Management of Devolved Funds(1)

8/13/2019 Management of Devolved Funds(1)

1/31

Management Of Devolved Funds: A Case Study Of Kisumu Municipality

1

MANAGEMENT OF DEVOLVEDFUNDS: A CASE STUDY OF

KISUMU MUNICIPALITY

BY:

A network of civil society organization, underthe leadership of Community Initiative ActionGroup-Kenya with Facilitation from Ufadhili Trust

The report was written and compiledBy-Chris owalla


2/31


2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 3CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................... 4

1.0 Types and purposes of devolved funds ..................................................................... 4

i. Rural Electrification Programme Levy Fund ....................................................... 4iii. Local Authorities Transfer Fund ........................................................................ 5iv. Constituencies Development Fund .................................................................... 5v. HIV/ AIDS Fund .............................................................................................. 6vi. Roads Maintenance Levy Fund .......................................................................... 6vii. Secondary School Education Bursary Fund .................................................... 7

1.1 Scope of the survey ................................................................................................. 71.2 Methodology of survey ............................................................................................ 7

CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................... 82.0 A situational analysis of projects within Kisumu Municipality ............................. 8

2.1 Kibuye Ward................................................................................................. 8

2.2 East Kisumu Ward ........................................................................................ 92.3 Aerodrome Ward .......................................................................................... 92.4 Railways Ward ............................................................................................ 132.5 Stadium Ward ............................................................................................. 142.6 Central Ward .............................................................................................. 162.7 South West Ward ........................................................................................ 172.8 North Ward ................................................................................................ 172.9 Market Ward ............................................................................................... 182.10 Milimani Ward ............................................................................................ 192.11 Kaloleni Ward ............................................................................................. 20

2.12 Kajulu East Ward ........................................................................................ 222.13 Kajulu West Ward ....................................................................................... 232.14 Kolwa Central Ward .................................................................................... 242.15 East Kolwa Ward ........................................................................................ 242.16 Manyatta Ward ............................................................................................ 242.17 17. Nyalenda Ward ...................................................................................... 252.18 Management of Secondary Education Bursary Fund in K isumu Town West .. 26

CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................... 283.0 Challenges in Implementing Decentralised Funds ................................ .............. 28

3.1 Governance.................................................................................................... 283.2 Implementation .............................................................................................. 28

3.3 Monitoring and Evaluation .............................................................................. 283.4 Effectiveness and Efficiency ............................................................................ 293.5 Recommendations for improving management of devolved funds ..............Error!Bookmark not defined.

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 30


3/31


3

INTRODUCTION

Good leadership is an important requirement for economic growth and enjoyment of humanrights. Development is about people and can only be achieved through programmes that areresponsive to public needs and aspirations.

For that, planners of development projects are, therefore, expected to widely consultstakeholders and target beneficiaries in order to win acceptance and speed upimplementation.In whatever capacity, good leadership champions for and rallies resources to the public andensures such facilities are used only on intended purposes. Here, there is no distinctionbetween political or any other form of leadership.For almost twenty years, Kenya’s post-independence governments have sought to reduce thelayers of bureaucracy that delay channeling of funds from the Treasury to differentdevelopment projects. Yet history teaches us that efficiency and transparency are core pillarsfor building public trust in public institutions and processes. This study takes a critical look at projects earmarked for implementation through resources

devolved from the centre to the periphery through seven different channels within KisumuMunicipality. It spotlights the use of the Rural Electrification Programme Levy Fund(REPLF), the Free Primary Education Programme (FPE), the Local Authority TransferFund (LATF), and the Constituencies Development Fund (CDF). Also reviewed are projectsunder the HIV/ AIDS Fund, the Roads Maintenance Levy Fund (RMLF), and the SecondarySchool Education Bursary Fund (SEBF). The study concludes that although devolution of funds is a good idea, it requires widerpublic participation and scrutiny to safeguard the resources against misuse by thoseappointed as their custodians. That way, higher value for money is achieved, while onlyprojects of utmost public good are implemented to tame wastage and vested interests.


4/31


4

CHAPTER ONE

Like many other countries in the world, Kenya has embraced the policy of involving thepublic in selection and prioritization of development projects. This “bottom-up” strategyseeks to democratize the national budget and enhance wider acceptability by end users for

sustainability and tighter scrutiny by concerned communities.

There are indications that these funds are helping to provide services to communities thatfor many years did not benefit substantially from the Government. However, there areincreasing concerns about their utilization. Given the importance of this resource devolutionapproach, an in-depth analysis of institutional, design and implementation factors thatimpact on the efficiency of the use of the funds is necessary.

It is for the foregoing reasons that this project took a critical objective analysis of the statusof projects supported by different devolved funds in Kisumu Town East and Kisumu TownWest constituencies which comprise the Kisumu Municipality. The study was donebetween April and May 2007. That way, existing and potential causes of weaknesses intheir management are addressed.

1.0 T ypes and purposes of devolved funds

i. Rural Electrification Programme Levy Fund The Rural Electrification Programme Levy Fund (REPLF) was established in 1998 throughamendments to sections 129 and 130 of the Electric Power Act (1997). It is used forfinancing programmes relating to the design, construction, equipping, operating, andmaintaining electrification projects identified by rural communities.

The institutional framework of REPLF comprises the Ministry of Energy, the ElectricityRegulatory Board (ERB), Kenya Power and Lighting Company (KPLC - the implementingagency), District Development Committees (DDCs), Constituency Development Fund(CDF) committees and local community committees for specific projects.

ii. Free Primary Education ProgrammeIt was established in January 2003 through the National Alliance Rainbow Coalition (NARC)government’s manifesto. The fund aims to address financing and quality challenges inprimary education, and targets all Kenyan children attending formal and non-formal publicschools. Children from poor families are emphasised. The fund comprises an allocation

equivalent to Sh1,020 per child in a year, with the amount disbursed to aconstituency/district based on the number of pupils enrolled in schools within that area. Thefirst allocation is for the purchase of teaching and learning materials; the second for generalpurposes, while the third tranche is for operations and maintenance. Communities areexpected to participate in the management and implementation through members of schoolcommittees. Respective head teachers and school committees make procurement decisions.


5/31


5

iii. Local Authorities Transfer Fund This was established through the LATF Act No. 8 of 1998 and came into effect thefollowing year. It aims to improve service delivery, financial management, and reduceoutstanding debt portfolios of local authorities (LAs). Every year, Treasury allocates toLATF kitty an amount equivalent to 5 % of the total revenue collected by the Governmentper annum.

Currently, LATF makes up approximately 24% of local authority revenues. At least 7% ofthe total fund is shared equally among the country's 175 local authorities; 60% of the fund isdisbursed according to the relative population size of the local authorities. The balance isshared out based on the relative urban population densities. LATF monies are combinedwith local authority revenues to implement local priorities.

