INCEPTION REPORT by alicejenny

VIEWS: 10 PAGES: 31

									Inception Report
Covering the 3 months between August 2005 and October 2005




                           Support to
                           Local Administration Reform
                           Programme in Turkey




                                                           Date:       November 2005
                                                           Author:     Technical Assistance Team
                                                                       Backstopped by UNDP
                                                           Version:    Final
                                                                       Cleared by MoI and NSC




Important Disclaimer
Support to Local Administration Reform Programme is an EU-funded technical assistance project. The direct
beneficiary of the project is Ministry of Interior. The project is being implemented by United Nations Development
Programme (UNDP) Country Office in Turkey. Views and comments in this report does not necessarily reflect the
views of a/m institutions.



                                                                                                                     i
Table of Contents

1.    PROJECT SYNOPSIS                                                            1

2.    INTRODUCTION                                                                4

3.    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY                                                           5

4.    REVIEW OF PROJECT DESIGN                                                    8

4.1 Policy and programme context                                                   8
4.2 Project objectives and results to be achieved                                 10
4.2.1 General approach                                                            10
4.2.2 Updated list of results to be achieved by the consultant                    11
4.3 Update on activities and work-plan (for the entire duration of the project)   15
4.4 Resources                                                                     16
4.5 Assumptions and risks                                                         16
4.6 Management and co-ordination arrangements                                     17
4.7 Budget and Financing arrangements                                             18

5.    PROGRESS MADE DURING INCEPTION PHASE                                        19

5.1   Activities in progress                                                      19
5.2   Problems encountered                                                        22
5.3   Logistical issues                                                           22

6.    WORKPLAN FOR THE NEXT REPORTING PERIOD                                      24

6.1 Results (intermediate outputs) to be delivered                                24
6.1.1 Component A                                                                 24
6.1.2 Component B                                                                 24
6.1.3 Component C                                                                 25
6.1.4 Component D                                                                 25
6.2 Activity and resource schedule                                                25

7.    CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS                                             27

7.1 Conclusions                                                                   27
7.2 Recommendations                                                               27
7.2.1 Monitoring                                                                  27
7.2.2 Mobilisation of short-term experts                                          27
7.2.3 Approval of Contractual Reports                                             28
7.2.4 Incidental Expenditures                                                     28

8.    LIST OF ANNEXES                                                             29




                                                                                   ii
1.                  PROJECT SYNOPSIS


Programme Name               Turkey - Local Administration Reform Programme (MEDA 2001)
                             Support to
Project Name
                             Local Administration Reform Programme in Turkey
Reference No:                EuropeAid/114738/C/SV/TR
Project Duration             28 months
Project Start Date           01.08.2005
Project End Date             30.11.2007
Status                       End of Inception Period (October 2005)
Main direct beneficiary      Ministry of Interior of the Turkish Republic
           Contact person:   Mr. Murat Zorluoğlu (Programme Director – SPO)
                  Address:   İçisleri Bakanlığı – Mahalli Idareler Genel Müdürlügü
                             06644 Bakanlıklar
                             Ankara - TURKEY
         Telephone and Fax   +90-312-4181072 +90-312-4187208
                   E-mail:   murat.zorluoglu@icisleri.gov.tr
Contracting Authority        European Commission Delegation in Turkey
           Contact person:   Ms. Umut Özdemir – Sector Manager
                  Address:   EC Delegation to Turkey
                             Uğur Mumcu Cad. No. 88
                             Gaziosmanpaşa
                             Ankara - TURKEY
         Telephone and Fax   +90-312-4598700 +90-312-4361093
                   E-mail:   Umut.Ozdemir@cec.eu.int
Implementing Agency          United Nations Development Programme – Turkey Office
           Contact person:   Ms. Yesim Oruc - Programme Manager
                  Address:   UNDP-Turkey (UN House)
                             Birlik Mahallessi, 2 Cadde. N. 11
                             06610 Çankaya
                             Ankara - TURKEY
         Telephone and Fax   +90-312-4541100 +90-312-4961463
                   E-mail:   yesim.oruc@undp.org




                                                                                          1
Overall      To advance local administration reform in Turkey by improving the capacity of local administrations to
Objective    effectively deliver services to citizens, to formulate policy and to manage the administration

Specific      Strengthen the capacity for local administration reform
objectives    Improve budgetary procedures and service performance in selected pilot administrations
(Purposes)
              Improve efficiency and effectiveness of human resources

Expected     Purpose 1: Strengthen reform capacity
Results
             1. Draft strategy for the implementation of local administration reform developed through a participatory
             process and aligned with Turkey’s EU integration process
             2. Regular assessments of progress of local administration reform prepared by MoI
             3. Legislation needed for the implementation of local administration reform elaborated, in line with European
             standards
             4. Improved Government's communication with national Local Authorities and civil society, as well as with EU
             institutions (EC, EP), Local Authorities and other European international organisations (CoE), with regards to
             progress of Local Administration reform in Turkey.
             5. Mandate and organization of the General Directorate for Local Authorities (MoI) reviewed and aligned with
             local administration reform objectives and strategy; GDLA working procedures streamlined
             6. MoI staff dealing with local administration issues (at MoI HQ, as well as in provincial and district
             governorships) trained on EU local government systems, legislation and standards; and enabled to better cope
             with Government tasks and responsibilities in this field. English proficiency of GDLA managing staff’ improved
             7. Capacity of MoI-GDLA to identify, formulate, implement, monitor and evaluate programmes and projects to
             further advance the reform of the local administration towards meeting EU standards enhanced.
             8. Managers and staff of national and regional Unions of Local Authorities trained in EU member-states' and
             candidate countries' experience in local government reform as well as in lobbying for municipal/local interests
             9. Capacity of national and regional Unions of Local Authorities for networking and information exchange
             strengthened
             10. Existing municipal partnerships reinforced and new partnerships promoted, including partnerships
             between municipalities in Turkey and those in EU member and candidate countries
             Purpose 2: Improve budgetary procedures and service performance in selected local administrations
             11. At least 6 pilot local administrations selected through and open and transparent process; and pilot projects
             on improving budgeting and service performance formulated and agreed with relevant local authorities
             12. Service Improvement Action Plans developed - through a participatory process- and implemented in at
             least 6 pilot administrations
             13. Transparent multi-year budgets and investment plans prepared, adopted and provided to the public in at
             least 6 pilot local administrations
             14. Capacity of Mayors, municipal managers and staff of at least 6 pilot administrations for strategic and
             multi-year investment planning, participatory and transparent budgeting, sound financial management and
             regarding the design and management of Service Improvement Plans strengthened
             15. Small and medium sized municipalities are provided with effective and free-of charge software tools and
             manual for financial management, including tools for multi-year budgeting and investment planning
             16. Flexible and sustainable mechanism created and support provided to local administrations for improving
             financial management and service performance
             Purpose 3: Increase effectiveness and efficiency of human resources
             17. New training courses and manuals on "Municipal management for small and medium sized municipalities"
             developed and pilot tested (taking into account European best practices)
             18. A group of "regional trainers" on local administration management is created, in close co-operation
             between MoI, TODAIE and regional Unions of local authorities
             19. Human resources capacities in local administrations have been strengthened, through co-operation
             between MoI and regional Unions of local authorities
             20. A training program and certification system for Turkish consultants on local financial management
             developed




                                                                                                                               2
Expected        21. MoI and TODAIE ensure availability of a group of certified consultants on municipal/local administration
Results         finances
                22. Municipalities and Special Provincial Administrations have direct online access to resources on local
                administration training and consulting
                23. Effective and efficient management of the LAR Programme by the MoI

Key              TA and training to strengthen reform capacity at Government and Unions of Local Authorities, including
components        awareness-rising and support-mobilization for local administration reform (Component A)
                 TA and training for improving budgetary procedures and service performance in selected pilot local
                  administrations (Component B)
                 Training for human resources in local administration, including TA for the development of training
                  programmes and materials and for strengthening the training capacities of government institutions
                  (TODAIE) and regional Unions of Municipalities (Component C)
                 Support to general steering and management of LAR Programme's implementation (Component D)
Target          MoI units and staff dealing with local authorities (General Directorate for Local Authorities, Provincial and
groups and      District Governorships, other MoI units and staff); Municipalities, Metropolitan Municipalities and their staff;
beneficiaries   Special Provincial Administrations ; Unions of Local Authorities; citizens and local civil society organizations
                (especially those in pilot municipalities); local administration and training experts and institutions (especially
                TODAIE)




                                                                                                                                     3
2.   INTRODUCTION

     The Local Administration Reform Programme was agreed between the European
     Commission (EC) and the Turkish Government in 2002. Through the Financial
     Memorandum signed in early 2003, the EC committed funds from the MEDA
     Programme to finance the technical assistance and training activities needed for the
     implementation of the programme, which was entrusted to the Ministry of Interior
     (MoI).

     The EC Delegation carried out the tender procedure to select a provider for this
     technical assistance and training; and reserved some funding for a grant to be
     provided directly to TODAIE, as a suitable training institution chosen as MoI partner
     for the implementation of some of the activities envisaged under the training
     component of the programme.

