Abstract: This case study details how a second grant from Integrity Action to the National Taxpayers Association is being used to train monitors in Community Integrity Building. Monitors employing the approach in Nandi in the Rift Valley region have begun building their evidence base around stalled projects across the province, many of which have been at a standstill for years. This case study outlines two current examples of this kind of project in Matema and Chumundu. Through their constructive and solutions focused engagement with key stakeholders, NTA monitors have brought new momentum to these projects and communities and have clear strategies in place for keeping them progressing.

Monitors engage with county governments in Nandi province to resurrect stalled development projects

Nandi, Kenya

Citizen engagement and closing the loop

2 Integrity Action

We have seen really positive results when monitors engage the community members

On the 31st of December 2014, Integrity Action made a second grant of GBP £27,240 to NTA for the continuance of their monitoring programmes and to enable training of a second intake of monitors in Community Integrity Building who could take on projects in more regions of Kenya. NTA Monitoring programmes now operate in eight regions across the country.

“The first grant that we got from Integrity Action was to pilot the CIB approach in Homa Bay county, focusing on the five stages, and now we can implement these learnings in the current project we have found in Nandi. We have seen really positive results when monitors engage the community members and engage the different stakeholders.” (Carol Othim, NTA)

Local context Monitors were trained in Nandi in early August 2015. Franciscah Marabu is the regional coordinator who facilitated the training and oversees the monitoring work. Franciscah and her team select development projects from across the region at random, and allocate them to the newly trained monitors. The monitors began making their initial visits towards the end of August 2015.

These development projects are meant to improve facilities and access to resources, and are funded by taxpayers’ contributions. Funds are distributed from central government down to local constituencies through the County Government system. Community members can make applications to the County Government (CG) for funds to be allocated to various local development projects, to improve the conditions of schools and roads and improve access to water, electricity and healthcare.

Integrity Action and The National Taxpayers Association: Partnership background Integrity Action first partnered with the National Taxpayers Association in December 2013, making an initial grant of GBP £25,060 that was used to train NTA team members in Community Integrity Building (CIB). NTA in turn trained and supported community monitors to audit County Government-funded projects across Kenya.

Integrity Action’s CIB approach revolutionised the monitor training and the results NTA were getting at the local project level. The CIB process shifted the monitoring from a confrontational approach towards a more collaborative way of working with stakeholders, and monitors learned to focus on finding solutions to issues and working through them with the community groups.

Citizen engagement and closing the loop 3

Communities form Project Management Committees (PMCs) that are usually elected by the community to steward the applications and manage the work once funds are allocated.

Several of the projects that were selected in Nandi were facing a similar problem, they had been initiated several years back but had stalled in the early stages due to conflict between stakeholders, communications breakdown and constitutional changes that led to funding delays. Monitors Edwin Kipkoech and Arnold Kipchirchir both visited projects (a community Polytechnic and a water tank respectively) that had experienced these kinds of delays.

Community Integrity Building: Integrity Action’s intervention to re-invigorate stalled projects When beginning to monitor a project with a history of complications stretching back several years, the context sensitivity phase of CIB is more crucial than ever. Both monitors needed to gather detailed testimonies and evidence to piece together the history of each project and track where conflicts and delays originated and why, building up an understanding of who the key stakeholders are and what could help or hinder this project moving forward. Building a trusted relationship with the PMCs and various other stakeholders, many of whom had grown cynical and lost their motivation for the project, proved vital. Repeat visits and a conscientious approach to learning about the project’s history served to reinvigorate the groups’ faith in the respective projects.

The next stage was for the monitors to arrange dedicated meetings with the County Government personnel and

other stakeholders. They presented the evidence they had gathered, learned about the delays and what was causing them and made the case for prioritising the overdue work. Monitors formed and developed working relationships with the County Government stakeholders, gaining access to more detailed information about the way their systems worked and when funds could be expected.

The County Governments appreciated having a focused representative reporting the real state of affairs on the ground, helping them to prioritise. At the same time, Arnold and Edwin were able to learn more about the local County Governments’ working processes, which helped them to strategise with the PMCs, manage expectations and keep momentum up effectively and realistically.