An advisory committee comprising the private sector, the Ministry of Finance, thePermanent Secretary from the Ministry of Local Government, and the Kenya LocalGovernment Reform Programme’s secretariat, guides LATF operations. Its annual reports

and other disbursement information are disseminated through newspaper advertisements.Some 60% of LATF allocations are released to a local authority if it met its set requirements. The remaining 40% is given out based on LAs performance measured through LASDAPand other indicators. Budgeted LATF allocations are gazetted but no disbursement is madeunless LAs meet the requirements.

iv. Constituencies Development Fund The Constituencies Development Fund (CDF) was established through an Act of Parliamentin 2003 and became operational on January 9, 2004 upon the publication of the KenyaGazette Supplement No. 107 (Act No. 11). The fund aims to control imbalances in regional

development brought about by partisan politics. It targets all constituency-level developmentprojects, particularly those aiming to combat poverty at the grassroots.

At its inception, the fund was allocated 2.5% of the government's ordinary revenue. This wasincreased to 3.2 per cent in the 2006/2007 national Budget. A motion seeking to increasethis allocation to 7.5% of government’s revenue was passed by Parliament last year, but hasnot been implemented. MPs had also sought to be allowed to use the fund to sponsorcultural activities such as sporting. However, Finance minister Amos Kimunya frowned onthe new requests, saying a bloated CDF allocation would deny revenue to other importantnational projects.

In any case, question marks have been raised over the way some MPs – as patrons of theirrespective CDF – have handled the kitty. A number of them have suffocated theircommittees with relatives and political cronies, while others have only implemented projectswhere they hope to harvest votes at the next General Election.

Indeed, there are cases in courts of law pitting MPs against committee members orconstituents for allegedly misappropriating the funds. In late March, the ParliamentaryService Commission recruited 210 CDF managers to handle the operations of the kitty


6/31


6

within the constituencies. Some CDF committees have been guilty of failing to submit theirproject proposals or account for implemented ones in time, thereby delaying the nextallocation.

Currently, 75% of the fund is allocated equally among all the 210 constituenciescountrywide, while the remaining 25% is disbursed according to poverty levels in aconstituency.

A maximum 10% of each constituency’s annual allocation may be used for an educationbursary scheme. CDF is managed through four committees; two of which are at the nationallevel and two at the grassroots level.According to the CDF Act, expenses for running constituency project offices should notexceed 3% of annual constituency allocations. Each constituency is required to keep aside5% as an emergency reserve. The CDF is not to be used to support political bodies/activitiesor personal award projects. A sitting MP is not a signatory to the CDF bank account butconvenes the CDF Committee in her/ his constituency. The penalty for misappropriation ofthe Funds is a prison term of up to five years, a Sh. 200,000 fine or both. CDF project

proposals are submitted to MPs who in turn forward them to the Clerk of the NationalAssembly. The approved project list is reviewed by the National CDF committee, whichpresents final recommendation to the Finance Minister.

v. HIV/AIDS FundPresident (now retired) Daniel Arap Moi established the HIV/ AIDS fund in 1999 through aPresidential order contained in Legal Notice No. 170. The move coincided with thedeclaration of HIV/ AIDS as a national disaster, the formation of the National Aids ControlCouncil (NACC) and the AIDS Control Committees (ACCs). The fund targets individualsinfected with and affected by HIV/ AIDS, with the focus being on long-term care and

support. The fund is administered by NACC, which receives budgetary allocations andchannels them to Aids Control Units and Constituency ACCs (CACC) before onwarddisbursement to Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and Community basedorganizations (CBOs) for implementation.

vi. Roads Maintenance Levy Fund The Roads Maintenance Levy Fund (RMLF) was established in 1993 through an Act ofParliament. It caters for the maintenance of public roads, including local authorityunclassified roads. The fund is made up from a fuel levy on petroleum products and transittoll collections. It is administered by the Kenya Roads Board, which was established in 1999.

RMLF targets maintenance of roads under the control of the Ministry of Roads and PublicWorks, Kenya Wildlife Service and district roads committees. 60% of the fund’s annualallocation goes to international and national trunk and primary roads; 24% to secondaryroads; and 16% to rural roads. The latter portion, which is managed by district roadcommittees, is shared equally among constituencies within a district.


7/31


7

vii. Secondary School Education Bursary Fund The Secondary School Education Bursary Fund (SEBF) was established in 1993/ 4 through aPresidential pronouncement. It aims to cushion the country’s poor and vulnerable groupsagainst high and increasing cost of secondary education, therefore reducing inequalities. Italso aims to increase enrolment in (and completion of) secondary school. The fund targetsorphans and girl children as well as those from poor households and urban slums, who areachieve good results.

Students send their applications through their respective school heads. SEBF is not basedon a fixed share of the national budget. Allocations vary depending on the Ministry ofEducation’s annual provisions, the number of students enrolled in secondary schools withineach constituency, national secondary school enrolments and poverty indices.

Since 2003/4, SEBF has been coordinated by Constituency Bursary Committees, whichscreen potential beneficiaries, coordinate and disburse the funds, and prepare reports to theMinistry of Education. Local community leaders are represented on SEBF committees.

Affirmative action ensures a minimum of Sh.500,000 is allocated to constituencies in Aridand Semi Arid Lands (ASAL). The minimum annual allocation per beneficiary by schoolcategory is as follows: Sh.5, 000 for day schools; Sh.10, 000 for boarding schools; and Sh15,000 fornational schools.

1.1 Scope of the survey The survey covered projects supported by devolved funds in all the following 17 wardswithin Kisumu Town East and Kisumu Town West constituencies:-

Railway Market Kibuye Kaloleni Milimani Aerodrome North Ward Kisumu Central Kisumu East

South West Manyatta Nyalenda Kolwa East Kolwa Central Kajulu East Kajulu West Stadium

1.2 M ethodology of surveyDifferent methods were used in conducting this study. Researchers scrutinized existing

budgets and plans of the devolved funds from relevant offices within K isumu Municipality. They also made field visits to confirm the efficacy of the information. The study sought tomatch the information in the books with the reality on the ground. Team members also conducted interviews with members of committees charged withprioritizing and implementing the projects. However, there were cases whereimplementation levels did not match the amounts alleged to have been spent, or even bizarreinstances where the said projects were non-existent.


8/31


8

CHAPTER TWO

2.0 A situational analysis of projects within Kisumu Municipality The study analyzes projects within each and every ward within the Municipality; shedding

light on levels of implementation and amounts of money used by the time the survey wasconducted.

2.1 Kibuye Ward

A total of Sh.500,000 was allocated to construct a public toilet at the Kibuye Market. Thiswas done without open tendering. Of the amount, Sh375, 840 was acknowledged as spent,while the remaining Sh.126,160 could not be accounted for.

The construction was completed with six fixed doors but there is no running water, thus

rendering its condition poor. The water for use is bought a few meters away by the toilet’scaretakers and stored in containers. Those who use the facility pay money which is ultimatelyspent as wages for caretakers and for maintenance.

The Central Toilet was never rehabilitated and six doors are missing, reducing it to a healthproblem for traders at this busy market who normally use them.However, a sewerage system was dug and 6-inch PVC pipes laid, following a tender given toMrs. Ghail Mojo who lacked plumber skills. She withdrew from the work midway, and theproject is unfinished to date. Tendering information and documentation process was notfound, but Kshs. 300,000 was spent.

Also, 12 gates were supposed to be constructed at Kibuye market, but only five were builtand the work is not going on. The residents do not know how much was spent in theproject. Informal (Jua-Kali) traders are bitter because they feel they ought to have had thechance to make and build the gates. But records available from the council show that Sh329,047,000 was spent.Following demands by traders for more gates, a tendering notice was advertised and localtraders sent their bids, but no feedback has been forthcoming.

