The State Department for Devolution has disbursed Sh5.7 billion in Level 2 conditional grants to 46 counties to fund local development projects.
The funding is part of the Second Kenya Devolution Support Program (KDSP II), a performance-based reform programme funded by the Government of Kenya with support from the World Bank.
The programne brings together 18 national implementing agencies to help counties roll out critical reforms.
To drive these changes, counties receive financial grants for meeting reform targets in Financial Management, Human Resource and Performance Management, Accountability and Public Participation.
Speaking from his Nairobi office, Devolution Principal Secretary Michael Lenasalon hailed the disbursement as a major milestone for devolution.
“This disbursement marks a crucial step in strengthening devolution, ensuring our counties have the foundational financial capacity and institutional strength to deliver lasting, impactful development directly to our communities," said the Principal Secretary.
Unlike the equitable share funding, KDSP II grants are strictly tied to performance.
To qualify for the Level 2 grants, counties underwent assessments on specific reform targets.
These included reduction of pending bills, cleaning of county Human Resource records to achieve consistency, transforming how counties manage staff performance, increasing own Source Revenue and citizen oversight and feedback in implementation of projects.
The Principal Secretary explained that earlier in the year, counties accessed smaller Level 1 capacity-building grants by demonstrating the establishment of basic governance frameworks.
Under this grant, the 47 counties received a total of Sh1.67
billion (Sh35.2 million each) to finance capacity building and institutional strengthening
activities.
To unlock the much larger Level 2 development grants, however, counties had to prove actual results by achieving the set reforms targets.
“The funds meant for level 1 are strictly to support governance issues while level 2 are for funding development projects to improve service delivery to citizens,” the PS elaborated.
The Level 2 funds disbursed vary from County to County. Counties with the highest allocation of Sh184 million shillings include Kitui, Kwale, Migori, and Turkana, while Kajiado, Uasin Gishu and Kakamega received Sh55 million each.
The PS explained that counties received more or less funding based on how well they met their reform targets.
"The disbursed amounts were determined by individual county performance alongside the Commission on Revenue Allocation's (CRA) Fourth Basis county-sharing formula," the PS stated.
"Counties differ when it comes to metrics such as size and populations. The time and resources required to screen projects in vast counties far exceed what is needed in geographically smaller counties. Similarly, conducting a human resource audit in a county with a smaller population and staff of 100 employees requires a completely different level of effort than executing the same audit for a county with a higher population and workforce of 1,000 employees.”
Speaking on the next steps, the Principal Secretary stated that counties must transfer the allocated monies from their County Revenue Fund (CRF) to the Special Purpose Account (SPA) within 14 days of receipt.
“The National Treasury transmits KDSP II conditional grant funds directly into the CRF," the PS explained. "Counties are then required to transfer those funds to a dedicated special purpose account, which is exclusively used to finance the implementation of KDSP II program activities.”
The Principal Secretary further urged the County Governments to immediately revise their service delivery investment workplans, budgets, and cash plans in line with the newly disbursed amounts.
Explaining the methodology used in evaluating the
performance of counties, KDSP II Program Coordinator Dr Samuel Nyaga stated
that verification protocols were developed to guide the Independent
Verification Agents during the assessment.
"The protocols determined the exact methodology the agents followed during the assessment," Nyaga explained. "This approach ensured that all results are accurate, trustworthy, and fully meet the program’s quality standards."
"To guarantee fairness and transparency in the assessment process, any county that felt aggrieved by the initial findings of the Independent Verification Agent, was provided a window to formally appeal before the final scores were tabulated,” Nyaga.
