COUNTRY: KENYA

MAKING DEVOLUTION WORK:

AN INTEGRATED UNDP SUPPORT PROGRAM TO THE DEVOLUTION PROCESS IN KENYA

PROJECT DOCUMENT

2014-2018

2

Table of Contents Abbreviations .................................................................................................................................................... 3

Summary ........................................................................................................................................................... 4

1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 7

2. Situation Analysis .................................................................................................................................. 8

3. Programme Strategy ........................................................................................................................... 12

3.1. UNDP’s Approach ................................................................................................................ 12

3.2. Target group ........................................................................................................................ 15

3.3. Coordination Mechanisms .................................................................................................. 16

4. Programme Results and Main Activities ............................................................................................. 17

Pillar 1: Policy and Legal Framework ....................................................................................................... 17

Pillar 2: Capacity Building for Individuals and Institutions, Supporting Devolution .............................. 19

Pillar 3: Strengthening Service Delivery Mechanisms and Peaceful Co-existence at County and Sub-County Levels .......................................................................................................................................... 21

Pillar 4: Citizen Empowerment in Local Development Planning and Financing ...................................... 22

Pillar 5: Piloting County Demonstration Projects .................................................................................... 24

5. Management Arrangements ............................................................................................................... 25

6. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework .............................................................................................. 30

7. Risk Management ................................................................................................................................ 32

Annexes ........................................................................................................................................................... 33

a. Risk Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 33

b. Roles in the One UN Delivering as One Strategy on Devolution ................................................. 35

c. Work Plan .................................................................................................................................... 36

3

Abbreviations

ABD Area Based Development CG Council of Governors CIC Commission on the Implementation of the Constitution CPD Country Programme Document CRA Commission on Revenue Allocation DDWG Devolution Donor Working Group DEX Direct Execution DSWG Devolution Sector Working Group FAO Food and Agricultural Organization IBEC Inter-Governmental Budget and Economic Council KEPSA Kenya Private Sector Alliance MSE Medium and Small Enterprise MTP Medium-Term Plan NCBF National Capacity Building Framework NDI National Democratic Institute NESC National Economic Social Council NEX National Execution NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations RRI Rapid Results Initiative SBAA Standard Basic Assistance Agreement TA Transition Authority UN United Nations UNCDF United Nations Development Capital Fund UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNESCO United Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization UNIC United Nations Information Centre UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNOPS United Nations Office for Project Services WFP World Food Programme

4

Summary

Project Title INTEGRATED SUPPORT PROGRAM TO THE DEVOLUTION PROCESS IN KENYA

UNDAF Outcome(s): Outcome 1.3-Devolution and Accountability: By 2017, Kenya enjoys a participatory devolution process that is well understood by stakeholders, adequately coordinated and equitably resourced for the delivery of accessible and quality services; devolved institutions are legally, financially and technically empowered, well managed, effective, accountable; and resource management is transparent, equitable, effective and efficient at all levels.

Expected CP Outcome(s):

Outcome 2- Devolution and accountability: Same as UNDAF Outcome 1.3 above

Expected Output(s):

i) The national and county governments and the Constitutional Commissions have the technical, financial and functional capacity to strengthen the legal and institutional framework for a coordinated and effective transition to the devolved system of government

ii) The national and county governments have the appropriate regulatory framework to enable the implementation of responsive, accessible, participatory, equitable, transparent, and accountable service delivery with a focus on vulnerable groups, supported by effective M&E systems.

Implementing Partner : Ministry for Devolution and Planning

Responsible Partners: Council of Governors; Transition Authority; Commission on Revenue Allocation, Intergovernmental Budget and Economic Council, National Treasury and Select County Governments

Other Actors UNDP, other UN Agencies, Development Partners

5

Programme Period: 2014-2018 Atlas Award ID: ______________ Start date: January 2014 End Date December 2018 PAC Meeting Date 18 February 2014 Management Arrangements NEX

Brief Description

This integrated programme is designed to support to the implementation of devolved government to achieve improved governance and socio-economic development in Kenya. This intervention is derived from the UN Delivering as One UN Strategy on Devolution and further guided by the Government’s MTP II process. It is meant to transition to a Joint UN Programme The programme will contribute to UNDAF Outcome 1.3 and CPD Outcome 2 on devolution and accountability namely: By 2017, Kenya enjoys a participatory devolution process that is well understood by stakeholders, adequately coordinated and equitably resourced for the delivery of accessible and quality services; devolved institutions are legally, financially and technically empowered, well managed, effective, accountable; and resource management is transparent, equitable, effective and efficient at all levels.

The key result areas of the programme include:

i) Strengthened policy and legal framework for devolved governance; ii) Strengthened and aligned capacities at national and county levels; iii) Enhanced service delivery mechanisms and resilience for disaster risk management,

peace building and conflict prevention; iv) Strengthened citizen engagement in devolved governance; and v) Integrated service delivery demonstrated in select counties.

The project is organised around five pillars with the following outputs: i) policies, laws and institutional reforms for effective implementation of the Constitution at national and county levels are adopted ii) strengthened institutional and human capacities at national and county level evident in supporting national and local development iii) improved service delivery mechanisms and response to opportunities and threats of insecurity and disaster iv) strengthened citizen participation mechanisms and processes to ensure effective and equitable service delivery, transparent and accountable use of resources v) an integrated service delivery framework pilot implemented

2014 AWP budget: USD: 10,368,000 Total allocated resources 2014: _________

o UNDP 300,000 o Norway 1,158,396 o Donor _________ o Government _________

Total resources required (2014-18):

USD.35, 000,000

7

1. Introduction The adoption of a new Constitution in 2010 followed by the general elections held on 4 March 2013 heralded a new era in terms of the politics and governance of Kenya. Amongst other gains, the Constitution established a two-level governance structure, comprising a national government and 47 county governments, laying the foundations for transfer of political, administrative and fiscal powers from a centralized government to counties. The devolved governance system under the Constitution aims to further the cause of democratic governance from the national to local levels and thereby improving local governance and service delivery through responsive institutions. The Government has started to put in place the policy, legal and institutional framework for the implementation of devolution. The Government launched the Second Medium Term Plan (2013-2017) entitled ‘Transforming Kenya: Pathway to devolution, socio-economic development, equity and national unity’, which clearly and unequivocally states the commitment of the Government to the full implementation of the Constitution; ensures the rapid set up of Counties without the disruption of public service delivery. At the same time, the Government will give priority to capacity development and alignment at both National and County levels as reflected in the National Capacity Building Framework. It is envisaged that County Governments will play a key role in the planning and implementation of projects and programmes, through Country Integrated Development Plans, leading to the realization of the Medium Term Plan (MTP) and the Kenya Vision 2030. Therefore “making devolution work” is a priority within the MTP II (2013-2017). At the National level, the Ministry of Devolution and Planning has the mandate to coordinate devolution activities and in particular has the responsibility as provided for in the 6th Schedule of the Constitution to support County Governments to have the requisite capacities to undertake their mandates. Other supporting institutions that have been created to build the new devolved systems include the Transition Authority (TA), the Council of Governors (CG), the Commission on Revenue Allocation (CRA), the Intergovernmental Budget and Economic Council (IBEC) and the Commission on Implementation of the Constitution (CIC). The Senate represents the counties and serves to protect the interests of the counties and their National Government [Art.96 (1)]. The Senate has to facilitate the enactment of a sound integrated democratic devolved system of sustainable development and a governance policy framework consistent with the Constitutional principles. Devolution involves the transfer of power and resources from the central government to lower levels of government, initially to counties, and then more significantly to sub-counties and the people. Kenya’s devolution is a combination of autonomy and interdependence, resulting in a cooperative system of devolved government. Such a devolved system is ambitious and complex and requires careful navigation, consultation and cooperation. Significant capacity challenges exist at county levels given that establishing County Governments is a completely new venture to all, and therefore the learning curve is very steep. There are the immediate challenges of initiating systems, and the rapid training and adjustment of both the County Assembly and Executive bodies. Whilst individual and organizational capacities and experience in managing government in general exist, the critical challenge is to make “DEVOLVED COUNTIES WORK” in line with the principles and provisions of the Constitution.

Art. 10 (2) of the Constitution, prescribes the national values and principles of governance which include sharing and devolution of Power

8

2. Situation Analysis Vision 2030 clearly sets the trajectory for Kenya to move from a low to a middle income country, and a variety of initiatives are outlined to achieve that goal. The key drivers include: continued focus to address the infrastructure deficit including roads, railways, airports, mass transit, energy; transforming the economy into a knowledge hub with information and communications technology at the centre driving productivity and prosperity; supporting science and technology programmes; reforming and managing land as a key natural resource; undertaking public sector reforms which promote efficiency, transparency, accountability and effectiveness; projecting the national values and ethics embedded in the Constitution of Kenya 2010. Devolution is at the centre of the political pillar of the MTP II, and is woven through the entire MTP II. As stated in the MTP II, ‘the Government is committed to the full implementation of the

Constitution to ensure the rapid set-up of all county institutions’1. The success of implementing the Constitution is central to the achievement of Kenya’s medium term plans and the Vision 2030. Kenya’s devolution; undertaken within the framework of a unitary state is a complex and ambitious initiative requiring strong political will and commitment. Devolution seeks to maximize citizen participation and engagement in governance; and foster greater national unity by recognizing diversity. County governments are meant to units of economic, political and administrative devolution that will not ensure equitable distribution of resources but

also open governance space at the local levels. A Policy Paper on the implementation of devolution was prepared by the then Ministry of Local Government2 as a basis for the implementation of the devolved system of government. The Policy Paper proposes the implementation mechanisms for the devolved system of government as envisaged in the Constitution of Kenya, 2010. Consequently, it identifies the broad basic policy framework for legislation and administrative actions needed to implement devolved government. Several key legislations were also enacted, including the Transition to Devolved Government Act, 2012; the County Governments Act, 2012; the Intergovernmental Relations Act, 2012; the Public Finance Management Act, 2012; Urban Areas and Cities Act, 2011. Additionally, the institutional framework for the implementation of devolution is largely in place both at the national and the county level. What is required is institutional strengthening and better coordination among the key actors to ensure proper multilevel governance and enabled county governments to address most pressing Kenyan’s needs and to plan for the future. The two levels of governance structure; 1 national government and the 47 county governments are distinct and yet interdependent, and therefore significant effort has to be invested in realignment and where necessary creating new institutions and systems. In particular, emphases should be to create new legislation, amend some existing and repeal others. This will create a lean, efficient, effective and responsive government at all levels, and remove the inertia of

