Final KESIP KETRACO VMGF April 2019 0

KENYA ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION COMPANY
The Kenya Electricity System Improvement

project (KESIP)
FINAL VULNERABLE AND

MARGINALIZED GROUPS FRAMEWORK
(VMGF)
April 2019
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................... ii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................... iv
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... vi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background .................................................................................................................................. 1
1.2 The Kenya Electricity System Improvement Project ................................................................... 2
1.3 Proposed Project Development Objective(s) ............................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 2: PURPOSE, JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES OF VMGF ................................................9
CHAPTER 3: LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR VMGs IN KENYA ........................ 12
3.1 Constitution of Kenya, 2010 ...................................................................................................... 12
3.2 Constitutional Implementation ................................................................................................... 14
3.3 Definition and treatment of IPs/VMGs by the World Bank ...................................................... 15
3.4 Other Legal and Policy Provisions that Facilitate Operationalization of OP 4.10 within Kenya’s
Legal Frameworks ............................................................................................................................ 15
3.5 Similarities and Differences between CoK and OP. 4.10 .......................................................... 17
3.6 Overview of the VMGs in Kenya .............................................................................................. 19
3.7 Location of IPs/VMGs in Kenya ................................................................................................ 20
3.8 Electricity access by the IPs/VMGs in Kenya ........................................................................... 21
CHAPTER 4: POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF KESIP ON THE IPs/VMGs....................................................... 27
4.1 Potential Positive Impacts .......................................................................................................... 27
4.2 Potential Adverse Impacts .......................................................................................................... 27
4.3 Proposed Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................... 28
CHAPTER 5: PLANS FOR CARRYING OUT SOCIAL ASSESSMENT FOR SUBPROJECTS ............. 32
6.1 Free, Prior and Informed Consultations during project implementation ................................... 33
6.2 Screening, Preparation and Implementation of VMGPs ............................................................ 34
6.3 Preparation of a Social Assessment ........................................................................................... 34
6.4 Capacity Building....................................................................................................................... 35
CHAPTER 7: CONSULTATIONS AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT .............................................. 37
CHAPTER 8: GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM .................................................................................. 39
8.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 39
8.2 World Bank Redress Service ................................................................................................ 42
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 ii

8.3 World Bank Inspection Panel ..................................................................................................... 42
CHAPTER 9: MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REPORTING ............................................................. 43
9.1 Monitoring and Reporting Mechanisms ..................................................................................... 43
9.2 Participatory Impact Monitoring (PIM) ..................................................................................... 44
CHAPTER 10: BUDGET ..................................................................................................................................... 46
CHAPTER 11: DISCLOSURE ............................................................................................................................ 48
11.1 Communication Framework ..................................................................................................... 48
11.2 Disclosure ................................................................................................................................. 48
11.3 Roles and Responsibilities ....................................................................................................... 49
ANNEXES ....................................................................................................................................... 50
ANNEX 1: HOUSEHOLD SOCIO-ECONOMIC QUESTIONNAIRE ......................................... 51
ANNEX 2: IPS/VMGS IN KENYA AS PER CONSTITUTION OF KENYA AND WORLD BANK
CLASSIFICATION ......................................................................................................................... 54
ANNEX 3: SOCIAL SCREENING FORM..................................................................................... 61
ANNEX 4: CONTENTS OF A VMGP ........................................................................................... 62
ANNEX 5: THREE POINT RANK ORDER SYSTEM FOR VMGPS (SAMPLE) ...................... 65
ANNEX 6: FEEDBACK DURING THE CONSULTATIONS HELD ON FEBRUARY 22, 2018 IN
NAIROBI AND COMMITMEENTS MADE BY KETRACO ....................................................... 67
ANNEX 7: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS ATTENDANCE REGISTER...……………..70
BOXES
Box 1: Treatment of community land ..............................................................................................13
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: List of equipment to be installed at existing substations ......................................................3
Table 2: Commitments by KETRACO during Consultations with VMGs……………………...….6
Table 3: Similarities between GOK and WB OP 4.10 .....................................................................17
Table 4: Overview of IPs/VMGs in Kenya ......................................................................................19
Table 5: Roles and responsibilities of RPT members ......................................................................24
Table 6: Decision for specific instruments .......................................................................................26
Table 7: Free, Prior and Informed consultations ..............................................................................33
Table 8: Key monitoring and evaluation indicators .........................................................................44
Table 9: Proposed budget for VMGP implementation .....................................................................47
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Map Showing marginalized counties in Kenya ................................................................20
Figure 2: VMGP Project Team Organogram ...................................................................................23
Figure 3: Community Level Grievance Redress Procedure .............................................................40
Figure 4: KETRACO'S Grievance Redress Procedure ....................................................................41
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 iii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
ACHPR African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
AD Anno Domini (Latin for the year of the Lord)
ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution
AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
ARAPs Abbreviated Resettlement Action Plans
ASAL Arid and Semi-Arid Land
CBO Community Based Organization
CEO Chief Executive Officer
CLO Community Liaison Officer
CoK Constitution of Kenya
CRA Commission on Revenue Allocation
CRC Community Resettlement Committees
CS Cabinet Secretary
EA Executing Agency
EMCA Environmental Management and Coordination Act
ERB Energy Regulatory Board
ERC Energy Regulatory Commission
ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
ESS Environmental and Social Standards
ESMF Environmental and Social Management Framework
ESMP Environmental and Social Management Plan
ETF Environmental Trust Fund
FPIC Free, Prior and Informed Consultations
GBV Gender-based violence
GMTS General Manager Technical Services
GoK Government of Kenya
GRMs Grievance Redress Mechanisms
GRS Grievance Redress Systems
HIV Human Immune Deficiency Virus
HH Household
ID Identification Card
IDA International Development Association
IDR Independent Review Panel
IP Indigenous People
IPPs Independent Power Producers
IPPF Indigenous People Policy Framework
KCAA Kenya Civil Aviation Authority
KETRACO Kenya Electricity Transmission Company Limited
KESIP Kenya Electricity System Improvement Project
KFS Kenya Forestry Services
KNBS Kenya National Bureau of Statistics
K-OSAP Kenya Off Grid Solar Access Programme
KNES Kenya National Electrification Strategy
KPA Kenya Ports Authority
KPC Kenya Pipeline Company
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 iv

KPLC Kenya Power and Lighting Company
Kshs Kenya Shillings
KV Kilovolt
KWS Kenya Wildlife Services
LCPDP Least Cost Power Development Plan
MCA Member of the county assembly
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MoE Ministry of Energy and Petroleum
MW Mega Watts
MV Medium Voltage
NDMA National Drought Management Authority
NGO Non-Governmental Organizations
NLP National Land Policy
NMT National Environment Tribunal
OMV Open Market Value
OP Operational Policy
PAPs Project Affected Persons
PCC Public Complaints Committee
PDO Project Development Objective
PDP Project displaced persons
PIM Participatory Impact Monitoring
PMU Project Management Unit
PIU Project Implementation Unit
PPP Public Private Partnerships
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
RAP Resettlement Action Plan
RoW Right of Way
RRA Rapid Rural Appraisal
RPF Resettlement Policy Framework
RPT Resettlement Project Team
RWG Resettlement Working Group
SA Social assessment
SEA Sexual exploitation and abuse
SEP Stakeholder Engagement Plan
SIA Social Impact Assessment
TLs Transmission lines
ToRs Terms of Reference
UN United Nations
US United States
VMG Vulnerable and Marginalized Group
VMGF Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Framework
VMGOs Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Organizations
VMGP Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Plan
WARMA Water Resource Management Authority
WB World Bank
WBG World Bank Group
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 v

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
1. The Government of Kenya (GoK) is seeking financial support of US$320 million from the
World Bank (WB) for the Kenya Electricity System Improvement Project (KESIP). The proposed
implementation period is 5 years, from 2019 to 2024. The project aims to improve the power systems
and electricity access and reliability, in line with the Kenya Growth and Development Strategy.
Under the Least Cost Power Development Planning (LCPDP) process and through feasibility
studies, KETRACO has identified priority projects for implementation through the WB financing
of KESIP.
2. The Project Development Objective (PDO) of KESIP are to: (i) increase the capacity, of
transmission system; and (ii) increase access to electricity in Kenya.
3. The project will have three components: Component 1: Access expansion and distribution
network strengthening (to be implemented by the Kenya Power and Lighting Company Limited);
Component 2: transmission network expansion and strengthening (to be implemented by
KETRACO); and Component 3: technical assistance and capacity building (to be implemented by
the Ministry of Energy (MoE).
4. The transmission component has a funding allocation of approximately US$120 million

equivalent. The exact locations and impacts of the subprojects to be implemented under Component
2 are not yet known, but they are likely to include: (i) construction of high-voltage transmission
lines and associated substations (ii) supporting the refurbishment and extension of a number of
substations.
5. The lines and substations to be constructed are currently not selected. KETRACO has
identified a long list of possible subprojects consisting of 10 sub-projects involving 132 kV and 220
kV transmission lines and associated substations and construction of three new 400/220kV
substations.
6. The investment by KETRACO is estimated to cost US$317 million. The exact lines and
substations that can be supported within the funding allocation for this category of US$ 120 million
under KESIP will be determined later based on priority, readiness, and environmental and social
screening and assessment. The proposed transmission lines are likely to pass through areas inhabited
by vulnerable and marginalized groups (VMGs) as defined by the GoK in the Constitution of Kenya
(CoK), 2010 and by the WB under the indigenous peoples (IP) – Operational Policy 4.10.
Policies that have been triggered for KESIP

The project has triggered the following safeguard policies of the WB: Environmental Assessment
OP/BP 4.01; Natural Habitats OP/BP 4.04; Forests OP/BP 4.36; Physical Cultural Resources OP/BP
4.11; Indigenous Peoples OP/BP 4.10; and Involuntary Resettlement OP/BP 4.12
Justification of VMGF
7. A VMGF is developed in line with WB’s OP 4.10 when a proposed project design is not
yet finalized, hence it is not possible to identify all of the impacts to facilitate the preparation of
VMG Plans (VMGPs). This condition applies to KESIP since at the time of preparation of this
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 vi

VMGF: (i) project sites have not yet been identified; and (ii) those IPs/VMGs whose rights and
livelihoods may be affected by the subprojects have not yet been defined.
8. Considering the proposed lines for funding, however, there is a possibility that the project
implementation will be undertaken in areas where IPs/VMGs are present or have collective
attachment to the project area. Therefore, in line with the country’s provisions for VMGs and
following best practices documented in the WB’s OP 4.10, the GoK has commissioned the
preparation of this VMGF to ensure that the project development process fully respects the dignity,
human rights, economies, and culture of IPs/VMGs and that the KESIP subprojects have broad
community support from the affected IPs/VMGs.
Purpose of this VMGF

9. This VMGF describes the policy requirements and planning procedures that KESIP will
follow during the preparation and implementation of its subprojects, especially those identified as
occurring in areas where IPs/VMGs are present. It outlines the specific means of ensuring that the
IPs/VMGs are given fair, prior and informed consultation before, during and after the project
implementation.
Potential Users of the VMGF

10. This Framework has been prepared as a reference document for use by KETRACO as the
implementing agency, as well as by other key stakeholders who will be involved in the planning,
implementation, management and operation of the proposed KESIP for KETRACO. As a reference
material, the framework is useful to the following project key stakeholders:
i. World Bank as the funding and development partner;

ii. Senior government officials responsible for policy making, and project planning and
development planning;
iii. Government extension workers in the various ministries;
iv. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) involved in natural resource management;
v. KETRACO, as the implementing agency;
vi. National and County Government officials responsible for planning and resource
management;
vii. Legislators, politicians and other local leaders;
viii. Potential consumers of electricity;
ix. The private sector;
x. Planners and engineers for the preparation of plans and designs of the subproject
activities;
xi. Project affected persons (PAPs) and host communities;
xii. Engineers, contractors and all technical persons to be involved in the implementation of
the subproject activities; and
xiii. Consultants recruited to support the preparation of the instruments to be used to
implement the VMGF including the VMGPs.
Consultations for the preparation of this VMGF

11. A meeting was held in Nairobi on February 22, 2018 that brought together stakeholders
representing the potential beneficiaries and partner agencies. The meeting participants reviewed the
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 vii

draft VMGF and gave their inputs that have been used to refine this Framework. A matrix of the
discussions is presented in Annex 6 together with the list of the participants.
12. Institutional arrangements for project implementation: The T-Line subprojects will be
under the administrative authority of the MoE, with KETRACO as the implementing agency.
County governments in the respective project regions will also be involved while policy and
strategic decisions will involve the following Ministries:
 Ministry of Finance;
 Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources;
 Ministry of Lands and Settlement (Physical Planning Department);
 Ministry of Roads, Public Works and Housing;
 Ministry of Agriculture;
 Regional Administration (Offices of the County and Sub-County Commissioners); and
 Subproject Steering Committee
Ancillary facilities
13. The transmission Component will have ancillary facilities such as worker camps, borrow
pits and waste disposal sites during the construction phase of the subprojects. However, treatment
of all these ancillary facilities has been covered under the ESMF which will guide the conduct of
the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), which will be subsequently summarized
into ESMP. The ESMP report will be made part and parcel of the contractor’s contract and will be
annexed to the document for monitoring and supervision as part of his deliverables.
14. Acquisition and compensation for ancillary facilities sites will be, in principle, on a willing
seller-willing buyer principle and on a temporary basis, i.e. the acquisition and usage of such sites
will only apply during the construction stage, after which ownership of the ancillary facility site will
revert to the pre-project owner(s). Also, the contractor will be required to mitigate or pay
compensation for any related impacts, and to restore each site after construction in accordance with
the requirements of OP 4.12 and the conditions agreed with the land holders ceding it for project
use. If an ancillary facility site is in VMGs land or affects VMGs, the contractor under the oversight
of KETRACO or KETRACO approved social specialists, in consultation with the VMGs will be
required to obtain an agreement with the affected VMGs through an FPIC process, and to prepare a
VGMP to be implemented by the contractor with KETRACO’s oversight. The VGMP will include,
in addition to agreed conditions for use of the land, compensation and conditions of restoration, a
stakeholder engagement and communication plan, a GRM and a benefit sharing plan (e.g. on issues
of employment, sharing of such resources as water) as well as plans for the Labour Influx and GBV
awareness and management. VMGs or other communities affected by the contractor’s activities at
the ancillary facilities sites will engage in a participatory monitoring process to ensure that all the
measures included in the contractor’s VMGP, including the restoration of the ancillary sites,
especially borrow pits, waste disposal sites as well as workers camps, are implemented as spelt out
in the VMGP.
Benefit sharing
15. KESIP is designed to directly support connecting 100,000 new consumers in urban, peri-
urban and rural areas another 20,000 new consumers in slums and informal settlements through the
national grid, in addition to other electricity systems improvement measures. The location of
subprojects is not known at this point of project preparation. In this regard, if subprojects under
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 viii

KESIP will be implemented in VMG areas, then they will benefit from grid connections under
component 1. Also, should a subproject under component 2 be in a VMG area, then KETRACO will
engage the VMGs in a free prior and informed consultations process for the preparation of VMGPs
in accordance with this VMGF.
16. In addition to the potential of KESIP to extend grid connection to VMGs under component
1, it is also important to note that a sister project, KOSAP, which is also supported by the World
Bank, has specifically been designed to extend off-grid electricity connections to 14 underserved
counties that have not been reached with grid electrification. Eight of these counties are
overwhelming VMG counties, which in practice means they are the majority beneficiaries of project
benefits under KOSAP. The other six counties have minority VMG communities and the VMGF
that was prepared for KOSAP has committed to special targeting of the VMGs in these six counties
to ensure they access project benefits. For these reasons, the combined efforts of KESIP and KOSAP
will ensure the government achieves its commitment to universal electricity access for all Kenyans
by 2022, including, VMGs.
17. On its part, KETRACO’s mandate is to accelerate construction of transmission lines and
related substations but not distribution. For this reason, the VMGP to be prepared under component
2 will be based on addressing the issues that were raised by VMGs during the consultations for the
preparation of this VMGF, including potential benefits that the VMGs can access from a KETRACO
implemented subproject. A key benefit will be to ensure VMGs are accorded preferential treatment
in unskilled labour employment, and to secure their representation on community level committees
such as the Community Grievance Committees that will be established for the project. The
commitments made by KETRACO during the consultations for this VMGF are presented in Table
2 below while details are in Annex 6.
Grievance Redress Mechanism

18. GRM: There will be two levels of grievance redress, i.e. the community level and the
Company level. The GRM at the community level will be guided by the community’s cultural norms
and values. KETRACO will encourage the formation of Community Resettlement Committees
(CRC) as the lowest level and first court of appeal for grievances arising from subproject
implementation. CRCs will be established for each subproject, and their roles will be to resolve
grievances through a culturally acceptable manner. KETRACO’s Community Liaison Officer
(CLO) will be the link between the CRC and KETRACO. The CRCs will be subproject based and
the selection of the committee members will be guided by the community’s governance practices
but will be expanded to include women, youth and people with disabilities. At the KETRACO level,
the PIU will be responsible for resolving grievances that have been referred to it by the CRC or
CLO. Grievances received directly by the PIU will be referred first to the CRC, depending on the
nature of the grievance.
Monitoring and evaluation

19. Monitoring and Evaluation: Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) are fundamental
components of projects implemented by KETRACO. Monitoring should be participatory and
include the assessment of beneficial and adverse impacts on IPs/VMGs within project impact areas.
The M&E should be based on FPIC with the IPs/VMGs who should play an integral role on its
implementation. All monitoring activities will principally remain the responsibility of the KESIP
project team. KETRACO will be responsible for compiling the data and auditing for completeness
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 ix

of the records, and for packaging compiled M&E information. However, if found to be necessary,
in agreement with the World Bank, third party monitors may be engaged to independently monitor
the implementation of KESIP, including the VMGF and VMGPs.
Budget for VMGF implementation

20. Tentatively, an approximate budget for the implementation of this VMGF and related VMGPs
has been included in table 9. The actual budget estimates will be provided once subproject sites
are known. The budget for the implementation of the VMGF will mainly include costs for
capacity building for KETRACO staff, working under the guidance of an expert consultant, to
screen for IPs/VMGs and prepare VMGPs; stakeholder engagement and other meetings,
information dissemination, hiring of consultants to prepare the VMGPs, SA, SEP, GRM and
M&E.
21. Once the subprojects have been appraised and finalized in the context of the VMGF, the required
budget estimates will be allocated by KETRACO from the project funds for proper
implementation of the VMGPs. The VMGPs budgets will be revised periodically, e.g. on a
yearly basis, or as necessary to ensure full implementation of the VMGPs. The VMGPs’ budget
will also include costs for implementation, such as travel and other logistical costs of the relevant
PIU staff. If consultants will be used, resources will be required to facilitate KETRACO staff to
undertake regular supervision visits. These costs will be included in the VMGP implementation
budget.
Disclosure
22. This VMGF will be disclosed in compliance with relevant Kenyan regulations and WB’s
OP 4.10. This is after the document has been reviewed and cleared by the World Bank (WB). The
document will be disclosed at the Website of the WBG and KPLC websites and will also be available
to any stakeholders in an accessible language, especially the VMGs who may have no access the
website. KETRACO will also provide copies of the approved VMGPs for disclosure at the WBG
Website and KETRACO website and at the local project level for access. Summaries of the VMGPs
will be developed and translated into Kiswahili. These will be placed in the public offices (chiefs
and ward offices) of the affected communities.
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 x

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1. The country’s long-term development blueprint, the Vision 2030, aims at transforming
Kenya into a globally competitive, newly industrialized, middle income and prosperous country.
Efficient, accessible and reliable infrastructure is identified as an enabler to achieving sustained
economic growth, development and poverty reduction by lowering the cost of doing business and
improving the country’s global competitiveness.
2. The Government of Kenya (GoK) is committed to universal access to modern forms of

energy by year 2030. Through the intervention of the GoK and its development partners, a total of
1.25 million new clients were connected to the national grid in the year ended 30th June 2016,
raising the country’s electricity access to a historic record of 60%. The electrification rate was
planned to increase to 70% by end of 2017 and to 100% by 2030. To attain these goals, policy and
regulatory frameworks have been articulated for the energy sector through the Energy Policy -
Sessional Paper No.4 of 2004, and the Energy Act of 2006. The Energy Policy and Act have been
reviewed to be aligned to the Kenya Vision 2030, the Constitution of Kenya (2010) and global
trends. However, the Energy Bill 2013 is still in draft.
3. The national government, with the support of development partners, has allocated
substantial resources for the development of energy infrastructure, including exploitation of
renewable energy resources. These efforts provide opportunities for collaboration with private sector
in renewable energy development and national electrification.
4. To align the sector plans with the Kenya Vision 2030 targets, the electricity subsector has
adopted a coordinated planning approach. The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), as mandated
by the Energy Act of 2006, coordinates a stakeholders’ committee, the Least Cost Power
Development Plan (LCPDP), to develop and review the electricity subsector plans.
5. KETRACO will draw from lessons learnt from the Kenya Electricity Expansion Project
(KEEP) to implement the proposed Kenya Electricity System Improvement Project (KESIP). KEEP
was financed through an International Development Association (IDA) credit by the World Bank
(WB). The project was implemented from 2010 to 2017 by the Kenya Power and Lighting Company
(KPLC), Rural Electrification Authority (REA), KETRACO and Kenya Electricity Transmission
Company Limited (KenGen). KEEP’s Project Development Objectives (PDOs) were to: (i) increase
the capacity, efficiency, and quality of electricity supply; and (ii) expand access to electricity in
urban, peri-urban and rural areas. By adding new geothermal generation capacity to the grid, the
project has enhanced the energy available for all consumers, reducing the cost of supply while
contributing to a greener energy mix. By connecting new typically poor consumers living in
informal settlements, the project has provided grid access to energy and created conditions for
productive activities.
KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 1

1.2 The Kenya Electricity System Improvement Project
6. The GoK is seeking financial support of US$320 million from the WB for KESIP, for a
proposed implementation period of 5 years, from 2019 to 2024. The project’s aim is to improve the
power systems and electricity access and reliability, in line with the Kenya Growth and
Development Strategy. The development of KESIP is driven by the imperative to dramatically
improve reliability of electricity supply to underpin economic activity and to sustain electrification.
Electricity service interruptions in recent years have been due to a number of factors that include:
inadequate generation capacity (especially during dry periods when hydropower availability is
reduced); congestion in the transmission infrastructure that constrains power transfers from where
there is surplus generation capacity to regions where there is a deficit; scheduled interruptions for
line work and unscheduled interruptions due to a weak network; inadequate preventive maintenance;
vandalism; inadequate automation, etc.
7. KESIP is designed to address the transmission and distribution aspects of electricity to

ensure reliable power supply by building resiliency into the network so as to enable it to react to
unexpected events by isolating problematic elements while the rest of the system is restored to
normal operation. This will also be achieved through minimizing the impact of scheduled network
maintenance on the fewest number of customers possible. Ultimately, the transmission and
distribution projects will provide reliability, enhance security of supply to the existing demand hubs
in the country, expand transmission and distribution capacity necessary to enhance electrification
initiatives, and reduce technical losses in areas currently served by long medium voltage lines.
8. Under the LCPDP process and through feasibility studies, KETRACO has identified
priority projects for implementation, out of which a few transmission lines and /or substations will
be funded through KESIP:
i. Malindi-Weru-Kilifi 220 kV 72kms and associated substation;

ii. Machakos-Mwala-Sarara 132 kV 78kms;
iii. Rumuruti-Maralal 132 kV 148 kms and associated substation;
iv. Kabarnet-Rumuruti 132kV 111kms and associated substation;
v. Menengai-Olkalaou -Rumuruti 70kms;
vi. Sotik-Nyamira 132kV 50kms;
vii. Kilgoris-Lolgorien-Kihancha 80 kms;
viii. Kimuka 400/220kV substation;
ix. Gilgil 400/220kV substation; and
x. Lessos 400/220kV substation.

