Ministry of Labour and East African A airs (MLEAA) Inua Jamii TOWARDS A MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SAFETY NET FOR KENYA Progress Report March 2016 Inua Jamii TOWARDS A MORE EFFECTIVE NATIONAL SAFETY NET FOR KENYA PROGRESS REPORT March 2016 Photo credits: Abraham Ali © HSNP 2015 CONTENTS Abbreviations and Acronyms.......................................................................................................................................................................ii Foreword....................................................................................................................................................................................................................iii Acknowledgements...........................................................................................................................................................................................v 1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................................................................1 1.1 Cash Transfers and the Social Protection System in Kenya..............................................................................................1 1.2 Building a National Safety Net: the Kenya National Safety Net Program................................................................2 1.3 Key Changes since Programme Approval..................................................................................................................................5 2. Key achievements of the NSNP..................................................................................................................................7 2.1 The Most Vulnerable and Poorest Households in Kenya Are E n ro l l ed i n the NSNP.................................7 2.2 NSNP Beneficiaries Receive Appropriate, Reliable, and Accessible Payments.....................................................15 2.3 Citizens Are Able to Appeal Decisions and Lodge Complaints to Improve Programme Performance..21 2.4 Monitoring and Learning Systems are Functional................................................................................................................24 2.5 The Cash Transfer Programmes Are Harmonized and Government-managed..................................................27 2.6 Programmes are Responsive to Shocks.......................................................................................................................................31 3. The NSNP’s Contribution to Improving Welfare and Increasing Resilience in Kenya .............................35 3.1 Impact Evaluation of the CT-OVC....................................................................................................................................................36 3.2 Impact Evaluation of the HSNP.........................................................................................................................................................38 3.3 Beneficiary Satisfaction Survey..........................................................................................................................................................39 3.4 Ongoing Research on the Impact of the NSNP Cash Transfer Programmes........................................................46 4. Moving Forward with the NSNP................................................................................................................................43 4.1 The Sustainability of the NSNP..........................................................................................................................................................43 4.2 Activities to Improve the Welfare and Increase the Resilience of Beneficiaries..................................................44 4.3 Complementarity with and Building Links to Other Programmes and Services...............................................48 5. Conclusion and Recommendations..........................................................................................................................51 Annex 1: Financing of the NSNP over Time.........................................................................................................................................53 Annex 2: Impact Evaluation Results..........................................................................................................................................................54 Annex 3: Progress on the Disbursement Linked Indicators (DLI)...........................................................................................55 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ASALs Arid and Semi-arid Lands BWC Beneficiary Welfare Committee CT-OVC Cash Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable Children DCS Department of Children’s Services DFID UK Department for International Development DLI Disbursement-linked Indicators DLR Disbursement-linked Results DOSD Department of Social Development GoK Government of Kenya HISP Health Insurance Subsidy Programme HSNP Hunger Safety Net Programme IPRS Integrated Population Registration Service KCB Kenya Commercial Bank KIHBS Kenya Integrated Household Budget Survey M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MIS Management Information System MLEAA Ministry of Labour and East African Affairs MLSSS Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services MODP Ministry of Devolution and Planning NDDCF National Drought and Disaster Contingency Fund NDMA National Drought Management Authority NIHF National Insurance Hospital Fund NSNP National Safety Net Programme NSPP National Social Protection Policy OPCT Older Persons Cash Transfer Programme OVC Orphans and Vulnerable Children PCK Postal Corporation of Kenya PforR Programme for Results PIBS Programme Implementation and Beneficiary Satisfaction survey PMT Proxy Means Test PWSD-CT Persons with Severe Disabilities Cash Transfer RC Rights Committee UFS-CT Urban Food Subsidy Cash Transfer UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund WFP World Food Programme Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya i FOREWORD T he goal of social protection is to ensure that all Kenyans live in dignity and are able to exploit their human capabilities for their systems, secure payments, and a functional complaints and grievance mechanism. All of these accomplishments have strengthened own social and economic wellbeing. Investing the safety net for vulnerable populations in social assistance improves the livelihoods in Kenya and improved the welfare of all of beneficiaries and in turn contributes to beneficiary households. national development. The Government of Kenya has made social protection a priority The NSNP has positively impacted the lives of in its policy and programming. As part of many vulnerable households across the country the government’s initiatives to improve and by providing them with an effective safety net enhance social protection in the country, to enable them to maintain a decent living much focus and attention has been placed on standard. Yet we can and must do much more the cash transfer social assistance programs to ensure that all vulnerable households in the through the establishment of the National country are able to access social assistance. We Safety Net Program (NSNP) in 2013. The NSNP is must also ensure that the NSNP’s operations are an important contribution of the government’s managed effectively and efficiently to ensure efforts to reduce poverty and the vulnerability of that the cash transfers have a maximum impact the population to economic, social and natural on recipient households. The Government of shocks and stresses. The establishment of the Kenya and the Social Protection Secretariat is NSNP builds on the Government’s commitment committed to the continued development and to reducing poverty as articulated in the Kenya improvement of the social protection sector and Vision 2030. the NSNP. This 2016 report examines the progress that has The NSNP involves the support and been made in the National Safety Net Program participation of many stakeholders, and I wish since its inception. The report’s findings reaffirms to acknowledge and thank the government that the NSNP cash transfers have made a staff and partners for their hard work and profound difference in the lives of beneficiary commitment in delivering a quality program households by improving their welfare and to the many Kenyan households that benefit increasing their resilience. As of today, more from cash transfers. In particular, I would like to than 500,000 households are receiving cash commend the Social Protection Secretariat in transfers on a regular basis, and an additional my ministry, for making the NSNP a successful 275,000 households in Northern Kenya are initiative. As the NSNP continues to develop, I able to receive cash assistance in the case am confident that the Government of Kenya of extreme weather events. Significantly, the will continue to deliver quality social assistance government has taken the lead in the financing services to those who depend on them. of the NSNP, with over 228,271 new households having been enrolled across the programmes and financed by the Government of Kenya in the FY 2015/16. Importantly, the NSNP has increased the efficiency and effectiveness of MRS PHYLLIS KANDIE, EGH, the cash transfer programs by, for example, CABINET SECRETARY establishing management information SOCIAL SECURITY AND SERVICES ii Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS S ocial protection initiatives have had a long history in Kenya, but it is, more specifically in the recent few years that the sector has Therefore, this report is a midterm assessment of the status of the program. The report finds that clear progress has been made over the past grown significantly. These initiatives, particularly two years towards the achievement of the NSNP social assistance and cash transfer programs, objectives and towards reducing poverty and have increased in terms of both coverage vulnerability among our most disadvantaged of beneficiaries and of the levels of benefits households. The report also highlights some provided to recipients. The systems and challenges that have been experienced in structures used to deliver these programs have delivering this large and complex program also been continuously improved. and identifies areas in which our ministries can improve on the program. In 2013, the sector was further strengthened by the launch of the National Safety Net Program The government is determined to continue (NSNP). The NSNP aims to increase the efficiency working tirelessly to build on the successes and effectiveness of safety net support to achieved to date and to find innovative ways to poor and vulnerable populations in Kenya by address the challenges that remain. We recognize bringing a number of cash transfer programs that our journey on the path to reducing poverty under one common framework: the Cash and vulnerability has benefitted from the support Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable Children of our development partners, including the (CT-OVC), Older Persons Cash Transfer Program World Bank, the UK Department for International (OPCT), and Persons with Severe Disabilities Development (DFID), UNICEF, the World Food Cash Transfer (PWSD-CT) in the Ministry of Labor Program (WFP), and the Swedish International and East Africa Affairs and the Hunger Safety Net Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). We Program in the National Drought Management thank these partners for their continued support Authority (NDMA) in the Ministry of Planning in this important area. We also recognize the and Devolution. Through this flagship program, effort and hard work of our officers in ensuring the government of Kenya is ensuring that the that this vision becomes a reality. social protection sector has stronger systems for identifying and registering beneficiaries, ensuring the timely delivery of payments, and improving accountability mechanisms. Moreover, the program is increasing the harmonization of the MRS. SUSAN MOCHACHE cash transfer programs, which will in turn make PRINCIPAL SECRETARY the sub-sector more coherent. Most importantly, SOCIAL SECURITY AND SERVICES the NSNP has expanded the coverage of the cash transfer programs in a coordinated manner. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya iii This report was prepared by a team jointly led by Winnie Mwasiaji (National Coordinator, Social Protection Secretariat, Ministry of Labour and East African Affairs) and Cornelia Tesliuc (NSNP Task Team Leader, World Bank). The primary author of the report was Kie Reidel, with support from Emma Mistiaen, Judith Sandford and Michael Munavu (World Bank). Comments and feedback were provided by Nicholas MacBotongore and Vera Mweu (Ministry of Labour and East African Affairs), Liz Drake and Florence Kinyua (DFID), Ric Goodman (Hunger Safety Net Programme), David Kamau (World Food Programme) and Luis Corral (UNICEF). The layout and design of the report was done by Robert Waiharo. The 2010 Constitution aims to move Kenya towards a more equitable and inclusive future. As a key step in achieving this, the Constitution lays out the right of all Kenyans to social protection. In order to put this right into practice, the Government of Kenya has worked to develop the social protection sector with a particular focus on social assistance through five cash transfer programmes. In recognition of the need to improve the social assistance sector, the Government of Kenya created the National Safety Net Programme (NSNP) in 2013 as a way to deliver these improvements. The NSNP acts as a mechanism to: (i) coordinate fragmented programming; (ii) strengthen implementation systems; and (iii) finance the scaling up of these programmes to ensure greater coverage. In the past few years, the NSNP has made considerable progress on increasing access to social assistance as well as increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the cash transfer programmes. Further, as the NSNP has developed, the government has continued to identify further potential areas for improvement as well as other potential cash transfer programmes that might serve Kenya’s vulnerable populations. This report discusses in detail the specific aims of the NSNP and the progress that it has made in securing a more efficient and effective safety net in Kenya. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya v vi Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 CASH TRANSFERS AND THE SOCIAL appropriate social security to persons who PROTECTION SYSTEM IN KENYA are unable to support themselves and their dependents.”1 Kenya’s Vision 2030, Kenya’s S ince 2000, there has been steady economic growth and modest rises in incomes in Kenya. However, high rates of poverty persist medium-term economic development strategy, further emphasizes the need for social protection as a necessary part of providing a in Kenya, particularly among vulnerable groups high quality of life for all of its citizens. The Vision such as children (especially orphans and 2030 strategy aims to reduce poverty through vulnerable children), older people, and people investing in vulnerable groups and recommends with disabilities. To meet these persisting the establishment of a consolidated Social challenges, the Government of Kenya has been Protection Fund. investing in social protection programmes, including social insurance schemes and safety To operationalize this emphasis on social net programmes. protection, the Kenyan government has taken many steps to increase and improve the safety This focus on social protection is specifically net services provided to Kenyan citizens. laid out in the 2010 Constitution, which aims Among the safety net programmes provided to move Kenya towards a more equitable and by the Government of Kenya, many resources inclusive future. The Constitution specifically have gone into its cash transfer programmes, lists a right to social protection. Article 43(1) specifically to increase the reach of and improve (e) provides that “Every person has a right to the services provided by these programmes. social security…[and] the State shall provide 1 The right to social security includes both social assistance and social insurance and thus is synonymous with social protection. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 1 The Government of Kenya currently has four extremely poor households that include a major cash transfer programmes2 that have member aged 65 or older who does not nationwide coverage. Between them, they receive a pension. provide benefits to over 500,000 vulnerable • Persons with Severe Disabilities Cash households (see Table 1). The four cash transfer Transfer (PWSD-CT): The PWSD-CT programmes are as follows: programme aims to provide immediate • Cash Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable relief from extreme poverty to people with Children (CT-OVC): The CT-OVC severe disabilities, while enhancing their programme aims to improve the welfare basic rights through the provision of regular of poor households caring for orphans and cash transfers. The programme targets vulnerable children (OVCs)3 and reducing people with severe disabilities who are poverty among the poorest segments of unable to look after themselves and require society. The programme’s main activity a caregiver. is providing cash payments to poor • The Hunger Safety Net Programme households caring for OVCs. (HSNP): The HSNP aims to reduce poverty • Older Persons Cash Transfer (OPCT): in the drought-prone arid and semi-arid The OPCT programme aims to strengthen regions of northern Kenya by delivering the capacity of older people and improve regular cash transfers to extremely poor their livelihoods. The programme targets households in four counties. Table 1: The Four Cash Transfer Programmes that Constitute the NSNP Transfer value (per Coverage (2015) household per Programme Year Launched Implementing Agency month) Households Counties Cash Transfer for Orphans and Department of Children’s Services 2005 Ksh 2,000 255,643 47 Vulnerable Children (MLEAA)a/ Department of Gender and Social Older Persons Cash Transfer 2006 Ksh 2,000 162,695 47 Development (MLEAA) Persons with Severe Disabilities Department of Gender and Social 2011 Ksh 2,000 25,471 47 Cash Transfer Development (MLEAA) Hunger Safety Net Programme 2007 HSNP Secretariat (NDMA) Ksh 2,550 84,340b/ 4 Total 519,878 47 Note: a/ There have been changes to the names and structures of the ministries since the inception of the cash transfer programmes, the most recent of which involved the ministerial reorganization the Ministry of Labour, Social Security, and Services (MLSSS) into the Ministry of Labour and East African Affairs (MLEAA). See section 1.3 for more information on the changes. b/ The numbers reported here refer to the HSNP households selected to receive bi-monthly cash transfers in 2015 and not those for whom accounts have been opened to receive emergency cash transfers when needed (see section 2.6 for further information). 2 When the NSNP was launched, a fifth programme – the Urban Food Subsidy Cash Transfer – was also operational and was included in the NSNP. This was phased out in 2014 as discussed in section 1.3 below. 3 OVCs are defined in the programme as children who have lost one or both parents, are chronically ill, have a chronically ill caregiver, and/or live in child-headed households due to having been orphaned. 