School report card 2013 Kenya

SCHOOL REPORT CARD
2013
© National Taxpayers Association (NTA)
May 2014
This publication was made possible through support provided by the Department for International
Development (DFID) and the Hewlett Foundation.
The findings expressed herein are those of the NTA and they do not necessarily reflect the views of our
partners.

Table of contents
Acronyms vii
Executive Summary 1
Acknowledgements 3
Public Primary Schools Enrolment Data for 2010-2011 4
Introduction 5
Methodology 6
PART A: SCHOOL REPORT CARD
1 Selection of SRC Committee Members & Training of Parents 7
1.1 Parents’ Participation in SRC Meetings 8
1.2 Records of minutes 8
1.3 Second meeting with Parents to discuss the SRC 9
1.4 Parents’ turnout for the second meeting to discuss and complete the SRC 10
2 SRC Ratings 11
2.1 SRC Ratings – National Outlook 11
2.2 SRC Ratings – Regional Outlook 12
2.3 SRC County Rankings 12
2.4 Relationship between active parental participation and student outcomes 13
2.5 Relationship between SRC ratings and K.C.P.E 14
2.6 SRC Rankings – Top 5 Counties by SRC Category 15
2.7 SRC Rankings - Worst rated Counties by SRC Category 16
PART B: NTA’s INDICATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR SCHOOL ANNUAL BASELINE DATA
3 School participation indicators 19
3.1 Pupil Enrolment 19
3.2 Pupil dropout rates 19
3.2.1 Dropout Rate for boys at the County level 22
3.2.2 Dropout Rate for Girls at the County level 23
3.3 Transition rates 24
3.4 Student absenteeism 25
3.5 Annual mean scores 26
3.5.1 Educational outcomes from 2009 to 2012 26
3.5.2 Educational outcomes at county level 27
3.6 Total Number of school facilities constructed 28
3.6.1 Sanitation 28
3.6.2 Water 30
3.7 Numbers of teachers 31
3.7.1 Teacher-Pupil Ratio 32
3.8 School development plan 33
3.8.1 Relationship between un/availability of SDP/SIP and K.C.P.E outcomes 34

3.9 Proportions of schools that had enrolled physically challenged pupils 35
4 Perceptions pertaining FPE grant amount – KES 1020 37
4.1 Received proposals from schools on sufficient FPE amount 37
4.2 County Analysis 37
5 Conclusions 38
6 Recommendations 39
List of Tables
Table 1 – Sample size distribution at county level 6
Table 3 - Proportions of schools where meetings were held (1st Meeting) 7
Table 4 - Parents who attended the first meeting to explain the SRC and select Committee
members 8
Table 5 - Regional Attendance ratios 8
Table 6 – Proportions of schools with well-kept records of meetings 9
Table 7 - Proportions of schools which held a second meeting 9
Table 8 - Parents who attended the 2nd meeting to discuss and complete the SRC 10
Table 9 - Proportions of parents who attend the final meeting at regional level 10
Table 10 - SRC Ratings by category disaggregated by region 11
Table 11 - SRC Ratings at Regional level 12
Table 12 - SRC County Rankings 13
Table 13 - Top 5 Counties (SRC Category 1) 15
Table 17 - Top 5 rated Counties (SRC Category 5) 15
Table 23 – Worst rated Counties - Bottom 5 (SRC Category 1) 17
Table 24 - Worst rated Counties - Bottom 5 (SRC Category 2) 17

Table 33 - Dropout incidence grade 1-8 - Girls 21
Table 34 - Dropout incidence grade 1-8 - Boys 22
Table 35 - Boys dropout ratio disaggregated by County 23
Table 36 - Girls dropout ratio disaggregated by County 24
Table 37 - Educational outcomes [Grade 1 to 8] - 2009 - 2013 28
Table 38 - Number of students sharing 1 toilet 29
Table 39 - Teacher: Pupil ratio vs K.C.P.E Outcomes 33
Table 40 - Proportions of schools that had SDP/SIP 34
Table 41 - Relationship between un/availability of SDP/SIP and K.C.P.E outcomes 35
Table 42 - Proportions of schools with physically challenged pupils 36
Table 43 - Proposed FPE Grant 37
Table 44 - Proposed FPE Grant at county level 37
List of figures
Figure 1 - Parsons Correlation between SRC ratings with KCPE 2013 14
Figure 2 - Pupil Enrolment from between 2009 to 2013 19
Figure 3 - Dropout rate (YEAR 2009 - 2013) 20
Figure 4 - Drop-out rate by Grade: 2009/2013 20
Figure 5 - Total dropouts [Before SRC vs After SRC] 21
Figure 6 - Total absences from between 2009 - 2013 25
Figure 7 - Educational outcomes [Grade 1-8] 27
Figure 8 - Number of toilets from 2009 to 2013 29
Figure 9 – Supply [Access to piped water] 30
Figure 10 - Access to water [Supply & Stored] 30
Figure 11 - Total absences disaggregated by availability of tapped water 31
Figure 12 - Number of teachers from between 2010 to 2013 31
Figure 13 – The number of pupils in classes [2013] 32

Acronyms
ASAL Arid and Semi-Arid Land
BOG Board of Governors
DEB District Education Board
DEO District Education Officer
DFID Department for International Development
DQAS Directorate of Quality Assurance and Standards
KCPE Kenya Certificate of Primary Education
KESSP Kenya Education Sector Support Programme
MOEST Ministry of Education Science and Technology
NTA National Taxpayers Association
SIMSC School Instructional Materials Selection Committee
SMC School Management Committee
SRC School Report Card

1National Taxpayers Association (NTA)
Executive Summary
This SRC project reports tremendous achievements in the work carried out within this programme
since its inception in 2009. In harmony with the projects main objective, practical parental contribution
has significantly improved over the last 4 years. During this phase of project an average of 62
parents attended the initial meeting to train and select members for the SRC, in comparison to 42
parents previously, representing an increase of 20 parents in each school. This feat is also reflected
by the 0.23 points improvement in SRC category 10 ‘parental responsibility’ ratings, as the schools
ratings have marginally improved from the previous phase. Of significance to this finding, there is an
emerging connection between the SRC project and performance in examinations. As a matter of fact,
schools with parents who are actively involved in the running of schools will by-all-means catapult
the overall performance of their children.
Overall, for this phase, there is an encouraging improvement of 4 points in ratings across all the
SRC categories tested. Parallel to the previous phase, the ‘role of children in the school’ received
the highest ratings of 6.66 out of a possible 10 representing an improvement of .24 points. The
highest surge in terms of SRC category ratings in comparison to the previous phase was recorded
in SRC category 5 ‘Water and Sanitation’ (+0.58 points), meaning more schools now have access to
clean and free drinking water which is a basic commodity that is key to maximizing student school
attendance and consequently positive impact on outcomes.
The report further reveals a relationship between SRC ratings and overall K.C.P.E results. To this end,
schools that posted an improved performance in the SRC project had also improved K.C.P.E results
in 2013.
School participation indicators
Notably, this report outlines fundamental developments in the following key school participation
indicators over the last 3 years;
1. Improved child enrollment and survival rate especially the girl child in line with MDG goal no. 3;
The emergence of the F.P.E programme signaled an increase in enrolment. Significantly, the enrolment
of girls has been on the upward trend sustainably in the last 3 consecutive years.
2. Improved access to clean water and proper sanitation;
Access to clean water and proper sanitation improves enrolment and survival rates. In this regards,
our endeavors at the community level has witnessed the number of toilets increase by 6 per cent and
66 per cent of these schools now have access to free and safe drinking water.
3. Improved number of teachers;
The number of male teachers increased from 9,256 in 2010 to 9,855 in 2013 representing a 6 per
cent increase; while females increased by 7 per cent from 9,523 to 10,244 in the same period.
4. Educational outcomes
There is an exponential improvement in the primary school education outcomes over the last three
years particularly amongst girls.
Accountability Indicators
5. Number of public schools publicly displaying FPE grants received
There number of schools publicly displaying FPE grants in the schools has improved from 65 per cent
to 77 per cent from between 2009 to 2013. However, some of the head teachers have resorted to
displaying these funds in their office which in essence does not reflect the requirement by MOEST
that advocates for public display. The Headteachers have pointed out that due to lack of fencing

2 School Report Card 2013
around the schools, the accountability boards are open to vandalism. This initiative demonstrates the
schools’ administration accountability and empowers stakeholders especially parents to demand for
better services for their children consequently creating a conducive learning environment.
Attention and awareness indicators / Red flags
6. Worrying trends in student absenteeism
The rate of pupil absenteeism is on the rise and it is not being comprehensively measured and
addressed because of the compulsory education law that assumes unwavering student attendance.
However, this is not the case as reported and processes need to be put in place to measure and
mitigate pupil absenteeism. I.e. The total number of missed school days for each enrolled child for
each term and year.
7. Dropout rates especially from upper primary
While the proportion of pupils dropping out of school are reducing, the dropout ratios in some counties
are worrying and as noted especially in Taita Taveta County which recorded a dropout incidence of 17
per cent for boys against the national average of 3 per cent. To make the bad situation even worse,
most of these dropouts occur at the upper class/primary school level.
8. Sanitation
The number of toilets for both girls and boys has marginally increased. However, pupils are still
disadvantaged as indicated in this report that on average 51 boys are sharing 1 toilet while 45 girls
share 1 toilet on average. This is contrary to the MOEST policy which dictates that for every 23 girls
there should be 1 toilet and I toilet for 27 boys.