Table 1: List of equipment to be installed at existing substations
Equipment to be installed
Narok 1 x 23 MVA 132/33 kV
Bomet 1 x 23 MVA 132/33 kV
Kieni 1 x 23 MVA 132/33 kV
Mwingi 1 x 23 MVA 132/33 kV
Kitui 1 x 23 MVA 132/33 kV
Wote 1 x 23 MVA 132/33 kV
Kabarnet 1 x 23 MVA 132/33 kV
Kitale 1 x 100 MVA 220/132 kV
Olkaria IAU 1 x 105 MVA 220/132 kV
Malindi 1 x 23 MVA 220/33 kV
Garsen 1 x 23 MVA 220/33 kV
1 x 150 MVA 220/132/33 kV
Kibos 1 x 45 MVA 132/33 kV
Garissa SVG/STATCOM 132/33 kV
Sultan Konza SVG/STATCOM 132/33 kV
Lessos SVG/STATCOM 220/132 kV
Isinya SVG/STATCOM 400/220 kV
1.3 Proposed Project Development Objective(s)
9. The project development objectives (PDO) for KESIP are to: (i) increase the capacity of
the transmission system; and (ii) increase access to electricity in Kenya.
10. The proposed project aims to address system bottlenecks in the medium voltage (MV)
network to reduce technical losses and create capacity to support last mile electrification. The
proposed project will directly support connecting 100,000 new consumers in urban, peri-urban and
rural areas and another 20,000 new consumers in slums and informal settlements. The proposed
project is also expected to support high-voltage transmission network while also providing technical
assistance support for sector studies, including a detailed feasibility study to be carried out by
KETRACO to determine the technical, legal, environmental and social feasibility of implementing
some identified transmission lines under PPP arrangements. The preparation of the relevant
feasibility- stage safeguard instruments (ESIA, RAP, VMGP and social assessments) as appropriate
will also be supported under the project. Finally, the proposed project is expected to support
technical assistance and capacity building support to KPLC and KETRACO, the two implementing
agencies, MOE and other sector agencies.
1.3.1: Project Components
11. The project’s development objectives will be achieved through three components: (i) Last
mile electrification and grid expansion (approximately US$ 235 million) which will be implemented
by KPLC; (ii) Transmission network expansion and strengthening (approximately US$ 85 million)

to be implemented by KETRACO; and (iii) technical assistance and capacity building, needed for
among others, for PPP feasibility studies; sector development and strengthening and sustaining the
policy, institutional, and regulatory environment; and enhancing institutional, governance,
management, technical and operational capacity of the sector agencies (approximately US$ 15
million), to be implemented by the Ministry of Energy.
12. Component 1: Access expansion and distribution network strengthening (approximately

US$ 235 million equivalent): Kenya National Electrification Strategy (KNES) has identified that to
achieve universal access by 2022, some 2.3 million connections will need to be made through grid
densification (extending the existing distribution network by 2km). Another 580,000 connections
will need to be made through grid intensification within 600m radius of existing distribution network
and some 270,000 connections through grid expansion (within 25km radial distance around the
periphery of the existing distribution system of KPLC). The proposed project will aim to support
mostly grid densification and intensification and some grid expansion to reach about 120,000 new
connections benefiting about 450,000 people. The exact lines and substations to be supported under
this component will be determined during project implementation.
13. Component 2: Transmission network expansion and strengthening (approximately

US$120 million equivalent): This component is expected to introduce high voltage network to
areas that have been serviced by long medium voltage lines to reduce technical losses and reinforce
the existing medium voltage networks. The component will also increase transmission adequacy
for interconnecting different regions of the country and improve reliability of power transmission
and ensure compliance with N-1 contingency criteria. KETRACO has identified 10 sub-projects
involving 132 kV and 220 kV transmission lines and associated substations and construction of three
new 400/220kV substations estimated at US$317 million. The exact lines and substations that can
be supported within the funding allocation for this category under the proposed project will be
determined later based on priority, readiness, and environmental and social screening and
assessment. A long-list of sub-projects is provided in Annex 2.
14. The component is also expected to support an owner’s engineer (firm), which will help
KETRACO with preparation of design, bidding documents, bid evaluation, and project supervision
during the implementation phase. The funding requirement for the 10 transmission lines and three
substations is around US$250 million. With the funding allocation available, only 2 or 3 lines and 1
or 2 substations can be supported under the proposed project. The environment and social screening
and assessment following IDA guidelines is ongoing for all the lines and substations in the long list.
15. Component 3: Technical assistance and capacity building (approximately US$15

million equivalent):
16. The component will support a detailed feasibility study in accordance with the PPP law to
determine technical, financial, legal, social and environmental feasibility of piloting development
of some identified transmission lines under PPP arrangements, including establishing the value for
money for PPP. The initial phase of the study will start soon with support from an on-going IDA
credit (Eastern Electricity Highway Project, P126579), while the second phase will be supported
under the proposed project. Implementation of the PPP pilot will be supported by Africa50 and IFC
Advisory who are currently in discussion with KETRACO. The feasibility study will be supervised
by IFC on behalf of KETRACO and closely coordinated with Africa50 to ensure a consistent

approach for all the lines included in the pilot PPP. This component will also support the preparation
of the relevant feasibility-stage safeguard instruments (ESIA, RAPs, Social Assessments and
Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Plans) that will need to be prepared. The ToRs for such ESIA,
RAPs, Social Assessments and Vulnerable and Marginalized Groups Plans will be prepared to meet
the WB Performance Standards applicable to PPP transactions (in line with OP 4.03) and will
submitted to the Bank for clearance before being adopted.
17. The component will also include sector studies, capacity building, and training activities
to help sustain and enhance the policy, institutional and regulatory arrangements and reforms of the
GoK as well as gender and citizen engagement. Some of the studies to be supported under the
component will include optimal power market design, system operation and dispatch guidelines for
the ERC. Capacity building will include training and activities to strengthen governance,
management, technical and operation capacity of the sector agencies including MOE, ERC,
KenGen, GDC, and REA.
18. The Support to KETRACO will enable the company to develop the basic building blocks
for a state-of-the art transmission company able to attract commercial financing - a cost reflective
wheeling tariff, a strong balance sheet through delineation of separation points of KPLC and
KETRACO’s transmission assets, capacity to manage the PPP program, improved O&M practices
and standardization of design specifications, improved O&M practices and standardization of design
specifications. The component will also include consultancy support and incremental operating costs
for KPLC and KETRACO PIU. Finally, this component will also support the incremental
operational costs of the planning and coordination unit at MoE.
19. This VMGF is only concerned with Component 2 of KESIP, which will be implemented
by KETRACO, and which does not deal with any PPP activities. It should be noted that the exact
locations and impacts of the subprojects to be implemented under Component 2 are not yet known,
but they are likely to include: (i) supporting the extension of high-voltage distribution system aligned
with the recent expansion in the transmission network; (ii) upgrading heavily loaded distribution
lines to operate at a higher voltage; and (iii) supporting the refurbishment and extension of a number
of substations.
1.3.2 Benefit sharing for VMGs under the project
20. According to the PDO, KESIP is designed to directly support connecting 100,000 new
consumers in urban, peri-urban and rural areas another 20,000 new consumers in slums and informal
settlements through the national grid, in addition to other electricity systems improvement measures.
The location of subprojects is not known at this point of project preparation. In this regard, if
subprojects under KESIP will be implemented in VMG areas, then they are likely to benefit from
grid connections under component 1. Also, should a subproject under component 2 be located in a
VMG area, then KETRACO will engage the VMGs in a free prior and informed consultations
process for the preparation of VMGPs in accordance with this VMGF.
21. In addition to the potential of KESIP to extend grid connection to VMGs under component
1, it is also important to note that a sister project, KOSAP, which is also supported by the World
Bank, has specifically been designed to extend off-grid electricity connections to 14 underserved
counties that have not been reached with grid electrification. Eight of these counties are

overwhelming VMG counties, which in practice means they are the majority beneficiaries of project
benefits under KOSAP. The other six counties have minority VMG communities and the VMGF
that was prepared for KOSAP has committed to special targeting of the VMGs in these six counties
to ensure they access project benefits. For these reasons, the combined efforts of KESIP and KOSAP
will ensure the government achieves its commitment to universal electricity access for all Kenyans
by 2022, including, VMGs.
22. On its part, KETRACO’s mandate is to accelerate construction of transmission lines and
related substations but not distribution. For this reason, the VMGP to be prepared under component
2 will be based on addressing the issues that were raised by VMGs during the consultations for the
preparation of this VMGF, including potential benefits that the VMGs can access from a KETRACO
implemented subproject. A key benefit will be to ensure VMGs are accorded preferential treatment
in unskilled labour employment, and to secure their representation on community level committees
such as the Community Grievance Committees that will be established for the project. The
commitments made by KETRACO during the consultations for this VMGF are presented in Table
2 below while details are in Annex 6.
23. From the project’s point of view, the VMGPs that will be prepared in accordance with this
VMGF, will be considered a benefit sharing strategy since they will include the issues that
KETRACO committed to in its response to the questions and concerns raised by VMGs during
consultations for this VMGF. In addition, should additional benefits that are within the ability of the
project to deliver, then these will be considered during the VMGP preparation which will be
undertaken in consultation with the VMGs.
Table 2: Commitments by KETRACO during Consultations with VMGs

Specific Feedback from VMGs and KETRACO’s Response/commitment to Feedback and How it
other stakeholders Will Be Reflected in the Framework. If Not, Why Not?
 Involvement of KWS during  Subproject sites/routes are not yet known, which is why
initial planning of the projects KETRACO is preparing this VMGF. Once they become
and route selection should be known, and should they traverse areas under KWS mandate,
emphasized. then KWS and other key government agencies will be
 KWS urged KETRACO to consulted as early as possible.
ensure the protection of  KETRACO will work hand in hand with KWS to address any
conservancies and wildlife issues affecting protection of wildlife in the community
and/or communities living in conservancies and other sites, including any communities
forests which may be living in the forest should a KETRACO T-Line
facility be located in such a forest.
Will there be monitoring and -Monitoring and evaluation is a key factor during the entire life of
evaluation after project closure to the project to ensure that the project is being implemented
determine the effectiveness of according to design. In the course of implementation, remedial or
mitigation measures? corrective measures will be considered where necessary, on a
needs basis, based on the recommendations from the ongoing
monitoring activities.
-Post implementation evaluation is undertaken to assess the
achievements and lessons learnt during implementation.
-KETRACO will work with the participating VMGs to design a
participatory monitoring process to ensure their active involved in
project implementation activities.
There is a need for mitigation -KETRACO makes all efforts through design, to avoid or
measures for TLs passing through minimizes impacts on populations, cultural sites and natural
forests that pose danger to cultural resources when TLs pass through designated forest areas

sites of the vulnerable populations - In consultation with the affected VMGs community members,
due to opening up of rivers which are the RPF that has been prepared for KESIP will be used to
sacred places of worship, risk of determine eligibility and to guide compensation for any cultural
climate change and disruption of sites such as shrines or graveyards in the event that these have to
livelihood activities especially for be moved, if avoidance is impossible
hunter-gatherers -the participating communities will be invited during VMGP
preparation to propose safeguards to be used to minimize project
impacts on the people and environment
Will there be special compensation -Consultation with stakeholders has only just began. During the
packages for vulnerable groups? compensation stage, KETRACO will involve IPs/VMGs in the
process to get inputs on how they can be adequately compensated.
-All PAPs, including VMGs will be compensated for their lost
assets, including land, structures, trees and crops. However,
VMGs will be given preferential treatment in employment
opportunities, especially for unskilled labor
Will the other ethnic groups, e.g. the -Mary Amuyunzu-Nyamongo (WB Consultant) clarified that the
Luos and Kambas, living among the WB’s OP 4.10 and the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, have clear
vulnerable communities be criteria for identifying IPs/VMGs which are being applied to the
characterized as VMGs? KESIP project.
-As the aim of the World Bank policies is to “Do No Harm” to
people or the environment, if there are other ethnic communities
living among the VMGs, e.g. as squatters, then the project will
compensate them for their assets such as structures that may be
affected by the project, but not for land. -On the other hand,
should they also have legal proof of land ownership, and such
land is affected by the project, they will also be compensated for
their affected land parcels.
KETRACO will ensure that all PAPs are adequately compensated
for their lost assets at full replacement cost as guided by the
World Bank’s OP 4.12.
KETRACO should involve opinion -Free prior informed consultations will be undertaken throughout
leaders, women representatives and the project cycle.
local administration in all the stages -Participating VMGs will decide on the consultation methods and
of the projects in order to ensure strategies that is culturally appropriate for them, but which
public support of the project and to ensures that all PAPs – men, women, people with disabilities, and
effectively educate the VMGs who vulnerable VMG households can be involved and their needs
are highly influenced by their leaders considered. Every voice should count.
There are low literacy levels in Kilifi -Free, prior and informed consultations will be the guiding
County and most educated people principle throughout the project stages.
undermine and intimidate the less -Differentiated consultations, e.g. consulting the more vulnerable
educated - their views also members such as women, people with disabilities, and vulnerable
overpower those of the less educated VMG members separately, might be a good way of involving all
PAPs and circumventing elite capture of the consultation process
In Kilifi County, most local leaders -FPIC will be conducted throughout the project cycle
are not residents of the area hence -When forming committees for the projects, KETRACO will
they do not understand the issues ensure that committee members represent all segments of the
affecting the local community. community
Sometimes they withhold vital -VMGs will be given opportunity to select their members who
information from the community should represent them in such committee and who they must hold
accountable
-In the spirit of free, prior and informed consultations, PAPs,
including VMGs, will be given adequate notice of meetings to
enable them avail themselves from such meetings
-Also, VMGs will be consulted in ways that is culturally
appropriate to them, which would help to ensure their
participation

24. The WB’s Operational Policy, OP 4.10 on Indigenous Peoples (IPs) contributes to the
Bank's mission of poverty reduction and sustainable development by ensuring that the development
process fully respects the dignity, human rights, economies, and cultures of IPs. For all projects that
are proposed for WB financing and affect vulnerable and marginalized Groups (VMGs), as defined
by the Constitution of Kenya (2010), the WB requires the borrower to engage in a process of free,
prior and informed consultation (FPIC). The objectives of the policy are to avoid adverse impacts
on IPs/VMGs, secure broad community support for the project and provide the IPs/VMGs with
culturally appropriate benefits.
25. The WB provides project financing only where FPIC results in broad community support
to the project by the affected IPs/VMGs. Such WB-financed projects are prepared in a manner that
includes measures to:
a. Avoid potentially adverse effects on the IP/VMG communities;
b. When avoidance is not feasible, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for such effects;
c. Ensure that the vulnerable and marginalized people receive social and economic benefits
that are culturally appropriate and gender, as well as inter-generationally inclusive; and
d. The VMG Plans (VMGPs) are prepared based on FPIC with IPs/VMGs.
26. The OP 4.10 is triggered when it is likely that groups that meet the policy’s criteria “are
present or likely to be present in, or have collective attachment to the project area.” The preparation
of this VMG Framework (VMGF) is, therefore, to guide the preparation of instruments whose
implementation would safeguard the rights, dignity and cultures of the IPs/VMGs and ensure they
access project benefits in culturally appropriate ways. Due to the presence of IPs/VMGs in some
counties where KESIP will be implemented, OP 4.10 has been triggered for KESIP.

CHAPTER 2: PURPOSE, JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES OF VMGF
27. Justification of the VMGF: A VMGF is developed in line with WB’s OP 4.10 when a
proposed project design is not yet finalized, hence it is not possible to identify all the impacts to
facilitate the preparation of VMG Plans (VMGPs). This condition applies to KESIP since at the time
of preparation of this VMGF: (i) project sites have not yet been identified; and (ii) those IPs/VMGs
whose rights and livelihoods may be affected by the subprojects have not yet been defined.
28. OP 4.10 stipulates that in the event that IPs/VMGs are likely to be affected by a WB
financed supported project, but the subproject sites are not known at the time of project preparation,
then a VMGF must be prepared to provide guidance to the implementing agencies on the procedures
and processes to be followed in the development of a social assessment (SA), VMGPs, grievance
redress mechanism (GRM), as well as a monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework. The actual
instruments will be prepared when the exact project sites have been determined.
29. It is expected that some IPs/VMGs will be found in some counties in which KESIP will be
implemented. However, at this stage of project preparation, the exact subproject sites are yet to be
identified and the exact impacts of the project on IPs/VMGs are not yet completely known.
KETRACO has, therefore, prepared this VMGF to comply with requirements and provisions of OP
4.10 and in line with the applicable laws and regulations of Kenya.
30. Purpose/Objectives of the VMGF: This Framework describes the policy requirements and
planning procedures that will be used during the preparation and implementation of the project
components, especially those identified as occurring in areas where IPs/VMGs are present. Once
the subproject sites have been established, screening will be done to assess and confirm the presence
of VMGs. This will be followed by a site-specific SA that should inform the preparation of
individual VMGPs as set out in this Framework and further public consultations and stakeholder
engagements will be conducted at this stage. Screening will be done as guided by the WB’s OP4.10.
The screening steps are articulated further below.
31. The objective of this VMGF is therefore to ensure that the management of issues related to
IPs/VMGs is integrated into the development and operation of proposed investments to be financed
under KESIP to ensure effective mitigation of potential adverse impacts while enhancing accrual of
benefits for IPs/VMGs. This Framework provides information on the following:
i. The types of investments likely to be proposed for financing under the project;
ii. The potential positive and adverse effects of such investments on IPs/VMGs;
iii. A plan for carrying out the SA for such investments;
iv. The process for preparing VMGPs;
v. A framework for ensuring FPIC with the affected IPs/VMGs at each stage of project
preparation and implementation;
vi. Institutional arrangements, including capacity building where necessary, for screening
project-supported investments, evaluating their effects on IPs/VMGs, preparing
VMGPs, and addressing any grievances;
vii. Monitoring and reporting arrangements, including mechanisms and benchmarks
appropriate for the project; and
viii. Disclosure arrangements for VMGPs.

