Implement New Computer Program in 6 Government Ministries to Improve Service Delivery (NG0029)

Brief description:
This commitment seeks to contribute to improve the integrity of Government and the citizens’ trust of Government Service delivery who deliver need-assessments based on timely, fair, equitable, effective and transparent services, through more motivated, people-oriented, result-driven, efficient and effective public services in six key sectors.

General problem:
Unsatisfactory delivery of public service leading to receding citizens’ trust and apathy in government and prevalence of negative practices such as nepotism, favoritism, corruption, social-inequality, delays and wastages.

Specific OGP issue:
Capacity and responsiveness of government to citizens’ needs, expectations and satisfaction; and the feedback capacity of citizens to engage government on their right to quality service.

Rationale for the commitment:
The success of ongoing strategic public sector reforms spearheaded by BPSR/HoS largely reliant on a people-oriented, innovative, open public service as perceived by citizens would be sustained by improved service delivery.

Main objective:
1. To improve and support emerging merit-based, transparent and accountable governance systems, responsive feedback mechanism.
2. To contribute to attitudinal change from public service providers and value orientation in public service (political and religious neutrality, absence of tribalism, sectionalism, nepotism, favouritism, etc.)
3. To improve efficiency and process through the adherence to standards in Service Charter of the public sector rules and regulations, resulting in quality and satisfactory services rendered to the public.
4. To encourage good practices in the public service and replication with sub-nationals on steps to improving the quality of service delivery in line with global best practices.

Anticipated impact:
Increased access to quality and satisfactory services in the Health, Education, Agriculture and (infrastructure) Transportation, Works, Housing and Power sectors.

See action plan for milestone activities

15. Improve MDAs’ Service Charter compliance

Main Objective

“1. To improve and support emerging merit-based, transparent and accountable governance systems, responsive feedback mechanism.

2. To contribute to attitudinal change from public service providers and value orientation in public service (political and religious neutrality, absence of tribalism, sectionalism, nepotism, favouritism, etc.)

3. To improve efficiency and process through the adherence to standards in Service Charter of the public sector rules and regulations, resulting in quality and satisfactory services rendered to the public.

4. To encourage good practices in the public service and replication with sub-nationals on steps to improving the quality of service delivery in line with global best practices.”

Milestones

1. Advocacy visit to the management of selected MDAs
2. Sensitization Meeting with Top Management of Six (6) selected MDAs by Lead MDA and Non-State Actors involved
3. Review of existing Service Charters and creation of new ones where necessary to include levels of neutrality expected in processes of MDAs such as staff recruitment, performance assessment, promotion, contract award, the wastefulness of government resources, and discourtesy to the public, fraud and corruption.
4. High level advocacy to Budget Office for the inclusion of Ministerial SERVICOM Unit (MSU) of the Budget Line for Production/Implementation of Service Charter in MDAs
5. Conduct a biannual Joint Stakeholder meeting and Media Engagement towards raising awareness of the need for compliance with the Service Charter standards by service providers and communication of expectations to end-users
6. Measurement of MDAs’ compliance with the Service Charter
7. Conduct staff capacity assessment for SERVICOM
8. Conduct staff capacity development programmes on identified gaps
9. Biannual Performance Report by SERVICOM and OGP Secretariat of key stakeholders to FEC
10. Introduction of award system to best performing service delivery MDAs
11. Advocacy visits to selected state governors as part of sub-national engagement strategy
12. SERVICOM to publish compliance reports received from MDAs in easy to assess formats, e.g. website, selected dailies, social media platforms
13. SERVICOM to conduct quarterly meeting with Civil Society Organizations on emerging with issues on improving service delivery

Editorial Note: For the complete text of this commitment, please see Nigeria’s action plan at https://www.opengovpartnership.org/documents/nigeria-action-plan-2019-2021/

Commitment Analysis

This commitment seeks to improve public service delivery by government agencies and to engage selected state governors on service delivery improvement at the subnational level. The commitment aims to increase transparency and accountability in seven pilot ministries. These are the Federal

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, Federal Ministry of Education, Federal Ministry of Health, Federal Ministry of Power, Federal Ministry of Transportation, Federal Ministry of Works and Housing, and the Federal Ministry of Aviation. ^[180] It will do so by encouraging compliance with service charters – documents containing service pledges, service standards, and commitments to which citizens are entitled.

