evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Presupuesto Participativo Municipal — the Dominican Republic's Legal Mandate for Local Investment Budgeting

Dominican Republic · Santo Domingo · See the Dominican Republic profile · See the Santo Domingo profile

Evidence: Observational / pre–post Top 74% 57/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Since Ley 170-07 (2007), Dominican municipalities must decide part of their capital-investment budget through open community assemblies. Adoption spread from 59 municipalities in 2005 to 172 by 2010, but only 13 of 158 municipalities fully met all compliance indicators in 2025.

59 municipalities
Municipalities holding participatory-budget meetings (2005)
172 municipalities
Municipalities holding participatory-budget meetings (2010)
224 municipalities and municipal districts
Municipalities supported by FEDOMU
9 %
Average share of municipal budget committed via participatory process (2016-2018)
21 %
Average share of legally designated capital-investment budget committed (2016-2018)
4000 participants
Highest recorded turnout (Baní)
2.6 %
Baní turnout as share of population
13 of 158 municipalities
Municipalities fully meeting all compliance indicators (2025)
>100 municipalities
Municipalities scoring 60% or below (2025)
61-62 %
Average financial execution of participatory-budget commitments (2016-2018)

Details

Maturity
Established
Promoter
Federación Dominicana de Municipios (FEDOMU)
Period
2007–present
Keywords
public finance, citizen participation, municipal governance

Context

Ley No. 170-07, passed in 2007 and reinforced by Ley 176-07 and later Article 206 of the Constitution, requires Dominican municipalities to decide their legally-designated capital-investment share (40% of the national transfer municipalities receive) through open town-hall assemblies ('cabildos abiertos'). Villa González, in Santiago province, pioneered the practice in 1999 — before the law existed, modelled on Porto Alegre, Brazil — and remains a full complier today.

Objectives

To bind a share of municipal capital-investment budgets to citizen-chosen priorities set through open assemblies, formalised as an annual Municipal Investment Plan.

Activities

FEDOMU, the national municipal federation, provides technical support, while the Ministry of Public Administration scores every municipality's compliance through its SISMAP Municipal monitoring system.

Results

A 2012 World Bank review found the number of municipalities holding participatory-budget meetings rose from 59 in 2005 to 172 in 2010, with FEDOMU supporting 224 municipalities and municipal districts. A 2016-2018 evaluation of six municipalities by Participación Ciudadana found participatory processes committing an average of 9% of the total municipal budget (21% of the legally designated capital-investment share), with Baní achieving the highest recorded turnout at about 4,000 participants (2.6% of its population). SISMAP Municipal's 2025 compliance data found only 13 of 158 municipalities (about 8%) fully met all participatory-budgeting indicators, and more than 100 scored 60% or below. The Participación Ciudadana evaluation found average financial execution of commitments of only 61-62% over 2016-2018.

Conclusions

The mandate achieved genuine, sustained national adoption over 15+ years, but current SISMAP data show most municipalities not fully complying and no sanction exists for non-compliance; execution shortfalls mean a substantial share of formally committed funds are never spent on approved works.

Implementation
Indicative cost
Low (< €50k)
Time to results
Long (> 3 years)
Staffing & skills
Federación Dominicana de Municipios (FEDOMU) — technical support, Ministry of Public Administration / SISMAP Municipal — compliance monitoring, Municipal governments — assembly organisation

Conditions for success

  • A binding legal mandate tying a specific share of transfers to the participatory process
  • National technical-assistance body (FEDOMU) supporting municipalities
  • A dedicated national compliance monitoring system (SISMAP Municipal)

Common failure modes

  • No sanction exists for non-compliance
  • Only ~8% of municipalities fully met all compliance indicators in 2025
  • Average execution of committed funds was only 61-62% over 2016-2018
  • Even the best-performing municipality mobilised only 2.6% of its population

Where it fits

Governance type
national mandate implemented locally
Scale
national
Income level
upper-middle-income

Commonly funded by

National / regional programmes

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Similar practices you may find useful