2 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya While these cash transfer programmes 1.2 BUILDING A NATIONAL SAFETY NET: provide significant support to targeted THE KENYA NATIONAL SAFETY NET vulnerable households around the country, PROGRAMME the Government of Kenya realized that there was scope to improve coordination between the programmes and to make them more T he National Safety Net Programme is coordinated by the Social Protection Secretariat within the Ministry of Labour effective, both by increasing their coverage and and East African Affairs (MLEAA). The cash by implementing them more efficiently. The transfer programmes comprising the NSNP are cash transfer programmes have many aspects implemented by two ministries, the Ministry of in common, including their targeting methods, Labour and East African Affairs (MLEAA) and the payment systems, monitoring and evaluation Ministry of Devolution and Planning (MoDP), frameworks, and complaints and grievance through the National Drought Management mechanisms. Given these shared features, the Authority (NDMA). The three programmes under Government of Kenya realized that harmonizing the supervision of the MLEAA are the Cash and coordinating key implementation activities Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable Children for each programme would greatly increase the (CT-OVC) in the Department of Children’s efficiency and effectiveness of the cash transfers. Services (DCS) and the Older Persons Cash Transfer (OPCT) and the People with Severe Following a comprehensive review of the social Disabilities Cash Transfer (PWSD-CT) in the protection system,4 the Cabinet approved a Department of Social Development (DOSD). National Social Protection Policy (NSPP) in May Each of these departments has dedicated staff 2012. The NSPP outlines a vision for realizing the at both the central and sub-county levels. The right to social protection and the government’s Hunger Safety Net Programme (HSNP) is being ambition to enhance social assistance in implemented by the NDMA, a semi-autonomous Kenya.5 The NSPP states that the right to social agency under the Ministry of Devolution and protection will be achieved by: (i) ensuring that Planning (MoDP). An internationally procured the design and implementation of programmes Programme Implementation and Learning Unit is coordinated; (ii) strengthening and scaling (PILU) exists within the NDMA to support the up existing social assistance programmes; (iii) implementation of the HSNP. The NSNP is also putting in place the institutional frameworks supported by various development partners to ensure consistent and adequate levels of including the World Bank, the United Nations support; and (iv) conducting reviews based on Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the UK Department standards agreed upon by stakeholders. As a for International Development (DFID), the first step towards achieving these goals, the Government of Sweden, the Australian government established the National Safety Department of Trade, and the World Food Net Programme (NSNP) in 2013 with the aim Programme (WFP). Together, the Government of of strengthening the operational systems of Kenya and development partners are committed the cash transfer programmes while expanding to improving the cash transfer programmes and coverage of the programmes. expanding their coverage to support Kenya’s vulnerable households. 4 Ministry of State for Planning (2012). “Kenya Social Protection Sector Review” Nairobi, Kenya. 5 MGCSD (2011). “Kenya National Social Protection Policy,” Ministry of Gender, Children, and Social Development, Nairobi, Kenya. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 3 The main objective of the NSNP is to improve The World Bank set up a Programme for the welfare and increase the resilience of Results (PforR) to help the government to the beneficiaries of the four cash transfer achieve the key results that will deliver the programmes with the aim of reducing objectives of the NSNP. To achieve this, the poverty and vulnerability in Kenya. To achieve Bank also set in motion a Disbursement Linked these objectives, the NSNP aims to improve Indicator (DLI) process to release funds upon programme operations in several areas. The the achievement of particular results. Within NSNP has identified six key results that need the NSNP’s monitoring and evaluation (M&E) to be achieved by 2017 and multiple activities framework, nine disbursement-linked indicators that need to be implemented to achieve each were identified, each with specific disbursement- key result. Achieving these results will greatly linked results (DLRs). These are listed in Box 1. improve the social safety net in Kenya and help Once the government achieves each DLR, the to improve the lives of many vulnerable Kenyans. World Bank releases the relevant funds. The The six key results that the NSNP aims to achieve specific DLRs will be listed in more detail later in by 2017 include: the report. The most vulnerable and poorest 1. households in Kenya are enrolled in the These DLIs reflect specific areas where NSNP. progress will need to be made in order to achieve the key results of the NSNP. Since 2. NSNP beneficiaries receive appropriate, its inception, the NSNP has worked towards reliable, and accessible payments. achieving each of these DLIs and has made 3. Citizens are able to appeal and complain to significant progress towards achieving the improve programme performance. programme’s key results. In section 2,we 4. Monitoring and learning systems are list each of the key results, explaining the functional. importance of these results to the NSNP, 5. The cash transfer programmes are describing the progress that has been made harmonized and government-managed. towards achieving these results, and discussing 6. Programmes are responsive to shocks. what progress has been made on specific DLIs and what funds have been disbursed. Box 1: Disbursement Indicators for the Programme for Results • DLI 1: A set number of additional households have been enrolled in the NSNP according to the expansion plan. • DLI 2: A set percentage of programme beneficiaries meet the targeting criteria for the programme in which they are enrolled • DLI 3: The single registry is fully operational and programme MISs are using agreed standards for internal payroll controls. • DLI 4: A set percentage of NSNP payments are being made electronically using two-factor authentication. • DLI 5: A set percentage of payments are being disbursed to payment service providers on time • DLI 6: Functional complaint and grievance mechanisms have been created. 4 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 1.3 KEY CHANGES SINCE PROGRAMME OVC, OPCT, and PWSD-CT programmes. The APPROVAL coordinating departments of these programmes remained the same. The CT-OVC continues to In addition to the main areas of progress outlined below, two key changes in be managed by the Department of Children’s Services (DCS), the OPCT and PWSD-CT are government administration and programme managed by the renamed Department of Social composition have taken place since the launch Development (DOSD), and the HSNP is managed of the programme. These are as follows: by the National Drought Management Authority • The merger of many ministries, including (NDMA). those responsible for the cash transfer programmes that constitute the NSNP At the start of the 2014/15 financial year, the • The closure of the Urban Food Subsidy DOSD made the decision to streamline its cash Cash Transfer (UFS-CT), which was one of transfer programmes and closed down the the cash transfer programmes originally UFS-CT in order to prioritize its remaining two included in the NSNP. cash transfers (the OPCT and the PWSD-CT). As a result, beneficiaries of the UFS-CT received Following the 2013 election and in line with no more transfers after June 2014. This closure the new constitution, the number of ministries did not result in a net reduction in the total in Kenya was reduced from 47 to 18. As a result, number of cash transfer beneficiaries in Kenya the ministry overseeing the NSNP programmes because the expansion of the OPCT nationwide changed. The CT-OVC, OPCT, and PWSD-CT compensated for the reduction of beneficiaries programmes were moved from the Ministry in the geographic areas that had been of Gender, Children, and Social Development covered by the UFS-CT programme (selected (which ceased to exist) to the Ministry of constituencies of Mombasa). However, few – if Labour, Social Security, and Services (MLSSS), any – UFS-CT beneficiaries are now benefitting while the HSNP was moved to the Ministry from other programmes as only the OPCT of Devolution and Planning (MoDP), which expanded coverage in the 2014/15 financial replaced the Ministry of Northern Kenya and year. The OPCT expansion covered few UFS-CT Other Arid Lands. More recent restructuring programme beneficiaries because only limited has resulted in the MLSSS changing into the expansion took place in UFS-CT constituencies Ministry of Labour and East African Affairs and the OPCT targeting approach is likely to (MLEAA), which is now responsible for the CT- have excluded previous UFS-CT beneficiaries. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 5 2. KEY ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE NSNP S ince the launch of the NSNP in 2013, substantial progress has been made towards achieving the six key results outlined beneficiaries remains upto date. DLIs 1 and 2 of the World Bank Programme for Results were developed to measure these improvements. in section 1.2 above. A results framework was developed to measure this progress that Each of the four programmes has its own includes, but is not limited to, the DLIs outlined eligibility criteria for targeting potential in Box 1. This section describes some of the key beneficiaries. For the three programmes actions that have been taken and the progress managed by the MLEAA, the criteria combine made so far as measured by these indicators. a poverty threshold with a categorical element (that a household has at least one member who 2.1. THE MOST VULNERABLE AND can be classified as belonging to a vulnerable POOREST HOUSEHOLDS IN KENYA ARE group). Each of the three programmes has E N R O L L E D I N THE NSNP their own categorical element - orphans and vulnerable children, older people (those aged T his result involves identifying the households to benefit from any of the four NSNP cash transfers and ensuring that they meet the eligibility over 65), and people living with severe disabilities respectively for the CT-OVC, OPCT, and PWSD- CT programmes. Eligibility for the HSNP is solely criteria. As such, it relates to steps taken by poverty, but the programme covers only the four the government to: (i) expand the coverage of northern counties (Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera, the cash transfer programmes;(ii) improve the and Wajir). All of the four programmes first target procedures by which beneficiaries are selected; resources to the poorest geographical areas and and (iii) take steps to ensure that the registry of then, within those areas, identify households Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 7 Box 2: Disbursement-linked Indicators for Result #1 The specific disbursement-linked indicators (DLIs) that relate to this result are: DLI 1: A set number of additional households is enrolled in the NSNP according to the expansion plan. • DLR 1.1: Adoption of expansion plan for the NSNP informed by poverty and vulnerability criteria • DLR 1.2a: Enrollment of 65,000 additional households in the NSNP in accordance with the Expansion Plan and paid for by the government • DLR 1.2b: Enrollment of 130,000 additional households in the NSNP in accordance with the Expansion Plan and paid for by the government • DLR 1.2c: Enrollment of 235,000 additional households in the NSNP in accordance with the Expansion Plan and paid for by the government DLI 2: A set percentage of programme beneficiaries conform to the targeting criteria for the programme in which they are enrolled. • DLR 2.1: Establishment of baseline • DLR 2.2: Increase of 15 percent in the number of programme beneficiaries who conform to the targeting criteria for the programme in which they are enrolled. that fall into the categories that are eligible for The Expansion Plan outlines how each of the support. However, there is not enough funding programmes is expected to expand between to address the needs of all eligible households so fiscal years 2014/15 and 2016/17. It does so exclusion errors are inevitable. by estimating the total number of potentially eligible households under each programme in 2.1.1 Expanded Coverage and Increased each part of the country, using a combination of Government Financing of Project data from the 2009 Census and from the 2005/06 Beneficiaries KIHBS. This made it possible to estimate both A key commitment of the government the numbers of households likely to meet the through the Constitution and the Social categorical criterion for each programme and Protection Policy is to expand the coverage of the probable poverty level for each location. social protection services to reach those most It was then possible to set expansion targets in need. The government aims to almost double taking into account the number of existing the number of people receiving social assistance beneficiaries. over the life of the NSNP.6 The Expansion Plan also sets out the process Expansion Plan. In order to ensure that the cash for prioritizing locations for expansion in each transfer programmes expand in accordance with financial year. It specifies that 30 percent of any need and in a coherent and effective manner, new number of beneficiaries allocated to a cash the government developed and adopted an transfer programme in each fiscal year should Expansion Plan to guide the geographical be distributed among all 290 constituencies targeting of the NSNP. The programmes in Kenya, with the remaining 70 percent being adopted the Expansion Plan in October 2014, allocated to locations prioritized according to but then further revised it in October 2015. their poverty levels. Originally it was expected This information contained in the section is drawn from Sandford, Judith (2015), The 2015 Targeting Review, Chapter 2: Evaluation of 6 Achievement of DLR 1.2. 8 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya that the 30 percent would be allocated within the households that were identified as eligible each constituency starting with the poorest were enrolled into the HSNP or paid any benefits location in a constituency, but in late 2015 the during 2013/14 because a high proportion decision was made to allow the 30 percent to of households lacked a valid national ID and be distributed equally among any locations because there were delays in the opening of not prioritized by the 70 percent allocation bank accounts. As a result, by the end of the and that have not already met their full target 2013/14 financial year, only 46,777 beneficiaries of eligible households. No location may had received a payment from the HSNP.7 This have more beneficiaries than the number of figure continued to increase throughout the potentially eligible households estimated in 2014/15 financial year to 76,069 households the Expansion Plan. in June 2015. It now stands at 84,340 (as of January 2016). The Expansion Plan also specifies how the cash transfer programmes will be implemented when Expansion of MLEAA Programmes before the multiple programmes are operating in the same Expansion Plan in 2013/14. The three cash locality. It also confirms that the 46 locations transfer programmes managed by the MLEAA sampled for the CT-OVC impact evaluation will started prior to the development of the Expansion not benefit from any expansion. Furthermore, Plan. In financial year 2013/14, the government it stresses that the goal is the overall expansion substantially increased the budget available of the NSNP as a whole, so any measurement of for cash transfer programmes and planned expansion must be net of any households who to substantially expand the coverage of the have left any of the cash transfer programmes. MLEAA programme by approximately 207,500 beneficiaries. However, the government decided The DLI measures the expansion of the NSNP and to focus on equalizing beneficiary numbers also any households that used to be financed across constituencies rather than according to by development partners and are now being the distribution of poverty and vulnerability (as financed by the Government of Kenya. outlined in the expansion plan and protocols for the DLI). The government and its development HSNP Expansion. During the 2013/14 financial partners therefore agreed that the 2013/14 year, the government adopted a large-scale expansion would not be counted towards retargeting plan for the HSNP. The aim was to achieving the DLI. The planned and actual scale- identify 100,000 eligible households in the four up of the MLEAA programmes in the 2013/14 northern counties of Kenya. However, not all of financial year are presented in Table 2. Table 2: Proposed and Actual Expansion of MLEAA Cash Transfer Programmes in 2013/14 Active Beneficiaries in July/ Active Beneficiaries as of Program August 2013 Planned Expansion Actual Expansion July/August 2014 CT-OVC 155,340 90,000 100,258 255,598 OPCT 57,447 105,000 106,495 163,942 PWSD-CT 14,500 12,500 12,293 26,793 TOTAL 227,287 207,500 219,046 446,333 Source: Sandford, Judith (2015), The 2015 Targeting Review, Chapter 2: Evaluation of Achievement of DLR 1.2 7 This figure actually reflects the number who had received payments by mid-July 2014. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 9 Expansion of the OPCT in 2014/15. The actual However, it should be noted that this expansion expansion of any of the NSNP cash transfer was slightly off-set by the reduction in programmes is dependent on the budget beneficiaries caused by the closure of the UFS- available. In the 2014/15 financial year, only CT. The termination of this programme led to the OPCT received a budget increase that was 9,268 households exiting the NSNP. sufficient to enable an expansion in the number of beneficiary households. Initially an expansion Increased Government Financing. The of 46,000 new beneficiaries of the OPCT Government of Kenya has also increased the was planned for the financial year. However, budget allocated to the NSNP. This increase following a budget amendment and after the has not only helped to finance the increase Department of Social Development (DOSD) took in beneficiary numbers but has also begun some expected savings into consideration, the to replace funding initially provided by planned number for expansion was increased development partners. In the 2014/15 financial by 24,334 to nearly 71,000. In practice, the year, the Government of Kenya financed over actual expansion of the OPCT was closer to 61,400 beneficiaries of the CT-OVC programme 61,400. The shortfall can largely be accounted who were previously financed by the World Bank for by the fact that expansion targets in the four and UNICEF, which no longer provide direct northern counties were not achieved because financing for transfers. Additionally, the HSNP of: (i) challenges involved in expanding to these was previously fully financed by development remote, low-capacity counties; (ii) the fact that a partners, but by June 2015 transfers to number of potentially eligible households were approximately 24,500 households had been already receiving another cash transfer (most switched to government financing. As a result, frequently the HSNP); and (iii) households could the government is financing the majority not be enrolled without valid national ID and of the cash transfer programmes, which has many households do not possess an ID. greatly increased the sustainability of the NSNP. These changes are discussed in more detail in section 2.5. Table 3: Number of Additional Households Enrolled in the NSNP According to Agreed Expansion Plan and Paid for by the Government Compared with July 2013 Baseline Baseline Current Situation 2013/14 Number of expansion not additional Government Government counting towards households [(b)- Programmes Total Financed (a) Total Financed (b) DLI (c) (a)-(c)] CT-OVC 152,331 47,139 255,470 215,470 100,258 68,073 OPCT 58,113 58,113 218,497 218,497 106,495 53,889 PWSD-CT 14,518 14,518 25,505 25,505 12,293 -1,306a/ UFS-CT 9,268 9,268 0 0 0 -9,268 HSNP 68,261 0 76,069 24,490 0 24,490 TOTAL 302,491 114,384b/ 575,541 483,962 219,046 150,532c/ Source: Sandford, Judith (2015), The 2015 Targeting Review, Chapter 2: Evaluation of Achievement of DLR 1.2 Notes: a/ This is largely comprised of households exiting the programme that have not yet been replaced. b/ This column does not add up because of differences in the provisional data provided by the cash transfer programmes. c/ This is not a sum of the numbers in the “Number of Additional Households” column, but rather the number of beneficiaries supported through the current payroll minus the baseline figure of 114,384 and the 2013/14 expansion that is not counted towards the achievement of the DLR. 10 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya As Table 3 shows, 150,532 additional pre-determined weights on the household households have been enrolled in the NSNP information collected by enumerators and according to the agreed Expansion Plan and entered in the programmes’ management are paid for by the Government of Kenya in information systems (MIS). Households are comparison with the July 2013 baseline. This then ranked based on their poverty score, figure includes households that have been newly and those that are below the cut-off for being targeted in accordance with the Expansion Plan considered “extremely poor” are added to the and households that used to be financed by programme. The CT-OVC programme makes development partners and are now financed use of a proxy means test (PMT) to determine by the Government of Kenya. However, it is net which households are “extremely poor” and of households that have exited the NSNP either should therefore be enrolled in the programme. temporarily or permanently (including those The PMT uses a set of weighted variables beneficiaries who have exited because of the that are proxies for the characteristics of poor closure of the UFS-CT). households to determine which households are eligible based on data from the 2005/06 Kenya 2.1.2 Improved Targeting Processes Integrated Household Budget Survey (KIHBS).8 Considerable progress has been made in Households that have been identified in the improving the quality of targeting in each community targeting and consequently visited programme since the inception of the NSNP. by enumerators are assigned a PMT score based It has been particularly important to strengthen on their household characteristics. Households targeting processes given the rapid expansion of below the pre-defined PMT cut-off are enrolled programmes since that time. All programmes into the programme. have developed targeting procedures that combine community-based targeting with The HSNP also uses a PMT, but it combines an administrative tool to assess the level the result of the PMT with the results of of need of targeted households. However, a community targeting process. It is the the actual processes followed vary from combined score from these two approaches programme to programme. that are then used to rank households. The three programmes managed by the MLEAA The introduction of a single registry system start with a process in which community for all of the NSNP programmes has made it members identify those households that possible check that potential beneficiaries of they believe meet the eligibility criteria. one cash transfer are not already benefitting After this, enumerators from the cash transfer from another. Through its links to the Integrated programmes visit and survey those households Population Registration System, the Single to verify that they meet the eligibility criteria Registry makes it possible to confirm the validity and assess each identified household’s poverty of any national ID information submitted by level. The methodology for this assessment prospective beneficiaries, thus reducing the varies. The PWSD-CT and OPCT programmes possibility of error or fraud. use a poverty score card that is calculated using 8 The Central Bureau of Statistics is currently implementing a new household survey, which should yield more recent and accurate national household data. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 11 Evidence of the Accuracy of the Targeting Figure 1: The Distribution of an Asset-based Wealth Index among Rural Households Process. One of the key improvements that 0.35 the NSNP is expected to deliver is more 0.15 accurate targeting, in particular a decrease the -0.05 proportion of households that do not meet the Asset Index -0.25 targeting criteria of the individual cash transfer -0.45 programmes.9 -0.65 -0.85 -1.05 A consultancy firm has been contracted by the Mean -1.25 government to measure how many households Rural Rural Rural poor CT-OVC population population (2005/06 Enrolled meet the programme targeting criteria as (2009 Census) (2005/06 KIHBS) KIHBS) part of the Programme Implementation Source: Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services, prepared by Mott MacDonald (2015), Kenya Orphans and Vulnerable Children Cash Transfer and Beneficiary Satisfaction (PIBS) Survey. Programme Impact Evaluation Baseline Report, Chapter 3: Targeting. Data are for the rural population from the 2009 census and the 2005/2006 KIHBS, the rural At the time of writing, the firm has surveyed a poor from the 2005/2006 KIHBS, and CT-OVC enrolled households representative sample of beneficiaries from all four cash transfer programmes, asking them the The targeting analysis compared the same questions that each programme asks during consumption and asset ownership of its targeting process. The firm is applying the households enrolled in the CT-OVC with those same PMT weights and poverty score measures of the rural population in the 2009 Kenya to the responses received from the surveyed Census and the 2005/06 Kenya Integrated beneficiaries to assess what proportion of them Household Budget Survey (KIHBS). As Figure fit the poverty targeting criteria. The firm is also 1 shows, the analysis found that the asset index assessing if households meet the categorical (a combined score of consumption and asset targeting criteria of each programme. Initial ownership) of the CT-OVC enrolled households estimates from the PIBS survey suggest that a large was similar to the average asset index of all majority (nearly 90 percent) of beneficiaries meet households living in rural areas as per the the targeting criteria. However, the PIBS consultancy Kenya Census and higher than the rural poor firm is currently reviewing these estimates and a households in the KIHBS. There may be a number precise measurement of targeting accuracy will be of reasons for this. One possible explanation provided in the near future. is that the poorest households may be unable or unwilling to care for OVCs and hence the Although the PIBS survey seems to show that average asset ownership of CT-OVC households households that are benefitting from the may be higher than the average for rural poor NSNP broadly meet both the categorical and households in general. It may also be a reflection the poverty criteria, this does not prove that of the data collected rather than a reflection of the poorest households in each community the situation on the ground. The baseline survey have been selected. The 2012 CT-OVC baseline was completed in 2012, over six years after the impact evaluation conducted a targeting analysis KIHBS survey and three years after the Census. to assess if households enrolled in the programme While many comparisons can still be made were among the poorest. between these populations, it is important to This, in fact, is the Disbursement-linked Indicator 2, “the establishment of a baseline for proportion of households conforming to the 9 targeting criteria of the programmes” and a follow-up disbursement after “the proportion of beneficiaries conforming to the targeting criteria increases by 15 percent compared to the baseline.” 12 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya recognize that some of the variations between reviewing or are planning to review the targeting populations could be due to time rather than criteria for beneficiary enrollment. For example, actual existing differences. once the KIHBS for 2015/2016 is completed, the programmes that use a proxy means test (PMT) Once data from the 2015/16 KIHBS are will update the PMT scores based on the new available, they will provide stronger evidence poverty thresholds as identified by the KIHBS. on this question. After a successful coordination The programmes will also review the results of between the Social Protection Secretariat and the PIBS survey on targeting accuracy with a the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics, questions view to finding ways to improve their targeting were added to the KIHBS asking whether or not practices and thus improve overall programme households are benefitting from cash transfer performance. programmes. Therefore, using these data, it will therefore be possible to compare the welfare of Harmonized Targeting and Use of a PMT. As those who receive transfers with the welfare of part of the process to improve the targeting of those who do not. Furthermore, the results of a individual programmes, the NSNP is developing targeting assessment that was conducted as part a harmonized targeting process for all of its of the HSNP baseline assessment should also constituent programmes given that they all use shortly be available. poverty as a criterion for being enrolled. This will ensure that all programmes will apply poverty It is also interesting to note that a small criteria in the same manner. Because proxy sample of households that were caring for means tests can rank and objectively compare OVCs was also interviewed for the CT-OVC the poverty status of households across a wide baseline survey, but these households were area, all of the programmes are working towards ultimately excluded during the community developing a common targeting PMT tool. What targeting process. Comparing the asset index progress has been made on this will be discussed of enrolled households and the asset index of in a later section. these excluded households reveals that the CT-OVC enrolled households had lower levels 2.1.3 Actions Taken to Ensure that the Registry of of consumption and scored lower in the asset Beneficiaries is Up to Date wealth index than the excluded households, All of the cash transfer programmes take a indicating that the community targeting process range of actions to ensure that the registry was successful in excluding the relatively better- of beneficiaries is kept up to date. These off eligible households. include ongoing change management actions regarding the reporting of deaths or a change of Despite some of the weaknesses in this caregiver and the use of the programme MIS to analysis, it demonstrates the need for more identify when orphans reach the age of 18. The work to be done to ensure that the poorest and programmes have also begun to introduce most vulnerable households are enrolled in the regular recertification or retargeting of CT-OVC programme. All of the programmes beneficiaries to ensure that the registry is up as well as the NSNP as a whole are currently to date and accurate. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 13 In early 2015, the Department of Social The recertification exercise used the Development (DOSD) conducted a revised PMT model that is being developed recertification of all OPCT and PWSD-CT as a potential common targeting and beneficiaries who had been enrolled prior to recertification tool for the NSNP. The exercise the 2013/2014 financial year. This recertification found that only 1.1 percent of OPCT beneficiaries took place in all 290 constituencies in Kenya and 0.8 percent of PWSD-CT beneficiaries and involved nearly 57,000 beneficiaries of the were also receiving cash transfers from another OPCT and 14,700 beneficiaries of the PWSD-CT program, which is currently not allowed. Also, (82.7 and 79.4 percent of the total number of nearly all of the beneficiaries met the categorical enrollees of each programme respectively). As criteria for each program, with over 99 percent Table 4 shows, 41,451 OPCT beneficiaries and of OPCT beneficiaries being over the age of 65 11,670 PWSD-CT beneficiaries were recertified and all PWSD-CT beneficiaries having a disability as eligible to receive cash transfers. However, and requiring 24-hour care. Additionally, around 11 percent (5,407) of OPCT beneficiaries in reviewing the welfare characteristics of and 8 percent (906) of PWSD-CT beneficiaries10 households, the recertification exercise found were found to have died. The DOSD experienced that the beneficiaries of both programmes problems in reaching 17.3 percent and 21.2 could be characterized as generally poor. The percent of OPCT and PWSD-CT beneficiaries DOSD is planning to review those households respectively. The reasons for this included who no longer appear to meet the programme logistical issues in conducting the recertification enrollment criteria (for example, because they (such as language barriers or bad weather) and are deceased, enrolled in multiple programmes, beneficiaries being away or having moved receive pensions, or do not meet the away from the locations in which they had categorical criteria) before deleting them from been enrolled. the relevant programme. Table 4: Recertification Coverage for the OPCT and the PWSD-CT, 2015 Frequency Percentage OPCT Recertification Number of constituencies covered 290 100 Number of households targeted for recertification 56,767 100 Number of households covered (out of total targeted) 47,257 82.7 Number of beneficiaries deceased (out of total reached) 5,407 11.4 Number of households analyzed for recertification (out of total reached) 41,451 87.7 PWSD-CT Recertification Number of constituencies covered 290 100 Number of households targeted for recertification 14,700 Number of household covered (out of total targeted) 11,670 79.4 Number of beneficiaries deceased (out of total reached) 906 8.4 Number of households analyzed for recertification (out of total reached) 10,764 92.2 Sources: (1) Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services, prepared by Sahara Institute of Management (2015). The Recertification of OPCT and PWSD-CT Programmes. (2) Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services (2015). Recertification Strategy for Cash Transfer Programmes in Kenya: 2015-2030, draft. This refers to the eligible household member, which in the case of the OPCT means the member who is over 65 years old and the in 10 the case of PWSD-CT it means the member who is registered with the programme as severely disabled. 14 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya The CT-OVC programme is currently designing 2.2 NSNP BENEFICIARIES RECEIVE a recertification process for its beneficiaries, APPROPRIATE, RELIABLE, AND some of whom have been enrolled in the ACCESSIBLE PAYMENTS programme since 2005. In the 2015/16 financial year, the CT-OVC programme will pilot a recertification exercise in two counties— A n essential component of any cash transfer programme is a payment system that delivers regular and reliable transfers in a Kwale and Kisumu—to help the programme to way that is accessible to beneficiaries. All four understand the implications of recertification cash transfer programmes aim to pay a transfer as well as to fine tune the processes and to their beneficiaries every two months. The methodologies involved in recertifying CT-OVC, OPCT, and PWSD-CT programmes households. Following the pilot, the CT-OVC provide each beneficiary household with Ksh programme will develop a recertification 2,000 per month, or about US$20, and the HSNP framework to guide future recertification, provides each beneficiary household with Ksh graduation, complementarity with other 2,550 (approximately US$25) per household per programmes, and exits from the programme. month.11 However, at the time of the launch of This recertification framework will also be used the NSNP, programme implementers recognized in the recertification processes for the other that these cash transfers were often paid late cash transfer programmes as they recertify their and that there were some weaknesses in the beneficiaries in the future. payment delivery system. The HSNP is also planning to retarget and Box 3: Cash Transfer Values recertify beneficiaries in 2016. This process is • CT-OVC: Ksh 2,000 (US$20) currently being designed in consultation with • OPCT: Ksh 2,000 (US$20) the other programmes that make up the NSNP. • PWSD-CT: Ksh 2,000 (US$20) • HSNP: Ksh 2,550 (US$25.50) Box 4: Disbursement-linked Indicators for Result #2 The specific disbursement-linked indicators (DLIs) that relate to this result are: DLI 4: A set percentage of NSNP payments are being made electronically using two-factor authentication. • DLR 4.1: 60 percent of NSNP payments are being made electronically using two-factor authentication. • DLR 4.2: 90 percent of NSNP payments are being made electronically using two-factor authentication. DLI 5: A set percentage of payments are being disbursed to payment service providers on time. • DLR: 5.1: 45 percent of all payments are being disbursed to payment service providers on time. • DLR: 5.2: 65 percent of all payments are being disbursed to payment service providers on time. At the time of the NSNP’s inception in 2013, HSNP transfer payments amounted to Ksh 1,750 per month. 11 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 15 2.2.1 Payment Mechanism be regulated financial service providers.13 At the time when the NSNP was launched, Policymakers also intended that the NSNP would the cash transfer programmes used two use mainstream payment infrastructure in which payment service providers, Equity Bank and payments would be made using two-factor the Postal Corporation of Kenya (PCK).12 authentication involving both a mag-stripe card The PCK made payments through post office and PIN. branches and required only national IDs or programme IDs to authenticate the identity of In the past year, the government has put beneficiaries. Payments were made manually, considerable effort into improving the and the reconciliation was a labour-intensive, NSNP’s payment mechanism. In 2014 the paper-based process. The two programmes government launched a bidding process for a that used Equity Bank (the HSNP and the CT- new payment service provider for all MLEAA- OVC in a limited geographical area) made managed programmes, and the contract was payments through a network of Equity Bank awarded towards the end of the year to the agents, using a smart card and biometric data to Kenya Commercial Bank (KCB). In early 2015 validate beneficiaries’ identities (in accordance the government made an intensive effort with two-factor authentication). The payment to register and biometrically enroll almost reconciliation process with Equity Bank was all beneficiaries of the MLEAA-managed completed electronically. programmes (except beneficiaries of the CT- OVC who were already being paid by Equity With the development of the NSNP, the Bank) to enable them to receive their payments government committed itself to addressing from the KCB. This new payment mechanism weaknesses in the current system. One aim uses two-factor authentication to verify that of the NSNP has been to ensure that all future payments are being made to the correct contracts with payment service providers beneficiaries and should reduce the amount comply with Kenya’s Anti-Money Laundering Act, of time spent on reconciliations because it which requires the payment service providers uses electronic systems. Table 5: Beneficiaries on Payroll and Those Given a KCB Card (MLEAA Programmes) Beneficiaries who had received a card as of…. Beneficiaries on June 2015 January 2016 payroll # % # % CT-OVC 200,984 173,371 86 185,896 92 OPCT 225,045 136,080 60 199,757 89 PWSD-CT 26,000 19,800 76 22,847 88 TOTAL 452,029 329,251 73 408,500 90 Source: MLEAA (January 2016). 12 Equity Bank made payments to households enrolled in the CT-OVC and HSNP programmes. The Postal Corporation of Kenya made payments to households enrolled in the CT-OVC, OPCT, and PWSD-CT programmes. 13 Other requirements of the Anti-Money Laundering Act are that: (i) all payments must be made in real time online; (ii) banks must fulfill stringent “know your customer” checks, making it nearly impossible to make payments to recipients without a national ID; (iii) agents cannot be exclusive to a single bank; and (iv) no systems can be used that are based on technologies or standards that cannot be integrated with other elements of the national payments system. 16 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya The HSNP also updated its payment organizational difficulties. Some beneficiaries mechanism around the time of the launch of have been unable to open bank accounts the NSNP. After a competitive process, it signed due lack of IDs and due to operational and a new contract with Equity Bank, but, unlike the organizational challenges, and as a result, these system used by the MLEAA-run programmes, beneficiaries have not been paid. As shown the mechanism requires beneficiaries to have in Table 5, as of June 2015, only 73 percent of a fully functional bank account. However, the beneficiaries had received a KCB card and were mechanism cannot be considered mainstream able to receive payments, but by January 2016 as the ID cards used are program-specific. This this had increased to 90 percent. However, was because HSNP programme implementers despite these challenges, the Government of felt the need to provide beneficiaries with a Kenya was able to submit evidence to the World biometric means of authentication to ensure Bank in May 2015 that they had met the relevant security in places where many recipients had DLRs, with 95 percent of NSNP cash transfer low literacy levels and limited understanding payments now being made using two-factor of banks and PIN numbers. CT-OVC households authentication. Table 6 presents the evidence that previously received their payments through that the Government of Kenya submitted to the Equity Bank continue to do so and did not Bank in relation to achieving this DLI. change to the KCB. The MLEAA and the NDMA continue to follow up There have been a number of challenges with their payment service providers regarding involved in switching payment service the recruitment of payment agencies.14 The providers, including difficulties in getting aim of the HSNP is for beneficiaries to have to all households biometrically enrolled, the travel no more than 20 kilometers to reach a slow establishment of payment agents, and payment agent, while the MLEAA programmes Table 6: Number of Cash Transfer Payments Made with Two-factor Authentication in May/June 2015 Total number of Beneficiaries paid using electronic Payment Beneficiaries two- factor authentication system Payment Cycle Provider Payment Instrument Description Branch and agency model with point Equity 59,352 March-April 2015 of service (POS) devices and biometric Bank CT-OVC 251,764 smart card Branch and agency model with POS 192,412 March-April 2015 KCB devices and biometric smart card Full bank accounts with biometric and HSNP 100,000 76,069 May-June 2015 Equity PIN-enabled smart card Branch and agency model with POS PWSD-CT 27,200 25,864 March-April 2015 KCB devices and biometric smart card Branch and agency model with POS OPCT 164,000 160,553 March-April 2015 KCB devices and biometric smart card Total 542,964 514,250 Percentage of NSNP beneficiaries paid using electronic two-factor 95% authentication system Source: Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services (May 2015). Kenya National Safety Nets Programme Payments Report: Beneficiaries Paid through Electronic, Two Factor Authenticated Instrument An agent is any commercial entity which can act on behalf of a bank as a point of service to provide cash to beneficiaries. 