The efficacy and effectiveness of public participation in the administration of CDF projects; Case of Nyatike Constituency.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION.

1.1 Background

Kenya attained its independence in 1963, to quickly address the problems that were affecting the people during this period, the government came up with sessional paper No. 10, 1965 (African socialism), a policy document that was aimed at overcoming the four pertinent problems that were affecting major regions at that time namely; poverty, illiteracy, disease and ignorance. This marked a stepping stone for Kenyan’s attempt to sustainable development.

Between 1964 and 1969, the two development plans were established focusing on the rapid growth of the GDP, reducing poverty and unemployment. This was because of the persistent poverty and unemployment despite favorable economic growth at that time. Despite all these efforts, the public were kept at bay; there was little or no public participation of the public. Most of the projects were government initiatives and did not express the needs of the intended beneficiaries.

Although the sessional paper No. 10 required that planning was to be extended to provinces, much of the planning and implementation remained centralized. The 1966 to 1970 development plans had no difference; they followed the up-bottom structure with the public having little or no say in the development plans. Ndegwa report, (Republic of Kenya, 1971) recommended that various committees be established to ensure coordination and people’s participation in development. He said that for government to realize its concerns of accelerating development in rural areas, process of both plan-making and implementation had to be extended to the district level and even divisions, where government come into contact with local realities.

Report of the working party on government expenditure (Republic of Kenya, 1982) recommended that districts should be the focal point for the management and implementation of rural development. All these were in spirit of getting close to the people in order to spur vibrant public participation. District focus for rural development (DFRD), a policy document was further enacted that required district development committees (DDC) to be responsible for coordination of rural development.

By the year 1999, the government through its agencies started to practice fiscal decentralization by devolving funds to the grassroots. By devolving these funds, it was aimed at the citizens participating in its utilization, planning, monitoring and even evaluation of the projects by the fund. These funds included local authority transfer funds, poverty alleviation funds, road maintenance fuel levy funds and constituency development funds among others.

The constituency development fund.

The Constituencies Development Fund (CDF) was established in 2003 through an Act of Parliament (The Constituencies Development Fund, Act, 2003) (GoK, 2003a). It followed a prolonged process beginning October 2000 when a motion was discussed and passed by parliament calling for the establishment of such a fund. Two years later, the motion was transformed into a bill and successfully passed into law in October 2002, only to be assented to by the next president- Mwai Kibaki in 2003 (Obuya, 2008). The fund is at least 2.5% of the ordinary revenue raised by the government each year. The annual CDF allocation has been increasing each year in relation to the cumulative increases in revenue by year. The enactment of the CDF Act 2013 was mainly aimed to ensure that the law governing CDF is aligned to the Constitution of Kenya 2010, specifically in compliance with the principles of:

  • Transparency and accountability.
  • Separation of powers.
  • Participation of the people.

The new law was also aimed to align the operations of the Fund to the new devolved government structure.The CDF fund was first distributed equally among the 210 constituencies but since 2004 the central government has committed to use an allocation formula to distribute the development funds such that the government may not break a promise on its obligation as happened in previous decentralization programs. This formula also aims to provide a fairly uniform fund to each constituency, but some allowance is made for poverty levels, such that the poorest constituencies receive slightly more resources. According to the CDF Act this formula estimates that 75% of the net available fund is distributed equally among all 210 constituencies, whilst 25% of the net available fund is distributed according to a weighted value of the constituency’s contribution to national poverty. The weighting factor applied to the constituency contribution to poverty is the ratio of urban-rural poor population derived from the 1999 population and housing census. This weight favors rural areas by a factor of 0.23 to urban areas. The net available CDF fund is the total CDF allocation after netting out 3% for an administrative budget and 5% for a so called constituency emergency budget.

The existence of the Fund was rationalized on three main grounds, promotion of equity in the allocation of resources, appropriate application of public resources, and cost effectiveness. It is argued that allocation of monies to all constituencies ensures that remote and underdeveloped districts whose constituents have little voice at the national level receive a portion of public resources that they would otherwise have missed out.

According to the CDF act 2013, the citizens have numerous roles they play in the administration of CDF. The roles are stated as below;

  1. Provide opinion on specific development projects to be funded by CDF.
  2. Provide membership to the PMC and the CDFC.
  3. Provide grassroots and practical auditing of CDF projects.
  4. Monitor CDF projects.
  5. Ensure sustainability of CDF projects.

1.2 Problem statement.

The Constituency development fund (CDF) targets improved efficiency in service delivery and community empowerment through participation in issues affecting them. This is well indicated in the CDF act that created slots to provide for decision making mechanisms that accommodate all. Manor (199) says that governments have continued to decentralize decision making and resource utilization to the grassroots. However, there is an alluded fear that major decisions are made by Members of Parliament (MPs) who are the CDF patrons at the expense of the public.

Transparency International (2005) found that there is fear that decisions to do with the CDF project allocations rests on the supporters of the constituency MP to the disadvantage of the opponents. There is limited public participation which is against the constitution of Kenya.

There is also the problem of unbalanced project allocation and probable marginalization of some individuals and clans in the constituency based on ethnic group, clan or political ideology. Mwalulu and Irungu (2005) say that CDF is likely to reproduce inequality in the country because it does not address itself adequately to the twin problems of poverty and inequality. CDF has also become a powerful campaign tool and strategy that give the incumbent MPs an edge over the opponents thus undermine good governance. Appraisal of the CDF concluded that save for the compliance of section 30 of the constitution, the entire statute is largely wanting in accommodating constitutional principles (Ongoya and Lumallas, 2005)

Most people in the constituency lack awareness about CDF and only very people participate in the activities by the CDF. IPAR (2006) in the study conducted in five constituencies; the general awareness and participation was rated poor, institutional awareness of their roles and responsibilities was low, identification of projects was mainly done by MPs, poor quality but expensive projects, flawed tendering process; where MPs channeled tenders to their friends, supports and family members.

Despite the requirement by the constitution that every public initiative must invite public participation as stipulated in Article 232 (1) on the values and principles of public service which include: involvement of the people in the process of policy making and, accountability for administrative acts and transparency and provision to the public of timely and accurate information. Mbithe, Colletta (2001) say that women participation is very low in CDF matters. Despite the 1/3 rule requirement by the constitution, most of the committees are still dominated by men.

According to Ringera, Humphrey (2011), the MPs still have a lot of say in CDF as they decide on the projects to be funded and in most cases the projects are to the favor of their supporters and disadvantage to their opponents’.

Most CDF committees are handpicked by the area MP, lack skills required for the management of the CDF, monitoring, evaluation etc. According to IPAR (2006), those handpicked may not have required skills to carry out management of the CDF.

1.3 Research questions.

  1. What is the extent of awareness among public regarding the constituency development fund?
  2. Is the public involved in the identification of the projects funded?
  3. What are the criteria of identifying the projects to be funded?
  4. To what extent are the projects identification criteria followed?
  5. What should be done to improve the administration of CDF?

1.4 Objectives of the study.

1.4.1 Broad objective.

To establish the general effectiveness of constituency development fund in uplifting the lives of the public through enhancing participation and viable development projects.

1.4.2 Specific objectives.

  1. To establish the level CDF awareness among public regarding CDF
  2. To investigate the extent public involvement in the identification of CDF-funded projects.
  3. To be able to identify the criteria that is applied in selecting/identifying the projects to be funded.
  4. To find out on the extent to which the criteria of identification is followed.
  5. To investigate whether there is regional balance in projects funding as stipulated in the constitution.
  6. To propose what should be done to achieve the effectiveness, viability as well as sufficiency in public participation in the CDF activities in the constituency.

1.5 Significance of the Study

The recommendation of study will be deemed to be important to the Constituency Development Fund Board in rethinking the alternative way of enhancing public participation. The findings will also be significant to the constituency development board, the district development board, the constituency CDF mangers, civil society organizations, community based organizations (CBOs) and other major stakeholders in identifying the pitfalls in public participation in CDF and strategies that can be put in place to curb the vice.

 

1.6 The scope and limitation of the study.

The study focus is on the effectiveness of constituency development fund in stemming out the twin problem of poverty and inequality which have been persistent in Kenya since independence. By addressing this, CDF would have full filled the primary objective for which it was set. The study was held in Nyatike constituency and the results used to determine the condition nationwide.

However, the study faced myriad of limitations. It may have been limited by the sampling strategy which did not cover the exclusive composition of the population. The study targeted those who could write as the researcher depended on filled questionnaires. The vastness of the study area made it difficult for the researcher to access some parts of the study area. This was further complicated by lack of both manpower and resources to facilitate the same.