4 Integrity Action

Case Study 1: Matema Water Project Arnold Kipchirchir completed his CIB training with NTA in August 2015 and was allocated a water project in Matema, Nandi province. Matema is a prime example of just how drastically projects can stall and how long delays can go unresolved without dedicated resources or individuals working to bring the various stakeholders together and keep the momentum of the project going.

Local contextThere was an acute need for a water tank for the village of Matema, as the existing well was over two kilometers away and women would need to carry jerry cans back uphill to their homes several times a day. The community urgently needed an alternative way of transporting water

from the source. Opinion leaders within the community held a meeting with the Chief of Matema area in January 2008 to consider alternatives. It was decided that a water tank that pumped water uphill and stored it closer to the villagers’ homes would save time and energy, reduce risk to local women, and liberate families who were getting by with unnecessarily scarce water supplies at home.

A Project Management Committee was elected in February 2008, a water source for the new tank was identified and the PMC worked independently to meet with the owners of the tea plantation where the source was to request permission to access it for the project. In April 2008 the PMC received a hydrologist sent by local government to assess the feasibility of the planned pipes and survey the source itself. The next day the Town Council delivered a letter to the chairman of the PMC, Julius Nyanke, approving the project and water source.

Following this approval, the PMC convened to plan the next stages. They went through a tendering process to select the right contractor, putting out a tender notice and analysing quotations and applications from various contractors. The PMC reviewed their capabilities and settled upon an agreed candidate.

“We agreed on a contractor and we received a quote for the work and the Bill of Quantities. Moses Agui was the contractor, and Lake Victoria Water was the company - they quoted 600,000 Kenyan Shillings to construct the tank.” (Julius Nyanke, PMC chairman).

With this approval in place and a workable quote received the PMC were in a position to apply for funding and move forward. They submitted a proposal for 600,000 Kenyan

Citizen engagement and closing the loop 5

The community urgently needed an alternative way of transporting water from the source.

Shillings to the Town Council of Matema in September 2012. In Nandi, funds are not dispersed via the PMC but are awarded from the local government to the selected contractors directly.

The funds were allocated for the water tank project and the budget approved in October 2012. Scoping work began and the tank itself at the top of the hill was successfully constructed. The Town Council purchased 200 pipes that would be laid from the source in the plantation to the tank at the top of the hill. The pipes were delivered and stored by the PMC, ready for plumbing work to start but the delivery was the last active stage of the project for the next three years.

Waiting for plumbing to commence, the PMC found that communication with the local government was deteriorating. They received less and less by way of updates or explanation. Due to the fact the PMC did not manage the budget themselves they were not able to ascertain what was stalling the appointment of a plumbing contractor to begin work.

After the General Elections in 2013, the local government systems changed as the new constitution was rolled out. The Town Council handed over to the County Government, to manage the funding and implementation of the water tank project going forward. Since that handover, no new plumbing contractor or service providers have been appointed by the new County Government to lay the pipes. The pipes have been lying in storage since they were delivered in 2012.

Context sensitivityWhen community monitor Arnold first visited Matema, he interviewed the PMC members, the local Chief and a number of would-be beneficiaries from the surrounding area, working on building a strong understanding of the local context as a foundation for his monitoring work. Once he understood each stage of the process to date he had a much better understanding of the heritage of the project and the areas that needed focused attention if the project was to get underway again. Once he had gathered his evidence and understood the intricacies of the project’s status, he could effectively represent the project and the community views to the County Government in a bid to push things forward.

6 Integrity Action

The entire economy will be healthier once there are generations coming together and learning skills and trades.

collaboratively with them; all we want to do is to move forward. At least now we are getting information about these details which helps us push on and plan properly”. (Arnold Kipchirchir, monitor)

Identifying these internal problems at the County Government level has led to a collaborative working relationship between Arnold and the County Representative, based on an awareness of the challenges the CG themselves were facing. This kind of constructive engagement has opened channels of communication and the CG representatives feel that they have a trusted and empathetic representative on the project.

