Final evaluation report : municipal development and finance program -- local government support program

The two programs contributed to USAID/T's objective to increase the provision of urban environmental services to the poor on a sustainable basis. They also contributed to urban development policy in Tunisia. Through support to the Ministry of the Interior and its various entities, training of supervisory staff and development of management tools for the local communes, and a number of studies that helped to define issues and suggest alternative approaches, the programs helped the GOT improve planning and monitoring of its municipal development programs. Municipalities are now better managed and trained, have a better understanding of the role of the private sector, and have better investment plans, though they continue to require substantial financial support and assistance. The programs also demonstrated a number of innovations in training and participation which have the potential to significantly change municipal management and the provision of infrastructure services. However, these gains are unlikely to be permanent in the absence of continuing attention by the GOT. There are also infrastructure needs which are not being met, apparently due to municipalities' failure to adequately assess needs and to prepare project requests, or administrative restrictions on government subsidies. The 1992 reorganization of the Caisse des Prets et de Soutien des Collectivites Locales (CPSCL) as a government financial window for communes or local governments was a key step in establishing a more efficient and effective financing process, and was one of the primary outputs of the MDFP. The Caisse has more than tripled its interest rates (to 6.5%) since 1992 and established a solid loan recovery record and become financially sound. However, the Caisse depends on government subsidies and external donor support and is far from being sustainable. After a slow start, the LGSP developed the Municipal Training Center (CNPRCRM), which has trained government local and regional staff. However, the Center will need more assistance in order to maintain its momentum and become sustainable. The LGSP was also decisive in encouraging community participation in municipal management and local decision making through its support of the GESCOME (Projet Gestion Communautaire de l'Environnement) initiative; the GESCOME approach may have resulted in considerable cost savings in providing municipal infrastructure. However, as a pilot activity, GESCOME was implemented in only two municipalities (in Sousse and in Kasserine, where the provision of additional funds by the governor made it particularly successful) and will not have nationwide impact without further efforts by the GOT and other municipalities. LGSP efforts involving the Federation Nationale des Villes Tunisienees (FNVT) were not successful. Likewise, the objective of promoting an increased role for NGOs in the municipal development process was not advanced. This reflects the weak position of independent NGOs in Tunisia. The following lessons were learned. (1) The methodology for implementing much of the program consisted of pilot efforts or studies followed by workshops and internal GOT reflections on the lessons and validity of these efforts. This has successfully led to wider impacts. A key component of this approach was structured collaboration between the GOT and Regional Housing and Urban Development Office (RHUDO) at every step in the process. (2) Collaboration with the World Bank was also of great importance in achieving program objectives, and provides a model that should be examined for replication in other countries. (3) The assembly of resources by the RHUDO from various USAID programs and collaboration at the field level of three Global Bureau Centers and a regional bureau is another model worthy of being replicated.