This paper looks at the challenges in ensuring successful devolved government arrangements and the skills, leadership and capability required to meet them. It highlights the benefits to be gained through training and ongoing evaluation of different approaches and sharing of experience. The aim of this paper is to stimulate debate and contribute to the discussion of the prospects and challenges associated with devolution. The paper will, in general, examine issues surrounding the implementation of devolution to achieve effective and efficient delivery of services. The paper is intended to stimulate the exchange of ideas among public & Private service practitioners, policy implementation officials and opinion leaders on policy directions for the optimal implementation of devolved government. It will assist in improving the understanding of how an effective devolved Kenya government should deal with the increasingly complex issues that will be arising after the 2012 election.

 Introduction:

The government of Kenya since independence has been delivering public services through its own sectors. As in many other developed countries, public services are outsourced. This approach has been implemented through the devolved government and has increased significantly in scope, scale and complexity.

This paper explores:

• The nature and extent of devolved government.
• The choice of devolved government compared to other policy implementation approaches, and essential considerations and factors for making it effective.

My research argues for a strategic, evidence-based approach to choosing and designing how the Kenyan government will operate, including using devolved government approaches. It highlights the need to give greater attention to the implications for the Kenyan Public Service (KPS) of operating under different implementation modes. Key issues that I will address include:

• Approaches to performance management.
• Building a federal service capability.
• Ensuring citizen satisfaction and trust.
• Effective policy-delivery interaction, and
• Supporting non-government providers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What is Devolved Government?

 

Devolved government involves the use by the public sector of the not-for-profit and/or the private sectors to deliver public goods and services. It has also been termed ‘third-party government. The government takes the direct provision in current public sector organizations (ministries) and employees in equipping them with the current training and tools to perfect their services. The assumption is that the organizations /ministries have undergone management and performance based reforms (so they operate without the trappings of traditional bureaucracy) and performance measures act as ‘market proxies’, allowing for benchmarking against key indicators. Example include the services provided by such agencies are Eradicate Measles, Kazi kwa Vijana- funding from the world back focused on offering soft loans to men under the age of 35 years to start up their business.

Experience with Devolved Government:

 

Kenya’s experience with devolved government is fairly new and government contracts have modestly been contracted to foreign governments. As of the last two years out sourcing of services through private companies has become increasingly diverse, including:

1. Infrastructure and construction activity: A range of organizational paradigms has evolved for sub-contracting work and managing projects and, more recently, for using public/private partnerships involving private sector funding and investment to build major infrastructure projects such as roads and tunnels as well as social infrastructure, including schools and hospitals.
2. Support and enabling services: This initially involved situations of clear commercial analogues and the simple use of public provisions (e.g. cleaning in government buildings), this has progressively expanded in scope as government bodies have sought cost efficiency gains and focused their activity strategically on core business. It has reached a new, more concerted level with the Government’s drive for agencies to outsource their information and communications technology (ICT) and corporate services functions as well.

• Marketization of government services: Since last year 2011 there has been significant moves for the commercialization (e.g. Kenya Post Service) and privatization (e.g. Kenya Power and lightening) of many activities or, in some cases, government withdrawal from involvement (e.g. the former Department of Administrative Services’ construction services). The number of government business entities has risen and the use of purchaser/provider splits has grown, with the provider operating at an arm’s length of the government.

1. Policy contestability: The Government has increasingly sought policy advice and input from external quarters as well as the public service and County governments resulting in contestability of ideas and advice. This has included recourse to think-tanks, research institutes, consultancy companies, private sector lobbyists and community advocates who vie with public servants for the ear of departments and their County representatives.
2. Delivery of government services to the public: Historically, many welfare services in Kenya had their origins in non-government delivery through charitable organizations. Over time the government has became increasingly involved in funding, while continuing service delivery through these NGOs. The expansion has continued with a broadening scope of human services (e.g. in relation to aged care, child care and vaccinations). A mix of service delivery methods evolved using direct service provision as well as the funding of other bodies to provide services, either directly either directly or through State Government funding arrangements.

These included subsidies to ensure availability of services of a reasonable standard and applying licensing and regulatory arrangements designed to influence the market for particular services. One of the most comprehensive moves away from direct service provision occurred in 2010 with the creation of a new public/private organization for the delivery of driver license services through State government funding arrangements.

The drivers for pursuing different forms of a devolved government in Kenya are diverse and arise from our new constitution. Some are technologically driven—the private sector or the charity sector has been active in certain areas prior to Kenyan Government involvement or the adoption of the new constitution. The Government decided to purchase their services and expertise to supplement or build on them or influence them via signing contracts. Capitalist society-has emerged in Kenya and grown in advanced technology and geographical positioning of the country is also a plus. To some extent the development and effective devolution has been foreshadowed by the upcoming elections and security compromise in the east African region. See, for example, the range of grants listed at https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/kenya/projects mostly focusing on development and education), as well as a recognition that the private and charitable sectors are often better geared to such provision and perceived public service inflexibilities. Majority of the grants have been awarded to government run institutions.

