GAZETTE NOTICE NO. 4333

under the jurisdiction of both the national and county governments that require coordination, collaboration, consultation and co-operation. 1.2.1 National Context At the National level, the National Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation System (NIMES) provides a framework for the conduct and practice of M&E within the public sector. NIMES overall objective is to provide a reliable mechanism to monitor and evaluate implementation of government policies, programmes and projects. NIMES aims at strengthening governance by; improving transparency, strengthening accountability relationships, and building a performance culture within the two levels of government to support better policy making, budget decision making and management. It is designed to ensure regular reporting on implementation progress of the country‘s priority policies, programmes and projects outlined in key policy documents such as MTPs, CIDPs, devolved funds programmes, the National Accountability Management Framework, and Performance Contracts and the Performance Appraisal System. NIMES is replicated by CIMES at the County level. Further, the National government has developed a Kenya National M&E Policy which articulates the Government‘s commitment to manage for development results at all levels. The policy provides a clear framework for strengthening the coverage, quality and utility of the assessment of public policies, programmes and projects. It proposes that adequate financial resources for monitoring and evaluation are allocated at all levels. The policy sets the basis for a transparent process by which the citizenry and other development stakeholders can undertake a shared appraisal of results; and outlines the principles for a strong M&E system as an important instrument for driving the achievements of programmes underpinning the Kenya Vision 2030. This policy applies to all public policies, strategies, programmes and projects managed by ministries, County governments, departments, parastatals and executing agencies of public programmes. The National M&E Policy provides clarity and direction to the NIMES. The policy captures institutional arrangements and responsibilities put in place to implement and coordinate M&E at both national and County levels, particularly the mechanisms to co-ordinate and link national and County level M&E systems. The M&E system and the requirement to report on progress encompass all levels of government, including national government, counties, the judiciary, constitutional commissions and independent offices. 1.2.2 County Context The Constitution requires the county governments to plan and budget to deliver on policies, programmes and projects. The planning, budgeting, implementation and M&E draw guidance within the framework of County Integrated Development Plan (CIDP), County Sectoral Plans, County Performance Management Plans, County Spatial Plan, Annual Development Plan (ADP), and Cities and Urban Areas Plans. Upon transition to the system of devolved governance, The County Government of Uasin Gishu inherited functions previously performed by the defunct local authorities and the national government departments at the defunct districts. Among these were the monitoring and evaluation systems, which were mainly in form of administrative data collection systems, and within projects undertaken with specific funding from Government or development partners. However, coordination of the various monitoring and evaluation systems within the development discourse of the County remains a daunting task, thus calling on the County government to develop and institutionalize a consolidated M&E system that will be able to track and ascertain implementation status of policies, programmes and projects and their impacts. At the moment, while there continues to be a substantial amount of administrative data collection and other data collection endeavors, minimal attention is given to data analysis, and quantitative and qualitative findings are seldom used to inform planning and policy making. A study conducted by the Government of Kenya through Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate (MED) in 2012 on the status of M&E in the Counties established various challenges which include: inadequate policy and legal framework, non-existing/operational M&E structures, inadequate funding for M&E, non-participation of stakeholders and inadequate technical capacity. Other challenges included; emphasis on activities and outputs rather than outcomes and impacts, inadequate analyses of results, lack of infrastructure and equipment to carry out monitoring, delayed reporting and non-utilization of generated evidence for decision making. The County Government of Uasin Gishu therefore intends to address the structural and functional weaknesses of monitoring and evaluation in the County by providing a policy framework and institutional arrangement for implementation of an effective monitoring and evaluation system. This will facilitate real time tracking of priority policies, programmes and projects; and ensure harmonized M&E and reporting within the County. 1.3 Justification of the Policy The constitution of Kenya provides the basis for monitoring and evaluation in the country. The Constitution has provisions on transparency, integrity, access to information and accountability which are tenets of good governance. The main constitutional provisions on M&E and planning are Articles 10, 35, 56, 174, 185, 201, 203, 225, 226, and 227. Monitoring and evaluation is an important element of implementing government initiatives to ensure that transparency, integrity, access to information and accountability principles are embraced in resource allocation and management at all levels of government. Consequently, the government should use monitoring and evaluation as an integral part of managing implementation of government policies, programmes and projects. Section 47(1) of the County Government Act (2012) requires the Executive Committee to design a performance management plan to evaluate performance of the County public service and implementation of the County policies. Further, Section 108(1) of the Act outlines the responsibilities of devolved levels in preparation of a five-year County integrated development plan (CIDP) with clear goals and objectives, an implementation plan with clear outcomes, provisions for monitoring and