_______

?3 / ,3 -Djf.f-twm, PD-A ,D-*,p6

Sran 1. TRANSACTION CODE &SNCY "On IMYSRN,,• L O EELOP M N Trt,O WA PA F

PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND REQUEST & £OO FOR ALLOTMENT OF FUNDS PART I I CI CAG 2. DOCUMENT CODEl N 5

1. COUNTRY/ENToT"' 4. DOCUMENT RE% lON NUMIER

DS/RAD Origi nal D c S..PROJECT MUMGEP (7 ddijif) 6. 7, PROJECT.UREAU/OiCETITLE (Maezxeu 40 hrectera)

A SYSOL 6. COO

C931-1053 ] DSB C E Managing Decentralization 4. PROJECT ACTION TAKEN S. PERIOOS EST. OF IMFLEMENTATION

APPROVAL

DECISION poipsJwuovco Ok: OCAUTHORIZCD VMS. [L QTRS [.

10.APPROVED 1UDGET AID APPROPRIATED FUNDS (S000)

.APPRo ,.PRIMARY, PRIMARY TECH. CODE E. ,ST FYZ H. 2ND F,,8 K. 3RD Y .

A. APPON PURPOSEL COot C GRANT 0 .OAN F GRANT 0 LOAN I GRANT J. LO"L L GRANT 4. LOAN

( FN 664 720 778 - -395 121 EHt 284 720 648 - 400 131

143

TOTALS 426- _9bR R 1 1 P FOJEIVT w 1%N OI N G A . ]A. APPRO. Q. "N.4TH F _E4&TH T FY 8LIFE OF PROJECT AUT OrRIIED aMANT LOAN

PRIATION itENTicrm A PPlOPRI AT ZAC. ,:RANT P L.OAN X. 4RANT S. LOA-J T GRANT U. .OAN COOEISN N

I LIFR OF PROJCCTt FN 1400 40 ,0.M j_2 - ,-C€.-.NTAL., 121 EH UOF ,OJCCT

I 1 PRO.jCT FUNOING141 _______1X6 ______ 18___141_TOTALS .. J _ _-.9.41 t__i-,_i 12. INITIAL PROIECT FUNDING ALLOTMENT REQUESTED (S0001

B. ALLOTMENT REQUEST NO. 1. FUNDS RESERVED FOR ALLOTMENT

A. APIHOPNIA TIOI4 t: G'.AN I LO.ANI' TYPEO NAME Whi,(. SKH.PRiF/FNV)

it) FN 778_121 EH 648 SIGNATURE

141 DATE

TOTALS 1426

14. SOURCE/ORIGIN OF GOODS AND SERVICES 941 D000 9] LOCAL OTHER

1S. FOR AMENDMENTS. NATURE OF CHANGE PROPOSED

FOR . AUTHORIZING 17. ACTION DATE IS. ACTION REFERENCE ACTION REFERENCE DATE wt OFFICE SYMIOL 1 m Tv (Oplee101I) o vO "YW,,PPC/PIA ,ISk

• IUSE ONLYI

AID Ill". 17-74)

_ _

PROJECT AUTHORIZATION AND REQUEST FOR ALLOTMENT OF FUNDS

PART II

ENTITY: Development Support Bureau

PROJECT: Managing Decentralization

PROJECT NUMBER: 931-1053

I hereby approve DS/RAD funding in the amount of $4,033,000 for the Managing Decentralization Project over a 5-v~j period subject to availabilityof funds, and I authori&1778,O00 of FN andwS48,000 of EHR in FY 1979. The contribution of additional funding as authorized by regional bureaus isalso approved for this project.

Signature: a .7TO" Babbi -Deputj3Asi stant Administrator

for Food and Nutrition Development Support Bureau

Date: _,_ _ _ _. _ _

Attachment: PAF and Project Paper

Clearances: uL DS/RAD:Harlan HobgoodJA - Date I DS/RAD:James Wunsch DOate DS/RAD:Norman Nicholson Date DS/RAD:John Gelb Date )-7. DS/PO:Robert Simpson Date

___

I1. TRANSACTION COViE

AG|NCv On ImYCONATIONAI, E.VIELOm0aNT A A0 Pp

N AN GC1_1,,IPROJECT PAPER FACESHEET 0 ELETE . DOCUMENT

3 I. COUNTRY/ENTITY 4. DOCUMENT REVISION NUMUER

DS/RAD nrigina1 . PROJECT NUMUER (7 dJgits) 6. |UR1EAU, OFFICE 7. PROJECT TITLE (.,aximum 40 chwacef.)

-A. SYMUOL . GCOOK

931-1053 1 DSB L-363 Managing Decentralization " 1. ESTIMATED FY OF PROJECT COMPLETION ESTIMATED9. DATE OF OULIGATION

I 84~A. INITIAL WY 17191 3. UANTEN orYI8t C. FINAL. pry 1813 nt.r z, 2. 3. 4)

10. ESTIMATED COSTS 3000 OR EQUIVALENT SI -

FIRST FY LIFE OF PROJECT A. FUNDING SOURCE

B. PPX C. C o. TOTAL C. FX F. L.'C 0. TOTAL.

AID APPqOPRIATFD TOTAL 1 ,42 1,426 4.01- 4.- qI GRANTI 1 1,426 1.424L,426. 4.0.3 L.OANI I I I I I I

OTMER 1 .U..

HOST COUNTRY

OTHER DONOR(S)

TOTAS _ _ ,426 4,033 1 4,033 II. PROPOSED IUDGET APPROPRIATED FUNDS SO1OI

A. APPIRCo . PRIMARY PRIMARY "ECH. COOE E. IST FY N. 2ND FY 80 K. 3NO FY1yS

PRIIATION PURPIOSE SCODE C. GRANT 0.L0AN f. GRANT I G.L0AN I. GRANT J.. LOAN I.. GRANT M. LOAN

1,) EN 6_ 84 77n 1.42L. 79r121

(3) _____ T_____ (4)

_

TOTALS 1.426 795

N. 4TH FY IL. STH ~y.. LIFE OF PROJECT 12. IN-D3EPTH EVAL.UATION SCHEDULED

A. APPqOPRIATION OZRANT ] . LOAN q, GRANT L-OAN T. GRANT L.OANS. U.

,FN 866 1946 4,033 ?"

121 94 _ _ _ _

(3) . 1 (4)

TOTALS 866 946 1 4.033 1

13. DATA CHANGE INDICATOR. WERE CHANGES MADE IN THE PIO FACESHEET DATA. 8LOCKS 12, 13. 14, OR IS Ok IN PRPMFACESHEET DATA. 8.OCK 27 IF YES, ATTACH CHANGED PID FACESHEET.

W i-NO 2 *YES

14. tG E CLEARANCE IS. DATE DOCUMENT RECEIVEDIN AI3/W. OR FOR AI O/W OOCU.SIGNATUR MENTS. DATE OF DISTRISUTION

TITLE HalnH oDATE SIGNED

Office Director I 0I I I AIl 1330.4 13-761

MANAGING DECENTRALIZATION

Project Paper

Page

Part I. Summary and Recommendations 1

A. Recommendations 1

B. Description of the Project 2

C. Summary Findings 11

Technical 11

Financial 12

Economic 14

Social 15

Relationship to other DS/RAD projects 16

Part II. Project Description and Background 19

A. Project Background 19

B. Project Description 42

1. Project Goal 42

2. Project Purpose 43

3. Project Outputs- 47

4. Project Inputs 69

Part III. Project Analyses 80

A. Technical Analysis, Including Environmental Assessment 80

B. Budget and Analysis 81

C. Social and Economic Analysis 82

ii

Part IV. Implementation Arrangements 84

A. Analysis of Recipient and AID's Administrative 84

Arrangements

B. Implementation 90

C. Implementation Plan 93

D. Evaluation Plan 101

E. Project Operations 104

Project Design Logical Framework 110

1

Managing Decentralization Project Paper

Part I. Summary and Recommendations

A. Recommendations

Authorization of a grant in the amount of 4,032,684 over a five

year period. This represents an obligation of 1,425,468 in FY 1979,

a second obligation of 794,983 in FY 1981, and an obligation of

866,332 in FY 1982, and a final obligation of 945,901 in FY 1983.

2

B. Description of the Project

The goal of this project isto increase the quality and quantity

of goods and services delivered to the poor majorities. The subgoal

which will contribute to this larger goal is strengthening the capacity

of decentralized organizations to identify, design, organize, implement

and maintain development projects and service programs. The term

decentralization as used here refers to expanding the authority,

responsibility, and/or resources of field offices (deconcentration) or

of local authorities or other local bodies (devolution).

To achieve this subgoal, the purpose of this project is to

perform three major tasks: (1)to define and help implement national

strategies for decentralization; (2)to strengthen the effectiveness

and expand the responsiveness of decentralized sector service prograIms;

(3)to strengthen the general operational capacity of local governments.

In each task, the project will focus on organization, managerial, and

administrative issues associated with decentralization.

The logical justification for this project rests on three

conclusions:

- decentralization inplanning, organization, management and

implementation of development projects and programs isan

important and valid means of increasing the quantity and

quality of goods, services, and influence available to the

poor majorities in LDCs;

3

- to organize and operate effectively decentralized projects

and programs, project designers and public administrators

must confront and resolve early in the project development

process, numerous difficult issues of organization and

management of human resources and institutions internal and

external to such projects and programs; and

- a centrally funded project which marshals a multidisciplinary

team to integrate practical experience with organizational

principles via action research, and to disseminate this

information through consultation and state-of-the-art materials

to AID and other donor personnel, can make a highly cost­

effective contribution to the successful design and

implementation of such projects.

Substantial recent research has demonstrated that there are

significant advantages to decentralizing the planning and management of

development projects and service delivery systems. These materials,

firmly grounded inUSAID and other donor experience indicate that these

advantages include:

- improved project management;

- more effective and responsive planning;

- increased popular participation and support;

- increased efficiency of central bureau operations;

- avoiding diseconomies of scale;

- greater equity in development;

- greater involvement by traditional and non-governmental

institutions and organizations in development.

4

However, both field experience and accepted principles of

organization science indicate, as well, that decentralization must

contend with three general problems: (1)balancing local action with

continued national authority; (2)effectively and efficiently managing

larger numbers of dispersed actors and programs; and, (3)maintaining

program coherence and integrity as number and diversity of participants

increases. These general problems are manifestc in a number of specific

organizational and management issues indecentralized projects.

For example:

- identifying and implementing the appropriate mix of functions

between spatially oriented, multifunctional authorities,

and vertically organized, single-function ministries;

- integrating local initiative with national planning, programming

and budgeting responsibilities;

- integrating local accountability of programs with hitherto

nationally based and controlled personnel systems;

- determining the optimal location and logistical support for

deconcentrated services;

- upgrading local management and information generation and

utilization capacity;

- institutionalizing local participation into the organization

and management of programs;

- avoiding control by local elites;

- avoiding the deterioration of national planning and goals

into merely local "porkbarreling";

5

preventing local factionalism from paralyzing decentralized

projects and programs; and others.

USAID has responded to the opportunities offered by decentralization

with a large number of projects supporting deconcentrated services,

upgraded local authorities, decentralized service centers, training and others. While some of these projects insome contexts have progressed well, others have experienced problems, and no one issure

how they will perform once external funding and support is completed.

Furthermore, USAID experience has remain fragmented, among bureaus,

missions and sectoral areas. For these reasons, this office believes a centrally funded project to survey and integrate AID experience in decentralization, to consult with missions and host governments on the de­signing of and implementation of decentralized projects, and to

disseminate information on the organization and management of decentralization would materially improve future decentralized projects'

effectiveness and efficiency.