While collecting data, the respondents were mainly interviewed on their perception while no data was collected on attitude which could have shed more light on CDF and how it can be administered effectively to address the needs of the public.

During key informant interview, administrative weaknesses were cited yet no data was collected regarding the same.

1.7 Operational definitions.

  1. Community- UNDP defined community as a group of people living in a geographically defined area, or a group that interacts because of common social, economic, or political interests.
  2. Community Participation- Community participation concerns the engagement of individuals and communities in decisions about things that affect their lives.
  3. Development projects- A specific activity or task settled upon to translate an idea about helping communities to meet an identified need into practical actions that will substantially change people’s lives for the better.
  4. CDF projects- These are the projects implemented in the constituency level using the constituency development funds allocated by the central government to the constituencies.
  5. Project cycleThis is the sequence of phases through which the project will evolve, which includes identification, preparation, appraisal, implementation and evaluation.
  6. Project implementationThis is a vital stage of the project cycle that involves resources being mobilized, activities determined and a control mechanism established so that the project inputs can produce project outputs in order to achieve the project purpose.
  7. Project sustainabilityThis refers to the continuation of a project’s goals, principles, and efforts to achieve desired outcomes.
  8. Community AwarenessThese are programs aimed at making the community more informed, alert, self-reliant and capable of participating in all activities and programs that concern them.
  9. Empowerment- Empowerment is the process of enhancing the capacity of individuals or groups to make choices and to transform those choices into desired actions and outcomes to enable them better influence the course of their lives and the decisions which affect them

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

The literature review focuses on the effectiveness of public participation in ensuring that the CDF projects are relevant to the target beneficiaries especially in regard to the contribution to the development, project sustainability, and public awareness. The review then gives an overview of what exists in this field of study. Concepts and terms such as participation, community development sustainable development decentralization and constituency development fund are discussed.

2.1 Community and Community participation

According to UNDP a community is defined as a group of people living in a geographical defined area, or a group that interacts because of common social, economic, or political interests. Communities do contain interest groups and they are made up of individuals, but they are more than interest groups and are more than the sum up of the individuals who make them up. The individual men, women and children, some rich, some poor, do not just co-exist in a shared space. They interact in many different ways, some visible, some invisible. The existence of community is not something that can be demonstrated, it is a philosophical point of departure that is shared, albeit implicitly, by most of the key players (Schouten and Moriarty, 2003). The CDF projects are community based; and for this, the CDF act (2013) states that;

     “…Projects under this Act shall be Community based in order to ensure that the prospective benefits are available to a widespread cross section of the inhabitants of a particular area.”

Participation in development can be defined as the process through which people with an interest (stakeholders) influence and share control over development initiatives and the decisions and resources that affect them. The Constitution provides citizens with the right to participate in the decision-making process and other duties of the national and county legislative bodies. Specifically, Articles 118(1) (b) and 196(1) (b) directs the national and county legislatures respectively to “facilitate public participation” in its work. Additionally, Article 119(1) states that citizens have the “right to petition Parliament to consider any matter within its authority,” meaning that Kenyans can request Parliament to take up issues important to them.

In practice this involves employing measures to: identify relevant stakeholders, share information with them, listen to their views, involve them in processes of development planning and decision-making, contribute to their capacity-building and, ultimately empower them to initiate, manage and control their own self-development.

The Constitution supports access to information by all citizens, which is a key ingredient to effective and active citizen participation. Kenya’s national and county legislative bodies, for instance, are directed by the Constitution to conduct their work in an open and transparent manner; Articles 118(1)(a) and 196(1)(a) specifically direct Parliament and the county assemblies respectively to hold public meetings and conduct their work in the full view of all citizens. Another reference to public information sharing is in Article 201(1)(a), which states that there be “openness and accountability” and public participation when it comes to public financial matters. Public participation is a political principle, which has now been recognized as a right – the right to public participation. Article 10(2)(a) of the Constitution holds that the national values and principles of governance include patriotism, national unity, sharing and devolution of power, rule of law, democracy and participation of the people. The objective behind public participation is to facilitate the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision. Persons affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the process leading to the decision.

Citizen participation in Kenya finds its early roots in development projects that benefited local communities. Throughout the post-colonial era, the country took legislative steps to provide ways for citizens to be active participants in the governing of their country. Most of these ways, however, were limited to local authorities and the implementation of laws incorporating citizen participation did not reach their full potential because citizens did not fully understand their rights or embrace the opportunity. Finally, local authorities struggled to promote local funding and planning processes to citizens, like the Local Authority Service Delivery Action Plan (LASDAP) and the Constituencies Development Fund (CDF). Participation can take different forms, depending on the breadth of stakeholders involved and the depth of their participation.

2.2 Community development.

Julius Nyerere (1968) said that community development is the participation of people in a mutual learning process involving themselves, their local resources, external resources and external change agents. He said that people can’t be developed; instead they can only develop themselves. This means community development requires the participation of both the local people and the external change agents in order to ensure that the projects remain relevant to the target beneficiaries.

According to Biddle M. W (1996) community development is a social process whereby people pool resources together in order to improve their social and economic conditions in the frustrating and challenging world. The emphasis in community development is the engagement in common activities and has mutual interest. Community development is a collaborative, collective action taken by the local people to enhance the long term social, political and economic conditions of the people.

By involving members of the community, it increases the capacity of the community to identify their own solutions to their own problems. It also enhances the contribution by the community in improving their capacity to deal with their own challenges.

According to UN, community development is defined as a process whereby efforts are of the people themselves are united with those of the government and Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs) in order to improve the social, economic and the cultural conditions of communities. Community development involves commitments to the principles of participation, improvement, equality and social justice.

As a principle of community development, it aims at empowering the people; that is, they are empowered through education and participation. People must be given opportunity to pursue their own community development and hence must determine their own priorities.

Therefore any effort to develop a community should be on a partnership basis and not ‘boss-client’ mode.

2.3 Sustainable development.

Over the years, the definition of sustainability in development literature has varied widely and broadened in scope. The concept arose in response to economic growth models that characterized development approaches over the last half century. The IFAD Strategic framework 2007-2010 (IFAD 2007) gave the following definition of sustainability: Ensuring that the institutions supported through projects and the benefits realized are maintained and continue after the end of the project. IFAD’s Office of Evaluation adds to this definition by considering resource flows. It acknowledges that assessment of sustainability entails determining “whether the results of the project will be sustained in the medium or even longer term without.

2.4 Decentralization.

Decentralization refers to the transfer of responsibilities for planning, management and resource-raising and allocation from the central government and its agencies to the lower levels of government (Work 2002:5). Decentralization is the situation where the central government cedes powers to sub national units such as regional or local governments which have some geographical jurisdiction (Katsiaouni, 2003)..Most governments have adopted a decentralized government to facilitate the development within the decentralized units. By 1980s, majority of governments were engaged in d4centralisation in one kind or another.

There are three typologies of decentralization namely; political decentralization which refers to devolution, fiscal decentralization which involve transfer of allocation and expenditure and administrative decentralization which involve transfer of functions to lower tiers of the state (Manor, 1999; Work, 2002).

Kenya adopted decentralization immediately after independence in 1963. Chitere and Ireri (2004) say that at independence, the government adapted majimbo[1]. However when Kenya became a republic in 1964, the system was abolished and a centralized system of government adopted.

Kenya has however applied different initiatives in trying to devolve the government services. It is argued that it is through decentralization that the government can easily reach the people. As (Muia 2008a) puts it,   Decentralization is one way in which people’s right to participate in governance is attained. The GoK has achieved this by setting up the local authorities. There were 175 local authorities in total. In 1971, a national conference in Kericho suggested there was need to have a bottom up approach to development planning and service delivery so as to stimulate development in the rural areas. This led to the conceptualization of the Special Rural Development Programme (SRDP) in 1974. However, the SRDP was not operationalized due to precincts of resources.

