Delivering the future promise of devolution

constraints and challenges within this common agenda. Where a differentiated approach to tackle lagging counties is required, this should be coordinated through regional initiatives such as NeDi network-management software.

DELIVERING THE FUTURE PROMISE OF DEVOLUTION

The policy reform options outlined in this study have set out a broad agenda that requires concerted action within, across, and between the spheres of government, their executives and legislatures, as well as citizens. There are several opportunities to start addressing the issues relating to service delivery now. These opportunities should be taken. This study has highlighted the importance of a coordinated action collaboration. It is therefore proposed that a simple, high-level joint plan of action to make devolution work for service delivery be developed and endorsed by the Summit. Such a joint plan of action would include the following:

• A clear statement of the challenges facing devolved service delivery • A limited number of high-level actions to address the challenges—actions that would be organized around (1) addressing sectoral service delivery issues through service delivery frameworks; and (2) addressing cross-sectoral issues in areas such as financing service delivery, HRM, and participation and accountability, with a strong message to tackle corruption in devolved service delivery • The arrangements for implementation, including the key authorizers, stakeholder teams, and those actually responsible for leading the implementation of each action • A process of mutual accountability in terms of jointly monitoring and assessing the progress of the implementation of the plan.

In conclusion, this study shows that the future of devolution is promising. The relatively new county governments continue to develop and become more responsive and accountable to citizens. Achieving the devolution promise will require both levels of government to play their part and, as envisaged in the Constitution of Kenya of 2010, to conduct their mutual relations on the basis of consultation and cooperation.

APPENDIX A

MDWSD Policy Options

This appendix brings together the principal policy and other options aimed at making devolution work better for service delivery. These are the most important options included in the Making Devolution Work for Service Delivery (MDWSD)’s background papers and policy briefs. (These papers and briefs include a much wider range of recommendations.) For the purposes of this synthesis, key policy options are grouped around the discussion in the final chapter of this report.

The MDWSD policy options are presented in a series of tables, each of which deals with one of the thematic areas, including functions and responsibilities; funding service delivery; county resource allocation and use; service delivery oversight, management, and systems; human resource management; politics, participation, and accountability; and intergovernmental coordination, collaboration, and cooperation. The tables consist of

• A first column spelling out the specific challenge or issue that is being addressed; • A second column setting out some of the considerations for any response to the challenges identified; • A third column presenting the policy options, with a description of measures or actions that could or should be taken to improve service delivery; • A fourth column identifying who should take the lead in implementing recommendations and who should provide support to the leading institution or agency; • A fifth column showing the time frame that will be needed to implement the recommendation, as follows: within the next 12 months (short term); within the next 3 years (medium term); and within the next 5–6 years (long term).