African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) 2014
Kenya, 2014
Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS)
Created on
September 16, 2022
Last modified
September 16, 2022
Page views
170314
Download
717
Documentation in PDF
Metadata
DDI/XML
JSON
Identification
Survey ID Number
KEN-KNBS-APRM-2014-v1.0
Title
African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) 2014
Translated Title
No translation
Country
| Name | Country code |
|---|---|
| Kenya | KEN |
Study type
Population and Housing Census [hh/popcen]
Abstract
1. APRM focuses on deepening democratic practices while strengthening achievements, disseminating best practices and rectifying underlying deficiencies in governance, and socio-economic development processes among AU Member States. This encourages and builds transformative leadership through a self-assessment process, constructive peer dialogue and the sharing of information and common experiences, in order to reinforce successful and exemplary practices among African countries. Participating countries accelerate their progress towards adopting and implementing the NEPAD priority programmes
The APRM process involves the simultaneous evaluation of performance in four distinct thematic areas (pillars):
(I) Democracy and political governance;
(ii) Economic governance and management;
(iii) Corporate governance; and
(iv) Socio- Economic development.
2. The APRM process in Kenya was guided by an independent multi-stakeholder to ensure that the assessment process was independent, participatory, and all inclusive. Kenya engaged in a long and vigorous national consultative process and the survey of ordinary Kenyans. This process culminated in the development of a comprehensive Kenya Country Self Assessment Report and a National Programme of Action (NPoA).
3. Some of the overarching issues identified by external reviewers, which relate to areas of deficiency or shortcomings in the Kenyan systems and the review report called for these more general problems, seemingly interlinked, to be given a holistic, and more urgent attention because of the wider impact they have on the quality of governance in the country.
4. The first APRM country review report made a remarkably frank assessment of Kenya's problems. The APRM process has given Kenyan citizens an opportunity to express themselves freely under a new constitutional dispensation.
The report called for appropriate measures to embrace leadership that 'recognizes the need for dramatic change in a society' and that 'entails, not simply directing change but managing it in a way that ensures broad ownership, legitimacy and self-directed sustenance and replication of change in all associated systems.
5. The overarching issues identified in the 2006 APRM Country Review Report are;
Managing Diversity; Poverty and Wealth Distribution; Land; Corruption; Constitution; Gender Inequality; Youth Unemployment and Transformative Leadership.
The specific objectives of the second review are as follows:
(i) Reinvigorate and institutionalise the APRM process in the country;
(ii) Appraise to what extent the NPOA is being implemented, and its continued relevance, on the basis of which a new NPOA would be proposed and adopted;
(ii) Examine whether the identified commendable or best practices in the Base Review are being reinforced and promoted and;
(iv) Tackle any new and emerging issues relevant to governance and socio-economic development in the country.
The APRM process involves the simultaneous evaluation of performance in four distinct thematic areas (pillars):
(I) Democracy and political governance;
(ii) Economic governance and management;
(iii) Corporate governance; and
(iv) Socio- Economic development.
2. The APRM process in Kenya was guided by an independent multi-stakeholder to ensure that the assessment process was independent, participatory, and all inclusive. Kenya engaged in a long and vigorous national consultative process and the survey of ordinary Kenyans. This process culminated in the development of a comprehensive Kenya Country Self Assessment Report and a National Programme of Action (NPoA).
3. Some of the overarching issues identified by external reviewers, which relate to areas of deficiency or shortcomings in the Kenyan systems and the review report called for these more general problems, seemingly interlinked, to be given a holistic, and more urgent attention because of the wider impact they have on the quality of governance in the country.
4. The first APRM country review report made a remarkably frank assessment of Kenya's problems. The APRM process has given Kenyan citizens an opportunity to express themselves freely under a new constitutional dispensation.
The report called for appropriate measures to embrace leadership that 'recognizes the need for dramatic change in a society' and that 'entails, not simply directing change but managing it in a way that ensures broad ownership, legitimacy and self-directed sustenance and replication of change in all associated systems.
5. The overarching issues identified in the 2006 APRM Country Review Report are;
Managing Diversity; Poverty and Wealth Distribution; Land; Corruption; Constitution; Gender Inequality; Youth Unemployment and Transformative Leadership.
The specific objectives of the second review are as follows:
(i) Reinvigorate and institutionalise the APRM process in the country;
(ii) Appraise to what extent the NPOA is being implemented, and its continued relevance, on the basis of which a new NPOA would be proposed and adopted;
(ii) Examine whether the identified commendable or best practices in the Base Review are being reinforced and promoted and;
(iv) Tackle any new and emerging issues relevant to governance and socio-economic development in the country.
