INFLUENCE OF COMMUNITY CAPACITY BUILDING ON PERFORMANCE OF WATER RESOURCE USERS ASSOCIATIONS IN WATER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT IN THARAKA NITHI COUNTY

BY

FRANCIS KOOME SIMON

A RESEARCH PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN PROJECT PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI

2012
i

DECLARATION This Research Project report is my original work and has not been presented for a degree in any other university. Signature Francis Koome Simon Date:

This Research Project report has been submitted for examination with our approval as the university supervisors Signature . Dr. Jamleck Muturi John Lecturer, Department of Zoological science Kenyatta University Date ..

Signature Date . Mr. Chandi John Rugendo Lecturer, School of Continuing and Distance Education, Department of Extra Mural Studies, University of Nairobi.

ii

DEDICATION This work is dedicated to my wife Jacinta Karimi who made sure that my study is a success through moral support. Also my humble dedication and appreciations goes to my kids Maureen and Lewis for their encouragement and support.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT My acknowledgement goes to my supervisors Dr. Jamleck Muturi John and Mr. Chandi John Rugendo for their guidance, encouragement, moral support while writing this project and also for supporting me through my study at the University of Nairobi- Meru Extra Mural Centre. My appreciation also goes to my lecturers for their support, encouragement and their kindness through the two years of my studies at the University of Nairobi. Special thanks go to my classmates for their moral support and encouragement and my family for encouragements and support. Special thanks also go to all working colleagues for supporting me throughout my study. Special appreciation goes to my Project Manager for allowing me attend studies to the inconvenience of my work. May God, bless them abundantly.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

DECLARATION .ii DEDICATION.............................................................................................................................. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................................... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS v LIST OF FIGURES ..v LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... xii ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ................................................................................. xiiii ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................. xv INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Background of the study ........................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Statement of the problem .......................................................................................................... 3 1.3. Purpose of the study ................................................................................................................. 4 1.4 Objectives of the study.............................................................................................................. 4 1.5 Research questions .................................................................................................................... 5 1.6 Assumptions of the study .......................................................................................................... 5 1.7 Significance of the study........................................................................................................... 6 1.8 Delimitations of the study ......................................................................................................... 6 1.9 Limitation of the study .............................................................................................................. 7 1.10 Definition of significant terms ................................................................................................ 7 1.11 Organization of the study ...8 CHAPTER TWO ........................................................................................................................ 10 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 10 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 10 2.1.1 Water resource issues ........................................................................................................... 10
v

2.2 Water Sector Reforms in Kenya ............................................................................................. 12 2.3 Organization of Water Resources Users Associations............................................................ 13 2.4 Formation of Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) ................................................ 14 2.5 Adequate Funding WRUAs ................................................................................................... 15 2.6 Management of WRUAs......................................................................................................... 17 2.7 Relationship with Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA) ................................. 18 2.8 Capacity building issues ......................................................................................................... 19 2.9 Community participation challenges ...................................................................................... 22 2.10 Staff quality and involvement ............................................................................................... 23 2.11 Organization adaptability challenges .................................................................................... 24 2.12 Collaboration challenges ....................................................................................................... 24 2.13 Knowledge management and sharing ................................................................................... 26 2.14 Review of Water Users Associations performance Challenges ............................................ 26 2.15 Summary ............................................................................................................................... 28 2.16 Conceptual framework ........................................................................................................ 29 2.17 Research gaps........................................................................................................................ 31 CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................................... 32 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................................................................. 32 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 32 3.2 Research Design...................................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Target population .................................................................................................................... 32 3.4 Sampling procedure and sampling size................................................................................... 33 3.4.1 Sampling procedures ............................................................................................................ 33 3.4.2 Sample size .......................................................................................................................... 34 3.5 Instruments and Techniques of Data collection .................................................................... 35
vi

3.5.1 Focused group interviews. ................................................................................................. 36 3.5.2 Interviews ............................................................................................................................. 36 3.5.3 Questionnaire ....................................................................................................................... 36 3.6 Pre-Testing .............................................................................................................................. 36 3.7 Validity ................................................................................................................................... 36 3.8 Reliability................................................................................................................................ 37 3.9 Operational definition of variables ......................................................................................... 38 3. 10 Methods of data analysis ...................................................................................................... 43 3.11 Ethical Consideration ............................................................................................................ 43 CHAPTER FOUR ....................................................................................................................... 44 DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION .................................... 44 4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 44 4.2 Analysis................................................................................................................................... 44 4.2.1 General characteristics of the respondents ........................................................................... 44 4.2.1.1 Gender of the respondents ................................................................................................ 44 4.2.1.2 Age of the respondents...................................................................................................... 45 4.2.1.3 WRUA performance ......................................................................................................... 45 4.2.2 Education and Training ........................................................................................................ 47 4.2.2.1 Education .......................................................................................................................... 47 4.2.2.2 Training ............................................................................................................................. 49 4.2.3 Coordination and management. ........................................................................................... 52 4.2.3.1 Information ....................................................................................................................... 53 4.2.3.2 Communication ................................................................................................................. 55 4.2.3.3 Motivation factors. ............................................................................................................ 56 4.2.3.4 Collaboration of the WRUAs............................................................................................ 59
vii

4.2.3.5 Other coordination and management issues ..................................................................... 60 4.2.4 Accessibility and reliability of resources. ............................................................................ 64 4.2.4.1 Sources of funds ................................................................................................................ 64 4.2.4.2 Quantity and types of resources ........................................................................................ 66 4.2.4.3 Consistency of funds and resources. ................................................................................. 67 4.2.4.4 Management of resource ................................................................................................... 69 4.2.4.4.1 Record keeping .............................................................................................................. 69 CHAPTER FIVE.71 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, DISCUSSIONS, CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................ 71 5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 71 5.2 Summary ................................................................................................................................. 71 5.2.1 Education and training ......................................................................................................... 71 5.2.1.1 Education .......................................................................................................................... 71 5.2.1.2 Training ............................................................................................................................. 71 5.2.2 Coordination and management ............................................................................................ 72 5.2.3 Accessibility and reliability of resources. ............................................................................ 74 5.3 Discussion ............................................................................................................................... 75 5.4 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 80 5.5 Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 81 5.6 Suggestions for further research ............................................................................................. 82 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 83 Appendix I: Introduction letter .....88 Appendix II: Questionnaire for the WRUA committee ................................................................ 89 Appendix III: Questionnaire for WRUA stakeholders to guide in the interviews ........................ 99
viii

Appendix IV: Questionnaire to WRMA staff ............................................................................. 100 AppendixV:Map of project area ................................................................................................. 102

ix

LIST OF FIGURES Fig 1 Conceptual framework..29

LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1: WRUAs in Tharaka Nithi county and their membership.33 Table 3.2: Name of the WRUA, WRUA membership and sample size ...35 Table 3.3: Operational definition of variables...38 Table 4.1: Gender of the respondents44 Table 4.2: Analysis of ages of respondents...45 Table 4.3: Mean WRUA performance ..46 Table 4.4: Education background of the respondents ...47 Table 4.5: Relationship between percentage of executive committee members education and performance of WRUAs48 Table 4.6: Training attended per WRUA..49 Table 4.7: Types of trainings and their correlation coefficients50 Table 4.8: Relationship between the mean of people who attend trainings and the performance of the WRUAs ....51 Table 4.9: Applicability of trainings offered to the WRUA in WRUA management ..52 Table 4.10: Information storage in respective WRUAs.53 Table 4.11: Correlation coefficients of various form of information storage in relation to performance of the WRUA.54 Table 4.12: Name of the WRUA against various communication channels.55 Table 4.13: Percentages of various factors that motivates community to be WRUA members56

xi

Table 4.14: Name of WRUA against motivation factors ......56 Table 4.15: Relationship between WRUA performance and benefits accrued from WRUA...57 Table 4.16: Relationship between WRUA performance and volunteerism...58 Table 4.17: WRUA collaboration with stakeholders 59 Table 4.18: Coordination and management result in percentages.....60 Table 4.19: WRUAs and various collaboration support given in percentages..61 Table 4.20: Cross tabulation between consistent implementation of SCMP and WRUA performance.....62 Table 4.21: Cross tabulation between WRUA performance and WRUA holding meetings according to by-laws..63 Table 4.22: Financial resources from different stakeholders.64 Table 4.23: Cross tabulation of WRUAs and different sources of finance...65 Table 4.24: WRUAs and the expenditure requirements....66 Table 4.25: Correlation coefficient of various resources...66 Table 4.26:WRUAs and consistent availability of resources67 Table 4.27: Relationship between WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds..68 Table 4.28: Number of WRUAs and financial monitoring systems used..69 Table 4.29: WRUAs and other records kept..69 Table 4.30: Other aspects of resource management. 70

xii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS CBO CDF FAO FGD GOK IDIs IFAD IO JMP MKEPP NGO SPSS UNDP UNEP WCO WDC WHO WRMA WRUA WSP : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Community Based Organizations Community Development Fund Food and Agriculture Organization Focus Groups Discussions Government of Kenya In-Depth Interviews International Fund for Agricultural Development Intergovernmental Organization Joint Monitoring Programme Mt. Kenya East Pilot Project Non Government Organization Statistical Package for Social sciences United Nation Development Programme United Nation Environmental Programme World Customs Organization Water Development Cycle World Health Organizations Water Resource Management Authority Water Resource Users Association Water Service Provider
xiii

WSTF

Water Services Trust Fund

xiv

ABSTRACT This study was set to assess the aspects of capacity building that influence the performance of Water Resource Users Associations in Tharaka-Nithi County. Previous studies carried out in Kenya on management of community projects show that the condition of many of these projects was between poor and pathetic. Poor management and coordination, partnerships, institutional funding, poor project leadership, lack of transparency and accountability, lack of participation and ownership of the WRUA and high illiteracy rate leading to low technology adoption were cited as possible factors that influence performance of community based projects. The purpose of the study was to access how community capacity building influences the performance of water resource users association in water catchment management in Tharaka Nithi County. The objectives of the study were:-to access whether improved education and training of members of Water Resource Users Associations, community coordination and management, and availability and accessibility to resources are related to improved WRUA performance in water catchment management. Descriptive and correlation research method were used in this research. Descriptive design was used to collect data in order to answer questions concerning the current status of the water resources users association. Since this study aimed at clarifying relationships, correlation research was used. The instruments used included the use of structured questionnaires and interviews. Interviews were conducted to give indepth information which was omitted by the questionnaire. The survey was administered to 115 respondents out of 693 members of the nine WRUAs in Tharaka Nithi County. The data collected was analyzed using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) and Excel spread sheet. The data output is presented in form of tables and description. The researcher also used the Karl Pearson`s product moment correlation analysis to access the relationship between the variables. The study found out that there were very strong relationships in various aspects of education and training, coordination and management, availability and accessibility of resources with performance of WRUAs in water catchment management. The key ones being high positive relationship between the numbers of executive committees with education levels of at least secondary level and number of WRUA community members trained with the performance of the WRUA. The study also found out that various types of trainings offered to the WRUA have varying influence on performance. There is also a strong positive correlation between accrued WRUA benefits and performances of the WRUA. It was also found out that WRUAs that have high number of volunteers working for them were performing poorly. The study also found out that WRUAs required diversified consistent support e.g. technical, infrastructure and equipments to improve their performance. The study recommends that there is need for WRUAs to be capacity built not only in training but on skills on networking, information and knowledge management. The WRUAs also requires support in technical, infrastructure, equipment and human in the early stages of WRUA operation in order to make them self sustaining.

xv

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the study Among the planets renewable resources, fresh water may be the most depleted resource. It is difficult to purify, expensive to transport and impossible to substitute. Fresh water is essential for food production, economic development and life itself (Ki-moon, 2012). Its importance to human health and well-being was underlined in mid 1993 when the United Nations new commission on sustainable Development made improvement on the water quantity and quality as one of the first priorities for technology transfers from wealthy countries to poorer ones. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) statistics, it is estimated that about 1.1 billion people in the world do not have access to safe water (WHO&UNISEF, 2010). The United Nations' states that by 2025, 1.9 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world population could be under stress conditions (UN, 2009). According to the 1992 National Water Master-plan, the annual renewable fresh water resources in Kenya is 20.2 billion cubic meters, comprising of surface water of 19.59 billion cubic meters and ground water of 0.62 billion cubic meters. Assuming that amount of water is still available to the current population of 40 million people; this translates to 505 cubic meters per capita per year. In global standards therefore, Kenya is a water scarce country (Government of Kenya, 1992). Most international development agencies and water managers, such as United Nations (UN)Water, Global Water Partnership - an World Water Council now agree that better governance of water resources, more so than availability, is the key to solving the growing water crisis in developing countries (WHO&UNISEF, 2010). Many studies have been carried out on management of water projects by communities; Khwajas (2001) study on projects managed by communities in Kenya suggests that projects managed by communities are more sustainable than projects managed by local government.

This is supported by a study carried out by Belgium Administration for Development Cooperation, (1999) on assessment of Water Users Associations in Kajiado and concluded that communities had ability to take over and manage their water projects. Communities were also willing to pay for their water use. This is further supported by the Kenya water policy review and strategy formulation (1999) which produced Water Act 2001 and recognized the role of communities in managing water either has Community Water Service Providers (WSPs) or Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) (GOK,1999). To guide the implementation of the Act, National Water Services Strategy (NWSS) for the years 2007-2015 was formulated in June 2007. Its mission is to realize the goals of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) declaration and the vision 2030 of the Kenya government concerning access to safe and affordable water and basic sanitation (GOK, 2007). JICAs (2003) study on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage schemes in Kenya identified several constraints to development of community managed irrigation and drainage projects: weak and ineffective water users organizations, lack of adequate skills and knowledge by the irrigation farmers, lack of skill and knowledge on irrigation by irrigation personnel and low funding of small scale irrigation development. This study is supported by Kleemter (2000) who studied Malawi rural water supplies and found out that half of water projects were performing poorly. The researcher argues that this stems largely from lack of institutional support from external agencies after project implementation. It is in above context that the government of Kenya with assistance of International Fund for Agricultural Development formulated a pilot project called Mt. Kenya East pilot project for Natural resource management based in the eastern side of Mt. Kenya catchment to ensure that the communities participate effectively in natural resources management for poverty reduction and food security. The design of MKEPP is based on a conceptual framework in which, poverty is clearly identified as the core driving force to environmental degradation, which ultimately generates more poverty. The project approach is through river basin approach where Water Resource Users Associations were formed, capacity built and supported so that they can perform their role of water catchment management.

As of June 2011, the total numbers of WRUAs formed in Kenya were 440; Tana water catchment has 130 WRUAs (WRMA, 2011). So far fifteen WRUAs have been formed in the MKEPP project area. In Tharaka Nithi County 9 WRUAs have been formed (MKEPP, 2010). 1.2 Statement of the problem The Water Act 2002 mandated public participation in the management and utilization of water resource (Water Act 2002). Before that, management and utilization of water resources fell solely on the Government and communities were not involved in the management of the water resources in any way. Therefore communities had no ownership of the water resource which lead to over abstraction, degradation of water catchment and water pollution. Community participation is institutionalized through formation of Water Users Associations (WUAs) for water resource management and Water Service Providers for water utilization. This is supported by studies carried out on management of water projects in Kenya; Khwajas (2001) study on projects managed by communities in Kenya suggests that projects managed by communities are more sustainable than projects managed by local government. However, studies carried out on these water institutions and projects concluded that they were not performing to their expectations due multiple challenges and constraints they experience. Studies carried out by Belgium Administration for Development Cooperation (1999), on assessment of Water Users Associations (WUAs) in Kajiado District concluded the general condition of the WUAs managed projects was between poor and pathetic. Out of the WUAs studied, 60% were poorly managed, 63% of the WUAs projects required major rehabilitation, 88% of the WUAs had no skills and expertise to handle financial issues and 90% of the WUAs did not consistently contribute to water user fees. This is supported by a study carried out by Water Services Board in Kisumu, Nairobi and Mombasa on Water Service Providers which concluded that only 9 out of 55 Water Service Providers (WSPs) provide continuous water supply to their clients. Consumers complained of underperformance of their service providers in terms of inaccurate billing and metering, pipe bursts, illegal connections, poor workmanship on installations, Vandalism, over changing and corruption (WASREB, 2009).