Research Methods:

Choosing Devolved government for policy implementation:

The growth in devolved government is part of a broader diversification of public sector delivery modes. The concept of what constitutes the ‘public service’ has been evolving somewhat by stealth, with a greater focus on an enabling rather than a doing role. As a result, traditional barriers between sectors are in existence. This has been occurring in an increasingly complex operating environment for the public service. Policy issues at the heart of government’s agendas frequently transcend traditional organizational boundaries, requiring integrated responses that are inter-agency and inter jurisdictional (e.g. immigration and homelessness).

Such issues often call for government approach change and the active engagement of departments and ministries. At the same time, citizens’ expectations of seamless and tailored service delivery are expected. The implications of these developments for traditional approaches to public administration are significant. The central government and its agencies will be judged increasingly on their skills in matching policy problem and implementation method, that is, in determining which delivery mode works best for specific policy issues, and in what environments. This calls for what has been called a contemporary view of the role of the state in service delivery one informed by the available evidence on how to deliver services efficiently and effectively. This in turn requires strong policy, leadership and strategic skills across the central government supported by a deep contextual understanding of the relevant issues and government ministries forces at play    (Prime minsters office republic of Kenya task force report-pg. 23-41).

Generating Public Value-at the heart of an assessment of how best to deliver services efficiently and effectively is the issue of how to serve the public interest and generate public value. The concept of public value is an advanced way of thinking about and evaluating the goals and performance of public policy and as providing a yardstick for assessing activities produced or supported by government. Public value provides a broader measure than is conventionally used within the new public management literature, covering outcomes, the means used to deliver them as well as trust and legitimacy. It addresses issues such as equity, ethos and accountability. Matching implementation approaches direct delivery, devolved government or a market approach to particular policy issues must take account of the need to ensure public value. A range of implementation modes and their policy characteristics are imperative as well       (Public Management Institute, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven-pg. 2).

Implementation Mode Policy Characteristics Examples:

 

Devolved government service accessibility and its acceptance by users is a critical success factor (e.g. to increase the reach of service delivery or tap into organizations with close connections to the community or which are group focused) and 60% current government ministries cannot meet this. Fully funded departments dealing with issues of homeless persons’ assistance, women’s refugees, aged-care community participation and behavioral change is required to address complex policy issues for a viable devolved government to exist. In most instances, the required skills are not available to the degree necessary in the public service to oversee successive implementation of such programs. It would necessary to acquire or develop that capability. This can also involve the government in creating infrastructure feasibility studies. The effective operation of certain institutions is important for policy objectives, notably from a social capital perspective, with an array of funding and grants programmes pitched to this end. Support for community, cultural and sporting bodies leveraging of private sector assets is required (Commission of Implementation of the Constitution report-pg. 13-17).

 Public/Private Partnerships:

Government adoption to functionality behavioral change is required at a mass level with unlimited ministerial, departmental and individual adaptations sought towards an overall policy implementation goal. Policy adoption issues require an emphasis on flexibility within the public and private sector with an emphasis on innovation and local engagement, which often leads the government to adopt a devolved approach; direct government delivery channels should become more innovative. The greater use of devolved arrangements and working with other sectors will help the public service to break new ground in its own delivery capability. With the implementation of County government Interventions, for example, Government Business Managers in counties will have the opportunity to co-ordinate service delivery by both government and non-government providers.

Other operational issues which are important when considering devolved government or alternative delivery models include whether accountability, privacy, security, consumer protection, access and equity or other policy considerations can be addressed satisfactorily through the contract or funding agreement specification and performance management arrangements. Services can be specified and performance measured to the degree appropriate to the levels of risk tolerance identified and the degree of control required. If there is an established market, or number of providers able to undertake delivery, bearing in mind the maturity of that business market and the agency capability for administering and managing the funding and contractual arrangement. Choice of implementation mode will be more efficient. If necessary, a mix of approaches may be required, particularly where there are multiple agency and jurisdictional players, and multiple services touching the same citizen, such as in the provision of healthcare services. In these cases, complex networks encompassing both direct public delivery and devolved delivery can operate along with elements of a market approach.

The advantages identified in practice for devolved government centre on flexibility, competition, the capacity for tailored responses and legitimacy, that is, there is proximity to, and acceptance by users. It is also expected that service delivery will be based on increased cooperation between the three tiers of central government, county government and the business community. Such an approach recognizes that limits exist to what government can do and that the private and community sectors also have much to offer. This networked approach can only become increasingly important for the public service, particularly in view of the call for more innovative responses to complex policy challenges like social inclusion where tailored solutions offer potential for sustainable change supported by community engagement and ownership.

New Approach Required:

 

Just as the approaches to policy implementation must evolve and be diversified, so too must the framework for federal public administration. It cannot be assumed that the public sector architecture established to support traditional bureaucratic forms of public administration will support alternative delivery arrangements adequately. New approaches to accountability will be required which call for strong strategic leadership. Concerted attention must be given to the implications of a shift for the public service, where appropriate, from a doing to a more enabling role, including it operating in some policy settings within what a political scientist of Kenya referred to have termed it as a ‘hollow state’. This term is used to connote separation between the financing of government services and the provision of services, and it requires a new approach to public sector and performance management- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObGSS-aC_rA - Prof.Karega Mutahi.

Dimensions of Effective Devolved Government:

 

A number of key public value dimensions are central to the approach and to ensuring that the potential benefits of devolved government are realized. They are summarized in point form below and then discussed in greater detail in subsequent sections. Areas where supportive action at the KPS-wide level would assist are also identified.

