lagos state government - sparc · pdf filethe policy directions together with the central...

LAGOS STATE GOVERNMENT

REPORT ON REVIEW OF HIGH LEVEL

POLICY DOCUMENTS

APRIL 2010

Content List

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Executive Summary

Section One Background ..................................................................................................... 1

Section Two: Process followed ............................................................................................. 2

Section Three: The Ten Point Agenda 2003-2007 (TPA) ......................................................... 4

Section Four: Review of LASEEDS Review Report 2008 ...................................................... 9

Section Five: Review of Lagos State Vision .........................................................................12

Section Six: The Ten Agenda and policy directions in the 2008-2010 Budgets ...............15

Section Seven: Comparative analysis of TPA, MDGs, LASEEDS Review Report and Vision 20 :………………………………………………………………………….17

Section Eight: Synthesis ........................................................................................................19

Section Nine: Summary of Recommendations ....................................................................20

Section Ten: Next Steps.......................................................................................................22

Appendix One: Workplan for Initial Input ................................................................................23

Appendix Two: Review of the LASEEDS Review Report 2008 ..............................................25

Abbreviations and Acronyms

DFID Department For International Development

EPA Dakar Education For All

EXCO Executive Council

GDP Gross Domestic Product

IGR Internally Generated Revenue

LASEEDS Lagos State Economic Empowerment Development Strategy

LEAP Lagos Economic Advancement Programme

LEEDS Local Government Economic Empowerment Development Strategy

LVS 2020 Lagos State Vision 20:2020

M&E Monitoring &Evaluation

MDAs Ministries, Departments and Agencies

MDGs Millenium Development Goals

MEPB Ministry of Economic Planning and Budget

MTSS Medium Term Sectoral Strategies

NEEDS National Economic Empowerment Development Strategy

PESTLE Policy, Economic, Social, Technology and Legal Environment

PPP Public Private Partnership

SDC Stakeholders Development Committee

SLGP State and Local Government Programme

SMART Simple, Measurable, Achievable, Reasonable and Time bound

SPA Seven Point Agenda

SPARC State Partnership for Accountability Responsiveness and Capability

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

TPA Ten Point Agenda

UK United Kingdom

VM&VS Vision, Mission and Value Statement

Executive Summary The State Partnership for Accountability, Responsiveness, and Capability (SPARC) Programme funded by the UK Government’s Department for International Development (DFID) commissioned the review of LASEEDS review report of 2008 (Review Report 2008), the Ten Point Agenda 2003 – 2007 (TPA), and the Lagos State Vision 20:2020 (LSV2020) together with all other documents highlighting the policy direction of Lagos State. The review was expected to draw out lessons that would inform development partners’ future programmes, and the State’s planning and documentation processes. The methodology employed was desk reviews of all documents as Consultants.

Key Recommendations:

Review of LASEEDS Review Report 2008: Consultants made the following recommendations:

State and LG political leadership and politicians should be involved the strategic

document preparation process to ensure full implementation.

Environmental scanning using Political, Economic, Social, Technology and Legal

Environment (PESTLE) or similar tool is necessary to strengthen the SWOT analysis.

Also a macro-economic review (fiscal strategy) is necessary.

The scope of review should be wider as the findings and lessons learned would inform

and guide the development of future development plans

The Vision, Mission and possibly Value Statements should be reviewed to ensure the

policies stated in Lagos State Economic Empowerment Development Strategy

(LASEEDS) and the corresponding targets and strategies all seek to ensure the

attainment of the State Vision, Mission & Value Statements.

Justice and security should be treated as a sector in future policy and strategy plans.

Views of politicians should be taken on board a strategy document to ensure

implementation is not derailed.

The planners and all who will be involved in the development and planning processes

should be trained on inputs, outcomes and output target setting and strategy

development.

Gender and social inclusion issues are critical and should be reviewed.

Using pilot projects should be an integral part of the State’s development strategy so that

lessons learned would inform the roll-out programme.

Review of Vision 2020: The consultants made the following recommendations:

The State may wish to hold LSV2020 validation workshops/town hall meetings to

promote ownership by the people. The regular performance review summit envisaged

had not been held by the end of January 2010. Consultants , however, confirmed during

site visit that the 2010 edition of the Ehigbeti Summit was underway (April 2010)

Future Vision documents and Economic Development Plans should include a PESTLE

analysis.

A model-based macroeconomic analysis and forecasting of Lagos State should inform

future Vision documents and Economic Development Plans.

Future plans should include detailed costing of strategies in Action Plans.

Future plans should include a robust M&E Framework.

A robust risk analysis framework should be included in future Vision and plan

documents

An Input-Output table should be developed or a Value Chain Analysis should be

conducted for future high-level economic policy documents. Also environmental

scanning should be done using PESTLE and macroeconomic modeling should also be

done. A risk mitigation plan should be an integral part of future vision documents and

economic development plans.

Steps should be taken to finalize the State’s Statistical Masterplan to remedy data deficiency in future vision documents and economic development plans.

The two Vision Statements are good but the second one is nebulous as it lacks clarity,

brevity and sharpness. There is no Mission Statement but the statement of three

objectives meets this need, in a sense.

Gender issues should be mainstreamed into future Vision documents.

Implementation: Detailed cost estimates and action plans should be provided in future documents together with funding and resource mobilization issues.

1

Section One Background

The Task

The State Partnership for Accountability, Responsiveness, and Capability (SPARC) Programme funded by the UK Government’s Department for International Development (DFID) commissioned the review of Lagos State Economic Empowerment Development Strategy (LASEEDS) Review Report of 2008 (Review Report 2008), the Ten Point Agenda 2003 – 2007 (TPA), and the Lagos State Vision 20:2020 (LSV2020) together with all other policy and strategy documents of Lagos State. The review of the high policy and existing strategic documents, other documents and processes is a necessary first stage of the process for the development of a State Development Plan (successor to LASEEDS) and the Medium Term Sector Strategies (MTSSs). The LASEEDS document was developed for the period 2005-07 using the TPA as a policy framework. His Excellency, the Governor, stated in his 2009 Budget Speech that the plans for the development of the LASEEDS II (to fast track the attainment of MDGs) were underway. Although the process for the development of LASEEDS II did not actively start in 2009, the State is interested in developing a long term (10 – 15 years) State Development Plan that would be linked to the 2011 budget. However, in line with the Governor’s statement in the 2009 budget and as addition to the three pilot MTSSs developed in 2008, seven additional MTSSs were developed in 2009/2010. These MTSSs were not linked to the 2010 budget. The review of the MTSSs was outside the scope of this assignment as they would be the subject of review for MTSS development. The objectives of this review are follows:

To produce a clear understanding of the policy environment of Lagos State o To determine whether the policy and strategy developed were well

articulated with regard to the process followed o To ascertain level of programme implementation

to assess the scope of the policy documents against approved benchmarks

to provide basis for further dialogue and collaboration with stakeholders

including the development/donor community.

