This is a citizen survey that revolves around fundamental & civic rights issues.

1. REPORT
Citizen Survey (RFP-RFP-ECE-42423
Citizen Survey Comprehensive Report
Frontieri Consult PLC
14 February 2024
Frontieri

2. Presentation Outline
 Introduction and Background
• Background
• Geographic scope of the survey
• Objectives of the assignment
 Methodology
• Design and sampling distributions
• Data collection methods
• Methods of data analysis
 Findings
• Findings on priorities of citizens
• Findings on Fiscal transparency and citizens participation in the process
 Conclusion and implications

3. 1. Introduction and Background

4. 1.1. Background
 Civic engagement is a vital component of democracy, sustainable
development, and good governance.
 Public attitudes and trust in institutions can dictate individual behaviors to
shape policy design and generate desired policy outcomes .
 Identifying citizen priorities is also critical to effective policymaking and
governance.
 Knowledge of citizens' priorities helps policymakers develop and
implement policies that address the most pressing issues while promoting
responsive governance centered on the needs and concerns of citizens .
 It is against this backdrop that this citizen survey is conducted to inform the ECE
programming by CAI.

5. 1.2. Geographical Scope
 Addis Ababa Hub-Covered 4 sub-cities from Addis Ababa and 2 sub-
cities from Sheger City(Oromia)
 Dire Dawa Hub(DD City Council &Localities)
 Dessie Hub( Selected sites in Amhara Region)

6. 1.3. Objectives of the Survey
 The survey set out to assess:
 Attitudes towards or trust in local and national government and in
local/regional authorities and institutions and attitude or trust in Civil
society/civil society organizations (CSOs)
 Levels of civic engagement and participation in local governance issues
(current and desired)
 Policy actions at the national, regional, and woreda levels that they want CSOs
to prioritize through ECE

7. 2. Methodology

8. 2.1. Research Design and Approach
 Cross-sectional descriptive research design(Survey)
 Concurrent mixed methods research approach(Quantitative and
qualitative approaches applied simultaneously)

9. 2.2. Sampling & Sample Distribution
Frequency Percent
Total 2059 100.00
Hub Addis Ababa 859 41.72
Dessie 600 29.14
Dire Dawa 600 29.14
Gender/Sex Female 1042 50.60
Male 1017 49.40
Disability status PWOD 1846 89.70
PWD 213 10.30
Place of residence Urban 1481 71.90
Rural 578 28.10
Age categories Youth 460 22.30
Adults 1440 69.90
Elderly 159 7.70
Education Illiterate 515 25.00
Can read & write &
primary
750 36.40
Secondary 441 21.40
Above secondary 353 17.10

10. 2.3. Data collection and analysis
Data Collection
 Survey Questionnaire
administered by
interviewers(face-to-face)
 Focus Group
Discussions(FGDs)
Data analysis
 Descriptive and inferential statistics used to
summarize and make meaning of the
quantitative data(Data from questionnaire)
 Tables and graphs used to visualize the data
 Verbal descriptions of data summarized in
tables and graphs
 FGDs transcribed
 Findings from FGDs integrated into the
quantitative results

11. 3. Results and Findings

12. 3.1.1. Top priorities of citizens disaggregated by hub & other key characteristics
 In general, the top priorities citizens raised are more similar than different
across hubs.
 Inflation and peace and security stood first and second among respondents
of Addis Ababa and Dessie hubs, both genders, the adult and elderly age
categories, persons without a disability (PWoDs) and respondents from
urban locations.
 Results from FGDs with PWDs, internally displaced people and people
diagnosed with leprosy reveal similar findings as those from the quantitative
ones.
 Besides, the disadvantaged groups added the prevalence of structural, social
and family level discrimination.
 Marginalization and social stigma are aggravating the impact of inflation,
housing problem, and peace and security concerns.