A critical lesson of experience guiding this project isour

conclusion that a multidisciplinary approach must be brought to these problems. No single discipline or theoretical approach to public administration includes even a majority of the analytical and applied tools required to perform these tasks. For example, in strengthening

specific sector delivery systems, the skills of field administration

specialists are necessary to identify and prescribe general personnel

6

and information control systems which maximize the use of available

personnel resources, stimulate delivery of field services rather than

office work, and sustain and support the information flow necessary to

provide informed program coordination, evaluation and revision by policy

level personnel. However, even these important activities are not

sufficient: also necessary are the sector specific skills of experts

in the organization and management of the several service delivery

systems. The logistical and personnel characteristics; the desirable

and necessary relationship between and among the various professionals

and paraprofessionals involved; the particular configuration of

relationships between clients and organizations; and the varying

mixes among research and application, demonstration and prescription, and

information and uncertainty unique to each sector, must be carefully

addressed in designing organizational and managerial structures and

subsystems to support decentralization. Decentralization causes the

salience of these issues to increase as the relevance of earlier,

hierarchically oriented solutions, diminishes.

Further critical support for decentralized sector programs can

come from local governments: recurrent cost support, identification of

top candidates for paraprofessional responsibilities, lateral

coordination with other sector activities, and institutionalized

channels to increase responsiveness and accountability to local

concerns are among these activities. But for these to occur, local

government must be strengthened generally, better organized, and

7

better managed than has hitherto been the case. Thus specialists in

local government, particularly those experienced in dealing with rural

governments and mobilizing their skills and resources to facilitate

and integrate central programs to local needs, can contribute much

to the decentralization of sector programs. A parallel argument

can certainly be made for specialists inadministration trained in

political economy, or "public choice." These skills can be used to

design nonhierarchical, flexible, possibly lower-cost alternatives

to conventional bureaucratic structures for organizing and delivering

public services.

It is,therefore, essential that a critical mix of interacting

specialists from a variety of approaches and disciplinary perspectives

to administration be focused on this problem. The applied solutions

to organizing and managing decentralization have not come in the past

from any one of these, and are even less likely to do so in the future

as the pace and complexity of integrated, multilevel and multi­

actor programs increases.

For these reasons, this project will bring four bodies of knowledge

and expertise to the challenge of organizing and managing decentralization:

the traditional concerns of public administration with public organization

performance in LDCs including contemporary findings on field administration

in LDCs; the rich body of applied experience pertinent to strengthening

the capacity of local government; recent experiments and innovations in

service delivery systems which have developed modes of organization

8

and management articulated to the particular social, economic and

operational characteristic of diverse service sectors; and,

contemporary thinking inthe area of political economy which is

sought to adapt the traditional, hierarchical bureaucratic structure

to sophisticated lessons of experience regarding individual, group

and organizational patterns of behavior inmarket situations.

The project will be contracted to an institution or consortium

of institutions for five years to accomplish the following five

major outputs:

1. Long Term Country Consulting and Applied Research. In at

least four countries (one ineach geographic region), the contractor

will work with USAID field missions and LDC government to: (1)develop

the information bases for strategizing, and assist inthe formulation

of such strategies and tactics to implement decentralization efforts;

(2)assist in the design and programs and projects supporting these

strategies; (3)assist in developing and implementing appropriate

organizational and managerial techniques to expedite decentralization;

(4)implement pilot decentralized projects; (5)assist inanalyzing

administrative problems incurrent decentralization efforts; and

(6)provide evaluation studies to determine the impact and effectiveness

of such programs. The findings from these activities will be synthesized

with state-of-the-art material and included incase studies, operating

handbooks, and other documents to made available to the field and

to other interested indecentralization.

9

2. Short Term Consulting and Applied Research. The project will

deliver consultants to selected Missions who will assist indesigning,

monitoring, and evaluating decentralized projects appropriate to

individual host-government environments. This will include:

(1)advice on adapting to specific LDCs decentralized projects utilized

in other developing countries; (2)responding to specific requests

by host governments for help inexpediting project and program goals

requiring decentralization; and, (3)developing project initiatives

utilizing decentralization strategies to attack recurrent local

development problems.

3. Operationally Relevant Sate of Art and Practical Guidance

Materials: The contractor will review and abstract the major lessons

of experience in decentralization as presented inthe scholarly

literature, reports of donor agencies, project documents and other

sources. Particular attention will be given to recent and current

decentralization efforts in LDCs and their relevance to public

choice approaches to administration. These will be circulated as

state-of-the-art materials. During both long and short-term con­

sultancies to field Missions, analytical reports on case materials will

be developed which will address themselves to the key organization

and management issues identified above. These activity reports will

be synthesized with state-of-the-art materials to produce additional

iterations of knowledge.

10

4. Networing of Experts in the Field: The contractor or

cooperating institution(s) will identify field practitioners and

scholars with experience in the design and management of decentralization

and will draw them into a systematic interchange of information through

newsletters and other information exchanges.

5. Information Dissemination and Training: Utilizing the products

from the above efforts, training materials will be developed and tested

through workshops and field seminars for application inLDC and regional

training institutions. Materials such as the reference manuals will

thus be made available to other consulting firms and teaching institutions

which will improve the general state of the drt in delivery of consultant

services to AID and other donor agencies and directly to LDCs.

This project will be managed and backstopped by DS/RAD management

science staff which will monitor the technical work and assure the most

appropriate application of project outputs. The manager will be aided

by the Development Administration Steering Committee and a specific

project committee composed of representatives of the Regional Bureaus.

Close coordination in project development and execution will be maintained

with the UN, the IBRD, and other IGOs or NGOs working this field.

11

C. Summary Findings

1. Technical

The project has as its primary purpose the marshalling of

resources which missions can draw upon to assist in the design,

implementation, and evaluation of projects which utilize decentra­

lized strategies to increase the flow of basic services to the

poor majority. The technical details will, however, be specific

to the particular projects and countries inwhich the prime

contractor will be involved. For example, the input of the

contractor will be different if the project isone concerned with

supporting general expansion of the responsibilities and capabilities

of local government (for example, incooperation with programs now

underway inGhana or The Philippines), or is concentrated on problems

of institutionalizing user associations in small scale irrigation

projects, or developing management systems to facilitate decentralized

health delivery systems. Similarly, the contribution of the contractor

will be greatly affected by the nature of host government commitment

to decentralization, by the character of the rural social structure,

by local cultural patterns, by available local physical and human

infrastructure, by the historical role of local government, etc.

Infact, it is in large part to help project managers effectively

respond to this complex set of variables that this project is

designed.

Thus the contractor will be expected to respond flexibly,

drawing from its diverse expertise to adapt to local conditions,

12

priorities, and opportunities for decentralization. What integrates

the contractor's tasks are the three cross-cutting core issues of

decentralized administration: integrating national and local

organizations and activities; managing increased numbers of dispersed

and increasingly autonomous actors and projects; and, maintaining

program coherency and integrity in spite of probable local

particularistic, fragmenting and elite pressures. How the contractor

will resolve this is expected to be varied sensitively with

country and prggram circumstances.

2. Financial

It is not the purpose of this project to meet all the needs

of AID missions for professional input into decentralization

projects of interest to their host governments. It isassumed that

consultation by the contractor will be one input into the design,

implementation or evaluation phases of such projects. This input

would, naturally, be primarily concerned with organization and

management aspects of decentralized projects; occasionally a larger

country-level strategizing role or a pilot project implementation

role would be appropriate; however, in those circumstances,

mission funds would be expected to support the nonprofessional and

a portion of the professional inputs for the projects.

As an applied research project, it is anticipated that between

four and six long-term associations with AID missions including

the strategic, design and pilot implementation phases would be

13

developed; and that around six short-term design/evaluation con­

sultations would be performed per year. The long-term involvements

would provide in-depth involvement and understanding for the

project research functions, and will complement and strengthen the

short-term activities. The latter will serve as a "reality-testing"

ground in the ongoing AID context of project design, implementation

and evaluation. The two activities ought, therefore, to encourage

the contractor to engage inlong-term thinking about decentralization,

but to continuously force those thoughts through field applications,

keeping the research phase closely relevant to AID and other donors'

needs.

The provision of approximately $800,000 a year for five years

for this project reflects the cost of the contractor's involvement

with a select group of missions in short-term applied research and

consultation. Itfurther covers the cost of information dissemination

activities, but not all costs of long-term research or pilot

implementation phases of the project. As the information

dissemination system and the expert network will multiply the

results of the direct conceptual/applied research and consultation

work of the prime contractor, these outputs are important inaccomplishing

the project goal. They are, in fact, the means by which this DS/RAD

investment will have an impact on the large number of projects targeted

14.

at the rural poor which the Agency undertakes each year.

This information will be made available to other contractors

whose understanding of decentralization is critical to their

effective work in LDCs.. This will further support the activities

of AID, other donors and LDC administrators themselves.

3. Economic Analysis

The economic need for and justification of this project is

based upon the congruence between AID and host governments' current

concern with dispersing the benefits of developmgnt to the poor

majorities, and the well-known administrative problems associated

with decentralization. The challenges of organizing and managing

vastly increased numbers of projects, of maintaining central­

local coordination, of avoiding program fragmentation, and of

strengthening local government, are serious ingredients to

mobilizing effectively local resources to identify and support

projects which reach the poor majorities.

Decentralizing project and program responsibility to the

localities-- including the identification, implementation,

maintenance and recurrent cost phases-- is essential if the

resources of the poor majorities are to be unlocked and focused

on development, and if these programs are to be continued over

the long run. This has become particularly evident inconsidering

the recurrent cost aspects of human resource programs such as

health, nutrition, and family planning. However, this decentralization

15

must be carefully and effectively integrated and interfaced with

the continued responsibilities of centrally based planning, logistical,

personnel and budgetary functions. It is to address the organization

and management of this critical linkage dimension while itsupports

the strengthening of local institutions, that this project is

designed. And it is in providing this critical increment of

organizational development that this project has its economic

justification.

Of course, the economic feasibility of the various decentralization

efforts which this project will support must be appraised independently

of this pruject. This latter function, however remains a largely

mission, or in some cases, joint responsibility between this office

and the appropriate mission. Each project supported by this

effort should be economically sound in its own right, assuming

it is administratively feasible. This centrally-funded project

will expedite and facilitate these administrative assumptions and

requirements through field consultation and applied research.

4. Social Analysis

The immediate and direct beneficiaries of this project

will be AID mission staffs with responsibility for encouraging

expansion of the quality and quantity of services delivered to

the poor majorities. The project will increase their capacity

to identify and resolve at the project design and implementation

stages the administrative problems inherent indecentralization.

16

Advice on these issues will be provided through professional

consultation and written materials disseminated throughout the

Agency. Substantial benefits should over the life of the project,

also flow to the poor majorities, as the number of projects

utilizing decentralized strategies to disperse goods and services

increase and as they are better organized, managed, and integrated

into national plans and programs. Indeed, the evidence as discussed

intXa project background and as presented in the social and

economic project analysis, is that decentralization isa means of providing

increrlsed levels of services at lower costs when itcan maintain program

integrity, national leadership, and coherent management.This is particularly

the case when such decentralization efforts include maximum

utilization and mobilization of local governments intheir

strategies.

5. Relationship to Ongoing DS/RAD Activities

Managing Decentralization is one of several complementary

DS/RAD projects intended

to strengthen the ability of LDCs to deliver goods and services

to the poor majorities. The unique focus of this project ison

strategizing at the national level on decentralization, strengthening

the general capacities of local governments, and organizing and

managing deconcentration of sector-specific service activities.

In each case the primary concern of the project iswith administrative

17

processes and structures, and designing them to make decisions,

implement projects and support programs at the field or local

level more effectively.

