Determinants of Implementation of County Bursary Regulations in Kirinyaga County, Kenya

Abstract

Kirinyaga County bursary scheme was introduced in the 2013/14 financial year. Bursary for secondary schools and higher level institutions being a National government function, the county sought advice from the then cabinet to offer state support to enhance access, ensure retention and reduce corruption in the provision of school education. Poor vetting criterion and compliance of guidelines have resulted in cronyism and nepotism which have plagued the bursary award process for decades. Poor monitoring & evaluation has piled up grievances with no follow up system. Lack of clear regulations on funding allocation has allowed political interference on budget cycles. The County bursary targets were students from poor households and the vulnerable. This study sought to examine the determinants of implementation of county bursary regulations in Kirinyaga County, Kenya. The study was guided by the following objectives; To establish the extent to which compliance of guidelines determines the implementation of County Bursary in Kirinyaga County, to explore the extent to which vetting criteria determines the implementation of County Bursary in Kirinyaga County, to examine the extent to which funding allocation determines the implementation of County Bursary in Kirinyaga County and to examine the extent to which monitoring of utilization of the bursary fund determines the implementation of County Bursary in Kirinyaga County. The new public administration theory that captures the concept of equity and fairness was adopted to explore the gaps during implementation of county bursary regulations in Kirinyaga County. The study sourced requisite data from 70 parents whose students benefited from bursary and 31 principals, both samples having been picked from the PTAs membership. The respondents were drawn using a combination of random and purposive sampling procedures. The study adopted descriptive design which was used to analyze primary data. Data was presented, interpreted and analyzed using frequency & percentage distributions, cross tabulations with STATA. Qualitative data in form of first hand experiences, informed opinions and suggestions, were analyzed using qualitative procedures and were used to strengthen quantitative findings. The results of the study indicated that majority of beneficiaries allocation by need were from poor households 51% followed by bright students at 29%. Similarly, orphans and special needs students both received 9.7%