The Municipality of Mirdite

Mirdite

Mirdita Municipality is located in the north-eastern part of Albania, and bordered by Fushë Arrëz and Puka Municipalities to the north, Lezha Municipality to the west and Kukës and Dibra Municipalities to the east. It is bordered by Dibra Municipality to the south-east and Mat and Kurbin Municipalities to the south. Rrëshen town is the seat of this municipality. The municipality encompasses 4 towns and 81 villages, scattered over 7 administrative units, namely: Rrësheni, Rubiku, Selita, Kthella, Fani, Oroshi and Kaçinari. Mirdita, following the construction of the A1 highway (Rruga e Kombit) gained importance as a passage and natural entering gate to Kosovo. Although, the Construction of this axis road enhanced the volume of traffic and travelling quality, it stimulated little social-economic development for the area. Integration of rural areas with urban ones, and internal migration towards larger cities represent some of the challenges that affect the quality of life and social and economic development of the municipality. Mirdita Municipality extends over a territory of diversified cultural and ethnographic heritage and its underground is rich in minerals. Mirdita underground is exceptionally rich in copper and pyrite which gave rise to four towns connected with the mining industry. The major part of this industry is currently nonoperational. These are some of the reasons why Mirdita registered one of the highest internal migration rates, as well as emigration during the last 25 years .Among the most interesting fields is the exploitation of hydro-energetic capacities of Fan i Madh and Fan i Vogël, Uraka, Zalli i Dodajve rivers and other streams, and it is estimated that they can ensure energy production potential. These hydro recourses might be exploited for aquatic products .

Mirdite Rreshen City
Mirdite Rreshen City Mirdite Rreshen City Mirdite Rreshen City Mirdite Rreshen City Mirdite Rreshen City Mirdite Rreshen City
Municipality Municipality Center Administrative Units Respective cities and villages
Mirdite Rreshen City Rreshen Rreshen City, Villages; Nderfushas ,Nderfan, Geziq, Tarazh, Jezull, Koder Rreshen, Sheshaj, Fushe-Lumth, Malaj, Malaj Eperm, Tene, Lurth, Bukmire, Kulme
Mirdite Rreshen City Rubik Rubik City, Villages; Fierze, Bulshize, Fang, Rasfik, Katund i Vjeter, Munaz, Rreja e Zeze, Rreja e Veles, Vau Shkeze, Rrethi i Siperm, Livadhez, Bulger
Mirdite Rreshen City Selita Kurbnesh City, Villages; Lufaj, Bardhaj, Lekunde, Zajs, Kthelle e Siperme, Kurbnesh-fshat, Merkurth, Kumbull
Mirdite Rreshen City Kthelle Villages; Balldren, Mali-Kakariq, Qender-Kakariq, Gocaj, Balldren i Ri, Torovice, Malecaj, Koljakaj
Mirdite Rreshen City Fan Villages; Klos, Shtrungaj, Bisake, Fan, Zall-Xhuxhe, Katundi i Ri, Konaj, Shengjin, Petoq, Xhuxhe, Dardhez, Thirre, Sang, Hebe, Domgjon, Gjakez, Munelle
Mirdite Rreshen City Orosh Reps City, Villages; Kullaxhi, Blinisht, Pshqesh, Mashterkor, Shemri, Gryke Orosh, Lgjin, Bulshar, Planet, Ndershen, Nenshejt, Koder-Spac, Gurth-Spac, Lajthize
Mirdite Rreshen City Kacinar Villages; Kacinar, Arrez, Kuzhnen, Simon, Shengjergj, Shtuf, Shperdheze
Download
Final Score of Local Government Mapping 2020
58

Criteria 1 EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY 65

Sub-criteria 1 Does the public administration have a clear vision and participatory and inclusive plan to achieve development? 56