     In late July 2005, an agreement was signed between the EC Delegation and United
     Nations Development Programme (UNDP)-Turkey by which this latter organization
     was entrusted with the delivery of the technical assistance and training funded by the
     MEDA Programme.

     The project was eventually started in August 2005; and has completed its inception
     phase in October. The implementation of the project activities will take place in the
     period November 2005 to November 2007.

     What follows is the Inception Report elaborated by the team seconded by UNDP-
     Turkey to assist the relevant units and officials at the Ministry of Interior in the
     implementation of the LAR Programme; and shows the results of their joint work in the
     adjustment of the original project design to the existing situation and conditions, as
     well as the commitments jointly undertaken by the MoI and the technical assistance
     (TA) team in regards to the implementation of the programme.




                                                                                         4
3.   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

        The situation (policy context) at the start-up of the “Support to Local
         Administration Reform (LAR) Programme” project is somewhat different from the
         situation that existed when the LAR Programme was formulated and agreed
         between EC and Turkish Government.

        At this stage, the priority in this policy area (as confirmed by the revised
         Accession Partnership with Turkey recently proposed by the EC) is not the
         formulation of a reform policy or strategy, but rather the effective and full
         implementation of the legislation recently enacted (Laws on Municipalities,
         Metropolitan Municipalities, Special Provincial Administrations and Unions of
         Local Authorities, as well as Law on Public Finances).

        However, with the necessary adjustments at the level of specific results to be
         pursued through the implementation of the project, as well as in the work-
         programme, both the general objective and the specific objectives set for the LAR
         Programme remain valid.

        The LAR Programme was originally devised to be implemented over a period of 3
         years (2003- 2005), with external support funded by the EC (technical assistance
         and training) also during the same period. The amount of EC-funded inputs
         (especially m/months of long-term and short-term expertise) was probably
         estimated bearing in mind this time-span and the original work-programme
         (activities to be carried out).

        Due to delays in the launching of the Programme and related TA, the final
         duration of the Programme and the corresponding TA and training support project
         has been reduced to 28 months; and the amount of EC-funded external inputs
         has been reduced proportionally. However, the programme of work laid down in
         the Terms of Reference (ToR) for the TA funded by the EC was substantially the
         same as in the original programme.

        During the inception phase, the MoI (main direct beneficiary of the EC-funded TA)
         and the TA team have agreed to jointly pursue a number of specific results which
         is still fully consistent with the list of results set out in the Programme Document
         (Technical and Administrative Provisions- TAPs).

        Both Ministry of Interior (MoI) and UNDP TA Team are aware that achievement of
         such results is going to require an additional effort on both sides (TA Team and
         beneficiaries of the TA, particularly MoI, Unions of Local Authorities, Local
         authorities chosen for the pilot projects and TODAIE).

        MoI and UNDP TA team are committed to working together in the pursuance of
         the results agreed for the updated programme/project, and therefore in the
         implementation of the activities needed to achieve those results. MoI will ensure
         that not only MoI units and staff (in HQ or in governorships and sub-
         governorships) but also other direct beneficiaries of the project are willing to
         commit themselves to the achievement of the relevant results and to provide their
         own resources that might be needed to this end.

        In the updated list of expected results, the formulation of some of the results has
         been adjusted to existing situation and conditions, thus reflecting some changes
         in their scope and reach (i.e. “implementation” strategy). Also, some results have
         been added as new (i.e. review mandate, organization and working procedures of
         GDLA).

        MoI and UNDP have agreed to jointly carry out a results-based management of
         the TA project. Accordingly, when planning work and allocating resources, the

                                                                                           5
    emphasis has been shifted from “activities” to “results” (final or intermediate). This
    new approach is reflected in the new format given to the main planning instrument
    to be used by the project: the “Results-based activity and resource schedule”

   Concerning programme management structures, during the inception phase, the
    MoI has appointed a new Programme Director (PD) and has formed the
    Programme/Project Steering Committee (PSC). In addition to membership set out
    in the TAPs and the ToR, MoI has invited the Union of Turkish Municipalities
    (TBB), General Directorate for Budget and Financial Control (Ministry of Finance),
    State Planning Organisation (DPT), Bank of Provinces and TODAIE to appoint
    representatives to the PSC.

   An inter-institutional Working Group (WG) has been formed to assist the MoI with
    the implementation of activities under Component B of the programme; and the
    formation of similar working groups under components A and C is also being
    considered.

   Co-ordination meetings are being regularly held between the TA Team and the
    PD. The representative of the ECD is being invited to attend these meetings on a
    monthly basis. However, in order to ensure full ownership of the project by its
    main beneficiaries, it has been agreed to set up a broader Project Co-ordination
    Group (PCG) gathering representatives of General Directorate for Local
    Authorities (GDLA- Heads of Department), MoI Training Department, Union of
    Turkish Municipalities and TODAIE. This PCG will hold meetings every second
    week.

   In the present situation and circumstances, an issue which may require further
    confirmation or decisions by the main partners of the programme (ECD and
    Government-MoI) is the need to set up an Advisory Committee (AC) to provide
    high level advice and discussions to promote reform, in addition to the enlarged
    Programme Steering Committee. Such Advisory Committee - foreseen in both the
    TAPs for the Programme and the ToR for the TA project- would include
    representatives from EU Unions of Municipalities and Universities alongside
    representatives of Turkish Parliament (Committee for Internal Affairs), Political
    parties, Non-governmental organizations and Universities.

   During the inception phase, progress in the implementation of activities planned
    for this period was in some cases hampered by a number of difficulties and
    constraints (insufficient awareness of the project by some key stakeholders,
    logistical problems and difficulties etc.). Nevertheless, the project has made
    substantial progress especially under components B and C.

   In Component B, a call for applications for the pilot projects on improving budget
    and service performance has been elaborated, agreed by the working group and
    communicated to all eligible local authorities (all Municipalities, Metropolitan
    Municipalities and Special provincial Administrations). The deadline for
    submission of applications has been set to December 5 and the composition of
    the independent committee to be made responsible for the final selection of pilot
    administrations has been agreed by the Steering Committee, on the proposal
    elaborated by the working group. The Selection Committee will be established in
    late November.

   In Component C, the basic outline for the two training programmes to be
    developed and implemented under the project has been developed; and the terms
    and conditions for co-operation between the TA team at the MoI and TODAIE in
    the further development and delivery of the programmes has been agreed. The
    TA team at MoI has provided assistance to TODAIE in the elaboration of the
    “Action” to be funded by the separate grant to TODAIE, that is mentioned in the
    ToR for the TA project.




                                                                                        6
   Under Component A, it has been decided that the strategy working group
    mentioned in the programme documents should be set up with the mandate to
    work out a strategy for the “implementation” of the legislation recently adopted,
    rather than a broader strategy to guide further steps in the process of reforming
    the Turkish system of local administration. Also, since a great deal of the
    legislative work envisaged at the time when the programme was formulated has
    already been accomplished, part of the project resources originally thought to
    support the drafting of legislation will be reallocated to support the reform and
    strengthening of administrative capacities at MoI, governorships and sub-
    governorships to deal with the implementation of the reforms agreed by the
    Parliament.

   Also under Component A, it has been agreed to channel the support to Unions of
    Local Authorities through the nation-wide Union of Turkish Municipalities and
    Union of Provincial Services.

   In general, in the light of the new role and responsibilities foreseen in the recent
    legislation for the Special Provincial Administrations, it has been agreed to extend
    project activities and support – as long as it is feasible – also to these local
    authorities (in addition to Municipalities).

   In the next reporting period (November 2005-January 2006) the project team at
    the MoI (which includes PD, PCG and UNDP’s TA team) will strive to catching up
    with the implementation of the activities and the delivery of the outputs planned
    for the first months, but which accomplishment has been delayed due to
    difficulties encountered at the start up of the project. The main milestones for this
    next period will be:

            o   Under Component A

                   Strategy working group set up (November)
                   Communications plan for the LAR programme developed and
                    adopted (December)
                   Organizational and functional review of GDLA and training needs
                    assessment completed (January)
                   Training system for governors, sub-governors and staff in
                    governorates/sub-governorates reviewed - Workshops for
                    provincial and district governorates planned and time-scheduled.
                   English language training programme for GDLA officials
                    developed and approved. - Courses started.
                   Training/Capacity needs at Unions of local authorities assessed
                    (experts’ reports) and detailed training programme developed,
                    presented and agreed with Unions.
                   Partnerships’ Evaluation Report produced.

            o   Under Component B

                   6 pilot local administrations selected.
                   Work advanced in the formulation of the 2 first pilot projects

            o   Under Component C

                   Expert’s report on the review of training programmes and
                    manuals developed in EU member and candidate countries
                    produced and its findings and recommendations provided to
                    experts responsible for the development of the training
                    programmes.
                   Work in the preparation of training programmes A and B
                    (including training materials) advanced.