32. Potential users of the VMGF: This VMGF has been prepared for use by KETRACO as the
implementing agency to guide the preparation of Social Assessments (SA) and related Vulnerable
and Marginalized Groups Plans (VMGPs) if subprojects may be located in, or traverse IP lands. It
will also be a useful reference document for other key stakeholders who will be involved in the
planning, implementation, management and operation of the proposed KESIP for KETRACO. As a
reference material, the framework will be useful to the following project key stakeholders:
xiv. World Bank as the funding and development partner;

xv. Senior government officials responsible for policy making, and project planning and
development planning;
xvi. Government extension workers in the various ministries;
xvii. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) involved in natural resource management;
xviii. KETRACO, as the implementing agency;
xix. National and County Government officials responsible for planning and resource
management;
xx. Legislators, politicians and other local leaders;
xxi. Potential consumers of electricity;
xxii. The private sector;
xxiii. Planners and engineers for the preparation of plans and designs of the subproject
activities;
xxiv. Project affected persons (PAPs) and host communities;
xxv. Engineers, contractors and all technical persons to be involved in the implementation of
the subproject activities; and
xxvi. Consultants recruited to support the preparation of the instruments to be used to
implement the VMGF including the VMGPs.
33. Ancillary facilities: The transmission Component will have ancillary facilities such as
worker camps, borrow pits and waste disposal sites during the construction phase of the subprojects.
However, treatment of all these ancillary facilities has been covered under the ESMF which will
guide the conduct of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA), which will be
subsequently summarized into ESMP. The ESMP report will be annexed to the Contractor’s contract
for monitoring and supervision as part of his deliverables.
34. Acquisition and compensation for ancillary facilities sites will be, in principle, on a willing
seller-willing buyer principle and on a temporary basis, i.e. the acquisition and usage of such sites
will only apply during the construction stage, after which ownership of the ancillary facility site will
revert to the pre-project owner(s). Also, the contractor will be required to mitigate or pay
compensation for any related impacts, and to restore each site after construction in accordance with
the requirements of OP 4.12 and the conditions agreed with the land holders ceding it for project
use. If an ancillary facility site belongs to or affects VMGs, the contractor under the oversight of
KETRACO or KETRACO approved social specialists, in consultation with the VMGs will be
required to obtain an agreement with the affected VMGs through an FPIC process, and to prepare a
VGMP to be implemented by the contractor with KETRACO’s oversight. The VGMP will include,
in addition to agreed use of the land, compensation for related impacts and conditions of restoration,
a stakeholder engagement and communication plan, a GRM and a benefit sharing plan (e.g. on issues
of employment, sharing of such resources as water) as well as plans for the Labour Influx and GBV
awareness and management. VMGs or other communities affected by the contractor’s activities at

the ancillary facilities sites will engage in a participatory monitoring process to ensure that all the
measures included in the contractor’s VMGP, including the restoration of the ancillary sites,
especially borrow pits, waste disposal sites as well as workers camps, are implemented as spelt out
in the VMGP.
35. As the contractor will be acting on behalf of KETRACO, it will be KETRACO’s

responsibility to provide oversight for the contractor’s activities, and to ensure that the aspects of
this VMGF (and RPF) that are the responsibility of the contractor are implemented in accordance
with the provisions of the respective document. To this end, KETRACO will ensure that:
i. The contractor’s responsibilities for ancillary facilities as spelt out in this VMGF
(and RPF) – including preparation of a VMGP (in case ancillary facilities are in
VMGs areas) form part of the agreement between KETRACO and the contractor;
ii. All agreements between the contractor and the VMGs communities are
implemented in culturally appropriate ways. In this regard, KETRACO will require
the Contractor to have as one of its staff, a social specialist with expertise in VMGs
socio-cultural norms, and experience in OP 4.10, to ensure that relations with
VMGs and benefit sharing activities are culturally appropriate.
36. In addition to KETRACO’s responsibilities, the following principles will apply to

KETRACO and the contractor in addressing ancillary facilities impacts in accordance with the
provisions of OP 4.12 and this VMGF.
a. If any ancillary facility is in a VMG area, such land will be acquired by the contractor on a
willing seller-willing buyer principle, on a temporary basis and thorough an FPIC process.
b. As proof of the willing seller-willing buyer approach, the contractor will document and
submit to KETRACO a report detailing the land acquisition process for ancillary facilities
including FPIC and the resulting agreement with the affected community which includes
adequate compensation and a VGMP.
c. In the context of the willing seller-willing buyer principle, the contractor will take care to
ensure that the ancillary facilities do not cause harm to any neighbouring households or
communities living within the vicinity of the ancillary facility site or to the affected VMG.
In this regard, the contractor with oversight from KETRACO approved social specialists, in
consultation with the VMGs will be required to prepare a VMGP to be implemented by the
contractor and supervised by KETRACO, including, in addition to agreed use of the land,
compensation and conditions of restoration, a stakeholder engagement and communication
plan, a GRM and a benefit sharing plan(e.g. on issues of employment, sharing of such
resources as water) as well as plans for the Labour Influx and GBV awareness and
management, and participatory monitoring.
d. All measures to be taken by the contractor such as the restoration of the ancillary sites,
especially borrow pits, waste disposal sites as well as workers camps, will also be spelt out
in the VMGP.
e. KETRACO will ensure that these guiding principles are adhered to by the contractor.

CHAPTER 3: LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR VMGs IN KENYA
37. This section describes Kenya’s legal and institutional framework with respect to
IPs/VMGs. It also provides an analysis of the similarities and differences between OP 4.10 and the
national legal provisions.
3.1 Constitution of Kenya, 2010
38. The GoK uses the term ‘vulnerable and marginalized groups,’ which the 2010 Constitution
of Kenya (CoK) recognizes as groups being in a disadvantaged position in relation to dominant
communities in the country. The CoK does not provide a definition of IPs but mentions
“marginalized groups” and “marginalized communities.” In this regard, Article 260 of the
constitution defines a “marginalized group” as “a group of people who, because of laws or practices
before, on or after the effective date, were or are disadvantaged by discrimination on one or more of
the grounds in Article 27(4).” Article 260 goes on to define a marginalized community as:
i. A community that because of its relatively small population or for any other reason, has
been unable to fully participate in the integrated social and economic life of Kenya as a
whole;
ii. A traditional community that, out of a need or desire to preserve its unique culture and
identify from assimilation, has remained outside the integrated social and economic life
of Kenya as a whole;
iii. An indigenous community that has retained and maintained a traditional lifestyle and
livelihood based on a hunter-gatherer economy; and
iv. Pastoral persons or communities, whether they are (i) nomadic; or (ii) a settled
community that, because of its relative geographic isolation, has experienced only
marginal participation in the integrated social and economic life of Kenya as a whole.”
39. The CoK captures the disadvantaged position of VMGs in relation to other dominant
communities in Kenya. It “promotes and pledges to protect the diversity of language of the people
of Kenya and promotes the development and use of indigenous languages” (Article 7 (3). It spells
out human dignity, equity, social justice, inclusiveness, equality, human rights, non-discrimination
and protection of the marginalized as national values and principles of governance (Article 10
(2)(b)).
40. The CoK (2010) explicitly makes provisions on how to address the concerns of the
marginalized groups. It requires the state to address the needs of vulnerable groups, including
‘minority or marginalized’ and ‘particular ethnic, religious or cultural communities’ [Article 21(3)].
It also provides for: affirmative action programs and policies for minorities and marginalized groups
[(Articles 27(6) and 56)]; rights of ‘cultural or linguistic’ communities to maintain their culture and
language [(Articles 44(2) and 56)]; protection of community land, including ‘ancestral lands and
lands traditionally occupied by hunter gatherer communities’ (Article 63); and provides for an
equalization fund for basic services to marginalized areas (Article 204). The Community Land Act,
2016, is the legal framework that provides guidance on the treatment of community lands including
compensation for community or VMGs lands that may be required for development of projects. The
Act states that the County Government shall hold any unregistered community land in trust for the
community and may not sell or dispose of such land, except in accordance with the law. Kenya’s
legal framework will be followed in addition to the provisions of OP 4.12, in particular, about full

compensation at current replacement cost, in case a subproject is to be implemented on community
or VMGs land. To this end, all PAPs will be compensated for their lost assets, especially land, prior
to start of construction activities as required by OP 4.12.
Excerpts from the Community Land Act, 2016, and the Constitution of Kenya, 2010, on the
Treatment of community Land. (It is to be noted that in Kenya, most VMGs lands fall within
the category of unregistered community land)
Box 1: Treatment of community land

Constitution of Kenya, 2010, Article 40 (3): no interest in, or right over community land may be
compulsorily acquired by the State except in accordance with the law, for a public purpose, and upon
prompt payment of just compensation to the person or persons, in full or by negotiated settlement.
Community Land Act, Article 8: A county government shall not sell, dispose, transfer, convert for
private purposes or in any other way dispose of any unregistered community land that it is holding in
trust on behalf of the communities for which it is held.
Community Land Act; Article 6 (2) The respective county government shall hold in trust for a
community any monies payable as compensation for compulsory acquisition of any unregistered
community land. (3) Upon registration of community land, the respective county government shall
promptly release to the community all such monies payable for compulsory acquisition.(4) Any such
monies shall be deposited in a special interest earning account by the county government.
Community Land Act; Article 15 (1) Community land may be converted into public land through
compulsory acquisition in the manner prescribed under the Land Act, 2012. (2) A community land
management committee shall present any notice of intention to compulsory acquire part or the whole of
the community land from the National Land Commission given accordance with section 131 of the Land
Act, 2012, to the community assembly for information and any other direction on the matter regarding
the compulsory acquisition process. (3) Community land may also be converted into public land through
transfer and surrender with the approval of at least two thirds of the community assembly.
16. (1) A community may convert whole or part of its land to private land through transfer with the
approval of at least two thirds of the community assembly.
41. Article 69(1)(a) of the Community Land Act compels the State to: ‘ensure sustainable
exploitation, utilization, management, and conservation of the environment and natural resources’,
and Article 69(1)(d) requires the state to “encourage public participation in the management,
protection and conservation of the environment.” Further, Article 56 requires the State to “ensure
that VMGs have reasonable access to water, health services and infrastructure.”
42. In terms of participation, the CoK has provisions against exclusion from participation in
the governance and political life of the country. Article 56 states that the State “shall put in place
affirmative action programs to ensure that minorities and marginalized groups participate and are
represented in governance.” Article 7(b) obligates the State ‘to promote the development and use of
indigenous languages’ while Article 11(2)(a) obliges it to promote all forms of cultural heritage.

3.2 Constitutional Implementation
43. Kenya’s 2010 Constitution provides a rich and complex array of civil and political, socio-
economic and collective rights of relevance to indigenous communities. However, important
constitutional provisions alone are not enough. They require a body of enabling laws, regulations
and policies to guide and facilitate their effective implementation. In 2011, Kenya’s Parliament
enacted 22 laws, which are of general application and will have a bearing on the way Government
exercises power in various sectors, some of them of fundamental importance to IPs/VMGs.
44. Laws relating to reform of the judiciary, such as the Supreme Courts Act No. 7 of 2011 as
well as the Vetting of Judges and Magistrates’ Act 2011, are already transforming the way in which
the judiciary is dealing with claims presented to it by local communities. The revamped judiciary is
already opening its doors to the poorest and hitherto excluded sectors of Kenyan society.
45. The adoption of a law establishing the Environment and Land Court Act No. 19 of 2011 is
important for IP/VMG communities given that the Court will “hear and determine disputes relating
to environment and land, including disputes relating to: (a) environmental planning and protection,
trade, climate issues, land use planning, title, tenure, boundaries, rates, rents, valuations, mining,
minerals and other natural resources; (b) compulsory acquisition of land; (c) land administration and
management; (d) public, private and community land and contracts, choices in action or other
instruments granting any enforceable interests in land; and (e) any other dispute relating to
environment and land.”
46. The Commission on Revenue Allocation (CRA) is mandated by Article 204 of the CoK to
earmark 0.5% of annual state revenue to the development of marginalized areas – the Equalization
Fund, in addition to 15% of national revenue for direct transfer to County Governments.
Specifically, the tasks of the CRA as spelt out in the CoK include:
i. recommend on equitable sharing of revenues between National and County
Governments; and among counties, Article 216 (1)(b));
ii. recommend on financing and financial management of County Governments (Article
216 (2);
iii. define and enhance revenue sources of National and County Governments (Art. 216 (3)
(b);
iv. encourage fiscal responsibility by National and County Governments (Article 216 (3)
(c); and
v. determine, publish and regularly review a policy in which it sets out the criteria by which
to identify the marginalized areas for the purposes of Article 204 (2) (Article 216 (4)).
47. The objective of the Equalization Fund is to eradicate marginalization and other forms of
economic inequalities in Kenya and to bring all groups into mainstream development within 20
years from the date of promulgation of the CoK. It is notable that there is an overlap between the
counties designated as marginalized by the CRA and the location of marginalized groups in the
country.
48. Article 59 of the CoK establishes the Human Rights Commission, the Commission on
Administrative Justice and the National Gender Equality Commission, which are all tasked with
increasing inclusion and equality in access to services.

3.3 Definition and treatment of IPs/VMGs by the World Bank
49. The WB has a set of “Do No Harm” safeguard policies that are meant to protect project
affected persons (PAPs) from impacts and actions of Bank financed projects. This is in recognition
that some of the WB’s development activities have significant impacts on the rights and livelihoods
of IPs/VMGs, who worldwide constitute the “poorest of the poor and continue to suffer from higher
rates of poverty, lower levels of education and a greater incidence of disease and discrimination than
other groups” (WB 2010). Since the early 1980s, the WB Group (WBG) has adopted a number of
policies designed to mitigate harm to IPs in its financed projects (Mackay, 2005). These are referred
to as safeguard policies.
50. The WB OP/BP 4.10 requires that WB financed projects are designed not only to avoid
adverse impacts but equally important to recognize ‘the distinct identities and cultures of IPs/VMGs
that have remained inextricably linked to the lands they inhabited and the natural resources they
depend upon to survive”. The policy provides processing requirements for IPs/VMGs that include:
(i) screening to confirm the presence of VMGs in a subproject area, (ii) conduct of SA, in
consultation with communities involved; (iii) preparation of IP Plans (IPPs) or IP Policy
Frameworks (IPPFs); and (iv) disclosure. It also requires the borrower to seek broad community
support of IPs/VMGs through a process of FPIC before deciding to develop any project that targets
or affects IPs/VMGs.
51. The WB, like the United Nations (UN), does not define IP because of the varied and
changing contexts in which IPs live and because there is no universally accepted definition
(paragraph 3). Consequently, the OP 4.10 does not define the term either but instead it presents a set
of characteristics for identifying IPs/VMGs. For purposes of this policy, the term IPs is used in a
generic sense to refer to a distinct, vulnerable, social and cultural grouping possessing the following
characteristics in varying degrees:
i. self-identification as members of a distinct indigenous cultural group and recognition of
this identity by others;
ii. collective attachment to geographically distinct habitats or ancestral territories in the
project area and to the natural resources in these habitats and territories;
iii. customary, cultural, economic, social, or political institutions that are separate from those
of the dominant society and culture; and
iv. an indigenous language, often different from the official language of the country or
region.
3.4 Other Legal and Policy Provisions that Facilitate Operationalization of OP 4.10 within
Kenya’s Legal Frameworks
52. Kenya’s legal and regulatory framework has inclusion of several provisions, policies and
instruments that if well developed and implemented hold promise for addressing marginalization
and inclusion of IPs/VMGs. These include the National Land Policy (NLP). This Policy was
endorsed in 2009 while the Land Act, Land Registration Act and National Land Commission Act
were adopted in May 2012. Based on the NLP, Community Land Act No. 27 of 2016 was passed
on 21st September 2016 along with a number of other land related laws and regulations (but it is not
yet operational).

53. The NLP includes a key policy principle for restitution of land rights of minority
communities as a way of restoration and protection of land rights which were violated by colonial
and post-colonial governments (Articles 3.6.1.2 and 3.6.6 on restitution and land rights of minority
communities, respectively). The NLP calls on the GoK to secure community land and to “document
and map existing forms of communal tenure, whether customary or non-customary, in consultation
with the affected groups, and incorporate them into broad principles that will facilitate the orderly
evolution of community land law” (Article 3.3.1.2, paragraph 66).
54. The Forest Act of 2005 and Forest Policy of 2007 both have some provisions for the
customary rights of forest communities and community forestry. The Forest Act states that “nothing
in this Act shall be deemed to prevent any member of a forest community from using, subject to
such conditions as may be prescribed, such forest produce as it has been the custom of that
community to take from such forest otherwise than for the purpose of sale” (Article 22), and “…may
include activities such as ‘collection of forest produce for community based industries.’’(Article
47.2.e) under a license or management agreement. The Act defines a "forest community" as “a group
of persons who: (a) have a traditional association with a forest for purposes of livelihood, culture or
religion […] (Article 3). The Forest Policy recognizes the “traditional interests of local communities
customarily resident within or around a forest” (paragraph 4.3).
55. The National Policy on Culture and Heritage (2009) aims to promote and protect the
cultures and cultural diversity among Kenya’s ethnic communities. This includes the protection of
indigenous languages, the expression of cultural traditions, knowledge, and practices, traditional
medicines and community rights.
56. Of relevance to the situation of IPs/VMGs in the country is the Ministry of Education’s
Sessional Paper No. I of 2005: A Policy Framework for Education, Training and Research - Meeting
the Challenges of Education, Training and Research in Kenya in the 21st Century. This sessional
paper establishes that the language of instruction shall be the mother tongue in lower primary school
(classes 1-3) in the rural areas, and that a culturally sensitive approach must be used to address the
learning needs of different communities, including the IPs/VMGs.
57. The Policy Framework for Nomadic Education in Kenya (COK, 2010) provides for
appropriate approach to education. Although free and mandatory education was introduced in Kenya
in 2003, the pastoralist areas have continuously recorded much lower enrolment, transition and
completion rates compared to the rest of the country. The GoK formally adopted the Policy in 2010
to boost education access to nomadic communities. The policy contemplates education sessions
based on seasons rather than calendar terms. It considers use of an academic calendar that is flexible
and factors in climatic conditions and patterns of nomadic livelihood. It provides for the
development of curriculum that would be useful to pastoral lifestyle. Further, it proposes the creation
of a National Council for Nomadic Education.
58. The National Policy for the Sustainable Development of Northern Kenya and other Arid
Lands (Sessional Paper No 8 of 2012) states that ‘the Government will put in place an institutional
and legal framework for the development of Northern Kenya and other arid lands.’ The policy thus
calls on the government to establish a range of institutions that will provide long-term continuity in
Arid and Semi-Arid Lands (ASALs) development, including a National Drought Management

Authority (NDMA) and National Drought and Disaster Contingency Fund to increase
responsiveness to drought, National Council on Nomadic Education, Northern Kenya Education
Trust, Livestock Marketing Board, and Northern Kenya Investment Fund.
3.5 Similarities and Differences between CoK and OP. 4.10
59. The similarities and differences between Kenya’s key legal framework and Bank’s OP.
4.10 are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3: Similarities between COK and WB OP 4.10
OP 4.10 Constitution of Kenya Similarities/differences
Free, prior and Article 118(1): “Parliament shall (b) facilitate The Kenyan Constitution
informed public participation and involvement in the supports public participation
consultation legislative and other business of parliament and its and involvement in
leading to broad committees” government business, but
community Article 196(1) “A county shall … (a) conduct its does not explicitly mention
support business in an open manner, and hold sittings and the concept of Free Prior and
those of its committees in public participation and Informed Consultations
involvement in the legislative and other business of leading to Broad Community
the assembly and its committees” Support
Mitigation of Article 27(6) provides the means for redressing The Kenyan Constitution
harm to IPs marginalization and other forms of discrimination. focuses on efforts to redress
“To give full effect to the realization of rights past marginalization
guaranteed under this Article, the state shall take
full legislative and other measures, including
affirmative action programs and policies designed
to redress any disadvantages suffered by individuals
or groups because of past discrimination”
Culturally Article 69(1): “The State shall-(a) ensure The Kenyan Constitution
appropriate sustainable exploitation, utilization, management, focuses on equitable benefit-
benefit-sharing and conservation of the environment and natural sharing and not on culturally
resources and ensure equitable sharing of the appropriate benefit-sharing
accruing benefits”
Grievance Article 67 establishes the National Land The Kenyan Constitution
redress commission whose mandate is: “(e) to initiate focuses on redressing past
mechanism investigations on its own initiative or on a grievances. It explicitly
complaint, into present or historical land injustices, encourages the use of
and recommend appropriate redress; (f) to traditional dispute resolution
encourage the application of traditional dispute mechanisms in land conflicts
resolution mechanisms in land conflict”
Recognition and Article 63(4) protects community land from The Constitution provides for
protection of arbitrary disposal “except in terms of legislation mechanisms for the
customary land specifying the nature and extent of the rights of protection of communally
rights of IPs members of each community individually and held land
collectively”
Consultation -Article 11(1): “The Constitution recognizes culture The constitution focuses on
and benefits- as the foundation of the nation and as the promoting all forms of
sharing related cumulative civilization of the Kenyan people and cultural expression and
to the nation.” benefit sharing mechanisms
commercial

development of -Article 11(2) (a) obliges the state to: “promote all in case their cultural heritage
natural and forms of cultural expression through...arts, is commercialized
cultural traditional celebrations…and other cultural
resources heritage. Article 11(2) (c) obliges the State to
recognize the role of….and indigenous technologies
in the development of the nation”
-Article 11(3): “Parliament shall enact legislation
to-(a) ensure communities receive compensation or
loyalties for the use of their culture and cultural
heritage.”
-Article 69(1) Provides for public participation in
the management, protection and conservation of the
environment: “The State shall- …(d) encourage
public participation in the management, protection
and conservation of the environment”
Consultation This issue is not addressed in
and protections the Kenyan Constitution
to avoid or
mitigate the
effects of
economic and
physical
displacement of
IPs
60. The CoK and other related legislations as shown in Table 1 have a lot of similarities with
the tenets of OP. 4.10. There is considerable overlap between the groups identified by the GoK as
VMGs that have triggered OP 4.10 and those identified by the WB as IPs. Similarly, the groups
identified both by the GoK and OP 4.10 align with some of the groups that have been identified by
the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) in its conceptualization of the
notion of indignity and what it means in the African context.
61. In Kenya, the people who identify with the indigenous movement are mainly pastoralists
and hunter-gatherers as well as a number of small farming communities. Pastoralists are estimated
to comprise 25% of the national population, while the largest individual community of hunter-
gatherer’s number approximately 30,000. Pastoralists mostly occupy the ASALs of northern Kenya
and towards the borders between Kenya and Somalia, South Sudan, Ethiopia and Uganda.
62. Generally, there is no contradiction between the objectives and key principles of OP 4.10,
the CoK and the other legal documents of relevance to IPs/VMGs. Thus, the implementation of
some key Constitutional provisions would create an environment supportive of the application of
OP 4.10 in Kenya.