Acknowledgements
This report is the cumulative results of a mutual relationship between the Ministry of Education
Science and Technology (MOEST) and The National Taxpayers Association (NTA) with the support of
the Development Partners (DFID and Hewlett Foundation). The report sought to harness the skills
and knowledge of all the three institutions and empower parents assess their respective school
inorder to produce a report aimed at enhancing better management of schools and contributing to
better learning outcome in Kenya.
From the Ministry of Education thanks are due especially to Mr. Mohammed Mwinyipembe – Director
of Quality Assurance and Standards, Mr John Opiyo and the MOEST officials both at the County and
Sub-County levels for their immense support.
The NTA team led by Michael Otieno and Wolde Wesa, the National office and all the NTA Regional
coordinators are appreciated for their immense contribution to the entire exercise, particularly for
designing, leading and coordinating the fieldwork.
Many thanks go to Dr. Moses Ngware for his invaluable comments and our heartfelt appreciation goes
to the Kenya National Union of Teachers (KNUT), especially the executive officer, Mr Idris Aden and
the KNUT County Secretaries, Kenya Primary School Heads Association (KEPSHA) National office and
the County officials, The Teacher Service Commission (TSC), the teaching fraternity and the parents
at large who took an active role in the success of this entire project.
Last but not least we are gratified to the UKaid and the Hewlett & Flora Foundation, for their steadfast
support towards this exercise alongside the DAI staffs for their constructive comments which informed
this effort.

Public Primary Schools Enrolment Data for 2010-2011
Source: Ministry of Education Science and Technology

Introduction
The School Report Card project has been active in Kenya since 2009, when it was launched by the
MOEST in collaboration with the NTA with the main objective of improving the quality of education for
girls and boys in public primary schools by encouraging parents through capacity building to take a
more practical role in the education of their children.
The project adopts a formal, consensus-based reporting that is completed by school parents annually
on how well their school is performing on 10 key assessment areas of school attendance and
performance indicators. The result of the SRC exercise provides an opportunity for the education
sector management to obtain an independent view of their performance and status. Moreover, it also
provides an opportunity for identification of weak areas in education service provision and initiates
measures to enhance quality education delivery. In addition, the current phase included data on key
school performance indicators were collected to provide more insights on the status of our schools
and consequently compliment this report.
How does the SRC work?
Each year, all parents in the identified SRC schools will meet together to discuss and agree on
the assessment scores they want to list in their School Report Card. Then the parents, through
their School Report Card Committee, will send one copy of their completed School Report Card to
the school management at the school level, one copy to the County Director of Education at the
County level and finally one copy to the Ministry Head Office and NTA at the National level. This will
enable the education actors at all the mentioned levels to take appropriate action to mitigate issues
identified in the SRC assessment tool.
The School Report Card is a practical and accessible tool for parents to use to demand accountability
and it is important to note that the main purpose of this project is to mobilize parental support for their
schools and link the community at large with the ministry of education officials at different levels for
the purpose of enhancing governance and accountability in delivering quality services in education
sector. The engagement of the key stakeholders at different levels will form an important component
of the action plan in the context of the educational policy as envisaged in our constitution and the
Basic Education Act, 2013 which emphasizes partnerships and in doing so improve governance and
transparency in education sector.
Project Coverage
Since its inception, the project has been successfully realized in 30 per cent of all public primary
schools in Kenya from all 47 Counties. During the first phase, the project covered 5,772 public
primary schools from 43 Counties. In the current phase, the project covered 2,023 public primary
schools from 23 Counties in Kenya namely; Baringo, Bung’oma, Elgeyo/Marakwet, Garissa, Homa
Bay, Kajiado, Kakamega, Kilifi, Kirinyaga, Kisii, Kisumu, Kitui, Kwale, Makueni, Mandera, Marsabit,
Nakuru, Nandi, Nyandarua, Nyeri, Taita Taveta, Tana River and Vihiga.

Methodology
In respect to the available resources under the current phase, NTA targeted to reach 15 per cent
of the total public primary schools from half of the 47 Counties in Kenya. NTA intends to undertake
a longitudinal study over a number of years with the selected school to establish any identified
trend that can offer lessons going forward. The selection of these counties and the specific schools
was random. At the county level, an algorithm was employed to scientifically select the number of
schools per County for inclusion in the sample size. The sample size (x) of schools in a county was
determined as follows:
x= (Target Sample/ Total Public Schools * Number of Public Primary Schools in the county).
X = (3,000/20,153) * No. of Public Primary Schools in the County
However, due to the National Teachers Strike in June 2013, coupled with the countrywide transfer of
primary school heads and security concerns in some Counties like; Marsabit, Mandera and Tana River,
reaching our target of 3,000 schools was unattainable. Thus 2,038 (67.4%) public schools from 23
counties were achieved as shown in the table below.
Table 1 – Sample size distribution at county level
County
Code
County Name
Sampled
Schools
Per cent
of total
sample
33 Baringo 67 3.3
36 Bung'oma 141 6.9
34 Elgeyo/Marakwet 60 2.9
45 Garissa 19 0.9
41 Homa Bay 129 6.3
31 Kajiado 29 1.4
37 Kakamega 96 4.7
04 Kilifi 73 3.6
09 Kirinyaga 88 4.3
40 Kisii 113 5.5
39 Kisumu 94 4.6
13 Kitui 279 13.7
County
Code
County Name
Sampled
Schools
Per cent
of total
sample
02 Kwale 85 4.2
18 Makueni 46 2.3
47 Mandera 2 0.1
16 Marsabit 14 0.7
27 Nakuru 83 4.1
29 Nandi 74 3.6
07 Nyandarua 189 9.3
08 Nyeri 92 4.5
01 Taita Taveta 118 5.8
05 Tana River 10 0.5
38 Vihiga 137 6.7

PART A - SCHOOL REPORT CARD
1 Selection of SRC Committee Members & Training of Parents
During the school visits, the following question was asked to the respondents: ‘Was there a meeting
with parents to explain the School Report Card, and select School Report Card Committee
members’? This question sought to determine whether there was a meeting held with parents to
explain the SRC and also select members for purposes of participating in the SRC reporting.
An impressive (98 per cent) of the school responded that they held this meeting with parents to
explain the School Report Card and select the School Report Committee members. This finding
demonstrates the desire and commitment of parents towards the SRC programme and authenticates
that there were actual meetings (submitted the attendance list) held to explain the SRC and the
selection of the SRC committee.
Further scrutiny at county level shows that Kwale and Kilifi counties from the coastal region had
relatively higher proportions of schools that did not carry out this meeting.
Table 3 - Proportions of schools where meetings were held (1st Meeting)
Yes - Meeting was held No meeting was held
Total 98.2% 1.8%
BARINGO 98.4% 1.6%
BUNG'OMA 94.9% 5.1%
ELGEYO/MARAKWET 100.0% -
GARISSA 100.0% -
HOMA BAY 97.4% 2.6%
KAJIADO 100.0% -
KAKAMEGA 96.9% 3.1%
KILIFI 92.9% 7.1%
KIRINYAGA 98.8% 1.2%
KISII 98.0% 2.0%
KISUMU 98.8% 1.2%
KITUI 100.0% -
KWALE 90.4% 9.6%
MAKUENI 100.0% -
MARSABIT 100.0% -
NAKURU 100.0% -
NANDI 100.0% -
NYANDARUA 99.4% 0.6%
NYERI 98.9% 1.1%
TAITA TAVETA 98.3% 1.7%
VIHIGA 100.0% -
NOTE: A sample of 96 schools (4.8 per cent of the sampled schools) did not respond to this question

1.1 Parents’ Participation in SRC Meetings
Parental participation in the education of their children has improved from the previous phase. On
average, at the school level, 62 parents attended the initial meeting to select members for the SRC,
in comparison to 42 parents in the previous phase representing an increase of 20 parents in each
school.
The highest average turnout was recorded in Central region (91 parents per school) and the lowest in
Eastern region (43). In the Coastal region, the turnout was skewed towards women, in that; there
was nearly twice the number of females in attendance compared to men. Nyanza region recorded the
highest ratio of male attendees in comparison to Women.
In summary, a total of 103,804 parents attended this first meeting to explain the School Report Card
and to select committee members.
Overall, there were more women (61 per cent) than men (39 per cent) as shown in table 4 and 5
below.
Table 4 - Parents who attended the first meeting to explain the SRC and select Committee
members
Total Women Total Men TOTAL
Mean 38.05 23.67 62.12
Sum 63,825 39,979 103,804
Gender representation ratios 61% 39% 100%
Table 5 - Regional Attendance ratios
REGION Total Women Men Mean
Central 25482 15110 10372 91.01
Coast 17478 12253 5225 74.26
North Eastern 1886 1115 771 66.87
Eastern 12401 7852 4549 43.06
Western 18597 11564 7033 59.23
Nyanza 13363 7436 5927 49.86
Rift Valley 14597 8495 6102 56.61
Total 103804 63825 39979 62.12
1.2 Records of minutes
The importance of keeping records of SRC minutes cannot be over emphasized. Records tell us
what, where and when something was done and why a decision was made. They also tell us who
was involved and under what authority. They provide evidence of committee & individual activity
and promote accountability and transparency. These minutes can provide protection for individuals
who act on the decisions of the schools committee by providing evidence that they acted on the
committee’s directions.
Record keeping in our schools has improved by 4 points from the previous phase. However, there is
still room for improvement as 10 per cent of the schools sampled DID NOT has records of their first
meeting with parents. This point to apathy towards keeping record without knowing that, they form
a very clear picture of their deliberations in the meetings. Table 6 below further illustrates this.