1 See MTP II, pg.3

2 The Ministry of Local Government has been replaced by the Ministry of Devolution and Planning

“Devolution is the therefore the most significant challenging Constitutional commitment that Kenyans have made to themselves and as such, “making devolution work” will be the running theme and key flagship project of the Political Pillar under the Second MTP…”

MTP II-Pg.98

9

centralized bureaucracies. The rationalization of the National Government sector ministries has already began with the reduction of the 42 ministries down to a maximum of 22; and the devolution of political power, responsibilities and fiscal resources from the national to the county level, as well as providing tools and mechanisms to better understand functions and responsibilities. This effort has to continue in terms of redeploying skills and building new capacity centres at the county levels. However, the complexity and magnitude of the on-going devolution process demands a long – term commitment from all stakeholders involved. The regulatory framework is just the starting point; implementing devolved governance smoothly and with the desirable outcomes requires learning and adjustment, not only by County Governments (executive and legislative) but also by local communities, NGOs, civil society organizations and private sector actors. It also requires the adjustment of the working system and working mechanisms of the national government, and the establishment of a different pattern of relationships with counties by sectoral ministries, parastatals and other relevant national government agencies. A challenge that the new supporting institutions face is the limited capacity and exposure to devolution and its many intricacies. Beyond the guidance on principles emanating from the Constitution, they need exposure to the tools and methods of addressing devolution for them to meaningfully support the 47 counties. This challenge applies across the board for sector ministries and other agencies whose modus operandi was rooted in centralized governance. Creating awareness on devolution and its architecture among the public is also critical. A recent study by the National Democratic Institute (NDI)3 revealed that Kenyans still have limited understanding of the roles of the county governments with only 26% being able to mention four or more services to be provided by the County Governments. However, the same study revealed that 67% of Kenyans believe that devolution will have more opportunities than risks. All the transformation will hinge on creating sustainable economic growth and development and on improving the quality of life and livelihoods for all Kenyans through adherence to democratic principles of good governance, respect for the rule of law, citizen participation in decision-making and delivery of quality services. There is also need for political will at all levels, reinforced accountability and attitudinal change of public officers of both the National and County Governments. Economic growth should benefit from continuing political stability, increasing urbanization4, effective disaster risk management and policies, which foster sustainable human development. The economic prospects of the Kenyan economy have been bright since 2000 enjoying a 7.1% growth in 2007 although relatively slowing down in the post 2008 election period due to political uncertainties, global financial and economic crises, high food prices and a slowdown in global economic activity. Agriculture, industries and services are all projected to grow and expand by an average of +6.0%, which will expand the employment base and contribute to the structural transformation. This is likely to grow further by the oil and mineral sectors of the economy. Kenya’s urban centres already account for more than 65 percent of gross national income5and as Kenya is increasingly becoming urban, cities and towns will increasingly play their role of drivers of national economic and social development. The institutional set up and revenue generating mechanisms for devolution can have strong effects on economic growth and service delivery.

3 National Democratic Institute Survey, August 2013

4 Rate of urbanization: 4,2%

5 Human Development Report 2011: Sustainability and Equity – A Better Future for All, UNDP, 2011

10

MTP II Political Pillar: Devolution- Emerging Issues and Challenges

Concurrent functions are likely to present conflicts in terms of interpretations of mandates

Low levels of awareness of the devolved system of governance in both the public sector and the general public

Weak or inadequate financial and performance management systems in counties

Inadequate county profiling

Inadequate capacity for planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation both at national and county level

Inadequate and delayed release of resources leading to a disproportionate reform pace, inefficiencies and ineffectiveness in service delivery

Weak inter and intra agency/sectoral collaboration and coordination

Weak monitoring and evaluation critical to tracking performance and inform programming

Human resource and management at both levels of governments

Competition for resources and influence between counties and counties and national government, leading to high demand for resources

Once stabilized, devolution might spur significant local economic development as 47 County Governments refocus public sector investments in their respective areas. The success of devolution centres on the ability of counties to undertake the functions as outlined in the Fourth Schedule of the Constition. This requires that County Governments have the necessary resources to be able to perform. The Constitution provides that revenue raised nationally shall be shared equitably among the National and County Governments (Art.202). Further it provides that County Governments may be given additional allocations from the National Government’s share of revenue either conditionally or unconditionally. It therefore brings to the fore that, transfer of resources without the institutional capacity does not yield sustainable outcomes thus; developing institutional capacity at both levels of government is a long-term intervention that is required. Further, it requires institutional reforms at all levels, new skills and competences of government personnel, and new ways of communication between the public sector and the citizens.

Resources have now been allocated to counties but constraints in terms of uptake by County Governments in these early stages persist as documented by the National Treasury in a public advert issued in November 2013. A recent study by Transparency International6 revealed that the majority of Kenyans (83%) do not know how much money has been channelled to their respective County Governments. The same study also revealed that 36% of Kenyans feel that corruption is the highest threat to devolution, hence the fear of ‘devolution of corruption’. Finally, about a sixth of the respondents view the development priorities to be out of touch with the needs of citizens at both county and national levels. The Strategy for Public Finance Management Reforms in Kenya 2013-18 seeks to establish a public finance management system that is efficient, effective and equitable for transparency, accountability and improved service delivery, as per Chapter 12 of the

Constitution of Kenya 2010. The priority for fiscal decentralization is the identification, assigning and costing of functions to be decentralized from National to County governments as well as to provide a framework for intergovernmental fiscal relations. In addition there is need to develop systems and procedures for sub-county operations particularly as it pertains to urban jurisdictions which have an important and significant service delivery mandate. The current legal framework (Urban Areas and Cities Act)

6 Towards hazy horizons: An opinion poll on implementation of devolution and governance reforms in Kenya (September 2013), Transparency International

11

actually recentralizes urban service delivery for most urban areas from former local authorities to County governments. Given the UACA thresholds, a significant number of urban centers do not have municipal boards but a college of appointed commissioners. The new arrangements give rise to the risks of weakened accountability and under-funded urban service delivery. Proper monitoring and evaluation will be necessary to identify successes and failures and, where necessary, to adjust procedures and mechanisms. Accountability and strong fiscal management are imperatives for prudent and effective use of limited resources. There is therefore need for clarified responsibilities and proper management of public resources for economic development throughout the country. All these cannot bear fruit without political good will, commitment, cooperation and collaboration between the various stakeholders. Implementation of the devolved governance system also presents a crucial test for national cohesion and integration. Devolution politics could be the new frontier of conflicts and violence if the process is not well managed. On the one hand, the principle of cooperative government is central in informing the relationship between the National and County Governments as well inter and intra county conflicts. At the county level, negative ethnicity is one of the greatest challenges that counties could face in the devolved governance systems. Disaster Risk Management in Kenya not only requests for better infrastructure, but also better mechanisms for its implementation. It has been emphasized globally and nationally globally and nationally that Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) is a development issue, and needs to be better integrated into planning. In the recent past, Kenya has made some progress in DRR mainstreaming. It was recognised that during the first medium term plan, DRR issues were not adequately taken into consideration. As the 2008 – 2011 drought exposed the weaknesses in Vision 2030 and MTP I, UN bodies including UNDP advocated for mainstreaming DRR in MTP II and DRR is now adequately mainstreamed in MTP II. Support is therefore required to ensure that counties mainstream DRR issues in their county plans. At the national level, although the Ministry of Devolution and Planning has been playing an active role, coordination with other key ministries such as the Ministry of Interior and National Coordination remains weak and without a policy to set a clear institutional responsibilities or leadership, mainstreaming DRR through the organizational sphere is limited. Additional challenges can be found in the budgetary issues as there is currently no clear budget set aside for addressing DRR issues. The devolved government system has created opportunities and also challenges to address the socio-economic disparities across and within counties caused by historical marginalization, unequal distribution of national wealth and resources, poor planning and coordination and utilization of resources. Some of the challenges and obstacles that need to be addressed are poor access to or inadequate information; high unemployment especially among youth; weak capacities to participate in development processes; lack of integrated strategy for inclusive and sustainable urban development; uncoordinated institutional frameworks to support devolution; lack of appropriate policies, evidence-based planning and budgeting; all-pervasive corruption and lack of a policy framework for management and extraction of natural resources, especially in the extractive industry sector. These challenges resonate closely to those identified in the MTP II7 hence will require concerted efforts by all stakeholders for the issues to be addressed.

7 See the MTP II, Chapter 6, paragraph 6.1.2 pg. 99

12

3. Programme Strategy

3.1. UNDP’s Approach

The formulation of this Integrated Programme comes at a time when the UN system in Kenya has adopted Delivering as One (DaO) as the primary Modus Operandi for delivery of its work. The Government of Kenya has demonstrated its leadership by requesting the UN Development Group (UNDG) that Kenya becomes a Self-Starter DaO country. Kenya is now in the early phase of operationalizing the new DaO Standard Operating Procedures. The UNDAF 2014-2018, developed in adherence to this reality, provides the policy and reference framework for delivery of joint programmes and advocacy works under one UN Leadership, One Programme and One Budgetary and Operational Framework. UNDP, as the Manager of the Resident Coordinator’s System, will therefore provide the required support for successful transition to the DaO framework. The UN has developed a Joint One UN Strategy on Devolution to support the Government in devolution. The strategy, endorsed by the UNCT, aims to maximize the UN’s developmental impact on the devolution process. All UN support and interventions will be guided by this common strategy and follow the principles outlined therein. The “Delivering as One” strategy is informed by three factors: the desire to enhance the development impact of UN support to devolution; improve coordination between the UN, the Government and other partners; improving visibility and reporting of results. The strategy will inform the next United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) and create a model for replication on devolved governance and service delivery. The strategy creates a programmatic platform through joint programming to enhance development impacts in local development and leveraging benefits for marginalized, vulnerable and conflict –affected areas. The UN will provide technical and other material assistance to the National and County Governments, and mobilize expertise to provide demand driven support to the various aspects of devolution. The proposed programme is closely linked to the UNDP global strategic plan (2013-2017), whose vision is focused on making the next big breakthrough in development, to help countries achieve the simultaneous eradication of poverty and significant reduction of inequalities and exclusion8. The programme is linked to outcome three of the strategic plan namely: Countries have strengthened institutions to progressively deliver universal access to basic services. The proposed programme will be implemented from early 2014 and will transit into the period of the new UNDP Country Programme Document (CPD) and the UNDAF from July 2014 and will be fully aligned to Kenya’s Vision 2030 and the attendant MTP II. It addresses priority areas identified in the MTP II such as capacity development of County Governments and improved policy coordination and implementation. UNDP will work in close collaboration with other UN agencies and other development partners in the course of implementation of this programme, building synergies to avoid duplication. UNDP will continue to play a leading role for this programme and particularly, in alignment with the new UNDAF, and will ensure close collaboration with the National Government and the 47 Counties so that the priority and focus benefits the Kenyan people. The integrated devolution programme will be implemented over a period of four years from 2014 to 2018. The first phase corresponds to a one year transition period, to be implemented in 2014, as the UN prepares a joint programme to support devolution. It includes the key areas where UNDP has a comparative advantage and is taking a lead as specified in the UN Joint Strategy on

