final rp mercy

8/11/2019 Final RP Mercy

1/57


2/57

Disclaimer:

his document represents part of the author4s study

programme .hile at the $nstitute of Social Studies+ he,ie.s stated therein are those of the author and notnecessarily those of the $nstitute+

Research papers are not made a,ailable for circulationoutside of the $nstitute+

Inquiries:

Postal address: $nstitute of Social StudiesP+"+ -o* 135561721 he /aguehe %etherlands

ocation: Kortenaer8ade 91179 A; he /aguehe %etherlands

elephone: 16 2>62

#a*: 16 2533

ii


3/57

Ac&no'ledgement

$ .ould li8e to ac8no.ledge the support0 guidance and

encouragement gi,en to me by my super,isor &r+ Syl,ia-ergh and my second reader &r+ Ria -rou.ers in the courseof .riting this research paper+

My appreciation goes out to #eli* Andama0 indaMugisha and %atasha Ma?ari for their role as mydiscussants and for their input in this paper+

o the PPM family0 than8 you so much for ha,ing gi,enme a home a.ay from home+

$ .ould li8e to e*tend my appreciation to the @orld-an8 for ha,ing funded my studies at $SS and to /$'"S for

their support for the eld research for this paper+o my family and friends0 than8 you for being there for

me+ our lo,e and encouragement 8ept me going and mademe strong+ May Bod bless you allC

iii


4/57

Contents

Ac8no.ledgement

Dontentsist of ables

ist of #igures

ist of Maps

ist of Acronyms

Abstract

Chapter *#RO$+C#O*,

9+9 $ntroduction9+1 -ac8ground to the D

9+= Problem Statement

9+> Rele,ance and Eustication

9+7 Research "bFecti,es

9+6 Main research question

Research subGquestions

9+5 Methodology

9+ imitations and challenges to the study

9+3 Structure of the Paper

Chapter - CO*CEP#+A. A*$ A*A./#CA.!RAME0OR%

1+9 $ntroduction

1+1 Donceptual #rame.or8

Di,il Society "rganisations

Participation9>

Accountability

9>!Hecti,eness

97

1+= Analytical #rame.or8

Chapter 1 C$! * %E*/A2

=+9 $ntroduction

=+1 -ac8ground to D

=+= $nstitutional #rame.or8 for D $mplementation

=+> D ProFects


5/57

Chapter 3 #4E PO.#CA. CO*#E5# O! CSOS *%E*/A -

>+9 $ntroduction

>+1 rends in Di,il Society in Kenya

Chapter 6 C7. SOCE#/S E*8A8EME*# * C$!-6

7+9 $ntroduction

ProFect $dentication

Prioritisation of ProFects

/armonisation of ProFects

Appro,al and #unding

$mplementation of ProFects

Monitoring and !,aluation7+1 Donstraints to DS"s eHecti,e engagement in D

Doordination and collaboration amongst DS"s

$nformation gap and technical capacity

%et.or8ing=>

Access to information

Political interference

#inancial resourcesDonIict redress mechanisms

Chapter , CO*C.+SO*1,

ii


6/57

.ist o #ables

able 9: D allocations 122=G as percentage of

ordinary go,ernment re,enue

.ist o !igures

#igure 9: A &iagrammatic Presentation of the Analytical#rame.or8

#igure 1: $nstitutions under D

.ist o Maps

Map: Map of Kenya .ith the district boundaries

iii


7/57

.ist o Acronyms

D-" Dommunity -ased "rganisation

D Donstituencies &e,elopment #undD&D Donstituency &e,elopment Dommittee

D#D Donstituencies #und Dommittee

DAR$"% Dentre for a. and Research $nternational

DR!GD" Donstitution and Reform !ducation Donsortium

DS" Di,il Society "rganisation

$& &epartment of $nternational &e,elopment

&PD &istrict ProFect Dommittee

/$'"S /umanist $nstitute for &e,elopment

Dooperation$!A $nstitute of !conomic AHairs

$PAR $nstitute of Policy Analysis and Research

KA% Kenya African %ational nion

K$PPRA Kenya $nstitute for Public Policy Research andAnalysis

&D ocal &e,elopment Dommittee

R# egal Resources #oundation

MAPADA Mobilisation Agency for Paralegal Dommunities

in AfricaMARA Macha8os Residents Association

M&Bs Millennium &e,elopment Boals

M J ! Monitoring and !,aluation

MP Member of Parliament

%ARD %ational Rainbo. Doalition

%DDK %ational Douncil of Dhurches of Kenya

%B" %onGgo,ernmental "rganisation

%A %ational a* Payers Association

S"&%! Social &e,elopment %et.or8%&P nited %ations &e,elopment Programme

i,


8/57

Abstract

$n a bid to enhance community4s participation in

de,elopment at the grassroots le,el0 the go,ernment ofKenya in 122= established the Donstituency &e,elopment#und (D) through an Act of Parliament+ heimplementation of the fund has been faced .ith thechallenges of do.n.ard accountability and lo. communityparticipation+ his paper see8s to e*plore the roles playedby the Di,il Society "rganisations (DS"s) in Kenya inenhancing accountability and community4s participation inthe D processes+ his study uses Ba,enta4s po.er cubeframe .or8L to analyse the ndings from the eld+ heDS"s are faced .ith in,ited spaces40 created spaces4 andclosed spaces4 in the process of engaging in D+ heDS"s in interacting .ith the three spaces4 are underta8inga.areness raising and sensitisation campaigns on thecommunity4s rights0 roles and responsibilities in D+ DS"sare also underta8ing community mobilisation and ad,ocacy.or8 on D+ he ndings also re,eal that the politicalconte*t .ithin .hich the DS"s operate constrains the DS"sfrom playing their role in the D processes+ he studyused both primary and secondary data collected from theeld together .ith literature from boo8s and Fournals to

dra. its conclusion as presented and discussed in thepaper+

Relevance to $evelopment Studies

his paper is rele,ant to de,elopment studies due to itsfocus on the roles of DS"s in enhancing transparency0accountability and community participation in themanagement of funds intended for local community

de,elopment initiati,es+ -y focusing on the role played byDS"s in the management of public funds0 this study hopesto add to 8no.ledge and practice of communityde,elopment

%ey'ords

ransparency0 Accountability0 Participation0 Di,il Society"rganisations

,


9/57

Chapter *#RO$+C#O*

9 ntroduction

his study in,estigates the roles being played by Di,il Society"rganisations (DS"s) in Kenya to enhance accountability and community4sparticipation in the Donstituency &e,elopment #und (D)+

his chapter presents a bac8ground to the study highlighting theproblem that the paper see8s to analyse0 follo.ed by the rele,ance andFustication for underta8ing this study+ he research obFecti,es are thenpresented0 follo.ed by the research questions0 methodology andlimitations to the study+ he chapter ends .ith a presentation of thestructure of the paper+

9- :ac&ground to the C$!

$n 122=0 the go,ernment of Kenya established the Donstituency&e,elopment #und (D)0 a fund that see8s to enhance community4sparticipation in the ght against po,erty at the grassroots le,el+!stablished under the D Act 122=0 D .as to help in de,elopment bychannelling nancial resources to the Donstituency le,el for theimplementation of community based de,elopment proFects .ith long termeHects of impro,ing the peoples4 social and economic .ell being (D Act122=)+ Another obFecti,e of the introduction of the D .as to control andreduce imbalances in regional de,elopment brought about by partisan

politics as had been e*perienced pre,iously in Kenya (Mapesa J Kibua01226)+

he establishment of D is in line .ith the go,ernment4s eHorts tobringing de,elopment closer to the people by ensuring that the communityis in,ol,ed in the decision ma8ing processes and in the actualimplementation of de,elopment proFects at the community le,el+ he DAct requires that the area Member of Parliament (MP) constitutes aDonstituency &e,elopment Dommittee (D&D) charged .ith theresponsibility of managing D at the constituency9le,el+ "nce the D&Dhas been con,ened0 the MP is to hold a meeting at the locational1le,el

.here the community is e*pected to articulate their needs and come up.ith proFects to address these needs+ he D&D then recei,es the proFectproposals from the ,arious locations in the constituency and prioriti?esthem according to short term and long term de,elopment priorities of theconstituency+ he proFects prioriti?ed are then for.arded to the D boardfor funding+ "nce funded0 D proFects are to be implemented .ithin thee*isting structures of go,ernment at the district le,el+

9his is a political boundary+1his is an administrati,e unit of go,ernment+ $n the conte*t of D it is .ithin aconstituency+

6


10/57

he main form of decentralisation in Kenya is deGconcentration=.iththe district being the lo.est unit of de,elopment planning+ $deally0 theconstituency should be lo.er than the district but this is not al.ays thecase+ here are o,erlaps .here a constituency can be a district or aconstituency can be in diHerent districts or se,eral constituencies can be

.ithin one district+ he o,erlap bet.een districts and constituencies hasresulted or e,en made .orse by the creation of ne. districts>+ Durrently0Kenya has 17> oHicially ga?etted districts and 192 Donstituencies+

D is administered by the D -oard through the ,arious institutionscreated under the D Act for the fund4s implementation (details on theinstitutions under CDF follow in chapter 3)+ he D Act 122= Section>(1a) mandates that at least 1+7N of the go,ernment4s annual ordinaryre,enue be channelled to all the constituencies for purposes ofde,elopment at the grassroots le,el (details on CDF follow in chapter 3).-elo. is a table summari?ing the allocations to D for nancial years122= O 122+

Table 1: CDF allocations 2003-8 as percentage of ordinary government revenue

Financial year Total annual allocation!s"#

$ of ordinary governmentrevenue

2003/4 1.26 billion 2.5

2004/5 5.6 billion 2.5

2005/6 !.2 billion 2.5

2006/! 10.1 billion 3.5

200!/" 10.1 billion 2.!