Table 6 – Proportions of schools with well-kept records of meetings
REGION
Availability of well-kept records
Yes No
Central 89.7% 10.3%
Coast 82.5% 17.5%
North Eastern 90.3% 9.7%
Eastern 99.0% 1.0%
Western 91.1% 8.9%
Nyanza 89.8% 10.2%
Rift Valley 89.9% 10.1%
Total 90.5% 9.5%
1.3 Second meeting with Parents to discuss the SRC
In accordance to the SRC guidelines, schools are mandated to preside over a second meeting with
parents to further discuss and complete the SRC form. Slightly above three-quarters (77%) held a
second/ final meeting with parents to discuss and complete the School Report Card. This represents
a 7-point drop from the previous phase where 84 per cent of that sample held this meeting.
North Eastern region (100%) represented the highest incidence in terms of number of schools per
region that held this meeting. The lowest incidences were recorded in Coast (67%) and Western
(68%) regions.
Table 7 - Proportions of schools which held a second meeting
REGION
Was there a second or final meeting
Yes No
Central 74.1% 25.9%
Coast 67.4% 32.6%
North Eastern 100.0% -
Eastern 99.0% 1.0%
Western 67.9% 32.1%
Nyanza 77.8% 22.2%
Rift Valley 74.6% 25.4%
Total 77.3% 22.7%

1.4 Parents’ turnout for the second meeting to discuss and complete the
SRC
In the second meeting to discuss and complete the School Report Card, 74,901 parents out of the
initial 103,804 parents attended, representing a 72 per cent follow up across the counties studied.
Incidences of absentee parents were highest in Coast region; where, 35 per cent of the parents who
attended the first meeting did not show up for this meeting. Notably, the lowest proportion of parents
absconding was in Eastern and North Eastern regions with 9 per cent and 10 per cent respectively.
Looking at the parallel figures for the meetings, more women attended in all the two meetings.
However, among women, their attendance was slightly higher in the first meeting than in the second
meeting.
Table 8 - Parents who attended the 2nd meeting to discuss and complete the SRC
Total Women Total Men TOTAL
Mean 34.19 21.66 55.81
Sum 45851 29050 74901
Gender representation ratios 61% 39% 100%
Table 9 - Proportions of parents who attend the final meeting at regional level
REGION TOTAL % follow-up Total women Total men
Central 18779 74% 11113 7674
Coast 11598 66% 8059 3539
North Eastern 1714 91% 998 716
Eastern 11108 90% 7217 3891
Western 11456 62% 6955 4501
Nyanza 10122 76% 5626 4498
Rift Valley 10124 69% 5876 4227
Total 74901 72% 45844 29046

2 SRC Ratings
In this section, parents were required to rate the schools performance in accordance to key school
performance indicators (KPIs). Parents were to give ratings out of 10 (1-10), where 1 represented
a school that is very poor in that category and 10 represents a school that is the very best in that
category. There were 10 categories included in the School Report Card, namely;
SRC-1. School Safety and Protection SRC-2. School Facilities
SRC-3. Access to Textbooks SRC-4. Continuous Assessment
SRC-5. Water and Sanitation SRC-6. Roles of Children at the School
SRC-7. The Management of Instructional Materials SRC-8. Performance of the School Management Committee
SRC-9. Homework Assignment and Marking SRC-10. Parental Responsibility
2.1 SRC Ratings – National Outlook
A general overview gives these schools an average rating of 61 out of a possible 100 points,
representing an encouraging 4-point improvement from the previous phase. Similar to the previous
phase, “Roles of Children at the School” - (Category 6) was the best rated category amongst the 10
categories with an average of 6.66 out of a possible 10, representing an improvement of 0.24 points.
The highest surge in terms of SRC category ratings in comparison to the previous phase was seen in
SRC category 5 ‘Water and Sanitation’ (+0.58 points).
Despite a notable improvement of 0.23 points, ‘Parental Responsibility’ – (Category 10) was once
again rated as the poorest SRC category amongst the 10 SRC categories tested with a mean average
score of 5.46 points out of a possible 10 points. Improving parental contribution in taking a more
active role in the education of our children is the superseding objective of the SRC programme. From
this data, we can conclude that despite a notable improvement from the previous phase most parents
still observe their inclusion in the education of their children as non-essential.
Parallel to the last phase, schools emanating from the central region received the highest ratings
(66.52/100) representing a 2.3 per cent increase; while, schools in Eastern Region received the
lowest ratings (58.59/100) as shown in Table 10 below.
Table 10 - SRC Ratings by category disaggregated by region
REGION
SRC
1
SRC
2
SRC
3
SRC
4
SRC
5
SRC
6
SRC
7
SRC
8
SRC
9
SRC
10
Mean
100
Mean
Phase II
Total Phase III 6.27 6.03 5.84 6.41 5.90 6.66 6.22 6.34 6.02 5.45 61.11 57.38
Central 6.74 6.51 6.51 7.07 6.26 7.09 6.70 6.86 6.82 5.89 66.52 64.22
North Eastern 5.97 6.06 6.38 6.62 5.94 6.88 6.24 6.53 5.97 5.68 62.26 52.45
Rift Valley 6.43 6.36 6.21 6.27 6.02 6.61 6.38 6.48 5.95 5.55 62.17 58.83
Nyanza 6.16 5.95 6.19 6.47 5.84 6.40 6.17 6.07 6.22 5.40 60.90 55.65
Coast 5.80 5.80 5.71 6.51 5.82 6.74 6.15 6.06 5.57 5.05 59.19 55.64
Western 6.56 5.90 4.83 5.91 5.66 7.03 6.12 6.64 5.66 4.83 59.13 55.87
Eastern 5.87 5.65 5.67 6.23 5.80 5.99 5.77 5.79 5.86 5.95 58.59 57.91
Total Phase II 5.93 5.75 5.58 5.96 5.32 6.42 5.78 5.88 5.53 5.22 57.38

2.2 SRC Ratings - Regional Outlook
Parallel to the previous phase, ‘the role of children in school’ was the best rated category in 5 out
of the 7 regions sampled. This indicates that, teachers take good care of children in school and the
pupils are always accountable to the teachers while at School. However, most parents from the data
shown in the table below do not play their part well, for instance taking good care of their children
while at home. This is illustrated by the parental responsibility rating that was the worst rated
category in six of the seven regions. In both Eastern and Nyanza regions ‘continuous assessment’
was the best rated category while ‘school facilities’ was the worst rated category in Eastern region.
Table 11 - SRC Ratings at Regional level
Province Best Category Mean Worst Category Mean
Central Roles of children 7.09 Parental Responsibility 5.89
Coast Roles of children 6.74 Parental Responsibility 5.05
Eastern Continuous Assessment 6.23 School facilities 5.65
North Eastern Roles of children 6.88 Parental Responsibility 5.68
Nyanza Continuous Assessment 6.47 Parental Responsibility 5.40
Rift Valley Roles of children 6.61 Parental Responsibility 5.55
Western Roles of children 7.03 Parental Responsibility 4.83
2.3 SRC County Ratings
Similar to the previous phase, Kirinyaga County in Central Region was best rated County with a
cumulative mean total of 72.82 out of a possible 100 points, followed by Nyeri (67.03) and then
Makueni County (66.65) with the latter, incredibly recording a 10-point surge from the previous
phase.
It is worth noting that Kirinyaga County has also been top of the Grade 8 K.C.P.E County Rankings
since the formation of County Governments; asserting that there is a link between a well-run school
and overall student outcomes.
Notably, Garissa County (65.28/100) recorded the highest increase in comparison to the previous
phase (37.85/100).
Tana River County was the worst rated County with a cumulative mean of 47.00/100 followed by
Mandera County 50/100 then Kakamega County (52.87) in that order. It is good to point out that
Tana River and Mandera Counties have been dogged by persistent ethnic tensions and this could be
the probable reason for their poor showing.
The county ratings is an indication of performance in terms of school facilities management, academic
responsibilities management, parental responsibilities and children’s role while at school as shown in
the Table below. Counties that performed better were rated highly while poor performers were rated
low.