3.6 Overview of the VMGs in Kenya
63. Table 4 presents a brief overview of the main IPs/VMGs in Kenya. A comprehensive
description of IPs/VMGs is provided in Annex 2.
Table 4: Classification of IPs in Kenya by the WB

Name Key characteristics
Sengwer The Sengwer live in the three administrative sub-counties of Marakwet, West Pokot and Trans
Nzoia and along Cherangany Hills. They are estimated to be 50,000 (30,000 of them live in their
traditional territories and another 20,000 in the diaspora). They lived by hunting and bee-
keeping. While most Sengwer are officially landless, a few, especially those in the northern parts
of the Cherangany Hills received some land, but even this land is contested.
Ogiek The Ogiek (Ogiot - sing.) ethnic group consists of 20-30 groups of former hunters and honey
gatherers, mostly living in forested highlands in western Kenya. Traditionally the Ogiek had
occupied most of the forests in the extreme west and south of Western Kenya, but today their
main area of living is in and around the Mau forest, which is not part of the operational areas.
Turkana The Turkana people are the second largest of the pastoral people of Kenya with a population of
1,034,000. They occupy the far northwest corner of the nation, an area of about 67,000 square
kilometers. Their animals are the main source of income and food. Turkana’s have also pursued
other non-pastoral income-earning activity in both urban and rural environments.
Rendile The Rendile are a Cushitic tribe that inhabits the climatically harsh region between Marsabit
hills and Lake Turkana in Northern Kenya where they neighbour the Borana, Gabbra, Samburu
and Turkana tribes. They (Rendile) consist of nine clans and seven sub clans. The primary towns
include Marsabet, Laisamis, Merille, Logologo, Loyangalani, Korr, Kamboi, Ngurunit, and
Kargi.
Gabra The Gabra are an Oromo people who live as camel-herding nomads, mainly in the Chalbi desert
of northern Kenya and the highlands of southern Ethiopia. They are closely associated with other
Oromo, especially their non-nomadic neighbors, the Borana. The Gabra speak the Borana dialect
of Oromo, which belongs to the Cushitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic language family and have a
population of about 3,000.
Ajuran The Ajuran are ethnically Somalis. They were a kingdom that ruled Somalia before the advent
of Europeans into Africa. They are about 59,000 located in Marsabit, Isiolo and Moyale sub-
counties and Wajir North.
Maasai The Maasai (or Masai) are semi-nomadic people located primarily in Kenya and northern
Tanzania. Maasai’s population is about 684,000 and is located in the Rift Valley Province,
Kajiado and Narok sub-county.
Illchamus They are originally a pastoralist people who used to live on the mainland but due to clashes,
some of them were forced to migrate to an island in Lake Baringo, while others remained on the
mainland. They have a population of 34,000 and are located in Southeast and southern shore of
Lake Baringo, and southwest shore as far north as Kampi ya Samaki.
Aweer/ These are a remnant hunter-gatherer group living along the Kenyan coast in Lamu sub-County
Boni on the mainland. The Aweer have a population of 8,000 and are located in the Coast Province,
in Lamu, and Tana River counties in forests.
Pokot They are basically divided into two sub-groups based on livelihood and have a population of
662,000. The Pokot are located in the Rift Valley Province, Baringo and West Pokot sub-
counties
Endorois Endorois community is a minority community that was living adjacent to Lake Baringo and has
a population of about 20,000. Once able to migrate with the seasons between Lake Bogoria and
the Mochongoi forest, the Endorois are now forced to live on a strip of semi-arid land between

their two traditional sites with no access to sustain their former cattle rearing and beekeeping
livelihood.
Watha The Watha people are mostly found in the rural arid and semi-arid lands of the country. A
minority of them live in thick forests scattered all over the country. The people are traditionally
hunters and gatherers. In Malindi sub-county a Watha community is found in four divisions (i.e.
Malindi, Langobaya, Marafa and Magarini). In Tana River County the Watha are found in
Sombo and Laza divisions while in Mandera they are located found in Central division. The
population of Watha community is estimated at approximately 30,000 persons.
3.7 Location of IPs/VMGs in Kenya
64. Out of 47 counties in Kenya, 14 have been defined as “marginalized areas” by the CRA.
The CRA defines these as “communities that have been excluded from social and economic life of
Kenya for different reasons” and “geographic locations (County or sub-County) where significant
populations of underserved communities live” (CRA, 2013).
65. The 14 underserved counties, which are deemed to be marginalized by CRA include
Mandera, Wajir, Garissa, Tana River, Samburu, Isiolo, Marsabit, Narok, West Pokot, Turkana, Taita
Taveta, Kwale, Kilifi and Lamu (as illustrated in Figure 1). They collectively represent 72% of the
country’s total land area and 20% of the country’s population, including historically nomadic
societies that even today continue to rely on pastoralism for their livelihoods. Their population is
highly dispersed, at a density four times lower than the national average. They present profound
infrastructure deficits, including lack of access to social services. There is also significant insecurity
in certain areas, giving rise to substantial numbers of displaced persons and livelihood adaptations
that further undermine economic prosperity.
Figure 1: Map showing the marginalized counties in Kenya (in red)

3.8 Electricity access by the IPs/VMGs in Kenya
66. Most of the IPs/VMGs are found in areas generally regarded as inaccessible, ASALs of
Kenya. These areas were generally neglected over the years and the years of economic and political
marginalization have resulted in the ASALs being the most under-developed areas in the country.
The colonial governments regarded them as non-productive. Successive independent governments
saw the areas as too expansive to invest in. It is upon this realization that recent government
initiatives have been established to address the development challenges in these areas.
67. In the recent past a project, known as the Kenya Off-grid Solar Access Project (K-OSAP)
was initiated to allow the IPs/VMGs in the 14 underserved counties to access solar powered
electricity. This project will be implemented by MoE through REA and KPLC. This initiative will
supply stand-alone solar panels and solar mini-grids to supply power to households and other
establishments.
3.9 Institutional Arrangement
68. The T-Line subprojects will be under the administrative authority of the MoE, with
KETRACO as the implementing agency. County governments in the respective project regions will
also be involved while policy and strategic decisions will involve the following Ministries:
 Ministry of Finance;
 Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources;
 Ministry of Lands and Settlement (Physical Planning Department);
 Ministry of Roads, Public Works and Housing;
 Ministry of Agriculture;
 Provincial Administration; and
 Subproject Steering Committee.
69. The Ministry oversees the Energy Sector in Kenya and is responsible for procuring
resources from the National Treasury and other developmental partners for the overall project
implementation. The Ministry is also responsible for coordinating the actions of the implementing
agencies to ensure they meet the PDOs. In this regard, KETRACO will look to the Ministry to
provide oversight to ensure that the overall approach related to VMG issues between KETRACO
and KPLC is well coordinated.
70. Generally, the KESIP Project will be implemented by three agencies - MoE, KPLC and
KETRACO. In addition to providing overall oversight and coordination, the Ministry will be
implementing part of Component 3 (technical assistance and capacity building). It will also be
responsible for the overall monitoring of project progress and for consolidating the progress reports
from each implementing agency.
71. KPLC will be responsible for Component 1 (access expansion and distribution network
strengthening) and associated technical assistance activities. KETRACO will be responsible for
implementation of Component 2 (transmission network expansion and strengthening) as well as
support for PPP feasibility studies and associated technical assistance activities.

72. Each transmission development VMGP will require that a detailed implementation process
is in place for the delivery of the entitlement package to ensure compliance with this VMGF and to
meet the objectives of the VMGP. The strategy of implementation would include the delineation of
roles and responsibilities of organizations/institutions, as well as CSOs and community groups. In
addition, it will articulate the procedures to be followed along with the support facilities available,
and a timeframe for implementation of each of the activities.
73. A subproject steering committee will be formed if a determination is made during the
screening that the subproject is likely to be in an area with IPs/VMGs, hence the likelihood to
interfere with the people’s livelihoods and rights. The committee will comprise representatives from
MoE, KESIP PIU, county and sub-county representatives and IPs/VMGs. In addition, in each
affected county, sector ministries including Environment and Mineral Resources, Lands, Gender,
Sports, Culture and Social Affairs will also be incorporated in this committee. The committee will
provide a link between KESIP, the IPs/VMGs and the county/sub-county administration. The
committee will meet monthly and act as the focal point for all VMG related issues during the
implementation of the subproject. The IPs/VMGs will be facilitated to form their own groups whose
representative will be a member of the subproject steering committee.
74. For each subproject a specific PIU will be set up to manage and oversee all the activities
of the VMGP. The size of the team, its formation, its functions and terms of reference (ToRs) will
be dependent on the extent of the land acquisition, challenges of the T-Line in question and number
of PAPs. In general, the PIU will comprise of an overall project manager, a socio-economist,
surveyor, wayleave officer, environmentalist, socio-economist transmission engineer, land valuer,
legal officer, financial administrator, database administrator and other key support staff, as
illustrated in Figure 2. During implementation, the community will be involved in the project
activities, especially on the management of grievances.

Figure 2: Project organogram
3.10 Roles and responsibilities
75. The MoE will provide oversight and procure the necessary resources for the project
implementation. The Board of Directors (BoD) will be responsible for policy approval while the
Chief Executive Officer (CEO) will approve the finances and operations, and provide overall
direction for the project. The roles of the other technical staff are summarized in Table

Table 5: Roles and responsibilities of the RPT members
MoE -Provide oversight
-Provide resources for project implementation
-Coordinate activities between KETRACO and KPLC
-Consolidation of progress reports from KETRACO & KPLC
-Reporting to the World Bank
Board of Directors -Policy approval
CEO -Approve finances and operations
General Manager, -Supervise technical designs and operations
Technical Services -Approve technical works
-Administration of technical staff
-Bridge between the management and the technical team
General Manager, -Company’s chief accounting officer
Finance -Authorize payments
-Supervise accounting systems
Manager, Supply -Preparation of RFP documents for consultancy works
Chain -Key member of the tender committee
-Supervise procurement procedures
-Issue contracts
Senior Manager Legal -In charge of company’s legal services
services -Supervise way leave and land acquisition
-Facilitate transfer of alternative land acquired for vulnerable PDPs
-Draft contracts for outsourced RAP services and monitor the contract
implementation
-Promote amicable settlement of any disputes that may arise during the
resettlement process
-Facilitate the transfer of substation land to KETRACO
-Register easements
-Custodian of the company seal
-Secretary to the board of directors
Manager Internal -Audit company operations and systems
Auditor -Implement the company’s anti-corruption policy
Procurement officer In charge of procurement processes for the project
Project Engineer Has overall responsibility for the project, including:
-Ensuring timely preparation and implementation of the RAP prior to
start of civil works
Prepare project progress reports
-Coordinate work during construction
-Supervise contractors
-Handle re-routings
-Disseminate information to contractor
Project Accountant -Process payments to consultants
-Process payments to PAPs
-Verify compensation details
-Make the actual payments
Land Surveyors -Draw mutations for land transfers
-Ground truthing
-Rerouting the line
-Scaling of the trace for valuation
-Supervise contracted surveyors

Land Economist -Wayleaves acquisition
-Valuation and Compensation
-Resolving land related disputes
-Negotiations over compensation
Socio-economist Responsible for all social safeguard activities of the project, including:
-Link between the PAPs and KETRACO
Contact local administration (county and national government) and
plans for sensitization meetings
-Hold sensitization meetings and sensitize communities on the project
-Handle the social component of the project
-Prepare RFPs, RPFs and TOR for RAP, SIA, SA and VMGP
-Prepare RAP for the project
-Supervise RAP Consultants
-Responsible for supporting the project Engineer in ensuring timely
implementation of the RAP/VMGP
-Carry out a socio-economic survey of the project area
-Oversee Resettlement1
Engineers -In-charge of various engineering works - civil, electrical and
mechanical
Environmental experts -Preparation of EIAs
-Acquisition of ESIA licenses
-Implementation of Environmental Social Management Plans (ESMP)
-Supervise consultants
Support staff -Support the project implementation process
Consultants -Provide professional services - survey work, construction, valuation,
design, wayleave acquisition, ESIA, RAP, SIA, SA, VMGP,among
others
Liaison Officer -Liaises with the community
-Acts as the link through Communication (in the local language)
between KETRACO and the Community
Communication -Develops and coordinates the Corporate communication between
Officer KETRACO and the community
-Coordinates Corporate Social Responsibilities
- Coordinates project notices and publications
-In charge of complaints channeled through official corporate channels
Project Clerk -Collates and manages all project data
76. For each of the subprojects, there will be put in place a system of ensuring that activities
are developed and approved accordingly. Table 6 presents a decision flow matrix that will be
improved upon as the instruments’ requirements become clearer.
1
KETRACO has in-house trained staff who can undertake this work. In case there is need for more personnel, consultants
will be sourced to augment the in-house team.

Table 6: Decision for specific instruments
Activities Who is responsible? Who approves?
Appointment of resettlement General Manager Technical General Manager Technical
project team (RPT) Services Services
Screening The ESS specialists attached to General Manager Technical
the PIU, supported by expert Services
consultants
Subprojects Project Implementation Team General Manager Technical
Services
Determination and Project Implementation Team General Manager Technical
development of screening (ESS Specialist) with support Services
tools and approval from consultants with
expertise on the social and
cultural groups in the
project area
Approval of budget and Project Engineer General Manager Technical
funding Services
Obtaining World Bank No Project Engineer World Bank
Objection
Reporting to the world Bank Project Engineer General Manager Technical
Services

CHAPTER 4: POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF KESIP ON THE IPs/VMGs
4.1 Potential Positive Impacts
77. The potential positive impacts of the project will be realized in the economic, education,
social, health, security and environmental sectors. Positive impacts are also anticipated on gender,
beliefs and culture, including the following:
i. Uplift the livelihood and economic outcomes of the IPs/VMGs due to employment
creation, enhanced savings as funds used to purchase kerosene can be channeled for other
uses or saved;
ii. Diversification of livelihood and economic activities;
iii. Better academic performance since students will be able to spend longer study hours due
to availability of light;
iv. Improved health services due to the fact that health facilities will be equipped with
laboratories and refrigeration equipment that rely on electricity. This will also lead to
enhanced safe delivery of pregnant mothers;
v. Create an enabling environment for attaining gender parity among the IPs/VMGs by
increasing the number of girls attending school, thereby reducing gender inequalities;
vi. Investment in the generation of clean, renewable energy, which, given the challenges
created by climate change, represents a positive social benefit for the society as a whole;
and
vii. Reduction in insecurity incidences through the increased ability to track the movement
of the criminals which will be achieved through installing floodlight masts in areas where
the mini-grids will be stationed.
4.2 Potential Adverse Impacts
78. Permanent infrastructure will result into an infinite loss of use of or limited access to
property, vegetation, or land by the affected persons as a result of the subproject activities. While
negative impacts are expected to be minimal, they could include the following:
i. Land acquisition - land that is found suitable for some of the proposed infrastructural
development may need to be acquired, which could translate to loss of land, pasture
and/or crop cover;
ii. Labor influx - civil works for some of the proposed infrastructure works may attract labor
(skilled and unskilled) from outside the project area. This in turn may have negative
social and cultural impacts such as increase of infections, child labor, teen pregnancies,
young people dropping out of school to take up jobs, gender-based violence (GBV) and
sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA), etc.; and
iii. Temporal impacts - these may include short-term interruption in the current use of
property or land by the affected communities or individuals as a result of the subproject
activities.
iv. Potential adverse impacts on community conservancies.
v. Potential adverse impacts on cultural sites of the vulnerable populations, including
impacts on rivers which and other sites such as sacred places of worship, or cultural
activities such as initiation ceremonies.

vi. Potential impacts on livelihood strategies of some VMGs especially the hunter-gatherer
communities.
4.3 Proposed Mitigation Measures
4.3.1 Mitigation against impacts related to land take
79. To avoid or minimize adverse impacts and, at the same time, ensure enhancement of
benefits and full participation of the IPs/VMGs, KETRACO will ensure the following measures are
implemented.
i. Avoid the need for land acquisition and displacement of VMGs. Where land acquisition
is inevitable, the provisions of the Resettlement Policy Framework (RPF) will be
followed. The RPF clearly stipulates all land tenures, including how community land,
will be handled. Where unregistered community/VMG land will be affected, a
comprehensive consultation process will be mounted by KETRACO, using the free, prior
and informed consultation principles, to ensure VMGs understand the need for their land,
either for wayleave or substation, so as to secure their broad support for the project. In
this regard, free, prior and informed consultations with the VMG communities and their
leaders will be done to agree with them on the best compensation modality for the
community.
ii. The IPs/VMGs and their organizations will be informed of the selection, design, and
implementation processes to seek input and to provide clarification. KETRACO will
carry out an analysis of the socio-economic impacts of the proposed subprojects on
IPs/VMGs through a transparent process with the FPIC of the affected communities. It
will also ensure that the interventions do not unnecessarily and intentionally exacerbate
factors outside the scope of planned impacts. Further, KETRACO will screen the
activities of subprojects for a preliminary understanding of the nature and magnitude of
potential impacts, and explore alternatives to avoid or minimize any adverse impacts as
detailed in the Environment and Social Management Framework (ESMF) and RPF.
iii. As part of the free, prior and informed consultation process, VMGs will be sensitized on
the provisions of the Community Land Act 2016. According to this Act, unregistered
community land is held in trust for the community by the respective county governments.
However, the Act prohibits the County Government from transacting on such land by
stating that “the County Government shall not sell, dispose, transfer or convert for
private purpose or in any way dispose of unregistered community land that it is holding
in trust on behalf of the community for which it held”. Despite this prohibition, the Act
empowers the county governments to “hold in trust on behalf of a community any monies
payable as compensation for compulsory acquisition of any unregistered community
land”, until the community has registered its land. The money is to be held by the County
Government in an interest earning account. Upon registration, the Act requires the
County Government to promptly transfer to the community all the compensation money
and interest earned. The affected communities will also be sensitized on the OP 4.12 and
OP 4.10 provisions that require that project benefits should flow directly to the

communities, and that where VMGs are concerned, such benefits should be culturally
appropriate.
iv. As it is not within the mandate or capacity of KETRACO to ensure or fast-track the
registration process2, KETRACO will inform VMGs and communities of the challenges
of the conditions imposed by the Community Land Act, concerning cash compensation
for unregistered community land as a way of discouraging them from opting for cash
compensation. Also, due to the fact that an unregistered community is not formally
organized and has no structures for handling compensation cash in the name of the
community, and to avoid causing harm to the more vulnerable segments and households
among VMGs who may lose out if the community decides to divide the cash among its
members, e.g. by sub-clans or sub-ethnic groups, the VMGs will be sensitized on the
option of in-kind compensation in the form of community subprojects which would
ensure that everyone in the community benefits, without discrimination.
v. To enable them select appropriate alternative compensation strategies, and in order to

arrive at transparent agreements on in-kind compensation that also ensure that vulnerable
subgroups are protected and no transitional hardships are imposed, KETRACO will
inform the affected communities of the amount of cash compensation that corresponds
to their land (at full replacement cost plus transaction costs) and work with them to
identify viable alternatives of comparable value, in the form of in-kind compensation of
their choice. In this regard, KETRACO will facilitate consultations among community
members to ensure that the in-kind compensation projects that are selected are beneficial
to all community members, including vulnerable individuals and households among
them. Should KETRACO find that there are specific in-kind compensations that are
particularly beneficial to vulnerable VMG households, then these will be included as
priority for implementation. They will also be encouraged to actively participate in the
implementation of the in-kind compensation projects through being involved in
implementation monitoring.
vi. Should VMGs or any other community insist on cash compensation after being sensitized
on the conditions of the account that would be held in trust for them by the County
Government and interest thereon, then they will be sensitized to organize themselves,
and, in consultation with the County Government, agree on modalities that would enable
them keep track of the account as they pursue registration of their land once the county
and national governments put in place all the mechanisms for such registration with the
view of having the funds released to them as soon as they register their land. While
community comanaged trust arrangements are not included in the Community Land Act,
2016, KETRACO will pursue this possibility with the concerned county government as
a way of assuring the community of the safety of their compensation money. This
however is not a promise of this VMGF as it is not embedded in law.
2
Community lands in Kenya have not yet been registered because the national and county governments are yet to put in
place all the required institutional and other mechanisms for their registration, which in practice means that communities
would not immediately enjoy benefits of cash compensation should they choose this as their preferred compensation
mode. It is not known when the registration may happen, but it could take years, and Ketraco has no ability to intervene
in this or to put a time limit to it.