Source: Gikonyo, 2!

oo8ing at table 9 abo,e0 the trend sho.s that the nancial allocationsto D ha,e been increasing o,er time+ hat being the case0 it may alsomean that there are more resources going to the community for purposesof de,elopment in their areas+ As earlier noted0 the D .as instituted to

ma8e de,elopment more responsi,e to the local needs and to empo.er thecommunity by increasing their decision ma8ing po.ers and for them toshape the de,elopment process in their local areas+ $n so doing0 proFects

=&ened as the transfer of authority and administrati,e responsibility from onele,el of central go,ernment to another .ith the lo.er le,els still accountable tothe central go,ernment (%&P0 1223)>he Donstituency boundaries ha,e remained stable .hile the district boundaries8eep changing as ne. districts are created to .oe ,oters+ $t is not uncommon tond particular ethnic groups li,ing .ithin the same locality and ha,ing a districtof their o.n is percei,ed as a .ay of preser,ing their ethnic identity+ he ethnic

groups are therefore a.ardedL districts in e*change for political support+ hecreation of districts has especially been common to.ards election periods to .oe

,oters to ,ote for particular political candidates mainly those in po.er or thoseaHiliated .ith those in po.er+

5


11/57

underta8en in D are to be in line .ith the community4s identied needsthereby increasing o.nership and sustainability of D proFects in thecommunity as opposed to the centrally planned community de,elopmentinitiati,es+ Bi8onyo argues that allo.ing community4s participation in theD ma8es proFects Qto benet from the use of local 8no.ledge4

(Bi8onyo0 122:1)+ he use of local 8no.ledge can help ensure thatproFects address local needs and ta8e into account the local ,alues of thepeople thereby leading to community o.nership of de,elopmentinter,entions and increasing the chances of sustainability of proFects+

91 Problem Statement

After many years of centrali?ed planning and past attempts atdecentralisation that did not bear much fruit0 D .as e*pected to bringthe much needed de,elopment to local communities and to address theregional inequalities brought about by partisan politics+ he D is said to

ha,e mainly been used for purposes of social de,elopment and tounderta8e proFects such as the construction of health centres0 schools0rural roads0 .ater and sanitation0 police posts and cattle dips amongothers+

Many authors ha,e argued that in some regions of the country0 suchproFects under the D ha,e been the rst infrastructural de,elopment inmany years ($!A 1226 Mapesa and Kibua 1226)+ his sho.s that if utili?ed.ell0 D has great potential to facilitate the much needed de,elopment atthe local le,els and to address some of the inequalities that e*ist in thecountry+ /o.e,er0 if not implemented .ell0 D has the potential oflocali?ing corruption and reinforcing inequality at the lo.er le,els due toloopholes in the D Act coupled .ith the unequal po.er relations at thecommunity le,el .here the proFects are being planned and implemented+As argued by ,arious authors0 D has mainly been used for politicalpatronage as opposed to local community de,elopment as .as en,isionedin the D Act (A.iti 122 $!A 1226 Bi8onyo 122 Mapesa and Kibua1226 M.alulu and $rungu 1225)+ here ha,e been allegations thatproFects implemented under D ha,e in most cases been identied by aselected fe. that are close to the MP+ @hile the D Act requires that thecommunity be in,ol,ed in decision ma8ing0 concrete mechanisms of ho. toin,ol,e the community seem to be lac8ing in the pro,isions of the D Act+

here is limited access to information about D operations and there areno e*plicit mechanisms put in place to promote accountability for thefunds and in the D processes in general+

imited access to rele,ant information on D and lo. le,els ofa.areness in local communities regarding their roles and responsibilitiesin D is said to ha,e undermined the communities4 participation in theD processes ($!A 1226 Mapesa and Kibua 1226)+ #urther0 it has beenargued that the D allocation formula does not result in equitabledistribution of resources since it does not pro,ide for mechanisms toaddress the inequalities that e*isted as a result of past go,ernmentapproaches to de,elopment and that the poorest regions are not actuallythe main beneciaries thereby raising doubt as to .hether D actuallyaddresses regional inequality as stated in the D Act ("yugi0 122)+


12/57

As per the D Act0 the community members from each location are tocome up .ith a list of proFects .hich are then submitted to theconstituency de,elopment committee (D&D)0 .hich then prioriti?esproFects and for.ards them to the national D board for appro,al andfunding+ $n practice ho.e,er0 Members of Parliament (MPs) appear to ha,e

control o,er .hich proFects get prioriti?ed and consequently get fundedthereby undermining Ds aim of ensuring community4s participation indecision ma8ing in de,elopment processes at the local le,els+ hecommunity members4 decision ma8ing appears to stop at the mere listingof the proFects .ith little inIuence on .hat happens after.ards at theprioriti?ation and funding le,els+ ProFects e,entually prioritised may not bein line .ith the community4s needs because the community4s top prioritymay not be a priority to those .ho prioritise the proFects and thecommunity does not ha,e that much inIuence in the process of prioritisingproFects+

he eHecti,eness of D has been undermined by poor managementand lac8 of transparency and accountability+ oop holes in the D Actappear to ha,e created room for malpractice and corruption as e*posed byDi,il Society "rganisations (DS"s) in the local media+ D allocations atthe local le,el are said to be based on patronage net.or8s+ @hereas theallocation formula is clear at the national le,el (as discussed in chapter 3)0allocation at the local le,el is based on the proFects prioriti?ed by theDonstituency &e,elopment Dommittee (D&D) and for.arded to the D-oard for funding+ An MP can easily use his patronage net.or8s (bynominating them to the D&D7) to ensure that the proFects identied andprioriti?ed are in the locations that the MP got most ,otes or in locations

.here the MP hopes to get future ,otes (M.alulu and $rungu0 1225) sincethere are not clear mechanisms to guide against this in the D Act+ othat e*tent0 D can be said to be used as a campaigning tool forincumbent MPs and go,ernment for purposes of retaining political po.erat both local and national le,els+

#urther0 the MP is a member of the &istrict ProFects Dommittee (&PD)that is supposed to harmoni?e proFects to a,oid duplication+ he MP is alsothe one .ho for.ards the proFects prioriti?ed to the D board forfunding+ he -oard4s decisions are subFect to appro,al by theDonstituency #und Dommittee (D#D) O composed only of MPs O .ho ma8e

a nal decision on .hether to fund the proFects then communicates thedecision to the board6+ Such blending of roles of the MP underminesaccountability and eHecti,e implementation of D as argued by Mapesaand Kibua (1226)+ Acting as a legislator0 implementer and o,erseer ofgo,ernment de,elopment acti,ities can lead to conIict of interests+

$n addition0 such blending of roles of the MP allocates great po.er tothe MP and .ithout putting in place proper mechanisms for communities4

7he D Act (as discussed in chapter =) requires the MP to select members ofthe D&D+ he MP nominates the members as per the guidelines in the D Act+hese guidelines ho.e,er only stipulate the number and category of membership

but no form of qualication or criteria for selection is gi,en+6his sho.s that despite the board being the o,erall body charged .ith theimplementation of D the board4s decision are subFect to appro,al by the D#D+his puts to question ho. independent the board4s decision may be+

3


13/57

engagement in the D processes+ he unequal po.er relations bet.eenthe MP and the community appear to ha,e been institutionali?ed by theD Act (Bi8onyo0 122)+ @hile this may not ha,e been the intendedpurpose of the D Act0 it has made the community ,ulnerable to thepreFudices and patronage of the MP+ his in turn hinders D from

reali?ing its ,ery obFecti,es of enhancing community participation indecision ma8ing and promoting equity in resource allocation+ Suchunequal po.er relations may also hinder eHecti,e DS"s engagement.ithin the D processes as pro,ided for by the D Act+ As argued in thispaper0 such shortcomings compel DS"s to loo8 for alternati,e .ays ofengagement in the D processes+

DS"s practise in Kenya has sho.n that DS"s can play an importantrole in shaping policy as discussed in chapter four of this paper+ hisimplies that DS"s ha,e the potential for ensuring that the de,elopmentobFecti,es of the D are met+ DS"s ha,e been at the forefront in raising

a.areness on D and bringing to light cases of malpractice in the fund4simplementation+ DS"s could therefore go a step further to sensiti?e thecommunity to not only 8no. of the e*istence of D but to also 8no. oftheir rights and responsibilities in D+ -esides0 communities can onlyhold their leaders to account if they ha,e the rele,ant information+

D is a public fund and therefore local communities4 participation isparamount in D and in ensuring that D realises its set obFecti,es+here has been lac8 of transparency and accountability in the utilisation ofthe D especially .ith regards to nancial allocations to indi,idualproFects and the criteria for selecting beneciaries of D bursaries5+ hishas resulted due to lac8 of compliance to the requirement that such

information be put up on public notice boards in the D oHices at theconstituency le,el and those at the chief4s oHices .hich is in thecommunity+ his sho.s that the problems in D may not only relate toloop holes in the D Act but also to poor mechanisms to enforcecompliance .ith the D Act+

93 Relevance and ;usti


14/57

maFority of the people in the grassroots since neither is made a,ailable inan acti,e medium4 (%yamori0 1223:193)+ his accountability on paper doesnot guarantee the actual e*istence of the claimed proFects in the reports0on the ground+

Dreating ne. institutional arrangements .ill not necessarily result in

greater inclusion Qof the community4 (Ba,enta0 1226:1=)+ o address theproblems confronting D it may require addressing the issues related tothe po.er relations .ithin the D institutions+ /o.e,er0 the MPs may notbe interested in changing ho. D .or8s since D in its current form.or8s to the ad,antage of the MP+ @ithout the rele,ant information onD communities may not be in a position to eHecti,ely engage in D.ithin the e*isting po.er relations+ DS"s appear to be in a better positionto empo.er the community to better engage in D and hold their leadersto account+ his study also ac8no.ledges that DS"s ha,e their o.ninterests and may also hinder community4s engagement in D+ his study

is based on the assumption that DS"s .or8 for the best interest of thecommunity and .ill therefore be ad,ocating for the communities4 interestsas opposed to DS"s selsh4 interests+ herefore the focus of this paper onthe roles of DS"s in enhancing accountability and community participationin the D processes is critical since it adds to 8no.ledge and practice ofcommunity de,elopment+

/o. .ell DS"s can ad,ance the community4s interests in the conte*tof D depends on the e*istence of a facilitating political en,ironmentsince D is highly politici?ed and controlled4 by the MPs+ !Hecti,e DS"sengagement also depends on the institutional and organi?ational dynamics.ithin ci,il society+ his study analyses ho. .ell DS"s are utilising their

e*isting capacity in underta8ing their ,arious roles at the national andlocal le,el and the lin8ages bet.een DS"s at both le,els since it is at thegrassroots le,el that the implementation of the D ta8es place+

