By Lawrence Williams
A recent audit has called into question the Freetown City Council’s (FCC) efficient use of tied grants in seven devolved sectors, namely: Youth, Social Services, Gender and Children’s Affairs, Sports, Agriculture, Fisheries, Marine and Fire Prevention. The audit, which focused on the utilisation, monitoring, evaluation and reporting of tied grants for the financial years 2021 to 2023, revealed that at least SLE800,000 was either injudiciously utilised, spent on misplaced priorities or activities not eligible for funding. This misuse of funds violated the Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers and Allocations (IFTA) requirement, the budget call circular, and the work plans of the devolved sectors listed.
Tied grants are central government funds allocated to local councils for specific functions outlined in the 2022 Local Government Act. These funds must be used for approved activities within designated sectors, adhering to public financial management laws and regulatory guidelines. The goal is to ensure optimal use of resources for the benefit of the intended communities.
However, the audit findings indicate that the FCC largely disregarded these expenditure frameworks, resulting in significant financial losses and potentially undermining the economic growth and development of the target communities and beneficiaries.
Skills Training for Youth
The report reveals a concerning discrepancy in the use of youth-devolved tied grants. While the intended purpose was to equip young people with skills in areas like carpentry, tailoring, and welding, the audit findings paint a different picture.
Despite an allocation of SLE672,880 for youth development from 2021 to 2022, there was no evidence of skills training initiatives. Instead, over half of the funds (SLE357,270) were channeled into community sensitization programs covering issues like teenage pregnancy, environmental health, and waste management. While these are undoubtedly important issues, the auditors argue that the council neglected its core responsibility to provide youth with tangible skills, potentially contributing to social problems like unemployment and crime.
The audit also raises questions about the council’s spending practices. For instance, SLE12,284 was reportedly spent on renting external halls for youth workshops, despite the council having its own suitable facilities. A physical verification even revealed that one of the supposed venues was a private residence. Additionally, there are doubts about the authenticity of a community dialogue on teenage pregnancy, as many listed participants, the report said, denied any knowledge of the event or receiving transportation allowances.
The team recommended that the council refunds the misspent funds and ensure future adherence to work plans. However, the FCC youth devolved sector officer defended the spending, emphasising the importance of sensitization programs, while citing time constraints and funding delays as reasons for deviating from the original plan. They maintained that the community dialogue did take place, but acknowledged difficulties in verifying participant information.
The management response suggests that instead of refunds, better controls should be implemented, such as having the Finance Devolved unit handle participant payments. This response leaves open the question of accountability and whether the youth of Freetown truly benefited from the allocated funds.
Youth Entrepreneurship Funds
The auditors noted that another key activity in the work plan of the youth devolved sector was to provide start-up financial support and training on small medium enterprise scheme (SMES).
From 2021 to 2023, a total of SLE275,000 was disbursed to 200 young entrepreneurs to kickstart new businesses or grow existing ones. This sounds promising, but did it actually work? During their investigation, the auditors found some major red flags. For instance, they noted that there were no laid down criteria such as application forms, business plans/proposals, and there were no clear rules or procedures for evaluating or assessing beneficiaries. Instead, the funds were disbursed to youth based on recommendations from councillors and personal connections. Additionally, the auditors did a random selection of beneficiaries based on the list submitted by the FCC to verify the information provided by the council. During the verification, they discovered that about 95% were ghost beneficiaries, and the few who responded had no clue about the program.
They said: “We observed that 95% of the contact numbers were not in existence. Those who responded also stated that they had no idea about the activity.”
The auditors therefore concluded that it was impossible to ascertain the judicious use of these funds, and whether in fact it reached the intended beneficiaries.
They said: “The flaws in the disbursement of the start-up fees to youths may have resulted in a waste of resources by the FCC. There is a likelihood that these funds were not given to the intended beneficiaries which would have impacted the lives of these youths and reduced the rate of unemployment.”
The findings indicate that young people with real potential might have been overlooked, while funds went to only God knows where! They recommended that the council establish clear criteria for choosing beneficiaries, track where the funds go and make sure it is actually helping young entrepreneurs, and hold officials responsible for this mess and make sure it doesn’t happen again.
