DOCSLIB.ORG

Projectdocagropastoralproduction-1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

REQUEST FOR CEO ENDORSEMENT/APPROVAL PROJECT TYPE: FULL-SIZED PROJECT (FSP)

THE GEF TRUST FUND

Date of Resubmission: 23 Sept 2010
INDICATIVE CALENDAR
Milestones

Work Program (for FSP) CEO Endorsement/Approval GEF Agency Approval Implementation Start

PART I: PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
Expected Dates

June 2007 October 2010 November 2010 February 2011

GEFSEC PROJECT ID: 3370 GEF AGENCY PROJECT ID: PIMS 3245 COUNTRY: Kenya PROJECT TITLE: Mainstreaming Sustainable Land Management

in Agropastoral Production Systems of Kenya

GEF AGENCY: UNDP

OTHER EXECUTING PARTNERS: GOK (MINISTRY

AGRICULTURE AND RELEVANT DISTRICTS) GEF FOCAL AREAS: Land Degradation GEF-4 STRATEGIC PROGRAM(S): LD SP 2 in TerrAfrica SIP

Mid-term Review (if planned) Dec 2013 Implementation Completion June 2015

A. PROJECT RESULTS FRAMEWORK

Objective: To provide land users and managers with the enabling policy environment, institutional, financial incentives and capacity for effective adoption of SLM in four Agropastoral districts

Compone Ty nts

  • Expected Outcomes
  • Expected Outputs
  • GEF
  • Co-Fin
  • Total

($)
1,070,000

  • %
  • ($)
  • %

Knowledg e based land use planning forms the basis for improving drylands sustainabl e
T



Knowledge base for landscape based land use planning in place: Communities engaged in and benefiting from experiential learning for slm:

  • 26
  • 2,990,000 74
  • 4,060,000



At least 50% of cultivators in the pilot landscapes adopting 3-5 forms of improved practices At least 30% increase in soil fertility from baselines for land users consistently engaging in 3-5 improved practices At least 50% of the agriculturalists and pastoralists in the pilot landscapes taking decisions on the basis of the weather and drought early warning information At least 60% of land users and 75% of technical officers requiring to up-date skills have done so Lessons on improving land and resource tenure, range rehabilitation, sustainable charcoaling, improving livestock mobility, and other important project initiatives available for dissemination through the upscaling project;
AUN

Technical staff

provided with skills and other capacities

  • required in slm
  • economic

developm ent facilitation:



Particularly degraded lands rehabilitated: A participatory m&e system designed and used to provide information to link policy decisions to ecosystem health and improvements in livelihoods:



1

Viability of the agropastor alism productio n system increased through diversifica tion increased access to finance
TA



Livestock trade improved: Access to markets for alternative sustainable livelihood options increased: Farmers and herders increase access to micro-finance and credits: Agricultural productivity increased sustainably: Livestock mobility supported as an adaptation technology: Strategies for

  • 955,800 29
  • 2,315,000 71
  • 3,270,800



At least 50% increase in agricultural produce for key crops for those adopting 3-5 improved practices consistently At least a 20% increase in livestock prices being obtained in markets within the pilot landscapes due to better marketing/trading conditions At least 25% increase in numbers accessing micro-finance and credits at least 40% increase in household incomes for more than 50% of participating households, At least 50% of current mobile pastoralists still retain livestock mobility by the end of the project At least 50% reduction in incidents of conflicts over land and resources in the pilot districts





for SLM



upscaling best practices in the region formulated:

The policy, regulatory and institution al arrangeme nt support mainstrea ming of sustainabl e land managem ent in the agropastor al
TA

SLM policies reviewed in a participatory processes and

  • 701,861 23
  • 2,315,000 77
  • 3,016,861



At least 2 policies revised to mainstream SLM principles and so provide a better policy environment for SLM; At least 5 charcoal associations have rules and regulations for sustainable charcoal and are actively enforcing them; recommendations for mainstreaming generated: Implementation of the new charcoal rules tested on the ground: Charcoal associations capacitated to engage in sustainable charcoal and improve governance: Technologies for improved conversions along the charcoaling chain provided



At least 5 groups with sustainable charcoal production operations and earning money from carbon finance; At least 80% of charcoal producers have received training on sustainable charcoal Collection of revenue by Districts and Revenue Authority from charcoal processes increase by 25% Number of charcoal producers using improved kiln in carbonization in pilot landscapes increase by at least 30% Traditional institutions have revised by-rules that are integrated into national and district policies for resource management

productio n system.

