By Team
A report by Homa Bay County Public Service Board has revealed serious integrity and corruption issues at the Finance Department.
The Board report found out discrepancies in salaries, payment of both special and basic salaries to some employees, failure by chief’s officers to account for human resources in their departments, unexplained removal and reinstatement of staff in the payroll, irregular health risk payment and non-compliance with allowance guidelines.
The report revealed of unexplained removal and reinstatement of Staff in the Payroll, which could have led the lose money.
In the analysis of the Integrated Personnel and Payroll Database (IPPD) payroll for the period between June 2024 and November 2024, and the payroll for the period between December 2024, when HRIS payroll system was adopted, and May 2025 revealed that 430 individuals were being removed and returned in the payroll in different months of the year.
Further, sample files of these employees reviewed had no information or letters explaining the removal and return of their details in the payroll sys
The Management did not provide any plausible explanation for the inconsistent appearance of these individuals in the payroll system.
As a result, it could not be confirmed if they are legitimate employees of the Homa Bay County Government. Poor human resource management practices.
The report recommended :
“Management should explain the reason for the removal and inclusion of the concerned staff.
Management should ensure that personal files of employees are always updated.”
Failure by Chief Officers to Account for the Human Resource in Their Department
Examination of payment vouchers relating to payment of monthly salaries revealed that they were supported by schedules that were not reviewed and approved by the Chief Officers of the respective departments.
As a result, it was impossible to confirm if the Chief Officers were able to account for the human resources within their departments.
Failure by the Chief Offices to account for their staff raises concerns about authenticity of payroll records pointing out to the existence of unverified staffs.
Recommendation
The chief officers of the County Government should verify the schedule of employees in their department before payment of salaries.
Irregular change in job groups
Examination of the payroll data and verification of records maintained by the County established the following:
- While the management did not advertise for promotions or appointments between July 2024 and May 2025, payroll data showed multiple changes in job groups leading to skipping of job groups. There were 614 employees whose job groups changed. Out of this number, 50 employees had their job groups changed two times between July 2024 and May 2025, while the job groups for the other 563 changed once.
- Employee with personal number 20230246395 was irregularly redesignated from Revenue Clerk II to Personal Assistant, with a change in job group from H to M without any justification.
Irregularities in job group progressions may result in unforeseen payroll expenditures, disrupting planned financial allocations.
Recommendation
- Management should ensure appointments, promotions and re-designations are conducted in a fair and transparent manner.
- Management should also take corrective action against irregular and unauthorized changes in the job groups.
Noncompliance with Allowances Guidelines
The SRC Circular SRC/TS/29(81), dated 10 August 2023 on Remuneration and Benefits for Public Officers in the County Government Executive for The Third Remuneration Review Cycle 2021-2022 – 2023-2025 (7), lists all the earnings county executive officers are entitled to.
Analysis of payroll data and comparison of salary and allowance processed through the IPPD and HRIS payroll systems revealed the following anomalies:
Staff Paid Both Basic Salary and Special Salary
Review of payroll for the period between July 2024 and May 2025 revealed that there were fifteen employees (15) employees who were paid both basic salary and special salary.
Total amount of Kshs. 3,126,025 was paid where Kshs.2,155,100 was paid in form of basic salary while is Kshs.970,925 was paid in form of special salary.
Section 65(1) of the County Governments Act, 2012 set out factors County Public Service Board should consider in selecting candidates for appointment.
Further Section 65(2) specifies merit as one of the overriding factors in determining whether appointment, promotion or re-designation are undertaken in a fair and transparent manner.
Section B25(1) of the Human Resource Policies and Procedure manual for the public Service, 2016 provides that promotions in the public service will be based on qualifications and other requirements for appointment as stipulated in the career progression.
Use of erroneous data in the payroll system may lead to erroneous transactions.
Recommendations
- Management of Homa Bay County Government should institute measures to ensure that the payroll data is accurate and up to date.
- Management of Homa Bay County Government should institute measures to ensure the that employees’ personal files are updated.
Staff Earning Both Rental Allowance and Special House Allowance
There were also forty (40) employees who were earning both rental house allowance and special house allowance.
The total amount earned between July 2024 and May 2025 is Kshs.3,054,000.
Staff Earning Allowance They Do Not Usually Earn
Analysis of payroll data between July 2024 and May 2025 revealed that employees whose job designation and department of deployment do not attract extraneous duty allowance and health risk allowance were irregularly paid a total of Kshs.2,080,200.
This included Kshs.2,068,200 relating to Extraneous Duty Allowance that was paid to thirty-seven (37) employees, and Kshs.12,000 relating to Health Risk Allowance that was paid to two (2) employees, as shown below:
Risk
Loss of funds due to overpayment and irregular payment of allowances
Recommendation
- The Management should adhere to the set SRC guidelines on Remuneration and Benefits for Public Officer in the county governments.
- Management of should establish control measures to ensure that every employee only earns allowances applicable to them.
- Management should verify and confirm the designations of the employees, and their respective departments and, where necessary, recovery the irregularly paid allowances.
Salary Over-Commitment
Section 19(3) of the Employment Act, 2007 states that without prejudice to any right of recovery of any debt due, and notwithstanding the provisions of any other written law, the total amount of all deductions which under the provisions of subsection (1), may be made by an employer from the wages of his employee at any one time shall not exceed two-thirds of such wages or such additional or other amount as may be prescribed by the Minister either generally or in relation to a specified employer or employee or class of employers or employees or any trade or industry.
Finding
Analysis of the payroll of permanent staff of Homa Bay County Executive for the period between July 2024 and February 2025 revealed that some employees as shown in the table below received less than a third of their basic salary:
| Pay Month | Number of employees |
| July | 789 |
| August | 758 |
| September | 702 |
| October | 1,436 |
| November | 1,395 |
| December | 23 |
| February | 559 |
Employees on Acting Capacity
Criteria
Section 34 of the Public Service Act, 2017 states that an acting appointment shall be made by the lawful appointing authority and subject to the prescribed regulation and procedures which apply to appointments. An officer may be appointed in an acting capacity for a period of at least thirty days but not exceeding a period of six months.
Section C14(1) of the Human Resource Policies and Procedure manual for the Public Service, 2016 provides that when an officer is eligible for appointment to a higher post and is called upon to act in that post pending advertisement of the post, he is eligible for payment of acting allowance at the rate of twenty percent (20%) of his substantive basic salary.
Acting allowance will not be payable to an officer for more than six (6) months.
Finding
Analysis of the payroll revealed that a total of nine (9) employees as shown below have been on acting capacity during the year under review and have since drawn excess money of Kshs.836,978 as acting allowances.
It was noted that these employees have been on acting capacity for more than 6 months as shown below. In the circumstances, there was violation of the provisions of the act and irregular payment of allowances:
Non-Compliance with Law on Ethnic Diversity in Staffing
Sections 7(2) of the National Cohesion and Integration Act, 2008 provides that no public establishment shall have more than one third of its staff from the same ethnic community.
Section 65(1)(e) of the County Governments Act, 2012 stipulates that in selecting candidates for appointment, the County Public Service Board shall consider the need to ensure that at least thirty percent of the vacant posts at entry level are filled by candidates who are not from the dominant ethnic community in the county.
Finding
Analysis of the payroll for May 2025 revealed that Homa Bay County Executive had total work force of 7,202 out of which, 5,519 or 76% were from the same community.
- Recommendation
Management must ensure compliance with the provision of the law.