To generate recommendations on process, policy areas and priorities

To feed findings of the review into new policy and strategy documents of the

state.

Team Composition

The two Consultants were Oshuwa Gbadebo-Smith (reviewed TPA and LASEEDS Review report 2008) and Weneso Orogun (reviewed Lagos State Vision 2020 and annual budgets for 2008-2010). The reviews took place from January 25 - 29, 2010.

2

Section Two: Process followed

The Consultants who facilitated the reviews of the documents met with the Director, Economic Planning Department for proper briefing. The Consultants agreed objectives of the assignment, documents to be reviewed, template that would be used for the review and activities and timelines. See Appendix 1 for details of work plan. Documentation reviewed included the 10 Point Agenda, LASEEDS Review Report 2008, Vision 20:2020, Budget Speeches of His Excellency the Governor of Lagos State (2008, 2009 and 2010), MDG Conditional Grants Reports and last report of the Ehingbeti Summit. Other documents such as the Project WHEEL and Strategic Management Framework (yet to be discussed at ExCo) were not available for review. Consultants did not make a presentation of the initial review findings to Economic Planning Department although it was part of the process.

Limitations and Constraints

The reviews were completed within the agreed timeframe for desk reviews of the available documents. Consultants did not review some high level policy documents which included the Project WHEEL 2009 document and the Strategic Management Framework 2009 document as they were unavailable. Impact assessment was not completed due to limited time, unavailability of some key documents and access to the relevant state actors. Also Consultants did not have necessary discussions and feedback workshop with stakeholders (ExCo at State and local governments, State local governments legislators, public managers and staff of local governments, and key members of the civil society). Consultants were not debriefed by the management of MEPB at the end of the input because of their busy schedules. Furthermore, documents to be reviewed were not easily and readily available to Consultants.

3

Introduction

The policy directions together with the central policies and guidelines of the Lagos State Government are stated in the following documents: a) Ten Point Agenda 2003 - 2007, b) LASEEDS 2005 - 2007 (both outdated although they are seen as living documents), c) MTSS for Education, Health and Environment sectors 2008 - 2011, d) central policies and guidelines issued and reviewed from time to time, and e) new policy directions or priorities as stated in the Governor’s budget speeches. To scan the policy environment of Lagos State, Consultants reviewed the following documents that were made available: The Ten Point Agenda 2003 - 2007, Ehingbeti summit resolutions, Vision 20 20:20 (2010-2020), the LASEEDS Review Report 2008 which reviewed LASEEDS 2005 – 2007, 2008, and the annual budgets 2009, 2010.

Section Three: The Ten Point Agenda 2003-2007 (TPA)

A former Governor of Lagos State developed the Ten Point Agenda (TPA) also called the Lagos Economic Advancement Programme (LEAP). The current Governor adopted and carried forward the TPA from 2007 though it has expired. The TPA clearly enjoys the highest level of ownership and commitment from the political leadership as MDAs are expected to justify their budgetary proposals on the premise of the TPA (MEPB Call circular, July 2009). There is no clear evidence that compilation of the TPA was based on significant or documented findings from public sector, research, or surveys. It therefore appears that the TPA was originally the campaign manifesto of the then Governor. However, the MEPB which produced the document, noted in the preface that "the TPA is the aggregation of stakeholders' thoughts on plans and programmes for leaping Lagos State to greater sustainable development". There is no evidence that the legislature was part of the development of the document. Sometimes references are made to the fact that the TPA document is an enhanced partnership for development which came out of Ehingbeti resolutions - planned consultative fora. The TPA is generally seen as a policy guide (a list of “policies”) for the State to achieve poverty alleviation and sustainable economic growth and development. The TPA contains broad statements of intentions of the State Government as shown in Table 1 below. Table 1: Lagos State Ten Point Agenda

TEN POINT AGENDA

1 Roads - Aggressive road rehabilitation and construction of new roads under our road agenda

2 Transportation - The creation of an integrated mass transit programme with emphasis on road, rail, and water transportation under our transportation model policy

3 Power and water supply: power generated capacity of about 1,000 MW and growing water supply to about 1,800 billion litres per day

4 Environment / Physical Planning - Improvement in our environment through physical planning with the intention of making Lagos a model city state

5 Shelter - A shelter agenda that aims for the provision of affordable mass housing schemes through facilitation of liberalized mortgage system and the development of new satellite towns

6 Health - programme that will include the expansion of wards, pursuit of primary healthcare programme, the deepening of blindness prevention programme, strengthening of emergency medical services and the enhancement of medical personnel welfare

7 Education - agenda include the establishment of millennium schools in all local government areas, rehabilitation and maintenance of

existing schools and libraries, curriculum review and the enhancement of teacher’s welfare, and the development of vocational, technical and skills education.

8 Food security – facilitation of sustainable food production and processing, empowerment of farmers / fishermen cooperatives societies and support for strategic food preservation and farm settlement development

9 Employment – introduction of graduate empowerment programme, drain ducks and waste management, Lagos railway project, power project, and an export processing zone

10 Revenue enhancement – diversification of revenue sources, widening of tax net, effective revenue collection mechanisms and development of database.

