The Municipality of Elbasan

Elbasan

The new municipality of Elbasan is bordered in the north with the municipality of Tirana, in the east with the municipality of Librazhd, in the south-east with the municipality of Prrenjas, in the southwest with the municipality of Gramsh and west with the municipalities of Cërrik and Peqin. After the Administrative Territorial Reform, the Municipality of Elbasan has 13 administrative units: Elbasan, Labinot-Fushe, Labinot-Mal, Gjinar, Shushice, Gjergjan, Funar, Shirgjan, Tregan, Gracen, Bradashesh, Zavalis and Papër. The center of the municipality is the city of Elbasan. The Municipality of Elbasan has a population of 141,714 inhabitants, according to INSTAT, Census 2011, and according to the Civil Registry is 179,074 inhabitants. This municipality has under its administration 1 city and 116 villages.

Elbasan Elbasan City
Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City
Municipality Municipality Center Administrative Units Respective cities and villages
Elbasan Elbasan City Elbasan Elbasan City
Elbasan Elbasan City Labinot-Fusha Villages; Labinot-Fushe, Godolesh, Griqan i Siperm, Griqan i Poshtem, Xibrake, Mengel
Elbasan Elbasan City Labinot-Mal Villages; Labinot-Mal, Guri Zi, Serice, Lamolle, Bene, Lugaxhi, Qafe, Qerret, Shmil, Dritas
Elbasan Elbasan City Gjinar Villages; Gjinar, Lleshan, Valesh, Pashtresh, Derstile, Lukan, Sterstan, Xibresh, Maskarth, Kaferr, Pobrat
Elbasan Elbasan City Shushica Villages; Shushice, Shelcan, Mlize, Hajdaran, Fush-Bull, Vasjan, Polis i Vogel, Polis Vale, Vreshtaj
Elbasan Elbasan City Gjergjan Villages; Gjergjan, Bujaras, Gjonme, Keshtjelle, Koder Bujaras, Muriqan, Thane
Elbasan Elbasan City Funar Villages; Branesh, Bixelle, Prec e Siperme, Ceruje, Korre, Mollagjesh, Krrabe e Vogel, Prec e Poshtme, Stafaj; Branesh, Bixelle, Prec e Siperme, Ceruje, Korre, Mollagjesh, Krrabe e Vogel, Prec e Poshtme, Stafaj
Elbasan Elbasan City Shirgjan Villages; Shirgjan, Bathes, Bujqes, Jagodine, Kuqan, Kryezjarr, Mjekes
Elbasan Elbasan City Tregan Villages; Tregan, Blerimas, Bizhdan, Cikallesh, Gurisht, Kacivel, Kycyk, Mucan, Shinavlash, Shilbater, Trepsenisht, Tudan
Elbasan Elbasan City Gracen Villages; Gracen, Plangarice, Terbac, Bodin, Shingjin, Gjorm, Pajenge, Mamel, Dopaj
Elbasan Elbasan City Bradashesh Villagest; Bradashesh, Balez Lart, Balez Poshte, Kusarth, Kozan, Karakullak, Letan, Rrile, Shtemaj, Ulen, Katund i Ri, Fikas, Petresh, Shemhill, Shijon, Recan, Gurabardh
Elbasan Elbasan City Zavaline Villages; Zavaline, Selte, Kamican, Joronishte, Nezhan, Burrishte
Elbasan Elbasan City Paper Villages; Paper, Broshke, Murras, Valas, Vidhas, Pajun, Bizhute, Paper-Sallak, Vidhas-Hasgjel, Lugaj, Jatesh, Balldre, Ullishtaj
Download
Final Score of Local Government Mapping 2020
61

Criteria 1 EFFECTIVENESS AND EFFICIENCY 72

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 92 56 56
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 88 29 59
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 78 63 70
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 93 42 68
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 78 60 69
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 85 46 66

Sub-criteria 2 Financial Management: Is there an effective and efficient planning and management of local financial resources? 66

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 98 67 83
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 89 48 69
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 91 91
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 91 91
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 84 84
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 86 86
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 40 40
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 19 19

Sub-criteria 3 Informed Decision-Making: Is the decision-making based on reliable and updated information? 78