Kind of Data
Census/enumeration data [cen]
Unit of Analysis
Households
Version
Version Description
Version 1.0 (July 2014)
Version Date
2014-07-24
Scope
Notes
Households
Coverage
Universe
1. The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) 2014 a cross sectional household based survey was nationally representative. The sample composed of 2,000 selected households within 200 clusters from all the 47 counties of Kenya, including urban and rural areas of these counties. The clusters were selected using the Equal Probability Selection Method (EPSEM). The clusters were selected systematically from NASSEP V frame and standardized so that each could have one Measure of Size (MoS) A pilot survey was done to adequately prepare for the main survey. Training of the main field personnel took place for five days before the actual data collection. All the thirteen teams proceeded to their respective counties for data collection.
Producers and sponsors
Primary investigators
| Name | Affiliation |
|---|---|
| Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) | Ministry of Devolution and Planning |
Producers
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Industrialization | Ministry of Industrialization and Enterprise Development | Technical assistance |
Funding Agency/Sponsor
| Name | Role |
|---|---|
| Ministry of Devolution and Planning | Financing |
Sampling
Sampling Procedure
The African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) 2014 a cross sectional household based survey was nationally representative. The sample composed of 2,000 selected households within 200 clusters from all the 47 counties of Kenya, including urban and rural areas of these counties.
The APRM household survey utilized the recently created fifth National Sample Survey and Evaluation Programme (NASSEP V) frame which is a household based sampling frame developed and maintained by KNBS. It is based on the list of enumeration areas (EAs) from the 2009 Kenya Population and Housing Census. The frame is stratified according to County and further into rural and urban. Each of the sub-samples is representative at county level and at national (i.e. Urban/rural) level and contains 1,340 clusters.
During the 2009 population and housing census, each sub-location was subdivided into census enumeration areas (EAs), i.e., small geographic units with clearly defined boundaries. The primary sampling unit for NASSEP V master sampling frame, and for the APRM, is a cluster, which constitutes one or more EAs, with an average of 100 households per cluster.
The survey used two-stage stratified cluster sampling where the first stage selected the 324 clusters from NASSEP V using equal probability selection method (EPSEM). The second stage randomly selected a uniform sample of 15 households in each cluster from a roster of households in the cluster using systematic random sampling method.
Sample Size and Allocation
A sample of 2,000 households was estimated for the survey. The sample size was calculated to give representative estimates of various governance indicators for the main domains of interest: urban, rural, and national. The allocation of the sample was done using the square root allocation method to ensure that the urban domain got enough sample. Ultimately, the number of households allocated to the rural domain was 1210 while those in urban were 790 households.
Selection of Clusters
The clusters were selected using the Equal Probability Selection Method (EPSEM). The clusters were selected systematically from NASSEP V frame with equal probability independently within the Counties and urban-rural strata. The EPSEM method was adopted since during the creation of the frame, clusters were standardized so that each could have one Measure of Size (MoS) defined as having an average of 100 households.
Household selection
From each selected cluster, a uniform sample of 10 households was selected systematically, with a random start. The systematic sampling method was adopted as it enables the even distribution of the sample across the clusters and yields good estimates for the population parameters. Selection of the households was done at the office and assigned to the enumerators. There was no allowance to replace non-responding households.
The APRM household survey utilized the recently created fifth National Sample Survey and Evaluation Programme (NASSEP V) frame which is a household based sampling frame developed and maintained by KNBS. It is based on the list of enumeration areas (EAs) from the 2009 Kenya Population and Housing Census. The frame is stratified according to County and further into rural and urban. Each of the sub-samples is representative at county level and at national (i.e. Urban/rural) level and contains 1,340 clusters.
During the 2009 population and housing census, each sub-location was subdivided into census enumeration areas (EAs), i.e., small geographic units with clearly defined boundaries. The primary sampling unit for NASSEP V master sampling frame, and for the APRM, is a cluster, which constitutes one or more EAs, with an average of 100 households per cluster.
The survey used two-stage stratified cluster sampling where the first stage selected the 324 clusters from NASSEP V using equal probability selection method (EPSEM). The second stage randomly selected a uniform sample of 15 households in each cluster from a roster of households in the cluster using systematic random sampling method.
Sample Size and Allocation
A sample of 2,000 households was estimated for the survey. The sample size was calculated to give representative estimates of various governance indicators for the main domains of interest: urban, rural, and national. The allocation of the sample was done using the square root allocation method to ensure that the urban domain got enough sample. Ultimately, the number of households allocated to the rural domain was 1210 while those in urban were 790 households.
