The CIDP Review is a highly participatory stakeholder review that happens during political leadership transition between county administrations before or after elections. It forms an important part of the successor/forthcoming CIDP, and typically assesses results achieved against original or revised targets by sector, program and/or project. This assessment is documented in both financial (spending, investments) and non-financial progress (service delivery outputs and outcomes, project completion outputs) terms with successes, challenges and lessons feeding into the successor CIDP.
Linkages
Upstream: CIDP, ADPs, Annual Reports
Downstream: Lessons/Knowledge Base, Inputs to Forthcoming CIDP
Description
Led by County Finance and Economic Planning, the CIDP Review is critical transition process that involves Sector Working Groups, the CBEF and other Stakeholders, including the general public. It involves a two-phase process that typically takes place during the political leadership change from one county administration to the next. The first phase is mainly technical, and involves a financial and non-financial sectoral and programmatic review of results achieved against original (or revised) CIDP targets. This phase might take place at any time during the leadership transition (before or after new leadership is in place). The second phase is both political and technical, and often involves the new county leadership in mapping successes to take forward, lessons learned and challenges to be addressed. The output of this second phase is a comprehensive review which forms an essential part, even an entire chapter, in the successor CIDP. Both phases would use stakeholder and public participation as a means of validation.
For a more detailed description of the CIDP Transition Review process, follow this link: CIDP Transition Review Step by Step Description
|
i
|
A thorough, in-depth final review of the CIDP is extremely important to assess the effectiveness of County Government spending. It is a delicate exercise as it can be easily manipulated politically. It is not a “final evaluation” as it is be carried out while its implementation is still on-going, during the final fiscal year covered by the plan. It is usually done as the first step of the formulation of the following CIDP (after the elections) but it can slow down that process. Ideally, the CIDP Review could be conducted before the elections while ensuring that it is performed by an independent party and safeguarded – to the extent possible – from political manipulation. That would give voters a somehow objective measure of the ability of the current executive to deliver on its promises, possibly contribute realistic expectations towards new “manifestos” and also certainly provide the public and the incoming executive – be it led by a returning or new governor – with a solid starting point in the formulation of the new plan. |
Resources
Laws and Regulations
Guidelines and Tools
Guidelines for the preparation of County Integrated Development Plans (Revised). Ministry of Devolution and Planning (MODP). September 2017
Guidelines for the development of the County Integrated Monitoring and Evaluation System (CIMES). April 2019. Monitoring and Evaluation Department,The National Treasury and Planning State Dept; COG
County Performance Management Framework. Council of Governors, 2017
County Public Participation Guidelines. Ministry of Devolution and Planning (MoDP), Council of Governors (CoG). 2016
