The Municipality of Cerrik

Cerrik

The new municipality of Cërrik lies generally in a flat and hilly area between the two rivers, Shkumbin and Devoll and has as center the city of Cërrik. The municipality is bordered in the north with Elbasan and Peqin municipalities, in the south-east with the municipality of Gramsh, in the south with the municipality of Kuçovë and in the west by the municipality of Belsh. After the territorial reform the municipality of Cërrik consists of 5 administrative units, which are: Cërrik, Gostimë, Mollas, Shala and Klos. According to the 2011 Census, this municipality counts 27.445 inhabitants with a density of 144.71 inhabitants/km², and according to the Civil Registry this municipality counts a population of 46.652 people, with a density of 189.65 inhabitants/km². The new municipality has an area of 189.65 km2.

Cerrik Cerrik City
Cerrik Cerrik City Cerrik Cerrik City Cerrik Cerrik City Cerrik Cerrik City
Municipality Municipality Center Administrative Units Respective cities and villages
Cerrik Cerrik City Cerrik Cerrik City
Cerrik Cerrik City Gostima Villages; Gostime, Gjyral, Shtepanj, Shushice, Shtermen, Malasej, Cartalloz
Cerrik Cerrik City Mollas Villages; Mollas, Selite, Kamuna, Dragot, Topojan, Linas, Dasar
Cerrik Cerrik City Shales Villages; Shales, Licaj, Kurtalli, Xibrake, Xherie, Kodras
Cerrik Cerrik City Klos Villages; Klos, Selvias, Qyrkan, Lumas, Qafe, Floq, Trunc, Banje
Download
Final Score of Local Government Mapping 2020
53

Criteria 1 EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY 68

Sub-criteria 1 Does the public administration have a clear vision and participatory and inclusive plan to achieve development? 64

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 83 82 83
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 80 52 66
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
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
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 67 61 64
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 81 48 65
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 63 59 61
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 80 43 62

Sub-criteria 2 Financial Management: Is there an effective and efficient planning and management of local financial resources? 61

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 38 34 36
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 78 50 64
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 82 82
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 86 86
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 72 72
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 81 81
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 44 44
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 14 14

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 78 71 74
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 83 39 61
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 67 67
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 61 61
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 30 30
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 85 85
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 62 62
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 75 75

Sub-criteria 4 Effective coordination and cooperation: Are the municipality interactions with central government, donors, other municipalities etc. effective and efficient? 80

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 68 68
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 78 78
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 67 67
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 78 78
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 75 75
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 86 86
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 58 58
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 75 75
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 78 78
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? 64

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 62 62
1 What is the level of municipal service delivery availability and access? % of Citizens that give an opinion for all 21 services scored 89 89
2 To what extent are the citizens satisfied with the quality of service delivery in their municipality? Aggregation of scores for all 21 services 52 52
2 To what extent are the citizens satisfied with the quality of service delivery in their municipality? Aggregation of scores for all 21 services 44 44
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 63 61 62
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 81 18 50
4 Do people have equal access to local government services? 0=no, 25=few people, 50=some people, 75=most people, 100=all people 78 73 76
4 Do people have equal access to local government services? 0=no, 25=few people, 50=some people, 75=most people, 100=all people 85 45 65
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 71 72 71
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 36 46 41
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 51

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? 55

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 45 45
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 78 75 35 63
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 73 25 36 45
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 87 84 85
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 85 41 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 63 61 62
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 78 23 51
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 0 0 0
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 95 50 73

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? 58

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 87 82 84
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 88 41 65
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 80 77 79
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 78 20 49
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 75 75 38 63
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 83 30 27 47
4 Does the Municipality enforce local laws and regulations impartially? Scale: 0=Not at all to 100= completely 50 50
4 Does the Municipality enforce local laws and regulations impartially? Scale: 0=Not at all to 100= completely 70 70

Sub-criteria 3 Incidence of Corruption: What is the degree of corruption? 41

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 53 48 51
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 64 14 39
2 What is Corruption Perception level for the Municipal Government? Scale: 0= Completely corrupt to 100= Not at all corrupt 51 51
2 What is Corruption Perception level for the Municipal Government? Scale: 0= Completely corrupt to 100= Not at all corrupt 24 24
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. 98 98
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. 52 52
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 47 41 44
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 78 18 48

Criteria 3 ACCOUNTABILITY 49

Sub-criteria 1 Checks and Balances: Are there institutions, which have control, supervision, and sanction power on the local administration? 51

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 17 11 14
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 60 7 34
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 13 11 12
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 57 11 34
3 Does the Municipal Council have oversight of the municipal government functions? 0=no, 25=poor, 50=fair, 75, very good, 100=excellent, 82 80 81
3 Does the Municipal Council have oversight of the municipal government functions? 0=no, 25=poor, 50=fair, 75, very good, 100=excellent, 78 23 51
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 93 93
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 92 92
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 27 25 26
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 72 16 44

Sub-criteria 2 Recourse: Are there any recourse mechanisms for different groups in place, and are they effective? 49

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 70 61 66
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 90 20 55
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 60 59 60
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 80 18 49
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 90 71 50 70
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 85 20 27 44

Sub-criteria 3 Government's Responsiveness: What is the level of Municipality local government's responsiveness? 48

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 87 80 83
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 98 30 64
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 50 45 48
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 30 32 31
3 What is the average of resolved complaints by the municipality? 0=No data or & of cases resolved over the total cases 100 100
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 45