14 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 17 aim for no more than 6 kilometers.15 However, Figure 2: Distance Traveled by Beneficiaries to Reach a Payment Agent the PIBS survey asked beneficiaries how far 90 they had to travel to reach a payment agent (see 80 Figure 2), and over 75 percent of the CT-OVC and 70 OPCT recipients and over 65 percent of PWSD- Percent of total 60 CT recipients reported having to travel more 50 40 than six kilometers. On the other hand, only 16 30 percent of HSNP beneficiaries reported having 20 to travel more than 20 kilometers to a payment 10 agent, which is relatively low considering the 0 CT-OVC OPCT PWSD-CT HSNP expansiveness of the four counties in which the <6 km 6 km or more <20 km 20 km or more HSNP operates. Source: Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services, prepared by Promin Consultants and Development Impact Consultants (2015), Programme Implementation and Beneficiary Satisfaction Survey Cycle 1 Report, draft. As noted above, the programmes are working to recruit additional payment agencies to Table 7 shows the timeliness of payments made ensure that beneficiaries do not have to travel by the four NSNP cash transfer programmes long distances to collect their payments. As since 2013. As can be seen in the table, the can be seen from the HSNP data in Table 6, timeliness of HSNP payments has increased Equity Bank has made significant progress in significantly since the launch of the programme terms of the coverage of their payment agents, but this remains a challenge for the remaining with most locations in the four northern three programmes. The introduction of a new counties being serviced by at least one agent. payment mechanism was expected to improve To date, the MLEAA programmes have focused the situation through timely reconciliation at the on biometric enrollment and the issuing of end of each payment cycle. HSNP has improved cards to beneficiaries, but in the future there in payment timeliness and payments are now will be a greater focus on the quality of service made according to a defined schedule. Even that they provide. the MLEAA programmes were able to pay on time for a while at the end of the 2014/15 fiscal 2.2.2 Timeliness of Payments year with the new payment system. However, As mentioned previously, NSNP payments to challenges have remained particularly at the start payment service providers and beneficiaries of the financial year. Paying the first payment have often been late as a result of a number of of the financial year on time has always been a operational issues. In recent years, the HSNP has struggle for the programmes as there is often been making regular timely payments, but the a delay in the release of Treasury allocations to other programmes have continued to suffer from the programmes. These delays were exacerbated delays in payment and unpredictable payment at the beginning of the 2015/16 financial year schedules. These delays have a negative effect saw, thus causing continued delayed payments on the welfare of the recipient households as to beneficiaries. The ministries and programmes they cannot rely on having funds by a particular are actively seeking ways to resolve these delays, date which makes household financial planning including by establishing a regular dialogue with very difficult. Treasury to find ways to prevent future delays in receiving financing. While the MLEAA programmes have some beneficiaries in the remote and vast Northern counties of Kenya, the majority of beneficiaries 15 are located in more populated areas of Kenya, thus making the six kilometer or less travel distance goal a realistic one. 18 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya Table 7: Timeliness of Payments to Beneficiaries OnTime Late Payment Cycle HSNP OPCT PWSD-CT CT-OVC NSNP - All Jul 2013 - Aug 2013 N/A Late Late Late Late 47 days 47 days 57 days Sep 2013 - Oct 2013 N/A On Time On Time Late Late 70 days Nov 2013 - Dec 2013 N/A Late Late Late Late 76 days 197 days 67 days Jan 2014 - Feb 2014 Late Late Late Late Late 37 days 17 days 139 days 8 days Mar 2014 - Apr 2014 Late Late Late Late Late 19 days 125 days 79 days 9 days May 2014 - Jun 2014 Late Late Late On Time Late 44 days 15-79 daysa/ 34 days Jul 2014 - Aug 2014 Late Late Late Late Late 1 day 98 days 163 days 92 days Sep 2014 - Oct 2014 On Time Late Late Late Late 63 days 102 days 113 days Nov 2014 - Dec 2014 On Time Late Late Late Late 2 days 41 days 51 days Jan 2015 - Feb 2015 Late Late Late Late Late 4 days 50 days 42 days 65 days Mar 2015 - Apr 2015 On Time On Time On Time On Time On Time May 2015 - Jun 2015 On Time On Time On Time On Time On Time Jul 2015 - Aug 2015b/ On Time Late Late Late Late Sep 2015 - Oct 2015 On Time Late Late Late Late Nov 2015 - Dec 2015 On Time Late On Time Late Late Notes: a/ New beneficiaries experienced a payment delay of 79 days, while initial beneficiaries experienced a payment delay of 15 days. b/ Data on the number of days on which payments were made late were not available in time for this report. 2.2.3 Benefit Levels interviewed, many of whom stated that the The main objective of the NSNP is to improve transfer values were too low and should be the welfare and increase the resilience of increased to have more impact. beneficiaries by providing them with regular and predictable cash transfers. The cash Currently households enrolled in the CT-OVC, transfers have significantly improved the well- OPCT, and PWSD-CT programmes receive Ksh being of recipient households (see section 2,000 per month while households enrolled 3.3 of this report), yet some households and in the HSNP receive Ksh 2,550 per month. programme officials believe that the value of the These differing benefit levels reflect the different cash transfers is not high enough and should histories of the programmes and how recently be increased. The Programme Implementation there have been any adjustments to the transfer and Beneficiary Satisfaction (PIBS) survey had levels. The value of the transfer paid by the a qualitative component in which beneficiary CT-OVC programme was initially (in 2007) set households and programme officials were at a level that took into account the average Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 19 incomes of the target group, the ratio of the However, despite the increases in 2011, the transfer to the poverty line, and average monthly purchasing power of the MLEAA transfers has expenditures on health and education, and the diminished over recent years. Figures 3 and 4 OPCT and PWSD-CT programmes followed suit. use a simple calculation based on the consumer The result was a transfer level of Ksh 1,500, which price index to show the diminishing purchasing represented around 12 percent of the poverty power of the CT-OVC transfer compared with line and 25 to 30 percent of the income of that of the HSNP transfer, which increased poor households. On the other hand, the HSNP slightly in March 2012 and more substantially in benefit level was initially set at a value calculated June 2013. to be 75 percent of the cost of a full food basket food ration. As seen in Figure 3, the real value from the CT-OVC increased back to its level in 2008 Since then there has been significant (approximately Ksh 1,300) after the transfer consumer and food price inflation in Kenya. value raise was approved in 2011. However, In response, the MLEAA increased the value since 2011, the purchasing power of the CT- of the transfers paid by its three programmes OVC beneficiaries has continued to decrease from Ksh 1,500 to Ksh 2,000 in December 2011, and is currently near the levels immediately while the value of the HSNP transfer has been before the last raise was approved at only Ksh increased several times, most recently in July 1,000. As seen in Figure 4, the purchasing power 2015, as shown in Table 8. of HSNP beneficiaries, on the other hand, has been steadily rising. There has been some Table 8: Increase in HSNP Cash Transfer Value over Time initial dialogue among the government and its Dates transfer value in effect Amount (Ksh) development partners about increasing the cash March 2009 - August 2011 1,075 transfer values of the MLEAA programmes, but September 2011 - February 2012 1,500 to date, no concrete actions have been taken. March 2012 - June 2013 1,750 November 2013 - July 2014 2,300 July 2014 - June 2015 2,450 July 2015 - Feb 2016 (current) 2,550 Source: Programme administrative data. Figure 3: Real Value of CT-OVC Transfer Figure 4: Real Value of HSNP Transfer 1,600 1,600 1,400 1,400 1,200 1,200 1,000 1,000 800 800 600 600 400 400 200 200 0 - Mar-07 Sep-07 Mar-08 Sep08 Mar-09 Sep-09 Mar-10 Sep-10 Mar-11 Sep-11 Mar-12 Sep-12 Mar-13 Sep-13 Mar-14 Mar-14 2008 Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-10 Dec-10 Jun-11 Dec-11 Jun-12 Dec-12 Jun-13 Dec-13 Jun-14 Initial transfer value (1,500) Adjusted transfer value (2,000) Initial value when set (2008) 1,075 1,500 1,750 2,300 2,450 Source: Sandford, Judith (2015). “Protecting Benefit Levels from Inflation”. Paper Source: Sandford, Judith (2015). “Protecting Benefit Levels from Inflation”. Paper presented at the June 2015 JRIS Mission, Naivasha, Kenya. presented at the June 2015 JRIS Mission, Naivasha, Kenya. 20 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 2.3 CITIZENS ARE ABLE TO APPEAL coordinated approach to delivering functioning DECISIONS AND LODGE COMPLAINTS complaints and grievance mechanisms for all TO IMPROVE PROGRAMME four programmes. While complaints are still PERFORMANCE handled at the local level by each individual program, the programmes all make use of similar A nother key result the NSNP is working towards achieving is the establishment of a system to enable citizens to appeal against processes to collect, record, and respond to complaints. At the national level, all complaints and grievances are recorded on the NSNP Single decisions, lodge complaints, and provide Registry system. Complaints by beneficiaries general feedback to programme implementers. can be classified as either general complaints The NSNP aims to ensure that all four cash transfer or complaints related to fraud and corruption. programmes have a functional complaints and These two types of complaints are handled in grievance mechanism in place to strengthen different ways. their accountability. At the time of development of the NSNP in 2013, both the HSNP and CT-OVC All four programmes now have clear programmes already had functioning complaints procedures for making, receiving, recording, and grievance mechanisms and ways to inform and responding to complaints, and these communities about the existence and rules of procedures are clearly laid out in the these mechanisms. Both programmes were Operation Manuals of each cash transfer able to collect complaints and grievances from programme. Each programme has established beneficiaries and channel them to programme Beneficiary Welfare Committees (BWCs) or, in managers for action. Both programmes also had the case of the HSNP, Rights Committees (RCs). Service Charters detailing the rights of programme These BWCs and RCs play a number of roles: beneficiaries. However, the other two programmes, (i) disseminating information to programme the PWSD-CT and the OPCT, were using existing beneficiaries, (ii) receiving and documenting government anti-corruption committees to all complaints; (iii) addressing complaints that receive and respond to complaints. can be resolved locally; and (iv) escalating beneficiary complaints to higher authorities 2.3.1 Progress on Developing Functional Appeals when necessary. BWCs and RCs are expected to and Complaints Processes record all complaints in a specified format and Functional Complaints and Grievance then forward these complaints to the relevant Processes. The NSNP has developed a officials for action. BWCs and RCs have been Box 5: Disbursement-linked Indicators for Result #3 The specific disbursement-linked indicator (DLI) that relates to this result is: DLI 6: Functional complaint and grievance mechanisms • DLR 6.1a: A complaints and grievance mechanism is functional at the national level for all cash transfer programmes. • DLR 6.1b: A complaints and grievance mechanism is functional at all levels for all cash transfer programmes. • DLR 6.2a: 45 percent of programme beneficiaries can name two ways to make a complaint • DLR 6.2b: 65 percent of programme beneficiaries can name two ways to make a complaint. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 21 established in all locations for the HSNP and CT- complaints, requests for information, and OVC programmes, but to date the OPCT and the household updates submitted by beneficiaries. PWSD-CT programmes are still in the early stages The system is able to isolate complaints from of establishing BWCs. Until recently, these two any other requests made by beneficiaries. The programmes have received minimal resources to system is further able to break down complaints finance programme management and support, into categories, for example those related to but the establishment of BWCs is a priority in this bribery, account problems, card problems, or financial year (2015/16). missing payments, and is able to track how and when these complaints are addressed. Figure Additionally, as part of the complaints and 5 provides a screenshot of some complaints grievance mechanism, all programmes have submitted by beneficiaries to the HSNP case developed management information systems management system. (MISs) that include a module to record all complaints and grievances received by the Further, staff have been assigned to manage programme. However, many complaints are complaints in each of the program’s never entered into the MIS. Because of this, management units, and a complaints and responsibility for maintaining the complaints grievance hotline has been set up, though and grievance modules of the MISs of the the NSNP implementers are making efforts MLEAA programmes is being decentralized to ensure that it is functioning effectively. to the county level. So far, a pilot initiative has However, the broader call center system is not decentralized the complaints and grievance fully operational because of staffing constraints. modules of the MISs to 10 counties, and the results of this pilot will inform the NSNP as it Despite this progress, programmes have faced extends this decentralization across the country. some challenges in responding to complaints and grievances. In the first round of the PIBS The complaints and grievance module for survey in 2015, households were asked about the HSNP MIS has also been decentralized. the complaints and grievance processes and This module has been turned into a case among those households that had submitted management information system that tracks a complaint, 63.7 percent allege to have not Figure 5: Number and Type of Personal Complaints Submitted to the HSNP Case Management System between February 2015 and January 2016 Personal Complaints 750 500 Registered 250 0 Cases Account not opened Account not working Card not received Exclusion errors Forgotten PIN/Biometrics failure Illegal fees Lost, stolen or damaged card Missed household Missed/Late payment Request replacement card Uncategorized Wrong payment amount Source: Programme administrative data (HSNP) 22 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya received any response. Of those that did receive The HSNP began raising awareness of its a response, 70.2 percent reported that this complaints and grievances procedures in response was unsatisfactory. October 2014 with a series of local radio scripts. These radiocasts informed communities • 63.7% of beneficiaries who have made about many aspects of the program, including complaints have not received a response. household registration into the program, bank • 70.2% of beneficiaries who received a response account openings, programme entitlements, on their complaints say it was unsatisfactory. payment requirements, modes, and frequency, complaints channels, and ID registration. By Now that a complaints and grievance understanding all of the processes of the HSNP, management system has been established households should easily be able to identify at the national level for the NSNP as a whole, any issues with the programme and register the related DLI has been achieved. However, a complaint or grievance. Furthermore, the the MLEAA is still seeking to recruit more HSNP has distributed service charters that staff to manage the hotline to ensure that it is explain the rights of beneficiary households to appropriately staffed at all times. Before the DLI Rights Committees and households in the four related to functioning systems at the county and counties covered by the HSNP - Wajir, Mandera, community levels can be considered as having Turkana, and Marsabit. This outreach by the been met, BWCs need to be established in all of HSNP has been fairly successful as the number the programmes and the systems for recording of complaints made regarding the HSNP is and escalating complaints from the local level to higher than in the other NSNP programmes. higher authorities need to be improved. The CT-OVC, OPCT, and PWSD-CT programmes Awareness of Complaint Mechanisms among have recently completed several activities Beneficiaries. Another key challenge facing the related to raising awareness of complaints and NSNP is ensuring that beneficiaries are aware of grievances procedures. The programmes’ field the complaints and grievance mechanisms that offices were provided with a variety of materials exist. It is imperative that beneficiary households, to be disseminated to beneficiaries including as well as other community households, are aware 600,000 NSNP complaints and grievance of the complaints and grievances processes charters in both English and Swahili, 300,000 and know how to make a complaint. The HSNP CT-OVC programme charters, and 50,000 complaints and grievances programme has a programme charters for the PWSD-CT and strong outreach component designed to make OPCT programmes. Furthermore, 10,000 posters communities and beneficiaries aware of how to about complaints and grievances were put register a complaint with the programme. As a up in public places within communities, and result, the HSNP has received more complaints public meetings were held in 16 counties to than the other programmes. However, the CT- raise awareness of the complaints procedures OVC, PWSD-CT, and OPCT programmes have among beneficiary households. recently started implementing more initiatives to make their beneficiaries aware of their complaints and grievance procedures. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 23 To ensure that further outreach activities are 2.4 MONITORING AND LEARNING SYSTEMS effective, the government contracted with a ARE FUNCTIONAL survey firm to find out the extent of awareness among beneficiaries about the existence of the complaints and grievance processes as A nother key result that the NSNP aims to attain is to have functional monitoring and learning systems in place.16 During the part of the PIBS survey. The survey included development of the NSNP, the government questions asking respondents if they know with the support of its development partners how to make a complaint and if they can established a monitoring and evaluation specifically name the different ways of making system framework that included a number of complaints. indicators to monitor progress in implementing the NSNP. Data on these indicators would be The data from the survey (June to September collected through each program’s management 2015) revealed that considerable work is information system (MIS) and used to gauge still needed to make beneficiaries aware of progress towards the achievement of the NSNP’s the complaints and grievances mechanism. goals. At that time, all of the programmes had Among all of the beneficiaries surveyed, only an MIS but only two were functioning well – 36.7 percent responded that they were aware those for the CT-OVC and the HSNP. Thus, the of how they could give feedback or register NSNP set a goal of developing well-functioning complaints to programme personnel. When management information systems for each of asked specifically to name the ways to make a complaint, only 25.5 percent were able to name the four cash transfer programmes. one way and only 11.1 percent were able to name two or more ways. Furthermore, the NSNP aimed to build strong M&E capacity within the government and to • 36.7 percent of beneficiaries are aware of how put efficient M&E systems in place to provide to provide feedback or register complaints. regular updates and reports on programme • 25.5 percent of beneficiaries can name one operations. Similarly, the NSNP aimed to way in which a complaint can be made. conduct regular evaluations of its constituent • 11.1 percent of beneficiaries can name two or programmes to gather feedback on the impact more ways in which a complaint can be made. of cash transfers and to assess the effectiveness of the programmes. Box 6: Disbursement-linked Indicators for Result #4 Although there are many aspects related to having a functional monitoring system, there is one particular disbursement-linked indicator that relates to M&E: DLI 3: The Single Registry is fully operational with programme MISs using agreed standards for internal payroll controls. • DLR 3.1 Programme MISs are fully operational using agreed standards for internal payroll controls. • DLR 3.2 The Single Registry is fully operational and linked to the Integrated Population Registration Service (IPRS). The objective of the monitoring and learning system is also to build capacity to use the evidence to influence policy and make 16 operations more efficient. 24 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 2.4.1 Progress on Developing Monitoring and previously, the HSNP and CT-OVC already had Learning Systems MISs in place in 2013, but the OPCT and PWSD-CT The NSNP M&E framework links inputs, did not. However, by June 2014, all programmes activities, outputs, outcomes, impact, and the had functional and operational MISs in place results that the Government of Kenya aims with standards for internal payroll controls. This to achieve. In addition, the framework details met the disbursement-linked indicator DLR 3.1. the data collection procedures and reporting functions that the government intends to Each programme MIS has multiple features undertake to monitor progress towards the that connect with other operational aspects achieving the program’s objectives. of the programmes, such as payments, targeting, enrollment, complaints, and M&E. Since the NSNP was created in 2013, Each program’s MIS contains a registration considerable progress has been made towards module for both targeting and enrollment that achieving the objectives and key indicators of contains beneficiary data. The MIS also has a the programme. With regard to M&E, the four payment module to make post-payroll checks cash transfer programmes have all begun to and reconciliations more efficient, accurate, report on the common indicators as set out in and timely. In addition, each MIS has a change the NSNP monitoring framework. Furthermore, management module that can produce each programme now has a functioning MIS beneficiary lists that identify households that no that is able to record and report on all pertinent longer meet the eligibility criteria. The MISs also program-related information. Additionally, there contain modules for registering complaints and are several monitoring and evaluation activities grievances, and, as mentioned previously, they that have taken place by external independent are currently being decentralized to the county firms or are currently underway to collect level to improve the management of incoming additional information on the progress that the data from the local level. Additionally, each MIS NSNP has been making towards achieving its is able to support M&E by being able to produce objectives. There has also been considerable reports on any data of interest. Finally, the capacity building in the government on M&E programme MISs are able to link to and provide related functions. For example, there are information to the common Single Registry, now dedicated M&E staff members in the which is discussed in more detail in section 2.5.1. Social Protection Secretariat and a greater awareness of M&E functions among all cash Building M&E Capacity. Considerable work transfer programme staff. Also, the government has been done by NSNP personnel to build organized an M&E learning event in June 2015 the program’s M&E capacity. Each of the cash that involved government officers from all transfer programmes has M&E staff in place, different programmes. and the Social Protection Secretariat also has a dedicated M&E officer. Several training sessions Programme MISs. In order to make the have been held for staff and managers of programmes more accountable and make their other programmes to raise awareness of the operations more efficient, it was necessary for importance of M&E and of how best to use each cash transfer programme in the NSNP M&E information in the design and operations to develop a functional MIS. As mentioned of programmes. The government held an M&E Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 25 learning event for the personnel of the NSNP cash those households that are benefitting from the transfer programmes in June 2015, which gave NSNP cash transfer programmes, which will yield participants an opportunity to assess progress data that can be used to monitor the progress of being made by all of the NSNP’s programmes the NSNP. using monitoring reports produced by the NSNP. Participants identified key challenges Monitoring and Evaluation Reports. In addition and developed action plans to overcome these to building the M&E capacity of the government, challenges. Also, ongoing training sessions on the NSNP is also planning to use data from the M&E are being held for NSNP officers at the Single Registry and programme MISs to produce county level, which are especially important as bi-monthly, bi-annual, and annual M&E reports the programme MISs are being decentralized to on its progress in areas such as enrollments, this level. payments, and complaints and grievances. However, the NSNP has so far found it difficult Connecting the NSNP MIS to Other to ensure the accuracy of the information being Government Processes. One of the aims of the collected in the MIS and thus has not been able NSNP is to provide high-level policymakers and to produce the intended reports. The Social the public with information on social protection. Protection Secretariat M&E team is working with As part of this goal, the NSNP is seeking ways each programme and the Single Registry to to link its MIS with the Government of Kenya’s produce more accurate and reliable reports that National Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation programmes can use to inform their operations. System (NIMES). NIMES was established in 2004 Figure 6 shows some of the key indicators that and is currently being used to track the medium- the NSNP’s M&E system is collecting. term plans associated with Kenya Vision 2030, of which social protection is a key aspect. The Figure 6: Key Indicators Collected in the NSNP M&E System NSNP provides data on two indicators on Payments Complaints Targeting social protection to NIMES - the number of Number of % Payments Number of payments households on the NSNP payroll and total bene ciaries on payroll disbursed to PSP on time disbursed on schedule NSNP expenditure. Having these indicators on NIMES is likely to help policymakers and the Number of payments Number of payments Complaints disbursed to PSP disbursed in arrears public to have a clear understanding of the reported social protection landscape in Kenya. Number of reported % Complaints Number of active complaints actioned actioned bene ciaries The NSNP worked closely with the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics over the past couple of years to ensure that social The NSNP and its individual programmes protection questions were incorporated into have contracted with a number of consultants the 2015/2016 Kenya Integrated Household to undertake independent and external Budget Survey (KIHBS). The KIHBS is designed monitoring and evaluations of the programme. to collect socioeconomic data on the Kenyan One assessment that is currently underway population to be used to update poverty, and that has been mentioned previously is the welfare, and employment statistics. The KIHBS Programme Implementation and Beneficiary now includes questions designed to identify Satisfaction (PIBS) survey, which is designed 26 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya to gather information from beneficiaries on 2.5 THE CASH TRANSFER PROGRAMMES how well various programme operations are ARE HARMONIZED AND GOVERNMENT- implemented. It will also collect information MANAGED pertaining to the achievement of certain DLIs (namely targeting and complaints and grievances).The PIBS survey will involves three T he four cash transfer programmes are implemented by different departments and ministries. The CT-OVC programme is rounds, the first of which took place in June to implemented by the MLEAA’s Department of September 2015. The next two rounds will take Children’s Services, and the OPCT and PWSD are place in 2016. The NSNP is also procuring an implemented by the same ministry’s Department operational monitoring consultant who will of Gender and Social Development. Meanwhile, provide in-depth monitoring and reporting the HSNP is implemented by the National on key areas of interest by visiting and Drought Management Authority (NDMA). observing operations in various programme These varied implementation arrangements locations. This work is anticipated to take place had resulted in a high degree of fragmentation, throughout 2016. duplication, and inefficiency among the programmes. Furthermore, the disjointed Finally, there are two ongoing impact implementing arrangements failed to optimize evaluations, one for the HSNP and one for implementation capacity or support a coherent the CT-OVC programme. The CT-OVC impact approach to capacity-building across the sector. evaluation conducted a baseline survey in September 2012, and an end line survey The NSNP is working towards harmonizing the is anticipated for 2016. This evaluation is cash transfer sector and making all cash transfer exploring the impact that cash transfers have on programmes fully government-managed. The beneficiary households, while also investigating the impact of making the receipt of cash transfers government conducted a functional review in conditional on beneficiaries fulfilling certain 2014 to:(i) identify any current gaps in staffing conditions. The HSNP’s impact evaluation is capacity and physical resources to quantify the gathering data for an operational evaluation and need for capacity building in the short term and for continuous monitoring of the programme. (ii) provide evidence for whether and how best to This evaluation will analyze the program’s design harmonize and consolidate the CT programmes. and implementation as well as investigating The functional review found that the processes the impact on beneficiaries of both the regular used in all four cash transfer programmes cash transfers provided by the HSNP and the were largely the same, including programme emergency scale-up cash transfers provided to design, targeting/enrollment, payments, case additional at-risk households in times of crisis. management, grievances, MISs, and monitoring The consultancy that is conducting the HSNP and evaluation. The functional review further evaluation is finalizing its baseline report and found that consolidating the management will continue with follow-up surveys in the of the various cash transfer programmes upcoming years. would have significant benefits in terms of increasing both the total number of households covered by safety nets and the efficiency of the programmes’ operations. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 27 Box 7: Disbursement-linked Indicators for Result #5 The specific disbursement linked indicators (DLIs) that relate to this result are: DLI 8: A strategy for consolidating the cash transfer programmes is developed. • DLR 8.1: Adoption by the NSNP of a strategy for consolidating the CT-OVC, OPCT, and PWSD-CT programmes. • DLR 8.2: Implementation of a strategy for consolidating the CT-OVC, OPCT, and PWSD-CT programmes. DLI 9: The government finances the HSNP in line with its budget and policy commitments. • DLR 9.1: GOK finances the HSNP in line with budget and policy commitments As part of this harmonization process, 2.5.1 Progress on Harmonizing Systems within the NSNP aims to link each program’s MIS the NSNP and Moving Towards Government to a Single Registry, which will contain Management of the NSNP information on the beneficiaries of all four The Single Registry. As a first step towards the cash transfer programmes. The Single Registry harmonization integration of all cash transfer will not only be able to provide consolidated programmes, the NSNP created a Single Registry information on beneficiaries of all cash transfer of Beneficiaries in early 2015. The Single Registry programmes but will also be able to prevent will make it possible to build a picture of households from benefitting from more than NSNP beneficiaries as a whole and will enable one program, strengthen the process for policymakers and programme managers to verify verifying beneficiaries’ identities, and provide a that beneficiaries fit the eligibility criteria, are not foundation for developing other consolidated receiving more than one cash transfer, and have systems such as payment systems. a valid ID number. The Single Registry has several useful features. First, it is housed on servers in the Based on this functional review, the government Social Protection Secretariat, but the MISs of each intends to formulate a consolidation and individual cash transfer programme can instantly harmonization plan to deliver more effective and automatically input information into the services to cash transfer beneficiaries. This Single Registry. Second, it is able to cross-check consolidation plan will coordinate the activities beneficiaries from each cash transfer programme of the four cash transfer programmes to take to ensure that no households are benefitting advantage of any economies of scale and from more than one NSNP programme. Third, streamline implementation arrangements. A key the Single Registry is linked to the Integrated aim of the NSNP is for all of the cash transfer Population Registration Service (IPRS) to enable programmes to be managed and funded by each programme to cross-reference the national the government instead of by its development ID number for all beneficiaries with the IPRS partners as this will make them more likely to database to determine if it is a valid ID number be financially sustainable. and if the person meets the age criteria for the cash transfer programmes. Figure 7 shows the links between the Single Registry and the individual programme MISs. 28 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya The Single Registry also has a module for M&E Even though the Single Registry is setup and indicators. While each individual program’s functioning and is linked to the individual MIS can also do this, before the Single Registry, programmes’ MISs and to the Integrated compiling all the information from each MIS Population Registration Service, a recent audit into a single monitoring report for the NSNP as a report of the Single Registry noted that there whole was a cumbersome and difficult process. are still some areas that could be improved. The With the Single Registry, it is now much faster report made the following recommendations: and more efficient to compile accurate and up- • The Single Registry should incorporate to-date information on programme operations. reporting mechanisms for the other M&E Currently, the Single Registry’s M&E module variables of interest that currently have to is being updated to incorporate reporting be collected from the MISs of the individual mechanisms for variables of interest, including programmes. targeting, change management, payments, • The Single Registry dashboard should be complaints and grievances, and enrollment. accessible to national, county, and sub- However, when producing bi-monthly M&E county officers (at present it is only accessible reports, the Single Registry is still only able to to the Single Registry administrator). report on 60 to 70 percent of variables of interest, while the remainder have to be retrieved from • The current disaster recovery plan for the the MISs of the individual programmes. The Single Registry should be improved as it has government is currently trying to incorporate never been tested so there is no assurance these remaining variables into the Single Registry that it will be possible to recover the data reporting system. in the case of an unforeseen incident. Figure 7: Links between the Single Registry and Each Programme’s MIS Current Social Civil Protection programmes Registration on Single Registry System National NSNP Population MIS Registry Single 30 million Registry ID database HSNP CT-OVC OPCT/PwSD WFPs CTM MIS MIS MIS MIS HSNP CT-OVC OPCT/PwSD WFPs CTM Database Database Database Database MAss registration Geographic-based Geographic-based Electronic undertaken by registration registration undertaken registration international undertaken by children by social development undertaken by NGOs o cers and location o cers and location WFP OVC committees committees HSNP-Hunger Safety Net Programme CT-OVC-Cash Transfer for Orphans and Vulnerable Children CTM-WFPs Cash Transfer Module OPCT-Older Persons Cash Transfer PsSD-Persons with Severe Disability Programme Source: WFP complimentarity initiative update, June 2015. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 29 While the government is working on these To date, the disbursement-linked indicators improvements, the progress made to date for this result have not been met. However, it is means that both DLRs 3.1 and 3.2 have anticipated that the consolidation strategy and been achieved. harmonized targeting process will be finalized and adopted in the 2015/2016 financial year. Consolidation of the NSNP. The government is seeking to develop a consolidation strategy and Government Management of the NSNP. a common targeting process for all of the NSNP The Government of Kenya has substantially cash transfer programmes. The development of increased its financing of cash transfers in this strategy has proven challenging because of recent years, having funded all of the recent differing views among cash transfer programme expansion of the NSNP. As a result, there has implementers over the level of consolidation been a significant increase in the number of that is feasible or desirable. A functional review beneficiary households that are paid from was conducted in 2014, on the basis of which government funds as opposed to development the government developed a draft consolidation partner financing (as was discussed in section strategy but recognized the need for further 2.1). Most significant has been the decision technical support. At present a consultant by government to take over the financing of is helping the government to finalize the the HSNP, which had previously been entirely consolidation strategy by facilitating dialogue financed by development partners, as part of between the four NSNP cash transfers and other the Programming Framework to End Drought key stakeholders, including the Treasury. Emergencies in Kenya. Specifically, when the government adopted this framework in 2012, One of the critical areas of the consolidation the goal was it to contribute Ksh 312 million to strategy is the development of a harmonized the HSNP the following year and increase this targeting and recertification process, including by a further 10 percent each year to the tune the targeting tools used by each programme of 30 percent of the total HSNP budget. At the (including the PMT and the community inception of the NSNP, the government had not screening and validation processes) and the yet achieved this financing goal, but by June targeting and recertification implementation 2014, it began to finance the HSNP in line with its processes. The consultant has identified several policy commitments. This means that the related areas of agreement and disagreement among disbursement-linked result has been met. stakeholders and has noted that the targeting tools for all the cash transfer programmes Figures 8 and 9 show the increased government are similar (approximately 90 percent of the financing of both the CT-OVC and HSNP questions are similar), although there is a programmes. The remaining two programmes slight difference in methodologies and in the – the OPCT and the PWSD-CT - are already fully weighting of variables. Based on this analysis, the financed by the government. A more detailed consultant has created a draft of a harmonized table showing the evolution of government targeting tool that will be reviewed at a future and development partner funding of the NSNP meeting by cash transfer programme personnel. can be found in Annex 1. This tool will be piloted by the NSNP cash transfer programmes with technical assistance from the WFP and UNICEF. 