

pita

l de

velo

pmen

t (m

icro

sca

le ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t);

and

(ii)

com

plem

enta

ry s

ervi

ces

•Pe

rfor

man

ce

Con

trac

t

b) E

vide

nce

that

bud

get a

lloca

tions

hav

e be

en m

ade

tow

ards

com

plem

enta

ry

serv

ices

in li

ne w

ith th

e se

ctor

gui

delin

es

i.e. (

i) m

axim

um 2

5% fo

r en

hanc

ing

LG

capa

city

to s

uppo

rt ir

rigat

ed a

gric

ultu

re

(of w

hich

max

imum

15%

aw

aren

ess

rais

ing

of lo

cal l

eade

rs a

nd m

axim

um

10%

pro

cure

men

t, M

onito

ring

and

Supe

rvis

ion)

; and

(ii)

min

imum

75%

for

enha

ncin

g fa

rmer

cap

acity

for

upta

ke o

f m

icro

sca

le ir

rigat

ion

(Aw

aren

ess

rais

ing

of fa

rmer

s, F

arm

vis

it, D

emon

stra

tions

, Fa

rmer

Fie

ld S

choo

ls):

Sco

re 2

or

else

sc

ore

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r, ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

•Th

e Pe

rfor

man

ce C

ontr

act

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er

the

LG b

udge

t al

loca

tions

mad

e to

war

ds

com

plem

enta

ry s

ervi

ces

in li

ne w

ith

the

sect

or

guid

elin

es

•Pe

rfor

man

ce

Con

trac

t of

cur

rent

FY

c)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e co

-fun

ding

is

refle

cted

in t

he L

G B

udge

t an

d al

loca

ted

as p

er g

uide

lines

: Sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r, ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:₋

The

Perf

orm

ance

Con

trac

t to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

th

e LG

refl

ecte

d co

-fun

ding

in t

he L

G B

udge

t an

d al

loca

ted

as p

er g

uide

lines

•Pe

rfor

man

ce

Con

trac

t

76LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

d)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

use

d th

e fa

rmer

co-

fund

ing

follo

win

g th

e sa

me

rule

s ap

plic

able

to

the

mic

ro

scal

e ir

riga

tion

gran

t: S

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pl

anne

r, ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:•

The

Bud

get

Perf

orm

ance

Rep

ort

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er t

he L

G u

sed

the

farm

er c

o-fu

ndin

g fo

llow

ing

the

sam

e ru

les

appl

icab

le t

o th

e m

icro

sc

ale

irri

gatio

n gr

ant

•B

udge

t Pe

rfor

man

ce

Repo

rt

e)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

di

ssem

inat

ed in

form

atio

n on

use

of

the

farm

er c

o-fu

ndin

g: S

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n ev

iden

ce

on:

₋D

isse

min

atio

n of

info

rmat

ion

on u

se o

f th

e fa

rmer

co-

fund

ing

in D

TPC

, LLG

s an

d to

the

fa

rmer

s

•M

inut

es fr

om

mee

tings

bet

wee

n D

PO a

nd D

TPC

and

LL

Gs

•C

opy

of in

form

atio

n sh

ared

10Ro

utin

e ov

ersi

ght

and

mon

itori

ng:

The

LG m

onito

red,

pr

ovid

ed h

ands

-on

supp

ort

and

ran

farm

er fi

eld

scho

ols

as p

er g

uide

lines

Max

imum

sco

re 8

a) E

vide

nce

that

the

DPO

has

mon

itore

d on

a m

onth

ly b

asis

inst

alle

d m

icro

-sc

ale

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

(key

ar

eas

to in

clud

e fu

nctio

nalit

y of

eq

uipm

ent,

env

iron

men

t an

d so

cial

sa

fegu

ards

incl

udin

g ad

equa

cy o

f w

ater

sou

rce,

effi

cien

cy o

f m

icro

ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t in

ter

ms

of w

ater

co

nser

vatio

n, e

tc.)