8 UNDP Global Strategic Plan- 2013-2017

13

Devolution as shown in annex b. The co-leads in the key result areas that UNDP will partner closely with include UN Habitat, UNESCO, UN Women, UNOPS, WFP and FAO. Additionally, given UNICEF’s comparative advantage in evidence based planning, UNDP will work closely with UNICEF to support county capacity building in this area. The proposed programme is therefore part of the larger UN programme seeking to kick-start programmes that are immediately critical to the implementation of the devolution programme and to establish a base for long-term support. The proposed five pillars, based on the priorities identified in the key results areas, will form the base for larger support from all UN agencies. The “One UN” programme framework will allow for the creation of a common platform based on an agreed set of principles, targeting common themes and geographical areas. This is particularly evident through the ‘County Demonstration’ as outlined in pillar 5 which is part of the Area Based Development (ABD) Approach. UNDP’s work in democratic governance, peace building and conflict prevention, human rights and gender equality, empowering the poor and reducing vulnerabilities, inclusive and sustainable economic growth have yielded positive results in the past. Key results for the past cooperation period in Kenya have included the promulgation of the 2010 Constitution through a peaceful referendum and the largely peaceful 2013 general elections; strengthening of governance and rule of law framework through the establishment of constitutional commissions and independent oversight offices; development and entrenchment of peace, social cohesion and conflict prevention architecture in national legislation and institutional arrangements; enhanced natural resource management and governance; strengthened public-private partnerships and dialogue though Kenya Private Sector Alliance (KEPSA) and National Economic and Social Council (NESC); development of the MSE Act and formation of the MSE Authority; formulation of MTP I and MTP II to facilitate implementation of Vision 2030; integration of disaster risk reduction into development plans and processes; and rollout of devolution in all the 47 counties. UNDP has a pool of local and international experts, who can be mobilized to support various aspects of devolution. These include, but are not limited to, policy expertise on capacity development, change management and local governance. This is further supported by UNDP’s global knowledge networks, tools and frameworks. UNDP’s neutrality and convening mandate gives it a comparative advantage to lead coordination among other UN agencies and development partners and to facilitate coordination within government agencies and other stakeholders. In 2011, UNDP mobilized its partners to support the Task Force on Devolved Government that developed the architecture for devolution including the draft policy paper and bills on devolution, that were later enacted into laws. The key to UN support is coordinated engagement with Government at national and county levels and other stakeholders in support of devolution, re-affirming the UN commitment to Paris and Accra principles of aid effectiveness. These principles will be adhered to when supporting devolution as stipulated by the Constitution, while ensuring compliance with both national and county development plans and planning, and when mobilizing resources and capacities to support the devolution process. This programme highlights the following key principles as enumerated in the One UN Strategy on Devolution:

Support programs to be aligned to county development plans as stipulated in law and in particular to assist in addressing the reduction of disparities among counties;

Support the budget processes and report any off-budget financing to relevant government entities at both levels of government;

14

Support and promote the use of government accounting and reporting systems and procedures, and build capacities to adapt to new systems and packages; and

Support County Governments in developing project agreements and project implementation modules.

Further, the UN partner agencies engagement will be guided by the following engagement principles as stipulated in the UN Devolution strategy:

Human rights based approaches, gender equality and environmental sustainability;

Promotion of transparency and accountability with regard to effective public financial management and fiduciary responsibility;

Capacity development for leadership, public administration, negotiation and integrity; and

Public participation and social inclusion, including protection of vulnerable groups, vulnerable migrants and communities affected by migration.

UNDP’s support will employ a combined strategy of supporting both upstream policy making processes and improvement of downstream service delivery. The engagement will be both at national level and involve institutional strengthening of key institutions to deliver on their mandate, including technical support to key policy processes and sector coordination. At the County and sub-county levels the focus will be to provide technical and institutional support for service delivery provision to people and support engagement of communities in accordance with the principle of public participation that is supported by the Constitution. The inclusion and participation of CSOs, informal dwellers, communities and vulnerable groups is crucial for the success of the devolution process, as they are one of the ultimate beneficiaries of the policies. While support to overall capacity building under the National Capacity Building Framework will target all the counties, UNDP will also provide targeted support on building systems and processes for service delivery to a maximum of sixteen (16) counties during the four year programme period. The National Government together with the 47 Counties will agree on the counties to be selected for more focused intervention by the UN partners. Implementation will include peace building and conflict prevention including developing community resilience to disasters and management of the environment. UNDP will use volunteerism as a key asset to support devolution interventions at the county level. UN Volunteers can be drawn upon to strengthen structures, processes and systems of the devolution model. This support can also be extended at the county levels focusing on both direct service delivery as well as for long term capacity development of the county governments and their constituencies. The volunteerism as model will be used to support county specific interventions especially to support county level capacity development and the Huduma Centres. The proposed programme can be illustrated by the table 1 below:

15

Table 1: Integrated Programme Results Matrix Pillar Key Results Output

UNDAF/CPD OUTCOME: By 2017, Kenya enjoys a participatory devolution process that is well understood by stakeholders, adequately coordinated and equitably resourced for the delivery of accessible and quality services; devolved institutions are legally, financially and technically empowered, well managed, effective, accountable; and resource management is transparent, equitable, effective and efficient at all levels.

1. Policy and Legal Framework

Strengthened policy and legal framework for devolved governance

Policies , laws and institutional reforms for effective implementation of the Constitution at national and county levels are adopted

2. Capacity Building for individuals and institutions supporting devolution

Strengthened and aligned capacities at national and county levels

Strengthened institutional and human capacities at national and county level evident in supporting national and local development

3. Strengthening Service Delivery Mechanisms and Peaceful Co-existence at County and Sub-County Levels

Enhanced service delivery mechanisms and resilience for disaster risk management, peace building and conflict prevention

Improved service delivery mechanisms and response to opportunities and threats of insecurity and disaster

4. Citizen Empowerment in Local Development Planning and Financing

Strengthened citizen engagement in devolved governance

Strengthened citizen participation mechanisms and processes to ensure effective and equitable service delivery, transparent and accountable use of resources

5. Piloting County Demonstration Projects

Integrated service delivery demonstrated in select counties

An integrated service delivery framework pilot implemented

3.2. Target group

The support to the devolution process is ultimately targeted to the people of Kenya. Devolution is meant to bring governance closer to the people by ensuring that public services are effective and efficient and closer to the people, and most importantly that people can effectively participate in their governance processes both at the national, county and sub-county levels. Key support will also be directed to key institutions that are meant to facilitate the devolution process namely; The Ministry of Devolution and Planning, the Council of Governors, the Transition Authority, the Commission on Revenue Allocation and the Intergovernmental Budget and Economic Council (IBEC) under the Chairmanship of the Deputy President, the CIC and the envisaged Intergovernmental Technical Committee, once it is created. Table 2: Select Target institutions and their mandate

Institution Mandate

Ministry of Devolution and Planning

To provide leadership and coordination in planning, public service delivery and devolution for a globally competitive nation

Council of Governors To provide a mechanism for Consultation amongst County Governments, share information on performance of the counties in execution of their functions, facilitate capacity building for Governors and consider reports from other intergovernmental forums on national and county interests

16

Institution Mandate

Transition Authority To facilitate and coordinate the transition to devolved system of government in Kenya as per the Transition to Devolved Government Act, 2012 and the provisions under section 15 of the sixth schedule to the constitution

Intergovernmental Budget and Economic Council

To provide a forum for consultation and cooperation between National Government and County Governments

Commission on Revenue Allocation

To make recommendations on the equitable allocation of the revenue generated nationally between the national and the county governments so as to ensure an equitable and prosperous Kenyan society

Intergovernmental Technical Committee

Be responsible for the day to day administration of the Summit and of the Council of Governors

Commission on the Implementation of the Constitution

To ensure that policies, laws, structures, systems and administrative procedures developed and applied at all levels are consistent and in accord with the letter and the spirit of the Constitution

In addition to the above institutions directly linked to the facilitation of the devolution process, it is important to include line ministries. The inter-ministerial and inter-sectoral aspect is crucial to ensure an adequate delegation of powers and resources, responding to Kenyans’ needs. UNDP, within the framework of the Joint UN Strategy on Devolution will provide support to select County Governments as per the established criteria. The UNDP Amkeni wa Kenya programme will support community level participation and civil society organizations working with youth, women and other marginalised groups to effectively engage on devolution. UNDP will also engage with the private sector as key players in local economic development through the creation of jobs and economic empowerment of the youth.

3.3. Coordination Mechanisms

UNDP together with the other UN agencies acknowledged within the UN Strategy on Devolution that for devolution to be successful there is need for a coordinated response to the government’s requests for support. However, there are inherent challenges of adopting a common strategy and approach to support government, given that there are other stakeholders who are also involved in similar initiatives at all levels of government. Coordination challenges have arisen among the development partners with regard to overlapping activities and on the selection of counties to support.

Within the framework of the Devolution Sector Working Group (DSWG), the stakeholders have agreed to openly share information on various interventions. There is an ongoing initiative to map out donor activities with a bid to develop a common database that can serve as reference point for all support to devolution and minimize duplication. Currently, there are initiatives by bi-lateral donors directly or through other mechanisms. The World Bank is supporting performance monitoring, county level Public Financial Management (PFM) and public sector management systems. Under the “Bridging the Divide through Accountable Governance” the European Union

17

(EU) plans to support devolution-related activities such as civic education and public financial management while USAID has an immediate programme focusing on capacity building through the Kenya Transition Initiative and are planning to roll out a five year programme (AHADI9) targeting selected counties and CSOs. Therefore, there will be need for even greater coordination within the framework of the DSWG and among the Devolution Donor Working Group (DDWG) to avoid duplication and a situation where selection of counties may leave some counties without any support.