30 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya Figure 8: Government and Development Partner Financing of Figure 9: Government and Development Partner Financing of the CT-OVC between FY2013/2014 and 2015/2016 the HSNP between FY2013/2014 and 2015/2016 Government and Development Partner Financing of the CT-OVC Government and Development Partner Financing of HSNP 80,000,000 40,000,000 70,000,000 35,000,000 60,000,000 30,000,000 CT-OVC Financing (USD) 50,000,000 HSNP Financing (USD) 25,000,000 40,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 15,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 0 FY 2013/2014 FY 2014/2015 FY 2015/2016 FY 2013/2014 FY 2014/2015 FY 2015/2016 CT-OVC Govt CT-OVC Partner CT-OVC Govt HSNP Partner Source: CT-OVC programme administrative data. Source: HSNP and CT-OVC programme administrative data. 2.6 PROGRAMMES ARE RESPONSIVE TO to shocks by rapidly scaling up their coverage SHOCKS or increasing the amount of support that they provide. This undermines the ability of cash R ecurrent drought can undermine the impact of social protection programmes by inducing vulnerable populations to deplete transfer programmes to provide effective safety net support to poor and vulnerable households. their assets. There is much evidence in arid areas of the strong and direct correlation between In this context, the NSNP created the National worsening weather conditions and decreased Drought and Disaster Contingency Fund household consumption and expenditure. (NDDCF) for the HSNP. The NSNP is focusing Scaling up and down cash transfer programmes on the HSNP in the first instance because it in a timely manner before a drought situation operates in drought-prone areas. The National deteriorates has been shown to be more Drought Management Authority, which effective and cost-efficient than initiating ad hoc manages the HSNP, established mechanisms emergency responses. necessary to scaleup HSNP transfers, including the establishment of an early warning system International evidence has shown that and local contingency plans. When the warning scaling up existing safety net programmes is indicators are triggered, the HSNP will be able more effective at protecting livelihoods than to use those contingency funds to extend its emergency food aid. However, at the time of cash transfer support to populations affected the development of the NSNP, none of the cash by the shock. transfer programmes had the ability to respond Box 8: Disbursement Linked Indicators The specific disbursement linked indicator (DLI) that needs to be achieved to help meet this result is: DLI 7: System for scaling up the NSNP as part of the national drought risk management system • DLR 7.1: A system for scaling up the NSNP as part of the national drought risk management system that has been created with agreed levels of GOK contingency financing Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 31 2.6.1 Progress on Making the Programmes This expansion of coverage of the HSNP cash Responsive to Shocks transfers is triggered by satellite data that In its normal operations, the HSNP provides are generated every 10 days. These data are approximately 100,000 households with reported in a “vegetation condition index” that regular cash transfers that are paid into the the NSNP considers to be quantitative, objective, and financially acceptable. The vegetation households’ functioning bank accounts. In condition index works by comparing the current order to be ready to respond to shocks and vegetation satellite images and index with the emergencies, the HSNP has developed a second range of values observed in the same period in list of 272,000 households with open bank previous years. If the vegetation is on the worse accounts. These households do not receive cash end of the range of values from previous years, transfers under normal circumstances, but are this indicates an extreme vegetation deficit provided with cash assistance from the HSNP and triggers the HSNP to widen its coverage in the event of drought or other emergency temporarily to mitigate the effects of drought situations. It is thought that providing cash early on households living in the HSNP areas. Table 9 before households feel the full impact of a crisis presents an example of the vegetation condition is the best way to mitigate the adverse impact of index produced in September 2015 for a few drought or other emergency situations. selected counties of Kenya. Table 9: Vegetation Condition Index for Samburu, Isiolo, and Turkana Counties, September 27, 2015 ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT Remarks COUNTY Sub VCI as at VCI as at Color VCI values Drought Category County 21st September 28th September 3-monthly average ≥50 Vegetation greenness above normal 35 to 50 Normal vegetation greenness 21 to 34 Moderate vegetation deficit 10 to 20 Severe vegetation deficit <10 Extreme vegetation deficit SAMBURU County 21.37 19.85 The county continues to experience worsening trend. S. East remains in the severe band with north in the moderate band and fast deteriorating. S. East S East 14.02 13.48 has ongoing response activities after the activation of the contingency plan. S. North 24.83 22.56 S. North needs to be monitored closely to understand the repercussions for S. West 39.61 36.71 local livelihoods and to prepare a possible drought response. ISIOLO County 17.79 17.06 A significant vegetation deficit that has marginally deteriorated further. The entire county remains in the severe band. Contingency plans have already I. North 19.88 18.93 been activated and are being implemented. Need to review effectiveness I. South 14.6 14.2 of the interventions. TURKANA County 25.61 23.4 General worsening trend with T. Loima experiencing severe vegetation deficit. Need to review contingency plans in readiness for possible response T Central 34.57 33.07 activities. T. East 27.64 25.33 T. Loima 20.63 18.85 T. North 22.22 20.02 T. South 26.02 23.53 T. West 28.18 25.57 32 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya The HSNP has completed two pilots testing this two weeks of the drought trigger being reached, cash assistance expansion approach. Poor rains a quicker, cheaper, and less costly crisis response in April and May of 2015 triggered Kenya’s first than food aid alternatives. emergency scale up of HSNP coverage across the four counties. In April 2015, the HSNP paid out Ksh On the basis of these two pilots, plans 417 million (approximately US$4.3 million) to an have now been established to create an additional 90,648 households and in May 2015, institutionalized drought risk management the HSNP paid out Ksh 95 million (approximately system and contingency fund, which is US$1 million) to an additional 38,961 households expected to be a key financing mechanism in (see Table 10). The payments were made within the future. The National Drought Management Authority (NDMA) has drafted the necessary Table 10: HSNP Expansion of Cash Assistance Pilot, April and May 2015 legal framework, fund regulations, and deed Number of Amount Paid Amount Paid of trust for this contingency fund. These have Households (Ksh) (US$) been reviewed by the legal advisor for the World April Expansion 90,648 417 million 4.3 million Bank Disaster Risk Financing team and have May Expansion 38,961 95 million 1 million been submitted to Treasury for review. Once Source: HSNP programme administrative data. the Treasury responds, the National Drought Contingency Fund can be established. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 33 3. THE NSNP’S CONTRIBUTION TO IMPROVING WELFARE AND INCREASING RESILIENCE IN KENYA T he main objective of the National Safety Net Programme is to improve the welfare and increase the resilience of beneficiaries, Kenya’s cash transfer programmes within the NSNP are no exception, and several evaluations and monitoring reports have provided with the aim of reducing poverty and evidence that they are improving the welfare vulnerability in Kenya. The aim of the NSNP of recipient households. Rigorous impact cash transfer programmes is to provide regular evaluations of the CT-OVC programme and the and predictable cash transfers to vulnerable HSNP have revealed that the programmes have households.17 There is plenty of evidence had significant positive effects on beneficiaries’ worldwide that cash transfer programmes can consumption, dietary diversity, and assets and be an effective means of alleviating poverty have had spillover effects in the local economy. and facilitating the attainment of an adequate Furthermore, a recent beneficiary satisfaction standard of living for beneficiary households. survey of over 3,000 households enrolled in Cash transfers have been shown to improve the NSNP cash transfer programmes revealed household welfare by increasing consumption, that beneficiaries feel that the cash transfers improving health, increasing school attendance, have significantly improved their livelihoods. This raising self-esteem, and improving diet.18 section presents the results of the CT-OVC and HSNP impact evaluations and of the beneficiary satisfaction survey in more detail. 17 Households in the cash transfer programmes are considered to be vulnerable based on their circumstances (caring for orphans and vulnerable children, people with severe disabilities, or older people) or based on where they live (those living in arid and semi-arid regions of Northern Kenya). 18 See “DFID, 2011, Cash Transfers: Evidence Paper, London: Department for International Development, Policy Division” for a literature review of the evidence of the impact that various cash transfer programmes worldwide have had on reducing poverty and vulnerability. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 35 3.1 IMPACT EVALUATION OF THE CT-OVC The impact evaluation also showed that the cash transfers improved the care of orphans A n external independent consultant conducted a rigorous impact evaluation of the CT-OVC programme between 2007 and and vulnerable children in a variety of ways. Significantly, the programme led to a significant reduction in child labour on farms, particularly 2009, with a baseline survey of a sample of for boys. The CT-OVC programme also had a beneficiary households in 2007 and a follow- positive impact on school enrollment for older up survey in 2009. The evaluation revealed children. Children between 13 and 18 years that the programme had a broad range of of age living in beneficiary households were positive effects on beneficiary households, more likely to be enrolled in school, had half including reducing poverty, increasing food consumption and dietary diversity, increasing a year more of grade completion, and were school attendance and use of health care, and less likely to drop out of school than the strengthening the local economy. control households. The survey data revealed that the CT-OVC The CT-OVC programme also had a significant programme had significantly reduced the impact on younger children who were born share of beneficiary households living on after the baseline survey was carried out, less than 1 dollar a day and increased their which suggests that the programme was consumption of both food and non-food having an inter-generational impact. In products (see Figure 10). The programme also particular, the programme led to a reduction increased per capita expenditure, particularly in the incidence of diarrhea among 3 to 5 year on food, with the result that the diversity of olds living in beneficiary households as well as the diet of beneficiary households increased a significant increase in households seeking as they consumed more animal products and care for children suffering from diarrhea. The more fruit. In addition, smaller and female- likelihood of 3 to 5 year olds in beneficiary headed households tended to consume a households being vaccinated against measles significantly larger share of dairy/eggs, meat/ and accessing preventive health care also fish, fruit, and other foods derived from their increased. own production. Figure 10: Distribution of Real Consumption Expenditure per Adult Equivalent (baseline and follow-up survey) Baseline - including attritors (2007) Follow-up (2009) .0001 .0002 .0003 .0004 .0005 .0004 Density Density .0002 0 0 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Real monthly consumption expenditure per adult equivalent Real monthly consumption expenditure per adult equivalent kernel = epanechnikov, bandwidth = 161.91 Source: Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services, prepared by Oxford Policy Management (2010). CT-OVC Operational and Impact Evaluation 2007-2009 Final Report: Annex E. 36 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya Box 9: CT-OVC Impact Evaluation Highlights • Income multipliers of Ksh 1.34 and Ksh 1.81 in West and East regions • A 13 percent reduction in the share of households living on less than 1 dollar a day • A 13 percent increase in measles vaccination among children aged 3 to 5 years old • A 13 percent increase in access to preventive care for children under the age of 5 • A 9.1 percent increase in school enrollment among children aged 13 to 18 years old The impact evaluation also showed that the increase in participation in household-run, non- CT-OVC programme had improved outcomes farm business enterprises. For those individuals related to adolescent sexual behavior and (particularly women) who lived far from markets, social behavior. Adolescent children enrolled the receipt of the transfer helped them to in the cash transfer programme were less likely participate in casual wage labour activities. The to have sex, less likely to have unprotected sex, programme was also associated with an increase and less likely to have multiple partners than in working in casual non-agricultural wage adolescents in control households. Furthermore, labour (particularly for males) and a decrease in young women enrolled in the programme working in agricultural wage labour. were 5 percentage points less likely to become pregnant than their counterparts not enrolled in The CT-OVC programme increased social the programme. Mental health outcomes also capital and strengthened informal safety nets were better for adolescent youths enrolled in the and risk-sharing arrangements in beneficiary program, with lower rates of depression, greater households. Even in the case of the poorest belief in their own agency and self-efficacy, and households, transfers increased self-esteem and more positive views of the future than young increased their ability to engage in community women in control groups. and religious activities. The evidence from impact evaluation indicates When beneficiaries spend their cash transfers, that the CT-OVC programme affected some they pass on the benefits of the extra income aspects of the livelihoods of beneficiaries and to others inside and outside the local economy, their communities in rural Kenya, particularly often to households that are not eligible for the in the case of female-headed and smaller cash transfer who tend to own most of the local households. Female-headed households and businesses. The study found income multipliers smaller households enrolled in the cash transfer from the CT-OVC programme in the West and programme owned more small animal livestock East regions, in which every Ksh transferred than control households that were not enrolled to poor households raised local income by in the programme. Ksh 1.81 in the East region and Ksh 1.34 in the West region. However, the impact evaluation The CT-OVC programme also influenced the report noted that these income multipliers are type of income-generating activities in which potentially limited by poorly functioning labour, the beneficiary households participated, capital, and land markets that may constrain the most of which involved casual or informal supply response of local producers. Key findings labour. For adults in female-headed households, from the impact evaluation are in Annex 2. receiving the transfer was associated with an Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 37 3.2 IMPACT EVALUATION OF THE HSNP The cash transfers also had a significant effect A n external independent consulting firm completed an impact evaluation of the first phase of the Hunger Safety Net Programme on reducing hunger and increasing food security among beneficiary households. Many respondents referred to reduced hunger as (HSNP 1), with a baseline survey in 2009 and a the most fundamental impact that the HSNP follow-up survey in 2012. The impact evaluation had had on their wellbeing, with the majority revealed that HSNP 1 had significantly increased of households responding that they had been consumption and reduced poverty in beneficiary able to have more and/or larger meals. This was households. It also showed that the programme evident in the increase in food consumption had resulted in significant improvements in expenditure, particularly among poorer terms of food security, child education, savings, households, smaller households, and households and spending on healthcare. who had received a higher cumulative per capita transfer value over the previous year. The follow-up survey conducted three years after the baseline survey showed that there The impact evaluation showed that the cash had been a decrease in the severity of poverty transfers had a small but significant impact among HSNP households and a reduction in on the average monthly amount spent on the percentage of households in the lowest healthcare per household member. There national consumption decile. Figure 11 shows was also a marked increase in the likelihood of the impact of the cash transfers on the poverty seeking health care among those who suffered indicators of beneficiary households. The results an illness or injury in the previous three months. indicate that the HSNP cash transfers act as an However, this was the case for both the treatment important safety net for these households and and control groups so cannot be attributed to mitigate the impact of adverse shocks such as the HSNP. the drought that occurred in 2011. There was no conclusive evidence that the programme In terms of education, the quantitative data from had a significant impact on the ownership of impact evaluation did not produce any definitive livestock or other productive assets, but there is evidence of the HSNP having a positive impact on evidence to suggest the programme is enabling school attendance or expenditure. However, the beneficiaries to increase their purchases of “non- qualitative research indicated that beneficiary productive assets” such as housing materials, households believed that the programme was clothing, and basic household items. helping households to meet the financial costs Figure 11: Poverty rates of HSNP Beneficiary Households at the Time of the Baseline and Follow-up Surveys 100 80 60 40 BL FU2 20 0 In bottom Poverty Severity of In bottom Poverty Severity of national Gap poverty national Gap poverty decile decile HSNP households Control households Source: Ministry of Devolution and Planning, prepared by Oxford Policy Management (2013). Kenya HSNP Monitoring and Evaluation Component Quantitative Impact Evaluation Final Report, 2009-2012. 