₋If

mor

e th

an 9

0%

of

the

mic

ro-

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

mon

itore

d: S

core

2

₋70

-89%

mon

itore

d sc

ore

1₋

Less

tha

n 70

% s

core

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋Th

e m

onth

ly r

epor

ts fo

r th

e pr

evio

us F

Y to

es

tabl

ish

the

num

ber

of m

icro

-irr

igat

ion

equi

pmen

t th

at w

ere

mon

itore

d₋

Cal

cula

te t

he p

erce

ntag

e m

onito

red

•M

onito

ring

rep

orts

fo

r pr

evio

us F

Y as

per

st

anda

rd fo

rmat

s

b) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG h

as o

vers

een

tech

nica

l tra

inin

g &

supp

ort t

o th

e Ap

prov

ed F

arm

er to

ach

ieve

ser

vici

ng a

nd

mai

nten

ance

dur

ing

the

warr

anty

per

iod:

Sc

ore

2 or

else

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

•Re

port

s on

spe

cific

ran

dom

ly s

ampl

ed fa

rmer

s to

est

ablis

h if

LG o

vers

aw t

he A

ppro

ved

Farm

er

trai

ning

; als

o in

terv

iew

the

farm

ers

•Fi

eld

Mon

itori

ng a

nd

Supe

rvis

ion

repo

rts

c)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

pro

vide

d ha

nds-

on s

uppo

rt to

the

LLG

ex

tens

ion

wor

kers

dur

ing

the

impl

emen

tatio

n of

com

plem

enta

ry

serv

ices

with

in t

he p

revi

ous

FY a

s pe

r gu

idel

ines

sco

re 2

or

else

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:₋

The

LG h

ands

-on

supp

ort

repo

rts

to L

LG

exte

nsio

n w

orke

rs (

quar

terl

y)₋

Revi

ew a

nd c

heck

a s

ampl

e of

3 L

LG a

nd

inte

rvie

w e

xten

sion

wor

kers

to

veri

fy t

he h

ands

-on

sup

port

giv

en.

•Su

perv

isio

n re

port

s•

Min

utes

of

field

m

eetin

gs

77LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

d)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

est

ablis

hed

and

run

farm

er fi

eld

scho

ols

as p

er

guid

elin

es:

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:₋

Repo

rts

on fa

rmer

fiel

d sc

hool

s to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

the

y ar

e es

tabl

ishe

d an

d ru

n as

per

gu

idel

ines

•Re

port

s on

farm

er

field

sch

ools

11M

obili

zati

on o

f fa

rmer

s: T

he L

G h

as

cond

ucte

d ac

tiviti

es

to m

obili

ze fa

rmer

s to

par

ticip

ate

in ir

riga

tion

and

irri

gate

d ag

ricu

lture

.

Max

imum

sco

re 4

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

con

duct

ed

activ

ities

to

mob

ilize

far

mer

s as

per

gu

idel

ines

: Sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

•Re

cord

s sh

owin

g fa

rmer

s m

obili

zed

by g

ende

r an

d pa

rtic

ipat

ed in

irri

gatio

n ac

tiviti

es

•At

tend

ance

she

ets

•Fi

eld

base

d ph

otos

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e D

istr

ict

has

trai

ned

staff

and

pol

itica

l lea

ders

at

Dis

tric

t an

d LL

G le

vels

: Sc

ore

2 or

el

se 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋Re

port

s to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

the

Dis

tric

t ha

s co

nduc

ted

a tr

aini

ng fo

r St

aff a

nd p

oliti

cal

lead

ers

at D

istr

ict

and

LLG

:

•Tr

aini

ng r

epor

t

E.

Inve

stm

ent

Man

agem

ent

Max

imum

26

poin

ts fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

12Pl

anni

ng a

nd

budg

etin

g fo

r in

vest

men

ts: T

he L

G

has

sele

cted

farm

ers

and

budg

eted

fo

r m

icro

-sca

le

irri

gatio

n as

per

gu

idel

ines

Max

imum

sco

re 8

a)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

an

upda

ted

regi

ster

of

mic

ro-s

cale

ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t su

pplie

d to

fa

rmer

s in

the

pre

viou

s FY

as

per

the

form

at: S

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

•Th

e re

gist

er o

f ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t su

pplie

d

•Re

gist

er/I

nven

tory

of

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

kee

ps a

n up

-to

-dat

e da

taba

se o

f ap

plic

atio

ns a

t th

e tim

e of

the

ass

essm

ent:

Sco

re 2

or

els

e 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pro

duct

ion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

:₋

The

data

base

of a

pplic

atio

ns fo

r th

e cu

rren

t and

pr

evio

us F

Y an

d ch

eck

the

last

dat

e of

upd

ate.