Studies carried out by JICA (2003) on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage schemes in 11 Districts in three Provinces of Kenya namely; Rift-valley, Central and Eastern also agree with the above findings in that they indicated that community based irrigation schemes were not performing as expected due to varies challenges which included; management and coordination conflicts of WUAs, poor project leadership, lack of transparency and accountability, poor extension services, lack of participation and ownership of the WUA, weak commitment and low morale of Ministerial staff, lack of adequate credit and access to credit facilities and high illiteracy rate leading to low technology adoption. Studies also carried out by World Bank (2004) on River Water Users Association (RWUAs) in arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya found out that the associations faced constraints such as; lack of resources including technical capacity, no clear relationship with Water Resources Management Authority(WRMA) and no capacity building programmes in place. This is

supported by studies done by Nele F. (2008) on Integrated Water Resources Management- a case study of Bwathonaro Water Resource Users Association in Meru North which found out that although indicators reflect a positive impact of its work, the WRUA faced several operational challenges including lack of enabling environment that facilitates not only establishment but also the operationalization of the WRUA, external support with regard to capacity building and guidance by WRMA, Membership commitment to WRUA and WRUA representativeness. However there have been little studies on how the above challenges and constraints influence the performance of WRUAs and specifically on how capacity building factors influence WRUA performance. To strengthen community participation and involvement in the management of natural resources and especially water resources this study was carried out to critically assess the capacity building factors that influence the performance of WRUAs.. 1.3. Purpose of the study The purpose of this study was to critically assess how community capacity building influences the performance of Water Resource Users Associations in water catchment management in Tharaka-Nithi country. 1.4 Objectives of the study The objectives of the study were:
4

i.

To assess whether improved education and training of members of water resource users associations (WRUA) is related to the improved performance of Water Resource Users Associations in water catchment management.

ii.

To assess whether improved community Coordination and management of WRUAs is related to improved performance of Water Resource Users Associations in water catchment management.

iii.

To investigate whether improved availability and accessibility to resources for WRUAs is related to their improved performance in water catchment management.

1.5 Research questions i. Is improved education and training of members of Water Resource Users Associations related to improved performance of Water Resources Users Associations in water catchment management? ii. To what extent is improved community coordination and management of WRUAs related to performance of Water Resources Users Associations in water catchment management? iii. How does improved accessibility and availability of resources relate to performance of Water Resources Users Associations in water catchment management? 1.6 Assumptions of the study The researcher made the assumption that the respondents answered the questions to their best of knowledge and correctly. It is also assumed that the sample selected represents the general population. The data collection instruments are valid. The researcher also assumes that the procedures for data analysis will be appropriate. The researcher also assumes that the results of this study will provide a guide to both the community, government and other stakeholders in the management of water catchment areas.

1.7 Significance of the study Studies done by other researchers agree that community participation in Community development project is the key to sustainability of these projects. ( Khwajas, 2001 and Belgium Administration for Development Co-operation, 1999). Other studies also agree that capacity building of communities influences their performance (UNDP, 2004). Studies done by other researchers also contradict these findings and states communities have adequate, complete and reliable information to undertake their own development (Mwangi, 2006). This study is significant since it will add knowledge to the earlier studies carried out on capacity building. It will give an in-depth analysis on the capacity building factors that influence performance of community based projects. This might prompt further researches. The study is of significance to the communities in that they will benefit by having prior knowledge on how capacity building influences the performance of their Water Resource Users Associations and hence the need for capacity building. This study will also give policy makers a base on the relevant issues affecting performance of Water Resource Users Associations and will serve as a scientific guide on community involvement in management of natural resource especially water. The study will be of significance to the developing partners in preparing and funding community based natural resource management projects especially water resource. Indeed most of the practitioners of community development might adopt capacity building, community participation and involvement on their development projects on experimental basis. 1.8 Delimitations of the study The study was delimited to the Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) based in Tharaka Nithi County which is made of the following Districts; Meru South, Maara, Tharaka South and Tharaka North. It is important to note here that many WRUAs do not follow the administrative boundaries and might cut across two or more Districts or counties. The population was sampled to get a representative sample. The study was also delimited to three specific areas of study. These areas were:- education and training, coordination and management, availability and accessibility of resources and how they influence the performance of WRUAs in water catchment management.
6

1.9 Limitation of the study This study used descriptive and correlation design. As a result, the study shows relationships and not the causes. The study design also used questionnaires and focused group interviews to collect data. Literacy levels of the sample population were not uniform in the area of study and some had difficulties in filling the questionnaire. This was overcome by use of the local language and the researcher interpreting every question when requested. The interviews also took time to be done. Time and resources constraint could not allow an extensive coverage of all the factors. Three factors only were considered; education and training, coordination and management and resource availability and accessibility. The time and financial resources available also means that the study covered a small geographical area and the duplication of the findings to other areas may require piloting before full scale implementation. 1.10 Definition of significant terms Capacity building - Capacity building is the approach to community development that raises peoples knowledge, awareness and skills to use their own capacity and that from available support systems to resolve the more underlying causes of mal development. In this study education and training, coordination and management and accessibility and availability of resources are the capacity building factors which were considered. Community Coordination Members of a Water Resource Users Association. The act of organizing and collaborating with stakeholders in river basin to achieve the WRUA objectives in water catchment management. Education It refers to various levels of formal schooling to acquire knowledge. The act of getting people together to accomplish desired goals and objectives using the available resources efficiently and effectively.
7

Management -

Performance -

In this study performance is the accomplishment of water catchment management which will lead to reduced water related conflicts as per the water resource management guidelines.

Training

This is the method of acquiring skills to perform specific tasks

Water Users Association A group of people who have come together for the purpose of abstracting and utilizing a water resource. Water Resource Users Associations In this study, Water resource users association (WRUA) is an association of water users, riparian land owners, non-consumptive users, or other stakeholders who have formally and voluntarily associated for the purpose of cooperatively sharing, managing and conserving a common water resource Resources These are materials, assets, finances and human who are transformed by the WRUA to produce the desired benefits. 1.11 Organization of the study The study is organized into five chapters, each chapter containing specific information. Chapter one contains the introduction of the study. It gives background of the study , statement of the problem, objectives of the study both the purpose and specific objectives of the study, research questions, significance of the study, limitations of the study, delimitations of the study, basic assumption of the study and definition of key terms. Chapter two reviews the literature based on the objectives of the study. It further looked at the conceptual framework and describes the research gaps. Chapter three covers the research methodology, describes the research design, target population, sampling procedure, instruments and techniques of data collection, pre-testing, operational definition of variables, methods of data analysis and ethical considerations. Chapter four this gives the results of the data analysis, the presentation in tables and the interpretation. The variables considered were education and training, coordination and management and accessibility and availability of resources. Chapter five gives the summary of the research
8

findings, discussion on the findings, conclusions made and recommendations on each the three variables namely; education and training, coordination and management and accessibility and availability of resources.

CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction This chapter includes a desk review of similar studies done by other scholars on factors that affect the performance of community based groups with a focus on global and local trends. This includes: - the process of water sector reforms in Kenya, formation and functions of water users associations and performance of Water Resource Users Associations. Other areas covered in the literature review include capacity building issues, staff quality involvement, organizational adaptability, collaboration challenges and knowledge management as documented by other scholars other researchers. This chapter also contains the conceptual framework and research gaps. 2.1.1 Water resource issues Of all the planets renewable resources, fresh water may be the most critically depleted resource. Difficult to purify, expensive to transport and impossible to substitute, fresh water is essential to food production, to economic development and to life itself (Ki-moon 2012). Its importance to human health and well-being was underlined in mid 1993 when the United Nations new commission on sustainable Development made improvement of the water quality as one of the first priorities for technology transfers from wealthy countries to poorer ones. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) statistics, it is estimated that about 1.1 billion people in the world do not have access to safe water (WHO, 2010). The United Nations' states that by 2025, 1.9 billion people will be living in countries or regions with absolute water scarcity, and two-thirds of the world population could be under stress conditions (UN, 2009). According to the 1992 National Water Master-plan, the annual renewable fresh water resources in Kenya is 20.2 billion cubic meters, comprising of surface water of 19.59 billion cubic meters and ground water of 0.62 billion cubic meters. Assuming that amount of water is still available to the current population of 40 million people; this translates to 505 cubic meters per capita per

10

year. In global standards therefore, Kenya is a water scarce country (Government of Kenya, 1992). The concept of a water stress index was pioneered based on an approximate minimum level of water required per capita to maintain an adequate quality of life in a moderately developed country in an arid zone. Falkenmark began with the calculation that 100 litres per day (36.5 cubic metres per year) is a rough minimum per capita requirement for basic household needs to maintain good health. The experience even of water-efficient countries shows that roughly five to 20 times this amount tends to be needed to satisfy the requirements of agriculture, industry and energy production. Based upon these findings, Falkenmark suggested the specific thresholds of water stress and water scarce countries, (Falkenmark and Lindh, 1976). A country whose renewable fresh water availability, on an annual per capita basis, exceeds about 1700 cubic meters will suffer only occasional or local water problems. Below this threshold countries begin to experience periodic or regular water stress. When fresh water availability falls below 1,000 cubic meters per person per year, countries will experience chronic water scarcity, in which the lack of water begins to hamper economic development and human health and wellbeing. When a country renewable fresh water supplies fall below 500 cubic meters per person, countries began to experience absolute scarcity. The 1,000 cubic meter benchmark has been accepted as a general indicator of water scarcity by the World Bank and other analysts (UN, 2009). According to the 1992 National Water Master-plan, the annual renewable fresh water resources in Kenya was 20.2 billion cubic meters, comprising of surface water of 19.59 billion cubic meters and ground water of 0.62 billion cubic meters. Assuming that amount of water is still available to the current population of 40 million people; this translates to 505 cubic meters per capita per year. In global standards therefore, Kenya is a water scarce country (Government of Kenya, 1992).

11

2.2 Water Sector Reforms in Kenya Kenya being a water scarce country it faces serious challenges with regard to protection of resources, provision of water supply and sanitation services. The country having a population of about 40 million (2010 population census), it faces an enormous challenge of providing water and sewerage services to the increasing population. Studies on water services in Kenya from the Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation (JMP) show that in 2008, 59% of Kenyans (83% in urban areas and 52% in rural areas) had access to improved drinking water sources. According to JMP, 19% of Kenyans (44% in urban areas and 12% in rural areas) are reported as having access to piped water through a house or yard connection. According to the JMP estimates, access to improved water sources in urban areas decreased from 91% in 1990 to 83% in 2008. In rural areas, however, access increased from 32% to 52% during the same period. Estimates from the Water Impact Report (2009) approximates that in 2006-2007 only 37% of Kenyans had access to sufficient and safe drinking water close to their homes at an affordable price ((WHO/UNISEF,2008) . The water sector is now under radical transformation driven by the national policy on separating water resources management and development from water services delivery. This conforms to the Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper, the Economic Strategy for Wealth and Employment Creation and backed up by the Water Act 2002 in an attempt to meet the Millennium Development Goals. The main thrust of the reforms was to separate water resources management and development from water services delivery and focusing the Ministrys role on policy ( GOK 2002). In 2002, the present Water Act (the Act) was enacted to provide for the Management, conservation, use and control of water resources and for the acquisition and regulation of the rights to use water. In September 2007 the long-awaited Water Resources Management Rules (the Rules) were promulgated, helping to fill some of the gaps in the Act. The Act is notable in general terms for devolving the management (not supply) of Kenyas water resources to the Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA). This in turn is mandated by S (15) to formulate a catchment management strategy for the management, use, development, conservation, protection and control of water resources within each catchment area. Kenya is
12

divided into six Catchment areas namely: Tana catchment area, Athi catchment area, Rift valley catchment area, Lake Victoria North Catchment area, Lake Victoria South Catchment area and Ewaso Nyiro catchment area (Ministry of Water and Irrigation, 2007).

One of the statutory ways to promote an effective catchment management strategy is for WRMA to provide mechanisms and facilities for enabling the public and communities to participate in managing the water resources within each catchment area (Water Act 2002 (S 15(3) (e))). (S 15(5)) of the Water Act 2002 and then goes on to say that the catchment management strategy shall encourage and facilitate the establishment and operation of Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) as fora for conflict resolution and co-operative management of water resources in catchment areas. Most importantly, the Water Act (2002) enacts on the principle of local users taking responsibility for the guardianship of their own resource. This represents a complete change in water resource management strategy, which in turn will require a major reassessment in thinking on the part of both consumers and managers. It is now widely understood that community participation in local resource management is desirable, and indeed the only way to solve social, as opposed to technical problems. This is supported by Khwaja`s (2001) study on project managed by communities in Kenya which suggest that projects managed by communities are more sustainable than projects managed by local government. Although formation and registration of WRUAs is well detailed in the WRMA rules, the need for capacity building is not well defined. 2.3 Organization of Water Resource Users Associations According to Cole (1995), an organization exists when two or more persons agree to collaborate over a period of time in order to achieve certain common goals. He further notes that a work organization consists of a group or groups of people who collaborate in a structured and permanent relatively way in order to achieve one or more goals which they share in common, and which they could not achieve by acting on their own. Mintzberg (1979) defines an organizational structure as an intangible web of relationships between people, their shared purposes and the tasks they set themselves in order to achieve those purposes. The prime purpose of structure is to achieve an effective balance between the division
13

of labour tasks and responsibilities on the other hand, and the need coordinate individuals efforts and roles on the other. He further continues to say that The understanding that members of an organization acquire about their own structure may be as much based on unwritten evidence and informal arrangements as any formal statement of rules, procedures and role descriptions. According to Cole (1995), there are many organizations that go to great lengths to prescribe their organization structures and there are countless others that have informal arrangements, where the sense of structure is tacit and flexible. Most organizations embrace a range of structures within their boundaries. The water Act 2002 is silent as to how WRUAs should be structured. This leaves them to be set up outside it, probably deliberately, thereby enabling WRUAs to act as checks on the performance of WRMA. It effectively encourages ownership of the association by its members, who are united in their interest of conserving a natural resource; and it also renders WRUA management free from official interference and control, at least by the water authorities.