  • PMU
  • Project managed efficiently and cost-effectively
  • 303,073 23
  • 1,040,000 77
  • 1,343,073

  • 3,030,734 26
  • 8,660,000 74 11,690,734

Total costs C. INDICATIVE FINANCING PLAN SUMMARY FOR THE PROJECT ($)

Preparation Project Agency Fee

350,000 3,030,734

Total

  • GEF Grant
  • 304,266
  • 3,685,000

  • 9,010,000
  • Co-financing
  • 350,000
  • 8,660,000

  • 700,000
  • 11,690,734
  • 304,266
  • 12,695,000

Total

D. INDICATIVE CO-FINANCING FOR THE PROJECT BY SOURCE ($)

Co-financing Source

Government Contribution UNDP CO

  • Cash
  • In-kind
  • Total

  • 3,660,000
  • 3,660,000

  • 1,000,000
  • 1,000,000

  • MDG Centre
  • 1,000,000
  • 1,000,000

2

  • ICRAF
  • 3,000,000
  • 3,000,000

  • Total co-financing
  • 1,000,000
  • 7,660,000
  • 8,660,000

E - Table 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT BUDGET/COST1

Cost Items

Estimated staff weeks

  • GEF amount ($)
  • Co-financing ($)
  • Project total ($)

  • Contractual services - individuals
  • 250

180

  • 80,000
  • 132,000
  • 212,000

Contractual services - companies International consultants
90,000
0
110,000
80,000
200,000
80,000
Office facilities, equipment, vehicles and communications

  • 83,073
  • 140,000
  • 223,073

Travel Total

  • 50,000
  • 90,100
  • 140,100

  • 855,173
  • 303,073
  • 552,100

F. CONSULTANTS WORKING FOR TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE COMPONENTS:

  • Component
  • Estimated

staff weeks

350

GEF
($)
Other sources
($)

80,000
115,000 195000

Project total
($)

Local consultants International consultants Total
350,000 100,000 450000
430,000 215,000 645,000
100 450

G. DESCRIBE THE BUDGETED M&E PLAN:

1. A detailed project M&E plan and process is described in the UNDP Project Document; a summary is presented below. Project monitoring and evaluation will be conducted in accordance with established UNDP and GEF procedures and will be provided by the project team and the UNDP Country Office (UNDP CO) with support from UNDP/GEF. The Logical Framework in Annex 2 provides indicators for project implementation, cross referenced to the SIP Results Framework as currently designed, along with their corresponding means of verification. These will form the basis on which the project Monitoring and Evaluation System will be built.

2. Project start: A Project Inception Workshop will be held within the first 2 months of project start with those with assigned roles in the project organization structure, UNDP country office and where appropriate/feasible regional technical policy and programme advisors as well as other stakeholders. The Inception Workshop will be crucial to building ownership for the project results and to plan the first year annual work plan. It will address a number of key issues including: assist all partners to fully understand and take ownership of the project; detail the roles, support services and complementary responsibilities of UNDP CO and Regional Coordination Unit (RCU) staff vis à vis the project team; discuss the roles, functions, and responsibilities within the project's decision-making structures, including reporting and communication lines, and conflict resolution mechanisms; share the terms of reference for project staff as needed.

3. The inception workshop will also provide a venue for finalizing the first annual work plan as well as reviewing and agreeing on the indicators, targets and their means of verification, and rechecking assumptions and risks; providing a detailed overview of reporting, monitoring and evaluation (M&E) requirements; confirming the monitoring and evaluation work plan and budgets and schedules; discussing financial reporting procedures and obligations, and arrangements for annual audit; planning and scheduling Project Board meetings; clarifying

1 In accordance with both UNDP and GEF policies no GEF project resources will be used to pay any government, agency, or NGO staff or

3

personnel

roles and responsibilities of all project organization structures; and holding the first Project Board meeting. If the first board meeting is not held at the inception workshop, it will be held within the first 12 months following the inception workshop.

4. Quarterly: Project Progress will be monitored quarterly using the UNDP Enhanced Results Based
Management Platform. The risks identified at project design will be entered into ATLAS and monitored quarterly. The risks related to markets, micro-finance and conflicts are all rated critical under the Enhanced Results Based Management Platform on the basis of their innovative nature (high impact and uncertainty due to no previous experience justifies classification as critical), and the high incidents of conflicts in the ASALs. These will therefore be monitored very carefully and information used to adapt project management. Quarterly Project Progress Reports (PPR) will be generated in the Executive Snapshot, using the information recorded in Atlas. Other ATLAS logs will be used to monitor issues, lessons learned etc. The use of these functions is a key indicator in the UNDP Executive Balanced Scorecard.