evaluation, and clear reporting mechanism. Sections 7 and 8 of the Intergovernmental Relations Act (2012) establish the National and County Government Coordinating summit with functions including those related to M&E, thus: evaluating the performance of national or County governments and recommending appropriate action; receiving progress reports and providing advice as appropriate; monitoring the implementation of national and County development plans and recommending appropriate action. Other functions include: coordinating and harmonizing the development of county and national government policies; consideration of reports from other intergovernmental forums and other bodies on matters affecting national interest; and consultation and co-operation between the national and county governments. Public Finance Management Act (2012) outlines the responsibilities of County government regarding management and control of public finance. Section 104(1) states that, subject to the constitution, a County Treasury shall monitor, evaluate and oversee the management of public finances and economic affairs of the County government. This includes the monitoring of the County government‘s entities to ensure compliance with the Act and effective management of their funds, efficiency and transparency and, in particular, proper accountability for the expenditure of those funds; and reporting regularly to the County assembly on the implementation of the annual County budget. Further, section 126(1) requires the County government to prepare a development plan in accordance with Article 220(2) of the constitution, that includes strategic priorities for the medium term that reflect the County government‘s priorities and plans; and programmes to be delivered with details for each programme of the strategic priorities to which the programme will contribute, the services or goods to be provided, measurable indicators of performance, and the budget allocated to the programme. The CGUG, in cognizance of the importance of M&E for implementation of its various plans, has adopted M&E as a management tool to enhance achievement of development targets and promote transparency and accountability in the public sector. Notably, the CGUG has committed to use M&E as a tool to demonstrate results and enhance accountability. Towards this commitment, the County government has commenced on 2002 2002 establishing and implementing a CIMES. However, the various efforts are adversely affected by several challenges: fragmented and varying M&E practices, inadequate technical and financial capacities and weak coordination. These challenges are compounded by the fact that though the Constitution of Kenya 2010, PFM Act 2012, County Government Act 2012 and other relevant legislations require M&E to be undertaken, there is no existing appropriate policy framework. To realize this commitment, the CGUG is developing this policy framework to establish and implement CIMES. The Policy will institute a more coordinated and systematic approach to monitoring and evaluation in the County and will complement other County Government efforts in providing timely and regular information for decision making through tracking of the CIDP and other development plans. An operational robust CIMES will— (a) Strengthen M&E coordination within the County; (b) Ensure availability of timely and reliable data; (c) Track the implementation of investment programmes as outlined in the CIDP and other County development plans; (d) Provide feedback to the County policy formulation, planning, budget allocation and execution processes; (e) Build partnerships with stakeholders geared towards desirable outcomes and strategies; (f) Feed into the National Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation System (NIMES), even as it addresses the weaknesses highlighted in the situational analysis. CHAPTER TWO—POLICY OBJECTIVES AND PRINCIPLES This chapter discusses the objectives and principles of the M&E Policy. 2.1 Policy Strategic Objectives/Purpose This Policy seeks to provide a framework for establishment of a monitoring and evaluation system in the County to provide tracking systems that determine whether policies, programmes and projects impact the development process, as articulated in the CIDP and other County development plans. It will also establish common structures and standards that govern the application of effective monitoring and evaluation system in the County, thus facilitating realization of maximum development outcomes. 2.1.1 Policy objectives The CGUG M&E policy seeks to institutionalize M&E in the County in order to enhance implementation of the County government plans towards realization of the County vision. To achieve this, the policy will pursue the following objectives— (a) To establish a County Integrated M&E system to track whether policies impact the development process, as planned; (b) To promote a culture and practice of M&E for evidence-based decision making in government and non-state actors undertaking public development programmes in Uasin Gishu County; (c) To strengthen reporting and enhance accountability for performance in implementation of programmes, policies and projects at County and devolved levels, and enhance standardized reporting at devolved levels; (d) To promote use of monitoring and evaluation results through enhanced dissemination, communication and use of M&E findings to enhance implementation of policies, programmes and projects; (e) To provide feedback to the County policy, planning, and budget allocation and execution processes, and further build partnerships with stakeholders geared towards desirable outcomes and strategies. (f) To provide adequate monitoring and evaluation capacity to facilitate the full operationalization of CIMES for effective tracking and reporting on implementation progress of CIDP. (g) To ensure adequate budget is provided for monitoring and evaluation function in the County at all administrative levels; (h) To strengthen partnerships and collaborations with stakeholders (development partners, CSOs, private sector, among others) in the county in the establishment and operationalization of CIMES. 2.2 Policy Guiding Principles This policy outlines a set of principles to be observed in the practice of monitoring and evaluation in the County.  