For VMGs household or individuals who may lose housing or have their livelihoods
significantly curtailed by the loss of land due to project activities, transitional assistance
will be considered in consultations with them to cushion them from transitional
hardships, as stipulated in the RPF. Also, local communities will be given the first
employment opportunity by the contractors. In this regard, KETRACO will ensure that
the contractor will not unnecessarily import labor, unless such importation is for skilled
labor not found in the local community within the project area.
vii. Whatever mode of compensation is agreed with the community, KETRACO will ensure
that the compensation is implemented prior to start of works. This includes placing the
cash into the County Government Account should they choose this mode of
compensation.
viii. Since subprojects to be implemented through KESIP are linear by nature (except for
substations), most affected PAPs, including IPs/VMGs (if any) will normally relocate
within their unaffected land parcels. Only those whose land parcels are totally affected
by the wayleave corridor would relocate outside their land parcels, which means they
would be resettled outside the way leave corridor. Such people are considered to be
permanently displaced and are given support to relocate in addition to full compensation
at current replacement cost for their land, structures and any other assets.
80. As much as possible, the project will promote the use of local labor – both skilled and
unskilled. nevertheless, the project will mount a sensitization and awareness campaign to dissuade
families from allowing their school/underage children from participating in project activities to
guard against child labor.
4.3.2 Mitigation against other project impacts
81. During consultations with VMGs and other stakeholders for the preparation of this VMGF,
stakeholders identified some potential adverse impacts on VMGs including impacts on community
conservancies, cultural sites and livelihood strategies of some VMGs such as the hunter-gatherer
communities. They were also concerned that there should be post-construction monitoring to
determine the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures, including mitigation for T-Lines
that may pass through forests. These requests/concerns will be addressed through the participatory
monitoring process involving VMGs through their representative organizations as indicated in Table
8.
82. To mitigate against such impacts, KETRACO will work hand in hand with KWS to address
any impacts on community conservancies, and with the communities’ cultural leaders to ensure the
protection of cultural heritage sites of the communities by ensuring subprojects are designed in such
a way as to avoid any interference with such cultural sites. To achieve this, once subproject sites are
known and initial route design is established, VMGs active participation of VMG community and
cultural leaders will be sought to enable them to identify any cultural or livelihood sites along the
initial route design. The findings will be taken on board in the design of the final subproject T-Line
route. Should any residual impacts remain after mitigation through design, KETRACO will agree

with VMGs on appropriate mitigation measures for the same and the agreed to action will be
included in the VMGP. The VMGs, especially their leaders, will be encouraged to actively monitor
the implementation activities to ensure subprojects are implemented according to design.
83. Community participation will be a key factor in the implementation of this VMGF as it is
the only way for ensuring that the concerns of the VMGs identified during the preparation of this
VMGF, and the commitments made by KETRACO, (see Table 2 above) are implemented as agreed.
To this end, the affected communities will be encouraged to undertake active monitoring of project
activities and to bring any concerns to the attention of KETRACO
84. To protect the community from negative actions by project workers, safeguards will be
built into the contractors’ agreements to ensure that workers are not engaging in activities or vices
that could disrupt the social and cultural set-ups of the local communities. To this end, measures
will be put in place to ensure that the contractors, subcontractors and other agencies involved in the
project to do not involve themselves in actions that will lead to sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA)
of the communities or other gender-based violence (GBV) actions. To achieve this, the contractor
will be required to sensitize communities and their staff on the kind of relationships beteween project
workers and the community that may predispose community members to, e.g. SEA. On their part,
contractors will be required to put in place Codes of Conduct (CoC) in appropriate languages, to be
signed by their workers committing them not engage in sexual relations with community members,
especially underage children, or any acts that may be disruptive or abusive to the cultural norms and
social dynamics of the community. The CoC will include appropriate sanctions to be enforced by
the contractor in case of failure to observe its provisions.
85. Finally, a GRM will be prepared for KESIP in consultation with the VMGs as outlined in
chapter 8 of this VMGF. This will be another modality for ensuring community participation and
monitoring of project activities.

CHAPTER 5: PLANS FOR CARRYING OUT SOCIAL ASSESSMENT FOR
SUBPROJECTS
86. If, based on the screening, it is concluded that IPs/VMGs are present in, or have collective
attachment to the subproject site, KETRACO will undertake a SA to evaluate the subproject’s
potential positive and adverse effects on the IPs/VMGs, and examine project alternatives where
adverse effects may be significant. The breadth, depth, and type of analysis required for the SA will
be proportional to the nature and scale of the proposed subproject’s potential effects on the
IPs/VMGs present. KETRACO will prepare detailed ToRs for the SA once it is determined that
IPs/VMGs are present in the project area. The IPs/VMGs will be consulted based on the free, prior
and informed consultations principles, which refers to a process whereby affected vulnerable and
marginalized communities freely have the choice, based on sufficient information concerning the
benefits and disadvantages of the project, of whether and how these activities occur.
87. KESIP projects affecting the IPs/VMGs that meet the OP 4.10 criteria, whether negatively
or positively, will be prepared in consultation with the affected communities. The policy requires
that the implementing agencies engage in FPIC with the affected vulnerable and marginalized
communities at every stage of the project to fully identify their views concerning the potential
impacts of the project on them and to obtain broad community support for the project. Similarly, the
development of project-specific measures to avoid adverse impacts and enhance culturally
appropriate benefits should be drawn in consultation with the IPs/VMGs.
88. The project will put the following measures in place:

i. Ensure that project design frameworks and the attendant processes and activities are
disclosed in culturally appropriate and accessible manner;
ii. Ensure that IPs/VMGs and their organizations are fully incorporated in the selection,
design, and implementation processes;
iii. Ensure coordinated efforts to equitably distribute project services through the
implementation of a stakeholder engagement plan (SEP);
iv. Undertake specific impact assessments of proposed subprojects on the economic and
social development of IPs/VMGs and dominant communities;
v. In collaboration with the identified IPs/VMGs, screen all subprojects for potential
impacts; and
vi. Implement outreach activities to IPs/VMGs to raise awareness on the importance of the
transmission subprojects.
89. Social Assessment will provide the VMGs with the opportunity to participate in the design
of the project. It is anticipated that during the Social Assessment, the VMGs will be sensitized to
ensure that places of cultural importance, community conservancies if any, and other critical habitats
are not negatively impacted by the project. The monitoring of project activities will start at the social
assessment stage.

CHAPTER 6: FRAMEWORK FOR ENSURING FREE, PRIOR AND INFORMED
CONSULTATION WITH IPs/VMGs
6.1 Free, Prior and Informed Consultations during project implementation
90. The FPIC with the vulnerable and marginalized communities will be conducted at each
stage of the project and especially during implementation. In this regard, the IPs/VMGs have been
consulted at the Framework preparation stage to fully capture their views and ascertain their broad
community support for the project. The FPIC, in relation to activities taking place that affect
IPs/VMGs, refers to a process whereby affected vulnerable and marginalized communities freely
have the choice, based on sufficient information concerning the benefits and disadvantages of the
project, of whether and how these activities will occur according to their systems of customary
representation and decision-making. Table 7 presents the operationalization of FPIC for the
proposed project.
Table 7: Free, Prior and Informed Consultations
Free No threats: the IPs/VMGs will not be coerced to support any activity by any of the
project teams and local leaders through any means such as threats of not being
included in the project if they do not support the process
No manipulation: the IPs/VMGs will not be manipulated by the leaders through any
means possible to participate or support decisions and actions
No intimidation: the IPs/VMGs will be allowed to participate in project activities with
full understanding of their rights and of their own willingness
No incentives: there will be no use of ‘carrot and stick’ tactics to lure IPs/VMGs into
supporting or engaging in Project activities
Prior The consultation process will start early and be iterative in nature. This will allow the
PIU to incorporate concerns of the IPs/VMGs and recommendations into project
design
Before any activity is initiated, the project team will ensure that the development plans
are finalized and the specific requirements, including consultations, consensus-
building and land acquisition are included
Informed Information to be provided will be accurate and in an appropriate language
The information will articulate the objectives of the proposed activities, duration,
those targeted, proposed benefits sharing and legal issues
Information will be channeled by use of various media accessible to the IPs/VMGs
Information will take into view the cultural contexts
Consultation The form may vary for different communities – it may be oral or written but will be
consultative and participatory
The process for providing consent will reflect the diversity of views and outcomes
which will be documented
Decision-making will not exclude or marginalize individuals due to gender, ethnicity,
age, disability, location or any other factor

6.2 Screening, Preparation and Implementation of VMGPs
91. The steps to be followed for the preparation of VMGPs for KESIP will include a screening
process, to determine whether IPs/VMGs are present in, or have collective attachment to the
subproject area. This screening will be conducted by the ESS within KETRACO PIU with the
support of consultants with expertise on the socio-cultural dynamics of the groups in the project
area. Ideally, the screening for IPs/VMGs should consider the GoK’s framework for identification
of IPs/VMGs according to the CoK, 2010. However, the WB criteria for identification of IPs/VMGs
as per OP. 4.10 will be used to make a final determination.
92. The preparation of VMGPs will be done in accordance with the requirements of OP 4.10
and each VMGP will be submitted to the WB for review before the respective investment is
considered eligible for Bank financing (see annexes 3, 4 and 5 for the relevant instruments on
VMGPs).
93. The need for VMGPs will depend on: (i) the presence of IPs/VMGs; and (ii) the nature and
scale of the subproject impact on groups that meet the OP 4.10 criteria. The VMGPs will capture
the nature and scale of the subproject impacts and vulnerability of IPs/VMGs, including:
i. Adverse impacts on customary rights of use and access to land and natural resources;
ii. Negative effects on the socio-economic and cultural integrity;
iii. Effects on health, education, livelihood, access to the project benefits, and social security
status; and
iv. Other impacts that may alter or undermine indigenous knowledge and customary
institutions. It will also identify ways in which to bring benefits of the project to IP/VMG
communities if technically feasible.
94. KETRACO will consult with IPs/VMGs and ensure that the PAPs receive culturally
appropriate social and economic benefits. It will also establish measures to avert the identified
potential adverse impacts on IPs/VMGs. Where this avoidance is proven to be impossible, VMGPs
will outline measures to minimize, mitigate, and compensate for the adverse impacts.
95. The level of detail and comprehensiveness of the VMGPs will vary depending on the
specific subproject and the nature of impacts to be addressed. If the impacts are limited to acquisition
of customary land, the elements of the VMGP will be combined in the RAP. If IPs/VMGs are the
sole or overwhelming majority of the subproject beneficiaries, the elements of the VMGP could be
integrated into the subproject design or documents such as community development program to
ensure that all IPs/VMGs participate in and receive culturally appropriate benefits from the project.
Further, a social assessment will be conducted to identify and note any cultural differences that
would need to be addressed by the subproject.
6.3 Preparation of a Social Assessment
96. The SA is aimed at ensuring FPIC with the IPs/VMGs during project design, planning and
implementation. It will make provisions for ensuring that mitigation of potential adverse impacts
deriving from subproject activities, including potential impacts identified in Table 2, are based on a

participatory and consultative processes acceptable to the IPs/VMGs and WB. The SA will address
the following key issues:
i. Profile of the community – livelihoods, ethnicity, household structure and leadership,
gender relations;
ii. Likely impacts (both positive and negative), future livelihoods and resettlement patterns.
This will include an affirmation as to whether the potential impacts identified during the
preparation of this VMGF would result from project activities since the subproject site
would already be known;
iii. Relationship of different groups and conflict potential of the project;
iv. Capacity and roles of social structures including customary institutions, economic and
social groups;
v. Gender relations and women’s empowerment including GBV and SEA, and
recommendations for their prevention;
vi. Constructive engagement of vulnerable groups including persons with disability, older
persons, chronically ill, women and youth in the subproject; and
vii. Suggestions for accessible GRM.
97. Beyond social screening, the subproject investments will comply with the following:
i. Conserve and sustainably use land and other natural resources that impact on IPs/VMGs
and other communities;
ii. Mitigate any possible adverse impacts;
iii. Be socially and culturally acceptable to the IPs/VMGs and economically feasible;
iv. Be institutionally feasible - the local institutional capacity should be adequate to take up
activities;
v. Be environmentally sustainable and avoid detrimental impacts from those activities that
cannot be mitigated;
vi. Be supported by the IPs/VMGs and other communities through participatory
consultation; and
vii. Be supported by training and capacity building, if necessary, to enhance IPs/VMGs and
community development.
98. The PIU will prepare detailed ToRs for the SA study once it is determined that IPs/VMGs
are present in a subproject site. These TORs will be approved by the Bank before the recruitment of
expert consultants to support the conduct of the SA, as well as preparation of VMGPs and other
social instruments under the project, including RAP and ESMP.
6.4 Capacity Building
99. During the IPs/VMGs’ orientation and mobilization process, their individual and
organizational interests, capacity and skills will be assessed. If required, the VMGF proposes the
provision of training for the IPs/VMGs and their organizations in resource mapping, record keeping,
basic account keeping and M&E, among other skills that will enable them to be part of the entire
project implementation.
100. Although KETRACO will engage qualified consultants to support the preparation of the
RAP, SA, VMGP and ESMP for the project, the ESS staff involved in KESIP will be trained in:

i. operationalization of the VMGF with special attention on developing VMGPs;
ii. conducting SA;
iii. community mobilization and sensitization;
iv. stakeholder mapping and analysis;
v. Conducting FPIC;
vi. Use of participatory tools and techniques; and
vii. Monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the VMGF instruments.
101. It is anticipated that the content and scheduling of the staff training will be done in such a
way that it enhances the implementation process without interfering with the flow of the project
activities.

CHAPTER 7: CONSULTATIONS AND STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
102. The CoK (2010) recognizes the right of citizens to participate in decisions that directly
affect them. Hence, public participation and consultation is a cardinal requirement in all matters of
public interest in Kenya. There are a variety of laws, regulations, and orders that have a bearing on
stakeholder consultations and engagements, including: The Land Act, 2012; The Land Registration
Act, 2012; The National Land Commission Act, 2012; County Government Act, 2012; and The
Environmental Management and Coordination Act, (EMCA), 2012.
103. The stakeholder analysis and community engagement will be carried out in order to:
i. Identify key stakeholders that are affected, and/or able to influence the project and its
activities;
ii. Identify the most effective methods and structures through which to disseminate project
information, and to ensure regular, accessible, transparent and appropriate consultation;
iii. Promote understanding among all project stakeholders - in an open, inclusive, culturally
appropriate and transparent process of engagement and communication to ensure that
stakeholders are well informed about the proposed investment;
iv. Disclose information as early and as comprehensively as possible;
v. Involve the stakeholders in the planning process. In this regard, the stakeholders are
included in the scoping exercises, the assessment of impacts, and the generation of
mitigation and management measures, and in providing local knowledge and information
for the baseline status;
vi. Build relationships that will serve to establish and maintain a productive relationship
between the project team and stakeholders;
vii. Engage marginalised and vulnerable groups of people by increasing the opportunity for
them to comment on the proposed subprojects and to voice their concerns;
viii. Ensure the concerns of the VMGs are taken on board in the finalization of project design;
ix. Ensure that any negative impacts of the project on VMGs – including the potential adverse
impacts identified in table 2 (where applicable) are mitigated in accordance with this VMGF
and the provisions of the RPF on the VMGs;
x. Ensure that where VMGs ate concerned, the project and related benefits are implemented
in culturally appropriate ways
xi. Manage expectations, through providing space for understanding and managing
stakeholder and community expectations and by disseminating accurate information in
accessible ways; and
xii. Ensure compliance with both local regulatory requirements and international best practices.
104. This Framework seeks to ensure that IPs/VMGs are informed, consulted, and mobilized to
participate in the relevant subprojects. The KETRACO PIU will undertake consultations from the
very beginning and will continue till the end of the project. KETRACO will conduct FPIC with any
likely impacted IPs/VMGs and those who work with and/or are knowledgeable of IPs/VMGs
development issues and concerns. To facilitate effective participation, the VMGPs developed for
the subprojects will propose a timetable to be followed to consult IPs/VMGs at different stages of
the project cycle, especially during preparation of the civil works program.

105. The PIU will undertake a social impact assessment (SIA) to gather relevant information
on: (i) socio-demographic data; (ii) social, cultural and economic situation; and (ii) social, cultural
and economic impacts, both positive and negative, on the IP/VMG communities in the relevant
subproject areas. Participatory consultation with affected households will be undertaken during
project planning and implementation. The VMGP consultation will be done before the
implementation of the project to capture and integrate feedback from the IPs/VMGs.

CHAPTER 8: GRIEVANCE REDRESS MECHANISM
8.1 Introduction
106. Grievance redress mechanism (GRM) refers to institutions, instruments, methods and
processes by which a resolution to a grievance is sought and provided. For any energy project, a
number of mechanisms are available to aggrieved parties to access redress. The mechanisms can be
complex and diverse. They may be institution specific (internal) to a project and set up from its
inception or others may emerge over time in response to needs identified while the project evolves.
GRMs are intended to be accessible, collaborative, expeditious, and effective in resolving concerns
through dialogue, joint fact-finding, negotiation and problem solving.
107. Grievances may arise from members of communities who are dissatisfied with the
consultation, eligibility criteria, PAP categorization, valuation of assets, crop compensation rates,
option packages offered, prohibitions, community planning measures, or the actual implementation.
During the initial stages of the socio-economic survey, stakeholders shall be made aware of all the
above matters and provided with copies of grievance procedures as a guide on how grievances will
be managed.
108. Where a subproject is located in, or traverses VMGs land, a GRM will be prepared in
consultation with them to ensure that it is culturally appropriate. This will accord the VMGs with
an opportunity to actively participate in project activities and to ensure that any complaints, disputes
or grievances resulting from project activities are resolved at in ways that respect their dignity and
human rights. The GRM will be another avenue for VMGs to monitor project activities and to report
any implementation shorfalls or concerns.
109. There will be two levels of grievance redress, i.e. the community level and the Company
level. The GRM at the community level will be guided by the community’s cultural norms and
values. KETRACO will encourage the formation of Community Resettlement Committees (CRC)
for each subproject, whose roles will be to resolve grievances through a culturally acceptable
manner. KETRACO’s Community Liaison Officer (CLO) will be the link between the CRC and
KETRACO. The CRCs will be subproject based and the selection of the committee members will
be guided by the community’s way of governance.
110. The community level grievance redress procedure will start with registration of the
grievances with KETRACOs CLO on site or with the CRC. The CLO will convene a meeting with
CRC, invite the aggrieved party to the meeting and present the grievance to the committee for
hearing. The committee will resolve the complaint if possible, if not, the CLO will escalate the
unresolved complaints to the PIU. The community level grievance redress procedure is illustrated
in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Community Level Grievance redress procedure
Community Liaison Officer (CLO)

receives grievance on site
(verbal, email, letter etc)

CLO logs in the grievance
Meeting held
grievance
unresolved CLO convenes a meeting Meeting held,
with the CRC and the grievance resolved
complainant
Matter escalated
to the PIU
111. The second level grievance redress will be at the Company level, whereby, grievances will
be received by KETRACO through email, letters, verbal, suggestion box or from the CLO. Once
grievances are received, they will be logged into the grievance log in the office. Some grievances
may be resolved immediately, if not, they will be escalated to KETRACOs PIU, as illustrated in
Figure 4.
112. The PIU will hold a meeting with the aggrieved party and possibly resolve the grievance.
However, if the PIU is unable to resolve it, depending on the nature of the grievance, the PIU will
escalate the grievance to The NLC through the General Manager Technical Services (GMTS) or the
Company Secretary for arbitration. NLC will resolve it but if unable to, the aggrieved party will
have an option to go to court in which case the court judgement will be final.
113. Where the PIU escalates the matter to the Company Secretary (CS) for arbitration, the CS
in consultation with the MoE will commence the arbitration process, and the aggrieved party will
be invited for hearing. An award may be granted by the arbitration process and if the aggrieved party
accepts the award, the grievance will be resolved. If the aggrieved party challenges the award in
court, then the court judgement will be given and that will close the matter.
114. The project will try as much as possible to resolve issues locally and expeditiously to ensure
that all affected persons do not suffer harm. KETRACO will partner with institutions with the
capacity to train and undertake alternative dispute resolution (ADR) to accelerate the process.
Mediators, who may be members of the IP/VMG communities or people with expertise in this area,
will be identified and engaged on need basis.

115. Figure 4: KETRACO’s Grievance redress procedure
Receive complaint
through a letter, email,
Phone Calls etc.
Log in to a book and or a computer software
Complainant A further meeting with the

Resolved Escalate If unresolved complainant is held
is informed,
to the
matter closed R
PIU u
e
n s
r o
PIU escalates the e l
matter to the s v
Company Secretary o e
for arbitration d
l
v
e Award
,
CS
PIU escalates
Arbitration commenc
the matter to GMT
proceedings es forwards
NLC through
R Arbitratio natter to
GM Technical
e Services NLC
R
s
e
o s
l o
v Matter referred to Court l
e v
PS/CS appoints advocate to defend the suit
d e
Award Award
Court Judgement
Award accepted or court judgement Received

Matter Closed

8.2 World Bank Redress Service
116. The Bank’s Grievance Redress Service (GRS) is aimed at making it more accessible for
project affected communities and to help ensure faster and better resolution of project-related
complaints. The GRS is open to everyone that believes he/she has been affected or harmed by a
Bank-financed project and who feels his/her issues have not been resolved by the implementing
agency. During consultations, the implementing agency should create awareness on the existence of
the WB-GRS to the PAPs and all other stakeholders. The VMGPs should discuss the GRS
procedures in detail and should clarify that the system:
i. Is available to the PAPs but it does not deal with matters already considered by the GRS
unless the complainants have new evidence previously not available to them;
ii. Does not deal with Bank financed projects that have already been closed; and
iii. Does not award damages nor provide direct compensation.
8.3 World Bank Inspection Panel
117. The Inspection Panel is the World Bank’s independent complaints mechanism. Its mandate
is to ensure that the voices of people who may be adversely affected by Bank-financed projects
are heard, and to promote accountability at the Bank. The Inspection Panel independently,
impartially and objectively evaluates the process followed by the Bank. The Panel does not
investigate unless it receives a formal, written Request for Inspection. The Panel has the power to
review Bank-funded projects and determine whether Bank Management is following the operational
policies and procedures put in place in order to provide social and economic benefits, and avoid
harm to people or to the environment. The individual VMGPs should also document the process of
filing complaints to the Panel for the benefit of the PAPs.