In 1983, the District Focus for Rural Development (DFRD) was initiated with the goal of institutionalizing participatory bottom-up approach development. District Development Committees (DDCs) were established under the chairmanship of the District Commissioners (DC) and secretary-ship of the District Development Officer (DDO). The goal of the DDC was to serve as the focal forum for all stakeholders in the district engaged in development. Locally developed plans were consolidated into 5-year District Development Plans (DDPs). The DDPs, while expressing the aspirations of the local areas, were also guided by the National Development Plan. Given the dominance of DFRD by the provincial administration, the initiative lacked the participation of citizens and thus did not represent the views of local areas. Further, resource constraints curtailed the effective implementation of the DDPs. The DFRD strategy was revised in June 2008 to conform to the Vision 2030 and its First Medium Term Plan (2008-2012) which has a strong emphasis on political decentralization (A guide for understanding decentralization in Kenya, 2011). Some of the decentralized funds include; Local authority Transfer fund (LATF), poverty alleviation fund (2000/2001), constituency HIV/AIDS fund (2001/2002), roads maintenance fuel levy funds (RMFL (2000/2001)), free primary education (FPE), Schools bursary funds and Constituency development Funds (CDF). These demonstrate the government commitment to decentralization of economic power to ensure service delivery is effectively offered to communities.

2.5 Decentralization in the New Constitution

At the heart of the screech for a new constitution was a determination by the people of Kenya to devolve governance and decision making so as to furnish them with a greater say in how they and their resources are governed. It therefore followed that the structure of government was changed fundamentally in the new constitution so as to position devolution to be at the mainstay of national life. The devolution adopted in the new constitution is intended to; Promote democratic and accountable use of power, foster national unity by recognizing diversity, give self governance powers to the people, enhance the participation of people in the exercise of powers of state and in making decisions that affect them, enable communities to manage their own affairs further their development, to protect and promote the interests of minorities and marginalized communities, provide easily accessible services throughout Kenya and to ensure equitable sharing of national resources

To achieve these objectives, the constitution established 47 county governments in addition to the national government as well as the following guidelines; adoption of the principles of democracy and separation of powers, reliability of sources of revenue, and equitable representation where one gender cannot comprise more than two- thirds of the members of governance and management bodies, requirement that the national government ensures reasonable access to its services in all parts of the republic (Article 6(3), requirement that the county governments on their part decentralize their services to the extent that it is efficient and practicable to do so (Article 176(2)).

2.6 Constituency Development Fund (CDF)

The Constituency Development Fund, here in referred to as CDF, was created in 2003, through an Act of Parliament (The Constituencies Development Fund, Act, 2003) (GoK, 2003a), Kenya Gazette Supplement No. 107 (Act No.11), with the aim of ironing out regional imbalances brought about by benefaction politics. It provides funds to parliamentary jurisdictions (constituencies). Other decentralized funds targeting to address regional disparities include Local Authorities Transfer Fund (LATF) and Roads Maintenance Levy Fund (RMLF), the Community Development Trust Fund (CDTF), the Rural Electrification Fund, the HIV/AIDs Fund and the Secondary School Bursary Fund, among others. All these funds are based on different legal frameworks and managed by various government agencies.

It followed a prolonged process beginning October 2000 when a motion was discussed and passed by parliament calling for the establishment of such a fund. Two years later, the motion was transformed into a bill and successfully passed into law in October 2002, only to be assented to by the next president- Mwai Kibaki in 2003 (Obuya, 2008). The CDF fund was first distributed equally among the 210 constituencies but since 2004 the central government has committed to use an allocation formula to distribute the development funds such that the government may not break a promise on its obligation as happened in previous decentralization programs. This formula also aims to provide a fairly uniform fund to each constituency, but some allowance is made for poverty levels, such that the poorest constituencies receive slightly more resources. According to the CDF Act this formula estimates that 75% of the net available fund is distributed equally among all 210 constituencies, whilst 25% of the net available fund is distributed according to a weighted value of the constituency’s contribution to national poverty. The weighting factor applied to the fund is at least 2.5% of the ordinary revenue raised by the government each year.

The annual CDF allocation has been increasing each year in relation to the cumulative increases in revenue by year. The enactment of the CDF Act 2013 was mainly aimed to ensure that the law governing CDF is aligned to the Constitution of Kenya 2010, specifically in compliance with the principles of Transparency and accountability, separation of powers, Participation of the people and aligning the operations of the Fund to the new devolved government structure. The constituency contribution to poverty is the ratio of urban-rural poor population derived from the 1999 population and housing census. This weight favors rural areas by a factor of 0.23 to urban areas. The net available CDF fund is the total CDF allocation after netting out 3% for an administrative budget and 5% for a so called constituency emergency budget. The existence of the Fund was rationalized on three main grounds, promotion of equity in the allocation of resources, appropriate application of public resources, and cost effectiveness. It is argued that allocation of monies to all constituencies ensures that remote and underdeveloped districts whose constituents have little voice at the national level receive a portion of public resources that they would otherwise have missed out.

Table 1: Constituency’s statutory allocation ceilings (As per CDF Act 2013)

 ACTIVITY ANNUAL ALLOCATION
Emergency Reserve 5%
Bursary 25%
Office Administration/Recurrent expenditure 6%
Monitoring and Evaluation 3%
Sports Activities 2%
Environment Activities 2%

2.7 Theoretical basis of the study

The study is based on Fredrick Hertzberg theory of motivation. Hertzberg (1959) looked at the causes of job satisfaction and dissatisfaction. He developed a theory of work motivation which clearly shows that people are satisfied with bad working condition (hygiene factors) and encouraged to work hard by good work environment (motivator).

In the same manner, the theory can be adopted to include public participation. Public/community participation may be influenced by the environment in which the members live in. Environment as a result of unstructured mechanisms to allow for participation, lack of information, political interference, inadequate and absence of proper infrastructure, bad policies and forced repetition are hygiene factors which create a bad participation environment thus influencing public participation negatively.

Suitable and sufficient infrastructure, good relationship between leaders and their subjects, public-centered service delivery, secure participation environment and national cohesion strategies are motivators and thus create environment influencing future participation positively. It is therefore important for development stakeholders to endeavor to create a favorable participation environment that will motivate the general public towards good participation culture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.8 Conceptual framework

Figure 1: CDF project circle

 

 

 

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This section will deal with research design to be employed in the study, target population, sample size and sampling procedures, research instruments, instrument validity, instrument reliability, data collection procedures and data analysis techniques.

3.1 Study site description.

The study was carried out in Nyatike constituency, one of the 290 constituencies in Kenya. It is one of the constituencies in Migori district. The constituency borders Ndhiwa constituency to the north, Lake Victoria to the west, Tanzania to the south and Suna West.

The constituency has approximately 45,000 registered voters (IEBC, 2013). The population totals to 144,625 (National census, 2009) with an area of 677.70sq. Km. There are seven administrative wards namely; Kachieng’, Kanyasa, North Kadem, Macalder/Kanyarwanda, Kaler, Got Kachola and Muhuru county assembly wards.

The constituency like others is headed by an MP who is the CDF patron[2]. There is a Constituency fund committee (CDC) and a constituency fund committee; all charged with the responsibility of managing the CDF and the projects.

The constituents provided primary data which was in the form of survey questionnaires and in-depth interviews while the CDF administrators participated in the in-depth interviews. All study participants were required to give a written consent indicating that they had understood the purpose of the study and had voluntarily agreed to participate in the study.

 

 

3.2 Target/study population.

Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) said that, target population is an entire group of individuals, events or objects having common observable characteristics. Is the sum total of all that conforms to a given specification. The study population was drawn from adult constituents who were preferably 18 years and above. The inclusion criteria was 18 years and above and willing to participate in the study. This population was able to provide quantitative and qualitative data on the effectiveness of public participation in the selection of CDF projects.

Additional data was collected from key informants, who were selected from location committees, bursary committees, school heads, project managers and other relevant CDF personnel who had perquisite information on the CDF and who had knowledge and experience on the same.

3.3 Research design

Borg (1996) postulates that a research design is logical and valuable way of looking at the world. Orodho (2003) defined research design as the scheme, outline or plan that is used to generate answers to research problems. That is, an arrangement of conditions for collection and analysis of data in a manner that aims to combine relevance with research purpose.

To accomplish its purpose, the study adopted an inter-method triangulation as discussed below. Therefore, the research sought information from the public and the CDF administrators on participation rate in matters related to the CDF of Nyatike constituency.

3.4 Triangulation.

This study used inter-method triangulation by combining use of surveys and in-depth interviews to generate a richer and comprehensive view of the level of citizen participation and the relevance of the CDF projects to the public for which they are intended for.

Researcher used methodological triangulation. According to Durfy (1987), triangulation is the use of two or more methods of data collection procedures within a study. Durfy (1987) elaborates that methodological triangulation can take two forms namely; within method and between method.

In within method triangulation, the researcher takes one method such as in-depth interview method and uses several strategies within that method to examine the data. The advantage of this kind of triangulation is in checking the reliability of the quality of data though bias and validity threats are still possible.