Table 12 - SRC County Rankings
Rank COUNTIES
SRC
1
SRC
2
SRC
3
SRC
4
SRC
5
SRC
6
SRC
7
SRC
8
SRC
9
SRC
10
Total/
100
KCPE
MEAN
2013
01 KIRINYAGA 7.41 7.13 7.15 7.61 6.81 7.67 7.16 7.34 7.20 6.57 72.82 274
02 NYERI 6.73 6.64 6.81 7.23 6.34 7.25 6.76 6.70 7.14 6.30 67.03 256
03 MAKUENI 7.00 6.43 6.37 6.93 6.41 6.80 6.48 6.43 6.63 7.15 66.65 267
04 GARISSA 6.28 6.44 6.61 6.72 6.39 7.00 6.56 6.83 6.39 6.06 65.28 183
05 BARINGO 6.64 6.58 6.85 6.17 6.12 6.83 6.86 6.72 6.06 5.73 64.66 265
06 NYANDARUA 6.47 6.17 6.07 6.75 5.97 6.76 6.46 6.71 6.51 5.42 63.64 245
07 NAKURU 6.35 6.27 6.14 6.45 6.03 6.47 6.47 6.80 6.20 5.62 62.83 244
08 BUNG'OMA 6.75 6.47 5.76 6.51 5.83 7.12 6.67 6.88 5.75 5.19 62.81 249
09 KISII 6.52 6.18 6.52 6.56 5.77 6.47 6.27 6.40 6.25 5.50 62.46 242
10 NANDI 6.61 6.33 6.10 6.48 5.97 6.73 6.17 6.42 5.87 5.52 62.15 267
11 KISUMU 6.13 6.04 5.90 6.50 6.09 6.40 6.05 5.99 6.12 5.06 60.84 265
12 KAJIADO 6.21 6.25 5.93 6.57 6.04 6.70 6.14 5.89 5.86 5.15 60.55 258
13 KWALE 5.86 5.91 5.63 6.67 6.18 6.95 6.42 6.13 5.59 5.03 60.40 218
14 MARSABIT 5.86 5.93 6.29 6.57 5.57 6.86 5.79 6.14 5.71 5.43 60.14 239
15 TAITA TAVETA 5.92 5.78 6.01 6.57 5.76 6.83 6.10 6.29 5.63 5.32 60.10 217
16 HOMA BAY 5.87 5.70 6.10 6.37 5.72 6.34 6.17 5.84 6.25 5.52 59.67 258
17 VIHIGA 6.75 5.90 4.20 5.65 5.86 7.33 6.18 6.94 5.92 4.91 59.65 259
18 ELGEYO/MARAKWET 6.19 6.29 5.87 5.80 5.93 6.36 6.07 6.14 5.61 5.49 59.39 271
19 KILIFI 5.68 5.89 5.54 6.35 5.59 6.48 6.13 5.63 5.44 4.73 57.54 226
20 KITUI 5.68 5.52 5.55 6.12 5.70 5.86 5.65 5.68 5.74 5.75 57.22 233
21 KAKAMEGA 6.03 5.05 4.36 5.41 5.13 6.49 5.22 5.88 5.20 4.18 52.87 261
22 MANDERA 4.00 3.50 5.00 6.00 4.50 6.00 6.50 6.50 4.00 4.00 50.00 183
23 TANA RIVER 4.43 4.14 3.71 5.29 5.00 5.29 4.00 5.71 5.57 3.86 47.00 207
2.4 Relationship between active parental participation and
student outcomes
The table above validates the existing causal relationship between active parental participation
towards the SRC project and overall student outcomes. Counties which recorded high ratings in
parental responsibility also performed better during the 2013 K.C.P.E. Where parental responsibility
was above average there was a significant difference of 11 units (249 minus 238) out of a total of 500
units possible in the final national exam. There is therefore a strong correlation between assertive
parental responsibility and high learning outcomes. This data suggests that the more we as parents
involve ourselves in mechanical processes designed to facilitate the education of our children, then
the more successful the children will be in institutions of learning such as primary schools.

2.5 Relationship between SRC ratings and K.C.P.E
Pearson correlation theory was employed to establish the relationship between SRC ratings and
the K.C.P.E results for 2013. The graph below shows a moderate score of 0.5 indicating that SRC
overall ratings are moderately correlated to K.C.P.E outcomes. However, as illustrated by the graph
below, SRC category 1 ‘school safety and protection’ (0.71 score) is strongly linked to K.C.P.E results
meaning this category is paramount to the performance of students during K.C.P.E.
Similarly, SRC category 2 (School Facilities) at (0.59 score) and category 9 (Homework assignment
and marking) at (0.50 score) are significantly related to K.C.P.E results.
Figure 1 - Parsons Correlation between SRC ratings with KCPE 2013
Equation 1 – KEY - Correlation explained
Coefficient, r
Strength of Association Positive Negative
Small .1 to .3 -0.1 to -0.3
Medium .3 to .5 -0.3 to -0.5
Large .5 to 1.0 -0.5 to -1.0

2.6 SRC Rankings – Top 5 Counties by SRC Category
Kirinyaga County in Central Region led in 9 of the 10 SRC categories; Makueni County with an
average rating of 7.15/10.00 was the best rated County in Category 10 ‘Parental Responsibility’ as
shown in the breakdown below in Tables 13 - 19.
COUNTY
SRC - 1
“School Safety and
Protection”
KIRINYAGA 7.41
MAKUENI 7.00
BUNG'OMA 6.75
VIHIGA 6.75
NYERI 6.73
COUNTY
SRC - 2
“School Facilities”
KIRINYAGA 7.13
NYERI 6.64
KAJIADO 6.63
BARINGO 6.58
BUNG'OMA 6.47
COUNTY
SRC - 3
“Access to Textbooks”
KIRINYAGA 7.15
BARINGO 6.85
NYERI 6.81
GARISSA 6.61
KISII 6.52
COUNTY
SRC - 4
“Continuous
Assessment”
KIRINYAGA 7.61
NYERI 7.23
KAJIADO 6.94
MAKUENI 6.93
NYANDARUA 6.75
Table 13 - Top 5 Counties (SRC Category 1) Table 14 - Top 5 Counties (SRC Category 2)
COUNTY
SRC - 5
“Water and Sanitation”
KIRINYAGA 6.81
MAKUENI 6.41
GARISSA 6.39
NYERI 6.34
KAJIADO 6.25
COUNTY
SRC - 6
“Roles of Children at the
School”
KIRINYAGA 7.67
VIHIGA 7.33
NYERI 7.25
BUNG'OMA 7.12
GARISSA 7.00

COUNTY
SRC - 7
“The Management of
Instructional Materials”
KIRINYAGA 7.16
BARINGO 6.86
NYERI 6.76
BUNG'OMA 6.67
GARISSA 6.56
COUNTY
SRC - 8
“Performance of the
School Management
Committee”
KIRINYAGA 7.34
VIHIGA 6.94
BUNG'OMA 6.88
GARISSA 6.83
NAKURU 6.78
COUNTY
SRC - 9
“Homework Assignment
and Marking”
KIRINYAGA 7.20
NYERI 7.14
MAKUENI 6.63
NYANDARUA 6.51
GARISSA 6.39
COUNTY
SRC - 10
“Parental Responsibility”
MAKUENI 7.15
KIRINYAGA 6.57
NYERI 6.30
GARISSA 6.06
KITUI 5.75
2.7 SRC Rankings - Worst rated Counties by SRC Category
Mandera and Tana River counties received bottom ratings in 9 out of the 10 SRC categories; Kilifi
County was listed as the poorest in the performance of the school management committee (SRC
category – 8).
This is due to a multitude of factors that bedevil school in these Counties. Some of these factors
include amongst others unfavorable climatic conditions, heightened tension and insecurity related to
ethnic conflict, long periods of draught and consequently poor availability of water.
Mandera County performed poorly in school safety and protection indicating that this county is highly
insecure as illustrated in table 23- 32 below.

COUNTY
SRC - 1
“School Safety and
Protection”
MANDERA 4.00
TANA RIVER 4.43
KITUI 5.68
KILIFI 5.70
KWALE 5.86
COUNTY
SRC - 2
“School Facilities”
MANDERA 3.50
TANA RIVER 4.14
KAKAMEGA 5.05
KITUI 5.52
HOMA BAY 5.70
COUNTY
SRC - 3
“Access to Textbooks”
TANA RIVER 3.71
VIHIGA 4.20
KAKAMEGA 4.36
MANDERA 5.00
KILIFI 5.48
COUNTY
SRC - 4
“Continuous
Assessment”
TANA RIVER 5.29
KAKAMEGA 5.41
VIHIGA 5.65
ELGEYO/MARAKWET 5.80
MANDERA 6.00
Table 23 - Worst 5 Counties (SRC Category 1) Table 24 - Worst 5 Counties (SRC Category 2)
COUNTY
SRC - 5
“Water and Sanitation”
MANDERA 4.50
TANA RIVER 5.00
KAKAMEGA 5.13
KILIFI 5.55
MARSABIT 5.57
COUNTY
SRC - 6
“Roles of Children at the
School”
TANA RIVER 5.29
KITUI 5.86
MANDERA 6.00
HOMA BAY 6.34
ELGEYO/MARAKWET 6.36
COUNTY
SRC - 7
“The Management of
Instructional Materials”
TANA RIVER 4.00
KAKAMEGA 5.22
KITUI 5.65
MARSABIT 5.79
KISUMU 6.05
COUNTY
SRC - 8
“Performance of the
School Management
Committee”
KILIFI 5.59
KITUI 5.68
TANA RIVER 5.71
HOMA BAY 5.84
KAKAMEGA 5.88

COUNTY
SRC - 9
“Homework Assignment
and Marking”
MANDERA 4.00
KAKAMEGA 5.20
KILIFI 5.42
TANA RIVER 5.57
KWALE 5.59
COUNTY
SRC - 10
“Parental Responsibility”
TANA RIVER 3.86
MANDERA 4.00
KAKAMEGA 4.18
KILIFI 4.71
VIHIGA 4.91