This commitment includes 13 milestones. Activities aim to create service charters for MDAs that don’t have them and revise existing service charters to reflect citizen feedback. SERVICOM (Service Compact with All Nigerians) intends to promote compliance through training, citizen engagement, and monitoring. The commitment also plans for advocacy to include a Ministerial SERVICOM Unit in MDAs’ service charter budget line. In addition, on the subnational level, this commitment envisions a compact of state-governors affirming the provision of service delivery in accordance with their service charters. ^[181] The pilot subnationals are drawn from the six geopolitical zones in Nigeria. These are Nasarawa State, Katsina State, Bauchi State, Oyo State, Imo State, and Delta State. ^[182]

The commitment is relevant to the OGP value of access to information, as it plans for SERVICOM to publish compliance and performance reports on MDAs in a variety of formats, including websites and social media. It is also relevant to the OGP value of civic participation, as it entails SERVICOM meeting with CSOs every quarter to gather their inputs on how to improve service delivery.

If implemented fully, this commitment would have a moderate potential impact on improving service delivery by MDAs. On average, SERVICOM reports that MDAs have a 44% rate of compliance with their service charters. ^[183] This commitment aims to achieve greater compliance with MDAs’ service charters, as assessed by SERVICOM’s Composite, Weighted-Average Index: Timeliness (24%), Information (18%), Professionalism (16%), Staff Attitude (12%), and Service Delivery (Value for Money) (30%). ^[184] Additionally, planned capacity building could improve civil servants’ awareness of Service Charters and expected quality of service delivery. Publication of a biannual performance report, the planned award system, and linking MDA budgets, and staff promotions to service charter performance could potentially provide an incentive for greater compliance with Service Charters. Finally, including a Ministerial SERVICOM Unit in MDAs’ service charter budget line will address SERVICOM’s funding challenges. According to SERVICOM, previously, most SERVICOM Units in Ministries have not had a budget line. MDAs have not adhered to the Federal Executive Council-approved circular on budgetary provision for their SERVICOM Units, and for MDAs with a budget line, funds have not been released in a timely manner. ^[185]

However, according to the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), MDAs’ service delivery faces a number of challenges, including limited e-government services, opportunities for citizen feedback, and information sharing between and among MDAs. In addition to SERVICOM efforts, improving service delivery will require a concerted effort by MDAs’ leadership. ^[186]

Given the complex challenges that exist for ensuring effective service delivery in Nigeria, there needs to be an ongoing dialogue between SERVICOM, MDAs, governors, and civil society clarifying how SERVICOM can add value in improving service delivery. The first two milestones of this commitment could be used to this end.

Commitment 15. Improve MDAs’ service charter compliance

● Verifiable: Yes

● Does it have an open government lens? Yes

● Potential Impact: Moderate

● Completion: Limited

● Did it open government? No early results to report yet

This commitment sought to provide targeted training, monitoring, and problem solving for public service delivery in targeted MDAs. During implementation, Service Compact with all Nigerians (SERVICOM) conducted high-level advocacy visits to 17 MDAs, such as the Federal Ministry of Works and Transportation and the Federal Housing Authority (Milestones 1 and 2). [232] Among states, SERVICOM had a low level of response and only conducted a visit to Nasarawa State (Milestone 11). [233] Several other activities were completed but with less frequency than expected in the action plan. These include joint meetings with the media and civil society (Milestones 5 and 13). [234] Staff also received capacity-building (Milestone 8) and SERVICOM presented awards to the best-performing MDAs (Milestone 10). [235]

SERVICOM continued to evaluate and present MDAs with scorecards on their public service provision (Milestone 6). [236] SERVICOM received MDAs’ compliance reports, but reports past 2019 are not available online (Milestone 12). [237] According to the OGP Secretariat evaluation report, SERVICOM reviewed service charters and developed charters for MDAs that lacked them (Milestone 3). [238] SERVICOM and the OGP Secretariat also submitted an annual performance report to the Federal Executive Council (Milestone 9). However, SERVICOM was not able to secure a budget line for the ministerial SERVICOM units’ implementation of service charters (Milestone 4). IRM did not find evidence that SERVICOM conducted a staff capacity assessment (Milestone 7).