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
11 Is there a general local plan which takes in consideration the community vision and thoughts? 0-100 where 0=No Plan, 25 =Partial Plan with little consideration for Community Thoughts, 50= Partial Plan with partial consideration, 75= Good plan with good consideration 100=Very Good plan with full consideration 0 0 0
11 Is there a general local plan which takes in consideration the community vision and thoughts? 0-100 where 0=No Plan, 25 =Partial Plan with little consideration for Community Thoughts, 50= Partial Plan with partial consideration, 75= Good plan with good consideration 100=Very Good plan with full consideration 69 33 51
12 (If 11 = 0) Is there a strategic local plan for the Municipality that has gone through a participatory process? 0-100 where 0=No Plan, 25 =Partial Plan with little participation, 50= Partial Plan with partial participation 75= Good plan with good participation 100=Very Good Plan with full consideration 0 0 0
12 (If 11 = 0) Is there a strategic local plan for the Municipality that has gone through a participatory process? 0-100 where 0=No Plan, 25 =Partial Plan with little participation, 50= Partial Plan with partial participation 75= Good plan with good participation 100=Very Good Plan with full consideration
13 (If 12 = 0) Is there any other plan (e.g. operational development plan or other medium-term plan) for the Municipality? 0=No other plans, 50=some plans 100=All necessary Plans 0 0 0
13 (If 12 = 0) Is there any other plan (e.g. operational development plan or other medium-term plan) for the Municipality? 0=No other plans, 50=some plans 100=All necessary Plans
2 Are there annual plans for various sectors (education, infrastructure, waste management, water, forestry etc.)? 0=No sectorial plans, 25= Few Sectorial Plans 50=some plans 75=Most of Sectorial plans, 100= All of the necessary sectorial plans 35 50 43
2 Are there annual plans for various sectors (education, infrastructure, waste management, water, forestry etc.)? 0=No sectorial plans, 25= Few Sectorial Plans 50=some plans 75=Most of Sectorial plans, 100= All of the necessary sectorial plans 79 54 67
3 Are these plans implemented in order to guide the municipality decision-making process? (Are these plans implemented) 0 to 100 where 0= No Implementation, 25=Poor Implementation, 50=Some Implementation, 75=Good Implementation, 100=Perfect Implementation 41 46 44
3 Are these plans implemented in order to guide the municipality decision-making process? (Are these plans implemented) 0 to 100 where 0= No Implementation, 25=Poor Implementation, 50=Some Implementation, 75=Good Implementation, 100=Perfect Implementation 62 38 50

Sub-criteria 2 Financial Management: Is there an effective and efficient planning and management of local financial resources? 54

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Does the municipality have a medium term budget framework to deliver its strategic plan objectives/or projects? 0=No Medium Term Budget, 25=Medium term budget with little/no linkage to strategic plan/objective, 50= Medium term budget with some linkage to strategic plan/objectives 75=Medium term budget with good linkage to strategic plan/objectives, 100=Medium 50 42 46
1 Does the municipality have a medium term budget framework to deliver its strategic plan objectives/or projects? 0=No Medium Term Budget, 25=Medium term budget with little/no linkage to strategic plan/objective, 50= Medium term budget with some linkage to strategic plan/objectives 75=Medium term budget with good linkage to strategic plan/objectives, 100=Medium 81 38 60
2 Does your Municipality have the adequacy and capacity (administration and department staffing) to manage its budget efficiently? 0 to 100 where 0= no capacity, 25= little capacity, 50=some capacity, 75= good capacity, 100=full capacity 55 55
2 Does your Municipality have the adequacy and capacity (administration and department staffing) to manage its budget efficiently? 0 to 100 where 0= no capacity, 25= little capacity, 50=some capacity, 75= good capacity, 100=full capacity 75 75
3 Is there in place a good and effective financial management and control mechanisms? 0=No mechanisms in place, 25=few mechanisms in place, 50=some mechanisms, 75=good number of mechanisms, 100=All necessary mechanisms 46 46
3 Is there in place a good and effective financial management and control mechanisms? 0=No mechanisms in place, 25=few mechanisms in place, 50=some mechanisms, 75=good number of mechanisms, 100=All necessary mechanisms 75 75
4 How efficient is the municipality in collecting local revenues (tax and tariffs) from citizens and businesses? % of the own revenues over total revenues (2016). That will be the score assigned 16 16
4 How efficient is the municipality in collecting local revenues (tax and tariffs) from citizens and businesses? % of the own revenues over total revenues (2016). That will be the score assigned 7 7

Sub-criteria 3 Informed Decision-Making: Is the decision-making based on reliable and updated information? 71