"Participation in Rural Development" complements this project

in its emphasis on mobilizing the rural poor to participate in

and through the structures which the Decentralization project will

strengthen. Decentralization, inother words, looks primarily at

"top-down" and administrative problems; Participation looks primarily

at "bottom-up" and mobilization and popular organization problems.

We anticipate that at times the two projects may overlap slightly;

we regard this, however, as an opportunity for fruitful cross­

fertilization and cooperation between varying skills, disciplines

and approaches to a fundamental problem in current development goals.

This project complements "Area Development" in its emphasis

on strengthening and supporting the administrative capacity of

local governments and field representatives of sector ministries

which will be responsible for supporting, funding (inpart), and

implementing the regional plans that project will develop. This

project isalso concerned with strengthening the capacity of local

governments to assess and contribute grass-roots concerns to area

and other planning efforts.

The Decentralization project generally complements the portfolio

of this office in its concern with strengthening the operational

18

capacity of field personnel and local governments. For innearly

all cases: rural markets, off-farm employment, project management, etc.,

strengthened decentralized institutions are implied by and will

strengthen their programs of rural development.

Insummary, Managing Decentralization isone of several

projects in this office concerned with increasing LDC and AID

abilities to constructively mobilize the poor majorities to participate

in,and to ultimately control their development. Its unique

focus ison building organizational and managerial technical

competency into national decentralization strategies, into

strengthened local government,and into the deconcentration of

service ministries.

19

Managing Decentralization

II. Project Background and Description

A. Project Background

The basic needs, poor majority and participatory orientation of

USAID assistance since the mid-1970's along with increased concern by

LDCs for these goals has had a substantial impact on the design and

operating characteristics of development assistance. Major infrastructure,

centrally funded and operated projects have increasingly given way to

smaller scale, dispersed, locally oriented, supported and administered

efforts. Indeed, inthe FY 1979 Congressional Presentation, more than

250 USAID projects fit at least one of these criteria.

The demand this places on LDCs is clear and dramatic: decentralization

of delivery systems, personnel, resources, skills and initiative is

both stimulated by these projects, and required if their long-term

prospects are to be bright. The consequences for LDC institutional,

operational and managerial infrastructures are equally significant:

hitherto centralized policymaking and operational control must be

decentralized, and weak local authorities must be materially

strenghened.

To continue to be a full partner indevelopment assistance, USAID

must expand its capacity to respond to these institutional needs.

AID must offer effective and appropriate advice on organizing and

managing decentralization, both for sector ministries and for local

government. For example, AID should be able to respond to such problems

20

as: increasing horizontal linkages among local officials; identifying

critical local skill deficiencies and designing appropriate training

projects; designing organizational and management routines and

procedures pertinent to local skills and needs; institutionalizing popular

participation inlocal government; supporting the administration of

local level planning and integrating itwith regional and national

planning; designing and supporting central support and logistical

capabilities to support local activities; and developing administrative

and legal reforms to strengthen local institutions.

Several LDC governments have long been committed to decentralization.

Tanzania, for example, has attempted since the mid-1960's to disperse

the benefits of development throughout the country and to encourage

local self-management inthe process. Several Latin American states

have encouraged and strengthened local government and administration by

establishing municipal development corporations, banks or institutes

(Honduras, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Venezuela, Brazil, Paraguay and Bolivia).

In the last decade, several other developing nation governments have

made verying degrees of policy and/or statutory commitments to

decentralize their public investment planning and administrative processes.

They include, among others, Ghana, Kenya, Ethiopia, Upper Volta,

Thailand, Egypt, Tunisia, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea,

and Panama. They may be followed by several other governments currently

considering new decentralization, including Liberia, the Sudan, Cameroon,

Zaire, Nigeria, several Sahelian states, Nicaragua, El Salvador,

21

Indonesia, the Yemen Arab Republic, and others.

Activities innumerous sector areas involve decentralization.

Health extension systems, family planning, nutritional education,

small scale irrigation and water management, potable water, range

management, general agricultural extension and research application,

reforestation and anti-desertification, rural service-training centers,

small-farmer savings mobilization, agricultural-credit administration,

all have operational requirements which encourage, require or demand

decentralization. In some cases, local level personnel must be trained

and supported to work with and institutionalize local associations

which are required to plan projects, marshal local labor or financial

or other resources; and manage both the construction and start-up

phase as well as to continue local operation. Substantial recent

research on development projects (inagriculture, for example,

see Uma Lele and Small Farmer Strategies Report of DAI) has suggested

that the failure to address these local institutional needs fatally

weakens such projects from the start. Inother cases, the effective

delivery of services requires the ability and willingness of local

practitioners/agents to respond quickly and flexibly to locally unique

conditions and needs. Insome cases local absorption of recurrent costs,

and local quality-performance control are essential if human service

programs are to be financially feasible and socially viable. Inall

cases, the formerly centralized logistical, planning, personnel,

information processing and policy making routines and systems

22

must be adopted to allow and stimulate greater local initiative, to

make better use of existing field personnel, to work as partners in

a context of expanded local accountability, and to maintain, as well,

national leadership and program/goal integrity.

Rather than dealing with these issues on a project-by-project

basis, several developing states have deliberately chosen broader approaches

to decentralization. These have made a conscious national policy choice

for across the board initiatives to upgrade local and regional planning

capacities, reassign and retrain personnel, redistribute resources to

local authorities, increase local revenue capacities, and re­

orient general statutory authority. This mode of decentralization is

becoming more common among developing states as fears of a loss in

centralized authority are overcome by a recognized need to modify

administrative structures in order to mobilize local human and material

resources,and to better distribute geographically and socially the

benefits of development.

A substantial upgrading of the capacity of local government is

necessary ifthese initiatives are to succeed. Because of long

traditions of administrative centralization, weakness in local resources

and skills, and at times, the centralizing influence of earlier

international donor aid local government has languished, and usually

been the weakest link between citizen and central government. This

has been an error of serious consequences, as it has made nearly

impossible the mobilization and involvement of the vast majority

23

of LOC populations into the development process. Ithas impeded their

control over local service delivery, short circuited their input on

local needs, separated local leadership and authority from national

institutions, and discouraged local initiative in financing, initiating

and maintaining local development efforts; equally, it has raised the

cost of development programs by lodging most authority and responsibility

for them in expensive, central, hierarchical bureaucracies. Thus local

support for and the relevance of programs shrank as national costs

grew. What isneeded now are organizational strategies and management

tactics to support the current efforts of LDC governments to build

local institutions into engines of development. Several reforms in

are offering promise of some genuine structural innovations/strengthening

local government, and may prove substantially more effective inboth

the short and long run than either the centralized, hierarchical model

of centrally planned and controlled development, or the project-by-project

modal for decentralization.

Decentralization has been identified as a means of increasing

the level of public services delivered to the populace at a lower cost

through several advantages it brings to development programs and projects:

- Improved project management: Expetitious and coordinated

implementation of development projects has always been a

challenge. Frequently, highly centralized technocratic

hierarchies have been thought to be the only efficient way

to meet this challenge. However, as developing states and

donor agencies move to larger numbers of small scale projects, and to

area-wide, multisector "integrated" projects inorder to reach the

rural poor, overcentralized management is becoming more of a problem

than a solution. Itis,for example, difficult to manage effectively

from the center and meet the highly varied circumstances, problems

and opportunities found across large areas. Adaptability, flexibility

and speedy utilization of idiosyncratic opportunities are qualities

particularly necessary to projects seeking substantial local participation

in labor and material resources, and which depend for lasting success,

on local leadership. Finally, integrated projects require close and

timely coordination of functions traditionally separated by line

ministries which generally coordinate only at the center. Resolving

misunderstandings or genuine policy disagreements, or even concluding

simple coordination agreements through such structures can slow projects

intolerably. Effective, timely feedback from the target population

appears increasingly to be the best monitor of such efforts. But it is

seldom obtained, short of confrontation, without a change in the locus

and style of project authority.

- More effective planning: While central planning has a critical

role in national development (seeting national goals and priorities,

allocating scarce resources, stabilizing the macro-economic

environment), there are several critical planning activities which

can be far better performed at sub-national levels. Among these

are: identifying and tailoring optimal strategies for varying

geographic, demographic and economic conditions; responding to

locally perceived needs, desired improvements, and willingness to

support particular projects; adapting plans quickly to meet charged

local circumstances; encouraging genuine local popular participation

and leadership; gathering, processing and responding to feedback on

plan implementation performance; and, providing a basis for manage­

ment through sub-national, horizontal authorities which can integrate

multisectoral activity.

- Increased onmular particiation: Encouraging genuine participation

when policymaking has occured primarily at the national offices

of separated sector ministries has been difficult. Even when

local input has been desired and encouraged, the weakness of

local institutions and the general absence of administrative

structures near enough to the people to respond quickly and

flexibly to their input has weakened such participation. Partici­

pation, to be sustained and effective, requires the mobilization

of local actors and the institutionalization of their activity.

Decentralization is necessary to effect the second of these two

requirements for local participation.

It ought to be emphasized that empirical research has

demonstrated that the involvement of local recipients and leaders

in development projects substantially increases the likelihood of

long term proect success. Decentralizaticn is necessary to

increase the scope of decisions, and thus incentives, available

to local participants, as well as to build institutions to

encourage, structure, focus and stabilize such participation.

- -ncreasing the efficiency of central bureaus: Decentralizing the

authority to plan local projects within national planning guide­

lines, to develop and implement locally adopted participatory

strategies, and establishing "horizcntal" authcrities to integrate

and manage different but cocrdinate sectors are means by which

national, senior management can give mere attention to strategic

and policy questions and less to daily management. Management

by exception through decentralized decision structures should

free senior management, decrease response time for both routine

and exceptional decisions, and reduce administrative overhead

by slowing the growth of central ministry rtaffs.

- Avoiding diseconomies of scale: Substantial experience in

administration has demonstrated that in certain areas a reduced

proportion between serpce-unit and consumer substantially

improves agency perfcrmance. This is the case, for exc-ple,

where a substantial exchange of infor-.ation must occur between

client and practitioner (i.e., social services, public health,

agricultural extension), and where substantial voluntary public

compliance is necessary if the service is to succeed (i.e. range

and forest management, small scale irrigation maintenance). Overly

large bureaus and operational units in each case tend to drive up

costs and reduce the effectiveness of performance. In the first

circumstance, local practitioners/agents must be willing and able

to make and implement decisions without constant recourse to

/S? local

They must be responsive -o

superiors' review and clearance.

These require skills, authority

needs, perceptions and priorities.

to be availacle to the local actor,

and incentives

and resources

to encourage their orientation to the locality.

or local collective

In the second situation, some

measure

This might

. action is required for sector programs

to succeed.

take the form of local service-uscr

associations, or local

changes in common usage of collective

leadership in legitimizing

In each case, voluntary and

goods such as ranges and forests.

and must be nurtured and

sustained local efforts are necessary,

and locallY­

developed through adaptable locally-oriented,

At the same time, hcwever, continued

national

responsive efforts.

logistical support, training and policy coordination is needed.

to be avoided Just as much as genuine

needof scale Diseconomies

economies of scale need to be achieved.

in deloent: Analysts concerned with the euit'SGreater

domestic political economy of developing states have

argued congently

They note that in developing

states resources

for decentralization. Employ­

have tended increasingly to be concentrated

at the center.

educationalprojects,developmentcontrol over ment opportunities,

cultural opportunilicenses,manufacturingopportunities, trading and

to a point where

ties and political authority have

been concentrated

unable to participate in either the rural residents are generally

They face declining living standards,

modern economy or polity.

and are unable to assert or defend their basic human rights to

civil and criminal justice, equity of access to economical assets

and to social serrice, employment opportunity, and reasonable

security against seasonal and disaster risks.