PART B - NTA’s INDICATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR SCHOOL ANNUAL
BASELINE DATA
3 School participation indicators
3.1 Pupil Enrolment
Pupil enrolment in primary schools has continued to increase since introduction of free primary
education by the Kenyan government in 2003. According to the MOEST, total pupil enrolment in
grades 1 to 8 increased from 6.06 million in 2002 to 8.9 million in 2013. Gross Enrolment Ratio at
primary level increased from 93% in 2002 to 107.6% in 2007. The national NER estimate for 2007
was 91.6%, of which 94.1% were boys and 89.0% girls.
The graph below shows the enrolment figures for the schools sampled during the NTA’s Indicative
Framework for School Annual Baseline Data. There is an increasing trend in pupil enrolment from
2009 to 2013. Encouragingly in line with the MDG no. 3, more girls compared to boys were enrolled
between 2012 and 2013. This is in line with the efforts carried out by DFID, Government of Kenya,
County Governments and communities in advocating for Girl Child education.
Figure 2 - Pupil Enrolment from between 2009 to 2013
3.2 Pupil dropout rates
The most challenging aspect in primary school education since independence has been the high
dropout incidence after initial child enrolment. As part of its program, NTA continue to encourage
parents to follow up on their children through school system to completion with the goal of improving
primary school completion ratio. Baseline data collected indicates a descending trend in child dropouts
from between 2009 to 2013. However, the overall drop-out rate from the school system (from Grades
1 to 8) in 2013 was 3%, and as shown below, dropout incidences are higher amongst boys compared
to girls.

Figure 3 - Dropout rate (YEAR 2009 - 2013)
As shown in the graph above, the number of girls and boys dropping out of school is reducing;
however, most children (both boys and girls) drop-out of school at upper primary classes - between
grade 4 and grade 7 as indicated in the graph below.
Figure 4 - Drop-out rate by Grade: 2009/2013

3.2.1 Impact of SRC in curbing dropouts
Ensuring uninterrupted education throughout all education levels is one of the fundamentals of the
SRC project. The programmes tasks parents to take an active role in ensuring that children attain
minimum secondary education level. This report shows a remarkable reduction in the number of
children dropping out of primary school. From between 2010 to 2011, the number of children who
had dropped out of school was 52,237 compared to 48, 643 between 2012 and 2013 representing a
drop of 7 per cent. As indicated in the graph below, this achievement is higher amongst the girls (7.5
per cent) in comparison to boys (6.4 per cent).
Figure 5 - Total dropouts [Before SRC vs After SRC]
Table 33 - Dropout incidence grade 1-8 - Girls
Number of girls who dropped out from mainstream education Grade %
of dropoutsCLASS YEAR 2009 YEAR 2010 YEAR 2011 YEAR 2012 YEAR 2013
Standard 1 1476 1335 1291 1212 1118 11.5%
Standard 2 1540 1333 1212 1181 1109 11.4%
Standard 3 1520 1361 1322 1324 1268 12.1%
Standard 4 1611 1505 1408 1518 1313 13.2%
Standard 5 1745 1562 1591 1544 1322 13.9%
Standard 6 1820 1703 1684 1646 1467 14.9%
Standard 7 2103 1901 1883 1908 1599 16.8%
Standard 8 699 706 752 691 648 6.3%
Total 12514 11406 11143 11024 9844 100.0%

Table 34 - Dropout incidence grade 1-8 - Boys
Number of boys who dropped out from mainstream education Grade %
of dropoutsCLASS YEAR 2009 YEAR 2010 YEAR 2011 YEAR 2012 YEAR 2013
Standard 1 1895 1904 1623 1605 1608 11.9%
Standard 2 1782 1909 1752 1739 1632 12.2%
Standard 3 1934 1825 1813 1882 1752 12.7%
Standard 4 1931 1912 1905 1908 1819 13.1%
Standard 5 2044 2034 1913 1994 1793 13.5%
Standard 6 2153 2140 2096 2085 1716 14.1%
Standard 7 2226 2292 2283 2226 1853 15.0%
Standard 8 996 1155 1132 1126 1037 7.5%
Total 14961 15171 14517 14565 13210 100.0%
3.2.2 Dropout Rate for boys at the County level
With a dropout incidence of 17 per cent, Taita Taveta County ratios are much higher than the National
average of 3 per cent. To compound this, most of these dropouts occurred in Grade 8 (19 per cent).
Literature review point towards a bilateral rationale that explains this undesirable situation; 1) the
robust campaign focusing on girl child education which as a result pay minimal or no attention to boys
and 2) mining (Iron ore and Gem stone) in the County which lures school-aged boys to the mines
for money and 3) ranches in the County which employ boys as herd boys. Previous studies also
uncovered the high teacher absenteeism ratio in the same county and this habit (teacher skiving) has
a direct impact on the prospects of any child completing primary education.
Elgeyo/ Marakwet (0.3 per cent) and Kajiado (0.7 per cent) counties recorded the lowest dropout
ratio for boys amongst the counties studied. The low dropout rate in Kajiado County can be explained
by its proximity to Nairobi City County and the fact that majority of Kajiado families eke their
livelihood from Nairobi (“Nairobians” living in Kajiado) thus are highly influenced by the interaction
with the residents of Nairobi.
Cross analysis at the school level shows that NDOME Primary School in Taita Taveta County recorded
the highest dropout rate (31 per cent) amongst boys where a third dropped out in 2013; in comparison
CHEPKOGIN Primary School in Elgeyo-Marakwet County recorded the highest dropout rate of 2 per
cent amongst the County with the lowest drop-out rate.
The ranked table below also shows dropout incidences from Grade 1 to 8 disaggregated by the
counties studied.

Table 35 - Boys dropout ratio disaggregated by County
COUNTY Mean Grade1 Grade2 Grade3 Grade4 Grade5 Grade6 Grade7 Grade8
TAITA TAVETA 17.3% 16.5% 16.8% 17.3% 16.5% 17.4% 17.6% 17.5% 19.2%
KISUMU 5.7% 5.5% 5.9% 5.4% 6.1% 6.7% 5.8% 5.6% 4.3%
KISII 4.7% 4.8% 4.7% 4.7% 4.1% 4.9% 5.6% 6.0% 3.0%
HOMA BAY 3.9% 4.0% 3.7% 4.2% 3.9% 3.6% 4.5% 4.6% 2.7%
KWALE 3.6% 2.8% 3.7% 3.8% 3.9% 4.3% 4.2% 3.9% 1.9%
KITUI 3.0% 2.7% 2.6% 2.7% 2.8% 3.1% 3.7% 3.8% 2.3%
VIHIGA 2.8% 1.9% 2.5% 2.7% 2.7% 3.1% 3.8% 4.1% 1.8%
KILIFI 2.8% 2.0% 2.3% 3.0% 2.9% 3.0% 3.2% 2.6% 3.3%
KAKAMEGA 2.5% 1.6% 2.2% 2.1% 2.3% 2.9% 2.8% 4.2% 2.0%
BARINGO 2.4% 1.9% 1.8% 2.1% 2.2% 2.8% 3.5% 4.3% 0.7%
MARSABIT 2.4% 2.6% 3.0% 2.8% 2.7% 2.7% 2.3% 2.4% 0.7%
NAKURU 2.1% 1.1% 1.5% 1.8% 2.1% 2.4% 2.7% 3.2% 2.2%
NYANDARUA 2.0% 1.6% 1.3% 1.7% 2.0% 2.1% 2.6% 3.1% 1.4%
BUNG'OMA 2.0% 1.7% 1.8% 1.7% 2.0% 2.2% 2.4% 2.7% 1.2%
NYERI 1.7% 2.0% 1.7% 2.0% 1.5% 1.8% 2.1% 1.9% 0.6%
KIRINYAGA 1.7% 1.7% 1.8% 1.4% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 2.5% 0.8%
GARISSA 1.2% 1.4% 1.1% 1.2% 1.4% 1.7% 1.5% 0.9% 0.5%
KAJIADO 0.7% 1.0% 1.1% 0.7% 0.9% 0.3% 0.3% 1.4% 0.1%
ELGEYO/M-WET 0.3% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% 1.0% 0.2%
3.2.3 Dropout Rate for girls at the County level
The dropout ratios for girls at the county level are parallel to those of boys in all the Counties but
Taita Taveta which had a 2 per cent drop out incidence for girls in comparison to boys 17 per cent
over the same period.
All the 3 counties sampled from the former Nyanza region topped the dropout rate for girls, suggesting
a serious block in the completion of primary education for girls in Nyanza region.
With a dropout rate of 5.5 per cent, Kisumu County was at the top of the list, Kisii County (4.9 per
cent) and Homabay County (4.8%) followed in that order.

