Enhancing Governance: Public Participation Practices in Elgeyo Marakwet County, Kenya

1. ELGEYO MARAKWET COUNTY IN KENYA Public Participation Practices & Experiences Presenter: John Maritim, Director of Economic Planning 11/05/2017

2. Kenya’s Profile • One of the countries in East Africa • Land area: 582,646 Sq. Km • Population: 47 million people • GDP USD: 65 Billion • GDP per Capita (USD): 1,500 • Economic Growth: 5.6% • Poverty level: 40% of population • Development challenges: poverty, inequality, climate change, and vulnerability to internal and external economic shocks

3. Kenya’s Governance Structure • Two tier governance system; 1 national government and 47 county governments • National Government: • Organs; Executive, legislature & Judiciary • Mandates; International affairs & trade, defence, internal security, education (except ECDE), judicial processes • County Governments: • Organs; Executive & legislature • Mandates; Health, agriculture, feeder roads • Both levels are distinct but interdependent

4. National Planning Framework • Vision 2030 is the long term economic policy framework • It targets to make Kenya a globally competitive and prosperous nation with a high quality of life for all • Anchored on economic, social and political pillars: • Economic Pillar – anticipates a sustained growth rate of 10% yearly to 2030 • Social Pillar – seeks to create a just, cohesive and equitable social development • Political Pillar – issue-based, people centred, result oriented and accountable democracy • Vision 2030 implemented through 5 year Medium Term Plans (MTPs)

5. Elgeyo Marakwet County Profile • Area: 3030 Km square • Population: 460,092 • Poverty level: 52% • Legislature: 20 elected & 10 nominated members and speaker • Roles; representation, legislation and oversight • Executive: led by the Governor has 9 ministers (policy makers), Chief Officers, Directors and other staff • Administrative Units; 4 Sub-counties, 20 Wards, 70 locations and 160 villages

6. County Planning Framework • Guided by a 5-year County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP) • Priorities identified in a an inclusive and participatory process • CIDP priorities aligned to; • Kenya Vision 2030 • Medium-Term Plans (5-year) • Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) • Other planning documents; Sectoral plans and spatial plans • Priorities are integrated to include partners and investors participation

7. Constitution and Legal Framework on Fiscal Management • Constitution of Kenya: Article 201 provides for openness and accountability, including public participation in financial matters • County Government Act 2012: Section 115 provides for mandatory public participation in the county planning process • Public Finance Management Act 2012: Section 126 guides county governments on integrated development planning that includes strategic priorities identified in a participatory way • Urban Areas & Cities Act 2012: Urban areas and cities must institutionalized active participation of its residents in the management of its affairs

8. County Public Participation Legislative Framework • County Public Participation Act 2014 established; • Institutional organs for public participation • Processes and tools for public participation • Platform for memorandum submissions and petitions filing • Public participation financing mechanisms • Reporting framework

9. Public Participation Processes Targeted Outcomes • Informed citizen priorities • Enhanced equitable development process • Effective and efficient service delivery by government • Enhanced innovations and best practice replication • Public ownership of developments and thus sustainability • Curb negligence, corruption and un-ethical governance practices • Improved the quality of policies being developed • Reduced citizen lamentations on governance • Reduced conflicts between the executive and legislative arms of governments

10. Types of County Public Participation Processes • Budget Processes • Monitoring and evaluation processes • Law enactment processes • Open forums (County Hall meetings)

11. Budget Process PP Practice (2013-2015) • One held for each of the 20 Wards • Open to all without discrimination • Dates and venues communicated one week in advance • Communication through notices, Radio & Print media • Dissemination of budget documents not done before date • Pre-prepared proposals by sectors for each Ward • Each Ward’s eventual allocations not guaranteed • On the D-Day participants do not break into groups • Government officials gave justifications of pre-proposals • Groups agree or amend proposals

12. PP Practice (2013-2015) Successes • Created public awareness on citizens civic duties including participation in development processes • Complied with the Constitutional and legal provisions on public participation • Improved communication and feedback mechanisms

13. Civic Duty Institutionalizing Public Participation

14. PP Practice (2013-2015) Challenges • Regional representations during forums skewed • Special interest groups – women, youth, PWDs representation at forums not guaranteed • Minimal participation by elected leaders at forums • Huge amendments of budget priorities by political representatives at the County Assembly • Minimal participation by non-state actors and civil society groups • Too much technical officers influence on priorities • Regional bias in allocations and thus skewed developments • Minimal citizens engagement due to non-prior dissemination of budget documents

15. Actions Taken to address Challenges • Formal invitation to special interest groups, political leaders and non-state development actors to attend • Dissemination of simplified budget documents prior o forum dates • Enactment of the Equitable Development Act (EDA), 2015 to; • Equitably allocate funds to Wards based a formula with parameters (population, poverty, area, facilities access.. ) • Guarantee funding of budget priorities • Institutionalize public participation in project identification, prioritization, implementation and oversight of projects • Establish relevant development committees