₋Sa

mpl

e ap

plic

atio

ns to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

the

y ar

e pa

rt o

f the

dat

abas

e

•D

atab

ase

of

appl

icat

ions

•C

opie

s of

app

licat

ions

fr

om L

LGs

•Su

bmis

sion

lett

ers

c)

Evid

ence

that

the

Dist

rict h

as c

arrie

d ou

t far

m v

isits

to fa

rmer

s tha

t sub

mitt

ed

com

plet

e Ex

pres

sions

of I

nter

est (

EOI)

: Sc

ore

2 or

else

0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce o

btai

n an

d re

view

₋Fa

rm v

isit

repo

rts

and

sign

ed c

omm

itm

ent

form

s

•Fa

rm v

isit

Repo

rts

•A

gree

men

t to

Pr

ocee

d fo

r Q

uota

tion

Form

s

78LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

d)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

Dis

tric

t Ag

ricu

ltura

l Eng

inee

r (a

s Se

cret

aria

t) p

ublic

ized

the

elig

ible

fa

rmer

s th

at t

hey

have

bee

n ap

prov

ed b

y po

stin

g on

the

Dis

tric

t an

d LL

G n

otic

eboa

rds:

Sco

re 2

or

else

0

Che

ck t

he D

istr

ict

and

at le

ast

5 LL

G n

otic

e bo

ards

to

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

the

LG

pub

liciz

ed t

he e

ligib

le

farm

ers

that

the

y ha

ve b

een

appr

oved

•D

istr

ict

and

LLG

no

tice

boar

ds

13Pr

ocur

emen

t,

cont

ract

m

anag

emen

t/ex

ecut

ion:

The

LG

pro

cure

d an

d m

anag

ed m

icro

-sc

ale

irri

gatio

n co

ntra

cts

as p

er

guid

elin

esM

axim

um s

core

18

a) E

vide

nce

that

the

mic

ro-s

cale

ir

riga

tion

syst

ems

wer

e in

corp

orat

ed

in t

he L

G a

ppro

ved

proc

urem

ent

plan

fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

: Sc

ore

1 or

els

e sc

ore

0.

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t an

d D

ispo

sal U

nit

obta

in a

nd

revi

ew:

•Th

e Pr

ocur

emen

t Pl

an fo

r th

e cu

rren

t FY

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er m

icro

-sca

le ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t w

as in

corp

orat

ed

•A

ppro

ved

Proc

urem

ent

Plan

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

req

uest

ed fo

r qu

otat

ion

from

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

supp

liers

pre

-qua

lified

by

the

Min

istr

y of

Agr

icul

ture

, Ani

mal

In

dust

ry a

nd F

ishe

ries

(M

AAI

F):

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

0

From

MA

AIF

obta

in:

₋A

cop

y of

the

pre

-qua

lified

sup

plie

rs.

From

Pro

cure

men

t an

d D

ispo

sal U

nit

obta

in:

₋Re

ques

ts fo

r qu

otat

ion

for

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

supp

liers

to

dete

rmin

e w

heth

er t

hey

wer

e pr

e-qu

alifi

ed b

y M

AAI

F

•Pr

e-qu

alifi

ed

supp

liers

•Re

ques

ted

for

quot

atio

n

c) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

con

clud

ed t

he

sele

ctio

n of

the

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

supp

lier

base

d on

the

set

cri

teri

a:

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

0

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t U

nit

obta

in a

nd r

evie

w:

₋M

inut

es o

f th

e co

ntra

cts

com

mit

tee

to c

heck

w

heth

er s

elec

tion

of t

he ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t su

pplie

r ba

sed

on t

he s

et c

rite

ria

•M

inut

es o

f th

e C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee

(CC

)

d) E

vide

nce

that

the

mic

ro-s

cale

ir

riga

tion

syst

ems

was

app

rove

d by

th

e C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee:

Sco

re 1

or

else

0

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t U

nit

obta

in a

nd r

evie

w:

•M

inut

es o

f th

e co

ntra

cts

com

mit

tee

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er m

icro

-irr

igat

ion

syst

ems

wer

e ap

prov

ed

by C

C b

efor

e co

mm

ence

men

t of

inst

alla

tion.