5. Annually: Annual Project Progress will be monitored and captured through the Annual Project Review/Project
Implementation Reports (APR/PIR). This key report comprehensively combines both UNDP and GEF reporting requirements and includes, but is not limited to, reporting on: progress made toward project objective and project outcomes - each with indicators, baseline data and end-of-project targets (cumulative); project outputs delivered per project outcome (annual); lesson learned/good practice; AWP and other expenditure reports; risk and adaptive management; and, ATLAS QPR. Portfolio level indicators (i.e. GEF focal area tracking tools) are used by most focal areas on an annual basis as well.

6. Periodic Monitoring through site visits: UNDP CO and the UNDP RCU will conduct visits to project sites based on the agreed schedule in the project's Inception Report/Annual Work Plan to assess first hand project progress. Other members of the Project Board may also join these visits. A Field Visit Report/BTOR will be prepared by the CO and UNDP RCU and will be circulated no less than one month after the visit to the project team and Project Board members.

7. Mid-term of project cycle: The project will undergo an independent Mid-Term Evaluation at the mid-point of project implementation, expected to be late-2012. The Mid-Term Evaluation will determine progress being made towards the achievement of outcomes and will identify course correction if needed. It will focus on the effectiveness, efficiency and timeliness of project implementation; will highlight issues requiring decisions and actions; and will present initial lessons learned about project design, implementation and management. Findings of this review will be incorporated as recommendations for enhanced implementation during the final

half of the project‟s term. The organization, terms of reference and timing of the mid-term evaluation will be

decided after consultation between the parties to the project document. The Terms of Reference for this Midterm evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the Regional Coordinating Unit and UNDP-GEF. The management response and the evaluation will be uploaded to UNDP corporate systems, in particular the UNDP Evaluation Office Evaluation Resource Center (ERC). The relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools will also be completed during the mid-term evaluation cycle.

8. End of Project: An independent Final Evaluation will take place three months prior to the final Project Board meeting and will be undertaken in accordance with UNDP and GEF guidance. The final evaluation will focus

on the delivery of the project‟s results as initially planned (and as corrected after the mid-term evaluation, if

any such correction took place). The final evaluation will look at impact and sustainability of results, including the contribution to capacity development and the achievement of global environmental benefits/goals. The Terms of Reference for this evaluation will be prepared by the UNDP CO based on guidance from the Regional Coordinating Unit and UNDP-GEF. The Terminal Evaluation will also provide recommendations for follow-up activities and will be accompanied by a management response which will be uploaded to PIMS and to the UNDP Evaluation Office Evaluation Resource Center (ERC). The relevant GEF Focal Area Tracking Tools will also be completed during the final evaluation. During the last three months, the project team will prepare the Project Terminal Report. This comprehensive report will summarize the results achieved (objectives, outcomes, outputs), lessons learned, problems met and areas where results may not have been achieved. It will also lay out recommendations for any further steps that may need to be taken to ensure

sustainability and replicability of the project‟s results.

4

9. Learning and knowledge sharing: Results from the project will be disseminated within and beyond the project intervention zone through existing information sharing networks and forums. The project will therefore identify and participate, as relevant and appropriate, in scientific, policy-based and/or any other networks, which may be of benefit to project implementation though lessons learned. The project will also identify, analyze, and share lessons learned that might be beneficial in the design and implementation of similar future projects. Finally, there will be a two-way flow of information between this project and other projects of a similar focus. Most activities in the M&E work plan are not separately budgeted and will be mainstreamed into the work plans and resourcing dedicated to achieving the three Outcomes as specified in the Budget Summary table above. The costs of the midterm and final evaluations have been allocated equally to the budgets of the three Outcomes in that table.

Table 2: Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation Timetable and Costs in US$

  • Type of M&E activity
  • Responsible Parties
  • Budget
  • Time frame

allocation

Project Coordinator UNDP CO
Within first two months

  • of project start up
  • Inception Workshop

Inception Report
None
UNDP GEF Project Team UNDP CO
Immediately following IW
None
Measurement of Means of Verification for Project Purpose
Project Coordinator will oversee the hiring of specific studies and institutions, and delegate responsibilities to relevant team members

  • 10,000
  • Start, mid and end of

project

Indicators Measurement of Means of Verification for Project Progress and Performance (measured on an annual basis) APR and PIR
Oversight by Project GEF Technical Adviser and Project Coordinator Measurements by regional field officers and local IAs