                                                                                       7
4.    REVIEW OF PROJECT DESIGN

4.1   Policy and programme context

      The project’s inception phase has fully confirmed the policy context in which the Local
      Administration Reform Programme – and hence the EC-funded technical assistance –
      is to be implemented, as described in the comments to the relevant sections of the
      Terms of Reference (Relevant country background and Current state of affairs)
      already formulated in UNDP’s Technical Offer.
                                                                                                              1
      The sole updates to be registered here in regards to this policy context refer to :

      The confirmation of the priority given by the Government at this stage (as expressed
      by high ranking officials of Ministry of Interior and Prime Ministry) to the work to be
      done at different levels – Government, Local Authorities and their Unions, civil society
      – for ensuring full implementation of the new Laws enacted since late 2003, rather to
      embarking now in additional policy and/or legal reforms; and not withstanding the
      Government’s wish to keep open the public and policy discussion on “next steps” in
      the process of decentralising the Turkish system of Public Administration.

      The confirmation of UNDP’s assumption that, alongside the reform and upgrading of
      the role, responsibilities and administrative/managerial capacities in Municipalities and
      Metropolitan Municipalities, a second and very important change has been set into
      motion in what concerns the position, role and responsibilities of the Special Provincial
      Administrations, now in the process of becoming full-fledged self-governing local
      administrations, with important administrative responsibilities.

      It is to be noted again here that this policy context is somewhat different from the one
      described in the ToR for the project, which was still very much the same as the policy
      context described in the “Technical and Administrative Provisions” (TAPs) for the LAR
      Programme. This Programme Document – that the ToR for the project follow very
      closely – was elaborated in the years 2001-2002 when the current Government of
      Turkey was not yet in office; and was obviously based on the situation that existed at
      that time.

      Many of the features of the factual situation and policy context upon which both the
      TAPs and the ToR were developed have not significantly changed since. This is the
      case with regards to the lack of or insufficient capacities in many of the Turkish local
      administrations (particularly Municipalities, Metropolitan Municipalities and SPAs) for a
      smooth and complete implementation of the new requirements set by the Turkish laws
      in many aspects (strategic planning, multi-year budgeting and investment planning,
      new rules on financial management, accounting and control, performance-based
      service organization and delivery, etc.). This is also the case with elements or aspects
      in which new legislation is still to be elaborated and enacted (local revenue system,
      personnel system and the management of human resources, etc.). And eventually,
      this is also the case with regards to the absence of a comprehensive, consistent and
      long-term governmental strategy – widely supported by all main stakeholders,
      including political parties and the Parliament – to frame and guide the process of
                                                                                      2
      reforming the system of local administration in Turkey over the coming years.


      1
        On a different level, it is to be recorded also here the final solution of the issue of the definitive enactment
      of the new Law on Municipalities, once the Parliament corrected the procedural irregularities declared by
      the Constitutional Court (see footnote 2 in page 4 of the revised Technical Offer);
      2
        The absence of such a strategy is by no means a rare “particularity” of Turkey. The reform of the local
      administration system is in any democratic country (with representative and active institutions, political
      organizations and civil society) an integral part of a larger process of institutional and societal changes,
      which cannot be easily “encapsulated” in the form of a set of well-defined, detailed and comprehensive
      “strategies”. It is all too normal that this type of reforms are taken forward by “partial” or “short-term” drives,
      which are frequently the result of political and policy decisons made on the ocassion of a change of
      Government or electoral majority.

                                                                                                                           8
However, the importance of the legal changes introduced since late 2003 – as
mentioned in UNDP’s Technical Offer – must not be underestimated. These legal
changes have actually set a clear policy framework for the MEDA-funded LAR
Programme, since the life-span of a programme of this nature is not unlimited, but
obviously circumscribed to a period of a few years. In fact, the time-span left for the
implementation of the Programme (originally set for three years) is going to basically
coincide with the remaining period of office of the present Government. Without taking
a big risk, it can be presumed that the present Programme should at this stage
concentrate in supporting the implementation of the new legislation enacted in 2003-
2005 rather than in helping design future changes to be introduced in 3-4 years time
(possibly after the next general election in late 2007). This approach has recently
been confirmed with the publication of the EC’s proposal for a revised “Accession
                           3
Partnership” with Turkey . In this document, the EC is proposing that the short-term
priority to be met in the coming 1-2 years (2006-2007, period which coincides with the
life-span of the project) in this field is “Ensure effective, transparent and participatory
local government, in particular through the implementation of recently adopted
legislation”.

This conclusion has a number of implications with regards to the final design of the
“Support to LAR Programme” project both at the level of objectives and results as well
as in regards to the work-programme. In general terms, it can be assumed that the
project is to have a main focus in strengthening the capacity of the Ministry of Interior
and the Unions of Local Authorities (Municipalities and SPAs) to pursue the effective
implementation of the new legislation adopted by the Parliament; as well as in
supporting the local authorities themselves – through pilot projects and training of their
staff – on the development of their own capacities so that they can effectively cope
with their new legal responsibilities in the delivery of public services to the citizens and
perform an efficient management of their administrations. Work in the design and
formulation of “next steps” in the reform process, at the level of new legislation or
basic policy decisions, is not one of the prime objectives for this programme/project.

Concerning the project’s linkages to other ongoing programmes and
operations/activities funded by international donors, it is to be noted here that the
World Bank-funded project on Performance Measurement System in local
administrations is now coming to its end. The results of this project, also managed by
the Ministry of Interior, will be of a great value for the implementation of some of the
activities envisaged under the project at hand; namely the activities under Component
B (pilot projects) which are addressed at improving service performance in selected
local administrations. Moreover, although preferably oriented towards further policy
and legal changes in the sphere of local finances (revenue side) and fiscal
decentralisation, a reference has to be made here to the completion and publication of
the World Bank-sponsored “Municipal sector review”, which was still under
preparation when both the TAPs for the EC-funded LAR Programme and the ToR for
the related TA were developed and drawn up. The contents of this review (published
in September 2004) may have an impact on the implementation of the project at hand
in so far as the Government takes decisions aimed at the implementation of the WB’s
recommendations. For instance, these recommendations include the formation of two
inter-ministerial working groups (one to be lead by the Ministry of Interior and a
second one to be lead by the Treasury) to deal with the identification and formulation
of further reforms affecting local administrations.

Other donor-funded activities and projects with which the project at hand will have to
build the appropriate information exchange and co-ordination mechanisms are
UNDP’s “Local Agenda 21” programme, the EC Civil Society Development
Programme and the EC Civil Service Modernisation Programme as well as
programmes funded by some EU member countries in support to the strengthening of
local administrations and their Unions in Turkey. However, due to more urgent tasks,
the project team has not yet been able to establish these contacts and to set up the



3
    COM (2005) 559 / SEC (2005) 1426, adopted 9 November 2005

                                                                                          9
        necessary coordination mechanisms. This will be undertaken in the next reporting
        period.

4.2     Project objectives and results to be achieved

4.2.1   General approach

        Both the overall objective and the specific objectives (purposes) of the LAR
        Programme were set at the programme-level (TAPs) and reproduced without any
        changes in the ToR for the technical assistance and training project. By submitting its
        proposal for this project, UNDP demonstrated willingness to contribute to the
        achievement of these objective and purposes, which were agreed between the
        Turkish Government and the EC. In the inception phase, the TAT has not received
        any indication from the Government (MoI) or the EC Delegation which may suggest a
        change or reformulation of these objectives; and therefore they remain as the broad
        framework for the project.

        In this respect, the contribution of the project to progress towards the general
        objective will eventually have to be measured in terms of compliance of Turkish Local
        Administration system with standards and requirements set at the European Charter
        of Local Self-Government as well as with EU principles and best practices concerning
        effective, transparent and participatory local government. One of the criteria to be
        benchmarked with EU standards is the actual capacity of Turkish local authorities to
        formulate policy, manage their administrations and effectively deliver public services
        at the same level of EU local authorities.

        During the inception phase the team has looked back at the list of results mentioned
        in the TAPs for the LAR Programme and has tried to identify what the “contribution” of
        the TA project can be to the achievement of each of those results. As it is known, the
        main responsibility for the pursuance and achievement of the results identified at
        programme level lays with the “beneficiary” (in this project, the Ministry of Interior).
        The role of the consultant is to help the beneficiary achieve such results through the
        advice, assistance and training provided by the TA team and the production (or the
        contribution to the production) of a number of specific outputs.

        At the “result” level, the updated Logframe attached to this Inception Report shows a
        mix of specific outcomes and outputs expected from the project, to which achievement
        both the beneficiary (MoI) an the consultant (UNDP) are mutually committed. In most
        cases, full achievement of the final expected result depends not only on the work of
        the consultant’s team, but on additional action and inputs from the MoI or other
        beneficiaries of the project (pilot local administrations, Unions of Local Authorities,
        TODAIE, etc.).

        The final list of results to which UNDP commits itself, through and efficient use of the
        resources allocated to the project and a faithful cooperation with the MoI and other
        project beneficiaries and stakeholders, shows a number of results (23) which is very
        close to the number of results agreed for the Programme, and follows also very
        closely the scope and formulation of such results. Below there is a short explanation
        of the scope and reach of such results-list, which shows the outcome of findings and
        conclusions of the TA team during the inception phase.

        It is the intention of UNDP and the MoI to perform a results-based management of the
        project. For this reason, while keeping the basic structure of the project in three main
        “components” or broad support areas, UNDP now proposes to waive the use of
        “sub-components” for the organization of the project’s work. Therefore, the
        results are listed by components; work-programmes (activity lists and time schedule)
        and any other management tool to be used during the implementation of the project




                                                                                             10
        (such as resource-allocation schedules) will in the future be directly based on the
                       4
        results’ list.