The Water Resources Management Authority rules define a WRUA as An association of water users, riparian land owners, non-consumptive users or other stakeholders who have formally and voluntarily associated for the purposes of cooperatively sharing, managing and conserving a common water resource. Rule 10 of WRMA covers the registration of WRUAs with WRMA and certainly clarifies some of the uncertainties existing as a result of the scanty reference to them in the Water Act(Ministry of Water and Irrigation,2007). However it says little more about the preferred entity of a WRUA other than to prescribe that for a WRUA to be considered for registration by the Authority, it should be legally registered, have a constitution Legally registered entity is itself defined in the Rules as an organization, corporate body or person that has legal status. 2.4 Formation of Water Resource Users Associations (WRUAs) WRUAs are not easy to set up due combination of the need for a lengthy constitution and bureaucratic paranoia in the Registry of Societies. According to WRUA development cycle (WDC) developed by WRMA, WRUAs often start life as Self-Help Groups or Community Based Organizations (CBO) registered with the Department of Social Services. CBOs are easily established and very little documentation needs submitting before a registration certificate is
14

issued, which itself is enough to facilitate opening a bank account. WRMA Sub-region office in Meru accepts CBOs as WRUAs and indeed some WRUAs seem reluctant to tackle the next step of association formation. The upper reaches of many of the rivers round the northern slopes of Mt Kenya are tapped by large commercial flower farms. With relative wealth, an office infrastructure, transport and some worldliness, one of these often drives both the formation of a WRUA, and its continuing administration. This is generally a benefit, although cultural differences may mean the preformation sensitization process is unduly hastened, and the association is born with insufficient consultation of those who will ultimately be expected to join, manage and contribute to it. Similarly, cultural differences may manifest themselves in the conduct of meetings and other association activities. These differences might certainly be less apparent if WRUA management was in the hands of indigenous Kenyans, but generally they are far outweighed by the advantages of different cultural groups each bringing contrasting strengths to the table. At the outset, a prospective WRUA may comprise no more than a few interested individuals determined to band together for the better management of their resource. Even if the group gets no further than this, failing to achieve formal recognition or registration, many of its objectives may still have been achieved. Arguably, the process of establishing a WRUA is just as important as the end result, and going though this will give users the opportunity to meet and respect the views of each other, and hopefully unite them in a common goal (WRMA, 2011). According to MKEPP annual report, (2010), the enthusiasm with which users embrace the idea of a WRUA varies enormously from those who have experienced no real water shortages so far and have dispute over the resources allocation and those who have not experienced any water shortages. There is also no doubt that attendance at WRUA meetings is far higher when water is scarce. 2.5 Adequate Funding WRUAs Adequate funding is a factor of performance. Mancini cites that planning for future needs should be in place early and needs to be continually developed during the life of the project. Late release of funds, insufficient amounts, poor timelines in releasing the funds, are some of the challenges faced by community based projects as noted by Mancini (2003).
15

Two basic issues dominate the funding of any WRUA; how much does it need which depends generally on its ambitions - and how is going to raise this. All WRUAs levy a joining fee, and then an annual membership fee, which varies according to membership category. In practice, many large farms already make additional contributions in cash or kind (e.g. provision of office infrastructure or transport to meetings), in order to help the WRUA function effectively, community consumers may contribute time and labour. If the majority of the funds to run a WRUA are provided by one or two members of the WRUA, there is inevitably a risk of these starting to wield a disproportionate degree of power and influence in the WRUAs affairs. More democratic contributions are therefore preferable, but this may not always be practical (Ministry of Water and Irrigation, 2004). Some WRUAs have received Donor funding for one-off projects such as weir construction or the installation of reticulation systems. However, core office support is dependent on subscriptions and such other income as the WRUA can rise. Water sales to road builders, and visitor fees to see how WRUAs work, have brought in additional income. Several WRUAs are contemplating stocking their waters with fish to attract sport fishermen, who may even stay in WRUA facilities or use its appointed guides. Others are hoping additional revenue will come from commercial tree nurseries or bee-keeping projects. Sales of borehole water may bring in future revenue for WRUAs, either for agriculture or even in bottles for personal consumption ( Ministry of Water and Irrigation,2004). Being mandated through the catchment management strategy to encourage and facilitate the establishment and operation of WRUAs (water act 2002) ,WRMA could easily divert some of any money it ultimately raises from water charges back to help the formation of new WRUAs or to fund existing ones. It would certainly be good for consumers who pay for water to see some of their money being recycled back into the system. This is supported by a study done by Nele (2008) on Bwathonaro Water Resources Users Association in Imenti North, which found out that to guarantee a certain level of financial and logistic independence, WRMA has to support the WRUAs in finding sources of funding and development of a realistic financial backing. One such source would be The Water Services Trust Fund which was established under S 83 of the Water Act 2002 to assist in financing the provision of water services to areas in Kenya which

16

are without adequate water services. Initially confined to funding water supply, it is now permitted to fund water resource management and WRUAs could also apply to it for financing. These sources of funding are supported by Adhikari, (2005), and GEF, (2003) who say that organization can enhance funding of the activities through raising local funds and the diversification of funding sources. It is further supported by Mulwa (2008) studies on communities in Kenya which found out that fundraising strategies for community based

organizations in Kenya varies from Merry-go-round, micro-credit, consultancy services ,fanfare, and small special events, harambees to endowment fund. Other sources are public-private sector partnerships, the corporate social responsibility, and Government funding and donor support. Mulwa (2008) further notes that different sources of funds will influence directly or indirectly, the implementation of community based water projects due to the conditions that go with them as well as the volume each strategy is likely to earn. Studies also carried out by World Bank (2004) on River Water Users Association (RWUAs) in arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya found out that the associations faced constraints such; lack of resources including technical capacity, no clear relationship with Water Resources Management Authority(WRMA) and no capacity building programmes in place. According to studies carried out by Nyoroka (2009) on challenges facing the sustainability of community based projects in Meru concluded that other factors not studied in the researcher`s study like funding and community participation may account to some of the challenges influencing sustainability and performance of community based projects. 2.6 Management of WRUAs Membership and management of WRUAs is detailed in their constitution, the contents of which are largely governed by their legal status. The constitution of an Association, registered under the Societies Act, is often based upon the specimen provided by the Registrar, as modified to suit individual requirements. More detailed management provisions may be contained in bye-laws made subsidiary to the constitution. The potentially complex issue of WRUA membership seems efficiently managed by the creation of different categories of membership, this ensuring that all water users are represented, either directly or indirectly, on the Association. Riparian landowners are all usually entitled to
17

membership, while community water projects with their own off-take either elect one or more representatives to membership of the Association or automatically nominate one or two of their office-bearers. The responsibilities of membership of the WRUA often take time to absorb, and project representatives may be lax in reporting back decisions made at meetings, as well as the rationale behind them, to their project members (WRMA, 2008). Large-scale users like large irrigation schemes or Chuka Water & Sewage Co Ltd are represented on their Association as individual or commercial members, and pay a higher Membership fee. To ease administration some associations also divide their river into geophysical sections, perhaps three; upper, middle and lower, or in the case of the Mutonga in to five sections; and each of these sections may have the right to elect an area Member. Finally, to help distinguish between primary and secondary stakeholders, there may be an observer Member category for those who are not water users but have an interest in the activities of the WRUA and the conservation of the resource it (Ministry of Water and Irrigation, 2004). Management of the WRUA devolves upon an executive committee, usually made up of the Associations office bearers, and also perhaps of others either from different sections of the river, or varying interest groups. The frequency of both committee and general members meetings varies, but members seem to meet on average about once a quarter, with the committee meetings being called in response to specific problems. One of the members meetings will be the Annual General Meeting. Meetings of the Tungu WRUA are hosted by different members in rotation, enabling members to experience a different part of the river, and the problems associated with it, each time they meet (MKEPP Report, 2011). Studies done by Nele (2008) on Bwathonaro WRUA suggest that representativeness is crucial in determining the communitys respect of and support for any WRUA. 2.7 Relationship with Water Resources Management Authority (WRMA) While the fact of WRUAs being set up outside the Water Act 2002 makes them fully autonomous, operating beyond any influence of WRMA can make for an awkward relationship between the two. While WRMA suggests that its duty is to provide an enabling environment for the establishment of WRUAs, it may use the eventual autonomy of a WRUA as an excuse to deny it assistance.
18

Once established, a WRUA can be registered with WRMA. Rule 10(6) of WRMA rules provides the procedure for registration by completion and submission of Form 18, and Rule 10(5) requires WRMA to maintain a register of all WRUAs. There are also provisions enabling WRMA to cancel registration, although not of course to disband the WRUA (Ministry of Water and Irrigation, 2007). The WRUA also supplies WRMA with details of its river, catchment area, legal registration, bank account and other relevant information. In furtherance of a two-way relationship WRMA agrees in the Memorandum to send representatives to WRUA meetings, conduct abstraction surveys, monitor water quality and generally assist the WRUA in revenue collection, proposal writing, project management and water resource Management (WRMA rules, 2007). The devolutionary process may be taking some time to absorb, both for users and administrators. WRMA staffs also worked in the old centralized system and are taking time to adapt. 2.8 Capacity building issues According to Wikipedia, Capacity building also referred to as capacity development is a conceptual approach to development that focuses on understanding the obstacles that inhibit people, governments, international organizations and non-governmental organizations from realizing their developmental goals while enhancing the abilities that will allow them to achieve measurable and sustainable results. Capacity building can also be characterized as the approach to community development that raises peoples knowledge, awareness and skills to use their own capacity and that from available support systems to resolve the more underlying causes of mal development. Capacity building helps us better understand the decision-making process; to communicate more effectively at different levels; and make more decisions, eventually instilling in them a sense of confidence to manage their own destinies. Capacity building strengthens the assessment of analysis action process in the community and, therefore leads to higher performance (Wikipedia). The UNDP (2004) defines capacity building as a long-term continual process of development that involves all stakeholders; including ministries, local authorities, non-governmental organizations, professionals, community members, academics and more. Capacity building uses
19

a countrys human, scientific, technological, organizational, and institutional and resource capabilities. The goal of capacity building is to tackle problems related to policy and methods of development, while considering the potential, limits and needs of the people of the country concerned. The UNDP outlines that capacity building takes place on an individual level, an institutional level and the societal level. The World Customs Organization-an intergovernmental organization (IO) that develops standards for governing the movement of people and commodities, defines capacity building as "activities which strengthen the knowledge, abilities, skills and behaviour of individuals and improve institutional structures and processes such that the organization can efficiently meet its mission and goals in a sustainable way." Capacity building for development, therefore not only meets concrete needs for skills or resources, but responds to the feelings that come from peoples experiences of poverty or oppression. It is necessarily concerned with along investment in people (Deborah, 1997). Capacity building should go behold training and bring wider issues into the picture; applied research and demonstration, technology transfer, community participation ,effective governance ,technical assistance and institutional development ( World bank 2003).It continues to say that water sector reforms is a process which requires investment of time, political capital and financial resources (for studies, capacity building and institutional development). Alaerts, (1996) reminds that never to forget that vision and innovations are ultimately the most important ingredient of capacity building and empowerment. The UNDP (2004) assessments found out that institutions are inefficient because of bad or weak policies, procedures, resource management, organization, leadership, frameworks, and communication. The UNDP (2004) believes knowledge is the foundation of capacity. They believe greater investments should be made in establishing strong education systems and opportunities for continued learning and the development of professional skills. They support the engagement in post-secondary education reforms, continued learning and domestic knowledge services.

20

The implementation of accountability measures facilitates better performance and efficiency. Lack of accountability measures in institutions allows for the proliferation of corruption. The UNDP promotes the strengthening of accountability frameworks that monitor and evaluate institutions. They also promote independent organizations that oversee, monitor and evaluate institutions. They promote the development of capacities such as literacy and language skills in civil societies that will allow for increased engagement in monitoring institutions (UNDP, 2004). In Ministry of water and irrigation strategic plan 2009-2012 (Ministry of Water and irrigation, 2008) key emphasis is laid on the need to capacity build WRUAs to collect records and monitor data acquisition instrument. Water Resources Management authority (2009) in preparing its Tana water catchment area management strategy plans to support Water Resource Users Associations to facilitate formation and capacity build them to undertake water resource management, and support the development and implementation of sub catchment management plans for those WRUAs. The above is supported by World Bank (2004), who states that community water organization can be capacity build in support to hydrological services for long term (planning) and short term operational purposes in the following areas: Infrastructure to measure hydrological data, Local institutional capacity to analyze hydrological data, Facilities to disseminate information to planners, managers and operators. Studies carried out by World Bank (2004) on River Water Users Association (RWUAs) in arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya found out that the associations faced constraints such; lack of resources including technical capacity, no clear relationship with Water Resources Management Authority(WRMA) and no capacity building programmes in place. This is supported by studies done by Nele (2008) on Integrated Water Resources Management- a case study of Bwathonaro Water Resources Users Associations in Meru North which found out that although indicators reflect a positive impact of its work, the WRUA faced several operational challenges including enabling environment that facilitates not only establishment but also the operationalization of the WRUA, external support with regard to capacity building and guidance by WRMA, Membership commitment to WRUA and WRUA representativeness.

21

2.9 Community participation challenges Community participation is the taking part in formation, implementation and management of initiatives (Mwangi, 2007). Community Participation is the process by which community members opinions and views affects decision making at community level (Grishvilli, 2003). Participation approaches have been popularized by Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) and Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) approaches to community development and research which Chambers (1994) refers to as family of approaches and methods to enable rural people to share/enhance and analyze their knowledge of life and conditions to plan and act. Decision making by project implementing communities is reported to be a challenge resulting from inadequate skills and knowledge, Grishvilli, (2003), Mwangi, (2006) noted that communities have adequate, complete reliable information to support objective rational decisions. He noted that such decisions once made have to be acceptable. World Bank, (2003) indicated that the focus for decision making lies in how community projects are identified, selected and implemented. Mwangi, (2007) noted that low community participation leads to reduced to low project performance. The project implementation team plays an important role in the participation process, bridging the gap between the communities and project team (UNEP 2006). Activities to enhance performance include creating a reserve fund, registration, federations and saving and credit funds. Active participation of communities improves the march between community needs and what it obtains. Through participation, the community develops

ownership and skills for collective action (Adhikari and Risal, (2006). Studies carried out by Belgium administration for development cooperation (1999) on assessment of Water Users Associations (WUAs) in Kajiado District concluded the general condition of the WUAs managed projects was between poor and pathetic. Out of the WUAs studied, 60% were poorly managed, 63% of the WUAs projects required major rehabilitation, 88% of the WUAs had no the skills and expertise to handle financial issues and 90% of the WUAs did not consistently contribute to water user fees.

22

This is supported by MKirigia`s ( 2010) study on factors affecting the performance private water firms in delivery of water services and found out that there was inadequate community involvement in making decisions in terms of how best to run their projects. 2.10 Staff quality and involvement Having adequate competent staff is an important factor for implementing and performance of sustaining community based projects (Mancini, 2003). A major factor to community organization success is centered on lack or inadequate staff that is well trained and educated (Mancini, 2003). A shortage of skilled and experienced managers, technicians, supervisors and field monitoring staff is significantly hindering reaching and assisting local communities (Michael, 2004) and continues to cite that mobility and effectiveness of various government partners is also inadequate to meet the demands for assistance. A shortage of essential field equipment for monitoring /extension activities (vehicles, radios, GPS, water levels/quality measurement equipment) along with a lack of funds for fuel ,vehicle maintenance and travel allowances places further constraints on carrying out essential capacity building activities, (Michael, 2004) Community projects which are insufficiently coordinated may lead to confusion of different approaches; communities could lose focus of long term development goals and duplication of institutional efforts (The 4C`s working group, 2003); World Bank (2003); in its studies noted that the recognized advantage of greater inter-agency collaboration/coordination unfortunately is often overshadowed by the reality of competition for resources and operational rivalry. This according to World Bank (2003) can be reduced by working under the government which can facilitate inter-agency coordination and enhanced communication. Studies carried out by JICAs (2003) on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage schemes in 11 Districts in three Provinces of Kenya namely; Rift-valley, Central and Eastern also agree with the above findings in that they indicated that community based irrigation schemes were not performing as expected due to varies challenges which included: management and coordination of conflicts of WUAs and low morale of Ministerial staff. This is also supported by studies done by Nyoroka (2009) on community based groups in Meru which found out that community based projects required a lot of external support to sustain themselves
23

in terms of external supervision, monitoring and evaluation, infrastructure development, market linkages, management of sales and capacity building support services. 2.11 Organization adaptability challenges An organization ability to adapt to community needs/members needs and contextual changes strongly influences its ability to continuously provide services that make a difference in quality of life (Mancini, 2003). Many researchers have found maintaining flexibility and adaptability strongly influence performance, Holder & Moore, (2000): LaFond, 1995: Lefevre, 1990: Shediac-Rizkallah & Boni, (1998) cites Mancini, (2003). Typically, change is the hallmark of community life and consequently, of necessity organization must respond to change to remain viable. Adaptations may range from changes in goal, to reduction in programming, to increasing and deceasing sites, participants, collaboration. World Bank (2003) observed that organization can adjust for its future. This flexible management can be hampered by antiquated internal administrative structure. An effective feedback system allows an organization to identify adjustment needs early and specify the appropriate responses. Project adaptability challenges may result from constraints imposed by failure to respond to inherent challenges, redundancy and duplication of services, poor timeliness, irrelevance and failure to assess and account for changes in the community project (Mancini, 2003). Studies carried out by JICA (2003) on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage schemes in 11 Districts in three Provinces of Kenya namely; Rift-valley, Central and Eastern also agree with the above findings in that they indicated that community based irrigation schemes were not performing as expected due to varies challenges including high illiteracy rate in the WUA leading to low technology adoption. 2.12 Collaboration challenges Effective collaboration is essential for long term survival and performance of community based projects (Mancini el al, 2003). According to (Mancini el al., 2003) many researchers (Bamberger and Cheema, 1990); (LaFord, 1995); (Glaser, 1982), have found that out that an atmosphere that values collaboration contributes to projects success and sustainability.
24

Collaboration and partnership are more effective when they include all relevant community leaders, key agencies, organization in a community project are critical elements in success and performance. Ineffective and inadequate networks, reduce projects effectiveness, reduce resources contributed and brought to the project, reduces breadth and depth of their involvement .Partnership relationship must be about supportive behavior to success and sustainability (Mulwa, 2007). Good collaboration is founded on relationships of trust and familiarity. Sound relationships require time to develop. Frequent changes of managers, local staff and community leaders may lead to discontinues in agency support for community based efforts according to 4C`s working group, (2003). World Bank, (2003) noted that the community projects effectiveness can be improved through sharing, cooperating in the same planning processes, conducting joint assessment and using incentives to support collaborative project design and supporting inter-agency interacting at all stages of the projects cycle. But this usually limited by differences in funding, project cycles differences, economic benefits and incentives , changes in local situation policy changes, methodological differences and the continued contention over the lead agency issue. According to Mwangi, (2006) having regular contact with other institutions, projects and groups with strategic importance to the project can result to healthy exchange of approaches and resources (knowledge, expertise). The culture of staff embedded in traditional construction and procurement, often is unprepared to respond innovatively and positively to partnerships arrangements and requirements. Delays in process may stall or discourage local collaboration while rules and policies may not be designed for many partnerships (4C`s working group, 2003). Nele, (2008) in his study on Bwathonaro WRUA found out that for the WRUA to facilitate change it must be supported by the majority stakeholders. A study carried out by Nyoroka (2009) concluded that coordination was quite poor in community based projects in Meru and these projects may seek alternative ways for coordinating their projects well even if it means hiring competent people.