Accountability:

 

Accountability arrangements are built into upfront decision-making about, and the scope and design of, implementation approaches. They are tailored to the policy issue at hand, appropriately balance the need to be accountable for the use of public resources and performance and the achievement of desired outcomes, and include adequate provision for external scrutiny.

They are based on a clear understanding of:

• Responsibilities and accountabilities of different players and the nature of what is being funded.
• Level of risk tolerance and the stringency of the controls required.
• Degree of specificity and flexibility attached to the product or service to be funded.
• Outcomes are preset or are developed locally within agreed parameters.
• Agencies taking responsibility and being accountable for the design and implementation of devolved arrangements and for the overall performance of the network.
• The establishment of shared goals and outcomes, and performance management of individual providers.
• Where the initiative involves local flexibility and innovation in the design of measures and accountability arrangements need to support an adaptive approach.
• Strong local governance arrangements and capability, with shared commitments on objectives and parameters and a strong sense of common goals.
• Considerable strategic attention given to the choice and framing of the most appropriate funding mechanism whether a contract, grant or other form of funding agreement for reflecting provider accountabilities.
• Review and evaluation processes are used, particularly where complex networks are adaptive.

Systems involved:

 

External scrutiny is tailored to the nature of the exercise by focusing on the quality of the risk management framework, its design, and how it has been managed, the appropriateness of the control mechanisms and how they are applied. At the service-wide level, consideration is given to providing guidance on managing accountability in different implementation modes and on varied approaches to dissemination of information on devolved government regarding lessons learnt to avoid pitfalls. Lessons would be based on:-

• Building evaluation capacity.
• Focusing attention on the respective uses of contracts, grants and other funding arrangements.
• Fostering strategic conversations on the practical implications for accountability, particularly in relation to initiatives involving the devolution of decision-making power and those based on community collaboration.

Findings

 

Effective Approaches to Performance Management:

 

Performance management arrangements to support delivery of outcomes with and through non-government providers are built into the upfront design of approaches in order to secure accountability and the proper use of public resources. They are also designed to drive continuous improvement and produce better outcomes from a public interest and user point of view. Outcome measures may be used where possible. Recognizing that output and input indicators may also be appropriate, depending on the circumstances. Considerable clarity has been achieved as to the status of the indicator and the link between indicators and stated policy outcomes. The level of risk tolerance and control is articulated and used to underpin the setting of performance indicators. Indicators are pitched to the nature and purpose of the product or service being funded, and on the basis that the potential impact of performance measurement requirements on the capability of providers and performance overall, is recognized and addressed. Performance reporting requirements should be as streamlined as possible, focusing on data that is required for the effective management and operation of the initiative, and ensuring that timing, content and mechanisms are not counterproductive but user-friendly and developed in consultation with stakeholders. Performance measures and reporting systems should be reviewed regularly and adjusted where required.

Skills development in performance management is an important area for project design and investment. A strategic approach should be taken to driving overall performance through supportive systems. Effective performance information systems should be in place enabling comparative performance data to be developed and tested in consultation with stakeholders. At the service-wide level, considerations are:

• Encouraging debate and information sharing on the design and application of different performance metrics and systems, research and evaluation and sharing of both negative and positive experience.
• Incorporating the performance management challenges in devolved government settings and guidance on how to meet them in relevant learning and development programmes.

 

 

Building Public Service Capability:

 

Capability demands for devolved government centre on the public service in an enabling rather than a doing mode, having the skills to deliver with and through others, requiring new forms of public management, and organizational alignment of skills, ICT, culture and orientation to delivery mode. Organizational leadership provides strong strategic direction, aided by business-focused corporate services.

Sufficient business intelligence and subject area expertise can be retained by agencies to enable them to manage ongoing policy development and implementation. Strong capacity existence in contract design and management and more broadly in managing other funding and grants administration issues, including attention to the management of conflict of interest and integrity issues that can arise in a more commercialized environment. Strong capacity should also be in place and systems design for recognizing the complexities involved in fusing multiple players into a system for seamless service delivery, a process which must be informed by an evidence-based understanding and readiness for trial and adaptation.

Skills in systems thinking, network building and relationship management are imperative, and supported though recruitment, developing an increased mobility between sectors. Integration and connectedness is a design critical feature, with integration approaches including government as integrator, prime contractor as integrator and third party as integrator. Supportive organizational systems should be in place, including: complex network applications requiring significant investment of resources; high-level management attention and stakeholder engagement; and strong strategic, project management and operational capacity. At the service-wide level, consideration should be given to:

• Fostering skills development in systems design and network management, as well as strategic leadership in such a setting.
• Facilitating a community of practice and sharing experience and lessons learnt.
• Focusing on commissioning skills and their development as well as leadership in devolved government and how to work proactively in this mode.
• Addressing ICT skills shortages and fostering collaborative approaches to systems development.
• Encouraging mobility and interchange between sectors.
• Safeguarding Citizen Satisfaction and Trust.
• Protecting public confidence is seen as a core part of the design and management of delivery systems and as a matter of public accountability.