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Is the municipality decision making based on reliable statistics/data and up to date information? 0=No reliable statistics, 25=few reliable statistics, 50=some reliable statistics, 75=Reliable statistics, 100=Very reliable statistics 43 32 38
1 Is the municipality decision making based on reliable statistics/data and up to date information? 0=No reliable statistics, 25=few reliable statistics, 50=some reliable statistics, 75=Reliable statistics, 100=Very reliable statistics 81 58 70
2 How reliable are the data on the Land Registry that your Municipality uses? 0=No reliability in Land Registry, 25=Little reliability, 50=some reliability, 75=High reliability, 100=Full reliability 51 51
2 How reliable are the data on the Land Registry that your Municipality uses? 0=No reliability in Land Registry, 25=Little reliability, 50=some reliability, 75=High reliability, 100=Full reliability 63 63
3 To what extent does the municipality use a GIS system/Platform? 0=No usage/system, 25=Little usage, 50=Average usage, 75=High usage, 100=Full usage 20 20
3 To what extent does the municipality use a GIS system/Platform? 0=No usage/system, 25=Little usage, 50=Average usage, 75=High usage, 100=Full usage 79 79
4 Is there a comprehensive reporting system within the municipality? 0=No system, 25=little reporting, 50=average reporting, 75=good reporting, 100=Very Good Reporting 31 31
4 Is there a comprehensive reporting system within the municipality? 0=No system, 25=little reporting, 50=average reporting, 75=good reporting, 100=Very Good Reporting 73 73

Sub-criteria 4 Effective coordination and cooperation: Are the municipality interactions with central government, donors, other municipalities etc. effective and efficient? 69

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 How effective is the process of consultation between central and local government? 0=No effectiveness, 25=little effectiveness, 50=average effectiveness, 75=good effectiveness 100=very good effectiveness 56 56
1 How effective is the process of consultation between central and local government? 0=No effectiveness, 25=little effectiveness, 50=average effectiveness, 75=good effectiveness 100=very good effectiveness 58 58
2 How effective is the coordination among the municipal departments? 0=No effectiveness, 25=little effectiveness, 50=average effectiveness, 75=good effectiveness 100=very good effectiveness 46 46
2 How effective is the coordination among the municipal departments? 0=No effectiveness, 25=little effectiveness, 50=average effectiveness, 75=good effectiveness 100=very good effectiveness 77 77
3 To what extent is the Municipality productive in its cooperation with donors and international community? 0=No cooperation, 25=little cooperation, 50=Some cooperation, 75=Good cooperation, 100=Perfect cooperation 53 53
3 To what extent is the Municipality productive in its cooperation with donors and international community? 0=No cooperation, 25=little cooperation, 50=Some cooperation, 75=Good cooperation, 100=Perfect cooperation 62 62
4 To what level does the local government cooperates with other municipalities? 0=No cooperation, 25=little cooperation, 50=Some cooperation, 75=Good cooperation, 100=Perfect cooperation 40 40
4 To what level does the local government cooperates with other municipalities? 0=No cooperation, 25=little cooperation, 50=Some cooperation, 75=Good cooperation, 100=Perfect cooperation 65 65
5 Is there a good internal cooperation within the municipal council? 0=No cooperation, 25=little cooperation, 50=Some cooperation, 75=Good cooperation, 100=Perfect cooperation 43 43
5 Is there a good internal cooperation within the municipal council? 0=No cooperation, 25=little cooperation, 50=Some cooperation, 75=Good cooperation, 100=Perfect cooperation 83 83

Sub-criteria 5 Satisfaction towards services: What is the degree of citizens' satisfaction with the quality of public service delivery and its accessibility? 73

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 What is the level of municipal service delivery availability and access? % of Citizens that give an opinion for all 21 services scored 79 79
1 What is the level of municipal service delivery availability and access? % of Citizens that give an opinion for all 21 services scored 96 96
2 To what extent are the citizens satisfied with the quality of service delivery in their municipality? Aggregation of scores for all 21 services 64 64
2 To what extent are the citizens satisfied with the quality of service delivery in their municipality? Aggregation of scores for all 21 services 51 51
3 Does local government conduct assessments to determine the level of satisfaction that citizens have with the delivery of public services? 0=No assessment at all, 25=irregular and few assessment, 50=Some assessments, 75= regular assessments, 100=full procedure and regularity for citizen assessments of service satisfaction 23 15 19
3 Does local government conduct assessments to determine the level of satisfaction that citizens have with the delivery of public services? 0=No assessment at all, 25=irregular and few assessment, 50=Some assessments, 75= regular assessments, 100=full procedure and regularity for citizen assessments of service satisfaction 65 42 54
4 Do people have equal access to local government services? 0=no, 25=few people, 50=some people, 75=most people, 100=all people 35 35 35
4 Do people have equal access to local government services? 0=no, 25=few people, 50=some people, 75=most people, 100=all people 83 63 73
5 Is the process of obtaining municipal administrative services (permits, licenses, certifications, different documents etc.) easily accessed? 0=very difficult, 25= difficult, 50=average, 75=easy, 100=very easy 50 38 44
5 Is the process of obtaining municipal administrative services (permits, licenses, certifications, different documents etc.) easily accessed? 0=very difficult, 25= difficult, 50=average, 75=easy, 100=very easy 83 52 68
6 Do women and men have equal access to local government services? 0 to 100 where 0=not at all equal and 100= completely equal 100 100
6 Do women and men have equal access to local government services? 0 to 100 where 0=not at all equal and 100= completely equal 98 98