Selection of Clusters
The clusters were selected using the Equal Probability Selection Method (EPSEM). The clusters were selected systematically from NASSEP V frame with equal probability independently within the Counties and urban-rural strata. The EPSEM method was adopted since during the creation of the frame, clusters were standardized so that each could have one Measure of Size (MoS) defined as having an average of 100 households.
Household selection
From each selected cluster, a uniform sample of 10 households was selected systematically, with a random start. The systematic sampling method was adopted as it enables the even distribution of the sample across the clusters and yields good estimates for the population parameters. Selection of the households was done at the office and assigned to the enumerators. There was no allowance to replace non-responding households.
Deviations from the Sample Design
Not available
Response Rate
Household heads were the key respondents or any other person considered a potential respondent in the household.
Response for the selected households was not as good as for previous household survey. The survey targeted 2000 households and 1698 responded to the interview translating to 84.9 percent compared to the previous survey (99.5%).
Response for the selected households was not as good as for previous household survey. The survey targeted 2000 households and 1698 responded to the interview translating to 84.9 percent compared to the previous survey (99.5%).
Weighting
8 The 2014 APRM sample was not self-weighted and thus a weighting adjustment was required to provide estimates representative of the target population. The base weights incorporated the probabilities of selection of the clusters from the census EAs database into the NASSEP V sample frame, the probabilities of selecting the APRM survey clusters from NASSEP V and the probabilities of selection of the 10 households from each of the NASSEP V clusters. These base weights were then adjusted for household non-response.
Data Collection
Dates of Data Collection
| Start | End |
|---|---|
| 2014 | 2014 |
Data Collection Mode
Face-to-face [f2f]
Supervision
Was supervised by the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics.
Data Collection Notes
8 All teams proceeded to their respective counties for data collection. Thirteen teams participated in data collection; a team consisted of three research assistants and a supervisor. The teams were accompanied by CSOs pay a courtesy call to county administration. The importance of this was to ensure security of research assistants.
Preliminary editing of the questionnaires was done at the field before transporting the materials to Nairobi for data entry. Transporting questionnaires was done after every three days to ensure data entry proceeded smoothly
Preliminary editing of the questionnaires was done at the field before transporting the materials to Nairobi for data entry. Transporting questionnaires was done after every three days to ensure data entry proceeded smoothly
Data Collectors
| Name | Abbreviation | Affiliation |
|---|---|---|
| Kenya National Bureau of Statistics | KNBS | Ministry of Devolution and Planning |
Questionnaires
Questionnaires
The household survey questionnaire was the survey instrument used to record respondents perceptions on specific issues. APRM questionnaire English language was translated to Swahili and both languages were used during the interviews.
It was subdivided into 5 sections and an identification panel. Identification panel contained information on questionnaire identification (County, cluster, household number and household visits).
Questions on Household Demographics Characteristics, Social- Economic Development, Economic Government and Management, Corporate Governance, Democracy and Political Governance are contained in sections 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively.
It was subdivided into 5 sections and an identification panel. Identification panel contained information on questionnaire identification (County, cluster, household number and household visits).
Questions on Household Demographics Characteristics, Social- Economic Development, Economic Government and Management, Corporate Governance, Democracy and Political Governance are contained in sections 1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively.
Data Processing
Data Editing
The data was edited by the editing staff.
Other Processing
Data entry program was developed in CSpro version 5.0; it was developed to capture APRM pilot and the main survey. A data dictionary containing all the data items in the questionnaire was developed, and a screen was generated, Skips and consistence checks were incorporated in the program. This was done to minimize data entry errors.
Training and testing of data entry program:
The program was tested and installed in a server at KNBS data processing centre. Training of data entry personnel took three days. Questionnaire content was trained during the first two days; this was done to ensure keyers understood the questionnaire and could identify and correct data errors. Final testing of the program was done during the third day by keyers using life data from the survey. Program errors noted during the test were fixed ready to begin data entry
Data entry:
Two supervisors and twenty entry clerks were involved in the exercise. A total of 200 clusters were received from the field containing 2000 questionnaires. Keyers took twenty five days to complete both 1st and 2nd entry. Double entry was done to minimize data entry errors, the two sets of data were compared and differences were corrected. A final data set without data entry errors was saved ready for cleaning.