Approaches to be adapted to:

• Service quality, continuity and sustainability, public scrutiny, and avenues for redress when things go wrong.
• Service users access to meaningful information and ensuring seamless delivery of services designed around the experience and circumstances of the citizen.
• Testing of citizen satisfaction and experience, and the active use of feedback as a basis for service improvement, forms part of systems design and ongoing implementation.
• Training models of co-ordination and joined up government from the citizen point of view, including through business community.
• Fostering research and evaluation in order to know what works, including into both people and places policies.
• Encouraging greater use of Web technology to enhance citizen feedback and engagement. The Common Measurements Tool (CMT) was introduced in Canada in 1998 as an easy-to-use, question-based client satisfaction survey instrument. It facilitates benchmarking across jurisdictions and enables public sector managers to better understand client expectations, assess levels of satisfaction with service delivery and identify priorities for improvement. The Institute for Citizen-Centered Service (ICCS) acts as custodian of the CMT and oversees arrangements for licensing its use by other jurisdictions. Such a platform being adopted in Kenya will make it possible for the various counties be able to monitor service capacity training outcomes (https://www.iccs-isac.org/en/cmt>22).

 

Providing for Effective Policy/Delivery Interaction:

 

Effective feedback loops can be established between policy development and delivery. Approaches should be adopted to ensure that implementation is consistent and aligned with policy objectives, including through action to foster goal clarity. Provider selection and reinforcement through performance management regimes should be put in place from the inception of the new system. Approaches are adopted aimed at ensuring that policy development is informed by on-the ground intelligence and experience, including by means of mobility and interchange, avenues for interaction with network members, collection of provider and user views and evaluations. There is recognition of some inherent revisiting of the purchaser/provider split in adaptive systems involving local flexibility of response.

Supporting Non-Government Providers:

 

Strategic consideration should be given to supporting the capability of non-government providers, particularly not-for-profit organizations. A tailored approach should be developed, including such measures as information provision, training, sharing of experience and better practice, provision of professional support, and, wherever possible, streamlining reporting requirements and mechanisms to assist provider efficiency. A good understanding of non-government providers, their potential, modus operandi, the challenges they face and present, the impact that doing government business has on them. At the service-wide level, consideration has to be facilitated for a better understanding of third sector issues and the potential for collaborative work, and supporting productive relationships within various sectors in a county.

The current accountability framework and arrangements has been designed around traditional  modes of government bureaucracy. Devolved government brings additional levels of complexity and challenge, it involves longer, and often more diffuse, relationship and responsibility chains. Many policy responses and whatever the implementation approach. It requires flexibility and innovation at the point of delivery, implying a degree of open-endedness, which does not always sit easily with the traditional unitary government. Some fine-tuning of arrangements has occurred over the past one year in response to concerns about contracting raised by parliamentary committees. Recommendations for improvement include: the insertion of access clauses in contracts and public/private partnerships to enable departments such as the Kenya Revenue Authority to access contractors’ records and premises and carry out appropriate audits moves to discourage the use of commercial-in-confidence provisions in contracts which can limit public scrutiny, and an increased focus on good recordkeeping practice. While these have led to important developments, more fundamental reconsiderations of accountability concepts and mechanisms are required. Key questions include:

• Given the changing nature of public sector delivery, are traditional approaches to accountability adequate for the different implementation tools available?
• Does the federal government provision allow for sufficient transparency and accountability in relation to the use of public money, while supporting high performance, innovation and encourage risk avoidance and conservative decision-making?
• Experience in Kenya and internationally points to an inherent balancing act or trade-off between accountability and flexibility and innovation. Richard Munga an economist at the university of Nairobi argues that ‘accountability is inevitably reduced under contracting out and at best, involves a trade-off between efficiency and accountability’ and refers to a series of ‘accountability deficits’.

Performance & Accountability:

 

Karega Mutahi a professor at the University of Nairobi explores how current accountability and performance management arrangements are applied to the three different public policy implementation modes in his model. He argues that;

• “A one-size-fits-all accountability and performance management framework may be seen as anachronistic in light of the diversity of policy implementation modes and the accountability and performance gaps emerging in the current government framework.”- https://www.the-star.co.ke/news/article-92456/ps-karega-mutahi-cautions-devolution
• He argues that the contracting arrangements may constrain innovation due to funds scarcity.

Articulating Outcomes and Performance:

 

The process of developing performance objectives and indicators for devolved service provision can be demanding, and has become increasingly so as the services being delivered are increasingly complex and sensitive. As the Commission for Economic Development for women in Kenya (CEDK) has found, Results are relatively simple to assess for fixed services that are highly standardized, such as administering inoculations, but difficult to set and measure in dealing with complex multi-faceted services. In reality, a range of input, output and outcome measures are used across different programme and service activity. While there appears to be broad agreement that as programmes mature, target setting should progress towards outcome indicators, which may not always be possible or desirable. It is critical that the status of the indicator is recognized and the logic linking lower-level indicators and policy outcomes is understood (https://www.cawee-ethiopia.org/res/GOVERNANCE%20REPORT%20FINAL.pdf- pg. 2-3.).