Criteria 2 TRANSPARENCY & RULE OF LAW 60

Sub-criteria 1 Transparency: Is information related to public service delivery performance and resources planning and utilization (including bidding processes) available and accessible for citizens? 59

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 How Transparent is your local Government? 0-Not at all transparent to 100- Completely transparent 50 50
1 How Transparent is your local Government? 0-Not at all transparent to 100- Completely transparent 57 57
2 Is there a good information flow from the Municipality around local projects, activities, municipal budget or service provision available and accessible? 0=No Information, 25=little information, 50=some information, 75=good information, 100=All necessary information/Very Good 53 38 49 46
2 Is there a good information flow from the Municipality around local projects, activities, municipal budget or service provision available and accessible? 0=No Information, 25=little information, 50=some information, 75=good information, 100=All necessary information/Very Good 67 31 52 50
3 Does the municipality have transparent administrative procedures (e.g. to get a building permit, business license, etc.)? 0=No at transparent procedures, 25=little transparent, 50=Average, 75=Good level of transparency, 100=Fully transparent 60 38 49
3 Does the municipality have transparent administrative procedures (e.g. to get a building permit, business license, etc.)? 0=No at transparent procedures, 25=little transparent, 50=Average, 75=Good level of transparency, 100=Fully transparent 77 48 63
4 Do communities have access to information about the performance of the local services, the resources available to it, and how these resources were used? 0=No Information, 25=little information, 50=some information, 75=good information, 100=All necessary information/Very Good 40 28 34
4 Do communities have access to information about the performance of the local services, the resources available to it, and how these resources were used? 0=No Information, 25=little information, 50=some information, 75=good information, 100=All necessary information/Very Good 60 44 52
5 Does the municipality have a website that is updated with the all relevant information? 0= no website, 25= website with little update, 50= website with average update, 75= website with good updated, 100= website with full updated information 73 69 71
5 Does the municipality have a website that is updated with the all relevant information? 0= no website, 25= website with little update, 50= website with average update, 75= website with good updated, 100= website with full updated information 73 77 75

Sub-criteria 2 Rule of Law: Effectiveness of Institutional Legal Framework: What is the level of effectiveness of the institutional legal framework - at local level? 60

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Is the institutional legal framework effective and efficient in ensuring equal rights for all municipality citizens (women, man, youth, and vulnerable groups)? 0=Not at all effective, 25= little, 50=Average, 70=Good level, 100=Fully effective 58 46 52
1 Is the institutional legal framework effective and efficient in ensuring equal rights for all municipality citizens (women, man, youth, and vulnerable groups)? 0=Not at all effective, 25= little, 50=Average, 70=Good level, 100=Fully effective 83 69 76
2 Are there measures in place (with regard to municipality) to educate citizens about their legal rights and obligations? 0=No measures, 25=few measures, 50=some measures, 75=Good measures, 100=All necessary measures 33 20 27
2 Are there measures in place (with regard to municipality) to educate citizens about their legal rights and obligations? 0=No measures, 25=few measures, 50=some measures, 75=Good measures, 100=All necessary measures 60 42 51
3 Does the local government raise awareness through its own website or public media (radio, newspapers, and social media) about laws and local regulations? 0=no awareness raising, 25=little awareness raising, 50=some awareness raising, 75=good awareness Raising, 100=full awareness raising 40 32 50 41
3 Does the local government raise awareness through its own website or public media (radio, newspapers, and social media) about laws and local regulations? 0=no awareness raising, 25=little awareness raising, 50=some awareness raising, 75=good awareness Raising, 100=full awareness raising 62 58 52 57
4 Does the Municipality enforce local laws and regulations impartially? Scale: 0=Not at all to 100= completely 54 54
4 Does the Municipality enforce local laws and regulations impartially? Scale: 0=Not at all to 100= completely 55 55

