Kenya adopted a new Constitution and began the process of devolution in 2010. The new Constitution was the institutional response to longstanding grievances over the centralization of state powers and public sector resources, and regional disparities in service delivery and development outcomes. This radical restructuring of the Kenyan state has three main objectives: decentralizing political power, public sector functions, and public finances; ensuring a more equitable spatial distribution of resources between regions; and promoting more accountable, participatory, and responsive government at all levels. The first elections under the new Constitution were held in 2013. Alongside the national government, 47 new county governments were established. Each county government is made up of a County Executive, headed by an elected Governor and works under the oversight of an elected County Assembly. Seven years after the "devolution train" left the station, this report takes stock of how devolution has affected the delivery of devolved basic services to Kenyan citizens. Whereas devolution was driven by political reform, the ensuing institutions and systems were expected to deliver greater socioeconomic equity through devolved service delivery. The Making Devolution Work for Service Delivery (MDWSD) study is the first major assessment of Kenya’s devolution reform. The study was a jointly coordinated effort by the Government of Kenya and the World Bank. The study provides key messages with respect to what is working, what is not working, and what could work better to enhance service delivery based on the currently available data. It provides an independent assessment of service delivery performance in five sectors, namely health, education, agriculture, urban, and water services and includes an in-depth review of the main pillars of devolved service delivery, namely public financial management, intergovernmental finance, human resource management, politics and accountability.

The Kenya government has performed fairly well in the enactment of laws, policies and regulations on response prevention and management of Sexual and Gender Based Violence. These laws, policies, rules and regulations have been extensively utilized in the process of developing this SGBV M&E framework. To mention a few, the drafters considered provisions of the Constitution (2010), the Sexual Offences Act (2006), the Children's Act(2001) the Penal Code (2009), the Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act (2011), the National Gender and Equality Commission Act (2011),among other key national legislations and international instruments including the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) 1979,the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) 1990, and the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa (Maputo Protocol, 2003). These form the legal, human rights and State obligation context upon which the framework is premised as a living document for the collection of data on SGBV in Kenya. The Commission, pursuant to its mandate and functions as stipulated in the Constitution of Kenya 2010, and in the National Gender and Equality Commission Act 2011, in collaboration with LVCT Health, I-TECH, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, facilitated the development process for a national multi-sectoral Monitoring and Evaluation Framework for Prevention of and Response to Sexual and Gender Based Violence in Kenya. The multi-sectoral framework was developed based on agreed understanding of the continuum of services, and roles and obligations of numerous sectors and their links to the broader spectrum of response prevention, and coordination of SGBV intervention in Kenya. An intensive consultative process was followed in every phase of the development of this framework. Beyond agreements on critical indicators, indicator definitions, performance measurements, feedback and validation of the framework, the stakeholders outlined responsibilities of each agency in the implementation path of the framework. Their participation was crucial in ensuring consensus, quality and ownership of the process and the framework. The framework provides the following: Establishes one integrated and functional SGBV multi-sectoral monitoring and evaluation system; Monitoring and evaluation of national efforts in the prevention of and response to SGBV; and Contributes to evidence-informed funding, advocacy, decision making and programming. The framework takes cognizance and complements other related national frameworks including the National HIV and AIDS Monitoring, Evaluation and Research Framework (2009/10-2012/13); Monitoring and Evaluation framework for Kenya Health Sector Strategic Investment Plan (July 2012- June 2018) and the Vision 2030 implementation framework. This relationship is intended to establish linkages in reporting due to the documented intersections between GBV and other health challenges, including HIV.

Essay from the year 2018 in the subject Law - Comparative Legal Systems, Comparative Law, , language: English, abstract: This paper discusses the Kenyan constitutional and legal framework for the enforcement of county laws. It exposes the inadequacy of the legal and institutional framework as the root of all other challenges experienced in the enforcement of county laws in Kenya. These challenges include lack of capacity for the enforcement of county laws by the counties, corruption menace, lack of a uniform code of conduct for county askaris, the novelty of devolution to county askaris and the general public and the lack of county courts to resolve disputes involving counties and enforce county laws. Proposals for addressing these challenges are given stressing on the need to enact legislation to provide for the legal and institutional framework for the enforcement of county laws in Kenya. This is important because one of the ways through which the objects of devolution can be achieved in Kenya is through the effective and efficient enforcement of county laws and regulations. Kenya adopted a new Constitution on 27th August 2010 with devolution1 being one of its most transformative aspects. Devolution was a good solution to the problems of marginalization, inadequate service delivery and regional disparities in development which was associated with the highly centralized system of government. With devolution, two levels of government were created: national and county governments.

A growing number of governments are working to improve their performance by creating systems to measure and help them understand their performance. These systems for monitoring and evaluation (M & E) are used to measure the quantity, quality, and targeting of the goods and services--the outputs--that the state provides and to measure the outcomes and impacts resulting from these outputs. These systems are also a vehicle to facilitate understanding of the causes of good and poor performance.