•M

inut

es o

f th

e C

ontr

acts

Com

mit

tee

(CC

)

79LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

e) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

sig

ned

the

cont

ract

wit

h th

e lo

wes

t pr

iced

te

chni

cally

res

pons

ive

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent

supp

lier

for

the

farm

er

wit

h a

farm

er a

s a

wit

ness

bef

ore

com

men

cem

ent

of in

stal

latio

n sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

Pro

cure

men

t U

nit

obta

in a

nd r

evie

w:

₋Li

st o

f bi

dder

s -

Sam

ple

3 si

tes

and

revi

ew s

elec

ted

bidd

ers’

pri

ce

to d

eter

min

e if

it w

as t

he lo

wes

t an

d te

chni

cally

re

spon

sive

•Li

st o

f se

lect

ed

bidd

ers

•C

ompa

re w

ith

othe

r bi

dder

s’ p

rice

s

f) E

vide

nce

that

the

mic

ro-s

cale

ir

riga

tion

equi

pmen

t in

stal

led

is in

lin

e w

ith

the

desi

gn o

utpu

t sh

eet

(gen

erat

ed b

y Ir

riTr

ack

App

): S

core

2

or e

lse

0

From

MA

AIF

obta

in t

he s

tand

ard

tech

nica

l des

igns

is

sued

to

LGs:

•Sa

mpl

e 3

site

s, c

heck

and

det

erm

ine

whe

ther

: th

e va

riou

s as

pect

s of

the

sys

tem

s ar

e as

per

de

sign

s (a

ccor

ding

to

the

appl

icab

le le

vel o

f th

e co

nstr

uctio

n at

the

tim

e of

the

ass

essm

ent)

•st

anda

rd t

echn

ical

de

sign

s•

Site

vis

it

g) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

hav

e co

nduc

ted

regu

lar

tech

nica

l sup

ervi

sion

of

mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n pr

ojec

ts b

y th

e re

leva

nt t

echn

ical

offi

cers

(D

istr

ict

Agr

icul

tura

l Eng

inee

r or

Con

trac

ted

staff

): S

core

2 o

r el

se 0

From

the

Dis

tric

t Pr

oduc

tion

Offi

ce, o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋LG

sup

ervi

sion

rep

orts

to

esta

blis

h th

at t

he L

G

have

con

duct

ed r

egul

ar t

echn

ical

sup

ervi

sion

₋Sa

mpl

e 3

site

s an

d re

view

site

boo

ks t

o ve

rify

•Su

perv

isio

n re

port

s•

Site

boo

ks

h) E

vide

nce

that

the

LG

has

ove

rsee

n th

e ir

rigat

ion

equi

pmen

t sup

plie

r du

ring:

i.

Test

ing

the

func

tiona

lity

of t

he in

stal

led

equi

pmen

t: S

core

1 o

r el

se 0

ii.H

and-

over

of t

he e

quip

men

t to

the

Appr

oved

Far

mer

(de

liver

y no

te b

y th

e su

pplie

s an

d go

ods

rece

ived

not

e by

the

ap

prov

ed fa

rmer

): S

core

1 o

r 0

₋Sa

mpl

e 3

site

s an

d re

view

site

boo

ks t

o ve

rify

if

the

LG p

rodu

ctio

n de

part

men

t ov

ersa

w t

he li

sted

pr

oces

ses

•Su

perv

isio

n re

port

s•

Site

boo

ks

i)