Sub-criteria 1 Institutional Framework: Is there an effective institutional framework for managing citizen participation? 59

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 93 89 91
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 75 36 56
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 33 30 31
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 75 39 57
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 75 71 73
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 83 27 55
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 53 48 51
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 73 20 47
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 92 92
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 83 83

Sub-criteria 2 Decision making: Is there an effective dialogue platform which ensures the involvement of all stakeholders in the process of decision making? 52

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 12 11 12
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 70 14 42
2 Does Local Government engage youth in government decision making? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 77 77 77
2 Does Local Government engage youth in government decision making? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 73 25 49
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 77 75 76
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 70 9 40
4 Does the local government engage women in decision making? Average of three indices below 67 67
4 Does the local government engage women in decision making? Average of three indices below 81 81
41 Percentage of Women at the Municipal Council >=50% equals 100 points 86 86
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 59 59
42 Percentage of Women in Management Positions >=50% equals 100 points 47 47
43 Percentage of Women over total number of Municipal Employees >=50% equals 100 points 58 58
43 Percentage of Women over total number of Municipal Employees >=50% equals 100 points 95 95
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 82 82 82
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 88 11 50

Sub-criteria 3 Citizen Engagement: What is the level of citizen engagement? 35

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 57 52 55
1 Do citizens participate in local government strategic planning meetings? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 69 11 40
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. 22 22
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. 11 11
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 78 64 71
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 78 20 49
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 58 52 55
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 60 16 38

Sub-criteria 4 Civic engagement: What is the level of civic engagement? 35

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. 31 31
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. 10 10
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 60 59 60
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 63 86 75
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 43 43
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 17 17
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 11 11
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 14 14
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 75 66 70
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 75 48 62



Download Municipality Profile

Demographic Profile

Surface (km2)Number of Administrative UnitsNumber of CitiesNumber VillagesNumber of FamiliesPopulation Civil Register 2016Population Cencus 2011
189.655128121844692127445

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
692910

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
1255

Economic Profile

Number of Businesses (total)Large BusinessesSmall BusinessesNumber of FarmsAgricultural Land Surface (in ha)
6370

Administrative Profile

Number of Municipal EmployeesCity Council Members
MenWomenTotalMenWomenTotal
10913424312921

Cerrik Municipality Administrative Map

Local Governance Mapping - Cerrik Municipality

53
Download

Effectiveness and Efficiency

68

Transparency & Rule of Law

51

Clear vision and inclusive planning

64

Transparent and accessible information

55

General Local Plan

66

Transparency

45

Strategic Plan

0

Information around projects, activities etc.

45

Operational Development Plans

0

Transparent administrative procedures

63

Annual Sectorial Plans

65

Access to information about services performance

51

Implementation of plans

62

Updated Website with all the relevant information

73

Financial Management

61

Rule of Law

58

Medium Term Budget Programme

64

Effectiveness of Institutional Legal Framework

65

Administration and Department staffing

86

Educative measures on citizens legal rights and obligations

49

Financial management mechanisms

81

Awareness raising on aws and local regulation

47

Collection of Local Revenues

14

Impartially enforcement of local laws and regulations

70

Informed Decision-Making

71

Corruption

41

Reliable statistics and up to date information

61

Anti-corruption policy, strategy, or action plan

39

Reliability of data on the Land Registry

61

Perception on corruption

24

Usage of GIS Platform

85

Corruption Experience

52

Comprehensive Reporting System

75

Mechanisms to prevent corruption

48

Cooperation with third parties

80

Participation and Citizen Engagement

45

Consultation with central goverment

78

Institutional Framework

59

Coordination among departments

78

Patforms for citizen participation

56

Cooperation with donors and international community

86

Community structures arising from civil initiative

57

Cooperation with other municipalities

75

Coordinator of Public consultation & Notification

55

Internal cooperation within the municipal council

83

Coordinator of the Right on Information

47

Satisfaction towards services

64

Participatory budget system

83

Access to municipal service delivery

89

Involvement of all stakeholders

52

Quality of service delivery

44

Influence of CSO-s in decision-making

42

Municipality Assessments for Services Provided

50

Engagement of youth in decision-making

49

Equal access to local government services

65

Engagement of vulnerable groups in decision- making

40

Obtaining municipal administrative services

41

Engagement of women in decision-making

81

Gender equality in access to services

98

Gender and Domestic Violence Officer

50

Accountability

49

Citizen Engagement

35

Control mechanisms

51

Participation of citizens in municipal meetings

40

Open forums for CSOs to engage with local authorities

34

Engagement with local government or CSOs

11

Well equipped and skilled local NGOs

34

Participation of citizens on local government projects

49

The supervisory role of Municipal Counsil

51

Involvement in monitoring and evaluation

38

Following of recommendations of state audit

92

Civil engagement

35

Involment of community councils in monitoring

44

Membership in political parties, trade unions and NGOs

10

Recourse

49

Awareness of legal rights and responsibilities

75

Mechanisms for lodging complaints

55

Active Citizens in Interaction on Local Issues

17

Mechanisms to share inputs

49

CSOs active in educating citizens

14

Effectivity on treating complaints

44

The capability of media to raise awareness

62

Responsiveness

48

Responsiveness to requests from the community

64

Responding to complaints

31

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