Transparency and Accountability: The County government will ensure all findings are publicly available unless there are compelling reasons otherwise, all resources utilized for development purposes shall be accounted for and realized results disseminated in formats that are easily accessible to all stakeholders.  Participation and Inclusion: Involvement of all stakeholders in monitoring activities, and ensure that there are incentives in place for them to engage therein. Stakeholders, and particularly the intended beneficiaries, are consulted in the evaluation, and that the consultations‘ results are used effectively to enhance the implementation process of programmes/ projects.  Ownership: A rights-based culture is promoted and entrenched by its inclusion in the value base for all M&E processes whereby the citizens have the opportunity to participate in the CIMES processes.  Promote Learning: Ensure that good practices and lessons learnt are shared among all stakeholders while providing opportunities for County M&E staff to be trained in effective monitoring and evaluation techniques.  Operational Effectiveness: The M&E process shall be routine, systematic and regularized, include a robust system built which is resilient that will promote benefits that are clear and the system scale is appropriately given resource availability. Management of the M&E function shall lead to a sustained on-time delivery of excellence and timely reporting of results for early intervention which is an important pillar of this policy.  Partnerships and collaboration: County government, development partners and its citizens shall collaborate to ensure that all development plans are executed to the benefit of the people of the County.  Managing for results: Monitoring and evaluation should focus on measuring the results (outputs, outcomes and impacts) of public policies, programmes and projects for target groups. 7th May, 2021 THE KENYA GAZETTE  Demand-driven: The quality and timeliness of quantitative and qualitative information must respond to the demand. Data producers should ensure that the production cycle is synchronized with the policy and budget cycle and, hence, inform the planning and budget cycle.  Credibility: Monitoring and evaluation shall be credible and based on reliable data or observations. Monitoring and Evaluation reports shall reflect consistency and dependability in data, findings, judgments, and lessons learnt, with reference to the quality of instruments and procedures and analysis used to collect and interpret information. To ensure the credibility and usefulness of M&E findings, the M&E practice should observe the following: (a) Impartiality and compliance with international standards in data collection, analysis and reporting, (b) Evaluators practice should conform to the code of conduct, (c) Use of realistic and practical techniques and indicators for measurement of results and progress, (d) Due regard for the welfare, beliefs and customs of those involved or affected, (e) Confidentiality on the identity of information providers.  Mainstreaming: To facilitate tracking of cross cutting issues and related results, the issues (gender, human rights, climate change, among others) will need to be mainstreamed into the Monitoring and Evaluation of projects and programmes.  Other specific principles to Monitoring and Evaluation will include: (a) Compliance with national and international best practices; (b) Reliance on data generated by KNBS and other local and international agencies; (c) Adaptability and ease to update; (d) Sustainability; and (e) Subscription to CIMES by all the stakeholders. Table 1 shows specific principles that will guide monitoring and evaluation in the County. Table 1: Principles of M&E Monitoring Evaluation  Ensure that monitoring is involved at all stages of the programme or project design and implementation.  Involve all stakeholders in monitoring activities, and ensure that there are incentives in place for them to engage therein.  Create an environment in which monitoring is perceived as beneficial both to individual performance and to organizational capacity.  Use a diversity of methods, including both qualitative and quantitative indicators.  Ensure that monitoring processes address the objectives, outputs of the respective projects and programmes.  Provide opportunities for County M&E staff to be trained in effective monitoring techniques.  Building enough time within the programme and project implementation process for participants to engage in the consultations and discussions of M&E results.  Ensure that good practices and lessons learnt are shared among all stakeholders.  Involve stakeholders in ongoing revision of the programme in the light of insights gained from monitoring.  Make provision for costs of monitoring activities in original budget  Ensure that clear targets are identified at the start of the project/programme implementation process and that delivery against these targets are used as the main framework for evaluation.  Incorporate a clear framework (such as a Results Matrix and Gantt chart) in the design of the project or programme to provide the basis for subsequent evaluation.  Make provision for costs of evaluation in original budget.  Ensure that all stakeholders, and particularly the intended beneficiaries, are consulted in the evaluation, and that the consultations‘ results are used effectively to enhance the implementation process of the project/ programme.  Identify and report important non-intended consequences.  Use a diversity of methods, including both qualitative and quantitative indicators.  Ensure that insights from the evaluation are disseminated externally so that others can learn from them. CHAPTER THREE—IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POLICY This chapter presents the resources required for Monitoring and Evaluation and operationalization of CIMES. Specifically, it highlights Tools and Standards for M&E, Capacity Development, Compliance with Policy Requirements, and Policy Review. 3.1 Introduction The County will rally the leadership to support actualization of CIMES by being the champions and users of the system. To ensure M&E receives full attention from all County staff involved in implementation and reporting, the M&E targets and indicators will be linked directly to the performance management system of the County, including Performance Contracts and Performance Appraisal System. The County directors will therefore be required to work closely with the CMED to ensure that the M&E function is given adequate attention within the County performance management process. 