The between method triangulation is the use of data collected through more than one method. The researcher brings together data collected through quantitative and qualitative research methods in order to permit one type of data to elaborate the findings of another by providing richness and detail leading to a complete understanding of the phenomenon under study; and neither necessarily takes precedence over the other (Duffy, 1987)

The basic assumption in the use of triangulation is that the weaknesses in each single method will be compensated by the counter-balancing strengths of another (Rohner, 1977). In this case the survey questionnaires will yield data that can be measured and hypothesis that will be confirmed by measurement. The researcher will be able to establish the level of public participation in the administration of CDF projects. In addition, the in-depth interviews will focus on key informants who have experience and knowledge on the administration of constituency development funds, thus have firsthand information on CDF matters and can provide holistic view of the subject being studied. In-depth interview are also flexible allowing the researcher to explore and discover issues that might not be discussed in details during survey interviews due to their highly structured nature.

Qualitative data was collected from the CDF managers and administrators (key informants) while quantitative data was collected from the adult constituents within Nyatike constituency.

3.5 Specific methods of data collection.

The specific methods of data collection used in this study included field survey and in-depth interviews. The questionnaires were specifically administered to individual respondents. Here is the description of each method:

 

3.5.1 Survey interviews

The first phase of the study included survey interviews to adult respondents through questionnaires to establish the level of public participation in the identification and administration of CDF in Nyatike constituency. The public participation was established by interrogating the demographic factors and how they affect the level of participation.

The main reason for using the survey interview questionnaires   is that it allowed the researcher to measure the level of public participation, capture the factors affecting the level of public participation, access whether there is a relationship between public participation and factors such as demographic characteristics, knowledge, attitude and perception of the CDF kitty.

The advantage that survey interview have over in-depth interview is the ability to use statistical methods to measure and quantify the rate at which the public participate in the identification of public projects, their rate of knowledge as well as the perception and generalize the findings to the general administration of CDF and public involvement.

The survey interviews were able to explain causality between the different variables being studied and at the same time come up with predictive factors affecting the rate of public participation.

3.6 Sampling.

According to Mugenda and Mugenda (1999:10), sampling is a process of selecting a number of individuals for a study in such a way that the individuals selected represent the large group from which they were selected.

According to Orodho and Kombo (2002), sampling is the process of collecting a number of individuals or objects from a population such that the selected group contains elements representative of the characteristics found in the entire group.

Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) suggest that a sample of between 20-50 % would be reliable and sufficient for generalization. This study however, used Krejcie and Morgan’s table for determining sample size for the head teachers, teachers and pupils. The table was found suitable since it gives 95% certainty and 5% sampling error (Krejcie and Morgan 1970).

Table 1: Total population and sample size for county wards, CDF committees and constituents.

Data collected from total population sample size remarks
County wards 7     7 5 sampled
CDF committees 18 7 1 per ward
Constituents              45000 75 15 per ward

 

The researcher divided the population into seven clusters (administrative units). Constituents were picked through simple random sampling. From the sampled cluster, all the ward representatives were purposively sampled while one committee from each ward was randomly sampled. Seventy five respondents were picked from every stratum through simple random sampling from five wards. The remaining two wards were used for pilot study.

3.7 Research instruments

The main research instrument used in this study was the questionnaire and interview schedule. According to Nkapa (1997), a questionnaire is carefully designed instrument for collection of data in accordance with specification of the research questions. Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) noted that questionnaires are commonly used to obtain information about the population. Each item in the questionnaire is developed to address a specific research question of the study. The researcher, the questionnaire and the interview schedule adequate in the study because they are the most suitable research instruments for descriptive research design. It further minimizes bias on the side of researcher and the respondent (Kombo and Tromp, 2005). The researcher found questionnaire very adequate for the study subjects.

3.8 Instrument validity

Validity is the degree to which result obtained from the analysis of the data actually presents the phenomenon understudy (Orodho, 2003). In testing the validity of the instrument that is to be used, a pilot study was conducted in North Kadem Ward. The reason behind pre testing was to assess the clarity of the instrument item so that those items found to be inadequate in measuring the variables were either discarded or modified to improve the quality of the research instrument thus increasing the validity.

3.9 Reliability of research instrument

Reliability is the measure of degree which a research instrument yields consistent results after repeated result (Nsubuga 2000). Reliability enhances the dependency, accuracy, clarity and adequacy of the instruments. The study used test retest type of reliability. The relationship between the two tests in the pilot study is calculated using the Pearson product moment correlation co efficient. The formulae to be used to calculate the correlation coefficient (r) is:

3.10 Data collection methodology.

The researcher obtained permission from the university and a research authority letter from the constituency CDF committee. Introductory letter was attached together with the questionnaires to the respondents participating in the study for the purpose of creating rapport, confidence and removing any suspicion by assurance of confidentiality of the respondents who participated in the study. Questionnaires were given out and picked up later on the second day and third day as was agreed upon. The interview schedule was done on the third day.

3.11 Data analysis techniques

After collecting data which are qualitative and quantitative in nature from the field using questionnaires and interviews, the data was analyzed using a descriptive statistics and the result presented using tables of frequencies and percentages. Bar graphs and pie charts were used to present information facilitated by statistical package for social sciences (SPSS).

 

 

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.0 Introduction.

This chapter presents a general view of the study findings. The main variables discussed are socio-demographic factors, public awareness regarding CDF, CDF related factors, CDF participation environment and knowledge and perception regarding to the constituency development fund administration.

4.1 Socio-demographic factors.

This section describes the study findings on socio-demographic characteristics such as areas of residence, gender, age, level of education, marital status and occupation.

4.1.1 Area of residence.

Area of resident plays a significant role in establishing the distribution of respondents by the geographical area. Out of the 75 respondents interviewed, there were 15 from each county ward with the distribution varying in terms of gender distribution.

4.1.2 Gender.

Gender has always played a prominent part in the discussion participation of public participation and the study sort to establish the gender distribution of the respondents. Out of 75 respondents interviewed, 28 % (18) were female and 72 % (57) were male. This indicates that the level of participation among males was higher compared to that of female, and at   the same time indicates the discrepancy in the rate of public participation between men and women. A study in Kenya reveals that women are still dominated by their male counterparts, and that they don’t feature so much in matters to do with public participation (Mbithe, Colletta; 2011)

 

 

Figure 2: Distribution of respondents by gender.

 

4.1.3 Age.

The median age bracket of the respondents interviewed was (31-40) years. Most of the respondents interviewed (82.6%) were aged between 18years and 50years old which indicate which indicate that a large number of young people participate in the CDF issues compared to the older generation. This age group is expected to be more enlightened and active in issues to do with policy formulation affecting them. Most of those in this age group are also likely to have formal education making them have more information compared to the older generation.

Figure 3: Distribution of respondents by age.

4.1.4 Level of education.

Majority of the respondents’ highest level of education was either primary or secondary school education with 48% (36) of the respondents highest level of education attained being primary school education, 40% (30) secondary education, 8% (6) had certificate/ diploma education while 4% (3) were either undergraduate or graduates. There was none who had not attended school. This indicates that those with higher education may have more information thus participate in CDF more easily compared to those with lower education.

Figure 4: Distribution of respondents by Level of education.

4.1.5 Marital status.

Although there is a thin relationship between the marital status of an individual and participation, the study determined the marital status of respondents since it is generally expected that the social support from spouses or partners determine a person’s attitude towards social issues around them. Marital statuses also determine time and availability thus is an important aspect in this study despite the fact that there is no direct correlation. In this study, 52% (39) of the participants were married, 30% (24) were single, 12% (9) were separated while 4% (3) were widowed or widower.

Figure 5: Distribution of respondents by marital status

4.1.6 Occupation.

A larger percentage (68%) of the respondents was either unemployed or self employed, while only 32% were employed.

Figure 6: Distribution of respondents by employment status.

Of the self employed, 20 were farmers, 14 were bodaboda[3] operators, 12 were in business, and 2 were mining while 1 was a mechanic. The occupation of an individual has a bearing on the information individual accesses and also the availability of time thus determines the level of participation and awareness among individuals. Occupation also equips one with economic and social power making an individual to express himself/herself freely.

Figure 7: Distribution of respondents by employment sectors.