  • 10,000
  • Annually prior to

APR/PIR and to the definition of annual work plans

Project Team UNDP-CO UNDP-GEF Government Counterparts UNDP CO
None None
Annually

  • TPR and TPR report
  • Every year, upon receipt

of APR
Project team UNDP-GEF Regional Coordinating Unit Project Coordinator UNDP CO
Steering Committee Meetings
None None
5,000 12,500
Following Project IW and subsequently at least once a year To be determined by Project team and UNDP CO To be determined by Project Team and UNDP-CO At the mid-point of project implementation.
Periodic status reports Technical reports
Project team Project team Hired consultants as needed

Mid-Term External Evaluation
Project team UNDP- CO UNDP-GEF Regional Coordinating Unit External Consultants (i.e. evaluation team)

  • Project team,
  • Final External

Evaluation

  • 20,000
  • At the end of project

  • implementation
  • UNDP-CO

UNDP-GEF Regional Coordinating Unit External Consultants (i.e. evaluation team) Project team UNDP-CO External Consultant
Terminal Report Lessons learned
At least one month before the end of the project
None

  • 5,000
  • Project team
  • Annual reviews SLM

5

  • Type of M&E activity
  • Responsible Parties
  • Budget
  • Time frame

allocation

Recommended publications
  • Peasant Transformation in Kenya: a Focus on Agricultural Entrepreneurship with Special Reference to Improved Fruit and Dairy Farming in Mbeere, Embu County

    Peasant Transformation in Kenya: a Focus on Agricultural Entrepreneurship with Special Reference to Improved Fruit and Dairy Farming in Mbeere, Embu County

    PEASANT TRANSFORMATION IN KENYA: A FOCUS ON AGRICULTURAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO IMPROVED FRUIT AND DAIRY FARMING IN MBEERE, EMBU COUNTY BY GEOFFREY RUNJI NJERU NJERU A THESIS SUBMITTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES (IDS), UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI AUGUST 2016 DECLARATION This thesis is my original work and has not been submitted for a degree in any other university. Geoffrey Runji Njeru Njeru Signature……………………………………………. Date …………………………… This thesis was submitted for examination with our approval as university supervisors. Professor Njuguna Ng‟ethe Signature …………………………………….. Date……………………………………. Professor Karuti Kanyinga Signature ……………………………………. Date …………………………………….. Dr. Robinson Mose Ocharo Signature…………………………………….. Date …………………………………….. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION............................................................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................ iii LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... vii LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... viii ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................ ix ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...........................................................................................
  • Mbeere District Short Rains Assessment Report

    Mbeere District Short Rains Assessment Report

    MBEERE DISTRICT SHORT RAINS ASSESSMENT REPORT 15TH – 18TH FEBRUARY 2008 Assessment Team Eliud Wamwangi Ministry of Water and Irrigation Lydia Macharia Ministry of Health Julius Kisingu World Food Programme TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................1 1.1 District Backgroud Information.................................................................................1 1.2 History of Relief Operations......................................................................................1 1.3 Food Security Trends.................................................................................................1 1.4 Summary of Recommendations.................................................................................1 2 DISTRICT FOOD SECURITY SITUATION...................................................................2 2.1 Overall Food Security Situation.................................................................................2 2.2 Impact of Shocks and Harzards on Food Security.....................................................3 2.2.1 Rainfall...............................................................................................................3 2.2.2 Crop Production and Prices ...............................................................................4 2.2.3 Livestock Production and Prices........................................................................7 2.2.4 Water and Sanitation..........................................................................................8
  • Mbeere SMART Survey Report

    Mbeere SMART Survey Report

    MoPHS NDMA MBEERE DITRICT INTEGRATED HEALTH AND NUTRITION SURVEY MARCH 2013 FINAL REPORT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The survey team would like to express their sincere thanks to all who made it possible given the numerous challenges faced. In particular, the team would like to thank National Drought Management Authority (NDMA) for the funding and the ministry of Public Health and Sanitation for granting staff permission to participate in the survey. In particular, special thanks go to Mr. Francis Wambua (the Survey co-ordinator), Mr. Alex Leseketeti (Drought Management Officer), Mr. Samuel Murage (monitoring and evaluation officer) and Mr. Andrew Mlawasi (data analyst) for their leadership role during planning, training data collection in technical support and data cleaning, Analysis and report compilation. Special acknowledgment goes to the Health Team led by Ms Valerie Wambani (monitoring and evaluation officer), Ms Emmy Maina (Provincial Nutritionist) and Ms. Kiringa (District Nutritionist) for their role in the planning, coordination and supervision. The invaluable work by Monica Mugo and Bibiana Muturi (NDMA) for data entry is highly acknowledged. Sincere gratitude also goes to the entire survey team composed of the health staff and Field monitors from Mbeere North and Mbeere South district who tirelessly participated for the entire data collection exercise. 2 | P a g e ACCROYNM AND ABBREVIATIONS ARI Acute Respiratory Infection CI Confidence Interval ENA Emergency Nutrition Assessment FAO Food and Agriculture Organization GAM Global Acute Malnutrition
  • Mapping and Characterising Water Points in Mbeti South Location, Mbeere District