Constitutional or legislative guarantees of such rights,

it is generally accepted, are meaningless without enlarging

or opening up the economy and the modern polity that play key

roles in distributing social and economic opportunities. The

opportunity to have real control over resources is the key to

the ability of.the least advantaged to begin to defend all

other rights.

- Involving traditional local institutions and leadershiD in

development: Many developing states,"it has been suggested, are

centralized, hierarchical bureaucracies which penetrate only

superficially and are ineffective outside majcr urban centers.

The problem is essentially one of linkage or integration; here

there exists a dual polity which parallels the dual economy.

In each case there are modern-urban-western oriented structures

co-existing, but rarely cooperating or joining, with traditional­

rural-indigenous mechanisms of making decisions and producing

goods. The relative advantages of the national polity (technical

skills, resources, a naticnal plan) have not been joined with the

relative advantages of the indigenous polity (proximity to the

populace, familiarity with local conditions, trusted mechanisms

and individuals), A positive-sum rather than competitive perspective

on national political power coupled with an aggressive strategy to

strengthen decentralized institutions is necessary to bridge the

dual polity gap and to energize local development potential.

National resources, skills and perspective must be jcined ,withlocal

resources, manpower, intelligence and leadership. This combination

requires a genuinely collcorative strategy to involve and encourage

the growth and development of local institutions while actors. fir­

the two polities work to share the authority and responsibility for

such Joint ventures. The practical problem is, of course, convincing

each structure of the "aal gains that each will make by participating

in such genuinely Joint ventures, and so designing the prccess and

procedures that the right incentives and disincentives will operate

to encourage collaboration to continue through long term institutional­

ization.

30

This project is based on our conclusion that the achievement

of current development goals requires more effective mobilization and

utilization of local resources, skills and institutions than has

hitherto been the case. The mobilization of human resources for

rural growth, and of popular assets to provide dnd expand public goods

and services for the poor majorities ultimately requires that the poor

majorities be meaningfully involved inthe development process.

Centralized hierarchical authority structures work at a serious

relative disadvantage when a large number of field agents implement

a program at many locations. This also is the case when tactical

flexibility, local initiative and maintenance, local contributions

and self-regulation are required for a project to succeed and to last

beyong the presence of external supporting actors and assets.

Perhaps their relative disadvantage ismost clear when one

must mobilize substantial resources in development projects. For when

the users of public goods and services at the local level have no

effective influence over program design or over the quality and

quantity of services rendered because delivery systems are dominated

by distant hierarchical bureaucracies, then they receive less,

contribute less, care less about the fate of the program, and disassociate

themselves from its objectives. To solve these dilemmas, decentralization

of project and program responsibility, to field personnel of the

ministries and to local governments, is essential. AID missions and

host governments must support this decentralization with effective,

V3/I

appropriate and timely advice on the design, organization, and

management of decentralized enterprises. There are, it is generally

acknowledged among practitioners and scholars several operational

challenges inadministering decentralized enterprises:

-- Strengthening weak local institutions: For a number of reasons,

local governments in LDCs tend to be extremely weak institutions.

Historically they were granted primarily civil functions

(registration of vital statistics, collecting local taxes,

keeping order), encouraged or allowed minimal funds and local

participation, and stood aside while field agents of the

central government provided most vital services and designed

and implemented most development projects. Nearly all real

legislative power was retained by national parliamentary or

executive bodies, and most local executive authority was

exercised by representatives of national ministries. Local

governments were starved for skills, resources, authority

and functions.

In recent years LDC governments and donor agencies have turned

to local authorities to take a larger role in achieving rural

and participatory development. They have found, ,iowever,

that these authorities are often too weak to be effective

mobilizers and sustainers of local development efforts; even

where progress has been made through local government, the needs for

development demand still stronger performance on their part.

32

To attack the needs of local government directly, requires

that a large number of issues be confronted: horizontal

linkages among officials must be strengthened; critical

local skill deficiencies must be identified and remedied;

organizational and management routines pertinent to local

skills and needs must be designed; local level planning must

be supported and integrated into regional and national

plans; sectoral ministries and field personnel must be

sensitized and in some measure accountable to localities;

central support and logistic I systems to sustain local

governments must be defined and implemented; administrative

and legal reforms may be required to facilitate their larger

role; and, most importantly, popular participation must be

institutionalized into a meaningful role within local

government.

Balancing local initiative and action with continued national

authority: While decentralization is advocated widely as a

means of ,timulating local initiative, leadership, autonomy

and responsibility, most analysts nonetheless acknowledge

a continued crucial role for national governments and national

authority structures. One of the most serious challenges to

the serious decentralizer is successfully mixing and integrating

national institutions' activities and functions. How does one,

for example, identify and implement the appropriate mix of

33

functions and responsibilities between spatially-oriented,

multifunctional authorities, and vertically-organized, single­

function ministries? Should the latter play a primarily

technical and personnel support role? Are they to set

guidelines and performance standards, and should they monitor

and enforce these standards? Should they have the authority

to step inand suspend local authorities under specified

circumstances? And how should these answers be varied among

the various sectors (i.e., health vs. natural resource

regulation)?

A second aspect of this coordination is integrating local

initiative and planning with national planning, programming

and budgeting responsibilities. How does one, specifically,

maintain a coherent national plan and allow localities meaningful

control over their own development? How does one ensure

consistency (and optimally, complementarity) among planning

by the various localities without stifling local initiative?

How does one coordinate local financial planning, both capital

and recurrent, with national budget decision making?

A third aspect of this dilemma is reflected inthe difficulty

of reconciling personnel systems based on central control

over evaluation and advancement with local accountability for

project and program performance. Historically, promotion

has been through vertical ministries, with authority, compensation,

prestige, etc., all associated with movement from the rural

34

areas, and with all decisions made at regional or national levels. Incentive structures and control, or at least meaningful input in personnel decisions, must be reoriented to the rural areas and to the clients of these projects and programs. Can this be done without disrupting and demoralizing existing civil service systems? What incremental steps can be taken to encourage this process? What personnel functions should be retained by central offices?

In summary, national authority structures will inall likelihood continue to perform important policy making resource allocation functions, even indecentralized systems. How should lines of communication be drawn; shared and separated decision requirements and opportunities to be identified; resources and authority be distributed; and personnel be organized, to effectively integrate and coordinate the two structures which will then exist?

35

--Effectively and efficiently managing larger numbers of dispersed,

increasingly autonomous, actors and programs: As decentralization

progresses, increasingly important decisions about project design

and implementation, and about program operation will gravitate

to more dispersed, generally less formally trained field persLnnel.

Insome cases, appropriate training will be necessary to upgrade

their management and professional skills. Inmany cases personnel

systems will need modification to encourage decision making by field

employees rather than passing the slightly ambigous cases upward.

Also needed will be information gathering and management systems

which effectively monitor their field performance, encourage field

services, and, discourage reporting of fictional data.

Effective logistical support systems which encourage and

facilitate field activities, and do not tie field personnel to

regional or national offices are imperative. Absolete systems

for generating and disbursing payrolls, collecting travel compen­

sation, and procuring program commodities and even simple office

supplies, insome situations centralize all fiscal decision making

in one or a few offices, slowing field programs intolerably. Yet

fiscal integrity must be maintained.

Finally, decentralization with popular participation will add

a new management dimension, as local participation must be insti­

tutionalized into project and program management. What role should

such organizations have? Should local participation be structured

36

through local government, existing non-governmental organizations,

or through new, ad hoc organizations? What juridical status

should they have? What authority over project personnel? These

obviously do not exhaust the questions, but only provide a sample

of the challenges which decentralization brings to traditional,

vertical, bureaucratic principles and procedures of control and

command.

--Maintaining program coherence and integrity as the number aid

diversity of participants increases: ifcentralized bureaucracies

have at times encouraged inflexible and locally unresponsive

programs dominated by an urbanized, educated elite, the opposite

extreme isa danger of "overdecentralization." Projects and

programs can fall under the control of local elites, which then

use these resources to increase their advantaged position.

Alternatively, local factionalism can, and has, totally halt

projects, as local political forces and conflicts displace project

goals, and suborn them to local battles. Ethnicity, regionalism,

class conflict, religion, or simple political factionalism are all

dangerous for decentralized projects and programs.

Finally, national plans, goals, priorities and guidelines are

vulnerable to subversion by the forces of distributive polities:

by "porkbarreling." While the porkbarrel has some extremely

important functions to fulfill in resolving or easing political

and economic conflicts, itmust not displace comprehensive,

economically based planning in distributing the limited development

resources of LDCs.

37

These last problems are perhaps particularly difficult, for if resources are genuinely decentralized, then some localism

and parochialism is probably to be expected. The experience of the United States with this suggests itis an endemic danger.

However, insome cases (rural electrification in India, for example), effective power sharing arrangements and national guide­lines have captured the advantages of decentralization, but retained effective national guidelines, priorities and plans. The critical sectoral, institutional and cultural requisits of such arrangements

need to be specified and applied indecentralized projects.

38

New decision routines, information systems, operating procedures,

communication patterns must be developed to provide for local initiative,

effective manayement and continued national leadership. Sensitive

allocation of resources, skills, responsibilities and authority to

institutions and to individual officials must be expedited to adjust

existing organizations to a decentralized operating mode. A major

lesson of experience'has been that no single discipline or theoretical

approach to public administration is sufficient to answer all these

questions. This might be expected to be even more pertinent in the

more problematic LDC administrative environment.

What is necessary is the productive interaction among several

complementary but different approaches to organizing and managing

decentralization. Decentralization, we suggest, because of its ipact

upon and involvement with so many actors-- from national planning,

personnel and budgetary matters, to middle-level personnel, to field

and local government personnel, to traditonal authorities, non­

governmental organizations and individual clients-- isa particularly

"ecological" process; actions inone sphere have a multitude of

complementary and contradictory, continuous and discontinuous

ramifications. For this reason, several frames of reference are required

to predict and respond comprehensively to the implementation of

decentralization.

Insome instances, for example, a simple change inthe locus

of decision or the burden of information may resolve operational

39

problems. Inothers, a scaling "down" of procedural complexity to existing field skills may be necessary. Insome situations, partial to total abandonment of vertical channels of control and policy making may be needed, and new, lateral, locally responsive structures may be the necessary revision to expedite decentralization.

To perform this flexible, interactive and creative analytical and prescriptive process of organizing, managing and strategizing for decentralization, it is our opinion that four bodies of knowledge

and expertise are required:

- The traditonal discipline of public aministration,

particularly inthe area of development administration, has value as we confront the organization and management issues pertinent to decentralization. Particularly appropriate are recent and current concerns of development administration specialists: Simplified and localized management and in­formation systems, the value of a more "folk administration" oriented strategies, and the modification of field guidelines and routines to encourage field services, as discussed by such researchers and scholars as Chambers, Leonard, Moris, Rondinelli and Siffin, are highly promising additions to and revisions of a body of useful administrative expertise. These findings should be applied in future decentralized projects.

A broad, multidisciplinary body of experience has been generated by public administrators, city managers, county and rural

government specialists, and political scientists generally,

as they have dealt with the operation and improvement of local

government throughout the world. This information must be

marshalled and delivered through applied research and cornr

sultation to strengthen local government in LDCs. Institution­

alizing popular involvement; fitting management approaches

and routines to available skills and needs; developing horizontal

linkages between ministry field personnel, locally employed

personnel, and local popular representatives; vesting res­

ponsibilities in local governments appropriate to their

institutional and personnel capacity; developing logistical

systems to support these functions from the center; and re­

structuring administrative and legal codes to encourage and

support local government are among the tasks which must be

performed to support the devolution of authority and res­

ponsibility to local government. Indeed, the entire question

of scaling activities, skills, resources, routines and res­

ponsibilities to support and encourage the development of local

institutions goes to the very heart of this project.

