Use of Open Budget Data in Social Auditing of Constituency Development Funds in Kenya Country Case Study of Practical and Innovative Approaches on Open Budget Data and Fiscal Policies Davis A. Adieno July 2015 This report was researched and authored by Davis Adieno. It was commissioned by The Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency (GIFT) as a country case study of practical and innovative approaches on Open Budget Data and Fiscal Policies. The author of this publication is grateful to all interviewees and reviewers for their participation, time, patience, responses and generous contribution to material and content that made this publication possible. Special thank you to the senior management at the CDF Board in Kenya, Mr. Martin Napisa - National Coordinator at National Taxpayers Association (Kenya), and Ms. Wanjiru Gikonyo - National Coordinator at The Institute of Social Accountability (TISA) for facilitating the research and providing all the necessary support that made this report possible. The author sincerely thanks The Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency (GIFT), and in particular Mr. Randall Kemp for his support, without which this publication would not have been possible. The content presented and views expressed remain the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of GIFT, or the respondents above. Table of Contents I. Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 4 II. List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ....................................................................... 13 III. Outline of the Report .......................................................................................... 15 IV. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 17 V. Characteristics of CDF Budget Data ...................................................................... 36 VI. The Case Studies ............................................................................................... 61 VII. Conclusions ........................................................................................................ 98 VIII. Recommendations ............................................................................................ 100 IX. References ....................................................................................................... 103 X. Appendices .......................................................................................................... 106 This paper examines the process of II.I. Executive producing and disseminating Summary Constituency Development Fund (CDF) data, the challenges thereof, and whether feedback from users has Globally, open data is now openly and helped improve this process. It further widely used to describe data made explores demand for new updated data, accessible, in formats that can be how this has been repurposed by Civil manipulated by computers (allowing the Society Organisations (CSOs) to creation of new interfaces, mash-ups address various core problems and the and other data analysis), and without impact both on transparency and restrictions on how the data can be re- accountability, and national laws and used. The clamour for the Kenyan regulations. In doing so it also highlights government to provide data and major challenges CSOs have faced in information to facilitate citizen accessing and using data and existing participation in governance processes gaps that warrant further research. has been building for some time. The technological revolution in Information Kenyan Context and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and the rapid growth and There has been rising demand for penetration of mobile phone information especially at the sub- technologies in the country has national level following devolution in presented opportunities hitherto Kenya that introduced 47 county unavailable to share data and governments. However, most of the information. Despite these initiatives to provide data and opportunities, access to critical public information have not led to concrete data and information remains a major citizen action, largely because they are challenge. This includes budget data typically one-way publishing of data via which in many instances is still provided online electronic portal. This includes in hard copy publications or in formats the Kenya Open Data Initiative (KODI) that are difficult to analyse. When launched in 2011 by the government. provided in analysable formats, serious Kenya’s CDF was established in 2003 to capacity gaps still exist among end fight grassroots poverty and spark users to organise, process and translate economic empowerment and growth. this into meaningful information. The National Management Board (CDF Board) has been proactively publishing data on allocations and disbursements www.fiscaltransparency.net 4 online since its establishment in 2007 management and administration. 1 The through amendments to the CDF Act ruling embodied longstanding and 2003. CSOs have taken advantage and sustained campaigns by CSOs and proactively repurposed this data and other stakeholders for institutional used it to engage with the public, fellow reforms of CDF. CSOs and the media, largely to encourage citizen’s demand for Main Findings on CDF Data Production Processes transparency and accountability. Social audits based on the data have The study established three main unearthed serious irregularities in CDF sources of CDF data sources existed: and led to long-standing calls for nationally at the CDF Board, sub- reforms. These have mainly centred on nationally at constituency offices, and reducing the powers of Members of community level at project sites. The nature of data and information provided Parliament (MPs) in directly managing by the CDF Board on its website the kitty. included project financial disbursements and allocations, project re-allocations, Attempts were made to reduce powers information on its capacity development of MPs with the revised CDF Act 2013, and outreach programmes. At the but this still left MPs with considerable constituency offices, the nature of data influence over key decisions in the and information included details of management of the fund. On Friday 20th Project Management Committees February 2015, the High Court in Kenya (PMCs), location of projects, amounts allocated and implementation status. At ruled that the CDF Act 2013 was the project level the nature of data and unconstitutional since it violated the information included bills of quantities, Constitution in the process leading to its project plans, contracts, feasibility enactment and the substance of the assessment reports, and annual legislation, including the nature, evaluation reports on implementation administration and management of the progress. CDF. It was also found to have The process of generating and the flow contravened the constitutional principles of CDF data was found to be fairly of the rule of law, good governance, transparency, accountability, separation of powers and the division of powers 1 A summary of the ruling can be accessed here between the national and county http://www.tisa.or.ke/images/uploads/CDF_Petiti government and the public finance on_ruling_summary.pdf, also read media story http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Court- Constituency-Development-Fund-Act- unconstitutional/-/539546/2630260/-/kdlvwr/- /index.html www.fiscaltransparency.net 5 straight forward. It started with national and project sites within constituencies. level allocations, disbursements to Some had updated data or information, constituencies, project implementation, some outdated, and others, in certain monitoring, and finally by reporting back instances, missing altogether. Apart to the national level. Data on project from the Board’s website where it was allocations, disbursements, re-allocation more explicit, accessing detailed data or and project implementation status was information from constituency offices publicly available through the CDF and project sites by citizens and CSOs Board website – though with several was difficult. Despite this, interviewed gaps highlighted in the paper. PMCs CSOs indicated the Board had filed monthly progress reports with Fund significantly improved the quality of data Account Managers (FAMs) that were and information on its website in recent submitted on a quarterly basis to the years – partially attributed to sustained Board. However, the process of pressure by social audits. reviewing the data was lengthy due to few members of staff at the Board A cursory review revealed that data on leading to delays in updating data. re-allocated projects was not available Information on when data was either for all constituencies. This raised reviewed or updated was not provided questions as to whether the on the Board’s website making it difficult constituencies didn’t have re-allocated to track or alert users. funds, or the data was missing. 3 No specific data standards were found The main challenge in the generation of applied to the CDF data. Similarly, there data was administrative capacity gaps in were no systematic feedback channels handling the volume of data received (except by email on the website) from all the constituencies by the Board. available for data users. The Board The Board could not visit and verify largely relied on media reports, public projects in all 290 constituencies in a awareness and sensitisation meetings, timely manner, resulting