Sub-criteria 3 Incidence of Corruption: What is the degree of corruption? 61

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Is there any anti-corruption policy, strategy or action plan in place dealing with corruption or bribing cases at local level? 0=No Policy/strategy/action plan, 50=existing but insufficient, 100=Existing and sufficient 36 17 27
1 Is there any anti-corruption policy, strategy or action plan in place dealing with corruption or bribing cases at local level? 0=No Policy/strategy/action plan, 50=existing but insufficient, 100=Existing and sufficient 42 29 36
2 What is Corruption Perception level for the Municipal Government? Scale: 0= Completely corrupt to 100= Not at all corrupt 53 53
2 What is Corruption Perception level for the Municipal Government? Scale: 0= Completely corrupt to 100= Not at all corrupt 65 65
3 What is the Corruption Experience level with the Municipal Structures? % of citizens how had at least one contact with Municipality during the last 12 months and said that no bribe was paid or implied. 59 59
3 What is the Corruption Experience level with the Municipal Structures? % of citizens how had at least one contact with Municipality during the last 12 months and said that no bribe was paid or implied. 97 97
4 Are there local government systems/mechanisms to prevent corruption in your Municipality? 0=no mechanisms, 25=poor mechanisms, 50=average, 75=good mechanisms, 100=Perfect mechanisms 25 25 25
4 Are there local government systems/mechanisms to prevent corruption in your Municipality? 0=no mechanisms, 25=poor mechanisms, 50=average, 75=good mechanisms, 100=Perfect mechanisms 54 38 46

Criteria 3 ACCOUNTABILITY 55

Sub-criteria 1 Checks and Balances: Are there institutions, which have control, supervision, and sanction power on the local administration? 55

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Are there open forums for CSOs to engage with local authorities on the Municipal budgeting and planning process? 0=no, there aren't any, 25= few forums with little access, 50=some forums with some access, 75=Yes there are forums mostly accessible, 100=Enough Forums fully accessible 26 89 58
1 Are there open forums for CSOs to engage with local authorities on the Municipal budgeting and planning process? 0=no, there aren't any, 25= few forums with little access, 50=some forums with some access, 75=Yes there are forums mostly accessible, 100=Enough Forums fully accessible 38 46 42
2 Are local non-governmental organizations well equipped and skilled to hold local government accountable? 
 (0 = Not capable at all; 25=Mostly not capable; 50=Average, 75= Mostly Capable, 100 = Very capable 35 14 25
2 Are local non-governmental organizations well equipped and skilled to hold local government accountable? 
 (0 = Not capable at all; 25=Mostly not capable; 50=Average, 75= Mostly Capable, 100 = Very capable 27 54 41
3 Does the Municipal Council have oversight of the municipal government functions? 0=no, 25=poor, 50=fair, 75, very good, 100=excellent, 43 32 38
3 Does the Municipal Council have oversight of the municipal government functions? 0=no, 25=poor, 50=fair, 75, very good, 100=excellent, 56 60 58
4 Does the municipality management follow adequately the recommendations of the audits (State Audit)? 0=not at all, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=a lot of the time, 100=all the time 63 63
4 Does the municipality management follow adequately the recommendations of the audits (State Audit)? 0=not at all, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=a lot of the time, 100=all the time 83 83
5 Are community councils involved in the monitoring and evaluation of the public sector performance? (departments, projects, budgeting) 0=No/No community councils exist, 25=little involvement, 50=average, 75=good involvement, 100=Very high involvement 38 31 35
5 Are community councils involved in the monitoring and evaluation of the public sector performance? (departments, projects, budgeting) 0=No/No community councils exist, 25=little involvement, 50=average, 75=good involvement, 100=Very high involvement 40 60 50

Sub-criteria 2 Recourse: Are there any recourse mechanisms for different groups in place, and are they effective? 51

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Does the municipality have the mechanisms for lodging complaints and giving a feedback (e.g. Complaint Office)? 0=no mechanisms, 25=there is a mechanism but with little or no feedback 50=there is a mechanism with average feedback, 75=there is a mechanism with good feedback, 100=there is a mechanism with full feedback 38 35 37
1 Does the municipality have the mechanisms for lodging complaints and giving a feedback (e.g. Complaint Office)? 0=no mechanisms, 25=there is a mechanism but with little or no feedback 50=there is a mechanism with average feedback, 75=there is a mechanism with good feedback, 100=there is a mechanism with full feedback 71 40 56
2 Is there any feedback mechanisms established for citizens to share inputs with local government concerning services delivery? 0=no mechanisms, 25=few mechanisms, 50=some mechanisms, 75=good number of mechanisms, 100=all the necessary mechanisms 40 35 38
2 Is there any feedback mechanisms established for citizens to share inputs with local government concerning services delivery? 0=no mechanisms, 25=few mechanisms, 50=some mechanisms, 75=good number of mechanisms, 100=all the necessary mechanisms 44 50 47
3 How effective is the municipality in treating citizens or businesses complaints? 0=No effectiveness 25= Mostly ineffective, 50=Average, 75= Mostly effective, 100=Very effective 46 40 48 45
3 How effective is the municipality in treating citizens or businesses complaints? 0=No effectiveness 25= Mostly ineffective, 50=Average, 75= Mostly effective, 100=Very effective 67 35 50 51