In recent years, substantial progress has been made in

strengthening the performance of sector-specific service

delivery systems. Inaction research and operations, both in

developing and developed countries, such factors as: size

of delivery systems (both spatially and in personnel); scope

of functional responsibilities (number of diversity of responsi­

bilities per unit); levels allocated responsibility for policy­

making technical support and program delivery; mix of local,

41

national and user-free funding; mix of professional, paraprofessional

and managerial personnel and their responsibilities; and explicit

and implicit role allocations between clients and service personnel,

have been found to materially affect both subjective and objective

measures of system performance. It is highly desirable to bring this

sectorally based and oriented expertise to bear on the ongoing

attempts by USAID LDCs to decentralize service delivery systems.

-- A strong contributor to the cutting edge" of contemporary public

administration has been the sub-discipline of "public choice"

This approach has stressed designing programs, policies and

institutions to be congruent and emergent patterns of individual

behavior, both among officials and consumers. Among its concerns

have been: a careful use of social cost/benefit analysis; close

attention to questions of economy and diseconomy of scale; the

importance of convergence between civil service personnel systems and

personal incentives to produce and deliver the public service

concerned; the role of local-level monitoring of system performance;

and, non-governmental and non-hierarchical alternatives to traditional

hierarchical bureacratic delivery system. We believe that these

structural and procedural alternatives to traditional centralized

bureaus and programs ought to be applied on a pilot basis whenever

feasible to LDC decentralization efforts.

B. Project Description

I. Project Goal and Subgoal:

The project goal is to increase the volume and scope of services

delivered to the poor majorities. This is to be achieved through the

subgoal of strengthening the capacities of decentralized institutions.

The latter include local governments, nongovernmental organizations,

special-use districts, and deconcentrated field services of sector

ministries. As discussed at some length in the project background,

there is substantial evidence that decentralization ingeneral, and

strengthening these institutions inparticular, is an advantageous

ifnot essential measure effectively to disperse the benefits of develop­

ment to the rural poor. Furthermore, it shows potential, ina number

of ways, to be a mor6 cost-effective approach than the traditional,

centralized, bureaucratic style of project and program management.

While the project activities financed by DS/RAD are, we feel,

a necessary means to accomplish this broader goal, they are not

sufficient. Also required, but outside the scope of this project (except as assumptions), are host government policies which support and encourage decentralization, and donor financing of programs to utilize decentralization.

A review of LDC decentralization efforts has convinced us that there is

ample and growing support for this approach among USAID clientele; a

similar review of USAID projects demonstrates substantial donor activity

indecentralization.

Evaluation of Goal Attained:

This project, like other centrally funded projects, is intended to

contribute to the development effort through both immediate applied

research and consultation, and longer term information dissemination and networking. While we do, of course, anticipate a broad and diffuse impactthrough the latter activities, we feel that the impact of the project on project goals can be most immediately measured and instructive by focussing on those countries inwhich the contractor isdirectly involved The primary consideration of goal achievement will be evidence of improved performance by decentralized organizations. This could include increased numbers of projects designed, implemented and maintained by localities, increased performance (both in effectiveness and cost efficiency) in delivering services by localities and deconcentrated bureaus, increased use of local level planning both in local decisions and in input to regional and regional planning, and greater levels of popular participation in local government and bureau field activities. The evaluation instruments should be the normal field survey techniques, and should also consider such issues as cost and benefit distribution trends; varying performance among the several decentralized institutions; and causal links between host government policy toward decentralization

and effectiveness of project interventions.

2. Project Purpose:

The project purpose isto strengtjen AID and LDCs' capacity to utilize decentralization in four ways: to strengthen AID's ability and enhance its efforts to provide general advice on decentralization as an overall strategy to stimulate countrywide growth, and as a strategy to selectively apply inparticular geographic areas or service sectors;

to strengthen AID and LDCs' abilities and enhance their efforts to

strengthen local governments' institutional capacity; to strengthen

AID and LDCs' abilities and enhance their efforts to design the

organization and management aspects of decentralized projects and

programs in general, and particularly as they pertain to deconcentrated

sector service programs, to inter and intra-institutional coordination,

and to personnel utilization;atodstrengthen AID and LDCs' ability and

enhance their efforts to identify and apply innovative debureaucrati­

zation and sector-specific management and organization modes to seljcted

weak and/or high priority geopgraphic areas or service sectors.

This purpose is recommended because of the substantial growth in

decentralized projects sponsored by USAID, the thorny organization and

management issues associated with decentralization, and the need to fuse

USAID's extensive but fragmented field experience in these issues with

substantial, focused, professional administrative expertise.

It is, as discussed at some length in the project background

generally acknowledged that there are serious challenges in

balancing local action with continued national authority, effectively and

efficiently managing large numbers of dispersed projects and actors,

maintaining program coherence and integrity as the number and diversity

of project/program participants increase, and strengthening hitherto

weak local governmental institutions. These challenges, we believe,

could be met more effectively by integrating the hitherto fragmented

experience of AID, LDCs and other donors, and by systematically bringing

the lessons of experience to bear on project design, implementation and

evaluation through a program of applied research, state of the art work,

and field consultation.

Evaluation of Purpose Attainment:

There are three aspects of purpose attainment in this project

which ought to be considered in the evaluation: strategic planning,

use made of decentralized institutionsand sophistication of organizational

and managerial subsystems to support these institutions. As the proje(

will provide consultation, advice and applied research appropriate to

the conditions of various selected countries, it needs to be evaluated

according to specific country circumstances and needs.

The impact of the project on the field-site countries can be

judged by a number of criteria:

1) increased coordination and cooperation among sector ministries,

local governments and national planning and budgetary institutions, in

their decentralization efforts;

2) existence, revision and implementation of comprehensive policy

statements regarding the goals, means, challenges and priorities of

decentralization;

3) increased responsibilities and functions for field personnel

of sector ministries, including input and influence in central policy

decisions;

4) increased responsibilities, functions, and resources allocated

to local governments;

5) increased utilization or serious consideration of debureau­

cratization through special authorities, nongovernmental organizations,

or other approaches to supply local services;

6) increased specificity and detail in project papers and other

development projects on organizational and managerial aspects of

decentralized projects;

7) existence of a central support capacity for decentralized

institutions, including logistical, fiscal, personnel and managerial

resources and skills;

8) increased utilization of specialized organization and management

subsystems for specific deconcentrated service bureaus, and/or for

local governments.

The evaluation team should gather information to answer these

analyzing USAID and host government project papersquestions by:

and documents; evaluating host government personnel, fiscal, and

organizational policies; assessing host government general strategies

toward decentralization (ifany); evaluating the distribution of

personnel and their responsibilities; analyzing the patterns of

responsibilities allocated to local and deconcentrated institutions

over the life of the poriect; evaluating national technical support

resources for local and deconcentrated institutions; and interviewing

local officials and field personnel regarding their activities, level

of participation, and perception of national policy and support.

3. Project Outputs: to

The project will be contracted to/institution or consortium of

institutions for five years to accomplish the following five major

outputs:

1. Long Term Country Consulting and Applied Research. In at

least four countries (one in each geographic region), the contractor

will work with USAIDfield missions and LDC governments to:(l) develop

the information bases for strategizing, and assist in the formulation

of such strategies and tactics to implement decentralization efforts;

(2)assist in the design and programs and projects supporting these

strategies; (3)assist in developing and implementing appropriate

organizational and managerial techniques to expedite decentralization;

(4)implement pilot decentralized projects; (5)assist in analyzing

administrative problems in current decentralization efforts; and

(6)provide evaluation studies to determine the impact and effectiveness

of such programs. The findings from these activities will be synthesized

with state-of-the-art material and included in case studies, operating

handbooks, and other documents to be made available to the field and

to others interested indecentralization.

2. Short Term Consulting and Applied Research. The project will

deliver consultants to selected Missions who will assist indesigning,

monitoring, and evaluating decentralized projects appropriate to

individual host-government environments. This will include: (1)advice

on adopting to specific LDCs decentralized projects utilized in other

developing countries; (2)responding to specific requests by host

governments for help in expediting project and program goals requiring

decentralization; and, (3)developing project initiatives utilizing

decentralization strategies to attack recurrent local development

problems. Projects designed will vary to fit country-specific needs.

The selection of countries for consulting work above will be done

through consultations among the contracting university(s), DS/RAD, the

interbureau project committee, concerned missions, and host government

officials. The attempt will be to have some activity in each

of the four major regions (Asia, Near East, Africa, and Latin America),

inorder to increase information exchange and cross-fertilization, and to make

generalizations applicable to as wide an audience as possible. That will

depend, of course, on the interests of each regional bureau and its

willingness to assist on developing applied research projects,

project consulting, and information dissemination activities, so that

the contracting university(s) will be able to plan staffing and work

to accommodate these needs. The selection of countries and projects

for university involvement will be on the basis of expression of mission's

interest, the overall significance of the projects or proposals in

question as development administration and service delivery innovations

and efforts, the scope for advances in decentralization offered by the

projects, and the priorities set by the Development Administration

Steering Comittee.

Specific projects to be designed by the contractor, or on which it

might offer design assistance, will vary to fit country-specific needs.

Examples of projects inwhich decentralization is a major focus, which

currently fit the Agency's priorities and goals, and would be likely

areas for a consultation, design, and/or pilot implementation roles, are

discussed at length, below. Depending upon host government and mission

interests and needs, these activities could vary from collaborating inthe

design, evaluation and implementation of the organization and management

aspects of specific projects, to development and implementation of entire

projects intended to encourage or support decentralization, to strategizing

at the sectoral and/or national level with mission and host government

personnel on optimal approaches to decentralization generally.

3. Operationally Relevant State of Art and Practical Guidance

Materials: The contractor will review and abstract the major lessons

of experience indecentralization as presented inthe scholarly literature,

reports of donor agencies, project documents and other sources. Particular

attention will be given to recent and current decentralization efforts in

LDCs and their relevance to political economic approaches to administration.

These will be circulated as state of the art materials. During both long

and short-term consultancies to field Missions, analytical reports on

case materials will be developed which will address themselves to the key organization and management issues identified above. These activity reports will be synthesized with State-of-the-Art materials to produce additional iterations of knowledge.

4. Networking of Experts inthe Field: The contractor or cooperating institution(s) will identify field practitioners and scholars with experience in the design and management of decentralization and will draw them into a systematic interchange of information through newsletters and other information exchanges.

5. Information Dissemination and Training: Utilizating the products from the above efforts, traini,! materials will be developed and tested through workshops and field seminars for application inLDC and regional training institutions. Materials such as the reference manuals will thus be ,iade available to other consulting firms and teaching institutions which will improve the general state of the art indelivery of consultant services to AID and other donor agencies and directly to LDCs.

It isassumed that:(a) AID and LDC rural development practitioners recognize the need for more knowledge and information and that they are willing to use it inproject design and implementation when it is available; (b)the U.S. and LDC professionals (researchers and practitioners) will be able collaboratively to design and carry out studies, prepare strategies and implement recommended approaches; and that (c)the consultants, USAID mission personnel and researchers see the need for and are willing to work together to integrate more fully their now largely separate activities. The

integration of consulting and research activities under this project

depends heavily upon the willingness of these three groups, given their

combined efforts to result in better accomplishment of the common goal of

reaching the rural poor.

