Untitled

www.nta.or.
ke
SPOTLIGHT
The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants
CDF
CDF Spotlight
The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

Citizens report card for constituencies headed by presidential aspirants
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Introduction About CDF About the Project NTA Research Methodology l Gatundu South Constituency l Gichugu Constituency l Saboti Constituency l Mwingi North Constituency l Gatanga Constituency l Langata Constituency l Sabatia Constituency l Eldoret North Constituency
2 3 4 5 7 14 21 28 35 40 45 52 59
74 75 78 79
5.0
Impact Stories after NTA Assessment

Annex 1: Responses from CDFCs
CONTENTS
Annex 2: Constituency Appreciation Letters Annex 3: Bank Statement for Tseikuru Market Shed Annex 4: Pre-Assessment Interview Sheet
Citizens Report Form | Annex 5: Technical Assessment Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants821
1.0 Introduction
The NTA is a national, independent, non-partisan organization focused on promoting good governance in Kenya. Since 2006, the NTA has been implementing programmes focused on citizen demand for accountability through monitoring of the quality of public service delivery and the management of devolved funds. It has achieved this through the development of social accountability tools (Citizen Report Cards), civic awareness, citizen capacity-building, partnerships with government agencies, service providers, private sector, civil society and community action groups. NTA is fully independent of government; however, it is committed to working with the government to improve service delivery and the management of devolved funds. Our Vision: An accountable, citizen-responsive government delivering quality services to all. Our Mission: To promote accountable, effective and efficient collection and utilization of public resources through citizen empowerment, enhancing public service delivery and partnership building. NTA has a governing council of 12 prominent civil society and religious organizations and eight active regional coordination offices covering the entire country that effectively support and enable operations at regional and constituency level. NTA employs professional experienced staff with minimum university degree in the relevant field of operation. The team has enabled NTA to establish itself as an authority in field of governance and advocacy for transparency and accountability. NTA has established constituency level structures where activities of the organization are shaped, managed and implemented by citizens through the Constituency Monitoring Committees (CMCs). This has significantly improved NTA reach and enhanced demand for accountability at grassroots level. NTA has established a call centre in Western region in partnership with Provincial Commissioner, Western Province to improve the quality of government services for all citizens living in western province. The NTA is also conducting Sector Public Expenditure Reviews to identify areas where services can be improved to benefit all Kenyans. NTA has conducted research and provided information to Kenyans through its Citizen Report Cards (CRCs), scoping studies, public forums and civic education through the media to present issues of how devolved funds are being used and their impact on development in constituencies in a user-friendly, simple, and accessible manner. NTA has produced Constituency Development Fund (CDF) Citizens Report Cards (CRCs) for 121 constituencies and Local Authority Transfer Fund (LATF) CRCs in 21 local authorities. Baseline Scoping studies and report cards have also been produced for key public services like Health, Education, Registration Services, Rural Roads, Post Budget analysis and Security to enhance demand for accountability and potential for public action. NTA is implementing a public primary school report card nationwide in partnership with the Ministry of Education that seeks to bring parental involvement back to the management of public primary schools.
Our Vision: An accountable, citizen-responsive government delivering quality services to all.
2.0 About CDF
2 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants
DF was established through the Constituencies Development Fund Act, 2003 as amended in 2007 with the goal of fighting
financial year 2003/4 followed by Ksh. 5.4 Billion in 2004/5, Ksh. 7 Billion in 2005/6, Ksh. 9.7 Billion in the year previous to the elections, that is 2006/7, Ksh. 9.8 Billion to the newly elected parliament in 2007/8, Ksh. 9.8 Billion in 2008/9, Ksh. 12 Billion 2009/10, Ksh. 13.9 Billion in 2010/2011 and Ksh. 17 Billion in financial year 2011/2012 and another Ksh. 17.1 Million allocated per constituency to complete stalled/ongoing projects. CDF was a noble idea whose effects have been felt at the grassroots level in every corner of Kenya but has been be deviled by myriad problems largely due to weak legislation, institutional and oversight mechanisms coupled with lack of information by citizens.
poverty at the grassroots level. To achieve this goal the CDF ensures that constituencies receive 2.5% of the Government annual ordinary revenue, besides monies to be received from other sources by the CDF Board. 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 renege 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 constituencys 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 favours 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. In total, the government allocated Ksh. 1.3B to the CDF fund for the
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.
Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 3
3.0 About the Project
ack of information to citizens at the constituency level on the management of CDF has largely contributed to dismal
them. ii. To provide information to the presidential candidate MPs and their CDF Committees about the concerns of citizens on badly implemented or abandoned projects to ensure their timely correction/completion in the 8 constituencies iii. Increased awareness and demand by citizens to participate in the formulation, approval, implementation and evaluation of CDF projects in line with the constitution and enabling legislation. iv. Enhanced transparency and accountability in the management of CDF funds at the constituency level by MPs and their CDF Committees. v. Improved oversight by citizens to ensure adherence to set standards and proper utilization of CDF funds in the implementation of projects. vi. Enhanced access to detailed CDF budget information by citizens on actual revenue and expenditure on CDF to enable effective oversight. vii. Provision of information to government and other decision
participation in their selection and implementation of projects resulting to mismanagement of the funds by some unscrupulous individuals. The new constitution through Article 35(1) provides that every citizen has the right of access to information held by the State, Article 201(a)provides that there shall be openness and accountability, including public participation in financial matters and Article 174(c) provides that the object of the devolution of government is to give powers of self-governance to the people and enhance the participation of the people in the exercise of the powers of the State and in making decisions affecting them. The above provisions coupled with Chapter 6 of the constitution on leadership and integrity offers citizens the greatest opportunity to participate and make sound decisions on who shall be the managers of their resources in the new county governments. Additionally, the Minister for Finance in his 2011/2012 national budget statement proposed Ksh.17.1 million per constituency to go towards completion of abandoned and incomplete projects. Citizens therefore need to be alert and monitor the usage of these funds for the intended purpose in the current financial year to prevent diversion to political activities. The main aims of this picture book include: i. To lobby for allocation of the Ksh.17.1 million allocated to constituencies to correct/complete badly implemented or abandoned projects in the 8 constituencies headed by presidential aspirants to ensure that citizens fully benefit from
The new constitution provides that every citizen has the right of access to information held by the State.
making organs to enable advocacy on key policy areas to be improved to enhance effectiveness and efficiency in the management of CDF and other devolved funds.
4.0 NTA Research Methodology
he research methodology involved the following stages and methods.
no commensurate value for money or they were not fully benefitting from them. The constituencies targeted are those whose members of parliament have expressed their interest in running for presidency.
4. NTA project categorization