3.1.1 Monitoring This is a process of collecting, analyzing and reporting data on policies, programmes or projects inputs, activities, outputs, outcomes and impacts in order to track whether actual investment results are being achieved. This policy will guide the County to monitor activities in the implementation of the County development plans to provide the leadership, managers, decision makers and other stakeholders with timely implementation feedback. The monitoring strategy will entail— 2004 2004 (a) Tracking implementation of County policies, programmes and projects identified in the development plans; (b) Monitoring of programmes and projects at the institutional, administrative and political levels to show achievements of outputs and outcomes in the development plans; (c) Continuous monitoring of programmes and projects and reports generated on a quarterly basis to inform timely decision making; (d) Generation and compilation of County Annual Progress Report for policy making. 3.1.2 Evaluations This is a systematic and objective assessment of an ongoing or completed project, programme or policy on its design, implementation and results. It determines the relevance and fulfillment of objectives, efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. Evaluation is linked to monitoring as it tells managers whether project/programme activities are moving toward or away from project/programme objective and why. It therefore provides lessons learnt and recommendations for future improvements. The county will conduct formative and summative evaluations for its policies, programmes and projects with an aim of improving achievement of anticipated results. The county evaluation strategy will include— (a) Assessment of the outcomes and impact of policies, programmes and projects to ensure effective service delivery; (b) Provision of evidence-based information that is independent, credible, reliable, and useful for timely decision-making processes; (c) Linkage to the performance management system; (d) Strengthen partnerships and collaborations involving the County Government, National Government and non-state actors; (e) Commission of reviews, mid-term & end term evaluations, and impact evaluations of programmes/projects. The policy recommends the following evaluations— (a) Programme/Project Evaluations – Baseline, Mid-term and End-term Evaluations will be conducted on policies, programmes and projects in the County; (b) Impact Evaluations – Policies, programmes and projects will be subjected to impact evaluation. (c) Process and Performance Evaluations – Mandatory reviews and evaluations of institutional working mechanisms and procedures, and how they affect implementation of policies, programmes and projects will be conducted to generate new knowledge for lesson learning and management. (d) Special Reviews – Reviews for specific interventions will be conducted at the request of County Assembly and County Executive Committee. 3.1.3 Standards and Tools Some of the M&E tools, methods and approaches include performance indicators, M&E plan, M&E Framework, formal surveys, Rapid appraisal methods, Participatory methods, Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS), Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis and Impact evaluations. The choice of an appropriate tool depends on context and a range of considerations. Performance Indicators – These are measures of inputs, processes, outputs, outcomes, and impacts for policies, programmes and projects. The indicators will track progress, demonstrate results, and enable managers take corrective action. Each of the sectors/departments and other County government agencies will convene their respective stakeholders (state and non-state actors) meetings to identify and develop sector-specific indicators. This will be done in collaboration with the CMED. CMED will then come up with County indicators to be monitored. M&E Plan – The CMED will coordinate development of a costed County M&E Plan that will show the policies, programmes and projects that will be tracked and assessed in a financial year. The Plan will show indicators, baseline data and targets, and reviews and evaluations to be undertaken. M&E Framework – The CMED will coordinate development of M&E framework that presents impact, effect, output and activities along with verifiable indicators, means of verifications and assumption. The framework provides the basis for M&E needs and purposes. Formal Surveys – These will be used to collect standardized information from a carefully selected sample of people or households. Surveys usually collect comparable information for a relatively large number of people in particular target groups. Citizen report cards, client satisfaction or service delivery surveys will be promoted in the County. Rapid Appraisals – These are less structured data collection methods aimed at supplying needed information in a timely and cost-effective manner. They are quick, low-cost and involve key informant interviews, community group interviews, focus group discussions and mini-surveys. Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) – These will track the flow of public funds and determine the extent to which resources actually reach the target groups. The surveys will examine the manner, amount, and timing of releases of resources to different levels of service delivery units. PETS are often implemented as part of larger service delivery and facility surveys which focus on the quality of service, characteristics of the facilities, their management, incentive structures, among others. Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis – These are tools for assessing whether or not the costs of an activity can be justified by the outcomes and impacts. Cost-benefit analysis measures both inputs and outputs in monetary terms. Cost-effectiveness analysis estimates inputs in monetary terms and outcomes in non-monetary quantitative terms (such as improvements in student reading scores). Impact Evaluation – A systematic identification of the effects whether positive or negative, intended or not, on individual households, institutions, and the environment caused by a given development activity such as a program or project. Impact evaluation brings out the extent to which activities reach the poor and the magnitude of their effects on people‘s welfare. Impact evaluations can range from large scale sample surveys in which project populations and control groups are compared before and after, and possibly at several points during program intervention; to small- scale rapid assessment and participatory appraisals where estimates of impact are obtained from combining group interviews, key informants, case studies and available secondary data. Results Based M&E Framework – Effective monitoring and evaluation is based on a clear, logical pathway of results, in which results at one level lead to results at the next level. Results from one level flow towards the next level, leading to the achievement of the overall goal. If there are gaps in the logic, the pathway will not flow towards the required results. The major levels are; Inputs, Outputs (including processes), Outcomes and Impacts. 3.2 Capacity Development 7th May, 2021 THE KENYA GAZETTE Capacity development will be an integral part of CIMES because structured and institutionalized Monitoring and Evaluation practice will enhance service delivery in the County. The financial and technical capacities for M&E will be developed to meet the current challenges, with cross- cutting capacity issues also accorded special consideration. These will include; creating an enabling environment for M&E, rationalization of key monitoring reports and building County capacity for M&E. The County will set aside adequate financial and human resources for County M&E activities for effective monitoring and evaluation. This will be done at the projects/planning stage. The required financial and human resources for M&E will be considered within the overall costs of delivering the agreed results and not as additional costs. 3.2.1 Financial Resources for Monitoring and Evaluation Financial resources for M&E will be allocated as part of programme based budget. The County will strive to build partnerships with development partners to finance M&E related activities. The County will therefore ensure at least one per cent of the development budget is provided for M&E activities under the department of Economic Planning. Each department is required under this policy to set aside adequate funds to undertake routine M&E within their programmes and projects budget. 3.2.2 Technical Capacity The human resources required for M&E activities will be developed by assigning adequate staff to the M&E function. Their capacities will also be strengthened by providing the necessary M&E training, tools and equipment. For the purpose of this policy, operationalizing CIMES will involve provision of the following items:  Capacity building of technical officers and M&E champions;  Each department will be required to re-designate an M&E officer who will work in liaison with CMED;  Sensitization of the County Assembly, and the County Executive;  Commissioning and training for the CIMES computerization (e-CIMES), to manage data entry, aggregation and reporting. 3.3 Compliance with Policy Requirement A fully operational M&E system will assist in institutionalizing result-based management reforms even as it re-orients County public service and agencies towards the production of tangible results and value for money. Even though the policy functions as a quasi-enforcement mechanism, the sustainability of the M&E system will be ensured by a system of incentives. The benefits will be reflected at the individual level, as departments and sub-county performance will be linked to individual performance appraisal and, ultimately to wage reform. In the final analysis therefore, the CIMES will become an incentive-based reporting system both at institutional and individual levels, thus guaranteeing its sustainability. The policy will therefore, be enforced through incentives, benefits and sanctions on adherence to the set standards in undertaking M&E in the county. The County M&E Committee (CoMEC) will ensure compliance through rewards/incentives and sanctions. 3.3.1 Rewards This Policy recognizes the important role of incentives in the implementation of M&E as a way to raising awareness of the usefulness of M&E, and the utilization of M&E information. The CoMEC will apply incentives to appreciate M&E efforts and innovations. Some of the incentives include— (a) Public recognition and/or payment of 13th salary for County departments that conduct and use M&E; (b) Use of M&E experience as a criterion for staff promotion, employee of the year award, County honours/awards and letters of commendation; (c) Additional funding incentives to County departments that conduct effective M&E; and (d) Budgetary incentives for high-performing programmes/projects. 3.3.2 Sanctions The Policy recommends sanctions that will be directed to County departments and agencies, and individual officers that may include— (a) Financial penalties (budgetary and salary cuts or with-holding) (b) Name and shame by highlighting adverse M&E information and reports to County Assembly and disseminating widely; (c) Enact laws, decrees or regulations to make M&E mandatory; (d) Require performance exception reporting where targets are not met, with programme areas explaining poor performance. The operational procedures and standards introduced in this Policy will be developed by the CoMEC. 3.4 Policy review The Policy anticipates an evolving M&E environment that requires continuous review of its practices, approach and tools. This will be done after every five years through a participatory process involving all the key stakeholders in the County. This will make the Policy responsive to emerging developments in the practice and approaches of M&E. CHAPTER FOUR—REPORTING, COMMUNICATION AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT This chapter presents reporting structure that outlines the reporting requirements, dissemination of M&E information and knowledge management. 