4. Programme Results and Main Activities The proposed pillars of the UNDP integrated programme are derived from the UN Delivering as One strategy on devolution, which argued for support to make devolution work; maximizing on the UN areas of comparative advantage, and the already existing involvement in supporting development across Kenya’s landscape. The strategy recognized that implementation of devolution is one of the most significant challenges facing the Government of Kenya, and its success is pivotal to the achievement of Vision 2030 and the Second Medium Term Plan (2013 -2017). The proposed five (5) pillars represent the main elements of the four (4) key result areas of the strategy ‘UN Delivering as One Strategy on Devolution’ which UNDP is taking lead. In addition they highlight the core business support areas of the UN and UNDP reflected in current and future UNDAFs under the governance and service delivery areas. The proposed programme cuts across the economic, political and social pillars identified in the Second Medium Term Plan (2013-17), and gives special focus and attention to county capacity building. Within the framework of the UNDAF, UNDP’s approach is linked to the strategy employed in UNDP’s Country Programme Document (CPD), 2014-2018. The CPD calls for alignment of UNDP’s interventions for a more harmonised and integrated approach along with other UN agencies to ensure enhanced effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of development results. The five programme areas in the CPD include: (1) Democratic Participation & Human Rights (2) Devolution & Accountability (3) Productive Sectors & Trade (4) Policy & Legal Frameworks on Environmental Sustainability, Land Management, and Human Security; and (5) Community Security, Peace and Social Cohesion, and Resilience building. Pillar 1: Policy and Legal Framework The Constitution is the supreme law of the land from which all policies and legislation will be derived. The UN is already playing a strong support role, particularly to national institutions charged with the responsibility to roll out devolution. Further support is required to national bodies like the Ministry of Devolution and Planning, Council for Governors, Transitional Authority, Commission on Revenue Allocation, National Treasury, Intergovernmental Budget and Economic Council, and Sector Ministries, who regularly dialogue with and have to formulate and implement policy with the 47 Counties. The inter-ministerial and multi-level mechanisms are key elements to ensure the development of regulatory frameworks and policies in line with a shared political vision.

9 Ahadi is Swahili word for promise

18

Whilst policies might exist at the national level, there is a need to provide more support to strengthen policy and legal capacities and frameworks for devolved governance. Legal and policy frameworks are planned to come up at each county level of government. In particular there is a challenge in terms of harmonization with the Constitution, particularly supporting legislation and regulations seeking to replace the previous hierarchical system of centralized governance. Additionally, there is need to strengthen county level legal policy framework development and implementation. Sectoral challenges are emerging in the implementation of devolution such as the current crisis in the health sector, which call for strengthened dialogue between the national bodies, the Ministry of Health and the 47 Counties. Such processes are necessary and will help create opportunities for inclusive and equitable service delivery, local economic development and infrastructure development. It is of critical importance that devolution must not end at the county levels, but that the devolved function cascade to sub-county levels and effectively reach the communities. These local levels critically require development of procedures and systems to make inclusive governance work for the new systems, to deepen understanding of integrated development and to avoid ambiguities and misinterpretation. There is need to recognize the fundamental roles previously played by local governments in the previous dispensation, and to ensure that services previously provided by the defunct Local Authorities can be provided with minimal disruption in the new devolved set up. Additionally, there will be need to support counties to develop legislations that are in sync with national policies and laws. Strengthening the legislative capacity of the County Executives and County Assemblies is a key priority, as there is a current gap that may hamper implementation of devolved functions including enhancement of local revenue generation. UNDP together with the other UN agencies will provide focused support based on UN principles of engagement, and ensuring that Human Rights Based Approach (HRBA) will be built in county plans and budgets, and promoting maximum citizen participation in policy making processes to respond to special needs including women and marginalized groups. Legislation and related regulations on sectors, land management, service delivery, housing and planning will have to be harmonized in line with the new architecture and urban challenges. This also touches on a range of sector policies that need to be connected and harmonized with the new constitutional order including health, water, education and infrastructure. This calls on the whole UN system’s specializations and capacities to be deployed to support the urgent policy and legal framework alignment. UNDP will also support the formalization of public-private dialogue frameworks at both national and county levels to ensure private sector participation in both national and county level decision making and to facilitate dialogue towards public-private collaboration. There is need also to leverage on an already existing network of civil society organizations in over 40 counties, to provide support for enhancing grassroots engagement in county governance. CSOs should play a key role in marshalling the people’s voices into the processes of legislation and policy development in order to make these are people responsive and at the same time enhance local ownership. Since devolution is a cross-cutting agenda, synergies will be built across programs to enhance effectiveness and efficiency in realizing results. The main output in this area will be policies, laws and institutional reforms for effective implementation of the Constitution at national and county levels are adopted. The main activities under this component include:

19

Support to all the key supporting institutions to devolution in their quest for putting the new system in place and ensuring its full alignment with the Constitution.

Support to drafting new laws by the key organs –Senate, National Assembly, County Assemblies, to enable the Constitutional provisions to be realized and review of laws that were enacted before the promulgation of the Constitution.

Support to Council of Governors to develop a pool of expertise in policy and legislative drafting that can provide technical support to county governments.

Support the preparation of County development plans/policies including the linking planning, budgeting for both National and County Government suing the MTP II and the MTEF process. This will shape the planning, budgeting, monitoring and evaluation in accordance with the new Constitution and help prepare templates and briefs for Counties.

Support evidence-based policy making for sustainable human development at national and county level, through support to national and devolved institutions including institutions of knowledge, connecting them to Human Development Report methodologies, implementation and monitoring of MTP II, MDGs and the post 2015 agenda.

Support the development of Public Private Dialogue Policy institutionalization of public-private dialogue frameworks in selected counties.

Support the implementation of the Urban Areas and Cities Act and further definition of Urban Development policies.

Support the development of a range of policies responding to specific thematic areas including the National Peace Policy; Ethnic Relations and Race Policy; Firearms Control Policy; Disaster Risk Management Policy and Border Conflict Management.

Support key sector ministries in dialoguing and vesting capacity at county levels for initiating, interpreting and implementing policies e.g. health, education, water, infrastructure.

Pillar 2: Capacity Building for Individuals and Institutions, Supporting Devolution Devolution is a major reform process that calls on individuals and institutions to be transformed, re-engineered and in some cases where the roles are no longer tenable, institutions need to be abolished. The bottom line is capacity building and capacity realignment of individuals, institutions and organizations. Whilst devolution is new and calls for new knowledge, there is a wealth of existing knowledge and practices that are relevant and need to be aligned. The national level needs to effectively connect with the 47 Counties in different ways and to live up to the interdependence enshrined in the Constitution. At the county level, there exists a skill mix from staff that worked under the previously deconcentrated central government institutions at the district level and the former Local Authorities. The law provides that these staff whose functions have been devolved are deemed seconded to the County Governments. However, the skill mix and career levels vary and this poses a challenge to the County Governments ensuring that staff cadres adapt to the new institutions. There is a further challenge of ensuring that the ongoing staff rationalization process doesn’t create discontent and anxiety among a majority of staff hence affect overall performance and service delivery at the County level. Counties therefore need to develop change management programmes to be rolled out during this transition period. A number of concerns exist, especially regarding human resources issues such as payroll management, pensions and management of benefits like medical schemes. This needs to be worked on with the participation of the affected public service staff since this is not only a human resources issue but it is also politically sensitive. The key is to develop and institutionalize knowledge, skills, and tools for devolved governance at national, county and sub county levels. The novelty of the Kenyan devolution process implies that

20

national and county institutional structures need requisite support to learn and optimize delivery of stated service mandates at both levels of government, with special attention paid to sub-county structures. UNDP and the UN system will harness its repository of knowledge and networks to ensure that relevant tools and instruments for capacity assessments are developed to undertake capacity analysis and identify areas that require support. The result of this analysis will inform the government’s interventions in this area and ensure that capacity development is broader and not limited to training. Instead, it will include systems and institutional development issues that may be identified and require a long-term and sustainable intervention. UNDP and the UN system will work to support the Government’s National Capacity Building Framework for capacity development. The main output in this area will be strengthened institutional and human capacities at national and county levels evident in supporting national and local development. The main activities will include:

Support the Ministry of Devolution and Planning to roll out the National Capacity Building Framework for Devolution, initially with the roll out of the Rapid Results Interventions. This will include technical support to the County Governments through technical experts seconded from the National Government who will be embedded within the counties to undertake on the job training and mentoring of County Officials with an initial focus on Public Financial Management. Further, there will be support to the development of knowledge and skills in transformative leadership and change management training for elected and appointed representative including women and youth and public servants to implement devolution.

Support the Kenya School of Government, specifically its proposed Centre for Devolution Studies to be a model institution to provide capacity support for devolution.

Support establishment of processes at county levels for functionality and improved performance management systems including :

Support the county governments in evidenced based planning and budgeting including a robust M&E system

Support mainstreaming corruption prevention measures in the County Integrated Development Plans (CIDPs)

Support establishment of performance management systems including RBM, strategic planning and performance contracting at county levels

Strengthening service delivery mechanisms at the county levels Mainstreaming priorities for inclusive and sustainable growth at county level. Supporting the coordination of the MSE sector at both national and selected county level,

with a focus on women, youth and other marginalized groups. Build capacities of counties for resource mobilization and utilization for development. Develop a pool of UN volunteers embedded within the Council of Governors that can be

available to provide short- term technical support to devolution and develop volunteerism as a capacity development strategy to advance county development agenda.

Institutional strengthening of the Ministry of Devolution and Planning, the Council of Governors, IBEC to provide the necessary capacity support to county governments on devolution.

21

Pillar 3: Strengthening Service Delivery Mechanisms and Peaceful Co-existence at County and Sub-County Levels One of the main justifications for devolution is that Counties are closer to the citizens and therefore they will attend to citizen needs and activate citizen power. Citizens demand services and infrastructure, which are seen as the “goods” that the State (government) delivers. This also includes improved resilience and capacities for disaster risk management, peace building, and conflict prevention. Mechanisms for service delivery are key to a successful devolution outcome. This includes providing both “hard” and “soft” infrastructure essential for the production and delivery of services. There is a particular focus on organizational capacities at county levels where there is shortage of critical skills and limited capacities to leverage both capital and technical expertise. This is one of the most important and critical indicators for successful devolution and very soon all counties and county representatives in Kenya will be asked by their communities whether they have made a difference in improving access particularly by the poor and disadvantaged groups. One of the evident successes of the first Medium Term Plan was the building of infrastructure, which now needs to be replicated at county levels and be nationally scaled. There is need to take cognizance of building and deepening the infrastructure for resilience, and capacities for disaster risk management. The second MTP seeks to close the “infrastructure deficit” to enable sustainable development, and poverty reduction; it needs to focus on implementation of county development plans. The UN will support strengthening the role of counties co-ordination and implementation of quality food security and resilience building projects with an emphasis on ensuring there is linkage with other longer term investment programmes. The support will be in form of technical staff to coordinate the asset creation programme at county level. While recognising the role of the government as the first line of response for localised emergencies, the UN programmes such as WFP, with its comparative advantage on knowledge and experience in food procurement and logistic- shall support in the revision/development of guidelines for management of relief operations taking into account both national and county governments aspirations. It is hoped that with clear guidelines in place, that the roles of both national and county governments shall be clearer. The UN shall support selected counties in setting up systems for management of relief food. This shall greatly enhance the capacity of counties to respond to short term food needs of vulnerable people. Additionally peace building at both the national and county levels is essential and capacities for conflict early warning, prevention, and management will need to be sustained to ensure minimal interruption in service provision and peaceful co-existence. Considerable focus should be on managing inter- and intra-county tensions over trans-boundary resources through, for instance, building collaborative leadership and mediation capacities. The main output in this area will be: improved service delivery mechanisms and response to opportunities and threats of insecurity and disaster. The main activities will include:

Support to County Governments in developing guidelines, systems, training, and support to prepare inclusive infrastructure and service delivery plans.