Evid

ence

tha

t the

Loc

al G

over

nmen

t ha

s m

ade

paym

ent o

f the

sup

plie

r w

ithin

spe

cifie

d tim

efra

mes

sub

ject

to

the

pres

ence

of t

he A

ppro

ved

farm

er’s

sign

ed a

ccep

tanc

e fo

rm:

Scor

e 2

or

else

0

From

the

CFO

, obt

ain:

₋C

opie

s of

pay

men

t re

ques

ts fr

om s

uppl

ier/

files

, co

ntra

cts

and

dete

rmin

e if

paym

ent

was

don

e w

ithi

n sp

ecifi

ed t

ime

fram

e

•Sa

mpl

e co

ntra

cts

•Pa

ymen

t re

ques

ts

j)

Evid

ence

tha

t th

e LG

has

a c

ompl

ete

proc

urem

ent

file

for

each

con

trac

t an

d w

ith

all r

ecor

ds r

equi

red

by t

he

PPD

A L

aw:

Scor

e 2

or e

lse

0

From

the

PD

U o

btai

n an

d re

view

:

₋Pr

ocur

emen

t fil

es fo

r m

icro

-sca

le ir

riga

tion

proj

ects

for

the

prev

ious

FY

to d

eter

min

e w

heth

er t

hey

are

com

plet

e.

•Pr

ocur

emen

t fil

es fo

r m

icro

-sca

le ir

riga

tion

proj

ects

80LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

F.

Envi

ronm

ent

and

Soci

al S

afeg

uard

s

Max

imum

12

poin

ts fo

r th

is

perf

orm

ance

are

a

14G

riev

ance

re

dre

ss: T

he L

G

has

esta

blis

hed

a m

echa

nism

of

addr

essi

ng m

icro

-sc

ale

irri

gatio

n gr

ieva

nces

in

line

wit

h th

e LG

gr

ieva

nce

redr

ess

fram

ewor

k

Max

imum

sco

re 6

a) E

vide

nce

that

the

Loc

al G

over

nmen

t ha

s di

spla

yed

deta

ils o

f th

e na

ture

an

d av

enue

s to

add

ress

gri

evan

ce

prom

inen

tly in

mul

tiple

pub

lic a

reas

: Sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

Des

igna

ted

Gri

evan

ce R

edre

ss O

ffice

r ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

₋C

heck

if G

RM is

dis

play

ed o

n th

e Pr

oduc

tion

depa

rtm

ent

notic

eboa

rd

•LG

Pro

duct

ion

Dep

artm

ent

notic

eboa

rd•

LLG

not

iceb

oard

s

b)

Mic

ro-s

cale

irri

gatio

n gr

ieva

nces

ha

ve b

een:

i.Re

cord

ed s

core

1 o

r el

se 0

ii.

Inve

stig

ated

sco

re 1

or

else

0

iii.

Resp

onde

d to

sco

re 1

or

else

0

iv.

Repo

rted

on

in li

ne w

ith

LG

grie

vanc

e re

dres

s fr

amew

ork

scor

e 1

or e

lse

0

From

the

Des

igna

ted

Gri

evan

ce R

edre

ss O

ffice

r ob

tain

and

rev

iew

:

•Lo

g of

gri

evan

ces

and

chec

k w

heth

er t

hey

wer

e in

vest

igat

ed, r

ecor

ded

and

resp

onde

d to

;

•Re

cord

s of

gri

evan

ces

15Sa

fegu

ards

in

the

deliv

ery

of

inve

stm

ents

Max

imum

sco

re 6

a) E

vide

nce

that

LG

s ha

ve d

isse

min

ated

M

icro

- ir

riga

tion

guid

elin

es t

o pr

ovid

e fo

r pr

oper

siti

ng, l

and

acce

ss

(wit

hout

enc

umbr

ance

), p

rope

r us

e of

agr

oche

mic

als

and

safe

dis

posa

l of

chem

ical

was

te c

onta

iner

s et

c.sc

ore

2 or

els

e 0

From

the

LG

Pro

duct

ion

office

find

out

whe

ther

:

-Mic

ro-

scal

e ir

riga

tion

guid

elin

es (

incl

udin

g E

& S

re

quir

emen

ts)

have

bee

n is

sued

to

the

bene

ficia

ry

smal

l-ho

lder

farm

ers.

