Trainingon

Community Score Card

Nepal, September 1820, 2012

Om Prakash Arya & Amar Deep Singh

CUTS-International, India

Why does poor accountability exist?

• Service users or citizens are mostly at receiving end, less informed, unheard, in poor relationship with service providers

• Despite rules and regulations for civil servants, there is still a wide area of administrative discretion

• Political leaders and supervisors of service providers who would like the service providers to be accountable to them

• The service providers themselves, whose objectives and interests often differ from those of supervisors and service recipients

• Distance between the people and the government servants

• Both service providers & recipients take demand of accountability as a misdeed

Citizens

Service Providers

Less informed,at distance, Unheard, at receiving end, excluded from decision making process,Have no in/direct power to hold them accountable

Imbalance

Without being equally aware & attentive as service providers, how the recipients can demand accountability?

Pressure from both sidesHave own interestsWork overloadNo clearly defined functions

Can service providers perform effectively without support from community and supervisors?

Stretched

How to enhance accountability?

• Creating room for citizens to engage with

• Enhancing awareness level through information sharing

• Building communication channels

• Building trust & relationship

• Raising voice of unheard

• Cluster demand instead of individual demand

• Collective solutions and joint implementation

• A beautiful hybrid tool

• Relatively easy to use and flexible in application.

• Mechanism of direct feedback

• Strengthens citizens voice

• Enhances confidence of both service users and providers

• Engage people and thus build local capacity

About Community Score Card…

• Measure quality of services

• Kills several birds with single stone

• Generate and shares information on important issues

• Ensure inclusion of all groups

• Make heard the unheard voices

• Generate performance criteria

• Promote dialogue and consensus building

• Emphasizes on joint decision making

• Build trust, communication & partnership among all stakeholders

• Brings solution from the bottom & through mutual dialogue

What does community score card do?

Critical success factors

• Strong skills to facilitate the process

• Deep knowledge of the services to the facilitator

• Strong information and dissemination effort to ensure maximum participation from all the stakeholders

• Strong social mobilization process

• An understanding of the local socio-political governance context;

• a technically competent intermediary to facilitate the process;

• participation/buy-in of the service provider

• Coordinated follow up.

2

Input Tracking Matrix

3Community Generated Performance Assessment

4

Self Evaluation

5

Interface Meeting

6

Follow Up

1 Preparatory Ground Work

6 steps of CSC Process

CSC Process Community Gathering

Input tracking

Performance Scorecard Self-Evaluation

Interface Meeting

Feedback and Dialogue

Immediate ImprovementsIssues for Follow-up

Accountability

Transparency Socio-economic development

Preparatory Groundwork

Better Services

Instit. Reforms

Steps of community score card

Preparatory Groundwork

• Identifying the scope of the assessment

• Identifying and training of facilitators

• Involve other partners

• Divide into groups by use of service

• Mobilize community

• Invite key persons from outside community

• Community gathering to explain stages of process

Steps for Preparing the Groundwork

Step-1: Identifying the scope of the CSC 

Decide on the geographical scope and location for each exercise. Ideally, this should be a village.

Decide what facilities and services are to be evaluated (i.e. infrastructure, Village Saving and Credit Society; etc.)

Step-2: Get Basic Data on Community

Population data/ Services of GP (Entitlements, Timing, quantity, quality etc.)/Poverty profile / Social profile- Poor, marginalised, living area etc.

Step-3: Community gathering to explain stages of

processAwareness Building and MobilizationEnsuring Participation of Poor and Vulnerable Groups

Step-4: Identifying and training of facilitators

The CSC depends on the quality of the facilitation and mobilization undertaken. Ideally, people or groups with experience in facilitating participatory methods should be engaged for the task. These facilitators need to be trained on the CSC process and how to organize the exercise.