38 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya Box 10: HSNP Impact Evaluation Highlights • A 10 percent reduction in extremely poor households, (those in the lowest national consumption decile) • A 7 percent reduction in the severity of poverty and in the poverty gap • 87 percent of beneficiary households reported eating more and/or larger meals of accessing education. Additionally, there was 3.3 BENEFICIARY SATISFACTION SURVEY some evidence that the programme was having a small positive impact on the proportion of children whose main activity is education. T he Programme Implementation and Beneficiary Satisfaction survey (PIBS) is designed to provide the government with Furthermore, there was some evidence that the HSNP was having a positive effect on children regular independent and rigorous data on who were already in school, with a significant the implementation of the NSNP and on increase in the proportion of children passing beneficiaries’ level of satisfaction with the Standard 4 and in the highest grade achieved by services that it provides. The government children aged between 6 and 17 years old. This procured an external independent consultant impact was most noticeable for the poorer and to complete the PIBS survey. This consultancy smaller households enrolled in the HSNP. firm will regularly interview a random and representative sample of 3,222 NSNP After one year of programme operations, beneficiaries located in all 47 counties of Kenya. a significant number of HSNP households reported positive changes in their work The first PIBS survey took place between April patterns and reported being able to expand or and September 2015, and the consultancy improve their existing businesses as a result of firm produced a first draft of the report receiving the HSNP cash transfers. The impact in early October 2015.19 This draft report evaluation also revealed that the cash transfers shows that beneficiaries are satisfied overall were enabling some women (specifically those with the NSNP’s services and that the NSNP in female-led households) to take more control cash transfers have had a positive impact on of the household budget and to increase their their overall well-being. Over 90 percent of participation in income-generating activities. respondents reported improvements in their consumption and household diet. Additionally, There was much evidence from the impact over three-quarters of the respondents reported evaluation that the HSNP is having a improvements in health, school attendance, and statistically significant impact in terms of self-esteem. Beneficiaries also indicated that the increasing the uptake of credit, particularly by cash transfers have had a positive impact on poorer households. There were also significant household participation in the community and increases in the proportions of HSNP households their acceptance by the community. Some of that had cash savings and that had borrowed the respondents said that the cash transfers had cash in the previous month. Annex 2 lists some of enabled them to buy assets and start income- the key findings of the HSNP impact evaluation. generating activities. The findings of the PIBS At the time of writing this progress report, the PIBS survey report is not yet in final form and is not yet available to the public. 19 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 39 Table 11: PIBS Survey – Proportion of Beneficiaries Reporting Positive Impact of the NSNP on Various Well-being Indicators Indicator CT-OVC HSNP OPCT PWSD-CT Overall % of beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on 94.7 94.2 94.8 91.6 93.6 household consumption % of beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on 92.8 94 95.3 92.7 93.8 household dietary diversity % of beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on 95.4 82.8 68.9 75.3 79.2 household members’ school attendance and performance % of beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on 89.7 81 88 86.7 85 household health % of beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on 82.4 76.7 78.5 79.2 78.4 household members’ self-esteem % beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on 75.6 73.8 71 68.2 71.8 acceptance by other community members % of beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on 65.4 66.1 54.9 51.3 59.4 households’ participation in community activities % beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on household 47.4 61 46.4 47.1 52.5 ownership of assets % beneficiaries reporting a positive impact of the NSNP on household 29.2 44.7 21.3 29.9 34 income-generating activities Source: Ministry of Labour, Social Security and Services, prepared by Promin Consultants and Development Impact Consultants (2015), Programme Implementation and Beneficiary Satisfaction Survey Cycle 1 Report, draft. survey with regard to the impact of the NSNP evaluation, set to take place between 2015 on household well-being can be found in Table and 2017, will follow on from the work of the 11. The results are given separately for each cash first impact evaluation (2009-2012) and will transfer programme as well as collectively for the investigate changes that have taken place in NSNP as a whole. the programme. The quantitative aspect of the impact evaluation will look into the changes As shown by the PIBS survey, NSNP that have taken place in the programme since beneficiaries believe that the cash transfers the last impact evaluation, including the types have had positive effects on their welfare, of households that are targeted, the value of particularly in terms of improving consumption, transfers, and the scale-up of the programme diet, school attendance, health, self-esteem, and to be responsive to shocks. In addition to this community acceptance/participation. rigorous quantitative impact evaluation, the evaluation will use qualitative methods to 3.4 ONGOING RESEARCH ON THE IMPACT investigate the effects of the HSNP cash transfers OF THE NSNP CASH TRANSFER on the local economy, the context in which the PROGRAMMES programme is operating and how this is affected T wo further impact evaluations are currently in progress, one for the CT-OVC programme and another for the HSNP. The current HSNP by the cash transfer, and the operation of the Arid Lands Support Programme.20 The Arid Lands Support Programme is a DfID funded programme that aims to build more resilient livelihoods for some of the poorest 20 people in northern Kenya. This programme complements the HSNP, to ensure longer-term resilience to drought and other shocks in the four counties of Turkana, Marsabit, Mandera and Wajir. 40 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya The 2012-2016 impact evaluation for the CT- transfers, in which households are penalized by OVC programme is also a follow-up to the a reduction in their payment if they do not meet previous impact evaluation (2007-2009) and certain conditions pertaining to the education will gather information on the program’s recent and health of their children. The evaluation pilots and initiatives. In addition to looking at is also analyzing the targeting of the CT-OVC the overall impact of the cash transfers, as in the programme to determine if the programme is last study, this impact evaluation is specifically reaching the most vulnerable households. investigating the piloting of conditional cash Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 41 4. MOVING FORWARD WITH THE NSNP A t the inception of the NSNP, policymakers identified the key results that the programme had to meet and specific activities other similar programmes such as with the World Food Programme’s cash-for-assets programme and with other services that may help them that it must undertake to achieve those results. further. As a result, the NSNP continues to As the NSNP develops and progresses, they are evolve to better serve the needs of vulnerable identifying other goals for the NSNP to pursue populations in Kenya. in the future to make it more efficient and effective and to realize the right to social security 4.1 THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE NSNP enshrined in the Constitution. Most importantly, they are working to ensure sustainability of the NSNP and cash transfers by passing the National N ational Social Protection Policy as Law. The government developed the National Social Protection Policy (NSPP) in 2011 in response to Social Protection Policy into law and ensuring continued government commitment to funding the new Constitution of Kenya that specifically the social protection sector. Additionally, the lays out a right to social protection. In Kenya’s NSNP has identified several new potential ways vision of moving towards a more equitable and to increase the impact of the cash transfers, inclusive future, the NSPP seeks to reduce poverty ranging from indexing their value to inflation and vulnerability by protecting individuals and to varying the cash transfer amount based on households from the impact of adverse shocks. household size and vulnerability. These initiatives The NSPP aims to achieve this by increasing the are at various stages of design and piloting and access of individuals and households to social may be added to the NSNP in the future. Finally, welfare services. the NSNP is providing beneficiaries with links to Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 43 The NSPP lays out policy measures in most of the NSNP’s operating budget, thus social assistance, social security, and health ensuring the program’s sustainability. Figure insurance. The National Safety Net Programme 12 shows the expected financing of the NSNP (NSNP) falls under the social assistance policy through FY2017/2018, demonstrating the measures, which seek to establish institutions and continued expansion of the programme as provide resources to provide social assistance as well as the increasing funding being provided well as coordinate approaches to the design by the Government of Kenya. Even though an and implementation of all social assistance expansion plan for the post-2017 has not yet programmes. In addition, the social assistance been developed, the Government of Kenya is policy measures of the NSPP enable the committed to continuing the expansion of the government to scaleup existing social assistance NSNP to realize the Constitution’s right of social programmes and widen their geographical and protection for all. demographic coverage. Furthermore, the NSPP supports the government to regularly review Figure 12: Projected Financing for NSNP, FY 2012/2013-FY 2017/2018 (US$ millions) the implementation of its social assistance 250 interventions. 200 This National Social Protection Policy was 150 approved by the Cabinet in May 2012. It 100 has yet to become law but is currently before the National Assembly awaiting debate and 50 approval. The sessional paper providing the 0 broad strategies for implementation of the policy FY 12/13 FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 FY 16/17 FY 17/18 was approved by the National Assembly earlier in Total Financing Government Development Partners 2015. The National Social Protection Council Bill Source: World Bank (2013). Programme Appraisal Document for the National Safety Net Programme for Results. is awaiting discussion in Parliament and, once passed, will provide legal underpinning for the 4.2 ACTIVITIES TO IMPROVE THE WELFARE implementation of the policy. Once the NSPP AND INCREASE THE RESILIENCE OF becomes law, the NSNP will have a stronger BENEFICIARIES basis for continuing to expand and improve its cash transfer programmes. C onditional Cash Transfers. Many cash transfer programmes around the world, particularly in Latin America, are conditional in that they make The Continued Expansion of the NSNP. In the receipt of the cash transfer dependent upon accordance with the National Social Protection the recipient households taking certain actions to Policy, the government is committed to scaling improve their welfare, often in the areas of health up existing social assistance programmes to reduce poverty and increase the resilience of or education. Other programmes, including the individuals and households. It has developed cash transfer programmes within the NSNP, have an expansion plan for the NSNP that sets out soft conditions in which households are supposed clear goals for the coverage of the various to make similar investments in their own well- cash transfer programmes through 2017. After being but do not cease to receive transfers if they 2017, the government of Kenya will be funding do not make those investments. 44 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya While conditional cash transfers are very This pilot currently covers slightly more than common in Latin America, they are not as 1,500 households spread around six counties. widespread in Africa. Many researchers and Households began to be penalized in March practitioners have raised concerns about 2015, and an impact evaluation conducted the feasibility of implementing conditional between 2012 and 2016 will assess the effect cash transfers in Africa due to the poorer that the conditions have had on the households. quality of social services and more limited This impact evaluation will determine if the implementation capacity in many African penalties used in the pilot have improved countries than in Latin American countries. outcomes for households more than the soft For example, if transfers become conditional conditions currently imposed by the CT-OVC on recipients investing in their family’s health programme. Programme staff who have visited or education, then it is necessary to have well- the households receiving the conditional cash functioning health and education systems to transfer report that many of the beneficiaries meet the demand. Also, strong government believe that imposing these conditions will help capacity is needed to implement a conditional the CT-OVC programme to meet its objectives cash transfer to collect and manage data of improving school attendance and health required to ensure that households have outcomes, but the impact evaluation will complied with the conditions. produce hard evidence if the conditions affect these outcomes. Because of this debate about how appropriate conditional cash transfers are in the Figure 13: Compliance with Health Conditions in the CT-OVC Pilot, May/June 2015 payment cycle African context, it is important to create an 90 evidence base on the relative effectiveness 80 of conditional versus unconditional (or soft 70 condition) cash transfer programmes in Africa. 60 % Compliance The NSNP is currently conducting a pilot study 50 of a conditional cash transfer within the CT-OVC. 40 The households involved in this pilot study must 30 20 meet certain conditions related to education and 10 health in return for their transfers. The education 0 condition is that beneficiary households are 0 1 2 Child Age 3 4 5 required to ensure that their children aged 4 and Source: CT-OVC programme administrative data. older are enrolled in and attend school at least 80 percent of the time. The health condition Initial data the CT-OVC programme has is that beneficiary households are required to ensure that their children under the age of 1 year collected from the pilot show that households old are up-to-date with their vaccinations and are more likely to comply with the health that their children under the age of 5 years old conditions related to the youngest children are taking Vitamin A supplements and attending than with the older children. In data from the growth monitoring clinics. If any households May/June 2015 payment cycle, nearly half of all of are not meeting these conditions, then money the 5 year olds from beneficiary families did not is deducted from their cash transfers for each take Vitamin A supplements or attend growth payment cycle until the household begins monitoring clinics (see Figure 13) compared to to meet the conditions. over 80 percent of newborns who complied Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 45 with health conditions. On the other hand, these as a result of errors made by the school or health data show that the oldest children, those over facility such as attendance sheets being filled the age of 7, are the most likely to have complied out incorrectly by teachers, vaccine shortages, with the education conditions, with over 90 or health workers turning away OVCs for non- percent being in compliance. Younger children urgent growth monitoring. Once the impact are somewhat less likely to comply with the evaluation results are available, policymakers education conditions, with less than 80 percent will need to weigh any positive impact against of 5 year olds and less than 90 percent of 4 and the operational difficulties of implementing a 6 year olds being in compliance (see Figure 14). conditional cash transfer to determine if it is However, the actual impact of the conditions worth continuing or expanding the programme. will not be known until the impact evaluation is completed at the end of 2016. Indexing Transfer Values to Inflation. Adjusting the value of cash transfers to prevent their Figure 14: Compliance with Education Conditions in the CT-OVC Pilot, May/June 2015 payment cycle purchasing power from diminishing was 100 discussed in detail in section 2.2.3. Currently, 90 the HSNP is the only programme to index cash 80 transfer values to inflation. On the other hand, 70 the value of the CT-OVC has not increased since % Compliance 60 50 2011, which has meant that the real value of the 40 cash transfer has greatly decreased over recent 30 20 years. The government and its development 10 partners have started an initial dialogue 0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 about how best to address the problem of Child Age the diminishing purchasing power of the cash Source: CT-OVC programme administrative data. transfers in the MLEAA programmes. While the pilot will yield some interesting One option would be to index benefits to information on whether conditional transfers inflation. This is possibly the simplest option as can improve household well-being, it has faced it would only involve checking the consumer many operational difficulties and challenges. price index once a year to determine whether Due to logistical issues, it took several years for the purchasing power of the transfer has been the pilot to be successfully launched. Once the eroded and then adjusting the value of the pilot study started, it has proved to be time- transfer for the following year. A second option consuming and resource-intensive to conduct would be to index transfers to a basic basket of verification checks to ensure that households goods, which was the approach initially used are meeting the conditions. Verifying the health in the HSNP (75 percent of a full food basket). conditions involves enumerators going to This approach has the advantage that it could every household, while verifying the education take into account regional variations in benefit conditions involves enumerators visiting each levels, thus making the purchasing power of the child’s school to check their attendance and transfer consistent among different counties. enrollment. Households have often been A final option that managers of the NSNP and penalized for failing to comply with conditions the MLEAA programmes are looking at would 46 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya be to setting the cash transfer according to the The programmes are beginning to look minimum wage or to index it to a proportion into ways to vary the value of cash transfers of the minimum wage. These options have according to household circumstances. If a all been discussed by the government and its household has multiple vulnerable people, the development partners, but to date no decisions household would be eligible to receive a higher have been made. cash transfer. Figure 16 presents an example of what a future cash transfer programme might Variable Cash Transfer Values. Currently all look like if a programme were to vary the households in the CT-OVC, PWSD-CT, and amount of cash transfer that it provided based on the number of vulnerable members in a OPCT programmes receive Ksh 2,000 per beneficiary household. month and all households enrolled in the HSNP receive Ksh 2,550 per month. These cash In the hypothetical situation presented in transfer amounts are the same for all households Figure 15, each household receives Ksh 1,000, regardless of their circumstances. Previous each vulnerable person in the household impact evaluations of both the HSNP and the receives Ksh 500 and each additional CT-OVC have shown that smaller households household member receives Ksh 100. The benefit most from receiving the transfer as the household on the top left now only receives cash goes further among fewer people. Figure Ksh 1,500, and the household on the top right 15 presents an example. The figure assumes now receives Ksh 4,200. If the NSNP chooses to that there are 10 households enrolled in the vary the cash transfer value in the future, they cash transfer program, among whom there are could do so based on this example or they 21 vulnerable people (indicated in orange). All could choose to vary the transfer based on other of the households receive Ksh 2,000 regardless household characteristics. For example, extra of their size and regardless of how many cash could be given per vulnerable member, vulnerable people are in the household. For per additional household member, and/or per example, the household on the top left has only working adult member. While increasing cash one older person and receives Ksh 2,000, while transfer values based on household composition the household on the top right has 13 people, would probably be more equitable, there are still five of whom are considered vulnerable, yet this many questions about efficiency, effectiveness, household also receives Ksh 2,000. and availability of resources. Figure 15: Same Cash Transfer Value for All Households Figure 16: How Cash Transfers Might Vary Based on Household Regardless of their Composition Composition MLEACA programmes by HH charecteristivs: Number of households: 10 Per household: KSh 1,000 Number of households: 10 Current situation for MLEACA Number of vulnerable persons: 21 Number of vulnerable persons: 21 Per vulnerable person: KSh 500 programmes: Ksh 2,000 Total monthly transfer: KSh 24,300 Per other HH member: KSh 100 Total monthly transfer: Ksh 20,000 Source: Power Point presentation at the June 2015 JRIS mission, Naivasha, Kenya. Source: Power Point presentation at the June 2015 JRIS mission, Naivasha, Kenya. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 47 The NSNP is looking into these questions services that can help [to] transform their lives to determine if variable cash transfers are a [such as] access to banking, credit, and savings… possibility for the future. It is being assisted skills training and business development services by consultants engaged jointly by UNICEF to facilitate informal and formal employment…”21 and the WFP under the auspices of United The need for policymakers to understand how Nations Development Assistance Framework these complementary mechanisms would (UNDAF) Social Protection group. These function in the context of Kenya was also a key consultants are expected to come up with recommendation in the government’s Social policy recommendations to the government Protection Sector Review in 2012.22 on how transfer values can be adjusted regularly to take account of inflation and of the The government is therefore increasingly multiple vulnerabilities that characterize certain interested in establishing systems that would households. With these recommendations, enable safety net beneficiaries to transition the government will make decisions on any from safety net programmes such as the CT-OVC changes to the transfer values of the cash to programmes aimed at helping them to rise transfer programmes. out of poverty and into productive employment such as youth employment programmes. 4.3 COMPLEMENTARITY WITH AND BUILDING LINKS TO OTHER Similarly, the government is exploring how PROGRAMMES AND SERVICES best to help safety net beneficiaries to benefit W hile four of the government cash transfer from other social services such as health care. programmes are working together as The government is currently piloting the Health part of the NSNP, there are several other large- Insurance Subsidy Programme (HISP), an initiative scale assistance programmes in Kenya, such aimed at providing Kenya’s poorest with a health as the WFP’s food assistance programmes and insurance subsidy that covers both inpatient the government’s national school feeding and outpatient care in public and private health programme that have many similarities to facilities. The first phase of the programme covers the NSNP programmes in terms of assistance 125,000 Kenyans in 21,777 households (selected provided and target groups. Programme from the Single Registry) in all of Kenya’s 47 managers are working towards achieving counties. Since around mid-2015, the National greater coordination between the NSNP and Hospital Insurance Fund (NHIF) has registered these other programmes. a total of 18,441 out of the 21,777 households and issued them with beneficiary cards. The Connecting Beneficiaries to Other Services. The registration of the remaining beneficiaries will National Social Protection Policy identifies the continue until all targeted households are need to maximize the impact of social protection enrolled in the programme. Key stakeholders programmes by building graduation and exit including NHIF county branch staff, county mechanisms into safety net programmes, as children officers, county governments, local appropriate and by ensuring complementarity leaders, beneficiary welfare committee (BWCs) across programmes. The NSPP commits the members, community health workers, and government “…to ensure that people who are health care providers have been made aware of receiving social assistance have access to other the existence and importance of the HISP. Once 48 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya the HISP starts providing health care coverage Central to achieving effective coordination to these households, the programme will be and collaboration of safety nets in Kenya evaluated and if the pilot proves to be a success, is avoiding duplication of assistance and then the government will consider expanding ensuring that programmes complement each the HISP design. other. The WFP and the NSNP are currently working together to ensure that the WFP’s food Complementarity with the World Food assistance programmes (including cash-for-assets Programme. The Social Protection Secretariat is and unconditional cash transfers) will be fully implementing a Complementarity Initiative with integrated into the Single Registry of the NSNP. the World Food Programme (WFP) that aims to This is expected to result in greater coherence, integrate the WFP’s safety net programmes in coordination, and harmonization of the major Kenya with the National Social Protection Policy. safety net programmes in Kenya. In addition, The WFP has traditionally provided unconditional accountability will be increased by the creation in-kind food assistance, but as part of its of an integrated and effective complaints and corporate strategic plan and focus, it has been grievance mechanism for the NSNP. gradually moving its focus towards supporting As many as 5.7 percent of Cash for Assets poor and food-insecure households to develop households are currently also receiving transfers assets that contribute to their own and their from a MLEAA programme (CT-OVC, OPCT, and communities’ resilience rather than continuing PWSD-CT). This overlap will continue to grow as to provide them with assistance that is primarily the programmes expand. suited to emergency situations. At the same time, the WFP is currently providing the NSNP with technical assistance over the next four years It is also possible that government programmes to design and implement the complementarity in other sectors that target Kenya’s vulnerable strategy for integrating solutions to hunger into populations may make use of the Single the Kenyan safety net. Registry in the future. Republic of Kenya (2012) Kenya National Social Protection Policy , pp. 15 21 Ministry of State, National Development, Planning, Vision 2030 (2012) Kenya social Protection Sector Review. 22 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 49 5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS K enya’s provision of social protection sector has improved and increased over the past decade. On the social assistance side, for framework for delivering these programmes in order to leverage efficiencies and to ensure optimal impact for beneficiaries. example, a number of cash transfer programmes have been established and implemented over The National Safety Net Programme (NSNP) is an this period. Increasing numbers of robust impact important mechanism through which issues evaluations have demonstrated the important of weak systems, fragmented programming impact that these programmes have had in and low coverage are being addressed. As reducing poverty and in increasing household this report shows, significant progress has been resilience. However, in the course of implementing made in building accountability structures, these often small, pilot programmes, the ensuring harmonized information systems government, its development partners, and and creating a Single Registry of beneficiaries, other stakeholders learned a number of using a more secure and efficient payment important lessons. The first lesson learned was infrastructure, and expanding the number of the need for stronger mechanisms for delivering poor and vulnerable households benefitting cash transfers underpinned by comprehensive from cash transfers. Moreover, the follow-on policies and institutional arrangements. Given benefits of building coherent national systems the low coverage of the programmes in relation and infrastructure are already being observed, to the needs of the vulnerable, a key concern as in the case of the health insurance sub-sector has been how best to progressively scale up using the Single Registry to expand its services these programmes. Second, there was also need to the poor and vulnerable. to ensure a more harmonized and coordinated Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 51 Looking forward, the government and its NSNP should ensure that its complaints and partners will need to redouble their efforts grievances hotline is fully staffed and fully to achieve the results specified in the NSNP. functioning in order to record and address There are a few key challenges that the NSNP any complaints or grievances submitted by continues to face in terms of improving its beneficiaries. performance and increasing its impact. The 4. While most NSNP beneficiaries seem following recommendations are designed to to meet the targeting criteria of help it to address these challenges: the programmes, there is room for improvement in terms of ensuring that the 1. One of the biggest challenges to achieving most vulnerable households are enrolled the required results is the need to increase in the programme. Once the data from the timeliness and regularity of payments the 2015/2016 KIHBS are available, it will to beneficiaries, particularly in the case be necessary to update the poverty criteria of the MLEAA programmes. Delays and used the programmes when calculating sporadic payments erode the benefits of the PMT scores (as the current PMT uses data NSNP and make it difficult for households to from the 2005 KIHBS). budget or plan ahead. It is recommended that the ministries and cash transfer 5. While most NSNP beneficiaries have programmes have regular dialogue with the reported that the cash transfers greatly Treasury to reduce the current delays in the improve their well-being, over time the transmission of funds from the Treasury to value of the cash transfer for the MLEAA the programmes. programmes has diminished due to inflation. The last time the value of the 2. Another payment-related challenge is MLEAA cash transfers was increased was ensuring all beneficiaries are able to 2011. As a result, with inflation averaging receive their cash transfer payments. 8 percent per annum, the cash transfers Many households have been unable to are worth less today than they were worth open bank accounts because of various in 2011 in terms of purchasing power. It operational challenges and therefore have is recommended that the MLEAA cash been unable to receive their payments. It is transfer programmes should begin to index recommended that the NSNP work closely the value of their cash transfers to inflation. with payment service providers to address the problems that are preventing certain 6. As the cash transfer sector has grown households from opening bank accounts. in the past few years as evidenced by this report, there is now a need for 3. Too few beneficiary households are aware the government and its development of the existence of the programmes’ partners to consider the shape of the complaints and grievance mechanisms, social protection landscape beyond 2017. and the programmes resolve only a small An important consideration in this respect percentage of the complaints that they will be how best to build stronger links receive. The NSNP should scale up their between cash transfers and other services activities to inform beneficiary households and programmes such as health insurance, of the channels through which they can make complaints and express grievances. agriculture, and youth employment services The DOSD programmes should establish to meet the wider needs of vulnerable beneficiary welfare committees to collect people and communities. complaints and concerns. In addition, the 52 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya Annex 1: Financing of the NSNP over Time 2013/2014 FY 2014/2015 FY 2015/2016 FY BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET CT-OVC Total KSH 6,736,038,365 KSH 4,014,902,652 KSH 7,755,540,606 KSH 6,492,891,251 KSH 9,024,644,619 USD 77,425,728 USD 46,148,306 USD 83,843,682 USD 70,193,419 USD 90,246,446 GOK KSH 4,763,061,693 KSH 2,146,551,562 KSH 5,699,286,882 KSH 4,589,878,684 KSH 7,541,028,395 USD 54,747,836 USD 24,673,006 USD 61,613,912 USD 49,620,310 USD 75,410,284 World Bank Loan KSH 938,038,749 KSH 933,495,690 KSH 619,115,800 KSH 516,643,667 KSH 313,265,800 USD 10,782,055 USD 10,729,836 USD 6,693,144 USD 5,585,337 USD 3,132,658 Foreign Grant KSH 1,034,937,923 KSH 934,855,400 KSH 1,437,137,924 KSH 1,386,368,900 KSH 1,170,350,424 USD 11,895,838 USD 10,745,464 USD 15,536,626 USD 14,987,772 USD 11,703,504 OPCT Total KSH 2,857,000,000 KSH 2,560,112,645 KSH 5,930,585,940 KSH 5,602,223,299 KSH 8,028,299,971 USD 32,839,080 USD 29,426,582 USD 64,114,443 USD 60,564,576 USD 80,283,000 GOK KSH 2,857,000,000 KSH 2,560,112,645 KSH 5,930,585,940 KSH 5,602,223,299 KSH 8,028,299,971 USD 32,839,080 USD 29,426,582 USD 64,114,443 USD 60,564,576 USD 80,283,000 World Bank Loan Foreign Grant PWSD-CT Total KSH 770,000,000 KSH 770,000,000 KSH 770,000,000 KSH 775,686,797 KSH 1,200,000,000 USD 8,850,575 USD 8,850,575 USD 8,324,324 USD 8,385,803 USD 12,000,000 GOK KSH 770,000,000 KSH 770,000,000 KSH 770,000,000 KSH 775,686,797 KSH 1,200,000,000 USD 8,850,575 USD 8,850,575 USD 8,324,324 USD 8,385,803 USD 12,000,000 World Bank Loan Foreign Grant HSNP Total KSH 2,226,000,000 KSH 1,234,165,600 KSH 4,261,558,730 KSH 4,068,207,293 KSH 4,255,527,660 USD 25,586,207 USD 14,185,811 USD 46,070,905 USD 43,980,619 USD 42,555,277 GOK KSH 312,000,000 KSH 249,600,000 KSH 624,000,000 KSH 626,408,791 KSH 1,349,527,660 USD 3,586,207 USD 2,868,966 USD 6,745,946 USD 6,771,987 USD 13,495,277 World Bank Loan Foreign Grant KSH 1,914,000,000 KSH 984,565,600 KSH 3,637,558,730 KSH 3,441,798,502 KSH 2,906,000,000 USD 22,000,000 USD 11,316,846 USD 39,324,959 USD 37,208,632 USD 29,060,000 SPS Total KSH 138,332,413 KSH 30,285,560 KSH 577,848,656 KSH 329,325,167 KSH 779,088,073 USD 1,590,028 USD 348,110 USD 6,247,012 USD 3,560,272 USD 7,790,881 GOK KSH 19,263,413 KSH 14,606,440 KSH 14,795,906 KSH 10,933,734 KSH 13,244,073 USD 221,419 USD 15,679,120 USD 159,956 USD 118,203 USD 132,441 World Bank Loan KSH 119,069,000 KSH 15,679,120 KSH 563,052,750 USD 318,391,433 KSH 762,844,000 USD 1,368,609 USD 180,220 USD 6,087,057 USD 3,442,070 USD 7,628,440 Foreign Grant -- -- -- -- KSH 3,000,000 USD 30,000 NSNP Total KSH 12,727,370,778 KSH 8,191,950,666 KSH 19,295,533,932 KSH 17,268,333,807 KSH 23,287,560,323 USD 146,291,618 USD 94,160,352 USD 208,600,367 USD 186,684,690 USD 232,875,603 Note: Reported in Kenya Shillings (Ksh) and in US dollars (using the average exchange rate of each financial year (Ksh 87 to US$1 in 2013/14 FY, Ksh 92.5 to US$ 1 in 2014/15 FY, and Ksh 100 to US$ 1 in 2015/16 FY) Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya 53 Annex 2: Impact Evaluation Results Key Impacts on Beneficiary Households from the CT-OVC Impact Evaluation (2007-2011) • 13% reduction in the share of households living on less than one dollar a day. • 20% increase in dairy and egg consumption among smaller-sized households and a 16% increase among female-led households. • 14% increase in meat and fish consumption among smaller-sized households and a 7% increase among female-led households. • 12% reduction in child labour on farm. • 9.1% increase in school enrollment among children aged 13-18. • 4.4% reduction of dropping out of school among children aged 13-18. • Half a year more of grade completion among children aged 13-18. • 11% reduction in incidence of diarrhea among children aged 3-5. • 29% increase in care sought for children with diarrhea. • 13% increase in measles vaccination among children aged 3-5. • 13% increase in access to preventive care for children under age 5. • 11% less likely for beneficiaries to have had unprotected sex three or more times in the past 3 months. • 7% less likely for young women having had more than 2 sexual partners in the previous year. • 15% less likely for young males (15-24) to suffer from depression. • 19% more likely for young males (15-24) to score above the median on the Hope scale, an indicator of agency and self-efficacy. • 7-9% increase in youth believing that life would be better in 1,3, and 5 years. • 5% reduction in pregnancy among women aged 12-24. • 15% increase in the share of smaller-sized households owning small animals and a 6% increase among female-led households. • 7% increase in participation in household-run, non-farm business enterprises for female-led households. • Income multipliers of Ksh 1.34 and Ksh 1.81 in West and East regions. Key Impacts on Beneficiary Households from the HSNP Impact Evaluation (2009-2012) • 10% reduction in extremely poor households, i.e. those in the bottom national decile. • 7% reduction in severity of poverty and in the poverty gap. • Beneficiary households spend Ksh 213 more on food per month per adult equivalent. • 87% of beneficiary households report eating more and/or larger meals. • 13% increase in positive changes in work patterns and 5% increase in being able to expand or improve existing business. • Female beneficiaries, particularly in female-led households, have an increase in household empowerment with more control of the household budget and more likely to undertake income generating activities. • Children in beneficiary households are more likely to have passed Standard/Grade 4 • Beneficiary households spend more on healthcare per capita. • Beneficiary households are more likely to save money and access loans. 54 Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya Disbursement Linked Result (DLR) Disbursement Linked FY13/14 FY14/15 FY15/16 FY16/17 FY17/18 Indicator Assessment: September 2013 Assessment: July 2014 Assessment: July 2015 Assessment: July 2016 Assessment: July 2017 I. Expanding cash transfers to promote more comprehensive and equitable coverage 1. Number of additional 1.1 Expansion Plan for the 1.2a 65,000 additional HHs 1.2b 130,000 additional HHs 1.2c 235,000 new HHs enrolled households enrolled in NSNP, informed by poverty and enrolled in the NSNP according enrolled in the NSNP according in the NSNP according to agreed the NSNP according to the vulnerability criteria, adopted to agreed Expansion Plan and to agreed Expansion Plan and Expansion Plan and paid for by expansion plan. (US$ 10) paid for by GOK in comparison paid for by GOK in comparison GOK in comparison with July with July 2013 baseline with July 2013 baseline 2013 baseline (US$ 24.89) (US$ 24.89) (US$ 40.21) II. Strengthening Programme Systems to Ensure Good Governance 2. Percent of programme 2.1 Establishment of baseline 2.2 The percent of programme beneficiaries who conform to (US$ 5) beneficiaries who conform to Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya the targeting criteria for the the targeting criteria for the programme in which they programme in which they are enrolled. are enrolled increased by 15 percentage points (US$ 15) 3. Single registry is fully 3.1 Programme MISs fully 3.2 Single Registry is fully operational with programme operational using agreed operational with links to IPRS MISs using agreed standards standards for internal payroll (US$ 10) for internal payroll controls. controls (US$ 15) 4. Percent of NSNP payments 4.1 60% of NSNP payments 4.2 90% of NSNP payments made electronically using made electronically using two- made electronically using two- two-factor authentication. factor authentication (US$ 6) factor authentication (US$ 9) Baseline: 40% Annex 3: Progress on the Disbursement Linked Indicators (DLI) 5. Percent of payments 5.1 45% of all payments 5.2 65% of all payments disbursed to Payment Service disbursed to Payment Service disbursed to Payment Service Providers on time. Providers on time (US$ 7.5) Providers on time (US$ 7.5) Baseline: 25% 55 56 6. Functional complaint and 6.1a Complaints and grievance 6.2a 45% of programme 6.1b Complaints and grievance 6.2b 65% of programme grievance mechanisms. mechanism is functional at beneficiaries can name two mechanism is functional at all beneficiaries can name two Baseline 6.2 15% national level for all five cash means of making a complaint levels for all five cash transfer means of making a complaint transfer programmes (US$ 5) (US$ 10) programmes (US$ 10) (US$ 10) III. Harmonizing cash transfer programme to improve sectoral coherence 7. System for scaling up the 7.1 A system for scaling up the NSNP as part of the national NSNP as part of the national drought risk management drought risk management system. system has been created with agreed levels of GoK contingency financing (US$ 20) 8. Strategy for consolidating the 8.1 Strategy for consolidating 8.2 Strategy for consolidating cash transfer programmes. CT-OVC, OPCT, PWSD-CT and the CT-OVC, OPCT, PWSD-CT UFS-CT adopted and UFS-CT implemented (US$5 m) (US$ 10) 9. The government finances the 9.1 GoK finances the HSNP in HSNP in line with budget line with budget and policy and policy commitments. commitments (US$5 m) Number of DLRs per 2 5 5 5 3 assessment Total disbursement per US$ 20 million US$ 32.5 million US$ 70.89 million US$ 67.39 million US$ 59.21 million assessment Note: Achieved DLIs are highlighted in blue. Inua Jamii Towards a More Effective National Safety Net for Kenya