“There’s been no supervision from the County Government. We would expect the leaders to follow up, to see the completion of this project. We didn’t see that. They might be budgeting for a project here, but if a pressure comes from another area of the region, they’ll transfer their attention there immediately, just to satisfy those others. And because we can’t speak directly, our project suffers”. (Simon Kosdie, PMC member)

Being able to communicate directly with the County Government and advocate for progress of particular projects is vital to avoid long delays and navigate changes of priority internally.

“Now we feel we have a spokesperson. The people here must have a place where they can directly fetch their water, this project is very important to us. Arnold has learned about our needs and we can see that NTA will be speaking up for us. That is what it takes”. (Japhette Odira, PMC member)

Constructive engagementArnold identified and built up contact with Mr Julius Rutto, the County Representative at the County Government. He made calls and arranged meetings with Mr Rutto to get to the bottom of the problems, throughout September 2015. He uncovered that there had been an issue internally at the County Government with the proposed water source at the tea plantation, which was why they hadn’t started laying the pipes. Arnold also learned that Parliament had delayed the release of funds to the County Government itself, another contributing factor to the delays.

“My plan for the coming months is to continue the monitoring work and keep up these relations with the County Government. They are aware we are working

Citizen engagement and closing the loop 7

Case study 2: Chemundu Polytechnic

Edwin Kipkoech was trained at the same time as Arnold, in August 2015. He was allocated two projects in Chemundu province to monitor. Edwin’s projects had also been initiated several years ago, under the old Town Council system. The changeover to County Government, as well as early-stage problems between stakeholders, had caused insurmountable delays at the very early stages of the project.

Most families in Chemundu province rely on small scale farming to support themselves but industry beyond that is limited and the area has had long-standing problems with youth unemployment. Elders from across the province came together and planned to build a Polytechnic that would educate and train people from their villages. A Project Management Committee was voted in by community members’ villages in 2012.

“There was a gathering of 100 people from the surrounding area, to elect members of the Project Management Committee to lead progress for this Polytechnic project. From leading this PMC I got a sneak preview to see how we are planning for this. We plan to make a dairy, a greenhouse, workshops – to allow people here to train in practical, revenue generating skills”. (Charles Osuogo, PMC Chairman).

“It’s something that is really going to benefit many people from these villages. They need vocation, they need to be working but they lack the skills. The entire economy will be healthier once there are generations coming together and learning skills and trades.” (Edwin Kipkoech, monitor)

The PMC applied for three million Kenyan Shillings to cover development projects for the whole plot - a governor’s office, dispensary, nurse’s accommodation, and the Polytechnic itself. The funding was dispersed in stages and the Town Council made the first dispersal for the Polytechnic of 400,000 Kenyan Shillings in January 2013.

The Town Council stipulated that the first section of the awarded funds needed to be spent on demarcating the land for the project site and fencing it off before any other work could begin.

This proved to be the main stumbling block for the Polytechnic project. “This is what we have been following up with the registrar to assist us to actually demarcate the land. The surrounding villages had some objections as to where the demarcation was planned, and there were some disagreements over land ownership”. (PMC Chairman)

8 Integrity Action

We went to the district registrar to request a surveyor, to come and make an objective assessment. There was a breakdown in communication between the

various village elders over the land demarcation. The funding could not continue until this plot had been marked out and fenced off so everything came to a standstill.

When he first started working on the Polytechnic case, Edwin spent time on the context sensitivity stage of the CIB process, working to understand the environment and putting together the various factors that had contributed to such a long delay. The demarcation disagreements meant that the fencing had been abandoned, and the absence of communication or exchange of information between the Project Management Committee and the County Government meant that neither party was fully aware of the

circumstances on each side. The project was therefore at a stalemate with neither side really understanding why.