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 86 60 73
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 85 50 68
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 78 78
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 79 79
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 47 47
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 73 73
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 89 89
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 94 94

Sub-criteria 4 Effective coordination and cooperation: Are the municipality interactions with central government, donors, other municipalities etc. effective and efficient? 85

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 83 83
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 75 75
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 84 84
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 85 85
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 88 88
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 88 88
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 77 77
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 83 83
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 84 84
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 96 96

Sub-criteria 5 Satisfaction towards services: What is the degree of citizens' satisfaction with the quality of public service delivery and its accessibility? 66

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 76 76
2 To what extent are the citizens satisfied with the quality of service delivery in their municipality? Aggregation of scores for all 21 services 57 57
2 To what extent are the citizens satisfied with the quality of service delivery in their municipality? Aggregation of scores for all 21 services 50 50
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 60 71
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 88 38 63
4 Do people have equal access to local government services? 0=no, 25=few people, 50=some people, 75=most people, 100=all people 84 79 82
4 Do people have equal access to local government services? 0=no, 25=few people, 50=some people, 75=most people, 100=all people 88 35 62
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 48 48 48
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 52 4 50
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 59

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? 62

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 44 44
1 How Transparent is your local Government? 0-Not at all transparent to 100- Completely transparent 41 41
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 86 60 36 48
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 90 60 33 61
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 94 48 48
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 90 50 70
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 86 60 60
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 77 46 62
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 94 23 58
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 92 58 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? 53

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 84 48 66
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 81 35 58
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 75 40 57
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 75 46 61
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 86 38 37 53
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 79 44 36 53
4 Does the Municipality enforce local laws and regulations impartially? Scale: 0=Not at all to 100= completely 47 47
4 Does the Municipality enforce local laws and regulations impartially? Scale: 0=Not at all to 100= completely 39 39

Sub-criteria 3 Incidence of Corruption: What is the degree of corruption? 62

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 69 50 59
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 88 33 61
2 What is Corruption Perception level for the Municipal Government? Scale: 0= Completely corrupt to 100= Not at all corrupt 40 40
2 What is Corruption Perception level for the Municipal Government? Scale: 0= Completely corrupt to 100= Not at all corrupt 41 41
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. 82 82
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. 91 91
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 69 50 59
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 85 29 57

Criteria 3 ACCOUNTABILITY 59

Sub-criteria 1 Checks and Balances: Are there institutions, which have control, supervision, and sanction power on the local administration? 68

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 81 63 72
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 88 38 63
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 73 58 66
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 79 35 57
3 Does the Municipal Council have oversight of the municipal government functions? 0=no, 25=poor, 50=fair, 75, very good, 100=excellent, 81 50 66
3 Does the Municipal Council have oversight of the municipal government functions? 0=no, 25=poor, 50=fair, 75, very good, 100=excellent, 96 38 67
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 89 89
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 96 96
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 73 48 61
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 85 33 59

Sub-criteria 2 Recourse: Are there any recourse mechanisms for different groups in place, and are they effective? 63

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 92 81 87
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 96 44 70
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 83 77 80
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 94 38 66
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 83 42 37 54
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 91 33 37 54

Sub-criteria 3 Government's Responsiveness: What is the level of Municipality local government's responsiveness? 45

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 84 60 72
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 94 33 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 38 38 38
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 31 23 27
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 54

Sub-criteria 1 Institutional Framework: Is there an effective institutional framework for managing citizen participation? 60

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 88 48 68
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 85 25 55
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 69 48 58
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 67 27 47
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 63 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 73 29 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 86 63 74
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 75 27 51
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 98 98
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 94 94

Sub-criteria 2 Decision making: Is there an effective dialogue platform which ensures the involvement of all stakeholders in the process of decision making? 67

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 73 63 68
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 79 40 60
2 Does Local Government engage youth in government decision making? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 78 60 69
2 Does Local Government engage youth in government decision making? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 81 31 56
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 84 65 74
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 85 38 62
4 Does the local government engage women in decision making? Average of three indices below 85 85
4 Does the local government engage women in decision making? Average of three indices below 93 93
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 98 98
42 Percentage of Women in Management Positions >=50% equals 100 points 69 69
42 Percentage of Women in Management Positions >=50% equals 100 points 86 86
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 94 94
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 89 69 79
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 90 42 66