Category A Projects Well implemented, completed projects
This category is for CDF projects that were scored above 50% by the engineer during the technical assessment and were found to be well built; with good value for money (i.e. the budget spent is commensurate to the project delivered).
1. Secondary Data Collection and Analysis

In February 2012, NTA out of public interest sought the opinions of citizens about the management of CDF in constituencies whose MPs had declared interest in running for the Kenyan Presidency. This was done through administration of structured questionnaires that captured their views in a pre-assessment in sampled 8 constituencies. It emerged that many constituents were mainly concerned about projects they were not benefitting from; that were badly implemented, stalled or abandoned. After the pre-assessment and collating the views, NTA went ahead and obtained an official list of CDF projects from the eight constituencies that was analysed together with the pre-assessment questionnaires to sample projects to be visited.
At each project site they: I. Interviewed intended citizen beneficiaries and the people in charge around the project II. Took digital photographs of the project; III. The engineer undertook a technical assessment of the project using a structured Project Technical Assessment Form (see Annex 2) .
1
Category B Projects Badly implemented, complete and incomplete projects

This category is for CDF projects which had scored less than 50% on the Technical Assessment Form, and were found to
3. Desk-based Analysis and Final Project Classification

Following the independent technical assessment, the engineer/quantity surveyor selected 4 projects that ranked poorly in his/her assessment and for which numerous
be poorly constructed with poor value for money, and/or with budgets much larger than what is actually delivered.
Category C Projects Well implemented, incomplete projects

This category is for CDF projects which had scored above 50% on the Technical Assessment Form, and were projects well implemented but ongoing, i.e. Money had been used to build a structure of good quality, but the construction is incomplete.
2. Project Site Visit, Rapid Assessment, Independent Technical Assessment and User Interviews
NTA Regional Officer, engineer/quantity surveyor and a Professional Photographer visited all selected CDF projects based on citizens feedback on the projects they felt have
complaints had been registered by constituents during the pre-test assessment. These projects included those whose funds had been out rightly wasted through bad implementation, stalled and abandoned projects. The rapid assessment and technical assessment provided a conclusive analysis for qualification of projects to the picture book.
1 The data listed in this form was based on the findings from interviews with project users
Category D Projects - Abandoned Projects

This category of projects are incomplete and did not receive financial allocation in the subsequent Financial Year. It should be noted that the CDF Act provides for continuous allocation to projects until completion.
and the CDF Committees of the 8 Constituencies who provided vital feedback, information and clarifications that were vital for the production of the draft and final Citizens Report Card.
Category E Projects Ghost projects

This category is for CDF projects which had been officially allocated funds but the project did not physically exist at the time of study i.e. It is a ghost project.
Category F Projects Reallocated Funds

This category is for CDF projects that were not implemented for the reason that the funds were reallocated to other projects and with authority from the CDF Board in accordance with the CDF Act.
Category G Projects - Delayed implementation

The project is officially allocated funds but the implementation has not started and funds are in the project account.
5. Comments and Review

Following the elaborate process of compiling the Citizens Report Card, NTA constantly consulted with Fund Account Managers
NTA is fully independent of government; however, it is committed to working with the government to improve service delivery and the management of devolved funds.
GATUNDU SOUTH CONSTITUENCY KIAMBU COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. UHURU KENYATTA
Munyu-ini A.P. Post

Project Name Munyu-ini A.P. Post Activity Construction of an A.P. Post Location/Ward Ndarugu Assessment date 25/01/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 1,040,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,040,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,040,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 83% Category A Comments This is a well done block with good quality walling stones, roofing sheets, timber works, windows and doors. Going by the current allocations schedule, the work was done within the budget, demonstrating proper use of funds. Project Status Complete
Kiamworia Secondary School

Project Name Kiamworia Secondary School Activity Construction of a laboratory Location/Ward Kiganjo Assessment date 24/01/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 1,150,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,150,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,150,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 75%, Category A Comments The benches along the walls have been linked with the plumbing and gas system very good workmanship. The cost estimate is the same as the amount spent hence value for money is evident. Additional funding should now be availed to complete the guttering, roof painting and paving all round the laboratory. Project Status Complete
Gatundu South Dairy
l Refer to Annex 1 for response from Gatundu South CDFC
Gatundu South Dairy