“I took the PMC here through the CIB process, and tried to ascertain how much communication or exchange of information there had been with the County Government to date. I found out that the project was stalled, since 2013. When the constitution changed, youth polytechnics fell under the Country Government’s responsibility, and that meant that the PMC had no history of contact with this new group.” (Edwin Kipkoech, monitor)

“We went to the district registrar to request a surveyor, to come and make an objective assessment and recommendation for how we can demarcate fairly. The new Governor says we will be receiving funds for the building. But the whole community they are waiting for that, we really can’t know what is coming and what is not.” (PMC chairman)

“We knew that when the monitor took this time to go through every detail, this monitor was taking time on the other side too. We explained every circumstance so that he can sit with the County Governor and find out what is going on. If he knows how much time we have been waiting and how much we need this project, he can make that case to them.”

After building this evidence base, Edwin visited the County Government to express what the community and beneficiaries are experiencing, and investigate the status of the project from the County Government side.

Citizen engagement and closing the loop 9

Constructive engagement

Edwin met with the Director of Education on September 10th 2015. He explained about the conflict over the land, and how much this was holding up progress. The Director understood the importance of overcoming this barrier so that the rest of the work could progress.

“When I went to the CG office three days ago, they are telling me that this monitor had been there, they had understood the case and it was important to them that the project can progress. We were happy about that. In our group we now have this person who is regularly going there, knowing the details of how far along we are, what needs to be pushed, what needs to be challenged. So now we feel like at least things are not stuck in the ground. We have someone who is committed to helping us move forward.” PMC member

Edwin’s visits have built bridges between the various stakeholders and reinvigorated the project years after it initially stalled.

“The Director said that he would directly investigate this issue and come back with direction on the demarcation so the fence can be made.” (Edwin Kipkoech, monitor)

“We now know that the Governor is really behind this project. He wants it to be an example for this county, to make it outstanding – when it is up, you will be hearing about it from the other side of the country!” (Village elder)

“I hope as part of NTA that we can ensure the local government does get this project complete. We know that to achieve that we have to be working with every single relevant authority, and every stakeholder, at the same time. So that no one element can fall down and stop the whole process.” Edwin

Edwin has begun to successfully advocate the personnel at the County Government to champion the Polytechnic project. The Director of Education has been encouraged enough to prioritise the project and create a model example that will be recognised across the region.

10 Integrity Action

Edwin accredits the CIB process to achieving this shift in such a short space of time. “The systematic approach of the five stages is really making a difference to this kind of work. Especially this part of Closing the Loop, where after the findings you can discover the actual problem, and you can fix. It is beneficial to me personally, as I am able to form relationships and contacts with so many stakeholders and government officials. This is very useful as it pays forward for all projects coming next – when you have established already these good relations, everything can come easier and easier. In other monitoring work you can just collect information and then you deliver it. You are not involved to really learn what’s going on, or encouraged to get involved to rectify things. This approach means you can actually change what you find to be important to change. It is much more satisfying because you can really achieve a lot with this approach.”

“The county government say they want to make a model for even the other counties. Now that they have this excitement we are really hoping that it is going to go through. When the money comes in, if we can have that dispersed in one go, as soon as possible, you know we can be finished making this place in one year. He can represent us to them and also represent their position and plans back to us, keeping us informed, and we can inform these communities who are planning to send their sons and daughters here. We need this third party – we can be comforted that nothing underhand can be allowed now when there is a monitor overseeing everything. He is some kind of broker and representative who is checking for both sides.” (PMC Chairman)

The systematic approach of the five stages is really making a difference to this kind of work.

Citizen engagement and closing the loop 11

Integrity Action partners to help people at all levels of society to act with and demand integrity.

For more information, contact: info@integrityaction.orgwww.integrityaction.org

The case studies of citizen engagement and closing the loop are part of a suite of knowledge management tools that have been produced by Integrity Action. The series aims to distil and document practitioner experiences.

The case studies are intended to share emerging knowledge on approaches that have worked in using Integrity Action’s Community Integrity Building approach to empower communities and to promote transparency, accountability and inclusion in development decision-making, investment and operations.

Citizen engagement and closing the loop