It could, therefore, be assumed that the TPA came out of the first three resolutions of the Ehingbeti Summits (2000, 2001and 2002). The Ehingbeti fora have served as a veritable platform for articulation of resolutions for sustainable development of the Lagos, a city state. Stakeholders from the public and private sectors and the civil society (with development partners in attendance) are widely consulted on development issues and priorities of the State during the Ehingbeti gatherings. Although the TPA expired in 2007, it continues to be the basis for the development of policy and strategic documents such as LASEEDS 2005 – 2007, the Lagos State Millennium Development Goals 2006 Report, the MTSSs, the Project Wheel document, Strategic Management Framework document report 2009 and also the Governor’s budget speeches since 2004 to date. The TPA also guides development in the State. The TPA is the first set of development agenda developed by any state in Nigeria and therefore precedes all others including the President’s Seven Point Agenda articulated in 2007.

The Ten Point Agenda and the National Seven Point Agenda (SPA)

In this section, we shall articulate the coherence or divergence between the TPA and the President’s Seven Point Agenda (SPA). The TPA established in 2003 precedes the SPA and the national Vision 2020 which were developed in 2007 and 2009 respectively. Therefore the TPA has influenced policy environment in Nigeria. Also influencing the policy environment in Nigeria are other national and international programmes which include the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 2015 and the Dakar Education for All (EFA) Goals 2015. The President’s Seven Point Agenda is as follows: 1. The Provision of Critical Infrastructure

2. Food Security

3. National Security and Intelligence

4. Human Capital Development

5. Land Reform and Housing

6. Niger Delta Development

7. Wealth Creation

Table 2 below seeks to match the State’s TPA with the National SPA as it is important for the State to contribute towards the achievement of the national priorities and therefore the international policy commitments of the Federal Government; for example attaining the MDGs and the EFA.

Table 2: Ten Point Agenda and President’s Seven Point Agenda

State Ten Point Agenda National Seven Point Roads - Aggressive road rehabilitation and construction of new roads under our road agenda

1. Infrastructure development

Transportation - The creation of an integrated mass transit programme with emphasis on road, rail, and water transportation under our transportation model policy


Power and water supply: power generated capacity of about 1,000 MW and growing water supply to about 1,800 billion litres per day


Environment / Physical Planning - Improvement in our environment through physical planning with the intention of making Lagos a model city state


Shelter - A shelter agenda that aims for the provision of affordable mass housing schemes through facilitation of liberalized mortgage system and the development of new satellite towns

5. Provision of housing for all

Health - Programme that will include the expansion of wards, pursuit of primary healthcare programme, the deepening of blindness prevention programme, strengthening of emergency medical services and the enhancement of medical personnel welfare

4. Human development, including free and compulsory primary education, improved health care delivery, and improved welfare package for all workers

Education - Agenda include the establishment of millennium schools in all local government areas, rehabilitation and maintenance of existing schools and libraries, curriculum review and the enhancement of teacher’s welfare, and the development of vocational, technical and skills education.

4. Human development, including free and compulsory primary education, improved health care delivery, and improved welfare package for all workers

Food security – Facilitation of sustainable food production and processing, empowerment of farmers / fishermen cooperatives societies and support for

7. Wealth creation and poverty alleviation for all, including industrial regeneration and youth and women’s

State Ten Point Agenda National Seven Point strategic food preservation and farm settlement development

empowerment

2. Rural Transformation and Food Security, including intensive agricultural development

Employment – Introduction of graduate empowerment programme, drain ducks and waste management, Lagos railway project, power project, and an export processing zone

7. Wealth creation and poverty alleviation for all, including industrial regeneration and youth and women’s empowerment

Revenue enhancement – Diversification of revenue sources, widening of tax net, effective revenue collection mechanisms and development of database.

Not applicable 3. National Security and Intelligence

Not applicable 6. Niger Delta Development

National Security and intelligence, and the Niger Delta aspects of the national Seven Point Agenda are not directly applicable to Lagos State.

Section Four: Review of LASEEDS Review Report 2008

The defunct State and Local Government Programme (SLGP) funded by DFID supported the development of LASEEDS which is seen as a good first effort at developing a Lagos State medium term strategy policy document. SLGP subsequently supported the review of LASEEDS in February 2008. One of the objectives of this review was for the review findings and lessons learnt to inform the development of LASEEDS II and development partners’ future programmes. The Governor stated in his 2009 Budget Speech that the plans for the development of the LASEEDS II (to fast track the attainment of MDGs) were underway although there was no clear evidence of development during this input. Furthermore, the Governor stated that MTSSs would be developed for seven other sectors. Consultants were advised that the process for developing the seven MTSSs started in 2009 and were well underway. Consultants reviewed the LASEEDS Review Report 2008 - process, content and implementation. Please refer to Appendix 2 to this report for the detailed review at a glance. Process The review process employed by the Consultants of the LASEEDS Review in 2008 was comprehensive and included: i) agreeing upfront on the scope of the review (Education, Health, Environment and Roads) with SLGP and MEPB given the short time frame; ii) desk review of relevant documents, and iii) discussions with several internal stakeholders. The political leadership (ExCo), members of the State House of Assembly, the politicians and local governments’ staff were not consulted.

Content

Format: The reporting format is concise, easy to read and understand. The report is short and the use of tables as appendices gave additional necessary as well as useful detailed information without unnecessarily lengthening the main report. Scope of work: The scope of work was pre-agreed with SLGP and MEPB and was limited to a general review of the LASEEDS, and detailed and specific reviews of the four policy areas - Education, Environment, Health and time permitting Roads (which were done). An expanded scope of work would have better served the review as the lessons learnt from the review of all sectors in LASEEDS would inform the development of future planning, and other policy and strategy documents in the State. Situation analysis: The situation analysis in LASEEDS was not reviewed. The State’s Vision, Mission and Value Statements were also not reviewed for relevance. Neither were they validated for the specific sectors of Education, Environment, Health and Roads. These reviews should have been done to ensure alignment with the overall vision and mission of the State, and also ensure that the stated strategies in the four policy areas would achieve the Vision and Mission Statements of the State and also contribute to the achievement of the national Vision. Targets and strategies: The review of the targets and strategies for the Education, Environment, Health and Roads were thorough and detailed. The reviews established a mix in quality and of the level of SMART compliance of the stated targets and strategies. While some targets were fully compliant, some were partially compliant and some were considered to be weak. Some stated targets were actually strategies. Some targets were adjudged to be too many for example Education. As with targets, the strategies were also considered to be mixed, some did not relate to the targets and some were too general because they did not state how target would be met.