Project Name Kiganjo Dairy Activity Rehabilitation Works Location/Ward Kiganjo Assessment date 02/04/2012 Estimated cost Total funds awarded Kshs. 3,500,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 3,500,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 43% Category B Comments This project has taken too long to complete having received its first allocation in the 2006/07 financial year. Where construction works have been undertaken, relatively good quality materials were used but the majority of renovation works remain undone. With this allocation, a lot more could have been undertaken. The dairy is not yet operational and dairy farmers in the area have expressed their disappointment in this project. Project Status Abandoned and not in use
Magomano Ituru Road
Magomano Ituru Road

Project Name Magomano Ituru Road Activity Murraming Location/Ward Ngenda Assessment date 26/01/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 4,300,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 4,300,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 4,300,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 40% Category B Comments Although certified complete, the grading of the road surface is not well done and the drainage system has not been well attended to. The drainage system is crucial to the life of any road and should be prioritized. The funds allocated to this project were enough to achieve alot more than what is on the ground. Project Status Complete and in use
GICHUGU CONSTITUENCY KIRINYAGA COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. MARTHA KARUA
St. Elias and Goretti Sec School
St. Elias and Goretti Sec School

Project Name St. Elias and Goretti Secondary School Activity Construction of 3 classrooms, laboratory, kitchen and dining hall Location/Ward Baragwi Assessment date 03/07/2012 Estimated cost Total funds awarded Kshs. 3,566,236 Total funds spent Kshs. 3,566,236 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 85% Category C Comments The classrooms are complete while the dining hall is still under construction. Good quality work is evident in the structures that are complete, that is, the classrooms and the laboratory. The dining hall and kitchen height will however need to be increased for proper air circulation. Overall, good usage of CDF funds. Project Status Ongoing
St. Peters Karumandi South Primary School
St. Peters Karumandi South Primary School

Project Name St. Peters Karumandi South Primary School Activity Construction of exhaustible toilets Location/Ward Karumandi Assessment date 31/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 600,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 600,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 600,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 45%, Category B Comments Project implementation commenced in 2009 but remains incomplete to date. Although good quality materials were used, major cracks have emerged on the walls depicting poor workmanship. The toilets that the pupils are currently using are in a deplorable state and are posing a health hazard. Additional funds need to be availed to revive this all important project. Project Status Abandoned
Raimu Primary School

Project Name Raimu Primary School Activity Construction of a toilet block Location/Ward Baragwi Assessment date 30/03/2012 Total funds awarded Kshs. 150,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 150,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 48%, Category B Comments Although initially well implemented, construction works on this project have stalled owing to lack of adequate funding. Wear and tear due to weather vagaries has naturally set in meaning the final cost on completion will be much higher than would have been the case had this project been implemented in good time. Additional funds need to be availed to complete this project. Project Status Abandoned and not in use
SABOTI CONSTITUENCY TRANS NZOIA COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. EUGENE WAMALWA
Kibagenge Secondary School

Project Name Kibagenge Secondary School Activity Construction of two classrooms and staffroom Location/Ward Waitaluk Assessment date 30/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs 600,000 Total funds awarded Kshs 600,000 Total funds spent Kshs 600,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 83%, Category A Comments A well implemented project, the classrooms have good finishing, and there are no defects in any part of the project. The classrooms are well painted, windows and doors are steel made and they were well fitted. The community was involved in project identification and implementation. The project represents value for money. Project Status Complete and in use
Bondeni dispensary
Project Name Bondeni dispensary Activity Construction of a maternity ward Location/Ward Kinyoro Assessment date 30/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 1,000,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,000,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,000,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 83%, Category A Comments A well implemented project with good workmanship and the materials used were of good quality. The project was professionally painted, steel doors and windows were well fitted. The ceiling board was well placed and painted. The community was involved in project identification. Although the project represents value for tax payers money, it needs to be put to use to benefit the community. Project Status Complete and not in use
Chebukaka Primary
Project Name Chebukaka Primary School Activity Construction of four classrooms Location/Ward Saboti Assessment date 30/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 2,000,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 950,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 950,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 38%, Category B Comments Although the little resources were stretched to do substantive work, the workmanship is poor. In addition to poor quality bricks used, poor quality of wood was used for roofing. Parents contributed windows worth Kshs. 11,000. Project Status Incomplete but in use
Kitalale Dispensary
Project Name Kitalale Dispensary Activity Construction of maternity wing Location/Ward Kinyoro Assessment date 29/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 2,500,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,000,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,000,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 35%, Category B Comments The little available funds were stretched to do a lot of work but of poor quality. There are cracks on the walls and on the floors. The project management committee did not consult the District public works officer before constructing the project resulting to poor implementation. Project Status Complete but not in use
Sirende Primary School

Project Name Sirende Primary School Activity Renovation of 4 classrooms Location/Ward Waitaluk Assessment date 09/06/2011 Total funds awarded Kshs. 250,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 250,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 47%, Category B Comments The project was poorly implemented, there are cracks on the floor and on the wall. Parents Teachers Association contributed Kshs. 328,900 and 112,100 bricks. Khetias supermarket also contributed Kshs. 9,000 towards the project. The funds were not well used as it was enough to complete the project. The project does not represent commensurate value for taxpayers money. Project Status Incomplete but in use
Mokoywet Primary School

Project Name Mokoywet Primary School Activity Construction of 1 classroom Location/Ward Waitaluk Assessment date 10/06/2011 Total funds awarded Kshs. 250,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 250,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 48%, Category B Comments Poor workmanship is displayed in this project, the beams are not straight and roofing was poorly done. The project is taking long to be completed and the community expressed their dissapointment at the slow pace of implementation. The Project management committee should speed up the completion of the project. Project Status Ongoing and not in use
MWINGI NORTH CONSTITUENCY KITUI COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. KALONZO MUSYOKA
Kyuso girls secondary school

