| Year of assessment | 2024-2025 |
| Date of publication | February 2026 |
| Country procurement volume | EUR 1.83 billion reported in 2023/2024 |
| Principal organisation | Public Procurement Regulatory Authority |
| Main partners | World Bank |
Kenya
This MAPS MAIN assessment of Kenya resulted in recommendations targeting the harmonisation and updating of the legal framework, strengthening institutional capacity and professionalisation (particularly of small procuring entities), improving the use of e-procurement and data systems, enhancing procurement operations and contract management, and reinforcing transparency, accountability, and anti-corruption mechanisms.
Share
LinkedIn
Youtube
Quick facts
Background
Why was a MAPS assessment initiated?
The MAPS assessment was initiated to diagnose strengths, weaknesses and gaps in Kenya’s public procurementsystem, support ongoing public procurement reforms, and align the legal and institutional framework with international standards and national policy objectives.
Who initiated the assessment?
The assessment was requested by the Government of Kenya, through the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority, with technical and financial support from the World Bank.
Brief description of the country procurement system
Kenya’s public procurement system is highly decentralised, with over 34,500 procuring entities across national and county governments. It is highly regulated, governed mainly by the Constitution of Kenya (2010), the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act (PPADA) 2015, the PPAD Regulations 2020, and the National Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Policy (2020).
Is there anything else about the country that merits mention?
Kenya is implementing major reforms including introduction of a national e-procurement system and preparation of a Sustainable Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Framework. Preference and reservation schemes for disadvantaged groups are in place, but their effectiveness remains unclear.
The assessment experienced delays due to the extensive volume of contract file reviews, stakeholder availability constraints, and the phased development of the e-procurement system during the assessment period.
Main results and impact
Issue(s):
- The legal framework is comprehensive but overly complex, with too many procurement procedures, overlaps between the PPADA and PPADR, and very short minimum tender timelines.
- Eligibility, qualification, and capacity requirements are insufficiently regulated and inconsistently applied.
- Sustainable public procurement (SPP) is weakly reflected in binding regulations.
Recommendations:
- Restructure, update and harmonise the legal framework, clarifying hierarchy between law, regulations and policy.
- Reduce and simplify procurement procedures, including introducing a competitive procedure for low‑value procurement.
- Lengthen tender submission timelines and improve flexibility.
- Integrate the draft sustainable public procurement framework into legislation and implementing regulations.
Issue(s):
- Many procuring entities, especially small ones, lack sufficient capacity, staffing and skills.
- Roles and responsibilities among central institutions show gaps and overlaps, particularly for training, monitoring, and e‑procurement management.
- Procurement planning is often not aligned with budgets, and late payments are widespread.
Recommendations:
- Redefine, restructure and strengthen procuring entities, with targeted support for smaller entities.
- Expand capacity building and harmonise working conditions for procurement professionals.
- Strengthen procurement planning, enforce alignment with budgets, and improve cash management to enable timely payments.
- Clarify institutional responsibilities, especially for monitoring, training, and e‑procurement.
Issue(s):
- Weak needs analysis and market research prior to procurement.
- Strong focus on procedural compliance and purchase price, rather than value for money and performance.
- Contract management weaknesses, including delays, amendments, and late payments.
- Preference and reservation schemes are complex, inconsistently applied, and poorly monitored.
Recommendations:
- Require systematic needs analysis and market studies and provide guidance and training.
- Simplify operational procedures and improve guidance on planning, evaluation, and contract management.
- Reduce payment delays, including shortening payment deadlines.
- Review and simplify preference and reservation schemes, and strengthen engagement with the private sector.
Issue(s):
- Incomplete publication of procurement information and weak data accessibility.
- Limited civil society engagement in procurement monitoring.
- Weak enforcement of audit findings and anti‑corruption measures.
- High costs and structural limitations in the procurement complaints system.
Recommendations:
- Use the e‑procurement system to improve transparency, completeness and accessibility of procurement data.
- Strengthen audit and oversight effectiveness, including enforcement of recommendations.
- Lower barriers to complaints, reduce fees, and strengthen appeals mechanisms.
- Improve integrity systems, including whistle‑blower protection, disclosure of beneficial ownership, and use of open contracting data standards.