4.2.2   Updated list of results to be achieved by the consultant

        Component A (Project Purpose 1) Strengthen reform capacity

        The following results are proposed under this Component:

        1. Draft strategy for the implementation of local administration reform developed
           through a participatory process and aligned with Turkey’s EU integration process

        2. Regular assessments of progress of local administration reform prepared by MoI

        3. Legislation needed for the implementation of local administration reform
           elaborated, in line with European standards

        4. Improved Government's communication with national Local Authorities and Civil
           Society, as well as with EU institutions (EC, EP), Local Authorities and other
           European international organisations (Council of Europe), with regards to
           progress of Local Administration reform in Turkey.

        5. Mandate and organization of the General Directorate for Local Authorities (MoI)
           reviewed and aligned with local administration reform objectives and strategy;
           GDLA working procedures streamlined

        6. MoI staff dealing with local administration issues (at MoI HQ, as well as in
           provincial and district governorships) trained on EU local government systems,
           legislation and standards; and enabled to better cope with Government tasks and
           responsibilities in this field. GDLA managing staff proficiency in English language
           improved

        7. Capacity of MoI-GDLA to identify, formulate, implement, monitor and evaluate
           programmes and projects to further advance the reform of the local administration
           towards meeting EU standards enhanced.

        8. Managers and staff of national and regional Unions of Local Authorities trained in
           EU member-states’ and candidate countries' experience in local government
           reform as well as in lobbying for municipal/local interests

        9. Capacity of national and regional Unions of Local Authorities for networking and
           information exchange strengthened

        10. Existing municipal partnerships reinforced and new partnerships promoted
            including partnerships between municipalities in Turkey and those in EU member
            and candidate countries

        Results 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9 and 10 are fully in line with results described in the Programme
        document and in the ToR for the TA project.

        Nevertheless, the formulation of the results has been adjusted to what the project can
        actually deliver – in cooperation with the relevant beneficiaries – and does not include
        those aspects that are not at the reach of the TA team and/or its partners at the MoI.
        For instance, the “adoption” of a reform strategy by the government. In other cases,
        the result has been formulated bearing in mind the “outcome” to be directly pursued
        by the project rather than the real objective pursued by the programme. This is for
        instance the case with result 3: a raise in the level of awareness or in the mobilisation
        of support for the programme to reform the local administration, while being one of the

        4
          It is UNDP’s firm understanding that this approach is fully consistent with the orentations and guidelines
        laid down in the latest version (2004) of the EC’s Project Cycle Management manual.

                                                                                                                 11
sub-objectives of the project and one of the results set at programme level, is not in
itself a result that can be delivered through the cooperation between MoI and the
consultant. What the project can deliver in this field is an improvement of the
Ministry’s communication with stakeholders of local administration reform.

In the formulation of result 1 (LAR strategy), the words “…the implementation of…”
have been deliberately inserted. The reason – already anticipated in the technical
offer – is that, at the start up of the project, the policy context has evolved, compared
to the situation that existed when the Programme was formulated. The inception
phase has confirmed the priority given by the Government, at this stage, to the need
to ensure the effective application of the new legislation already adopted. The leading
role in this field has been entrusted to the Ministry responsible for local administration
(MoI), which lacks a consistent strategy and action plan for ensuring this objective.
Indeed, as also quoted in the technical offer, there are a number of reforms which are
still to be identified, designed and implemented concerning the revenue side of local
finances and linked to it, the introduction of performance-based budgeting and service
delivery (as pointed out in the WB’s review); or the aspects related to local civil
service. But identifying and developing reform strategies in these areas falls –
realistically - out of the reach of this project.

In relation to the tasks entrusted to the Ministry of Interior, two new Results (5 and 7)
have been identified during the inception phase as requiring the project’s work and
UNDP’s assistance:

The first one (result 5) is a logical consequence of the reforms already introduced in
the Turkish system of local administration, which call for a redesign of the mission,
mandate, organization and working procedures of the General Directorate for Local
Authorities and more broadly of the Government structures directly dealing with local
administration affairs. In this respect, there is a shared understanding within the
Ministry and the TA team that these structures, lately re-organized by legislation
enacted in the mid-80’s, need a profound organizational change, which should go
hand in hand with the training envisaged under result 6, as the two sides of the same
coin (a change in the way state bureaucracy interacts with local authorities).

Result 7 is intended to address one of the current weaknesses of these structures: the
still insufficient capacity to identify, formulate, manage and monitor the implementation
of time-bound and results-based programmes and projects aimed at the
modernisation of the system of local administration in Turkey (regardless of the
sources of funding for such programmes and projects). The activities leading to the
achievement of this new result will transfer know-how to and strengthen the skills of
Ministry officials involved in this type of tasks. Handbooks and guidelines such as
those presented in the EC’s Project Cycle Management (for external aid) manual will
be used to this end.

With regards to legislation (result 3), as already pointed out in UNDP’s technical offer,
the needs for technical assistance are at this stage quite different from the ones
envisaged in the Programme document. At that time (2002-2003), the objective was
probably to assist the Government and the Parliament with the elaboration,
consultation, and adoption of new primary legislation in line with European
requirements and standards (namely, but not only, the European Charter of Local
Self-government). At present, the new primary legislation is already in force; and it
seems to be basically in line with those standards and requirements. Moreover – and
despite the nuance introduced in the ToR, which refer this part of the assistance to the
elaboration of “secondary” legislation – the Ministry of Interior has informed the TA
team during the inception phase that most of the pieces of secondary legislation
foreseen in the new Laws have already been elaborated and some of them have been
adopted. In this new context, it has been suggested that much of the project’s efforts
and resources originally thought to be invested in this area could have a better use in
support of other areas and results. Nonetheless, the project will keep a result in the
field of legislation yet mostly oriented towards ensuring that both the new primary and



                                                                                       12
secondary legislation recently introduced (or about being introduced) are fully
compliant with European requirements and standards.

Results 8, 9 and 10 are kept as in the Programme document and the ToR; the first
one formulated as an “output”, while the other two are formulated as “outcomes”.

Component B (Purpose 2):        Improve budgetary procedures and service
performance in selected local administrations

In this block, the TA team has made an effort to differentiate the “results” to be
pursued through the pilot projects from the pilot project’s themselves (which are to be
seen as an instrument for the achievement of such results).

The list of results proposed under this Component is the following:

11. At least 6 pilot local administrations selected through an open and transparent
    process; and pilot projects on improving budgeting and service performance
    formulated and agreed with relevant local authorities

12. Service Improvement Action Plans developed - through a participatory process-
    and implemented in at least 6 pilot administrations

13. Transparent multi-year budgets and investment plans prepared, adopted and
    provided to the public in at least 6 pilot local administrations

14. Capacity of Mayors and municipal managers and staff of at least 6 pilot
    administrations for strategic and multi-year investment planning, participatory and
    transparent budgeting, sound financial management and regarding the design
    and management of Service Improvement Plans strengthened

15. Small and medium sized municipalities are provided with effective and free-of
    charge software tools and manual for financial management, including tool for
    multi-year budgeting and investment planning

16. Flexible and sustainable mechanism created and support provided to local
    administrations for improving financial management and service performance

Result 11 makes reference to the openness and transparency of the process of
selection of the project’s pilot local administrations. This is a pre-condition for the
success of the pilot projects and a demonstration that the Government (MoI) is trying
to use the project to the benefit of the totality of the local administrations in Turkey. By
ensuring the openness and transparency of the process, the administrations to be
selected will not only be given an opportunity to improve their budgets and public
services, but to help in the development of projects, methodologies and tools which
can be replicated to other local administrations.

Results 12, 13 and 14 intend to summarise the objectives for the pilot projects,
formulated as results. This is the way in which such results were formulated in the
Programme document; and is consistent with the definition of the EC-funded support
to the LAR Programme as providing technical assistance and training for the
achievement of such results. In the implementation of the project’s activities aimed at
the formulation of multi-year budgets, UNDP will strive to make use of approaches
and tools developed by the organisation for ensuring the adequate consideration of
gender issues in the budgeting process.

Results 15 and 16 correspond to the outputs expected from sub-components B.3 and
B.5 in the ToR (listed among the “results to be achieved by the consultant” in its
section 2.3). However, it is to be mentioned here that, while the scope of result 15
(software tools and manual) has been kept unchanged, work already done during the
inception phase has changed the assumptions and perceptions upon which this
“expected result” was based. In fact, the Turkish market of commercial software is

                                                                                         13
already providing the majority of Municipalities with software tools and applications
adapted to the new accounting standards set for public administrations’ finances.
What seems to be missing are specific tools for multi-year budgeting and investment
planning also linked to programme-budgeting and performance-based management of
local services. Subject to the final findings and recommendations of the short-term
experts (STEs) mobilised during the inception phase, the formulation of these results
might still require some adjustments (to be proposed in future progress reports).