Project Name Kyuso girls secondary school Activity Construction of a dormitory, 3 Classrooms and Staff House Location/Ward Kyuso Assessment date 31.08.2011 Total funds awarded Kshs. 5,802,981 Total funds spent Kshs. 5,802,981 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 85%, Category A Comments The materials used to construct the structures are of good quality. The stones were well dressed and of good quality. Plastering was well done. The school compound was also fenced using good quality steel posts and chain link. The overall workmanship was commendable. The work done was within the required time frame and the expenditure was within the estimated cost. Project Status Complete and in use
Kalonzo Secondary School

Project Name Kalonzo Secondary School Activity Construction of dining hall & 3 classrooms Location/Ward Kyuso Assessment date 31.08.2011 Total funds awarded Kshs. 5,000,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 5,000,000 Total Unaccounted Funds: Nil Technical Performance score 68%, Category A Comments The stones used were of good quality and well dressed. The foundation, walling and roofing were well constructed. Steel windows and wooden doors were also fitted to the classrooms. The fascia board was also well fitted .Generally the work was well undertaken and there is value for money to the community. Project Status: Complete and in use
Mutwangombe Polytechnic
Project Name Mutwangombe Polytechnic Activity Construction of a workshop Location/Ward Endui Assessment date 28.3.2012 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,050,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 0 Unaccounted for funds Kshs. 1,050,000 Technical Performance score N/A, Category E Comments The old building in the secondary school compound was constructed by the community in the 1980s. It was used as a polytechnic by then, but it was later changed to a secondary school in 2008. Despite the polytechnic having been changed to a secondary school, Mwingi North CDF allocated funds to the project for a period of two consecutive years as follows. Kshs. 200, 000 was allocated to the project in 2007/08 followed by Kshs. 250,000 in 2008/2009. The funds cannot be accounted for by the then project management committee. Information from the ground indicate that part of the CDF allocation for 2006/07 amounting to kshs.600,000 was used to paint one side of the building with red paint before the polytechnic was converted into a secondary school but NTA was not able to get any document to show how the funds were used.
Tseikuru Market Shed

Project Name Tseikuru Market Shed Activity Construction of a market shed Location/Ward Tseikuru Assessment date 27.03.2012 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,109,811 Total funds spent Kshs. 454,358 Total in the Bank Kshs. 655,453 (in the bank) Technical Performance score 35%, Category B Comments The CDF allocation was meant to construct market sheds, but the project management committee instead started the construction of market stalls. Market sheds were meant to serve many market operators as opposed to the five abandoned stalls which would serve only few persons. This was against the market community proposal to Mwingi North CDF. The structure was abandoned at the wall level for the last three years. The market stalls have been poorly constructed with outside walls done using stones while the partition walls done using bricks. It is also important to note that a market shed is scheduled for construction in the same market under economic stimulus programme. This will lead to waste of resources and duplication of efforts. Bank statement See Annex 3
Mataka - Mivukoni Road

Project Name Mataka Mivukoni Road Activity Construction of a road drift Location/Ward Mivukoni Assessment date 28.3.2012 Total funds awarded Kshs. 4,500,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 4,500,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 38%, Category B Comments The materials used to construct the drift were sourced locally. The structure is small in size and no reinforcement was used. The amount spent on the project is more than the work done and does not represent value for taxpayers money.
Kavaani - Mutairu Earth Dam

Project Name Kavaani Mutairu Earth Dam Activity Construction of an earth dam Location/Ward Ngomeni Assessment date 28.3.2012 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,400,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,400,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 33%, Category B Comments The soil on the embankment was poorly compacted and the depth excavated is too shallow to store water in the reservoir. The spillway is so low that unnecessarily big freeboard was left. The fencing was poorly done. The projects workmanship is poor and the overall output does not represent value for taxpayers money. Project Status: Incomplete
GATANGA CONSTITUENCY MURANGA COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. PETER KENNETH
Kirwara Youth Polytechnic

Project Name Kirwara Youth Polytechnic Activity Purchase of training equipment and water tanks, construction of latrines and general renovation works. Location/Ward Gatanga Assessment date 25/11/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 2,500,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 2,500,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 2,500,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 90%, Category A Comments This project represents proper utilization of taxpayers funds. The bulk of the funds were used for the purchase of computers, construction of 7 latrines, renovation works, purchase of tanks among other activities. The atmosphere within the computer room now makes for a very good learning environment for the students. These funds have been able to revive the polytechnic and its now of big benefit to the youth of Gatanga. Project Status Complete and in use
Ngelelya AP Post
Project Name Ngelelya AP Post Activity Construction of Assistant Chiefs Office and AP Lines Location/Ward Ithanga Assessment date 4/04/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 1,950,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,950,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,950,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 95%, Category A Comments This project was well implemented, within good time and budget allocated. There is very high skill display in workmanship and very good choice of materials. Both structures are devoid of cracks and the finishes are well done. This project represents good value for taxpayers funds. Project Status Complete and in use
Gatanga Youth Empowerment Centre
Gatanga Youth Empowerment Centre

Project Name Gatanga Youth Empowerment Centre Activity Construction Location/Ward Gatanga Assessment date 5/04/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 5,000,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 5,000,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 5,000,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 90%, Category A Comments This is an impressive project. The empowerment centre boasts of a sound-proofed recording studio and hall/ theatre. The quality of workmanship is excellent and so are the fittings and finishes. The recording studio is also air conditioned and has a wall to wall carpet in addition to the recording equipment. The raised platform in the hall/ theatre is very well executed and so is the unique ceiling work. This project represents how taxpayers funds should be used to develop communities and grow the talents of the young leaders of tomorrow. Project Status Ongoing
LANGATA CONSTITUENCY NAIROBI CITY COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. RAILA ODINGA
Langata Location Chiefs Office