Gender: Gender and social inclusion in LASEEDS was not specifically reviewed. However, the sections on Education and Health in the appendices had some targets and strategies relating to gender inclusion. Implementation Implementation and M&E: Implementation structure was adequately reviewed and it was stated to contain a clear organizational framework for implementation of LASEEDS but M&E Monitoring Committee was not set up which affected the systematic monitoring of LASEEDS. Funding: The funding of LASEEDS was adequately reviewed. The review report has a Summary of financing for LASEEDS which reviewed the declared sources of funds. The Lagos State Revenue Profile reviewed in details showed huge variances between state budgets and actual revenue on one hand and between LASEEDS projections and revenue on the other hand. Lastly, the review report has a table on the State’s Estimated Financial Allocations to core sectors in LASEEDS and the State’s approved 2005-2007 budgets. Other areas of review Below are other areas that were contained in the LASEEDS review report worth noting. TPA, MDGs and NEEDS: The review report has a good section on the reflections of the TPA, the NEEDS and the MDGs. Useful comments were made on the MDGs and NEEDS at the end of each of the four priority areas analyzed where necessary. Bench marking 2005 and 2006: The review report has a section on the summaries of the 2005 and 2006 benchmarking exercises. Omissions from LASEEDS: Three clear omissions were identified in the LASEEDS review report using the SEEDS manual as the framework:

Justice and Security Sector: Inadequate treatment of justice and security although

judicial and legal systems, and public security were mentioned under public service

reforms.

Local Governments: Due regards was not given to the role of local governments in

development of a strategy document, for example, in the delivery of primary

education and health care although LEEDS would have addressed some of these.

Pilot projects: No pilot projects in LASEEDS.

Recommendations Consultants recommend as follows: Process: The following should be involved in the development of any strategic document for the State: i) political leadership (State and local governments ExCo and members of respective Houses of Assembly), and politicians to get a proper and fair perspective of the State’s developmental issues and ensure political will for implementation of the plan.

Environmental scanning using PESTLE or a similar tool is necessary as it would

strengthen the SWOT analysis. Also a macro-economic review (fiscal strategy) is

necessary. These will put the strategic document in proper contexts.

Content: The scope of the review should have been expanded beyond the four policy areas even if it meant giving Review Consultants more time. This is because the findings and lessons learned from the exercise would inform and guide the development of other state development plans and development partners’ programmes in future.

Environmental scanning (using PESTLE or any other tool) should have been carried

out as part of the situation analysis which should ordinarily precede the development

of LASEEDS.

The Vision, Mission and possibly Value Statements should be reviewed to ensure the

policies stated in LASEEDS and the corresponding targets and strategies all seek to

ensure the attainment of the State Vision, Mission & Value Statements. More

particularly and in view of the limited scope to work, the Vision and mission

statements of the four sectors (Education, Environment, Health and Roads) should

have been reviewed.

Justice and security should be treated as a sector in future policy and strategy plans

of the State.

Involvement (consultations) of politicians and due regard should be given to their

views in developing the strategic document. This will at least ensure ownership and

therefore implementation of the plans.

The planners and all who will be involved in the development and planning processes

should be trained on inputs, outcomes and output target setting and strategy

development which should all be clearly linked/related; also costings of programmes

and / activities.

Gender and social inclusion should be reviewed especially given their importance in

comprehensive State development and State agenda.

Pilots projects should be an integral part of a state’s development strategy so that

lessons learned would inform the roll-out programme

There is no evidence that the Stakeholders’ Development Committee (SDC) conducted a systematic stakeholders’ needs assessment exercise to generate data required to set targets, agree and cost strategies to bring about desired outputs and outcomes.

Section Five: Review of Lagos State Vision

In this section, Consultants reviewed the process, the contents and implementation or Lagos State Vision 20:2020 (LSV2020). The development of the LSV2020 was a good first effort especially given the short time-frame. However it is obvious from the review that the development of the LSV2020 was rushed as the time given the states to develop their contributions to the National Vision 20:2020 was short. The copy of the LSV2020 forwarded to the National Planning Commission though signed by His Excellency the Governor is still considered a draft as it has not gone back to the various stakeholders (government and non-government) for final validation because of the time constraint. The LSV2020 is therefore still a work-in-progress that shall be fine-tuned should the need arise. Please refer to Appendix 3 for the detailed review.

The Process

The Governor in his preface to the LSV2020 seemed to have equated the Vision document with economic development plans. There is no evidence that the Stakeholders’ Development

Committee (SDC) conducted a systematic stakeholders’ needs assessment exercise to generate data required to set targets, agree and cost strategies to bring about desired outputs and outcomes. It is apparent that SDC did not carry out a Policy, Economy, Social, Technology and Legal Environment analysis (PESTLE) to support the SWOT analysis it undertook. The result is inadequate environmental scanning required for robust identification of opportunities. For example, an analysis of the technology environment, a critical component of PESTLE, would have drawn attention China and India. At the dawn of the 21st Century, the

high potential economies like China and India, began to feel the wealth of the first wave countries pass into their hands. With it, millions thronged to their major cities. China declared the creation of 50 silicon valleys of which a dozen appeared to be most promising and enjoyed government funding of between $50-$70 billion for innovation. Lagos State as the economic hub and as a trail blazer, could set up silicone valleys and / or technology villages (similar to the existing Otigba Computer Cluster) that would contribute to Nigeria’s software development and provision of back office services to other countries. Also the SDC should have conducted a model-based macroeconomic analysis of the State with clear GDP forecasts covering the life of the vision. The process used to identify the seven critical economic sectors is not clear given the absence of an input-output table which is the standard tool used by economists to determine sectoral focus. In the absence of an input-output table, value-chain analysis which is a proxy for input-output table should have been used in developing the LSV2020. The LSV2020 document does not include detailed costing of agreed strategies for achieving set targets and there is no Monitoring and Evaluation Framework that would turn programme implementation into a learning process in which lessons learned in an implementation cycle feed into subsequent phases of programme implementation. The document did not contain a risk analysis and therefore lacks a risk mitigation plan.