A number of researches ha,e been underta8en on aspects such as theuse and management of D (A.iti 122 Mapesa and Kibua 1226)0 Dspotential to be used as a campaigning tool (M.alulu and $rungu0 1225)and on the adequacy of Ds allocation formula ("yugi0 122)+ here isho.e,er little information on DS"s e*periences and nature of theirengagement in the D+ his study see8s to loo8 at the roles that DS"s areplaying in D ho. .ell they are underta8ing these roles and the

opportunities and constraints to their eHecti,e engagement in D+ hestudy then goes a step further to loo8 at .hether DS"s by underta8ingthese ,arious roles in D are enhancing or limiting the opportunities forthe community4s participation in the D processes+

96 Research Ob=ectives

his study see8s to achie,e t.o obFecti,es+ #irst to analyse theconduci,eness of the political en,ironment for DS"s engagement in D.ithin the e*isting political en,ironment .hile loo8ing at the institutionaland organi?ational dynamics .ithin ci,il society especially relating to theirad,ocacy roles ,isGTG,is the D+ Secondly0 it e*amines the roles that DS"sha,e played and are currently playing in enhancing accountability andcommunity4s participation in the D process+

99


15/57

9, Main research >uestion

/o. are the DS"s enhancing accountability and community4s participationin the D process in KenyaU

Research sub-questions

9+ @hat is the political conte*t .ithin .hich DS"s in Kenya operateU1+ @hat roles are DS"s underta8ing in relation to the D process in

KenyaU=+ /o. eHecti,ely are the DS"s playing the roles of enhancing

accountability in the DU>+ -y underta8ing these roles0 are DS"s enhancing or limiting

opportunity4s for community4s in,ol,ement in the D processesU

9? Methodology

his study .as an e*ploratory study and based on qualitati,e data for thepurpose of nding out the roles being played by DS"s in Kenya inenhancing accountability and community4s participation in the Dprocesses+ he study relied on primary data collected during the eldstudy and also on secondary data from the literature re,ie.ed+ Prior to theeld.or80 a literature re,ie. .as underta8en to pro,ide some bac8groundinformation on D and DS"s underta8ings in D+ he literature re,ie.entailed a re,ie. of publications and documents on D by go,ernment0

research institutions and DS"s in Kenya+ he secondary data .as alsoused for purposes of data triangulation+

he researcher undertoo8 a eld study in Kenyaduring the period ofEuly to August 1223+ Primary data .as collected through semiGstructuredinter,ie.s .ith 8ey informants from go,ernment0 donors and DS"s+ oguide the inter,ie.s0 an inter,ie. guide had been prepared in ad,ance+SemiGstructured inter,ie.s .ere preferred because they .ere consideredto pro,ide some Ie*ibility and room for further probing for purposes ofclarication and elaboration on issues under study+ o start .ith0 8eyinformants .ere purposi,ely selected after .hich the sno.Gballingtechnique .as applied to locate other respondents+ $n total0 t.enty se,en

respondents .ere inter,ie.ed for the purpose of this study as highlightedbelo.+

hree respondents from donor organisations .ere inter,ie.ed andthey included &epartment for $nternational &e,elopment ($&)0/umanist $nstitute for &e,elopment Dooperation (/$'"S) and nited%ations &e,elopment Agency (%&P)+ he donors inter,ie.ed .erepurposi,ely selected due to their ha,ing supported the acti,ities of some ofthe DS"s in this study+ he donors .ere inter,ie.ed to ascertain .hat they.ere doing in supporting the DS"s in relation to D+

%ine respondents from go,ernment .ere purposi,ely selected due to

their percei,ed 8no.ledge and e*perience ha,ing been directly in,ol,ed inthe implementation of D+ he respondents .ere dra.n from the

See map of Kenya in appendices .ith locations of eld study+

91


16/57

go,ernment departments0 D board and the constituency de,elopmentcommittee (D&D) at the constituency le,el+ he respondents .ereinter,ie.ed to get their roles in the D processes and their ,ie.s on theDS"s roles in the D processes+

DS"s .ere purposi,ely selected on the basis of ha,ing acti,ities

related to D and also on the basis of .hether they .ere operating at thenational or at the local le,els3+ Respondents from DS"s .ere inter,ie.edto establish the roles they .ere playing to enhance accountability andcommunity4s participation in D+ $nter,ie.ing respondents fromgo,ernment0 donors and DS"s .as to bring in diHerent perspecti,es intothe study+ Donducting inter,ie.s .ith those outside Di,il Society .as toshed light on other people4s ,ie.s on D DS"s and on DS"s engagementin D+

hree constituencies of %airobi0 Macha8os and Ma8ueni .erepurposi,ely selected for this study+ %airobi .as selected on the basis ofbeing the capital city .ith a large number of DS"s based in the areathereby pro,iding an opportunity to interact .ith diHerent national le,elDS"s engaged in D+ Macha8os and Ma8ueni .ere purposi,ely selectedon the basis of being more rurally located 92and ha,ing some national le,elDS"s underta8ing acti,ities related to D at the local le,el incollaboration .ith the local le,el DS"s+ #or e*ample0 Dentre for a. andResearch $nternational (DAR$"%) in %airobi .as underta8ing someacti,ities .ith Mobilisation Agency for Paralegal Dommunities in Africa(MAPADA) in Ma8ueni and %ational a* Payers Association (%A) in%airobi had .or8ed closely .ith Macha8os Residents Association (MARA)in Macha8os in some of their acti,ities in Macha8os+ oo8ing at DS"s in

%airobi and DS"s in Macha8os and Ma8ueni therefore pro,ided a meansof assessing the nature of lin8ages that e*ist bet.een national and localle,el DS"s+ he close pro*imity of Macha8os and Ma8ueni to each otherpro,ided an opportunity to learn .hat .as happening in bothconstituencies as opposed to ,isiting Fust one+ 'isiting both constituencies.as aimed at enriching the study+

At the national le,el0 se,en respondents from DS"s .ere inter,ie.ed+he DS"s included Donstitution and Reform !ducation Donsortium(DR!D")0 Dentre for a. and Research $nternational (DAR$"%)0 $nstituteof !conomic AHairs ($!A)0 %ational Douncil of Dhurches of Kenya (%DDK)0%ational a* Payers Association (%A)0 egal Resource #oundation (R#)

and Social &e,elopment %et.or8 (S"&%!)+ At the local le,el inMacha8os0 three respondents from DS"s .ere inter,ie.ed+ herespondents .ere dra.n from Macha8os Residents Association (MARA)and the regional oHice of %ational a* Payers Association (%A)+ $nMa8ueni0 ,e inter,ie.s .ere conducted .ith respondents dra.n from@omen Research Dentre and &e,elopment $nstitute0 Ma8ueni regionalassembly0 Maendeleo ya @ana.a8e and Mobilisation Agency for ParalegalDommunities in Africa (MAPADA)+

he inter,ie.s .ere recorded using a ,oice recorder (e*cept .hererespondents .ere reluctant to the inter,ie. being recorded) and later

transcribed for better analysis and ease of reference+ An analysis of the3#or an o,er,ie. of DS"s inter,ie.ed0 see appendi* 992ocated a.ay from the capital city

9=


17/57

data .as done based on the main themes of the inter,ie.s+ At the end ofthe eld study0 a feedbac8 session .as organi?ed to present preliminaryndings of the study to the respondents for purposes of ,alidating the eldndings and to get additional information to ll in the gaps in the datacollected from the eld+

92 .imitations and challenges to the study

his study is limited rst in the sense that the ndings are specic to theareas that ha,e been studied and not meant generalisation to the .holecountry but the ndings are only applicable to the study areas .here eld.or8 .as conducted+

Some respondents .ere reluctant to pro,ide information .hile otherscancelled scheduled inter,ie.s at the last minute+ &espite se,eralattempts to inter,ie. MPs from the constituencies ,isited0 the researcherdid not get a response from the MPs and .as therefore forced to rely oninformation from an MP from a diHerent constituency .ho agreed to aninter,ie.+ A scheduled inter,ie. .ith the chair of the parliamentarycommittee on D failed to materiali?e at the last minute due to otherengagements on his side+ !Horts to reschedule the inter,ie. .ere notsuccessful+ his .as o,ercome by inter,ie.ing an Assistant Minister .hoshared his ,ie.s on D and on DS"s engagement from an MP4sperspecti,e+

&ue to the amount of criticism le,ied against the Donstituency&e,elopment Dommittee (D&D) in relation to the management of D theresearcher had hoped to inter,ie. current members of the D&D .ho .ere

DS" representati,es in D to learn from their e*perience in relation toDS"s role .ithin the D&D+ /o.e,er0 this .as not possible because despiteha,ing been informed that the DS"s the researcher .as to inter,ie. .erepart of the D&D0 it turned out that they .ere former members of the D&D+@hile being former members of the D&D may ha,e presented some bias inrelation to their ,ie.s of ho. the current D&D may be playing their role0being former D&D members also pro,ided an opportunity to freely discuss.hat goes on in the D&D and ho. much inIuence DS"s ha,e in thedecision ma8ing process .ithin the D&D+

9@ Structure o the Paperhis paper is structured into 6 chapters+ he ne*t chapter (1) loo8s atdenition of some 8ey concepts as used in this paper+ Dhapter = loo8s atthe political conte*t of DS"s in Kenya+ Dhapter > gi,es the details of Din Kenya highlighting the institutional and legal frame.or8 go,erning theD as .ell as its pro,ision for DS"s engagement in D+ Dhapter 7presents the ndings on roles played by DS"s in D and on ho.eHecti,ely DS"s are playing these roles+ he chapter also loo8s at .hetherDS"s engagement in D enhances or limits community4s in,ol,ement inD+ he conclusions of the study follo. in chapter 6+

9>


18/57

Chapter - CO*CEP#+A. A*$A*A./#CA. !RAME0OR%

-9 ntroduction

his chapter presents the denition of concepts as .ill be applied in thestudy+ he chapter also presents the analytical frame.or8 .hich pro,idesthe basis for the analysis of the ndings on the roles played by DS"s toenhance accountability and community4s participation in D+