Sub-criteria 3 Government's Responsiveness: What is the level of Municipality local government's responsiveness? 59

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Is the local government responsive to requests (i.e. letters and phones calls) from the community regarding projects, developmental issues etc.? 0=no responsiveness, 25=little responsiveness, 50=some responsiveness, 75= good responsiveness, 100= full responsiveness 46 38 42
1 Is the local government responsive to requests (i.e. letters and phones calls) from the community regarding projects, developmental issues etc.? 0=no responsiveness, 25=little responsiveness, 50=some responsiveness, 75= good responsiveness, 100= full responsiveness 71 50 61
2 Is the local government responsive to filed complaints of citizens? 0=no responsiveness, 25=little responsiveness, 50=some responsiveness, 75= good responsiveness, 100= full responsiveness 41 47 44
2 Is the local government responsive to filed complaints of citizens? 0=no responsiveness, 25=little responsiveness, 50=some responsiveness, 75= good responsiveness, 100= full responsiveness 46 68 57
3 What is the average of resolved complaints by the municipality? 0=No data or & of cases resolved over the total cases 0 0
3 What is the average of resolved complaints by the municipality? 0=No data or & of cases resolved over the total cases

Criteria 4 PARTICIPATION AND CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT 52

Sub-criteria 1 Institutional Framework: Is there an effective institutional framework for managing citizen participation? 49

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Are there opportunities/platforms for citizen participation in development planning (annual plans, budgets, and legislations) and decision-making process (LGUs public consultation process, municipal council meetings etc.)? 0=No opportunities, 25=few opportunities, 50=some opportunities, 75=Good opportunities, 100=All necessary opportunities/Very Good 35 26 31
1 Are there opportunities/platforms for citizen participation in development planning (annual plans, budgets, and legislations) and decision-making process (LGUs public consultation process, municipal council meetings etc.)? 0=No opportunities, 25=few opportunities, 50=some opportunities, 75=Good opportunities, 100=All necessary opportunities/Very Good 63 33 48
2 Are there community structures as councils, arising from civic initiative, which tackle different issues and propose changes and suggestions to the local government? 0=No structure, 25=few structures 50= some structures, 75=a good number of structures, 100=all necessary/needed structures 20 16 18
2 Are there community structures as councils, arising from civic initiative, which tackle different issues and propose changes and suggestions to the local government? 0=No structure, 25=few structures 50= some structures, 75=a good number of structures, 100=all necessary/needed structures 48 52 50
3 How effective is the function of the Coordinator of public consultation and notification at your municipality? 0=Not at all effective, 25=little, 50=average, 75=good, 100=very good 31 19 25
3 How effective is the function of the Coordinator of public consultation and notification at your municipality? 0=Not at all effective, 25=little, 50=average, 75=good, 100=very good 42 40 41
4 How effective is the function of the Coordinator of the Right on Information at your Municipality? 0=Not at all effective, 25=little, 50=average, 75=good, 100=very good 31 28 30
4 How effective is the function of the Coordinator of the Right on Information at your Municipality? 0=Not at all effective, 25=little, 50=average, 75=good, 100=very good 54 42 48
5 Does the Municipality have a participatory budget system, where citizens have the opportunity to participate and affect allocations? 0=no system 25=limited participation with no or little impact, 50=average participation with average/good impact, 75=good participation with good impact, 100= very good participation with full impact 18 18
5 Does the Municipality have a participatory budget system, where citizens have the opportunity to participate and affect allocations? 0=no system 25=limited participation with no or little impact, 50=average participation with average/good impact, 75=good participation with good impact, 100= very good participation with full impact 56 56

Sub-criteria 2 Decision making: Is there an effective dialogue platform which ensures the involvement of all stakeholders in the process of decision making? 53