Project Name Langata Location Chiefs Office Activity Purchase of a container, toilet block construction and civil engineering works on the compound. Location/Ward Langata Assessment date 27/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 440,090 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,800,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,800,000 Unaccounted for funds NIL Technical Performance score 45%, Category B Comments This project was aimed at putting up a temporary structure for the chief, toilets, fence and a parking bay. Average quality of materials was used. The container is damaged at the back; murram could have been used as filling material. The finishing was also poorly done. What has been implemented on the ground is not commensurate to the amount spent as the toilet has caved in and the workmanship exhibited is poor. There is no commensurate value for taxpayers money. Project Status Abandoned and not in use
Laini Saba Drainage

Project Name Laini Saba Drainage Activity Rehabilitation of drainage system Location/Ward Laini saba Assessment date 27/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 283,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,190,196 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,190,196 Unaccounted for funds NIL Technical Performance score 33% Category B Comments The project was aimed at draining storm water but there is no commensurate value for money reflected. The estimated cost of this project points to the fact that the implementation process exceeded the estimated cost by a huge margin. Materials utilized are of standard quality though the workmanship is poor. Project Status Complete and in use
Raila Educational Centre

Project Name Raila Education Centre Activity Putting up of storied classroom Location/Ward Makina Assessment date 28/03/2012 Estimated cost N/A Total funds awarded Kshs. 4,580,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 4,580,000 Unaccounted for funds NIL Technical Performance score N/A Comments The project was condemned and demolished as it was found to be a safety hazard to the occupants. This amounts to a waste of taxpayers money. Project Status Demolished
Langata CDF Office

Project Name Langata CDF Office Activity Building of CDF office Location/Ward All Assessment date 26/03/2012 Estimated cost Total funds awarded Kshs. 8,309,517 Total funds spent NIL Unaccounted for funds Kshs. 8,309,517 Technical Performance score N/A Comments The project on the ground is estimated to cost Kshs.350,000 which according to the technical assessment was well implemented. However, the project status list indicates that an ultra modern CDF office was to be put up three years ago at the cost of Kshs. 8,309,517 but it was not on the ground during the assessment. No bank statements were availed to indicate that the sums were in the project account. Efforts to get more information from the Langata CDF office were not fruitful. Project Status E- Ghost project.
l Refer to Annex 2 for a regret letter from NTA
SABATIA CONSTITUENCY VIHIGA COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. MUSALIA MUDAVADI
Bukulunya Secondary School

Project Name Bukulunya Secondary School Activity Construction of Dormitory Location/Ward Izava North Assessment date 29/3/2012 Estimated cost Total funds awarded Kshs. 3,550,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 3,550,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 85% Category A Comments The work done is commensurate with the amount spent. Good quality materials have been used and good workmanship displayed. Project Status Ongoing and in use
Kisangula Secondary School

Project Name Kisangula Secondary School Activity Construction of Dining Hall Location/Ward North Maragoli Assessment date 06/09/2011 Estimated cost Total funds awarded Kshs. 2,258,550 Total funds spent Kshs. 2,258,550 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 88% Category A Comments Good quality materials were used, with commendable workmanship. The cost is within estimates. Project Status Complete and in use
Yordani Bridge | From 2011

Project Name Yordani Bridge Activity Bridge construction Location/Ward Izava north Assessment date 29/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 4,500,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 4,300,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 3,600,000 to be paid Unaccounted for funds Kshs. 700,000 Technical Performance score 73%, Category C Comments Good workmanship is displayed and good quality materials have been used. Stone pitching was omitted to bring down cost. However, the amount awarded is higher than the amount spent. Project Status Ongoing
Sabatia Sports Complex | From 2007

Project Name Sabatia Sports Complex Activity Purchase and fencing of land for a Sports Complex Location/Ward West Maragoli Assessment date 29/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 2,600,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 5,180,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 2,680,000 Unaccounted for funds Kshs. 2,500,000 Technical Performance score 38%, Category B Comments This project is abandoned leading to wastage of public funds. Nothing has been done to develop the land to make it used as a sports complex. In addition, the amount spent is higher than the estimated cost. Project Status Abandoned and not in use
Nadanya Health Centre | From 2004

Project Name Nadanya Health Center Activity Maternity wing and gate construction Location/Ward Izava South Assessment date 29/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 1,060,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,920,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 400,000 Unaccounted for funds Kshs. 1,520,00 Technical Performance score 38%, Category B Comments The project was poorly implemented as materials of poor quality were used in addition to poor workmanship. Records for the 1,520,000 are not available and the current PMC say they are not sure how the money was used. The project began in 2004 and is not yet complete. There is no commensurate value for money. Project Status Abandoned
Solongo Youth Polytechnic | From 2007

Project Name Solongo Youth Polytechnic Activity Mechanic workshop construction Location/Ward West Maragoli Assessment date 29/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 1,713,600 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,180,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,180,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 48%, Category B Comments Fairly good materials were used but poor workmanship as shown by cracks on the walls and the floor. The roofing was also done poorly. Amount spent compromised on quality and is lower than estimated project cost. Project Status Abandoned
l Refer to Annex 1 for response from Sabatia CDFC
ELDORET NORTH CONSTITUENCY UASIN GISHU COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. WILLIAM RUTO
52 |
Leseru Secondary School