The work at the Ward Office has not started.

In the financial year 2006/ 2007, the CDF allocated Sh2 million and Sh1.5 million to KibuyeWholesale Market and Kibuye Jua-Kali, respectively. The money has been spent on the

following projects:-(a) Wholesale Market latrines were repaired and users are charged although they lack

running water. Some women traders use them to store hired chairs. Tenderingprocess and amounts spent are unknown.

(b) Jua-Kali shades are being built on a controversial road reserve. Amount allocated isnot clear. Mr Isaiah Onoka is the contactor.

(c) Wholesale re-carpeting is done. No information on contracts and tendering.


9/31


9

(d) Wholesale market shades work started but information about the contractor,tendering process and the amount allocated could not be traced.

(e) Mr. Peter Odima Peter, the vice-chairman of the CDF committee was the one incharge of supply and contract of building the burnt K ibuye Market. He personallybrought bricks and other building materials, including 100 iron sheets ascompensation to the traders that never finished the work. It was completed by thetraders themselves, but it was alleged Sh600,000 was spent.

2.2 East Kisumu WardLATF reports indicate Sh.200,000 was allocated to Dago-Kokore Primary School during thefinancial year 2005/ 2006 to buy desks; a claim that the institution refutes. The school, according to official documents, was double-funded by CDF and LATF at atune of Sh200, 000 each. The boreholes at Dago-Kokore and Kanyakwar primary schools were allocated Sh800,000by LATF in the financial year 2005/ 2006. Our findings indicate that the boreholes existing

in the two schools are privately owned by women groups and individuals.Also, the 50 desks provided by the CDF to Dago-Kokore Primary school during 2004/ 2005fiscal year were not prioritized by the institution, and they are of low quality.Riat Police Post/Chief’s Camp was allocated Sh.499,305 in the financial year 2004/2005according to CDF reports, which explain that Sh419,738 had been paid and Sh57,445 isreflected as the outstanding balance. The implementation status report shows that the workis in progress at advanced stage and is to be completed through the engineers department.But our survey found out that the existing facility is a private premise for the police,constructed by an individual called Mr Abdullah. The businessman also pays for electricityand water, among other utilities. However, there are contractor’s invoices and paymentvouchers for the project. The Chief’s Camp alleged to be under construction is an existing

private premise.

2.3 Aerodrome WardDuring the 2004/ 2005 financial year, LATF allocated Sh500,000 for the construction ofUsoma Dispensary. The first contractor estimated the cost at Sh499,325, but later varied it upwards. AvailableLATF reports show that Sh.443,738 had been paid and the balance to date is Sh65,587. Theimplementation status shows that the work is in progress and is to be completed through theengineers department.Interestingly, additional Sh80,000 was allocated for the same project in the subsequent

financial year, shooting its cost to Sh680,000. The committee overseeing this project is madeup of cronies of the local councilor. Available invoices show that the project cost is fullypaid, yet the work is incomplete. The committee officials were Joseph Okumu (Chairman) Joseph Omenda (Secretary), Willington Ochieng (Treasurer).

Reactivation of piped water was estimated at Sh.600, 000 in the 2005/ 2006 fiscal year. So far,no payment has been made. The same applies to piped water at Bandani whose cost was putat Sh800,000.


10/31


10

A nursery school at Pundo (Kombedu Market) was slated to be funded by CDF atSh500,000. The project was initiated by the area councilor and the committee members arehis cronies. The work, by Mr Owino, a CDF member, is complete, but poorly done.

The CDF allocated Sh.500,000 to a borehole in Usoma. The work was done by drillersbelonging to the area MP without consulting the local community and no open tenderingpreceded it.Community members had asked for piped water but not a borehole because the main pipeof water is within the area. Both the Usoma borehole and dispensary are public utilities butbuilt on private land. This complicates matters should the land owner decide to fence it offor sue for trespass and encroachment.


11/31


11

D ifferent dim ensions of U soma D ispensary.

Still at Usoma, the CDF allocated Sh125,000 to implement a community-driven public toiletproject. The toilet was dug four feet deep. Bricks for the work were brought, then takenaway. Ballast and sand were taken to the site but their use was later converted to construct aborehole. So, work on the toilet stalled. The development committees of these projects aremade up of cronies of either the area MP or councilor.

Pictu re 2: Pup ils learning in pathetic conditions at U soma Prim ary School.


12/31


12

Pictu re 3: A section of classroom at U som a Prim ary School whi ch was supp osed tobe built by CD F (2003/ 2004) to the tune Sh200, 000.

Pictu re 4: Current structural status of U soma Prim ary School.


13/31


13

2.4 Railways Ward The Jua-Kali Public Toilets is a project funded by LATF at Sh495, 804. Amount paid isSh412,526 while Sh82,278 is the balance. The implementation status shows that the work isin progress and is to be completed through engineers department. It is painted well withthree bathrooms and toilets for men and one bathroom and toilet for women. There is also a

urinal pit. Tendering was done by the municipal. There is a project committee. The project wasfinished by the engineers department after money allocated fell low because of unexpectedexpenditure on Value Added Tax. However, the facility was built on a road reserve andcould be demolished. The materials used were sub-standard. The right tendering procedures were not followed,and the local community members feel they were not consulted. The contractors were localcouncilors and Liberal Democratic Party officials.LATF also set aside Sh.640,000 to build stores for local traders in Railways Ward. Theproject is non-existent. The area councilor says he has not seen the stores and refers us tothe municipal council for any information related to the stores. The winner of the tenderreceived information of the award verbally and as such did not know when to commence thework on site. According to plan, two containers were to be at Oile Park, while one containerwas to be set up opposite Easy Coach booking office.Another non-existent project was the one to construct a Sh.500, 000 garbage incinerator atSh.500,000, to be funded through LATF. The Oile Park Public Toilets Project was completed at Sh.500, 000 with money from CDF;the project having been initiated by the local community. There was a consultative meetingand the composition of the development committees was done by the area MP. Thecommittee meetings are held depending on the availability of agenda. The mode of fundsdisbursement and tendering process is only known by the MP and his team The toilet is complete and operational, and it is managed by the local community.However, the contractor is unknown, and the tendering committee consists of cronies of the

area MP. The cost of fencing Oile Park was Sh.900,000 through CDF. The project is complete but thewhole fence has come down, and it does not exist anymore. In any case, the community wasopposed to the fence, saying it would deny them access to the Park.Also, stalls built at the Park were to have cemented floors but this is not the case. Theproject committee comprises MP’s cronies, with irregular meetings, while tendering for theproject was improper. The CDF built stalls behind the Kisumu District Hospitals at Sh1.3 million through a tenderawarded to a politician close to the sitting MP. The project is complete but is sub-standard, and only benefits selected traders and politicianswho are managing the stalls.


14/31


14

Picture 5: A section of 64 N yamlori kiosks build by C D F at Sh1.7 million.

2.5 Stadium WardAccording to LASDAP report, LATF estimated the cost of the Stadium Wall at Sh.500,000.Of this, Sh.431, 700 has already been paid. However, the tendering was not made public, andit is unclear how Mr. Maika Wa Mulunda won it. The tendering was not made public and it is not clear how Alina Trail and ConstructionCompany owned by Mr. Maika Wa Mulunda was awarded the job. The work had stalledwhen our team visited the project.


