<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>04524    a2200181   4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="005">20260709103205.0</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="082" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">TH 378.242 C3571 2025</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Catague, Samuel M. </subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Governance practices and service delivery of local government units : </subfield>
    <subfield code="b">bases for public service reform plan / </subfield>
    <subfield code="c">Samuel M. Catague</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1">
    <subfield code="a">Sibalom, Antique: </subfield>
    <subfield code="b">University of Antique, </subfield>
    <subfield code="c">2025</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">xvii, 160 pages ;</subfield>
    <subfield code="c"> 28 cm</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="504" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Includes bibliographical references </subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Abstract 
        This study aimed to find out the extent of governance practices and service delivery of Local Government Units in the Province of Antique as basis for public service reform plan. The respondents of the study were 18 Municipal Mayors, 18 Municipal Administrators and 324 randomly selected municipal employees of the 18 Local Government Units in the Province of Antique. Respondents' categorization included location, classification and Seal of Good Local Governance. Data were gathered with the use of questionnaire on governance practices and service delivery constructed by the researcher and duly validated by jury of experts. The frequency, percentage and mean were employed as descriptive statistical tools while t-test, One-Way ANOVA and Pearson's r were employed as inferential statistical tools. Significance level was set at .05. All statistical computations were processed through the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 23.0. Results of the study indicated that the extent of governance practices of local government units in terms of accountability, transparency and access to information and leadership was "Very Good" when they were taken as an entire group and when they were classified as to location, classification and Seal of Good Local Governance. The extent of service delivery of local government units in terms of water services, electrification services and housing services was "Good" while health and social services and education services was "Very Good" when they were taken as an entire group. When classified as to location, both coastal and inland local government units had "Good" extent of service delivery. When classified as to classification, 1st, 2nd and 5th class local government units had "Very Good" extent of service delivery while 3rd and 4th class had "Good" extent of service delivery. When classified as to Seal of Good Local Governance, local government units with Seal of Good Local Governance had "Very Good" extent of service delivery while those without Seal of Good Local Governance had "Good" extent of service delivery. Moreover, no significant difference was found in the extent of governance practices of local government units in terms of accountability, transparency and access to information and leadership when they were classified as to location and Seal of Good Local Governance while significant difference was found when classified as to classification. No significant difference was found in the extent of service delivery of local government units in terms of water services and electrification services when classified as to location and Seal of Good Local Governance while significant difference was found when classified as to classification. In terms of housing and social services, no significant difference was found in the extent of service delivery of local government units when classified as to location and classification while significant difference was found when classified as to Seal of Good Local Governance. In terms of education services, no significant difference was found in the extent of service delivery of local government units when classified as to location while significant difference was found when classified as to Seal of Good Local Governance and classification. In terms of housing services, no significant difference was found in the extent of service delivery of local government units when classified as to Seal of Good Local Governance while significant difference was found when classified as to location and classification. Finally, a significant relationship existed between governance practices and service delivery of local government units. A public service reform plan was proposed to enhance the governance practices and service delivery of local government units.
Keywords: governance practices, service delivery, public service reform plan</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="526" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">TH</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">GS</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Higher education</subfield>
    <subfield code="v">Theses and dissertations</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Local government</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="942" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="2">ddc</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">D</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="c">41646</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">41646</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="0">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="2">ddc</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="7">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">SB</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">SB</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">2026-07-09</subfield>
    <subfield code="e">Donation</subfield>
    <subfield code="l">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="o">TH 378.242 C3571 2025</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">TH 2422</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">2026-07-09</subfield>
    <subfield code="w">2026-07-09</subfield>
    <subfield code="y">D</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