4.1 Introduction The M&E reporting is important because it enables the County to check whether implementation of the CIDP and other County plans are on track and allows for corrective actions accordingly; make informed decisions regarding operations, management and service delivery; ensure effective and efficient use of resources; evaluate the impact of a programme/project; and whether new knowledge has emerged that requires strengthening and/or modification to the project management plan. Information generated from M&E will thus inform planning, budgeting and funding decisions about the overall implementation performance of various programmes/projects outlined in the CIDP. The information will also support policy-formulation, accountability and transparency. The 2006 2006 monitoring reports will include programmes and projects implementation reports, and County departmental reports. The evaluation reports will include reports commissioned by the CoMEC, such as the mid and end term review of the CIDP. 4.2 Reporting Requirements This policy requires state and non-state actors operating within the County to submit timely and accurate progress reports on policies, programmes and projects in line with approved reporting standards, formats and frequency. The CMED will adopt the standard reporting template in line with CIMES guidelines for collection of data from sectors. This will ensure similar and simplified reporting hence eliminate unnecessary reporting burdens and fatigue. Reporting will be at both County and sub-county levels with reports showing performance at both levels. The reporting on implementation of policies, programmes and projects will be on monthly, quarterly, bi-annual and annual basis. CIMES will therefore generate, on a regular basis, monitoring instruments for feedback to sectors/departments, stakeholders and lower geographic levels from where data will be routinely collected. The main products of the system will be Annual Progress Reports (APR), Mid-term and End-term reports on CIDP or successor policy documents, the Public Expenditure Review (PER) report, and Sub-county and County Annual and Quarterly Monitoring and Evaluation Reports. Others will include; set of regularly monitored sector indicators and core set of indicators for County monitoring, popular versions of key reports, policy research papers, policy briefs and seminar, analyses of surveys, and quarterly project monitoring reports. The County reporting timelines will be as follows— (a) Departmental monthly programmes and projects implementation reports to be submitted by the 5th day following the end of a month; (b) Departmental quarterly programmes and projects implementation reports to be submitted by 15 th day of the month following the end of the quarter; (c) Quarterly M&E reports to be submitted by the last day of the month following the end of the quarter; and (d) Annual M&E reports to be submitted by 30 th of August. The quarterly and annual M&E reports will be forwarded to CMED for consolidation and onward transmission to CoMEC for approval. The CoMEC will then submit the report to CEC for approval before submission to the County Assembly. To track implementation of its programmes/projects and contribute to the County Annual Progress Report (CAPR) reporting timetable, the County will adopt the following schedule:  Wards, through WaMEC, will compile their respective reports and submit to the Sub-Counties (and their SCoMECs) by the first day of the next quarter;  Sub-counties, through the SCoMEC, submit their reports to County M&E Directorate seven days after end of the quarter, following the quarter to which the report is referring;  Sectors, through the SeMECs, submit their reports to County M&E Directorate fifteen days after end of the quarter, following the quarter to which the report is referring;  County M&E Directorate thereafter compiles the County Annual Progress Report (CAPR) for onward submission to ToC and CoMEC 25 days after end of the quarter; and  CoMEC will release the report for sharing and dissemination after review. 4.3 Dissemination of M&E information The County will develop an effective communication strategy that will enable the County M&E Directorate share M&E information released by CoMEC with the County citizens and key stakeholders as required by the Constitution. In addition, disseminating these reports will improve programme/project implementation, create a sense of ownership amongst citizens, advocate for additional resources, and ensure that County development activities are captured in CIMES. Some of the reports to be disseminated include CAPR, and periodic programmes/projects performance reports. M&E reports will be disseminated through numerous methods such as written reports, oral presentations, press releases and fact sheets that will reach a wide and varied audience. Other channels will include social and new media platforms, County website; e-mail, text messages and mobile notification messages; and citizen participation fora. CHAPTER FIVE—COUNTY M&E INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE This chapter highlights the institutional framework to facilitate implementation of CIMES. It specifically presents the CIMES structure in the County, with responsibilities and functions of the major players. 5.1 County M&E Structure Strong institutional arrangements for coordination, implementation and reporting are fundamental for a functional M&E system. This policy therefore: (a) Establishes CIMES as per the CIMES guidelines; (b) Establishes a County M&E Directorate (CMED) to coordinate CIMES under the department responsible for Finance and Economic Planning; (c) Establishes Service Delivery Unit (SDU) under the Governor‘s Office to coordinate service delivery that feeds into CIMES; (d) Adopts CIMES structures for the County; (e) Establishes M&E desk in each County department to coordinate M&E functions within the department; The structure of the CIMES envisaged in (d) above will encompass institutions from both levels of government, non-state actors (development partners working in the County, private sector and civil society organizations) and the citizens. The structure will comprise committees at the County, sub-county and ward levels. The existing legal structures such as the County Assembly, County Inter-Governmental Forum and the County Citizens Participation Forum will also form part of the CIMES structure. The County M&E Directorate under the Department of Economic Planning will coordinate CIMES. In addition, a service delivery unit (SDU) to be domiciled in the governor‘s office may be established to support CIMES in monitoring implementation of the governor‘s priority programmes and projects. 7th May, 2021 THE KENYA GAZETTE The structure will comprise the County Assembly Committee responsible for Finance and Economic Planning, County Monitoring and Evaluation Committee (CoMEC), Technical Oversight Committee (ToC), and the Sector Monitoring and Evaluation Committee (SeMEC). At the lower levels, there will be a Sub-County M&E Committee (SCoMEC) and Ward M&E Committee. Annex 1 illustrates how the main committees and Fora are involved in CIMES. 