15/31


15

Pictu re 6 Picture 7

Pictu re 6 shows the part of th e Stadium W all which has been renovated at Sh.500,000,while Picture 7 is of the section of the same wall that was brought down by strongwin ds. T o date, no work has been done on it.

Among other development programmes within the municipality, Sh.600,000 was to be spenton constructing a refuse chambers during the 2005/2006 financial year through LATF.However, nothing has been done on this front, and the status is unknown.According to the financial 2006/ 2007 report, Sh..800,000 was to go towards reactivatingstreet lights within Kisumu City through LATF. Community members say such work hasbeen done by Nakumatt Supermarkets.

In the 2005/ 2006 fiscal year, CDF allocated Sh.750,000 to Kisumu Union Primary School torenovate toilets and improve its sewerage system. However, the institution only receivedSh.250,000, and a misunderstanding arose between CDF committee members and parentsover the balance. The CDF team wanted to handle the utilization of the funds, contrary tothe needs of the school and parents. As a compromise, the school was given 100 desks byCDF committee which by then was under supervision of Mr. Orawo and Mr. Nashon whoare members of the CDF team.


16/31


16

Then there is the Sh.800,000 Arina Borehole Project, funded by the CDF at Sh.800,000.Thetender was never identified but the status is reported to be complete. The project is non-existent.

The existing borehole belongs BAFOPE self help-group which was neither funded by CDFnor LATF.Kisumu Day Secondary School received Sh475,000 during the 2005/ 2006 financial year inform of a cheque, for which the school is grateful. However, the institution expected moremoney during the following year to complete the building which was at lintel level. The same Kisumu Day Secondary School was allocated Sh2.2 million by CDF to buildclassrooms in the 2005/2006 fiscal year. The project is listed as ongoing but that wascontrary to the reality on the ground. Our survey established that the school received acheque of Sh.700,000 in the second week of May, 2007. The fate of the cheque said to havebeen disbursed earlier is unknown.Another initiative is the Joyland Special School Water Project, funded by CDF at a cost ofSh100,000. The CDF report shows that the work is complete yet the project doesn’t exist,and the school hopes someone would charge the CDF committee for falsifying the

information. The only water project that is ongoing in the school is done by Salvation Army,Nairobi office.

2.6 Central WardKisian Primary School is said to have received Sh.300,000 during the 2005/ 2006 financialyear; a benchmark prequalification for a donor who wanted to fund the school’s projects. The institution’s development committee was hand picked by the area MP, and areacommunity members feel they were not consulted. Work on the classrooms is ongoing, doneby Odima Contractors under Mr John Oyoo.

At Ngege Primary School, there are classrooms being built. The chairman of the school,

Jared Ochieng Owiti said the area MP gave the school a cheque of Sh.2 million and askedthat it be taken to Pabari Hardware. The school has no idea how the money was usedafterwards. There is no school or community committee that oversees this project. The headteacher has refused to sign the letter/ certificate of completion which was brought to him bythe area MP. Two of the six classrooms have been completed.

A dispensary is being built at Rainbow Primary School on public land. However, there is nocommunity member involved in the project and the chairman for the local developmentteam was not aware of distribution of responsibilities in this project. The negative results ofignoring targeted beneficiary communities in project initiation is best proved by a dispensarybuilt at Dr Robert Ouko Primary School but rejected by local people.

At Akingli Primary School, the institution’s management said CDF had constructed twoclassrooms said to have cost Sh.550,000. The same kitty also gave the school 115 desks in2005. Our team was informed the area MP gave the school a cheque of Sh.1 million forclassroom building project, with instructions to pass it to Pabari Hardware. Four classroomswere built with wire mesh windows that expose pupils to cold whenever it rains.Wachara Primary School got 50 desks from the CDF in 2004, while the neighbouringWachara Secondary School was given Sh200,000 to build a laboratory. The funds wereinadequate and the project has stalled.


17/31


17

The same kitty’s records indicate that Bar Union Primary School was allocated Sh.500,000 tobuild a library in 2005 financial year, while 29 orphans at the same institution got bursaries. The headmistress of the school, Mrs. Roselyn Ochieng said she had not received such funds.

Sidika Primary School got Sh.200,000 in 2005 financial year from CDF. Mr. Joram Kyat; theschool’s head teacher used this money to build two classrooms. The work is incomplete.

2.7 South West WardIn the financial year 2004/ 2005 LATF allocated Sh500, 000 for the construction ofclassrooms at Osiri and Bara secondary schools. The work began at Bara and Sh398, 092 hasbeen paid, with Sh101, 908 is the outstanding balance. Implementation status shows that thework is in progress and to be completed through the engineers department. The cost of building classrooms and one block toilet at Osiri was Sh.680, 000.There is noreport on the amount paid and the implementation status .The same applies to constructionof Oyiengo classrooms and construction of Aigo drift at a cost of Sh580, 000 and Sh700,

000, respectively.

At K ibwayi Primary School the community was asked to give 10% of the total cost of theproject. In return, they gave sand, gravel and other materials. The MP gave the schoolSh200, 000 .The mode of disbursement was not clear. There is no evidence if the money wasused in the school project.Nyawara Primary School was built by the same donor who put up Kibwayi Primary School.CDF gave the school Sh1.5 million which was withdrawn the same day. Of the total amount,Sh.100,000 could not be accounted for.Rota Primary School was allocated Sh.250,000 out of which Sh.100,000 was meant for desks.Only 25 desks were delivered, and their cost was exaggerated.

Although CDF allocated Sh.600,000 to Ojolla Market for fencing and water supply, the workon the ground doesn’t justify that expenditure. The contractor was Mr Isaiah Onoka.Rural electrification at Ogal Beach was allocated Sh.100,000 and is indicated as ongoing.However, the project, just like the Sh600,000 for Ojola Market shades, does not exist. The Ober Kamoth Health Centre was built in mid 1980’s and the local community soughthelp from the area MP to have it rehabilitated. Instead, they got a borehole project that theydid not ask for. Neither were they involved in its initiation.

2.8 North WardRepairing the Obunga Bridge is claimed to have taken up Sh100,000 from the CDF kitty, but

the work was poorly done, and without following open tendering and involving the localcommunity. The area MP handpicked a committee to oversee the project.Some Sh.450,000 from CDF was spent on constructing fish-drying shades, but the structureswere later destroyed by the town council because they were located on a road reserve.Community participation was lacking, and so was the link between the CDF committee andthe Town planning office.Kudho Primary School reports indicate that four classrooms were built and only two werecompleted from an existing foundation. Instead, the school received 100 sub-standard desks.


18/31


18

And at Manyatta Arab Primary School required two classrooms and placed its request withthe CDF committee, but got what was not its priority: renovations, paintings, andpartitioning of classrooms, plus 30 substandard desks. The tendering and implementationprocedures were not disclosed to the school’s management.

LATF allocated Sh.600,000 to the Nutrition Centre; an institution whose future remainsuncertain because the owner of the land on which it stands claims he was underpaid.On Manyatta Arab Estate, a community water project was implemented without opentendering, and its actual cost is, therefore, unknown.And over at Obunga, funds were allocated to build a dispensary. However, the project wasabandoned at the foundation level because it is located in a road reserve

Pictu re 8: Abandoned foundat ion of the proposed O bunga D ispensary.