-9- Conceptual !rame'or&

Civil Society Organisations

According to -ie8art Di,il Society is an intermediate associational (public)realm bet.een the state and its citi?ens0 populated by organisations .hichare separate from the state0 enFoy autonomy in relation to the state andare formed ,oluntarily by members of society to protect or e*tend theirinterests and ,alues (-ie8art0 9333:7 )+ herefore0 ci,il society can besaid to be an arena that pro,ides for the e*pression of interests and,alues+ his ma8es ci,il society not to be a neutral arena since the DS"soccupying it are not homogeneous and are moti,ated by ,arious interestsas they see8 to inIuence the state+

@hile DS"s are at the forefront of ad,ocating for principles of socialFustice and equity0 their ,ested interests may at times be in conIict .iththe common good or the ,ery ,alues and principles DS"s purport touphold ($& 1225 %&P99)+ #urther0 DS"s can reproduce and reinforceunequal social relationships0 and through their agendas or practices candiscriminate against .omen or marginalised groups QL ($&0 1225:1)+his is in line .ith Matanga4s argument that ci,il society can either be aprogressi,e force Q.hen it confronts and opposes an authoritarian state ora retrogressi,e one Q.hen it helps entrench an authoritarian regimethrough its moral0 political and economic supportL (1222:>)+ $n this paperDS"s in Kenya are loo8ed at as a progressi,e force .ith potential to

transform D+ he study uses the concept DS"s to broadly refer to %onGgo,ernmental "rgani?ations (%B"s)0 Dommunity based organisations(D-"s) and #aithG-ased organi?ations (#-"s)+

Participation

Participation may be broadly dened as a process .hereby localcommunities are able to ta8e part in the decision ma8ing process+Participation therefore requires an analysis of the .ays in .hich po.erand 8no.ledge dene spaces for engagement0 pri,ileging certain ,oicesand ,ersions and e*cluding others4 (-roc8 et al0 1229:9)+Participation may

be dened as the right to dene0 to shape and be engaged in a gi,en space(Ba,enta0 1226)+ $n the conte*t of this paper0 participation .ill be used to

99http:VV...+undp+orgVpartnersVci,ilWsociety

97
http://www.undp.org/partners/civil_societyhttp://www.undp.org/partners/civil_society


19/57

refer to the process .hereby local communities are able to inIuence thedecision ma8ing process .ithin D+

Accountability

he concept of accountability in this study .ill used to refer to theprocesses0 Q and structures that require po.erful actors Q to ans.erfor their actions to another actor Q andVor suHer some sanction if theperformance is Fudged to be belo. the rele,ant standard4 ($&0 122:9)Accountability is important because it underpins the allocation and use ofpo.er (ibid)+ here e*ist ,arious forms of accountability "erticalaccounta#ility(do.n.ard) .hereby citi?ens and local communities canhold their leaders to account (for e*ample through general elections) andalso hori$ontal accounta#ility(up.ard) .hereby one state entity maydemand for ans.ers from another state

he concept of accountability .ill be used concurrently .ithtransparency .hich refers more to processes0 procedures and ,alues0.hich ensure accountability4 (Rao and %aidoo0 122>:>)+ $n this paper0transparency is also used to refer to access of information in relation toD processes from the ,arious institutions under the D Act as .ill bediscussed later in the study (chapter 3)

!ectiveness

his study uses the term eHecti,eness to refer to DS"s ability to enhancethe community4s participation in the decision ma8ing processes in D+!Hecti,eness .ill also be used to refer to the ability of DS"s to promotetransparency and accountability in D+

-91 Analytical !rame'or&

#igure 9 belo. presents the analytical frame.or8 that .ill be used toanalyse the roles played by DS"s in enhancing accountability andcommunity4s participation in D+ he analytical frame.or8 used has beenadopted from Ba,enta4s (1226) po.er cube frame.or84 of analysis thatloo8s at the interrelationship bet.een spaces0 places and forms of po.er+Ba,enta argues that using the po.er cube frame.or84 may help in

assessing the possibilities of transformati,e action in the ,arious politicalspaces4 (1226:17)+ he study therefore considered the frame.or8 to beuseful in analysing the roles DS"s are playing in D to enhanceaccountability and community4s participation and .hether DS"s in playingthese roles enhance or hinder opportunities for the community4sparticipation in D+

Ba,enta denes spaces4 as opportunities0 moments and channels.here citi?ens can act to potentially aHect policies0 discourses0 decisionsand relationships that aHect their li,es and interests4 (ibid:16)+ #urther0boundaries of these spaces are shaped by the po.er relations .ithin themand around them that determine .ho gets to participate and .ho does not

participate+ hree types of spaces4 are identied closed spaces%.heredecisions are made behind closed doors .ith a selected fe. being in,ited0in"ited spaces%.here in an eHort to .iden participation0 ne. spaces are

96


20/57

created into .hich others are in,ited to participate and created spaces%.here the less po.erful actors form their o.n space against the po.erholders+ Ba,enta further argues that the important thing about spaces4 isthe person .ho creates them because the one .ho creates the spaces4 isli8ely to ha,e more po.er .ithin that space4+ he spaces4 are ho.e,er

dynamic and 8eep opening and closing through struggles for legitimacyand resistance0 coGoptation and transformation4 (ibid: 15)+

Ba,enta highlights that much of the public spaces for participationin,ol,e the contest bet.een local0 nationaland &lo#alarenas as locationsof po.er4+ (ibid: 15)+ Places are therefore seen as le,els of engagement+@ith regards to po.er0 Ba,enta uses 'eneKlassen and Miller4s (1221)three forms of po.er 'isi#le power%referring to the formal rules andstructures of decision ma8ing0 hidden power%referring to po.er held bypo.erful people and institutions to inIuence .hat gets in the decisionma8ing agenda and in"isi#le power%referring to .hat shapes meaning

and .hat is seen as acceptable by a person or by community+ %n"isi#lepower%may ma8e the status quo be seen as acceptable+

o guide the analysis0 the study loo8s at the institutions created underD Act 122= and based on the roles played by each institution0 the studyhas prepared a D ProFect Dycle .ith each stage of the proFect cyclerepresenting an institution under the D Act+ !ach stage of the DproFect Dycle .ill be ,ie.ed as an entry point for DS"s engagement inD+

#or purposes of this study0 in"ited spaces% .ill be used to refer to anentry point .here the D Act has created slots for DS"s representation+Closed spaces%in this study .ill be used to refer to an entry point .herethe D Act does not pro,ide slots for DS"s representation+ Createdspaces%.ill be used to refer to entry points .here DS"s faced .ithconstraints and in a bid to manoeu,re ha,e created spaces% .ithin .hichthey can push for the opening up of the closed spaces%or they can ha,emore inIuence on .hat happens .ithin the in"ited spaces%.

@hile Ba,enta loo8s at the &lo#al0 nationaland localle,els0 this study.ill loo8 at le,els in terms of national andlocalle"elDS"s+ @ith regardsto po.er0 the study .ill only loo8 at the "isi#le%and the hidden%po.ers asdescribed abo,e and .ill not loo8 at the in"isi#le%po.er due to the limitednature of the research+ #igure 9 belo. presents the D ProFect Dycle

diagram that .ill be used as the study4s analytical frame.or8+ he arro.son the analytical frame.or8 .ill be e*plained in details in chapter 7+

Figure 1: % Diagrammatic &resentation of t"e %nalytical Frame'or(

95


21/57

%ey$n,ited spaceDreated spaceDlosed space

Source: dopted fro* the CDF Guidelines 2+

9


22/57

Chapter 1 C$! * %E*/A

erfor*in& e-ecti"ely and accountin& transparently are essential

co*ponents of responsi#le practice, on which the le&iti*acy ofde"elop*ent inter"ention ulti*ately dependsL (!d.ards and /ume09337:6)

19 ntroduction

his chapter presents an o,er,ie. of D in Kenya+ $t starts by presentinga bac8ground on D follo.ed by the institutional frame.or8 of D+ hisis to help us conte*tualise the problems highlighted in chapter oneregarding D implementation in relation to the roles that DS"s areplaying as .ill be discussed in chapter 7+

19- :ac&ground to C$!

Ds origin can be traced bac8 to the D -ill drafted by opposition MPsin a bid to ha,e equitable distribution of resources across the country+ heD bill .as passed into la. in 122= follo.ing the coming into po.er of ane. go,ernment (Bi8onyo0 122)+ D resources are generated from ta*collected from 'alue Added a* ('A)0 $ncome ta* paid by salariedemployees0 duty paid on manufactured and imported goods and feescharged on licenses+ herefore0 each and e,ery Kenyan contributes

to.ards D (ibid)+At the national le,el0 the D Act 122= Section >(1a) mandates that

at least 1+7N of the go,ernment4s annual ordinary re,enue be channelledto the Donstituencies for purposes of de,elopment+ Section 93 (9) of theD Act stipulates the allocation criteria for the abo,e 1+7N to theconstituencies 57N is allocated equally among all 192 constituencies andthe remaining 17N is allocated based on the national po,erty inde*multiplied by the constituency po,erty inde*+

At the Donstituency le,el0 a ma*imum of =N of each constituency4sannual allocation may be used for administration0 97N for an education

bursary scheme0 1N for sports acti,ities and 1N for en,ironmentalacti,ities+ Although D does not co,er recurrent costs it allo.s =N of theconstituency4s annual allocation to be used for recurrent e*penses of,ehicles0 equipment J machinery since they constitute de,elopmentproFects under the D Act+ 1N may be allocated for Monitoring J!,aluation of ongoing proFects and capacity building acti,ities .hile 7N is8ept aside as an emergency reser,e to be made a,ailable for emergenciesthat may occur in the Donstituency+

191 nstitutional !rame'or& or C$! mplementation

he D Act 122= establishes 7 committees to aid in the propermanagement of D+ hese institutions are:

