- Under the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution, basic education is listed as a national government function, while counties oversee early childhood education and vocational training.
- Handing over all basic education functions to counties in one sweeping move would be risky and potentially chaotic.
- Pilot projects in select counties could serve as test cases, providing valuable lessons and refinements before the model is rolled out nationwide.
Kenya’s 2010 Constitution ushered in a bold era of devolved governance, bringing services and decision-making closer to the people. In the past decade, counties have taken charge of health, agriculture, early childhood education, and numerous other sectors — often with remarkable results. Yet, one of the most crucial services for the nation’s future — basic education — remains firmly in the grip of the national government.
It is time we asked ourselves a hard question: if devolution was meant to improve efficiency, accountability, and responsiveness, why should the education of millions of Kenyan children remain managed from offices hundreds of kilometres away? Kenya’s master and father of devolution, Rt. Hon. former Prime Minister Raila Amolo Odinga, could not have chosen a better moment to weigh in on the future of governance. His sentiments, delivered during the recent Devolution Conference in Homa Bay, come at a time when the country is grappling with questions about how to make devolved units more effective — and whether it is time to extend devolution to sectors still firmly under national control.
Under the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution, basic education is listed as a national government function, while counties oversee early childhood education and vocational training. The rationale was to safeguard national standards and equity.
However, over the years, centralization has proven to be a double-edged sword. While it allows uniform curriculum and exam standards, it has also entrenched inefficiency, slow decision-making, and a disconnect between policy and reality in the classroom.
Why Devolution Makes Sense
One of the strongest arguments for devolving basic education is that counties are far better placed to allocate resources effectively. Local leaders have an intimate understanding of their communities’ needs. They know which schools require additional classrooms, where water tanks are most urgently needed, and which nomadic populations would benefit from mobile schools. With funding managed locally, allocation can be swift, targeted, and responsive to actual conditions on the ground — not just guided by broad national averages.
Devolution would also bring greater accountability. A governor or county education executive can be directly confronted by parents and community representatives about why a school has no desks or why teachers are chronically absent. Under the current centralized system, such concerns often vanish into the bureaucracy of Nairobi, with no one readily answerable at the local level.
Equally important is the potential for contextualized education policies. Education cannot be treated as a one-size-fits-all service. Counties can adapt teaching to incorporate local languages, cultural heritage, and socio-economic realities while still adhering to national curriculum standards. For example, in arid regions where pastoralist communities migrate seasonally, the school calendar could be adjusted to avoid peak migration periods — a change that would help boost attendance and keep more children in school.
Cost of Centralization
The centralized management of basic education in Kenya has repeatedly revealed its shortcomings, with a series of persistent challenges hampering learning outcomes. One of the most glaring issues is the delayed disbursement of Free Primary Education (FPE) capitation grants. In many cases, these funds arrive months late, forcing schools to halt essential activities, accumulate debts, or operate under severe resource constraints.
Teacher deployment is another area of concern. While some schools enjoy a surplus of teachers, others — often in remote or marginalized regions — are left chronically understaffed. This imbalance not only strains overworked teachers but also compromises the quality of education that learners receive.
Infrastructure oversight suffers under the current system as well. In rural areas, it is not uncommon to find pupils learning in dilapidated classrooms that pose safety risks, yet the approval process for repairs can drag on for years within the national bureaucracy.
Centralization has also weakened community participation in education governance. Parents and local leaders are often confined to token roles in Boards of Management, with little real influence over key decisions affecting their schools.
Even school feeding programs, essential for keeping children in class — especially in arid and semi-arid counties — are hindered by this top-down approach. Counties could design these programs to align with local agricultural production and cultural dietary needs, but the current system leaves little room for such tailoring.
Concerns, Risks and Safeguards
Devolving basic education is not without its potential pitfalls. Experience from other devolved sectors has shown that some counties have struggled with corruption, the politicization of services, and uneven institutional capacity. However, these problems are hardly unique to county governments — the national administration has faced similar challenges for decades. The key, therefore, is not to reject devolution out of fear, but to design it with strong safeguards that protect quality and equity.
One critical safeguard would be the preservation of national standards. A unified curriculum, consistent teacher qualification requirements, and standardized national examinations must remain in place to ensure that all learners, regardless of their county, meet the same benchmarks.
Equally important is the establishment of an independent oversight body, such as an Education Quality Assurance Authority, with the mandate and powers to audit county education departments. Such a body would provide transparency and accountability, ensuring that local control does not lead to compromised standards.
Performance contracts should also be introduced for county executives responsible for education. These agreements would set clear, measurable targets tied to learning outcomes, making it easier to track progress and hold leaders accountable for results.
Capacity building is essential. Counties must be equipped with the necessary training, technical expertise, and resources before and during the transition. This preparation would help them manage the complex responsibilities of basic education while avoiding service disruptions.
Phased Roadmap
Handing over all basic education functions to counties in one sweeping move would be risky and potentially chaotic. A more sensible path would be a phased transition that allows for learning, adjustment, and capacity building along the way.
In the first phase, counties could take charge of infrastructure development, school feeding programs, and the management of non-teaching staff. These functions are less complex to transfer and would give local administrations an immediate role in improving the learning environment.
The second phase would involve devolving teacher deployment and granting counties more authority in shaping localized education policies, while the national government continues to oversee the curriculum to maintain consistency across the country.
In the third phase, counties would assume full responsibility for basic education management, with strict quality audits in place to safeguard standards.
This gradual shift should be overseen by a joint Ministry of Education–Council of Governors committee to ensure coordination and accountability. Pilot projects in select counties could serve as test cases, providing valuable lessons and refinements before the model is rolled out nationwide.
The debate over devolving basic education is not about dismantling national oversight — it is about unlocking local potential. Kenya’s children deserve schools that respond to their unique realities, not policies drafted in distant offices without understanding the local context.
Health services offer a compelling example. Since devolution, many counties have rapidly constructed and equipped hospitals, hired additional health workers, and brought services closer to residents. Similarly, in agriculture, counties have introduced region-specific initiatives — from irrigation schemes in semi-arid areas to subsidized farm inputs for local crops.
If these successes can be achieved in sectors as complex as healthcare, why not in basic education?
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE: Breaking Barriers: Advancing Inclusion and Special Needs Education in Institutions of Learning
The Author is a Professor of Chemistry at University of Eldoret, a former Vice-Chancellor, and a Higher Education expert and Quality Assurance Consultant. okothmdo@gmail.com
