32 devolved units flagged for Sh10b irregularities
By Mercy Mwai, August 12, 2025About 32 counties are in a spot for procurement irregularities amounting to Sh10 billion, a new report shows.
The report ranks Governor Johnson Sakaja’s Nairobi City County and Eric Mutai’s Kericho County as the counties with highest anomalies, Sh3.3 billion and Sh1.9 billion respectively.
The report, by the Auditor General Nancy Gathungu for the 2023/2024 Financial Year, raises concerns that contracts were awarded to suppliers without verifying their qualifications, contrary to the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Regulations, 2020 (PPADR).
PPAADR requires that suppliers’ credentials be verified to ensure that only competent and reliable suppliers are engaged. Reads the report: “Review of the County Executives’ procurement records revealed that thirty-two (32) County Executives had various procurement irregularities amounting to Sh10,094,695,416.”
It adds: “Use of direct procurement method without qualifications contrary to Section 91 of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015 which provides that open tendering shall be the preferred procurement method for procurement of goods, works and services.”
Budget approval
The counties with minimal irregularities include Baringo Sh6.8 million, Busia Sh4.9 million, Meru Sh 2.3 million and Vihiga Sh2 million. Trans Nzoia has no irregularities.
The other counties with irregularities include Kakamega Sh531.5 million, Nyandarua Sh445.2 million, Kisii Sh364.1 million, Migori Sh338.8 million, Samburu Sh335.3 million, Machakos Sh292.4 million, Narok Sh273.4 million, Kiambu Sh271.4 million, Kilifi Sh243 million, West Pokot Sh232 million, Uasin Gishu Sh225.5 million, Tana River Sh200 million, Lamu Sh169.9 million, Nandi Sh109.9 million, Isiolo Sh104.4 million, Laikipia Sh94.4 million, Nyeri Sh76.7 million, Bomet Sh65.8 million, Nakuru Sh51.6 million, Elgeyo Marakwet Sh16.5 million and Wajir Sh13.7 million,.
The report shows that procurement plans for the financial year 2023/2024 were not submitted by the required deadline of June 30, as specified under Regulation 8 of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Regulations.
Procurement activities exceeding the 2023/2024 financial year budget were undertaken without the requisite supplementary budget approval, in contravention of Section 67(1) of the Public Finance Management (County Governments) Regulations.
In addition, the report shows that procurement of goods and services that exceeded the specified limits was conducted without obtaining the approval of the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority, contrary to Section 66(3) of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015, which mandates that PPRA approval is required for procurement exceeding certain thresholds
Reads the report: “Regulation 5(1) of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Regulations, 2020 requires all procurement activities be based on an Approved Procurement Plan that aligns with the budget and operational needs of the entity.”
The report shows that in some counties, disadvantaged groups of youth, women and persons with disabilities were awarded less than 30 percent of the total procurement value, contrary to Section 157(2) of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015 (PPADA), which requires that at least 30 percent of public procurement opportunities be reserved for these groups to ensure inclusivity.
The procurement of goods and services was not adequately advertised, failing to comply with Section 63(1) of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015, which stipulates that procurement opportunities must be advertised to ensure transparency and fair competition.
The report further raises concerns that use of Request for Quotation to procure items was beyond the prescribed threshold of Sh3 million instead of open tender.
This is contrary to Section 45(3)(b) of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015 which states that all procurement processes shall be undertaken by a procuring entity as per the threshold matrix prescribed under the Second Schedule of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Regulations, 2020.
Direct procurement
Reads the report: “Use of direct procurement without qualifications contrary to Section 91 of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act, 2015 which provides that open tendering shall be the preferred procurement method for procurement of goods, works and services.”
Meanwhile the report has called out 17 counties for incurring expenditures totaling Sh 1.4 billion on various matters that could have been avoided and another 23 county executives for making irregular contributions to the Council of Governors (CoG) amounting to Sh79.8 million, contrary to Section 37 of the Intergovernmental Relations Act, 2012.
The Act states that the operational expenses in respect of the structures and institutions established in the Act shall be provided for in the annual estimates of the revenue and expenditure of the National Government.
Also flagged were avoidable/wasteful payments related to the discharge of court cases arising from commission or omission on the part of the county governments while others related to payments of interest arising from failure by management to adhere to contractual obligations.
The affected counties include Narok Sh756.1 million, Kisii Sh88.4 million, Kajiado Sh79.1 million, Mombasa Sh69.8 million, Nakuru Sh66.5 million, Nyandarua Sh51.8 million, Nandi Sh49.2 million, Garissa Sh41.2 million, Elgeyo Marakwet Sh23.1 million, Uasin Gishu Sh22.2 million, Siaya Sh8.1 million, Mandera Sh3 million, Embu Sh2.9 million, Isiolo Sh1.4 million, Trans Nzoia Sh943,251 and Nairobi Sh48,690.