16. Inspiration for EDA (2015) Act

17. Post EDA (2015) Act PP Guiding Principles • Representation and Inclusivity • Open attendance • Citizens stewardship • Guaranteed funding • Diversity • Documents accessibility • Feedback mechanisms

18. Pre-Public Participation Preparation • Announcements, adverts (radio, newspapers) & notices • Targeted invitations to political leaders and non-state actors • Inventory of completed and on-going projects per Ward • Distribution of simplified budget documents • Preparation of sector priority proposals based on development indicators of respective Wards • Preparation or updating of projects cost per unit reference list • Mobilization exercises – loudspeakers and churches • Briefing of team members

19. Mobilization Strategy Public Announcements on dates and venues

20. Order of Business On the PP D-Day • Prayer and introductions • Opening speeches by team leaders, local government officers and political representatives • Brief on the completed and on-going projects by government and non-state actors • Presentation on budget process and resource envelop as per EDA Act 2015 • From total allocation to the Ward 60% is divided between locations or villages • Participants break into groups (Locations or villages)

21. Order of Business On the PP D-Day cont’ • Participants prioritize without technical officers influence but provided with pre-prepared proposals • 40% of Ward allocation decided at plenary but guided by technical officers’ proposals • Agreed budget priorities resolutions signing • Copies of prioritized projects given to community leaders

22. Technical Presentation at a public participation Interactive process

23. Ownership of agreed issues Signing of Priorities

24. Post-Public Participation Activities • Prioritized list submitted to County Assembly (legislative arm) for approval • Publicization and documentation of citizen priorities • After approval by County Assembly; • Communities are mobilized to form projects management committees • Technical documents are designed for each project • Procurement processes • Projects implementation and technical assessments • Monitoring and evaluation

25. Impacts of PP On Citizens • Increased participation because of the guaranteed funding • Safeguarding of issues for the minorities and the special interest groups • Enhanced social audits by citizens and thus improved service delivery standards • Enhanced citizens participation in projects implementation and M&E thus ownership and sustainability of projects

26. Impacts of PP to the Government • Increase of approval rates of citizens’ priorities by County Assembly (legislative arm) • Enhanced participation by political leaders • Has improved service delivery processes and other governance processes • Has informed policy formulations and legislations • Reduced conflicts between the Executive and legislative arms • Has created platform for partnerships • Inspired adoption of international best practices such as Participatory budgeting and Open Government Partnerships

27. Robust Participation Desired Outcomes

28. Impacts of PP to Non-State Actors • Created a platform for partnerships • Created an entry point to test and implement best practices • Guards against duplication of projects and thus wastage and/or corrupt practices

29. Partnerships in Public Participation Development Partners and Interest Groups

30. Outstanding Challenges ….. • Un-balanced regional, minorities and special interest groups representation • Management of memoranda submissions through the internet and social media platforms • No full participation by politicians citing separation of powers principle • What value of priorities need to be decided each by the citizens and by central planning? • Transiting prioritization enthusiasm to implementation and monitoring and evaluation stages • High cost of participation has curtailed doing them at village levels

31. What has not worked? • Priorities voting system – due to non-representative participation at the forums • Public participation forums dedicated to children • Joint public participation by all development actors including; non-state actors and national government

32. Lessons Learned .... and thus OGP Commitments • Need to address the representation challenge by; • Adopting a delegates system approach with representation from all segments of population • Developing a delegates list of participants to add to open attendees • Holding of budget prioritizations at village level • Need for a policy to; • Manage prioritization memoranda submitted through post, emails and social media • Address petitions that may arise after prioritizations

33. Our OGP Commitments • Elgeyo Marakwet County is one of the 15 Sub-national governments globally participating in OGP • Has 4 commitments for 2017; • Robust and representative public participation processes • Transparent and accessible budgets • Open procurement and projects implementation processes • Responsive communication and feedback mechanisms

34. Robust and Representative Public Participation Processes Targets • Constitute a Public Participation technical working committee comprising executive and legislative arms for harmony • Develop public participation guidelines & regulations  • Develop mechanisms for identifying delegates yearly

35. Transparent & Accessible Budgets Targets • Constitute Sector Working Groups that’s includes; government, non-state actors and community representatives • Develop updatable projects cost per unit reference list • Simplify budget documents • Disseminate pre and post budget public participation documents

36. Open Procurement & Projects Implementation Processes Targets • Publish list of prequalified suppliers and successful contractors for projects • Publish awarded contracts list with technical estimates • Publish Projects Management Committee members • Publish project supervisory reports for projects • Publish project implementation status reports using a projects’ monitoring and evaluation dashboard software

37. Responsive Communication & Feedback Mechanisms Targets • Establish complaints and compliments committee  • Design internal protocols to formalize citizens feedback through social media platforms  • Identity Ward-based Feedback Champions to spread the word • Engage civil society and citizen oversight forums at village levels

38. Why are adopting Participatory Budgeting? • To enhanced capacity of stakeholders to conduct and manage budget public participation processes • To increase political goodwill in the budgeting processes • To increase citizen outreach in budgeting processes • To increase development ownership and thus sustainability • To link taxes payments with development initiatives

39. END THANK YOU