4.2 Awareness of the provisions of CDF act.

This study explored the level of awareness of the CDF act by the respondents based on the assumptions that the individuals interviewed in this study had had prior information on the CDF act either from their area MP, the CDC, friends, NGOs, county representative , in a public baraza or from other sources. Majority of the respondents (64%) did not know about CDF act while (36%) admitted they knew about CDF act. Most (28) of those who knew about CDF did so from a public baraza, 12 from area MP, 2 from county representative, 2 from an NGO, 1 from a friend while 3 from the website.

Figure 8: Distribution of respondents by awareness of CDF act.

 

Asked to state where the CDF money come from, majority (>72) said that the money comes from the national government while some said it comes from the MP. On the role of MPs, a few said their main role is patronage while some listed other roles such as selecting projects, providing funds, managing the CDF kitty etc. probed on their own roles, (<3%) identified participation in the administration and selection of CDF projects while a larger percentage did not respond. On the roles of CDC, administration of CDF kitty, selection of projects, allocations of bursary were identified as their functions.

4.3 Identification of CDF committee members.

The study tried to establish the criteria used to select the members of CDF committees based on the assumption that the respondents had knowledge on how such committee is constituted. Out of those interviewed, 54% said that the committee members are selected by the MP, 16% said they are identified by the community while 30% did not know how they are identified.

 

Figure 9: Distribution of respondents by knowledge on selection of CDF committees.

 

 

Asked about the criteria used, 6 of those who cited community said their names are forwarded the community leaders, 4 said names are forwarded by clan while 2 said the general public elects them.

Most of the respondents admitted they were not happy with how the committees were identified, 88% of those interviewed were not happy with how the committee were identified while only 12% were happy. Lack of transparency, favoritism, regional imbalance, interference by MP, corruption, rigging and lack of quorum for election were some of the reasons cited against the committee identification.

4.4 Complaints about CDF.

On whether there were complaints about CDF management, 64% of respondents said they had heard complaints, 32% had not while 3% did not respond. Some of the complaints indicated were; lack of transparency, misuse of funds, poor priotisation, discrimination of some regions especially where it is perceived they never voted for the MP, poor quality projects, uncompleted projects, only the MP’s supporters getting bursaries, CDF projects used as campaign propaganda, lack of qualifications among the administrators, MP having excessive powers in the administration and tenders awarded only to the MP’s supporters and relatives.

There is lack of priotisation of CDF funded projects, imagine a school that lacks necessary structures such as more classrooms, laboratory, library and the rest receives a school bus from the CDF kitty. How will the bus help students who do not know even how laboratory looks like?” (Respondent, 34years old)

Most of the respondents interviewed were not happy with the general management of CDF. 67% were not happy giving reasons such as poor management, marginalization of some clans, political interference, corruption and lack of public involvement as some of the reasons.

What can be done to improve the knowledge of CDF?

Respondents mentioned suggestions such as public education, numerous public forums, use self help groups and women groups, target potential areas such as markets and shopping centers, avail timely information and promoting public participation and involvement in CDF projects.

Most of the key informants also agree that public education and sensitization is necessary, public involvement and constant meetings on CDF can help raise the level of awareness and ultimate improvement in knowledge.

4.5 Participation in project cycle processes.

Only 16% of the respondents admitted knowing what the CDF act say about projects identification and implementation process while 84% of the respondents did not know. Out of those who knew about the CDF act, 3 knew it from the internet, 1 from a friend while five did so from a public forum.

On whether they were satisfied with such arrangements as provided in the act, 6 said yes, 3 said no while 66 never responded. The reasons for the arrangement included giving the public a say in the selection and implementation, ensured free, fair and balanced development. A reason against it was that it gave MPs power thus limiting the public involvement.

Only 32% of the respondents had attended public meetings to discuss CDF projects while 68% had not. Those who had not attended cited lack of information on those meetings or where they were being convened while others also cited violence that sometimes erupt in such meetings thus keeping them off from attending.

Figure 10: Distribution of respondents by attendance to the meetings.

 

 

Among the 32% (24) who attended the meetings, 6 say the meetings are free, 7 say there is less involvement of people, 10 say few people dominate while one person did not respond. Political leaders, supporters of the MP, and committee members are some people who are said to dominate these meetings.

 

“..Sometimes you ask yourself whether you should have attended those meetings because you don’t even get opportunity to give your views. Those who support the do not want people who have divergent views to talk…” (Respondent, 41 years old)

 

Asked whether they involved in implementation, monitoring and evaluation, only 8% of the respondents admitted being involved while 92% felt they are left out in these processes. Those who were involved stated roles such as; providing opinions, participating in the approval of tenders, monitoring the progress of works done and determining whether those who get the tenders complete their work.

On the tendering process, 81.3% feel the processes and procedures are not transparent while 18.7% say it is transparent. Advertising the tenders, involving the public, Mp avoiding interference and giving equal opportunity to all are some of the recommendations given to enhance transparency of the tendering process.

4.6 Extent of projects addressing needs of the public.

Asked to state some of the projects implemented in their areas, most of the respondents mentioned building school classrooms. Other projects included bursaries, school buses, bodaboda shades, beach management offices (BMUs), roads and dispensaries.

On whether the projects implemented satisfy their needs as residents; 46.7% agreed while 53.3% did not agree. Those who disagreed cite reasons such as lack of involvement of the public, most of the projects stalling while midway, some projects barely kick off, projects started far away from residents or projects addressing the needs of very few in the society.

 

“…some projects do not even address our needs, like a shade constructed there (bodaboda shade), how do I benefit from it yet am not a bodaboda operator?” (Female respondent, 47 years old)

On motivations to participating, respondents gave reasons such as to feel part of the development in the constituency, to make sure the funds are used well, to be able to air their opinion to issues of CDF, to make sure the only projects that address their needs are priotized and to be able to monitor their development.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

5.0 Introduction.

This chapter involves a discussion of the major findings based on the problem statement and study objectives, conclusion and recommendations based on the study findings.

5.1 Discussion

This study aimed at establishing the general efficacy and effectiveness of public participation in constituency development fund projects. As stated in chapter one, the objectives of the study were to: 1. To establish the level awareness among public regarding CDF, 2.To investigate the extent public involvement in the identification of CDF-funded projects, 3. To be able to identify the criteria that is applied in selecting/identifying the projects to be funded, 4. To find out on the extent to which the criteria of identification is followed, 5. To investigate whether there is regional balance in projects funding as stipulated in the constitution and 6. To propose what should be done to achieve the effectiveness, viability as well as sufficiency in public participation in the CDF activities in the constituency.

5.1.1 Socio-demographic factors and how they affect public participation towards CDF.

This study explored the socio-demographic factors and how they affect the level of public participation. The study looked at factors such as gender, age, level of education, marital status and occupation.

On gender, the study found that participation was lower among women compared to their male counterparts’ i.e. 28% against 78%. This finding is line with a study by Mbithe, Colletta (2001) that found that women participation is very low in CDF matters. Despite the 1/3 gender rule requirement by the constitution, most of the committees are still dominated by men. This disparity can be attributed to the psycho-social orientation of the communities, women discrimination and the patriarchal system.

On age, the rate of participation was higher among the youthful population. The average age of respondents in this study for instance was 31-40. Most the respondents (82.3%) were below 50 years old. Youth participation is high likely because most youths are actively involved in ensuring good governance, most youths are educated and are also accessible to information.

Level of education was found to have a high bearing on participation. Those with education are accessible to information, are aware of their roles, rights and responsibilities, have their opinions sought for in the administration process.

However, marital status and occupation were found to have little or no relation to the level of participation.

5.1.2 Level awareness among public regarding CDF act and determine the perception towards CDF.

The public awareness of CDF act was very poor (36%). This is in tandem with the study by IPAR (2006), a study conducted in five constituencies where the general awareness and participation was rated poor and institutional awareness of their roles and responsibilities was low. This was as a result of lack of knowledge and low level of participation in public meetings where the knowledge can be got.

Despite the requirement by the constitution that leaders should involve the public and create awareness, it was evident that little effort was made to ensure the public accessed information regarding the CDF. There was lack of awareness by the individuals on their own roles, roles of the MPs and the constituency development committee. Further interrogation showed even the CDF committees did not know their roles.

5.1.3 The extent public involvement in the identification of CDF-funded projects

According to the study, the extent of public involvement in the identification of CDF funded projects remains very low. Only 8% of the respondents feel they are involved while 92% say they are not involved in the identification. Most of the processes are undertaken by the CDF committee and few individuals who surround them. This is in line with a similar study by IPAR (2005) that found that most of the processes are done by the MP and the committee.

The projects that are identified do not reflect the needs of the community, projects are implemented without giving due attention to the immediate need. There is lack of priority concern, thus the projects do not reflect the immediate needs.