Project Name Leseru Secondary School Activity Construction of a dormitory Location/Ward Sosian Assessment date 04/07/2012 Total funds awarded Kshs. 800,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 800,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score Category A Comments The project was well implemented, the good qualities of materials were used and the level of workmanship is commendable. The external and internal finishing was neatly done. The project represents value for taxpayers money. Project Status Complete and in use
Kamagut Secondary School

Project Name Kamagut Secondary School Activity Construction of laboratory Location/Ward Kamagut Assessment date 04/07/2012 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,000,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,000,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 90%, Category A Comments The project was well executed with use of good quality materials and skilled workmanship. The building was fitted with metallic doors, grilled windows with window panes, pre-painted iron sheets. The verandah is supported with metallic pillars. The project exhibits value for money. Project Status Complete and in use
Kisor - Tebeswet Footbridge

Project Name Kisor - Tebeswet Footbridge Activity Construction of foot bridge Location/Ward Kiplombe Assessment date 27/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 150,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 100,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 100,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 68%, Category D Comments Good quality of materials used. Although the community contributed the hardcore and provided free labour, the amount spent is commensurate with the work done but the project is abandoned and it cannot be used in its current status. Project Status Abandoned.
Moses Kiptanui Dispensary

Project Name Moses Kiptanui Dispensary Activity Construction of a dispensary Location/Ward Kiplombe Ward Assessment date 28/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 1,200,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 700,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 700,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 43%, Category B Comments The project stalled at the ring beam level and most of the work was poorly done by seemingly unqualified artisans. The estimated cost is Kshs. 1,200,000. Poor value for the Ksh. 700, 000 used. The former project management mismanaged Kshs. 200,000. CDF office added the project extra Ksh. 500,000 to complete the project. There is low community participation in implementation of the project. Project Status Incomplete
Mogoiwet Cattle Dip

Project Name Mokoiywet Cattle Dip Activity Construction of a cattle dip Location/Ward Kiplombe Assessment date 27/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 400,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 280,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 280,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 40%, Category B Comments The project was not constructed using the required measurements as the passage is too small to be used by animals. In addition the quality has been compromised to reduce the cost. The community does not own the project as they complained of not having been involved in its implementation and the project currently is of no use to the community. Project Status Abandoned.
Sigowet Cattle Dip

Project Name Sigowet Cattle Dip Activity Construction of a cattle dip Location/Ward Kiplombe Assessment date 27/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 400,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 225,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 225,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 35%, Category B Comments Poor concrete mix, poor quality of bricks and timber which are already disintegrating. The quality has been compromised to reduce the cost. The project is abandoned. Project Status Incomplete and not in use.
IMPACT STORIES AFTER NTA ASSESSMENT

The assessment was done one (1) week before the launch
Nadanya Health Centre | From 2004

Project Name Nadanya Health Center Activity Maternity wing and gate construction Location/Ward Izava South Assessment date 29/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 1,060,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,920,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 400,000 Unaccounted for funds Kshs. 1,520,00 Technical Performance score 38%, Category B Comments The project was poorly implemented as materials of poor quality were used in addition to poor workmanship. Records for the 1,520,000 are not available and the current PMC say they are not sure how the money was used. The project began in 2004 and is not yet complete. There is no commensurate value for money. Project Status Abandoned
Nadanya Health Centre | After NTA Assessment
The building assessed earlier will be converted into a laboratory because it could not serve as a maternity ward.
St. Peters Karumandi South Primary School | From 2009

Project Name St. Peters Karumandi South Primary School Activity Construction of exhaustible toilets Location/Ward Karumandi Assessment date 31/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 600,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 600,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 600,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 45%, Category B Comments Project implementation commenced in 2009 but remains incomplete to date. Although good quality materials were used, major cracks have emerged on the walls depicting poor workmanship. The toilets that the pupils are currently using are in a deplorable state and are posing a health hazard. Additional funds need to be availed to revive this all important project. Project Status Abandoned
St. Peters Karumandi South Primary School | After NTA Assessment

Project Name Raimu Primary School Activity Construction of a toilet block Location/Ward Baragwi Assessment date 30/03/2012 Total funds awarded Kshs. 150,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 150,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 48%, Category B Comments Although initially well implemented, construction works on this project have stalled owing to lack of adequate funding. Wear and tear due to weather vagaries has naturally set in meaning the final cost on completion will be much higher than would have been the case had this project been implemented in good time. Additional funds need to be availed to complete this project. Project Status Abandoned and not in use
Raimu Primary School | After NTA Assessment
Gatundu South Dairy | From 2006

Project Name Kiganjo Dairy Activity Rehabilitation Works Location/Ward Kiganjo Assessment date 02/04/2012 Estimated cost Total funds awarded Kshs. 3,500,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 3,500,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 43% Category B Comments This project has taken too long to complete having received its first allocation in the 2006/07 financial year. Where construction works have been undertaken, relatively good quality materials were used but the majority of renovation works remain undone. With this allocation, a lot more could have been undertaken. The dairy is not yet operational and dairy farmers in the area have expressed their disappointment in this project. Project Status Abandoned and not in use
Gatundu South Dairy - After NTA Assessment
The building was renovated recently by a good Samaritan, but it is still not operational.
Langata Location Chiefs Office