93


23/57


24/57

ccounts and udit: Section => of the D Act stipulates that D shallbe audited and reported upon by the Dontroller and Auditor Beneral+

nstitutions for redress: Section 71(9) of the D Act states that disputesand complaints shall be for.arded to the -oard for appropriate action+ $ncase of complaints regarding misuse of D funds0 a complaint can be

for.arded to the D -oard for in,estigation and further action+

193 C$! Pro=ects

Section 19 of the D Act highlights the 8ind of proFects to be fundedunder D+ he proFects should be de,elopment proFects that arecommunity based and .hose prospecti,e benets can reach a .idecrossGsection of the inhabitants of a particular area+ D funds are not tobe used for supporting political or religious bodies or acti,ities+ /o.e,er0in the e,ent of an emergency0 a speciali?ed religious body or organi?ationmay be identied by the D&D and allocated resources to oHer emergencysupport (the proect cycle dia&ra* was presented in the analyticalfra*ework)

his chapter has presented the D as it is meant to beimplemented+ /o.e,er0 chapter one re,ealed that D in practise isdiHerent from the smooth picture presented abo,e+ As argued in thispaper0 the problems in D ha,e forced DS"s to use ,arious spaces4 toenhance accountability and community4s participation in D+ he ne*tchapter presents the political conte*t in .hich DS"s in Kenya operate tohelp us understand the en,ironment .ithin .hich the DS"s engaged inD are operating+

19


25/57

Chapter 3 #4E PO.#CA. CO*#E5# O!CSOS * %E*/A

/he success of de"elop*ent and participatory &o"ernance depends on#oth a ro#ust state and an acti"e ci"il society with healthy le"els of ci"icen&a&e*entL %&P9=

39 ntroduction

his chapter presents an o,er,ie. of the political conte*t .ithin .hichDS"s in Kenya operate+ he chapter .ill discuss DS"s de,elopment inline .ith the main phases of Kenya4s political de,elopment+ oo8ing atthe trends in Di,il Society in Kenya .ill help us conte*tuali?e Kenya4s

strong and ,ibrant ci,il society+ his is especially rele,ant in relation tothe roles the DS"s are underta8ing in D and ho. eHecti,ely they areunderta8ing these roles (as discussed in chapter 0)+

39- #rends in Civil Society in %enya

",er the last number of years0 Kenya has .itnessed an increase in DS"sin terms of their number0 scope of acti,ities and their inIuence on social0economic and political life of the Kenyan society+ he current number ofDS"s in Kenya may be appro*imated to be appro*imately 920222+According to information recei,ed from the %B" Doordination -oard0 thetotal number of national %B"s is >0 171 but this e*cludes other not forprot organi?ations registered through other a,enues+ #or e*ample0rusts are registered by Ministry of ands .hile Associations0Mo,ements0 #aith -ased "rganisations and Dompanies imited byBuarantee are registered either through the Attorney Beneral4sDhambers or the Ministry of Social Ser,ices+ @ith the diHerentregistration mechanisms the study may only appro*imate the number ofDS"s to be bet.een 50 222 O 920222+ o help shed some light on theen,ironment .ithin .hich DS"s in Kenya operate0 .e .ill no. loo8 atKenya4s political de,elopment and DS"s de,elopment .ithin that period

as discussed belo.+

@,3 @?2 (%enyatta era)#ollo.ing the independence of Kenya from the colonial rule by -ritain on91th&ecember0 936=0 the ne. go,ernment led by Kenya4s rst presidentEomo Kenyatta .as confronted .ith de,elopment challenges and limitednancial resources+ o address these0 the go,ernment acti,ely supportedthe formation of DS"s to contribute to the de,elopment process inKenya+ o that e*tent0 the Kenyatta go,ernment is credited .ith creatinga strong base for the ,oluntary Qorganisations sector in Kenya throughgo,ernmentG%B" open door policy4 (Matanga0 1222:92)+ $n that conte*t0the political en,ironment during this phase can be said to ha,e beenfa,ourable for DS"s operations+9=http:VV...+undp+orgVpartnersVci,ilWsocietyV

11
http://www.undp.org/partners/civil_society/http://www.undp.org/partners/civil_society/


26/57

@?2 @@ (Moi era)#ollo.ing the death of Kenyatta0 Moi became Kenya4s second presidentin 935+ $n a bid to entrench his regime0 Moi transformed Kenya into anauthoritarian state (Matanga0 1222)

931 .itnessed the amendment of the constitution that made Kenya aone party state+ he amendment barred the formation of oppositionalparties that could oppose the state+ his meant that DS"s .ere the onlyalternati,e left to oppose Moi4s authoritarian and personalised regime(Matanga0 1222)+ "n their part0 DS"s ad,ocated for constitutionalamendments in a bid to address the e*cessi,e po.ers placed upon thepresident+

DS"s e*erted pressure upon the go,ernment to open up thedemocratic space+ At the same time0 there .as increasing pressure fromdonors upon the go,ernment to open up the democratic space in Kenya+!Horts of DS"s combined .ith donor pressure can therefore be said toha,e led to the amendment of section 1a of the Kenya constitution in9331 to allo. the reGestablishment of multiGparty rule in the country+

@@- -BB-Although the amendments to the constitution meant that there .as anincrease in the democratic space as .itnessed by the e*pansion of ci,ilsociety0 the democratic space .as still limited since Moi still curtailed theacti,ities of DS"s and of the oppositional parties in Kenya by requiringthem to ha,e permits in order to ha,e a gathering of people or to hold arally (%deg.a0 9336)+ he opposition parties on their part .ere di,ided

along ethnic and party lines+ Such di,isions made the opposition partiestoo .ea8 to oppose the state as .as .itnessed during the 9331 generalelections .here the opposition lost to Moi+ DS"s called upon theopposition to unite as a precondition for .inning against Moi in futureelections+ /o.e,er0 the di,ided opposition once again lost to Moi in the9335 general elections+

&uring this period0 the constitutional debated had started bre.ingled by DS"s+ @ith support from donors0 DS"s undertoo8 massi,e ci,iceducation campaigns around the country+ his .as met .ith harassmentand intimidation from the go,ernment+ nli8e Kenyatta .ho .assupporti,e of DS"s acti,ities0 Moi percei,ed DS"s as the enemy andsought to curtail their acti,ities+ DS"s .ere ho.e,er aggressi,e in theirunderta8ings+ "n their part0 the opposition nally united and elded asingle presidential candidate in the 1221 general elections that mar8edthe end of the Moi era+ his process .as greatly supported by the DS"sand their net.or8s+ DS"s during this period can be said to ha,e had aclear and common obFecti,e of getting rid of Moi4+ DS"S also appear toha,e been reform oriented and acti,ist in their nature of approach+

-BB1 -BB?@ith the ,oting out of Moi in 1221 and the coming into po.er of the

%ational Rainbo. Doalition (%ARD) go,ernment in 122=0 there .as ane*pansion in the democratic space for DS"s in Kenya to participate in,arious acti,ities of ci,ic nature+ his is because the %ARD go,ernment

1=


27/57

.as more supporti,e of DS"s and there .as more engagement of DS"s

.ith go,ernment ma8ing the political en,ironment more conduci,e forDS"s engagement+

he %ARD go,ernment comprising mainly of former opposition partymembers ho.e,er coGopted many acti,e ci,il society leaders into the ne.

go,ernment creating a leadership ,acuum in ci,il society organisations+#or ci,il society0 the coming into po.er of the %ARD go,ernment alsomeant that the once clear and common obFecti,e (of getting rid of Moi)pre,iously held by ci,il society .as no longer holding+ DS"s thereforehad to get alternati,e .ays to engage .ith the go,ernment0 for e*ampleplaying an acti,e role in ci,ic a.areness in the constitution re,ie.process and ma8ing proposals for the amendment of the Kenyaconstitution+

he %ARD go,ernment did not li,e to its promise of deli,ering a ne.constitution to Kenyans as had been promised and instead hiFac8ed4 the

process from the DS"s and .atered do.n the contents of the draftconstitution+ DS"s on their part undertoo8 massi,e ci,ic a.arenesscampaigns to rally Kenyans to ,ote against the proposed draftconstitution .hich did not ta8e into account many of the proposalscollected from the communities by the DS"s+ he constitutionalreferendum in 1227 .itnessed the defeat of the proposed draftconstitutional thereby conrming the mobili?ing po.er of DS"s in Kenya+

DS"s in Kenya are ho.e,er not a homogeneous group+ &uring theconstitutional referendum0 DS"s appeared to ha,e become di,ided alongparty and ethnic lines leading to questions on ho. neutral4 and obFecti,eDS"s are in their acti,ities+ Such di,isions in Di,il Society continued tobe .itnessed in the period leading to the 1225 general elections .hoseresults .ere hea,ily contested and led to .ide spread post election,iolence+

-BB2 to datehe 1225 elections and the stalemate that ensued led to the formation ofa coalition go,ernment .ithout an oHicial opposition party in the country+he lac8 of opposition has forced the DS"s in Kenya to play the.atchdog role o,er the coalition go,ernment+ his places an importantrole upon DS"s in Kenya in mo,ing the country for.ard in the absence of

an oHicial opposition+ he go,ernment4s .illingness to engage .ith DS"sma8es Kenya4s political en,ironment conduci,e for DS"s engagement inD+

Role o CSOs in policy ormulation

DS"s ha,ing been at the forefront in ad,ocating for change in Kenya+ $nthe conte*t of this study0 DS"s ha,e been at the forefront in e*posingmalpractices in D and .ent a step further to lobby the community to,ote out MPs percei,ed to ha,e misused D+ his led to many MPsbeing ,oted out because as Romero (1223) highlights0 ho. .ell MPs

.ere percei,ed to ha,e used the D increased their probability of beingreGelected in Kenya4s 1225 general elections+ D presents anopportunity for DS"s to shift from ad,ocating for political issues to also

1>


28/57

include de,elopment issues+ he D has presented the DS"s in Kenya.ith greater opportunities for engagement .ith both the go,ernmentand the local communities+ /o. .ell DS"s can engage .ith the localcommunity and represent the communities interests also depends onDS"s do.n.ard accountability to the constituents as discussed belo.+