    Mapping and Characterising Water Points in Mbeti South Location, Mbeere District

    MAPPING AND CHARACTERISING WATER POINTS IN MBETI SOUTH LOCATION, MBEERE DISTRICT IEA Research Paper Series No. 21 April 2009 Published by: INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS 5th Floor, ACK Garden House 1st Ngong Avenue P.O. Box 53989 Nairobi- 00200 Tel: 254-20-2717402, 2721262 Fax: 254-20-2716231 Email: [email protected] Written by: Zacchaeus Kinuthia, David Warui and Francis Karanja of Centre for Training & Integrated Research in ASAL Development (CETRAD) P.O. Box 144 Nanyuki 10400 Tel: 062-31328; Fax: 062-31323 E-mail: [email protected] With the support of Heinrich Boll Foundation (HBF) Institute of Economic Affairs, 2009 First Published in 2009 ISBN: 978-9966-7183-8-9 Institute of Economic Affairs 2 Table of Content Acknowledgement .......................................................................................................................7 Executive Summary .....................................................................................................................8 Abbreviations and Acronyms ....................................................................................................12 1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................13 1.1. Water resources in Kenya: An overview .........................................................................13 1.2. The Tana River Drainage Basin ......................................................................................15 1.3. Mbeere District ..............................................................................................................15
  • Table of Contents

    Table of Contents

    TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface…………………………………………………………………….. i 1. District Context………………………………………………………… 1 1.1. Demographic characteristics………………………………….. 1 1.2. Socio-economic Profile………………………………………….. 1 2. Constituency Profile………………………………………………….. 1 2.1. Socio-economic Profile………………………………………….. 1 2.2. Electioneering and Political Information……………………. 1 2.3. 1992 Election Results…………………………………………… 2 2.4. 1997 Election Results…………………………………………… 2 2.5. Main problems……………………………………………………. 2 3. Constitution Making/Review Process…………………………… 3 3.1. Constituency Constitutional Forums (CCFs)………………. 3 3.2. District Coordinators……………………………………………. 5 4. Civic Education………………………………………………………… 6 4.1. Phases covered in Civic Education…………………………… 6 4.2. Issues and Areas Covered……………………………………… 6 5. Constituency Public Hearings……………………………………… 7 5.1. Logistical Details…………………………………………………. 5.2. Attendants Details……………………………………………….. 7 5.3. Concerns and Recommendations…………………………….. 7 8 Appendices 31 1. DISTRICT CONTEXT Gachoka constituency is one of the two constituencies in Mbeere District. Mbeere District is one of 13 districts of the Eastern Province of Kenya. 1.1. Demographic Characteristics Male Female Total District Population by Sex 81,885 89,068 170,953 Total District Population Aged 18 years & Below 47,677 47,143 94,820 Total District Population Aged Above 18 years 34,208 41,925 76,133 Population Density (persons/Km2) 82 1.2. Socio-Economic Profile Mbeere District: • Is the 7th most densely populated district in the province; • Has a primary school enrolment rate of 72.1%, being ranked 6th in the province and 35th nationally; • Has a secondary school enrolment rate of 23.5%, being ranked 7th in the province and 23rd nationally; • Experiences the following main diseases: Malaria, respiratory tract infections, skin diseases and infections, diarrhea diseases, and intestinal worms; and • Has an absolute poverty incidence of 51%, being ranked 18th of the 47 districts ranked in the country.
  • Droughtagain:Thehumanitariancrisisi