CHAPTER 9: MONITORING, EVALUATION AND REPORTING
9.1 Monitoring and Reporting Mechanisms
118. Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) are fundamental components of projects implemented
by KETRACO. Monitoring should be participatory and include the assessment of beneficial and
adverse impacts on IPs/VMGs within project impact areas. The M&E should be based on FPIC with
the IPs/VMGs who should play an integral role on its implementation.
119. All monitoring activities will principally remain the responsibility of the KESIP project
team. KETRACO will be responsible for compiling the data and auditing for completeness of the
records, and for packaging compiled M&E information. However, if found to be necessary, in
agreement with the World Bank, third party monitors may be engaged to independently monitor the
implementation of KESIP, including the VMGF and VMGPs.
120. The overall goal of the M&E process for the VMGP is to ensure that:
i. Effective communication and consultations take place;
ii. Reporting of any grievances that require resolution;
iii. Document the performance of KESIP about the IPs/VMGs; and
iv. Allow project managers and participants to evaluate whether the affected IPs/VMGs
have maintained their rights, culture and dignity and that they are not worse off than they
were before the project.
121. The specific objectives of the project evaluation will include:

i. An assessment of the compliance of activities undertaken in relation to the objectives
and methods identified in the VMGF;
ii. An assessment of the consultation procedures that have taken place at the community
and individual levels;
iii. An assessment of whether the affected communities and individuals have had access to
mitigation activities;
iv. The occurrence of grievances and extent of resolution of disputes;
v. An evaluation of the impact of the project on income and standard of living within the
communities; and
vi. Identification of actions that can improve the positive impact of the project and mitigate
potential negative impacts.
122. The VMGPs will indicate parameters to be monitored, institute monitoring milestones and
provide resources necessary to carry out monitoring activities. The KESIP PIU will institute an
administrative reporting system that will:
i. Provide timely information about all grievances arising because of KESIP activities;
ii. Identify any grievances that have not been resolved at a local level and require resolution
through the involvement of the KESIP team; and
iii. Document the timely completion of project obligations for all IPs/VMGs’ grievances.
123. The M&E reports for each subproject investment will be prepared by the implementing
agency annually and presented to IPs/VMGs for feedback before being handed over to the IP/VMG
committees at subproject level, after formation, for discussion and preparation recommendations on

how to fine-tune the VMGP. There will be a subproject steering committee, which will be
established for each subproject where IPs/VMGs will be represented. The M&E report will be
submitted to this committee for review and then to KESIP team and the WB. Details on these and
other indicators are contained in the respective ESMF.
124. Every year an independent external evaluation will be carried out to further cross-check
the quality of the project implementation and offer a guarantee that the IPs/VMGs dignity, human
rights, economies, social structures and cultures are being respected by KESIP, and that all decisions
of relevance to the IPs/VMGs are undertaken with the following principles:
i. That FPIC have been successfully done with the IPs/VMGs;
ii. That the IPs/VMGs receive social and economic benefits that are culturally appropriate
and socially inclusive (gender and inter-generationally); and
iii. That adverse effects on the IPs/VMGs communities, especially the taking of unregistered
community land, are, as much as possible, avoided, and if this not feasible, minimized
through project design, and any residual impacts are mitigated or compensated in
consultation with the affected VMGs in a culturally appropriate manner, based on broad
support by the IPs/VMGs.
9.2 Participatory Impact Monitoring (PIM)
125. The M&E of the VMGF implementation, as well as the implementation of the subprojects
in the operational areas inhabited by IPs/VMGs is an important management tool, which should
include arrangements for FPIC with the affected IPs/VMGs. The implementation of PIM at
subproject level will be an important element to assist the various structures to fine-tune their
interventions to maximize culturally appropriate benefits and provide space for the IPs/VMGs
communities to voice their concerns.
126. The PIM will be based on data gathered through the screening process/SAs, the
organizations of the IPs/VMGs, the relevant governmental structures (lands, forests, development
and social) at county or sub-county levels, etc. The organizations representing the IPs/VMGs will
play a key role as facilitators of the PIM process and the selection of the facilitators will be in close
collaboration with the decision-makers of the affected communities. The selected facilitators will
be those able to identify and define issues based on the PIM reports, which reflect the situation on
the ground in a transparent and plausible way. The facilitator will be people who are well versed
with the project area /environment and understand the reports in such a way that they can explain to
the affected in a way that is agreeable to their perceptions of issues. The monitoring and evaluation
indicators are presented in Table 8.
Table 8: Key Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators

Issues Indicator Responsibility Data Sources
Capacity Building Number of individuals & KESIP PIU Training workshops
for implementation institutions trained reports
of VMGP
IPs/VMGs Number of IPs/VMGs KESIP PIU Reconnaissance survey
orientation and meetings; VMGOs reports
mobilization Elders

Number of IPs/VMGs Community meeting
sensitized reports
Consultations with Number of Participatory KESIP PIU RRA reports PRA

IPs/VMGs Rural Appraisal (PRA) or VMGOs reports
Rapid Rural Appraisal
(RRA)
Attendance of PRA/RRA
PRA reports acceptable to
IPs/VMGs
Mapping of Level of VMGs KESIP PIU Baseline survey reports
community participation VMGOs Community transect
resources critical to Reports verified and reports
IPs/VMGs accepted by IPs/VMGs
Development of Number of projects passed KESIP PIU Implementing agency
strategies for by social screening ESSs reports
participation of Number of sub projects VMGOs
IPs/VMGs and implemented
mitigation measures Number of mitigation
measures successfully
implemented in culturally
appropriate manner
Capacity Building Types of training KETRACO Training reports
Number of Trainings ESSs
Attendance by IPs/VMGs VMGOs
Equitable Number of meetings KESIP team County Level and
representation of attended by IPs/VMGs ESSs National Steering
IPs/VMGs in representatives VMGOs Committee reports
decision making Number and types of VMGO reports
organs IPs/VMGs issues
articulated
Targeted Internal M&E ESSs Monitoring reports
Participatory M&E External M&E KESIP team
with IPs/VMGs Active involvemnt of VMGOs
concerning wayleave VMG organizations in
and/or substation project monitoring
acquisition of
unregistered
community land

CHAPTER 10: BUDGET
127. A tentative approximate budget for the implementation of this VMGF and related VMGPs
has been included in table 9. The actual budget estimates will be provided once subproject sites are
known. The budget for the implementation of the VMGF will mainly include costs for capacity
building for KETRACO staff, working under the guidance of an expert consultant, to screen for
IPs/VMGs and prepare VMGPs; stakeholder engagement and other meetings, information
dissemination, hiring of consultants to prepare the VMGPs, SA, SEP, GRM and M&E.
128. Once the subprojects have been appraised and finalized in the context of the VMGF, the
required budget estimates will be allocated by KETRACO from the project funds for proper
implementation of the VMGPs. The VMGPs budgets will be revised periodically, e.g. on a yearly
basis, or as necessary to ensure full implementation of the VMGPs. The VMGPs’ budget will also
include costs for implementation, such as travel and other logistical costs of the relevant PIU staff.
If consultants will be used, resources will be required to facilitate KETRACO staff to undertake
regular supervision visits. These costs will be included in the VMGP implementation budget.
129. All costs for implementing VMGPs will be financed by KETRACO through the KESIP
budget. The attendant costs will be estimated during feasibility missions based on interviews with
community members, key stakeholders and relevant government officials. The cost estimates will
be updated after detailed surveys and investigations as well as further consultations with IPs/VMGs.
130. The budget for the implementation of a VMGP mainly includes costs for training of the
PIU staff, IPs/VMGs committee members’ consultation/meetings, development and distribution of
communication materials, CBO/NGO/agency hiring consultants for VMGP implementation and
monitoring, GRM, etc. Once a subproject has been appraised and finalized in the context of the
VMGF, the required budget is to be allocated by the executing agency for proper implementation of
the VMGP. The VMGPs’ budget will also include costs for implementation such as salaries and
travel costs of the relevant KESIP officers, where necessary, for the subproject development.
131. At this stage, it is not possible to estimate the exact number of IPs/VMGs who may be
affected under KESIP since the technical designs and details of all investments have yet to be
finalized and subproject sites and the actual impacts are not yet known. However, when these
locations are known, and after the conclusion of the site-specific socio-economic study, a detailed
and accurate budget for each VMGP will be prepared using the appropriate VMGP template. Table
9 provides estimates for the costs of implementing the VGMF, including preparing and
implementing the VGMPs. The budget will be updated every six months to reflect the identified
subprojects and their respective impacts and mitigation measures. Also, the appropriate template
will be used in the preparation of VMGPs if these will be necessary when subproject sites are known.

Table 9: Proposed budget for VMGF/VMGP implementation
Indicative Budgetary Item Indicative Unit Source of funds
cost (USD)
Screening of subprojects for VMGs presence in the subproject 50,000 KESIP
areas
Stakeholders engagement and ongoing consultations for the 250,000 KESIP
preparation and implementation of VMGP
GRM activities 200,000
M&E studies on the implementation of VMGPs under KESIP 350,000 KESIP
Evaluation and implementation of the VMGPs 500,000 KESIP
KESIP/VMGPs training manual 10,000 KESIP
Annual VMGPs audit 50,000 KESIP
Total 1,410,000 KESIP

CHAPTER 11: DISCLOSURE
11.1 Communication Framework
132. A PIU housed in KETRACO will manage KESIP. Specific arrangements for administering
project activities at other levels will be established during project design. To ensure compliance with
the WB’s safeguards, KESIP will retain or recruit (if necessary) the current environmental and social
safeguard specialists. These specialists will provide technical support and ensure compliance with
the VMGF by coordinating and working with the executing institutions. A communication
framework, to be developed for KESIP, will elaborate the principles, strategies and structures on
how the project team and the affected IPs/VMGs should interact at each stage of project preparation,
implementation, monitoring and review to satisfy the criteria of FPIC.
133. A subproject steering committee will be formed, if a determination is made during the
screening that a subproject is likely to be located in an area with IPs/VMGs, hence the likelihood to
interfere with the people’s livelihoods and rights. The committee will comprise representatives from
MoE, KESIP PIU, county and sub-county and IPs/VMGs. In addition, in each affected county,
sector ministries including Environment and Mineral Resources, Lands, Gender, Sports, Culture and
Social Affairs will also be incorporated in this committee. The committee will provide a link
between KESIP, the IPs/VMGs and the county/sub-county administration. The committee will meet
monthly and act as the focal point for all VMGF related issues during the implementation of the
subproject. The IPs/VMGs will be facilitated to form their own groups whose representatives will
serve on the subproject steering committee.
134. The committee will be informed about all KESIP activities and will be expected to
communicate relevant information through the IPs/VMGs representatives to the communities. It
should also gather information and feedback from the IPs/VMGs communities to channel the same
to the relevant governmental structures and KESIP.
135. The elected representatives of the IPs/VMGs for a particular subproject will be responsible
for facilitating the communication between the IPs/VMGs and the project team in their respective
areas. They will be elected by PAPs during the pilot phase of the VMGF after a further introduction
and general discussion on the VMGF, the communication channels, etc. to ensure that the elected
representatives have broad community support and are elected by the VMGs on the basis of FPIC.
Committee formation will be based on administrative boundaries of the areas traversed by the sub-
project due to the linear nature of T-Lines. KETRACO will provide guidance to the PAPs on
formation of committees but the PAPs should independently select committee members.
11.2 Disclosure
136. This VMGF and subproject VMGPs will be made available to the affected IPs/VMGs and
their groups in accessible locations, and in both English and Kiswahili languages for broader
understanding.
137. Before project appraisal, the KESIP PIU will send the SA and draft VMGP to the WB for
review. Once the WB accepts the documents as providing an adequate basis for project appraisal, it

will make the documents available to the public in accordance with its Policy on Disclosure of
Information. The GoK will also make the documents available to the affected communities in the
same manner as the earlier documents. It is notable that this VMGF was consulted upon with key
stakeholders on February 22, 2018 and the feedback used to refine the document. The comments
and response on the issues raised is presented in Annex 6. The list of participants is also attached.
138. Each subproject VMGP will be disclosed to the affected IPs/VMGs with detailed
information of the subproject. This will be done through public consultations and made available in
the form of brochures, leaflets, or booklets, using both English and Kiswahili. A summary of the
VMGP will be made available in hard copies, in English and Kiswahili at: (i) Offices of the
executive agency; (ii) sub-county or county offices; and (iv) any other local level public offices
(chief, assistance chief, village administrator, ward representative, etc.). Electronic versions of the
framework, as well as the VMGPs, will be placed on the official website of MoE, WB and
KETRACO after approval and endorsement of the VMGF and each VMGP by the WB before the
approval of the subproject.
11.3 Roles and Responsibilities
139. Specifically, the ESS specialists in KETRACO, with the support of consultants, will be
responsible for:
i. Screening for subprojects affecting IPs/VMGs;
ii. Review and approve project proposals, ensuring that they adequately apply OP 4.10;
iii. Assess the adequacy of the assessment of project impacts and the proposed measures to
address issues pertaining to affected IPs/VMGs. This should entail an assessment of
project impacts and social risks, circumstances of the affected indigenous communities,
and the capacity of the applicant to implement the measures; and
iv. Assess the adequacy of the consultation process and the affected IPs/VMGs communities’
broad support to the project. They should monitor project implementation, and include
constraints and lessons learned concerning IPs/VMGs and the application of this VMGF
in its progress and monitoring reports. In addition, they should ensure that the affected
IPs/VMGs are included in M&E exercises.
140. The CBOs and NGOs present and active in the area will be engaged during the SA studies
as well as during the M&E of each subproject. The formation of GRM and steering committees for
each subproject investment will also include representation of the CBOs and NGOs.
141. The WB will receive all the VMGPs prepared, review and provide a ‘No Objection’ or
otherwise prior to subproject approval and start of implementation. During implementation, the WB
will also conduct field visits and M&E. The WB will approve the VMGF for KESIP before being
adopted for use by KETRACO.

ANNEXES

ANNEX 1: HOUSEHOLD SOCIO-ECONOMIC QUESTIONNAIRE
UNIQUE CODE
SECTION A: INTRODUCTION
Hello. My name is [……………………………………..]. I am working with Kenya Electricity Transmission Company
Limited (KETRACO). We are carrying out a Social Impact Assessment for ………………………………….. The result of this
exercise will inform how the project will be implemented.
Village ………………………… Name of Household Head ……………………………………
……… ………….
Sub-location ………………………… Household Head ID No. ……………………………………
……… ………….
Location ………………………… Household Head Contact ……………………………………
……… ………….
Division ………………………… Name of Respondent (If not HH ……………………………………
……… Head) ………….
District ………………………… Respondent Contact (If not HH ……………………………………
……… Head) ………….
Interviewer ………………………… Supervisor ……………………………………
…………. ………….
Section B: Demographic Data
B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6
Gender of Relationship to What is your age? What is your Number of What is the highest
respondent? Household head? marital status? Dependants level of education
1. < 18 yrs 1. Married (No. you attained?
1. Male 1. Head 2. 18 – 25 yrs of Spouses) 1. Primary
2. Female 2. Spouse 3. 26 – 35 yrs 2. Widowed 2. Secondary
3. Son/Daughter 4. 36 – 45 yrs 3. Divorced 3. Post-Secondary
4. Brother/Sister 5. 46 – 60 yrs 4. Separated 4. Never Attended
5. Parent 6. Above 60 yrs 5. Single
6. Other Relative 6. Other
B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12
Where Are your If yes, which? Do/Did your parents If no, where do/did Why did they move
were you parents alive? live here? your parents live? to here?
born? 1. Both parents
1. Yes >> 2. Mother 1. Yes >>
B9 3. Father B12
2. No >> 2. No >> B11
B10

Section C: Health and Vulnerability
C1 C2 C3 C4 C5
Are there What is the nature of the challenge? Has any If yes, what was the Where did they get
physically 1. Lame leg member of nature of illness? medical attention?
challenged people 2. Blind your 1. Malaria
in the HH? 3. Deaf household 2. Flu/Cough 1. Home
1. Yes >> 4. Dump been ill 3. Stomach 2. Hospital
C2 5. Crippled within the disorders 3. Dispensary
2. No 6. Crossed eyes last for 4. Diarrhoea 4. Clinic
7. Other (Specify) months? 5. Cholera
6. Headaches
1. Yes 7. Chronic
2. No Illness
8. Other
(Specify)
Name Disability Type of
Care
NB:Chronic illnesses include Ulcers, Sickle Cells, Cancer, Diabetes, Asthma, High Blood Pressure, Tuberculosis, HIV /AIDS.
Section D: Source of Income

D1 D2 D3
What do you do for a living? Other Sources of Incomes for the past What is the average income for the
one year Household per month (KSH)
1. Farming 1. Less than 500
2. Livestock Rearing 1. Farming 2. 501 – 2,000
3. Business 2. Business 3. 2,001 – 5,000
4. Formal employment 3. Employment 4. 5,001 – 10,000
5. Casual employment 4. Remittance 5. 10, 001 – 20,000
5. Others (Specify) 6. 20,001 – 50,000
7. Above 50,000
Section E: Assets
E1 E2 E3 E4 E5
Which of your For the affected plot If yes in E3, which one? If affected, can you If No, give
assets are affected? do you have proof 1. Title deed relocate within your land reason (s)
of ownership? 2. Allotment letter (if settlement land) or
1. None 3. Other, Specify outside the way leave
2. Land >> E2 1. Yes>>E3 trace. 3
3
Since T-Line subprojects are linear by nature, most affected PAPs relocate within their land because only small parcels of
land are affected. However, those whose land parcels are totally affected by the wayleave corridor – because they had very
small parcels in the first place - relocate outside their land parcels, which means they would be resettled outside the way leave
corridor. Such people are permanently displaced and are given support to relocate in addition to full compensation at current
replacement cost for their land, structures and any other assets

3. Structure (s) 2. No
4. Crops/Trees 1. Yes
5. Grave/Cultural 2. No >> E5
site
F5 F6 F7 F8 F9
Do you or any of If yes, where? Estimated total Land Type Nature occupancy
the affected size (Acres) 1. Land owner
families on this 1. Settlement 2. Tenant
plot have other 2. Trust 3. Co-owner
land holding 4. Co-tenant
nearby or 5. Licensee
elsewhere? 6. Renter
1. Yes 7. Squatter
>>F2
2. No
Section F: Land Ownership

F1 F2 F3 F4
Which type of ownership In which year did you How did you acquire this How do you use your land?
is your land under? acquire this land? property?
1. Leasehold 1. Crop Farming
2. Freehold 1. Buying 2. Livestock Keeping
3. Trust land 2. Inherited 3. Sanctuary
4. Squatter 3. Gift 4. Other Uses
4. Rented (specify)
Section G: Social Structures

G1 G2 G3
Which of these Public facilities are you close to? Distance to public facility? Description
1. Primary School
2. Secondary School 1. < 500m
3. Health Centre 2. 501m to 1 km
4. Road 3. 1-2 km
5. Water Source/Point 4. 2-3 km
6. Historical Sites 5. 3-5 km
7. Others (Specify) 6. More than 5 km
NOTES
*THANK YOU***