Data Cleaning and validation:
The two processes were running concurrently with data entry. Variable frequencies were generated to check quality of the data. CSPro commands were executed to flash out invalid data entries. Inconsistencies were also detected and corrected.
Data Analysis:
Dataset which was in CSpro format was converted to STATA version 12 format for analysis. Several datasets were exported to STATA depending on a record type. Dummy Tables had been developed to be used for tabulations. A tabulation program was developed and used to produce Tables used during report writing.
Training and testing of data entry program:
The program was tested and installed in a server at KNBS data processing centre. Training of data entry personnel took three days. Questionnaire content was trained during the first two days; this was done to ensure keyers understood the questionnaire and could identify and correct data errors. Final testing of the program was done during the third day by keyers using life data from the survey. Program errors noted during the test were fixed ready to begin data entry
Data entry:
Two supervisors and twenty entry clerks were involved in the exercise. A total of 200 clusters were received from the field containing 2000 questionnaires. Keyers took twenty five days to complete both 1st and 2nd entry. Double entry was done to minimize data entry errors, the two sets of data were compared and differences were corrected. A final data set without data entry errors was saved ready for cleaning.
Data Cleaning and validation:
The two processes were running concurrently with data entry. Variable frequencies were generated to check quality of the data. CSPro commands were executed to flash out invalid data entries. Inconsistencies were also detected and corrected.
Data Analysis:
Dataset which was in CSpro format was converted to STATA version 12 format for analysis. Several datasets were exported to STATA depending on a record type. Dummy Tables had been developed to be used for tabulations. A tabulation program was developed and used to produce Tables used during report writing.
Data Appraisal
Data Appraisal
Not available
Access policy
Access authority
| Name | Affiliation | |
|---|---|---|
| Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) | Ministry of Devolution and Plannng | directorgeneral@knbs.or.ke |
Contacts
| Name | Affiliation | |
|---|---|---|
| Director General | Kenya National Bureau of Statistics | directorgeneral@knbs.or.ke |
Confidentiality
Data and other materials provided by KNBS shall not be redistributed or sold to other individuals, institutions, or organizations without written authority from the Director General.
Data shall be used for statistical purposes only and not for investigation of specific individuals or organizations or any other purpose.
No attempt shall be made to produce links among datasets provided by KNBS, or among data from the KNBS and other datasets with a view to identifying individuals or organizations.
Any books, articles, conference papers, theses, dissertations, reports, or other publications that employ data obtained from the KNBS Data Archive will cite the source of data.
Requests for micro-data shall be serviced upon completion of and submission of the Application Form for Microdata.
Access conditions
The following general cost-sharing principles will apply to the dissemination of data:
Open access data (Public use) - data posted in the KNBS website for download will be available at no charge.
Registered access (Licensed) data - data will be availed to sponsors as per agreement between the sponsor and KNBS.
A sponsor is any party who contributes directly either materially or financially towards a data production process.
Users requesting for specialized services are expected to negotiate and agree on a cost-recovery agreement with the Director General.
KNBS may levy fees on statistical information products depending on the type of product, effort expended and the dissemination medium.
Open access data (Public use) - data posted in the KNBS website for download will be available at no charge.
Registered access (Licensed) data - data will be availed to sponsors as per agreement between the sponsor and KNBS.
A sponsor is any party who contributes directly either materially or financially towards a data production process.
Users requesting for specialized services are expected to negotiate and agree on a cost-recovery agreement with the Director General.
KNBS may levy fees on statistical information products depending on the type of product, effort expended and the dissemination medium.
Citation requirements
The data users shall acknowledge that any available intellectual property rights, including copyright in the data are owned by the KNBS.
The data user or client is encouraged to provide KNBS with a copy of such report, paper or article.
The data user or client is encouraged to provide KNBS with a copy of such report, paper or article.
Disclaimer and copyrights
Disclaimer
In no event shall KNBS become liable to users of its data, or any other party, for any loss or damages, consequential or otherwise, including but not limited to time, money, or goodwill, arising from the use, operation or modification of the data. In using these data, users further agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless KNBS for any an all liability of any nature arising out of or resulting from the lack of accuracy or correctness of the data, or the use of the data.
Copyright
(c) 2014, Kenya National Bureau of Statistics
Metadata production
DDI Document ID
DDI-KEN-KNBS-APRM-2014-v1.0
Producers
| Name | Abbreviation | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kenya National Bureau of Statistics | KNBS | Ministry of Devolution and Planning | Documentation of the census |
Date of Metadata Production
2014-07-24
DDI Document version
Version 1.0 (July 2014)