Table 36 - Girls dropout ratio disaggregated by County
COUNTY Mean Grade1 Grade2 Grade3 Grade4 Grade5 Grade6 Grade7 Grade8
KISUMU 5.5% 5.1% 4.7% 5.4% 5.9% 6.4% 6.5% 6.5% 3.8%
KISII 4.9% 4.4% 4.0% 4.8% 4.7% 5.0% 5.4% 6.9% 3.8%
HOMA BAY 4.8% 3.8% 3.7% 4.3% 4.8% 5.0% 5.9% 6.9% 4.3%
KWALE 3.9% 3.2% 3.8% 4.3% 3.7% 4.8% 4.7% 4.5% 1.8%
KILIFI 3.1% 2.3% 2.4% 2.8% 2.8% 3.4% 3.9% 4.0% 3.2%
KITUI 3.0% 2.9% 3.0% 2.7% 2.9% 3.2% 3.3% 3.6% 2.7%
VIHIGA 2.8% 2.2% 2.3% 2.6% 2.8% 2.8% 3.6% 4.2% 1.8%
BARINGO 2.8% 3.1% 2.9% 3.2% 2.8% 2.4% 3.2% 3.3% 1.1%
KAKAMEGA 2.7% 1.9% 2.1% 2.3% 2.6% 2.9% 2.9% 4.5% 2.3%
MARSABIT 2.6% 3.2% 3.1% 3.0% 3.1% 2.8% 2.4% 2.6% 0.6%
NAKURU 2.3% 1.1% 1.8% 1.9% 2.5% 2.6% 3.1% 3.0% 2.1%
TAITA TAVETA 2.1% 1.8% 1.9% 2.2% 2.0% 2.7% 2.1% 2.0% 1.5%
GARISSA 2.0% 1.2% 1.7% 1.8% 1.5% 2.1% 2.0% 2.1% 3.6%
BUNG'OMA 2.0% 1.8% 1.4% 1.6% 2.0% 2.1% 2.7% 3.0% 1.3%
NYANDARUA 2.0% 2.0% 1.8% 1.6% 2.0% 2.2% 2.4% 2.7% 1.2%
KIRINYAGA 1.6% 1.5% 1.5% 1.3% 1.7% 1.7% 1.9% 2.2% 1.1%
NYERI 1.4% 1.0% 1.0% 1.2% 1.3% 2.0% 2.1% 2.5% 0.4%
KAJIADO 0.7% 1.1% 0.9% 1.0% 0.9% 0.7% 0.4% 0.8% 0.2%
ELGEYO/M-KWT 0.6% 0.2% 0.0% 0.4% 0.5% 0.2% 0.3% 1.2% 1.7%
3.3 Transition rates
Negating the transition from primary school to work has become a main policy focus in Kenya. Our
greater effort has been to encourage continued education transition across all education levels and
especially transition between primary and secondary level. Transition rate in Kenya’s education system
can be defined as the percentage of Form 1 enrolment in secondary schools to the total number of
pupils who completed Standard 8 the previous year. A low transition rate signifies education wastage,
as most of the pupils who complete one level of education do not proceed to the next. Since 1991,
primary to secondary school transition rate has ranged between 39 and 46 percent. The year 1993
had the lowest transition rate when only 38.40 percent of those who completed grade 8 in 1992
joined Form 1 the following year. During the same period, boys had a higher transition rate than girls.
Data from the NTA’s Indicative Framework for School Annual Baseline Data indicates an improved
transition rate for both boys and girls. Nationally, the number of children completing Class 8 has
risen to over 800,000. However, approximately 30 per cent of primary school pupils fail to transit to
secondary schools because secondary schooling as part of basic education is yet to be actualized. Its
implementation would mean automatic progression. In this regard, it is good to note that the number
of secondary schools rose to 8,197 in the year 2012 from 7,297 in 2011, a 12 per cent change vis-
à-vis more than 20,404 primary schools in Kenya.

3.4 Student absenteeism
Students need to attend school daily to succeed. According to Park & Kerr (1990), research
demonstrates that the lack of attendance was statistically significant in explaining why a student
received a poor grade. Kenya’s education system is based on the assumption that barring illness or
an extraordinary event, students are in class every weekday. Compulsory education laws back up
this assumption. So strong is this assumption that pupil absenteeism has never been compressively
measured. Because it is not measured, chronic absenteeism is not acted upon. Like bacteria in a
hospital, chronic absenteeism can wreak havoc long before it is discovered. Chronic absenteeism
is not the same as truancy or average daily attendance. Chronic absenteeism means missing 10
percent of a school year for any reason.
This report shows that student absenteeism in Kenya Public Primary schools is on the rise. The
total number of student absences in the year 2009 was 685,755 compared to 992,114 in 2013
representing a 30 per increase in student absences as indicated in the graph below. This could as
well be a pointer amongst other factors to the fact that out of the 839,759 pupil who sat for KCPE
exam in the year 2013, only 467,353 pupils scored above the mean average of 250 marks that will
guarantee transition into secondary school.
Student absenteeism is slightly skewed towards boys than girls.
Figure 6 - Total absences from between 2009 - 2013

3.5 Annual mean scores
Most parents maintain their focus on what grades their children bring home and pay less attention
on how much their child is learning, or how good the quality of their learning experience is. Some
parents reward children for good grades, ascribing a monetary value to each good letter, or taking
away privileges for each bad one. For many families, ‘the grade is the goal’. This report shows a
relationship between low grades and dropout i.e. some children drop out of school because they are
deemed as a letdown by their peers, parents or community or do not see the need of pursuing the
intellectual path. Eventually we ask ourselves as parents, educationalists, researchers - What effect
does handing out grades have upon the student when it comes to motivation and learning outcomes?
We can look at three consistent effects of giving students grades – or leading them to focus on what
grade they’ll get. First, their interest in the learning itself is diminished. Second, they come to prefer
easier tasks – not because they’re lazy, but because they’re rational. After all, if the point is to get an
A, your odds are better if you avoid taking intellectual risks. Third, students tend to think in a more
superficial manner – and to forget what they learned more quickly – when grades are involved. To put
it positively, our hypothesis is students who are lucky enough to be in schools (or classrooms) where
they don’t get letter or number grades are more likely to want to continue exploring whatever they’re
learning, more likely to want to challenge themselves, and more likely to think deeply.
Thus, to promote education continuity we encourage parents to pay as much attention to how much
their child is learning and how good the quality of their experience is as they do to grades. It is
important that teachers practice and give priority to qualitative evaluations so as to make students
become more enthusiastic and proficient learners rather than to sort children (deciding who’s beating
whom).
We want students to “experience success and failure not as reward and punishment, but as
information - Jerome Bruner.”
3.5.1 Educational outcomes from 2009 to 2012
There is a noteworthy improvement trend in the primary school education outcomes over the last
3 years in the 18 Counties sampled for both girls and boys from grade 1 to 8 as shown in the
graph below. However, grade performances continue to descend as children progress up the grades
especially from grade 4 where the drop is highest – by 5.06 points. We have already seen a dropout
pattern from upper primary – how many of these children drop out simply because their parents
feel they are inadequate in class? The drop in performance cited from upper primary can also be
explained by the poor adjustment to a broader curriculum, learning the whole day, many different
teachers some of whom they do not connect with and a larger problem of transition from lower classes
to upper classes that comes with the shocks of adjustment to intensive and extensive learning.

Figure 7 - Educational outcomes [Grade 1-8]
3.5.2 Educational outcomes at county level
In this section school heads indicated the mean scores for their end of term exam for every subject
and by grade category from between 2009 to 2013. Analysis of this data at the county level positions
Kirinyaga County above the sampled counties with a mean grade of 49.67 out of a possible 100 for
Grade 8 pupils.
These analyses also reveal a certain drop in educational attainments from grade 4 onwards in most
counties. Notably, some of these counties recorded a drop of 2 points or more from grade 5 onwards,
namely; Nakuru, Kitui, Kisii, Nyandarua, Kajiado, Homabay and Kajiado.

Table 37 - Educational outcomes [Grade 1 to 8] - 2009 - 2013
COUNTY GRADE1 GRADE2 GRADE3 GRADE4 GRADE5 GRADE6 GRADE7 GRADE8
MEAN 50.45 51.52 51.01 45.95 46.00 46.15 46.82 49.67
KIRINYAGA 39.23 39.97 40.89 49.55 49.25 48.79 48.55 52.41
BARINGO 58.13 57.58 57.18 44.97 46.44 47.88 49.22 52.05
VIHIGA 46.62 48.86 48.24 44.11 44.94 45.58 47.17 51.38
HOMA BAY 59.64 60.16 59.16 49.14 48.98 48.82 49.25 50.69
KAJIADO 59.08 63.25 61.54 48.15 50.46 50.42 49.76 50.54
KISUMU 49.97 51.19 51.04 43.99 44.69 45.95 46.89 50.27
TAITA TAVETA 49.97 50.55 50.07 48.15 47.86 47.37 47.29 50.02
KAKAMEGA 50.03 51.38 50.51 43.48 43.59 45.22 45.66 49.97
KILIFI 54.95 56.18 56.12 48.76 47.98 47.27 47.49 49.49
BUNG'OMA 46.36 47.12 46.91 44.56 44.46 44.68 46.16 49.26
KITUI 51.51 52.88 52.05 42.99 43.4 44.38 46.03 49.15
KWALE 47.91 48.91 48.48 46.76 46.58 46.53 46.53 49.11
ELGEYO/MKWT 47.00 47.25 46.65 42.87 43.75 44.67 46.68 49.05
KISII 59.10 59.63 58.63 47.19 47.14 46.52 46.72 48.96
MARSABIT 54.21 57.5 56.22 45.9 46.64 46.84 48.29 48.83
NYANDARUA 54.07 54.98 53.87 45.09 44.92 45.08 45.50 48.62
NAKURU 61.46 62.00 61.27 47.4 46.96 46.16 46.43 47.62
GARISSA 57.19 57.77 55.95 50.39 47.65 46.34 46.63 47.41
NYERI 27.49 28.66 30.18 46.38 45.82 44.82 45.08 46.73
3.6 Total Number of school facilities constructed
The school environment plays a pivotal role in the retention of children in education system and
learning outcomes. Availability of proper facilities is a pre-requisite for creating a healthy environment
in a school. Provision of sanitation and water facilities contributes to the creation of a conducive
environment for children in the school.
3.6.1 Sanitation
Previous research studies state that availability of toilets in the school increases enrollment . At
younger ages, girls and boys both benefit from a latrine regardless of whether it is unisex or sex
specific; at older ages however; separate latrines become crucial especially amongst girls. Our
endeavor has seen the number of toilets increase from 23,929 toilets in 2012 to 25,539 toilets
in 2013 representing an increase of 6.7%. Parity was observed in the sampled counties in the
construction of toilets for girl, boys and school staff as indicated in the graph below.