CSOs Accountability

DS"s do.n.ard accountability4 to their constituents is important indetermining the eHecti,eness of DS"s as empo.erment agents (Kilby01227)+ @hether DS"s are percei,ed as being transparent andaccountable determines their le,el of legitimacy in the community andthis in turn has a bearing on DS"s performance+ $f they are percei,ed asnot being transparent and as unaccountable0 they may lose credibilityand legitimacy in society+ DS"s ha,e largely been percei,ed asaccountable to their donors .ithout do.n.ard accountability to those

they purport to represent+$n the conte*t of this study an e*ample .as gi,en in relation to

leadership .rangles in the %B" council that left the slot for %B"representation in the D %ational Management Dommittee 9>,acant+&espite such accusations0 DS"s in Kenya still ha,e some legitimacydra.n from their past ad,ocacy eHorts in the democratisation process ofKenya+ /o.e,er0 to maintain and increase their legitimacy in society0DS"s in Kenya need to impro,e do.n.ard accountability to those that bytheir ,ery mandate they should be representing+

CSOs .egitimacy

he abo,e discussion re,eals that o,er time0 DS"s in Kenya ha,e pro,edthat they are capable of bringing the much needed change in society+DS"s ha,e sho.n that the challenges confronting ci,il societynot.ithstanding0 they can still represent and ad,ocate for change insociety+ his has gi,en DS"s legitimacy in society based on past record ofbringing reforms in Kenya+

he go,ernment on its part gi,es formal recognition to DS"s as

important actors in de,elopment and regularly engages .ith DS"s inpolicy formulation in the ,arious sectors of go,ernment+ #ormalrecognition of DS"s by go,ernment is also .itnessed through thecreation of slots for DS"s representation in go,ernment underta8ings ane*ample being D .here as highlighted earlier there are slots for DS"srepresentation in Ds institutions+

!Hecti,e engagement of DS"s in de,elopment requires strong and,ibrant DS"s as those discussed abo,e+ &espite go,ernment4srecognition of DS"s as important actors in de,elopment and thereforepro,iding in,ited spaces4 for DS"s participation0 such in,ited spaces4are full of po.er dynamics forcing DS"s to loo8 for alternati,e spaces4

of engagement+ $n the ne*t chapter0 .e loo8 at ho. DS"s are utili?ingin,ited spaces4 and created spaces4 and closed spaces4 in underta8ing9>Renamed D board

17


29/57

their roles to enhance transparency0 accountability and community4sparticipation in D process+

16


30/57


31/57

$n relation to this entry point0 the D Act section 1=0 subsection 1states that the MP shall .ithin the rst year of a ne. parliament and atleast once e,ery t.o years thereafter0 con,ene locational meetings in theconstituency to deliberate on de,elopment matters in the location0 theconstituency and the district4+ he D Act does not specically allocate

any role to the DS"s and the study therefore considers this to be aclosed space4 for DS"s participation in the proFect identication stage+$ndi,idual members of DS"s may attend the meetings if in,ited0 but thestudy considers that they are doing so in their o.n indi,idual capacity asmembers of the community and not as representati,es of DS"s and it is.ith that in mind that the study considered this entry point of proFectidentication to be a closed space4 for DS"s+

@hether the community participates in the identication of proFectsdepends on ho. the MP shapes the boundaries of the space4 ofengagement+ here are those .ho .ill be in,ited and those .ho .ill not

be in,ited in the identication of proFects in D+ An MP inter,ie.ed inthis study highlighted the importance of the community4s participation+/e noted that for a proect to ha"e an i*pact, the co**unity *ust ownit 1. /he co**unity *ust #e in"ol"ed fro* day one4 (MP)+ $n realityho.e,er0 there is *ini*al in"ol"e*ent of the co**unity #ecause thosearound the 4 are the ones who decide on the proects to #ei*ple*ented 1...5.he proFects identied by those close to the MP .eresaid to be passed as ha,ing been identied by the community4+ &espitethe D Act mandating that the community be in,ol,ed thereby gi,ingthe community "isi#le power%%to identify the proFects they .antunderta8en0 the MPs hidden power%appears to shape the boundaries of

the space of proFect identication and he chooses .ho participates and.ho does not+

$n so doing0 4s and their patrons li*it how people participate inCDF% (a respondent fro* a CS6 at the national le"el). #urther0 if theco**unity does not know that CDF is their *oney, they will ha"e nointerest in &ettin& in"ol"ed 1in the CDF. 7hen the co**unity is *adeaware that CDF is their *oney #ecause they pay ta8, then theco**unity &ets interested and will want to #e in"ol"ed4+ he MPinter,ie.ed in this study highlighted that if the community does not8no. they need to be in,ol,ed then they may be e*cluded+ he MP

further argued that CS6s *ust sensiti$e the locals on their ri&hts. CDFis ta8 payers% *oney and it is i*portant that the locals know that it istheir *oney that they ha"e paid for in for* of ta8es. t is not*uheshi*iwa%s9*oney).As8ed .hy he thought the DS"s needed tosensiti?e the community on their rights0 the MP e*plained that DS"s hadalready raised a.areness on D but the people .ere still notdemanding to be in,ol,ed because they did not 8no. it .as their right tobe in,ol,ed+

#rom the abo,e e*amples it appears that the lac8 of communityin,ol,ement .as seen as resulting from the community4s lac8 ofa.areness on their rights in D and thereby allo.ing MPs to e*ercise

their po.ers on .ho participated and .ho did not participate in the96A title commonly associated .ith a person of authority+ $t is also commonly used.hen referring to politicians in Kenya+

1


32/57

identication of proFects in D+ As Ba,enta4s argues .ithout priora.areness building so that citi?ens possess a sense of their o.n right toclaim rights or e*press ,oice0 Q the mechanisms for participation maybe captured by pre,ailing interests4 (1226:=2)+

$n considering that it seems that it is the MPs .ho decide .ho gets to

participate in the proFect identication and that there is no slot for DS"srepresentation0 DS"s may not ha,e a direct inIuence on .hat happens inthe proFect identication process+ $n a bid to manoeu,re and get moreinIuence on .ho participates0 the DS"s inter,ie.ed ha,e createdspaces%.ithin .hich they are lobbying for the opening up of the proFectidentication process so that the community gets to be the ones decidingon the proFects to be implemented in D+ @ithin the created space%0 theDS"s highlighted that they .ere underta8ing ,arious roles (as .ill bediscussed belo.) to raise a.areness on D in the community and tomobilise the community to demand to be included in the process of

identifying the 8ind of proFects to be implemented in D+At the national le,el0 a respondent from a national DS" highlighted

that they .ere underta8ing a.areness creation at the national le,el andalso at the local le,el through their regional oHices in the country+#urther0 the DS" has also printed pamphlets .ith information on D.hich they distribute freely to the public to sensiti?e the public on Dtheir rights in D and ho. the community can participate in D+

As8ed .hat they hoped to achie,e by sensiti?ing the public0 the DS"respondent cited that the co**unity is not participatin& in CDF. /hoseclose to the 4 participate #ut that is not the co**unity. roectidenti;cation 1in CDF is not #ased on the needs of the co**unity #ut onthe needs of the 4. /he 4 needs political support and the people needde"elop*ent so there is a con


33/57

the organisation4s printed material+ his national DS" had trained alocal DS" in Ma8ueni that .as also one of the DS"s inter,ie.ed+

&uring the eld ,isit to Ma8ueni0 a respondent from the DS" trainedas a community facilitator highlighted that the training they recei,edfrom the national DS" .as on gender dimensions in relation to D they

.ere also trained on the content of the D Act and also on ho. tosensitise the community so that they may participate in D because thecommunity .as currently said to not participate in D due to lac8 ofinformation on ho. to engage in D+ #or the DS" respondent0 thecommunity needed to ha,e information to be in a better position toparticipate in the D+ #urther the respondent highlighted that they hadalso trained other DS"s .ithin Ma8ueni and that they .ere also doinga.areness campaigns in churches and public functions+ hey cited thatthey got good cooperation from churches and .ere at times in,ited bythe local churches to sensitise the members on D and ho. they could

be in,ol,ed in D+ #rom the abo,e e*ample0 .e see ho. informationproduced at national le,el .as being used for public a.areness on Dat the local le,el+

he study also found t.o local DS"s .ho .ere doing a.arenesscreation laying more emphasis on .omen4s participation in D+ heDS" highlighted that .omen .ere not in,ol,ed in D and that .hen itcame to the identication of proFects it is men .ho attend the bara?as95+#urther0 the respondent highlighted that e,en .here .omen are part ofthe D committees wo*en were #ein& used =as ru##er sta*ps5 forfor*ality%+ he DS" .as therefore sensiti?ing .omen not to #e used4because it .as their right to participate in D+

@hat .as interesting in Ma8ueni .as that there .ere se,eral DS"sdoing the same acti,ities on a.areness raising and .hen as8ed about.hether they collaborate .ith each other they highlighted that theyco*e to&ether when there is a co**on issue9!that #rin&s the* to&ether#ut not in their day to day acti"ities4

he study came across an interesting case of a DS" that .asunderta8ing a.areness raising on D and had not read or been trainedon the content of the D Act+ he study sought to nd out ho. the DS".as doing a.areness raising if they had not read or been trained on theD Act and the respondent cited that they rely on information they hear

from other DS"s+ @hile such sharing of information amongst DS"s mayhelp reach out to a bigger part of the community especially .here accessto information is limited0 it also poses a danger of sending distortedinformation to the community in the e,ent the source of the informationis not a reliable source+

#rom the abo,e discussions0 the study has presented e*amples ofDS"s playing roles in a.areness creation to empo.er the community sothat they may participate in D from an informed perspecti,e+ As onerespondent from go,ernment said0 *ost of the infor*ation out there on

95Public meetings+9hey ga,e an e*ample of .here they had .ritten to the D board to complainabout mismanagement of D in their area and .ere as8ed to collect signaturesand DS"s came together to mobili?e the community and get signatures+

=2


34/57

CDF is actually fro* the CS6s4+ @ith all the a.areness raisingcampaigns on D by diHerent DS"s the study still .anted to nd outho. according to DS"s0 the community .ould be more in,ol,ed in D.hereas the MPs .ere said to .ield hidden power4 that they used toensure that those .ho entered the in"ited spaces4 .ould ser,e the MPs

interests+ $n response0 the study .as informed that .hile the DS"s maynot ha,e a direct inIuence on .hether the MP in,ol,es the community ornot0 DS"s could ha,e an indirect inIuence by e*erting pressure frombelo.4 .here the community could demand that the MP in,ol,es them+