    Droughtagain:Thehumanitariancrisisi

    DroughtAgain:TheHumanitarianCrisisI nKenyaDroughtAgain:TheHumanitaria nCrisisInKenyaDroughtAgain:TheHumDROUGHT AGAIN… anitarianCrisisInKenyaDroughtAgain:The Humanitarian Crisis in Kenya October 2009 TheHumanitarianCrisisInKenyaDroug htAgain:TheHumanitarianCrisisInKen yaDroughtAgain:TheHumanitarianCris isInKenyaDroughtAgain:TheHumanita rianCrisisInKenyaDroughtAgain:TheH umanitarianCrisisInKenyaDroughtAgaPrepared by: The United Nations Office for the Coordination of in:TheHumanitarianCrisisInKenyaDroHumanitarian Affairs in Kenya (UN‐OCHA) Kenya ughtAgain:TheHumanitarianCrisisInK enyaDroughtAgain:TheHumanitarianC risisInKenyaDroughtAgain:TheHuman itarianCrisisInKenyaDroughtAgain:Th eHumanitarianCrisisInKenyaDroughtA Contents ACRONYMS/GLOSSARY .................................................................................................................... 4 Background ............................................................................................................................................. 5 The Humanitarian Situation in 2009 ....................................................................................................... 6 Drought Progression ................................................................................................................................. 7 The El Nino phenomenon ....................................................................................................................... 11 Floods & Mudslides and Disease Outbreaks ......................................................................................
  • Eastern Province

    Eastern Province

    EASTERN PROVINCE Eastern Province (PRE) Trunk Roads ABC Road Description Budget PRE Routine Maintenance of Bridges 7,928,125 PRE Operations of Provincial Resealing Unit 8,052,563 PRE Operation of Office 3,000,000 Meru Central/HQs Operations of Resealing Unit XII (Gakoromone) 4,239,000 C91 DB Meru - Maua 2,343,608 Machakos/HQs Operations of Resealing Unit III (Sultan Hamud) 4,266,000 Eastern (PRE) total 29,829,295 EMBU Trunk Roads ABC Road Description Budget B7 Embu - DB Mbeere 1,606,319 SUB TOTAL 1,606,319 District Roads DRE Embu Distict E629 MUGOYA -KIVWE 7,295,160.00 E652 Kanyuambora-kathageri 18,820,000.00 R0000 Administration Exp. 588,108.00 R0000 STORE 500,000.00 Total . forDRE Embu Distict 27,203,268.00 Constituency Roads Embu DRC HQ R0000 Administration/General Exp. 2,000,000.00 R0000 STORES 720,000.00 Total for Embu DRC HQ 2,720,000.00 Manyatta Const D459 DIST. BOUNDARY - E635 KAIRURI 3,575.00 D469 B7 MUTHATARI-KIAMURINGA 702,000.00 E629 Mugoya-Kivwe 2,004,000.00 E630 B6 Ena-B6(Nrb-Embu-Kivue) 1,536,200.00 E632 EMBU-KIBUGU 495,000.00 E633 Jnt.E632-D467 Kirigi 988,000.00 E634 kirigi-muruatetu 996,000.00 E635 KARURINA - KANGARU 1,001,000.00 E636 Manyatta-E647 Makengi 995,000.00 E637 MBUVORI-FOREST GATE 526,000.00 E638 Kairuri-kiriari-Kithunguriri 500,000.00 E639 mbuvori-kathuniri 502,400.00 E647 B6-Kivwe-Mirundi 1,053,000.00 E660 Kiriari-Mbuvori 700,000.00 UPP1 karurina-kithimu 1,000,000.00 UPP15 ITABUA-GATONDO 600,000.00 UPP2 MUGOYA-ITABUA-KIMANGARU 1,504,000.00 UUA1 B7 Embu-Cereal Board-GTI 637,000.00 UUF3 GAKWEGORI-KAPINGAZI-THAMBO
  • The Kenya Gazette

    The Kenya Gazette

    THE KENYA GAZETTE Published by Authority of the Republic of Kenya (Registered as a Newspaper at the G.P.O.) Vol. C—No. 51 NAIROBI, 28th August, 1998 Price Sh, 35 CONTEN £S GAZETTE NOTICES Gazerre Notices—(Contd.) PAaGs PaGs The Liquor Licensing Act—Appointment of| Eiquor Licensing Courts Members, etc. .. o 1516 The Co-operative Societies» Act—Liquidation Order, etc. : .. “1552 The Task Force to Review Health and Health Related Acts—Appointments .. 1516 The African Christian Marriage and Divorce Act— . Ministers Licensed to Celebrate Marriages, etc. 1552-1553 The Co-operative College of Kenya Act—Appoint- ment of Chairman of the Council of the College, Local Government Notices .. .- . 1553 etc. .. 1517 The Companies Act—Winding-up, etc. 1553-1568 The Local Government Act—Nomination of Coun- cillor, etc. .. oe . oe 1517 Loss of Policy .. .. 1569 Liquor Licensing . 1517-1518 Disposal of Uncolftected Goods .. - .. 1569 The Registration of Titles Act—Issue of Provisional Certificates .. .. 1518-1519 SUPPLEMENTNo. 46 The Registered Land Act—Issue of ‘New Land Title Supplement . Deeds, etc, . 1519, 1569 Legislative Paas Customs and Excise—Goods Held in the Customs LecaL Notice No. Warehouse, J.K.LA. 1520-1522 114—The State Corporations Act—Exemption 205 The Insurance Act—Registered Insurers, etc. .. ~. 1522-1533 . 115-116—The Local Authority Services Charge Regulations, 1998 205-206 The fndustrial Court—Award . 1533-1534 (Amendment) August, 1998) Probate and Administration ~ 1534-155) (Printed as Special Issue on 2ist [1545 1516 THE KENYA GAZETTE 28th August, 1998 GazeTre Norice No. 4534 Mbeere District ¢ Mbeere LiquorI 0 District Commissioner, Mbeere— Licensing Court (Chairman).
  • Front Section-Pgs I-1.Indd