Figure 8 - Number of toilets from 2009 to 2013
However, despite the increased number of toilets for both boys and girls students are still disadvantaged
as data from these schools indicate that 51 boys are sharing 1 toilet, while 45 girls share 1 toilet. This
is contrary to MOEST policy which dictates that for every 23 girls there should be 1 toilet and 1 for 27
boys. A paltry 4 counties (Nandi, Kirinyaga, Nyeri and Elgeyo/Marakwet) met this obligation for boys
and for girls 3 counties (Kirinyaga, Nyeri and Elgeyo/Marakwet) made the cut.
National viewpoint reveals that most of these schools fall short of the MoEST policy with just about
38 per cent of these schools having adequate toilets for both boys and girls.
Table 38 - Number of pupils sharing 1 toilet (Toilet ratio)
BOYS GIRLS
National 51 45
Garissa 96 68
Tana River 84 68
Kilifi 64 62
Kitui 67 59
Bung'oma 56 59
Homa Bay 57 54
Mandera 67 44
Kisumu 58 49
Kajiado 56 50
Kakamega 55 45
Nyandarua 48 43
BOYS GIRLS
National 51 45
Kwale 48 43
Taita Taveta 50 40
Kisii 44 41
Baringo 42 41
Nakuru 48 34
Vihiga 40 34
Marsabit 30 24
Nandi 27 25
Kirinyaga 26 20
Nyeri 23 16
Elgeyo/Marakwet 19 15

3.6.2 Water
Ensuring that students have access to safe, free drinking water throughout the school day is
encompassed in NTAs initiatives to create a school environment that supports health and learning.
Providing access to safe drinking water helps to increase students’ overall water consumption and
maintain good hydration. Besides quenching thirst, access to safe, drinking water contributes to
proper hygiene as children are assured of water to clean their hands consequently reducing risks of
infections related with poor hygiene and this will ensure that children will be in class and not away
from school due to hygiene related illnesses. There has been a 9 per cent increase in access to free
and safe water in the schools sampled from the year 2009 to 2013. Moreover, 66 per cent of these
schools now have access to safe water (Piped and/or stored) in comparison to 57 per cent in 2009;
of which 20 per cent is tapped water as demonstrated in the graph below.
Figure 9 – Supply [Access to piped water]
Figure 10 - Access to water [Supply & Stored]
YEAR 2009 YEAR 2010 YEAR 2011 YEAR 2012 YEAR 2013
Supply [Tapped/ Piped] 15.5% 16.2% 17.0% 17.8% 19.6%
Storage [Water tank] 41.1% 41.8% 43.5% 45.3% 46.2%
None – No clean water 43.4% 42.0% 39.6% 36.9% 34.2%
3.6.3 Relationship between availability of water in the school
and uninterrupted student attendance
In trying to understand the reason behind student absenteeism, we tested incidences of student
absenteeism against availability of water. We theorized that high absenteeism is linked to unavailability
of water. Indeed, schools that did not have tapped / piped water from between the year 2009 and
2013 accrued 72 per cent of all student absences as shown in the graph below. As earlier mentioned,
water is the basic requirement in ensuring proper health. Lack of water would mean our children
will fall ill quite often due to disease associated with poor hygiene and consequently accrue many
sick days. From this data, it is quite evident that our schools need water as an assurance of regular

student class attendance.
Figure 11 - Total absences disaggregated by availability of tapped water
3.7 Numbers of teachers
There is an increasing trend in the number of teachers enlisted in public primary schools. The number
of male teachers increased from 9,256 in 2010 to 9,855 in 2013 representing a 6 per cent increase,
while females increased from 9,523 in 2010 to 10,244 in 2013 representing a 7 per cent increase).
Figure 12 - Number of teachers from between 2010 to 2013

3.7.1 Teacher-Pupil Ratio
The teacher-pupil ratio measures the number of students per teacher. It reflects teacher workload
and the availability of teachers’ services to their students. The lower the teacher-pupil ratio, the
higher the availability of teacher services to students. The teacher-pupil ratio has implications not
only for the cost of education, but also for the quality. In crowded classrooms with a high number of
pupils per teacher the quality of education suffers. It is difficult for pupils to follow the course and
teachers can dedicate less time to the needs of each individual student.
The teacher-pupil ratio is not the same as class size, however the relationship between these two
measures of teacher workload is affected by a variety of factors, including the number of classes for
which a teacher is responsible and the number of classes taken by the pupil.
According to this data, the average class size is pegged at 40 pupils. However, majority of our
classrooms (45 per cent) had over 40 pupils in each class in the year 2013; 41 per cent had between
20-40 pupils and only 14 per cent below 20 pupils. Though the MOEST standards peg the classroom
size at 45, this is contrary to international standards which dictate for an average class size of 35
pupils.
Figure 13 – The number of pupils in classes [2013]

3.7.2 Hypothesis test: Relationship between teacher: pupil
ratio and learning outcomes
Pupils seemingly are not adversely affected by classroom occupancy when it comes to their K.C.P.E
performance especially boys. However, girls are performing better in less populated classrooms.
Significantly the K.C.P.E improvement trend is greater in classrooms with lesser population than the
reverse as shown in the table below.
Table 39 - Teacher: Pupil ratio vs K.C.P.E Outcomes
Teacher-
Pupil ratio
3 year
Average
2009 2010 2011 2012
Points
improvement
(2012 from
2009)
BOYS GIRLS BOYS GIRLS BOYS GIRLS BOYS GIRLS BOYS GIRLS BOYS GIRLS
1:20 and< 230 227 224 218 224 218 221 220 230 227 6.54 9.64
1:21-40 233 234 230 225 229 225 227 224 233 234 2.46 9.60
1: 41 + 235 226 229 224 227 220 228 222 235 226 5.37 2.39
Total 233 230 229 223 227 222 227 223 233 230 4.28 6.32
3.8 School development plan
School Improvement Programmes (SIP) is meant to strengthen the quality of teaching and plan
for resources in schools. Teachers benefit from the training workshops and resource centres set up
under these programmes. SIPs are helping teachers to teach more creatively and children to learn
faster through the introduction of child-centred activities. They involve working hand in hand with
governments while involving parents and communities in management in order to make schools
more efficient, effective and sustainable.
Favorably majority of these schools (94 per cent) had a school SDP/SIP. However, as shown in the
table below, schools sampled from Mandera County did not have SDP/SIP while all the schools in
Kajiado, Marsabit and Tana River counties had SDP/SIP

Table 40 - Proportions of schools that had SDP/SIP
COUNTY
SCHOOL HAVE SDP/SIP
TOTAL
YES NO SDP/SIP
BARINGO 90.9% 9.1% 100.0%
BUNG'OMA 93.6% 6.4% 100.0%
ELGEYO/MARAKWET 60.0% 40.0% 100.0%
GARISSA 75.0% 25.0% 100.0%
HOMA BAY 98.1% 1.9% 100.0%
KAJIADO 100.0% - 100.0%
KAKAMEGA 89.5% 10.5% 100.0%
KILIFI 95.2% 4.8% 100.0%
KIRINYAGA 95.7% 4.3% 100.0%
KISII 91.8% 8.2% 100.0%
KISUMU 94.1% 5.9% 100.0%
KITUI 95.8% 4.2% 100.0%
KWALE 93.3% 6.7% 100.0%
MANDERA - 100.0% 100.0%
MARSABIT 100.0% 100.0%
NAKURU 95.6% 4.4% 100.0%
NANDI 100.0% 100.0%
NYANDARUA 94.2% 5.8% 100.0%
NYERI 87.5% 12.5% 100.0%
TAITA TAVETA 91.1% 8.9% 100.0%
TANA RIVER 100.0% - 100.0%
VIHIGA 96.1% 3.9% 100.0%
Total 93.7% 6.3% 100.0%

3.8.1 Relationship between un/availability of SDP/SIP and
K.C.P.E outcomes
This data indicates a strong relationship between availability of SDP/ SIP in the schools programmes
and improved K.C.P.E performance. As shown in the table below, both boys and girls from schools
with SDP/SIP programmes performed considerably better than their counterparts emanating from
schools without SDP/SIP.