Whether this holds true in practice is subject to evaluation. Recent (CEDK) initiatives are instructive in this regard, with their increased focus on specifying the links between policy directions, objectives, outputs and performance indicators and related performance measurement systems. Whatever level of performance measure is used, the degree of specificity in measures applied to non-government providers through funding agreements and contracts will be a matter for careful judgment in each case. Where consistency and control are important, detailed requirements, such as service standards, should apply. In other cases, when innovation and local flexibility are sought, and indeed are critical to the policy objective, the performance measures chosen will need to allow for this flexibility. Experience in foreign devolved governments has highlighted the potential for poorly framed and overly detailed performance measures to undermine the responsiveness of some more complex devolved governance arrangements, unfortunately this has led to distortion and constriction of the services being delivered by making the indicator (or target) rather than the service the focus of provision. Such measures undermine efforts to the trial of different approaches, exploit significant intersections with other services and tailor integrated responses at the local level for a particular community or citizen grouping.

Professor Karega Mutahi conducted a research on, Devolved government performance. One of his finds was, devolved government especially in the County may narrowly focus on ‘speed and placement’ rewarding of short-term outcomes, thereby discouraging investment in retention and skills development and falling to emphasis on sustained placement- (A Report on the Implementation of Devolved Government in Kenya- Chaired: Karega Mutahi pg. 44-46, 2009).

The difficulty of focusing on performance stifling provider efficiency and innovation, skewed incentives impeding policy outcome and an overly lax approach, is that it could result in an inappropriate use of public resources and poor outcomes from a point of view. The key to developing real performance metrics is in recognition of third parties and numerous ways of implementing public policy, and a wide range of agency-third party articulations and vertical networks of third parties. The effectiveness of devolved management depends on the development of solid performance metrics that are compatible with the details of the modern hollow state. The Kenyan Public Service Commission needs the capacity to design and apply sophisticated and workable measures across the range of devolved government exercises. This is a skills set to be carefully developed and informed by experience. It is an area that would benefit from further research and evaluation and a sharing of experience (positive and negative) across a spectrum of devolved government exercises.

Conclusion:

 

Building Public Sector Capability:

 

One of the most obvious issues and pitfalls for devolved government has been contract management capacity. A recurring theme in Kenya and international experience is shortcomings in contract design and management detracting from outcomes, with the potential to have serious consequences.

Jail system expansion experience:

 

A number of reports have highlighted deficiencies in the early contractual arrangements of the Department of corrections for managing refugee’s detention centers. These included a lack of clearly identified and articulated objectives, and monitoring arrangements that failed to further define or measure lawful, appropriate, humane or efficient detention. The Human Rights Watch report (study done on refugee handling on Kenyan border) concluded that one of the aspects was jailing expansion contracts, which were flawed, onerous in its application, lacking focus in its performance, monitoring arrangements, and transferring risk to various service providers.

The report also concluded that the contract and contract management behavior created ‘a culture where the specified performance measures become, by default, entrenched as maximum standards because the service provider’s focus is on ensuring compliance so as to avoid financial sanction. The commission of economic development has been active in highlighting the need for skills development in this area and has supported this through better practice guidance. It has stressed consistently the need for staff to understand the relevant legal and policy frameworks and contracting practice. The importance of senior management support; the need for employees to be able to access expert advice when required; the advantages of employing personnel with the requisite interpersonal, subject matter and project management skills; and the necessity for contract managers to be fully cognizant of contractor capabilities (https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/kenya0610webwcover.pdf- 36-43).

Systems Design and Management:

 

Designing and managing devolved arrangements is complex and demanding. Delivering through others and ensuring that the desired public outcomes are achieved requires new capabilities. This is so for devolved government generally, and particularly so for more complex, networked applications. As Goldsmith and Eggers argue, “To achieve high performance in a devolved government environment, governments need to develop core capabilities in a host of areas where today they have scant experience conceptualizing the network, integrating it, and developing effective knowledge sharing practices across various ministries up to the county levels”- (Governing by Networks: The New Shape of the Public Sector pg.46-53, 2004).

Systems design, particularly for complex networked arrangements where a range of private and public sector organizations are brought together with the objective of seamless delivery, requires a great deal of skill. It needs to be informed by an in-depth and evidence-based understanding of how systems work, including trial and adjustment. Important design features, depending on the type and scale of the ministries, include: accountability, performance management, service stability, and transition arrangements choosing the right network members and partners for cultural and operational capability and proximity to the service user providing for the capacity to capture learning from the network, and supporting goal within the government framework.

Managing the implementation and relationships has significant implications for, and makes major demands on, agency systems, skills sets and orientations. Indeed, it may be described as a full-blown cultural transformation, which requires changing the very definition of public employee. Performance in such a setting depends increasingly on the ability to manage partnerships and hold partners accountable, requirements that represent a different form of public management. Operating in network mode calls for a high level of systems thinking as well as the skills needed for activating, arranging, stabilizing, integrating, and managing a successive implementation, which are qualitatively different to those required for more traditional delivery modes.

Implementers and ministerial heads will be valued; people who can build up relationships across the public, private and not-for- profit sectors and leverage these relationships to build networks of mutual benefit. Continuing action will be required across the federal government to ensure it has the necessary skills through strategic approaches to recruitment, development and fostering mobility between sectors. It is also important that such action is characterized by an opportunistic and proactive orientation, one designed to look for different and better ways of delivering public value, including through harnessing third sector potential by means of constructive partnerships.