5.2 Responsibilities and Functions of the M&E Committees and Stakeholders The roles and responsibilities of the various committees that constitute CIMES are given as follows. 5.2.1 County Assembly Committee The Committee responsible for Finance and Economic Planning will, on behalf of the County Assembly, receive County M&E reports, review and present to the County Assembly for approval. It may also authorize the governor to present the report at the summit. Frequency of the County Assembly Committee meeting will be determined by the County Assembly calendar. 5.2.2 County Intergovernmental Forum The Inter-Governmental Relations Act of 2012 (IGRA 2012) provides for the creation of County Intergovernmental Forum (CIF) to be chaired by the Governor or Deputy Governor in Governor‘s absence, or member of Executive Committee nominated by the Governor (As per the IGRA 2012). Its membership comprises of all heads of department of national government at the county level including County Commissioner and County Executive Committee members or their nominees in writing. The CEC member responsible for finance and economic planning is the convener of this committee. The forum will meet quarterly to:  Receive, review and endorse M&E reports from CoMEC;  Present M&E reports to the County Assembly Committee responsible for Economic Planning; and  Give policy directions on M&E at the county level. 5.2.3 County Citizen Participation Fora Public Participation Bill 2018 proposes establishment of citizen participation fora that will among other responsibilities participate in the development of M&E indicators to monitor and evaluate CIDP, and give feedback to M&E reports. The CEC or Chief Officer responsible for the topic of the forum chairs and convenes the Fora. Membership is from representatives of CSOs, representatives of rights of minorities, marginalized groups and communities, representative of private sector business community, and development partners‘ representatives in the County. 5.2.4 County Monitoring & Evaluation Committee (CoMEC) The committee will be co-chaired by the County Secretary and a senior representative of the national government at the county level nominated by the County Commissioner in writing. It will comprise County Chief Officers, Heads of technical departments of national government at county level, County Assembly Clerk, Court Registrars, Representatives from devolved funds and Technical representatives managing all other non- devolved funds. The Chief Officer responsible for Economic Planning is the convener of this committee. The committee's main responsibility will be overall policy direction of the monitoring and evaluation function including continuous review of this policy to ensure relevance. Other responsibilities include:  Oversee delivery, quality, timeliness and fitness for purpose of M&E reports;  Drive service delivery through Results Based Management;  Receive, review and approve County and Sub-County M&E work plans and M&E reports;  Convening County Citizen Participation fora to discuss M&E reports;  Mobilise resources to undertake M&E at County and sub-county level;  Approve and endorse final set of County indicators;  Submission of M&E reports to NIMES, CIF, CoG, constitutional offices and other relevant institutions; and  Dissemination of M&E reports and other findings to stakeholders. 5.2.5 Technical Oversight Committee (ToC) The Technical Oversight Committee will comprise up to ten technical officers conversant with M&E and drawn from both County departments and national government departments at the County level. The committee will be chaired by the Chief Officer responsible for Economic Planning, and convened by the Director responsible for M&E. ToC will provide guidance on all the technical matters regarding County M&E. Key responsibilities will include:  Identify, commission and manage evaluations;  Review of the M&E reports;  Present M&E reports to CoMEC;  Capacity building for M&E;  Sets the strategic direction for CIMES;  Endorse M&E Directorate‘s work plan and advises M&E Directorate on actions to be taken on various M&E issues;  Approves County indicator reports for use by CoMEC; and  Endorses M&E Directorate‘s reports to be presented to CoMEC. 2008 2008 5.2.6 Sector Monitoring and Evaluation Committee (SeMEC) This committee will be co-chaired by a Chief Officer and a Director from a relevant County and national government department respectively. Membership will comprise sector relevant County Departments‘ Chief Officers, equivalent national government representative from that sector and sector relevant CSOs. The committee will champion all M&E activities at the sector level. Key responsibilities will include; production of sector M&E reports, development of sector indicators, undertake sector evaluations and presentation of sector M&E reports to ToC. 5.2.7 Sub-County M&E Committee (SCoMEC) The Sub-County Administrator and Deputy County Commissioner will co-chair this committee. It will comprise Heads of Departments at the sub-county level, development partners, CSOs among others, and will be convened by the sub-county administrator or an officer in-charge of M&E at the sub-county. SCoMEC will be responsible for coordination of all M&E activities at the Sub-county and will be meeting quarterly. Other key responsibilities include; production of sub-county M&E reports, presentation of M&E reports to ToC, and development of relevant M&E indicators. The committee will also be charged with the implementation of recommendations adopted by CoMEC. 5.2.8 Ward M&E Committee (WaMEC) The Ward Administrator will be the chair of this committee that will comprise of all heads of departments at the ward level, development partners and CSOs. The Ward Administrator will be the convener. The committee will be responsible for coordination of all M&E activities at the ward level that include; production of ward M&E reports, presentation of M&E reports to SCoMEC and development of M&E indicators. Note: This committee will be constituted only when fiscal space allows. 