Supporting county level budgeting processes as per the Constitution.

22

Support planning processes at county levels as provided for in the County Governments Act 2012 which provides that a County Government shall plan for the County including;

Supporting the preparation of County Development Plans with detailed provisions of services and infrastructure priorities;

Close liaison with the sector ministries in terms of both their experience, and technical capacities of working at local levels; and

Support participatory planning and budgeting at local levels (Sub County) and to build a solid base for both upward and downwards accountability.

Establishment of county development funding mechanisms to support local development, which includes service and infrastructure provision.

Support to basic service delivery at county and sub-county levels and promoting the development of innovative solutions and mechanisms which ensure that services are delivered in a non-discriminatory, timely, and effective manner; this will be through County Enterprise Development Centers.

Institutionalization of public private collaboration at county level Support baseline studies on infrastructure and service delivery at County levels which feed

into county Development Plans. Support the establishment, monitoring and evaluation systems at County levels in

harmony with national support organs. Support to the Huduma (Service) centres to provide integrated services at the County

levels and the business promotion services as a delivery mechanism to public service to support enhancement of incubation of ideas, innovations, creativity, and technology enhancement for development.

Support the formulation of DRR mainstreaming guidelines for counties The development of risk management, early warning systems, and contingency plans Helping communities build resilience to cope with adverse climate change impacts Support promotion national cohesion and integration Undertake collaborative leadership training and cohesion building for managers and

technicians at National and County levels Support for studies, research and discussions on thematic issues on devolution

Pillar 4: Citizen Empowerment in Local Development Planning and Financing The most important stakeholder in the devolution process is the citizen who is supposed to benefit from government coming closer, and paying more attention to his/her needs. The county is the institution to which power is devolved and has to create mechanisms to bring better government services to the people (the villagers, small traders, farmers, fishermen and miners) whose lives they seek to improve and change. Citizen participation therefore ceases to be public rallies for elections and becomes an engagement for development. Therefore, financing and local development become a must for any program seeking to build capacities at county and sub- county levels. Empowered citizens need to understand the financing of development and be engaged in the local planning. That way, they cease to be onlookers and become active participants. Ideally, devolution expands the space for participation of various interest groups (ethnic, political, economic, social and religious), thus promoting equitable development and minimizing local conflicts and marginalization. Strategies towards this could include citizen feedback and response mechanisms, public participation in the county government decision-making (namely through the identification and prioritization of public policy choices), and planning and development. While

23

there exists strong CSOs at the national level, for greater social accountability at both levels of government, UNDP will support capacities of CSOs at the county levels so that they can effectively engage with County Governments. The government has developed the concept of ‘Huduma Centres’ to provide one stop service delivery10 points in all the 47 counties. The Huduma Centres are meant to provide integrated service delivery for essential government services in one place. It is also meant to increase youth employment and innovation opportunities at county level. UNDP and UN Millennium Challenge is supporting a Huduma strategy to use technology (mobile telephony and web-based Platform) to facilitate citizen feedback, and monitoring of the services provided by the government. This programme will provide support to the Huduma by supporting the government to deliver the services and citizens to access and provide feedback on the quality of service delivery. Devolution has raised high expectations and sometimes confusion at both county and national levels. On the one hand, there are the high hopes of the citizens that finally they will be in close touch with the decision makers in terms of service delivery and provision, unlike the previous arrangement of having to wait for an answer from Nairobi. On the other hand, there are fears among the devolved technocrats in fulfilling these expectations coupled with the related accountability challenges from local bodies. There are also fears that failure to deliver will have dire consequences for the elected bodies and their appointed officials. The Constitutional provision to ensure that both men and women including the youth and other marginalized groups are engaged in all public processes is essential at both the national and county levels. Consideration to ensure that issues such as Human Rights Based Approach (HRBA) and specifically that gender issues and HIV/AIDs mitigation processes are mainstreamed in development processes will be essential at county levels. The main output of the program will be strengthened citizen participation mechanisms and processes to ensure effective and equitable service delivery, transparent and accountable use of resources. The main activities in this area will include:

Support the finalization of public participation policy Support development of handbooks and manuals for citizen participation in English,

Swahili and other local languages Development of handbooks and manuals on citizen participation in English and the various

local languages Support curriculum and materials development for both elected and appointed officials

and dissemination through short courses and seminars Support coordination mechanisms for integrated civic education from public and private

institutions for individuals, community leaders, elected officials, civil society groups; and use of innovative and sustainable methods including training institutions, schools, Parents and Teachers Association forums and religious institutions.

Support citizen participation and engagement in service delivery mechanisms Support citizen engagement in policy making processes – provide specific tools to

empower citizens to be active participants –planning, budgeting and engaging different key stakeholders

10

The services currently provided are essential government services e.g. Birth Certificates, National ID, Passports, Driving License, PIN etc.

24

Building capacities of CSOs to effectively engage with the County Governments Develop a strategy for diaspora engagement in county development agenda Create awareness and implementation of the two thirds gender principle at the national

and county levels Support HRBA mainstreaming at County levels including consideration for HIV/AIDs

mitigation Support local development participatory planning at sub county levels

Pillar 5: Piloting County Demonstration Projects As stated earlier, the National Government together with the 47 Counties has to agree on the counties that will be selected for more focused intervention by the UN partners. This will strengthen the demonstration effect in participatory planning, fiscal decentralization, and local resource management through county structures. The selected counties should be prepared and interested to commit their resources and expertise to this venture, and so as to foster leadership and ownership in this demand driven process. The demonstration over a four-year period will engage County Governments in learning by doing and also foster cross- county learning. There will be several quick-win initiatives through funding from the UN and development partners which will consolidate the county demonstration effect. Ideally a few counties will get involved in different thematic areas and the UN will support these processes reflecting the different comparative advantages of the UN agencies. The UN and development partners will support and bring tried and tested methodologies to bear and support inclusive and participatory development. This model of participatory local development has been tested in a few countries under the UNDP/UNCDF local development model and has been partially documented in the UNDP/UNCDF manual –“Delivering the Goods.” (2005) The key features of the model include; a) learning decentralized development by doing; b) introducing real budgetary resources at local levels thus allowing local communities real involvement through local capacity building; c) accessing the local development facility, and d) capitalizing on real policy issues; and building upwards, downwards and horizontal accountability. In the case of Kenyan counties, there is a need to calibrate the issues and their impact through the lenses of the Constitution and various policy instruments to strengthen devolution. Beyond the broad questions and parameters of fiscal devolution there is an urgent need to develop and consolidate a culture of raising and managing local resources, and testing participatory planning approaches in real time. The capacity for local revenue generation is the real acid test for devolution. This process includes agreeing with the relevant key stakeholders including the Ministry of Devolution and Planning, Council of Governors and the Transition Authority, on the criteria for identifying the county or counties for demonstration. This is followed by detailed baseline studies of the agreed and identified county /counties, to establish a county local development program. This will build on the county development plans and focus on the dynamics at county levels. The main output will be an integrated service delivery framework pilot implemented. The main activities will include:

Identifying the pilot counties and sub counties and preparing the relevant memorandums of understanding

Undertaking baseline participatory studies to identify priority issues at community and other sub county levels

25

Supporting disaggregated planning to sub-county levels and agreeing on the unit of intervention for the UN support

Engaging in a planning and development cycle that feeds into the County Development planning and budgeting; to generate socio-economic data for county level real time MDG status report.

Training and capacity building of local administrators, technical staff, and local communities in local development and local economic planning.

Developing, monitoring and evaluation systems with clear indicators to facilitate the learning and feedback loop

Promote local innovations and adoption if ICT in planning and management The UN Delivering as One Strategy can be fully applied and tested through an integrated program at county level, and generate lessons, which can be replicated nationally. Through the County Demonstration projects a variety of local issues will emerge, together with inter and intra county issues including:

- Dispute resolution/management: intra and inter county and national versus county e.g. sector issues versus National Government issues e.g. health

- Engaging in South- South learning - Ongoing research and data collection and close work with centers of knowledge at

national and local levels. - Ongoing support to key institutions supporting devolution and appraising them of lessons

generated in the County demonstration projects - Providing short-term transition support from regional and global expertise, bringing new

knowledge and sharing lessons of experience.

5. Management Arrangements This project will be managed within the framework of NEX modality i.e. implementing partner and responsible partners from the National and County Governments. However, given the complexity of the devolution process, the fact the County Governments do not have adequate capacity as evidenced by the latest Controller of Budget’s First Quarter Report (2013/14) on expenditure by County Governments, UN agencies under the leadership and coordination of UNDP will organise some activities directly. Additionally, even under the NEX modality, UNDP has recently learnt lessons that there is need for the organization to even play a greater role in procurement of goods and services and ensure that due diligence is paid in following the laid down Government procurement procedures. In this regard, UNDP will work closely with Government counterparts to ensure that there is in-built capacity on public procurement but also that laid down procedures are followed before any payments are honoured. UNDP will take the leadership role in coordinating activities under this programme as specified in the UN joint strategy on devolution. UNDP and other co-lead agencies will play a lead role in project implementation. As the lead, UNDP will provide the Secretariat for the running of the activities. Each UN participating agency, will appoint a focal person on devolution to coordinate with UNDP and the Devolution Donor Working Group (DDWG) and the Devolution Sector Working Group (DSWG) as may be necessary. It is anticipated that once the next UNDAF is endorsed in July 2014, this project can inform and feed into a Joint Programme on Devolution.