#urther0 pressure from belo.4 .ould force the MP to in,ol,e thecommunity in decision ma8ing for fear that they may be ,oted out comethe general elections+ $n that conte*t0 DS"s may indirectly inIuence .hoparticipates in the proFect identication stage because the communityha,ing been sensitised by the DS"s on their rights in D could e*ertdirect pressure on the MP .ho in turn .ould allo. for community

participation in decision ma8ing+%e*t0 the paper presents the DS"s roles in the prioritisation of proFectsin D+

Prioritisation o% Pro"ects

Prioritisation of proFects pro,ides another entry point for the DS"s intothe D processes+ At this entry point0 the study found an in,ited space4for DS"s to be part of the D&D as discussed belo.+

"nce the proFects ha,e been identied at the locational meeting0 thelist of proFects is for.arded to constituency le,el for prioritisation by the

Donstituency &e,elopment Dommittee (D&D)+ @ithin the D&D0 the DAct (section 1=(>)) creates a slot for DS" representation thereby ma8ingthe D&D an in"ited space%for DS"s+ @ithin this in"ited space%of theD&D0 DS"s ha,e "isi#le power%ha,ing been in,ited to be part of theD&D .ith their role spelt out in the D Act+ DS"s in the D&D are to usetheir "isi#le power%to be part of the decision ma8ing process regarding.hich proFects gets prioritised for funding and on nancial allocations tothe indi,idual proFects+ DS"s representation to the D&D is based on theDS" being selected by the MP in line .ith the D Act that allo.s theMP to con,ene a D&D and select the representati,es of the ,ariouscategories of membership as pro,ided for by the D Act (men0 .omen0youth0 religious leader0 acti,e %B")+o that e*tent0 .hile the D Actallo.s for representation of ,arious actors in D&D0 it is the MP .hocreates the boundaries of participation and as Ba,enta (1226) says0 those.ho create the boundaries of participation ha,e more po.er .ithin thatspace+

#urther0 DS"s role in the D&D may be constrained due to the natureof nomination to the D&D+ he MP .ields great po.er both "isi#le%andhidden%po.ers as per the D Act and may use his po.er to ensurethat the DS"s nominated to the D&D are those that .ill help himad,ance his interests+ $n that conte*t0 the MP determines .ho enters the

decision ma8ing space and may use his hidden power%to ensure thosethat enter that in"ited space%are those that represent his interests andnot the interests of the community+ As a DS" respondent from %airobi

=9


35/57

said 4s ha"e political preferences. CS6s ha"e political preferencesand political interests. 7ill he 1CS6 representati"e in CDC representthe interests of the ci"il society or those of the 4 who put hi* in theCDCL @hile the abo,e statement raises the question of the legitimacy ofthe DS"s representati,e in D&D0 it also raises doubt on DS"s

representation of the community4s interests+@ith regards to the allegation that MPs selects D&D representati,es

(membership includes DS"s representati,es) from their patronagenet.or8s0 the MP inter,ie.ed responded that an 4 is elected #y thesa*e people and there *ust #e so*e le"el of trust in the 4. /he 1CDFct as de;ned today &a"e certain power to the 4 like for*ation of the1CDC co**ittee #ut truly think and %d want to #elie"e and think that*ost of our 4s who were elected, &o out there 1to arlia*ent to tryand i*pro"e the li"es of the people they represent. n that case, see nocontradiction in the way the ct is now and the way that should happen.>ut we ha"e had co*plaints a#out the 4s and patrona&e. >ut who canthe 4 work with? Can you &o and work with the people you defeated?/hat is a @uestion that people should address #ecause whoe"er you pickis #ound to ha"e #een on the side that elected you%.

he DS"s on their part .ere of the ,ie. that members to the D&Dshould be elected by those they represent to enable them play their role.ithout the inIuence of the MP+ $t therefore appears that .hile the DAct pro,ides an in"ited space%.ith "isi#le power%0 the MPs hiddenpower%pre,ails in the decision ma8ing process regarding .hich proFectsget prioriti?ed and later for.arded to the D board for funding+ Bi,enthe po.er dynamics .ithin this entry point0 it may e*plain .hy the D&D

has been accused of lac8 of transparency due to .ithholding informationon ho. proFects are prioriti?ed+ A local DS" respondent highlighted acase .hereby the community .as in,ol,ed in the identication ofproFects but some of the proFects that e,entually got funded .ere notpart of those that had been identied by the community+

Donfronted .ith the po.er dynamics discussed abo,e0 the study hadhoped to nd a created space4 for DS"s engagement but did not ndone+ his may be as a result of the said limited access to information thatmay ha,e forced DS"s to play the .atchdog role as .ill be discussed inthe entry point of implementation and monitoring later in the section+

&armonisation o% Pro"ects

/armonisation of proFects ta8es place at the district le,el+ At this entrypoint of harmonisation of proFects0 the study found out that it is a closedspace%for DS"s as e*plained belo.+

/armonisation of proFects in D is an import stage because this is thestage .hereby all proFects that ha,e been prioritised from the diHerentconstituencies .ithin the district are for.arded to the &istrict ProFectsDommittee (&PD) for harmonisation+ &uring harmonisation0 the &PDensures that the proFects being implemented by D are in line .ith thego,ernment4s de,elopment priorities and that there is no duplicationbet.een proFects being implemented under D and those beingimplemented by the line ministries+ he &PD also ensures that the costsallocated to the proFects are realistic and also loo8s at prospects for coG

=1


36/57

nancing .ith other donors .ho may be interested in funding some ofthe proFects implemented under D+ he D Act does not pro,ide anyslots for DS"s representation in this stage of harmonisation or proFectsma8ing the entry point of a closed space%for DS"s+

Analysis of the eld data did not re,eal any created space%by DS"s

to inIuence .hat happens at this stage+ According to Ba,enta0 .herethere are closed spaces0 DS"s are li8ely to create spaces%to lobby forthe opening up of closed spaces%+ his .as not the case at this entrypoint+ $nter,ie.s .ith respondents from go,ernment highlighted that inmost cases0 D&Ds did not for.ard proFects to &PD for harmonisation andthat there .as minimal in,ol,ement of the technical departments at thedistrict le,el for the proFect harmonisation process+

Approval an# 'un#ing

his stage of appro,al and funding is an important stage that ta8es placeat the national le,el+ $t is in this stage that proFects for.arded from the192 constituencies in the country are scrutini?ed and appro,ed forfunding+ @ithin this entry point of appro,al and funding0 the study foundan in"ited space%for DS"s in D+ "ut of the DS"s inter,ie.ed0 oneDS" had a nominated representati,e to this entry point (the D board)+

$deally0 once the proFects ha,e been prioriti?ed by the D&D andharmoni?ed by the &PD0 the area MP for.ards the list of proFects to theD board for appro,al and funding in line .ith the D Act (section 6f)+he entry point of appro,al and funding pro,ides an in"ited space%forDS"s .ithin .hich DS"s e*ercise their "isi#le power%in appro,ing and

funding of D proFects+Analysis of the eld data did not re,eal any created space4 .ithin theappro,al and funding entry point that .as being utilised by DS"s in thestudy+ /a,ing loo8ed at the appro,al and funding entry point0 the study.ill no. loo8 at the implementation of proFects+

Implementation o% Pro"ects

At this entry point of implementation0 the study found an in"ited space%and also a created space4 .hereby DS"s .ere underta8ing ,ariousroles to enhance accountability and community participation in D as

highlighted in this section+"nce the D -oard appro,es proFects for funding0 the funds are

transferred to the Donstituency &e,elopment Dommittee4s (D&D)account to be transferred to the ,arious ProFect ManagementDommittees for the implementation of the funded proFects+ he D&Do,ersees the implementation of the proFects but the day to day running ofthe proFects is done by the PMDs .ith the assistance of the rele,anttechnical department as stipulated in the D Act+ he in"ited space%forDS"s in this entry point of the implementation of proFects is through theslot for DS"s representation in the D&D gi,ing the DS"s "isi#le power%

to ta8e part in the decision ma8ing+ $n earlier discussions at the entrypoint of prioritisation of proFects0 the study highlighted that there areconstraints to DS"s participation in D&D in terms of e*ercising their

==


37/57

"isi#le power%due to the hidden power%of the MP that pre,ails .ithinthe D&D due to the selection of DS"s close to the MP to help himad,ance his interests thereby limiting the inIuence of DS"s in thedecision ma8ing process+

$n relation to the PMD0 the study considers it a closed space%because

the D Act does not pro,ide specic slots to any actors and has insteadonly highlighted that the members to the PMDs could be nominated0elected or ha,e been in e*istence+ A PMD being in e*istence refers to.here a committee may ha,e already been in place underta8ing adiHerent proFect but is retained as the proFects committee implementingthe D proFect+

he eld ndings re,eal that although the DS"s in this study .erenot directly in,ol,ed in the implementation of D proFects0 t.o of theDS"s (one in Ma8ueni and the other in Macha8os) had created spaces%for better engagement in D+ he t.o DS"s had set up their o.n

committee to play the .atch dog role o,er the PMDs implementing theproFects directly+ A respondent from one of the DS"s highlighted thatthey closely monitored ho. the PMDs .ere implementing the proFects toensure that the implementation .as going on .ell and that thecontractors .ere on site and .or8ing (in case the proFect .ithcontractors)+ #urther0 the DS" also 8ept trac8 of materials deli,ered forthe proFect implementation and the amounts being used+ he DS"shighlighted that since the D&D .as denying4 them information0 the DS"had decided to get the information directly from monitoring the PMDs+

he D&D is required to put up information on proFects funded andnancial allocations to the indi,idual proFects on public notice boards.here the community can ha,e access to information+ DS"s inter,ie.edhighlighted that some D&Ds .ere not putting up the information ma8ingit diHicult for DS"s to 8no. ho. much .as coming to the community+he researcher accompanied by a respondent from a local DS" paid a,isit to t.o public notice boards at a D&D oHice and at a chief4s camp inone of the areas under study and there .as no information on allocationsto proFects+