5.2.9 County Monitoring & Evaluation Directorate The County M&E Directorate will be domiciled in the department of Economic Planning to be headed by a County M&E Director and assisted by several sector M&E officers and M&E champions. There will also be ICT officers assisting County departments with M&E computerization activities. The directorate will work closely with the Planning and Budget Directorate that is responsible for county development planning. The M&E directorate will coordinate and function as the Secretariat to the M&E Committees. Key responsibilities will include:  The overall responsibility for ensuring use of the M&E system in the County lies with the Director of M&E, who works closely with all Directors in the County to ensure timely production of M&E reports;  Provide technical support and coordination of CIMES, including its institutionalisation within the County;  Prepare periodic CIMES performance reports for presentation to CoMEC;  Supporting the development of capacity for M&E through training, coaching and mentoring;  Coordinate regular M&E reports produced within the County departments and other agencies resident in County;  Support the implementation of the CIMES Guidelines and Standards as the main M&E tool across the County;  Maintaining the support systems that underpin reporting, such as the monitoring website and database of M&E (APR), Comprehensive Public Expenditure Review (CPER), Evaluations, Public Expenditure Tracking Surveys (PETS) and Metadata, etc.);  Systematically capture lessons learnt from successes, challenges and failures. Annex 1: Linkage between CIMES Committees 7th May, 2021 THE KENYA GAZETTE Annex 2: County M & E Structure Annex 3: Proposed CIMES Organogram 2010 2010 Annex 4: The Policy Implementation Action Plan Goal: Establish a robust County Monitoring and Evaluation System for efficient and effective service delivery Objectives: To establish common structures and standards that govern the application of effective monitoring and evaluation system in the County, thus facilitating realization of maximum development outcomes; To provide tracking system that determines whether policies, programmes and projects impact the development process, as articulated in the CIDP and other County plans. No. Action step Responsible person Deadline Resources Person of interest M&E Institutions 1. Establish Uasin Gishu County Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation System (CIMES) Chief Officer, Economic Planning 31st Dec 2020 Funds; Human resource. All persons involved in policy, programmes and projects planning, implementation and M&E in the County. 2. Establish Service Delivery Unit (SDU) in the Governor‘s office County Secretary 30th June 2020 Funds; Human resource; Office space, furniture and equipment; Staff in the Governor‘s Office 3. Establish County Monitoring and Evaluation Directorate in the Department of Economic Planning CEC, Finance & Economic Planning 30th June 2020 Funds; Human resource; Office space, furniture and equipment; Staff in the Department of Economic Planning; Departmental M&E champions. 4. Establish M&E desk in each County department Responsible Chief Officers 31 st Dec 2020 Funds; Human resource; Office space, furniture and equipment; Departmental M&E champions; Departmental staff charged with policy, programmes and projects planning, implementation and M&E. M&E Standards and Tools 5. Develop standards and tools on Monitoring and Evaluation Chief officer, Economic Planning st Dec 2020 Funds; Human resource. Staff in the Department of Economic Planning; CoMEC members. 6. Develop M&E Plan Chief officer, Economic Planning Beginning of each FY Funds; Human resource. Staff in the Department of Economic Planning; CoMEC members. 7. Prepare Annual M&E Work Plan Chief officer, Economic Planning Beginning of each FY Funds; Human resource. Staff in the Department of Economic Planning; CoMEC members. 8. M&E framework Chief officer, Economic Planning Beginning of each FY Funds; Human resource. Staff in the Department of Economic Planning; CoMEC members. Establishment of M&E structures 9. County Intergovernmental Forum (CIF) CEC, Finance and Economic Planning 31st Dec 2020 Funds; Human resource. Members of CIF as constituted 10. County Citizen Participation Fora (CCPF) Responsible CEC/Chief Officer 30th June 2020 Funds; Human resource. Members of CCPF as constituted 11. County M&E Committee (CoMEC) County Secretary Constituted Funds; Human resource. Members of CoMEC as constituted 12. Technical Oversight Committee (ToC) Chief Officer Planning 30th June 2020 Funds; Human resource. Members of ToC as constituted 13. Sub-county M&E Committees (SCoMEC) CEC/CS/Chief officer, Devolution 30th June 2020 Funds; Human resource. Members of SCoMEC as constituted 14. Ward M&E Committee (WaMEC) CEC/CS/Chief officer, Devolution 31st Dec 2020 Funds; Human resource. Members of WaMEC as constituted 7th May, 2021 THE KENYA GAZETTE Goal: Establish a robust County Monitoring and Evaluation System for efficient and effective service delivery Objectives: To establish common structures and standards that govern the application of effective monitoring and evaluation system in the County, thus facilitating realization of maximum development outcomes; To provide tracking system that determines whether policies, programmes and projects impact the development process, as articulated in the CIDP and other County plans. No. Action step Responsible person Deadline Resources Person of interest M&E Capacity Building 15. M&E capacity needs assessment Chief officer, Economic Planning 31st Mar 2020 Funds; Human resource. County staff involved in M&E 16. Defining skills and staff requirements for M&E Chief officer, Economic Planning 31st Mar 2020 County staff involved in M&E County staff involved in M&E 17. Defining technological requirements and equipment for effective CIMES Chief officer, Economic Planning 31st Mar 2020 Funds; Human resource. M&E staff; ICT staff. Dissemination and M&E Information 18. Develop communication strategy for M&E for effective dissemination of M&E results Chief offices – Economic Planning and PSM 30th June 2020 Funds; Human resource. Staff in the Department of Economic Planning; Directorate of Communication; All stakeholders. Policy Implementation and Review 19. Policy Review CEC, Finance and Economic Planning After 5 years upon approval Funds; Human resource. Implementers of the Policy 20. M&E Bill CEC, Finance and Economic Planning 31st Dec 2021 Funds; Human resource. MCAs Dated the 18th February, 2021. JULIUS RUTTO, MR/1721063 CECM, Finance and Economic Planning.