Many people do not know their roles in the administration of CDF projects as enshrined in the CDF act thus are not aware of their responsibilities das citizens.

5.1.4 The criteria that is applied in selecting/identifying the projects to be funded and how strictly it is followed.

The CDF act requires that every project identified must have been emanated from the community from which it is supposed to benefit, however, the criteria is totally flawed while identifying the projects. There is very minimal consultation. Most of the selection is done by the committee and the MP. It also concurs with the appraisal of the CDF that concluded that save for the compliance of section 30 of the constitution, the entire statute is largely wanting in accommodating constitutional principles (Ongoya and Lumallas, 2005)

According to the findings from the study, MP uses the projects to enhance popularity eliminating citizens from the path of selection of CDF projects. There is therefore no specific criteria used in selecting/identifying the projects and therefore there is no strictness in regard to the criteria.

5.1.5 Regional balance in projects funding as stipulated in the constitution.

The major complaint about CDF was that it did not give attention to regional balance. The MPs award projects to regions loyal to them while those regions that oppose them do not receive anything. Projects are used to punish those who voted otherwise awarded to those who support the MP. There is also a serial tendency to divide constituency into differently clans and they are awarded depending on the voting pattern.

During an interview with a focus group, it was evident that inequality has been bred at the constituency level depending on political divide or clan. This finding is in line with a study by Mwalulu and Irungu (2005) that contends that CDF is likely to reproduce inequality in the country because it does not address itself adequately to the twin problems of poverty and inequality. CDF has also become a powerful campaign tool and strategy that give the incumbent MPs an edge over the opponents thus undermine good governance.

5.1.6 What should be done to achieve the effectiveness, viability as well as sufficiency in public participation in the CDF activities in the constituency?

A number of suggestions were given by respondents and the focus groups on how to achieve the effectiveness, viability and efficiency of public participation in CDF activities. These included, promotion of awareness by enhancing civic education, involve the public in budgeting to eliminate corruption, limit the roles of Mps in running of CDF, change the CDF act to allow for an independent body to run the CDF and to give public a stake in procurement procedures.

5.2. Conclusion

There is a problem of lack of awareness regarding CDF and its administration. Public participation still remains low, and ineffective despite the efforts that have been initiated including devolving government, decentralization and delegation. Where it is practiced, it is only for meeting constitutional threshold and not for meaningful agenda.

Analysis carried out on socio-demographic variables confirms there that women are still discriminated especially in participating in CDF affairs. There is a skewed participation model with regard to gender in Kenya. These indicate that meeting the constitutional requirement with regard to gender rule still remain a challenge.

Citizens are discriminated from projects aimed at developing them. Most of the CDF project cycle processes are undertaken without involving the citizens against the requirement by the CDF act that state that priorities should be set by the citizens before they are harmonized by the CDC and scrutinized by the CDF Board. Most of the people are also ignorant of their roles in the administration of CDF. This limits the principles for which CDF was set for.

MPs have a lot of powers in the administration of CDF. Their role as a patron of the fund complicates the cycle for they use the kitty for their own personal and selfish motives especially for campaigns. Mostly the MPs single-handedly identify projects especially in areas where they got more votes or to increase their popularity.

There are also lack of follow up by the CDF board especially on projects identified because the projects identified by MPs themselves are just approved without giving due consideration to the priories of the community.

5.3. Recommendations.

Every development project requires collective responsibility and teamwork. Constituency development fund projects are aimed to benefit the communities and as been pointed out earlier, such development can only change the lives if the community itself is involved in its management. Public participation therefore is not just a matter of constitutionalism but also a factor in the development process. This section gives recommendations at the individual, institutional and policy levels.

At the individual level, the public should asses themselves in order to find out what motivates them to participate in the development programs especially those funded by the CDF. They should also establish the barriers to effective participation. By so doing, they would be able to form positive attitudes and deal with the barriers encountered. They should make effort of attending public development forums and baraza[4] so as to access information as most of the information is availed through these forums. The individuals should also make personal efforts to access the CDF acts so as to be aware of what it contains.

At the institutional level, the major CDF stakeholders should strive to promote public awareness and participation by convening public baraza to give the public a chance to air their views as well as give their submission on the projects selected. They should carry out civic education among the public to create awareness, promote participation, create confidence and eliminate the negative attitude among the public.

By inviting the public to their meetings, they should encourage participatory budgeting and expenditure tracking. All the operations should be free and transparent and the public should be engaged in the ensuring accountability. Monitoring and evaluation should be participatory.

At the policy level, the MPs should stop being the patrons of CDF in their respective constituencies to avoid their meddling in CDF projects and marginalization based on how the regions voted for them.

The CDF act should also be reviewed and a special body created at the constituency level to oversight on the management of CDF so as to promote transparency, accountability and fairness in the distribution of the CDF projects. A tough penalty should also be imposed on MPs who use the fund for their own campaign agendas.

The act should clearly state the level of public participation that should be regarded as efficient so as avoid non-meaningful consultations for purpose of justifying the constitution but which are insufficient and ineffective. The act should also be in tandem with the constitution to ensure that the one third gender rule is strictly adhered to while electing the CDF committee members.

The CDC and the CFC elections should be done by a body assigned by the CDF board to avoid the irregularities during elections and to restrain the MPs from selecting only their supporters to these committees.

There is need for systematic review of public participation in CDF projects studies in Kenya to answer the following research questions:

  1. How efficient is it for public to participate in the CDF projects?
  2. What are the benefits of public participation both to the individuals and the CDF management committees?

 

 

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES

Bailey, K. (1987) Methods of social research, New York; The Free Press.

Baker, T. (1985) Doing social research, McGraw Hill: Toronto

Brosio, G. (2000) Decentralization in Africa: A paper presented at IMF/World Bank fiscal decentralization conference, November 20-21, Washington D.C.

Chitere, P.O; Ireri, O.N (2004) District focus for rural development in Kenya, its limitation as a decentralization and participatory planning strategy and prospects for future. IPAR Discussion paper No: 046/2004, Nairobi; Regal Press Kenya Ltd.(http://www.ipar.or.ke/dp46abstract.pdf)

Dufffy, M.E. (1987) Methodological triangulation: a vehicle for merging quantitative and qualitative research methods. Image,: The Journal of Nursing Scholarship, (19(3), 130-133)

Gichini, M.W. (2011) Factors influencing completion rate of constituency Development Fund projects; University of Nairobi.

Gichuhi, J. (2009) An assessment of community participation in implementation of constituency development fund projects; University of Nairobi.

http://www.kippra.org/accountabilty.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/sustainable-development.

Katembu, F.Q. (2006) Outcomes and challenges of grass root participation in constituency development fund projects; University of Nairobi.

Keya, C.T. (2010) Role of internal audit in promoting accountability and good management in constituency development funds in Nairobi Province constituencies.

Kenya’s Vision 2030(2008), Government Printer; Nairobi.

Kingi, S.N. (2001) Fiscal policies for poverty eradication: Case study of revenue design; The Kenya experience; Nairobi,KIPPRA.

Mangeni, B. (2010) Determinants of youth participation in constituency development fund development projects; University of Nairobi.

Manor, J. (1999) The political economy and democratic decentralization, Washington D.C; World Bank.

Mapesa, B; Kibua, T. (2006) An assessment of the management and utilization of the constituency development fund in Kenya, IPAR discussion paper series No:076/2006.

Mbithe, C. (2011) Barriers to women participation in the constituency development fund projects; University of Nairobi.

Mugenda, M.O; Mugenda, M.A. (1999) Research methods: Quantitative and qualitative approaches, Nairobi; ACTS Press.

Muia, M.D. (2006) Proposed devolution of governance to district level in Kenya. A case study of their capacities and prospects. IPAR discussion paper series No: 086/2006.

Mwalulu, E; Irungu, J. (2005) Analysis of constituency development fund act; Nairobi: Institute of Policy Analysis and Research (IPAR).

Oakley, P. (1995) People’s participation in development projects; a critical review of current theory and practices; INTRAC.

Ongoya, Z.E; Lumallas, E. (2005) A critical appraisal the constituency development fund Act; Nairobi.

Oyugi, W. (1986) ‘’Two decades of decentralization effort,’’ African administration studies, No: 26 pp140-170.

Oyugi, Walter; Fiscal decentralization in Kenya: The case of LATF; (http://www.ipar.or.ke/dp69abstract.pdf).