DS"s .ere also mobilising the community to demand for informationfrom D&D+ "ne of the local DS"s inter,ie.ed highlighted we lo##y theco**unity to write 1the de*and letters the*sel"es and not us as 1

we do not want it to look as if 1 is the one doin& the work, we wantthis process to #e owned #y the co**unity4+ #rom the abo,e discussion0the DS"s are underta8ing roles that see8 to enhance the community4saccess to information+ @ithout information on proFects being underta8enin their areas the community may not participate in implementation ofthe proFects+ @hether the community .as in,ol,ed in the earlier stagesof identifying the proFects may also inIuence .hether the communityparticipates at the other entry points+ #urther0 .hether the proFects thatthe community identied are the ones that e,entually get funded mayalso inIuence .hether the community participates in D+ he rolesbeing played by the DS"s to increase the community4s access toinformation in D may be said to be enhancing the community4sopportunities for participation in D because .here they ha,e access toinformation0 the community can raise queries (for e*ample in the e,ent

=>


38/57


39/57

@ith regards to accountability0 a respondent from a national DS"cited that Benyans ha"e only one chance to hold the 4 to account andthat is throu&h the elections. CS6s can do little to hold the 4 toaccount #ut can open the people%s eyes throu&h ci"ic education. 4sfear CS6s can erode their political capital hence will account to so*e

e8tent to CS6s4+ #or the DS"s0 ci,ic education is an ongoing acti,ity intheir underta8ings+

o enhance accountability0 DS"s .ere using ,arious mechanismssuch as conducting social audits0 preparing citi?ens4 report cards andorganising public forums+ A respondent from a national DS" highlightedthat they organise public forums dubbed bunge la .ananchi493that bringtogether the MP0 D&D and local community+ Such forums .ere said topro,ide an opportunity for the community to as8 questions and recei,eclarication from the MP and the D&D+ /o.e,er0 the public forumsencounter challenges in that MPs and the D&Ds could choose .hether or

not to attend in .hich case the DS" uses the forum to raise a.arenesson D and sensiti?e the community on their rights in D+ he DS" alsounderta8es social audits12of D through their ,arious regional oHices inthe country+ $n Macha8os0 a local DS" .as underta8ing social audits andso .as another DS" in Ma8ueni+ @hat these DS"s had in common .asthat they .ere all using the same social audit guide prepared by anational le,el DS" (see Bi8onyo0 122)+

"ne national DS" highlighted that they periodically sampleconstituencies and do an assessment of ho. D has been used+ heyuse that information to publish Diti?en Report Dards19+ he DS" reportedthat they ha,e local committees and at times ma8e use of research

assistants to aid in data collection+ he DS" ta8es pictures of proFectsfunded under D and compares the status of the proFect in the picture.ith .hat has been reported by D&D+ he report cards also contain asummary of ndings follo.ing the audit of D in the constituency+ heDS" highlighted that the citi?ens4 report cards they had prepared hadhelped unearth proFects .hose status as reported along oHicial channelsconIicted .ith .hat .as sho.n in the pictures+ According to anothernational DS" respondent0 citi?ens4 report cards *ake 4s realise thatpeople are watchin&%.$n other .ords0 pressure e*erted by DS"s is aimedat enhancing the performance of the D&D and of the MP+ he respondent

cited the case of the 1225 general elections .here DS"s had donea.areness raising on D and as8ed Kenyans to ,ote out MPs .ho .erepercei,ed to ha,e misused D+ Diti?ens4 report cards are also said toact as a source of information for the public because the report cardscontain information on the nancial allocation to the indi,idual proFects

93Diti?ens4 parliament12social audit entails the e*amination of all aspects of a public proFect such asmanagement of nances0 oHicers responsible0 record 8eeping0 access toinformation0 accountability as .ell as le,els of public in,ol,ement (Bi8onyo0122)

19A tool for holding public oHicers to account11Romero (1223) obser,es that .here MPs .ere percei,ed to ha,e misused Dchances of them being reGelected .ere reduced .ith se,eral of them not being

,oted bac8 in+

=6


40/57

and status of proFects implementation in the particular constituency1=+ $nthe e,ent that the same proFects had been funded using money fromother sources0 the community could raise the issue .ith the D -oard+he report cards could therefore be used as a source of informationleading to .hat a respondent from a national DS" termed as demand

dri,en accountability4 citing that in the a#sence of citi$ens @uestionin&how resources are used, we will #e handin& o"er =#lank che@ues5 to 4sto use as they please without worry4+ /o.e,er0 important to note is .houses the report cardsU $s it the local eliteU @hat of community members.ho cannot readU /o. many reports can go out thereU Are report cardsbetter than Ds method of pining up nancial dataU @hat ofinformation and data .hen the proFect is ongoingU

@hether DS"s ha,e the preGrequisite s8ills to underta8e the socialaudits .as a point of concern raised by t.o respondents from thego,ernment+ hey questioned the capacity of DS"s to underta8e some of

the acti,ities on D due to the technical e*pertise required and thatDS"s .ere said to lac8 (engineer0 sur,eyor0 auditors) in relation totheir reporting to the status of D proFects+ o use a respondent4s.ords how will they know the set standards to #e a#le to ud&e whethera proect is &ood or #ad?5 Xuestions .ere raised by some go,ernmentoHicials on the sampling methods used by some DS"s for studiesunderta8en on D citing that they .ere politically moti,ated and notdri,en by the desire to enhance accountability+ "ne national DS"srespondent cited technical limitations in underta8ing some acti,ities(those requiring specialists) and had resorted to simple methods that donot require technical input+ An e*ample gi,en .as that of ta8ing pictures

as opposed to underta8ing nancial audits+he abo,e methods used by DS"s in their roles in enhancing

accountability raise question on ho. .ell the message is getting acrossto the local communities+ Putting into conte*t that most of theseacti,ities are happening in remote communities and suddenly there is alot of information and acti,ities being brought4 by DS"s0 there is the ris8of it being too o,er.helming for the community+ he social accountabilitymechanisms described abo,e may also require a literate community thatreads the reports prepared by DS"s other.ise DS"s may end upe*cluding those in the community .ho cannot read+

$n the ne*t section0 .e loo8 at the challenges and opportunities for DS"sin underta8ing their ,arious roles to enhance transparency0accountability and community4s participation in D+

69- Constraints to CSOs eDective engagement in C$!

$n this section0 the study loo8s the ability of DS"s to enhanceaccountability and community4s participation in D+ $n loo8ing at DS"seHecti,eness0 the study relies on the information recei,ed from the DS"sin relation to ho. they .ere underta8ing their roles in D+

1=#or e,ery constituency the DS" had assessed0 a citi?en report card perconstituency had been prepared+

=5


41/57

Coor#ination an# collaboration amongst CSOs

o empo.er the community0 the information sent out to the communityneeds to be credible+ "ne DS" respondent from %airobi highlighted thatthere are many DS"s dealing .ith D and as we &o out there as ci"il

society, the *essa&es &oin& out there are not unifor*. n certain casesunfortunately there are distortions4+ $f DS"s go to the community .ithconIicting information0 they may not only lose credibility but may alsoend up misinforming the community as opposed to informing them+#urther0 DS"s acti,ities in D appear to be fragmented anduncoordinated+ As one national DS" respondent highlighted ci"il societyis a *arket of actors. 'arious CS6s are currently runnin& si*ilarinitiati"es in a parallel way 1%.his poses a danger of duplication ofacti,ities and sending out conIicting information .here DS"s are notcommunicating .ell amongst themsel,es+

Another ris8 is .hereby se,eral national le,el DS"s are underta8ingmonitoring acti,ities in the local communities .ith little if anycollaboration among themsel,es+ Such fragmented acti,ities pose a ris8of each DS" going to the community and setting up committees tomonitor use of D+ he community could end up .ith se,eralcommittees monitoring D but .ith each committee being aHiliated toa diHerent national DS"+

@hile the abo,e lin8ages bet.een national and local DS"s mayappear to be .or8ing .ell0 it should not be ta8en for granted because ascautioned by a DS" respondent at the national le,el there is a dan&er ofor&anisations 1at the national le"el usin& people and people &roups

1local CS6s to &ather data without &i"in& as *uch in ter*s of trainin&and ad"ocacy skills to the co**unitiesL+ %ational DS"s therefore needto as8 themsel,es .hat s8ills they are bringing to the community+

In%ormation gap an# technical capacity

$t may be important that DS"s ha,e the rele,ant 8no.ledge in the areaor issues they are .or8ing on or else their credibility may be put indoubt+ DS"s could also end up causing confusion or misinforming thepublic as opposed to informing them+ As one respondent from a nationalDS" highlighted0 *any or&anisations are &ettin& into works of CDF

without the re@uisite capacity. /his has #een fuelled #y donor priorities#ecause *any donors ha"e put their *oney into this work and *anyor&anisations are applyin& to do this work without the capacity4+

As highlighted earlier0 some DS"s cited limited technical capacity interms of underta8ing roles that require the input of e*perts (engineers inthe case of dams and roads0 sur,eyors0 auditors) thereby hindering theeHecti,eness of DS"s .or8+ DS"s may not 8no. the set standards inproFects thereby requiring the input of e*perts and nancial constraintsonly ma8e this .orse as DS"s may not be in a position to hire thetechnical e*pertise needed+

=


42/57

(et)or*ing+,

An inter,ie. .ith a respondent from a national DS" highlighted thatmost organisations implement programs indi,idually although more andmore DS"s are getting into net.or8s+ A respondent from one national

DS" cited that donors e*phasise on oint initiati"es and CS6s arepushed indirectly to work to&ether. t is not that CS6s wanted to for*the networks #ut since the owners of the wallets want us to for*networks 1%/o.e,er0 it is not all DS"s .ho felt that .ay and t.oDS"s at the national le,el .ho .ere members of a DS"s net.or8 onde,ol,ed funds highlighted being in a net.or8 .as .or8ing out .ellsince e,eryone 8ne. .hat their role .as+A respondent from a donor organisation highlighted that donors .ant tofund proFects .hereby the money is spent mainly at the grassroots le,eland increasingly donors .ant to fund net.or8s+ he responded also saidthat national and local DS"s lin8ing up .ill spread the capacity that is

concentrated in airo#i to the &rassroots%Most DS"s inter,ie.ed highlighted that net.or8s of DS"s .or8ing

on D (de,ol,ed fund) .ere .ea8 and .here the lin8ages .ere strong0it .as as a result of the DS"s ha,ing .or8ed together in past programs+D therefore presents an opportunity to further strengthen e*istingnet.

final rp mercy

Documents