-M

oUs

betw

een

LGs

and

bene

ficia

ry fa

rmer

s in

clud

e cl

ause

s to

adh

ere

wit

h re

quir

emen

ts fo

r pr

oper

st

orag

e, u

se, t

rans

port

atio

n, a

nd d

ispo

sal o

f ag

ro-

chem

ical

s an

d if

LGs

mon

itor

com

plia

nce

wit

h th

e E

&

S sa

fegu

ard

requ

irem

ents

·Se

ctor

Gui

delin

es

on m

icro

- sc

ale

irri

gatio

n ·

MoU

s be

twee

n LG

s an

d fa

rmer

s·

Repo

rts

on fa

rm v

isit

s

81LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

Perf

orm

ance

Are

aN

o.Pe

rfor

man

ce

Mea

sure

Scor

ing

Gui

deA

sses

smen

t Pr

oced

ure

Mea

ns o

f Ve

rific

atio

n

b)

Evid

ence

tha

t En

viro

nmen

tal,

Soci

al

and

Clim

ate

Cha

nge

scre

enin

g ha

ve b

een

carr

ied

out

and

whe

re

requ

ired

, ESM

Ps d

evel

oped

, pri

or t

o in

stal

latio

n of

irri

gatio

n eq

uipm

ent.

i.C

oste

d ES

MP

wer

e in

corp

orat

ed in

to d

esig

ns, B

oQs,

bid

ding

an

d co

ntra

ctua

l doc

umen

ts s

core

1 o

r el

se 0

ii.

Mon

itori

ng o

f ir

riga

tion

impa

cts

e.g.

ade

quac

y of

wat

er s

ourc

e (q

ualit

y &

qua

ntity

), e

ffici

ency

of

syst

em

in t

erm

s of

wat

er c

onse

rvat

ion,

use

of

agr

o-ch

emic

als

& m

anag

emen

t of

re

sulta

nt c

hem

ical

was

te c

onta

iner

s sc

ore

1 or

els

e 0

iii.

E&S

Cer

tifica

tion

form

s ar

e co

mpl

eted

and

sig

ned

by E

nvir

onm

enta

l O

ffice

r pr

ior

to p

aym

ents

of

cont

ract

or

invo

ices

/cer

tifica

tes

at in

teri

m a

nd fi

nal

stag

es o

f pr

ojec

ts s

core

1 o

r el

se 0

iv.

E&S

Cer

tifica

tion

form

s ar

e co

mpl

eted

and

sig

ned

by C

DO

pri

or

to p

aym

ents

of

cont

ract

or in

voic

es/

cert

ifica

tes

at in

teri

m a

nd fi

nal s

tage

s of

pr

ojec

ts s

core

1 o

r el

se 0

From

the

LG

Env

iron

men

t offi

cer,

obta

in t

he

Envi

ronm

enta

l and

Soc

ial S

cree

ning

For

m/E

SMP

(whe

re a

pplic

able

), fo

r al

l mic

ro ir

riga

tion

proj

ects

to

veri

fy w

heth

er:

₋E

& S

scr

eeni

ng w

as c

arri

ed o

ut fo

r, ES

MP

prep

ared

and

cos

ted

(whe

re r

equi

red)

.

·En

viro

nmen

tal a

nd

Soci

al s

cree

ning

Fo

rms

·ES

MPs

(w

here

re

quir

ed)

·M

onth

ly m

onito

ring

re

port

s (i

ncud

es E

&S

aspe

cts)

·Si

gned

E &

S

com

plia

nce

cert

ifica

te


ANNEXES

Annex 1 Code of Ethics for the Assessment Teams

The assessment process and quality assurance under LG PA will be contracted to independent private firm(s). The contracted private firm(s) will have to adhere to the following standards/terms which should be part of the contract documents.

1. Fielding of competent team members:o Staff conducting the assessment should be those submitted for evaluation during

the bidding process. o The staff should demonstrate that they have proven capacity and experience in

the respective areas of expertise as presented in their respective CVs;o The staff should be neutral and without conflict of interest in terms of LG to be

reviewed.