    Front Section-Pgs I-1.Indd

    Department of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Central Bureau of Statistics Ministry of Planning and National Development Nature’s Benefits in Kenya An Atlas of Ecosystems and Human Well-Being PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT AUTHORS AND CONTRIBUTORS Mohammed Said (ILRI) Norbert Henninger (WRI) Stephen Adam (WRI) Amos Situma (DRSRS) Dan Tunstall (WRI) Jaspat L. Agatsiva (DRSRS) Sammy Towett (KWS) Patti Kristjanson (ILRI) Polly Akwanyi (WFP) Dan Tunstall (WRI) Robin Reid (ILRI) Michael Arunga (ILRI) Jo Tunstall (consultant) Mohammed Said (ILRI) Richard Bagine (KWS) Sandra van Dijk (ILRI) Paul Okwi (ILRI) Isabelle Baltenweck (ILRI) Ville Vuorio (ILRI) Jaspat L. Agatsiva (DRSRS) Hyacinth Billings (WRI) Patrick Wargute (DRSRS) Jamie Worms (WRI) Anthony K.M. Kilele (CBS) Emily Cooper (consultant) Godfrey Ndeng’e (CBS) Linda Cotton (consultant) REVIEWERS Carolina de Rosas (WRI) (sections or whole report) CARTOGRAPHY AND MAP DEVELOPMENT Norbert Henninger (WRI) Phil Angell (WRI) Janet Nackoney (WRI) Karen Holmes (consultant) Lauretta Burke (WRI) Florence Landsberg (WRI) Moses Ikiara (KIPPRA) Michael Colby (USAID) Russ Kruska (ILRI) Fred Kaigua (KATO) Antonio Di Gregorio (FAO) An Notenbaert (ILRI) Eunice Kariuki (ILRI) Habiba Gitay (WRI) Michael Arunga (ILRI) Shem Kifugo (ILRI) Faith Githui (ICPAC) Geoffrey Kimathi (WFP) Anthony K.M. Kilele (CBS) David Jhirad (WRI) Alan Kute (WFP) Geoffrey Kimathi (WFP) Christian Layke (WRI) Evans Kituyi (UoN) Susan Minnemeyer (WRI) EDITING AND WRITING Patti Kristjanson
  • The Relationship Between Subsidized Free Day Secondary Education and Retention in Secondary Schools in Kenya

    The Relationship Between Subsidized Free Day Secondary Education and Retention in Secondary Schools in Kenya

    Journal of Education and Practice www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222-288X (Online) Vol.7, No.17, 2016 The Relationship Between Subsidized Free Day Secondary Education and Retention in Secondary Schools in Kenya Asena Muganda James 1* Prof. Aggrey Mukasa Simiyu 1 Dr. Andrew Riechi 2 1.Masinde Muliro University, Department of Curriculum and Instructional Technology P.O Box 190-50100 Kakamega, Kenya 2.University of Nairobi, Department of Education Administration and Planning P.O Box 30197 Nairobi, Kenya Abstract A workforce that can adapt to the fast changing global dynamics is critical for sustainable growth and development. Secondary level segment in the education cycle of a Kenyan plays a key role in the development of this workforce and is important since it de-links one from elementary (primary) learning, provides a chance for one to complete the cycle of basic education and anchors as a springboard to either tertiary or higher learning. The study focused on the relationship between subsidized free day secondary education (SFDSE) and learners’ retention in secondary schools. The specific objectives were to determine retention rates of students in secondary schools before and after the introduction of SFDSE by the government since the year 2008 and the adequacy of SFDSE funds in enhancing retention of learners in secondary schools in Bungoma County. The target population of the study comprised of all the 3,993 stakeholders in the education sector including the Educational Officers, Principals, B.O.G chairpersons, P.T.A chairpersons and Parents from each Sub County in Bungoma County in Kenya.
  • THE KENYA GAZETTE Published by Authority of the Republic of Kenya (Registered As a Newspaper at the G.P.O.)