In their management’s response, the FCC claims they did their due diligence, but their explanations were not otherwise plausible, the auditors retorted. The FCC also says the beneficiaries are mostly small-scale vendors who can’t write business plans, but the auditors retort that this doesn’t excuse the lack of basic record-keeping. While they promise to improve, the auditors aren’t convinced. The issues remain unresolved, and the future of youth entrepreneurship funds hangs in the balance.
Sport Tied Grants
The auditors found that the sport tied grants, originally earmarked for organising sport competitions and engaging youth in sporting activities, were not used for sporting activities as required by the intergovernmental fiscal transfer and allocation. Instead, the grants were used for activities such as training community leaders on community health and environmental sanitation, seminars with physically challenged and disabled persons and disadvantaged children within the municipality, non-violence in local communities, crime prevention, drug abuse, violence amongst youths and budget preparation activities.
“The above activities implemented do not relate to sporting activities,” the audit team said. The team further said “there was no evidence of training in sporting skills; only refresher training for coaches and sports competitions were organised.” The team also found out that the FCC again spent SLE21,455 on hall rental for workshops/seminars even though the council has better halls or auditorium facilities where such workshops or seminars can be organised.
Youth groups or clubs were engaged in various sporting competitions such as volleyball and football for male, female, and physically challenged persons. The auditors observed that only a list of individual names was submitted instead of names of teams/clubs and the communities they represent. The youth devolved sector head requested SLE108,278 to be paid to 10-12 youth clubs for various sporting competitions as transport incentives. This money, the report said, was distributed to 20 participants instead of youth clubs, with some individuals receiving SLE500 each and others receiving SLE1,000. The auditors then randomly selected beneficiaries from the list of participants submitted and tried to contact them on the mobile numbers stated for each beneficiary. The outcome was quite revealing, as 95% of these mobile numbers were invalid or nonexistent. The remaining 5% of the numbers contacted responded that they had no idea about the sporting activities the council claimed to have organised. The team could not ascertain the participation of the other clubs for which these funds were allocated, which may have resulted in a waste of resources and wrong target groups.
The auditors also found that the council did not have written criteria for the selection of participants for the implementation of sporting activities. As a result, the auditors were unable to confirm the participation of the clubs for which these funds were allocated, potentially leading to wasted resources and the involvement of incorrect target groups.
The auditors recommend that the council’s chief administrator (CA) and chief finance officer establish a system to easily identify individuals or groups receiving council funds. Additionally, the CA and sector heads should develop criteria for recommending or inviting beneficiaries. The head of the youth devolved sector must provide contact details for individuals who received funds or refund the amount and provide evidence to the Audit Service Sierra Leone (ASSL).
Management responded that their annual budget and work plan guide their activities, with exceptions for emergencies like the 2021 coronavirus outbreak. They argue that activities like crime prevention are crucial for fostering peace and unity in sports. They acknowledge that some beneficiaries may have changed phone numbers but commit to implementing the recommendations going forward. The auditors, while noting the response, maintain that the issues remain unresolved and the CA should ensure the recommendations are implemented.
Agriculture Tied Grants
The audit of the agriculture tied grants revealed that SLE112,508 was expended on the purchasing of assorted planting seeds. However, attempts to verify the beneficiaries of these seeds proved unsuccessful, as the agriculture devolved sector officer was unavailable to assist in the verification process.
The lack of transparency and accountability surrounding the distribution of planting seeds raises concerns about whether the intended beneficiaries, the farmers, actually received them. The objective of encouraging farmers to engage in vegetable production and multiplication in Freetown may be compromised if there is no evidence to support the distribution of the seeds.
“We tried to obtain further clarifications from the devolved sector head. However, no response was received on this issue. It is highly likely that the assorted planting seeds were not distributed to the intended beneficiaries. Without evidence on the distribution of the planting seeds to farmers, the objective to encourage farmers to embark on vegetable production and the multiplication of vegetables in Freetown might not be achieved,” the report stated.
The report recommends a thorough investigation into the matter to determine whether the planting seeds reached the intended farmers. The investigation report should be submitted to the ASSL for further review and follow-up.
In response to the findings, the management claimed to have conducted an investigation and submitted a report indicating that the seed distribution was carried out. However, the auditors maintained that the issues and recommendations remain unresolved, as the report so provided does not adequately address the concerns raised.
This latest audit underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in the management of public funds, particularly when it comes to initiatives aimed at supporting devolved sectors of the FCC. The effective utilisation of tied grants is crucial for achieving the desired outcomes and ensuring that the benefits reach the intended recipients.