Project Name Langata Location Chiefs Office Activity Purchase of a container, toilet block construction and civil engineering works on the compound. Location/Ward Langata Assessment date 27/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 440,090 Total funds awarded Kshs. 1,800,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 1,800,000 Unaccounted for funds NIL Technical Performance score 45%, Category B Comments This project was aimed at putting up a temporary structure for the chief, toilets, fence and a parking bay. Average quality of materials was used. The container is damaged at the back; murram could have been used as filling material. The finishing was also poorly done. What has been implemented on the ground is not commensurate to the amount spent as the toilet has caved in and the workmanship exhibited is poor. There is no commensurate value for taxpayers money. Project Status Abandoned and not in use
Langata Location Chiefs Office | After NTA Assessment
Langata CDF Office | From 2009

Project Name Langata CDF Office Activity Building of CDF office Location/Ward All Assessment date 26/03/2012 Estimated cost Total funds awarded Kshs. 8,309,517 Total funds spent NIL Unaccounted for funds Kshs. 8,309,517 Technical Performance score N/A Comments The project on the ground is estimated to cost Kshs.350,000 which according to the technical assessment was well implemented. However, the project status list indicates that an ultra modern CDF office was to be put up three years ago at the cost of Kshs. 8,309,517 but it was not on the ground during the assessment. No bank statements were availed to indicate that the sums were in the project account. Efforts to get more information from the Langata CDF office were not fruitful. Project Status E- Ghost project.
Langata CDF Office | After NTA Assessment
Sigowet Cattle Dip

Project Name Sigowet Cattle Dip Activity Construction of a cattle dip Location/Ward Kiplombe Assessment date 27/03/2012 Estimated cost Kshs. 400,000 Total funds awarded Kshs. 225,000 Total funds spent Kshs. 225,000 Unaccounted for funds Nil Technical Performance score 35%, Category B Comments Poor concrete mix, poor quality of bricks and timber which are already disintegrating. The quality has been compromised to reduce the cost. The project is abandoned. Project Status Incomplete and not in use.
Sigowet Cattle Dip | After NTA Assessment
Annex 1: Responses from CDFCs

Gatundu South Constituency Sabatia Constituency
Annex 2: Appreciation Letters

Gichugu Constituency Eldoret North Constituency
Gatundu South Constituency
Langata Constituency
Sabatia Constituency
Saboti Constituency
Mwingi North Constituency
Annex 3: Bank Statement for Tseikuru Market Shed
Annex 4: Pre-Assessment Interview Sheet

A SURVEY OF CITIZENS PERCEPTION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CDF PROJECTS
Section A: Respondents Characteristics Informed Consent
Hello. My name is __________________________________and I am here on behalf of the National Taxpayers Association (NTA). NTA is a national, independent, non-partisan organization established in 2006 to support good governance in Kenya through strengthening citizen to government accountability, and citizen to citizen accountability. NTA is currently undertaking an assessment of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), its implementation and impact in several constituencies in the country. I would like to ask you some questions related to the CDF in ______________________constituency. Q. Have you ever heard of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF)? Yes No 1. Gender of respondent Male Female 2. Age (a) 18 25 (b) 26 35 (c) 36- 60 (d) 61 and above
3. Occupation ____________________________________________________________________________ 4. Sub- Location/ Village and Location _______________________________________________________ 5. District _______________________________________________________________________________ 6. Constituency___________________________________________________________________________ 7. County _______________________________________________________________________________
(If No, discontinue the interview) The information you provide will help in identifying the status of the projects in your constituency and your level of satisfaction with them. This information will be useful for future development programs in this constituency and the country at large. Participation in the survey is voluntary, and you can choose not to take part. All the information you give will be confidential. No names will be required and therefore there will be no way to identify that you are the one who gave this information. Respondent agreed to be interviewed: Yes No
Section B: Project Information

1. (a) (b) How would you rate the implementation of CDF projects in your constituency? Poor Fair/ Average Good Excellent Kindly give a reason for your rating above ______________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________________
2. Do you know of any well implemented project or projects in your community? (Note to the interviewer; well implemented projects reflect good workmanship, value for money, community satisfaction, are of benefit to the community e.t.c) Yes No
(a) Name of Project 1: _______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ (b) Name of Project 2:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ (c) Name of Project 3:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________
(If No, proceed to question 3) If Yes, name it/them and give a brief explanation (a) Name of Project 1:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location________________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ (b) Name of Project 2:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ (c) Name of Project 3:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ 3. Do you know of any badly implemented project or projects in your constituency? (Note to interviewer: These are projects that portray poor workmanship, poor quality materials, citizens may not be benefiting from them and generally represent no value for funds allocated.) Yes No
4. Are you aware or have you heard of any abandoned project or projects in your constituency? (Note to interviewer: Abandoned projects refer to those whose implementation has been halted for more than one year due to lack of sufficient funds or other reasons) Yes No
(If No, proceed to question 5) If Yes, name it/them and give a brief explanation (a) Name of Project 1:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________
(If No, proceed to question 4) If Yes, name it/them and give a brief explanation
(b) Name of Project 2:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ (c) Name of Project 3:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ 5. Are you aware or heard of any project or projects that has/ have received funding from CDF but whose implementation has not started or was never implemented? (Note to interviewer: These are projects that are physically nonexistent) Yes No
(b) Name of Project 2:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ (c) Name of Project 3:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ 6. (a) Have you ever been involved in the identification or implementation of any CDF funded project? Yes No (b) If yes, please specify the project name _______________________________________ 7. (a) In your opinion, are CDF funded projects of any benefit to you and your community? Yes No
(If No, proceed to question 6) If Yes, name it/ them and give a brief explanation (a) Name of Project 1:_______________________________________________________ Project Activity Undertaken: _______________________________________________ Location _______________________________________________________________ Brief explanation ________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________
(b) If yes, how are you benefiting? _____________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________
Thank you very much for your time and contribution. The information you have given today will be treated with strict confidentiality and will be used by the NTA to encourage the government to improve the delivery of services and the management of devolved funds for you as a citizen. Signed by the interviewer:________________________________________________ Date and time: ______________________________________________________
Annex 5: Technical Assessment Form