2.9 Market Ward There is an office and hall being managed by Jubilee United Development Group. The same

group is managing the public toilet at the market. The traders want a permanent store builtoutside the bus park while the area councilor and his team want containers to be usedinstead. The only existing container is privately owned.CDF cash was spent on putting up sheds for shoe shiners and used clothes traders withoutopen tendering. Therefore, the cost is unknown, and information on the contractorunavailable.A cold storage for fish exists but there is no electricity, rendering the facility unusable. Tendering for the project was not done, thereby making it impossible to establish its cost.


19/31


19

A total of Sh180,000 from LATF was used in renovating the Rotary Youth Polytechnic andsupplying electricity to one block without allowing the institution to make use of itspersonnel to reduce expenditure. As a result, poor quality materials were used. For examplewire mesh was used instead of grilled windows.Records at the municipal offices show that Sh.97,300 from LATF was spent on providingelectricity to Ondiek Primary School. However, the institution’s management maintains itreceived only Sh.30,000. Only five classrooms – and not the entire school – were connectedwith power, leaving the rest of the school in darkness.Other benefits to the school came from CDF in form of one classroom and 100 desksthrough unknown procurement procedures, making their cost impossible to establish.According to CDF books, the kitty used Sh.400,000 in connecting Anderson Estate withelectricity during the 2003/ 2004 fiscal year, but the project does not exist.On other matters, the CDF painted a public toiled that had been built by a parliamentaryaspirant, Mr. John Olago-Aluoch, only to brand it as a project of the kitty. And as if in asweetheart deal, an aide of the politician won a Sh1.5 million to provide “environmentalrenovation” of the Jubilee Market by constructing a dry fish store and a poultry shelter.

2.10 Milimani Ward

P P i i c c t t u u r r e e 9 9 : : T T h h i i s s i i s s t t h h e e M M i i l l i i m m a a n n i i W W a a r r d d o o f f f f i i c c e e b b u u i i l l t t b b y y LL AA T T F F .. I I t t w w a a s s l l u u m m p p e e d d t t o o g g e e t t h h e e r r w w i i t t h h s s u u p p p p l l y y o o f f e e l l e e c c t t r r i i c c i i t t y y t t o o J J o o e e l l O O m m i i n n o o S S e e c c o o n n d d a a r r y y S S c c h h o o o o l l a a n n d d b b o o t t h h c c o o s s t t e e d d a a t t S S h h ..4 4 8 8 9 9 ,,7 7 2 2 8 8 d d u u r r i i n n g g t t h h e e 2 2 0 0 0 0 4 4 / / 2 2 0 0 0 0 5 5 f f i i n n a a n n c c i i a a l l

y y e e a a r r ..

AA nnoonn--eexxiisstteenntt MMiilliimmaannii PPoolliiccee PPoosstt wwaass aallllooccaatteedd SShh..440000,, 000000 bbyy CCDDFF iinn tthhee 22000055// 22000066 f f iissccaall yyeeaarr,, aanndd tthhee ssttaattuuss rreeppoorrtt iinnddiiccaatteess iitt iiss aann oonnggooiinngg pprroo j jeecctt.. DDuurriinngg tthhee ssaammee ppeerriioodd,,


20/31


20

tthhee kkiittttyy ppuutt aassiiddee SShh33..55 mmiilllliioonn ttoo bbee ssppeenntt oonn ““uurrbbaann mmoobbiilliittyy”” iinn K K iissuummuu SSoouutthh WWeesstt WWaarrdd wwiitthhoouutt eexxppllaaiinniinngg tthhiiss ccoommppoonneenntt..

2.11 Kaloleni Ward

LATF allocated Sh.479,115 for the construction of a public toilet during 2004/ 2005 financial

year. Its contractors have so far been paid Sh381, 946, while a balance of Sh.97,069 isoutstanding. However the toilet is locked and abandoned; an indication that it is not apriority to the community (see picture 10 (below ).During the same fiscal year, LATF records shows Sh.20,995 was spent on a TV set for theKaloleni Hall. Our team established the public facility had received no TV.In the financial year 2005/2006 there was allocation for street lights to the tune of Sh620,000. But community members we interviewed said the project was non-existent. The same LATF accounts for 2006/ 2007 fiscal, there is Sh.700,000 allocations for garbageremoval; an activity the locals say does not take place.

Picture 10: Public toilet built in K aloleni using L AT F in 2004/ 2005 financial year at

Sh.479,115. T he project is incom plete, and is perm anently locked.

CCDDFF rreeccoorrddss f f oorr f f iissccaall yyeeaarr 22000033// 22000044 ssppeeaakk oof f SShh880000,, 000000 sseett aassiiddee ttoo bbuuiilltt aa bboorreehhoollee iinn AArriinnaa EEssttaattee,, bbuutt tthhee pprroo j jeecctt ddooeess nnoott eexxiisstt..

SSoommee SShh..550000,,000000 CCDDFF ccaasshh wwaass ssppeenntt oonn bbuuiillddiinngg aa PPoolliiccee PPoosstt iinn K K aalloolleennii dduurriinngg 22000055// 22000066 f f iinnaanncciiaall yyeeaarr.. T Thhee bbuuiillddiinngg,, wwhhiicchh wwaass cclleeaarrllyy oovveerr--qquuootteedd,, iiss ccuurrrreennttllyy bbeeiinngg uusseedd bbyy aann aassssiissttaanntt cchhiieef f .. IItt iiss uunnddeerrssttoooodd tthhaatt tthhee ccoouunncciill hhaass oorrddeerreedd tthhaatt tthhee bbuuiillddiinngg bbee


21/31


21

ddeemmoolliisshheedd bbeeccaauussee iitt iiss wwrroonnggllyy llooccaatteedd.. AAnnootthheerr eevviiddeennccee tthhaatt tthhee llooccaall ccoommmmuunniittyy wwaass nnoott ccoonnssuulltteedd,, lleeaaddiinngg ttoo wwaassttaaggee oof f ppuubblliicc rreessoouurrcceess..

PPiiccttuurree 1100:: TThhee pprrooppoosseedd ppoolliiccee ppoosstt iinn K K aalloolleennii,, bbuuiilltt wwiitthh SShh..550000,,000000 CCDDFF bbuutt nnooww uusseedd bbyy aann aassssiissttaanntt cchhiieef f ..

SSttiillll iinn K K aalloolleennii,, tthhee CCDDFF aallllooccaatteedd SShh..550000,,000000 ttoo bbuuiilldd aa ppuubblliicc ttooiilleett.. T Thhee bbuuiillddiinngg iiss ccoommpplleetteedd bbuutt llaacckkss wwaatteerr aanndd ddrraaiinnaaggee,, rreennddeerriinngg iitt aa ssttiinnkkyy f f aacciilliittyy tthhaatt nneeggaattiivveellyy aaf f f f eeccttss lliivveess oof f rreessiiddeennttss iinn tthhee nneeiigghhbboouurrhhoooodd.. T Thhee pprroo j jeecctt iiss aabbaannddoonneedd aanndd aa yyoouutthh ggrroouupp cchhaarrggiinngg uusseerrss iiss ttrryyiinngg ttoo ccoommpplleettee iitt.. AAnndd tthhaatt,, ccoonnttrraarryy ttoo CCDDFF AAcctt rreeqquuiirreemmeenntt tthhaatt aa pprroo j jeecctt oonnccee ssttaarrtteedd mmuusstt bbee ccoommpplleetteedd..