Republic of Kenya (1965) Sessional paper No:10 on African socialism and its application to planning in Kenya; Government Printer, Nairobi.

Republic of Kenya (1999) National poverty eradication plan, 1999-2015; Government Printer, Nairobi.

Republic of Kenya (2004) The Kenya Gazette supplements No: 107 (Act No:11) of 9th January 2004; Constituency Development Fund Act, 2003. Government Printer, Nairobi.

Republic of Kenya (2004) The Kenya Gazette supplement No: 17 of May 26th, 2004. Constituency Development Fund regulations, 2004. Government Printer, Nairobi.

Ringera, H. (2011) Role of Member of Parliament in choices and implementation of selected constituency development fund projects; University of Nairobi.

Sangori, J. (2010) Factors that influence the effectiveness of constituency development funds; University of Nairobi.

Scott, J. (2000) Rational choice theory: Understanding contemporary society: Theories of the present. International encyclopedia of social sciences,2, 126-138.

Smith, B.C. (1985) Decentralization: The territorial dimensions of the state, London: Allen and Unwin, pp 18-30.

Smoke, P. (2003) Decentralization in Africa: Goals, dimensions, myths and challenges; public administration and development (pp 1-10)

The constitution of Kenya 2010, Government Printer; Nairobi

Transparency International (2005) The role of Member of Parliament in constituency development fund management; Nairobi, Transparency International.

Wangusi, B.T. (2008) Causes of poor management of constituency development fund: Case of Sirisia constituency; University of Nairobi.

World Bank (1988) Rethinking decentralization in developing countries, Washington D.C; World Bank.

 

 

APPENDICES

Appendix i.

Informed consent for the survey interview with the respondents.

Study title: Efficacy and effectiveness of public participation in the identification and implementation of constituency development fund (CDF) projects: case study of Nyatike constituency.

This informed consent will be read to you, please feel free to ask for further clarification in any issue that you may not understand. Your participation in this study is voluntary; you can withdraw from the study at any time and failure to participate in this study will not affect the service receive from the CDF.

Part 1: Information sheet.

This study is being conducted by Okelo O. Lawrence as part of his Bachelors’ degree programme at the University of Nairobi and it will seek to establish the efficacy and effectiveness of public participation in the identification and implementation of constituency development fund (CDF) projects in Nyatike constituency, and also recommend possible interventions to improve on the effectiveness of public participation in community projects.

You are being asked to participate in this study because you are an adult and a member of constituency; which has been selected as the study site. If you accept to participate in this study, this interview will take approximately 40 minutes. The interview will explore the level of participation as well as the remedies to facilitate the same.

You will need to fill the survey questionnaires in order to get all the information discussed with you accurately. The information recorded is confidential and no one except the researcher will access the information recorded. In order to further ensure confidentiality, I will not identify you by name on the recorder and the information recorded will be destroyed six months after the completion of study. No one else will be present unless you would like someone to else to be there.

After data collection, I will prepare a report which might be shared in conferences and publications but this report will not identify you in any way. Your confidentiality in participating in this research is completely guaranteed.

There may be no direct benefit for you participating in this research study. There is also no risk in participating in this study. You might feel that your time has been inconvenienced, or some questions may upset you. If you are upset, you may choose to skip those questions or stop participating. You have the right to answer or not to answer any question you choose not to answer. This will not affect your life in any way neither will it interfere with your participation in other parts of this interview.

There will be no compensation of any kind due to participation in this research study. If you have any questions after you have been interviewed, you may contact Okelo O. Lawrence on 0713115244/0737558518.

Part 2: Certificate of consent.

I have read the informed consent/it has been read to me. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about it and all the questions I have asked have been answered to my satisfaction. I consent voluntarily to participate as a respondent in the research.

……………………………..                     ………………….                    …………..…….

Name of participant                                  Date                                         Signature

   If illiterate.

I have witnessed the accurate reading of the consent form to the potential participant and the individual has had the opportunity to ask questions. I confirm that the individual has given consent freely.

………………………………                     ……………………….             ……………….

Name of participant                                     Date                                           Signature

…………………………………               ……………………….                ……………….

Name of the witness                                 Date                                             Signature

Statement of the person taking consent.

I confirm that the participant was given an opportunity to ask questions about the study, and all the questions asked have been answered correctly and to the best of my ability. I confirm that the individual has not been coerced into giving consent and that the consent has been given freely and voluntarily.

 

……………………………………                    ………………….             ……………….

Name of the person taking consent                     Date                                   Signature

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix ii.

Informed consent for the semi-structured interview with the Key informants.

Study title: Efficacy and effectiveness of public participation in the identification and implementation of constituency development fund (CDF) projects: case study of Nyatike constituency.

This informed consent will be read to you, please feel free to ask for further clarification in any issue that you may not understand. Your participation in this study is voluntary; you can withdraw from the study at any time and failure to participate in this study will not affect the service receive from the CDF.

Part 1: Information sheet.

This study is being conducted by Okelo O. Lawrence as part of his Bachelors’ degree programme at the University of Nairobi and it will seek to establish the efficacy and effectiveness of public participation in the identification and implementation of constituency development fund (CDF) projects in Nyatike constituency, and also recommend possible interventions to improve on the effectiveness of public participation in community projects.

You are being asked to participate in this study because you are an adult and a member of constituency fund committee; which has been selected as the study site.

If you accept to participate in this study, this interview will take approximately 40 minutes. The interview will explore the level of participation as well as the remedies to facilitate the same.

I will need to record the interview using an audio-recorder in order to get all the information discussed with accurately. The information recorded is confidential and no one except the researcher will access the information recorded. In order to further ensure confidentiality, I will not identify you by name on the recorder and the information recorded will be destroyed six months after the completion of study. No one else will be present unless you would like someone to else to be there.

After data collection, I will prepare a report which might be shared in conferences and publications but this report will not identify you in any way. Your confidentiality in participating in this research is completely guaranteed.

There may be no direct benefit for you participating in this research study. There is also no risk in participating in this study. You might feel that your time has been inconvenienced, or some questions may upset you. If you are upset, you may choose to skip those questions or stop participating. You have the right to answer or not to answer any question you choose not to answer. This will not affect your life in any way neither will it interfere with your participation in other parts of this interview.

There will be no compensation of any kind due to participation in this research study. If you have any questions after you have been interviewed, you may contact Okelo O. Lawrence on 0713115244/0737558518.

Part 2: Certificate of consent.

I have read the informed consent/it has been read to me. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about it and all the questions I have asked have been answered to my satisfaction. I consent voluntarily to participate as a respondent in the research.

……………………………..                    ………………….                    …………..…….

Name of participant                                   Date                                         Signature

   If illiterate.

I have witnessed the accurate reading of the consent form to the potential participant and the individual has had the opportunity to ask questions. I confirm that the individual has given consent freely.

………………………………                     ……………………….             ……………….

Name of participant                                     Date                                          Signature

…………………………………               ……………………….                ……………….

Name of the witness                                 Date                                             Signature

Statement of the person taking consent.

I confirm that the participant was given an opportunity to ask questions about the study, and all the questions asked have been answered correctly and to the best of my ability. I confirm that the individual has not been coerced into giving consent and that the consent has been given freely and voluntarily.

 

……………………………………                     ………………….             ……………….

Name of the person taking consent                     Date                                   Signature

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix iii

Survey questionnaire.

Introduction.

My name is Okelo O. Lawrence; I am a student at the University of Nairobi in the department of sociology and social work. I am currently undertaking a study on the role of public participation in ensuring effectiveness of constituency development fund projects for my bachelor’s degree project paper. This project will contribute to the knowledge that could be used to improve implementation of CDF which will not only be of benefit to you but also other Kenyans. The information provided shall be treated with confidentiality.