In the UK, the government recognized how important implantation was; this led to the introduction of a National Programme for Third Sector Commissioning, aimed at building the project commissioning skills of civil servants and improving understanding of what the third sector could offer. The commission Development Agency was set up to improve commissioning practice and provide comprehensive training on what the third sector is able to offer. This suggests there is definitely a need for such a commission to be set up by the central government. (https://www.aog.ed.ac.uk/case_studies/devolution).

Building integration and connectedness within the federal and county government is also a fundamental design and management issue. The nature of relationships within government’s bodies varies significantly. In some, the interests and goals of different players are similar; in others they may be in competitive. Significant differences might exist in culture and ethos (e.g. between private sector and not-for-profit sector organizations). Trust may be an issue between key players because of past policies and/or practices. Implementation design and management will need to take account of these factors.

Integration is a significant component of well-designed and operating networks. Approaches evident through experience include:

• Government as integrator. This has been a common and long-standing practice across a range of devolved government arrangements.
• Central government should be the prime integrator. This approach mostly takes place where the ministry is seen as having specialist skills and industry connections not present in the public service which would better equip it for the role, for instance, major defense procurement, oil drilling and ICT applications.
• Third party as integrator. This involves the funding of an organization not involved in direct delivery of the service(s) to manage the implementation on behalf of the central government or public service agency. Examples include: Employer Brokers being established as part of the employment services system to co-ordinate and target the efforts of employment service providers, which includes matching the needs of job seekers and provide advice on, and referrals to, community services and other programmes for in-home assistance.

 

Forging connections in an increasingly fluid environment of public sector delivery can be a formidable challenge, particularly as ministries become more complex and diffuse, and involve elements of participative governance and active community engagement. In many policy areas, numerous intersections exist between services, and multiple services touch on a particular group (e.g. those living in remote communities). Providing an integrated response in such areas (whether people- or place-based) will often mean establishing connections between different ministries of multiple government and nongovernment players. In addition, defined ministries can operate within both the central and county governments. Operating effectively and adaptively across boundaries in this environment is part of devolved public services.

Organizational Systems:

 

Supportive organizational systems will also be required. Sophisticated ICT platforms to provide linkages within ministries and with the coordinating authority are at the operational heart of a devolved government. This can involve multi-tiered arrangements comprising: information on providers’ performance from a monitoring and accountability perspective to inform citizen choice; resource and contextual information and/or better practice advice and examples to assist providers; and a shared operational platform for government and non-government partners. These represent major undertakings requiring a significant investment of resources and a high level of management attention and stakeholder engagement. (https://siteresources.worldbank.org/KENYAEXTN/Resources/Kenya-Economic-Update-June-2010-Mombasa.pdf- pg 65, 80).

In 2010, the Kenyan Customs Service introduced the imports module of its online Integrated Cargo System (ICS) linking those involved in cargo movement, including brokers and freight forwarders. Severe difficulties ensued, with major consequences for the movement of sea cargo. A review identified shortcomings in governance and a lack of adequate testing and staged implementation. Critical issues included third party software incompatibility and inadequate training of relevant employees in operating the ICS with the result that network members were not sufficiently prepared for the new system. (https://siteresources.worldbank.org/KENYAEXTN/Resources/Kenya-Economic-Update-June-2010-Mombasa.pdf- 45-51).

The Employment Services Review Commission of Kenya identified stakeholder concerns with the Job Network ICT system’s complexity, its functionality and resultant work abounds and increased administrative burden. Such measures have under seen major redevelopment some central systems being implemented to standardize and simplify operation and provide the electronic lodgments of efficient services (https://www.publicservice.go.ke).

Safeguarding Citizen Satisfaction and Trust:

 

High levels of citizen satisfaction with, and trust in, the processes and machinery of devolved government are integral to effective public sector service provision is paramount.

 

Citizen-Focused Design:

 

Regardless of the system selected for delivering central and county government services to the public funded bodies like Job Network providers or human services center, protecting public confidence and ensuring citizen satisfaction should be of paramount concern. Achieving this by means of indirect, devolved government arrangements where the control mechanisms are less immediate requires skilful design. Having an understanding of the level and nature of risk tolerance (or intolerance) and how to manage this by balancing funding and accountability requirements, performance monitoring and relationship building will be critical. The critical design questions are:

• How can services of quality be delivered, service continuity assured, and appropriate avenues of public scrutiny and redress accessed when things go wrong?
• What information do service users need and how is this best provided?
• How can services be provided more seamlessly, presenting a less complex maze to service users?

Service Quality:

 

The establishment of service standards by way of funding arrangements has been a common feature of the provision of human services through devolved governments. Appropriate articulation of service expectations and standards and establishment of associated monitoring mechanisms has at times varied considerably and best practice is still evolving. Under the Human Rights Watch program, following a review, which identified the need for service standards in funding organizations for settling internally, displaced people. Contractual obligations, funded organizations must adopt and report on a set of Service Principles.

Service Continuity and Sustainability:

 

Managing the devolved provision of services in order to ensure continuity and sustainability, even when providers change or go out of business, will be a significant factor in maintaining public confidence in, and satisfaction with, government service provision. Effective transition arrangements need to be a key design feature of network modes of delivery.

Emerging challenges for the Building Excellence in Support and Training, a programme administered by the Public Service Commission established to review and refine programmes so as to ensure that the service provided is sustainable over time has not been successful from the central government execution.