22/31


22

PPiiccttuurree 1122:: AA ppuubblliicc ttooiilleett bbuuiilltt bbyy CCDDFF....

2.12 Kajulu East WardLATF allocated Sh517, 000 for the renovation of Gita and Got Nyabondo dispensariesduring the 2004/2005 financial year. Some Sh.488,511 have been paid, with a balance ofSh.28,489. The LASDAP report says the projects are completed, yet they are ongoing.

Kianja and Oriang primary schools were to get two classrooms each from Sh.600,000 LATFsupport during the 2005/2006 fiscal year; works categorized as being in progress withoutindicating implementation status, amounts paid and outstanding balance.Elsewhere within Kajulu East, the construction of Gita Maternity ward was funded byLATF in the financial year 2006/2007 at Sh580, 000.Yet there is no report onimplementation status.CDF allocated Nyamrongo Water Project was allocated Sh1.4 million in 2005/2006 fiscalyear and the project is categorized as ongoing.In Kindu Primary School, CDF allocated Sh100, 000 for the financial year 2006-2007. The school was renovated by the Government through Free Primary Education programmein 2004, 2005 and 2006.The funds were used in the construction of two classrooms atSh.400,000. The committee of the project consists of;

The Chairman-Ezekiah Gor Secretary- Mr. Ogolla, Head teacher Assistant-Elisha Menya Treasure-Rose Onyango Margaret Adero


23/31


23

The committee is gender representative. The criterion used in getting the contractors was viacommunity interviews. Tendering process was done through advertisements. The tenderingcommittee consists of;

The chief-Mark Odero Ass. Chief-Tom Ongadi Area Councillor-Peter Karogo CDF representative-Ben Muga Mzee Mbode Others, making total committee membership to 15.

The CDF allocated Kianja School Sh,800,000 disbursed in two financial years starting 2006. The project was relevant to the community in order to reduce expenditure on buildingmaterials. The construction of classrooms was started in 2006 and was initiated by the MP.The work is not yet completed, but two classrooms have been occupied. The communityalso wanted health and training facilities as their primary project to improve people’s livingstandards. Consultation was done with parents and community members participatedactively.

The committee consists of:Chairman -Paul OndiekSecretary -Head teacher Treasurer -Caren Amollo

They committee meets monthly The contractor is a local resident called David Ochieng

2.13 Kajulu West WardObuolo Secondary received Sh2 million from CDF and this has been spent on building fourclassrooms. The walls are already developing cracks; an indication of poor workmanship for

a project whose cost the public feels was inflated. The CDF committee used single sourcingand awarded the contract to Mr Benjamin Aching who is a relative of the area MP. The CDF gave the same school Sh.900,000 for electrification; a figure those in the knowcontend was exaggerated. They argue that only about 10 poles are required to connect theschool to the main source about 2.5 kilometers away. The three-year old project hascontinued to be listed as ongoing.Okok Secondary school has been the highest recipient of electrification from the CDF kittysince 2003/2004 financial year to date, totaling a whooping Sh4.5 million. Yet the projecthas yet to be completed.An interesting arrangement exists at Obuolo Health Centre. It receives two different lines offunding through two names. Under LASDAP, it is called “Simba Opepo” Health Centre andhas received Sh.499,300. On the other wing, the facility passes by the name Obuolo HealthCentre in the records of CDF and has been allocated Sh.600,00 during 2004/2005 financialyear.According to LASDAP reports, the health centre is a completed project, but it continues toget double funding. Also, the tenders for both Obuolo Secondary School and ObuoloHealth Centre were awarded to the same Mr Oching for his political connections. Althoughthe facility is not yet in use, members of the local community are already raising questionmarks on the quality of the works.


24/31


24

There is also the matter of CDF projects in three different primary schools in the ward beingawarded to one contractor believed to be closely linked to the area MP. The projects are atOngadi (Three classrooms at Sh.700,000), Bukna (Nursery section at Sh.600,000), andAlango (Maintenance and fencing at Sh.500,000).

2.14 Kolwa Central WardLATF allocated Sh.674,000 for the construction of two classrooms at Renja Primary Schooland a bridge in the financial year 2004/2005. Of this, Sh.450, 000 has already been paid,leaving a balance of Sh.224,000. The implementation status report indicates the work is inprogress, to be completed through the engineers department. In the financial year 2005/ 2006 LATF allocated Sh.300,000 and Sh.460,000 respectively forthe construction of toilets at Nyamasaria and replace Kaloo Bridge since CDF wasundertaking the same project. There is neither a report on the amounts paid nor anydocumentation on their implementation status. There is irregularity and lack of transparency in the CDF committee, with the kitty payingfees for children of some capable members. The area MP stands accused of hand-picking members to the CDF committee, and doingnothing to correct twisted allocation of Bursary funds to schools within the ward.A number of projects in the area have also stalled despite receiving CDF support over thelast three years, yet others were allocated funds that were never disbursed.For example, Bwanda Primary School never received Sh.500,000 printed in the books ashaving been allocated to the institution, while Nyalunya Primary School is supposed to havespent Sh2.6 million on the construction of four classrooms. The cost of the project, the localcommunity members argue, was inflated. More than Sh4.6 million had been spent onbuilding a new Nyalunya Secondary School but part of the building collapsed even before itcould admit its first batch of Form One students, occasioning additional expenditure.

Nyamthoe Farming Project straddling Kolwa East, Central and West locations received atotal of Sh4.2 million from CDF between 2003 and 2006 had not achieved much although itis run by a relative of Kisumu Town East MP Gor Sunguh.

2.15 East Kolwa WardIn the financial year 2006/ 7 both St Mark’s and Kasagam primary schools got Sh.100,000apiece. That was a reduction of Sh.100,000 on each school the previous year. However,disagreements over the utilization of the funds have pitied heads of the two institutionsagainst CDF committee members.

A project at Dago Primary School has been delayed by a contractor related to the area MPgot an initial payment of Sh.397,000 but did not complete the work. Instead the committeegave him additional Sh.180,000 after he threatened to sue the committee over allegedcontractual disrespect. The work is shoddily done.

2.16 Manyatta Ward


25/31


25

During the 2004/ 2005 financial year, LATF allocated Sh.500,000 to build Manyatta Marketshades. So far, Sh.349,000 is reported to have been used, and that the project is still inprogress, to be completed through the engineers department. Four out of the 10 pillarsconstructed two years ago at inflated rates are now on the verge of collapse. The project wasnot prioritized by the local community.LATF also allocated Sh.800,000 in the financial year 2006/ 2007 for two drifts at Auji. There’s only one constructed and the work done in the ground does not tally with allocatedamount.