25

2.13 Knowledge management and sharing Communities believe that good information supply and public awareness is the foremost prerequisite for the active community performance in programmes. Lack of or inaccessibility to information regarding the project, their application in practice on ground, options for applying them under variable circumstance, barriers to their use and other information as it pertains to the purpose and support activities of the projects initiative is primary challenge to the initiatives, implementation and performance of the projects ( The 4C`s working group, 2003). Bridging of barriers to maximize access to needed information benefits through avoiding costly duplication. Aim of media and communication development in projects is to increase awareness and knowledge of local communities (UNEP, 2005 and Mulwa, 2007). Exchange of information (vertical and horizontal) contributes towards the resolution of problem in a community project. In community development the kind of useful communication is not the traditional linear communication flowing from high levels to lower ones with passive audience. It has to be dynamic and in favour of two or more parties. Nele (2008) in his study on Bwathonaro WRUA found out that there is a strong relationship between awareness creation and level of resistance to change. The researcher notes that resentment is created by the lack of information and misinformation in Bwathonaro WRUA.

2.14 Review of Water Users Associations performance Challenges Studies carried out by Belgium administration for development cooperation, (1999) on assessment of Water Users Associations (WUAs) in Kajiado District concluded the general condition of the WUAs managed projects was between poor and pathetic. Out of the WUAs studied, 60% were poorly managed, 63% of the WUAs projects required major rehabilitation, 88% of the WUAs had no skills and expertise to manage financial resources. Studies carried out by JICA (2003) on sustainable community based irrigation and drainage schemes in 11 Districts in three Provinces of Kenya namely; Rift-valley, Central and Eastern also agree with the above findings in that they indicated that community based irrigation schemes were not performing as expected due to varies challenges which included; management and coordination of conflicts of WUAs, poor project leadership, lack of transparency and accountability, poor extension services, lack of participation and ownership of the WUA, weak
26

commitment and low morale of Ministerial staff, lack of adequate credit and access to credit facilities and high illiteracy rate leading to low technology adoption. Studies also carried out by World Bank (2004) on River Water Users Associations (RWUAs) in arid and semi-arid areas of Kenya found out that the associations faced constraints such; lack of resources including technical capacity, no clear relationship with Water Resources Management Authority(WRMA) and no capacity building programmes in place. This is supported by studies done by Nele (2008) on Integrated Water Resources Management- a case study of Bwathonaro Water Resources Users Associations in Meru North which found out that although indicators reflect a positive impact of its work, the WRUA faced several operational challenges including; lack of enabling environment that facilitates not only establishment but also the operationalization of the WRUA, external support with regard to capacity building and guidance by WRMA, Membership commitment to WRUA and WRUA representativeness. A study carried out by Nyoroka (2009) concluded that coordination was quite poor in community based projects in Meru and these projects may seek alternative ways for coordinating their projects well even if it means hiring competent people. She further found out that projects also required a lot of external support to improve their performance. According MKEPP Annual Report, (2011) and WRMA annual report, (2010), of the nine WRUAs formed in Tharaka Nithi County only one has been able to assess funding with WSTF to start the implementation of their respective Sub Catchment Management Plan (SCMP). Only two WRUAs of the fifteen formed by WRMA with assistance of MKEPP in the last eight years have so far been able to write proposals to development partners for funding. In the Tana catchment area, out of the 130 WRUAs formed only 12 have developed the capacity to write proposals to WSTF and received funding. Only one WRUA out of the nine formed in Tharaka Nithi County has internal mechanism of generating revenue. There is a general feeling that WRMA should make more use of WRUAs than it does. Being so newly created WRMA has little experience of dealing direct with water users, and if sensitively used, WRUAs could be a huge help in bridging the gap between WRMA and the public, (WRMA, 2009). Research from other community projects, the reviewed literature indicated the following project performance challenges ; inadequate funding to help in sustaining the project, Human resource
27

inadequacy in terms of inadequate numbers and inadequate relevant trainings , poor team spirit, low motivation, limited knowledge management and sharing skills required , staff mindset, high staff turnover/low continuity, lack of community involvement in decision making, inadequate collaboration support, which benefits the project implementation and performance through brought in resources, (in kind or expertise ) and participation. Inadequate adaptability /flexibility which occurs when projects are late in changing as community needs change; Leadership in competencies leading to inadequacies in continuous planning for improved performance,

accountability, poor involvement of community institutions, lack of clear project mission and vision ; poor coordination and inadequate information and communication . 2.15 Summary From the above discussions the following are the possible performance challenge areas; community coordination and management, institution inadequate accessibility and availability of resources, quantity and quality of human resource, inadequate information and communication channels and inadequate collaboration support.

28

2.16 Conceptual framework Moderating variable Government policies and weather conditions

Independent variables Improved Education and training of community members Academic qualification Type of training Number of people trained Relevance of the training

Improved coordination and management Information Communication Coordination Engagement of volunteers Collaborators Regular meeting Members concerns Regular planning Supervision Monitoring evaluation Infrastructure development Technical support

Dependent variable Improved WRUAs performance in water catchment management Proper record keeping Fair implementation of the constitution/bylaws Consistency in implementation of sub-catchment management plans Reduced water use conflict.

Improved accessibility and availability of resources -

Sources of resources Quantity of resources Consistency of resources Management of resources

Fig 1 Conceptual framework

29

The frame work shows three independent variables in the study. The researcher will assess the expected performance of the water resources users associations in water catchment management as the dependent variable through independent variable of the Education and training, coordination and management and accessibility and availability of resources. Government policies and weather conditions were some of the moderating variables of varying magnitudes. The study will assess the education and training challenges through responses in level of education, types of trainings impacted, frequency of trainings, number of trainings and the relevance of those trainings to performance of WRUAs. Coordination and management will be assessed through responses to WRUAs information management, communication, co-ordination, engagement of volunteers, regular meetings are held, presence of mechanisms to capture members concerns and holding of regular planning sessions. The study will try to assess the collaboration support through responses from what the members felt were their major needs which they were unlikely to meet on their own. The support will be in form of supervision, monitoring and evaluation, infrastructure development, and technical support services. The study will also assess how the WRUAs leadership manages its resources to achieve its objectives. These are some of the factors outside the WRUA control which may have influenced performance. Under the WRUAs the major ones may include Government policies and weather conditions. Government policies may have influenced the environment in which the WRUAs are working e.g. the new constitution places a lot of weight on the county Governments which might affect the performance of WRUAs. Weather conditions may have influenced the river base flows and which would have further affect the performance of WRUAs. The performance process means continued benefits to the project beneficiaries for a long time .The major objective of WRUAs according to water Act 2002 is to act as a fora for conflict resolution and co-operative management of water resources in catchment areas through implementation of sub-catchment management plans. Performance entailed doing all tasks/activities to ensure that the water related conflicts are minimized in the WRUAs
30

jurisdiction area. Performance therefore will be assessed through; proper record keeping, Fair implementation of the constitution/bye-laws, consistency in implementation of the subcatchment management plans and reduction in water related conflicts. 2.17 Research gaps Before the water Act 2002, a water resource was managed centrally by the government without the involvement of the local users. In the development of Water Act 2002, the Government recognized the need for public and communities participation in managing the resource, (Water Act, 2002). The water Act 2002 does not spell out clearly on how the public and communities will participate in managing the water resource in their catchment areas. It leaves to the interpretation of the implementers of the act. A research gap exists to study on the ways in which the public and communities can best be involved in the management of natural resources especially water. Since the enactment of the water Act 2002 and its subsequent implementation, 440 WRUAs have been formed and strengthened in Kenya, but there has been no assessment so far been done on the performance of these WRUAs, although the activity has consumed a substantial about of resources. The management of WRUAs devolves upon an executive committee which is elected from the WRUAs members. This committee is supposed to work on voluntary basis (balancing household needs and community engagement). According to studies carried out by Nyoroka, (2009) on challenges facing sustainability of community based in Meru found out that volunteerism did not seem to work in community based projects and the management of these projects were doing nothing about it. The researcher recommends a further research on volunteerism as it relates to performance of community based projects. Grishvilli, (2003), notes that decision making by communities is a challenge resulting from inadequate skills and knowledge, but Mwangi, (2006), notes that communities have adequate, complete reliable information to implement their activities in order to meet their objectives.The two findings contract each other and it is important to have an in-depth analysis of the capacity building factors that influence WRUAs performance.
31

CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction This chapter covers the research methodology. The methodology include: research design, the target population, sampling procedures, data collection procedures, tools and techniques of data collection, pre-testing, validity, reliability, data analysis and ethical considerations. 3.2 Research Design Descriptive and Correlation research methods were used in this study. Descriptive design was used to collect data in order to answer questions concerning the current status of the subject of study. It is the most appropriate in collecting data about characteristics of a large population of this study in terms of cost effectiveness and time constraints. Descriptive designs findings can also be generalized which this study was aimed to achieve. Techniques of correlational design research are particularly useful in social and behavioural investigations. Since this study aimed at clarifying relationships correlational research was used. The tools used included the use of structured questionnaires. The questionnaires were self administered to ensure a high return rate. Interviews were also conducted to give in-depth information which might have been omitted by the questionnaire. A quantitative method of data analysis was used in order to establish and describe the degree of relationship between the independent variables and dependent variables. The researcher determined how the following variables influenced the performance of WRUAs in water catchment management; Education and training, coordination and management, and availability and accessibility of resources. The survey was administered to 115 members out of 693 members of the 9 WRUAs in Tharaka Nithi County. 3.3 Target population The target population was the 693 members of the 9 WRUAs in Tharaka-County. The WRUAs are geographically well spread within the study area. Purposive sampling was used to select four employees of Water Resources Management Authority, five Mt. Kenya East Pilot Project for Natural resources, two CDF Officers and four Ministry of water officers in the region and four other staff of any other stakeholder working in the region were also be interviewed.
32

Table 3.1 WRUAs in Tharaka Nithi County and their membership WRUA NAME Gaki Imema Kagaka Kamatha Kiamuga Kithino Mutonga K.K. Thaimeka Tungu TOTAL Source: WRMA sub regional office Meru 3.4 Sampling procedure and sampling size. This section covers sampling procedures and how sampling size was arrived at. 3.4.1 Sampling procedures Sampling is the process of choosing the research units of target population which are to be included in the study. Sampling was done because a complete coverage of the population is not practically possible. In this study, the researcher used both probability and non-probability sampling methods. The non-probability techniques which were used were purposive. The researcher used purposive sampling to deliberately select government and other stakeholder staff to be interviewed.
33

MEMBERSHIP 40 78 45 30 60 170 55 80 135 693

The researcher used stratified sampling method to make sure that all the 9 WRUAs are included in the study then systematic random sampling procedure was used. This was achieved through listing all the registered WRUAs committee members to get sampling frame which was later subjected to sampling. 3.4.2 Sample size The study used the Fischer`s formula in calculating the sample size which is based on the sample for proportions, where by: Z2*P*Q n = E2 Where: n=the desired sample size Z=the value corresponding to the level of confidence required (in this case 1.96 Corresponding to 95% Level of confidence) P=Estimated level of an attribute that is present in the population (0.1 variability) Q%= estimated level of the attribute that is not present in the population. E%=desired level of precision (in this case 5%) The adjusted minimum sample size was collaborated by use of the following formula for correction for finite population n0 n1 = 1+ (n0/N) Where: n1=adjusted minimum sample size n0=minimum sample size as arrived at using the previous formula
34

N=the total known population. The minimum sample size from the groups will be 115. A list of all 693 WRUA members will be prepared. A systematic random sampling technique was used to identify the respondents. Table 3.2 shows the name of the WRUA, membership and sample size. Sampling frame derived from listing the WRUA members was done and then the members were allocated corresponding numbers which was used to get respondents. The researcher used purposive sampling to select five WRMA staff members, five Ministry of Water staff, five MKEPP staff, four CDF staff and four other staff to represent other water stakeholders in the area for interviews. Table 3.2 showing the name of the WRUA, WRUA membership and sample size WRUA NAME Gaki Imema Kagaka Kamatha Kiamuga Kithino Mutonga K.K. Thaimeka Tungu TOTAL MEMBERSHIP SAMPLE SIZE 40 78 45 30 60 170 55 80 135 693 7 13 8 5 10 28 9 13 22 115

3.5 Instruments and Techniques of Data collection The following are the tools and techniques which were used for data collection.
35

3.5.1 Focused group interviews. Focused group interviews were used to explore and understand people's beliefs, experiences, attitudes, behavior and interactions. It generated both non- numerical data and numerical data, e.g. a beneficiarys description, rather than a measure of their feeling and thereafter interpreted accordingly for the purpose of assessing WRUAs performance. The discussions were

unstructured and free flowing and thus yield in-depth information. The approach was to bring out target groups valuable insights being gained regarding peoples subjective perceptions; their deep rooted beliefs and feelings. This targeted other stakeholders other rather than WRMA. One group discussion was conducted for each of the following stakeholders MKEPP Staff, Ministry of Water and Irrigation (MOW&I)staff, nine WRUA management committee members in all the river basins; other stakeholder prominent group in each of the WRUA area of jurisdiction. 3.5.2 Interviews

These were conducted on one on one individual interview to explore their perspective on specific topics. Interviews were done with five WRMA Staff through a guiding questionnaire. 3.5.3: Questionnaire Questionnaires were administered to the 115 respondents selected randomly from the 693 members of the WRUA. 3.6 Pre-Testing Before the research instruments were finally administered to participants, pre testing for clarity and flow using mock interviews were conducted. A pilot study was undertaken to further test whether or not the questionnaire adequately captured all the information required in the study. 12 sample sizes were used for pre-testing representing about 10% of the sample size. 3.7 Validity Validity as noted by Robinson, (2002) is the degree to which result obtained from analysis of the data actually represents the phenomenon under study. Care was taken in constructing the questionnaire and the pre-testing was done to identify and change any ambiguous, awkward, or offensive questions as emphasized by Cooper and Schindler (2003). Expert opinion was
36

requested to comment on the representativeness and suitability of questions and give suggestions on the structure of the tools. This helped in the improvement of the content validity of the data that was collected. 3.8 Reliability Reliability on the other hand refers to a measure of the degree to which research instruments yield consistent results (Mugenda and Mugenda, 2003). The pre-testing aims at determining the reliability of the research tools including the wording, structure and sequence of the questions. The purpose of the pre-testing was to refine the research tools so that respondents in the major study did not have problem in answering the questions. After pre-testing, the responses were scored. The two parts of the instrument were treated as parts of the instruments. The scores of the two parts were then mathematically correlated through the use of the spearmans correlation coefficient. It was found to be 0.85 for the questionnaire for the WRUA members, 0.9 for the questionnaire for WRUA stakeholders and 0.93 or the questionnaire for WRMA staff, hence the instruments used were reliable.