26

a. Project Executive Board (Project Steering Committee) The Project Steering Committee (PSC) is the project management oversight body. It is the highest authority of the project responsible for making management decisions on a consensus basis for the project when guidance is required by the Project Coordinator. This means that the Steering Committee reviews project progress and results and may adjust activities according to the needs in a changing implementation environment. In order to ensure UNDP’s ultimate accountability, the Steering Committee decisions should be made in accordance to standards11 that shall ensure the best value to money, fairness, integrity transparency and effective international competition. The PSC shall be co-chaired by UNDP and the Ministry of Devolution and Planning. The PSC shall provide overall policy direction and make approvals on project implementation including recommendations for approval of project revisions. Project reviews by this group are made at designated decision points or as necessary when raised by all the stakeholders. The PSC will provide overall coordination of the programme, provide guidance regarding the technical feasibility of the programme, and ensure the realisation of programme benefits from the perspective of programme beneficiaries. The objective of the PSC is to ensure that donor assistance to the programme processes and key milestones are consistent and applied towards meeting priority activities. Each responsible partner will set up and lead a coordination mechanism to optimize the efficient use of resources, eliminate double allocations of funds to projects and initiatives and minimize potential differences among donors and other stakeholders. The PSC shall meet on a quarterly basis. The membership to the Steering Committee includes the following:

Executive: Refers to the individual representing the project ownership to chair the group. In this case, the Ministry of Devolution and Planning will be the Executive and shall designate the Project Coordinator, who will be the liaison officer for UNDP.

Senior Supplier: Refers to the individual or group representing the interests of the parties concerned, which provide funding and/or technical expertise to the project. The Senior Supplier’s primary function within the Board is to provide guidance regarding the technical feasibility of the project. As such both UNDP and funding donors will play the role of senior suppliers.

Senior Beneficiary: Refers to the individual or group of individuals representing the interests of those who will ultimately benefit from the project. The Senior Beneficiary’s primary function within the Board is to ensure the realization of project results from the perspective of project beneficiaries. In this case, Ministry of Devolution and Planning along with the Council of Governors, Commission on Revenue Allocation (CRA), select sector Ministries, Departments and Agencies and selected counties and the Transition Authority will represent the interests of Kenyan citizens who are the ultimate beneficiaries of the project intervention.

b. Project Technical Committee There will be thematic teams, focusing on the above five (5) Pillars. The key outputs and main activities to be implemented by each team will be defined in the work plan. UNDP shall designate

11 UNDP Financial Rules and Regulations: Chapter E, Regulation 16.05: a) The administration by executing entities or, under the harmonized operational modalities, implementing partners, of resources obtained from or through UNDP shall be carried out under their respective financial regulations, rules, practices and procedures only to the extent that they do not contravene the principles of the Financial Regulations and Rules of UNDP. b) Where the financial governance of an executing entity or, under the harmonized operational modalities, implementing partner, does not provide the required guidance to ensure best value for money, fairness, integrity, transparency, and effective international competition that of UNDP shall apply.

27

a project manager to coordinate all the devolution activities. The technical committee shall comprise of sub-committees organised according to the pillars and shall meet on a monthly basis. The main responsibility of the technical committee shall be to ensure that implementation is undertaken as per approved plans and ensure that project monitoring and reporting is undertaken. The technical committee shall also provide quality assurance on the results.

c. Programme Management Support The implementation of devolution requires dedicated human resources with a skills and competence mix to support the process. UNDP intends to create a resource base within the Country Office to steer the process. UNDP will use its existing human resource base and will engage technical expertise both locally and internationally to establish a Project Support Team (PST) to manage the implementation of the project. UNDP will further collaborate with the UNV office, to tap into the volunteering mechanism to support devolution. UNVs will be engaged as needed to provide specific technical support within counties. The PST will comprise of a Technical Advisor on Devolution, to provide high level policy and technical advice on devolution; a Programme Manager, to provide overall management and coordination of the integrated programme; one Programme Officer to liaise with national level partners and county governments; and a Monitoring and Evaluation officer, to coordinate monitoring and evaluation (M&E) activities of the programme and ensure timely M&E results reporting by all stakeholders; and a Finance Officer to manage project finances; and a Procurement Officer to manage all project related procurement and a Project Assistant to undertake administrative responsibilities.

d. Collaboration arrangements Funding for the project will be mainly through the National Execution (NEX) modality with a limited use of the Direct Execution (DEX) for some projects that will be implemented separately and contribute to this project. Under the DEX modality, UNDP will be responsible to organise and implement the activities while under the NEX modality the implementation of agreed activities and responsibility for specific output areas will lie with respective government agencies as indicated in the work plan. UNDP will manage the resources for the activities under this programme. Recognising the complexity of the devolution process and the independence of the agencies involved and the county governments, UNDP shall sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with all the partners to allow them to access funding directly. Development Partners that will support this programme will jointly sign a Joint Statement of Intent that will outline their collaboration in support of the programme.

e. Support to Implementation Owing to the nature and complexity of the project with various players, there will be a Project Coordinator at the level of the Ministry of Devolution and Planning and thematic focal points in the various agencies envisaged by the project. The focal points in various agencies will work closely with the PST.

f. Project Assurance Project Assurance is the responsibility of each Project Board (Steering Committee) member; however the role can be delegated. The Project Assurance role supports the Project Board by carrying out objective and independent project oversight and monitoring functions. This role ensures appropriate project management milestones are managed and completed. A UNDP Programme Analyst holds the Project Assurance role. The Programme Analyst, who holds the project assurance role, will be supported by the Deputy Country Director/Programme and the Governance Team Leader on matters related to strategic visioning and guidance. The M&E Advisor will provide support on matters related to reporting and monitoring of results and

28

adherence of development partners to requirements, and UNDP procurement and finance departments will provide administrative support on compliance with UNDP financial and procurement rules and regulations. Some of the key aspects that need to be checked by the Project Assurance Officer throughout the project as part of ensuring that it remains relevant include: beneficiary needs and expectations are being met or managed; risks are being controlled; adherence to the Project Justification (Business Case); project fits with the overall Country Programme; the right people are being involved; applicable UNDP rules and regulations are being observed; adherence to monitoring and reporting requirements and standards; quality management procedures are properly followed and that the Project Board’s decisions are followed and revisions are managed in line with the required procedures.

g. The Audit Requirements: The objective of the independent audit is to provide all stakeholders assurance that resources are being managed in accordance with agreed rules and regulations, more specifically:

The Kenya Government’s Public Financial Management laws and procedures, and any other agreed practices and procedures where resources are managed by a Third Party

The UNDP rules and procedures will apply whenever UNDP procures the component supported by the Basket Fund

The Work Plan activities, management and implementation arrangements, monitoring and evaluation and reporting provisions; and the requirements for implementation are adhered to in the areas of management, administration and finance.

The Responsible Partners audits must confirm and certify that the Kenyan Government’s rules and regulations governing public expenditure have been complied with, and additionally:

Disbursements are made in accordance with the Work Plan;

Disbursements are valid and supported by adequate documentation;

An appropriate system for internal control is maintained by all responsible partners and can be relied upon by all stakeholders;

Work Plan financial reports are fair and accurately presented;

The Work Plan monitoring and evaluation reports are prepared as required;

Work Plan disbursements are duly verified by responsible partners and the procurement, use, control and disposal of non-expendable equipment are in accordance with the Government of Kenya’s requirements or with UNDP’s rules and procedures when requested to procure on behalf of the responsible partners.

Where any of the responsible partner activities shall be funded through a basket facility, UNDP shall take the responsibility to audit the funded activities. A reputable firm sub-contracted by UNDP will conduct the audit as per the agreed rules and regulations. In the event of such an audit, the responsible partners will ensure that auditors are given all records and information that they will need to perform a meaningful audit.

h. Legal Context The project document is the instrument referred to as such in Article I of the Standard Basic Assistance Agreement (SBAA) between the participating government institutions and the United Nations Development Programme.

29

Publicity and Publications: Materials and products that will come out of this collaboration shall be owned jointly by the property of the Government of Kenya. The responsible partner and other collaborating parties will acknowledge the support of development partners in all information given to the press, project beneficiaries, all related publicity materials, official notices, reports and publications. This acknowledgement will be done in any appropriate way including display of the relevant and appropriate logos. In addition, all publications will be reviewed by the Development Partners before publication, and shall bear the appropriate disclaimer(s). UNDP will also work with the UN Information Centre (UNIC) within the framework of the UN Strategy on devolution.

30

Project Management Structure

6. Monitoring and Evaluation Framework

The monitoring of the devolution programme will involve tracking processes (efficiency), as well as, performance on the basis of specific expected results, using predefined indicators for each activity. Monitoring of the activities will primarily be the responsibility of the responsible partners and the programme management at UNDP. Based on the National M&E Framework, an M&E framework this programme will be developed and support will be provided to the partners.

The proposed project will be monitored through the following:

Annual work-plans approved and monitored by the Technical Committee. Reporting will be in the form of quarterly, bi-annual and annual reports, including Partners’ progress reports. Progress will be monitored by output indicators against set targets.

Project Steering Committee (Project Board)

Senior Supplier

UNDP and Donors

Executive

MoDP

Senior Beneficiary

MoDP,CG,CRA,IBEC,TA, Select Counties

Project Support Team

Short-Term Experts and UNVs

Project Assurance

UNDP Programme Analyst

Technical Committee

31

Quarterly progress reports will be prepared and circulated by all the responsible partners

Joint field missions and joint reviews between government and development partners

As this is a four-year programme, it is recommended that at least one mid-term and an end-term evaluation be undertaken by an external consultant, to measure outcomes/results achieved against stated baselines at the beginning of the programme.

For County specific support, there will be need to develop results frameworks that can track progress made by various counties on the interventions being supported by UNDP.

Technical support will be provided by an M&E officer who will facilitate in consultation with MoDP, the development of a M&E framework and tools for data gathering and results reporting. The M&E officer will also provide technical support to the responsible partners on M&E and organise training and coaching sessions. Monitoring and reporting will be a joint responsibility between the responsible partners and UNDP.

6.1. Within the annual cycle

On a quarterly basis, and as part of the Responsible Partners’ reporting requirements, assessment shall record progress towards the completion of key output results, and their contribution to the programme outcomes

Based on the initial risk analysis submitted, the risks shall be regularly updated by reviewing the external environment that may affect the programme’s progress.

The Programme Management Team shall compile and prepare joint quarterly progress and financial reports that shall be shared with the Project Steering Committee, during quarterly meetings. The team shall ensure that reports are of the right quality and reflect the actual progress of the project.