Step-5: Orientation Meeting with Service Providers

Service providers need to be oriented about the process and outcomes mainly how they will be benefitted

Step-6: Invite key persons from outside communityLocal leaders, facility staff, NGO workers, etc. will also need

to be invited. A decision on how the exercise will be scheduled has to be taken. The choice will determine when to call the outside parties, and what kinds of arrangements will be required for their participation

The organization of the meeting involves decisions about logistics including:Deciding the venue for the gathering based on a sense of the number of participants that will take

part. Ensuring materials for the gathering – paper, pencils, megaphone/PA system (optional), blackboard

(optional), etc.

“Listening to each other”

An opportunity for participants to learn about each

other’s experiences in Social Accountability Tools

implementation including results and challenges;

share their respective vision of Social

Accountability Tools and challenges; share their

respective vision and receive feedback from their

peers

Input Tracking: Why & How

Why do we use it?

• To gather information on the status of inputs in the service

and shows whether it has what it needs (inputs) to deliver

and operate as planned.

• To get a rough snapshot of inefficiency and possible

leakages at the local level.

How is it done?

• A discussion is facilitated in the staff or those responsible for

and knowledgeable about the facility, service or project to

get information (i.e., inventory of equipment, receipts,

budget allocation and expenditure reports, delivery invoices,

transect walk) on what should be there and what is there.

• Identification of the inputs required for a particular service or project (Participatory)

• Decide and explain which inputs are to be tracked/ monitored (It is better to track few inputs well than to track many ineffectively)

• Compile Supply-side information on what the inputs were planned and actually received (receipts, budget allocation and expenditure reports, delivery invoices)

• Finalize a set of Measurable Input Indicators (Bringing together different people in a participatory process to identify indicators reveals their different needs and expectations)

• Fill in the input tracking matrix

• Transact walk to gather more information on input

• Compiling suggestions for action

Gathering such information is in itself a empowering process

Steps for Input Tracking/Monitoring

Sample Inputs for an activity

Activity Name of the Input

Unit we use to measure input

Implementing Infrastructure project

Material like Cement, bricks

Number, weight, length, volume, etc.

Labor, engineering support

Number of days

Community contribution

Number of persons contributing, amount/kind/ labor

Project fund Amount

Time spend Months

Capacity Building activities

Material such as office equipments, furniture,

stationery

Number

Training programme

Number of participants, days of training

Resource persons Number of days

Preparations/coordination

Number and person months

Project funds Number of installments, amount received

Sample Inputs for an activity

Input Tracking: Outline

INPUT INDICATOR

ENTITLEMENT/ BUDGET/

RECORDED AMOUNT

ACTUAL AMOUNT REMARKS/

COMMENTS

A. Coverage or Distribution

A.1 Number of Hand-pumps 10 8 -

A.2 Number of public taps 15 13 Water supply only 4 hours per day

A.3 Number of wells 4 4 Poor Water quality

B. Equipment

B.1 Expenditure on pipes, tubes, valves, water meters

INR 10 lakhs INR 8 lakhs -

B.2 Expenditure on Tools & Machinery for water lifting etc.

INR 15 lakhs INR 12 lakhs -

Hypothetical Input Tracking Matrix

It is a participatory tool used for evaluating the performance of a service

or project by the Communities themselves. The community members do

this by:• Identifying issues to assess• Identifying assessment indicators• Scoring the indicators based on their own perceptions • Suggesting changes to improve performance and/or

conduct

Performance Score Card

Step-1: Divide Gathering into Focus Groups 

Step-2: Develop Performance Criteria

Step-3: Decide Standard/Benchmark Performance

Criteria

Step-4: Narrow Down and Finalize Criteria

Step-5: Scoring by Focus Groups

Step-6: Securing Explanation/Evidence to Back

Rankings

Step-7: Obtaining Community’s Suggestions for

Reform/Improvement

Steps for Performance Score Card

Project/Sub-

Project

Performance

Criteria/Indicator

Score(scale of

1-10)

Reasons for the Score

Recommendations

• Timing for executing performance score card in consent with community

• Take one indicator at a time

• Reasons (Specific) are more important to bring out

• Provide chances to speak especially poor and marginalized

• Recommendations (Specific) will consider both community and service providers for improvement

Performance Score Card : Outline

• The facilitator may ask the group to illustrate very high and low scores.

