A fresh showdown is brewing between governors and the Senate after a section of county chiefs rejected Parliament's inaugural fiscal performance scorecard, arguing that the rankings fail to capture the realities of running devolved governments and risk painting an unfair picture of service delivery across the country.
The pushback follows the launch of the County Fiscal Performance Measurement Index (CFPMI) by the Parliamentary Budget Office, which ranked Embu as Kenya's best-managed county while placing Kisumu, Kakamega, Busia, Bomet and Nairobi among the country's poorest fiscal performers.
The report assessed all 47 counties using seven public finance indicators, including budget implementation efficiency, development expenditure, own-source revenue, wage bill management, pending bills, county assembly expenditure and audit outcomes.
While Senate Speaker Amason Kingi described the index as the first scientific tool for measuring how prudently counties manage public resources, governors have questioned both the methodology and the conclusions, insisting the rankings overlook factors such as inherited financial obligations, delayed disbursement of funds from the National Treasury, the size of county budgets and the nature of recurrent spending.
Narok Governor Patrick Ole Ntutu, whose county ranked second overall behind Embu, backed the Senate's assessment, saying the results accurately reflected county performance. "Very well done. I totally agree with the Senate index," Mr Ntutu said.
Nakuru Governor Susan Kihika also welcomed the report after her county was ranked ninth nationally, describing it as validation of her administration's focus on financial discipline and development.
"Nakuru County is officially a top county," she said, hailing the county's placement among the country's top performers.
Ms Kihika said Nakuru invested Sh3.9 billion in development projects during the financial year while emerging as one of the country's best performers in wage bill management, ranking second nationally with a score of 0.982, well within the Public Finance Management Act's 35 per cent ceiling.
"We are not just talking about progress; we are funding it," she said, adding that the recognition reflected the county's commitment to transparent, high-impact governance.
Council of Governors Chairperson Ahmed Abdullahi, who was ranked third on his Wajir County performance, did not comment on the Senate's fiscal rankings.
Repeated calls to his mobile phone went unanswered, while text messages seeking the Council's official position had not been responded to by the time of publication.
Nairobi Governor Johnson Sakaja, whose administration was ranked among the bottom performers, acknowledged the importance of independent evaluations but argued that the assessment presented an incomplete picture of county performance.
Nairobi Governor Johnson Sakaja.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
"Budget absorption is an important fiscal indicator, but it is only one aspect of performance. It measures the proportion of allocated development funds that has been spent; it does not, on its own, capture the actual monetary value of development projects implemented," Mr Sakaja said.
He noted that the same report ranked Nairobi as the county with the highest actual development expenditure in the country during the 2024/25 financial year after spending Sh4.308 billion on development projects, ahead of Turkana and Kilifi.
The governor further pointed to the county's record Sh15.4 billion own-source revenue collection in the 2025/26 financial year, saying the figure reflected sustained reforms in revenue administration and financial management.
"Evaluating counties exclusively through absorption percentages does not provide a complete picture. A county with a relatively modest development allocation may achieve a higher absorption rate while investing significantly less in actual development than a county with a much larger budget. For this reason, both the absorption rate and the total value of development expenditure should be assessed together to provide a balanced, objective and meaningful comparison," he said.
Mr Sakaja has also maintained that Nairobi remained committed to prudent financial management and service delivery, arguing that the capital had invested more money in development than any other county while simultaneously recording the highest own-source revenue collection in its history.
Makueni Governor Mutula Kilonzo Jr. questioned the methodology used in compiling the rankings, saying it was premature to comment before understanding the assessment criteria.
"I have not understood the criteria used. Our development is affected by many things and all counties are not the same," he said.
Makueni Governor Mutula Kilonzo Jr.
Photo credit: File | Nation Media Group
Mr Mutula noted that by the close of the financial year, Makueni had implemented 73 per cent of its budget and recorded its highest-ever own-source revenue collection of Sh1.6 billion.
"I can't say much until I know the criteria used. We welcome any oversight on our work," he added.
Meru Governor Isaac Mutuma also challenged the ranking, arguing that the assessment largely reflected the performance of the previous administration rather than his own.
Mr Mutuma, who assumed office on March 17, 2025 following the impeachment of former Governor Kawira Mwangaza, said it was unfair to evaluate his administration using a financial year that largely preceded his tenure.
"We have prioritised prudent financial management, fiscal discipline, accelerated implementation of development projects and improved service delivery across Meru County. These efforts have already begun yielding measurable results," his office said.
The governor cited the Controller of Budget's Budget Implementation Review Report for the first nine months of the 2025/26 financial year, which ranked Meru second nationally in development expenditure absorption at 54 per cent, saying the improvement demonstrated the impact of reforms introduced after he took office.
Murang'a Governor Irungu Kang'ata, while acknowledging that the index had merit in encouraging counties to invest more in development, argued that the Parliamentary Budget Office's framework places excessive emphasis on physical infrastructure at the expense of investments in people.
Murang'a County Governor Irungu Kang'ata when he appeared before the County Public Investment Committee at Bunge Towers in Nairobi on May 27, 2024.
Photo credit: Dennis Onsongo | Nation Media Group
"It has some merit. It helps counties to work more on matters of development," Dr Kang'ata said.
"But some recurrent expenditures are actually development. Drugs, bursaries, medical insurance for the poor, school meals and human capital development should not simply be treated as consumption."
Drawing parallels with post-war Germany and Japan, Dr Kang'ata argued that investments in education, healthcare and human capital often generate greater long-term economic returns than physical infrastructure.
"It proves the point the PBO matrix gets wrong. Development is not what you build. It is what people can do," he said, adding that governments should stop classifying scholarships and other human capital investments as ordinary recurrent expenditure.
Bungoma Governor Kenneth Lusaka questioned both the process and transparency behind the assessment, saying counties had not been adequately consulted on the methodology before publication.
"It was not a fair rating. We need to be taken through the criteria. It is unfair when you carry out some assessment in a clandestine manner. Real development is on the ground in the counties," Mr Lusaka said.
"I am yet to go through the report and see the exact criteria they used to arrive at such a conclusion. I am studying the report before I issue a comprehensive view on the ratings," he said.
The criticism has also found support among some county leaders and allies of governors. Kiambu MCA Peter Mburu argued that county performance should be assessed using tangible projects rather than fiscal indicators alone, saying photographs and videos of completed projects would provide a better measure of governors' achievements.
The Senate defended the new index as an objective, evidence-based accountability tool developed using data from the Office of the Auditor-General, the Controller of Budget and other constitutional institutions.
According to Parliament, the CFPMI was designed to move county oversight away from political perceptions and towards measurable fiscal performance by assessing compliance with public finance management principles.
Mr Kingi said the report fills a long-standing gap in oversight by providing a scientific framework for evaluating how counties manage public resources.
"The purpose is not to generate a league table or encourage unhealthy competition among counties. Rather, it is to identify good practices, highlight areas requiring improvement and provide an objective basis upon which we can determine whether public resources are translating into meaningful development for our people," he said.
Senate Majority Leader Aaron Cheruiyot also dismissed suggestions that the rankings were politically motivated, insisting the index was grounded purely on data.
"The trend has been to say things based on how you relate with the governor. The results are pure science and nothing beyond science," Mr Cheruiyot said, even as he expressed concern over counties' poor performance in implementing development projects.
Although a majority of the governors questioned the methodology behind the rankings, a few others embraced the findings as an independent endorsement of their administrations' fiscal management.