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Are the CSO able to lobby and advocate effectively to influence local government planning and decision-making? 0=No ability, 25=little, 50=average, 75=Good, 100=Great/Very good ability 31 16 24
1 Are the CSO able to lobby and advocate effectively to influence local government planning and decision-making? 0=No ability, 25=little, 50=average, 75=Good, 100=Great/Very good ability 37 48 43
2 Does Local Government engage youth in government decision making? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 33 12 23
2 Does Local Government engage youth in government decision making? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 48 40 44
3 Does Local government engage vulnerable groups (disabled, extreme poor, marginalized communities, elderly) in decision making? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 21 71 46
3 Does Local government engage vulnerable groups (disabled, extreme poor, marginalized communities, elderly) in decision making? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 62 50 56
4 Does the local government engage women in decision making? Average of three indices below 68 68
4 Does the local government engage women in decision making? Average of three indices below 80 80
41 Percentage of Women at the Municipal Council >=50% equals 100 points 47 47
41 Percentage of Women at the Municipal Council >=50% equals 100 points 100 100
42 Percentage of Women in Management Positions >=50% equals 100 points 57 57
42 Percentage of Women in Management Positions >=50% equals 100 points 93 93
43 Percentage of Women over total number of Municipal Employees >=50% equals 100 points 100 100
43 Percentage of Women over total number of Municipal Employees >=50% equals 100 points 48 48
5 How effective is the function of gender and domestic violence officer/professional in your municipality? 0=Not at all effective, 25=little, 50=average, 75=good, 100=very good 50 13 31
5 How effective is the function of gender and domestic violence officer/professional in your municipality? 0=Not at all effective, 25=little, 50=average, 75=good, 100=very good 56 31 44

Sub-criteria 3 Citizen Engagement: What is the level of citizen engagement? 42

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Do citizens participate in local government strategic planning meetings? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 35 28 32
1 Do citizens participate in local government strategic planning meetings? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 46 42 44
2 Are citizens active in engaging with local government or CSOs to improve local situation? % of households that has done at least one of the following: -. Participated in public meetings, hearings, Council sessions, NGO activities, Communal activities, etc. 19 19
2 Are citizens active in engaging with local government or CSOs to improve local situation? % of households that has done at least one of the following: -. Participated in public meetings, hearings, Council sessions, NGO activities, Communal activities, etc. 43 43
3 Are the local government projects implemented with the participation of local actors/citizens in the Municipality? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 38 23 31
3 Are the local government projects implemented with the participation of local actors/citizens in the Municipality? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 46 38 42
4 Are citizens involved in the monitoring and evaluation of the public sector performance? (departments, projects, budgeting) 0= no involvement, 25= little involvement, 50= some involvement, 75= a lot of involvement, 100= very high involvement 30 26 28
4 Are citizens involved in the monitoring and evaluation of the public sector performance? (departments, projects, budgeting) 0= no involvement, 25= little involvement, 50= some involvement, 75= a lot of involvement, 100= very high involvement 40 38 39

Sub-criteria 4 Civic engagement: What is the level of civic engagement? 64

Indicator Scoring Scale Data
Source		 Score
MFGMunicipality Focus Group
CDCommunity Dialogue
CRCCitizen Report Card
DRDesk Research
1 Are citizens affiliated or have membership in political parties, trade unions and NGOs? % of citizens that declare membership at least on the following – political part, religious group, charity organization, NGO/association, community group, etc. 37 37
1 Are citizens affiliated or have membership in political parties, trade unions and NGOs? % of citizens that declare membership at least on the following – political part, religious group, charity organization, NGO/association, community group, etc. 35 35
2 Are citizens aware of their civil rights and responsibilities as members of the community? 0=no awareness, 25=little awareness, 50=some awareness, 75=a lot of awareness, 100=full awareness 40 44 42
2 Are citizens aware of their civil rights and responsibilities as members of the community? 0=no awareness, 25=little awareness, 50=some awareness, 75=a lot of awareness, 100=full awareness 50 96 73
3 Are citizens active in interacting with local government or publicly expressing their opinions about local/political/social issues? % of people who declare that have had at least one interaction which local government or have public expressed their opinion on a local issue 46 46
3 Are citizens active in interacting with local government or publicly expressing their opinions about local/political/social issues? % of people who declare that have had at least one interaction which local government or have public expressed their opinion on a local issue 72 72
4 Are the CSOs active and effective in civic education regarding citizen s right and responsibilities? 0=Not at all, 25=little effective, 50=average 75=Effective, 100=Highly effective 16 16
4 Are the CSOs active and effective in civic education regarding citizen s right and responsibilities? 0=Not at all, 25=little effective, 50=average 75=Effective, 100=Highly effective 77 77
5 Does the media have the capability to raise awareness on rights, responsibilities and key local developmental issues? 0=no capability, 25= little capability, 50=some capability, 75= Good capability 100= Very High capability 33 46 40
5 Does the media have the capability to raise awareness on rights, responsibilities and key local developmental issues? 0=no capability, 25= little capability, 50=some capability, 75= Good capability 100= Very High capability 50 73 62