A recent review highlighted the need for adjustment, finding that employees were not well enough trained and lacked the experience and expectations of retired government employees. The review also found that employees find it difficult to keep up with the increased complexity of entitlements arrangements (https://www.publicservice.go.ke).

Avenues for Complaint and Redress:

 

Effective avenues for citizen complaint and redress are vital in building public confidence in service delivery. They also form an important element in public accountability. Such avenues have been a feature of a successive devolved government especially in direct service delivery.

 

Two examples, which have been a success in the US government, are:

 

• New arrangements for the Unemployed citizens which include a process which enables clients to raise issues with their agency and, if they are not satisfied, to express these concerns to the 24/7 customer service phone bank.
• Homeless centers are required to have an internal complaints procedure in place and it must be displayed prominently as part of the service charter. Complaints are referred to a 1-800 number if the complainant is dissatisfied with how the Centre is handling them.

 

More generally, the quality of feedback mechanisms will be important in building citizen confidence in service delivery and driving continuous improvement. Processes need to be in place to ensure that complaints are handled in a timely and effective way and that data is collected, analyzed and used to identify and address any systemic issues.

Information for Service Users:

 

Openness and transparency through public dissemination of information on provider performance can play an important role in strengthening public trust in relation to services. Citizen choice is a central design feature of a range of endeavors. Informed choice requires the provision of relevant and accessible information. It would be the responsibility of the central government to introduce a quality ratings system to drive continuous improvement in service quality and access to information. A common issue has been how to present the information in user-friendly form rather than as bureaucratic reportage. An area for further development is the greater use of interactive, Web 2.0 technology to enhance feedback and citizen engagement between the federal and county government programmes services and clients.

Putting Citizens at the Centre:

 

Improving service delivery through better citizen-focused design and greater scope for citizen engagement has to be an increasing focus of the federal government. Our Prime Minister has stressed the need to continue to reform our system of government and government service, so that our citizens lie at the centre rather than the inflexible behemoths of official bureaucracy. Government services what is available and how to access them can be confusing, particularly where a range of providers and services are involved. For people undergoing major life events (e.g. the resettlement of the election violence that happened in 2007/8 elections or those with particular needs (e.g. Indigenous people in remote communities or recently arrived refugees from Somalia) the maze can be bewildering. There might also be an array of different and interconnecting services and obligations overseen by different tiers of government (federal, state and local)—all with their own forms, procedures and processes and a tendency to pass on the task of ‘joining the dots to the citizen. It is even more complex when devolved government is involved—increasing the number of players and the potential for confusion. The result can be a series of intersecting networks or mazes, with no clear entry point and no clear directions for moving between them.

The tendency has been to develop services based on bureaucratic needs. The issue is how to reorient service delivery so that citizen circumstances become the organizing principle and citizen expectations for more seamless service delivery are met. Whether to focus on ‘place’ (e.g. remote communities) or on ‘person’ (e.g. elderly citizens) is important in determining the most effective organizing rationale for a network and delivering particular policy outcomes.

Effective devolved governments have implemented a range of person- and place-based policies to address disadvantage. An assessment conducted by prof. Mutahi report on the evidence base relating to the effectiveness of these policies highlights a lack of systematic evaluation of the implementation approaches currently in existence and resultant evidence basis for understanding what works, and understanding the relative effectiveness of different person- and place-based policies in Kenya. The government has been drawing conclusions drawn on the basis of ad hoc rationalization and speculation and policies being created are generally being developed separately and sometimes in isolation from each other with little focus on exploiting the logical synergies between people and place.

It is an area that would benefit from further attention in Kenya through research and evaluation and sharing of learning across the central, county and territory public sectors. Tailoring services and gathering confirmation of their effectiveness will be critical in ensuring that service delivery can be continuously improved. Sharing lessons across agencies, jurisdictions and networks will also assist in promoting more citizen-friendly services.

Policy/Delivery Splits:

 

Devolved government can bring into sharp relief the interaction between policy development and delivery and the problems that can occur in the absence of effective feedback loops between them. The same issue can arise with the use of purchaser/provider split arrangements within government. On the one hand, it is important to ensure that implementation is consistent and aligned with policy objectives. This requires goal clarity and alignment, judicious selection of providers, and reinforcement through contractual and performance arrangements and appropriate monitoring. On the other hand, informing policy development with on-the-ground intelligence, knowledge of operational issues and the views of service providers and users is also essential. Providing workable mechanisms for this will form an important element of system design. Such mechanisms can include:

• Encouraging mobility and interchange between sectors to strengthen ongoing capability.
• Providing avenues for interaction with network members.
• Establishing effective feedback loops, undertaking analysis and taking account of provider views.
• Collecting information on user experience (e.g. through client surveys, analysis of complaints data.
• Pursuing programme evaluation.

 

Initiatives where decision-making power is shared with providers involve an inherent revisiting of the nature and extent of the purchaser/provider split.

Policy/Delivery Interaction:

 

If the objective is to deliver services in a sustainable format able to adapt to changing social and environmental demands. The local agency providing a complex service can best go about boosting service satisfaction, improving outcomes and securing local legitimacy by initiating interaction. The argument here is that the distinction between policy development and programme implementation, and between the purchasers and providers of services, should be progressively blurred, particularly in the case of very complex systems. A system design should be iterative. Past experience shows that delivery is rarely a one-off task. It is best understood not as a linear process—leading from policy ideas through implementation to change on the ground—but rather as a more circular process involving continuous learning, adaptation and improvement, with policy changing in response to implementation as well as vice versa.

