Making Devolution Work for Service Delivery in Kenya

Page 108

Making Devolution Work for Service Delivery in Kenya

A further success is that counties receiving higher allocations of the equitable share have used them to increase the number of staff to deliver those services. (For further discussion, see the section on staffing in chapter 5 of this report). Persistent challenges

The downside to county expenditure management is that budget execution rates are highly unstable in many counties. Figure 4.14 shows these rates by county across FY2014/15–FY2018/19, with counties ordered by the standard deviation of their budget execution rates. There are large differences in execution rates across counties but also large differences in the execution rates across years in the same county. The counties to the left of the figure spend a similar proportion of their budget each year, while those to the right perform very differently in different years. This instability in spending suggests weaknesses in PFM and is not likely to be conducive to the smooth running of public services if the funding available from year-to-year is fraught with uncertainty—meaning that sectors cannot plan on a sound basis. Development budget execution is the key driver of the variation. Development budget execution rates are significantly lower and more unstable than salary and operating budget execution. Delays in the release of the equitable share do not explain variations in execution rates between counties, suggesting that some counties are coping with these late releases better than others. Even in years when the late release of the equitable share was not a major factor, development budget execution has been much lower, and much more variable, than overall budget execution. Salary budget execution, on average, was close to 100 percent across all years and had low dispersion across counties. Operating budget execution averaged about 85 percent in FY2014/15 and FY2015/16, dropping slightly to 80 percent in

FIGURE 4.14

Budget execution rates, by county, FY2014/15–FY2018/19 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Bu Ki sia am b K u M wa om le ba sa Bu Ki ng sii om a Ki lifi M Kit ac u ha i k E Th lg os ar eyo ak … Ua a N sin ith G i ish u Ny er N i Sa aro m k bu ru Si ay Ka a jia do L Ny a an mu da ru Tr Bo a an m s et N M zoia ak ue Vi ni H hi om g a a Ba y

|

Budget execution rate (%)

86

Source: World Bank calculations from Controller of Budget data. Note: Each dot indicates the budget execution rate in a given year for each county. Counties appear in order (left to right) of the standard deviation of their budget execution rates.


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook

Articles inside

A.4 Service delivery oversight, management, and systems

4min
pages 180-181

A.1 Functions and responsibilities

5min
pages 170-172

A.3 County resource allocation and use

5min
pages 177-179

Major achievements and challenges

10min
pages 154-157

Delivering the future promise of devolution

2min
pages 167-169

The role of development partners

2min
page 166

Policy options to make devolution work for service delivery

18min
pages 158-165

Introduction

1min
page 153

References

2min
pages 151-152

Conclusions

2min
page 149

6.6 Project management committees

2min
page 148

MCA elections

3min
page 145

the civil service

2min
page 143

communication

2min
page 140

Makueni County

3min
page 144

6.1 Elements of social accountability systems

4min
pages 136-137

Citizen engagement and service delivery

2min
page 135

Introduction

2min
page 134

Key Messages

1min
page 133

5.1 Categories of staff on county payrolls in Kenya, FY2018/19

2min
page 127

5.1 Initiatives to improve HRM in Makueni County

2min
page 128

References

1min
page 132

Overarching HRM frameworks

2min
page 126

Capacity building

2min
page 129

Staff performance

2min
page 125

with equitable share funding per capita in FY2018/19

1min
page 118

as a share of FY2019/20 total, by county

1min
page 117

Key messages

1min
page 115

allocation and use of resources

2min
page 112

4.14 Budget execution rates, by county, FY2014/15–FY2018/19

6min
pages 108-110

4.6 Postdevolution asset and liability management remains incomplete

2min
page 106

4.5 Participatory planning in public financial management

2min
page 105

FY2019/20

1min
page 104

expenditure in Kenya, by county, FY2018/19

1min
page 102

4.4 Weaknesses in the structure of budgets at the county level

5min
pages 100-101

4.3 County budget cycle in Kenya after devolution

2min
page 98

4.1 Performance-based conditional grants

2min
page 92

4.2 County creditworthiness

2min
page 95

counties in Kenya, FY2017/18

1min
page 91

Allocation and use of resources at the county level

2min
page 96

spending

2min
page 97

Key messages

1min
page 83

by county, FY2017/18

2min
page 89

3.7 Deficiencies in ECDE information management

2min
page 75

3.8 Quality assurance in the ECDE sector

2min
page 76

Conclusions

2min
page 80

Intergovernmental relations

2min
page 77

under devolution

2min
page 73

3.9 Intergovernmental coordination in the agriculture sector

2min
page 78

County management of sector service delivery

2min
page 69

3.6 Information management in the devolved health sector

2min
page 74

perspectives B3.1.1 Institutional arrangements in the urban water and sanitation

3min
page 66

delivery, by sector

2min
page 59

Disparities in county expenditure on devolved services

2min
page 54

References

1min
pages 31-32

FY2017/18

1min
page 57

Devolution of functions

2min
page 64

2.9 Total county per capita spending, FY2013/14–FY2017/18

1min
page 44

Context

1min
page 23

Kenya

2min
page 65
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.
Making Devolution Work for Service Delivery in Kenya by World Bank Publications - Issuu