Content

The SDC should have conducted a model-based macroeconomic analysis of the State with clear GDP forecasts covering the life of the vision.

Scope of work: The selection of nine priority sectors without deploying vital tools of economic analysis, input-output analysis and / or value-chain analysis, PESTLE and macroeconomic modelling-renders the scope or coverage of the report inadequate. There is also lack of risk analysis and mitigation plans. SWOT Analysis: The SWOT Analysis is adequate although it does not have up-to-date socio-economic data. As stated earlier the SDC did not do an environmental scanning to support the SWOT analysis. Vision and Mission Statements: The Vision Statement is that “By 2020 Lagos State will truly be the centre of excellence and Africa’s Economic Hub. Lagos State will have a strong cultural identity in spite of its diverse population from within and outside Nigeria, will be a driver of social and political trends, and the Lagos Metropolitan Area will become one of the top 10 model Mega-cities in the World in terms of urban living indices”. The Vision statements are good but the second half is vague as it lacks clarity, brevity and sharpness. There is no explicitly stated mission statement in the LSV2020 document. This should have been stated. Targets and strategies: The targets were SMART although some appear to be ambitious and unrealistic for example the 15% annual growth target for Lagos especially when compared to

Shenzhen in China recording 14% annual growth rate. Transport is dominated by the internal commuting times and traffic jams for Lagosians which affect productivity in Lagos State. However Lagos's position as a major sea port and airport (important to manufacturing and export) is not emphasized enough. The strategies for achieving the set targets are linked

to the stated targets. Gender: There is no evidence of gender mainstreaming in the policies and corresponding targets and strategies although Lagosians state that gender imbalance is not an issue in the State.

Implementation The section on implementation appeared to have been rushed as cost estimates for the programmes or activities were not provided. Also funding / resource mobilization issues to insure full implementation were not adequately addressed in the documents. Although action plans were included in the document, they were not detailed enough. As stated above, the LSV2020 is still a working document and the gaps stated above should be addressed against future vision and / or planning documents.

Recommendations Consultants recommend as follows: Process: The state may wish to hold LSV2020 validation workshops/town hall meetings to

promote ownership by the people. The regular performance review summit envisaged had not been held by the end of January 2010. Consultants, however, confirmed during site visit that the 2010 edition of the Ehingbeti Summit was underway (April 2010).

Future Vision documents and Economic Development Plans should include an

independent PESTLE analysis.

A model-based macroeconomic analysis and forecasting of Lagos State should

inform future Vision documents and Economic Development Plans.


Future plans should include a robust M&E Framework .

A robust risk analysis framework should be included in future Vision and plannning

documents

Lagos's position as a major sea port and airport (important to manufacturing and export) is not emphasized enough

Content: An Input-Output table should be developed or a value chain analysis should be

conducted for future high-level economic policy documents. Also environmental

scanning should be done using PESTLE. Also Macroeconomic modeling should also

be done. A risk mitigation plan should be an integral part of future vision documents and

economic development plans.


The two Vision Statements are good but the second one is a bit nebulous as it lacks clarity, brevity and sharpness.. There is no Mission Statement but the statement of three objectives meets this need, in a sense.

Gender should be mainstreamed into future Vision documents.


Section Six: The Ten Agenda and policy directions in the 2008-2010 Budgets

In studying trends in public finances of Lagos State, Consultants attempted to throw light on whether budgetary allocations to the various sectors reflect overall policy priorities. In Appendix 6 below the Consultants considered various options but settled for a study of the budget speeches of His Excellency the Governor along with the relevant Appropriation Law. The more insightful approach of comparing actual budget performance with the approved budget could not be adopted within the time available due to paucity of performance data. Appendix 6 displays the available information for three years (2008, 2009 and 2010). It should be noted, however, that the 2010 budget proposals have not been approved by the State House of Assembly. Key findings from the reviews of the 2008, 2009 and draft 2010 budgets include:

LSG implemented a new classification of the economic functions of government by

adopting the IMF Standard classification with effect from 2008. MEPB justified the

change as an improvement over the traditional classification of MDAs into four

sectors: Economic, Social Services, Environmental Services and General

Administration. The new nine-item classification is reflected in Appendix 5 below.

Data on budget performance are not easily accessible in the State.

Consultants made the following key observations:

Percentage of the state budget devoted to general public services has been declining

since 2008. From 27.3 percent of the budget in 2008, the figure declined to 24.58

percent in 2010. This trend should be encouraged because it frees funds that could

be deployed in priority areas of government.

The percentage allocation to Public Order and Safety has been declining since 2008.

This trend would appear to be undesirable given the serious challenges posed by

crime in the State. However, the State Governor’s statement in his 2010 budget

speech that crime rate in the state is declining could be the reason for scaling down

expenditure in this area. Another possible explanation could be rising participation of

the private sector in funding public order and security initiatives.

Budget allocation to Economic Affairs declined steadily over the last three years.

From 27.9 percent in 2008, the figure dropped to 26.2 percent in 2009 and is

proposed to decline further to 24.58 percent in 2010. The reason for the decline is

not clear and therefore creates scope for further discussions with stakeholders.

Environmental protection has received a progressively lower percentage of the

State’s budgets over the last three years. The 6.68 percent proposed for 2010

compares unfavourably with the percentage allocations for 2009 (9.8 percent) and

2008 (11.0 percent).

The 2010 proposed allocation to Housing and Community Amenities of 8.59 percent

is about the level for 2008 but down from a high of 13.3 percent in 2009. The

implication is that the State might not be able to sustain its earlier momentum for

tackling the housing deficit through public funding.

LSG proposes to spend 7.03 percent of the 2010 budget on Health, an increase over

the 6.1 percent allocated in 2009 but a drop relative to the 7.3 percent for 2008.

Overall, budgetary allocations to health have been fairly stable in the last three years

and are reflective of the State’s policy priorities.

