The launch of the study report, by the Pan African Research Services (PARS) in partnership with the Kenya Red Cross
Society.
A new report has identified barriers to inclusion and challenges in scaling social protection programmes in
Kenya.
The study, conducted by Pan African Research Services (PARS)
in partnership with the Kenya Red Cross Society and funded by the European
Union Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid, focused on Kenya’s Turkana,
Garissa, and Tana River counties.
These regions were selected as a sample because of their high
vulnerability to disasters such as droughts, floods and displacement as
witnessed over the years.
Kenya’s social protection system has advanced considerably
over the past two decades, anchored by a strong constitutional mandate under
Article 43 of the 2010 Constitution and guided by the Kenya Social Protection
Policy (2023).
Its four pillars, including income security, social health
protection, shock-responsive social protection, and complementary programs, aim
to protect vulnerable groups throughout their life. Despite progress,
persistent errors of inclusion and exclusion undermine the credibility,
fairness, and effectiveness of these interventions.
The report reveals that 19 per cent of surveyed respondents
witnessed errors of inclusion where ineligible individuals received benefits,
often facilitated by favouritism, political interference, community bias or
outdated beneficiary data.
Turkana County was particularly affected, with 79 per cent noting
community bias and political patronage as key contributors. For example,
well-off individuals or relatives of officials often accessed cash transfers
unfairly, draining resources.
Conversely, errors of exclusion left about 16 per cent of eligible
vulnerable individuals without access. The study identified a lack of awareness
about programs, language and communication barriers, complicated registration
processes and discrimination based on gender, disability or geography as
primary factors.
Remote populations, women, persons with disabilities,
adolescent girls and young mothers were unfairly excluded. In some cases,
cultural norms and documentation barriers prevented widows and persons with
disabilities from enrolling, despite urgent need.
The report further notes that during disasters such as
droughts and floods, errors of exclusion forced many vulnerable households into
harmful coping mechanisms like selling assets at low prices, borrowing
exploitatively, withdrawing children from school or facing life-threatening hardships.
Inclusion errors involved financial strain on social protection budgets,
reducing coverage and public trust.
Beneficiaries and community leaders expressed frustration
over delayed or unpredictable payments, especially from NGO programs, which led
to hardship. Consistent and timely payments were noted as critical for
mitigating shock impacts and supporting recovery.
The study further identified systemic bottlenecks curbing
Kenya’s ability to expand social protection horizontally to reach new
beneficiaries and vertically to increase benefits.
Policy challenges included fragmented coordination
among ministries and NGOs and divergent perceptions of social protection as a
short-term relief tool rather than a long-term investment in resilience. Many
counties do not explicitly budget or prioritise social protection in their
development plans.
To add on, Legal challenges that
stem from Kenya’s current broken legislative framework. Several laws govern
different social protection pillars, but lack integration and clear mandates for
coordination across institutions. The report highlighted that the awaited
Social Protection Bill (2025) aims to streamline structures but remains
unimplemented.
The report lauded Kenya’s Enhanced Single Registry (ESR) for
improving targeting by consolidating socio-economic data of vulnerable
households into a centralised platform. It integrates with the national ID
system (IPRS) to reduce duplication and misclassification, and supports
community validation and grievance mechanisms. The ESR has enabled faster, more
transparent beneficiary verification and supports shock-responsive payout
scaling.
However, operational challenges remain. Regular data updates
are constrained by budget limitations, and county-level awareness and capacity
to utilise ESR data effectively are low. The paper recommends expanding
training, clarifying roles and integrating the ESR with early warning systems,
meteorological data, civil registration and health databases to improve
accuracy and responsiveness.
The researchers urged the government and development
partners to urgently address these challenges to build an inclusive, reliable
and shock-adaptive social protection system that effectively safeguards the
most vulnerable across Kenya’s diverse regions.