Component C (Purpose 3):          Improve effectiveness and efficiency of human
resources

The results proposed under Component C are:

17. New training courses and manuals on "Municipal management for small and
    medium sized municipalities" developed and pilot tested (taking into account
    European best practices)

18. A group of "regional trainers" on local administration management is created, in
    close co-operation between MoI, TODAIE and regional Unions of local authorities

19. Human resources capacities in local administrations has been strengthened,
    through co-operation between MoI and regional Unions of local authorities

20. A Training program and certification system for Turkish consultants on local
    financial management developed

21. MoI and TODAIE ensure availability of a group of certified consultants on
    municipal/local administration finances

22. Municipalities and SPAs have direct online access to resources on local
    administration training and consulting

Essentially, the results proposed under Component C are fully in line with the outputs
specified in the Technical Offer. Regarding the training programmes “A” and “B”
mentioned in the ToR, the list of results above differentiates the results related to the
“development” of training programmes and materials (results 17 and 20) from the
results concerning the “delivery” of training to final target groups (local administration
staff – result 19; and non-staff consultants on municipal finances – result 21). In
addition to these results, and in line with the methodology proposed by UNDP in its
technical offer (section 5.3.1), a separate result related to the “training of trainers” is
being proposed.

With regards to the contents of the training courses and manuals to be developed by
the project, and in addition to the subjects and topics mentioned in the ToR, UNDP’s
TA team will pay particular attention to aspects related to the preservation of the
environment and the management of environment-related responsibilities of
local authorities; as well as to the various ways and approaches of ensuring that
gender issues are given appropriate consideration in the formulation of local policies
and budgets, as well as in the organization and delivery of local public services.
Moreover, UNDP will ensure that gender issues are properly taken into account in
the selection of trainees for the programmes to be implemented under the project.

Result 22 reflects the expected output of the project’s activities under sub-component
C.3 in the ToR.

It is to be noted that achievement of the majority of results set under this Component
will be the outcome of the close co-operation between UNDP’s TA team operating
from the Ministry of Interior, the Local Administration Research and Training Centre of
TODAIE and the regional Unions of Local Authorities. In particular, achievement of
Result 19 will very much depend on the active co-operation of the Unions of


                                                                                        14
      Municipalities and the MoI services in the regions and provinces where this part of the
      training will be carried out.

      The new “Component D”: Support to general steering and management of LAR
      Programme’s implementation.

      A number of activities that the TA team will have to carry out do not fit under any of
      the three main components identified in the Programme document and the ToR but
      also cannot be considered as merely belonging to the “internal” management of
      UNDP’s contractual obligations or to UNDP’s support and backstopping to the TA
      team at MoI.

      These activities – described in sections 5.4.1 and 5.4.2 of the Technical Offer – are
      critical for the proper and successful management of the LAR Programme by its main
      direct beneficiary (the Ministry of Interior) in the conditions agreed by the Government
      and the EC.

      This group of activities should not be left out of the “results-based” management
      approach proposed for the entire project. For this reason, a final “result” (23) has been
      formulated to express the direct outcome expected from this group of activities. The
      result is formulated as follows:

      23. Effective and efficient management of the LAR Programme by the MoI

4.3   Update on activities and work-plan (for the entire duration of the project)

      Following the “logic” and approach described above (management of the project by
      results, not by sub-components or “activity clusters”), the activities to be implemented
      under the TA project have been planned and time-scheduled so that activities aimed
      at the achievement of any given result have been grouped together and properly
      sequenced and time-scheduled.

      The details can be found in the annexed “Results-based Activity Schedule” (Annex 2)
      of which here we would just to highlight the following points:
                                     5
      With very few exceptions , all activities listed in the ToR have been included in the
      project’s programme of work. Some additional activities needed for the
      accomplishment of the results introduced as new in the project’s Logframe (results 5
      and 7) as well as the activities related to result 23 have also been included in the
      schedule.

      Although activities leading to the achievement of each one of the project’s results are
      presented in its logical sequence and have been indicatively timed in accordance with
      the results-based approach, the emphasis has been shifted from the timing for the
      implementation of any given activity to the deadline by which the output corresponding
      to each activity should be produced (milestones).

      Accordingly, project or sub-component outputs identified and listed in UNDP’s
      Technical Offer that cannot be deemed as project final “results” are nevertheless
      listed as activity outputs in the column “milestones”.

      The timing for the implementation of a number of activities and the production of their
      expected outputs has been adjusted – compared to the timing foreseen in the ToR –
      in accordance with progress made and difficulties encountered during the inception
      phase (see below).


      5
        For instance, the activities mentioned under sub-component A.2 in the ToRs which were originally devised
      (in the Programme document) to support the drafting, consultation and adoption of new primary legislation
      on local administration, such as the establishment of an expert working group involving a parliamentary
      committee and consultations also involving the parliament (which is not a usual practice in the case of
      secondary legislation)

                                                                                                             15
4.4   Resources

      During the inception phase, the Programme Director and the TA team have worked in
      the identification of the resources needed for the successful implementation of the
      project’s activities and the achievement of its expected results.

      The exercise has mainly focused in working out an indicative allocation of the
      technical expertise (LTE, Int’l STE and Local STE) to be made available by the
      consultant (UNDP) for work to be done under each one of the project’s components
      and 23 results. The outcome of this exercise is shown in the Results-based Manning
      Table enclosed to this report (Annex 2).

      A preliminary conclusion of this work on planning is the following: this is a
      Programme/Project which was originally devised to be implemented over a period of
      three years (36 months). The programme of work was also developed bearing in mind
      such time-span; and the resources originally allocated to its implementation (both on
      the EC-funded side as well as concerning the beneficiary’s “in kind” contribution)
      must have been estimated taking into account such time-span and work-programme.

      Due to delays in the launching of the Programme and the procurement of the TA to be
      funded by the EC, such TA will only be available for a period of 28 months and the
      expert inputs to be provided by the consultant have been – in accordance with the
      ToR for the agreement signed between ECD and UNDP – substantially reduced (in
      terms of m/days of expertise) compared to the originally planned figures (in the TAPs).

      However, the programme of work to be implemented by the MoI with the assistance of
      UNDP is still, in accordance with the ToR for the TA contract, basically the same as in
      the Programme document. As a result of all these factors, the actual amount of
      external expertise that the MoI can receive for the implementation of the individual
      project activities and the production of their expected outputs and results is going to
      be less than originally planned; and for some activities, the external expertise
      available could perhaps be not sufficient to deliver the level of assistance actually
      needed for the production of a good-quality output.

      With the remarks and specifications proposed in this Inception Report, both MoI and
      UNDP have nevertheless agreed to jointly implement a programme of work which is
      still basically the same as the one originally planned (in the Programme document)
      and laid down in the ToR for the TA agreement.

      But both the MoI and the consultant are aware that since the external inputs/expertise
      available is going to be lower than originally thought, the successful accomplishment
      of the tasks and activities in the work-programme, the effective delivery of good
      quality outputs and in sum, the level of achievement of the project’s results, will very
      much depend on the additional effort and inputs from Ministry staff or the staff of other
      direct beneficiaries.

4.5   Assumptions and risks

      The project’s inception phase has confirmed the comments and remarks made in
      UNDP’s technical offer (section 1.3). In particular, it has confirmed the interest and
      commitment of the Government (Prime Ministry and Ministry of Interior) to drive and
      facilitate the actual implementation of the legal reforms recently introduced in the
      Turkish system of local administration as well as to make use of the EC-funded
      assistance to support these efforts.

      However, at the operational level, the inception phase has also showed some
      additional difficulties related to the level of awareness of the programme among its
      potential beneficiaries. In fact, the Programme Directors and the TA Team had to
      make use of the first contacts and meetings held with project beneficiaries and
      stakeholders – within and outside the MoI – to make a general presentation of the
      project itself.

                                                                                            16
      Although this awareness can be deemed as satisfactory now, there is still a need to
      ensure and strengthen ownership of the project by its main direct beneficiaries. To this
      end, it has been agreed that a full-fledged Programme Co-ordination Group, headed
      by the Programme Director, but also gathering authorised representatives of the
      following MoI units and project’s main beneficiaries, must be set up (see section
      below).

4.6   Management and co-ordination arrangements
                                                                                          6
      During the inception phase, the Project’s Steering Committee has been set up . As
      foreseen in the TAPs and the ToR, on the MoI side, the PSC is chaired by the Deputy
      Undersecretary responsible for local administration reform agenda (Mr. Şarbak). In
      addition to the membership described in section 4.3.3 of the ToR, the MoI invited the
      following institutions to appoint members of the PSC: State Planning Organization,
      Bank of Provinces (İller Bankası), Turkish Union of Municipalities (TBB) and TODAIE.

      A new Programme Director (Mr. Zorluoğlu) was appointed by the MoI in early
      October, replacing the previous PD (Mr. Şahin). Cooperation between both PDs and
      the TA Team is running smoothly with regular (daily) contacts and full availability of
      the PD to respond to the demands of the TA team.

      Nevertheless, in order to ensure full ownership of the project by its main direct
      beneficiaries, as a precondition for the successful delivery of the expected results, the
      Programme Director has to be assisted by a full-fledged Programme Co-ordination
      Unit. During the inception phase, the assistance required by the Programme Director
      for managing the programme was basically being provided by just one part-time
      secretary or by the TA team (experts and support staff).