Such a circular process should be part of implementation approaches whether the model is one of a tightly and centrally controlled network or a more diffuse one involving power sharing with providers and communities. It is important that this is given upfront attention in the design of the overall approach.

Third Sector Capacity:

 

Third sector capacity to deliver government services is obviously critical for successful devolved government. The public sector’s role in supporting that capacity requires strategic thought, and is an issue under consideration as part of the development of a national compact with the third sector.

Experience has highlighted a number of challenges for the not-for-profit sector when it engages in public service delivery. Such bodies often do not have the internal processes or skills required to satisfy adequately the reporting and governance requirements placed on them. They can find integrating a new business activity function (as a government service provider) with their charitable structure, vision and ethos to be challenging, including achieving the optimal balance between their advocacy role and that of government service provider. Many also find dealing with grants and other funding arrangements time consuming and inefficient, and that these detract from their core business. Workforce capability issues in NGOs may constrain the scope and effectiveness of collaborative arrangements. More broadly, while non-government provision of a service may be considered appropriate for social capital and/or proximity reasons, the supply of potential providers may be insufficient.

Supporting Devolved Government:

 

The ministry of internal affairs should have a department geared in championing the endeavors of the new devolved government. The departmental objectives should be to campaign for change, deliver public services messages, promotes social enterprise and strengthen communities. More specifically, the role should be: -

• Drive cross-government action to improve partnership working and ensure better terms of engagement between federal and county governments.
• Invest in programmes designed to develop and promote the sector by forging a policy and regulatory environment favorable to develop a strong evidence base and analysis function for government sectors.
• Actively streamlining implementation procedures, reducing red tape, giving advice to providers and procurers, and enhancing stability by encouraging government interaction.

Devolved governments establish a compact setting out principles guiding the government relationship in Federal, State and Local governments, which is reinforced by an independent commission. Governments introduce programme to assist the central government in building their capacity to increase the scale and scope of public service delivery. As part of the new mechanisms to build trust, enhance public confidence and work more closely with the various ministries, the central government should bestow this ministry on internal affairs with the responsibilities of developing effective relationships between government and the county governments in building social inclusion and ensuring consistency of treatment across government agencies.

Develop standards to guide accountability between the central government and the county governments with the aim of establishing social and economic value of the sector, as well as its independence. The departments should also provide a vehicle for consulting and addressing, social inclusion priorities creating opportunities to hear the views of disadvantaged and marginalized counties, strengthening sector capacity to deliver efficient and effective services and promote innovative policy and responses to community needs.

Resort to devolved government has grown in developing countries. A devolved government brings significant potential benefits and presents notable challenges. It involves a rethinking of the public service role from a doing to a more enabling one, with significant implications for public service structure, culture and capability. A tailoring of accountability and performance management frameworks and approaches is required to support devolved government. Strong leadership and organizational positioning is also called for to ensure that the necessary skills, systems and cultural orientation are present. The range of devolved government activity needs to be recognized.

The paper raises a series of issues, which must be addressed if the potential of devolved government is to be realized in the new Kenya. It highlights the benefits to be gained through trailing and ongoing evaluation of approaches and a sharing of experience in contributing to the available evidence on how to deliver services efficiently and effectively in developed devolved governments while moving towards a more contemporary view of the role of the state in service delivery. It is an area for all levels of public administration and one where inter-jurisdictional collaboration would be of value, particularly in light of the key policy issues on the national agenda, many of which involve complex and intersecting governing bodies. Devolved government arrangements will continue to play a major role in the delivery of public outcomes. Determining when and how to work most effectively in this mode will be a key strategic issue for the new Kenya.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:

 

Consultative forum on public finance management and fiscal decentralization. (n.d.). Retrieved

from https://www.cickenya.org/index.php/reports/other-reports/item/93-consultative-forum-on-public

 

Goldsmith, S., & Eggers, W. (2004). Governing by network: The new shape of the public sector.

Washington, DC 20036: Brookings Institution Press. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/books/2004/governingbynetwork

 

Jimenez, R. (2010). Welcome to Kenya. Police abuse of Somali refugees, 003(5), 1-94.

Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/kenya0610webwcover.pdf

 

Kelly, G.; Mulgan, G. & Muers, S. (2002), Creating Public Value: An Analytical Framework for

Public Service Reform, UK Cabinet Office, Strategy Unit, pp. 34–35, <http//www.strategy.gov.uk>- Christopher, P. (n.d.). The new public management:. Retrieved from https://www.ramp.ase.ro/en/_data/files/articole/8_01.pdf

 

Obiageli , E., & Obiageli , E. (2009, Sept). Kenya transparency and infrastructure project.

Document of the World Bank. Retrieved from https://www wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/03/12/000356161_20120312004241/Rendered/PDF/670650PJPR0P120Official0Use0Only090.pdf

 

Port of Mombasa (2011) Significance of the Port, 3(5), 3-67.

 

Sunrise live interview: Devolution (2012, Nov 20). [Web log comment]. Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=ObGSS-aC_rA