Monitoring plan shall be prepared and updated to track key management actions/events.

Joint review meetings by responsible partners and funding partners shall be held and any other activity jointly undertaken according to an agreed upon schedule.

6.2. Annual M&E

Annual Review Report- An annual review report shall be prepared by the Project Manager and shared with the Project Steering Committee. As minimum requirement, the Annual Review Report shall consist of updated information for each of the above components of the programme as well as a summary of results achieved against pre-defined annual targets at the output level.

Annual Programme Review. Based on the above report, an annual programme review shall be conducted during the fourth quarter of the year or soon after, to assess the performance of the project and appraise the Annual Work Plan (AWP) for the following year. In the last year, this review will be a final assessment. This review is driven by the Project Steering Committee and may involve other stakeholders as required. It shall focus on the extent to which progress is being made towards outputs, and that the outputs remain aligned to appropriate outcomes.

The responsible partners will ensure that annual results are submitted in a timely manner to enable the updating of the activities.

32

6.3. Evaluation

An independent evaluation will be conducted as agreed upon by the Project Steering Committee. The objective of the evaluation will be to assess the realised results against the planned results. The process will also assess the key project implementation issues, fiduciary responsibility and draw lessons learnt and make recommendations for future programme support. There will a mid-term evaluation and end term evaluation for the project.

7. Risk Management

There are a number of potential risks that may affect programme implementation that need to be taken into account as the programme is rolled out. The many challenges outlined earlier in this document ought to be taken into consideration as the proposed devolved system of government in Kenya is one that is unique and there are hardly any countries around the world that have rolled out such an ambitious programme. The implication is that there will be constant need to monitor the implementation and adjust as the programme is rolled to allow for smooth transition to the devolved system of governance. There are also bound to be challenges in the interpretation of laws that have already been passed on devolution to ensure that they do not conflict with each other and where necessary timely amendments to the legislation may be necessary to allow for a smooth transition. The novelty of the devolved system of governance in Kenya is by itself a potential risk as the country is moving from decades of centralised power within the national government. The power struggles between the devolved government and the national government and among the key stakeholders may continue for a long time and may hamper programme implementation. The matrix in annex 1 outlines some of the potential risks, the possibility of occurrence, impact on the project and proposed mitigation strategies.

Annexes

a. Risk Analysis

Risk Type and Impact Probability Mitigation

Overlapping

mandates on

institutions to support

the constitutional

mandate for

devolution

Political: High Devolution is a complex process that requires various institutions working together in a cooperative and collaborative manner. Any attempt to undermine or eliminate a single institution or weaken the legal framework will complicate or undermine entrenchment of the devolved systems of governance with uncertainties.

Medium: Recent attempts to disband the Transition Authority points to the possibility of instability of constitutionally/ legally mandated institutions

UNDP will continue engaging the state and other stakeholders with a view to ensuring fidelity to the constitution roadmap for implementation of devolution. UNDP’s capacity development interventions at both national and county levels will seek to strengthen devolution institutions and legal frameworks.

Weak collaborative

mechanisms between

key players on

devolution matters

Political: Medium

There is an overlap of

roles and functions of

various institutions

that have been

created to support the

process and this has

led to lack of proper

coordination on

certain activities

High:

Lack of trust and

sharing of information

among institutions

may persist over time;

this leads to

duplication of efforts

and resources.

UNDP will facilitate

frequent round table

consultative forums

among the players

Acrimony among

leaders hampers the

implementation

Political: High Successful implementation of devolution is predicated on sustainable political will unless leaders at the high level show commitment and unity of purpose devolution might fail.

High: On-going disagreements between Governors/Senators; National Assembly members/Senators; National government officials/County governors.

UNDP will continue to engage the state and development partners in marshaling political support and will to fully implement devolution in accordance with the constitution.

Disagreement on the amount of revenue to be allocated to

Political: High Without adequate financing of county

Medium Announcement of the first revenue sharing

UNDP will support Commission on Revenue Allocation in

34

Risk Type and Impact Probability Mitigation

counties governments, devolution of functions will stall, quality of services will deteriorate and public satisfaction on the implementation of constitution will be seriously affected

formulae was greeted with outcry by certain sections of political class.

public awareness and engagement over the revenue sharing formulae.

Inter-County and Intra County disputes especially over natural resources and county boundaries

Political: Medium The Intergovernmental Relations Act sets mechanisms for dispute resolution but the mechanisms have not yet been established

High New dimension of marginalization is emerging within counties that may threaten cohesion. Additionally cross- boundary conflicts over common resources need to be dealt with.

UNDP will continuously engage with relevant actors to ensure that dispute resolution mechanisms are established at both National and County levels.

Inadequate funding for the project

Financial: High There is need to have adequate resources to support both National and County level interventions. The needs are many and resource constraints may affect the ability to deliver effectively on the anticipated results

High Development partners wish to consolidate their support, and to ensure that the mechanisms will yield the desired results

UNDP will work with National and County Governments to expand resource mobilization base and work with development partners to ensure that resources mobilized are used prudently for intended results.

Weak transparency and accountability for use of resources

Strategic: High Fiduciary risks still remain high in Kenya. With devolution, there is fear that the counties may act as the new spheres for corruption.

High Donor support to development programmes is hinged upon proper mechanisms for financial accountability and a commitment to ensure that resources are used for the intended purposes

While UNDP will support use of country systems as part of the principles of development cooperation, UNDP will play its role of fiduciary responsibility for resources entrusted to it.

35

b. Roles in the One UN Delivering as One Strategy on Devolution

KRA Lead Agency

Co-Leads Other Actors Indicative One Year budget12 ($)

KRA 1: strengthened policy and legal framework for devolved governance

UNDP UN Habitat

UNESCO

UN Women, UNAIDS

UNFPA, ISDR, UNIC/UNCG, IOM, FAO, WHO, UNICEF

550,000

KRA 2: Knowledge, skills and tools for devolved governance developed at national and county levels

UNDP UNOPS, FAO

WFP, UNICEF, UNEP

UNFPA, UNESCO, ISDR, UNIDO, UNODC, UNIC/UNCG, IOM, ILO, WHO, UN Women

585,000

KRA 3: Evidence-based planning, budgeting and monitoring of services at county level enhanced

UNFPA FAO WFP, UNDP, UNAIDS, WHO, UNIC/UNCG, IOM

UNV, ILO, UN Women, UNICEF

400,000

KRA 4: Strengthened civic education, community participation and engagement on devolution

UNDP UN Women

UN Habitat, UNICEF, IOM, UNV, FAO, UNIC/UNCG

1,285,000

KRA 5: Enhanced resilience and capacities for disaster risk management, peace building and conflict prevention

UNDP FAO, WFP UN Women, UNIC/UNCG, IOM, ILO, OCHA, UNICEF, UNESCO

550,000

KRA 6: Sustainable urban governance and development mechanisms, industrial development planning established and strengthened

UN-Habitat

UNEP,

UNIDO

ISDR, UNIC/UNCG, IOM, UNOPS, UNICEF

3,000,000

KRA 7: Gender equality, women empowerment and human rights strengthened

UN Women

UNFPA,

OHCHR

WFP, UNICEF, UNDP, UN Habitat, FAO, UN Women, UNIC/UNCG, IOM, ILO, UNESCO

825,000

KRA 8: Halting and reversing the spread of HIV and AIDS and mitigating its impacts at County Level

UNAIDS UNFPA,

WHO

WFP, UN Women, UNODC, WHO, UNIC/UNCG, IOM, UNESCO, ILO, UNICEF,UNDP

600,000

TOTAL 7,795,000

12

These budgets are indicative UN agency resources, either core resources or to leverage

c. Work Plan

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

And baseline, associated indicators and targets13

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME (2014)

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET (2014)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Funding Source Budget

Description Amount (USD)

Output 1: Policies, laws and institutional reforms for effective implementation of the Constitution at national and county levels are adopted

1.1. Indicator: # number of policies and laws adopted at the National level to support effective implementation of Devolution. Baseline: 10 (2013)

Target: 15 (2018)

1.2 Indicator: Proportion of supported counties that have capacity to formulate laws that promote devolution;

Baseline: 0 (2013)

Target: 80% of counties (2018)

1. Support all key institutions in their quest for putting the new system in place and ensuring its full alignment with the Constitution

MoDP, CG, IBEC, CRA, TA, CIC

Technical Expertise, UNVs

500,000

2. Support drafting of new laws by Senate, National Assembly and County Assemblies,

IBEC, Senate, National Assembly, County Assemblies

Consultancies, Workshops

100,000

3. Support the Council of Governors to develop a pool of expertise in legislative drafting

Council of Governors (CG), KLRC

Consultancies, Workshops

100,000

4. Support the alignment of county development plans/policies with the National Plans and Policies

MoDP, CG, Select Counties

Consultancies, workshops, travel, accommodation

200,000

5.Support evidence-based policy making towards sustainable human development at National and County level including supporting the national and county HDR, implementation and monitoring of MTP II, MDGs and post 2015 agenda

MoDP Consultancies,

Publications,

Workshops

300,000

6. Support the development of Public Private Dialogue Policy including to institutionalize public-private dialogue frameworks in selected counties.

National Treasury, Ministry of Industrialization and Enterprise Development, KEPSA

Consultancies, Workshops

50,000

13 Apply to the five year programme. Annual targets will be elaborated in the M&E plan.

37

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

And baseline, associated indicators and targets13

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME (2014)

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET (2014)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Funding Source Budget

Description Amount (USD)

7. Support the implementation of the Urban Areas and Cities Act and Urban Development policy

Ministry of Lands, Housing and Urban Development , TA

Technical Expertise Workshops

150,000

8. Support the development of Policies relating to specific thematic areas including National Peace Policy including Ethnic Relations and Race Policy and Firearms Control Policy, Disaster Risk Management Policy and Implementation Strategy

Ministry of Interior and Coordination of Government

Consultancies, Workshops

200,000

9. Support Sector ministries in dialoguing and vesting capacity at County levels for initiating, interpreting and implementing policies e.g. health education, water, etc.