      While understanding that the MoI cannot provide additional full-time staff to support
      the Programme Director in his programme management and co-ordination tasks (as
      suggested in sections 5.1.2 and 5.2.15.2 of the TAPs), the effective implementation of
      the project’s activities would require a more direct involvement of other managers and
      officials of the Ministry of Interior (particularly from the General Directorate for Local
      Authorities).

      The most efficient way to arrange this involvement of MoI and GDLA officials whose
      active contribution is critical for the successful implementation of the project (but are
      otherwise responsible for other administrative and managerial tasks and
      responsibilities) is to set up a Programme Co-ordination Group. The membership of
      this group, also gathering representatives from project beneficiaries outside the MoI,
      has been agreed as the following:

            General Directorate for Local Authorities (2-3 Heads of Department,)

            MoI Training Department

            TODAIE

            Union of Turkish Municipalities (TBB)

      This PCG should hold regular meetings (every two weeks) with the three members of
      the TA Team in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the work
      programme and make the necessary decisions for arranging the in-kind contributions
      expected from beneficiaries and the external inputs to be provided by the TA team.

      Also, in order to facilitate the close monitoring of the implementation of the project by
      the EC Delegation and its direct and timely information on the progress made,



      6
          Minutes of the constitutive meeting held on October 4, 2005 are attached.

                                                                                              17
      monthly co-ordination meetings will be held with the participation of MoI Programme
      Director, ECD Sector Manager, UNDP Programme Manager and TA team.

      Concerning the process of elaboration and approval of project’s progress reports, and
      after having examined the relevant provisions in both the TAPs and the ToR for the
      TA, as well as Articles 26 and 27 of the General Conditions for EC-funded external aid
      service contracts, both MoI and UNDP have agreed on the following procedure:
      before submission to the Contracting Authority (ECD) for final approval, draft Progress
      Reports prepared by the TAT will be consulted with the Programme Director and
      subsequently submitted to the Programme Steering Committee for discussion.
      Comments and remarks put forward by PSC members and agreed at the PSC
      meeting will be integrated into the final version of the draft Progress Report, which will
      then be forwarded to UNDP Office. UNDP will prepare/edit the final version of the
      Progress Report to be submitted to the ECD for approval, and prepare the financial
      report to be enclosed to it. Copy of the final version will at the same time be sent to
      the MoI (Programme Director).

4.7   Budget and Financing arrangements

      There has been no update on the budget and financing arrangements of the project.
      ECD issued clarifications (October 25, 2005), in response to UNDP’s request
      regarding the utilisation of the budget provided for incidental expenditures.




                                                                                             18
5.    PROGRESS MADE DURING INCEPTION PHASE

5.1   Activities in progress

      The project’s activities were officially launched on August 12 with the first meeting of
      UNDP’s TA team and MoI Programme Director held on August 15.

      Since then the activities of the project team have been addressed to the following
      priority issues:

         Setting up the project’s office at the Ministry of Interior (within the premises of the
          GDLA’s Project Implementation Unit); and sorting out related logistical issues
          (office and communications equipment, etc.)

         Establishing first (or further) contact with project beneficiaries and stakeholder
          groups (MoI-GDLA management, MoI Education Department, Association of LA
          Controllers, Union of Turkish Municipalities, TODAIE, Prime Ministry etc.)

         Recruitment of project’s support staff ( 4 staff at work since 1st of October)

         Development of communication and working procedures between main partners
          (MoI, ECD, UNDP-TA team)

         Establishment of the project’s steering, management and co-ordination structures.

         Reviewing the project context and design (expected results, activities and work-
          programme) in dialogue with Programme Director and through meetings and
          discussions with other interested parties.

         Getting started with the tasks and activities envisaged for the inception phase or
          the first four months of project’s operations

      During the inception phase Activities under Component A have registered slower
      progress than activities under Components B and C. This is in part due to the larger
      number of activities to be started or accomplished during this phase under this
      component and also to the fact that many of the activities under this component
      require an active engagement of Ministry officials and international experts whose
      mobilization requires additional efforts and time.

      Concerning work in the development of a strategy for the implementation of local
      administration reform, once the scope of this activity has been clarified with the
      management of the MoI, it has been agreed that while the Ministry is going to set up
      the strategy working group foreseen in the project documents, the TA team will
      identify and recruit two STEs to support the working group in the development of the
      strategy. ToRs for these two experts have been prepared, and the local expert has
      already been identified and engaged. The Team leader is continuing the search for a
      suitable international expert to team up with the local expert; and it is expected that
      the first meeting of the strategy working group will take place in late November. A
      proposal for setting the mandate and working procedures for this working group is
      already being worked out.

      With regards to the communications plan, ToR for a local STE have been worked out,
      but the assignment has not yet been given to any expert. This first assignment – on
      the development of the communications plan – is to be carried out in November-
      December.

      Commencement of work in the field of legislation has been adjourned, since the
      Ministry doesn’t regard it as a high priority. Further discussions with GDLA staff are
      needed before deciding on the best way in which work in this field can be organized
      and on the recruitment of an external expert to undertake a first assignment aimed at
                                                                                              19
the evaluation of the recently enacted legislation and the identification of TA needs for
the coming months.

The assessment of training needs at the GDLA and the review of the in-service
training system for governors and sub-governors are presently being considered as
part of a broader block which should also include the activities aimed at reviewing the
mandate, organization and working procedures of the GDLA and the units in
governorates and sub-governorates dealing with local administration affairs (new
result 5). In the preliminary discussions with MoI PD and other officials, it has been
agreed that technical assistance in this block should be provided by EU experts from
countries with similar administrative systems and traditions as Turkey (particularly,
France); and that those experts should preferably have relevant experience of work in
similar units of a central government. The TA team has established contact with
officials in the French Ministry of Interior and the network of civil service training
institutions in France (ENA, IRAs) and is awaiting a response on a possible co-
operation in this field. In the meantime, ToR for these assignments will be developed
in November.

ToR for a first STE assignment on the assessment of training needs at the Unions of
local authorities and the development of a detailed training programme to be
implemented under the project have been drafted; and two STEs (one local, one
international) have been identified and contacted to take up this assignment.
However, further consultations with the Union of Turkish Municipalities are needed in
November because the implementation of the assignment and the follow-up training
programme will require an active co-operation of the Unions of local authorities in
terms of in-kind inputs.

Eventually, commencement of work in the field of municipal partnerships has been
delayed for two main reasons: the low level of priority given by the MoI to this block of
activities; and the ongoing discussions with MoI and ECD in order to clarify the type of
partnerships that the project refers to. The understanding of the TA team is that the
project should focus in the partnerships which can be established between Turkish
local authorities and local authorities in EU member and candidate countries;
particularly those promoted and/or funded by existing EC or CoE programmes. An
aspect which needs further clarification is whether the project’s work in this area
should also embrace partnerships between Turkish municipalities themselves; and to
this end, the Ministry and the TA team will continue working together to figure out the
type of municipal partnerships envisaged in the existing legislation and the ways to
address this issue under the project. Concerning the search for international ST
experts to deliver technical assistance in this field, the project team is in contact with
the Local Governance team at UNDP Regional Centre for Europe and the CIS in
Bratislava, which has already provided a number of CVs.

Work under Component B has focused, on one side, in the development of the call for
applications for the pilot projects and on the other side, on the mobilization of two
international STEs to undertake the reviews of the software tools and manuals on
municipal financial management available in the Turkish market or developed by
international donors in support to multi-annual investment planning at local level.

The development of the final version of the call for applications – which has already
been communicated to all eligible local authorities through various means (direct
mailing through the network of governorates and sub-governorates, publication in MoI
web-sites       such      as       www.mahalli-idareler.gov.tr,       www.beper.gov.tr,
www.yerelbilgi.gov.tr), was preceded by discussions with the MoI, other Ministries and
Union of Municipalities on the eligibility and selection criteria. As a result of such
discussions – which included an exchange of views at the constitutive meeting of the
PSC as well as further discussions in a working group specifically set up for this
Component – it has been decided that out of the 6 local administrations to be selected
as pilots, one of them should be a Special Provincial Administration.




                                                                                       20
As foreseen in the ToR for the project, the Programme Steering Committee has made
a decision on the appointment of the members of the selection committee, which will
evaluate the applications received and make a decision on the selection of pilot
administrations.

The reports submitted by the international experts dealing with the reviews mentioned
                                                                           7
above have provided the following principal findings and recommendations :

    Despite the fact that properly localized software production capacity exists, what
     is missing is clear guidelines from appropriate authorities answering such
     questions such as interface standards among BEPER, SAY2000i and local
     authorities’ software

    There is also lack of standardization among various commercial and in house
     packages that are in use. The relevant ministries have not set standards and
     unless some agency sets standards such as listing the mandatory functionalities
     etc., it will be difficult to develop and integrate new packages that can handle
     performance budgeting, strategic planning as well as multi-year investment
     planning.

    TAT unit should assist the technical departments at the MoI in defining the
     functions and capabilities of the software to be designed and implemented by
     domestic Turkish companies that meet the multiple requirements of the new
     legislation.