ANNEX 2: IPS/VMGS IN KENYA AS PER CONSTITUTION OF KENYA AND WORLD BANK
CLASSIFICATION
The IPs/VMGs groups in Kenya as per the CoK and based on the WB classification are described below
in summary.
(i) Sengwer
The Sengwer live in the three administrative sub-counties of Marakwet, West Pokot and Trans Nzoia and
along Cherangany Hills. They are estimated to be 60,000 (40,000 of them live in their traditional territories
and another 20,000 in the diaspora). They lived by hunting and bee-keeping. In his evidence before the
1932 Kenyan Land Commission, Mr. C.H. Kirk, stated how they used to go over Cherengany shooting
and the only people with whom they came into contact along Cherengany Hills were the Cherengany
Dorobo, a small tribe of Dorobo (Sengwer). Similar to other ethnic minorities, the Sengwer were
considered by the British to be served best if they were forced to assimilate with their dominant
neighbours. Hence, their traditional structure was not recognized and integrated as an independent ethnic
group in the system of indirect rule, but as a sub-structure of their neighbours.
Since the Sengwer’s land is in the plains of Trans Nzoia, which turned out to be the best area for
agricultural production in Kenya, they were displaced entirely from there to make way for white farmers.
A minority stayed behind as farm workers, but the majority went up into the forests of the Cherangany
hills. Since they were not considered as independent group, they were not invited to join the settlement
schemes in which the independent Kenya redistributed the white farms to the farm workers and the
dominant ethnic groups of the area. While most Sengwer are officially landless, a few, especially those in
the northern parts of the Cherangany hills received some land, but even this land is contested.
Livelihood: Before the colonial time, Sengwer used to be hunters and honey-gatherers. Following their
contacts with the Arabs and the Maasai some adopted small-scale agriculture (shifting cultivation) and/or
livestock rearing, but it is said that hunting remained their main source of livelihood until the 1920s. The
elders reported collective as well as individual hunting techniques. Gathering of fruits and other non-
timber-forest-products is mostly done by women, while honey collection from beehives as well as from
natural places such as holes in trees etc. is traditionally a male activity. It has - besides being eaten - a
variety of uses: Honey is mixed with water as a daily drink (breakfast), and used to brew beer; Honey
plays a major role in marriages and other ceremonies. Before marriage, honey is given to the mother of
the bride as part of the dowry. Honey has also medical use. People apply it to their body to drive away
mosquitoes and against muscle pains. Another smelly mixture is spread around the compounds to keep
wildlife at distance. Millet and Sorghum are the “traditional” crops, which were inherited from the Arab
traders and mostly planted in the lowlands.
The current status of indigenous sengwer: The sengwer have increasingly been restricted to areas with
home ‘bases’ involving agriculture and livestock rearing and outlying areas where some honey gathering
is still practiced. The sengwer continue to experience expropriation of their land and restrictions on access
to natural resources especially forests and water- which have further increased their sedentarization,
marginalization, social discrimination, and impoverishment. Even though they are considered, from the
formal legal point of view, as citizens equal to all other Kenyans, they do not have the same access to land
and other resources, protection against cattle rustlers, social and political influence, legal status and/or
organizational, technical or economic capacities as other Kenyan citizens.
(ii) Ogiek

The Ogiek (Ogiot - sing.) ethnic group consists of 20-30 groups of former hunters and honey gatherers,
mostly living in forested highlands in western Kenya.In 2000, the ethnic Okiek population was estimated
to number 36,869, though the number of those speaking the Akiek Language was as low as 500.
Local groups have more specific names, e.g., Kaplelach, Kipsang'any, Kapchepkendi etc. Okiek, a
Kalenjin language of the Southern Nilotic group, is the mother tongue of most Ogiek people, but several
groups now speak Maasai as their first language. Traditionally the Ogiek had occupied most of the forests
in the extreme west and south of Western Kenya, but today their main area of living is in and around the
Mau forest, which is not part of the operational areas. Nevertheless, some Ogiek groups are found in the
Upper Yala catchment near the villages Serengoni, Senghalo (Nandi South), in the Kipkurere forest
(Nandi South) and some live scattered in the Uasin Gishu Sub-County.
Livelihood: Traditionally the Ogiek divided land into lineage-owned tracts stretching along the
escarpment slope. Tracts transacted four or five ecological zones, giving families access to honey and
game during each season. Residence groups were small extended families, patrilineal cores that might be
joined by affine and matrilineal relatives. Six to ten adjacent lineages constituted a named local group, i.e.
a significant unit of cultural identity and history. Unlike many other hunter-gatherers, beside of honey,
Ogiek collect hardly any plants, fruits or non-timber-forest-products from the forest. Honey is eaten,
stored for future use, brewed into beer and traded. It is said to have been the main product for the barter
with their agricultural and/or pastoralist neighbours. Starting in the 1920s the Ogiek stated to cultivate
small millet and maize gardens due to reduced production from the forest. This led to a more sedentary
lifestyle in mid altitude forest and – in turn - a further increase of agriculture and/or pastoralism.
Today, agriculture is the main source of subsistence and income, which is supported through some
livestock rearing, hunting (which is illegal) and bee-keeping. Honey gathering is still a key activity and
carried out the traditional way, with few Ogiek using modern bee-hives and/or processing the honey for
regional markets. Blackburn concludes: "without honey and condition of getting it, Ogiek life would be
entirely different. This explains why the Ogiek live in the forest" (Blackburn 1974:151). Their access to
land varies very much from village to village. Before independence most Ogiek lived on state or trust land
(i.e. in the forests) with all usufructuary rights, but no letters of allotment. Following independence, the
land reform and the general land demarcation in 1969 usufructurary rights were out-ruled. Legal access
to land is now channelled through individual and titles and - in the Maasai-dominated Sub-Countys –
group ranches. Group-ranch demarcation began in the 1970s, crossing lineage land boundaries,
incorporating non-Ogiek into some groups, and registering significant parts of Ogiek land to nonOgiek.
During the same time, the Ogiek were evicted from the forest reserves. As they were not provided with
any land or compensation most had to go back and live illegally in the forests until the next eviction-team
would show up. The regular evictions, arrests and loss of property, crops and even lives further increased
the poverty of the Ogiek, underlined their social discrimination and cemented their marginalization.
(iii) Turkana
The Turkana people are the second largest of the pastoral people of Kenya with a population of 1,034,000.
They occupy the far northwest corner of the nation, an area of about 67,000 square kilometers. This
nomadic community moved to Kenya from Karamojong in eastern Uganda. The Turkana tribe occupies
the semi Desert Turkana Sub-County in the Rift valley province of Kenya. Around 1700, the Turkana
emigrated from the Uganda area over a period of years. They took over the area, which is the Turkana
Sub-County today by simply displacing the existing people of the area. Turkana warriors today still take
pride in their reputation as the most fearless fighters in East Africa. Adherence to the traditional religion
is weak and seems almost nonchalant among the Turkana. Location in the Country - Rift Valley Province,
Turkana, Samburu, Trans-Nzoia, Laikipia, Isiolo Sub county, west and south of Lake Turkana; Turkwel
and Kerio rivers.

Livelihood: Like the Maasai and tribes, Turkana people keeps herds of cattle, goats and camel. Livestock
is a very important part of the Turkana people. Their animals are the main source of income and food.
Turkana’s have also pursued other non-pastoral income-earning activity in both urban and rural
environments. This includes various forms of wholesale and retail trade (e.g. selling livestock, milk, hides
and skins, honey, and artisan goods etc.), traditional rental property ownership and sales, waged
employment (local and non-local, including working as a hired herder, farm worker, and migrant laborer),
farming (subsistence and commercial), and the gathering and selling of wild products (e.g. gum Arabic,
firewood, or medicinal plants). Fishing in Lake Turkana is another, long standing form of diversification.
Fishermen along Lake Turkana migrate to follow the patterns of fish movement. The pastoralists also
supplement their livelihoods by selling the fish. Many of them have also taken up weaving mats and
baskets particularly near the lake where weaving material is readily available from the Doum Palm. Other
natural resource-based livelihood diversification activities have included the collection and sale of aloe,
gum Arabic, honey, wild fruits, firewood, and the production and sale of charcoal and alcohol.
(iv) Rendile
The Rendile are a Cushitic tribe that inhabits the climatically harsh region between Marsabit hills and
Lake Turkana in Northern Kenya where they neighbor the Borana, Gabbra, Samburu and Turkana tribes.
They (Rendile) consist of nine clans and seven sub clans. They are culturally similar to the Gabbra, having
adopted some Borana customs and being related to the Somali people to the east. Rendile are semi-
nomadic pastoralists whose most important animal is the camel. The original home of the Rendile people
was in Ethiopia. They were forced to migrate southwards into Kenya due to frequent conflicts with the
Oromo tribe over pasture and water for their animals. Being pastoralists, the lifestyle of the Rendile
revolves around their livestock. In the northerly areas, camels are their main source of livelihood. This is
because camels are best adapted to the desert conditions that prevail in the northern Kenya. The camels
are an important source of milk and meat for the Rendille people. There are about eight or nine sub clans
including the Urowen, Dispahai, Rongumo, Lukumai (Nahgan), Tupsha, Garteilan, Matarbah, Otola, and
Saale with an estimated population of 72,000. The Rendile are located in Eastern Province, Marsabit Sub-
County, between Lake Turkana and Marsabit Mt. The primary towns include Marsabet, Laisamis, Merille,
Logologo, Loyangalani, Korr, Kamboi, Ngurunit, and Kargi.
Livelihood: The Rendile people are traditionally pastoralists keeping goats, sheep, cattle, donkeys, and
camels. Their nomadic lifestyle is become more prominent in the areas exposed to little urbanization and
modernization. In the recent past though, their livelihood has experienced constant competing interests
from the Samburu’s and Gabras leading them to constant conflict over land and water resources
particularly at the borderline of the boundary Sub-Countys. In the most cases, the raids and conflicts have
had the objective to replenish their herds depleted by severe droughts, diseases, raiding or other calamities.
(v) Gabra
The Gabra are an Oromo people who live as camel-herding nomads, mainly in the Chalbi desert of
northern Kenya and the highlands of southern Ethiopia. They are closely associated with other Oromo,
especially their non-nomadic neighbors, the Borana. The Gabra speak the Borana dialect of Oromo, which
belongs to the Cushitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic language family and have a population estimated to be
close to 70,000. They are located in Samburu Sub-County, Lake Baringo south and east shores; and in
Rift Valley Province (Chamus), Baringo Sub-County.
Livelihood: Gabra are pastoralists who keep and depend on cattle, sheep, goats, donkey, and camels. They
solely rely on access to water and pastures for the survival of their livestock. Typical Gabra household
keeps 5-10 cattle; 20-25 goats; 15-20 sheep; and 0-5 camels. Cattle provide the majority of income from
livestock production followed by goats, sheep, and camels. Majority of the grain consumed by Gabra
household in this zone is purchased. This includes maize, rice, and sugar. Households also rely on the
wild food including fruits and berries, honey, roots, and tubes. Climate change has had an impact on new

weather patterns and prolonged drought pushing the Gabra community to frequent water shortages. They
have a conglomerate of peoples living north of the Tana River in Kenya, the area around Lake Turkana
and the highlands of southern Ethiopia.
(vi) Ajuran
The Ajuran are ethnically Somalis. They were a kingdom that ruled Somalia before the advent of
Europeans into Africa. When the rest of the Somalis got fed up with their rule they took up arms against
them in war popularly known as Eji iyo Ajuran meaning the rest of Somalis vs. the Ajuran. The wars that
ensued deposed the kingdom and drove some of the Ajuran as far as where they live today in the North
Eastern Kenya and Eastern part of Ethiopia. Some of those who settled in present day Kenya eventually
adopted the language and customs of their neighbors and hosts, the Borana. The Ajuran are best known
in Somali history for establishing the Gareen dynasty based in Qalaafo (now part of Ethiopia). The Gareen
dynasty ruled parts of East Africa from the 16th to the 20th century. Among the Kenyan Ajuran people,
the majority speak the Borana language as their first language while others speak the Somali language as
their first language especially those from Wajir North Sub-County in the areas of Wakhe and Garren. It is
vital to note that since Somali is the language of wider communication in North-eastern Province, even
the Ajuran who speak Borana as their first language learn the language. The link between the Garreh and
Ajuran is their primary language, which is Borana and not Somali. Population: 59,000. Location in the
Country: Eastern Province, Marsabit, Isiolo and Moyale SubCountys, Wajir North.
Livelihood: The Ajurans, like the rest other Somali tribes of Northern Kenya have traditionally lived a
nomadic life. This way of life is dictated by the climate, which is semi-arid with two seasonal rains. They
follow water and pasture for the animals they keep such as cattle, camels, goats, sheep, donkeys and mules
that provide them their livelihood. Where the land is good for farming there are settled populations
growing corn, millet, sorghum and some fruits and vegetables. The Ajuran live in an area with relatively
high rainfall and good pasture for their animals. However, this blessing has on many occasions become
troublesome to them in terms of marauding neighbors in need of the same resources. The intrusion by
others has periodically resulted in clashes. Today, the Ajuran allow others to live and pasture their animals
in their communal land. Some of the main causes of their vulnerability include the following: erosion of
assets due to armed conflict during intermittent inter/intra-clan conflict, resulting in poverty; protracted
conflict and insecurity; Systematic marginalization and discrimination based on ethnicity and caste; poor
access to economic/employment opportunities. Notably, their right and ability of the transhumant
pastoralists to eventually return to their homes characterizes this type of seasonal movement and gives
rise to certain analyses.
(vii) Maasai
Kenya's most well-known ethnic tribe, the Maasai (or Masai) are semi-nomadic people located primarily
in Kenya and northern Tanzania. They are considered to be part of the Nilotic family of African tribal
groups, just as the Scilluk from Sudan and the Acholi from Uganda. The Maasai probably migrated from
the Nile valley in Ethiopia and Sudan to Maasai land (central and southwestern Kenya and northern
Tanzania) sometime around 1600 AD, along the route of lakes Chew Bahir and Turkana (ex Rudolph),
bringing their domesticated cattle with them. Once considered fierce warriors, feared by all tribes in the
zone, the Maasai lost most of their power during the late XIX century, as a consequence of a string of
natural and historic calamities. They were hit by drought, smallpox, and cattle pest, and contemporarily
had to mourn the departure of Laibon Mbatiani, their respected and much-admired leader, direct
descendant of the mythical OlMasinta, founder of the tribe. The Maasai speak the Maasai language, an
Eastern Nilotic language closely related to Samburu (or Sampur), the language of the Samburu people of
central Kenya, and to Camus spoken south and southeast of Lake Baringo. Maasai’s population is about
684,000 and is located in the Rift Valley Province, Kajiado and Narok Sub-county.

Livelihood: The Maasai are cattle and goat herders, their economy almost exclusively based on their
animal stock, from which they take most of their food: meat, milk, and even blood, as certain sacred rituals
involve the drinking of cow blood. Moreover, the huts of the Maasai are built from dried cattle dung.
(viii) Illchamus
They are originally a pastoralist people who used to live on the mainland but due to clashes they have
been forced to migrate to an island in Lake Baringo. It is a very traditional and culturally bound society,
hierarchical and male-dominated. They live from fishing in small boats made of balsam tree that dates
back maybe a thousand years. They also do some souvenirs and they have some livestock. Many are
uneducated and illiterate. They are eager to learn new things, participating and seemingly eager to create
a better life. They communicate mainly in their local language. They have a population of 34,000 and are
located in Southeast and south shore of Lake Baringo, and southwest shore as far north as Kampi ya
Samaki.
Livelihood: The majority of the Ilchamus practice both livestock rearing and agriculture, but on the islands
in Lake Baringo there are about 800 Ilchamus who live nearly entirely from fishing. The mainland
Ilchamus are semi-pastoralists with a long history of small-scale agriculture. The main types of livestock
owned by the Ilchamus are cattle (zebus), sheep (red Maasai and dopper cross) and goats (small east
African), but their herds are significantly smaller than those of their neighbors. The key problems here are
the insufficient security against aggressions from their neighbors, access to water and pressure of other
people on their land due to the non-existence of land titles. The nearest markets are at Marigat and
Kiserian.
(ix) Aweer/Boni
The Aweer are a remnant hunter-gatherer group living along the Kenyan coast in Lamu Sub-County on
the mainland. In the last 30 years, the Aweer have faced very difficult times. In 1967, their homeland
became a battlefield in the war between Kenya and Somalia. In Kenya today, they are a vulnerable group,
struggling to survive, in search of a new identity. Traditionally they depend on their elders for leadership
and do not normally meet for village discussion. There are some men who have more than one wife, and
each wife has her own house in which she lives with her children. The husband does not have his own
home but lives with each wife periodically. The Aweer have a population of 8,000 and are located in the
Coast Province, in Lamu, and Tana River Counties in forests. These figures are quoted from the 2009
Kenya Population and Household Census KNBS.
Livelihood: Hunters and Gatherers. They are indigenous hunter/gatherers famous for their longbows and
poison arrows. The Aweer are often referred to - and even sometimes refer to themselves - as the "Boni".
Considered by some as pejorative, Boni is based on the Swahili word "kubuni" which means 'to move', in
reference to their proclivity, historically, to move around in pursuit of their livelihoods, rather than settle
in one place. The lives of the Aweer were drastically changed when the Kenyan government curtailed
their traditional way of life as a response to the insecurity of the region after the Shifta War (1963–1967),
forcing them to settle in villages along the Hindi-Kiunga Road on Government Land between the Boni
National Reserve and the Dodori National Reserve while adopting slash and burn agriculture.
(x) Pokot
They speak Pökoot, language of the Southern Nilotic language family, which is close to the Marakwet,
Nandi, Tuken and other members of the Kalenjin grouping. Kenya's 2009 census puts the total number of
Pokot speakers at about 620,000 in Kenya. They have once considered part of the Kalenjin people who
were highland Nilotic people who originated in southern Ethiopia and migrated southward into Kenya as
early as 2,000 years ago. Though the Pokot consider themselves to be one people, they are basically
divided into two sub-groups based on livelihood. Population: 662,000. The Pokot are located in the Rift
Valley Province, Baringo and West Pokot Sub-Counties.

Livelihood: It is usually claimed that from the earliest time of the original Pokot, they were agriculturalist,
they did not have many cattle, and the few they had were taken by wild animals abounding the area. They
have been hunters and gatherer living in caves. Currently, Pokot are semi-nomadic, semi-pastoralists who
live in the lowlands west and north of Kapenguria and throughout Kacheliba Division and Nginyang
Division, Baringo Sub-County. These people herd cattle, sheep, and goats and live off the products of
their stock. The other half of the Pokoot are agriculturalists who live anywhere conditions allow farming.
Mixed farming is practiced in the areas of Kapenguria, Lelan and parts of Chepararia. These areas have
recorded rainfall between 120mm to 160mm while pastoral areas include Kiwawa, Kasei, Alale and parts
of Sigor receiving 80mm and 120mm. The livelihood of Pokot has led to constant conflict between them
and other pastoral communities – the Turkana, Matheniko and the Pokot of Uganda. This clash has been
sustained by semi-arid savannah and wooded grassland terrain that cuts along the habitation area.
Resources such as land, pasture, water points are communally owned, and they are no specific individual
rights.
(xi) Endorois
The Endorois community is a minority community that was living adjacent to Lake Bogoria and has a
population of about 60,000. However, the Government of Kenya forcibly removed the Endorois from
their ancestral lands around the Lake Bogoria area of the Baringo and Koibatek Administrative Sub
Counties, as well as in the Nakuru and Laikipia Administrative Sub-Counties within the Rift Valley
Province in Kenya, without proper prior consultations, adequate and effective compensation. Endorois are
a community of approximately 60,000 people who, for centuries, have lived in the Lake Bogoria area.
They claim that prior to the dispossession of Endorois land through the creation of the Lake Hannington
Game Reserve in 1973, and a subsequent re-gazetting of the Lake Bogoria Game Reserve in 1978 by the
Government of Kenya, the Endorois had established, and, for centuries, practiced a sustainable way of
life which was inextricably linked to their ancestral land. However, since 1978 the Endorois have been
denied access to their land, neighboring tribes as bona fide owners of the land and that they continued to
occupy and enjoy undisturbed use of the land under the British colonial administration, although the
British claimed title to the land in the name of the British Crown. At independence in 1963, the British
Crown’s claim to Endorois land was passed on to the respective County Councils. However, under Section
115 of the Kenyan Constitution, the Country Councils held this land in trust, on behalf of the Endorois
community, who remained on the land and continued to hold, use and enjoy it.
The Endorois’ customary rights over the Lake Bogoria region were not challenged until the 1973 gazetting
of the land by the Government of Kenya. The act of gazetting and, therefore, dispossession of the land is
central to the present to their current predicament. The area surrounding Lake Bogoria is fertile land,
providing green pasture and medicinal salt licks, which help raise healthy cattle. Lake Bogoria is central
to the Endorois religious and traditional practices. The community’s historical prayer sites, places for
circumcision rituals, and other cultural ceremonies are around Lake Bogoria. These sites were used on a
weekly or monthly basis for smaller local ceremonies, and on an annual basis for cultural festivities
involving Endorois from the whole region. The Complainants claim that the Endorois believe that the
spirits of all Endorois, no matter where they are buried, live on in the Lake, with annual festivals taking
place at the Lake. They believe that the Monchongoi forest is considered the birthplace of the Endorois
and the settlement of the first Endorois community.
Despite the lack of understanding of the Endorois community regarding what had been decided by the
Kenya Wildlife Service (hereinafter KWS) informed certain Endorois elders shortly after the creation of
the Game Reserve that 400 Endorois families would be compensated with plots of "fertile land." The
undertaking also specified, according to the Complainants, that the community would receive 25% of the
tourist revenue from the Game Reserve and 85% of the employment generated, and that cattle dips and
fresh water dams would be constructed by the State. To date, the Endorois community has not received

adequate compensation for this eviction, nor have they benefited from the proceeds of the reserve. Because
they no longer have free accesses to the lake or land, their property rights have been violated and their
spiritual, cultural and economic ties to the land severed. Once able to migrate with the seasons between
Lake Bogoria and the Mochongoi forest, the Endorois are now forced to live on a strip of semi-arid land
between their two traditional sites with no access to sustain their former cattle rearing and beekeeping
livelihood. The eviction of the Endorois people by the Kenyan government and the gazetting (or public
declaration of state ownership) of their land began in 1973 and continued until 1986.
Livelihood: Dependent on land and fishing from Lake Bogoria. Critically, land for the Endorois is held in
very high esteem, since tribal land, in addition to securing subsistence and livelihood, is seen as sacred,
being inextricably linked to the cultural integrity of the community and its traditional way of life.
(xii) Watha
The Watha people are mostly found in the rural arid and semi-arid lands of the country. A minority of
them live in thick forests scattered all over the country. The people are traditionally hunters and gatherers.
In Malindi Sub-County a Watha community is found in four divisions (i.e. Malindi, Langobaya, Marafa
and Magarini). In Tana River Sub-County, the Watha are found in Sombo and Laza divisions while in
Mandera the Watha are found in Central division. The population of Watha community in the Sub-
Counties is estimated at approximately 30,000 persons. This is only 2.7% of the entire Malindi, Mandera
and Tana River Sub-County population.
The Watha people are traditionally hunters and gatherers. However, since the government abolished
unlicensed hunting of game and wild animals, the Watha people now live in permanent settlements, some
of them along the river and where there are forests, mainly in the mixed farming and livestock farming
zones. The forests afford them an opportunity to practice bee keeping while those along the river practice
crop production. The land tenure system in the Sub-County is communal ownership. Most of the land in
the three Sub counties of Malindi, Mandera and Tana River are currently under trust land by the County
councils. Few influential people in the Sub-County have however managed to acquire title deeds from the
land offices in Nairobi. However, most of this trust lands are controlled by the majority tribes and becomes
a point of conflict if the smaller tribes and outsiders get involved. This is what has pushed the small and
marginalized tribes like Watha deep into the forests.