Project Name Constituency Name
County Name
Location/Ward Name
Project Score.
Project No.
Project Type & Source of funds
Detailed description of project Activity
Date project began
Date project ended (If complete)
Financial Information
FY 03/04 AMOUNT 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 TOTAL
Amount awarded as per CDFC/Local Authority Records.
3.2.Actual amount received (Project site)
Actual expenditure as at the assessment date.
3.4. Total Other Funds Spent to Date (2009/10) Kshs.(LATF, NGOs, CBOs, FBOs, Private Sector, etc.) Specify Actual Source
3.5 Total Funds Spent to Date (Kshs.)
Area (1) Quality of materials used
Out of 10
Justify the score you gave with explanation below (write clearly and neatly)
2)
Quality of workmanship.
(3) Was/is the project implemented within the budget and time? (4) What is the estimated cost of the project against what was spent based on the assessment? does it represent value for money? Total Marks out of 40 Explain the project score (Justify the project score) What is your overall recommendation on the project implementation
SUMMARY REPORT ABOUT THE PROJECT.
Percentage
Note: A mark of 10 is excellent, while a mark of 1 is very poor.

Name of technical reviewer: Signature of technical reviewer: Tel.No: Date of assessment:
Time:
www.nta.or.ke
HEADOFFICE National Taxpayers Association (NTA) Riara Gardens, Off Riara Road | Adjacent to Makini School P. O. Box 4037 - 00506, Nyayo Stadium, Nairobi, Kenya TeleFax: 254-20-3861813/4 | Cell Phone: 254-734-500940 Email: admin@nta.or.ke | Website: www.nta.or.ke
Nairobi Regional Office Riara Gardens, Off Riara Road Adjacent to Makini School P.O. Box 4037 - 00506 Nairobi Cell Phone: 254-738-992660 Email: nairobi@nta.or.ke Eastern Regional Office Town Plaza, 3rd Floor, Ngei Road P.O. Box 2046 90100 Machakos Cell Phone: 254-738-992666 Email: eastern@nta.or.ke Rift Valley Regional Office Meadows Hse, 1st Floor, Room 106 Opposite Sirikwa Hotel P.O. Box 4956-301 00 Eldoret Cell Phone: 254-738-992663 Email: riftvalley@nta.or.ke
Western Regional Office Kakamoni Plaza, 1st Floor Above Post Bank, Canon Awori Street Cell Phone: 254-738-992667 Email: western@nta.or.ke Central Regional Office Nyeri Teachers Plaza, 1st Floor, Room 10 P.O. Box 576 - 10100 Nyeri Cell Phone: 254-738-992661 Email: central@nta.or.ke Coast Regional Office Kanderbhouy Building Nkurumah Road,1st Floor, Suite 14, Opp Co-Op Bank P.O. Box 98860 Mombasa Cell Phone: 254-738-992664 Email: coast@nta.or.ke
North Eastern Regional Office Riara Gardens, Off Riara Road Adjacent to Makini School P.O.Box4037-00506 Nairobi Cell Phone: 254-738-992665 Email: northeastern@nta.or.ke Nyanza Regional Office Nakumatt Mega City, Mezzanine Floor Nairobi Road P.O. Box 204-40123 Kisumu Cell Phone: 254-738-992668 Email: nyanza@nta.or.ke
The findings expressed herein are those of the NTA and do not necessarily reflect the views of our partners.
National Taxpayers Association May, 2012

Untitled

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Untitled

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

www.nta.or.

The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0

Impact Stories after NTA Assessment

Our Vision: An accountable, citizen-responsive government delivering quality services to all.

2.0 About CDF

2 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

3.0 About the Project

4 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

4.0 NTA Research Methodology

he research methodology involved the following stages and methods.

4. NTA project categorization

1. Secondary Data Collection and Analysis

Category B Projects Badly implemented, complete and incomplete projects

3. Desk-based Analysis and Final Project Classification

Category C Projects Well implemented, incomplete projects

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 5

Category D Projects - Abandoned Projects

Category E Projects Ghost projects

Category F Projects Reallocated Funds

Category G Projects - Delayed implementation

5. Comments and Review

6 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 7

Munyu-ini A.P. Post

8 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

Kiamworia Secondary School

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 9

Gatundu South Dairy

10 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

l Refer to Annex 1 for response from Gatundu South CDFC

Gatundu South Dairy

l Refer to Annex 1 for response from Gatundu South CDFC

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 11

Magomano Ituru Road

12 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

l Refer to Annex 1 for response from Gatundu South CDFC

Magomano Ituru Road

l Refer to Annex 1 for response from Gatundu South CDFC

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 13

GICHUGU CONSTITUENCY KIRINYAGA COUNTY PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: HON. MARTHA KARUA

14 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

St. Elias and Goretti Sec School

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 15

St. Elias and Goretti Sec School

16 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

St. Peters Karumandi South Primary School

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 17

St. Peters Karumandi South Primary School

18 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

Raimu Primary School

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 19

Raimu Primary School

20 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 21

Kibagenge Secondary School

22 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 23

24 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

Citizens Report Card for Constituencies Headed by Presidential Aspirants | 25

Sirende Primary School

26 | CDF Spotlight | The pleas of constituents to presidential aspirants

Mokoywet Primary School