37

3.9 Operational definition of variables

Table 3.3: Operationalization of variables Research objectives Type of variable and Independent Questionnaire Level of education No in each level Categories of trainings No trained interview documentary analysis Indicator Measuring of indicator Data collection method Level of scale Ordinal Ratio Tools of analysis Mean percentage Type of analysis Descriptive Content correlation

1.Improved training -

Education

Academic qualification

Types of training

Trainings conducted people trained in each type of training

people trained

Relevance of the training

relevant trainings

Level of relevance of trainings

Performance of WRUAs

Dependent

Frequency of Effectiveness of the water WRUAs to achieve resource their objectives conflicts No of conflicts resolved No of activities in the Sub38

catchment management plan implemented -No of WRUA record keeping books well kept 2.Improved Coordination and management Independent Ordinal Ratio Types of information Information No Mean percentage Descriptive Content correlation

Communication

Channels of communication

No

No Regular meeting Members meetings

Members concerns

concerns resolved

Level of satisfaction of
39

members Ordinal Supervision Supervision visits Frequency Questionnaire interview Monitoring and evaluation Visits Frequency documentary analysis Ratio Mean percentage Descriptive Content correlation

Infrastructure development

Infrastructures developed

No

Technical

Technical trainings

No trained

Performance of WRUAs

Dependent

Effectiveness of the WRUAs to achieve Frequency of water their objectives resource conflicts No of conflicts resolved No of activities in the Sub40

catchment management plan implemented -No of WRUA record keeping books well kept

3.improved accessibility availability of Resources Sources of resources

and Independent

Questionnaire interview

Ordinal Ratio

Mean percentage

Descriptive Content Correlation

resources

Types and amounts

No

documentary analysis

Quantity of resources

resources

Types and amounts

No

Consistency of resources

resources

Type and frequency

Level of consistence No

Management of resources

management tools

Types of records No and types financial management trainings conducted

Frequency

41

Questionnaire Performance of WRUAs Dependent Effectiveness of the Frequency of WRUAs to achieve water resource their objectives conflicts No of conflicts resolved No of activities in the Subcatchment management plan implemented No of WRUA record keeping books well kept Interview Documentary analysis

Ordinal ratio

Mean percentage

Descriptive Content correlation

42

3. 10 Methods of data analysis Data analysis is the critical examination of the coded data and making inferences. The collected data was edited, coded and analyzed using statistical package for social sciences (SPSS). The analysis output was presented in terms of tables. The qualitative data took an exploratory/conceptual content analysis process. The researcher also used the Karl Pearsons product moment correlation analysis to assess the relationships between the independent and the dependent variables. 3.11 Ethical Consideration Ethical considerations in research can be defined as ensuring that the researcher conforms to the standards of conduct of the authorities in the area of research. Examples of ethical issues that may arise are voluntary participation of respondents, deception to participants, anonymity and confidentiality of information given, analysis and reporting, harm or danger to participants and any other professional code of ethics expected. To ensure that the research is done in an ethical manner according to the expectations of all authorities, a letter from the university was obtained. The researcher informed the respondents that the instruments being administered were for research purpose only and the respondents identity was kept confidential. The researcher also obtained an introductory letter from the university to collect data from the organization. Also, due to sensitivity of some information collected, the researcher holds a moral obligation to treat the information with utmost propriety. Further, since the respondents might be reluctant to disclose some information, the researcher reassured the respondents of use of the information and the confidentiality of identity of the informants.

43

CHAPTER FOUR DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION 4.1 Introduction This chapter covers analysis of data and presentation of results on an assessment of how capacity building factors influence the performance of water resource users associations in the management of water catchment in Tharaka Nithi County. The focus was on education and training of community members, coordination and management and accessibility and availability of resources. Both qualitative and quantitative data analysis results are presented. 4.2 Analysis The survey fieldwork was conducted in the months of June and July 2012.The questionnaire was administered by the researcher on 115 respondents and 115 respondents replied and therefore the return rate was 100%. The researcher read and interpreted to the respondents each of the questionnaire items when requested. The questionnaire provided a list of potential areas of challenges facing the performance of water resource users associations which the respondent rated. 4.2.1 General characteristics of the respondents The general characteristics accessed in this section are gender and age of the respondents and the mean performance of the WRUAs under study. 4.2.1.1 Gender of the respondents The results of the gender representation are shown on the table 4.1. Table 4.1 Gender of the respondents Gender Frequency Percentage

______________________________________________________________________________ Male Female Total 62 53 115

44

53.9 46.1 100.0

Table 4.1 shows that out of total of one hundred and fifteen (115) respondents who were interviewed, sixty two (62) representing 53.9% were males and fifty three (53) representing 46.1% were females. This shows that both genders were active in the Water Resource Users Association and in the management of the water catchment. 4.2.1.2 Age of the respondents This section shows the age distribution of the respondents. Table 4.2 Analysis of the ages of the respondents Age Frequency Percentage _____________________________________________________________________________ 26-30 31-45 46-55 56-Above 22 39 32 22 19.1 33.9 27.8 19.1

Total

115

100.0

______________________________________________________________________________ The table 4.2 shows most o the respondents are in the ages of 31-55 which is the most productive ages in any society. There is little presentation of the youth (only 19.1%) who are 30 years and below which could be interpreted to mean that the youth are in schools or colleges or working elsewhere. The presentation of the population follows a normal distribution curve in a rural setting in Kenya and specifically in the project area. 4.2.1.3 WRUA performance The performance of the WRUAs was based on the questionnaire where the respondents were asked to gauge the performance of their WRUA on a five grade scale:-very good, good, fairly good, poor and very poor. The grades were then assigned numbers as follows: - very good-5, good-4, fairly good-3, poor -2 and very poor -1.The marks were then used to get the mean
45

performance of each WRUA. The results obtained were then compared with the documentation analysis in the WRMA office in Meru town. The documentary data analysis from WRMA offices agreed with the primary data analysis of the WRUA performance. Table 4.3 shows the mean performance of respective WRUAs. Table 4.3 Mean WRUA Performance ________________________________________________________ Name of the WRUA Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka Mean performance 3.74 4.25 3.40 4.11 4.00 3.92 3.91 4.14 4.15

Table 4.3 shows the Kagaka WRUA is the highest performing WRUA with mean performance of 4.25 ,followed by Thaimeka with mean performance of 4.15 and the lowest performing WRUA is Kamatha with a mean performance of 3.40. All the WRUAs lie between 3.4 and 4.25 which between the performance rating of between very good to fairly good.

46

4.2.2 Education and Training This section covers the data analysis on education and training. 4.2.2.1 Education Table 4.4 shows the education background of the respondents Table 4.4 Education Background

Level of Education

Frequency

Percentage

______________________________________________________________________________ Primary 34 29.6 Secondary Above secondary 59 22 51.3 19.1

_____________________________________________________________________________ Total 115 100

______________________________________________________________________________

Table 4.4 reveals that the majority of the WRUA members were primary school or secondary school leavers. These were 34 and 59 respondents respectively representing a total of 29.6 and 51.3 % respectively. Only 19.1% had college or university education. The interpretation was that those who had advanced education were not WRUA members since they were engaged elsewhere. This would impact negatively on the performance of WRUAs.

47

Table 4.5 shows the relationship between the percentage of executive committee members who have at least secondary education and performance of WRUAs. Table 4.5 Relationship between the percentage of executive committee members with at least secondary education and performance of WRUAs _____________________________________________________________________________ WRUA Name Mean % performance Executive committee with at least sec. education (X) Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga K.K Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka Totals 3.74 4.25 3.40 4.11 4.00 3.92 3.91 4.14 4.15 35.62 ( Y) 57.2 62.5 53.2 57.5 56.0 55.4 54.5 58.2 62.2 516.7 (X2 ) 14.0 18.1 11.56 16.9 16.0 15.3 15.2 17.1 17.2 141.5 (Y2 ) 3271.8 3906.3 2830.2 3306.3 3136.0 3069.16 2970.3 3387.24 3868.84 29746.1 ( XY) 213.9 265.6 180.9 236.3 224 217.2 213.1 240.9 258 2050.1

Correlation coefficient (r) = (NXY - (X)(Y) ) / Sqrt([NX2 - (X)2][NY2 - (Y)2]). Table 4.5 has the details of the figures used in the formula and (r) the correlation coefficient is 0.768 showing that there is a strong positive relationship between the percentage of the executive committee of the WRUA with education levels of at least secondary level and performance of the WRUA. The higher the percentage of people with secondary education and above in the
48

executive committee the higher is the performance of the WRUA. The calculation of the coefficient of determination (r2) and multiplying by 100 enables us to clearly interpret the linear relationship between variables. The r2 in this case became (0.768*0.768= 0.59 or 59% after multiplying by 100. The results indicate that there is a moderately high positive linear (correlation coefficient of 0.768 and a coefficient of determination of 59%) relationship between the percentage of the Executive of the WRUA with education levels of at least secondary education and mean

performance of the WRUA. It is in 59% of the cases where an increase in percentage of number of executive committee with education levels of at least secondary level resulted in an increase mean performance of the WRUA. 4.2.2.2 Training Table 4.6 shows the types of trainings attended by the respondents in percentages per WRUA Table 4.6 Trainings attended per WRUA WRUA WDC Training 86.2 75 40 SCMP Training 69 100 83 66.7 77.8 53 28.6 63.3 61.5 By-laws and Constitution 13.8 62.5 20.0 66.7 55.7 72.7 85.7 42.9 46.2 Group dynamics Proposal writing

Tungu Kagaka Kamatha

69 25 40 22.2 22.2 27.3 14.3 100 92.3

3.4 0 0 33.3 0 9.1 28.6 14.3 0

Mutonga K.K 88.9 Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 77.8 63.6 71.4 0 46.2

__________________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.6 shows the most attended trainings in all WRUAs in descending order are WDC, SCMP and by-laws, constitution formulation and proposal writing.

49

Table 4.7 shows the correlation coefficients of the respective percentages of respondents who attended WDC Training, SCMP training, by-laws and constitution formulation, group dynamics, and proposal writing to the members of the WRUA and performance of the respective WRUA. Table 4.7 Types of trainings and their correlation coefficient on performance of WRUAs ______________________________________________________________________________ Type of training WDC SCMP By-laws and constitution Group dynamics Proposal writing Correlation coefficient(r) Coefficient of determination (r2 ) as % 0.01 0.03 0.54 0.13 0.19 0 .01 0.09 29 1.69 3.61

Table 4.7 shows that training by-laws and constitution formulation had comparatively highest positive correlation coefficient (0.54) and coefficient of determination of 24%, followed by proposal writing (0.19) and coefficient of determination of 3.61%, then group dynamics (0.13) and coefficient of determination of 1.69%, then SCMP with correlation coefficient of 0 .03 and coefficient of determination of 0.9% and lastly WDC with coefficient of determination of (.01) and coefficient of determination of 0.01% .The interpretation was that for a WRUA to perform properly it must have a strong bidding constitution and by-laws. This can only be achieved if all the members of the WRUA have been trained on by-laws and constitution formulation. Proposal writing is also a key factor of performance since for the WRUA to access external funding it must apply for the funding through proposal writing. Training on group dynamics is also another factor of performance since WRUAs are supposed to act as a forum for conflict resolution which is taught in group dynamics.

50

Table 4.8 shows the relationship between the mean number of people who attend training and the performance of their respective WRUA. Table 4.8 Relationship between the mean number of people who attend training and performance of WRUA ______________________________________________________________________________ Average members who attend trainings ( Y)

Name of WRUA

Mean performance indicator ( X)

( X2)

( Y2)

( XY)

Tungu Kagaka kamatha Mutonga K.K Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka Totals

3.74 4.25 3.4 4.11 4 3.92 3.91 4.14 4.15 35.62

13.9876 18.0625 11.56 16.8921 16 15.3664 15.2881 17.1396 17.2225 141.5188

32.8 51 25

1075.84 2601 625

122.672 216.75 85 169.455 102.4 98 113.39 170.775 143.59

41.23 1699.913 25.6 25 29 655.36 625 841

41.25 1701.563 34.6 1197.16

305.48 11021.84 1222.032

Correlation coefficient (r) = (NXY - (X)(Y) ) / Sqrt([NX2 - (X)2][NY2 - (Y)2]). Table 4.8 has the details of the figures used in the formula and the result is a Correlation coefficient of 0.69 and the coefficient of determination of 47.6 % showing that there is a strong positive relationship between the mean of the numbers of the WRUA who attend trainings and performance of the WRUA. The higher the mean of people who attend trainings the higher is the mean performance of the WRUA. The results imply that 47.6% of the cases, an increase in mean
51

number of WRUA members who attend trainings results in improved mean performance of the WRUA. This can be interpreted to mean that the higher the number of people in the WRUA who have been impacted the skills to manage the WRUA, the higher the performance of that WRUA. Table 4.9 shows the applicability of the trainings in WRUA Management. Table 4.9 Applicability of Training in WRUA Management Frequency Percentage ____________________________________________________________ Very important Important Total 20 115 17.4 100 95 82.6

Table 4.9 shows that 95 respondents corresponding to 82.6% felt that the trainings acquired were very important to WRUA management while 20 respondents corresponding to 17.4% felt that the trainings were important to the management of their WRUAs. The interpretation of the responses is that trainings acquired are related to performance of WRUAs. 4.2.3 Coordination and management. This section will analyze the coordination and management factors that influence the performance of WRUAs in water catchment management.

52

4.2.3.1 Information Table 4.10 shows how information is stored in the respective WRUA.

Table 4.10 Information storage in the respective WRUAs Head Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 15.4 12 0 11.1 14.3 0 0 0 7.7 Folders 89.7 87.5 10 100 100 100 11 100 84.6 Computers 2.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.7

Table 4.10 shows that all the WRUAs used folders for the information storage. Only two WRUAs (Tungu and Thaimeka) are using a computer for the information storage. The interpretation of the finding is that most of the WRUAs are in the impact stage in information technology and this might affect their performance.

53

Table 4.11 shows the correlation co-efficient of form of information storage in relation to performance of WRUAs Table 4.11 Correlation co-efficient of form of information storage and performance of WRUAs Correlation co-efficient Coefficient of determination ______________________________________________________________________________ Use of head Use of folders Use of computers -0.0776 0.3 0.16 -0.6 9 2.5

Table 4.11 shows that there is weak negative correlation between increased in uses of head as a tool for information storage with mean performance of the WRUA. The higher the percentage use of head as a tool for information storage the lower the performance. Uses of both folders and computers have a positive weak correlation with performance. The use of computers has a very low correlation with performance since most of the WRUAs had recently bought them at the time the study was being carried out and hence little impact on performance. It is only in 2.5% of the cases where an increase computer use resulted in an increase in performance of WRUAs.

54

4.2.3.2 Communication Table 4.12 shows the percentages of communication channels used by various WRUAs. Table 4.12 Name of WRUA Vs percentage of various communication channels Communication channel Name of WRUA Word of mouth Letters Telephone Email ______________________________________________________________________ Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 28.2 50 0 37.5 0 16.7 9.1 0 0 61.5 11.25 40 87.5 22.2 25 45.5 42.9 23.1 79.5 50 60 62.5 100 83.3 90.1 57.1 76.9 0 0 0 12.5 0 0 0 0 0

Table 4.12 shows that only one WRUA (Mutonga K.K) use email as a communication channel. All the WRUAs used letters and telephone as a means of communication with varying percentages. The interpretation of table 14 is that the low usage of internet as a channel for communication might have a negative effect on performance of the WRUAs since most development partners presently use internet as the preferred means of communication.

