Modest Gains, Massive Gaps: 2025 LGMSD Report Exposes Uganda’s Uneven Service Delivery Reality
KAMPALA — The Office of the Prime Minister has released the 2025 Local Government Management of Service Delivery (LGMSD) Performance Assessment, offering a familiar but troubling narrative: marginal national progress masking deep and persistent inequalities across the country.
On paper, the numbers suggest improvement. National performance rose to 67.23 percent, up from 60.15 percent the previous year. But beyond the aggregate score lies a more complex story—one of stark regional disparities, structural constraints, and a growing disconnect between reported performance and lived reality.
At the top of the rankings, a cluster of high-performing districts posted near-perfect scores. Isingiro District led with an impressive 98.37 percent, followed by Kiruhura at 97.10 percent. Urban councils in the central region also featured prominently, with Nansana Municipal Council scoring 94.50 percent, Kira Municipal Council at 93.88 percent, and Njeru Municipal Council at 93.75 percent.
Other strong performers included Kazo, Sembabule, Mukono Municipality, Mpigi, and Ibanda Municipal Council—all posting scores above 91 percent.
These districts, many located along the western and central growth corridors, registered particularly strong performance in water and sanitation, where the national best stood at 73.08 percent, and in production services at 71.54 percent—sectors closely linked to livelihoods and rural incomes.
A Tale Of Two Ugandas
Yet beneath the success stories is a widening gap that continues to define Uganda’s decentralised governance system.
At the bottom of the rankings are local governments struggling to meet even the most basic service delivery thresholds. Tororo Municipal Council ranked last with 33.74 percent, followed by Bukwo District (35.32 percent), Kotido Municipal Council (37.06 percent), Kween District (39.32 percent), and Bulambuli District (40.22 percent).
The pattern is unmistakable. Many of the lowest performers are concentrated in eastern and northeastern Uganda—regions grappling with difficult terrain, fragile infrastructure, and long-standing capacity challenges.
Infrastructure and asset management remains the weakest pillar nationally, averaging just 60.24 percent. Across these lagging districts, the symptoms are well known: impassable feeder roads, broken bridges, under-equipped health facilities, and public assets that deteriorate faster than they are repaired.
The Structural Problem
For years, *Watchdog Uganda* has raised concerns that performance assessments risk becoming routine exercises in ranking rather than meaningful tools for reform.
Critics argue that the LGMSD framework places disproportionate emphasis on compliance—timely reporting, documentation, and meeting minimum conditions—while failing to fully account for structural realities on the ground.
Recruitment freezes under public service policy have left many districts critically understaffed. In some cases, key departments operate at less than 50 percent staffing levels. Meanwhile, a large share of local government budgets is consumed by wage obligations, leaving limited fiscal space for development projects.
Bukwo District Chairperson Marisa Cheptegei summed up the challenge succinctly:
“Road funds and equipment remain inadequate… you cannot expect miracles in mountainous areas.”
In northern Uganda, Albetong District Chairperson David Kennedy Odong offered an even sharper critique:
“Lack of staff may not be the district’s fault, but when it comes to ranking, there is no sympathy.”
Their concerns highlight a central tension in Uganda’s decentralisation model—uniform assessment standards applied to highly unequal contexts.
Winners, Losers And The Funding Cycle
The implications of these rankings extend beyond prestige. LGMSD results are used to determine eligibility for performance-based grants, meaning high-performing districts often receive additional funding—while struggling ones fall further behind.
This dynamic risks entrenching inequality.
Districts with better infrastructure, stronger staffing levels, and historical advantages continue to attract more resources, while newly created or under-resourced local governments remain trapped in a cycle of underperformance.
Government officials, including Justine Kasule Lumumba, have defended the results, pointing to national development programmes such as the Parish Development Model (PDM) and Emyooga as drivers of improved service delivery.
“Effective service delivery is critical for improving livelihoods,” Lumumba noted in response to the findings.
That may be true at policy level. But with the national average still below 70 percent after years of incremental gains, questions remain about the pace—and equity—of progress.
Politics Of Performance
The geographic distribution of top performers is also raising uncomfortable questions.
Western Uganda’s consistent dominance in these rankings has sparked debate about whether resource allocation, political influence, and administrative capacity are evenly distributed across the country.
For residents in lower-ranked districts such as Tororo, Bukwo, or Kotido, the rankings often feel disconnected from daily realities—where access to clean water, functional schools, and basic healthcare remains uncertain.
Beyond The Numbers
Ultimately, the LGMSD assessment was designed to strengthen accountability and guide improvement planning. But unless its findings translate into targeted interventions, it risks becoming another bureaucratic ritual—high on data, low on impact.
Uganda’s decentralisation agenda was built on the promise of bringing services closer to the people. That promise, many would argue, remains unevenly fulfilled.
Closing the gap will require more than performance scores. It demands genuine fiscal decentralisation, equitable infrastructure investment, and a staffing policy that reflects the realities of local governments—not just national ceilings.
Until then, the annual rankings will continue to tell the same story: modest gains at the top, massive gaps everywhere else.
For millions of Ugandans, the real measure of performance is not a percentage score—but whether the nearest health centre has medicine, the road to market is passable, and local leaders can respond when it matters.
The 2025 LGMSD report has done its part by exposing the disparities. The burden now shifts to policymakers to act on them.
The post Modest Gains, Massive Gaps: 2025 LGMSD Report Exposes Uganda’s Uneven Service Delivery Reality appeared first on Watchdog Uganda.