Outputs: Applied Research and Consultation Activities

Applied research has been linked with consulting in this discussion

because it is intended that the research activities of the contracting

university(s) have direct relevance for the broader development programs

being undertaken in the country, for the purposes both of learning

from and contributing to the broader programs. These services will be

focused on four different aspects of programs: (a) balancing local

initiative and action with continued national leadership and authority;

(b) effectively and efficiently managing larger numbers of dispersed

actors and programs; (c)maintaining program coherence and integrity

as the number and diversity of program participants increase; and (d)

strengthening :itherto weak and neglected local bodies of government.

They will meet these 'four problems with four crosscutting bodies of

expertise: (1) current field and LDC applications of the general

discipline of public administration; (2)the subfield of public

administration concerned with bringing political-economic or "public

choice" reasoning to bear on public goods and services' issues; (3)

expertise in management and organization subsystems, particular as they

pertain to current innovations in sector-specific delivery systems; and

(4) expertise in municipal, county and rural government management,

support and institutional growth.

This expertise will confront the issues discussed above primarily

through the field consultation activities of the project. This will

grow from the long-run relationships developed (omptimally) with between

four and six cuuntries in four areas, including strategizing with host

government officials and mission personnel, and designing, evaluating

and implementing (some on a pilot basis) decentralized projects. The

long-term relationships will be essential in order to observe and

analyze the decentralization process as it experiences its own country­

unique problems. The short-term relationships will help cross-fertilize

these longer term activities, spread information more widely, and keep

the contractor tied closely to the realities of Agency-wide project needs.

They also, of course, will be a means of responding immediately to

Agency field needs in decentralization. There is a broad range of

projects, given varying country needs and priorities, which would be

appropriate areas for project assistance:

Organization-consultation training projects for local

institution'building:

While training has long been used by AID and other donors, a

relatively new approach to it has been coupled with a decentraliza­

tion initiative in one host country, to bring positive, though

still early, results. Specifically the "Economic-and Rural

Development Management Project" in Ghana (641-0077) (ERDM), has

approached training of individual officials as a means of

initiating a process of spatially oriented communication,

simulation, and problem-solving leading to further iterations

of problem identification and organization-consultation. One

might distinguish this approach from traditional training; the

latter generally has had individual skill building as the major

goal, while the new approach stresses cross-sector, organization

consultation-organization building as the goal, and the training

situation as the arena where this process isbegun. Preliminary

results suggest that this spatially oriented, cross-sector,

top to bottom, intensive (three weeks), locally delivered,

group-problem-solving oriented training is substantially

increasing the capacity and performance of the district level

of Ghanaian government, within rather than disrupting the

existing legal-administrative structure. This has hitherto

been a weak link inGhanaian administration, but one now

critical to the GOG's decentralized development strategy.

The contractor should be prepared co identify receptive and

profitable environments for such training, and be prepared to

tailor specific training projects to host government priorities,

goals and abilities, including horizontal (cross sector)­

spatially based, and vertical (single sector)- top to bottom

training. A training project or component such as this would

materially strengthen such projects as Bolivia's "Regional

Development Planning" project (511-0471) or the Botswana

"Rural Services" (633-0077) project. The latter, particularly,

is a case in point, as itwas described in the 1980 ABS as

generally successful, but with "defjciencies in coordinated

planning, allocation, and delivery of activities and services."

It is the design and preparation for such training rather than

the delivery of the training itself which the contractor will

be asked to provide.

Local integrated resource/service centers: An impediment both

to strengthening local administrative capacity and to delivering

services to the poorest (particularly in rural areas) has been

the lack of coordination among field personnel of independent

sector ministries; their spatial dispersion; and the often

inadequate physical facilities they have to work with. Projects a

designed to bring these field personnel together in/common

physical plant might be expected to: stimulate increased

communication among field representatives of various sectors

through their sharing the same building; make it easier for

private citizens to obtain services requiring the cooperation

or at least the consent of several field representatives; provide

economies of scale by pooling staffing, secretarial, administrative

and other resources. Coupled with organization-consultation

training such centers would encourage local planning, programming,

and coordinated implementation. While there are no projects

currently supported by AID which include all these facets,

aspects of them are included, among others, in the "Rural

Service Center Project" (492-0304) of the Philippines, the

"Sub-Tropical Lards Development Project" (511-0369) of Bcivia,

and the "Family Welfare Center Project" (388-6038) of Bangladesh.

Its potential linkage to the ERDM project of Ghana has been

already noted; it might, as well, be an effective complement

to intensive, integrated area projects such as BICOL (492-02225)

in the Philippines or the Arusha Project (621-0143) of Tanzania.

Debureaucratized service delivery systems: Along the "cutting edge"

of contemporary public administration action-research and application

has been "debureaucratization." This has been attempted, at times,

through non-governmental organizations, both private enterprise and

non-profit, through non-hierarchical and decentralized single-function,

special district authorities, and through increased use of local

government. Such organizations attempt, by bringing the management

and responsibility for selected public services closer to the public,

to provide more flexible, responsive, and lower-cost service operations.

Advocates of this approach argue that large, centralized bureaucracies

are a particularly costly and ineffective means of delivering services

to consumers. Overcentralization of decision making, overly long

chains of command, preoccupation with inter-bureau competition at the

national level, centrally oriented career and personnel systems, the absence

of market alternatives or discipline (because of funding iscompulsory and

indirect), and little if any effective control over the organizations by

the poor majority supposed to consume its services, all diminish the field

effectiveness and cost-efficiency of the traditional, centralized,

hierarchical bureaucratic delivery system.

Contemporary research in the United States indicates that the

local police department, the small, community oriented school district,

and a smaller unit for delivery social welfare services, among other examples,

provide greater levels of client satisfaction at lower costs. In LDCs,

the continued popularity of dual school systems, with non-governmental

religious schools a popular, cost effective option suggests such reasoning

is valid in that context as well. Or, in community health, the

government of Thailand has recently decided to expand the activities

of a non-governmental, non-profit organization from family planning,

where it has been very successful, to include general public health

services among the poorest, rural villages. The"Saemaul Undong"

program of The Republic of Korea has included significant elements of

debureaucratization and local responsibility in its highly successful

village development efforts. Ineach case, the lesson of experience has

been that organizing and managing these projects indecentralized and

non-hierarchical mode, closer to the consumers, and with extensive

local responsibility made explicit from the start, has led to higher volumes

of lower cost services, which are more satisfying to the local consumer.

A high priority task for the contractor isto help missions and

host governments identify service areas where debureaucratization might

provide greater services at lower costs to the poor majorities, and

to design specific projects to this effect. While AID projects have

included aspects of debureaucratization (local user associations, increased

roles for local governments, special local advisory groups, some localized

funding) few, if any, have integrated them all into comprehensive, or

pilot debureaucratized projects or programs.

Management and or antzation sub-system to support devolution of authority and responsibility to local governments: A largenumber of current AID projects are, and will place increasing demands on local governments to upgrade their ability to support: local planning; local funding, administration and maintenance of small public works; local support for decentralized service delivery systems; and local adoption of new agricultural, environmental and financial techniques and services. In short, many projects require local involvement to help effectively disperse the benefits of development, and to stimulate and sustain "bottoms-up" approaches to development.

To strengthen the capacity of local governments, modifications in organization and structure and improvements in management practices and modes are necessary. Specifically, routines to increase horizontal linkages, methods of integrating greater local participation with local government,ways of increasing the accountability of field personnel to local government, procedures to fit management routines to local skills, information systems appropriate to local skills and national policy needs, and the involvement of neighborhoods in local planning, etc., are needed to systematically strengthen the ability of local government to support devolution. The contractor should be prepared to offer extensive short and long term consultation on these and other aspects of local government. This consultation might take the form of national level strategic advice, design

of specific locally focused projects (such as ERDM or DIPRUD

inGhana), or advice and design assistance on other projects

which require local government involvement to achieve their

outputs and purposes.

Local Project Maintenance Authorities: Roth the Congressional

Mandate for increased participation and the dynamics of many

current and anticipated AID projects makes strengthening AID's

capacity to design such authorities into projects imperative.

Dispersed, small scale irrigation projects, for example, must

depend on locally based administration and maintenance to keep

recurrent costs from devouring national rural development

budgets. Such activities as allocating costs, performing

to project benefitsmaintenance duties, and organizing access

will probably have to be done by locally funded government or

by special user authorities. The "Small Irrigated Perimeter

Project" of Senegal (685-0208) is one example of a project

which requires such involvement. Rural road maintenance, natural

resource management, and area rehabilitation projects also

involve or could be materially strengthened through institutionalized

local support. Some projects, such'as the Seneqal Perimeter

project, the Ethiopian "Rural Roads" (663-0182) and"Southern

Gemu Gofa Area Rehabilitation" projects (663-O193),recognize

resources to helpthis imperative, and might usefully employ central

field missions effectively implement this aspect of these

projects. Others, such as the Haitian "Integrated Resource

Management Project" (521-0096) and Pakistan's "Rural Roads II

and Rural Clean Water Supply II Project"Project" (391-0443)

and might benefit(391-0425), have not confronted these issues,

from central leadership and support in strengthening these and

designing future such projects.

The Cornell University Report on Participation identifies

disunity of local users and their organizational weakness as

the single greatest problem ineffectively operating small scale

water projects. Furthermore, in regulating the use of common

resources such as rangelands and woodlands, practical experience

has demonstrated that community based leadership can do far

better in leading local action than bureaucracies perceived

locally as distant and unsympathetic. For example, in the

"Botswana Range Management and Livestock Development Project"

(633-0015) itwas observed in the Congressional Presentation

(FY 79) that, "Earlier project efforts had focused on the

transfer and use of the appropriate production technology, but

both project technicians and others concerned have concluded

that the key developmental constraints concern community

organization and government policy rather than technology."

What spatial and functional bases such authorities should

have, their extent of formal organization and official

recognition, their role in project design and implementation,

their taxing and juridical status, their link to

existing local governments, their coordination with ongoing

sector-ministerial responsibilities, their relationship to

future projects (including raising revenue), their relationship

to economies and diseconomies of scale, and their internal

organization and management are issues the contractor should

be prepared to address.

It isrecognized by this Office that there is substantial

experience among AID field personnel with questions of

institutionalizing and operating local user authorities.

Preliminary evaluations, however, indicate mixed success with

this in field projects. It is in part to provide a more cost­

effective and efficient means of marshalling, integrating

and disseminating these lessons of experience across bureaus

and field missions, thattKis project is intended. Field

consultation in project identification, design and implementation,

and generating state of the art materials will be the means

to this end.,

- Management and Organization Sub-Systems for Decentralized

Sector Programs: Inrecent years AID has dramatically increased

its role in decentralized service delivery by supporting many

attempts to deconcentrate the resources and operation of diverse

sector areas. Deconcentrated projects in health care delivery

systems, agricultural credit and extension, family planning,

non-formal education and others have been funded. Indeed,

in the FY 1979 Congressional Presentation, there were one

hundred and fifty-two projects employing deconcentrated service

delivery systems among the four regions. A selective

consultation/design intervention inthis area is suggested to

address the organization and management issues discussed above

in this paper. Specifically, the contractor should be ready to:

design personnel systems which provide for national technical

support and for local accountability; develop field reporting

and information systems which encourage field service delivery

and provide top sector officials information appropriate for

management; provide financial control systems which free field

personnel from overcentalized, slow disbursement procedures

but insure fiscal integrity; coordinate local project identifi­

cation with national level sector planning; develop local

level systems of cross-sector communication and coordination;

define the appropriate level to lodge technical support services,

and develop systems to apportion them among field actors;

identify program guidelines which encourage local initiative,

but maintain national goals and priorities; articulate different

decentralization strategies to the different characteristics

of the various sector programs (i.e., agricuiture, health,

education, credit, etc.); and to consult on other organization

and management issues pertinent to sectoral decentralization.