55

4.2.3.3 Motivation factors Table 4.13 shows the percentages of various factors that motivate community to be WRUA members. Table 4.13 percentages of various factors that motivate community members to be WRUA members What motivates WRUA Members Percentage Legality of the WRUA 0.8 45.4 53.8 Benefit from the WRUA Volunteerism

______________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.13 shows that most of the community members were motivated by volunteerism (53.8%), benefit accrued from the WRUA (45.4%) and legality of the WRUA (0.8%). Most of the community members therefore voluntarily joined the WRUA. Table 4.14 shows motivation factors cross tabulated against respective WRUAs. Table 4.14 Name of the WRUA against motivation factors WRUA Name Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka WRUA legality 0 0 0 11.1 0 0 0 0 0
56

WRUA benefit 30.3 87.5 25 66.7 25 75 40 100 61.5

Volunteerism 75.8 50 75 55.6 75 66.7 60 0 53.8

Table 4.14 shows that only one WRUA whose members are motivated by its legality to join the WRUA. The other WRUAs their members were motivated by the benefits of the WRUA and volunteerism. Table 4.15 shows the relationship between WRUA performance and benefits accrued from the WRUA Table 4.15 Relationship between WRUA performance and benefits accrued from the WRUA. WRUA name Mean Performance Benefit accrued from WRUA

______________________________________________________________________________ (X) (Y) (X2) (Y2) (XY)

Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka

3.74 4.25 3.4 4.11 4 3.9 3.9 3.14 4.15

30.3 87.5 25 66.7 25 75 40 100 61.5

14 18.1 11 16.9 16 15.4 15.3 17.1 17.2

918.1 7656.3 625 4448.9 625 5626 1600 10000 3782.25

113.3 371.9 85 274.1 100 294 156.4 414 255.2

______________________________________________________________________________ Totals 35.60 511 141.52 35280.48 2064.0

57

Correlation coefficient (r) = (NXY - (X)(Y) ) / Sqrt([NX2 - (X)2][NY2 - (Y)2]).

Table 4.15 has the details of the figures used in the formula and the result is a Correlation coefficient of 0.712 with a coefficient of determination of 51%. This shows there is a strong positive correlation between mean of WRUA performance and the benefit accrued from the WRUA. The results mean that in 51% of the cases an increase benefit accrued from the WRUA results in improved mean performance of the WRUA. Table 4.16 shows the relationship between WRUA performance and volunteerism. Table 4.16 Relationship between WRUA performance and volunteerism WRUA name Mean Performance (X) Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 3.74 4.25 3.4 4.11 4 3.9 3.9 3.14 4.15 (Y) 75.8 50 75 55.6 75 66.7 60 0 53.8 (X2) 14 18.1 11. 16.9 16 15.4 15.3 17.1 17.2 (Y2) 5745.6 2500 5 625 3091.4 5625 4448.9 3600 0 2894.44 (XY) 283.5 212.5 255 228.5 300 261.5 234.6 0 223.3 Volunteerism

______________________________________________________________________________ Total 35.60 511.9 141.52 33530.33 1998.8

______________________________________________________________________________

58

Correlation coefficient (r) = (NXY - (X) (Y) / Sqrt([NX2 - (X)2][NY2 - (Y)2]). Table 4.16 has the details of the figures used in the formula and the result is a Correlation coefficient of -0.554 with a coefficient of determination of 30.8%. This shows there is a negative correlation between mean of WRUA performance and increase in the members of the WRUA who joined the WRUA voluntarily. The results mean that in 30.8% of the cases an increase in members of the WRUA who volunteered to join results in a decrease in mean performance of the WRUA. 4.2.3.4 Collaboration of the WRUAs Table 4.17 shows how WRUAs collaborate with stakeholders. Table 4.17 WRUA collaboration with stakeholders WRUA Name WRMA WSTF MKEPP CDF

______________________________________________________________________________ Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 89.5 75 20 100 80 54.9 90.1 14.3 46.2 46.2 12.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 15.4 87.2 100 100 100 90 93.3 100 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.7

______________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.17 shows that only two stakeholders (WRMA and MKEPP) are active in all the WRUAs. WSTF is active in three WRUAs although it has low impact. CDF is only active in one WRUA (Thaimeka) out of the nine studied WRUAs. The above table shows that there are very few collaborators in WRUA activities. This may affect negatively the performance of the
59

WRUAs since they have at initial stages of implementing the activities and they require external assistance noting that MKEPP which is highly felt in the study area is ending in September 2012. 4.2.3.5 Other coordination and management issues The respondents rated other aspects of coordination and management as raised in the questionnaire and the results based on the frequency distribution on each item are shown in table 4.18. Table 4.18 Other Coordination and management results in percentage No. Question Agree not decided 1. WRUA holds meeting 100 According to by laws 2. Coordination ensures Collaboration is part of Joint planning sections. 3. WRUAs need infrastructure development support 4. Currently WRUA needs equipment to function optimally 5. WRUA needs technical support 6. Training slots are fairly shared 7. The WRUA members have Mechanism to capture member concerns 8. Consistent implementation Of SCMP
60

Disagree 0

highly disagree 0

Cum %

97.4

2.6

100

97.6

2.6

100

99.1

0.9

100

98.3

1.7

100

98.3 95.6 95.6

1,7 2.6 2.6

0 1.7 1.8

0 0 0

100 100 100

94.7

3.5

1.8

100

Coordination was assessed through:- holding of regular meeting according to by-laws where 97.4% agreed, collaboration where 97.6% agreed, training distributed uniformly where 95.6% agreed , WRUA members have a mechanism to capture members concerns where 95.6 % agreed and whether WRUA is implementing SCMP with 94.7 agreeing. The presented results indicated good coordination and management. All the above points towards good coordination and management which may be a possible source of good mean performance of the WRUAs which were rated in the range of 3-5 which was between fairly good and very good. On the questions on whether the WRUA required any external support to function optimally the assessment found out that 99.1% agreed on infrastructure development, 98.3% agreed on equipment support and 98.3 % agreed on technical support. The interpretation of these results is that the WRUAs are not yet self sustaining and that collaboration with external development partners is a factor of WRUA performance. Table 4.19 shows various collaboration support given to different WRUAs Table 4.19 WRUAs and various collaboration support given in percentage. WRUA Name Supervision Monitoring Evaluation Infrastructure Development Tungu Tagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 48.7 25 0 11.1 0 0 0 0 0 51.3 62.5 0 56.6 0 63.6 0 0 0 2.6 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
61

Technical support

41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

56.4 62.5 100 88.9 100 45.5 100 100 92.3

Table 4.19 shows that all the WRUAs get technical support, four WRUAs get monitoring support, three WRUAs get supervision support, two WRUAs get evaluation support and one WRUA gets infrastructure development support. This table supports table 4.18 where majority of the respondents agreed that WRUAs required an external support to function optimally. Table 4.20 shows the cross tabulation between consistent implementation of SCMP and WRUA performance. Table 4.20 Cross tabulation between consistent implementation of SCMP and WRUA performance Consistent implementation of SCMP Very good WRUA performance Good Fairly good Cumulative

______________________________________________________________________________ 1 highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree 0 8 0 0 83.3 75 75 50 16.7 14 25 50 100 100 100 100

______________________________________________________________________________ The table 4.20 shows that of those who highly agreed that their WRUA was implementing SCMP consistently, 83.3% also rated their WRUA as good, of those who agreed that their WRUA was implementing SCMP consistently 83% rated their WRUA as good, of those not decided on whether their WRUA is implementing SCMP consistently, 75% rated their WRUA as good and those who disagreed that their WRUA was implementing their SCMP consistently 50% agreed their WRUA was performance was good. Table 4.20 shows that that the higher the respondents agreed that the WRUA was implementing the SCMP consistently the higher they also agreed that the performance of their WRUA was good. This shows that there is a positive relationship between consistent implementation of SCMP and performance of WRUAs.

62

Table 4.21 shows the cross tabulation between WRUA Performance and WRUA holding meetings according to the by-laws. Table 4.21 Cross tabulation between WRUA performance and WRUA holding meetings according to by-laws WRUA Performance WRUA holding meetings according to by-laws Highly agree Very good Good Fairly good 33.3 24.1 16.1 Agree 66.7 74.7 77.8

______________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.21 shows that of the respondents who rated their WRUA as very good 33.3% highly agreed that their WRUA holds meetings according to by-laws, respondents who rated their WRUA has good 24.1% highly agreed that their WRUA held meetings according to their bylaws, of the respondents who rated their WRUA fairly good, 16.1% highly agreed that the WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws. Table 4.21 therefore shows that the higher the rating of performance of the WRUA higher the respondents highly agreed that the WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws. This shows that there is a high positive relationship between WRUA performance and WRUA holding meetings according to their by-laws.

63

4.2.4 Accessibility and reliability of resources. This section accesses the accessibility and reliability factors that influence performance of WRUAs. 4.2.4.1 Sources of funds Table 4.22 shows financial resources from different stakeholders.

Table 4.22 Financial resources from different stakeholders.

Source

Percentage

_____________________________________________________________________________ Members subscription fee Income generating activities Others stakeholders (external sources) Total 70 22 8 100

Table 4.22 shows that most of the funding of the WRUA activities comes from members subscription fees (70%), followed by income generating activities (22%) and the external sources of funding accounts for only 8%. This low external funding might affect the performance WRUAs negatively since most of their WRUA activities require higher heavy funding which is beyond the reach of WRUA members.

64

Table 4.23 shows the cross tabulation of various WRUAs and sources of finance. Table 4.23 Cross tabulation of various WRUAs and Their sources of finances WRUA Name Members subscription fee Source of finance Income generating activities Others

Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka

100 37.5 100 100 100 100 100 85.7 100

56.4 87.5 0 33.3 11.1 0 0 0 0

25.6 0 0 11.1 0 0 0 14.3 0

Table 4.23 shows that all of the WRUAs fund their income generating activities from members subscription, whereas 0nly four WRUAs get funding from income generating activities and only 3 of the WRUAs said they get external funding. This agrees with table 20 which indicated that only 8% of the funding comes from external sources. Table for 4.22 and 4.23 therefore points to the fact that the WRUAs get little funding from external sources which might mean that implementation of WRUA activities might take longer than planned and hence affect the performance of the WRUA.

65

4.2.4.2 Quantity and types of resources Table 4.24 shows the assessment of whether WRUAs has adequate resources to meet the expenditure needs. Table 4.24 WRUAS and their expenditure requirements

Adequate resources to meet WRUA expenditure needs WRUA Name Yes No

______________________________________________________________________________ Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 0 0 0 0 10 7.7 0 0 0 100 100 100 100 90 92.3 100 100 100

______________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.24 shows that only two WRUAs (Kiamuga and Imema) said that they have adequate resources to meet WRUA expenditure needs; otherwise all other WRUAs require extra funding. This shows that inadequate funding of WRUAs affects their performance. Table 4.25 shows the various correlation coefficient and coefficient of determination for various types of resources received by the WRUAs and WRUA Performance.

66

Table 4.25 Correlation coefficient and Coefficient of determination for various types of resources received by the WRUA and WRUA performance. Source of resources Materials Funds Human resource Correlation co-efficient 0.81 0.7 0.33 Coefficient of determination as % 66 49 11

Table 4.25 shows that material resource has the highest positive correlation coefficient (0.81) comparatively with coefficient of determination of 66% followed by funds resource (0.7) with coefficient of determination of 49% and lastly human resource (0.33) with coefficient of determination of 11%. The interpretation of this table is that stakeholders prefer to assist WRUAs in material form and hence the high positive correlation coefficient of material resource to performance of WRUAs. 4.2.4.3 Consistency of funds and resources. Table 4.26 shows the cross tabulation of WRUAs and consistency in receipt of resources. Table 4.26 WRUAs and consistency of resources Very consistency Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 23.1 37.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Average consistency 71.8 50 80 100 30 61.5 27.3 85.7 84.6 not consistency 5.1 12.5 20 0 50 30.8 72.7 14.3 15.4

67

Table 4.27 only two WRUA have indicated that they have very consistency flow of funds. Table 4.27 shows the relationship between WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds WRUA name Mean Performance (X) (Y) (X2) (Y2) (XY) Flow of funds

______________________________________________________________________________ Tungu Kagaka Kamatha Mutonga KK Kiamuga Imema Kithino Gaki Thaimeka 3.74 4.25 3.4 4.11 4 3.9 3.9 3.14 4.15 87.5 94.9 60 83 64 69.2 67.3 85.7 84.6 14 18.1 11 16.9 16 15.4 15.3 17.1 17.2 7656.25 9006.01 3600 6889 4096 4788.64 4489 7344.49 7157.16 327.25 403.33 204 341.13 256 271.26 261.97 354.80 351.09

______________________________________________________________________________ Total 35.60 695.9 141.52 55026.55 2770.83

______________________________________________________________________________ Correlation coefficient (r) = (NXY - (X)(Y) ) / Sqrt([NX2 - (X)2][NY2 - (Y)2]). Table 4.27 has the details of the figures used in the formula and the result is a Correlation coefficient of 0.65 with coefficient of determination of 42% showing a strong positive correlation between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds. The results
68

mean that in 42% of the cases, an increase in consistency of flow of funds result in increase mean performance of the WRUA. 4.2.4.4 Management of resource 4.2.4.4.1 Record keeping Table 4.28 shows cross tabulation of the WRUA and financial monitoring system used. Table 4.28 Number of WRUA and financial monitoring system used Financial monitoring Systems used No of WRUAs Percentages

______________________________________________________________________________ Receipts Cash books Ledger books Bank statement 9 6 7 7 100 67 78 78

______________________________________________________________________________ Table 4.28 shows that all the 9 WRUAs representing 100% use receipts,7 WRUAs (78%) use ledger books, then 7 use bank statement and 6 (67) use cash books. This shows some of the WRUAs have not yet opened bank accounts which might affect the WRUA performance. Table 4.29 shows the cross tabulation between WRUAs and other records kept. Table 4.29 No of WRUAs and other records kept. ______________________________________________________________________________ Other records No of WRUAs Percentages ___________________________________________________________________________ Attendance register 8 89 Minute book Asset register 9 7 100 78

69

Table 4.29 shows that 100% of the WRUAs use minute book, 89% of the WRUAs use attendance register and 78% of the WRUAs use asset register. This shows that most of the WRUAs have the required necessary financial records to manage the WRUA. The respondents rated other aspects of resource management as raised in the questionnaire and the results based on the frequency distribution on each item are shown in table 4.31 Table 4.30 shows other aspects of resource management Question Agree Not decided DisHighly cumulative %

agree Disagree

1. WRUA keeps Records properly 2. Minimal complain From WRUA Members On management of Resources 3. WRUA members needs external support e.g. financial Management and book keeping Table 4.30 shows that proper record keeping was indicated by 93% of the respondents, 90% indicated there was minimal complain on WRUA management of the resources. This indicates that the WRUA members had confidence on the way their financial resources are managed. Good management of resources is therefore positively related to good performance of the WRUAs since the WRUAs performance was rated between fairly good and very good. There is therefore good indication that improvement in resource management leads to improved performance of WRUAs. However 99.1% said that they still require external support in management of their financial resource.
70

93 90

6.9 6

0 2.6

0 1.7

100 100

99.1

0.9

100

CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, DISCUSSIONS, CONLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Introduction This chapter contains summary of findings in three areas namely education and training, coordination and management and availability and accessibility of resources, discussions, conclusions and recommendations derived from the resource. 5.2 Summary Below are the summary of the findings on education and training, coordination and management and availability and accessibility of resources. 5.2.1 Education and training This section gives the summary of findings on education and training 5.2.1.1 Education Descriptive statistics revealed that the majority of the WRUA members (80.9%) were in primary school or secondary school leavers. Only 19.1% had college and university educations. There is a moderately high positive linear (correlation coefficient of 0.768 and a coefficient of determination of 0.59) relationship between the percentage of the Executive committee of the WRUA with education levels of at least secondary education and mean performance of the WRUA. It is in 60% of the cases where an increase in percentage of number of executive committee with education levels of at least secondary level resulted in an increase mean performance of the WRUA. This means that the higher the number of the executive committee with at least secondary education resulted in an increase in mean performance of the WRUA. 5.2.1.2 Training Assessment of various types of trainings of offered showed that training by-laws and constitution formulation had comparatively highest positive correlation coefficient of (0.54) and coefficient of determination of 24%, followed by proposal writing (0.19) and coefficient of determination of 3.61%, then group dynamics (0.13) and coefficient of determination of 1.69%, then SCMP with correlation coefficient of (0 .03) and coefficient of determination of 0.09% and lastly WDC with
71

coefficient of determination of (0.01) and coefficient of determination of 0.01%. This means that different types of trainings have varying impact on performance of the WRUA. There is a positive correlation between the mean numbers of the WRUA members who attendant training and WRUA performance with correlation coefficient of 0.69 and the coefficient of determination of 47.6 %. The higher the mean of people who attend trainings the higher is the mean performance of the WRUA. The results mean that in 47.6% of the cases an increase in mean number of WRUA members who attend trainings results in improved mean performance of the WRUA. This means the higher the number of people who attend trainings in a given WRUA the higher the performance. 5.2.2 Coordination and management Descriptive statistics on information flow indicated that 100% of the respondent from seven WRUAs representing 78% agreed or highly agreed that information flow upwards and downwards was good. On information storage it was found out that there is weak negative correlation between increases in the use of head as a tool for information storage with mean performance of the WRUA. The higher the percentage use of head as a tool for information storage the lower the performance. The analysis shows that use of head as a information storage is not reliable and can easily be lost hence leading to poor performance. Use of both folders and computers has a positive weak correlation with performance. It is only in 2.5% of the cases where an increase computer use resulted in an increase in performance of WRUAs. On communication channels used by the WRUAs it was found out that only one WRUA used email as a communication channel representing 11% of the WRUAs. All the WRUAs used letters and telephone as a means of communication with varying percentages. This shows that WRUA are not up to date with the recent communication technologies. On motivation it was found that most of the community members were motivated by volunteerism (53.8%), benefit accrued from the WRUA (45.4%) and legality of the WRUA (0.8%). Most of the community members therefore voluntarily joined the WRUA.