• All the scorecards need to be documented properly so that the community can maintain a record of the results and use it for the interface meeting and follow up.

• The results must be recorded in such a manner to ensure durability and easy access.

• Facilitators should guide and help participants to score, but should avoid influencing the process.

• The scores from different groups should not be added

• Prepare for interface meeting before winding up

Hypothetical Performance Scorecard

S. No.

Performance Criteria Reasons/Remarks

Score (1-10)1. Positive Attitude of Staff  

1.1 Punctuality of staff 5Start late, but some work after hours

1.2 Polite behaviour 4Many staff shout at patients, rude to children

1.3Respect for patients  

3 Disrespectful

2. Management of the health facility  2.1 Cleanliness 7 Centre is clean, rooms mopped

2.2 Observing working hours 4Open on time, but come late, long lunch

3. Quality of services provided  3.1 Adequate supply of drugs 3 Drugs mostly not available

3.2 Adequate equipment 2No admission wards, other rooms not functional, no dental, surgery services…

3.3 Adequate and qualified staff 2 Health workers qualified but not enough in number and they are not dedicated

3.4 Emergency services available 24 hours

1Serious cases don’t get services they deserve, no admission wards for serious cases

Self-Evaluation Score Card

Self evaluation score card refers to the evaluation carried out by the service providers on their own performance. The indicators for this evaluation are generated in a participatory process by the service providers themselves.

•The self-evaluation scorecard is carried out by the service providers at the service by all the staff working at that particular facility/unit.

•The self-evaluation scorecard enables the service providers to generate their won indicators, and to realize that their objectives are not very different from those of the service users.

•It enables discussion with the community scorecards.

Self-Evaluation Scorecard

Step-1: Generating the list of indicators

Step-2: Carrying out the self-evaluation

Step-3: Discuss the high and low scores

Step-4: Prioritizing for action

Step-5: Discussing the input-tracking scorecard

Step-6: Preparation for the interface meeting

Project/Sub-

Project

Indicator Score(scale of

1-10)

Reasons for the Score

Recommendations

Andhra Pradesh, India: Improving Health Services through Community Score Cards

An interface meeting is a public forum or meeting where the service providers and users gather in order to present their respective scorecards and discuss ways in which the service can be improved.

This platform enables the service users to present their evaluation of the service performance, along with their concerns and priorities regarding the service.

The service providers also get an opportunity to present their views, concerns, constraints, and priorities.

Through the dialogue, the users and the providers negotiate and prepare a mutually agreed upon action plan to improve the service, for which they share responsibilities.

Interface Meeting

Indicator Score

Suggestions

Responsibility

Time Frame

Common Indicator

CI 1

CI 2

Community Indicator

SI 1

SI 2

Service Provider Indicator

PI 1

PI 2

Action Plan: Outline

Repeat Score Cards: Process• The main purpose of the repeat scorecard is to review

progress and provide inputs for a revised action plan by: • Scoring the same indicators again to reflect any changes

in performance• Reviewing progress related to implementing the action

plan• Discussing any changes experienced in service delivery

• RSC is repeated after a mutually agreed upon period of time. The process should be easier and faster since everyone has prior experience.

• All the previous scorecards and participants, if possible, should be present for the RSC.

• The action plans are also reviewed. If the progress has been

good, new ideas are selected for the next action plan. If the

progress has not been satisfactory, the participants have to

devise other ways to achieve their aims from the first action

plan.

Repeat Score Cards: Outline

Challenges and Lessons• Service providers and policy makers may feel threatened

by the CSC initiative.

• It is not guaranteed that service providers/government officials will be receptive to the problems identified by ‘common’ people and their suggestions for change.

• Service providers at local level do not always have the capacity or leverage to make decisions or implement change.

• It is important to help community members develop an understanding of the constraints faced by service providers, so as to avoid creating unrealistically high expectations.

• There is a risk that the CSC process could result in disillusionment on the part of community members and service providers if proposed solutions

Thank Thank YouYou