Sub-criteria 3 Citizen Engagement: What is the level of citizen engagement? 47

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 75 58 67
1 Do citizens participate in local government strategic planning meetings? 0=never, 25=rarely, 50=sometimes, 75=often, 100=always 73 48 61
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. 17 17
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 83 58 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 85 33 59
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 75 58 67
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 77 39 58

Sub-criteria 4 Civic engagement: What is the level of civic engagement? 40

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. 23 23
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. 15 15
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 97 73 85
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 65 50 58
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 36 36
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 40 40
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 63 63
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 33 33
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 81 79 80
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 38 57



Download Municipality Profile

Demographic Profile

Surface (km2)Number of Administrative UnitsNumber of CitiesNumber VillagesNumber of FamiliesPopulation Civil Register 2016Population Cencus 2011
872.0313111656022179074141714

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
4171233446811107

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
991682100558

Economic Profile

Number of Businesses (total)Large BusinessesSmall BusinessesNumber of FarmsAgricultural Land Surface (in ha)
1149272

Administrative Profile

Number of Municipal EmployeesCity Council Members
MenWomenTotalMenWomenTotal
5907561349302051

Elbasan Municipality Administrative Map

Local Governance Mapping - Elbasan Municipality

61
Download

Effectiveness and Efficiency

72

Transparency & Rule of Law

59

Clear vision and inclusive planning

64

Transparent and accessible information

62

General Local Plan

59

Transparency

41

Strategic Plan

0

Information around projects, activities etc.

61

Operational Development Plans

0

Transparent administrative procedures

70

Annual Sectorial Plans

68

Access to information about services performance

62

Implementation of plans

66

Updated Website with all the relevant information

75

Financial Management

66

Rule of Law

53

Medium Term Budget Programme

69

Effectiveness of Institutional Legal Framework

58

Administration and Department staffing

91

Educative measures on citizens legal rights and obligations

61

Financial management mechanisms

86

Awareness raising on aws and local regulation

53

Collection of Local Revenues

19

Impartially enforcement of local laws and regulations

39

Informed Decision-Making

78

Corruption

62

Reliable statistics and up to date information

68

Anti-corruption policy, strategy, or action plan

61

Reliability of data on the Land Registry

79

Perception on corruption

41

Usage of GIS Platform

73

Corruption Experience

91

Comprehensive Reporting System

94

Mechanisms to prevent corruption

57

Cooperation with third parties

85

Participation and Citizen Engagement

54

Consultation with central goverment

75

Institutional Framework

60

Coordination among departments

85

Patforms for citizen participation

55

Cooperation with donors and international community

88

Community structures arising from civil initiative

47

Cooperation with other municipalities

83

Coordinator of Public consultation & Notification

51

Internal cooperation within the municipal council

96

Coordinator of the Right on Information

51

Satisfaction towards services

66

Participatory budget system

94

Access to municipal service delivery

76

Involvement of all stakeholders

67

Quality of service delivery

50

Influence of CSO-s in decision-making

60

Municipality Assessments for Services Provided

63

Engagement of youth in decision-making

56

Equal access to local government services

62

Engagement of vulnerable groups in decision- making

62

Obtaining municipal administrative services

50

Engagement of women in decision-making

93

Gender equality in access to services

98

Gender and Domestic Violence Officer

66

Accountability

59

Citizen Engagement

47

Control mechanisms

68

Participation of citizens in municipal meetings

61

Open forums for CSOs to engage with local authorities

63

Engagement with local government or CSOs

11

Well equipped and skilled local NGOs

57

Participation of citizens on local government projects

59

The supervisory role of Municipal Counsil

67

Involvement in monitoring and evaluation

58

Following of recommendations of state audit

96

Civil engagement

40

Involment of community councils in monitoring

59

Membership in political parties, trade unions and NGOs

15

Recourse

63

Awareness of legal rights and responsibilities

58

Mechanisms for lodging complaints

70

Active Citizens in Interaction on Local Issues

40

Mechanisms to share inputs

66

CSOs active in educating citizens

33

Effectivity on treating complaints

54

The capability of media to raise awareness

57

Responsiveness

45

Responsiveness to requests from the community

64

Responding to complaints

27

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