13. 3.1.2. Top civic priorities of citizens disaggregated by hub & demographic
variables(gender, age groups, & disability status)
 The four most pressing issues across the hubs were peace and security, transparent
governance, freedom of movement, and non-discrimination.
 Peace and security was the top issue for respondents in Addis Ababa hub (76%),
Dessie hub (69%), and Dire Dawa hub (57%).
 Transparent governance was second most important for all three hubs (around 48%,
48% and 43%in Addis Ababa, Dire Dawa and Dessie hubs, respectively).
 Over a third of respondents in each hub wanted freedom of movement.
 Addis Ababa respondents prioritized non-discrimination at 43%.
 Citizens in the three hubs shared concerns requiring government action.
 Peace and security, transparent government and freedom of movement were the three top
concerns overall.

14. Figure 1. The four top civic priorities by hub
76%
48%
37%
43%
69%
43%
37%
33%
57%
48%
36%
29%
Peace & Security Transparent Governance Freedom of movement Non-discrimination & equal treatment
Figure 1. The four top civic priorites by hub
Addis Ababa Dessie Dire Dawa

15.  Women and men had similar top six concerns in the same order, led by peace and security,
transparent governance, and freedom of movement.
 Across age groups, peace and security was most important, followed by transparent
governance.
 Nearly a third or more of each group prioritized non-discrimination and equal treatment as
third.
 Youth ranked freedom of expression higher at 31%.
 PWoD and PWD prioritized peace and security, with the highest at 69%, and 62% respectively.
 Nearly half of the PWD prioritized opportunities for PWD second and transparent governance
third.
 The majority of the civic engagement issues correspond to business sector, followed by water
and hygiene and transport sectors.

16. 3.1.3. Citizens’ Views Regarding the Relevance of
Development Plans, Programs, and Projects Implemented
 Majority (64%) of the respondents said that local government and CSO development
programs and initiatives were slightly or moderately relevant to their needs, problems,
and priorities.
 The vast majority (77%) of respondents from the Addis Ababa hub said that the
government and CSOs' local development programs, projects, and initiatives were
slightly or moderately relevant to their needs, problems, and priorities, followed by the
respondents from the Dire Dawa hub (60%) and the Dessie hub (55%).
 Majority of the vulnerable groups viewed the development plans, programs, and
projects implemented in their woreda either slightly addressed (39.6% of females,
34.8% of youth, and 39% PWD) or did not address at all (31.1.% of females, 36.1% of
youth, and 39.9% PWD) the needs, problems and priorities of poor, vulnerable and
marginalized people in their community.

17. 3.1.4. Citizens’ Perceptions towards the Government
79 81 80 81 86 96
77 78 79 79
84
94
96 96 97 97
98
99
84 85 85 86
89
96
Kebele Woreda Zone/Sub-city Region Federal Prime Minister
Citizens' understanding of each tier of government expressed in %
Addis Ababa(n=859) Amhara(n=600) Dire Dawa(n=600) Whole sample( N=2059)

18. 3.1.5. Confidence of Citizens in the Current Governance
Process
 Majority of respondents of Addis Ababa hub (50%) and Dessie hub (61%) showed low/very low
confidence in the federal government.
 Majority of respondents from Dire Dawa hub demonstrated high and very high level of
confidence (44%).
 Disaggregation analyses by gender, age, disability status, location, and educational level paint
the same picture with the exception of the respondents from rural locations (41%), and the
illiterate group (45%), where majority opted high or very high level of confidence in the federal
government.
 Similarly, majority of respondents from Addis Ababa hub (63%), Dessie hub (65%) and Dire
Dawa hub (43%) showed low/very low confidence in the Woreda (local) government (Figure
3.b).
 Disaggregation analyses by gender, age, disability status, location, and educational level yielded
similar results.
 Poor executing power of the government, lack of transparency, and lack of accountability were
the three most widely mentioned reasons for having low or very low confidence both in the
federal and woreda governments.

19. 3.1.6 Views of Citizens about Their Voices
 Majority (58%) of the respondents expressed that their voice is rarely or never heard by the
federal government with 78% from Dessie hub and 57% from Addis Ababa and 38% from Dire
Dawa.
 Similarly, majority of the respondents (58%) expressed that their voice is rarely or never heard
by the woreda(local) government, with 60% from Addis Ababa hub, 74% from Dessie hub and
43% from Dire Dawa hub.
 Similar results are obtained with respect to gender, age, disability status and location both at
Federal and Woreda levels.
 Regardless of demographic features, majorities also believed “the government is afraid of
citizens' needs and voices” and that there is no platform to express one's voice.
 FGD participants also complained about lack of acknowledgment of peoples' voices and that
their views have no impact on government.
 They especially feel vulnerable groups are overlooked.