Table 41 - Relationship between un/availability of SDP/SIP and K.C.P.E outcomes
BOYS K.C.P.E SCORES 2012 GIRLS K.C.P.E SCORES 2012
YES school has SDP/ SIP 236.22 231.19
No SDP/SIP 228.21 223.43
Total 235.75 230.73
Variation 8.01 7.76
3.9 Proportions of schools that had enrolled physically challenged
pupils
Half of these schools (51 per cent) had pupils who had physical challenges. On average these schools
had enrolled 10 children with physical challenges which represent 1 per cent of all enrolled pupils
nationally. Significantly, all sampled counties reported having children with physical difficulties.
However, from the educational point of view, not all pupils with physical disabilities require special
school provisions. There may be variations in duration or severity among physical disabilities. In
other words, the handicapping conditions may be temporary or permanent and mild or severe.
Physically handicapped children may be multiply handicapped with; mental handicap, visual or
hearing impairment.
While it is well articulated in the constitution of Kenya as entitlement by persons with disability,
pupils who are physically challenged in most of these schools face surmounting challenges like;
classrooms, desks and toilets that are not friendly to person’s with physical disability. The situation
is even worrying when it comes to competing with their ordinary colleagues because of limited or
lack of access to materials and devices to overcome constraints arising from the person’s disability.

Table 42 - Proportions of schools with physically challenged pupils
COUNTY
Percentage of
pupils with physical
challenges
Number of physically challenged
Total Average/ school
BARINGO 0.4% 65 4.64
BUNG'OMA 1.3% 1173 12.22
ELGEYO/MARAKWET 0.4% 7 2.33
GARISSA 1.4% 203 15.62
HOMA BAY 1.7% 696 7.82
KAJIADO 0.3% 27 3.86
KAKAMEGA 2.0% 1015 16.37
KILIFI 2.6% 1042 20.84
KIRINYAGA 0.6% 226 5.26
KISII 2.7% 1203 17.43
KISUMU 2.1% 827 11.99
KITUI 0.8% 797 6.33
KWALE 0.6% 294 4.90
MANDERA 1.6% 10 10.00
MARSABIT 0.7% 46 7.67
NAKURU 0.5% 213 5.92
NANDI 0.2% 7 3.50
NYANDARUA 1.0% 826 9.60
NYERI 0.7% 157 3.92
TAITA TAVETA 1.2% 592 8.84
TANA RIVER 0.3% 11 2.20
VIHIGA 0.8% 494 5.55
Total 1.2% 9931 9.61

4 Perceptions pertaining FPE grant amount – KES 1,020
The cost of living in Kenya has doubled over the last 10 years and accordingly, the cost of running
schools which must now be different from what it was when the FPE Programme launched back in
2003.
All the schools sampled excluding one, lamented that the FPE grant of KES 1,020 per child per year
was insufficient.
4.1 Received proposals from schools on sufficient FPE amount
A third of these schools felt that KES 3,000 per child would suffice in the proper running of schools.
The highest proposal received was KES 15,000 per child, which was mentioned by 5 schools; and the
lowest was KES 2,000 which is nearly 100% of the current FPE grant as illustrated in the table below.
Table 43 - Proposed FPE Grant
Statistic Description Proposals in KES
Mean Average amount 3,384.78
Median Middle value in the list of figures proposed 3,000.00
Mode Most occurring figure 3,000.00
Range Difference between the largest and smallest values 13,000.00
Minimum Lowest figure proposed 2,000.00
Maximum Highest figure proposed 15,000.00
4.2 County analysis
With an average of KES 3,712 per child, FPE grant proposals received from schools from Kisumu
County were the highest followed by Kwale (KES 3,676) and Vihiga (KES 3,650) in that order. While
the lowest average proposals per school was received from Baringo County at (KES 2,579).
Table 44 - Proposed FPE Grant at county level
COUNTY
PROPOSED FPE GRANT
[MEAN – KES ]
KISUMU 3,712
KWALE 3,676
VIHIGA 3,650
KIRINYAGA 3,646
KISII 3,629
KAKAMEGA 3,536
KILIFI 3,534
HOMA BAY 3,466
MARSABIT 3,458
NYANDARUA 3,389
NYERI 3,364
COUNTY
PROPOSED FPE GRANT
[MEAN – KES ]
TAITA TAVETA 3,295
BUNG'OMA 3,281
NAKURU 3,244
ELGEYO/MARAKWET 3,183
KAJIADO 3,083
NANDI 3,055
GARISSA 3,046
KITUI 3,014
MANDERA 3,000
TANA RIVER 2,917
BARINGO 2,579
Total 3,385

5 Conclusions
This report has demonstrated the significance of the School Report Card Project in enhancing the
relationship amongst pupils, teachers and parents. This unison is proving vital in the successful
management and administration of schools, holistic pupil performance and general well-being of
pupil that is ultimately bringing out better learning outcomes as cited in the gradual improvements
of student performance in all grades over the last 4 years.
The School Report Card has envisioned the immense positive impact of hands-on parental inclusion
in improving quality of education in the schools and consequently learning outcomes for children. In
this regard, it is indeed encouraging to see that parents are motivated and this is manifested by the
gradual but steady increase in the number of participating parents and improved self-ratings for SRC
by parents themselves.
The causal relationship cited in the last phase of this project between practical parental inclusion and
better student outcomes is now more ostensible, meaning that this hypothesis is no longer a theory
but indeed factual. Since parents are apparently playing a pivotal role in this exercise it is crucial that
we continue apportioning them the necessary support in an attempt to encourage them to participate
more in the education of children as dictated by the new Basic education Act.
This report shows a variation of issues affecting different counties in different ways. For instance
the high dropout in Taita Taveta county amongst boys whereas the same is not widespread amongst
the girl child. Similarly, this report has outlined relationships between SRC categories and K.C.P.E
outcomes. According to this report SRC category 1 ‘school safety and protection’ with 0.71 Pearsons
correlation score is strongly linked to K.C.P.E results meaning this category is principal to the
performance of students during K.C.P.E at a National level. However, devolution has given forth to
county governments and each county must adopt its own priorities in improving education in each
county.
Last but not least, it is good to point out that there were improvements across the board at the
national level and this is down to the greater efforts and diverse intervention of all the education
stakeholders to whom we applaud and encourage not be daunted but keep the spirit going stronger
and stronger.

6 Recommendations
1. SRC processes must embrace local dialects
A formal review of the collected SRC forms completed by parents articulates that some parents
especially from rural set-ups are not fully conversant with the SRC project. These parents probably
find the project to be too intellectual and may be inadequate to be involved and thus shun the whole
exercise. This is exemplified by the high incidence of absentee parents after the initial meeting to train
and recruit SRC committee members. It is therefore commendable that local ways of communication
are adopted at the community level by for example translating the SRC to Kiswahili going forward,
especial in rural set-ups. This approach would in most cases improve the number of parents engaged
with the SRC project and catapult their participation.
2. Launch media campaigns to supplement SRC awareness
The success stories in this project are centered on parental inclusion in the education of children.
That is, the more parents are involved in this regard, the better the results we can expect both at the
administrative level and the learning outcomes. We therefore must reach out to more parents and
the entire school community inorder to encourage them to fully participate in the education of the
children through this enterprise (or individually) by use of available media vehicles and tools.
3. Measure and address student absenteeism
As revealed in this report, absenteeism is on the rise in most counties. Pupil school attendance
on a regular basis matters. It matters the most for the most vulnerable students who live in or
near poverty. A number of students are currently missing far too much lesson time, with multiple
detrimental effects. Disturbingly, chronic absenteeism is the first indicator of eventual child dropout.
A major reason this occurs, is because few schools routinely measure absenteeism. Because chronic
absenteeism is not measured, it cannot be monitored or acted upon. The good news is, if we do
measure and monitor absenteeism, there is quite a bit that can be done to improve it with existing
resources. Thus, as a nation we must act in a bid to ensuring that our students are ready, willing and
able to attend school every day. One way to promote unwavering school pupil attendance is awarding
incentives (points) for regular attendance. For instance, the maximum pass mark for pupils in school
based exams should be pegged at 80 out of a possible 100 whereas a pupil who has been attending
school regularly can additionally be awarded 20 per cent. Their future, and hence our future, depends
on it.
4. County Education Board should embrace this report on a national scale and
county level
This report reveals the divergence of issues affecting schools at the county level and especially
variation between boys and girls. It is therefore best suited if counties prioritize and concentrate on
the specific issues that are affecting their respective counties. Only then can we have the opportunity
to exhaustively implement change at the county level and consequently scale the same up to the
national level.
5. Continuance of the SRC vital
The progress and successes outlined in this report are considerably owed to the efforts made by
the School Report Card which has managed to unite all key education stakeholders and provided us
with a tool that can be used towards a common goal. It is therefore imperative that this project is
employed persistently so as to establish long, medium and short-term trends to inform new policy
developments in education at the county level and national level.

For further information, contact;
National Taxpayers Association
Riara Gardens, Off Riara Road,
P.O. Box 4037 - 00506, Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: +254 20 3861813-4 Cell: +254 734 500 940
Email: admin@nta.or.ke
Website: www.nta.or.ke
With Support from:

School report card 2013 Kenya

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à School report card 2013 Kenya

Similaire à School report card 2013 Kenya (20)

Plus de KenyaSchoolReport.com

Plus de KenyaSchoolReport.com (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

School report card 2013 Kenya