By Wale Obanigba, Esq.
The release of the 2025 State Performance Index (pSPI) by Phillips Consulting provides what may be the most objective validation yet of concerns many observers have raised about governance in Ondo State. Governments can dismiss political criticism, question motives, or challenge narratives. It is considerably more difficult, however, to dismiss a data-driven assessment that measures performance across all states of the federation using established governance indicators.
For Ondo State, the report presents a worrisome verdict.
Ranked 27th overall among the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory, Ondo recorded particularly weak performances in infrastructure, healthcare, education, and citizen satisfaction. The findings expose a fundamental contradiction at the core of governance in the state. Ondo is not short of resources, yet it continues to struggle to convert those resources into meaningful improvements in the lives of its citizens.
This conclusion aligns closely with concerns I previously raised in two separate articles: "Big Allocation, Myopic Vision: Ondo State's Fiscal Decline Under Aiyedatiwa" and "Who Is Holding Ondo's Money Hostage?" The former examined the disconnect between revenue inflows and fiscal ambition, while the latter focused on concerns surrounding the release and utilisation of public funds. The pSPI report now provides empirical evidence suggesting that these concerns deserve serious attention by the Lucky Aiyedatiwa’s administration.
One of the most profound aspects of the report is that Ondo performs relatively well in several revenue-related indicators. The state ranks 9th in Internally Generated Revenue (IGR) per capita, 11th in IGR per square kilometre, and 8th in IGR-to-FAAC ratio. It also ranks 13th nationally in Assets Per Capita. These figures reflect that the State's challenge is not primarily one of financial scarcity.
Indeed, the state has consistently benefited from substantial allocations from the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC). In recent years, it has ranked among the leading recipients of federal allocations nationwide. The pSPI further shows that Ondo ranks 14th in Capital Expenditure Per Capita and 17th in Debt Per Capita, suggesting that excessive indebtedness is not the primary constraint on service delivery.
The evidence therefore shifts the conversation. The question is no longer whether Ondo State has money, it is how effectively that money is being converted into public value. The pSPI findings suggest that citizens are asking the same question.
According to the report, most residents of the state do not believe they receive value for the taxes they pay. This is not merely a perception problem. It reflects the realities of ordinary people interacting daily with public institutions and services.
The report ranks Ondo 33rd in road quality, 32nd in school quality, and 35th in healthcare quality. The picture becomes even more frightening when other service-delivery indicators are considered. Ondo ranks 34th in affordability of public hospitals, 32nd in access to clean water supply, and 32nd in awareness of government policies and programmes.
These statistics are not conjectures, but represent the roads citizens travel every day, the schools attended by their children, the hospitals they rely on in moments of vulnerability, and the basic public services that define quality of life.
When citizens consistently encounter poor infrastructure and declining service delivery despite significant public revenues, questions will inevitably arise. Over time, those questions evolve into distrust.
The report also reveals a significant disconnect between objective performance indicators and public perception. While Ondo performs moderately in certain governance metrics, including ranking 13th in security of lives and property and 17th in opportunities for meaningful employment, these gains are overshadowed by severe weaknesses in social services and infrastructure. The result is a state that performs better on paper than it does in the daily experience of its people.
That finding resonates strongly with concerns previously raised regarding the management and release of public funds. Governance does not succeed merely because budgets are prepared and approved. Governance succeeds when approved funds are released efficiently, projects are implemented on schedule, and institutions are empowered to perform their statutory responsibilities. A budget that exists only on paper delivers no development.
Recurring complaints from Ministries, Departments, and Agencies regarding delayed releases, stalled projects, and operational constraints deserve closer scrutiny in light of the pSPI findings. If institutions responsible for healthcare, education, infrastructure, and public welfare cannot access resources when required, poor outcomes become almost inevitable.
This may help explain why Ondo's fiscal indicators appear considerably stronger than its development indicators.
The report also highlights an unsettling weakness at the grassroots level. Ondo ranks 32nd nationally in public awareness of local government programmes and projects. This suggests that governance is not only struggling at the level of service delivery but also in maintaining meaningful engagement with citizens.
Perhaps the most important lesson from the report concerns governance priorities. Fiscal prudence is often cited as justification for cautious spending and tight financial controls. Prudence is undoubtedly important. However, prudence should never be confused with paralysis. The true purpose of sound financial management is to transform available resources into measurable public benefits.
A state that ranks 9th in IGR per capita but 35th in healthcare quality and 33rd in road quality must confront difficult questions about how public resources are being translated into development outcomes.
The pSPI report therefore reinforces a central argument advanced in my earlier writings. Ondo State's greatest challenge is not revenue generation but governance execution.
The issue is not how much money enters the treasury. The issue is whether institutions have timely access to resources, whether budgets are implemented as approved, whether projects are completed efficiently, and whether citizens experience the benefits of public spending.
Moreover, the pSPI report does not merely diagnose problems, it also proposes solutions. It recommends deeper revenue diversification, improvements in the ease of doing business, greater capital investment in healthcare, education and infrastructure, stronger asset management, and improved fiscal sustainability through prudent borrowing and project prioritisation.
The findings are clear. Ondo State possesses the revenue base, institutional framework, natural resources, and human capital necessary to perform far better than its current ranking suggests. Yet the gap between resources and results continues to widen. Until public funds flow efficiently, institutions operate effectively, projects are executed transparently, and citizens begin to see tangible improvements in their daily lives, Ondo State will continue to underperform, not because it lacks money, but it has not yet mastered the governance structures required to transform revenue into results.
The pSPI report has merely quantified what many citizens have long voiced. The challenge before government is no longer one of diagnosis but of response. Whether the administration confronts these realities and acts decisively upon them may well determine Ondo State's developmental trajectory in the years ahead.
Wale Obanigba, Esq., is an economist and a legal practitioner writing from Akure.
Post a Comment