Sh23bn ‘wasted’: The shame of counties

Besides poorly thought-out yet costly projects, the report by the office of the Auditor-General shows that some contractors keep winning tenders and walking away taxpayers’ cash for shoddy work or no work done at all.

An analysis of the county executive audits indicates that pilferage and wastage have become a cause for alarm as many of these projects are often assigned to political cronies with little or no expertise.

In her report, Auditor-General Nancy Gathungu singles out Kitui, Nairobi, Kisumu, Nyandarua, Samburu and Vihiga as the worst performing in management of public resources, raising questions on at least Sh23 billion in the six counties.

She gave five counties an adverse opinion and Kitui a disclaimer of opinion in her report on their usage of public funds.

An adverse opinion means that in the course of examining how public funds were spent in the counties, auditors encountered many serious and persistent material breaches, to the extent that they could not fairly present the actual situation.

A disclaimer of opinion means that material breaches, lack of information and inconsistencies were so huge that the Auditor-General could not form any opinion on how money was spent.

Doubtful expenditure

A glimpse of the losses that Kenyans have had to shoulder has been captured in Kisii, where a contractor was paid Sh3,942,097 for drainage works and slope protection on the Masakwe-Nyanchogu road.

“Physical verification on October 14, 2020 revealed the stone pitching done at a cost of Sh2,184,000 had already been washed off by storm water in some sections. 

“Further, gabion boxes laid at a cost of Sh1,020,000 were fixed using light-gauge hexagonal double-twisted steel meshes, which were already torn. Consequently, the propriety and value for money (with regard to) Sh3,914,130 expenditures could not be ascertained,” the report states.

In Mombasa, the report says, there was a delay in the construction of a sports complex, though money had been paid to a contractor in 2018.

“However, as at the time of the audit, November 2020, the project’s remaining duration was 14 months (39 per cent of contract period) to completion, yet only seven per cent of the works had been done and paid for,” it states.

In Marsabit, the report says, there was doubtful expenditure amounting to  Sh43,942,367 on the purchase of office equipment and general supplies and services.

The audit shows that in Uasin Gishu County, construction of most milk cooling plants had been completed and coolers installed, but they were not operational as there was no connection to electricity.

Buildings at some of the plants were complete but coolers had not been delivered. Further, some milk cooling plants had been marked complete yet works, electricity connection, water at the various sites had not been done.

Unexplained expenditures

Consequently, the report adds, value for the Sh244,198,477 spent “as of 30 June, 2020 has not been realised despite the project overshooting the contract amount”.

In Garissa, the county contracted works for periodic maintenance of Galbet Road at a cost of Sh2,017,008.

However, grading and clearing of bush was done for 7.5 kilometres instead of 15 kilometres, contrary to the project progress report.

“A payment of Sh1,710,907, representing 85 per cent of the contract sum, had been made at the time of audit. Further, the project had stalled and the contractor was not on site,” says the report.

Between March 2017 and June 2019, the Kitui County government issued two tenders for the construction of mortuaries worth Sh23.6 million.

The projects at Mwingi Level IV Hospital and Kitui County Referral Hospital could have changed the lives of residents, who have suffered a shortage of morgues and poor services at existing facilities, sometimes being forced to cope with a bad stench.

By November 2020, however, the projects had stalled at different stages and lacked critical features such as doors, windows, roofing and morgue machines.

The county was also flagged over unexplained expenditures, huge pending bills and poorly done projects.

Stalled projects

Ms Gathungu could not make a conclusion as to whether the county government spent public funds lawfully and had working internal controls, hence the disclaimer of opinion.

The Nairobi City County reported that it paid several firms Sh249 million in FY 2019/2020 to collect and dispose of garbage.

However, the county could not provide procurement records of the contracts to auditors, whose review later found that “contracts for the same tasks in the same geographical zones were awarded to different firms at different payment rates”.

The Auditor-General further faults Nairobi City County for the procurement of 10 motorcycles at Sh3.6 million in August 2018, yet there had been a cheaper offer of Sh1.95 million for the same items.

In Nairobi, Ms Gathungu questioned at least Sh14.4 billion in unsupported expenditures, stalled projects, variances between financial statements and revenue records, irrational costing and unreported revenues.

In Nyandarua, the county reported that it spent some Sh2.2 million on 11,230 assorted seedlings for onward distribution and planting. But while examining county records, the Auditor-General reports that while the seeds were procured on June 22 and paid for on June 25, 2020, distribution had already taken place over a month before.

Prof Anyang’ Nyong’o’s Kisumu government reported that it spent some Sh5 million on renovation of his deputy’s house, beginning June 2019.

“However, the bills of quantities were not signed, had no preparation date and tender reference numbers. The contract agreement did not disclose the contract timeframe and the contract amount. Further, the works done under payment certificate number One (No. 1) dated June 17, 2019 amounting to Sh5 million were not supported by an inspection and acceptance report and letter of appointment of the inspection committee. There was no document provided to support certified works and hence it was difficult to confirm the extent of the works were done while the tender advert, regret letters and other procurement documents were not produced for audit purposes,” Ms Gathungu observed.