  1. Personal data.
  2. Name of Ward: ………………………………………..
  3. Gender: Male                        Female
  4. Age: below 18

18-30

31-40

41-50

51-60

Over 61

  1. Education level: Not attended school                   [   ]

Primary Education                       [   ]

Secondary Education                   [   ]

Certificate/diploma education     [   ]

Undergraduate Education             [   ]

Graduate Education                      [   ]

 

  1. Marital status: Married         Single         Divorced         Widowed

 

  1. Occupation: Self employed? Yes/No,   If yes, which profession? ……………………………………..

 

  1. Awareness of CDF act provision.
  2. Do you know about CDF act?                     Yes/No
  3. If yes, how did you get to know about CDF act?
  4. i) From area M.P                         [   ]
  5. ii) From member of CDC [   ]

iii) From friend                           [   ]

  1. iv) From NGO                           [   ]
  2. v) From County representative   [   ]
  3. vi) In a baraza                             [   ]

vii) Others? Specify…………………

  1. What do you know about CDF (probe; where does money come from, what is the role of your MP, your own role, the role of CDC, members of CDC)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

  1. How are members of CDF committee identified?
  2. a) Identified by MP and his friends (   )
  3. b) Community                               (   )
  4. If community identifies the committees, what are the criteria used to identify them?
  5. Names forwarded by clan                                     [   ]
  6. Election by the general public                               [   ]
  7. Community leaders forward the names                 [   ]
  8. Are you happy with how the committees were identified?   Yes/NO, explain.
  9. Have you heard of any complaints about CDF management?     Yes? NO,                   if yes, which ones? ……………………………………………………………………………………………..
  10. Are you happy with general management of the CDF? Yes/No, Explain.
  11. What can be done to improve your own or communities’ knowledge of CDF?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

  1. C. Participation in project cycle processes.
  2. Do you know what the CDF acts say about the projects identification and implementation process? Yes/No
  3. b) If yes, how did you get to know?
  4. Are you satisfied with such arrangement as provided as provided in the act? Yes/No, and why? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3. Have you ever attended meetings to discuss CDF projects in your location and sub-location? Yes/No.
  5. b) If yes, how open and free are the discussions?
  6. Free                                       [   ]
  7. Less involvement of people   [   ]
  8. Few people dominate             [   ] (probe who these people are) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
  9. Are you involved in the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of projects? Yes/No
  10. b) If yes, what are your roles at every level?
  11. Are tendering processes and procedures transparent? Yes [ ] No [   ]
  12. What do you recommend to enhance transparency in the tendering process?
  13. Extent of projects addressing needs of the public.
  14. What kinds of projects are implemented in your area? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
  15. Do you think the projects implemented in your location satisfy your needs as a resident in the location? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
  16. What are your motivations of participating in the project processes? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

 

 

 

 

Thank you very much once again for the information you provided, I assure you that this information will be treated with total confidentiality.

 

 

Appendix iv.

Key informant/in-depth interview guide

Introduction

My name is Okelo O. Lawrence; I am a student at the University of Nairobi in the department of sociology and social work. I am currently undertaking a study on the role of public participation in ensuring effectiveness of constituency development fund projects for my bachelor’s degree project paper. This project will contribute to the knowledge that could be used to improve implementation of CDF which will not only be of benefit to you but also other Kenyans. The information provided shall be treated with confidentiality.

Personal data.

  1. Personal data.
  2. Name of ward: ………………………………………..
  3. Gender: Male            Female
  4. Age: below 18

18-30

31-40

41-50

51-60

Over 61

  1. Education level: Not attended school                  [   ]

Primary Education                       [   ]

Secondary Education                   [   ]

Certificate/diploma education     [   ]

Undergraduate Education             [   ]

Graduate Education                     [   ]

  1. Marital status: Married         Single         Divorced         Widowed
  2. Occupation: Self employed? Yes/No,   If yes, which profession? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

 

Main discussion issues.

  1. Generally describe the CDF management structure in Nyatike constituency
  2. How are the CDF members identified?
  3. How do you describe the composition:- Gender, qualification and representation of the CDC?
  4. How do you rate the CDC member’s participation?
  5. Comment on the general participation of the public towards CDF projects.
  6. How can the participation of the general public be enhanced?
  7. How are the projects identified and implemented?
  8. Explain whether the projects are well distributed in the constituency.
  9. In your own opinion, are the projects addressing the needs of the public in the constituency?
  10. How do you rate the constituency’s satisfaction with the projects and the entire CDF management? How can this be improved?
  11. How can the weak areas be improved?
  12. What are your comments about CDF in general-The CDF act, its installation within the community, the role of MP and other stakeholders, community participation, management of funds, accountability mechanisms etc.
  13. In relation to efficacy and effectiveness of public participation in the identification of CDF projects, what are your parting shots?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Thank you very much once again for the information you provided, I assure you that this information will be treated with total confidentiality.

[1] Majimbo is a Kiswahili term that refers to regional decentralization.

[2] This is a provision by the CDF act 2013 that changed the role of the MPs to ex-officio member and not the CDF chairman as they used to be.

[3] Bodaboda refers to those who carry passengers using motor bikes or bicycles.

[4] Baraza refers to public forums or meetings

ARE WE LIKELY TO WIN WAR ON TRIBALISM?

www.lawrenceokelo.wordpress.com
————————————————————
The issue of tribalism in Kenya is real and enormous. Nobody should sit down and lie to himself he is not. The slogans like ” ‪#‎weAreOne‬” are not true and do not reflect the real intentions behind its use. It is a fact we have to accept that ‪#‎we_are_42_in_one‬. This I say without any ill-intention. Currently, people have been condemning ‪#‎Kalonzo_Musyoka‬ for allegedly dismissing a journalist on ground of his tribe, as a rational person, I would have done exactly that, because ‪#‎Muriithi‬ being pro jubilee carried that connotation in his mind and as he was asking the question. ‪#‎Aden_Duale‬ as he criticize Kalonzo Musyoka should remember that at some point he was also talking of protecting his people-the Somalis, a reasoning which in itself tribal.
We as a nation have to decide our fate and the route we are going to take to eradicate tribalism, not turn our head and assume all is well. Before you attack this post because you feel it is tribal, ask yourself how you are going to address the soaring impact of tribalism. I believe a paradigm shift has to be adopted to deal with this issue, but the most important thing is that historical injustices have to be addressed, the rate of inequality has to be checked and we must design Kenya that depicts Kenya not Kenya with few tribes dominating the majority. It all starts with representative leadership. WE have to redefine our political socialization to be able respect ideas from all corners of the country. Political intolerance is a very important step toward this.

Classical Liberalism ≠ Libertarianism, Vol. 2

Corey Robin

Antoine Louis Claude Destutt de Tracy, A Treatise on Political Economy (1817):

The truly sterile class is that of the idle, who do nothing but live, nobly as it is termed, on the products of labours executed before their time, whether these products are realised in landed estates which they lease, that is to say which they hire to a labourer, or that they consist in money or effects which they lend for a premium, which is still a hireling.—These are the true drones of the hive…

Luxury, exaggerated and superfluous consumption, is therefore never good for any thing, economically speaking. It can only have an indirect utility. Which is by ruining the rich, to take from the hands of idle men those funds which, being distributed amongst those who labour, may enable them to economise, and thus form capitals in the industrious class.

Friedrich Hayek, The Constitution of…

View original post 334 more words

Lupita Nyong’o named People’s most beautiful person of 2014

FOX 4 Kansas City WDAF-TV | News, Weather, Sports

(CNN) — Lupita Nyong’o is having quite the ride.

The “12 Years a Slave” actress has won an Oscar for best supporting actress, signed a deal with cosmetics giant Lancôme to become its first black ambassador, and now People magazine has bestowed one of its highest honors on her – “Most Beautiful person for 2014.”

lupita1The Mexican-born Kenyan beauty joins a cast of Hollywood A-listers who have headed the list, including Julia Roberts, Cindy Crawford, Tom Cruise and Beyonce. This year she topped others on the list including “The Americans” star Keri Russell, singer Pink and Johnny Depp’s future wife, actress Amber Heard.

During the 2014 awards season Nyong’o was often hailed for being one of the most fashionable on the red carpet. She made headlines in February for a moving speech she gave while accepting the best breakthrough performance award at the 7th annual Black Women in Hollywood luncheon.

View original post 104 more words

Med students gain insight into Alzheimer’s by pairing with patients

FOX 4 Kansas City WDAF-TV | News, Weather, Sports

[ooyala code=”xvcnJlbTrPVNe9FLi-SWI2wSWWXh69SQ” player_id=”null”]

PRAIRIE VILLAGE, Kan. — More than five million Americans have Alzheimer’s Disease, and new cases are expected to double by the year 2050.  Medical students are learning in a special way about the people who have the disease.

Scott Koppel and Herb Miller never run out of things to talk about.  It could be a character in a movie.

“I think she was like 66. Really old,” Miller, who is 88, said jokingly.

They could be talking about his military service during and after World War II, or they they could have a discussion of Alzheimer’s.

“What does good health mean if you don’t know who you are — if you can’t remember your loved ones?” Koppel asked.

Miller is far from being in that situation, but last year, he was diagnosed with early Alzheimer’s.

“The business of living is very easy to come by with the…

View original post 196 more words