The percentage of the budget allocated to Education was 12.7 percent in both 2008

and 2009 but increased slightly to 13.98 percent in the 2010 spending proposals.

This trend is encouraging given that the budget size has increased over the last three

years.

Recreation, Culture and Religion as well as Social Protection did not attract

budgetary allocations consistent with the government’s avowed commitment to pro-

poor policies.

Section Seven: Comparative analysis of TPA, MDGs, LASEEDS Review Report and Vision 20 :2020

In this section, we shall articulate a comparative analysis of the TPA, the MDGs, the LASEEDS Review Report 2008 and the Lagos State Vision 2020 (LSV2020). The TPA as stated above is not a policy document rather it appears to be a list of desirables with no clear outputs and strategies. From the examination of the last three budgets (2008, 2009 and draft 2010) it is evident that the policy directives stated in the TPA 2003-2007 were emphasized by his Excellency the Governor in his budget speeches for those three years. Furthermore, the titles of the budgets are clear indications of the focus of the Governor and his administration. For example the 2010 Budget is christened the “Budget of Consolidation”. The 2009 budget was titled “Budget of Accelerated Growth” and had a policy thrust of: “Poverty Eradication and Sustainable Economic Growth Through Infrastructure Renewal and Development To Ensure Fiscal Responsibility” which was shared by the 2008 budget and was christened “The Great Leap Budget”. Both 2008 and 2009 budgets placed emphasis on aggressive development and growth. Appendix 5 shows the correlation between the policy directions stated in the TPA and the policy areas articulated by the Governor in his 2008, 2009 and 2010 budget speeches. The Governor, in his budget speeches, articulated the long term goals and other goals of the State which usually included: i) public-private partnerships in the provision of infrastructure with the objective of improving service delivery, and ii) taxes. These did not derive from the TPA although it would not be feasible for the State to attain the level of development which include infrastructure without encouraging Public Private Partnership (PPP) and having a focus on taxation to boost the State’s internally generated revenues (IGR). As shown in Appendix 4 below, the TPA only highlights key features of some sectors. Several of the core elements of the TPA are reiterated in LASEEDS and only four core policy areas (Education, Environment, Health and Roads) were examined during the LASEEDS review exercise of 2008. However, the focal areas of NEEDS are reflected in LASEEDS though to a varying degree depending on the sector. The MDGs were incorporated into the State’s policy and strategy documents although in varying degrees. Education, health, and road construction and maintenance, were identified as priority policy areas and in all four documents reviewed: TPA, the Lagos State MDGs report, LASEEDS review report 2008 and the LSV2020. For each of these priority areas, policy thrusts and sometimes outcomes were articulated in the documents apart from the LASEEDS Review Report where the policy thrusts were not clearly stated in four policy areas reviewed. Power and water supply, transportation and environment / physical planning were identified as key areas of focus in the TPA and State MDG report. However these priority areas were outside the scope of work of LASEEDS Review Report 2008 which focused on education, environment, health and roads. Power and water supply were also surprisingly excluded in the LSV2020 though the inadequacy of power supply was seen as a binding constraint to economic development and growth. Given the apparent importance placed by the current administration on environment and physical planning, these were not accorded high profile in the LSV2020. As stated in Appendix 4 below, the LSV2020 addressed the seven critical economic areas (financial services, manufacturing industry, tourism, agriculture and allied industries, construction, telecommunications and information technology and trade/commerce/SMEs) although some in more details than others. Revenue enhancement which is a priority area in TPA and which is very necessary to meet the costs of development in the Stare was not specifically addressed in LSV2020. It is however conceivable that progress on the seven critical economic areas will expand the tax base and therefore raise IGR. Particularly relevant for increasing revenue are strategies to develop manufacturing sector, trade and commerce, SMEs and tourism. Public Private Partnership (PPP) is implied in LSV2020 but

strategies for driving this are not fully articulated. This is surprising given that Lagos State has a model PPP Framework Law that is a benchmark for other states in the country and beyond. Employment generation was not addressed as a sub-theme in LSV2020s though contained in the TPA. Employment generation is currently driving the State’s development. It is recommended that a job creation master plan or blue print be developed for Lagos State learning from a similar study exercise done for Tanzania.

Section Eight: Synthesis

The desk reviews were completed within the agreed timeframe for desk reviews of available documents. In line with the set objectives for this input, the Review Report provides an understanding of the policy environment of Lagos State. Review report highlighted areas where policy and strategy issues are not well articulated with regard to the process followed and also the level of implementation of the strategy document. The Review Report highlighted the scope of the policy documents against approved benchmarks and provides basis for further dialogue and collaboration with stakeholders including development partners. Some recommendations were included in the Review Report. Consultants did not have access to some high level policy documents which included the Project WHEEL 2009 and the Strategic Management Framework 2009 documents. Also the time for the input was limited to one week. However Consultants did not have necessary discussions and feedback of review findings with stakeholders (ExCo at State and local governments, State and local governments’ legislators, public managers and staff of local governments, and key members of the civil society). Consultants did not make the necessary debriefing presentations to the management of MEPB at the end of the input because the MEPB management was too busy with routine work to schedule the appointments requested. Impact assessments were not completed for these same reasons.

Section Nine: Summary of Recommendations

Review of LASEEDS Review 2008: Consultants made the following recommendations:

Process: State and LG political leadership and politicians should be involved the

planning process to ensure ownership and implementation.

Environmental scanning using PESTLE or similar tool is necessary to strengthen

the SWOT analysis. Also a macro-economic review (fiscal strategy) is necessary.

Content: The scope of review should be wider as the findings and lessons

learned would inform and guide the development of future development plans

The Vision, Mission and possibly Value Statements should be reviewed to ensure

the policies stated in LASEEDS and the corresponding targets and strategies all

seek to ensure the attainment of the State Vision, Mission & Value Statements

and the efficient delivery of goods and services to the public.

Justice and security should be treated as a sector in future policy and strategy

plans.

Politicians’ views and inputs should be taken on board a strategy document to

ensure full implementation.

Train planners and all who will be involved in the development and planning

processes on inputs, outcomes and output target setting and strategy

development.

Gender and social inclusion issues are critical and should be reviewed.