    One inter-sectoral working group should define the flow chart of functionalities,
     and specify the chains of approval and required information flows before too much
     work is done.

Activities under Component C have significantly advanced the project’s work-
programme for the development of the two training programmes foreseen in the ToR
(A and B); and worked out an agreement on the co-operation between the TA team
based at the MoI and TODAIE, as the training institution selected to partner-up with
UNDP’s TA team in this block of the project.

In September, a local short-term expert was engaged by the project to help the LTE
responsible for this Component with the development of an outline for both training
programmes. These outlines, which are based on a preliminary assessment of
training needs of local administration staff and of external experts (consultants who
may be contracted by local authorities to undertake financial and local services’
audits), have been used a base for the discussions with TODAIE. As a result of the
meetings and discussions held with MoI, TODAIE, TBB (Union of Turkish
Municipalities) and TAT, and in line with the recommendations of the short-term
expert, it has been agreed that the two training programmes to be subject of the co-
operation between TODAIE and UNDP’s TA Team operating at the MoI will be
delivered in two consecutive parts: the first part of these trainings will be delivered by
TODAIE, and will cover the basic theoretical subjects and topics, whereas the second
part – to be organized and delivered by the TA team - will focus on the specialised
fields of expertise.

Therefore, by this agreement, TODAIE has been chosen as the most suitable training
institution for the first part of the training activities to be undertaken under the project;
and will benefit from the project’s assistance to this end. The assistance will focus in
providing expertise for the detailed development of the training curricula and materials
for the theoretical part of the two training programmes:

          The first programme will be a “training of trainers” programme aimed at the
          formation of a critical mass of local administration and management training


7
  At the time of writing this report, reports from the experts have just arrived. The full elaboration of the
findings and recommendations will be made in the coming progress reports.

                                                                                                                21
              experts. After the completion of this programme, TAT will be taking the
              responsibility for the implementation of pilot trainings in the selected pilot
              administrations. The first group of experts trained as trainers under the
              agreement will subsequently be contracted by the TA project to deliver the
              training envisaged in the project to a minimum of 500 staff of municipalities
              and Special Provincial Administrations, through one-week training courses to
              be delivered in different locations.

              The second programme is addressed to the training and certification of two
              groups of 25 consultants on local administration finances. TODAIE and
              UNDP’s TA team will also implement the pilot version of the programme, so
              that the already certified consultants can provide expert inputs during the
              implementation of the second-round pilot projects on improving budgeting and
              service performance in selected local administrations, to be undertaken under
              Component B of the project.

      TODAIE will receive a separate grant from the ECD to cover the costs not borne by
      the TA project.

      Also under Component C, an international STE is expected to be engaged in
      November, with the assignment to undertake a review of training programmes and
      manuals being used in EU member and candidate countries, so that best practices
      and examples can be taken into account at the time of developing the detailed
      curricula and materials needed for these two training programmes.

5.2   Problems encountered

      As mentioned above, perhaps the most relevant problem the TA team has
      encountered during the inception phase is the lack or insufficient information and
      awareness of the programme among key beneficiaries and stakeholders.

      Indeed, not only the management and officials working at MoI HQ (particularly at
      GDLA), but also staff of other Ministry’s units (such as the Training Department),
      TODAIE or Turkish Union of Municipalities are fully mindful of the ongoing process of
      reforms undertaken with the passing of new legislation on local administrations.
      Moreover, many of them are directly involved in work related to the implementation of
      these legal changes in the practice (for instance, through work in the elaboration of
      secondary legislation or other instruments, such as the new regulation of personnel
      structures in municipalities – kadro). And there is a general and genuine concern at
      the MoI (notably at the GDLA) with regards to the challenges and tasks facing the
      administrative structures responsible for the actual implementation of these legal
      reforms both at municipal/provincial as well as at governmental levels.

      However, this awareness does not entail a sufficient knowledge or familiarity with the
      support programme agreed between the EC and the Government: the objectives and
      results pursued, the components and activities envisaged, the time-span for their
      implementation and more importantly, the expected involvement and role of the
      relevant units and institutions in the management of the programme and in the
      implementation of its work-plan. As mentioned above, at the beginning of the project
      there was an insufficient awareness and understanding in what concerns the “in-kind”
      contributions required from the various MoI units and other governmental and non-
      governmental institutions (Unions of Municipalities, pilot local administrations)
      involved in the programme. Perhaps the sole exception to this situation was TODAIE,
      the reason being that the managers of its Local Administration and Research Centre
      did already know that this Centre will be the beneficiary of a direct grant to be
      provided by the EC under the programme.

5.3   Logistical issues

      As per Article 6.2 of the Terms of Reference, UNDP is to (a) ensure that experts are
      adequately supported and equipped, and that there is sufficient administrative,

                                                                                         22
secretarial and interpreting provision to enable experts to concentrate on their primary
responsibilities; and (b) transfer funds as necessary to support its activities under the
contract and to ensure that employees are paid regularly and in a timely fashion.

UNDP and MoI cooperated successfully to provide the TAT with a suitable and
efficient working environment. MoI provided the TA team – from day one – with
reasonable office space and basic equipment (individual desks, use of a meeting
room) within the premises of the GDLA’s “Project Implementation Unit” (PIU). The PIU
is located at the Ministry’s HQ (an excellent location, from the viewpoint of contact
with internal and external stakeholders). With the exception of slight delay in the
opening of phone lines for the use of TAT, TAT faced no major logistical difficulties.
TAT is adequately equipped.

UNDP hired a project manager and 4 project assistants to provide TAT with sufficient
administrative and secretarial backstopping.




                                                                                      23
6.      WORKPLAN FOR THE NEXT REPORTING PERIOD

        The reporting interval of the project is 3 months starting from the signature of the
        contract between EC and UNDP. Accordingly next reporting period refers to
        November 2005 – January 2006.

6.1     Results (intermediate outputs) to be delivered

        In the next reporting period, the main target of the TAT will be to catch up with the
        undertaking and completion of the activities originally foreseen for the Inception phase
        (or for the first 4 months of the project) which because of the difficulties described
        above, could not be accomplished during this phase.

        Should the new work-programme proposed in this IR be endorsed by the beneficiary
        (MoI) and the ECD, the results to be delivered in the next period would be:

6.1.1   Component A

           Strategy working group established, and work started and advanced in the
            development of the draft strategy for the implementation of local administration
            reform.

           Evaluation (report) on European compliance of the new legislation on local
            administration adopted since late 2003; and a legislative plan for 2006 prepared.

           Communications plan developed and adopted; and programme web-site
            established (at the MoI-GDLA web-site)

           Organizational and functional review of GDLA completed (expert’s report
            available)

           GDLA staff training needs assessment and training strategy/action plan
            developed.

           Training system for governors, sub-governors and staff in governorates/sub-
            governorates reviewed (expert’s report, including recommendations for its
            improvement).- Workshops for provincial and district governorates planned and
            time-scheduled.

           English language training programme for GDLA officials developed and
            approved.- Courses started.

           Training/Capacity needs at Unions of local authorities assessed (expert’s report)
            and detailed training programme developed, presented and agreed with Unions

           Partnerships’ evaluation report produced.

6.1.2   Component B

           Selection Committee responsible for the evaluation of applications for pilot
            projects established; and 6 pilot local administrations selected.

           Experts’ reports on the review of commercial software and manuals for local
            financial management and on manuals and computerized tools for multi-tear
            investment planning delivered, discussed and accepted by the WG.- Follow up
            actions agreed.




                                                                                             24
6.1.3   Component C

           Final version of agreement on co-operation between UNDP’s TA and TODAIE
            elaborated and accepted by the MoI and the ECD.

           Expert’s report on the review of training programmes and manuals developed in
            EU member and candidate countries produced and accepted by the LTE
            responsible for this Component

           Training needs assessment in regards to professional “consultants” on local
            financial management completed.

6.1.4   Component D

           Project management and co-ordination structures completed with the
            establishment of a Project Co-ordination Group. PCG holding regular meetings.

           One meeting of Project Steering Committee held in November 2005 (Minutes)

           Programme Advisory Committee established (first meeting held)

           Inception Report drafted, discussed by the PSC and submitted to ECD

6.2     Activity and resource schedule

        Activities and resources (external expertise) required for the accomplishment of the
        tasks needed for the delivery of the results mentioned above are shown in the table
        enclosed as Annex 3.

        With regards to Component A, the Ministry of Interior should have set up the Strategy
        Working Group by the end of November. As agreed during the inception phase, this
        working group will be chaired by the Deputy Undersecretary responsible for local
        administration affairs (who also co-chairs the Steering Committee). Other members
        will be drawn from the ranks of relevant Government departments, as well as among
        the local administrations themselves. The TAT will be represented in the WG through
        two of the LTEs (Team Leader and Expert on Municipal Management and Training),
        as well as through one international and one local senior experts. In its first meeting,
        the strategy working group should be informed of its mandate and adopt a programme
        of work for the development of the new strategy. Work in the development of the
        strategy will be started immediately, so that a first draft can be presented and
        discussed by the working group in February 2006.