A major goal of the project will be preparing sector­

specific, field officer manuals on organization and management

aspects of deconcentrated service delivery systems.

Local qovernment development institutes and foundations: InSeveral

Latin American countries, central resource agencies have played

critical roles in sustaining and strengthening the capacity and

ability of sub-national governments. Through grants-in-aid

loans, training and consultation, these organizations have

23

strengthened local government's ability to undertake a variety

of substantive functions. Between 1969 and 1974 USAID supported

such activities in Guatemala (INFOM), Costa Rica (IFAM),

Paraguay (IDM), Bolivia (SENDU) and Honduras (BANMA). According

to an independent evaluation done of four of these institutes, [Municipal Development Institute]

"Through AID influence, the MDI's/have placed increasing emphasis

on cities and towns outside the capital metropolis, having the

effect of redistributing national revenues and development resources,

increasing the awareness of the relationship of local govern­

ment to rural development, and giving an opportunity for

municipal administrations to carry out often complex sub­

projects in a responsible manner ...." MDI's were seen, in

this evaluation, as varying intheir performance. However,

they were regarded as a generally important means of upgrading

the capacity of subnational levels of government, and of

stimulating increased delivery of specific services. Specific

modifications were suggested to remedy their weaknesses.

Applying the knowledge gained from this experience to other

regions to support and encourage decentralization efforts is

another activity the contractor might be called upon to do.

The contractor should be able to adapt the Latin American

experience to other host environments and priorities, and support

such newly established institutions through consultation regarding

their organization, management and policy concerns.

For example, this concept mnight be projectized elsewhere (Africa

for example) at the regional level, strengthening the capacity of

existing regional institutions to provide consultation and

training assistance to local governments such as many American

state universities have to county governments. The contractor

should also be prepared to help coordinate the activities of

these institutions with other, parallel agencies and resources,

such as the national institutes of public administration.

- Decentralized local-level planning: For a number of reasons, many

LDC's, particularly inAsia, have turned from aggregate, macro­

economic planning to sector-specific and local planning strategies.

The flaws of national economic planning have included weaknesses

in political and administrative support for the plans, deficiencies

intheir content, difficulties inrelating plan priorities to

investment decisionmaking, and inadequate administrative capacity

to implement and evaluate multisectoral investment strategies.

Sector-specific planning has been utilized to relate more closely

planning and implementation information and decisions, to reduce

the scale and burden of supervisory responsibilities; and more

closely to relate identifiable problems with specific programs,

plans and budgets. Subnational, spatially based planning has

brought decisionmakers closer to the populace, thereby increasing

their information and potential popular support; has encouraged

multisectoral coordination by reducing the number of personnel

involved and stimulating area rather than sectoral definitions

of problems and potential solutions; has encouraged the

disaggregation of "development" from aggregate "GNP" definitions

to definitions seeking the basic transformation of social,

economic and political structures, and balanced economic growth

with social equity; and has encouraged the diffusion of

administrative capacity among a wider variety of public and

private institutions in project generation and im,)lementation.

The increase in L.DC interest insector-specific and

subnational planning is reflected in the many projects USAID

included inthe FY 1979 Congressional Presentation that dealth

with such planning. Such projects as the Kenya "Rural Planning"

(615-0612), the Botswana "Agricultural Planning" (63>-0067), the

Bolivia "Rural Development Planning" (511-0471), the Ethiopian

"Southern Gemu Gofa Area Rehabilitation" (633-0193), the Pakistan

"Development Trainirj" (391-0426), and Upper Volta's "Forestry

Education and Development" (686-0235) have incommon the goal of

strengthening decentralized planning by either the sector

ministries or to spatially-defined, local subnational authorities.

Three interventions are proposed in this project which support

local planning:

-the design of management training for decentralization;

- the design of organization and management subsystems to

support decentralized planning; and,

- consultation on artticulating decentralized planning to

the larger administrative environment of the host government

including effective integration of decentralized planninq into

ongoing national budgeting, continued national planning, functions,

activities of other sector ministries, and activities of donors

and other levels of government.

The first two interventions have been discussed in detail,

above. The last intervention Willadd a highly useful,

contextually oriented aspect to the effective identification,

design and implementation of decentralized planning. As one

astute analyst observed, decentralized planning does eliminate

one set of problems, but a new set of contextual ones can

obviate its effectiveness. For example, a joint USAID-

University of Wisconsin field support missioh in Thailand

found recently that a well-funded, well-staffed, strongly­

supported decentralized planning effort was seriously weakened

by standard national budgeting procedures and by limited

coordination between sectoral and provincial planning efforts.

Decentralized procedures also require substantially higher levels

of administrative and managerial capacity throughout the society.

Local governments generally have poor taxing and revenue capacity,

and are thus dependent on national authop.ties for grants-in-aid.

Furthermore, they are usually staffed by poorly trained personnel.

eight

The / interventions discussed above are not intended to

be regarded as an all-inclusive list. They are intended to

reflect the major decentralizing activities USAID and LDC's

are involved in,ana to suggest some of the more useful

interventions which might be pursued to support them.

The contractor is encouraged and expected to respond

flexibly to mission-host government concerns, and to develop

responses to additional decentralization initiatives as

appropriate to these circumstances.

95

Project Manager and an appropriate 1-3 person team from

the contracting institution to work out a specific annual

work plan. The purpcse of this on-site visit is to permit

the contractor, in consultation with USAID Mission and LDC

officials, to assess the feasibility for undertaking sub­

projects in each country nominated by the inter-bureau com­

mittee; and to develop where appropriate, an implementation

plan that is tailored to each LDC situation for approval by

the Mission and the OS/DA Project manager (after review by

the appropriate regional bureau representative on the inter­

bureau project committee). No applied research/consulting

activities, whether short term or long term, will be under­

taken without such 'aspecification of work by the mission

but it must be recognized that missions may well differ in

their ability or willingness to plan ahead for these services.

The implementation plan would include definition of

resource allocation, mission and contractor inputs, scheduling

of inputs and planned outputs, and specification of

evaluation data requirements and methodology for each

activity. Generally speaking the evaluation of contractor

perfbrmance will be integrated with the evaluation of the

mission level activity which DS/DA's project is supporting,

but special attentlon must be given to assessing the validity

of the contractor's approach to decentralization problems

in each context and to evaluating the general utility of this

particular mission support mechanism.

96

If, for any reason, implementation of the project

should fall behind schedule the inter-bureau committee

and the contractor will be consulted by the DS/DA project

manager on appropriate adjustments in scheduling, resources,

or the allocation of resources among project outputs as the

case dictates. AA/ DS will be informed of the problem and

DS/DA's recommended responses.

The activities outlined in this document are

initially planned to cover a 5-year period. During the

first three months of the first year the details of the

core activities will be worked out.

97

Also d~rina the first three months arrangements will

be worked out with at least two specific missions for the

contracting university's involvement in ongoinq consulting

and applied research related to mission projects with an

important decentralization component. A proposal will also

be developed for the- four- major: state­

of-the-art papers dealing with salient aspects of the

problems of- decentralization. At the. end of- this three month period, the package of consulting, applied

research, and.state-of-the-art papers will be approved by

the" nter-bureau.Committee. Within the first six months of

the ei-rst. year we would. evolve a schedule. for a set of

information dissemination/ networking activities of a

specialized nature (e.g., regional or substantive con­

ferences/workshops).

By the end of the first year, therefore, we will have

achieved the. following outputs.

a) Applied research consulting arrangements will

be worked out in at least two countries.

b) Consulting network and roster (subject.to

caveat stated above) will be organized and in operation.

c) Plans will be under way for specialized. in­

formation dissemination activities.

d) Periodic elements of the informatior dissem­

ina.tion system will be functioning.

98

e) First four state-of-the-art papers should be indraft

form.

During the remaining four years the University will undertake

the following additional activities:

a) At least an additional three state-of-the-art papers.

b) Research and consulting relationships with at least two

additional missions (to be begun to later than the second year).

c) Continuation of the networking and information system

activities.

d) Organize a series of specialized seminars/workshops/conferences

either on regional basis or on specialized topics as seems appropriate.

e) Handbooks and manuals appropriate for use by AID, host

on the design and implementation ofgovernment and other field personnel

decentralized projects which have been field tested and revised accordingly.

f) Between six and eight case studies of decentralized

projects, emphasizing applied lessons of experience in a comparative

framework.

99

At eighth month of project: Four SOAPs, to cover:

1) Public Chuice/Political Economy strategies to strengthen

service delivery systems and local authorities among LDCs;

2) Strategies and tactics to strengthen local governments

(including rural municipalities, administrative districts,

local planning authorities, special authority districts, etc.)

among LDCs; including such topics as institutionalizing popular

participation, strengthening horizontal linkages at local level,

integrating local institutions to project and program development

and implementation, modifications of local personnel, management,

communication and information, and decision systems; work closely

with Area Development, Participation, and Local Revenue and

Fiscal Management Projects of this office;

3) Management, personnel, information, decision making, logistical,

training, etc. subsystems to support the organization and management

of deconcentrated service delivery systems, with particular emphasis

on sector-specific tactics and strategies of effectively managing

such deconcentrated systems; and,

4) Survey, integrate and synthesize recent findings on field

administration and implementation, particularly as they pertain

to simplified organizational and management subsystems for dispersed

and deconcentrated delivery systems, the use of "folk-administration"

approaches, and the use of nongovernmental organizations.

100

B) At 16th month of project: One major SOAP to integrate the findings of the above papers and applied research inthe project, with particular emphasis on developing a contingency model to choose among approaches to designing and supporting decentralization. This model should include such factors as project/program characteristics; host government resources, goals, and priorities; and project/program and environmental

characteristics.

C) At 20th month of project: Four case studies of decentralization efforts using a comparative framework to address the applied management, organization and administrative issues discussed in the project paper;

these should be of monograph length;

D) At 24th month of project: A revision of the original SOAPs to include findings of applied research and research by other instiLtjtions; four additional case studies as described in item "B," above;

E) At 30th month of project: A set of papers/handbooks/manuals appropriate to use by Aln, host government and other donor field personnel for design and implementation of decentralized projects; field testing by project

personnel to begin immediately;

F) At 36th month of project: Between two and four additional case

studies as described above (B).

G) At 42nd month of project: Revisions of applied field materials inlight

of field testing completed;

H) At 48th month of project: Seccnd edition of major paper synthesizing

approaches to decentralization and applied research findings;

101

D. Evaluation Plan

The DS/DA project manager is responsible for continuous

coordination and monitoring of project activities with the

contractor and regional bureaus. The project manager will

keep the DS/DA office director apprised of progress in each

area of activity, any problems which developand of the corrective

action being taken to resolve them. The inter-bureau pro­

ject committee and AA/DS will be advised should the project

fall behind the schedule. An annual report on the status

of the project will be submitted to the inter-bureau committee

for their review. Emphasis in this report will be given to

review of contractor inputs and early indications of pro­

gress/difficulties in achievement. This will include (a)

review of scopes-of-work progress to date on LDC adaptive

research/consulting/information services sub-projects; (b)

analysis of short term consultancy services requested by

USAID missions indicating type and scope of consultancies

and missions assessments/recommendations as to usefulness;

(c) review of arrangements for and status of development of the

state-of-the art papers, consulting roste-. and information

system including LDC participation; and (d) eff.ctiveness

of interaction among contractor, regions/bureaus, USAID

missions, DS/DA and other DS offices.

The annual report should summarize findings and make

recommendations and necessary revisions of project design

and implementation arrangements. .1

102

1. The first in-depth interim evaluation of the project will be conducted between 1.8-22 months after

initiation. The evaluation will be conducted, where possible, by a team composed of the DS/DA project manager, at least one representative from a participating regional bureau and a participating USAID Mission (one of whom tc serve as team leader), at least one independent decentrali' zation specialist with demonstrated experience in an appropriate discipline related to decentralization as defined in the PPandarepresentative of the contractor.

