Rose, JonathanOmolo, Annette2014-04-012014-04-012013-10https://hdl.handle.net/10986/17556Kenya's new Constitution mandates a new era of public participation in government, particularly in the 47 new County Governments. Despite the limited participation in decisions regarding the vast majority of government spending, Kenya has a significant history with direct participation in government, as this has been a feature in several of the government's devolved funds such as the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) and Local Authority Service Delivery Action Plans (LASDAP). The objective of this report is to provide lessons and draw on best practices from previous Kenyan experiences with participation in local government, with a focus on how to effectively implement public participation. The research therefore seeks to prompt dialogue, ideas and action among stakeholders to follow through on the strong mandate provided by the Constitution, both at the national and the county level. The report completes six case studies of direct public participation in local government, where cases were selected for their reputation of strong participation. Two of the case studies looked at the operation of the Local Authority Service Delivery Action Plans (LASDAP), which required citizen participation as part of the decentralized Local Authority Transfer Fund (LATF). Two of the case studies examined citizen engagement in the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) process, through which Members of Parliament spend discretionary funds in their local constituencies. Finally, two case studies looked at how citizens were engaged in overseeing the provision of water services through Water Action Groups (WAGs), consisting of individuals appointed by the water authority to report citizen complaints and monitor responses by the Water Service Providers (WSPs).en-USCC BY 3.0 IGOACCESSIBILITYACCOUNTABILITYACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMACCOUNTABILITY TO COMMUNITIESADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITYAUDITINGBENEFICIARIESBEST PRACTICESBUDGET CYCLEBUDGET FORMULATIONBUDGET PROCESSBUDGETARY ALLOCATIONBUDGETARY ALLOCATIONSCAPACITY BUILDINGCBOCITIZEN COMPLAINTSCITIZEN ENGAGEMENTCITIZEN EXPECTATIONSCITIZEN GROUPSCITIZEN INPUTCITIZEN MONITORINGCITIZEN PARTICIPATIONCIVIC ENGAGEMENTCIVIC LEADERSCIVIL SOCIETYCIVIL SOCIETY ORGANIZATIONSCIVIL SOCIETY REPRESENTATIVESCOALITION GOVERNMENTCOMMUNITIESCOMMUNITY ACTIONCOMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONSCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTCOMMUNITY GROUPSCOMMUNITY LEADERSHIPCOMMUNITY MEMBERSCOMMUNITY MOBILIZATIONCOMMUNITY REPRESENTATIVESCONSENSUSCONSTITUENCIESCONSTITUENCYCONSTITUENTSCONSULTATIONCONSULTATIONSCONSUMERSCOUNCILORSCOUNTY GOVERNMENTSDEMOCRACYDEVOLUTIONDISTRICT GOVERNMENTDORMITORIESELECTIONELECTIONSENGAGING CITIZENSENGINEERENGINEERSEXHIBITSEXTREME POVERTYFEMALEFOCUS GROUPFOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONSGENDERGOOD GOVERNANCEGOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTGOVERNMENT INFORMATIONGOVERNMENT REFORMGOVERNMENT REGULATIONSGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONSHOSPITALSHOTELSHUMAN RIGHTSINCOMEINFORMAL SETTLEMENTSINHABITANTSINSTITUTIONAL CAPACITYINTERVENTIONINTERVENTIONSINTERVIEWSLAWSLEGISLATIONLOCAL AUTHORITIESLOCAL GOVERNMENTLOCAL LEVELLOCAL OFFICIALSLOCAL PARTICIPATIONMEMBERS OF PARLIAMENTMOBILIZATIONMPNATIONAL ELECTIONSOPENNESSPARLIAMENTPARTICIPATORY APPROACHESPARTICIPATORY FOCUSPARTICIPATORY INITIATIVESPARTICIPATORY PROCESSESPHONE CALLSPOLITICAL PROCESSPOLITICAL PROCESSESPREPARATIONPROJECT IMPLEMENTATIONPROPERTY TAXESPUBLICPUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITYPUBLIC AUTHORITIESPUBLIC ENGAGEMENTPUBLIC FINANCEPUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENTPUBLIC OFFICIALSPUBLIC PARTICIPATIONPUBLIC RESOURCESPUBLIC WORKSRESIDENTS ASSOCIATIONSRIGHT TO INFORMATIONROAD INFRASTRUCTURESERVICE DELIVERYSERVICE PROVIDERSSERVICE PROVISIONSETTLEMENTSOCIAL AUDITSOCIAL AUDITSSOCIAL SERVICESSTAKEHOLDERSTRADE UNIONSTRANSPARENCYUSER CHARGESVILLAGEVOTERSYOUTH10.1596/17556