        The evaluation of recently enacted legislation from the viewpoint of its compliance
        with European requirements and standards will be carried out by a senior local expert
        to be engaged by the TAT. On grounds of such evaluation, and in close co-operation
        with GDLA staff directly involved in the drafting of secondary legislation, a legislative
        plan for the year 2006 will be drawn up. The plan will present a list of the legislation to
        be elaborated within this year, the steps to be followed for it (including external
        consultations with local authorities and other interested parties) and the indicative
        time-schedule for their development, drafting and adoption.

        The development of the LAR Programme’s communication plan is to be regarded at
        this stage as a top priority, which will require the engagement of a local expert on
        communication, with a sufficient knowledge and understanding of the issues and
        problems related to local administration reform in Turkey. A second local expert will be
        recruited to design the Programme’s web-site, which will be hosted at the web-site of
        the GDLA.

        Work in the organizational and functional review of the GDLA, assessment of training
        needs and development/review of training programmes for GDLA staff, governors,
        sub-governors and staff of governorships and sub-governorships dealing with local

                                                                                                25
administration issues will require the mobilization of some international experts. At his
stage, these experts have not yet been identified and engaged; and one of the
problematic aspects that can be anticipated here is that the total number of w/days
available for these contributions might not be sufficient for ensuring substantive TA
inputs to the successful accomplishment of all these activities. However, work in the
organization of English language training for MoI staff has just been started.

In the next reporting period, the TA Team is going to carry out – in close co-operation
with the Union of Turkish Municipalities and the Union of Provincial Services – an
assessment of training needs at Unions of local authorities. A roundtable will be
organized on 1-2 December, with the participation of representatives of regional
Unions. Two STEs (one local, one international) will be mobilized by the TA team to
facilitate this meeting, draw up the findings and conclusions mutually agreed with the
representatives of the Unions; and work out the details of the training programme
(workshops, study visits to EU countries, networking and information exchange event
to be supported by the project). The programme will then be implemented as of
February 2006.

An international expert and a local expert will be recruited and mobilized in this period
to carry out an assessment of the current situation in Turkey concerning partnerships
between local authorities (especially between Municipalities). Both experts will also
undertake work in supporting the MoI and the Union of Turkish Municipalities with the
development of a strategy for reinforcing existing partnerships and the development of
new ones, which implementation will be further supported by the project.

Under Component B, project’s activities in the next reporting period will concentrate in
completing the process of selection of the six local administrations (five Municipalities
and one Special Provincial Administration) to be chosen as partners for the
implementation of the pilot projects on improving budgeting and service performance;
as well as in the design of the two first pilot projects to be agreed with the relevant
administrations -Mayors and/or executive bodies- in February. This will require a
number of on-site visits of members of the Selection Committee. While the technical
assistance required by the selection committee during this process will be provided by
the LTE responsible for Component B, a short term local expert will be mobilized (in
January) to work in the design of the pilot projects.

In late November/early December, the specific working group set up during the
inception phase to advise the MoI and the TA team in regards to the implementation
of project activities under Component B, will have a meeting to discuss the finding and
conclusions of the international experts on the review of software tools and manuals
available in the fields of municipal financial management and multi-year investment
planning. The WG will adopt recommendations for further work in the development of
software tools and manuals for small and medium-sized municipalities.

In what concerns Component C, the main focus of project’s work and activities in the
next reporting period will be the development of detailed training curricula and
materials for the training of trainers on municipal management for small and medium-
sized municipalities. The review of training programmes and materials available/in use
in EU member and candidate countries – to be carried out by an international expert –
will be a key input to this work. In this period, the grant agreement by which the EC
Delegation is expected to provide funding to TODAIE for the implementation of the
first part of the training programme (n March-June 2006) should be signed.

Eventually, under the new Component D, the Project Co-ordination Group should be
established by the MoI and hold regular meetings (at least 4). As for the LAR
Programme Advisory Committee, should the MoI and the ECD confirm their
agreement to the establishment of such group, the TA team will immediately
undertake the search for the Turkish and international advisors to be invited to
become members of the AC, so that the Committee can have its first meeting within
the next reporting period (January).


                                                                                      26
7.      Conclusions and Recommendations

7.1     Conclusions

        As mentioned in different parts of this report, the situation (policy context) at the start-
        up of the “Support to Local Administration Reform (LAR) Programme” project is
        somewhat different from the situation that existed when the LAR Programme was
        formulated and agreed between EC and Turkish Government. This was already stated
        in UNDP’s technical offer and was reaffirmed during TAT’s work during inception
        phase.

        TAT devoted a considerable amount of time in orienting the stakeholders to the
        project and raising their awareness and understanding of project’s rationale,
        objectives and activities.

        With the exception of a few activities the project is progressing as planned. As
        indicated above, in the next reporting period, the main target of the TAT will be to
        catch up with the undertaking and completion of the activities originally foreseen for
        the Inception phase (or for the first 4 months of the project) which because of the
        difficulties described above, could not be accomplished during this phase.

7.2     Recommendations

7.2.1   Monitoring

        It is the intention of UNDP and the MoI to perform a results-based management of the
        project. For this reason, while keeping the basic structure of the project in three main
        “components” or broad support areas, UNDP now proposes to waive the use of “sub-
        components” for the organization and monitoring of the project’s work.

        Accordingly the annexed resource schedules (short-term experts’ inputs) have been
        developed as per results to be achieved. UNDP’s experience in management of
        similar projects demonstrated ????? (to be completed)

7.2.2   Mobilisation of short-term experts

        To comply with the ToR requirement that STE assignments shall be subject to the
        prior approval of the ECD, MoI and UNDP agreed on utilisation of Approval Request
        Forms (ARF) during the mobilisation of short-term experts. An ARF includes
        information on name and expertise of the proposed expert (s), the Project
        Component, Result and Activity to which the STE assignment is related to, scope of
        the assignment (tasks and expected outputs) the duty station of the assignment, and
        an indicative allocation of working days [at duty station, at home base, and on
        mission] required to fulfil the assignment.

        ARFs are developed by the TAT, cleared by MoI, and sent by UNDP to ECD for
        approval. UNDP proposes the followings to speed up the mobilisation process and
        make the engagement process more efficient:

             After being developed by TAT, an ARF should not wait no more than 5 working
              days at any step of STE approval process;

             Considering that the number of working days indicated in the ARFs is indicative,
              and that an assignment may take less or more time to be completed as per the
              additional needs that may emerge during the assignment, there should at least
              be 20% room of manoeuvre in terms of working days. This 20% decrease or
              increase in working days could be exercised without any prior approval but with
              sound justifications emailed to MoI and ECD.



                                                                                                 27
7.2.3   Approval of Contractual Reports

        Although UNDP still believes that approval of contractual reports (e.g. inception,
        progress and final reports) by the national steering committee is not in line with the
        spirit of a TA contract/agreement, and that quarterly steering committee meetings may
        become redundant and hence jeopardise the commitment of members of the steering
        committee, contractual reports will continue to be approved by the steering committee
        in advance.

        Steering committee meetings are called by the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry
        sends a draft version of the contractual reports to the members of the steering
        committee in advance. The relevant report is discussed at the committee meeting and
        feedbacks of the members are incorporated into the report by the TAT.

        UNDP wishes to reserve the right to send the contractual reports directly to the ECD
        (after reaching a consensus with MoI) when and if the steering committee cannot
        meet due to the reasons that are beyond UNDP’s and/or TAT’s reach or manipulation.

7.2.4   Incidental Expenditures

        The recommendations/issues under this section are based on the previous
        consultations between ECD and UNDP and clarifications issued by ECD. This section
        is not intended to list all the expenses that are chargeable against incidentals.

           The travel and accommodation expenses of key and non-key experts to be
            incurred during the project-related in-country missions (outside the duty station)
            are chargeable against incidental expenditures (travel + €70 per diem). Civil
            servants or other persons involved in project activities (such as members of the
            selection committee for pilot projects) will not be paid a standard rate of per diem
            however their travel and accommodation expenses will be covered

           As far as the international study tours are concerned; country exit fees, customs
            fees, and visa expenses are not chargeable against the project. Similar to
            missions in Turkey civil servants (or more generally, participants in study tours,
            other than project staff) will not be paid a standard rate of per diem however their
            travel and accommodation expenses will be covered The participants of
            international study tours have not been determined yet, neither the countries to
            which the tours will be organised. Hence UNDP proposes to approach this issue
            on an ad hoc basis, and proposes to send to ECD a detailed list of expenses that
            will be accrued during these studies at least 1 month in advance.

           For each training programmes, roundtable meetings, and other types of meetings
            UNDP will send also send to ECD a detailed list of expenses that will be accrued
            during these events at least 2 weeks in advance.




                                                                                             28
8.   LIST OF ANNEXES

     5.1. Updated Log-frame matrix

     5.2. Updated work-plan and resource schedule (full project duration)

     5.3. Updated work-plan and resource schedule for next reporting period

     5.4. LAR Programme technical implementation organigram

     5.5. List of members of the Programme Steering Committee

     5.6. List of meetings held during inception period

     5.7. Call for applications (pilot projects)

     5.8. Joint work-programme agreed between UNDP’s TA Team and TODAIE

     5.9. Financial Report and Supporting documents




                                                                              29

								
To top