Pilots projects should be an integral part of the State’s development strategy so

that lessons learned would inform the roll-out programme and implementation.

Review of Vision 2020: The consultants made the following recommendations:

Process: The state may wish to hold LSV2020 validation workshops/town hall

meetings to promote ownership by the people. The regular performance review

summit envisaged had not been held by the end of January 2010. Consultants

however, confirmed during site visit that the 2010 edition of the Ehigbeti

Summit was underway (April 2010)

Future Vision documents and Economic Development Plans should include a

PESTLE analysis.

A model-based macroeconomic analysis and forecasting of Lagos State should

inform future Vision documents and Economic Development Plans.


Future plans should include a robust M&E Framework.

A robust risk analysis framework should be included in future Vision and plan

documents

Content: An Input-Output table should be developed or a value chain analysis

should be conducted for future high-level economic policy documents. Also

environmental scanning should be done using PESTLE and Macroeconomic

modelling should also be done. A risk mitigation plan should be an integral part of

future vision documents and economic development plans.


The Vision statements (two) are good but the second one is a bit nebulous. There is no Mission Statement but the statement of three objectives meets this need, in a sense.

Gender should be mainstreamed into future Vision documents.


Section Ten: Next Steps

Consultants have identified the following as the next steps in the process:

Consultations with stakeholders: Discuss with selected stakeholders before

finalising the review report

Report validation: Present and validate the final copy of the review report

Stakeholders’ mapping: Map stakeholders (state and non-state actors) in the

policy and strategy development process

Development process: Clarify process for the development of the policy and

strategy document with stakeholders.

Appendix One: Workplan for Initial Input

OUTPUT FROM MEETING BETWEEN TECHNICAL LEAD (OGS) AND INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANT (WO) ON MONDAY JANUARY 25 2010 AT SPARC OFFICE LAGOS

WORKPLAN FOR INITIAL INPUT INTO REVIEW OF LAGOS STATE PLANNING DOCUMENTS OBJECTIVES

1. To produce a clear understanding of the policy environment of Lagos State 2. a) To determine whether the policy and strategy issues are well articulated with

regard to the process followed 2.b) To ascertain level of programme implementation 3. Assess the scope of the policy documents against approved benchmarks 4. To provide basis for further dialogue and collaboration with stakeholders including

the development/donor community. 5. To generate recommendations on process, policy areas and priorities

6. To feed findings of the review into new policy and strategy documents of the

state.

DOCUMENTS TO BE REVIEWED

1. 10 Point Agenda 2. Vision 2020 3. Budget Speeches of His Excellency the Governor of Lagos State (2008, 2009

and 2010) 4. SEEDS 1 Review 5. MDG Conditional Grants Reports (3 years) 6. Ehingbeti Summit Reports (3 most recent)

SUGGESTED TEMPLATE FOR REVIEW OF LASEEDS Review Report and VISION 2020 DOCUMENT

PROCESS CONTENT Q1: IS THE SCOPE OF THE REPORT ADEQUATE Q2 IS THE SWOT ANALYSIS FACTUAL AND EVIDENCE-BASED IN THE SENSE OF DRAWING ON STATISTICAL DATA? Q3 ARE STATEMENTS OF VISION AND MISSION ADEQUATE? Q 4 ARE TARGETS SMARTGA(I.E. SPECIFIC, MEASURABLE, ACHIEVABLE,

REASONABLE, TIME BOUND AND GENDER AWARE)?

Q5 ARE STRATEGIES FOR ACHIEVING SET TARGESTS SMART COMPLIANT? Q6 ARE GENDER ISSUES MAINSTREAMED IN THE REPORT?

IMPLEMENTATION

Q7 ARE COST ESTMATES FOR IDENTIFIED STRATEGIES

PROVIDED/ADEQUATE / REASONABLE? Q8 ARE FUNDING/RESOURCE MOBILIZATION ISSUES ADEQUATELY

ADDRESSED?

Q9 ARE IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAMMES /ACTION PLANS PROVIDED/REASONABLE/ADEQUATE?

TIMELINES ACTIVITITIES TIME ALLOCATED

1. Desk Review of Policy and Strategy Documents 5 Days

2. Talking to Selected Stakeholders and Scheduling of 2 No. Workshops

3 Days

3. Mapping Stakeholders and Designing 2 Workshops 1

4. Development of Workshop Materials including Power Point Presentations

1

5. Delivery of: a. Stakeholder Mapping and Process for Developing the MTRP b. Validation Workshop on Findings of the Review of LSG Policy and Strategy Documents

1 1

6. Writing/Submission of Report 1

Appendix Two: Review of the LASEEDS Review Report 2008

Section Review Notes Comments and/or Recommendations

Process: LASEEDS review team was initially briefed by SLGP team; and joint meeting with MEPB teams to set boundaries for the study: focus on three core sectors – Education, Environment and Health - for future MTSS development; and possibly Roads.

Discussions with: o senior officers of MEPB

and the four relevant ministries (list attached to the report)

o SLGP staff and consultants (present and past)

o Some public officers who were involved in the development

1 week desk review of documents: o Ten Point Agenda;

LASEEDS; Ehigbeti documents, MEPB files of process, SLGP reports, SEEDS benchmarking reports and budgets

Presentation of initial findings to MEPB and SLGP; comments incorporated into final review report

Review report submitted to SLGP on February 09, 2008

The review report contains a section on public consultations especially to determine the level and depth of the situational analysis; and outreach to ensure participation (one of the four pillars of good governance).

The materials reviewed were extensive and so were the public managers and officers discussed with.

The political leadership (ExCo) and members of the State House of Assembly on the one hand, and the politicians and local governments were not consulted

The review did not highlight lack of environment scanning using PESTLE tool as basis for SWOT analysis

The report did not highlight the fact that there was no macro-economic review (fiscal strategy). Recommendation: Involve ExCo and members of State and LG Houses of Assembly; Local Governments and/or the Ministry, and politicians to get a proper and fair perspective of things. Recommendation: Environmental scanning using PESTLE or similar tool is necessary as it would form the basis of the SWOT analysis. Also a macro-economic review (fiscal strategy) is necessary.