20. 3.1.7. Citizens’ Perception of and Trust in CSOs
 Most respondents (65%) were unaware of CSOs presence, with degree of awareness higher in Dessie hub (42%).
 Respondents' perceptions of CSO activities showed that CSOs engage more in social affairs like education, health,
and traditions than advocacy.
 Respondents in Dessie (61%), Addis Ababa (46%) and Dire Dawa (10%) said CSOs provide basic services like
education, health, roads, and power.
 In Dire Dawa (70%), Dessie (50%) and Addis Ababa (41%) said CSOs educate on health issues. Nearly half saw
CSOs as providing basic services, and over a third saw CSOs providing education on health.
 The perception on CSOs’ activities were similar in both rural and urban area respondents.
 Respondents from the three hubs who tended not to trust all CSOs operating in their localities had similar
reasons.
 The vast (90%) majority of respondents from Dessie said they do not trust all CSOs because CSOs only serve their
own interests, followed by Addis Ababa (69%) and Dire Dawa (59%) respondents.
 Majority (56%) of respondents in the three hubs reported that they did not know whether civil society
organizations had trustworthy relationships with the government, with the great majority (69%) of respondents in
the Dessie hub indicating this, followed by those of Dire Dawa (50%) and Addis Ababa (49%).

21. 3.1.8. Fiscal transparency and citizens participation in the
process
 Over 77% in Addis Ababa, over 92% in Dessie, and over 75% in Dire Dawa did
not know about the budget for the last three years.
 Over 77% of males, over 84% of females, over 80% of urban citizens, over 83%
of rural citizens, and over 90% of people with disabilities did not know about
the budget for the last three years.
 Most respondents learned about the budget through public meetings in Addis
Ababa (64.5%), Dessie (87%), and Dire Dawa (67.8%).
 While majority of youth (70.4%), adults (70.2%) primarily learned about the
budget through public meetings, majority (68%) of elders learned through
mainstream media.
 Again, considering gender, location, and disability, most learned through
public meetings - males (68.1%), females (67.9%), urban (63.3%), rural (83%),
non-disabled (68.2%), and disabled (65%).

22. 4. Conclusions

23. 4.1. Conclusion
 In all the three hubs respondents have shown that they have civic entitlements.
 TV and radio tend to be robust communication media in all hubs and the most
used media outlets across all demographic categories. Social media appear to
be the third most used.
 While respondents from Addis Ababa hub appear to be divided with respect to
accuracy of information they receive from media, majority from the other two
hubs feel that the information they receive is accurate
 Concerning media bias, while majority of respondents from Addis Ababa hub
perceived the media as either biased or highly biased, most of the respondents
from Dire Dawa hub viewed the media as unbiased or highly unbiased.
 Respondents from Dessie hub on the other hand showed divided views.
 Citizens’ engagement in civic issues in the form of participation in events
organized by different bodies was found to be very meagre, irrespective of who
organized it and type of event.

24. 4.1. Conclusion
 The top three ranking mechanisms citizens participate in local governance are public consultations,
social accountability and participation in local government committee.
 There is stagnation or decreasing trend in citizens’ engagement in governance process.
 Participation of vulnerable/marginalized groups, specifically persons with mental disability. ethnic and
language minorities and of religious minority, in public events is found to be rather low.
 The FGD results also show similar results with respect IDPs and people diagnosed with Leprosy.
 The level of support by both CSOs and the government to vulnerable groups to participate in
governance processes is rather low.
 FGD with female PWDs showed similar results with the government described as providing better
support.
 All in all, the three most ranked issues that need consensus building were found to be peace building,
development projects and budget Issues. However, only a small percentage in each hub contribute
"mostly" or "fully" in the exercise.

25. Thank you!