72

A correlation between WRUA mean performance and volunteerism and benefits accrued from the WRUA was done and the result revealed that there is a strong positive correlation between mean of WRUA performance and the benefit accrued from the WRUA with a correlation coefficient of 0.712 and a coefficient of determination of 51%. The results mean that in 51% of the cases an increase benefit accrued from the WRUA results in improved mean performance of the WRUA. On other hand correlation between WRUA performance and volunteerism showed a negative correlation of -0.554 with a coefficient of determination of 30.8%. This shows there is a negative correlation between mean of WRUA performance and increase in the members of the WRUA who joined the WRUA voluntarily. The results mean that in 30.8% of the cases an increase in members of the WRUA who volunteered to join results in a decrease in mean performance of the WRUA. On WRUA collaboration with stakeholders it was discovered that only two stakeholders (WRMA and MKEPP) are active in all the WRUAs. This implies that there are few stakeholders in the study area who have shown interest in supporting WRUA activities. WSTF is active in three WRUAs although it has low impact. CDF is only active in one WRUA out of the nine studied WRUAs representing 11%of all the WRUAs. Coordination and management was also assessed through various aspects and descriptive statistics indicated that:-holding of regular meeting according to by-laws where 97.4% agreed, collaboration where 97.6% agreed, training distributed uniformly where 95.6% agreed, WRUA members have a mechanism to capture members concerns where 95.6 % agreed and whether WRUA is implementing SCMP with 94.7 agreeing. The presented results indicated good coordination and management. All the above indicators points towards good coordination and management which may be a possible source of good mean performance of the WRUAs which were rated between fairly good to very good. On whether the WRUA required any external support to function optimally the assessment found out that 99.1% agreed on infrastructure development, 98.3% agreed on equipment support and 98.3 % agreed on technical support. This shows that there is a strong positive relationship between external support and performance of the WRUA.

73

Descriptive statistics found out that those who highly agreed that their WRUA was implementing SCMP consistently, 83.3% also rated their WRUA as good, those not decided on their WRUA implementing SCMP consistently 75% rated their WRUA as good and those who disagreed that their WRUA was implementing their SCMP consistently 50% agreed their WRUA was performance was good. This shows that there is a positive relationship between consistent implementation of SCMP and performance of WRUAs. Descriptive statistics also revealed that of the respondents who rated their WRUA as very good 33.3% highly agreed that their WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws, respondents who rated their WRUA has good 24.1% highly agreed that their WRUA held meetings according to their by-laws, respondents who rated their WRUA fairly good 16.1% highly agreed that the WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws. This shows that the higher the rating of performance of the WRUA higher the respondents highly agreed that the WRUA was holding meetings according to their by-laws. This shows that there is a high positive relationship between WRUA performance and WRUA holding meetings according to their bylaws. 5.2.3 Accessibility and reliability of resources. Descriptive statistics revealed that most of the funding of the WRUA activities comes from members subscription fees (70%), followed by income generating activities (22%). External sources of funding accounts for only 8%. This low external funding of WRUAs might affect the performance WRUAs negatively since most of their WRUA activities require higher heavy funding which is beyond the reach of WRUA members presently. Descriptive statistics also revealed that only two WRUAs (12%) whose members (10% for Kiamuga and 7.7% for Imema) said that they have adequate resources to meet WRUA expenditure needs, otherwise all other WRUAs require external funding. This shows that inadequate funding of WRUAs affects their performance. When different types of resources which the WRUAs get was correlated it was found out that material resource has the highest positive correlation coefficient (0.81) comparatively with coefficient of determination of 66%, followed by funds resource (0.7) with coefficient of determination of 49% and lastly human resource (0.33) with coefficient of determination of 11%.
74

This can be interpreted to mean that WRUAs get more material support than other types of support. The correlation coefficient between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds by the WRUAs is 0.65 with coefficient of determination of 42% showing a strong positive correlation between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds. The results mean that in 42% of the cases, an increase in consistency of flow of funds result in increase mean performance of the WRUA. Descriptive statistics revealed that 100% of the WRUA used receipts, 77% of the WRUAs use ledger books, then 77% use bank statement and 66% use cash flow. This shows some of the WRUAs have not yet opened bank accounts which might affect the WRUA performance. Descriptive statistics also revealed that proper record keeping was indicated by 93% of the respondents,90% indicated there was minimal complain on WRUA management of the resources. This indicates that the WRUA members had confidence in the management of their financial resource. Good management of resources is therefore positively related to good performance of the WRUAs since the WRUAs performance was rated between fairly good and very good. There is therefore good indication that improvement on resource management leads to improved performance of WRUAs. However 99.1% said that they still require external support in financial resource management. 5.3 Discussion The results of the study have clearly answered the research objectives and research questions since the effects of education and training, coordination and management, availability and accessibility to resources on performance of WRUAs in water catchment management have been quantified by descriptive statistics and the coefficients of determination. The results on the effect of education on management of community groups especially WRUAs is contrary to the popular belief that education is not a factor of leadership and once elected any leader can lead successfully. The study found out that in 60% of the cases where an increase in percentage of number of executive committee with education levels of at least secondary level resulted in an increase mean performance of the WRUA. The findings agrees with JICA (2003)
75

studies on sustainable community water projects in 11 Districts in three provinces of Kenya namely; rift-valley, Central and Eastern which indicated that community based water projects were not performing as expected due to varies challenges including high illiteracy rate in the WUA leading to low technology adoption. This is also supported by studies done by UNDP (2004) on empowerment and poverty reduction in Kathmandu, Nepal which found out there is a strong positive relationship between knowledge and capacity building. UNDP concluded that greater investments should be made in establishing greater education systems and opportunities for continued learning and greater support post secondary education reforms, continued learning and domestic knowledge services. There is a positive correlation between the mean numbers of the WRUA members who attendant training and WRUA performance. The results indicate that in 47.6% of the cases increase in mean number of WRUA members who attend trainings results in improved mean performance of the WRUA. This is supported by Grishvilli (2003) studies on situation analysis of community based organization in Georgia, USA which found out that inadequate skills and knowledge were the challenges which affect decision making by project implementing communities. Having adequate and competent community leaders is an important factor of performance of community based projects (Mancini, 2003). Adequate trained community leaders are important for effective performance: Mancini, 2003 quotes Glazer (1981), Marek, Mancini and Brock, 1999. Mancini, (2003) on studies done on sustaining community based programmes in Virginia, USA indicated that good performance is related to continuity issues of community leaders in influencing performance which include education qualification and adequate training. Assessment of various types of trainings offered to the WRUA showed training on by-laws and constitution formulation had comparatively highest positive impact on performance followed by proposal writing, then group dynamics, then SCMP and lastly WDC. This is supported by Water Act 2002 and WRMA rules (2007). According to WRMA rules (2007) management of WRUAs is enshrined in their constitution and a more detailed management provisions are contained in bylaws made subsidiary to the constitution. For a WRUA to be registered as a legal entity it must be able to formulate a constitution and by-laws which are submitted to Attorney Generals Chamber for approval. The water Act 2002 recognized the formation of WRUAs as a fora conflict resolution and co-operative management of water resources in the catchment areas. The
76

WRUAs can only be effective in conflict resolution if is trained on group dynamics which includes conflict resolution. On information storage it was found out that there is weak negative correlation between increased in uses of head as a tool for information storage with mean performance of the WRUA. On communication channels used by the WRUAs it was found out that only one WRUA used email as a communication channel representing 11% of the WRUAs. The higher the percentage use of head as a tool for information storage and low use of technology lowers the performance of WRUAs. This is supported by studies carried out by Nele (2008) on Bwathonaro WRUA in Meru North on integrated water resources management a case study of Bwathonaro Water Resource Users Association which found out that there is a strong relationship between knowledge management and sharing and level of resistance to change. On motivation it was found that most of the community members were motivated by volunteerism (53.8%), benefit accrued from the WRUA (45.4%) and legality of the WRUA (0.8%). Most of the community members therefore voluntarily joined the WRUA. A correlation between WRUA mean performance and volunteerism and benefits accrued from the WRUA was done and the result revealed that there is a strong positive correlation between mean of WRUA performance and benefit accrued by the members. The results found out that in 51% of the cases an increase benefit accrued from the WRUA results in improved mean performance of the WRUA. On other hand correlation between WRUA performance and volunteerism showed there is a negative correlation between mean of WRUA performance and increase in the members of the WRUA who joined the WRUA voluntarily. The results mean that in 30.8% of the cases increase in members of the WRUA who volunteered to join results in a decrease in mean performance of the WRUA. This is supported Mancini (2003) studies on sustaining community based programmes for families program development in Virginia, USA which found out that an organization ability to adapt to community needs/members needs strongly influence its ability to continuously provide services that make a difference in quality of life. On the other hand studies carried out by Belgium administration cooperation (1999) on assessment of Water Users Associations in Kajiando, Kenya found that WUAs managed projects

77

was between poor and pathetic because they were electing their leaders on voluntary basis. The study found out that the elected volunteers had no skills or expertise to handle financial issues. On WRUA collaboration with stakeholders it was discovered that only two stakeholders (WRMA and MKEPP) are active in all the WRUAs. WSTF is active in three WRUAs although it has low impact. CDF is only active in one WRUA out of the nine studied WRUAs representing 11%of all the WRUAs. This shows that there is low collaboration of the WRUAs with stakeholder hence influencing negatively on the performance of WRUA. This is supported by projects done by Nele (2008) on integrated water resource management a case study of the Bwathanaro Water Resource Users Association in Meru North which found out that although indicators reflect a positive impact of its work, WRUAs faced several operational challenges including enabling environment that facilitates not only establishment but also the operationalization of the WRUA in terms of external support. These operational challenges influence the performance of the WRUA. On whether the WRUA required any external support to function optimally the assessment found out that 99.1% agreed on infrastructure development, 98.3% agreed on equipment support and 98.3 % agreed on technical support. This shows that there is a strong positive relationship between external support and performance of the WRUA. Mwangi (2007) on studies carried out on community organization and action with special reference to Kenya, found out that having contact with other institutions, projects and groups with strategic importance to the project can result healthy exchange of approaches and resources. This is supported by studies carried out by Nyoroka (2009) on community projects in Meru which found out that community based projects required a lot external support to sustain themselves. Descriptive statistics revealed that most of the funding of the WRUA activities comes from members subscription fees (70%), followed by income generating activities (22%).External sources of funding accounts for only 8%. This low external funding might affect the performance WRUAs negatively since most of their WRUA activities requires higher heavy funding which is beyond the reach of WRUA members presently. Descriptive statistics also revealed that only two WRUAs (12%) whose members (10% for Kiamuga and 7.7% for Imema) said that they have adequate resources to meet WRUA
78

expenditure needs, otherwise all other WRUAs require extra funding. This shows that inadequate funding of WRUAs affects their performance. The correlation coefficient between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds by the WRUAs is 0.65 with coefficient of determination of 42% showing a strong positive correlation between mean WRUA performance and consistency in flow of funds. The results mean that in 42% of the cases an increase in consistency of flow of funds result in increase mean performance of the WRUA. The above findings are supported by many researchers; Mancini, (2003) studies on sustaining community based programmes for families program development implication from longitudinal research, Virginia States University found out that adequate funding is a factor of performance. Mulwa (2008) studies on quality impacts assessment of community projects found out that different sources of funding will influence directly or indirectly, the implementation of community based projects due to the conditions that go with them as well as the volume each strategy is likely to earn. Descriptive statistics also revealed that proper record keeping was indicated by 93% of the respondents,90% indicated there was minimal complain on WRUA management of the resources. This indicates that the WRUA members had confidence in the management of their financial resource. Good management of resources is therefore positively related to good performance of the WRUAs since the WRUAs performance was rated between fairly good and very good. There is therefore good indication that improvement on resource management leads to improved performance of WRUAs. This is supported by study by UNDP (2004) on empowerment and poverty reduction, Kathmandu, Nepal which states that accountability measures facilitate better performance and efficiency. Lack of accountability measures in organization allows for the proliferation of corruption which lowers performance of the organizations.

79

5.4 Conclusions From the analysis on education and training, coordination and management and accessibility and availability the study found out that an increase in percentage of number of executive committee with education levels of at least secondary level resulted in an increase in performance of the WRUA. In practice education is rarely considered when electing officials of WRUAs. Once WRUA officials are elected they undergo a lot of training in order for them to carry-out the mandate of the WRUA. The trainings are carried out in English and Kiswahili languages. The implications of electing officials who have never gone to school or of primary level education is that they might not fully understand the trainings which they will undertake hence the performance of that specific WRUA where that official comes from will reduced. There is a high positive relationship between number of WRUA members training and WRUA performance. In practice when WRUA trainings are being conducted only WRUA executive committee members are trained leaving out the other WRUA members. This implies that for WRUA to function properly, the trainers should try to cover all the WRUA members in their trainings since the leadership of the WRUA is based on election and any member of the WRUA can be elected a leader. It also implies that for the WRUA activities to be owned and accepted by all the WRUA members a lot of awareness creation and training is necessary to all the WRUA members. The analysis found out that various types of trainings conducted have varying influence on performance. Training on constitution and by-laws formulation and group dynamics led in the trainings which have the highest positive impact on WRUA performance. This implies that the constitution and by-law formulation is the cornerstone of WRUAs. Any WRUA which is not well trained on constitutional making implies that it will form a very weak constitution. Since constitution is a management and governance tool that WRUA with weak constitution will not perform has expected. There is a strong positive correlation between the benefits the WRUAs get and performance of the WRUA. This implies that adaptability of the WRUA on members needs is an important element of performance.

80

The analysis also found out those WRUAs that have high number of volunteers working for the WRUA have lower performance. The relationship between volunteerism and performance is therefore negative. This implies that the since volunteerism is affecting the performance of WRUAs negatively then all stakeholders in water management should look the issue and design alternatives. Analysis also found that there are few collaborators in WRUA activities in the study area. This is influencing the performance of the WRUA negatively since the WRUAs have not developed internal mechanisms to sustain themselves presently. This implies that if the WRUAs are left on their own in the current state they will not sustain themselves and might collapse in the long run. This therefore means that the WRUAs require diversified consistent external support to improve their performance until they reach sustainability stage. The support should be in terms of technical, infrastructure, equipment and human resources. 5.5 Recommendations In practice WRUA members rarely consider education as criteria for electing WRUA officials. A new criteria of getting effective WRUA officials who apart from attaining at least secondary education are willing to acquire knowledge and skills and willingness to serve the community well. It is important to carry out training needs assessment before carrying out any training on WRUA members. Since various types of training have varying influence over performance it is always important to rank trainings in order of influence and concentrate more on those trainings that have the highest performance impact. When assisting the WRUAs to develop the Sub Catchment Management Plan it is important to carry out PRA or RRA in order to capture community needs and benefits in the Sub Catchment Management Plan. There is need for the WRUAs to be capacity built not only in training but on skills on networking and information and knowledge management.WRUAs should be supported in technical support, infrastructure , equipment and human in order to assist the WRUAs to become self sustaining.