Content

Format of Report Format of review report used: 1) Executive Summary, 2) Introduction (task, team composition and structure of

The reporting format though short had the necessary details and easy to read especially with was


report), 3) Process followed and work done, 4) Outcomes (introduction, findings under Process, Content, and Implementation), 5) Recommendations & next steps, and 6) Report against TOR.

There report is supported by nine annexes.

good and easy to read and understand. The report is short. The use of tables attached to the report as annexes was a good idea – ease of understanding.

Is the scope of work adequate

The scope of work was clearly agreed with the SLGP and MEPB teams and was limited to the three core sectors, Education, Environment and Health, which MTSS development were planned for Feb 2008; and possibly Roads , a focus of the Governor and is critical to infrastructure sector .

It was clearly observed that the Federal SEEDS process did not come into a vacuum in Lagos State. Post 1999, the State had defined its political, strategic and developmental directions through 3 annual Ehingbeti Summits from 2000. Each summit was followed by actions and consolidated reports and analysis were taken to subsequent summit for discussions. This process is said to have led to the development of Governor Tinunbu’s TPA which was wholly adopted by the present Governor.

Each of the sector LASEEDS Target and Strategy Analysis section had comments on the targets, data available and location and on related set of strategies

Where applicable, comments were made on MDGs and NEEDS reflections at the end of each sector analysis.

Pre-determined scope was adequate for the time frame of 1 week. Scope could have been wider given the very wide scope of LASEEDS in its entirety: Shared Values (Vision, Mission, & Core Values); Empowering the people; Growing economic Sector; Reforming Government and its Institutions; Financing Strategies; and Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation. Recommendations: More time should have been given for more detailed work on a wider scope to draw lessons learned that would inform and guide the development of other state development plans

Depth of situational

Situational analysis was merely mentioned in the

There was no section dedicated to situational


analysis report analysis in the review report although clear recommendations were made (Pg 14) Recommendation: There is a section on the review of situation analysis done as PESTLE not done by the State in LASEEDS

Are statements of Vision and Mission adequate

The adequacy of vision and mission statements of the State and those of the four sectors were not reviewed

Recommendation: Vision and mission statements of the four sectors should have been reviewed

Are stated targets SMART compliant?

There is a mix in quality and of the level of compliance of the stated targets. While some are fully compliant (e.g. Increase in enrolment in public primary schools by 30% pg 25), some are partially compliant (eg reducing under-5 mortality from 150 to 100 per 1000 live births pg 39 – is not time bound), some are strategies (eg develop new burial grounds pg 36), and some “targets” appear to be compliant but do not describe outputs in terms of better service (eg complete 87 ongoing road projects covering 99.2 km by December 2007 pg 42)

Some targets were too many (Education), while generally targets for Environment and Roads are weak

Output targets should be SMART compliant and linked to the policy objectives Recommendations: The planners and all who will be involved in the development planning process should be trained in inputs, outcome and output target setting and strategy development which should all be clearly linked/related.

Are strategies SMART compliant

As with targets, there were no clear linkages between a target and its related strategies; where they are linked they are at different levels of being SMART compliant. For example, the strategies for “Increase solid waste collection by 25% annually” do not relate to the target (not SMART); they are general and all encompassing rather than

Strategies that would ensure that the targets are achieved and the overall policy outcomes are met should be developed. Therefore the strategies must have direct relationship to the corresponding targets.


stating exactly how a target will be met.

Were gender issues reviewed

Gender and social inclusion in LASEEDS was not specifically reviewed. However, the sections on Education and Health (pgs 24 – 32 and pgs 38 – 42 respectively) had some targets and strategies relating to gender inclusion.

Recommendations: Reviews of strategic documents should include review of gender and social inclusions

Degree of Implementation

Implementation and Monitoring and Evaluations

The review report has a section on: o Implementation structure

which was stated to contain a clear and organizational framework for implementation of LASEEDS

o Limitation of M&E. The M&E Monitoring Committee was not set up which affected the systematic monitoring of LASEEDS

Adequately reviewed

Review of funding The review report has a Summary of financing for LASEEDS (2005 – 2007) which looked at the declared sources: FAAC, IGR, Grants, and Loans (Page 45)

The Lagos State Revenue Profile for the same period and sources were reviewed (Pg 46). The profile shows huge variances between state budgets and actual revenue collected on one hand and between LASEEDS projections and revenue.

The review report has a table on the State’s Estimated Financial Allocations to core sectors in LASEEDS (pg 47) and the State’s approved 2005-2007 budgets (pg 48)

The funding of LASEEDS was adequately reviewed given the limitations imposed by time and scope of work

Others

TPA, MDGs and NEEDS

There is a good section on the reflection of the TPA, NEEDS and the MDGs

Where applicable, comments


were made on MDG and NEEDS at the end of each sectoral analysis.

Benchmarking 2005 & 2006

There was a section that summarized State results on the 2005 and 2006 Benchmarking Exercises

Recommendations and next steps

The review report had a section on recommendations (pgs 13 – 15) and next steps under the following heads: o Process: which has six sub-

heads o Content (applies to

imminent MTSS work): which has six sub-heads

o Implementation: which has five sub-heads

Omissions from LASEEDS

Using the SEEDS manual as the framework, three clear omissions were identified in the review report: o Detailed consideration of

justice and security although judicial and legal systems and public security were mentioned under public service reforms, this is inadequate.

o Due regards was not given to the role of local governments in development for example in the delivery of primary education, health care, and agriculture. LEEDS addressed some of these

o No pilot projects in LASEEDS-good for lessons learning

Recommendation: Justice and security should be treated as a priority area in the future strategy documents given the level of poor security in the State Recommendation: Local governments and politicians should be involved in the development process as they are key stakeholders Recommendation: Subsequent strategy documents should include pilots. Lessons from implementation of pilots will inform roll-out of the reform and / or development

Further omission from the Review Report as identified by this review team

Due regard was not given to the role of politicians in development who are known to have derailed implementation of the best planning document

Recommendation: Due regard should be given to politicians in developing strategic document to at least ensure they do not derail implementation of the planning document

www.lasg.gov.org