8. 7 members. This is responsible for some o f the poor performance by some c ouncils visited.  No Proper Handing over notes by focal persons upon transfer: The Team also discovered that there was no handing over note prepared by the IMC Committee that will provide guidance and direction by the IMC in cases of transfer. This situation has created a vacuum and rendered the performance of some institutions below expectations.

1. LOCAL COUNCILS MONITORING REPORT 1ST AND 2ND QUARTER 2021 . FIGHTING CORRUPTION THROUGH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL ANTI - CORRUPTION STRATEGY ( 2019 – 2023 )

7. 6 Government Service Commission (LGSC); especially when no handing over from the outgoing focal persons to the current was done for instance in Kambia, Kailahun and WARD - C to name a few . Thus, making it diff icult for the current focal person to have any proper idea about the operation of the IMC in the council. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is greatly affected by this challenge.  Local c ouncils are still to set up Audit Report Committees. One of the activit ies recommended for implementation by all l ocal c ouncils is the establishment Audit Report Committees . This was in direct response to queries Audit Reports across Government Institutions. Proper Audit Committees would be charged with the responsibility of following up on the implementation of Internal/external Audit recommendation to ensure that Audit issues are addressed. This was evident in Kenema City Council which has no Internal Audit Unit let alone an Audit Report Committee.  Lack of Supporting Docu ments : The team encountered difficulty in ascertaining compliance during the monitoring when Local Councils failed to produce comprehensive supporting documents as proof of full implementation.  Poor Filing System: The team identified poor Filing System in almost all of the Councils. Focal persons could not maintain a proper filing system and could not therefore keep track of progress in the implementation process.  Weak Coordination: The Monitoring Team also identi fied that, there is a serious challenge in the coordination of IMC activities in the local c ouncils . There is a lack of willingness and commitment by some management to support IMC activities and the implementation of NACS Action Points; thus, affect the p erformance of the c ounci ls .  Lack of Coordination and Information Sharing: It was identified that, there is a lack of information sharing between and among the management of the Institutions with regards transfer and posting of staff. Also, the Team noted with concern that Chief Administrators in some councils, tend to conceal important information to staff

6. 5 2 Functionality of IMC 67 43 64 % 24 36 % 3 Human Resource 45 17 38 % 28 62 % 4 Procurement 44 36 82 % 8 18 % Totals 245 145 59 % 100 41 % The table above shows that, there is an impressive overall performance of the councils in the implementation of the National Anti - Corruption Strategy action plans. From the table above, procurement units stand out to perform well, with 85% implementation o f the total action points, followed by functionality of the IMC with 64% compliance status. Forty - Nine (49) out of eighty - seven (89) action points of the Internal Audit were fully implemented recorded a compliance rate of 55%. Human Resource Management sc oring 38% being the least performing Indicator measured. However, there is much room for improvement especially in all area of focus, to ascertain 100% of compliance status, thereby helping to address issues bordering around corruption and corrupt practice s and eventually enhances transparency, accountability and service delivery. LIMITATION/ CHALLENGES  Lack of Coordination/communication among key Institutions responsible for coordinating activities of District and City Council ; namely the Local Governme nt Council Finance Department, the Local Government Service Commission, the Decentralization Secretariat and Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. This has affected the effective functioning of the Councils especially in the area of transfer s. The HR Policy stipulates that the staff members should be transferred after every two years for not more than two terms. The Team however noted that some staff were moved from their last post after six months with no reference to the district or city HR officer/Policy. Such a challenge can result in poor performance of c ouncils in the implementation of the NACS (2019 - 2023). It was challenging for the Monitoring Team to have an engagement with the respective focal person(s) of some c ouncils, due to transfer of such persons by Local

2. 1 INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND In accordance with Section (5)(1)(c) of the Anti - Corruption amendment Act, of 2019 the National Anti - Corruption Strategy Coordinating Secretariat (NACS), of the Anti - Corruption Commission (ACC) is tasked with the responsibility to coordinate the Implementati on of the National Strategy . The current NACS is primarily geared towards assessing the level of compliance in the implementation of Action Plans by Ministrie s, Department and Agencies (MDAs ) and Local Councils. However, this report is specific to local councils only. This monitoring report, as a critica l component in the implementation of the Strategy identifies progress an d addresses weakness in c ouncils that have the opportuni ty to create corrupt practices and hinder service delivery. Essentially, t his report focuses on the first and second quarter assessment of 2021 with primary focus to measure compliance performance in the implementation of action plans . It provide s a fair view of progress made by local councils whilst highlighting challenges and areas that will need improvement. OBJECTIVES The overall focus of this monitoring exercise was to assess and me asure the level of compliance by l ocal councils in t he implementation of the S trategy . To achieve the aforementioned focus, the following key objectives were outlined : - 1. To m easure compliance levels of each l ocal council with the approved benchmarks listed in the Implementation Action Plan. 2. To measure compliance on a comparative basis between and amongst all councils.