Sector Ministries Consultancies, Workshops

200,000

SUB-TOTAL OUTPUT 1 1,800,000

Output 2: Strengthened institutional and human capacities at national and county level

Baseline: National Capacity Framework on Devolution has been developed, initial training provided to county officials

1. Support the Ministry of Devolution and Planning to Roll out the National Capacity Building Framework including the training and mentoring of County Officers by National Government Officers

MoDP, CG, TA Training, Workshops, Technical Expertise

1,000,000

2. Support the KSG, Centre for Devolution Studies

KSG Technical Expertise

100,000

38

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

And baseline, associated indicators and targets13

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME (2014)

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET (2014)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Funding Source Budget

Description Amount (USD)

2.1. Indicator: Percentage of supported counties whose plans and budgets are approved by the COB

Baseline: 40% (2013)

Targets: 80 % (2018)

2.2. Indicator: No. of counties with performance management systems in place

Baseline: 0 (2013)

Target: At least 10 (2018)

2.3. Indicator: No. of counties that develop business models that are inclusive and sustainable

Baseline: 0 (2013)

Target: At least 10 (2018)

2.4. Indicator: MSE coordination mechanism in place

Baseline: None(2013)

Target: Yes(2018)

3. Support establishment of processes at County levels for functionality and improved performance management systems including RBM, performance based planning and budgeting, strategic planning, performance contracting, robust M&E systems, etc

MoDP, CG, Select County Governments

Consultancies, Workshops, Travel, Accommodation

1,100,000

4. Mainstreaming priorities for inclusive and sustainable growth at county level

Select County Governments, KEPSA

Consultancies, Workshops, Travel, Accommodation

200,000

5. Supporting the coordination of the MSE sector at both national and selected county level, with a focus on women, youth and other marginalized groups

Ministry of Industrialization and Enterprise Development. KEPSA

Consultancies, Workshops, Travel, Accommodation

200,000

6. Build capacities of County Governments for resource mobilization and utilization for development

National Treasury, CRA, Select County Governments

Consultancies, Workshops, Travel, Accommodation

100,000

7. Develop a pool of UN volunteers embedded within the CG for short-term support to counties

CG Allowances 300,000

8. Institutional strengthening for the MoDP, CG, IBEC , etc

MoDP, CG, IBEC Technical Expertise, UNVs, IT Support, Consultancies and Training

400,000

SUB-TOTAL OUTPUT 2 3,400,000

39

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

And baseline, associated indicators and targets13

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME (2014)

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET (2014)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Funding Source Budget

Description Amount (USD)

Output 3: Evidenced planning, budgeting for improved service delivery at county level in tandem with reduced security threats and improved response to risk and disaster in selected counties

3.1. Indicator: The existence of disaggregated data to inform socio-economic development

Baselines: National and county policies, plans, and strategies not informed by analytical studies and quality disaggregated data; No disaggregated data to monitor MDGs, human development issues; national and county development priorities; inadequate capacities at county level including on financial absorption;

Targets: At least 50% development policies and plans are informed by quality disaggregated data; System in place by 2016 to monitor national MTP II implementation progress

3.2 Indicator :# of surveys, MDGs and HD reports, assessments,

1. Support County Governments in developing guidelines, systems, training and support to prepare inclusive infrastructure and service delivery plans

CoG, County Governments

Technical Expertise, Workshops

200,000

2. Support County level budgeting processes as per the PFM Law

National Treasury, CG, TA, Select County Governments

Technical Expertise, Workshops

100,000

3. Support planning processes at County levels

MoDP, CG, TA, Select County Governments

Technical Expertise

100,000

4. Support establishment of county development funding mechanisms to support local development

MoDP, CG, Select County Governments

Technical Expertise

100,000

5.Support County Enterprise Development Centres

Select County Governments

Technical Expertise

200,000

6. Institutionalization of public private collaboration at county level

Select County Governments

KEPSA

Technical Expertise

50,000

7. Support baseline studies on infrastructure and service delivery at County levels

MoDP, KNBS, National Treasury and TA

Consultancies 100,000

8. Support the establishment of M&E systems at County levels in harmony with National support organs

MoDP, County Governments

Consultancies

200,000

40

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

And baseline, associated indicators and targets13

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME (2014)

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET (2014)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Funding Source Budget

Description Amount (USD)

analytical works, policies and advocacy papers conducted/prepared to inform development planning and management at national and county levels;

Baseline: 0 (2013)

Target : 4 (2018)

3.3. Indicator: # of national level institutions, counties and CSOs that have established functional coordination structures and mechanisms for disaster risk reduction and response; Peace building, Cohesion and Community Security.

Baseline: 0

Targets: 10

3.4 Indicator: # of counties with strategies for Peace Building Community Security and cohesion integrated development plans and budgets, sectors strategies & programmes mainstreaming;

Baseline: 0 (2013)

Target: 10 (2018).

9.Support the Huduma (service Delivery) Centres at County levels with placement of UNVs

MoDP

Allowances 50,000

10. Support in the formulation of DRR mainstreaming guidelines for counties

Ministry of Interior and Coordination of Government, NDMA

Consultancies 100,000

11. Development of risk management, early warning systems and contingency plans

Ministry of Interior and Coordination of Government, NDMA

Consultancies 150,000

12. Support communities build resilience to cope with adverse climate change impacts

Ministry of Interior and Coordination of Government, NDMA

Consultancies 100,000

13. Support promotion of national cohesion and integration

Ministry of Interior and Coordination of Government

Consultancies 150,000

14. Support collaborative leadership training and consensus building at National and County levels

UNDP, KIG Consultancies, Meetings

200,000

15. Support for studies, research and discussions on thematic issues on devolution

UNDP, PfPS, PeaceNet, TA

Consultancies, Publications, Conferences

200,000

SUB-TOTAL OUTPUT 3 2,000,000

Output 4: Citizen participation mechanisms and processes

1. Support the finalization of public participation policy

MoDP, TA, CoG Workshops, consultancies

50,000

41

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

And baseline, associated indicators and targets13

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME (2014)

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET (2014)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Funding Source Budget

Description Amount (USD)

strengthened to ensure effective & equitable service delivery and people-centred devolved system of government

4.1. Indicator: % of citizens satisfied with public service delivery by National and County Governments (disaggregated by County, Sex, Age, social group); Baseline: 63.5% (2009)

Target: 75% (2018)

4.2. Indicator: % of high burdened counties supported whose plans and budgets reflect HIV &AIDS

Baseline: 3 (2013)

Target:50% of high burdened counties have HIV & AIDS plans and budgets

2. Support development of handbooks and manuals for citizen participation in English, Swahili and other local languages

MoDP, Amkeni wa Kenya, TA

Workshops, Publications

200,000

3.Support curriculum and materials development and dissemination on devolution

MoDP, TA, CoG, Amkeni wa Kenya, , CSOs

Workshops, Publications

100,000

4.Support coordination mechanism for integrated civic education

MoDP, CoG, TA, Amkeni wa Kenya, , CSOs

Workshops 50,000

5. Support citizen participation and engagement in service delivery mechanisms including support to the CSO Huduma Initiatives

CoG, Amkeni wa Kenya, CSOs

Consultancies. Workshops, accommodation, Travel

150,000

6. Support citizen engagement in policy making processes including developing capacity of CSOs

Amkeni wa Kenya, CSOs Consultancies, workshops, accommodation travel

100,000

7. Develop a strategy for diaspora engagement in county development agenda

UNDP, Amkeni wa Kenya

Consultations, travel

50,000

8. Create awareness and implementation of the two thirds gender principle at National and County levels

Amkeni wa Kenya, National Gender and Equality Commission, CSOs

Consultancies, workshops, accommodation, travel

100,000

9. Support HRBA mainstreaming at County levels including HIV/AIDS mitigation

Amkeni wa Kenya, Kenya National Commission on Human Rights

Consultancies, workshops, accommodation, travel

100,000

42

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

And baseline, associated indicators and targets13

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME (2014)

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET (2014)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Funding Source Budget

Description Amount (USD)

10. Support local development participatory planning at sub-county levels

Amkeni wa Kenya, Select County Governments and CSOs

Consultancies, workshops, accommodation, travel

100,000

SUBTOTAL-OUTPUT 4 1,000,000

Output 5: Pilot testing of full local development cycle including participatory planning, budgeting (including gender budgeting), local level implementation capacities, performance and change management, monitoring and learning

5.1. Indicator: # of county governments capacitated to deliver equitable, high quality public services.

Baseline: 0 in 2013

Target: At least 10 by 2018

1. Identification of the Counties MoDP, CG, IBEC Meetings 50,000

2. Undertaking baseline participatory studies to identify priority issues at county and sub-county levels

MoDP, CG, IBEC, County Governments

Consultancies. Workshops, accommodation, Travel

50,000

3. Supporting disaggregated planning to sub-county levels

MoDP, CG, IBEC, County Governments

Consultancies. Workshops, accommodation, Travel

100,000

4. Training and Capacity development of the Counties in local development and local economic planning

MoDP, CG, IBEC, County Governments

Consultancies. Workshops, accommodation, Travel

100,000

5. Developing M&E systems MoDP, CG, IBEC, County Governments

Consultancies. Workshops, accommodation, Travel

200,000

6. Promoting local innovations and adoption of ICT in planning and management

MoDP, CG, IBEC, County Governments

Consultancies. Workshops, accommodation, Travel

100,000

7. Supporting South -South learning

MoDP, CG, IBEC, County Governments

Accommodation, Travel

100,000

SUBTOTAL-OUTPUT 5 700,000

43

EXPECTED OUTPUTS

And baseline, associated indicators and targets13

PLANNED ACTIVITIES

List activity results and associated actions

TIMEFRAME (2014)

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET (2014)

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Funding Source Budget

Description Amount (USD)

6. Improved Programme Management Support to the devolution programme

Baseline:1 Programme Officer in place

6.1. Indicator: No. of staff engaged

Baseline: 1(2013)

Target: At least 7 (2018)

6.2. Indicator: Unqualified Audit reports

Baseline: None

Target: All

6.3. Indicator: Positive Evaluation reports

Baseline: None(2013)

Target: Positive (2018)

1.Staffing:1 Technical Advisor, 1 Programe Manager, 1 Programme Officer, and 1 M&E Specialist, 1 Programme Analyst, 1 Finance Officer, 1 Procurement officer, 1 Programme Assistant

UNDP Salaries and allowances

500,000

2. Programme Monitoring UNDP 100,000

3.Annual Programme Review/Evaluation

UNDP 50,000

4.Programme Audit UNDP 50,000

5.Management costs14 GMS @8%

768,000

SUBTOTAL-OUTPUT 6 1,468,000

TOTAL 10,368,000

14 According to UNDP’s Policy on Cost Recovery from Regular and Other Resources (January 2011), UNDP will charge General Management Support (GMS) at 7%. Additionally,

Implementation Support Services (ISS) i.e. services provided mostly by Country Offices in the implementation of Regular and Other Resource-funded programmes and projects (i.e. costs directly related to the delivery of programmes) will be at 4% for each transaction supported by the Country Office