The purposesof the in-depth team evaluation are-to assess experience in the first phase of implementation,

focusing on the achievement of outputs as planned;and to recommend any revision needed in the project design, imple­mentation arrangements, and resource allocations prior to allotment of any additional project funding in the second tranche. The results of this evaluaticn will be reflected in the scope of work statement and money requirements in the PIO/T for funding the second tranche. In addition, the team would make recommendations fcr the next in-depth project evaluation including key elements to be considered,

data r.quirements, and methodology to be used.

2. Each state-of-the-art paper will be reviewed and evaluated as it is received, both in terms of profession.il

standF.-ds, relevance to LPC applications, and utility to Agency. This will be the responsibility of DS/DA professional

103

staff with assistance of other Bureau and Agency offices and outside decentralization specialists. The results will then be submitted to the Inter-Bureau Committee for review prior to publication and dissemination to the field.

3. 42 months: Interim evaluation especially directed toward the consulting and applied research results and the functioning of the University/host country/mission

relationships.

4. Final evaluation: Of all components of the project and will include final regional seminars conducted by the University to review substantively the results, findings, and experience gained during the project by all

parties.

104

E. Project Opera tons

Management responsibilitiesfor operations under the project are vested in DS/DA The responsibilities for monitoring and managing the activities in this problem area will be assigned to a member of the DS/aA' professional staff who has both interest and expertise in this field. The project manager will not only coordinate and monitor the activities of the contracting university but will also be involved in the substantive concerns of the project and will work in a collegial manner with the university to de­termine the scope and direction of issues papers and in­depth country specific applied research. However, the DA Steerinq Committee, advised where appropriate by the Inter-bureau Committee on Decentralization,- will not participate fully in major decisions affecting project operations. Specifically, these decisions include, but.are not limited to, the aggreagate allocation of resources of the project among the geographic regions, the selection ot LDCs where major applied research activities will be carried out; the evaluation of performance of universities,

individual consultants, DS/DA staff (in management of the project) and.the.missions (in the utilization,of the pro­

ject).

The scope of involvement of members of the Steering Committee will depend on their interests and needs in this

critical problem area.

--

105 The manaocrial appTroach propo sed for this p.ojoct

places upon the Steering Committee w-erbhers and the regionalbureaus a dual ,'esponsibility on the one hand, to identify and interpret the specific needs of inissions within thair region and seek through this project the maximum supportin meeting those needs; and on the other hand, to partici­pate in manacremnt with an agency perspe-ctive directed toward the objective of optimizing advance oi the state-of-knowledge about and practice in this critical problem area.

Each of the functions under the project will require somewhat different managerial treatmnt.

1. State-of-the-art Papers

The devolopment of the state-of-theart PaiPers and other problems and issues pape-rs will be managed primarily by DS/DA. The general subject matter &nd coverage will be avai-labTe for review and approval by the DA Steering Committ-ee, Asnoted above, a DS/DA professional sta.E member in the par­ticular area will work with the Inter-bureau Project Com­mittee and the university in develcpincf each document.

2. Network M.anagemen t

The development of networks and their utilization presents a somewhat more complex task than would appear on the surface, particularly when one element of the networking activity will be to assist the development of a roster of qualified experts interested in consulting on

106

AID projects. The sensitivity of the government collecting personal

information and using itfor employment decisions, the sensitivity

of universities to evaluating the performance of academics and the

requirements of the Privacy Act must be taken into account indesigning,

particularly, the roster of potential consultants.

Relying on the experience obtained in several other DS/RAD projects

indeveloping rosters, we will design the least cost, most effective

rostering and networking system possible for this project and the

others being developed by DS/DA with the same design. The contracting

university must be deeply involved initially indefining needed areas

of expertise for which individuals will be sought. The university will

also clearly be responsible for the networking activity apart from

the roster dimension. For these reasons, "network management" has

been included as an output oF the project and funds are budgeted for

that purpose.

3. Applied Research and Consulting

The most important concern of this project is to improve access

of the missions to the best available consulting talent and to encourage

more extensive use of applied research in program development and

operations. Responsibility for assuring that the right people are made

available to the mission for the right job at the right time is a

responsibility which must be shared by missions, regional bureaus, and

contracting universities, and DS/DA. DS/DA proposes to approach this

implementation problem inthe following fashion:

1. DS/DA will be responsible for developing materials to

present and explain the program to the missions. Wherever desired,

107

in AID/W or in regional conferences, a presentation of the program will

be made by DS/DA staff. DS/DA staff will also explain the program in

the course of TDY travel on other matters wherever desired and appropriate.

2. With respect to operations in LDCs where a major university

commitment will be made:

a.The contracting university and regional bureaus will propose

countries of particular interest for activities under their project.

b. Missions will be notified of such interest and will be asked

for agreement inprinciple along with that of the regional bureau involved,

the Interbureau Project Committee, and DS/DA.

c. Country selection will be made as part of the process of

specification of the annual work plan of the contractor. Once agreement

inprinciple is arrived at, a detailed scope of work will be developed in

country between a representative of the university and the mission, subject

to concurren. '.v the regional bureau and DS/DA. The role of the missions

will be substantial inall stages, both most effectively to serve

their needs, and because mission funding of some aspects of

long-term research and consultation activities isexpected.

3. With roup,ict to 108activities in count1i-j. which 11re not. countron of rimary Dp ticn byc i a unv,r, Ity

a. the regional bureaus will identify applied research/consulting

needs in their countries. b. the list of needs compiled by the regionalbureaus will be compiled and evaluated by DS/DAand the contractor; and either (i) needs will be met through the censulting roster or where needs are viewed as

(ii)

hic4i priority negoti­ations with the contracting un-"versity regardingthe use of research associaeL ,ots may be possi­ble.

4. As an operating princitle' miL'sins will be en­couraged to enter their own self-finannc-,d agreeents asa result of relatio..nhips sta.':ed with -niversities rather.than wor::ing through this OS/DA financed project. Therole of DS/DA's oroject in this connec-iJn in to get initialwork underwa,, make connection, facilitate transactionsand not to control the development of relationships. DS/DA_should be directly involved only inso, as funding under

this project is required for the R&D effort and availablefor anciliary consulting services. 5. In those situations in which an AID/W bureau ora mission is using the vehicle of this project to secureservices with its own funding, DS/DA would be kept informedDS/DA .in turn will notify the Interbureau Project Committee

109

of this activity periodically. The purpose is to assure

that the general cornitments for consulting by university,

are in fact carried out and to assist in project evaluation.

AID Ik.ie (I,-il PROJECT DESIGN SUMMA"Y ife f rco

LOGICAL FNAMEWORK F,F Y )9 _.rv 83roject n h&N wnaj: ana g ing De ce n t ra l i z a t io n ( 9 31- 1 05 3 ) loveI tUS F.o..lr1, 1 eP8 , l . .F 97

S oj: ad"ouumohle-o.&,,oaaI. Ulwve....IGo.lA.c..., 0ni: Volume of goodsA dmUJ Pokrconic Off il-licid":Poor majorities in LOC records; program amnitori-n A,,ufoi.Hand services in pertinent service I.,through collaboration with other DSBLOCs receive greater quality and quantity - economies willof not be disruptedf0 god services. areas delivered to poor majorities

Sguoa -cen have Increased by demonstrable projects; site visits and Interviews In LICs;raT z-e-o~ganuzatlons at service delivery level,n- amount over Including

cTiidtii9 I Ife of roject . Interviews with field and - poor majorities will lieallowedlocal governments, non-gover- oucal govern-eaccess to decentralized f~rogramsjmental organizations, special-use dis-

improved organizat-onal, managerialand operational capacity of field ment personnel.. program clents andtricts and deconcentrated field services project participants.

of and !9cal levels, Including: - IlCs will continue to be interestedsector ministries) central, regional and localcan more effective- - increased numbers of projects records In decentializatlou, and willly Identify, design, organize, Implement designed locally; and histories of projects and programs; adopt AID recomnendations- Interviews with local officials and

andand maintain development projects and projcct Ideas.- more opportunity for andlocal use of ­-I.ie a Input in project and progr-nm -

field personnel;RIM 'caoreeffectively offer compre- identification and design; Interviews with local leadership;more projects Implemented with na7yTs-- oT-s and eva(1afonhensive and appropriate strategic advice -hfmissions' decentralized projects with - AIuto LOC governments considering or choosing

local or field personnel management; particular emphasis on: and LDC rerognize need for - more projects and programs main- - more knowledge and information Inevidence of Integration of organiza- this area:-adaiission acntraintitions a Ined by local personnel andorganization and mnagement aspects of de-

tionalmorSAID missions and LOC Institutions can and management problems withresources, ­more effectively consult on and design tie i-n--t os-that wiTlIndicate-~ htwl - evidence of linkage among various

USAID will continue to propose andniae-eiec decentralized project design;f naeaogvros taint eie evcsItration to deliver services incraizedioncntr ministy asevces support projects utilizing deconcen-r,

if- purpose has been achieved: End ofd ugetra, ncludna mthe seofnerachli- project status. decentralized projects;gam(dbncld Improved AID andse gieand - evidence of experimental and Innova-cal eureaucratized) strateg Ies LDC capacity to: - US arnd IIC professionals will beand - address organizational and mana- tive approaches to service delivery _.systems. able to work collaboratively andsystems.sector-specific management modes and integrate their activities. ageilapcsodcntlzdgerJil aspects of decentralizedUSAID missions and LDC Institutions can service programs; - direct monitoring by SDilAprojects to -A- h,support and strengthen localmore effectively consult on and design In local Institutions;- Committee.governments' performance In

Identify and respond to weaknesses - to inivegriteIdentifying, - studies accepted by Interbureau resascandoultaing.i in develop and define comprehensive - information activities monitored

university has management capacityorganizing. Implementing and aintainin strategies for nationaldetraisfozation or sectoral DS/DA. by - quality research and consultingdevelo nt projects at -r athe local eve ecentralization; D/rostoraccpe.yD/A talent can be mobilized by this- roster accepted by S/A.ecan- Ipu s:-Operationally relevant state of the art nonhierarchicaldevelop and implement Innovative ­(non-bureaucratic) favorable evaluation of short andand practical guidance materials, long-term consultations by mission mechanism.andn1ueo~~pSLongitude mechanisms to deliver services, - investment in increasedpersonnel. profession­

of Outputs: alIndac--rciahoueaterieralprfesina talent will yield improveent inand applied research. in house and external professional state of artConsulting network of experts. - Interdisciplinary core team esta- in AID projects.review of research and state of artlished and applied research under - Dissemination of Information on de-papers. _ t of an-t:papers,centralization. way ii at least four countries'

- six case studies completed.-co-- at lease six state-of-the-arts Regular AID reporting procedures. p r t v syl me h n m ca- Contractual agreement with university- - practical materials such as hand- cooperative style mechanism canMission and host government commitmentwhich also simultaneously service books and manuals on organizing and institution.

their managing decentralized projects and Iown strategic and project for nput: nt nV Ineeds, programs agreements can be reached withare field tested and- - Budget of $4.053,000 over 5 yearsGuidance and decision making by Develop- available to missions. missions, host governments andent Administration Steering Committee - Mission funds of approximately agreersits-agreed upon Information services $1,00,000 over 5 years.and by interbureau Coordinating Commaittee. fulfilled; uirsiye n s- OS/DAStaff to assume management and - consulting roster functioning toprofessional review* AID's satisfaction."bV-fi Tn e;in--xt-o ITm