    THE KENYA GAZETTE Published by Authority of the Republic of Kenya (Registered As a Newspaper at the G.P.O.)

    THE KENYA GAZETTE Published by Authority of the Republic of Kenya (Registered as a Newspaper at the G.P.O.) Vol. CXX —No. 2 NAIROBI, 5th January, 2018 Price Sh. 60 CONTENTS GAZETTE NOTICES PAGE PAGE The Universities Act—Appointment 4 The Environment Management and Co-ordination Act— Environmental Impact Assessment Study Reports 17-24 The Public Finance Management Act —Uwezo Fund Committees 4-11 The Disposal of Uncollected Goods 24-25 The Mining Act—Application for Prospecting Licences 11-12 Loss of Policies 25-30 The Co-operatives Act—Extension of Liquidation Order Change of Names 30 etc 12 The Insurance Act—Extension of Moratorium 12 SUPPLEMENT No. 189 The County Governments Act—Special Sitting etc, 12-13 Legislative Supplements, 2017 The Land Registration Act—Issue of Provisional Certificates, etc 13-16 LEGAL NOTICE NO. PAGE The Trustees Act 16 —1 ne Veterinary Surgeons and Veterinary The Water Act—Approved Tariff Structure 16-17 Paraprofessionals Act, 2017 2711 [3 4 THE KENYA GAZETTE 5th January, 2018 CORRIGENDUM Pauline Chebet Member Kiptoo Elijah Member In Gazette Notice No. 7157 of 2017, Cause No. 168 of 2017, amend Jeptoo Dorcas Jepkoske Member the place of death printed as "Kirangi Sub-location" to read "Kimandi Sub-location" where it appears. SAMBURU WEST Sub-County Commissioner or Representative Member Sub- County Development Officer or Representative Member GAZETTE NOTICE No. 2 Sub- County Accountant Member THE UNIVERSITIES ACT National Government Rep—Ministry Responsible for Youth and Women Secretary (No. 42 of 2012) CDF Fund Account Manager Ex-Official Gladys Naserian Lenyarua Member GARISSA UNIVERSITY Lekulal Saddie Hosea Member APPOINTMENT Phelix Leitamparasio Member Josephine Kasaine Letiktik Member IN EXERCISE of the powers conferred by section 38 (1) (a) of the Isabella Leerte Member Universities Act.
  • Influence of Miraa Cultivation on Changing Agricultural Land Use Patterns in Mbita and Kianjiru Locations, Embu County

    Influence of Miraa Cultivation on Changing Agricultural Land Use Patterns in Mbita and Kianjiru Locations, Embu County

    INFLUENCE OF MIRAA CULTIVATION ON CHANGING AGRICULTURAL LAND USE PATTERNS IN MBITA AND KIANJIRU LOCATIONS, EMBU COUNTY BY MUGENDI G. M. B.A (HONS) A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN PLANNING, DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING, UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI November, 2017 DECLARATION This thesis is my original work and has never been presented in this or any other University for an award of a degree. Signed:………………………………………………………………………………………… Mugendi Geoffrey Moses Dated: …………………………………………………………………………………………. This thesis has been submitted for consideration with our approval as the supervisors Signed:…………………………………………………………………………………………. Mr. Charles Osengo Dated:………………………………………………………………………………………….. Signed:…………………………………………………………………………………………. Dr. Karanja Mwangi Dated:………………………………………………………………………………………….. i DEDICATION This MA (Planning) thesis project report is dedicated to the late Dennis Macharia Nthiga, (05th January 1991 to 14th May 2014). I am proud of you my doted nephew. You fought bravely to the very end. You wore that broad smile in spite of the suffering caused by Leukemia. Rest in peace Mash till we meet again; in our hearts you live on. Dennis would have graduated from Kenyatta University in December 2014 with a bachelor of Environmental Planning and Management Degree. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I acknowledge my supervisors Mr. Charles Osengo and Dr. Karanja Mwangi who guided me and offered invaluable suggestions and motivation that enabled me to complete this work; Dr. Samwuel Obiero, Dr. Fridah Mugo, Dr. Herbert Musoga and Plan. Titus Musungu for their helpful insights. I equally acknowledge the Principal Secretary, Ministry of Lands and Physical Planning for giving me time off to undertake this course and the Director Physical Planning Department and staff for their support throughout the time of this study.My student colleagues who walked every step of the journey with me will ever be remembered for their constructive criticisms during Theses seminar presentations.