The Effects of Savings and Internal Lending Communities (SILC) Social Fund on the Well-Being of Vulnerable Children in Kenya

Vulnerable children in Kenya experience overlapping deprivations in food and nutrition, healthcare, education, shelter and care. Savings and Internal Lending Communities (SILC) provide community-based mechanisms through which caregivers can mobilise resources and obtain emergency assistance through social funds. This study examined the relationship between the SILC social fund and the well-being of vulnerable children in Kenya, focusing on the adequacy, dependability and availability of the fund. A cross-sectional mixed-methods design was used. The sampling frame comprised 25,408 SILC participants in five selected counties. A stratified two-stage cluster sampling procedure was applied, with SILC groups selected using Probability Proportional to Size sampling and individual participants selected through simple random sampling. Quantitative data were obtained from 393 completed questionnaires, while qualitative evidence was collected through Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs). Descriptive statistics, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and multiple regression were used for quantitative analysis, while qualitative data were analysed thematically. The questionnaire contained 13 descriptive social-fund indicators; the available PCA output contained 12 indicators and yielded three components interpreted as adequacy, dependability and availability. The three components jointly explained 81.612% of the variance. Regression results showed that social-fund availability had a positive and statistically significant association with access to education (B = 0.097, p = .042), food (B = 0.429, p < .001), shelter and care (B = 0.101, p = .046), and healthcare (B = 0.267, p < .001). Adequacy and dependability showed outcome-specific associations. The models explained 13.1% of the variance in education, 18.6% in food, 2.2% in shelter and care, and 8.3% in healthcare. Qualitative findings indicated that caregivers used social funds to respond to emergencies involving food, healthcare, education and shelter, although limited resources and access constraints reduced their reach. The findings suggest that the SILC social fund is an important complementary safety-net mechanism, particularly when resources are available when needed, but it should not be interpreted as a stand-alone solution or as establishing causal effects in a cross-sectional design.

Savings and Internal Lending Communities, SILC, social fund, vulnerable children

1. Gonzales Martinez, R., D’Espallier, B., & Mersland, R. (2024). Informal insurance and loans in savings groups: A longitudinal and quasi-experimental approach identifies the role of the welfare fund for the extreme poor. Review of Development Finance, 14(1), 1–10. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-rdfin_v14_n1_a1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS), UNICEF Kenya, & UN Women. (2025). Brighter futures: Breaking cycles of poverty for Kenya’s children. KNBS, UNICEF Kenya, and UN Women. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Lee, H. E., Veliz, P. T., Maffioli, E. M., Munro-Kramer, M. L., Sakala, I., Chiboola, N. M., Ngoma, T., Kaiser, J. L., Rockers, P. C., Scott, N. A., & Lori, J. R. (2022). The role of Savings and Internal Lending Communities (SILCs) in improving community-level household wealth, financial preparedness for birth, and utilization of reproductive health services in rural Zambia: A secondary analysis. BMC Public Health, 22, 1724. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14121-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Panman, A., Madison, I., Kimacha, N. N., & Falisse, J.-B. (2022). Saving up for a rainy day? Savings groups and resilience to flooding in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Urban Forum, 33(1), 13–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-021-09424-w [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Parker, L., Francois, K., Desinor, O., Cela, T., & Fleischman Foreit, K. G. (2017). A qualitative analysis of savings and internal lending communities in Haiti—Do they make a difference? Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies, 12(1), 81–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450128.2016.1263773 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Rutherford, D. D., Ejeta, B., & Yirga, M. (2020). Highly vulnerable children: How their caregivers’ savings group participation facilitated their well-being. Vulnerable Children and Youth Studies, 15(3), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450128.2020.1714098 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Schreiber, R., & Tomm-Bonde, L. (2015). Ubuntu and constructivist grounded theory: An African methodology package. International Journal of Nursing Practice, 21(6), 715–723. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijn.12304 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Streeten, P., Burki, S. J., Haq, M. ul, Hicks, N., & Stewart, F. (1981). First things first: Meeting basic human needs in the developing countries. Oxford University Press for the World Bank. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. UNICEF Kenya. (2025). Child sensitive snapshot: Child poverty in Kenya. UNICEF Kenya. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• An Exploration of Stakeholders Perceived Mitigation Measures for Addressing Sanitation Challenges in George Compound in Lusaka Zambia
• Public Participation in Sustainable Development Programs: Examining Public Participation Methods and Levels at Pustaka Negeri Sarawak
• Responding to Climate Change through Livelihood Diversification: Implications of Household Economic Well-Being in Coastal Greater Accra
• Teacher Character Development Through Virtue and Eudaimonia: Insights from Nominal Group Technique (NGT)
• Transformation of Muslim Friendly Hospitality: An Overview of Shariah Compliant Tourism Development in Malaysia