81

5.6 Suggestions for further research Most of the WRUAs in the study area were assisted to be formed and capacity built by MKEPP project. After MKEPP project ends in September 2012 the WRUAs will be managed by executive committee who are elected members of the community on voluntarily basis. A study to establish on how executive committee members can be more effective would assist improving the performance of the WRUA. A study to establish how best WRUAs can reward or motivate volunteers or how best to address human resource is necessary. Other options of motivating project volunteers need to be explored especially for them to be able to devote more time and better commitment to project work for enhanced output/deliverables. A research to establish reasons as to why increase in volunteerism in the WRUA management decreases WRUA performance must be established to assist in the improvement of WRUA performance. Other capacity building factors that were not considered in this study can also be researched on to understand more deeply on issues of capacity building and how it relates to the performance of the WRUA.

82

REFERENCES Adhikari P. K., & Risal, R.N, (2006). An exploration of prevalence and sustainability of community based organization in Nepal. Alaerts, G. T., Harvest, F.J.A., Patorni F.M. (1996). Water sector Capacity building. Australian Agency for International Development. (2000). Promoting practical sustainability. Baker, K. & Campbell, N. (2003). The complete guide to project management (3rd edition). New York alpha books. Belgium Administration for Development Co-operation. (1999). Water Users Associations support project. Kajiado District feasibility study report. Blackburn, J., & Holland, (1998). Institutionalizing participation in Development. Chambers R. (1994). The Origins and Practice of Participatory Rural Appraisal. Claudio, S. (2004). The Community development Dilema: When are services delivery, capacity building, Advocacy and social mobilization really empowering. Retrieved 17TH April from http://mailto:aviva@netnam.org.vn. Cole, G. (1995). Organization Behaviour. Cooke, B. & Kothari, U. (2001). Participation: the new tyranny. Cooper & Schindler, D. (2003). Business Research Methods ( eigth edition). New York. Croxton, Fredrick, E., Dudley, J., Cowden & Sidney K. (1986). Applied general statistics (third edition). Printer S &v Isaac Pitman and sons LTD London. Dearden, P., & Parker, (1991). In service training needs assessment: A guide to the assessment of training needs. Deborah, E. (1997). Capacity building: An approach to people Centered development. Falkenmark & Lingh (1976).Water for starving World. Food and Agriculture Organisation. (1997). Participation in practice: from the FAO peoples participation. Retrieved 20th May 2012 from <http://www.fao.org. Frederick, G., & Lori, F. (2009). Research Methods for the behavioural sciences. Government of Kenya. (1992). National Water Master Plan. Government of Kenya.(1999).Kenya water policy review and strategic formulation Government of Kenya. (2007). National Water Services strategy for the years 2007-2015(1999). Government Printer. (2002). Water Act 2002. Government Printer. (2007). Water Resources Management Authority Rules.
83

Gray, S. (1994). Project Management issues. The Open University. Grishvilli, D. (2003). Final report on situation analysis of community based organization in Georgia. Grobal Environment Facility. (2003). Review of Financial Arrangements in GEF supported Biodiversity Project Monitoring and Evaluation- Paper II. Institute of Water and Sanitation Development. (1995). Project Planning and Management. A training module for rural water supply and sanitation personnel. International Fund for Agricultural Development. (2003). Mount Kenya East Pilot Project for Natural Resources Management: Appraisal Report. International Rescue Committe. (1997). Water Supplies Managed by rural communities. Isham, J. (1999). Institutional determinants of the impacts of community based water system. Ivancevich, M., Peter, L., Sleven, J., Phillip, B., Crosby, (1997).Management quality and competitiveness (2nd Edition). Irwin Macgraw-Hill, USA. Japan International Cooperation Agency. (2003). Project research on Development of Sustainable Community based Irrigation and Drainage Schemes in Kenya. Khwaja, A. (2001). Can good projects succeed in bad communities? Harvard University:Washington D.C. Ki-moon, B. (2012). Ensuring access to water for agriculture is vital for sustainable future. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp? Kleemeter, E. (2000). The impact of participation on sustainability: An analysis of the Malawi rural piped scheme program. World Development. Kothari, C. (2007). Quantitative Techniques (Third Edition). Vikas Publishing House PUT Ltd, New Delhi. Mancini, J., Marek, L., & Book D. (2003). Sustaining Community Based Programs and family development implications.A research at Virginia State University. Michael, M. (2004). Capacity Building for Water Supply projects in the Gash Barka Region of Eritrea. Mike F & Laurie K, (2005). Project Management: Open University, Zrinksidd, Croatia. Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development. (1986). Small Holder Irrigation Projects in Rural Development.
84

Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources. (2002). Country Strategy on integrated Water Resources Management. Ministry of Water and Irrigation. (2004). WRMA newsletter Ministry of Water and Irrigation. (2007). The water news-June- July 2007 Ministry of Water and Irrigation. (2007). WRMA Rules 2007 Ministry of water and Irrigation. (2008). Ministry of Water and Irrigation strategic plan 20092012. Mintzberg, H. (1979). The nature of managerial work Mkirigia, J. (2010). Factors Affecting the Performance of private water firms in delivery of water services. Mt. Kenya East Pilot Project for Natural Resources. (2010). Annual report. Mt. Kenya East Pilot Project for Natural Resources. (2011). Annual report. Mugenda, O., & Mugenda,A. (2003). Research methods: Quantitative & Qualitative Approaches. Muketha, J. (2006). Project Monitoring and Evaluation (unpublished). Kenya Institute of Administration, Nairobi. Mullins, L. (1996). Managed an organizational Behaviour . Mulwa, F. (2000). Demystifying Participatory Community Development. Paylines Publication Africa, Nairobi Kenya Mulwa, F. (2007). Participatory monitoring and evaluation of community project community based project monitoring quality impact assessment and people friendly evaluation methods. Zapt chancery research publishers Eldoret Kenya. Mulwa, F. (2008). Demystifying participation community development (2nd edition). Pay-Lines publication Africa, Nairobi, Kenya. Muriithi, M. (2010). Factors influencing successful implementation of the community based water projects in Kenya. Mwangi, W. (2006). Project Planning and Administration, Department of Sociology, Anthropology and Economics, Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya Mwangi, W. (2007). A Leader in Community Organization with special reference to Kenya. Nele, F. (2008). Integrated Water Resources Management for Conflict Transformation A Case Study of Bwathonaro WRUA (unpublished, Masters of Arts Thesis).
85

Norman, R. (2000). Rural community development. Nyoroka, M. (2009). An assessment of the challenges facing the sustainability of community based projects. Oakley, (1991). Projects with people: The practice of participation in rural development. Patrick, D. (2012). Determining sample size; Balancing Power, Precision and Practicality. Robinson, P. (2002). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. Sera, J. & Katz, T. (1998). Making rural water supply sustainable. The 4Cs working group. (2003). A framework for shared community stewardship.4Cs principles, elements, barriers, projects and tools. United Nations. (2009). United nations 2000-2008 millennium development goals indicators-The official united nationals site for the MDC indicators.II 7&8: Proportion of population using improved drinking water source. Retrieved from http:// unstats.un.org/unsd/mdg/data.aspx United Nations Development Programme. (2004). Nepal National Human Development Report: Empowerment and Poverty Reduction, Kathmandu, Nepal. United Nations Environmental Programme. (2005). Co-ordinating body on the Seas on East Asia; case study of coral reef monitoring and management projects. United Nations Environmental Programme. (2006). Case studies of Coral Reef Monitoring and Management Projects (2004, 2005). Water Resources Management Authority. (2009). Catchment Area Management Strategy. Water Resources Management Authority. (2009). Annual progress report Water Resources Management Authority. (2010). Annual progress report Water Resources Management Authority. (2011). Annual progress report. Water Services Regulatory Board. (2009). Impact report. Water and Sanitation Coverage. Water Services Regulatory Board. (2009). Impact Report. Water Service Quality. Wikipedia. Defination of capacity building.Retrieved from http://

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/capacitybuilding Wim, S. & Guy,H. (1995). Water sector policy review and strategy formulation. A general framework.

86

World Bank Post Conflict Fund, (2003) .Workshop on closing the gap on community integration activities; learning from inter-urgency collaboration fund final report World bank. (2004). Arid Lands Resource Management Project. Community Driven development Manual. World Customs Organization. (2011). Definition of capacity building. Retrieved on 4th June 2011 From http://www.wcoomd.org/home.htm. World Health Organization & United Nations Childrens Fund- Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP). (2008). Water Supply and Sanitation. Retrieved from http://www.wssinfo.org. World Health Organization & United Nations Childrens Fund- Joint Monitoring Programme (JMP). (2010). Water Supply and Sanitation. Retrieved from http://www.wssinfo.org.

87

APPENDICES Appendix I: Introduction letter.

Francis Koome Simon P.O. Box 996 -60100 EMBU 17th April 2012

Dear Sir/Madam,

RE: REQUEST FOR PARTICIPATION IN A RESEARCH STUDY I am a final year Masters of art student at the University of Nairobi. My area of specialization is Project Planning and Management. I am currently undertaking a research on INFLUENCE OF CAPACITY BUILDING ON PERFORMANCE OF WRUAS IN THARAKA-NITHI COUNTY.

I will be grateful if you could spare sometime from your busy schedule and complete the enclosed questionnaire. All the information provided will be used purely for academic purposes only and your identity will be treated with utmost confidentiality. Thank you for your cooperation.

Yours faithfully,

FRANCIS KOOME SIMON

88

Appendix II: Questionnaire for the WRUA committee

Instructions please tick in the appropriate bracket or provided spaces Date NAME OF WRUA..

SECTION A GENERAL DATA 1) Gender Male ( ) Female ( ) 2) What is your age in years 26 35 ( ) 46-55 ( ) 36-35 ( )

56 and above ( )

3) Education background Primary University ( ) ( ) Secondary ( ) College ( )

Post graduate ( ) Yes ( ) No ( )

4) Are you a member of a WRUA? 5) If yes, how did you become a member? a member of a WUA a riparian member a representative of an industry a representative of an institution an ex-official member Other (specify) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

6) Is there any other condition you must fulfill in order to become a member of WRUA Yes ( ) No. ( )

7) If yes, is there subscription fees required to be paid by a member? Yes ( ) No ( )

89

8) If yes, what are they? Membership fee Monthly subscription fee Yearly subscription fee Other contribution (Describe) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

9) Does your WRUA have a constitution? Yes ( ) No ( )

10) Does your WRUA have By-laws? Yes ( ) no ( )

11) If yes, how effective are your the by-laws very effective Effective Moderately effective Little extent Not at all ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) Yes ( ) No ( )

12) Are you a member of the executive committee? 13) If yes, how were you chosen Election Selection Appointment Other (Specify) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

14) How long have you been a member of the WRUA committee 1-3yrs 4-6 yrs 6-8 yrs ( ) ( ) ( )

Above 8 years ( ) 15. Does your WRUA have a sub-catchment management plan? Yes No ( ) ( )
90

16. If yes is the WRUA implementing the sub-catchment management plan consistently? I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

17)

What benefits have you received from being a WRUA member

18)

How can you gauge the performance of your WRUA? Very good Good Fairly good Poor Very poor ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

SECTION C: TRAINING 19) How many trainings have you attended since you became a member of this WRUA? 1-3 3-5 5-8 Above 11 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

20)

Have you attended any training more than once

91

yes

( )

no

( )

21)

If yes, how often since you became a committee member? Twice Thrice Four times Five times ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

More than five times ( )

22) What is the average number of trainees who attend those trainings? ( ) 23) List the training attended? 24) Rate the importance of training attended and their applicability in the management of the WRUA Very important Important Little importance No importance ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

25. Training slots are shared fairly amongst WRUA Members I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
92

D: COORDINATION AND MANAGEMENT 26 )How does the WRUA officials communicate with your members and other stakeholders? Word of mouth Letters Telephone E-mail Other (specify) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

27) How do you store WRUA information? Head Folders Computers Other specify ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) yes ( ) no ( )

28) Do you have a physical office?

29) If yes, what else is in that office? Chairs Desks Stationery Computers and accessories Other (specify) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

30) The flow of information downwards and the upwards is good. I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

31) Are you a paid employee of WRUA?

93

Yes

( )

No

( )

32) If yes, how are you paid? Allowances Monthly payment Daily payment Others (specify) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

33) If no, what motivates you to work for the WRUA? 34) WRUA holds meeting according to your by-laws. I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

35) Do you have any collaborators in management of your River basin? Yes ( ) No ( )

36) If yes, what kind of collaboration is there? Supervision Monitoring Evaluation Infrastructure Development Technical support ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

37. Coordination ensures collaboration is part of joint planning sections. I highly agree ( ) Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
94

38) .We need infrastructure development support in our WRUA to develop our water catchment. I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

39).Currently WRUA needs equipments to function optimally I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

40).WRUA needs technical support especially carrying out studies in our water catchment. I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

41) We need infrastructure development support in our WRUA to develop our water catchment. I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
95

42) Currently WRUA needs equipments to function optimally I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

43) WRUA needs technical support especially carrying out studies in our water catchment. I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree 44) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

How do you gauge your collaboration with the following stakeholders Very collaborative WRMA WSTF MKEPP CDF Other (specify) collaborative Fairly collaborative Not collaborative

45) Has there been any change in water related conflicts since the WRUA was formed? Yes ( ) No ( )

46) If yes, how is the change? Reduced Increased ( ) ( )

96

E: RESOURCES 47) What are the sources of resources to finance WRUA operations? Members subscription fee Income generating activities WSTF Others (specify) 48) What kind of resources do you get? Material Funds Human resource 49) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

How is the consistency of resources received? Very consistency ( )

Average consistency ( ) Not consistent 50) ( )

What financial systems do use to monitor your expenditure? None Ledger books Cash flow Receipts Bank statements Financial software Others (specify) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

51) What other records do you keep? Attendance register Minutes book Asset register Others (specify) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

97

52) According to your assessment are these record kept properly? I highly agree Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

53) The WRUA members have mechanism to capture members concerns/problems /suggestions for its use? I highly agree ( ) Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

54) There has been minimal complain from WRUA Members on management of resources I highly agree ( ) Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

55) WRUA members needs external support in technical areas like financial management and book keeping I highly agree ( ) Agree Not decided Disagree Highly disagree ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

56) Are the resources received enough to meet your WRUAs expenditure? Yes ( ) No ( )

57) If No, what do you think can be done to improve your resources base?
98

Appendix III: Questionnaire for WRUA stakeholders to guide in the interviews 1) How does your institution collaborate with WRUAs in your area of jurisdiction? 2) According to your opinion what can be done to improve your institution collaboration with WRUAs? 3) What improvements do you think can be done to improve the performance of WRUAs? 4) From your experience are WRUAs relevant in the management of water resources in the river basin?

99

Appendix IV: Questionnaire to WRMA staff 1) How long have you worked for WRMA? 1-5 Years 5-10 years ( ) ( ) ( )

Over 10 years

2) Education background? Primary Secondary College University degree Post graduate ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

3) Do you work directly with WRUAs? Yes ( ) No ( )

4) If yes, how often do you meet then? Once in a week Once in a month Quarterly Yearly Other (specify) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

5) How many WRUAs are you assigned to? 1-5 5-10 10-15 Above 15 ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

6) What is your assignment to the WRUA?

100

 .. 7) Since you were assigned to work with WRUAs, have you attended any training? Yes ( ) No ( )

8) If yes, which trainings? 9) Gauge your effectiveness in working with WRUAs. Very effective Effective Fairly effective Not effective ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )

10) What can be done to improve your work?

101

AppendixV: Map of project area (Yellow, orange and purple colour shows WRUAs along Tungu, Mutonga / Kithino and Kathita River Basin).

(Source: MKEPP-NRM)

102