Kosawo Primary School received Sh.200,000 from CDF between 2004 and 2006, but onlyone classroom has been constructed.Migosi Health Centre has been funded by both CDF and LATF. LATF (2005/ 2006)allocation was Sh.800,000, but work on the ground that not reflect that figure.In the CDF records, Manyatta Secondary School was allocated Sh2 million between 2003and 2005 financial year, yet the institution has no building project.Another CDF beneficiary is Manyatta Primary School which got Sh.250,000, and additionalSh100,000 to replenish its library stock after it caught fire. However, it was not possible to

establish how much was spent on repairing latrines.

2.17 17. Nyalenda Ward The Nyalenda Kowino Dispensary, though completed, has not been officially handed overto the community for use. The ownership of its land is in dispute, while tendering for thework was not open. I t is understood the project was completed by a second contractor afterthe first one had ditched it midstream.Learning institutions within the ward such as St Vitalis Nanga and St Mark’s Nyaberasecondary schools were given Sh.150,000 each by the CDF for repairs following flooding.Nyamthoe canal project has been receiving funding from the constituency kitty over the last

three years without finally clearing its path to the lake. Consultation with the localcommunity is necessary.LATF allocated Sh.500,000 to clear and open up the course of Auji River to controlperennial flooding but no tangible, positive results have been realized. Those in charge of theproject declined to share documents with our team. The construction of the Nyalenda Ward councilor’s office has been praised as a LATFsuccess story, having been allocated Sh.600,000 during the 2005/2006 financial year.Its tendering was done by the council and the work awarded to Dantom contractors.


26/31


26

Pictu re 13: T he Sh.600,000 L AT F -sponsored N yalenda Ward councilor’s office und erconstruction

2.18 Management of Secondary Education Bursary Fund in Kisumu Town West T Thhee rreeccoorrddss aavvaaiillaabbllee oonn tthhiiss f f uunndd f f oorr 22000055// 22000066 f f iinnaanncciiaall yyeeaarrss rreevveeaall tthhee f f oolllloowwiinngg::--

MMrr AAddhhoocchhee wwhhoo iiss aa CCDDFF ccoommmmiitttteeee mmeemmbbeerr aanndd ppeerrssoonnaall aassssiissttaanntt oof f aarreeaa MMPP K K eenn NNyyaagguuddii hhaass ttwwoo cchhiillddrreenn wwhhoossee f f eeeess aarree ppaaiidd bbyy tthhee kkiittttyy.. FFoorr eexxaammppllee,, hhiiss ddaauugghhtteerr SSaarraahh AAddhhoocchhee wwhhoo ssaatt hheerr FFoorrmm FFoouurr nnaattiioonnaall eexxaammss aatt CChhrriissttiiaann SSeeccoonnddaarryy SScchhooooll llaasstt yyeeaarr ((22000066)) rreecceeiivveedd SShh1144,,000000 iinn bbuurrssaarryy f f rroomm tthhee f f uunndd.. AAnnootthheerr ddaauugghhtteerr oof f MMrr AAddhhoocchhee,, LLiinneett AAlluuoocchh aanndd ssttuuddeenntt oof f LLiioonnss HHiigghh SScchhooooll hhaass aallssoo bbeenneef f iitteedd..

T Thheenn tthheerree iiss MMrr SSaammssoonn K K ooddaannddee ((f f oorrmmeerr K K iissuummuu DDiissttrriicctt EEdduuccaattiioonn OOf f f f iicceerr)) wwhhoossee rreellaattiivveess –– ssoommee nnoott eevveenn rreessiiddeennttss oof f tthhee ccoonnssttiittuueennccyy –– aarree aallssoo bbeenneef f iittiinngg f f rroomm tthhee f f uunndd..

T Thheeyy aarree K K eevviinn OOuummaa OOmmoolllloo,, GGeeoorrggee WWiilllliiss OOmmoolllloo,, aanndd DDoorriinnee AAnnyyaannggoo;; aallll ssttuuddeennttss aatt RRaalliieewwoo SSeeccoonnddaarryy SScchhooooll aanndd nnoott rreessiiddeennttss oof f K K iissuummuu T Toowwnn WWeesstt CCoonnssttiittuueennccyy,, aanndd ccoouulldd nnoott aappppllyy f f oorr tthhee bbuurrssaarriieess.. HHoowweevveerr,, tthheeiirr uunnccllee,, MMrr K K ooddaannddee wwrriigggglleedd hhiiss wwaayy ttoo eennssuurree eeaacchh ggoott SShh..44,,000000 tthhrroouugghh cchheeqquuee nnuummbbeerr 000000449966 oof f BBaannkk aaccccoouunntt nnuummbbeerr 22001122994422440000 ddaatteedd SSeepptteemmbbeerr 44,, 22000066..

LLiikkeewwiissee,, ssiixx ssttuuddeennttss oof f RRaammooggii AAcchhiieenngg OOnneekkoo SSeeccoonnddaarryy SScchhooooll iinn UUyyoommaa wwhheerree MMrr K K ooddaannddee iiss aa ggoovveerrnniinngg bbooaarrdd mmeemmbbeerr,, aallssoo ggoott bbuurrssaarriieess f f rroomm tthhee kkiittttyy oof f K K iissuummuu T Toowwnn


27/31


27

WWeesstt.. T Thheeyy wweerree BBoobb BBrriiaann OOddiirraa,, RRaammaann OO.. AAppoolllloo,, OOggwweennoo WW.. OOmmoonnddii,, GGeeoorrggee OOddhhiiaammbboo,, OOmmbbuurraa OOmmoolllloo,, aanndd GG..MM OOttiieennoo.. MMrr K K ooddaannddee hhaaiillss f f rroomm UUyyoommaa..

IInn tthhee mmeeaannttiimmee,, oorrpphhaannss f f rroomm tthhee ccoonnssttiittuueennccyy wwhhoo aapppplliieedd f f oorr tthhee bbuurrssaarriieess wweerree ttuurrnneedd aawwaayy.. T Thhee iinncclluuddeedd AA j jwwaanngg T T.. MMiirriiaamm K K iirreerrii,, J Jaaccoobb SS..AA j jwwaanngg oof f NNggeerree HHiigghh SScchhooooll,, aanndd

FFaaiitthh AA

ddhhiiaamm

bboo oof f LLww

aakk GG

iirrllss’’ HH

iigghh SScchhooooll..

T Thhee f f oolllloowwiinngg ssttuuddeennttss wweerree eeaacchh aawwaarrddeedd SShh..44,,000000 bbuurrssaarryy yyeett tthheeyy eeiitthheerr ddiidd nnoott nneeeedd tthhee mmoonneeyy oorr wweerree nnoo lloonnggeerr ssttuuddeennttss;; K K eenneeddyy BB..OOcchhiieenngg ((K K iissuummuu BBooyyss)),, J Joohhnn AAnnggwweennyyii NNddiieeggee ((LLiioonnss HHiigghh SScchhooooll)),, aanndd MMuusslliimm SSeeccoonnddaarryy SScchhooooll ssttuuddeennttss BBrreennddaa AA..OOggaaddaa,, MMeerrccyy AA..OOggoonn j jii ,, aanndd OO.. MM.. OOnnyyaannggoo..

IInnddeeeedd,, tthhee K K iissuummuu T Toowwnn WWeesstt ccoommmmiitttteeee bbrrookkee tthhee rruulleess bbyy ggiivviinngg SShh..55,,000000 bbuurrssaarryy ttoo LLeeaahh OOuukkoo,, aa SSttaannddaarrdd EEiigghhtt ppuuppiill aatt DDaaggoo T Thhiimm PPrriimmaarryy SScchhooooll..