2. Team objectivity, neutrality, and integrity during the assessment process:o The team members should adhere to the assessment process, procedures and

scoring as prescribed in the LG PA Manual.o The team members should not get involved in any sort of corrupt tendencies/

practices.o The team member cannot receive any payments from the assessed LGs/or related

bodies/stakeholders.o The team members should not have (or should declare) any sort of conflict of

interest in the LGs being assessed, e.g. the team member should not have been involved in work or related support to the LG in case over the past 5 years;

o Team members are obliged to report about any irregularities related to the assessments to the client.

3. Timely and quality production of the reportso The team members should produce the report as per the provided formats.o The team members should provide the report within the provided time.o The team members should provide comprehensive and accurate information

In case of failure to comply with the provisions of this code of conduct, the assessment team or any member thereon shall be subject to all/or some of the following disciplinary measures:

1. Additional work and reassessments: Teams may be required to conduct follow-up work on issues which are not sufficiently clear, or where there are cases of contradiction between the assessments and the quality assurance.

2. Deduction in the contract value for the assessments: In severe cases, where there are clear instances of wrong/flawed results, this may lead to deductions in the payments for the work conducted.

3. Blacklisting from future assessments: This will happen if there are strong reasons to believe that assessments lack quality, are flawed, or manipulated.


Annex 2 Exit Declaration Form


OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTER

LOCAL GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT OF SERVICE DELIVERY PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

EXIT DECLARATION FORM

This form is designed to capture key issues emerging during the Assessment of Local Governments. The key issues should be agreed upon by both the Assessment Team members and the Local Government Technical Planning Committee and fully endorsed by the Assessment Team Leader and the CAO/Town Clerk (or their representatives).

To be: (i) filled by the Assessment Team Leader; and (ii) signed by the CAO/Town Clerk or Representative of the District/Municipal Local Government on the one hand, and the Assessment Team Leader on the other hand.

Name of the Local Government …………………………..............................................................…………………………

Dates of the LG Performance Assessment………………................................................……………………………………

1. Level of preparedness by the Local Government for the Performance Assessment.

(a) Availability of key LG officials or their assigned representatives-(Tick if met):

i. Chief Administrative Officer

ii. Education Officer

iii. Health Officer

iv. Water Officer

v. District Production Officer

vi. Human Resource Officer

vii. Chief Finance Officer

viii. Planner

ix. Physical Planner

x. Gender Focal Person

xi. Environment Officer

xii. Secretary District Service Commission

xiii. Clerk to Council

xiv. Procurement Officer

xv. Internal Auditor


(b) Access to key documents (list)………….........................……………………………………………………………………….

………………………………………………………………………………………………………..........................................…………………………..

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..........................................…………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….........................................……………….

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………........................................………………..

2. Main strengths identified by the Assessment Team:

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….......….

3. Key gaps/challenges identified by the Assessment Team:

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………….......................…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

4. Specific areas of concern arising from the entire Annual Performance Assessment findings, whereby the D/MTPC is not in agreement (if any) ……………………………………………......................................………………….

……………………………………………………………………………………………………….......................................………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….......................................

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………..………………………………………………

5. General comments and observations by the CAO/Town Clerk about the LGPA process or team:

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………..............................…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Endorsement by CAO/Town Clerk or their authorized representatives:

Signed …………………………………........................……... Name…………………………………..................……………………………

Date……………………………………......................…………… (Insert official stamp of the LG).

Endorsement by the LG Performance Assessment Team Leader:

Signed …………………………………………....................….. Name……………..................…………………………………………………

Date……………………...................……………………………


85LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL


86LO

CAL

GO

VER

NM

ENT

MAN

AGEM

ENT

OF

SERV

ICE

DEL

IVER

Y PE

RFO

RMAN

CE

ASS

ESSM

ENT

MAN

UAL

OFFICE OF THE PRIME MINISTERPlot 9-11 Apollo Kagwa Road

P.O.Box 341, Kampala, Ugandawww.opm.go.ug

local government management of service delivery

Documents