Download Municipality Profile

Demographic Profile

Surface (km2)Number of Administrative UnitsNumber of CitiesNumber VillagesNumber of FamiliesPopulation Civil Register 2016Population Cencus 2011
869.71748145823738422103

Social Profile

Number of beneficiary households of economic aidNumber of persons with disabilities receiving social paymentsNumber of caretakers receiving social paymentNumber of health centersNumber of polyclinicsNumber of ambulances
176016191917147

Educational Profile

Kindergartens Level 1 (1-3 Year old)Kindergartens Level 1 (4-6 Year old)Elementary SchoolHigh School
Number of KindergartensNumber of childrenNumber of educatorsNumber of KindergartensNumber of childrenNumber of educatorsNumber elementary schoolsNumber of pupilsNumber of teachersNumber of high-schoolsNumber of pupilsNumber of teachers
2592248941252107239572273

Economic Profile

Number of Businesses (total)Large BusinessesSmall BusinessesNumber of FarmsAgricultural Land Surface (in ha)
4477237508380

Administrative Profile

Number of Municipal EmployeesCity Council Members
MenWomenTotalMenWomenTotal
13517230718321

Mirdite Municipality Administrative Map

Local Governance Mapping - Mirdite Municipality

58
Download

Effectiveness and Efficiency

65

Transparency & Rule of Law

60

Clear vision and inclusive planning

56

Transparent and accessible information

59

General Local Plan

51

Transparency

57

Strategic Plan

0

Information around projects, activities etc.

50

Operational Development Plans

0

Transparent administrative procedures

63

Annual Sectorial Plans

67

Access to information about services performance

52

Implementation of plans

50

Updated Website with all the relevant information

75

Financial Management

54

Rule of Law

60

Medium Term Budget Programme

60

Effectiveness of Institutional Legal Framework

76

Administration and Department staffing

75

Educative measures on citizens legal rights and obligations

51

Financial management mechanisms

75

Awareness raising on aws and local regulation

57

Collection of Local Revenues

7

Impartially enforcement of local laws and regulations

55

Informed Decision-Making

71

Corruption

61

Reliable statistics and up to date information

70

Anti-corruption policy, strategy, or action plan

36

Reliability of data on the Land Registry

63

Perception on corruption

65

Usage of GIS Platform

79

Corruption Experience

97

Comprehensive Reporting System

73

Mechanisms to prevent corruption

46

Cooperation with third parties

69

Participation and Citizen Engagement

52

Consultation with central goverment

58

Institutional Framework

49

Coordination among departments

77

Patforms for citizen participation

48

Cooperation with donors and international community

62

Community structures arising from civil initiative

50

Cooperation with other municipalities

65

Coordinator of Public consultation & Notification

41

Internal cooperation within the municipal council

83

Coordinator of the Right on Information

48

Satisfaction towards services

73

Participatory budget system

56

Access to municipal service delivery

96

Involvement of all stakeholders

53

Quality of service delivery

51

Influence of CSO-s in decision-making

43

Municipality Assessments for Services Provided

54

Engagement of youth in decision-making

44

Equal access to local government services

73

Engagement of vulnerable groups in decision- making

56

Obtaining municipal administrative services

68

Engagement of women in decision-making

80

Gender equality in access to services

98

Gender and Domestic Violence Officer

44

Accountability

55

Citizen Engagement

42

Control mechanisms

55

Participation of citizens in municipal meetings

44

Open forums for CSOs to engage with local authorities

42

Engagement with local government or CSOs

43

Well equipped and skilled local NGOs

41

Participation of citizens on local government projects

42

The supervisory role of Municipal Counsil

58

Involvement in monitoring and evaluation

39

Following of recommendations of state audit

83

Civil engagement

64

Involment of community councils in monitoring

50

Membership in political parties, trade unions and NGOs

35

Recourse

51

Awareness of legal rights and responsibilities

73

Mechanisms for lodging complaints

56

Active Citizens in Interaction on Local Issues

72

Mechanisms to share inputs

47

CSOs active in educating citizens

77

Effectivity on treating complaints

51

The capability of media to raise awareness

62

Responsiveness

59

Responsiveness to requests from the community

61

Responding to complaints

57

The average of complaints fully addressed

0
Legends
85(80 - 100 points) very good
65(60 - 79 points) good
50(40 - 59 points) average
32(20 - 39 points) poor
15(0 - 19 points) very poor