T Thheerree aarree ssoommee bbuurrssaarryy ccoommmmiitttteeee mmeemmbbeerrss hhoollddiinngg ppoossiittiioonnss iinn PPaarreennttss T Teeaacchheerrss AAssssoocciiaattiioonnss oof f pprriivvaattee sseeccoonnddaarryy sscchhoooollss iinnf f lluueenncciinngg aawwaarrddss oof f bbuurrssaarriieess ttoo tthhoossee iinnssttiittuuttiioonnss;; ssoommeetthhiinngg aakkiinn ttoo iinnssiiddeerr ttrraaddiinngg..


28/31


28

CHAPTER THREE

J Juuddggiinngg f f rroomm tthhee f f oorreeggooiinngg eexxaammpplleess,, iitt iiss cclleeaarr tthhaatt tthhee ddeevvoollvveedd f f uunnddss aarree bbeeiinngg mmiissuusseedd bbeeccaauussee ppuubblliicc ssccrruuttiinnyy iiss wweeaakk.. HHoowweevveerr,, iitt iiss iimmppoorrttaanntt ttoo eexxpplloorree rreeaassoonnss wwhhyy ssuucchh f f uunnddss aarree llaarrggeellyy ggooiinngg iinnttoo uusseess tthheeyy wweerree nnoott mmeeaanntt f f oorr..

3.0 Challenges in Implementing Decentralised Funds Let us now examine some of the key public perceptions in relation to the various funds.

3.1 Governance The Acts of Parliament that have created some of the funds give immense powers to sittingMPs. Corruption cases have been witnessed in the use of the funds, such as somecouncilors/MPs demanding that beneficiaries make advance contributions before receiving afraction of the benefits due or allocate money to projects that favors them. CDF is seen as

the most abused in this aspect, followed by the HIV/ AIDS and bursary funds, in that order.Political loyalties have led to unfair sharing of resources across constituencies/wards. Inaddition, there is a general lack of transparency and accountability probably due to theblending of supervisory and implementing roles.

3.2 ImplementationLow awareness by communities and fund managers of their roles and responsibilities in themanagement of the funds has contributed to poor performance, and total failure in somecases. Poor participation, particularly for marginalized groups, results in twisted prioritizationof projects and exclusion. The criteria for allocating secondary education bursary fund, forexample has been found to be unfair to orphans whose multiple roles undermine theiracademic performance. No mechanisms exist to deal with projects such as roads, watersystems, and schools that may cut across constituencies entailing shared benefits. No clearmechanisms exist to avert duplication of functions. Both CDF and the Ministry ofEducation offer education bursaries. There are also reported instances of a single projectclaiming support from different funds, with no checks to prevent ‘double’ accounting.Finally, there are challenges to ensuring that all devolvement funds reach all parts of theconstituency/ward in adequate quantities, and that all funds allocated are actually utilizedinstead of being returned to the source.

3.3 M onitoring and E valuationProfessional and technical supervision of the funds are lacking, resulting in poor projectimplementation. This has not been helped by low community participation in monitoringand evaluation due to inadequacy of data and general information about


29/31


29

the funds. There is a general misconception by communities that the funds are ‘free’ or are the personal gifts from political leaders and nottaxes from the public. Poor monitoring and evaluation has led to abuse of funds and fostered a sense of impunity amongst perpetrators.

3.4 E ffectiveness and E fficiencyAllocations from the various devolved funds are inadequate. In addition, tension between fund managers and technocrats over moneymanagement and remuneration has led to delays in the release of funds. Inappropriate professional and/or technical support, especiallyfrom Government ministries, has prevented funds from reaching target groups, while lack of transparency in procurement systems hasaffected cost-effectiveness of projects.

Summary of devolved funds injected from Treasury to Kisumu Town East and Kisumu Town West from 2003to 2007 financial years

constituency 1st tranch2003/ 4

2n tranch2003/ 4

Additional2003/4

1st tranch2004/5

Admin.cost2004/ 5

Additional2004/5

1st tranch2005/6

2n tranch2005/6

3r tranch2005/6

Total

Kisumutown west

1,000,000. 1,664,748 160,971 1,304,052. 72,793. 1,177,543 1,000,000 1,394,703 1,313,774 9,043,58

Kisumutown east

1,000,000 2,103,664 203,410 1,610,490 72,793 1,412,173 1,000,000 1,423,881 1,385.977 0,212,38

TotalAmount

2,000,000 3,768,412 364,381 2,914,542 145,586 2,589.716 2,000,000 2,818,584 2,699,751 19,255,97

constituency 1 st Year2003/4

2n year2004/5

3r year2005/6

4t year2006/7

Total

Kisumutown west

6,000,000 23,389,766 27,942,234 38,708,825 96,040,825

Kisumutown east

6,000,000 20,620,405 29,193,227 40,441,846 96,255,478

Total mount 12,000,000 44,010,171 57,135,461 79,150,671 192,296,303


30/31


30

3.5 R ecomm endations for improving managem ent of devolved funds An independent taskforce to shepherd projects implemented through devolved

funding.

Ministry of Public Works to uphold high moral probity levels in its staff forenhanced transparency in supervision of projects at the districts.

The final report to be made public There should be a transparency boards erected at all ongoing projects, stating the

contractor, the amount and the financial year.

RML to be used to make road networks around markets within communities. Bursary fund information to be made public and accessible to residents, preference

to be given to truly needy pupils/students.

District development officers and District accountant should ensure disbursement ofdevolved funds is timely and transparent.

All the devolved fund projects should have transparency board stating the name ofthe contractor, the project amount and the contact period.

There should be special Audit Unit for the devolved funds and the anothercommunity audit assembly for the purposes of looking at issue of transparency

CONCLUSION

Kenya’s seven operational decentralized funds face a number of challenges that haveprevented them from reaching their full potential. Generally community awareness andinvolvement has been low, and the funds are seen to have had little impact on the quality oflife of the population, partly due to inadequate allocations. Communities have questioned thevarious processes in identification and implementation of projects, as well as the monitoring

and evaluation of projects and funds, and have expressed concerns about accountability andtransparency.

There is a great deal of work to be done to educate communities on the role of the devolvedfunds, together with procedures for applying for and accessing them. And the recentrecruitment of 210 CDF managers is a positive move to not only “professionalize” the waythe funds are used, but also enhance fairness in project identification and prioritization, awayfrom the political favouritism and manipulation of sitting MPs.

There is need for community forums to audit the leadership and resource management andallocation either monthly or quarterly

New regulations and restructuring of the current funds are necessary to ensure that theymeet the needs of the targeted beneficiaries. Development of a better legal and institutionalframework is necessary for improved administration of the decentralized funds. In addition,cobwebs hampering implementation of projects such as changes in government or the‘privatization’ of funds by certain fund managers need to be cleared


31/31


Further we conclude that more than 60% of the money meant for the community projectsactually went into peoples pocket and there is need for more detailed study tracking all theprojects to ascertain the level of corruption.

Management of Devolved Funds(1)

Documents

Transcript of Management of Devolved Funds(1)