ANNEX 3: SOCIAL SCREENING FORM
To be filled by KESIP PIU Team4
SOCIAL SCREENING FORM FOR KESIP ACTIVITIES

A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A1. Type/description/justification of proposed
activity
A 2. Location of activity: Area coordinates and
map
A3. Duration of activity
A 4. Focal point and person for activity
B. EXPECTED BENEFITS
B1. Benefits for local people
B2. Benefits to Vulnerable and Marginalized
Groups (VMGs)
(Well documented, evidence of benefits)
B3. Total Number of expected beneficiaries
B4. Total Number of expected Vulnerable and
Marginalized Peoples beneficiaries
B5. Ratio of B3 and B4; Are benefits distributed 􀀘 YES 􀀘 NO
equitably? If NO state remedial measures
C. POTENTIAL ADVERSE SOCIAL IMPACTS
C1. Will activity entail restriction of access of 􀀘YES 􀀘NO
VMP to lands and related natural resources If yes exclude/mitigate from project (total area
affected? If minor seek FPIC/agreement
C2. Will activity entail commercial development 􀀘YES 􀀘NO
of natural and cultural resources critical to VMGs If yes exclude from project
C3. Will activity entail physical relocation of 􀀘YES 􀀘NO
Vulnerable and Marginalized Peoples 􀀘YES
􀀘NO If yes (more than a handful of households or no
land available within community) exclude from
If yes exclude from project project. For minor impacts seek FPIC/agreement
D. CONSULTATION WITH IP
D1. Has VMP orientation to project been done for 􀀘YES 􀀘NO
this group?
D2. Has PRA/RRA been done in this area? 􀀘YES 􀀘NO
D3. Did the VMP give broad support for project
􀀘YES 􀀘NO
If not exclude form Project
Prepared by: __________________________ Verified by: _________________________
Date: ______________________________ Date: _________________________________

Note: Attach sketch maps, PRA/RRA results and other relevant documents.
4
Note that this form will be updated in consultation with the local communities once the sites are determined.

ANNEX 4: CONTENTS OF A VMGP
VMGs Development Plan

Prerequisites
Prerequisites of a successful development plan for indigenous peoples are as follows:
(a) The key step in project design is the preparation of a culturally appropriate development
plan based on full consideration of the options preferred by the indigenous people affected by the
project.
(b) Studies should make all efforts to anticipate adverse trends likely to be induced by the
project and develop the means to avoid or mitigate harm.
(c) The institutions responsible for government interaction with indigenous peoples should
possess the social, technical, and legal skills needed for carrying out the proposed development
activities. Implementation arrangements should be kept simple. They should normally involve
appropriate existing institutions, local organizations, and nongovernmental organizations
(NGOs) with expertise in matters relating to indigenous peoples.
(d) Local patterns of social organization, religious beliefs, and resource use should be taken
into account in the plan's design.
(e) Development activities should support production systems that are well adapted to the
needs and environment of indigenous peoples, and should help production systems under stress
to attain sustainable levels.
(f) The plan should avoid creating or aggravating the dependency of indigenous people on
project entities. Planning should encourage early handover of project management to local
people. As needed, the plan should include general education and training in management skills
for indigenous people from the onset of the project.
(g) Successful planning for indigenous peoples frequently requires long lead times, as well as
arrangements for extended follow-up. Remote or neglected areas where little previous
experience is available often require additional research and pilot programs to fine-tune
development proposals.
(h) Where effective programs are already functioning, Bank support can take the form of
incremental funding to strengthen them rather than the development of entirely new programs.
Contents of VMGP
The development plan should be prepared in tandem with the preparation of the main investment.
In many cases, proper protection of the rights of indigenous people will require the
implementation of special project components that may lie outside the primary project's
objectives. These components can include activities related to health and nutrition, productive
infrastructure, linguistic and cultural preservation, entitlement to natural resources, and

education. The project component for indigenous people’s development should include the
following elements, as needed:
a. Legal Framework. The plan should contain an assessment of (i) the legal status of the
groups covered by this VMGP, as reflected in the country's constitution, legislation, and
subsidiary legislation (regulations, administrative orders, etc.); and (ii) the ability of such groups
to obtain access to and effectively use the legal system to defend their rights. Particular attention
should be given to the rights of indigenous peoples to use and develop the lands that they occupy,
to be protected against illegal intruders, and to have access to natural resources (such as forests,
wildlife, and) vital to their subsistence and reproduction.
b. Baseline Data. Baseline data should include (i) accurate, up-to-date maps and aerial
photographs of the area of project influence and the areas inhabited by indigenous peoples; (ii)
analysis of the social structure and income sources of the population; (iii) inventories of the
resources that indigenous people use and technical data on their production systems; and (iv) the
relationship of indigenous peoples to other local and national groups. It is particularly important
that baseline studies capture the full range of production and marketing activities in which
indigenous people are engaged. Site visits by qualified social and technical experts should verify
and update secondary sources.
c. Land Tenure. When local legislation needs strengthening, the Bank should offer to advise
and assist the borrower in establishing legal recognition of the customary or traditional land
tenure systems of indigenous peoples. Where the traditional lands of indigenous peoples have
been brought by law into the domain of the state and where it is inappropriate to convert
traditional rights into those of legal ownership, alternative arrangements should be implemented
to grant long-term, renewable rights of custodianship and use to indigenous peoples. These steps
should be taken before the initiation of other planning steps that may be contingent on recognized
land titles.
d. Strategy for Local Participation. Mechanisms should be devised and maintained for
participation by indigenous people in decision making throughout project planning,
implementation, and evaluation. Many of the larger groups of indigenous people have their own
representative organizations that provide effective channels for communicating local preferences.
Traditional leaders occupy pivotal positions for mobilizing people and should be brought into the
planning process, with due concern for ensuring genuine representation of the indigenous
population. No foolproof methods exist, however, to guarantee full local-level participation.
Sociological and technical advice provided through the regional environment divisions (REDs)
is often needed to develop mechanisms appropriate for the project area.
e. Technical Identification of Development or Mitigation Activities. Technical proposals

should proceed from on-site research by qualified professionals acceptable to the Bank. Detailed
descriptions should be prepared and appraised for such proposed services as education, training,
health, credit, and legal assistance. Technical descriptions should be included for the planned
investments in productive infrastructure. Plans that draw upon indigenous knowledge are often
more successful than those introducing entirely new principles and institutions. For example, the

potential contribution of traditional health providers should be considered in planning delivery
systems for health care.
f. Institutional Capacity. The government institutions assigned responsibility for indigenous

peoples are often weak. Assessing the track record, capabilities, and needs of those institutions
is a fundamental requirement. Organizational issues that need to be addressed through Bank
assistance are the (i) availability of funds for investments and field operations; (ii) adequacy of
experienced professional staff; (iii) ability of Indigenous Peoples’ own organizations, local
administration authorities, and local NGOs to interact with specialized government institutions;
(iv) ability of the executing agency (EA) to mobilize other agencies involved in the plan's
implementation; and (v) adequacy of field presence.
g. Implementation Schedule. Components should include an implementation schedule with

benchmarks by which progress can be measured at appropriate intervals. Pilot programs are often
needed to provide planning information for phasing the project component for indigenous
peoples with the main investment. The plan should pursue the long-term sustainability of project
activities subsequent to completion of disbursement.
h. Monitoring and Evaluation. Independent monitoring capacities are usually needed when
the institutions responsible for indigenous populations have weak management histories.
Monitoring by representatives of Indigenous Peoples’ own organizations can be an efficient way
for the project management to absorb the perspectives of indigenous beneficiaries and is
encouraged by the Bank. Monitoring units should be staffed by experienced social science
professionals, and reporting formats and schedules appropriate to the project's needs should be
established. Monitoring and evaluation reports should be reviewed jointly by the senior
management of the implementing agency and by the Bank. The evaluation reports should be
made available to the public.
i. Cost Estimates and Financing Plan. The plan should include detailed cost estimates for
planned activities and investments. The estimates should be broken down into unit costs by
project year and linked to a financing plan. Such programs as revolving credit funds that provide
indigenous people with investment pools should indicate their accounting procedures and
mechanisms for financial transfer and replenishment. It is usually helpful to have as high a share
as possible of direct financial participation by the Bank in project components dealing with
indigenous peoples.

ANNEX 5: THREE POINT RANK ORDER SYSTEM FOR VMGPS (SAMPLE)
To be filled by KESIP PIU Team and World Bank as part of review and monitoring
Criterion Points Explanation

Screening
1. Have all IP groups in project area been 0 Not stated
identified (is screening adequate)? 0.5 The names of some groups have been mentioned; baseline
survey has been proposed; Aggregates all groups together
1 Detailed description of all indigenous groups is given
Social Assessment
2. Has a social assessment been done (Is 0 Not stated
baseline data given)? 0.5 Proposed to collect all relevant data - no specifics; data
briefly stated; or not updated, data not disaggregated
1 Disaggregated population data of IP; relevant socio-
economic indicators have been stated; data that
needs to be collected are listed;
3. Has legal framework been described? 0 Not stated
0.5 Brief mention of framework given
1 Constitutional provisions, legal statutes and
government programs in relevant sectors related to
indigenous peoples stated
Have benefits/ adverse impacts to IP 0 Not Discussed
groups been identified? 0.5 Potential impacts have been briefly discussed
1 Potential positive and negative impacts identified
and discussed
Consultation, Participation, Community Support
Have IP been involved in free, prior and 0 Not determinable
informed consultation at the project 0.5 Brief mention that consultations have taken place; no
implementation stage? Are there any details provided
records of consultation? 1 Detailed description of process given; appropriate
methods used, interlocutors are representative
Does project have verifiable broad 0 Not stated
community support (and how has it dealt 0.5 States that IP groups will be involved in preparing
with the issue of community village/community action plans; participation
representation)? process briefly discussed
1 Detailed description of participation strategy and
action steps given
7. Is there a framework for consultation 0 No
with IPs during the project 0.5 Passing mention
implementation? 1 Detailed arrangements
Indigenous People Plan
8. Is there a specific plan (implementation 0 Not stated
schedule)? 0.5 Flexible time frame (activities need to be proposed);
given activity wise; year-wise distribution;
mentioned but integrated into another project

document (RAP, etc.); no separate treatment;
combined with RAP;
1 Detailed description given
9. Does the IPP/IPDP include activities 0 Not stated
that benefit IP 0.5 Activities stated but not detailed
1 Activities clearly specify
10. Are activities culturally appropriate? 0 Not stated
0.5 Cultural concerns noted but not explicit
1 Activities support cultural norms
11. Have institutional arrangements for 0 Not stated
IPP been described? 0.5 Mentioned but integrated into another project
document RAP, etc.); no separate treatment
1 Detailed description of agencies involved in
implementation of plan, including applicable IPO's
or tribal organizations.
12. Is a separate budget earmarked for 0 Not stated
IPP? 0.5 Mentioned but integrated into another project
document (RAP, etc.); not broken-down activity-
wise
1 Detailed description given
Are there specific monitoring indicators? 0 Not mentioned
0.5 Proposed that monitoring indicators shall be
designed later; Project outcomes that need to be
monitored are stated
1 Monitoring indicators disaggregated by ethnicity
Has a complaint/conflict resolution 0 Not mentioned
mechanism been outlined? 0.5 Passing mention of mechanism in document
1 Detailed description and few concrete steps of
mechanism given
Were the Indigenous Peoples Plan or 0 No
Framework (IPP/IPPF) disclosed in Info 0.5 Disclosed in Info shop
shop and in Country in an appropriate 1 Detailed Summary in appropriate form, manner and
language? language
Special Considerations
If applicable, what considerations have 0 None
been given to the recognition of the rights 0.5 Passing mention
to lands and natural resources of IPs? 1 Detailed considerations
17. If applicable, what considerations 0 None
have been given to the IP sharing of 0.5 Passing mention
benefits in the commercial development 1 Detailed considerations
of natural and cultural resources?
18. Does the project involve the physical 0 No resettlement unless with their prior consent
relocation of IPs (and have they formally 0.5 Only within traditional lands or territories
agreed to it)? 1 Yes, physical relocation outside their traditional
territories with no compensation or consent

ANNEX 6: FEEDBACK DURING THE CONSULTATIONS HELD ON FEBRUARY 22,
2018 IN NAIROBI AND COMMITMEENTS MADE BY KETRACO
Issue Feedback Specific Feedback KETRACO’s

Provider Response/commitment to Feedback
and How it Will Be Reflected in the
Framework. If Not, Why Not?
Stakeholder Martha Nzisa – Involvement of KWS during Subproject sites/routes are not yet
Engagement Resource Planner initial planning of the projects known, which is why KETRACO is
KWS and route selection should be preparing this VMGF. Once they
emphasized become known, and should they
traverse areas under KWS mandate,
then KWS and other key government
agencies will be consulted as early as
possible.
Preservation of Martha Nzisa – KWS urged KETRACO to KETRACO will work hand in hand
conservancies Resource Planner ensure the protection of with KWS to address any issues
KWS conservancies and wildlife affecting protection of wildlife in the
and/or communities living in community conservancies and other
forests sites, including any communities
which may be living in the forest
Evaluations after Martha Nzisa – Will there be monitoring and Monitoring and evaluation takes place
project closure Resource Planner evaluation after project closure during and after the project
KWS to determine the effectiveness of implementation. In the course of
mitigation measures? implementation, remedial or
corrective measures will be
considered where necessary, on a
needs basis. Participating VMGs are
encouraged to be actively involved in
the monitoring of implementation to
ensure that the project is implemented
according to plan
Mitigation Elly Ochere – There is a need for mitigation -KETRACO makes all efforts through
measures Development measures for TLs passing design, to avoid or minimizes impacts
Economist Water through forests that pose danger on populations, cultural sites and
Resources to cultural sites of the vulnerable natural resources when TLs pass
Management populations due to opening up of through designated forest areas
Authority rivers which are sacred places of - In consultation with the affected
(WARMA) worship, risk of climate change VMGs community members, the RPF
and disruption of livelihood that has been prepared for KESIP will
activities especially for hunter- be used to determine eligibility and to
gatherers guide compensation for any cultural
sites such as shrines or graveyards in
the event that these have to be moved,
if avoidance is impossible
-the participating communities will be
invited during VMGP preparation to
propose safeguards to be used to
minimize project impacts on the
people and environment

Special Elly Ochere – Will there be special Consultation with stakeholders has
compensation for WARMA compensation packages for only just began. During the
VMGs vulnerable groups? compensation stage, KETRACO will
involve IPs/VMGs in the process to
get inputs on how they can be
adequately compensated. All PAPs,
including VMGs will be compensated
for their lost assets, including land,
structures, trees and crops. However,
VMGs will be given preferential
treatment in employment
opportunities, especially for unskilled
labor
Amendments to Eunice Lepariyo - Amendments to be made in the -Amendments have been made in this
VMGF IDHRO VMGF document that states that document
the Illchamus were forced out of
the mainland and relocated to
Lake Baringo. She clarified that
although there are some
Illchamus in Lake Baringo, they
are still inhibitors of the
mainland
Classification Eunice Lepariyo - Will the other ethnic groups, e.g. Mary Amuyunzu-Nyamongo (WB
ofnVMGs IDHRO the Luos and Kambas, living Consultant) clarified that the WB’s
among the vulnerable OP 4.10 and the Constitution of
communities be characterized as Kenya, 2010, have clear criteria for
VMGs? identifying IPs/VMGs which are
being applied to the KESIP project.
However, if there are other ethnic
communities living among the VMGs
and their assets are affected by the
project, they will be compensated for
their affected assets. Should they also
have legal proof of land ownership,
then they would also be compensated
for their affected land parcels.
KETRACO will ensure that all PAPs
are adequately compensated for their
lost assets at full replacement cost as
guided by the World Bank’s OP 4.12.
Stakeholder Eunice Lepariyo - KETRACO should involve Free prior informed consultations will
engagement IDHRO opinion leaders, women be undertaken throughout the project
representatives and local cycle. And participating VMGs will
administration in all the stages of decide on the consultation methods
the projects in order to ensure and strategies that is culturally
public support of the project and appropriate for them, but which
to effectively educate the VMGs ensures that all PAPs – men, women,
who are highly influenced by people with disabilities, and
their leaders vulnerable VMG households can be
involved and their needs considered.
Every voice should count.
Grievance Kambi Godana – There are low literacy levels in -Free, prior and informed
management VMGs Waata Kilifi County and most educated consultations will be the guiding
Kilifi people undermine and intimidate principle throughout the project
the less educated - their views stages.

also overpower those of the less Differentiated consultations, e.g.
educated consulting the more vulnerable
members such as women, people with
disabilities, and vulnerable VMG
members separately might be a good
way involving all PAPs and
circumventing elite capture of the
consultation process
Grievance Jumaa Barisa - In Kilifi County, most local -FPIC will be conducted throughout
Management VMGs Waata leaders are not residents of the the project cycle
Kilifi area hence they do not -When forming committees for the
understand the issues affecting projects, KETRACO will ensure that
the local community. Sometimes committee members represent all
they withhold vital information segments of the community
from the community -VMGs will be given opportunity to
select their members who should
represent them in such committee and
who they must hold accountable
-In the spirit of free, prior and
informed consultations, PAPs,
including VMGs, will be given
adequate notice of meetings to enable
them avail themselves from such
meetings
-Also, VMGs will be consulted in
ways that is culturally appropriate to
them, which would help to ensure
their participation
Amendments to Kipruto Kimosop Amendments to be made in the KETRACO will try to get the
VMGF – MCA from VMGF document that states that information from the Kenya National
Baringo the Endorois community has a Bureau of statistics (KNBS) to enable
population of about 20,000. He the amendments to be made in the
clarified that KETRACO use the document.
2009 Census to get the right
population size.
Effective Mercy Towett - She requested the stakeholders Go and become ambassadors of free,
communication and KPLC who attended the forum to be prior and informed consulta
dissemination of good ambassadors when they go throughout the project stages between
information. back to the grounds. KETRACO and key stakeholders and
stakeholders including VMGs
Additional Collins Nthuni - KETRACO to consider the Documents to be read and considered
references in the KWS National Spatial Plans and for addition
VGMF National Land Use Policy as
additional supporting documents
in the legal framework of the
VMGF.

ANNEX 7: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ATTENDANCE REGISTER


Final KESIP KETRACO VMGF April 2019 0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final KESIP KETRACO VMGF April 2019 0

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final KESIP KETRACO VMGF April 2019 0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KENYA ELECTRICITY TRANSMISSION COMPANY

The Kenya Electricity System Improvement

FINAL VULNERABLE AND

TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................................... ii

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 ii

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 iii

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 iv

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 v

4. The transmission component has a funding allocation of approximately US$120 million

Policies that have been triggered for KESIP

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 vi

Purpose of this VMGF

Potential Users of the VMGF

i. World Bank as the funding and development partner;

Consultations for the preparation of this VMGF

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 vii

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 viii

Grievance Redress Mechanism

Monitoring and evaluation

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 ix

Budget for VMGF implementation

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 x

2. The Government of Kenya (GoK) is committed to universal access to modern forms of

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 1

7. KESIP is designed to address the transmission and distribution aspects of electricity to

i. Malindi-Weru-Kilifi 220 kV 72kms and associated substation;

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 2

1.3 Proposed Project Development Objective(s)

1.3.1: Project Components

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 3

12. Component 1: Access expansion and distribution network strengthening (approximately

13. Component 2: Transmission network expansion and strengthening (approximately

15. Component 3: Technical assistance and capacity building (approximately US$15

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 4

1.3.2 Benefit sharing for VMGs under the project

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 5

Table 2: Commitments by KETRACO during Consultations with VMGs

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 6

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 7

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 8

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 9

xiv. World Bank as the funding and development partner;

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 10

35. As the contractor will be acting on behalf of KETRACO, it will be KETRACO’s

36. In addition to KETRACO’s responsibilities, the following principles will apply to

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 11

3.1 Constitution of Kenya, 2010

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 12

Box 1: Treatment of community land

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 13

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 14

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 15

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 16

3.5 Similarities and Differences between CoK and OP. 4.10

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 17

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 18

Table 4: Classification of IPs in Kenya by the WB

KETRACO VMGF FOR KESIP, 2019 19

3.7 Location of IPs/VMGs in Kenya