4. 3 exercise. Out of Two hundred and forty five (245 ) Action Points, one hundred and forty five ( 1 4 5 ) were fully implemented given a compliance score of 59% . A total of one hundred ( 100 ) outstanding action points were not fully implemented which form the baseline for the monitor ing of the third and fourth quarter exercise ; which is about 41% of action points. Table 3 – Local Council with full Compliance Score The table indicates that overall only o ne (1) out of twenty two (22) local c ouncils monitored in the first and Second quarter monitoring scored (91%) full compliance rate which is only 5% of the total local councils targeted. This c ouncil implemented almost all of its agreed Action Points except one ( 1) which is the formulation o f an Internal Anti - Corruption Policy for all staff. Table 4 – Councils with Significant Compliance Score # Local Coiuncils Total Action Points Implemented Action Points Outstanding Action Points Compliance Status % 1 Western Area Rural District Council 12 10 2 83% 2 Kenema District Council 11 9 2 82% The table above further indicates that two ( 2 ) out of Twenty two ( 22 ) Local Councils monitored scored an average high - performance records as indicated an impress ive performance in the overall monitoring e xercise. Table 5 – Moderate Compliance Score # MDA/Institutions Total Action Points Implemented Action Points Outstanding Action points Compliance Status % No Local Council Total Action Points Implemented Action Points Outstanding Action Points Compliance Status % 3 Pujehun District Council 11 10 1 91%

3. 2 3. To i dentify challenges and issues derailing the implementation of the NACS and recommendations for possible corrective intervention. 4. Provide guidance on the effective implementation of activity plans and functionality of the Integrity Manage ment Committee. 5. Produce and present a report on the find ings (compliance Level) of c ouncils. SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY During the period under review , the Secretariat targeted a total of Twenty two (22 ) local c ouncils across the country. The scope covers the 1 st and 2 nd quarter s of 2021 . SUMMARY OF FINDINGS OF THE FIRST & SECOND QUARTER MONITORING # District # of Local Councils Total Action Points Fully Implemented Outstanding % Comp Score 1 North West 4 48 27 21 56% 2 North East 5 52 30 22 58% 3 South 6 63 37 26 59% 4 East 5 60 36 24 60% 5 W/A 2 22 15 7 67% Totals 22 245 145 100 59% Table 2 – Summary Local Councils and the implementation of Actions Points The table above indicates the total number of local c ouncils monitored in respect of the number of Action Points implemented in the first and second quarter monitoring # of Local Councils Total # of Action Points Activities implemented Outstanding Activities 22 245 145 100 Average (%) 59% 41%

5. 4 1 Freetown City Council 10 5 5 50 2 Port Loko District Council. 12 6 6 50 3 Port Loko City Council 12 6 6 50 4 Karena District Council 12 7 5 58 5 Kambia District Council 12 7 5 58 6 Bombali District Council 10 6 4 60 7 Tonkolili District Council 11 6 5 55 8 Makeni City Council 10 5 5 50 9 Falaba District Council 11 6 5 55 10 Koinadugu District Council 10 7 3 70 11 Koidu New Sembehun City Council 16 8 8 50 12 Kenema City Council 11 7 4 64 13 Kailahun District Council 11 6 5 55 14 Kono District 11 6 5 55 15 Mattru District Council 10 5 5 50 16 Bonthe Municipal Council 10 5 5 50 17 Moyamba District Council 10 5 5 50 18 Bo District Council 11 6 5 55 19 Bo City Council 11 6 5 55 It is indicated from table above that nineteen ( 19) Local Councils recorded Moderate Compliance Score out of twenty two (22) targeted local councils (22) the result of the monitoring indicates that the no Local council in the above table score beyond 70% compliance rate which indicates a moderate compliance accordi ng to the ACC 2021 Established C ompliance Barometer. Detailed Analysis of Compliance Level of Thematic Area of Focus. # Area of Focus # of Action Points Full Compliant % Compliant Score Outstanding % 1 Internal Audit 89 49 55 % 40 45 %